Big Brother and the National Reading Curriculum

Yeah, the whole language people surely are in major denial aren’t they? All I can say is, thank God the government has intervened to stop the disasterous whole language experiment.

Janis

You don’t know much about Richard Allington if you think he’s whole langauge! Please don’t paint everyone with the same brush.

Beth/OK

“You don’t know much about Richard Allington if you think he’s whole langauge!”

You’re right, he’s “Balanced Literacy.”

And to that I’ll refer anyone interested to the article on this site by Louisa Moats, “Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Literacy”

http://www.ldonline.org/ld_indepth/reading/whole_language_lives_on.html

Janis

Oh, yeah … I think that’s the link that makes me laugh. That’s the one where she lets you know what a whole language classroom looks like.

From the link

[i]A Typical Whole-Language Class(22)
A first- or second-grade classroom in which whole-language ideas predominate is not the traditional class of bygone years. It has clusters of desks, not rows; the space is not arranged so that children focus on the teacher in front of the class. Learning centers and clusters of desks lend themselves to individualized, self-directed, and small-group learning. A classroom library corner has many books of different genres and a comfortable place to read. Little use is made of the chalkboard. Paper charts prevail. [/i]

Oh, no! In my classroom kids sit at tables, have a variety of on-level literature to read, and look at charts on the wall! I MUST be a whole-langauge teacher! Please! Articles like this and smug attitudes about reading is why many teachers feel threatened to try anything new.

BTW, I use PG in my classroom. ALL of my kids read on or above grade level. I just get tired of all the arguements between the two camps of reading.

EX: She uses four-blocks. She must not teach phonics then.

I read through many professional sites on a weekly basis. I feel less welcome as a teacher here than anywhere else.

Back to Allington:
He has revolutionized my teaching more than any other sources. I have worked very hard as a young teacher at time on task. My second graders [b]read[/b] for a minimum of one hour each day. That’s without ‘cute activities’ or worksheets. I think if some of you actually read some of his books you might see he’s not so ‘whole-language’ or ‘balanced literacy’ as y’all so snidely put it.

Beth/OK

ANytime somebody starts spouting the “Big Brother” stuff I know they’re avoiding the real issues. OH, yes, it is All One Big Plot.
And … Heinemann is the publisher that keeps whole language thriving and cheering for itself so loudly it can’t hear anything else.
NOtice there was precious little in that post actually about reading — it was about politics. I, too, have long been utterly disgusted with the reading wars. Talk to me about what you are doing with your students and how it’s working and what you’re struggling with. Posts full of loaded rhetoric aren’t helping a single child or adult learn to read.

“I think if some of you actually read some of his books you might see he’s not so ‘whole-language’ or ‘balanced literacy’ as y’all so snidely put it.”

http://www.teachersread.com/facts.htm
Actually, I have read some of his books, and “Dr. Dick” certainly is (using your terminology) “balanced literacy.”

“I, too, have long been utterly disgusted with the reading wars. Talk to me about what you are doing with your students and how it’s working and what you’re struggling with. Posts full of loaded rhetoric aren’t helping a single child or adult learn to read.”

Sadly, this “war” has to be fought. I don’t know of anyone in my district using PG or any other evidence-based reading program. Four Blocks rules in our metro area.

Loaded “troll-type” posts aren’t designed to spark intelligent debate, just argument. Doesn’t help a single person learn to read. Granted, I tend not to ignore them because so often the posters *are* believers and they ought to be aware that there really *are* people out there who know better… except that (just like converts and believers of many things) they tend to think that those who disagree are Part Of The Big Brother Conspiracy or Just Don’t Understand The Truth. And since “the truth” is waht feels right (hey, in this ad-driven culture you tend *not* to learn genuine critical thinking… ) and if something contradicts it you don’t change *your* model, heaven forfend.

Now when it comes to people actually making decisions, doing the teaching, face to fac e— I’ll engage in questions and discussiosn… but even then, the loaded one-sided stuff just isn’t constructive.

Thanks to Sue and others; it helps maintain some faith when I see that there are still a few critical readers and thinkers out there.

I had an indirect encounter with one of those authors in the last year and I will tell you, there is a war and that side will distort the truth to get their way. There are BIG BUCKS involved in programs like 4 Blocks and those involved will certainly do what they can to preserve their reputations and profits. I was successful (on curriculum committee) in getting 4 Blocks out of my child’s school and Open Court was adopted instead.

Janis

OK, I too grow weary of this. Balanced literacy is sane and approprpriate in most cases. Balanced literacy (I don’t give a flying fig what Louisa Moats says) reminds us that fluent reading is more than decoding words. A huge, huge issue I am dealing with in my resource literacy class in H.S. right now is comprehension. Most of these students have learned to decode, but the comprehension is abyssmal.

Balanced reading instruction includes TEACHING decoding skills, comprehension skills and oral fluency skills.

Now, we tend to forget that most people are not LD. In LD people some of the cognitive processes do not work the way they work for most people.

Most little kids can rhyme. This is a good early indicator that the auditory processing system is in pretty good shape. Then there may also be auditory memory and auditory sequencing, but some of this is built into rhyming.

We don’t need to teach most students auditory processes at this level, they were exposed in preschool years to rhyme and so forth and they picked it up. They start school and in a balanced literacy program they learn the letter sounds, are shown how to blend the sounds into words and they do it, some with a little more or less practice, but this is not a huge issue for them to learn. This is pretty basic stuff.

