CHARLES BEAMS spoke of Whole Language 3 to DAN TRIPLETT on 08-27-96
CB>HOWEVER, my view of education, after 27 years of teaching and
CB>watching  educational fads come and go, is that our educational
CB>systems ought to  be based on research - sound research that starts
CB>with a small study,  graduates to a medium sized study, and finally
CB>becomes a large study.   We ought not use techniques and materials
CB>that can't be proven to work  over and over again.
CB>Every day that we use our children as guinea pigs is another day
CB>lost.   In my opinion, whole language is a fad whose success has not
CB>been proven  and therefore may be costing a lot of our children an
CB>opportunity to  become outstanding readers and thinkers.  I know you
CB>feel differently,  but Great Britain, California and many other
CB>nations and states are  backing away from whole language as quickly
CB>as they can - the evidence  against it is mounting.
It not my purpose here to "convert" anyone to WL but to challenge what I 
consider misconceptions regarding the theory.  I would be interest in 
learning more of Great Britain's WL woes.  I do not think WL is a fad 
and believe it is here to stay.  Properly understood it is the best way 
(IMNSHO) to teach (especially early childhood).  
As for the evidence against it mounting, time will tell.  I do believe 
that we discussed the relative confidence we can place in any research 
that attempts to isolate a single factor as a cause of this or that.  In 
California's case, WL is merely an excuse for a poorly run educational 
system complicated by the diversity of its student population and 
unmanageable class size.  
I would like to add that I think it is healthy to have one's view 
challenged and that you (as well as others) have challenged mine 
regarding WL.  I do not operate in blind faith here and am investigating 
some of the criticisms you presented a bit further.  I am in now way an 
expert (as in know-it-all) but I do try to honestly communicate all-I-
know (or all-I-understand).  
We can drop the WL thing, continue, or pick a specific WL concept (such 
as --inventive spelling--) which I think is very misunderstood as well.  
Even Rush Limbaugh has lambasted the practice.  I ask you, is he an 
expert on spelling pedagogy?
Whole Languagely Yours,
Dan
CMPQwk 1.42 445p
... Don't let your mind wander. It's too little to be let out alone.
* ++++++  *
     _   /|    ACK!
     \'o.O'   /
     =(__)+
       U
 
--- WILDMAIL!/WC v4.12 
---------------