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?
CB>As I understand it, some interpret the reading process as a fluid motion 
CB>- the reader's eyes flow across the page absorbing words, images and 
CB>information all as one process.  As I understand the quote that prompted 
CB>your response, the hope was that the reader could achieve a state 
CB>in which he/she could focus on the meaning of what was on the page, 
CB>interpreting and analyzing what was being read, rather than focusing on 
CB>the mechanics of the reading process.  It was this view of reading that 
CB>lead to the development of the whole word and the whole language
CB>processes.
That seems reasonable, but the implication that this is also
something that happens naturally is questionable, and to
extend it to invented writing is counterproductive (imo)....
What happens, again imo, is that over time, the overall
appearance of words and phrases become familiar, and the 
child doesn't have to spend as much time on each one.  What
happens, now, if the appearance of the word isn't consistent?
If every kid is spelling 'recluse' differently, and they are,
perhaps, looking at each other's work, NO ONE will ever
recognize the correct pattern!  I know that I've seen study
results which suggest that exposure to incorrect spelling of
words leads to an eroding of spelling skills; one might
reasonably extend that expectation to reading, wouldn't you
think?
___
 * MR/2 2.26 * DOS=HIGH? I knew it was on something...
--- Silver Xpress Mail System 5.4P1a
---------------