This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Strauss, S. L. Articles by Altwerger, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?

The logographic nature of English alphabetics and the fallacy of direct intensive phonics instruction

Franklin Square Hospital, Baltimore, USA, steven.strauss{at}medstar.net

Bess Altwerger

Towson University, Baltimore, USA, balterwerger{at}towson.edu

US government mandates to implement intensive phonics instruction in elementary classrooms invoke an alleged scientific superiority of this approach over more meaning-centered models. But curiously absent from this scientific enterprise is a study of the phonics system itself. Advocates of intensive phonics have not demonstrated that the commonly taught patterns are capable of imparting the desired amount of decoding abilities to developing readers. In fact, the English phonics system operates at a level of complexity that essentially defies teachability. The explanation for this level of complexity is the logographic nature of English alphabetics. Recent neuroimaging research does not independently support intensive phonics, despite claims to the contrary, because the capacity of magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) machines to identify brain regions used for decoding says nothing about the role of decoding in reading. Neuroimaging does not distinguish the phonological processing of a decoding model of reading from the graphophonic processing of a meaning-centered model. A recent multiclassroom study comparing distinct reading instruction practices found that letter-sound patterns were actually learned better by children in whole language classrooms than children in intensive phonics classrooms. We conclude that neither linguistic, neuroscientific, nor classroom research has demonstrated the superiority of intensive phonics over meaning-centered approaches to reading.

Key Words: alphabetic writing • logographic writing • neuroimaging • phonics • whole language

References

• Altwerger, B. (2005) Reading for Profit: How the Bottom Line Leaves Kids Behind. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Altwerger, B., Jordan, N. and Shelton, N. (2007) Rereading Fluency: Process, Practice and Policy. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Arya, P., Martens, P., Wilson, P., Altwerger, B., Jin, L., Laster, B. and Lang, D. (2005) `Reclaiming Literacy Instruction: Evidence in Support of Literature-based Programs', Language Arts 82(6): 63—72.
• Business Roundtable (2000) Essential Components of a Successful Education System, 4 December, URL: http://www.brtable.org
• Clowes, G.A. (1999) `Reading is Anything but Natural: An Interview with G. Reid Lyon', School Reform News, URL (consulted August 2003): http://www.heartland.org
• Coverdell, P. (1998) `The Reading Excellence Act', Senate Testimony, Congressional Record, p. S1293, 3 March, URL (consulted March 2001): http://www.thomas.loc.gov
• Flurkey, A. and Xu, J., eds (2003) On the Revolution of Reading:The Selected Writings of Kenneth S. Goodman. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Foorman, B.R., Francis, D.J. and Fletcher, J.M. (2003) `Correcting Errors', Phi Delta Kappan 84(9): 719—20.
• Fountas, I. and Pinnell, G.S. (2001) Guiding Readers and Writers Grades 3—6. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Garan, E. (2002) Resisting Reading Mandates: How to Triumph with the Truth. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Goodman, K.S. (1967) `Reading: A Psycholinguistic Guessing Game', Journal of the Reading Specialist 6: 126—35.
• Goodman, Y.M., Watson, D.J. and Burke, C.L. (2005) Reading Miscue Inventory: From Evaluation to Instruction. Katonah, NY: Rchard C. Owen.
• Guardian (2005) `Teachers' Anger at Kelly U-turn over Phonics', (2 December), URL (consulted May 2006): http://education.guardian.co.uk/primaryeducation/story/0,,1655983,00.html
• Klima, E. and Bellugi, U. (1979) The Signs of Language. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
• Lenneberg, E. (1967) Biological Foundations of Language. New York: Wiley.
• Lyon, G.R. (1997) `Testimony before the Committee on Education and the Workforce, U.S. House of Representatives', 10 July, URL (consulted June 2000): http://edworkforce.house.gov
• Lyon, G.R. (1998) `Testimony before the Committee on Labor and Human Resources, U.S. Senate, entitled: Overview of Reading and Literacy Initiatives ', 28 April, URL: http://www.readbygrade3.com
• Martens, P., Arya, P., Wilson, P. and Jin, L. (2005) `The Impact of Text Characteristics on Second Graders' Readings and Retellings of Texts with Contrasting Story Structures', paper presented at the National Reading Conference Annual Meeting, Miami, December.
• National Reading Panel (NRP) (2000a) Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read, an Evidence-based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction — Reports of the Subgroups, National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, April. NIH Publication no. 00—4754.
• National Reading Panel (NRP) (2000b) Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching Children to Read, an Evidence-based Assessment of the Scientific Research Literature on Reading and its Implications for Reading Instruction — Reports of the Subgroups (Summary Report), National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, December. NIH Publication no. 00—4769.
• NewYork Times (2007) `In War Over Teaching Reading, a U.S.-local Clash', (10 March): Vol. CLVI, p. 1.
• Owocki, G. and Goodman, Y. (2002) Kidwatching: Documenting Children's Literacy Development. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.
• Rayner, K., Foorman, B.R., Perfetti, C.A., Pesetsky, D. and Seidenberg, M.S. (2002) `How Should Reading Be Taught? ', Scientific American 286(3): 84—91.[Medline] [Order article via Infotrieve]
• Rosenberger, P.B. and Rottenberg, D.A. (2002) `Does Training Change the Brain?', Neurology 58(8): 1139—40.[Free Full Text]
• Shanahan, T. (2005) `But Does it Really Matter?', Phi Delta Kappan 86(6): 452.
• Shaywitz, S. (2003) `Overcoming Dyslexia: A New and Complete Science-Based Program for Reading Problems at Any Level'. New York: Alfred A. Knopf.
• Simos, P.G., Fletcher, J.M., Bergman, E., Breier, J.I., Foorman, B.R., Castillo, E.M., Davis, R.N., Fitzgerald, M. and Papanicolaou, A.C. (2002) `Dyslexia-specific Brain Activation Profile Becomes Normal Following Successful Remedial Training', Neurology 58: 1203—13.[Abstract/Free Full Text]
• Strauss, S.L. (2005) The Linguistics, Neurology, and Politics of Phonics: Silent `e' Speaks Out. Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
• Venezky, R.L. (1999) The American Way of Spelling. New York: Guilford.
• Woodcock, R., Johnson, W. and Bonner, W. (1990) Woodcock Johnson Psycho-Educational Battery — R. New York: Riverside Publishing.

Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, Vol. 7, No. 3, 299-319 (2007)
DOI: 10.1177/1468798407083664


CiteULike    Complore    Connotea    Del.icio.us    Digg    Reddit    Technorati    Twitter    What's this?

This Article Abstract Free Full Text (Free PDF) Free Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a friend Similar articles in this journal Alert me to new issues of the journal Add to Saved Citations Download to citation manager Request Permissions Request Reprints Add to My Marked Citations Citing Articles Citing Articles via Google Scholar Citing Articles via Scopus Google Scholar Articles by Strauss, S. L. Articles by Altwerger, B. Search for Related Content Social Bookmarking                         What's this?