cover article in Time magazine on gifted education

"nimue" wrote:

Anne Rogers wrote:
Anne didn't write this - I did
I don't like phonics. There are too many exceptions at least in
English, as another recent thread pointed out. Although I will sound
out the syllables of a word if I've mis-thought what it was.

My mum is a teacher, she told me the reason phonics is generally
considered better is that it seems to work better for kids who are
slow or have learning difficulties,

Something about that sounds so arrogant. Maybe you and she didn't mean it
that way. Still, that belief sets up a system that devalues phonics and

I think what was meant was that if the child has already learned to
read via whole word, that phonics isn't the necessary. At least that
is what I took from it. The children who have reversal problems (they
see god when what is written is dog for instance) will not do well
with whole word methods.

exalts (the absolutely idiotic, imo) whole language. I learned to read with
phonics. I have always tested in the 99th percentile for reading and
comprehension; I read so fast that when I was young people used to ask me if
I had taken the Evelyn Woods course (that was a speed-reading course). Of
course I hadn't; I just read very quickly, but I used to joke and say I
taught it! Anyhow, phonics worked wonderfully for me and I am certainly
not slow and have no learning difficulties (in English -- math is another

Well I am exactly the same and was taught by whole word - I think that
both of us would have done well whatever method we learned by. My
mom had to force me to go outside and play. Of course in those days
we didn't have TV.

I didn't take an Evelyn Woods course, but my mom had a book in the
bookcase called "How to Read Better and Faster", and I was home sick
with asthma quite a bit so I read a lot of books that she might not
have absolutely been thrilled that I read including a joke book called
"For Doctor's Only".. When I was in HS, I read Gone with the Wind in
one day (and it gave me nightmares)

I have a little bit of a problem with manipulating numbers (as in
arithmetic). I loved geometry though, and computer programming. And
I had a zoology major in college with an English Lit minor.

story). That said, I wonder how I would have done had the wretched whole
language approach been used in my school. I think phonics works best for
the vast majority of children and whole language only works for a few. I
say use what works best.

Phonics works with a lot of children, and so it should be used, but it
won't work with all of them. --Neither of them should be taught
exclusively.

And I really don't like phonics at all - I feel about it almost as you
do about whole word.

so rather than teaching all
children by a non phonics method and then finding out who can't do
that a couple of years later and then having to teach them via
phonics, you teach everyone it right from the start

Yeah -- that's because it's best for nearly everyone. I would wager that
those for whom it does NOT work wouldn't benefit much from whole language,
either. I am not one for religious wars, but when I think about whole
language and phonics, I can see killing in the name of phonics (just
kidding! Calm the **** down!).

and even though
you still want to be able to spot those with difficulties and they'll
still be slower,

Yeah -- these are the kids who would have had reading problems regardless of
which approach was used -- and phonics still benefits these kids more than
whole language.

you've given them the foundations of the tools at a
much younger age, generally resulting in a higher average reading age
than other methods do.


Cheers
Anne

In article ,
Sue wrote:
toypup" wrote in message
The kid is 2 yo and reading for Pete's sake. What more do you want? I do
think a child reading that young is gifted. I know some parents push and
push their kids, and those kids can probably read without truly
understanding anything. However, one who does it on her own volition is
definitely gifted.

There's more to life than reading and she is not doing any of those things
yet, so imo, she is not gifted.. I am not too impressed by reading at an
early age, because mostly it is sight words and remembering them from
repeating them over and over. They don't have comprehension nor the rules
that go along with it. If a child picks up a book and reads it, sure it is
lovely and mine have done that too, and they could read certain books at an
early age, but it just doesn't mean that they are gifted.

If one is taught phonics early, this does not happen.
The entire spoken vocabulary becomes immediately included
in the written, and it is not memorizing words on sight.

There is structure in both the spoken and written language,
but alas the attempt is to ignore the structure; doing so
makes the vocabulary harder to learn. In general, learning
structure and concepts first makes details easier. Do not
file everything under miscellaneous, but do not forget that
what holds in one place may or may not hold in another.
--
This address is for information only. I do not claim that these views
are those of the Statistics Department or of Purdue University.
Herman Rubin, Department of Statistics, Purdue University
Phone: (765)494-6054 FAX: (765)494-0558

toto wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:46:16 GMT, "Stephanie" wrote:

Either you recognize a word or you don''t. If you don't and you
come across it in your reading, what do you DO? I don't really understand
that. Thanks.

