DOCSLIB.ORG

60 Yearscelebrate WELCOME

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
60 Yearscelebrate WELCOME 60 YEARSCelebrate WELCOME Dear NRC/LRA Colleagues and Friends of Literacy, versity of Colorado is speaking on Thursday afternoon. Her title is: “Teaching with Integrity in the Face of High-Stakes Testing.” Greetings! May this be one of the best NRC conferences you have ever attended. Or if you are a new participant, be ready for an On Friday, Professor Hilary Janks of the University of the amazing experience—according to those of us who have come for Witwatersrand of South Africa is speaking on: “May You Live many years, NRC is our scholarly home. The Executive Officers, in Interesting Times”: Critical Literacy in South Africa. Both of Board of Directors, Headquarters Office (Christopher Roper these invited speakers bring perspectives and experience as outsid- and his capable crew), and many members have worked hard ers to NRC. I encourage you to attend, as their presentations will and thoughtfully to assure that the stage is set for a tremendous be enlightening. experience in Fort Worth, Texas at the 2010 Annual Meeting of In addition to the invited non-member speakers, there are other the National Reading Conference. all-attendee meetings with our members speaking. One such This meeting marks our 60th Anniversary. Sixty years ago, profes- event is the Presidential Address to be presented by Dr. David sors of reading met here in Fort Worth with a sense of urgency Reinking (Clemson University) on Wednesday. The title of his to share ideas about college and adult reading. Their meeting was talk is: “Beyond the Laboratory and Lens: New Metaphors for important because many first-generation students were coming Literacy Research.” Another all-participant event is the Oscar to college because of the GI Bill. This huge uptick in the number S. Causey Address on Thursday morning. Dr. Barbara M. Taylor and kinds of students forced colleges and universities to change (Emerita, University of Minnesota), last year’s Oscar S. Causey instruction and presented new opportunities for research. Hence, award winner, will speak. Her title is: “The Power of Collabora- the National Reading Conference was formed. tive Teaching with Integrity.” Finally, on Saturday morning, an integrative research review is presented by Dr. Catherine This year, 2010—60 years hence—we have returned to Fort Compton-Lilly (University of Wisconsin Madison). Her talk Worth to invent our organization once again. Understanding of is titled: “Family Literacy across Time: The Field, Families, and the reading process is no longer thought of as an autonomous Bradford Holt.” phenomenon; rather, many in literacy see reading (and writing) as far more complex, involving and including social, historical, Awards are given at each Plenary Session. I strongly encourage anthropological, linguistic, and other theoretical and paradigmatic you to attend, indicating your support for the Plenary Sessions. constructs and orientations. Thus, at the end of this conference A new Program Area was added to the conference program this we will take the final steps toward officially being known as the year. After the excellent leadership of Professors Marla H. Literacy Research Association, a decision made by the member- Mallette and Nell Duke, who developed a special series of ship in 2008. research training sessions, we created an Area so that members Welcome to the conference. Here you will find the most current, could propose to present sessions related to their research exper- noteworthy and groundbreaking literacy research. Scholars are tise. To bridge the development of this Program Area, welcome to share their scholarship and respond to the work of Drs. Mallette and Duke served as chairs. others. Perhaps this invitation is best expressed by sharing the new Also, the conference hotel was carefully selected by the Execu- Vision Statement of the Literacy Research Association: tive Committee to be easy to navigate and to facilitate talk with “The Literacy Research Association (LRA) is a community of scholars friends and colleagues. dedicated to promoting research that enriches the knowledge, under- Events you will appreciate attending include the Presidential standing, and development of lifespan literacies in a multicultural and Reception on Wednesday evening. Our anniversary celebration multilingual world. LRA is committed to ethical research that is rigor- begins at that reception—be ready to raise a glass to toast the ous, methodologically diverse, and socially responsible. LRA is dedicated NRC. Then on Thursday early evening is the Annual Town Hall to disseminating such research broadly so as to promote generative Meeting—a place for conference participants to speak about theories, informed practices, and sound policies. Central to its mission, issues both within and outside of NRC that are meaningful to LRA mentors and supports future generations of literacy scholars.” our professional lives. Be prepared to raise questions, listen to This particular program is very rich. We received 763 propos- responses, and help to direct the organization. Friday