After reading all the comments about this “controversy” including my own, it occurs to me that we start with the letters and as we mature we begin to recognize more and more combinations. Certainly, an adult proficient reader is not “sounding out” each word, and that’s what confused some educators. Why bother teaching arithmetic – let’s go right to calculus and save a lot of time.
Welcome to the SDMB, and thank you for posting your comment.
Please include a link to Cecil’s column if it’s on the straight dope web site.
To include a link, it can be as simple as including the web page location in your post (make sure there is a space before and after the text of the URL).
Cecil’s column can be found on-line at this link:
Does the “whole language” approach to reading work? (28-Apr-1995)
You may also find this thread interesting:
Whole Language: Myth or Fallacy?
I know you were being facetious, but there are, in fact, mathmatical correlaries. How strange, it must seem to alien visitors, that these Earthlings memorize mathematical facts (times tables are a good example), rather than merely applying a more general equations.
The “basics” are necessary, just not sufficient. You can’t just teach phonics and expect all children to get whole word on their own; you can’t just teach arithmetic and expect that calculus will come naturally on its own.
No one is arguing that you shouldn’t teach the basics, just that the emphasis should be on the end, not the means.