Hi Chuck,
In your post about "Whole Language" there was a quote:
-> when Dr. Edmund Huey published a book called "The Psychology and
-> Pedagogy of Reading". He was an incredibly influential educator who
-> pushed the whole word method pursuasively and relentlessly. A quote
-> from his book gives a glimpse of the techniques for reading he
-> advised:
->
-> "Even if the child substitutes words of his own for some that are on
-> the page, provided that those express the meaning, it is an
-> encouraging sign that the reading has been real, and recognition of
-> details will come as it is needed. The shock that such a statement
-> will give to many a practical teacher of reading is but an accurate
-> measure of the hold that a false ideal has taken of us, viz. that to
-> read is to say just what is upon the page, instead of to "think",
-> each in his own way, the meaning
-> that the page suggests. Inner saying there will doubtless be, of some
-> sort; but not a saying that is, especially in the early reading,
-> exactly parallel to the forms upon the page. .. Reading to be
-> truthful, must be free of what is on the page."
Reading must be FREE of what is on the page????? I thought the whole
point to reading was to interpret WHAT is on the PAGE?
Recently another teacher posted remarks VERY similar to these in
k12.chat.teacher newsgroup. She suggested that kids should learn through
the context, by looking at pictures and substituting words for the ones
on the page that had nearly the same meaning was OK.
I guess I was a bit hard on her. I was pretty much shocked, and
indicated it in my follow-up message to her suggestions. Unfortunately,
the way I wrote my piece, she felt attacked and sent me an e-mail
thanking me for "teaching" her about how one must be prepared to stand
behind their beliefs when they state them in the newsgroups, since
others (such as me!) will tear them to shreds. :-(
Sheila
--- PCBoard (R) v15.22/M 10
---------------