The Mathematics and Reading Connection. ERIC Digest.
Provides full-text access to the ERIC Digest of this name dealing with The domains of the three Rs-reading, 'riting and 'rithmetic-long before the whole language . "Integrating Mathematics, Science and Language: an instructional program. Mathematics and science learning is critical during the early childhood years For instance, the National Association for the Education of Young Children on science whereas approximately 15 minutes were devoted to language and literacy. . teachers were told that we wished to observe the entire period during which. Whole language describes a literacy philosophy which emphasizes that children should focus The idea of "whole" language has its basis in a range of theories of learning Sometimes the relationships and their patterns do not work, as in the . Its Department of Education, Science and Training published a National.
Success in reading and mathematics is based on process skills that incorporate the integration of contextual information and with prior knowledge to produce meaning. The development of the skills involved in these domains could be considered the four Cs: Knowledge is actively constructed in each of these areas.
In reading, letters form words that symbolize objects, attributes or action. In mathematics, numbers symbolize amounts, patterns or relationships. These words and numerical expressions create a basis for additional focus or information processing. This knowledge can be constructed and enhanced through collaboration with others in the classroom or workplace. Knowledge is communicated with others to share, compare and assess information. These strands should be interwoven into the classroom environment to aid in the content, methodology, and assessment in mathematics.
Bickmore-Brand suggests that these steps will create a positive association with mathematics and mathematical relevancy in society. In this manner, mathematics helps students develop an understanding of the events in society. It specifically addresses the topic for elementary school curriculum in a chapter by David J. Whitin, "Connecting Literature and Mathematics" who suggests that children's literature can help students meaningfully connect their world to the world of mathematical ideas.
The Yearbook focuses on building a discourse community of meaningful mathematical communication within classrooms and beyond. Children are expected to figure out for themselves the connection between the letters and the sounds of the words as the adult points to them. There is no further explication of how the letters represent words.
The assumption that children learn like adults also translates into student choice of reading material, a focus on advanced reading comprehension strategies for young children, avoidance of reading groups or sequential oral reading, and ample time in school for independent silent reading in the company of others Drop Everything and Read! These activities are the instructional core of a whole-language curriculum, not ancillary components.
Spelling, like reading, is meant to happen by having children imitate the stages and characteristics of adult writing. Debbie Powell and David Hornsby, in a best-selling handbook for teachers, state, "We feel that there are no stages of development in terms of the strategies spellers use because the strategies beginning spellers use are the same as those of mature spellers.
All language is naturally acquired, according to whole-language devotees. Reading is analogous to listening; children's brains are focused on meaning as language is processed, not on the structure or form of language.
To focus instead on structure and form is unnatural and unnecessary. Children will extract the structure and form of print if they are exposed to it sufficiently in the context of meaning-making activities, just as they have extracted the rules of phonology and syntax in oral language without any formal instruction. Thus, the teacher is instructed to stress the meaning of what is being read, to ask always if a word the child misread "makes sense," and to emphasize imitative reading of "whole, authentic texts" even if the child cannot read them independently.
The acquisition of the alphabetic code is a minor concern because it will happen if children have a purpose for learning it. Phoneme awareness, phonics, spelling, punctuation, and other skills of written language can be learned "naturally. Natural learning is playful, incidental, and easy.
Phoneme awareness will happen if children play rhyming games; spelling will happen if children write; word recognition will happen if children follow the print as the adult reads; and comprehension will happen if children's curiosity is piqued.
The teacher needn't follow a structure or sequence; she is to share, guide, and facilitate as the child discovers how reading works. Powell and Hornsby state, "Proficient readers easily recognize most words and gain meaning usually without even attending to all of the letters or even all of the words, because their ability to decode is largely automatic and subconscious. Teach phonics and spelling on an "as needed" basis, that is, after students make errors on words while they are reading and writing.
Phonics is allowed into the whole-language classroom, but it is not taught first, foremost, or formally. The teacher is to observe errors "miscues" children are making while reading text and is then to provide "mini-lessons" on the word pattern or sound-symbol correspondence the children missed while reading.
The goal is to read a specific text, not to learn skills that may generalize to all texts. Too much phonics instruction is harmful to children, so keep it unobtrusive. In whole-language orthodoxy, phonics is seen as a distraction, an interference that prevents real reading from occurring. Phonics and other instruction in component reading skills are necessary evils that divert children from reading authentic text and thinking creatively about its content.