evening, we als, of which 541 were accepted for presentation. Each proposal will celebrate the beginnings of the Literacy Research Association underwent a rigorous review led by an amazing group of area with a complimentary dessert reception. Opportunities for brief chairs (find their names on page 77 of the program) and the comments about the meaning of the name change are invited. review teams (find a list of all reviewers on pages 78 and 79 of the Hurry back from your dinner to enjoy this event. program). Patricia A. Anders In addition to presentations selected through the peer review 2010 Program Chair and President-Elect process, two speakers are invited by the Program Chair to speak at Plenary Sessions. This year, Dean Lorrie A. Shepard of the Uni- Celebrating 60 Years of Literacy Research 60th Annual Meeting l December 1 - December 4, 2010 l Fort Worth, TX 1 60 YEARSCelebrate IN MEMORIAM Edward Bernard Fry in his eye and always offered an interesting point Helen J. Harper of view, whether you agreed with him or not. Edward Bernard Fry, a friend and leader in Helen J. Harper passed away on August 7, 2010 Ed Fry served as NRC president in 1974-1976 NRC, passed away on September 2, 2010. World at the untimely age of 53. A foundation estab- and sat on almost all the NRC committees. War II and service in the Merchant Marine in lished in her memory will help University of Early on when there was no support to edit the the Pacific Rim interrupted his college educa- Nevada, Las Vegas Curriculum and Instruction Yearbook, he became the editor for several years. tion at Occidental College. He then returned to doctoral students complete their dissertations. He won the Oscar S. Causey Award in 1980 and complete his degree and went on to finish his Donations can be made to the UNLV Founda- the Albert J. Kingston Award in 1991. He sug- doctorate at the University of Southern Califor- tion at 4505 Maryland Parkway, Box 451006, gested as NRC grew that a management com- nia. He wanted to know more about the flood of Las Vegas, NV 89154-1006. Note that the gift is pany would be necessary. Subsequently, officers veterans returning to college who had difficulty in memory of Helen Harper. often relied on his good business sense to make reading and was persuaded by a colleague to at- sure that NRC had a healthy balance in its ac- Helen was born in Saskatoon, Canada. She tend his first session of NRC. His first academic count. In recent years he was adamant that NRC taught secondary-school English Language job was at Loyola University, and from there he should remain a small organization focused on Arts in two rural Alberta school districts before moved to Rutgers University, where he served as research to promote dialogue amongst members. completing her Master’s degree at the Univer- Chair of the Reading Program for 22 years. To him teacher education was the purview of sity of Calgary with the guidance of Dr. John A researcher, Ed Fry was driven by a curios- IRA, an organization in which he was quite ac- Willinsky, now at Stanford University. She ity that never faded. He was one of the first tive. Within NRC he opposed the name change earned her Ph.D. at the University of Toronto’s Ontario Institute for Studies in Education with to develop and investigate computer-assisted and passing any political resolutions. Ed lobbied the supervision of Dr. Roger Simon. Helen’s first instruction and programmed learning. He even against the presence of publishers at conferences faculty position was at the University of Western wrote a small research-based book on speed because he worried about the potential influence Ontario; she then moved to the University of reading, an attempt to question the fortunes that they might have on the organization. Nevada, Las Vegas as a professor of Cultural people paid for Evelyn Wood’s speed-reading A champion for the underrepresented and poor, Studies and English Education. course. Ed also designed the diacritical marking in a banquet address Ed asked us, as NRC system, which was one of the reading techniques Over the years Helen collaborated on several members, “to look to the left, then look to the tested as part of the landmark First Grade major funded research projects. Her book pub- right” and realize that NRC needed to recruit Studies (Bond & Dykstra, 1967). His company, lications include Wild Words/Dangerous Desires: a more diverse membership. One of his major Drier Press, named after his mother’s family High School Girls and Feminist Avant-Garde accomplishments was helping to set up the name, published many materials for teachers Writing and Advocacy Research in Literacy Educa- university press in Zimbabwe. He also raised and tutors.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Scientific Evidence for Effective Teaching of Reading
