Let's talk pedagogy - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
Reply
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 103 Old 03-20-2006, 06:20 AM - Thread Starter
 
RomanGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Across the pond
Posts: 1,996
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hello there everyone out there in MDC Land.

I am a new member and have been browsing the Comparison threads and notice that while there is a lot of discussion about how Waldorf works vs. what Montessori works, for example, there is very little discussion about pedagogy in general and which techniques work best for most children (if there are any that are "best"). I find this topic really interesting so I though I would start a discussion. I would love to hear people's views on the following:

1) Individual learning vs. learning as a group (otherwise known as child-centred vs. teacher-centred) - which one is better at the preschool/kindergarten stage? I am rather partial to Montessori and have always considered child-centred approach to be the better approach but I do have friends who say that Montessori did not work for their child because in the mixed-age class, the child always wanted to do what the older children were doing even though he/she was not ready for it (example, a 3-year old who sees the older kids writing in notebooks and then wants to write in a notebook rather than just trace the sandpaper letters). When the child was then put into a classic teacher-centred kindergarten where all the children learned as a group, the child was much happier because noone was doing something else, so there was no "I want to do what he's doing". Anyone have any experience with this?

There is also the Waldorf argument that children should have routine and rhythm and the child-centred approach lacks this because the child just does what he or she wants within the prepared environment. I am less convinced by this, as I think that even within the prepared environment, there is a certain rhythm to the day.

2) reality vs. fantasy There are a couple of other threads discussing this as well. It seems that Montessori and Waldorf are diametrically opposed on this point. Montessori emphasised that a child wants and needs to learn as much about the real world as possible and that fantasy should be introduced later when a child is able to understand the difference and thereby appreciate fantasy for what it is. The Waldorf approach relishes in telling children fairy tales and immersing them in fantasy because (and here I am really summarising so please correct me if I have not explained properly) the child has his or her whole life to learn about the cold hard facts of the real world so why not let children be children. So far, with my 19-month old, I much prefer the reality approach and so, it seems, does she. She loves to look at a picture of broccoli in a book and then run to the fridge and point to the broccoli inside. She thinks that this is the coolest thing. She has a much more limited interest in Winnie the Pooh, Maisy or fantastic stories that she does not understand because she has not yet experienced that in her daily life.

3) Pre-reading and reading skills - I grew up in the public school system in Canada and learned pre-reading and reading skills when I was 6 - nothing before as far as I can remember. I don't think this hindered my ability to read and I was always in the top reading group in my class (but then the whole class learnt to read at the same age) but I do think that my reading comprehension skills would have been better had I learned at least some pre-reading skills earlier. I was certainly quite eager to learn to read before but no one would teach me. In France, children who demonstrate that they are clearly ready learn pre-reading skills (the letters and their sounds) in Kindergarten, which I think makes sense. I also read an article in the French newspaper the other day interviewing a specialist who said that children who read the best and have the best comprehension are those who are taught using the phonics method (synthetic or analytic is fine) earlier rather than later - the reason being that children will have an easier time identifying the sound with the letter earlier rather than later in their childhood.

4) Synthetic phonics, analytic phonics or whole word - which is best for learning to read? Montessori uses synthetic phonics with seemingly huge success. Which method does Waldorf use? I don't even know and would be interested in learning.

Please note that this thread is not for slamming one type of school for the philosophy underlying its approach, whether that philosophy is religious, secular humanist or whatever. It is to discuss the strengths and weaknesses of various pedagogical techniques that are used in each type of school and that's it.

As you can see, I am clearly closer to the Montessori approach but would love to hear from others with the same or differing views on any of the topics discussed above!

Caroline

Roman Goddess, mom to J (August 2004) and J (April 2009).    h20homebirth.gif signcirc1.gif
RomanGoddess is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 09:08 AM - Thread Starter
 
RomanGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Across the pond
Posts: 1,996
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Bump!

Roman Goddess, mom to J (August 2004) and J (April 2009).    h20homebirth.gif signcirc1.gif
RomanGoddess is offline  
#3 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 12:51 PM
 
orca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: there and back again
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
As a teacher who has taught in both public and private schools I have to say that no one "program" works best. The problem with strict pedagogy, found in traditional Montessori and Waldorf etc. schools is that you have to find the school that fits your child. Their mandate is to teach THEIR method and your child has to fit their mould. I've been very happy teaching in public schools (Ontario & B.C. Canada) because I can take the best of all teaching methods and pedagogy and apply them as I see fit to meet the individual needs of EVERY student in my classroom. I use lots of Montessori, Reggio, Waldorf, methods but only pick and choose what works best for each student. That's the beauty of public school... the mandate is to teach to the individual learner and adjust accordingly to guide each child towards success. (That's why public school teachers strike over class size... it's a lot of work to do this for every child... sadly many give up and quit trying...)

