Return-Path: <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Received: from literacy (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by literacy.nifl.gov (8.10.2/8.10.2) with SMTP id e9HHGX925468; Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:16:33 -0400 (EDT) Date: Tue, 17 Oct 2000 13:16:33 -0400 (EDT) Message-Id: <001701c0385d$bcac5b20$f349b23f@hppav> Errors-To: listowner@literacy.nifl.gov Reply-To: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Originator: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Sender: nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov Precedence: bulk From: "Mary Ann Corley" <macorley1@earthlink.net> To: Multiple recipients of list <nifl-povracelit@literacy.nifl.gov> Subject: [NIFL-POVRACELIT:196] Reading Instruction X-Listprocessor-Version: 6.0c -- ListProcessor by Anastasios Kotsikonas X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.50.4133.2400 Status: O Content-Length: 5863 Lines: 134 To all: In light of the recent and lively discussion on this list about reading instruction and the role of phonological awareness, I'm cross-posting a message sent today by Nickie Askov to the NLA list, in response to an earlier posting by Tom Sticht. So much of the current research points to a "balanced approach" to teaching reading, which means that both whole language and phonological awareness have a role in instruction. It does not seem to be an "either-or situation," but, as Nickie points out, depends on the learner's needs. Here's Nickie's posting: -Mary Ann Corley ****************************** Tom and others, I have always had problems with the idea that legislation should prescribe instructional practices in the classroom. Learners have different needs, and they should be taught by the methods that work best for them. That being said, however, instructors should know a variety of methods and strategies so that they can adapt instruction to the needs of individuals. Unfortunately, many adult educators have not been trained in how to teach reading and therefore have been heavily reliant on commercial materials. (I realize that this is a vast over-generalization...there are many knowledgeable and effective teachers of reading!) I certainly hope that professional development that is offered does not focus exclusively on how to teach phonemic awareness and phonics. I do hope that professional development will emphasize developing a portfolio of approaches to teaching reading (with their theoretical underpinnings) so that teachers can offer "balanced" reading instruction which is what IRA has been recommending. States could direct their professional development funds in that direction if they saw the need in their states to improve reading instruction. Certification is really another issue for discussion...whether or not it would improve teacher competency in all aspects of adult education. Nickie Askov >David: I hope the NLA list members may provide comments on the >following. > >Tom Sticht > >Policy Issues Related to Adult Literacy Instructional Practices > >On March 6, 2000 I posted a message on the NLA list noting that the 1998 >Adult Education and Family Literacy Act (AEFLA) extends adult literacy >education funding policy into prescriptions for the actual practice of >adult education. The text of the AEFLA emphasizes that in considering >applications for grants from educational providers, granting agencies >should consider whether or not the program "Öuses instructional >practices, such as phonemic awareness, systematic phonics, fluency, and >reading comprehension that research has proven to be effective in >teaching individuals to read." It refers to these instructional >practices six times throughout the AEFLA. > >About a month later, on April 13, 2000 the National Reading Panel >mandated by the U.S. Congress issued a press release about its report >on teaching reading to children. The press release included the >following: > > "Quote: National Reading Panel Reports Combination of Teaching Phonics, >Word Sounds, Giving Feedback on Oral Reading Most Effective Way to Teach >Reading > >In the largest, most comprehensive evidenced-based review ever conducted >of research on how children learn reading, a Congressionally mandated >independent panel has concluded that the most effective way to teach >children to read is through instruction that includes a combination of >methods. > >The panel determined that effective reading instruction includes >teaching children to break apart and manipulate the sounds in words >(phonemic awareness), teaching them that these sounds are represented by >letters of the alphabet which can then be blended together to form words >(phonics), having them practice what they've learned by reading aloud >with guidance and feedback (guided oral reading), and applying reading >comprehension strategies to guide and improve reading comprehension. End >Quote" More information about the National Reading Panel is available at >the panel's web site, http://www.nationalreadingpanel.org. > >In my earlier posting I noted that many adult educators in workshops I >had conducted on Listening and Reading Processes of Adults were not >familiar with phonemics and phonics. Of some 247 participants, of whom >45 to 76 percent were teachers, depending on the particular site, 38-70 >percent said that this new emphasis upon phonemics, phonics , etc. was >"Very important" to their classroom teaching or tutoring. Yet, 38-79 >percent said they had never received training in teaching or tutoring >phonemic awareness and 31-59 percent said they had no training in >teaching phonics. > >The policy issues I am interested in are > >(1) should federal or state adult literacy education funding legislation >include policy related to instructional practice, > >(2) should adult educators who work in adult literacy education be >required to attend staff development education for certification in the >conceptual understanding of the relationships of oral and written >language, including how to teach phonemic awareness and phonics, how to >help students develop fluency and how to increase listening and reading >comprehension, > >(3) should special funding be provided for supporting this type of staff >development and > >(4) would this include ESOL educators? > >You can respond on the NLA list or directly to me to me at >telephone/fax (619) 444-9133 or email: tsticht@aznet.net > >Thanks! Eunice N. Askov, Ph.D. Professor of Education Director, Institute for the Study of Adult Literacy 102 Rackley Building The Pennsylvania State University University Park, PA 16802 Phone: (814)863-3777; Fax: (814)863-6108 http://www.ed.psu.edu/isal/ Email: ENA1@psu.edu (on sabbatical leave July 1, 2000 - June 30, 2001) *********************************
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Tue Jan 16 2001 - 14:47:27 EST