RE: Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
Title: RE: [PEN-L:30697] Re: War Against Literacy= I wrote: The Bushite teach-to-the-test Bushwa is a disaster (as is the whole Leave No Child Behind nonsense, which seems aimed at helping the private schools), but here's a good word for phonics: different children have different learning styles, some learning to read better with phonics and others with other methods. The problem with phonics is _not_ really about phonics _per se_. Rather, it's about forcing all kids into the same mold. Here in California, the school system did the same thing with a different teaching method (whole language) that may or may not have benefitted McGraw-Hill. We need more pluralism in teaching techniques, more individual-oriented approaches. BTW, I wonder if BUSINESSWEEK and other McGraw-owned media outlets reported on this? Charles J. writes: BW is a McGraw Hill mouthpiece on issues like this (it's also so pro-US on all issues, it makes the Economist seem like a model of fairness). As Michael points out, BW is the most commonsensical of US business mags when it comes to domestic issues (except, I would guess, when it comes to reading technologies or other matters that mix with McGraw's businesses). It's very common for journalists, politicians, and others to be relatively progressive on domestic issues while being rah-rah patriotic on foreign affairs. California was the center of the conflict once Florida and Texas were bought out. Yes indeed, McGraw Hill through its Open Court brand was the main beneficiary of changes made in California. Whole Language could never be encompassed by the publishers, hence their need to switch to phonics. See Krashen on this below. The article is very useful, especially since I didn't know the details of this case. My impression has always been that the horrible state of California students' knowledge should be blamed on former governor Reagan's cut-backs and such phenomena as Prop. 13 (and the failure of later governors to reverse these). Anyway, my point is that phonics work for some students. The problem with public education is that they usually want to apply a one size fits all policy. There seems to be some progress in the move away from this... BTW, I'm the father of a son (Guthrie, age 12) who's finally back in a public school in Torrance, CA (after a disaster at a non-public school and at a different public school, in Culver City). I must say I've never been happier about his school situation. He's semi-autistic (having what's called Asperger's syndrome) but the combination of a special-ed homeroom (for 7th grade), mainstream classes about individual subjects, and a one-on-one aide (paid for by the public school) seems to be working very well. Not only is he learning, but he's very happy and wants to be the Valedictorian! Too bad he has to take a 40 minute commute each way... Jim
Re: RE: Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
I think this is the point. The interesting research issue for someone is to examine how and why phonics vs. whole language became a religious issue. On Monday, September 30, 2002, at 09:47 AM, Devine, James wrote: Anyway, my point is that phonics work for some students. The problem with public education is that they usually want to apply a "one size fits all" policy. There seems to be some progress in the move away from this... Ken Gordon
Re: Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
At 07:30 PM 09/29/2002 -0700, Charles wrote: I would bet you used phonics methods in beginning reading within a much larger approach to reading, which usually is, in a nutshell, to learn to read by reading so as to have lifelong reading to learn. That might include sight vocabulary/whole word methods, too. My little nephew, he's not even two, very verbal, and recognizes some written language that is highly contextualized. So he clearly is already a whole language reader. Yeah, of course, I used everything: phonics where it made sense, and for the one and two syllable words that don't follow the rules, I used a whole-word recognition bingo game. And then of course we sat and read books together for many, many years. And of course I started with letter recognition games etc. when everyone was around two. Of all the languages I have learned (about five), English is by far the hardest to learn to read and write; obviously, you need a bag full of tricks. It's unfortunate that good pedagogy (which comes from training in a lot of different methods and experience with children) has to give way to ideology and the market. Joanna
War Against Literacy=$$$$
This one is going to make the ruling regime a lot of money, too. In fact, Bush was giving some sort phonics-based cheerleading session when word of 9-11 came in. He then fled to a bunker in Nebraska. -http://www.guerrillanews.com/government/doc326.html Hooked on Phonics Savanna Reid, February 21, 2002 The McGraw publishing dynasty has closer, longer-standing ties to President Bush than even Enrons ex-chairman Ken Lay. While the countrys attention has been focused on the War on Terror and the implosion of a little Houston-based energy company, Bush and McGraw have quietly pushed through a national education curriculum that many critics fear may drive up drop-out rates, further deepening the educational opportunity gap between wealthy and poor. The law is ironically called the No Child Left Behind Act, and its mandates are coming soon to a school district near you. You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test. President Bush, at Townsend Elementary School, touting his education