Politics of Teaching Reading

Proponents of each of the 2 approaches to reading (phonics based vs whole language) maintain their approach is the “KEY” to engaging children in reading and are often critical of the other. The “whole language” group think children’s literature, writing activities and communication activities can be used across the curriculum to teach reading. The backers of “phonics” instruction insist that a direct, sequential mode of teaching reading enables students to master reading in an organized way. The debate over which system is best isn’t new. In fact the question has been argued through much of the 20th century with the pendulum regularly swinging back and forth.

Which is best?

It depends:

– some children tend to be visual learners and are more likely to benefit from the whole language approach since their strength is in recognizing words and word sequences that they have seen before. They tend to enjoy and learn from the popular literature and the peer interactions prominent in this approach.

– some children tend to be auditory learners and they learn best by what they hear so they rely more on the systematic approach of phonics.

The majority of experts now contend that neither approach by itself is effective all of the time but that both approaches possess merit. What does succeed most of the time is a carefully designed reading program that employs part whole language and part phonics and takes into account each students learning style, strengths and weaknesses.

In recent years the school system in Ontario has increased emphasis on the whole language approach and most children are experiencing success in the development of their reading skills. There are however a significant number of children where this is not the case. For some reason(s) the whole language approach is not working for them and they are falling behind their classmates in this essential skill. Unfortunate biproducts of this failure to learn reading frequently show up as: