Hi Dan,
Well we seem to be on the same wave length here. BTW how did you get
into teaching kindergarten? You certainly seem to enjoy it. I don't meet
or speak to many male kindergarten teachers - and one I did know didn't
really "teach" IMHO. :(
To get back to the message at large - You were discussing Whole
Language with Charles:
DT>The point is that our language is complicated for young children.
  >Teaching phonics is important as is teaching sight-word skills.  But the
  >answer to literacy hardly rests on the shoulders of phonics instruction.
  >Phonics is an important part but only a piece of a greater puzzle.
And there you have it in a nutshell - I wrote about this for a
university course.
DT>If a teacher is using phonics and word-attack skills as a *primary*
  >means of instruction they certainly are not following a whole language
  >approach.  A question I might ask is "To what degree are they teaching
  >phonics and word-attack?"
Another excellent observation/point. As I said to Charles, it's not so
much what is taught but how it is taught - and of course how much it is
taught. No method should be taught to the exclusion of all others. I
believe in an eclectic approach to most things. I think I said this in
another message that Sheila replied to.
  Sounds like you are describing "drill and
  >practice."  These same teachers probably use lots of work sheets in
  >their classroom.  Work sheets (IMO) do not teach any skills.  There is
  >not one skill that work sheets really teach (I think they are primarily
  >busy work).  I am not saying all work sheets are bad...in fact some are
  >very good.
I think we are all guilty of giving busy work now and then. I think it
depends on how much you give it and at what level. Some kids really
enjoy busy work. ;) So for extra work it can be useful. 
Yes, there are many good work sheets it depends on the definition of a
work sheet. I have files of what I consider work sheets but probably are
more like blackline masters. Some are drill type work but children need
practise at times and there is no harm in that now and then when the
concept is well grasped.
 But in general (I mean if work sheets are a primary part of
  >the classroom curriculum) they are not skill developing tools.
  >Busy work yes, skill development -- no.  At best they can facilitate the
  >learning objectives of lesson.
Agreed.
  But the draw a line from the letter to
  >the picture that matches is pointless.  I'd be happy to elaborate if
  >someone wants to hear why I believe this.
I basically agree with you but would love you to elaborate so I can get
a picture in my mind why I agree! ;)
DT>That oughta raise some eyebrows here.....but my statement is not meant
  >to step on toes.  Like I said, some oughta are very good.
This was very much what was said when I went through my teacher
training. We did a whole exercise about phonics work sheets and how they
only looked at one answer to the question.  Example a picture depicting
an eating vessel - if the child labels it as a p word and the work sheet
dictates a d one who is wrong? Neither it can be called a dish or a
plate. I think you get the idea. We looked at several sheets and saw
them through a child's eyes coming up with all the possibilities that
each picture could be taken.
I like Mary Barrata-Lorton's workjob idea much better. Real objects to
sort into boxes or hoops with the required letter in mind. Then of
course you go over and discuss with the child why they put each object
there.
Another message about this later....
                        Ruth
DT>More on this Whole Language thing later.....
Looking forward to it..... :)
---
 þ QMPro 1.53 þ Knowledge without wisdom is like a song without a singer.
---------------