State-of-the-science primary -grades reading instruction or whole language?
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Educational Psychologist
- Vol. 29 (4), 211-215
- https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2904_5
Abstract
Three explicit instructional alternatives to whole-language instruction are reviewed. Each is targeted at children with high risk for reading failure, and each enjoys more empirical support than whole language. The case is made that whole language is obsolescent relative to reading instruction developed and validated in the 2.5 years since whole language was conceived. Notably, however, experiencing more explicit instruction of reading skills and strategies in no way precludes the authentic reading and writing experiences emphasized in whole language. Rather, explicit instruction enables at-risk students to participate more fully in such literacy experiences.This publication has 37 references indexed in Scilit:
- The progress of the whole-language debateEducational Psychologist, 1994
- Some observations on beginning reading instructionEducational Psychologist, 1994
- Toward disciplined inquiry: A methodological analysis of whole language researchEducational Psychologist, 1994
- Does Phoneme Awareness Training in Kindergarten Make a Difference in Early Word Recognition and Developmental Spelling?Reading Research Quarterly, 1991
- Explicit versus implicit instruction in phonemic awarenessJournal of Experimental Child Psychology, 1990
- Use of Thinking Aloud in Identification and Teaching of Reading Comprehension StrategiesCognition and Instruction, 1985
- Rhyme and Reason in Reading and SpellingPublished by University of Michigan Library ,1985
- Categorizing sounds and learning to read—a causal connectionNature, 1983
- Acoustic-phonetic skills and reading: Kindergarten through twelfth grade.Journal of Educational Psychology, 1973
- A reinterpretation of the direction of effects in studies of socialization.Psychological Review, 1968