Word attack strategies are taught:

If you don't know a word, what should you do?

1. Look at the pictures.
2. Try to sound out the word.
3. Look at the beginning letters.
4. Look at the ending letters.
5. Look for a smaller word in the word.
6. Skip the word and read the sentence to the end.
7. Try to guess! What word makes sense? Does your
guess look like the word you see?
8. Use the words around it.
9. Go back and re-read. Does it sound right?
10. Put another word in its place.
11. Ask a friend or an adult.
12.Look in the dictionary

A more detailed look he
http://www.readinga-z.com/more/reading_strat.html

Most of those strategies seem to presume that the child already has
the word he is attempting to read in his/her vocabulary, and would
actually has some idea what the word means if they could identify it.

Otherwise they need to use 6, 8, 10 which together amount to guess
some word-meaning that might cause the sentence to make sense.

My kids, perhaps because of their ESL origins, did NOT know what
words meant before they read them. Dictionaries were seldom helpful,
since the word definitions were harder for them to understand than the
words themselves - or worse: gave multiple meanings. That left
adults, and my kids quickly got tired of asking people what words
meant.

lojbab

toto wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:05:11 -0400, "nimue"
wrote:

One weakness in the system that comes to my mind is the ...
preference of the teacher! I wish all learning could be aimed at the
needs of the children.

How do you propose to do that in a class of 30 students?

It's called differentiating learning

It's called differentiated instruction and the NYC school system is hot for
it right now -- that and using data to help differentiate instruction.

and it is done all the time in
elementary school classrooms. It's not always easy, but it is being
done.

http://members.shaw.ca/priscillather...entiating.html

1. Differentiating the Content/Topic

Content can be described as the knowledge, skills and attitudes we
want children to learn. Differentiating content requires that students
are pre-tested so the teacher can identify the students who do not
require direct instruction. Students demonstrating understanding of
the concept can skip the instruction step and proceed to apply the
concepts to the task of solving a problem. This strategy is often
referred to as compacting the curriculum. Another way to differentiate
content is simply to permit the apt student to accelerate their rate
of progress. They can work ahead independently on some projects, i.e.
they cover the content faster than their peers.

2. Differentiating the Process/Activities

Differentiating the processes means varying learning activities or
strategies to provide appropriate methods for students to explore the
concepts. It is important to give students alternative paths to
manipulate the ideas embedded within the concept. For example students
may use graphic organizers, maps, diagrams or charts to display their
comprehension of concepts covered. Varying the complexity of the
graphic organizer can very effectively facilitate differing levels of
cognitive processing for students of differing ability.

3. Differentiating the Product

Differentiating the product means varying the complexity of the
product (http://www.rogertaylor.com/reference/Product-Grid.pdf) that
students create to demonstrate mastery of the concepts. Students
working below grade level may have reduced performance expectations,
while students above grade level may be asked to produce work that
requires more complex or more advanced thinking. There are many
sources of alternative product ideas available to teachers. However
sometimes it is motivating for students to be offered choice of
product.

4. Diffferentiating By Manipulating The Environment or Through
Accommodating Individual Learning Styles

There has been a great deal of work on learning styles over the last
2 decades. Dunn and Dunn (http://www.learningstyles.net/) focused on
manipulating the school environment at about the same time as Joseph
Renzulli recommended varying teaching strategies. Howard Gardner
identified individual talents or aptitudes in his Multiple
Intelligences theories. Based on the works of Jung, the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator (http://partners.mce.be/wbt/mbti/personal.htm) and
Kersley's Temperament Sorter focused on understanding how people's
personality affects the way they interact personally, and how this
affects the way individuals respond to each other within the learning
environment. The work of David Kolb and Anthony Gregorc's Type
Delineator follows a similar but more simplified approach.

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

Rosalie B. wrote:
"nimue" wrote:

Anne Rogers wrote:
Anne didn't write this - I did
I don't like phonics. There are too many exceptions at least in
English, as another recent thread pointed out. Although I will
sound out the syllables of a word if I've mis-thought what it was.

