Study Backs Phonics, ‘Whole Language’ Mix

A long-awaited report on how to best teach children to read calls for a mix of early phonics training and lots of reading, the approach now taken in California after its embrace of the controversial “whole language” method.

In endorsing such a balance, the report, released Wednesday by the National Research Council in Washington, said it is time for a truce in the “reading wars” that have plagued schools for decades.

Prepared by a panel that included psychologists and neurobiologists as well as educators, the 344-page report says instruction needs to be based on science rather than ideology or simplistic notions of reading that have led to one-size-fits all prescriptions.

With literacy problems hampering as many as four in 10 American children, it seeks to enlist parents, pediatricians, social workers and preschool teachers--as well as those in classrooms--in helping children to read.

“It’s clear that perpetuating the pendulum swings from phonics to whole language isn’t helping kids,” said Catherine Snow, a Harvard University education professor who chaired the 17-member committee. “What we need to do is get beyond that . . . and just simply try to conceptualize what is good reading instruction, what do readers need to know and what do good readers do.”

The report, which was commissioned by the U.S. Department of Education and the National Institute on Child Health and Human Development, notes that scientists working in such diverse fields as neuroscience, linguistics and biology have produced a detailed picture of the complexities of reading. Though it takes pains to be diplomatic, it establishes clear positions on several prominent educational controversies.

After acknowledging the lack of consensus on bilingual education, for instance, the report says there is evidence that children whose first language is not English may do better if taught to read first in their native tongue--because they are likely to best grasp the meaning of words and sentences in that language.

The report also says that while “invented spelling” can help children understand the connection between letters and their sounds, “conventionally correct” spelling must also be taught from the earliest grades through “focused instruction and practice.” Many schools now de-emphasize spelling, believing it will be learned naturally--and that old-fashioned drills will bore students and curtail their creativity.

The document similarly tries to avoid taking sides on the hottest issue in the reading wars, hardly even using the terms phonics or whole language.

But it draws on a broad sweep of research dating back to the 1960s that has been denounced by advocates of whole language. The report says that fluent reading “depends critically” on the ability to connect the letters of words to the sounds they represent. Children should be taught those skills directly and systematically, it says.

The whole language approach, on the other hand, gives minimal attention to those skills, arguing that they will be picked up naturally in the course of reading interesting stories.

Whole language gained prominence in the 1980s but during the 1990s California saw its scores on national tests dip to among the lowest of all states. Beginning three years ago, the state moved on various fronts--from textbooks to teacher education and testing--to emphasize that even preschool children need to become aware of the sounds of words and have lessons in phonics.

The shift, in turn, sparked resentment among education school professors who saw it as an intrusion on their turf.

That debate, Wednesday’s report says, has diverted attention from helping the 40% of American fourth-graders who read poorly--a group that is disproportionately poor and includes 4.5 million African American children and 3.3 million Latinos.

U.S. Secretary of Education Richard W. Riley welcomed the report as a “clear signal that we need to move beyond the contentious reading debate.”

Claude Goldenberg, a Cal State Long Beach education professor who served on the panel, said the report sought to reflect the best research, not just appease various factions.

“Where this is going to get the most criticism is from people who think it places too much emphasis on the basic skills side and not enough on the fact that reading is a contextual, meaning-based process,” he said. “But some will read it as not going far enough [toward phonics].”

Adria Klein, a Cal State San Bernardino professor who is on the board of the International Reading Assn.--a group that represents 90,000 teachers and has been associated with whole language instruction--praised the report’s balance.

“I like that they start with comprehension and that they ask for more and more intensive reading opportunities,” she said.

In one of its key recommendations, the report calls for changes in state policies and licensing requirements to better prepare teachers to teach reading. The panel also recommends more training for current teachers and the hiring of more reading specialists to help students most at risk of failure.

While some children may never read well, such as those with severe learning disabilities, “excellent instruction” early on can prevent most reading problems, the report says.

And excellent instruction, it says, goes beyond phonics or the mere ability to say the words on the page. Children also have to understand their meaning, it notes, and teachers can help there, too, through lessons on vocabulary and skills such as how to summarize the main idea of a story.

A third essential, according to the panel, is that children practice using a wide variety of stories and books so they can read easily and rapidly--otherwise, reading is so labored that the meaning gets lost and it becomes an exercise in tedium.

“However you go about it and whatever you call it, you have to make sure that every day, step by step, kids are making adequate progress in these three things,” said Marilyn Adams, a leading reading researcher and panel member, who helped draft California’s latest policy.

But the panel cited one potential hurdle to putting its findings into operation--the fact that current reading textbooks are missing key elements.

For example, only 30% of the books used in kindergarten and first grade emphasize explicit phonics instruction and only 60% have lessons helping children break words down into sounds.

“Ironically, these relatively neglected instructional components are among those whose importance is most strongly supported by research,” the report said.