Teachers are warned that if children receive too much phonics instruction outside of a meaningful context, they will become "word callers" who do not understand the real purposes of reading. Skill lessons are to be unobtrusive, brief, and, if possible, disguised. Teaching phonics should be a covert operation. Children should construct their own insights into language. The skilled whole-language teacher is coach, model, and guide.
Concepts are to be discovered, not presented, because discovery, according to the whole-language canon, promotes higher-order thinking. Although active engagement is a principle of good teaching, the discovery approach to language skills can be imprecise and unnecessarily time consuming. It should not replace direct teaching of concepts. It is unimportant to teach strategies for reading single words out of context.
According to whole-language doctrine, the point of reading is not to read individual words; it is to understand connected text. This truism has been translated into a prohibition against teaching or testing the child's ability to read single words out of context.
Work on word recognition is minimized in favor of literature-related activities, even in the beginning stages when children cannot yet read. Accuracy in word reading is not valued for its own sake. Children's reading errors miscues are accepted if the error is the same part of speech as the misread word or if it does not change the meaning of the passage. Good readers can recognize words on the basis of a few sound-symbol correspondences, such as beginning and ending consonants, and don't really need to know the inner details, such as vowels.
In whole language, reading is viewed as a process of predicting words on the basis of meaning and context. The good reader samples the print, and detailed decoding of all the sounds in words is unnecessary. As a consequence, teaching all the letter-sound correspondences, and teaching children the skills to sound out an entire word, is unnecessary.
Thus, many so-called phonics activities in whole-language classrooms emphasize the decoding of initial consonants and maybe end consonants and word families that is, the part of a syllable composed of the vowel and all the consonants that follow it, such as -ild, -ank, or -odgebut complete knowledge of the sound-symbol system is not emphasized.
When a child is reading and cannot recognize a word, the child should be asked to guess at the word from context and then sound the word out if guessing does not yield a word that would make sense in the sentence. On a third-grade teacher's wall, in a classroom in Washington, DC, where I conduct a research project, is the following poster: If a word in a sentence is unfamiliar, read to the end of the sentence. Skip the word you do not know. After reading the sentence, use the context to guess the word.
If you still do not know the word, do the following: Think about your letter sounds. Think about word parts. Try to say the word. Does it make sense? If you still don't know the word, look it up in the glossary or dictionary. Ask someone for help. Whole language dictates that recognition of unknown words is a function of three "cueing systems.
Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Reading Instruction | LD Topics | LD OnLine
The sense of the passage is supposed to drive word recognition. The graphophonic cueing system is to be deployed as a strategy of last resort if context-based guessing has not yielded the correct word. They recognize them out of context by their letter-sound correspondences. A typical whole-language class22 A first- or second-grade classroom in which whole-language ideas predominate is not the traditional class of bygone years.
It has clusters of desks, not rows; the space is not arranged so that children focus on the teacher in front of the class. Learning centers and clusters of desks lend themselves to individualized, self-directed, and small-group learning.
A classroom library corner has many books of different genres and a comfortable place to read. Little use is made of the chalkboard. There is a prominent "word wall," on which high-frequency vocabulary is placed in alphabetical order.
Words such as off, on, orange, open, our, and oil might all be placed under Oo. The varying sounds of those letter correspondences are irrelevant to the presentation. Children gather on the floor around the teacher's chair during reading instruction. The teacher introduces a lesson with a "shared" reading; she previews a selection with the youngsters by taking a "picture walk" through the book's illustrations.Relationship Between Mathematics & Science Subjects : Easy-to-Intermediate Math
She introduces new vocabulary meanings needed to understand the story, but there is little reference to word structure. The five to ten new words on the vocabulary list are presented as if they should be recognized on sight, by their appearance and context. Vocabulary words are selected for their meanings, not for their sound-symbol correspondences, so they are not used to reinforce a lesson on sound-symbol decoding. The teacher reads the book aloud as she follows the text with her finger.
She leads a discussion about the story, eliciting from children their prior knowledge of the content and their questions about the content. After the story, she teaches a phonics mini-lesson on a family of words with similar spellings, by listing them and asking the children to read them aloud. The words are chosen because of their use in the text. More readings of the text follow on subsequent days. By week's end, children may have read the same text three or four times, the first few by choral reading and patterning.
When children take turns reading, they are encouraged to refer to the sense of the text to figure out unknown words. Assignments often involve writing or illustrating a personal response to the text in a reader-response journal. Spelling instruction is given on those words that the children misspell, after they have been used in writing. During instruction, the children are asked to invent what they think the likely spelling of a word might be Have a go! There are no spelling lists or spelling workbooks.