reform plans, Feb. 21, 2001. On January 8, Bush signed his Education Plan, (the No Child Left Behind Act), into law. Its critics assert that while not only will children be left behind in record numbers, the act will also principally serve as a windfall for McGraw-Hill Companies, a publishing giant with close family ties to the President. Bush implemented a prototype of this plan in Texas. Puffed with pride, Bush informed the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research that, In 1994, there were 67 schools in Texas that were rated 'exemplorary' (sic) according to our own tests. Many teachers and education researchers have been less enthusiastic about Bush-McGraw policies, challenging the legitimacy of the programs reliance on the science of phonics and decrying the punitive testing regimen that cracks down on minority children. Phonics is an approach to teaching reading that emphasizes sound-bites over words as the fundamental building-blocks of literacy. Loosely based on phonetic linguistics and chock full of scientific-sounding jargon like phonemic awareness and phonograms, research on phonics emanates almost exclusively from sub-publishers of the McGraw-Hill Companies. Proponents call phonics instruction an indispensable tool for decoding (sounding out) whole language (words). The systems detractors point out that although 84% of all English words are phonetically regular (easy to decode with phonograms), the other (phonetically irregular) 16% are the words that appear with greatest frequency in text ? about 80% of the time. These statistics have been brushed aside as trivial by outspoken proponents of phonics instruction, who insist that science is on their side. Scientific assessment testing likewise made it into national education reform legislation via heavily-promoted research published by the McGraw-Hill Companies. Congress heard testimonials from professional consultants with vested interests in overstating confidence in the rigor and objectivity of research that links high-stakes standardized testing to improvements in public school performance. Objecting teachers were accused of patronizing the poor by setting low standards for minority students A Texas trial foreshadowed the grim outlook for underprivileged students under 'test-mania' infused education policy. The centerpiece of the Governor Bush-McGraw testing program, the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS), was taken to court in 1999 for discrimination against black and Latino students. Judge Edward C. Prado ruled that even though the test clearly had a discriminatory impact (minority graduation rates fell from 60 to 50% after TAAS was implemented as a prerequisite for graduation), TAAS was deemed educationally necessary - so the policy was allowed to stand. Forget Kenny-Boy: Meet the McGraws The Bush and McGraw families have been close since the 1930s. McGraw connections with the Barbara Bush Foundation for Family Literacy are so extensive that the families seem to intertwine seamlessly. Florida Governor Jeb Bush and his brother in Texas both implemented radical education reform policies at the state level to virtually mandate the use of McGraw-Hill products in public classrooms. John Negroponte, Bushs ambassador to the U.N., comes from an executive position in global marketing at McGraw. On his first day in the Oval Office, Bush met with McGraw himself, shortly before announcing an ambitious national phonics-promoting education policy. In a close examination of the Bush education policys many favors for McGraw, The Nations Stephen Metcalf points out, to teach phonics you need a textbook and usually a series of items ? worksheets, tests, teacher's editions ? that constitute an elaborate purchase for a school district and a profitable product line for a publisher. A survey published in the Elementary Reading Market Update for January 2001 found that more than 45%
RE: War Against Literacy=$$$$
Title: RE: [PEN-L:30692] War Against Literacy= The Bushite teach-to-the-test Bushwa is a disaster (as is the whole Leave No Child Behind nonsense, which seems aimed at helping the private schools), but here's a good word for phonics: different children have different learning styles, some learning to read better with phonics and others with other methods. The problem with phonics is _not_ really about phonics _per se_. Rather, it's about forcing all kids into the same mold. Here in California, the school system did the same thing with a different teaching method (whole language) that may or may not have benefitted McGraw-Hill. We need more pluralism in teaching techniques, more individual-oriented approaches. BTW, I wonder if BUSINESSWEEK and other McGraw-owned media outlets reported on this? Jim -Original Message- From: Charles Jannuzi To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sent: 9/29/2002 5:18 AM Subject: [PEN-L:30692] War Against Literacy= This one is going to make the ruling regime a lot of money, too. In fact, Bush was giving some sort phonics-based cheerleading session when word of 9-11 came in. He then fled to a bunker in Nebraska. -http://www.guerrillanews.com/government/doc326.html Hooked on Phonics Savanna Reid, February 21, 2002 The McGraw publishing dynasty has closer, longer-standing ties to President Bush than even Enron's ex-chairman Ken Lay. While the country's attention has been focused on the War on Terror and the implosion of a little Houston-based energy company, Bush and McGraw have quietly pushed through a national education curriculum that many critics fear may drive up drop-out rates, further deepening the educational