In response to a message to Charles on ...
RL>Well, I hope you can understand what I have been
RL>trying to get at. ;)
I disappeared from the echo for a while - busy at work and 
alternating interests kept me working on other things.  Throughout I 
have downloaded some of the old mail and am just getting around to 
responding.  Sorry for the delay.
As we carried on the discussion over whole-language vs. phonics 
instruction, we were ofen at odds over our terminology - we've even 
been unable to agree on what whole language instruction involves and 
we're also often focusing on different grade levels - you on 
Kindergarten, me on first thru third grades.
I hope to bring a little closure to this - it has simply gotten out 
of hand.  I see Kindergarten as a readiness program - the focus 
should be on getting kids ready to read - perhaps near the end of 
the school year some initial reading attack skills should be 
introduced.  First thru third grades should focus on reading - 
perhaps as much as 50% of each instructional day should be direct 
reading instruction.  This instruction should involve a wide variety 
of instructional approaches, including phonics, word-recognition, 
rhyming, writing, spelling instruction, etc.
I am sure, if I taught at this level I would do quite a bit more 
formal instruction in word attack skills and spelling than you 
would.  I find nothing wrong with worksheets and practice exercises 
(computers, blackboards, slates, etc.) on word attack skills - it 
worked for an awful lot of us during the 50'sand 60's and I don't 
think whole language, in its purest form, has as good a track record.
Having said all of this, I don't think there's a lot more for me to 
say.  Although there are aspects of whole language (literature based 
instruction) that are usable in a more traditional reading program, 
I would pick and choose carefully.  Not much you're going to offer 
is going to convince me otherwise unless it is a large scale 
quantitative study that proves that students in whole language are 
outscoring traditionally taught students on a reasonably good 
standardized test.
I *am* willing to change my instructional style, but I want my 
modifications to either be under serious review (quantitative 
evaluation of the impact) or proven in large scale studies to be 
effective.  I have employed too many fads, in my 28-years of 
teaching, only to wind up disappointed and I'm not going to change 
any more without some strong proof of the effectiveness of the new style.
Chuck
Chuck Beams
cbeams@dreamscape.com
http://www.dreamscape.com/cbeams
___
* UniQWK #5290* A Redneck's Seven Course Dinner: Possum and a six pack!
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------