|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
 |
||
| Letters to the Editor: The Reading and Writing Wars Nov. 22, 1996 Page A15 © 1996 Dow Jones & Company, Inc. |
||
| As
a 25-year veteran of the first-grade classroom, I am responding to your Oct.
30 page-one article "ABCeething: How Whole Language Became Hot Potato In
and Out of Academia." The controversy between advocates of whole language
and those of an exclusively phonetic approach to reading and writing is most
unfortunate. All children need an eclectic, well-rounded approach to these
important skills. They are best served by avoiding extreme or exclusive
methodologies that have of late become ridiculous political and emotional
issues. Overlooked in the whole language/phonics tempest is the importance of sight word mastery to reading fluency. Using only whole-language techniques tends to produce readers who guess at meaning and gloss over words. Students taught to read phonetically often get discouraged at the end of the sentence because too much time and energy have gone into sounding out each word. Memorizing common words such as "the," "what" and "want," which defy simple phonetic rules but are abundant in our complex English lexicon, is essential. Such sight words provide the "glue" which allows new readers to enjoy and understand what they have read. We need to have a synthesis of all three approaches: phonics, whole language and sight word acquisition. Wise reading teachers have quietly been doing this for years. Rather than being polarized by extreme points of view, we should refrain from simplistic formulas and learn from the eclectic methodology of these good teachers. Patricia Overy |
|
|
|
© 2004 The Valley School | 310 30th Avenue East, Seattle, WA 98112 | (206) 328-4475 | info@thevalleyschool.org |
||