opportunity gap between wealthy and poor. The law is ironically called the No Child Left Behind Act, and its mandates are coming soon to a school district near you. You teach a child to read, and he or her will be able to pass a literacy test. President Bush, at Townsend Elementary School, touting his education reform plans, Feb. 21, 2001. On January 8, Bush signed his Education Plan, (the "No Child Left Behind" Act), into law. Its critics assert that while not only will children be left behind in record numbers, the act will also principally serve as a windfall for McGraw-Hill Companies, a publishing giant with close family ties to the President. Bush implemented a prototype of this plan in Texas. Puffed with pride, Bush informed the Manhattan Institute for Policy Research that, In 1994, there were 67 schools in Texas that were rated 'exemplorary' (sic) according to our own tests. Many teachers and education researchers have been less enthusiastic about Bush-McGraw policies, challenging the legitimacy of the program's reliance on the science of 'phonics' and decrying the punitive testing regimen that cracks down on minority children. Phonics is an approach to teaching reading that emphasizes sound-bites over words as the fundamental building-blocks of literacy. Loosely based on phonetic linguistics and chock full of scientific-sounding jargon like 'phonemic awareness' and 'phonograms', research on phonics emanates almost exclusively from sub-publishers of the McGraw-Hill Companies. Proponents call phonics instruction an indispensable tool for 'decoding' (sounding out) 'whole language' (words). The system's detractors point out that although 84% of all English words are phonetically regular (easy to decode with phonograms), the other (phonetically irregular) 16% are the words that appear with greatest frequency in text ? about 80% of the time. These statistics have been brushed aside as 'trivial' by outspoken proponents of phonics instruction, who insist that science is on their side. 'Scientific assessment' testing likewise made it into national education reform legislation via heavily-promoted research published by the McGraw-Hill Companies. Congress heard testimonials from professional consultants with vested interests in overstating confidence in the rigor and objectivity of research that links high-stakes standardized testing to improvements in public school performance. Objecting teachers were accused of 'patronizing the poor' by setting 'low standards' for minority students A Texas trial foreshadowed the grim outlook for underprivileged students under 'test-mania' infused education policy. The centerpiece of the Governor Bush-McGraw testing program, the Texas Assessment of Academic Skills (TAAS), was taken to court in 1999 for discrimination against black and Latino students. Judge Edward C. Prado ruled that even though the test clearly had a discriminatory impact (minority graduation rates fell from 60 to 50% after TAAS was implemented as a prerequisite for graduation), TAAS was deemed educationally necessary - so the policy was allowed to stand. Forget Kenny-Boy: Meet the McGraws The Bush and McGraw families have been close since the 1930s. McGraw connections with the Barbara Bush
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
--- Devine, James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The Bushite teach-to-the-test Bushwa is a disaster (as is the whole Leave No Child Behind nonsense, which seems aimed at helping the private schools), but here's a good word for phonics: different children have different learning styles, some learning to read better with phonics and others with other methods. The problem with phonics is _not_ really about phonics _per se_. Rather, it's about forcing all kids into the same mold. Here in California, the school system did the same thing with a different teaching method (whole language) that may or may not have benefitted McGraw-Hill. We need more pluralism in teaching techniques, more individual-oriented approaches. BTW, I wonder if BUSINESSWEEK and other McGraw-owned media outlets reported on this? Jim BW is a McGraw Hill mouthpiece on issues like this (it's also so pro-US on all issues, it makes the Economist seem like a model of fairness). California was the center of the conflict once Florida and Texas were bought out. Yes indeed, McGraw Hill through its Open Court brand was the main beneficiary of changes made in California. Whole Language could never be encompassed by the publishers, hence their need to switch to phonics. See Krashen on this below. I've been reading quite a few interesting articles on the topic. NYT, as usual, is laughable (that's always interesting), but here is the better stuff: http://www.pdkintl.org/kappan/k0206kra.htm Whole Language and the Great Plummet of 1987-92: An Urban Legend from California There is compelling evidence that California's low reading scores are related to California's impoverished print environment, not to the introduction of the whole-language approach to literacy, Mr. Krashen points out. By Stephen Krashen THERE ARE a number of ways to define an urban legend. Here's one from the Urban Legends Research Centre: An Urban Legend is usually a (good/captivating/titillating/engrossing/incredible/worrying) story that has had a wide audience, is circulated spontaneously, has been told in several forms, and which many have chosen to believe (whether actively or passively) despite the lack of actual evidence to substantiate the story.1 I wish to add another urban legend to those that already exist, a legend that I believe ranks with the