    Read About It: Scientific Evidence for Effective Teaching of Reading Kerry Hempenstall Edited by Jennifer Buckingham Research Report | March 2016 National Library of Australia Cataloguing-in-Publication Data: Creator: Hempenstall, Kerry, author. Title: Read about it : scientific evidence for effective teaching of reading / Kerry Hempenstall ; edited by Jennifer Buckingham. ISBN: 9781922184610? (paperback) Series: CIS research report ; 11. Subjects: Effective teaching. Early childhood education--Research--Australia. Literacy--Research--Australia. Teacher effectiveness. Other Creators/Contributors: Buckingham, Jennifer, editor. Centre for Independent Studies (Australia), issuing body. Dewey Number: 371.10994 Read About It: Scientific Evidence for Effective Teaching of Reading Kerry Hempenstall Edited by Jennifer Buckingham Research Report 11 Related CIS publications Research Report RR9 Jennifer Buckingham and Trisha Jha, One School Does Not Fit All (2016) Policy Magazine Spring Issue Jennifer Buckingham, Kevin Wheldall and Robyn Beaman-Wheldall, ‘Why Jaydon can’t read: The triumph of ideology over evidence in teaching reading’ (2013) Contents Executive Summary ...............................................................................................1 Introduction ..........................................................................................................3 The power of improved instruction ...................................................................4 Effective, evidence-based reading instruction: The five ‘keys’
    [Show full text]
  • Reading in the Twentieth Century. INSTITUTION Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI
    DOCUMENT RESUME ED 479 530 CS 512 338 AUTHOR Pearson, P. David TITLE Reading in the Twentieth Century. INSTITUTION Center for the Improvement of Early Reading Achievement, Ann Arbor, MI. SPONS AGENCY Office of Educational Research and Improvement (ED), Washington, DC. PUB DATE 2000-08-00 NOTE 46p.; CIERA Archive #01-08. CONTRACT R305R70004 AVAILABLE FROM CIERA/University of Michigan, 610 E. University Ave., 1600 SEB, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-1259. Tel: 734-647-6940; Fax: 734- 763 -1229. For full text: http://www.ciera.org/library/archive/ 2001-08/0108pdp.pdf. PUB TYPE Information Analyses (070). Reports Research (143) EDRS PRICE EDRS Price MF01/PCO2 Plus Postage. DESCRIPTORS *Educational History; *Educational Practices; Futures (of Society); Instructional Materials; *Reading Instruction; *Reading Processes; *Reading Research; Reading Skills; Teaching Methods IDENTIFIERS *Reading Theories ABSTRACT This paper discusses reading instruction in the 20th century. The paper begins with a tour of the historical pathways that have led people, at the century's end, to the "rocky and highly contested terrain educators currently occupy in reading pedagogy." After the author/educator unfolds his version of a map of that terrain in the paper, he speculates about pedagogical journeys that lie ahead in a new century and a new millennium. Although the focus is reading pedagogy, the paper seeks to connect the pedagogy to the broader scholarly ideas of each period. According to the paper, developments in reading pedagogy over the last century suggest that it is most useful to divide the century into thirds, roughly 1900-1935, 1935- 1970, and 1970-2000. The paper states that, as a guide in constructing a map of past and present, a legend is needed, a common set of criteria for examining ideas and practices in each period--several candidates suggest themselves, such as the dominant materials used by teachers in each period and the dominant pedagogical practices.
    [Show full text]
  • Decodable Readers and Leveled Readers for Transparent Orthographies
    From Research to Practice: Designing Evidence-Based Early Reading Lessons Presented at AREW Post Conference Addis Ababa Presented by May 23, 2013 Linda Farrell Readsters [email protected] © 2016 Readsters, LLC 1 © 2016 Readsters, LLC Objectives You will understand: • How findings from three important research publications can guide early grade reading curriculum development: 1. The Simple View of Reading (Gough & Tunmer, 1986) • Decoding and Language Comprehension both have to be strong in order to achieve strong reading comprehension 2. Reading in the Brain (Dehaene, 2009) • Children learn letter patterns, starting with small chunks and moving to large chunks • There are three general stages in learning to read 3. Visible Learning (Hattie, 2009) • The best learning outcomes are achieved with direct instruction • Direct instruction requires students to practice each concept is learned to mastery © 2016 Readsters, LLC 2 Objectives You will recognize: • Characteristics of a research-based early grade reading scope and sequence for early grade reading instruction that includes all 3 stages of learning to read • The difference between decodable and leveled texts • Adequate versus inadequate practice © 2016 Readsters, LLC 3 Objectives You will experience: • How it feels to learn to read with an unfamiliar alphabet © 2016 Readsters, LLC 4 Our Primary Experience in Mother Tongue Curriculum Development Our primary experience in teaching children to read has been in Niger and The Gambia in these languages: Niger The Gambia • Fulfulde • Jola •
    [Show full text]
  • Traditional Phonics, Whole Language, and Spelling Before
