--------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00028 Date: 08/27/96 From: DAN TRIPLETT Time: 08:40pm \/To: RON MCDERMOTT (Read 3 times) Subj: The Real Story 2 RON MCDERMOTT spoke of THE REAL STORY 2 to DAN TRIPLETT on 08-23-96 RM>DT>Try this phonetically "hear." You don't need the vowels. RM> RM>You "need" the vowels... The word has the sound of 'e', RM>which suggests that the letter 'e' is present with either RM>an adjacent vowel, or an 'e' at the end of the word, no? No.....the dominate sounds are the initial /h/ sound and since it's an r controlled ending the r controls the sound. However it's not important to my point so Im willing to concede that the vowels are important. But you are missing the point of my message. I am merely trying to show that our spelling conventions are sometimes very difficult and that phonetically sounding out every word is not possible. I was at a workshop put on by Washington's Center for the Improvement of Student Learning. I attended several reading workshops. In college I was told that our language was approximately 87% predictable. But in this workshop it was said that if we programmed a computer to spell phonetically it would only get an average of 50% on a spelling test. Remembering that many sight words which are unpredictable would be on such a test this statistic makes some sense. RM>DT>These same teachers probably use lots of work sheets in RM>DT>their classroom. Work sheets (IMO) do not teach any skills. RM> RM>I'm not sure that the function of worksheets IS to teach; RM>they are more along the line of practicing something already RM>taught... Oh Im sure we can find many that are designed to do some teaching (as in the learning by doing kind of teaching). What I am arguing is that worksheets are not the "doing" of anything. They are at best busy work. I also feel that there are times (probably frequent times) where a worksheet is entirely appropriate. But for or the most part, and especially in the primary grades, worksheets are inappropriate to the developmental ability of the child and are unnecessary unless there is a specific need for the worksheet (like to record findings in science or a response worksheet to a specific reading). I teach kindergarten so am somewhat unfamiliar with how worksheets are used in classrooms. As for practicing with a worksheet, we have manipulative and games that can do that more concretely. Dan CMPQwk 1.42 445p PROFESSOR: Someone who talks in somebody else's sleep. * ++++++ * _ /| ACK! \'o.O' / =(__)+ U --- GEcho 1.11+ * Origin: The South Bay Forum - Olympia, WA (360) 923-0866 (1:352/256) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00029 Date: 08/27/96 From: DAN TRIPLETT Time: 09:10pm \/To: CHARLES BEAMS (Read 3 times) Subj: Re: Whole Language 2 CHARLES BEAMS spoke of Re: Whole Language 2 to ERICA LONG on 08-19-96 CB>Responding to a message by Erica, to Charles on <08/12/96>... CB>First of all, let me state that I am no expert, only a critic. As CB>for the issue you raise, "What is the true definition of whole CB>language instruction?", that has not been completely resolved here CB>in this echo. BUT, I can tell you that MANY who practice and teach CB>whole language do not use phonics nor word attack skills. In CB>general, much of what I have read suggests that these processes are CB>a "last-resort" skill, and even then are seldom used. I thought I posted the "true definition" a while ago. Time will show that the true definition is exactly what I have stated. Critics ignore the real facts regarding whole language and focus on some of the failures (where WL failed because those using it failed to understand correctly what it was...many thought basic skills were no longer important but they were wrong. Whole language never intended to dump basic skill teaching -- I have stated this before). Charles....when you say that "many who practice and teach whole language do not use phonics nor word attack skills" you really should be saying "Many who do not use phonics nor word attack skills are not really teaching according to whole language theory>" CB> CB>I guess the question is - does the "true" whole language process CB>include primary instruction and practice in phonics and word-attack CB>skills YES YES YES..... or, has the teacher using these skills actually blended CB>several programs? I don't get this one... CB>EL>CB> "Inventive spelling" shouldn't be allowed past mid-first CB>EL>grade; There is no such thing as inventive spelling, not really. Someone long ago already invented spelling. Noah Webster cleaned it up a bit and we are stuck with what we have. Children do have "transitional" spelling techniques. What does one expect when someone is just learning something so very new. Close approximations! It's real life. I fully agree that spelling correctly needs to be addressed in the first grade. When children "publish" their work there should be an emphasis on editing procedures including checking of spelling. That's where children's dictionaries can come into play. C The point that critics are making is that a word IS a CB>spelling and to try to disassociate the word from the letters that CB>constitute it's very existence is to teach VERBAL