LM_NET: Library Media Networking
> In my research a lot of the
studies that I have come across attacks the phonics versus
whole language approach. In an article by Regna Lee Wood
(National Review ~Sept 14, 1992) Thats right - they're wrong
(contribution of illiteracy to deteriorating educational
standards). ...
>I wasn't trying to prove anything, just trying to get a little insight
better understanding on the accusations being made in these articles and
studies. Does anyone have anymore information, insights for me? That's
all.
>Thats why I purposed the question, maybe I should have said it in a
different manner.
Dear Nicole
Research is like the Bible and statistics - you can use it to support
whatever argument you are proposing or point of view you wish to defend. And
even though the most BORING course I did during my Masters two years ago
(which is relatively rare qualification for primary school teachers here so
it still has a lot of validity) was Educational Research, it still alerted
me to look behind the published conclusion to the research methods that were
used to reach that conclusion and test their objectivity and validity.
Because it is very easy to skew your methods to prove your hypothesis even
if unconsciously.
Apart from the fact that Wood's 'research' is 10 years old, it is full of
statements that have no support within the conclusion "That switch from
sounding words by syllable to sighting them by configuration is the reason
that since 1950 about 50 million children with poor sight memories have
reached the fourth grade still unable to read. And it is the reason that
two-thirds of these 50 million have never learned to read." illustrates what
I mean. Where has Wood got these figures from?
And who is Regna Lee Wood and what is it that he/ she has done that makes
him/her an expert on which you would base a paper? Anyone can write a
'research' paper and have it published without having any credentials to
give it credibility.
You will notice that I am not supporting one side of the argument or the
other here, just trying to encourage you to look at the quality of what you
are basing your work on and suggesting that it might be beneficial for you
to find other works (particularly that of Dr Marie Clay - Reading: the
Patterning of Complex Behaviour and Dr Brian Cambourne - The Whole Story)
that have an opposing viewpoint and then contrast the arguments to form your
own opinion and then in your paper you could state what you believe and how
and why you have reached that conclusion.
But to give you a tiny indication of which side of the fence I am on, give
this piece of work to a non-reader and see how well they succeed in sounding
it out and then making sense of what they have 'read'. In the first
sentence alone 10 of the 26 words defy simple phonetic sounding out. How
frustrating would that be? How long would a child stick at a task with that
sort of frustration level, given that there is a growing school of thought
that a person's natural concentration span for a new task is their age plus
three minutes! Or if motivation and relevance are factors, try the first
sentence of Harry Potter - in fact try the title!
More than 2 cents worth,
Cheers
Barbara
Barbara Braxton
Teacher-Librarian
Palmerston District Primary School
PALMERSTON ACT 2913
T. 02 6205 6162
F. 02 6205 7242
E. barbara@austarmetro.com.au
W.http://www.palmdps.act.edu.au
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-==-=
All postings to LM_NET are protected under copyright law.
To quit LM_NET (or set-reset NOMAIL or DIGEST), send email to:
listserv@listserv.syr.edu In the message write EITHER:
1) SIGNOFF LM_NET 2) SET LM_NET NOMAIL or 3) SET LM_NET DIGEST
4) SET LM_NET MAIL * Please allow for confirmation from Listserv.
For LM_NET Help see: http://ericir.syr.edu/lm_net/
Archives: http://askeric.org/Virtual/Listserv_Archives/LM_NET.html
See also EL-Announce for announcements from library media vendors:
http://www.mindspring.com/~el-announce/
=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=--=-=-=
LM_NET
Mailing List Home