‘Scientifically tested’ methods would refer to any method that is backed by research. I am a teacher, and I can tell you that there is plenty of research being done on a variety of methods besides phonics, and any responsible teacher is already familiar with the research, keeping updated on the latest research, and implementing in his/her classroom a variety of techniques.
Although there has been a push- mostly be people on the right who aren’t very familiar with educational methods- towards phonics, I think most elementary school teachers are still teaching with a variety of methods. If you know of a school system that has mandated phonics-only reading teaching, I’d love to know its name. I’m not saying such a school does not exist, but I don’t think you’ll find anywhere near a majority, as the OP implies.
No, you’ve got it “bass-ackwards”. See, society has mistakenly listened to the self-annointed “intellectuals” and their proposals for new and better “methods” for forty-some years now, and the results have spoken for themselves. Instead of progression within the public education instututions, there has been re-gression. Finally, people are standing up and saying, “enough is enough”. Parents are demanding that public education go back to the tried and true “basics”. The legislators that are actually listening to the legitimate concerns of “The People”, you are attempting to defame as “conservatives”.
But all we have to go on to evaluate teachers, is the results of their “teaching”. Forty years ago, every high-school graduate, from the valedictorian, to the student at the bottom of the class, could read. Today, after what you speak of as “intellectual approaches to human learning”, we have high-school graduates that cannot read or are functionally illiterate. Again, the results speak for themselves. Enough is enough!!
This is precisely what the public education establishment, after being infected with the liberal orthodoxy, has been putting out for the past quarter-century. Work-drones who lack the mental skills required to make change without the aid of a calculator.
George C. Collinsworth
A liberal’s worst nightmare; A redneck with both a library card and a concealed-carry permit.
[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by tomndebb *
**I won’t give you 60%, because I refuse to acknowledge “thru.” That leaves you with hiccup, sough, and slough–less than 60%
Although a hiccough is loud, it will not sough through the boughs in the slough
Let’s count, shall we?
Now, let’s see, you admit to three out of five being archaic or obsolete. Let’s do some basic math:
Three out of five comes out to three-fifths.
Three-fifths is equal to six tenths.
Six tenths is equal to sixty one-hundredths.
Sixty one-hundredths is usually equal to sixty percent.
“sixty percent” can also be written as “60%”.
So, can you please explain to me, how it is one can be a self-styled master of basic education and not be able to realize that three out of five equals 60%?
Well, I was reading at age four and I “hear” words in my head. If I run across a given name that I can’t come up with a plausible pronunciation for, it can interrupt my reading, but I really doubt I could be considered a slow or poor reader.
(I read four books over the weekend, for what it’s worth.)
I think people just tend to have dominant brain traits. I am a very aural person–I learn best through hearing, whether at a lecture or thrrough verbal instructions. I have a very good memory for things I’ve heard, including music or voice recognition, while I have a relatively poor memory for things I’ve seen. I think that probably plays a role.