language, not CB>reading or writing. How can it be called reading when a child reads CB>"qnd" from his journal and says "dog?" That's not reading. You are right....if I had a child who spelled "dog" "gnd" I would have some serious concerns. DOG is a simple cvc word and is entirely phonetic. However if a child spelled "The jragon sad this iszt a plas to liv......" for "The dragon said this isn't a place to live.." I would see the rationale behind the spelling. (this was an actual example from a child's writing) Some people say "dragon" with the /j/ sound in the beginning and it works well. For said....sad is understandable. I hope you get the idea.......that isn't to say I would not teach spelling to this child. I would. But spelling isn't important in rough drafts even in the real world. I'll bet you have a spell checker on your computer that you use routinely. I do....:) CB>EL>So we do lots of story telling (I hate show and tell!) CB> CB>My wife, who teaches 4th grade, does a form of show and tell everyday CB>and says it is the kids' favorite time of day. Talk about a way to CB>get kids to develop their verbal skills and learn public speaking! CB>Why do you dislike it? It's not show and tell....it's "bring and brag." I hate it too because many children bring things to share and then just sit there with no idea of what to say. Meanwhile I have 25 five-year-olds doing the squiggly dance on the floor. CB> CB>EL>Encouraging, encouraging, encouraging. CB> CB>No one is arguing with that. CB> CB>EL>Writing is hard and why, if you are five, would you want to go out CB>EL>to the teacher and let them tell you all the wrong bits because CB>EL>in year 1 there will be more wrong bits than right. CB>And I haven't read a single article about whole language that CB>suggests that better literature can't be a sound improvement on old CB>teaching styles. You lead a sheltered life..... Dan......thanks for letting me butt in...... CMPQwk 1.42 445p Pardon Me For Jumping In....but I just had to say..... * ++++++ * _ /| ACK! \'o.O' / =(__)+ U --- GEcho 1.11+ * Origin: The South Bay Forum - Olympia, WA (360) 923-0866 (1:352/256) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00030 Date: 08/27/96 From: CARL BOGARDUS Time: 10:16pm \/To: RON MCDERMOTT (Read 2 times) Subj: WHERE WE STAND RM> would be a GOOD thing. I submit, counsellor, that your RM> arguments are inconsistent with one another; you don't get to RM> have it BOTH ways.... ;-) CLAP! CLAP! --- Maximus 2.02 * Origin: VETLink #13 Las Cruces NM (505)523-2811 (1:305/105) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00031 Date: 08/25/96 From: DAVE MAINWARING Time: 09:30am \/To: SHEILA KING (Read 2 times) Subj: Demand for Programmers SK> located in the "Silicon Valley" in the San Jose area, discussion about SK> programming jobs came up one day at lunch. Several of the attending SK> teacher-participants had picked up newspapers and looked at the want SK> ads, and were floored by the number of jobs available for programmers. SK> All in all, with the space division of Rockwell (where my hubby SK> works) being bought out by Boeing last week, it game me a good feeling SK> that we won't go hungry since there are so many C++ programming jobs out Me thinks that people are mis-reading the advertisments. There is a huge demand currently for software engineers and other college degreed indiviuals who program in C++ and other object-oriented programming languages. These are not the "programmer" jobs of the eighties when one could learn a programming language and not have to have a college degree. In today's market the college degree is a given. I'm for teaching anyone who has the interest a programming language. However to equate knowing how to program in C++ or anyother language as an automatic career calls for a serious reality check. SK> there that he could choose from. SK> Sounds to me like kids with the good fortune to get set on the SK> programming path will have a job waiting for them? They also are the ones who get set with math and English. I;m not at all sure that ten years from now there will be a market for C++ programming just look at the "programmers" who were Cobol Programmers, RPGII programmers etc...todays hot language is tomorrows antique. Contract programmers are getting $100-$140 per hour to write in Lotus Notes, as soon as there are more who bodies then the wages will drop. --- Maximus/2 2.01wb * Origin: Bionic Dog Society, Newton, MA 617/964-8069 (1:101/138) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00032 Date: 08/26/96 From: CHARLES BEAMS Time: 10:09am \/To: DAN TRIPLETT (Read 3 times) Subj: The Real Story 2 Responding to a message by Dan, to Charles on <08/19/96>... DT>CB>-Many do not teach children the phonetic patterns and rules of the DT>CB>English Language. Some teachers do not even teach spelling." DT>CB>================== DT> DT>Yes we do... That seems to be much of the debate, doesn't it? The research I found suggests that many teachers using whole language do not formally teach phonics skills and word attack skills. The fact that there are also many who *do* teach those skills does not deny that there are many who don't. DT>Try this phonetically "hear." You