My mum is a teacher, she told me the reason phonics is generally
considered better is that it seems to work better for kids who are
slow or have learning difficulties,

Something about that sounds so arrogant. Maybe you and she didn't
mean it that way. Still, that belief sets up a system that devalues
phonics and

I think what was meant was that if the child has already learned to
read via whole word, that phonics isn't the necessary. At least that
is what I took from it. The children who have reversal problems (they
see god when what is written is dog for instance) will not do well
with whole word methods.

exalts (the absolutely idiotic, imo) whole language. I learned to
read with phonics. I have always tested in the 99th percentile for
reading and comprehension; I read so fast that when I was young
people used to ask me if I had taken the Evelyn Woods course (that
was a speed-reading course). Of course I hadn't; I just read very
quickly, but I used to joke and say I taught it! Anyhow, phonics
worked wonderfully for me and I am certainly not slow and have no
learning difficulties (in English -- math is another

Well I am exactly the same and was taught by whole word - I think that
both of us would have done well whatever method we learned by. My
mom had to force me to go outside and play. Of course in those days
we didn't have TV.

I didn't take an Evelyn Woods course,

I never did, either -- didn't need to. However, now that you mention it, I
realize that I have never met anyone who took an Evelyn Woods course.

but my mom had a book in the
bookcase called "How to Read Better and Faster", and I was home sick
with asthma quite a bit so I read a lot of books that she might not
have absolutely been thrilled that I read including a joke book called
"For Doctor's Only".. When I was in HS, I read Gone with the Wind in
one day (and it gave me nightmares)

Why? I just have to ask -- why did it give you nightmares?

I have a little bit of a problem with manipulating numbers (as in
arithmetic). I loved geometry though,

I don't!

and computer programming. And
I had a zoology major in college with an English Lit minor.

Cool.

story). That said, I wonder how I would have done had the wretched
whole language approach been used in my school. I think phonics
works best for the vast majority of children and whole language only
works for a few. I say use what works best.

Phonics works with a lot of children, and so it should be used, but it
won't work with all of them. --Neither of them should be taught
exclusively.

And I really don't like phonics at all - I feel about it almost as you
do about whole word.

so rather than teaching all
children by a non phonics method and then finding out who can't do
that a couple of years later and then having to teach them via
phonics, you teach everyone it right from the start

Yeah -- that's because it's best for nearly everyone. I would wager
that those for whom it does NOT work wouldn't benefit much from
whole language, either. I am not one for religious wars, but when I
think about whole language and phonics, I can see killing in the
name of phonics (just kidding! Calm the **** down!).

and even though
you still want to be able to spot those with difficulties and
they'll still be slower,

Yeah -- these are the kids who would have had reading problems
regardless of which approach was used -- and phonics still benefits
these kids more than whole language.

you've given them the foundations of the tools at a
much younger age, generally resulting in a higher average reading
age than other methods do.


Cheers
Anne

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

"nimue" wrote:

Rosalie B. wrote:
"nimue" wrote:

I didn't take an Evelyn Woods course,

I never did, either -- didn't need to. However, now that you mention it, I
realize that I have never met anyone who took an Evelyn Woods course.

I'm not sure that I have either, but when my husband entered flight
training the pre-flight work included speed reading because they felt
that pilots needed to be able to process information faster than 300
wpm. Don't know that it was actually Evelyn's course though

but my mom had a book in the
bookcase called "How to Read Better and Faster", and I was home sick
with asthma quite a bit so I read a lot of books that she might not
have absolutely been thrilled that I read including a joke book called
"For Doctor's Only".. When I was in HS, I read Gone with the Wind in
one day (and it gave me nightmares)

Why? I just have to ask -- why did it give you nightmares?

Because I couldn't accept the ending. I don't know how to explain it
- it was just so real to me and having Rhett walk away was so
devastating.

I meant that you might not realize that you were making a judgment -
that it was a prejudice that was under the radar, not that we were a
liar. I'm sure that you believe that you weren't making a judgment.


I really was just making an observation, similar to how you might
observe one child has gone a different route through to learning to walk
than another. You can't make judgements (or a foolish if you are) about
how a child learns something, only how they are taught something, which
in this instance hasn't really occurred anyway, I think Donna is doing
an excellent job in providing an enriching environment for her DD and
fully sympathise with her concerns over kindergarten as it would seem
that learning phonics at that stage would be meaningless and I doubt at
any stage this child is going to find phonics helpful. There does come a
point when you read words that you've never heard spoken - but they are
often scientific and general phonics rules don't often help. I heard the
word menarche spoken for the first time recently, I'd always read it as
men-arch, but it seems to be pronounce men-ark-ie, phonics wouldn't tell
you that, looking it up in a dictionary would.

Cheers
Anne

Yeah -- these are the kids who would have had reading problems regardless of
which approach was used -- and phonics still benefits these kids more than
whole language.

