This book was published in 1908, but the terminology and the methodology
it expounds are exactly what the whole language crowd is now claiming to
be the "new science" of reading. The whole word method continued
to gain favor during the 1920's. Much of this was due to books published
by Dr. Arthur Gates of Columbia University. His book "New Methods
in Primary Reading" was filled with "research" that supposedly
proved the superiority of the word method. Much of this research has since
been found to be incorrect or based on improper research methods. Published
in 1928, the book advocated the following reading strategies:
1. Try to recognize the general pattern, or configuration of the word.
2. Special characteristics of the appearance of the word 3. Similarity
to known words 4. Recognition of familiar parts in longer words. 5. Use
picture clues 6. Use context clues 7. Phonetic and structural analysis
of words
The strategies were listed in the order of their importance for new
word recognition. Only rarely would a student arrive at number seven without
believing they had found the secret word. The 1928 "strategies"
are very similar to what is advocated by whole language experts today.
In some of the more extreme implementations of whole language, phonetics
is never mentioned at all. A prominent whole language guide for teachers
states that to a child "every sentence is a puzzle that must be worked
out before its full meaning can be constructed". For many children,
this is a very prophetic utterance. In most whole language classrooms,
phonics is never taught explicitly or intensively. Phonics is only taught
in "authentic contexts" or incidentally, as the need may arise.
In other words, only if the teacher observing the student thinks it is
necessary. Whole language subscribes to the same general philosophy used
by the "developmentally appropriate" advocates. This philosophy
states that a child cannot be taught a particular concept until the child
is developmentally ready. It is claimed that attempting to teach a child
to read before they are "developmentally ready" will not work
and could damage the child's delicate self-esteem. There is much debate,
but very little scientific proof, that these ideas are correct. Determining
the developmental readiness of a child is a very subjective exercise.
By 1950, the whole word method had become the dominant method used for
teaching reading. However, it was apparent that something was very wrong.
Reading skills were dropping and too many students were graduating from
high school functionally illiterate. A change came when Rudolf Flesch 
demolished
the whole word method in his book "Why Johnny Can't Read". This
led to new studies, which by the 1970's had caused most schools to return
to a more phonics-based program. Measurable improvements in reading abilities
during the late 1960's and all through the 1970's were observed. The U.S
Department of Education noted in their recent reading survey that student
performance had been increasing significantly until 1984. From that point
on, reading scores have been dropping until 1992, at which time they fell
below the scores from the early 1970's. Not surprisingly, this coincides
with the rise of whole language as a "new" reading method.
The term "whole language" was coined by Dr. Kenneth Goodman
of the University of Arizona in the early 1980's. Whole language developed
into much more than just a reading program. It is an educational philosophy
in its own right, like OBE. It attempts to cover the whole gamut of language
learning, including reading, writing and speaking. Much of the philosophy
is derived from that used in developmentally appropriate practices teaching.
Parts of whole language have been shown to be of value, but the methods
used for actually learning to read are a major point of debate. Goodman
believed that learning written language occurs naturally, in the same way
we acquire spoken language. He thought children could learn to read primarily
by figuring out the meaning of words from an analysis of the context in
which they occurred. Good readers don't read word by word Goodman argued.
"[t]hey construct meaning from the [entire] text. Indeed, accuracy
is not an essential goal of reading".
In a whole language classroom children are immersed in reading and writing
projects at the expense of systematically teaching specific reading or^
writing skills. Students are encouraged to recite what the teacher reads
aloud from an entertaining big-print book. They are allowed to write using
"inventive spelling", without actually learning punctuation,
grammar or penmanship skills. One of the essential beliefs is that language
is learned from "whole to part", with word recognition skills
picked up in the context of actual reading and writing, or "immersion"
in a print-rich classroom. A recent description of whole language written
by two Rochester elementary school teachers which appeared as a 
letter-to-the-editor,
illustrates this belief.
" Whole language teaches from the whole to the part. In other words,
we first work on a paragraph, then the phrases, the sentences, and finally
the sounds within words. This is phonics!"
(continued...)
Chuck Beams
Fidonet - 1:2608/70
cbeams@future.dreamscape.com
___
* UniQWK #5290* A cheap shot is a terrible thing to waste.
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------