Quotes are taken from a message written by Dan to Charles on
07/28/96...  
CB>I have read many more articles opposing Whole Language than I have 
CB>supporting it, but maybe that's just where I'm looking.
DT>I would be interested in hearing about the ideas in these articles.
Since my receipt of this message, I've spent some time researching 
articles and information on Whole Language from the Internet.  I've 
found articles both pro (2) and con (10), so please note the statement 
and response above - we were looking for the thrust of the arguments in 
opposition to the teaching technique and so that is where the thrust of 
my response will lie.  So let's start with the question, "What is Whole 
Language?"
In a message to Sheila King on 7/24/96, you said..
DT>Whole Language simply is a term that is used to describe instruction 
DT>that stems from extensive research of the natural acquisition and 
DT>development of literacy.
I saw this idea repeated in both of the pro-WL articles I've read, so 
it is not unique with you.  However, I found many more specific 
references to research in articles by authors who were not promoting the 
process, and these all tended to suggest that WL is ineffective.  From 
an article by Jill Stewart that appeared in the "LA Weekly" (no date 
available, source was http:/www.kidsource.com):
"Unfortunately, whole language theorists were promoting such beliefs 
without the benefit of controlled studies or methodologically accepted 
research.  According to articles published in 1995 by the respected 
American Federation of Teachers, to date, no meaningful research has 
ever verified their claims.  "The movement's anti-science attitude 
forces research findings into the backroom," the Federation's articles 
noted.  Ominously, the Federation noted, the primary tenet of whole 
language philosophy, that learning to read is akin to learning to speak, 
"is accepted by no responsible linguist, psychologist or cognitive 
scientist in the research community.""
Also from the article by Jill Smith, comes information on the success of 
perhaps the largest study of the impact of whole language of all such 
studies...
"But whole language, which sounds so promising when described by its 
proponents, has proved to be a near-disaster when applied to--and 
by--real people.  In the eight years since whole language first appeared 
in the state's gradeschools, California's fourth-grade reading scores 
have plummeted to near the bottom nationally, according to the National 
Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP).  Indeed, California's fourth 
graders are now such poor readers that only the children in Louisiana 
and Guam--both hampered by pitifully backward education systems--get 
worse reading scores."
The following paragraph is taken from "Action Reading" at 
http:/azbiz.net/ats/reading/aread3a.html
"In July of 1995, 40 distinguished professors of linguistics, 
psycholinguistics, cognitive science and neurology wrote to the 
Commissioner of Education of the State of Massachusetts objecting to the 
Education Department's promotion of Whole Language Reading in the 
State's public schools.  Those professors were from M.I.T., Harvard 
University, University of Massachusetts, Brandeis, Boston University, 
Northeastern University.  The doctors were from Massachusetts General 
Hospital.  These forty professors and MD's noted the correspondence 
between the increased use of Whole Language and the decline in students 
reading scores."
There are a considerable number of other references in the materials I 
uncovered to ongoing research that demonstrates that children learn to 
read by decoding.  Jill Stewart reports further...
"Reading scholar Marilyn Adams was completing a book, "Beginning to 
Read", which detailed widespread findings that small children have a 
tough time with the "miscue and review" method, which encourages a child 
to guess at words from context, then learn later by revising their 
errors.  "Science has consistently, firmly and indisputably refuted 
these hypothesis,: Adams wrote.  The new research confirmed a huge body 
of studies from the 1960's through the 1980's, which showed that 
gradeschoolers must very directly and clearly be shown how to decode and 
sound out each letter and word on their own.  Without being explicitly 
and systematically taught that basic ability, the studies said, all but 
the most exceptional children were doomed to a long struggle with the 
printed page."
(To be continued...)
___
* UniQWK #5290* Whew! Only 1 min left of this 40 min. downlo#$%NO CARRIER
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------