    A comparison of three approaches to literacy acquisition : traditional phonics, whole language, and spelling before reading by Roxanne L Sporleder A thesis submitted in partial fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Education Montana State University © Copyright by Roxanne L Sporleder (1998) Abstract: A quasi-experimental research design was used to compare three approaches to literacy acquisition in nine first-grade classrooms to determine if there was a significant difference in achievement in phoneme segmentation, reading, and spelling development at the end of twenty-one weeks of instruction. All nine classrooms within one school district with a total of 151 first-grade students received instruction in reading following the district curriculum guidelines and using a newly adopted literature-based reading series. The basal provided a wide variety of opportunities to read, write, and talk about meaning. In addition to the basic reading program, students in the nine classrooms received differentiating instruction. Three classrooms were introduced to phonics within the context of literature and learned spelling using word families. Three classrooms received direct instruction in phonics using a traditional approach to learning letter sounds, blending words, and reading short controlled texts. These also learned spelling using word families. Another three classrooms received instruction in the letter representations of phonemes with an emphasis on metacognition and spelling words before ever reading them. At the beginning of the school year, students were given baseline tests to identify phoneme segmentation skills, letter knowledge, spelling development and reading ability. At the end of twenty-one weeks, these same tests as well as the WRMT-R were administered.
    [Show full text]
  • Foothill Elementary School
    2018-2019 School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) Foothill Elementary School The School Plan for Student Achievement (SPSA) is a plan of actions to raise the academic performance of all students. California Education Code sections 41507, 41572, and 64001 and the federal Elementary and Secondary Education Act (ESEA) require each school to consolidate all school plans for programs funded through the Consolidated Application (ConApp) and ESEA Program Improvement into the SPSA. For additional information on school programs and how you may become involved locally, please contact the following person: Principal: Israel Avila Telephone: (951) 358-1610 Address: 8230 Wells Ave., Riverside CA Fax: (951) 358-1611 District Name: Alvord Unified School District Email Address: [email protected] CDS Code: 33669776031538 Approved by District Board of Education on March 14, 2019. The School Plan for Student Achievement 1 of 76 3/6/19 Foothill Elementary School Alvord Unified School District TABLE OF CONTENTS PAGE Programs 4 Recommendations and Assurances 5 School Profile (Elementary Schools) 6 Alvord Strategic Plan 8 Central Focus on School Reform 10 Comprehensive Needs Assessment Components 12 Analysis of Site’s Current Instructional Program 13 SPSA Annual Evaluation 16 Description of Barriers and Related School Goals 18 Performance Data & Conclusions 19 CAASPP Results (All Students) 19 CAASPP Results Data Analysis 23 ELPAC Results 25 Action Plan: Planned Improvements in Student Performance 28 Performance Goal 1.1: English-Language Arts
    [Show full text]
  • Preparation Manual: Science of Teaching Reading: (293)
    Preparation Manual Science of Teaching Reading: (293) Overview and Exam Framework Sample Selected-Response Questions Sample Selected-Response Answers and Rationales Sample Constructed-Response Question Copyright © 2020 by Texas Education Agency (TEA). All rights reserved. Preparation Manual Section 3: Overview and Exam Framework Science of Teaching Reading (293) Exam Overview Exam Name Science of Teaching Reading Exam Code 293 Time 5 hours Number of Questions 90 selected-response questions and 1 constructed-response question Format Computer-administered test (CAT) The TExES Science of Teaching Reading (293) exam is designed to assess whether an examinee has the requisite knowledge and skills that an entry-level educator in this field in Texas public schools must possess. The 90 selected- response questions and the 1 constructed-response question are based on the Science of Teaching Reading exam framework. Questions on this exam range from Prekindergarten–Grade 6. Your final scaled score will be based only on scored questions. The Standards Science of Teaching Reading (STR) Standards. The STR standards identified in this section are targeted for classroom teachers of early learners (birth through age eight). The standards address the discipline that deals with the theory and practice of teaching early reading. The standards inform proper teaching techniques, strategies, teacher actions, teacher judgements, and decisions by taking into consideration theories of learning, understandings of students and their needs, and the backgrounds and interests of individual students. The standards are also aligned with the Texas Prekindergarten Guidelines and Chapter 110 of this title (relating to Texas Essential Knowledge and Skills for English Language Arts and Reading).
