The progress of the whole-language debate
- 1 September 1994
- journal article
- Published by Taylor & Francis in Educational Psychologist
- Vol. 29 (4), 217-222
- https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2904_6
Abstract
The whole-language framework carries certain strong implications with respect to the appropriate and inappropriate content and conduct of classroom instruction. Because a number of these implications are new or controversial, empirical investigations of their relative instructional efficacy are strongly warranted. On the other hand, advocates of whole language have argued that it is properly seen, not as a set of methods, but as a set of beliefs about teaching and learning as a sociopsycholinguistic process and, further, that within this belief framework, questions about what works more or less well with whom are not merely unanswerable but logically unaskable. The thesis of this article is that the most controversial positions of the whole-language movement—including its rejection of the value instructional efficacy studies—derive from a misguided understanding of cognitive theory.This publication has 7 references indexed in Scilit:
- Toward disciplined inquiry: A methodological analysis of whole language researchEducational Psychologist, 1994
- What Does the Term Whole Language Mean? Constructing a Definition from the LiteratureJournal of Reading Behavior, 1990
- Whose Agenda Is This Anyway? A Response to McKenna, Robinson, and MillerEducational Researcher, 1990
- Whole-Language Research: Foundations and DevelopmentThe Elementary School Journal, 1989
- The Cooperative Research Program in First-Grade Reading InstructionReading Research Quarterly, 1967
- Perception of the speech code.Psychological Review, 1967
- The magical number seven, plus or minus two: Some limits on our capacity for processing information.Psychological Review, 1956