Again with the phonics. Advocates of the look-say / whole language method say that kids will learn the phonetic rules of the language without any explicit instruction, provided that they get enough exposure to good literature, and so forth.
However, it is pretty clear that advocates of the look-say / whole language method are wrong. It hasn't worked in the Minneapolis Public Schools. At any rate, that seemed to be the consensus at the regular meeting of the Minneapolis Board of Education on September 29, 1999. High school teachers who spoke at the meeting reported that a lot of the kids who didn't pass the reading section of the Minnesota Basic Standards test were unlikely to pass it unless they received some phonics instruction and practice. According to a newspaper article under the heading "Less than a third of 4th graders can read well," it is noted "Numerous government-sponsored studies over the last decade have found that explicit instruction in sound-letter relationships and phonics practice, combined with exposure to rich literature, produce the best results (St. Paul Pioneer Press, 7 April 2001 )." [The preceding passage was lifted from my school board platform] It's not enough for the district to ask Houghton Mifflin to expand the "phonics component" of its English language curriculum product. We need to introduce phonics instruction to K-4 classrooms as a regular part of the curriculum: Phonics instruction accompanied by classroom activities that will help kids learn the skills, like blending letter sounds; Phonics instruction and practice that is integrated with and reinforced by the rest of the English language curriculum. Not an add on. Not another "phonics piece." Why does the look-say / whole language method retain a lot of support within the educational establishment? Diane Ravitch, author of "Left Back: a century of failed school reforms," says you can blame "progressive" social engineers, and the look-say method is a method of dumbing-down the curriculum for the not-college-bound. I agree with Ravitch that it is a method of dumbing-down the curriculum. But I don't buy the "progressive" conspiracy theory that is woven into her history lesson. Ravitch supports a neo-conservative school reform agenda and has been a policy advisor to presidents Bush and Bush. I wrote a brief review of "Left Back: " by Diane Ravitch, and a few other books, which can be found at my web site <http://educationright.tripod.com> It's easy to dismiss advocates of phonics instruction as right-wing wackos (Republicans), but those "right-wing wackos" are in charge of a lot of suburban school districts that have an effective reading curriculum. -Doug Mann, King Field _______________________________________ Minneapolis Issues Forum - A Civil City Civic Discussion - Mn E-Democracy Post messages to: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subscribe, Unsubscribe, Digest option, and more: http://e-democracy.org/mpls