Children are expected to collaborate as they work on reading and writing projects. This is a constructivist environment: What's wrong with whole language?
Almost every premise advanced by whole language proponents about how reading is learned has been contradicted by scientific investigations. Almost every practice stemming from these premises has been less successful with groups of both normally developing and reading-disabled children than practices based on reading science. As Michael Pressley, editor of Educational Psychologist, has remarked, "At best, much of whole-language thinking They are not the core ideas on which whole language was constructed, however, and they are not the intellectual property of whole language.
Whole-language beliefs about the psychology of basic reading instruction, and the practices that have been based on those beliefs, are misinformed in theory and ineffective in application. The National Reading Panel's Teaching Children to Read reviews once more what is known about the psychology of reading and reading instruction. It does not evaluate whole language directly, but it does synthesize evidence on critical components of teaching reading.
The tenets and practices of whole language are contradicted by the following facts: Learning to read is not natural. Alphabetic writing systems are a late cultural invention for which we are not biologically specialized.
Only some languages have written symbol systems, and many of those writing systems represent whole words, concepts morphemesor syllables.
Only some of the most recently invented writing systems represent individual speech sounds. Spoken language may be hard-wired in the human brain, but written language is an acquired skill that requires special, unnatural insights about the sounds in words. Most children must be taught to read through a rather protracted process in which they are made aware of sounds and the symbols that represent them, and then learn to apply these skills automatically and attend to meaning.
The alphabetic principle is not learned simply from exposure to print. Children can understand our alphabetic writing system if they have acquired a more fundamental understanding called phonological awareness.
That is, in order to read new words written with an alphabetic system, children need to be able to map the symbols to the speech sounds that make up spoken words. Children who lack the required insights often are unable to read or spell well, even if they are reasonably intelligent or acquainted with the information in books.
Phonological awareness is primarily responsible for the development of the ability to sound words out. The ability to use phonics and to sound words out, in turn, is primarily responsible for the development of context-free word-recognition ability.
Context-free word-recognition ability, moreover, is primarily responsible for the development of the ability to read connected text and comprehend it.
Many children who are challenged in learning written language are relatively proficient in spoken language. Spoken language systems are learned automatically, without conscious instruction, when children share experiences and language with caretakers.
Spoken language comprises deeply networked rules for sound production and sentence construction that are devised and learned by a community of language speakers. Written languages, in contrast, are arbitrary systems that use a variety of symbols for words, concepts, syllables, and sounds. Written English, in contrast to spoken English, uses a much wider vocabulary and more complex, formal syntax to convey meaning.
Reading and writing require mastery of a special language with a special skill that exceeds our natural abilities. Most of the variability in reading achievement at the end of first grade is accounted for by children's ability to decode words out of context, using knowledge of phonic correspondences.
The most common and fundamental characteristic of poor text reading is the inability to read single words accurately and fluently. Skill in word reading in turn depends on both phonological awareness and the development of rapid associations of speech to print. Context is valuable for deciphering the meanings and uses for unfamiliar words once they have been named or decoded. It also helps to resolve ambiguities that arise from reading words such as content, which can be a noun or predicate adjective or verb.
Words are recognized, however, from detailed perceptual data at the average rate of about five words per second. We see what is printed, every letter of it, and our minds recognize letters, sounds, and word pieces simultaneously and interactively as we search for meaning.
- Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Reading Instruction
Good readers are more aware of the details of language structure and more attentive to internal aspects of words than poor readers. They are less likely to use a guessing strategy. In fact, guessing from context leads to egregious errors; only 10 to 25 percent of words are correctly guessed. The consequences of whole language for teachers and children Between andan entire field rushed to embrace a set of unfounded ideas and practices without any evidence that children would learn to read better, earlier, or in greater numbers than they had with the basal readers in use at the time.
The California Language Arts Frameworks of were especially influential in driving publishers away from basic-skill instruction. Predictable or repetitive text that children could memorize was preferred to stories that required children to sound words out based on what they had been taught. Beyond classroom reading instruction itself, however, whole language has had far-reaching—it is not too much to say corrupting—effects: Rejection of reliable, valid measures of achievement.
In order to justify its love affair with whole language in the face of little or no evidence for its positive results, the field of reading education began to disavow scientific methodology and objective measurement.