legend of the alligators living in the sewers of New York City.2 I will refer to it as the Plummet Legend. It goes like this. After whole language was introduced in California in 1987, test scores plummeted to the point where California's fourth-graders were last in the country in 1992. It makes a good story, if we can judge by the number of times it has been repeated. But this sudden plummet never happened. It is an urban legend, a captivating and worrisome story that has been told in several forms and that many people have chosen to believe despite the lack of actual evidence. The Plummet Legend has had serious consequences. It has led to the discrediting of the whole-language approach to literacy and has nurtured a strong movement promoting a skill-building approach.3 I will try to show here both that the evidence does not support this legend and that the legend is inconsistent with the results of studies of literacy development. Did Test Scores Plummet in California? Here is a more complete version of the Plummet Legend. In 1987 a group of whole-language advocates took over the California Language Arts Framework Committee and brought in whole language. Phonics instruction and other forms of direct teaching were banned, and language scores plummeted to the point where California's fourth-graders scored last in the country in reading in 1992. California is now recovering from this damage, thanks to a rational, sensible phonics-based approach to reading. This is not what happened. I served on the California Language Arts Framework Committee in 1987. Phonics teaching was not banned. We simply proposed that language arts should be literature-based. This is hardly controversial. In fact, I regarded it as part of the definition of language arts. Did teachers change their ways in California? Nobody really knows. There have been no empirical studies comparing methodology in language arts teaching before and after the 1987 committee met. Did test scores decline? It is certainly true that California fourth-graders scored last in the country in the fourth-grade National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) in reading in 1992. But this was the first time NAEP scores had been presented by state. It was assumed that there had been a decline, but there was no evidence that this was so, for no comparison with earlier test scores was made. Jeff McQuillan examined CAP (California Achievement Program) reading comprehension scores from 1984 to 1990, which I present in Table 1. There is no clear pattern of increases or decreases during these years, which leads to the conclusion that California's reading
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
I sort of wrote this up while engaged in pro-Whole Language debate in support of people like Krashen and Goodman (true heroes for language and literacy education in the US). It has since grown into a presentation at the World Congress for Applied Linguistics in Singapore this December (my other presentation is about articulatory phonology so believe me this one is better here). I'll pretend you just woke up at the very end of my allotted 20 minutes in time for the rousing conclusion. Notice how all jargon is carefully explained in context: Why phonological reading skills are top-down subcomponents of whole language Charles Jannuzi, Fukui University, Japan Conclusion In the cases of ESL/EFL learning and ESL/EFL literacy, it could be argued that we need to think more along the terms in which Goodman (1967,1993) originally expressed and later clarified his view of reading as a psycholinguistic guessing game: that is, ALL language processing and comprehension comes together with mentally internalized linguistic knowledge and non-linguistic background knowledge as a TOP-DOWN, wholistic orchestration of many skills, including those that have been traditionally thought of as bottom-up and text-driven. There is no one aspect of a written text that is self-sufficiently bottom-up without top-down cognition. Active human minds and brains have to be engaged in language learning and text comprehension, or no meaning can be understood, interpreted, revised, created or exchanged. Given the complex, irregular, incomplete, partly logographic (like Chinese characters, read as whole words), partly phonological nature of English writing conventions and the reading processes this requires, even phonological (sublexical) manipulation of text and phonics skills must be more top-down, mind-driven processes than text-driven artifacts and bottom-up rule inputs. Texts and external rules do not drive comprehension processes and never will. It is precisely because written English is both alphabetic while so phonologically incomplete and inconsistent that, if it is visually and linguistically processed at sub-lexical levels, it truly is the psycholinguistic guessing game that Goodman has called it (see Figure 1--sorry no attachments for a list like this; I'll have it up online soon). All parts of ESL/EFL reading, then, from grapho-phonological elements to lexical, syntactical, discoursal and schematic ones too, if they contribute to language access and meaningful engagement of text, are best thought of as top-down in nature. And, in the areas that have been traditionally thought of as the linguistic, text-driven bottom-up levels, it is the phonological and lexical elements that may prove most linguistically reinforcing and illuminating. Thus, it is important for teachers to revise and implement more complete concepts of phonology in teaching a SL/FL and in teaching how to read it. As whole language teachers we must help students to learn to read ESL/EFL so that they may then read to learn in English. References Goodman, K. (1967). Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist 5, 126-135. Goodman, K. (1993). Phonics phacts. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann. __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
