Hooked on Phonics

Before reading this chapter, I don’t think I’d ever heard of the ‘whole language’ approach to reading. I was definitely brought up on the phonics method. At an early age, I became one of the millions of children who would spend a few hours of the evening watching Sesame Street, soaking in lessons on how to spell words via singing puppets. On the screen I would see, for example, an ‘f’ on the left side of the screen and ‘ood’ on the right. They would slowly come together as Cookie Monster pronounced each in its turn until finally they came together and formed a single word (which Cookie Monster then proceeded to devour). Seeing words I knew appear in symbolic form was an amazing feeling; just as Williams explains, I was creating order and making significant connections with my working vocabulary, my growing comprehension of the alphabet, and the mental images already in my mind of that given word. At home, I did drawings and scribbles like most children would. I drew pictures with captions and whether or not they were spelled correctly had little importance because the general idea was understood and my command of language was improving.

Phonics was great because it enabled me to be a more independent learner; could “decode” words in storybooks all by myself (155). I learned in kindergarten and first grade about letters, which ones were consonants and which ones were vowels, and how when you combined certain ones, different sounds resulted. From these critical lessons, I was able to recognize more words from sounding them out. And figuring out how to identify words through visual and speech repetition increased my reading pace over the years and my ability to comprehend text. That’s why, in my opinion, the phonics approach seems to be a better method for young children-it’s more about an organic and gradual progression. The whole language approach, on the other hand, appears to stress “immers[ion] in a text-rich environment” where syntax and context are key (156). Of course these cues are important, but not necessarily at a pre-school level. Learning to differentiate between the multiple meanings of word, like Williams’ example of house, comes naturally with time and experience.

The benefits of phonics are proven. That’s why it’s no longer a debate about which approach is more advantageous. Letters and sounds are the building blocks for literacy. Teaching children how to distinguish the ways in which these elements coalesce (through educational television, books, school, or programs like ‘Hooked on Phonics’) helps them to become better readers, and in turn, better writers. That’s not to say, however, that I don’t see any pros in the whole language approach. As some people have mentioned, balance is important. I like the way Williams mollified the issue by stating that “…responsible reading teachers and scholars now advocate a view of reading instruction that draws on whole language to support phonics-based programs” (165). Whole language learning has the added advantage that it incorporates free writing in the classroom, which phonics does not, and that it does not zero in on superficial errors. Still, phonics is what sets up most readers with a good foundation in language and literacy.

Finally, in regard to the last section of the chapter on computers, I have to say that I agree with Williams and his belief that word processing programs and the Internet have improved the methods for integrating reading and writing instruction (169). Personally, I love being able to generate as many documents as I want, creating pieces of writing with the full knowledge that I can just as easily rearrange or rewrite my material, or destroy it completely if need be. I’m forced (in a good way) to write, read, and edit, and I learn new words and refresh my existing vocabulary along the way through the use of spell check and the thesaurus. On-line, I like reading The New York Times because I can get the same stories from print, but they have a neat feature on the Web that I don’t have-an instant dictionary. If I’m unsure of a word in an article, I just let my mouse hang over it and a question mark pops up. If I click on that question mark, usually it will take me to a dictionary, explaining the meaning of that word and enhancing my comprehension of the article as a whole. This is just one example of the many amazing resources available through the use of computers and the Internet today. Of course there are drawbacks of sometimes having unreliable/unidentifiable sources, but overall the benefits of the Internet far outweigh the risks. And in the end, as Williams points out, in relation to reading and writing, it’s all about motivation. Regardless of an individual’s reading or writing abilities, he/she has to be exposed to opportunities for lots of practice and be willing to make the most of those opportunities (at all ages and stages of development) in order to become a “good” reader/writer.