Miller conducted their first major review of the evidence, andwhen they updated their analysis, twenty of forty-five studies that purportedly evaluated the effectiveness of whole language declined to use or report any standardized measure of reading achievement. Instead of acknowledging that objective assessments were proving them wrong, many reading-education researchers rejected objectivity itself. Those invested in defending whole language criticized traditional achievement tests as unauthentic and replaced them with measures of motivation, enjoyment, or self-esteem.
Attitude, not achievement, became the outcome of concern in the reading education research community. A positive attitude toward reading was expected to lead children automatically into more and better reading.
Many reading-education researchers replaced standardized, reliable, validated assessments with alternative assessments that probed attitudes. For example, turn taking in conversation, reading poetry or a shopping list. He found that the children did better when they read the words in connected text. Later replications of the experiment failed to find effects, however, when children did not read the same words in connected text immediately after reading them individually, as they had in Goodman's experiment.
Critics argue that good readers use decoding as their primary approach to reading, and use context to confirm that what they have read makes sense. Application of Goodman's theory[ edit ] Goodman's argument was compelling to educators as a way of thinking about beginning reading and literacy more broadly.
This led to the idea that reading and writing were ideas that should be considered as wholes, learned by experience and exposure more than analysis and didactic instruction. This largely accounts for the focus on time spent reading, especially independent reading. Some versions of this independent reading time include a structured role for the teacher, especially Reader's Workshop.
Despite the popularity of the extension of Chomsky's linguistic ideas to literacy, there is some neurological and experimental research that has concluded that reading, unlike language, is not a pre-programmed human skill. It must be learned. Sally Shaywitz,  a neurologist at Yale Universityis credited with much of the research on the neurological structures of reading.
Contrasts with phonics[ edit ] Because of this holistic emphasis, whole language is contrasted with skill-based areas of instruction, especially phonics and synthetic phonics. Phonics instruction is a commonly used technique for teaching students to read. Because they do not focus exclusively on the individual parts, tending to focus on the relationship of parts to and within the larger context, whole language proponents do not favor some types of phonics instruction.
Whole language advocates state that they do teach, and believe in, phonics, especially a type of phonics known as embedded phonics. In embedded phonics, letters are taught during other lessons focused on meaning and the phonics component is considered a "mini lesson".
Instruction in embedded phonics typically emphasizes the consonants and the short vowelsas well as letter combinations called rimes or phonograms.
The use of this embedded phonics model is called a "whole-part-whole" approach because, consistent with holistic thinking, students read the text for meaning first wholethen examine features of the phonics system part and finally use their new knowledge while reading the text again whole. Reading Recovery is a program that uses holistic practices with struggling readers. This mixed approach is a development from the practice employed in the 70s and 80s when virtually no phonics was included in the curriculum at all.
Theorists such as Ken Goodman and Frank Smith at that time advocated a "guessing game" approach, entirely based on context and whole word analysis. Most whole language advocates now see that children go through stages of spelling development as they develop, use and gain control over written language.
Early literacy research conducted by Piagetian researcher, Emilia Ferreiro and published in her landmark book, Literacy Before Schooling, has been replicated by University of Alabama professor, Maryann Manning.
Based on this research "invented spelling" is another "whole-part-whole" approach: To write a word they have to decompose its spoken form into sounds and then to translate them into letters, e. Empirical studies  show that later orthographic development is fostered rather than hindered by these invented spellings — as long as children from the beginning are confronted with "book spellings", too. It became a major educational paradigm of the late s and the s. Despite its popularity during this period, educators who believed that skill instruction was important for students' learning and some researchers in education were skeptical of whole language claims and said so loudly.
What followed were the "Reading Wars" of the s and s between advocates of phonics and those of Whole Language methodology, which in turn led to several attempts to catalog research on the efficacy of phonics and whole language. This was a further turning of the wheel of conflict over how to teach reading that had been running for the whole century. She determined that phonics was important but suggested that some elements of the whole language approach were helpful.
While proponents of whole language find the latter to be controversial, both panels found that phonics instruction of varying kinds, especially analytic and Synthetic Phonicscontributed positively to students' ability to read words on tests of reading words in isolation.
Both panels also found that embedded phonics and no phonics contributed to lower rates of achievement for most populations of students when measured on test of reading words in isolation. The Panel recommended an approach it described as "scientifically-based reading research" SBRRthat cited 5 elements essential to effective reading instruction, one of which was explicit, Systematic Phonics instruction phonological awareness, reading comprehension, vocabulary, and fluency were the other 4.
In December the Australian Government endorsed the teaching of synthetic phonics, and discredited the whole language approach "on its own".