This is a continuation of the email that I had sent to Robert
Slavin.
Extract from Robert’s blog post:
“Since it is impossible to know in
advance which students will need phonics and which will not, it just makes
sense to teach using methods likely to maximize the chances that all children
(those who need phonics and those who would succeed with or without them) will
succeed in reading.”
From my experience of teaching shut down kids, I believe all
students will benefit greatly if the pronunciation of phonemes is taught correctly
from the onset. The reason the reading wars are going on for decades is precisely because of the pronunciation of phonemes being taught wrongly.
Dr. If the foundation is laid right, then all the kids will
not have to grope in the dark. Even the kids who somehow learn to read
regardless of the way they are taught will be able to read from the onset and
not sometime later as is happening now.
I would like a response from you so that we may continue
with this discussion.
…End of my email to Robert Slavin…
My additional comment now:
Just because one is a Ph.D. should not mean one can write
what one likes on a blog that will be read by the masses. That is rather
irresponsible. Even more irresponsible is not to respond to comments and to
emails.
How are we ever going to get rid of the Reading Wars when we
don’t discuss matters openly. What nonsense is this about not knowing ‘which
student will need phonics and which will not’. All students will benefit from
phonics if the pronunciation of phonemes is taught correctly. Why is this such
a difficult matter for the westerners to grasp?
The following is another extract from his article.
At www.evidenceforessa.org, you can
find 65 elementary reading programs of all kinds that meet high standards of
effectiveness. Almost all of these use approaches that emphasize the five
pillars. Yet Evidence for ESSA also lists many programs that equally emphasize
the five pillars and yet have not found positive impacts. Rather than
re-starting our thirty-year-old pillar fight, don’t you think we might move on
to advocating programs that not only use the right curricula, but are also
proven to get excellent results for kids?
Is Robert Slavin a research Director or an advocate of
programmes?
I am giving Robert Slavin my findings from having taught
more than 70 so-called dyslexic kids for 15 years since 2004. I had observed
them and interviewed them during my tuition as well as after they had left my
tuition classes.
I know for a fact that kids shut down/disengage from
learning to read when they are confused. All my students could read in Malay
and those who went to Chinese schools could read in Romanised Mandarin.
How many programmes have we used during the last 3 decades?
Why are we doing the same things over and over and expecting different results?
How does he do research, as the Director of the Centre for Research and Reform in Education when he does not comprehend what I
have written to him?
No comments:
Post a Comment