Whole Language vs. Phonics-which is better?

[SFG75]

Here in the states, the "reading wars" have erupted periodicially. There are numerous sites about both philosophies. An excellent article on both views, as well as their respective strengths and weaknesses, can be found on a professor at Northern Arizona's website.

Whole language
*"Sight-reading"
*Kids learn by seeing the word and hearing the word pronounced
*"Top down" learning whereby the reader constructs meaning out of words from prior experiences

Phonics:
*"bottom-up" reading where kids decode the meaning of a text
*Words are broken down into subparts
*Students learn how to spell out words using correct sounds.

Some evidence to consider
-Study on whole language effectiveness

-Whole language primer

Phonics supplemental materials

Reading rockets article on phonics

Pro-phonics article

U.K. phonics effectiveness studies

In learning how to read, I was a "whole language" learner. I used books with supplemental records to memorize words and their meaning(cognitive psychology here ) to me helped me to use that in the correct manner. If made a spelling or pronunciation error, my parents would correct me on the spot and I learned the given word at that very moment.

Not every reading program works for everyone, so I guess the question is this-When it comes down to getting results, which is more effective in creating better readers?

 

[abecedarian]

I've homeschooled since 1989, and have taught 7 kids to read well. My 10 year old dd still struggles, and I'm now working with a 6 year old boy. Among homeschoolers Whole Language, or "Look-Say" ranks right up there with chanting naked in the moonlight, or devil worship..But I've found that a combination of the methods works the best. Teach the sounds, learn phonograms, lots of copywork( younger kids gravitate to this anyway), use stories that hold interest, teach sight words.

 

[cajunmama]

I have had experience with both. The school my children attend is a charter school- an independent public school, free to attend, with its own school board, accountable directly to our state's Board of Elementary and Secondary Education, instead of the district school board. Our school used to use whole language, as part of "No Child Left Behind" program. After a few years of this, the faculty decided that this program really didn't work well and so, phased out the whole language and started to use phonics. I figure that there is no magic bullet, that what works for one kid may not work for another. But I have noticed that my oldest,(whole language), was not as proficient a reader as my son (phonics), when she was his age. What I like about phonics is that it gives children tools to use to figure the word out themselves. What I don't like is that when my son asks for help with his phonics homework, I have to get his other sister to help him, since neither I nor my oldest daughter have any clue how to "code" words. I don't know how I learned to read. As far back as I can recall, I have known how to read.

 

[SFG75]

I could see abec's point about mixing them up as a benefit. A lot of people take the best parts of a given theory or plan and then combine them. While I'm a little leary of this eclectic approach, I guess the ultimate goal is to get kids to learn, not which theory all and in itself, is the best. The problem I have with phonics is that it's rather tedious. I mean, sounding out a word piecemeal? My elementary teachers did that and it didn't help one bit for me. Sad to say, I learned to read inspite of their efforts. It it wasn't for those "sight-see" books with records and great parenting...........