The LD child comes in and needs to be TAUGHT to DO what other people DO easily. This teaching may require much time spent in carefully sequenced, explicit practice. It may take2-3 years to get the auditory processing system to the point that the child can really achieve some success and positive reinforcement from reading.

There were some people who encouraged teachers to pretty well abandon phonics instruction in this country. This bad and very unbalanced teaching became known as “Whole Language.” My guess is that these reasearch level people really had never worked with our population, but rather the higher end of the normal population. They wrongly extrapolated this to all children.

Let’s not now make the same mistake of being familiar with the LD or dyslexic end of the population, understanding what they need and extrapolating their needs to every child.

We need balanced literacy for all children. But, we need to be well able to respond to the needs of children in our classrooms and to be able to adjust our instruciton to meet their needs.

An over-emphasis on the same standards for all children can actually preclude this. In our standards-packed and rigorous curriculum in CA there is little enough time to cover all the standards, never mind adjusting instruction to the needs of the child.

I did that in my resource room reasonably effectively, then standards invaded my program too. I was informed that my IEP goals all needed to be standards based so it could be shown that my students were being taught the curriculum.

There is no way I can teach my students things that they need (that others don’t need to that same extent) and still teach all the standards.

I fear that nationalizing any curriculum in the end removes decision-making authority from the people who know the children the best.

So, you lament that not all teachers are wonderful, that a few are good, many are average and a few are real duds. Regrettably, this is the same description of people in life in almost any situation. You won’t get the 100% excellent teachers that you really wish you could have. I wish you could.

I think in the end, proactive citizens who have control of their community schools and take the time and the effort to involve themselves would get a better result. People working together in their communities, who really care and know the population can respond to the needs of that population. Yes, change is hard work for everyone.

Using government to bully people into a one-size-fits-all curriculum probably will prove to dissapoint over the long run when every solution begets two new problems.

….and, after my above post, I printed and began to read Allington’s introduction, referenced on a post on page 2. It is an excellent read. I highly recommend that each of you read this. It is the preface to his book. Of course, I liked it because he states many of things that I have said, from time to time, here.

Allington, by the way, was NOT a whole language guru. I precede whole language and his name was never linked with that group.

I have cited the First Grade Studies from the 60’s that found the major determinant was the teacher. No single program made significant and lasting difference. Teachers made the differences. Teachers still do.

Much of the statistics that are tossed about now are fiction. Pure and simple. Or, statistical misunderstanding. The 40% of our kids can’t read is a statistical misunderstanding, not a fact.

Please take the time read this yourself.

Thanks!

As you see, this thread has piqued my interest. I am not entirely sure of the origin of this metaphor, however I know that it has been used to illustrate the role played by powerful national governments that attempt control the minutia (sp?) of day to day life, as in the communist governments of eastern Europe.

I have even heard a former friend, who was from Hungary during that era, refer to the gov. as Big Brother. I also had a friend in H.S. whose parents grew up in the USSR and emigrated in the 50’s. Big Brother dictated all aspects of their lives. It does rather illustrate viewpoint that we little people out and about and around don’t know much and we need our revered, respected and expert federal government to tell us what to do and how to do it.

ankly, I think it is a symptom of greed and power in government. It is always sold to us as being for our own benefit and we are often too eager to buy because it shifts the responsibility and the worry elsewhere. It does come back to haunt us, eventually.

Now as to the success of this approach and philosophy, I direct your attention to the former Soviet Union and the numerous former republics of that giant, Big Brotherly system.

Anitya, I heard Louisa Moats speak last April, and no one is a bigger proponent of true balanced literacy than she is. But she does insist that systematic, explicit phonics instruction by a trained teacher be a component of a TRUE balanced literacy program. I have spent time looking at the “systematic, explicit phonics” book put out as part of the 4 Blocks program and it is sad. And that’s all I’ll say about it. Open Court is an example of a true balanced literacy curriuclum…solid phonics and excellent literature with spelling, vocabulary, comprehension and writing all integrated.

Janis

Thank you for your responding. However, we do not have the research to back this up. Open Court was adopted in some low performing schools and was not responsible for raising test scores after 2 years of use in the LA area several years ago. The results were mixed, some actually dropped in scores.

This does support what I have stated and what many others state: the difference is in the teacher, not in the method or the program. Four blocks really did start as an organizational method to promote balanced literacy. It is NOT a program per se. However, as with all things, people start to profit by publishing materials with a label associated with them.

The kind of phonics Louisa Moats insists upon is not necessary for all learners. I do believe the LD population needs this approach, however the upper 50% needs phonics, but they don’t need nearly as much. This group of children possesses phonemic awareness, they have intact phonological processing skills and they recognize word chunks quickly and easily and transfer this to decoding new words.

We make a mistake when we attempt to legislate any method. The LD population is certainly NOT the population to use to base reading methology for all upon. Any more than using the other extreme of the continuum. Again, good teaching is the ingredient that is needed. Good teachers adjust instruction to the needs of learners. Good teacher understand how to teach phonics and have the techniques to use to make it understandable to the tiny dyslexic group.

The statistics on the number of people who cannot read in this society have been inflated by the misinterpretation of test scores.

The gov’t keeps a watchful eye on medical practice. There are standards of care for hospitals, those that don’t meet them will not be accredited and not get public funds. Doctors or nurses that don’t meet them will be sued or lose their license.
The gov’t keeps a watchful eye on the water you drink, the air you breathe, the food you eat and the medicine you take.

I really wouldn’t have it any other way.

It is not big brother. It is just standards. Accountablilty for all.
Standards in education is not a bad thing.
Those that are accountable should have no fear.