|
Title: Whole language lives... , By: Manzo,
Kathleen Kennedy, Teacher Magazine, 10466193, May/Jun99, Vol. 10, Issue 8 |
CURRICULUM
|
Whole language lives... |
And it's thriving in a state known
for top readers.
Notes to the Dear Reader reading this.
Use the resources (and especially the “Checklist of guidelines for evaluating research and research claims.”) to critically examine the article below.
Emphasis is in boldface and underlining.
[Hints and questions are inserted in brackets, italics, and boldface.]
Please answer these
questions as you read along.
Amid the snow-soaked boots that line the hallway of
Jot your answer here.
“Books fly around this school,” says Gail Gibson, a teacher
and Mapleton's principal. Such
enthusiasm for reading isn't surprising. [Is books
flying around the room a good operational definition and measure of enthusiasm
for reading? Can you think of more valid measures?]
Jot your answer here.
In recent state results from the National Assessment of
Educational Progress,
Jot your answer here.
And Mapleton consistently [How often?] beats average scores on statewide tests, despite an enrollment with many impoverished students [What percentage? What does ‘many’ mean?] and a local economy sapped of strength by struggling potato farms, failing timber mills, and an abandoned military base.
[Do the authors tell what level of proficiency is the average? What if the average is low? What would that say about Mapleton
students’ proficiency? Should there be
an external criterion for proficiency? What would be an example of
external criteria for different levels of reading proficiency? Please see this website. http://reading.uoregon.edu/flu/flu_benchmarks.php
]
Jot your answer here.
On last year's assessments, only 6 percent of Mapleton's 4th graders failed to read at the “basic” level, while nearly half demonstrated advanced skills.
[Is it clear what ‘advanced’ means? Are the skills that define ‘advanced”
presented? Advanced compared to what? Do
we need clear definitions of different levels of proficiency in order to judge
the reading of Mapleton students, and to judge the effectiveness of their
instruction?]
Jot your answer here.
What is surprising, however, is that students at Mapleton and
many other schools in
[Do we need to know what percentage?
Do we need to know the operational definition of whole language? Could different teachers teach in very
different ways and still call it whole language? If so, then how can anyone say that “whole
language” is effective?]
Jot your answer here.
In recent years, once-popular whole language strategies have been blamed for students' anemic reading achievement as a back-to-basics movement has gathered strength nationwide.
[Is the phrase ‘back to basics’ an insult? Is the movement really back to basics or is it really an advancement to science movement?]
Jot your answer here.
But as Mapleton illustrates, whole language, while maimed, is surviving — even thriving — in some places.
[The authors imply that whole language has always been effective but
was wrongly blamed? But if it WAS
effective, why would students’ reading be ‘anemic’? If students’ reading was
anemic and if whole language WAS used, then isn’t whole language “to
blame”? If so, is it a
good idea that it is thriving?!]
Jot your answer here.
In classrooms from
[If they are going to criticize teaching “phonics skills as the foundation of a solid reading program,” shouldn’t they cite scientific research showing that whole language “literature-based methods” are more effective?]
Jot your answer here.
The
[Is it possible that the level of proficiency at the
http://www.insideschools.org/fs/school_profile.php?id=55
How might this account for proficiency?]
Jot your answer here.
[Is it possible that many children knew how to read before they got to
this school? Should the authors know the
entry level skills of students before they claim that the school taught
students to read (pre-test)? How do they rule out the alternative
explanation that children were taught by their parents? To TEST whether whole language is an effective
way to teach reading, should there be an experiment that has a control
group that is the same demographically as the Manhattan New School, but does
NOT get whole language? What could this experiment show?]
Jot your answer here.
[Is it clear what ‘improved significantly’ means? Do the authors
describe a control
group that is the same demographically as the
Jot your answer here.
And at
[Is this evidence of effectiveness?]
Jot your answer here.
“It really depends on what area of the country you're in or who you are talking to… but there are still many people who
believe in the whole language philosophy,” says
Gerald Oglan, president-elect of the Whole
Language Umbrella, a subgroup of the National Council of Teachers
of English. More than 1,000 individuals and dozens of Teachers Applying Whole
Language groups are members.
Whole language philosophies took root in classrooms across the nation in the 1980s, but the movement has been besieged with criticism in recent years. “We are on the defensive,” Oglan admits, “and we're still trying to regroup.” Whole language has been blamed for declining test scores by those who charge such instruction is not rigorous enough.
[It sounds like the writers believe these charges are false? If so, do they give data to show that
children who receive whole language (in contrast to children in equivalent
groups who are taught a different way) learn more?]
Jot your answer here.
Advocates, however, believe that the failure of many teachers
to spell out how whole language translates into
classroom practice is at the root of the problem. Teachers were at a loss to
explain to parents and policymakers how they teach reading skills, or why
spelling is not emphasized with beginning learners, or whether research
supported what they were doing.
[The authors are claiming that whole language is criticized because
teachers don’t know how to explain it.
Is this likely? Is it possible
that whole language is criticized by parents and policy makers because many
kids who get whole language don’t learn to read? Is this an example of being unwilling to
accept data that challenge what you believe?]
Jot your answer here.
Compounding this miscommunication was the fact that some teachers who embraced whole language may not have had the experience, knowledge, or resources necessary to implement it.
[Should there be data SHOWING that this is the case? Is it alright just
to make a statement like this and not back it up?]
Jot your answer here.
In many places, explains Brenda Power, an associate professor
of education at the
Back-to-basics advocates argue that explicit, systematic phonics instruction is most beneficial to young readers, especially poor and minority students who are considered most at risk. But Harwayne, for one, believes that such lock-step methods aren't necessary for most children. [He may believe that, but where are the data that show he is right?] Five-year-olds will wander up to her door and ask her to review their writing. Students stuff the school's suggestion box with thoughtfully written recommendations for improving the school, and they rarely sit idly when they can be reading or writing, she says. “They know what reading and writing are for, and they know what it means to get lost in a good book.”
[Is this evidence that whole language is effective? Why do the writers put this in? More pleasant images?]
Jot your answer here.
These attitudes and habits come from good instruction, Harwayne insists. [Yes, but is whole language the ONLY kind of
good instruction?] In the best whole language
classrooms, she and other proponents say, teachers are not merely facilitators.
They are skilled in regularly assessing students' skills and progress and are
attentive in selecting strategies for increasing their proficiency. They are
knowledgeable about the latest education research and capable of studying what
works in their own classrooms. And they are careful to describe for parents and
administrators what goes on in their classrooms. [Shouldn’t these claims be backed
up by definitions and data on skill, knowledge, and study of what works? Without data, are these claims credible?]…..
By Kathleen Kennedy Manzo
Summarize the weaknesses of
this article.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
Now, outline an experiment to TEST
whether whole language is more effective than a “phonics-based” reading
program. See pilot tests and
demonstration research, and the items under number 7, in “Guidelines for Evaluating Research and Research Claims” Here is a website that gives examples of reading
assessments that could be used in an experiment. http://reading.uoregon.edu/assessment/assess_types.php