At the end of the day it is the teacher who is in the class with your child who makes the difference. Unless your child (and not you!) fits the mould of these schools they won't suceed. I have good friends who LOVE LOVE LOVE Waldorf and were heartbroken when their children did not suceed there. Every child is different and you have to look at what is best for their needs (those kids are really happy in public school right now).

Good luck.

Wife to Dh Mom to Ds (6) Dd (3)
and our brand new Ds
orca is offline  
#4 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 12:58 PM
 
orca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: there and back again
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Oh, I forget to say to find a school that uses a whole language approach to literacy. Phonics are important, but not a complete tool. In Pre K and early primary there should be lots of story telling, singing, playing and games to reinforce letter sounds and word families. Waldorf uses an oral storytelling tradition to encourage imagination and discourages formal literacy instruction until the later years. Not bad for kids who are uninterested, but if you have a little reader in your house s/he may get frustrated. Again, each child should be assessed to see what type of learner they are (visual, musical etc.) Look into Multiple Intelligences by Howard Gardner at Harvard University.

Wife to Dh Mom to Ds (6) Dd (3)
and our brand new Ds
orca is offline  
#5 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 02:33 PM
 
LindaCl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Posts: 1,069
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I don't subscribe to the idea that there is any one "best" way to do it, although I have a lot of opinions about "bad" ways to do it. But most children are incredibly resilient and will come out just fine with any educational approach as long as their educators are committed, upright, caring, and capable people overall, and the child is motivated to engage themselves. Where I find the most children run into problems is when they lose that motivation, or misapply it maybe, and this can result from the fact that their attentiveness is compromised (hungry, tired, stressed, etc). I also see them run into real problems when its reinforced over and over again that by engaging, they are really only setting themselves up for negative feedback. This could be in terms of their academic work, but also in terms of their social interaction with teachers and/or other students.

You ask really good questions.

1) Individual vs group learning: As pertains to preschool and kindergarten, I can't really identify much with the word "learning", because I think at this age most children don't need "school learning", I think they best learn by osmosis, especially from other people, but this doesn't have to be a structured group learning experience. I think they need to have rhythm, but it doesn't have to be in a school. They benefit immensely from a rich exposure to well-spoken language. They benefit much more from free and challenging physical play than they do any kind of so-called 'desk work', even coloring or painting. They benefit from self-driven exploration, especially in the rich environment of colors, smells, sounds, textures and plant and animal life provided by the natural world. They benefit from hearing stories. And they benefit from interaction with other children outside the home. I don't think any particular "curriculum" need to attach to these experiences--the ideal curriculum is one that doesn't act as an impediment to these critical issues.

2) I strongly disagree with the idea that "fantasy" needs to be eliminated, and only reintroduced after the concepts of the "real world" are firmly established. I don't see evidence this phenomenon occurs in mainstream education. I'm not very knowledgeable about Montessori, but my hunch is that the "fantasy life" persists somehow, just under the surface, and it simply isn't expressed during the school day.

What I've seen happen in mainstream education is that the attempt to recreate this creative, playful imaginative quality through educational exercises and what have you result in absurdly goofy and clumsy attempts that accomplish nothing. This problem first appeared on my radar screen when my older children were in public middle schools and high school, and at that time I saw the failure of this idea over and over again. The teachers were trying to reawaken "creativity", and what they got back was "kooky". What qualified as "creative" were things like putting google-eyes in your illustrations. There were some students that still held their own natural creative imaginations, and they could apply individual creativity upon demand like this. Those that didn't *have it* weren't relearning it or rediscovering it. I think that we don't well know how to reawaken the creative and fantasy imagination, so I consider it a very risky undertaking to consciously draw children *away* from it at a time that it comes naturally to them. This idea seems now to me to be working against a child's nature rather than with it.

3) Ultimately good reading skills depend on a great deal more than early skills in reading mechanics. Even good early readers, who master very basic early reading easily, need to call upon *very* different skills altogether to progress after the first few years. Developing the aesthetic sensibility toward quality writing in good literature, and developing good comprehension skills, are essentially wholly different challenges that are certainly made more difficult if the student hasn't some mastery of the basic reading mechanics, but otherwise those entry skills in mastering reading mechanics do not continue to serve as good tools for the students as they go on to more advanced reading. Reading "mechanics" must transfer to reading "automaticity", and at that point good reading demands higher level thinking skills.