    [Show full text]
  • Submitted to the Office of Special Education Programs U.S
    Submitted to the Office of Special Education Programs U.S. Department of Education Originally submitted to OSEP on April 3, 2017 Updated and submitted on May 2, 2017 Colorado Department of Education Exceptional Student Services Unit www.cde.state.co.us 1 Contents Introduction ....................................................................................................................... 4 Stakeholder Involvement .................................................................................................... 5 Legislation for Sustainability ............................................................................................... 7 Phase I & II Connections ..................................................................................................... 9 Colorado’s Vision for Literacy and the SSIP Area of Focus ............................ 9 SSIP Theory of Action ..................................................................................... 9 Our Core Values ................................................................................................................ 10 Our Concerns (Root Causes) ........................................................................ 10 Our Vision of the Future .............................................................................. 11 State-Identified Measurable Result* ................................................................................ 12 Improvement Strategies .............................................................................. 12 Implementing
    [Show full text]
  • Introduction
    chapter one Introduction tom loveless or the American school curriculum, the twentieth cen- Ftury ended like it began, with an intense debate over what schools should teach and how they should teach it. In 1902 John Dewey, who would eventually become the twentieth century’s most fa- mous advocate of school reform, wrote about two “sects” fighting over the curriculum. One group sought to “subdivide each topic into studies; each study into lessons; each lesson into specific facts and formulae. Let the child proceed step by step to master each one of these separate parts, and at last he will have covered the entire ground.” The other camp, ob- served Dewey, believed “the child is the starting point, the center, and the end.” Because this view focused so intently on the child, Dewey concluded, “It is he and not the subject-matter which determines both the quality and quantity of learning.” A student-centered approach required a particular type of pedagogy, Dewey noted with approval, a teaching style recogniz- ing that “learning is active.” Dewey’s observations could have been written in 1999. Nearly a century had passed, but neither side had surrendered. Cease-fires had been fleeting. Decade after decade the conflict that Dewey had observed—and later be- came an important participant in himself—kept recurring. The terms education progressive and education traditionalist arose as labels for its partisans, who usually kept their squabbles within the walls of the nation’s schools of education. Occasionally, however, the disagreement burst into 1 2 tom loveless the headlines, captured the nation’s attention, and reminded everyone of the bitterness and rancor in which the politics of education is steeped.
    [Show full text]
  • READING INTERVENTION IDEAS Phonological Awareness
    READING INTERVENTION IDEAS Phonological Awareness………………………………………………2 Assessments………………………………………………………………..2 General order of Development……………………………………………..2 Intervention Ideas…………………………………………………………..2 Phonemic Awareness……………………………………………….2 Programs……………………………………………………3 Rhyming…………………………………………………………....4 Segmentation……………………………………………………….5 Blending…………………………………………………………….6 Sound Sequencing…………………………………………………..8 Sound Insertion and Deletions………………………………………9 Sound Substitution and Transposition………………………………9 Reading Readiness Skills………………………………………………10 Assessments…………………………………………………………………11 Intervention Ideas……………………………………………………………12 Programs……………………………………………………………………..12 Letter Identification………………………………………………….12 Letter-Sound Association……………………………………………13 Phonological Awareness to Print……………………………………14 Programs……………………………………………………..15 Phonics………………………………………………………………….15 Synthetic Phonics……………………………………………………15 Analytical Phonics…………………………………………………...16 Embedded Phonics………………………………………………...…17 Programs………………………………………………………….…………..17 Multisyllabic Words………………………………………………….18 Vocabulary………………………………………………………………20 Sight Word Identification ……………………………………………23 Reading Practice in Decodable Text………………………………….25 Programs………………………………………………………………………25 Reading Fluency…………………………………………………………27 Assessments…………………………………………………………………..27 Programs……………………………………………………………………...29 Comprehension………………………………………………………….30 Assessments………………………………………………………………….30 Intervention Ideas…………………………………………………………….30 Narrative Text………………………………………………………...38 Expository Text………………………………………………………39
    [Show full text]
  • Structured Literacy and Typical Literacy Practices
    TCXXXX10.1177/0040059917750160<sc>Council for Exceptional Children</sc><sc>TEACHING Exceptional Children</sc> 750160research-article2017 Structured Literacy Structured Literacy and Typical –11. Copyright 2018 The Author(s). DOI: 10.1177/0040059917750160 Literacy Practices Understanding Differences , Vol. XX, No. X, pp. 1 to Create Instructional Opportunities Louise Spear-Swerling TEACHING Exceptional Children Isabelle Rowe is an elementary-level services as a student with a learning Key Features special education teacher who is disability in the area of reading. beginning her second year of teaching. Although Ms. Rowe had had good Explicit means that important skills and A third grader named Curtis was preservice preparation with considerable concepts are taught clearly and directly recently placed on her caseload after exposure to evidence-based instruction by the teacher; students are not being identified with dyslexia at the for students with reading difficulties, expected to infer them simply from end of Grade 2. In preparation for her experience with specific intervention exposure or incidental learning (Archer working with him, Ms. Rowe read his programs for students with dyslexia & Hughes, 2011). Systematic and file. She knew that difficulties with was limited. Ms. Rowe was determined sequential means that skills and phonemic awareness, decoding, and to find the details of Curtis’s previous concepts are taught in a logical order, spelling are central to dyslexia, and as interventions, so that she could use that with important prerequisite skills she anticipated, Curtis did have a information to help design more taught first (Torgesen, 2006). For history of these kinds of problems. As a effective special education instruction.