don't need the vowels. Consider the DT>/sh/ sound. Why does our language spell /sh/ sound as in sugar, or *ti* DT>as in motion, or *oc* as in ocean, or *se* as in nauseous. Although my teaching assignment has always been math, I am certified N-6 as well as 7-12 mathematics and, in addition to having learned to read through heavy doses of phonics, have about 12 credit hours in reading instruction - I understand the process. DT>The point is that our language is complicated for young children. DT>Teaching phonics is important as is teaching sight-word skills. But the DT>answer to literacy hardly rests on the shoulders of phonics instruction. DT>Phonics is an important part but only a piece of a greater puzzle. "Reading" is such a broad term that I'm not actually sure what you are referring to here. If you mean that learning to read for understanding is an important skill, or that the amount of energy someone needs to put into their reading and writing is dependent on the type of work being done (technical, pleasure, journal, etc.), then I agree. However, recent research, as quoted in one of my postings, suggests that good readers do, indeed, read every letter and every syllable of the words in the text. To not teach reading through the use of spelling and phonics skills denies a significant number of children the opportunity to become proficient readers. DT>CB>Of course there are variations in the practice - just as there are DT>CB>differences in the way that teachers teach phonics. I'd say my DT>CB>position is, if a teacher is using phonics and word-attack skills as DT>CB>a primary means of instruction (not just when a student is totally DT>CB>lost), then they are not following whole language practices. DT> DT>If a teacher is using phonics and word-attack skills as a *primary* DT>means of instruction they certainly are not following a whole language DT>approach. A question I might ask is "To what degree are they teaching DT>phonics and word-attack?" Sounds like you are describing "drill and DT>practice." Yes, I am, though I do think that there's a need for a lot of research on the best way to teach phonics. My belief that learning to do things right the first time and then to strengthen those skills through practice and reinforcement is unshakable. DT>These same teachers probably use lots of work sheets in DT>their classroom. Work sheets (IMO) do not teach any skills. And so, we disagree. A worksheet is nothing more than a printed page...some are better than others, agreed...but I see nothing inherently wrong with practicing skills we want to learn. DT>There is not one skill that work sheets really teach (I think they DT>are primarily busy work). That seems to be the fad-theory of the moment, but can you cite any research to back that up? DT>I am not saying all work sheets are bad...in fact some are DT>very good. But in general (I mean if work sheets are a primary part of DT>the classroom curriculum) they are not skill developing tools. DT>Busy work yes, skill development -- no. At best they can facilitate the DT>learning objectives of lesson. But the draw a line from the letter to DT>the picture that matches is pointless. I'd be happy to elaborate if DT>someone wants to hear why I believe this. I am interested. Please elaborate. Chuck Beams Fidonet - 1:2608/70 cbeams@future.dreamscape.com ___ * UniQWK #5290* "I drank WHAT!?" - Socrates --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: The Hidey-Hole BBS, Pennellville, NY (315)668-8929 (1:2608/70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00033 Date: 08/26/96 From: CHARLES BEAMS Time: 11:09am \/To: MATT SMITH (Read 3 times) Subj: Re: Where We Stand Responding to a message by Matt, to Charles on <08/21/96>... MS>I'll ask the question that Shanker doesn't want to hear: why _should_ MS>businesses care about HS achievement? Fair question, but I'm going to begin by answering with questions of my own. If they _shouldn't_ care (as you suggest), then why _do_ they care? Why do many business leaders suggest, in public print, that the schools aren't producing kids with skills that prepare them for the workplace? Why are there frequent vocal complaints by business leaders that those they hire can't read and do math? And yet, why do these business leaders continue to hire students without checking their high school transcripts to see what kind of grades they got in English and math? MS>Businesses are in the business of making money for MS>themselves, not in the business of flogging HS sophomores MS>to work harder and take tough courses. And yet business leaders attended the education summit in New Jersey last spring in droves and voiced their concerns over the quality of the education of those graduating from our high schools. Those who were present even agreed to start reviewing transcripts before hiring. Others, not present, continued to pound away in the press at the lack of skills among those they hire. To be quite honest, our perception of the concern is totally different. MS>Few businesses hiring _college_ grads even look at _college_ transcripts. That's not the way I understand it. Quite often employers send representatives out to the colleges looking for the very best college