whole language vs phonics

[PrincessFiona]

I'm not trying to start a debate here (promise)...I'm just curious about where you guys stand on this?

My son's teacher is an advocate of whole language...memorization in order to teach reading. Basically, the kids memorize words...purple, it, on etc etc and learn to "read" that way. Later in the year they go backwards and talk about blending words....where she says that kids then have 'aha' moments.

In my eyes, this is just backwards. Whatever happened to phonics? I asked her about kids learning to sound out words etc and she told me that 99% of our reading vocabulary is 'memorized' and "how often do you come across a word that you have to sound out anyway?"

Hmmm...yes, I suppose that's true..but if you study a foreign language or science or even read a book with vocabulary that is beyond what you've memorized you have to be able to sound it out.

Does anyone have positive experiences with this 'whole language' concept?

kris

Kris,
All I know is that some people (well, teachers) can get strong opinions about this and it can start to feel like talking about religion or politics. Ok, I am exaggerating a little.

My very uneducated opinion is that there is a bit of both and that it also depends on the child. But beyond that..... :!

[PrincessFiona]

Maybe that's the reason for my sort of..defensive response to it. The teacher does feel quite strongly about her method and has disparaged the Montessori method on several occasions.

I have to say that Amanda had this teacher and she is a wonderful reader now...so who knows. Maybe both ways work equally well...

kris

Is Alex doing ok with it?

Too bad that she is disparaging the Montessori. I know some kids who learned to read through their programs and do just great. I think the thing is there isn't a set in stone only one way approach to it....but I'm sure I could find someone to disagree with me. (Like my nieghbor who teaches third grade and is *convinced* that is how his daughter will learn to read). Again... :!

[mommax3]

I would say that I have a *slight* preference for the phonics approach....but I do believe that memorization of sight words comes into it, too. I guess you could supplement with some phonics at home, right? (Maybe after you get moved, at least!)

Sally

[Rapunzel]

Wellll, having taught reading to struggling readers during my college years and now having taught my older three kids to read (and, they're now pretty darned good at it!) I have to vote for a combined method with a heavier emphasis on the phonics portion.

There is definitely a lengthy list of words in the English language that defy phonetic rules and must be memorized - no doubt about it. But, I have found that it helps my kids tremendously to learn phonetic rules before tackling the "exceptions". I'd say most words in the English language can be "sounded out" once one knows the rules. Generally what I do is start out with 100% phonetic practice and gradually mix in memorization of the exceptions (ie "sight words") until we're at about an even 50/50 split between the two. We don't reach that point until the child is reading at about a second grade level (so, for my kids, a few months into an intensive reading process).

I see value in both methods and I think dealing in absolutes in this matter is just silly. Both have merit and both should be used to the extent that they are helpful.


Jennifer

[Rapunzel]

I must add that the school at which I tutored the struggling readers during my college years taught the "whole language" method of reading pretty exclusively. I would teach these kids the phonetic rules to help them.

I think an exclusive "whole language" approach to reading is a sink-or-swim scenario. It's the way I learned to read so obviously I got thrown into the deep end and swam. But, a lot of kids sink - and I suspect a misused whole-language approach is actually to blame for the miserable failure rate many public schools have in teaching kids to read.

Also, it takes less effort to teach a child to read from a primarily phonetic approach (with memorization added later).

Jennifer

[Amiens]

Like Jen, I have to vote a combination of the two. Emma is reading, and has learned through a combination of the two. At first I think she "memorized" the word, but now realizes what letters make what sound because when she comes across an unfamiliar word she will try to sound it out- one part at a time.

JMHO (just my humble opinion).

The teacher needs to remember that one method won't work for every child.

Crystal

I learned to read phonetically and so I might be biased that way (that's why I didn't say much before). But I think it makes more sense with a whole language approach added in for words that don't fit the rules.

The part of whole language that I don't understand....it seems like you would have to know every word eventually. I guess I don't know much about it -- what do you do when you come across a word you don't know? I'm thinking of how that works for a highschooler or adult who learned that way....

I've got to say I think phonics is the way to go for teaching -- and they will learn "sight words" along the way. While you and I don't need to sound out words, we've been reading for 30+ years! I remember sounding out words in primary school, and some kids still sounding out words in high school. It's really just the fundamentals!

I might be a tad defensive as Jacob is in Montessori and they're starting their letter learning this week. As an aside, I was SO irritated at the parents meeting when, as the teacher is explaining their teaching method (straight letter sound, not letter name), one parent raised her hand and said "But what do we do if we've already exposed our child to the letter names?" Oh come on! Puhleeese! I just said "Well, I guess Harvard is out!"

[SueC]

Not having given it much thought, I like the phonics approach. That is how I learned to read, and I was always a very good speller and read several grade levels ahead all through elementary school. Obviously the shorter words (the, it, on, etc.) are memorized by site, but it seems to make sense to use phonics and sounding it out to tackle the rest. But then again, I'm not an educator and obviously this other approach must work if they are teaching it. Does the teacher actually discourage using a phonics approach at home? I suppose I would be content to have another approach taught to my child if I could supplement it at home the other way.

[PrincessFiona]

I just said "Well, I guess Harvard is out!"

I vote this the funniest post I've read in a long time!

I wish I had been there to enjoy that! I love those big parent meetings where parents jump in with "Johnny is very advanced at X....will you give him separate work" or "my child is already reading 3 levels above her grade level, can she go to a higher grade for language arts" etc in the middle of a huge group of parents.

Kris

I just said "Well, I guess Harvard is out!"

I vote this the funniest post I've read in a long time!

I wish I had been there to enjoy that! I love those big parent meetings where parents jump in with "Johnny is very advanced at X....will you give him separate work" or "my child is already reading 3 levels above her grade level, can she go to a higher grade for language arts" etc in the middle of a huge group of parents.

Kris

Oh yeah? Then I'll add the bit about the parent who said "I get how to teach addition, you add 2 + 2 (holding up 2 fingers on each hand) and that equals 4. But how do you teach subtraction?" After waiting for the teacher to stifle a laugh and give an answer, I turned around and said "Jellybeans".

I guess I shouldn't be hoping to make some new friends here. I'm really a b****!

[DCJenn]

Wow- a whole world that I had yet to think about. (thanks, guys)

I have no idea how I learned to read, all I know is that I read. I imagine it was whole word, because I have a terrible problem with sounding out words. I have to hear them first if they're funky. Like the name Penelope. I can remember reading a book in some grade and mentally pronouncing it:
Pen-eh-lope.

Oh well, I'll be happy with whatever approach works. We read him books but he's just at the point where he's getting the English, so I'm guessing reading will follow eventually.

Jenn

I'm on the same page with folks who "voted" for a combination of both whole language and phonics. I learned primarily through phonics and believe it has served me well -- with pronunciation especially. In my brief teaching stint, whole language kids seemed to be terrible spellers. Just my two cents.