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?