students and to offer them top dollar to work for their firms. Again, our perceptions differ. You made a number of other comments that indicate we are in total disagreement about what education can, and does, offer businesses. I saw no point in continuing the debate. Chuck Beams Fidonet - 1:2608/70 cbeams@future.dreamscape.com ___ * UniQWK #5290* Anything not nailed down is a cat toy. --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: The Hidey-Hole BBS, Pennellville, NY (315)668-8929 (1:2608/70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00034 Date: 08/26/96 From: CHARLES BEAMS Time: 11:33am \/To: DAN TRIPLETT (Read 3 times) Subj: Whole Language 1 1/ Responding to a message by Dan, to Charles on <08/19/96>... DT>These articles were written by by people who are against Whole Language. DT>The reason some of the groups you cited exist is to combat the inclusion DT>of Whole Language in the schools. Yet when I read articles in DT>professional journals and when I go back and read the text book on whole DT>language, when I go to work shops on whole language, none of what the DT>opponents of WL are saying is being taught. I understand. DT>I'll get into more about these groups later as I uncover their hidden DT>agenda (Such as the Action Reading people you mentioned....they have a DT>stake in all this controversy and it is a bit self-serving). Uncovering their agendas won't really impress me very much - many people who have a bias still have legitimate points to make. I *WOULD* be impressed with articles citing (describing) research in which children taught using whole language programs have excelled in reading, especially if they are on the same scale as the results from Great Britain or California. DT>Then ALL of these authors don't have a real understanding of WL. They DT>are simply commenting on what they have seen in their respective school DT>districts which was, I would guess, literacy programs in the name of WL DT>which were anything but. Much of what I have read suggests that the devotion of whole language theorists to their program is remarkable, especially given the lack of credible evidence that the process can be made to work on a large scale. I continue to marvel that you would suggest that *ALL* of those who disagree with you are wrong, but that you are right in defining whole language. DT>The concepts contained in WL are research based. One such concept is DT>the psycholinguistic view of the reading process. I mentioned this in DT>my original post. And two of the articles I posted soundly refuted that claim, including one which quoted a study by the American Federation of Teachers, which noted that no such credible research exists. And as noted in the article I posted, "What is Whole Language?", "Psycholinguistics is a relatively new branch of science which studies the psychology and physical development of oral language in young children. It does not deal in any direct way with reading acquisition." Chuck Beams Fidonet - 1:2608/70 cbeams@future.dreamscape.com ___ * UniQWK #5290* "My God," exclaimed the tagline, "I'm in the wrong joke! --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: The Hidey-Hole BBS, Pennellville, NY (315)668-8929 (1:2608/70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00035 Date: 08/27/96 From: CHARLES BEAMS Time: 04:56pm \/To: ALL (Read 3 times) Subj: Where We Stand Reposted with the permission of the American Federation of Teachers http://www.aft.org Today's guest columnist is Romy Wyllie, an interior designer in Pasadena, California, who is writing a book about bringing up a son with Down syndrome. Her article also appeared in theLOS ANGELES TIMES, February 26, 1996, and in the CHICAGO TRIBUNE, March 8, 1996. Can developmentally disabled children learn more in a mainstream classroom than they would in a special class? Thirty-five years ago, most mentally and physically handicapped children were excluded from any form of education in public schools. Today, the pendulum has swung with full force in the opposite direction as a class-action lawsuit pressures the Los Angeles schools to place a larger number of disabled students in mainstream classes and reduce the school system's reliance on separate special education programs. Educators have spent years developing specialized methods for teaching retarded children to read and write at a pace appropriate for their level of learning. Now, all that effort may go to waste. The new term, INCLUSION, sounds democratic and forward-thinking, but does it really address the needs of the children? Administrators, lawyers, and parents can dream of a perfect world where every disabled child is accepted by peers in a mainstream class. But policies are too often based on generalizations developed by professionals who are out of touch with the reality of the classroom situation. Is a severely disabled child in a wheelchair included in a regular classroom setting if he or she has to spend the day at the back of the room near the exit, ignored by a busy teacher trying to cope with 29 normal, active students? What do regular students, already struggling with their own learning, gain from the presence of an emotionally disturbed or mentally^ retarded student who has a fit, throws a tantrum, or attacks a classmate? The concept of inclusion is deceptive because it helps parents believe their child is being normalized. It takes away the stigma of "special education," "disabled" or "retarded." It makes administrators feel good because they are integrating all students into one common program. In reality, inclusion is creating a nightmare for the teachers and is harming both regular and special students. Andrew, our Down syndrome son, was born 37 years ago today. The doctor suggested he be placed in an institution, but we ignored the doctor's advice and brought up Andrew as an integral part of our family. Andrew benefited from the individual attention of specially trained teachers in special education classes in the Chicago public schools. A partial mainstreaming program in Kenwood Academy helped his social adjustment and taught other students to accept him. Placement in special or regular classes should be adjusted according to a student's progress. If, in his early formative years, Andrew had been included in a regular elementary classroom with his own age group, he would have foundered as he struggled to learn. Failure would have destroyed his self-esteem. As a result of his educational experience and home life, Andrew acquired confidence and the skills to function in the working world. He now lives at the Lambs Farm, a community for the handicapped in Libertyville, Illinois, where he enjoys an active social life under the umbrella of a well-run residential program. For the last 12 years, he has worked full-time at a supermarket in Lake Forest, Illinois. He is known for his conscientiousness and outstanding punctuality. Customers ask for him because he packs their groceries so carefully. Instead of working with disabled children in a separate program, special education teachers coping with inclusion are left to worry about their students reaching high school without being able to write a simple sentence or count money because an aide did their homework for them. It is important to teach these children the basic skills of living. For some, a work-study program will enable them to find jobs and live independently. Special education encompasses a wide range of disabilities, from high-functioning children who can benefit from being included in a regular classroom setting to the severely disabled who need one-on-one training in a separate program. Who will gain from the integration of all children, regardless of physical or mental ability? Will the administrators be praised for their all-embracing policy? Will the school system save money? Will the parents feel less guilty? Will the high-functioning disabled children be better educated and better adjusted? Will the severely disabled child have his needs met? There are too many variables. All children will suffer if the pressure for inclusion eliminates valuable special education programs. Disabled students should have their needs assessed individually and be placed in settings that will provide them with the best training for life. Chuck Beams Fidonet - 1:2608/70 cbeams@future.dreamscape.com ___ * UniQWK #5290* Smile they said, it could be worse. So I did and it was. --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: The Hidey-Hole BBS, Pennellville, NY (315)668-8929 (1:2608/70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00036 Date: 08/27/96 From: CHARLES BEAMS Time: 05:03pm \/To: DAN TRIPLETT (Read 3 times) Subj: Whole Language 3 Responding to a message by Dan, to Charles on <08/19/96>... DT>Interesting stuff....has some political underpinnings as well. The DT>religious right is behind much of the controversy. At least they DT>have their hands in the debate.... Interestingly enough, there is probably no one writing in this echo more distant from the "religious right" than I am. Our local superintendent of schools once referred to me as a "relic of 60's liberalism" and indeed, I am a real left-winger. HOWEVER, my view of education, after 27 years of teaching and watching educational fads come and go, is that our educational systems ought to be based on research - sound research that starts with a small study, graduates to a medium sized study, and finally becomes a large study. We ought not use techniques and materials that can't be proven to work over and over again. Every day that we use our children as guinea pigs is another day lost. In my opinion, whole language is a fad whose success has not been proven and therefore may be costing a lot of our children an opportunity to become outstanding readers and thinkers. I know you feel differently, but Great Britain, California and many other nations and states are backing away from whole language as quickly as they can - the evidence against it is mounting. Chuck Beams Fidonet - 1:2608/70 cbeams@future.dreamscape.com ___ * UniQWK #5290* A friend in need is a pest indeed... --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: The Hidey-Hole BBS, Pennellville, NY (315)668-8929 (1:2608/70) --------------- FIDO MESSAGE AREA==> TOPIC: 265 EDUCATOR Ref: DCY00037 Date: 08/27/96 From: CHARLES BEAMS Time: 05:10pm \/To: DAN TRIPLETT (Read 3 times) Subj: The Real Story: Whole La Responding to a message by Dan, to Charles on <08/19/96>... DT>I didn't get the impression that California did significant research DT>into the nature of WL. If they had, they could not possibly have missed DT>the part that phonics plays in a WL classroom. I don't have first hand evidence with which to refute your point, but, as described in the article I posted from Jill Stewart, a good number of "experts" from across the state gathered together to design the reading program. The state education department and its commissioner continued to defend the process for several years, even after preliminary evidence suggested the process was failing - they had to know what was being promoted as whole language in the schools, and they supported it. The state's colleges continued to train tens-of-thousands of new teachers in a process that the professors (many self-proclaimed experts who had researched it) deemed to be "whole language." I think YOU think of whole language as a process somewhat different from the purists' point of view. DT>California, like many other well-intentioned folks, simply do not DT>understand the underlying ideas that are foundational to a Whole DT>Language perspective. It certainly is a matter of who is out of step in representing the whole language process - Dan Triplett, or the state education department of California, all of the universities in California, and most of the school administrators in California. Hmmm.... DT>Drill and practice is out. Such an approach is far too structured DT>for young children. I think this proclamation is far too broad to be taken seriously. I can't imagine an athlete suggesting that "drill and practice" are out, nor the student trying to learn his/her math facts. But it's a process that you don't believe will work in learning to read? I disagree 110%. DT>From a recent college textbook about early childhood education DT>(Copyright 1990) consider the following: DT> DT>"Some people mistakenly believe that as soon as you advocate the whole- DT>language approach to literacy, you assume that teaching strategies in DT>reading such as the sight- or whole-word approach and the phonics DT>approach are eliminated. With the whole-language approach to literacy DT>development, we feel that teachers create a literate environment and DT>then use the best tools available to teach the components of literacy. DT>These tools include........the sight- or whole-word approach, where DT>children see the representation of the whole word and begin to read it; DT>or phonics, where children learn the letter sound in order to facilitate DT>sounding out the words as they read." There are two parts to the confusion that arises out of this discussion, including your quote. Part one of the argument is the degree to which whole language should include phonics. One report I posted proclaims that phonics instruction is the very LAST step in teaching children to read (in a 7-step process), but the quote you post suggests that it is a very important second step (perhaps as much as 40%?) of the instructional process (which may still not be enough, BTW). We do not have a definitive answer to this yet, do we? The second part of this disagreement, however, is perception. How do people perceive whole language? As an example, I point to the use of the slang, "dork." This word was popular in our area for quite some time by our students as they chastised one another and they used the word to mean "stupid" or "oaf." As *I* grew up, the word "dork" meant a "penis" and it was not considered polite to use it in mixed company. Despite my efforts to curtail the use of the word in my class and in our school, it was used frequently and even some of the younger teachers started using it. Eventually the perception of "dork" became that of "stupid" or "oaf" and the original meaning was lost. Today, the common perception of "whole language" is reading instruction that denies the importance of phonics and word attack skills. Many teachers graduating from many colleges today, trained in the whole language approach, do not even know how to teach phonics skills (see Jill Stewart's article). To deny that and say simply that they are doing it incorrectly does not solve the problem for millions of kids taught to read without knowledge of word attack skills. Our objective here is to get the word out that phonics and word attack skills must be a significant part of the instruction in EVERY child's reading instruction, or we are doing them a grave disservice. Call it whole language, call it phonics, call it "dork," but for heaven's sake, teach it correctly! DT>This is a reflection on those teachers and not the concept of WL. I am DT>on a WL listserv and we have had this discussion and all agree that DT>phonics and decoding skills are important. Again, this does not deny that many teachers of whole language do *not* teach phonics nor does it prove that YOUR perception of the process is correct. And how much phonics is taught by these teachers? Is it enough? Chuck Beams Fidonet - 1:2608/70 cbeams@future.dreamscape.com ___ * UniQWK #5290* <> - you're it! --- Maximus 2.01wb * Origin: The Hidey-Hole BBS, Pennellville, NY (315)668-8929 (1:2608/70)