SSRN Home Search and Download Papers Browse Abstract and Paper Submission Subscribe to Networks View Briefcase Top Papers Top Authors Top Institutions

 

Abstract

 


 


Download | Share | Email | Add to Briefcase | Buy Hard Copy

The Reading Wars: Understanding the Debate Over How Best to Teach Children to Read

Kenneth Anderson
Washington College of Law, American University; Stanford University - The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace



Los Angeles Times Book Review, June 18, 2000

Abstract:     
This 2000 review essay from the Los Angeles Times Book Review examines the perennial debate over teaching reading to children - phonics or whole language. It focuses first on the 2000 report of the National Reading Panel of the National Institutes of Health, a study examining reading pedagogy limited to statistically defensible studies, rather than anecdotal reports in education journals. That report, in carefully couched language, endorses the use of phonics while acknowledging the importance of (eventually) learning to read 'in context'. The NIH study indeed concludes that the characteristics of phonemic awareness "most effective in enhancing" reading and spelling skills included "explicitly and systematically teaching children to manipulate phonemes." The review concludes, on the basis of that report and other recent books on reading, that the phonics arguments clearly have the better argument grounded in actual evidence. It addresses the political and ideological undertones to the debate - the recent election of Bush as the No Child Left Behind president, and the association of phonics instruction with conservative reformers - and discussing the writings of Gerald Coles, who endorses whole language pedagogy as a mechanism for left-wing social change, for pedagogy and schools as ideological agents of progressive social change, going far outside any agenda of teaching reading. It takes up broader critiques of prevailing self-esteem pedagogy from the right-wing in Maureen Stout's The Feel Good Curriculum. It ends with a discussion of practical ways in which parents can address gaps in their children's reading skills through Diane McGuinness's provocative, useful, but somewhat over-confident (given the state of current scientific evidence as found in the NIH report) advice to parents on dealing with remediation. The general conclusion of the review is that given by linguist Steven Pinker in the preface to McGuinness's book: "Language is a human instinct, but written language is not ... Children are wired for sound, but print is an optional accessory that must be painstakingly bolted on. This basic fact about human nature should be the starting point for any discussion about how to teach our children to read and write."

Keywords: reading, phonics, whole language, Steven Pinker, Gerald Coles, National Reading Panel, self-esteem, education, language, linguistics, No Child Left Behind,

JEL Classifications: 20, 21, 28, 30

Accepted Paper Series

Date posted: October 16, 2006 ; Last revised: October 16, 2006

Suggested Citation

Anderson, Kenneth, The Reading Wars: Understanding the Debate Over How Best to Teach Children to Read. Available at SSRN: http://ssrn.com/abstract=935776


Export to: Export Citation What's this?

Contact Information

Kenneth Anderson (Contact Author)
Washington College of Law, American University ( email )
4801 Massachusetts Avenue N.W.
Washington, DC 20016
United States
Stanford University - The Hoover Institution on War, Revolution and Peace
Stanford, CA 94305-6010
United States
Feedback to SSRN (Beta)


Paper statistics
Abstract Views: 1,166
Downloads: 75
Download Rank: 0

© 2009 Social Science Electronic Publishing, Inc. All Rights Reserved.  FAQ   Terms of Use   Privacy Policy   Copyright
This page was served by apollo6 in 0.156 seconds.