I think you're saying exactly what I intended to say, it really does
seem to give the best overall results for group teaching at kindergarten
age. I think a lot of children without even being taught it are going to
learn a proportion of their vocabulary by word recognition - after
all, a good number of children can recognise their own names before
learning any phonics. My son kind of does half and half, he knows the
majority of the sounds, but a lot of the stuff he attempts to read is
single words, with some kind of context and he'll sound out the first
syllable then guess at the word from the context.

Cheers
Anne

"nimue" wrote in message
...
Stephanie wrote:
"toto" wrote in message
...
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 15:35:18 -0400, "nimue"
wrote:

Why do you think that word recognition is a less valid method of
reading? That is the way I was taught - I never had any phonics.

That's too bad. I love phonics. I think it is without a doubt the
BEST way
to teach children to read.

As long as the end result is fluent reading, I don't see that the
method used makes any difference. Note that children with hearing
problems or those with auditory processing disorder will not be
well-served by trying to use phonics to teach them to read. And many
other children seem to learn effortlessly without phonics
instruction.




One weakness in the system that comes to my mind is the ...
preference of the teacher! I wish all learning could be aimed at the
needs of the children.

How do you propose to do that in a class of 30 students?



That's why I said "I wish!"

Luckily my kids seem to be fine with the
phonics route, because I would be in a huge conundrum if I were to
try and teach word recognition / whole language. I simply would not
have the first idea how to do it, since I dont get it myself.






--
Dorothy

There is no sound, no cry in all the world
that can be heard unless someone listens ..

The Outer Limits

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore

"nimue" wrote in message
...
toto wrote:
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007 21:05:11 -0400, "nimue"
wrote:

One weakness in the system that comes to my mind is the ...
preference of the teacher! I wish all learning could be aimed at the
needs of the children.

How do you propose to do that in a class of 30 students?

It's called differentiating learning

It's called differentiated instruction and the NYC school system is hot
for
it right now -- that and using data to help differentiate instruction.

and it is done all the time in
elementary school classrooms. It's not always easy, but it is being
done.

http://members.shaw.ca/priscillather...entiating.html

1. Differentiating the Content/Topic

Content can be described as the knowledge, skills and attitudes we
want children to learn. Differentiating content requires that students
are pre-tested so the teacher can identify the students who do not
require direct instruction. Students demonstrating understanding of
the concept can skip the instruction step and proceed to apply the
concepts to the task of solving a problem. This strategy is often
referred to as compacting the curriculum. Another way to differentiate
content is simply to permit the apt student to accelerate their rate
of progress. They can work ahead independently on some projects, i.e.
they cover the content faster than their peers.

2. Differentiating the Process/Activities

Differentiating the processes means varying learning activities or
strategies to provide appropriate methods for students to explore the
concepts. It is important to give students alternative paths to
manipulate the ideas embedded within the concept. For example students
may use graphic organizers, maps, diagrams or charts to display their
comprehension of concepts covered. Varying the complexity of the
graphic organizer can very effectively facilitate differing levels of
cognitive processing for students of differing ability.

3. Differentiating the Product

Differentiating the product means varying the complexity of the
product (http://www.rogertaylor.com/reference/Product-Grid.pdf) that
students create to demonstrate mastery of the concepts. Students
working below grade level may have reduced performance expectations,
while students above grade level may be asked to produce work that
requires more complex or more advanced thinking. There are many
sources of alternative product ideas available to teachers. However
sometimes it is motivating for students to be offered choice of
product.

4. Diffferentiating By Manipulating The Environment or Through
Accommodating Individual Learning Styles

There has been a great deal of work on learning styles over the last
2 decades. Dunn and Dunn (http://www.learningstyles.net/) focused on
manipulating the school environment at about the same time as Joseph
Renzulli recommended varying teaching strategies. Howard Gardner
identified individual talents or aptitudes in his Multiple
Intelligences theories. Based on the works of Jung, the Myers-Briggs
Type Indicator (http://partners.mce.be/wbt/mbti/personal.htm) and
Kersley's Temperament Sorter focused on understanding how people's
personality affects the way they interact personally, and how this
affects the way individuals respond to each other within the learning
environment. The work of David Kolb and Anthony Gregorc's Type
Delineator follows a similar but more simplified approach.

--
nimue

"Let your freak-flag fly, and if someone doesn't get you, move on."
Drew Barrymore



It sure as heck is not being done in Fairfax VT. At least not effectively.