In our first "Theories and Models of Literacy" class I commented that in teaching reading I ascribed to the Whole Language Learning Theory as opposed to teaching reading using phonetics. I added that I learned to read this way. (I attended first grade in the early fifties.) However, when asked what Whole Language Learning means exactly I was at a loss to explain.
Doing a bit of research I can succinctly define it this way: The Whole Language Learning Theory essentially is a literacy philosophy that emphasizes reading for meaning and strategy instruction rather than teaching methods of decoding and breaking down words as in phoenics.
Wikepedia says, "Whole language is an educational philosophy that is complex to describe, particularly because it is informed by multiple research fields including but not limited to education, linguistics, psychology, sociology, and anthropology. Several strands run through most descriptions of whole language:
focus on making meaning in reading and expressing meaning in writing;
constructivist approaches to knowledge creation, emphasizing students' interpretations of text and free expression of ideas in writing (often through daily journal entries).
emphasis on high-quality and culturally-diverse literature; integrating literacy into other areas of the curriculum, especially math, science, and social studies; frequent reading, (a) with students in small "guided reading" groups, (b) to students with "read alouds," and (c) by students independently; "reading and writing for real purposes; focus on motivational aspects of literacy, emphasizing the love of books and engaging reading materials; meaning-centered whole to part to whole instruction where phonics are taught contextually in "embedded" phonics (different from decontextualized phonics); and emphasis on using and understanding the meaning making role of phonics, grammar, spelling, capitalization and punctuation in diverse social contexts.
Underlying premises of whole language Learning theory
The idea of "whole" language has its basis in a range of theories of learning related to the epistemologies called "holism." Holism is based upon the belief that it is not possible to understand learning of any kind by analyzing small chunks of the learning system. Holism was very much a response to behaviorism, which emphasized that the world could be understood by experimenting with stimuli and responses. Holists considered this a reductionist perspective that did not recognize that "the whole is greater than the sum of its parts." Analyzing individual behaviors, holists argued, could never tell us how the entire human mind worked. This is—in simplified terms—the theoretical basis for the term "whole language."
This is the teaching philosophy we use in the Adult Learning Center at the Brooklyn Public Library where I tutor.
During class I chimed in that I, too, never had a phonics lesson in school and that I certainly learned to read (I believe someone had asked how someone can learn to read without phonics instruction). That is how I learned to read and I received my primary schooling in the 1970s. While it worked just fine for me (and you!), as a special education professional, I favor a balanced literacy approach. I believe some students absolutely must have formal phonics instruction. The same method (phonics vs. whole language) doesn't appear to be equally effective with all students. Also, for a whole language approach to be truly successful, there must be sufficient access to literature in the home environment as well. I have found this to be a gap/missing component with the urban students I teach.
ReplyDeleteAfter class last night, Intro to Language Studies with Prof Troyka, I am more prone to agree with you. That and I also attended the first in a series of 7 classes at LAC on teaching Adult Basic Education. One thing we talked about in that class was different learning styles.
ReplyDeleteWhat exactly is a Balanced Literacy Approach? I know that at times when my students stumble over a word, especially one that lends itself to sounding out, we do that.
Jane