Responding to a message by Sheila, to Charles on ...
SK>Reading must be FREE of what is on the page????? I thought the whole
SK>point to reading was to interpret WHAT is on the PAGE?
As I understand it, some interpret the reading process as a fluid motion 
- the reader's eyes flow across the page absorbing words, images and 
information all as one process.  As I understand the quote that prompted 
your response, the hope was that the reader could achieve a state 
in which he/she could focus on the meaning of what was on the page, 
interpreting and analyzing what was being read, rather than focusing on 
the mechanics of the reading process.  It was this view of reading that 
lead to the development of the whole word and the whole language processes.
SK>I guess I was a bit hard on her. I was pretty much shocked, and
SK>indicated it in my follow-up message to her suggestions. Unfortunately,
SK>the way I wrote my piece, she felt attacked and sent me an e-mail
SK>thanking me for "teaching" her about how one must be prepared to stand
SK>behind their beliefs when they state them in the newsgroups, since
SK>others (such as me!) will tear them to shreds. :-(
If any of the material in the Jill Stewart article would be of any use 
to you in that debate, Jill told me that she had, more or less, turned 
that article into the public domain because of the importance of the 
topic.  I would guess you could use some, or all , of that article to 
help you in the discussion.
Chuck Beams
Fidonet - 1:2608/70
cbeams@future.dreamscape.com
___
* UniQWK #5290* A bird in the hand, gets highly agitated
--- Maximus 2.01wb
---------------