discussed the current reading wars several years ago when she said that the term “balanced reading program” appears to have emerged in the last few years as a truce between the sides—an acknowledgment that reading instruction requires attention to both code and meaning. Dr. Chall quipped: “It is curious that most meaning-emphasis proponents, who start out by underplaying the position of phonics, end up by pleading for balance” (p. 262). She concludes that code-emphasis supporters have always included holistic strategies, and thus implied that phonics advocates always employed a balanced approach.
Chall, J.S. (1997). Are reading methods changing? Annals of Dyslexia, 47, 257-263.
These whole-language folks won’t admit that they’ve just learned the easy part of reading instruction and are only half-finished…I love literature-based learning and believe that without a balance of code and great stories, we don’t create real readers. Like I said, though, the code is the more difficult part to teach for most people.
Jean Chall’s work will be regarded highly over time. Whole language radicals will find that history judges failure loudly. Their unconcern with the data, with the impact upon children of poverty, upon children with learning problems, upon children at risk - will leave them regarded as fools by future generations of caring teachers.
Thanks for the history reminder, Susan. Ken