Interversity Quotes"I think it's time to ask the Standardistos: Where's the test for compassion? For honesty? For curiosity? For moral commitment? Until they can answer, let's tell them to shut up." —Susan Ohanian (One Size Fits Few: The Folly of Educational Standards) Interversity ProjectsEchoes of Orwell:The purpose of this webforum is to promote a lively discussion among students and faculty alike about George Orwell's 1984 and the parallels or echoes found in today's society. |
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index] Re: whole language question
Teresa, A "rigid (ie-scripted) whole language program" is an oxymoron. There's no such thing. Gloria gpipkin@i-1.net ----- Original Message ----- From: Teresa or J Glenn To: ARN-L@LISTS.CUA.EDU Sent: Saturday, March 02, 2002 9:18 AM Subject: Re: whole language question True whole language does teach phonics, as in letter sounds, does it not? I need to be able to differentiate between poor teachers and poor teaching strategy. Juanita, I'll be honest with you: I'm trained as a high school English teacher & have had very little in the way of whole language versus phonics. It is, however, my understanding that a good teacher of *either* form would include parts of BOTH the whole language AND the phonics approach. The students that I am currently teaching had a very rigid (ie-- scripted) whole language program and they (a) cannot read anything very complex; (b) hate reading; and (c) cannot spell anything, including extremely short & well-worn words like really (relly, reilly, realy, reely, rally, etc.) and very (vary, viry, virry, varry, veery, etc.). I have to wonder. My daughter is in first grade and is doing the Success For All program. Her vocabulary from this week (she's in a 3.2 reading group-- third grade, second semester) included bouquet, antagonized and transparent. So yes, it sounds familiar. Teresa G.
Post a Message to arn-l: |
eric |