If there could be such a
thing as a cold war in the field of education, the phonics vs. whole language debate of
the late eighties/early nineties certainly is worthy of consideration. Like
many of history’s epic conflicts, a handful of ideologues were able to impose
some very extreme and radical views upon an ill-informed, but nonetheless
content, populous. A nation of parents raised on Sally, Dick and Jane, Cat In the Hat, and, ultimately, Sesame Street suddenly found out that
they had learned it all wrong and their children faced certain illiteracy
should such malpractice continue.
Ironically it was our
colleges and universities that played the role of the Illuminati
bent on imposing the New World Order of Whole Language upon the masses.
Overnight, at many universities, educating teachers in phonemic instruction
became a heretical act. Resignations were tendered and textbooks rewritten.
Jump ahead to the twenty-first century and our
nation is left with elementary schools with teachers trained in two very different
approaches to reading instruction. Phonics:
the practice of breaking a word down into individual sounds, was believed to be
exclusive of the focus on the whole word and its meaning in relation to its
place in a text, or, whole language.
In 1997, Congress took matters into their own
hands and created The National Reading Panel. Designed to be the definitive
answer to the controversial question of best practice, The National Reading
Panel researched over ten thousand published papers on the teaching of reading
before issuing the report: “Teaching Children to Read.” While many critics take
issue with the endeavor itself, the bill to the American tax payers ran into
the tens of millions of dollars, it at least settled years of feuding as its
findings were generally accepted as gospel. Though elementary school teachers
were somewhat relieved that the controversy was over, many felt that tens of
millions of dollars could have been saved if the panel had simply asked
experienced teachers their opinion in the first place, for the findings of the
report clearly stated that a healthy combination
of whole language and phonics made for a comprehensive reading program and that
the ratio of the two would differ for each individual child.
To those of us here at Walden, the concept that
each child is an individual learner is nothing new and certainly not a
multimillion-dollar revelation. Teaching reading to students by knowing their
individual strengths and challenges has been the rule here since our inception.
We have, however, benefited from the vast numbers of new resources that have
sprung up since the findings of the National Reading Panel and the
understanding learning to read is a sequential process beginning with
understanding word sounds and finishing with skilled reading comprehension. In
addition to working one-on-one with reading consultant, Sammie Brian, we have
adopted new reading programs in kindergarten, third and fourth grades while
strengthening our resources in first and second. New leveled titles and
assessment batteries allow us to determine the reading level of each child as a
foundation for differentiated instruction.
While new resources and programs continue to open
up options and directions in our curriculum, we are constantly reminded that
such materials are only tools. In the midst of all change and challenge that
face elementary schools today, no amount of money, controversy or “next best
thing” will ever be able refute the fact that a quality teacher who knows and
cares for each individual in her class will always be the key to student success.
Effective methods and curriculum, like fine tools, only work as well as the
artisan who puts them into motion.