tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4184539467031647989.post5967416917855686278..comments2023-10-07T02:42:10.642-07:00Comments on Coalition for Kid-Friendly Schools: On Surprises in ReadingFedUpMomhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00951858601020687242noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4184539467031647989.post-84244318010439758362011-10-30T10:46:46.067-07:002011-10-30T10:46:46.067-07:00Chris says:
***
It doesn't necessarily mean t...Chris says:<br /><br />***<br />It doesn't necessarily mean that he wants to kids to know the meaning of a given passage before reading it;<br />***<br /><br />Au contraire, I think that's exactly what Kohn means.<br /><br />Chris, while you're speechless, watch the video I just posted about "My Cat". You'll see whole-language teaching in action.<br /><br />If you're lucky enough to have very verbal kids who figure out phonics for themselves, you never have to confront this nonsense.FedUpMomhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00951858601020687242noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-4184539467031647989.post-36318453373030795232011-10-30T10:21:18.755-07:002011-10-30T10:21:18.755-07:00I'm speechless. Reading the end of a book fir...I'm speechless. Reading the end of a book first?? I'm with you -- I try not to read even those front-cover blurbs. I've even joked that they they should put a random number of blank pages at the end of every novel, so you wouldn't know in advance when the ending was coming . . .<br /><br />The question remains whether this is Whole Language Nonsense, or just Nonsense. In other words, I wonder if you could find equally (but differently) discouraging videos of teachers working in a phonics-based program. There just seems to be a need to take reasonable basic principles (kids should know the sounds letters usually make; reading is more than just decoding sounds; kids should read for meaning, too) and build crazy instructional "strategies" on top of them.<br /><br />Again, I'm reluctant to get into defending any of this stuff, and am generally inclined to second your poxes. But as for the Alfie Kohn quote, on some level it is true, isn't it? In other words, a kid with a bigger vocabulary is going to have an easier time learning to read, because the words themselves will already be familiar to him or her. The vocabulary might not come from reading, it might come from being read to or just from being exposed to conversation. If that's all he means, it doesn't sound so controversial. It doesn't necessarily mean that he wants to kids to know the meaning of a given passage before reading it; just that it helps if they're already familiar with the vocabulary in the passage.<br /><br />What it implies for instruction is another matter. Kids won't always know the words in advance. If they don't, are they better off sounding it out, or guessing from the context? Their guesses might be way off. On the other hand, sounding it out won't necessarily help them understand what the word means. It just seems like reading has to involve some interaction between puzzling out the sounds (from the letters) and figuring out the meaning (from pre-existing understandings or from context, if it's possible at all without a dictionary). So I'm hesitant to write off Whole Language, if it's basically trying to incorporate that latter element into understanding how kids learn to read. But I'm perfectly ready to believe that it can be botched in practice.<br /><br />Sorry, that was a long comment to write after saying that I'm speechless!Chrishttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07559356125770114400noreply@blogger.com