Neil Bush is also involved in the testing business. Is that an omen of impending collapse? -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
I cannot speak about educational matters in particular, but BW is probably the least ideological of business publication -- probably because they do not seem to be pitching to the rubes, but to business people who profit from information. Charles Jannuzi wrote: BW is a McGraw Hill mouthpiece on issues like this (it's also so pro-US on all issues, it makes the Economist seem like a model of fairness). -- Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929 Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
--- Michael Perelman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I cannot speak about educational matters in particular, but BW is probably the least ideological of business publication -- probably because they do not seem to be pitching to the rubes, but to business people who profit from information. I should have clarified: I meant its international edition, which seems to be screened by the US government for appropriate propaganda. As is Time, which includes such great stuff as: The US Navy never transported nuclear weapons to Japan; the Japanese were upset because the aircraft carriers are nuclear powered. In fact, the US Navy and Air Force moved tactical nukes all over the place, including Japan (but also my backyard in Chambersburg, PA), and at least the JCP knew this about the activities in Japan(though I'm assuming the LDP and the bureaucrats did too). Still, BW in its US edition sucks, too. It's breathless coverage of .com hype and the new, new economy and productivity growth were through and through in support of US dominance of global business discourse. BTW, I recently wrote up a piece for BW Online, international edition and it was rejected by the NY editors as being 'too insider baseball', whatever the hey that means. I think it was because the piece didn't necessarily have a negative focus on Japan or deal with Japan as exotic outland. At least the Times HE Supplement had the good sense to take it, and they pay better than the cheapskates at BW! C Jannuzi __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
Hey Charles, I'm lost. I've taught three children to read using phonics...with outstanding results. Is the point that phonics is a bad method? Or that the tests are self serving? Joanna
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
Michael Perelman asked, Neil Bush is also involved in the testing business. Is that an omen of impending collapse? Silverado Neil has a company that produces web-based multi-media instructional support material. That no doubt fits under the supplemental services component of No Child Left Behind. One could view the law in the context of a long term strategy to open up broader opportunities for privatization of public education. To the extent that its philosophy fails, it will of course be the public schools that will bear the brunt of the blame. The obvious solution will be to turn more and more to the innovative and flexible private sector. http://www.ignitelearning.com/home.htm Tom Walker 604 255 4812
Re: War Against Literacy=$$$$
--- joanna bujes [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey Charles, I'm lost. I've taught three children to read using phonics...with outstanding results. Is the point that phonics is a bad method? Or that the tests are self serving? Joanna I would bet you used phonics methods in beginning reading within a much larger approach to reading, which usually is, in a nutshell, to learn to read by reading so as to have lifelong reading to learn. That might include sight vocabulary/whole word methods, too. My little nephew, he's not even two, very verbal, and recognizes some written language that is highly contextualized. So he clearly is already a whole language reader. The point is that multi-billion dollar programs for phonics and phonemic awareness are not necessary and they can't overcome a lack of books (or good meals) in childrens' lives. The money would be far better spent on total literacy and language development programs (in the case of ESL students or bilinguals who are stronger in a language other than English). Whole language doesn't exclude phonics approaches (though often when people say they are using phonics they are actually using something quite different). I learned to read watching and hearing my older sister reading Dr. Suess out loud. I always thought phonics in first and second grade was some form of maths that didn't make sense. The new spin on phonics isn't really phonics. It's stuff called 'phonemic awareness', and it has a monolithic research machine in Florida and Texas universities behind it. This is the stuff the Bushes are cramming down peoples' throats and it's no coincidence it's going to make billions for those who have made investments in the companies with the teaching and testing software and course materials. See 'Beginning to read and the spin doctors of science: The political campaign to change America's mind about children learn to read' by Denny Taylor (NCTE Press, ISBN 0-8141-0275-1). Amazon has it, as well as a review by yours truly. CJ CJ __ Do you Yahoo!? New DSL Internet Access from SBC Yahoo! http://sbc.yahoo.com