I think it's a mistaken notion that these higher level thinking skills required for reading develop naturally from the early reading mechanics skills. I see students who have the mechanics down but don't develop the fluidity they need. I see students who have both down cold, but are just "barking" the words--their mentally imagery isn't adequate to follow the narrative. And then I see students who just don't have the "ping-ping", I call it. What they read remains essentially isolated thought, and the students can't or won't access whatever real life or educationally acquired knowledge "pool" that's necessary to apply from within. As they read, the text doesn't attach to anything. These students don't have the 'hooks' to see patterns, to draw correlations to other ideas or experience, or to thoughtfully draw significance from what they've read.

I'm already long trying to say this, but I think in preschool and kindergarten if too much focus, importance, and time is devoted to early reading mechanics, there is too often a price to pay later in these other domains.

4) Waldorf's method to teach reading falls into that catch-all term "mixed approach". It begins with writing, and from writing, the children advance to reading. In terms of phonics, it is taught but I wouldn't characterize the phonics instruction as a firmly "structured phonics" curriculum. Especially in comparison to the highly structured and all-consuming effort put forth in mainstream schools today, reading instruction in WE would appear on the surface to be something of a laissez-faire approach. It isn't at all, but reading instruction elsewhere is something of a highly engineered and orchestrated operation these days.

As with most everything else in Waldorf, the class teacher's own approach largely determines how it is taught in any given classroom, so there's a lot of variety there. There were major differences between how my own two children were taught. In my own judgement, Waldorf does an amazing job in areas where the mainstream schools are still completely flummoxed. But I think it could be improved in certain areas. It's very difficult to accomplish in an independent private school, but I think it would be great if there were the skills or resources to better diagnose student reading difficulties. And I think that a more structured phonics approach should be attended to in teaching spelling. This isn't the popular view right now, but for a lot of reasons, I would not like to see Waldorf adopt a more rigidly structured phonics approach in reading. Instead I think maybe a more rigorous application of it in spelling instruction could be a huge benefit.

Linda
LindaCl is offline  
#6 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 03:09 PM - Thread Starter
 
RomanGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Across the pond
Posts: 1,996
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
Oh, I forget to say to find a school that uses a whole language approach to literacy. Phonics are important, but not a complete tool. In Pre K and early primary there should be lots of story telling, singing, playing and games to reinforce letter sounds and word families.
Can't write lots now but just one quick question for newmom22: Are you saying that the phonics approach does not incorporate story-telling, singing, playing and games to reinforce letter sounds and word families? I am not a professional educator so maybe I have misunderstood the phonics method but I never thought that using a "pure" phonics method without whole word excluded all this.

Will have more comments later.

Roman Goddess, mom to J (August 2004) and J (April 2009).    h20homebirth.gif signcirc1.gif
RomanGoddess is offline  
#7 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 05:14 PM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp
Can't write lots now but just one quick question for newmom22: Are you saying that the phonics approach does not incorporate story-telling, singing, playing and games to reinforce letter sounds and word families? I am not a professional educator so maybe I have misunderstood the phonics method but I never thought that using a "pure" phonics method without whole word excluded all this.

Will have more comments later.
I have some thoughts on these topics as well, but to this, I would like to say that in traditional American classrooms where traditional phonics are taught, there are a lot of drills, flashcards, and really dull work regarding learning sounds and sound families. Whole language was in response to a lot of these techniques, which took the joy of reading right out of the classroom (unless you happened to be a kid who liked that stuff).

A more contemporary approach that blends whole-language and phonics together is an approach called Phonemic Awareness. It's way more fun and a big part of it is learning through the usage of games, making rhymes, etc.
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
#8 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 06:36 PM
 
Lillianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Hi all!
Here a few responses from the M perspective:
One of the key ingredients for Montessori is the group of children in the Children's House, you really can't take the materials out, take the trained adult out and do this with just one child. The community is incredibly important, so I would like to offer that this is not individual vs. group learning, but that we utilize important concepts to both theories.
To clarify the M method of offering the child the possibility to learn the mechanics of language: there are 3 areas of study. The first and most important is Spoken Language: stories, songs, poems, fingerplays. This is an essential feature in Children's House and must occur before any other lessons. (ex, we always give the child a concrete experience, say with frogs, before giving any nomenclature, etc.) Then we go to Written Language and finally to Reading. The child does not solely learn phonics...he also learns phonograms and puzzle words (sight words).
All lessons taught in Children's House utilize the central theories to M involving mechanical memory and psychosensorial manipulation and always proceed from simple to complex.

