 |
 |
It's always struck me that WHOLE Language must teach phonics--otherwise it wouldn't be WHOLE. I know! I know! "Whole Language" doesn't mean only WHOLE, in the non-specialized sense. "Whole Language," in fact, offers a philosophy related to the complete context of early language arts instruction. For me analogies to sports come naturally, so. . . . We don't assume that Wayne Gretzky learned to play hockey by reading the rule book--but by the age of ten he probably knew the rules very well. Of course, we shouldn't build programs that suit only superstars, but the idea that _anyone_ should learn the skills of hockey, figure skating, or basketball in a classroom strikes me a bit strange. In the same way, the idea that anyone should learn to "read" exclusively by sounding out phonemes/graphemes/or any--emes in isolation leaves me wondering what's not being said when we get into the Phonics vs. Whole Language debate. I suspect that these issues are often political rather than pedagogical. Will we hear more about this at Inkshed14? You'll be there, won't you, Jamie? Henry P.S. Last year in Milwaukee Russ mentioned a group of MIt linguists who took strong exception to the errors in Whole Language. Russ then sent it on to me. If I can find it in my files, I'll post it. H. ------------------------------------------------------------------------- Henry A. Hubert | [log in to unmask] Department of English and Modern Languages . University College of the Cariboo | Ph. 250-828-5236 P.O. Box 3010 . FAX 250-371-5697 Kamloops, B. C. | V2C 5N3 . -------------------------------------------------------------------------