    [Show full text]
  • An Introductory Guide for Reading First Coaches (PDF)
    GUIDE MENTOR SUPPORT FACILITATE INTERPRET ANALYZE ORGANIZE An Introductory Guide for Reading First Coaches Aproduct of the National Center for Reading First Technical Assistance. Developed by the Central Regional Reading First Technical Assistance Center, Vaughn Gross Center for Reading and Language Arts at the University of Texas at Austin. This publication was produced under U.S. Department of Education Contract No. ED-03-CO-0082 with RMC Research Corporation. The views expressed herein do not necessarily represent the policies of the U.S. Department of Education. No official endorsement by the U.S. Department of Education of any product, commodity, service, or enterprise is intended or should be inferred. 2005 ii Leading for Reading Success: An Introductory Guide for Reading First Coaches TABLE OF CONTENTS I NTRODUCTION. xi C HAPTER 1: DEFINING THE C OACHING P ROCESS Leading for Reading Success Objective . 1 Taking the Lead: Key Ideas . 1 ➤ What is the goal of Reading First?. 1 ➤ How will Reading First accomplish this goal?. 1 ➤ What is coaching? . 2 ➤ How will coaching help schools achieve Reading First goals?. 2 ➤ What are the qualities of an effective Reading First coach? . 4 ➤ What are the guidelines for Reading First coaching? . 6 References . 8 Keeping the Lead: Practice Activities . 11 ➤ Coaching or Coasting?. 13 C HAPTER 2: INCORPORATING THE F IVE E SSENTIAL C OMPONENTS OF S CIENTIFICALLY B ASED R EADING I NSTRUCTION Leading for Reading Success Objective . 1 Taking the Lead: Key Ideas . 1 ➤ Why is it important for Reading First coaches to have a solid understanding of scientifically based reading research? .
    [Show full text]
  • Literacy Is the Secret to Boys Success ( … and Phonics Is the Key to Literacy )
    Literacy is the Secret to Boys Success ( … and Phonics is the Key to Literacy ) Research shows that between 30 and 40 percent of Australian boys (and girls) have a reading level far below their expected outcome. Simply examine the results of the NSW basic skills and literacy tests. Its not debatable – its factual. We believe that literacy among boys is possibly the single largest determinant of the ‘success’ of boys throughout their life. Literacy impacts continuously upon their life chances … the lack of literacy has many apparent causes, but we believe a single common thread runs through these causes – the dominance of the ‘whole language’ approach – typified by the Reading Recovery program – which is the dominant theology among Australian schools. It seems strange to suggest that the ‘solution’ is in fact the problem … but consider this. In nearly every school in Australia, kindergarten aged children are expected to learn to read by memorising the individual word, by each word’s individual shape and letter contents. They are encouraged not to ‘sound out’ the word (the proven, traditional phonics system) as has been the case until 20 years ago, but instead to essentially memorise and guess the words they encounter. This technique has ‘converted’ the English language into the Chinese language, where each of the 6000 symbols are memorised. But at the age of 5, a child already knows and uses 5000 words. By the age of 8, it is as high as 25,000 words. As a learning technique, the Whole Language approach is a form of educational elitism. The technique works for children who have good memories, and those who are good at operating in a ‘contextual environment’ – guessing the word remnants they don’t know.
    [Show full text]