Talk:Whole language
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
[edit] POV
"that it serves chiefly to provide employment for special ed teachers."
That's really treading on POV. That's an insult, not a fact asserted by the critics. It's true that the insult is properly attributed to the critics, but it's still not really a fact they believe so much as a slur on the educational system.
Might be possible to NPOV this by ending the sentence before this thought and saying something like, "They further assert that whole language is the primary reason so many remedial reading teachers and programs are necessary."
Jdavidb 18:47, 5 Mar 2004 (UTC)
[edit] article needs work
This page needs significant work. Having been taught by phonics myself I have no understanding of what this alternative is, and why people advocate it, so I can't help directly. However, as a start I can at least point out why the bullet-points on this page don't tell me anything
- literate classroom environment
What's a "literate environment"? Three things come to mind: a) the teachers are literate, which should a prerequisite for any literacy program, b) the pupils are literate, which means that you don't need a literacy program at all, or c) the walls are talking to you.
- reading to and with students
Surely you can't teach literacy without reading, so this should be a characteristic of any literacy program. It's certainly a characteristic of phonics.
- individualized instruction
This is just a resourcing issue, not a different style of teaching.
- independent reading
Again, surely you can't teach literacy without reading. I'd expect all programs to have this.
- students as authors
And you can't teach literacy without writing. Nothing special.
_____
This article is biased and NOT VERIFIABLE. Please revise.
- integrating literacy skills into curriculum across disciplines
What, like reading textbooks and writing things on a board? Were there schools that just talked phonics in an isolated setting and then threw away the blackboard and didn't use any textbooks? Or is there something more to this?
- increased parent involvement
This, again, is a resourcing issue, not really a style of teaching. Ideally you'd get parents to help out with teaching all parts of the curriculum.
I'm not attacking Whole Language, I think the problem is that the article doesn't explain what Whole Language is.
Ben Arnold 7 July 2005 23:05 (UTC)
[edit] removed
"Arguing against the pictographic point of view aforementioned, some employ the following simile: teaching a phonetic language using Whole Language is like teaching people to read Chinese without teaching them how to write the letters. This would, they hold, hamper one's ability to remember and distinguish between letters."
- Aside from the awkward sentence structures, this implies that the Chinese written language has letters - obviously it does not. While it does have pronunciation systems to aid in its teaching that either have letters (pinyin) or something similar (zhuyin), I find that this para doesn't seem to add much to the article, and I'd rather take it out than make the corrective edits. Perhaps someone else wants to put this back in cleaner and correct form? --Ur Wurst Enema 06:00, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
- Perhaps I should also add that while I'm no linguist I do agree with the general idea of the removed para. It would be pretty hard to be literate in Chinese without learning either pinyin or zhuyin. --Ur Wurst Enema 06:04, 11 January 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Article needs work reply
I believe this is what the author meant in the bullets:
Literate classroom environment = Print-rich environment as in having lots of print such as stories written by students, labels, poems, diagrams, etc... on the walls of the classroom where students can view them.
Reading to and with students = reading to/with students using authentic literature rather than using textbooks which are usually written to teach specific skills and lack the vocabulary, style, subject matter, variety of form and complexity that mainstream and prize-winning children's books have.
individualized instruction = could mean differentiated instruction where the teacher works with small groups of students to develop skills they need to develop that other students may have already developed. This would be different than in a class where the teacher teaches and paces the skills equally for the entire class and ignores the fact that the students are different levels of proficiency.
independent reading = independent reading of reading level appropriate, authentic literature.
students as authors = students writing using the writing process and acting as professional authors do by choosing their own topics, revising their work and publishing (making books out of) their material. The traditional writing instruction would be focused on teacher-given writing assignments with the focus on spelling and convention.
integrating literacy skills = using reading, writing, listening and speaking as a means to learning information about other subjects such as math, science and social studies. Not just reading textbooks and writing things on the board but using literacy skills to read articles, stories, non-fiction books, internet sources, letters from professionals in that field etc...
Anyway, like I said, I think that's what the author may have meant but I could be wrong.
[edit] National Geographic Channel randomised intermediate letters
National Geographic Channel has an item that demonstrates that so long as the first and last letters of a word are correct, the letters in between can be randomised without affecting the meaning.
Nioatanl Gorghpeaic Cnenahl has an ietm that datsntoarems taht so lnog as the frsit and lsat lteerts of a wrod are cerorct, the lteters in beweten can be romdanised wuhtiot atecffnig the minneag.
This claim is superficially true, but what you cannot be sure of is whether two or more words share the same random pattern. Should pairs of words share the same pattern, sometimes this might lead to loss of meaning, while other times this might lead to a completely wrong and dangerous meaning. It may also be true that the longer words are the harder they are to decode, in which case the reader may get stuck. Since Microsoft Word doesn't have a word-randomising function, the randomisation has to be done by hand, which is slow and difficult.
It is hard to think of dangerous word pair examples, however the onus in on the advocates of National Graphic randomised intermediate letters to show that such problems will never occur.
Tabletop 04:17, 17 June 2006 (UTC)
[edit] Origin and Development of the Philosophy
Why is there nothing on the origins of this educational philosophy? It would be a good addition to the article.
[edit] Major Revision
I made major changes to the text of this article. I retained from the original author's work the clear substantive points made but took pains to reframe the article so that this controversial subject is treated neutrally. I do hope that I have accomplished that task. It SHOULD be clear that this is an area over which there is considerable debate, rancor, and disagreement. It SHOULD be clear that whole language has important benefits and that many have raised concerns. It SHOULD NOT seem like an endorsement of whole language or like it is supporting the "non-whole language" view.
As the previous poster suggested, I included some basic epistemological background. I am happy to discuss further revisions and share my understanding of this area with those interested.
--Kearnsdm 09:19, 29 September 2006 (UTC)
[edit] National Geographic Channel randomised intermediate letters goes haywire
An example of the National Geographic randomized intermediate spelling going haywire has surfaced. This week's Economist newspaper has a heading that read:
- Tanzania - Bye bye poverty.
but due to greater familiarity with another place it was read as
- Tasmania - Bye bye poverty.
OK, its not a perfect transposition, as an N is swapped with a M, and a S is swapped with a Z.
Nonetheless, such misunderstandings are asking for trouble in the long run. National Geographic fails to warn of any problems.
Tabletop 04:03, 1 October 2006 (UTC)
[edit] National Geographic Randomised Letters - Jump to conclusions
When using NGRIL, your eyes sometimes jump to conclusions:
- Ivan Lazarev was of Armenian origin.
- Ivan Lazarev was of American origin.
Tabletop 04:34, 4 October 2006 (UTC)