My sweetie and I have a lovely little lady 07/02 and 3 cats
Lillianna is offline  
#9 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 06:46 PM
 
orca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: there and back again
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Actually, my understanding of phonemic awareness is that it is the application of phonics based skills. Our spoken language is made up of discrete words, which are made up of syllables, which themselves are made up of the smallest units of sound, called "phonemes. " Phonics can be taught in a creative, playful way but it almost always is relegated to the workbook domain. You can look at the phonics approach as a bottom/ up approach to literacy. For some kids that works, but since only 25% of the English language is actually spelled phonetically it can be a totally irrelevant teaching strategy for a lot of kids.

For example:

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer

in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is

taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a

toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae

we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.


Whole language or “balanced literacy” as some districts call it looks at literacy as a multi faceted approach to learning. Of course, traditionalists would look at the example and say that it is poorly spelled not see that the meaning is still understood. Personally, I would rather see kids trying to get their thoughts out and not focus on the small details (in those early years)

Anyways, my point is that there are many, many ways to teach literacy and phonics is not the be all and end all. Some teachers use shared reading, guided reading, shared writing and guided writing, literacy centres, writer’s workshops... you get the point. Again, it is about the individual learner and schools that advocate "phonics" and "traditional" methods of teaching cater to the very small percentage of students who actually learn that way.

So much more to say, but my baby needs me...gotta go.

Wife to Dh Mom to Ds (6) Dd (3)
and our brand new Ds
orca is offline  
#10 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 07:03 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,586
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer

in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is

taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a

toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae

we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
I am just on my way out too so I don't have time to type much either, but reading and understanding are two different things. This was established by the Greeks. I'll be back with some info on the historial background to abandonment of phonetics and going to whole language reading instruction.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#11 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 07:04 PM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
Actually, my understanding of phonemic awareness is that it is the application of phonics based skills. Our spoken language is made up of discrete words, which are made up of syllables, which themselves are made up of the smallest units of sound, called "phonemes. " Phonics can be taught in a creative, playful way but it almost always is relegated to the workbook domain.
I'm with you all the way, until the last sentence! My training in phonemic awareness (and I taught parent-child classes on it as well) were based on no workbooks, and more physical hands-on games, assisted writing, book reading, songs, rhymes, and etc. It is a huge part of phonemic awareness training to engage the auditory, speaking, and visual centers of the brain, not just visual. The important parts of it to me were the identification of sounds within words, being able to take words apart and put them together again, and other creative wordplay. Phonemic awareness is actually something that comes BEFORE phonics - its the ability to discern the sounds in a word. Spelling is unimportant at that point and not part of phonemic awareness at all, as your example demonstrates.

Imagine my surprise when I compared the traditional Montessori method and phonemic awareness training sheets and discovered ... they're identical! Playing "I Spy" with the first or last phoneme ("I Spy something that starts with the sound /b/") or playing rhyming games...or clapping out the syllables...using movable letters to write things down...etc.

I think either approach can work, depending on the child. Some children are scared off of reading due to phonics drills, some can't do the deduction whole language requires. For us, we used phonemic games at home (and she did them at school), she sounded out words for about a year... and then magically, overnight, she was able to read via whole word. It was really weird, to be honest.
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
#12 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 07:11 PM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22

For example:

Aoccdrnig to a rscheearch at an Elingsh uinervtisy, it deosn't mttaer

in waht oredr the ltteers in a wrod are, the olny iprmoetnt tihng is

taht frist and lsat ltteer is at the rghit pclae. The rset can be a

toatl mses and you can sitll raed it wouthit porbelm. Tihs is bcuseae

we do not raed ervey lteter by it slef but the wrod as a wlohe.
And yet, if I write a word (presumably) new to the reader, such as
"FLOCCINAUCINIHILIPILIFICATION" or "Rhamphorhynchus" and you want to read it aloud or to yourself, don't you break it down and sound it out, using your internalized knowledge of what sounds the different letters generally make in isolation or combination (rh probably sounds like "r"...)?

(Yeah, just TRY reading those out loud)
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
#13 of 103 Old 03-23-2006, 07:23 PM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by LindaCl

2) I strongly disagree with the idea that "fantasy" needs to be eliminated, and only reintroduced after the concepts of the "real world" are firmly established. I don't see evidence this phenomenon occurs in mainstream education. I'm not very knowledgeable about Montessori, but my hunch is that the "fantasy life" persists somehow, just under the surface, and it simply isn't expressed during the school day.
I have to agree with Linda, and I'm a montessori mama. I think most of the children I've seen in various M schools do engage in a wide variety of fantasy play, whether the teacher wants to admit to it or not. If they know they're not supposed to be doing it, they just take it underground, baby! The good teachers I've seen help redirect it in cool ways -i.e writing stories, dramatic acting, yoga, etc. OR they ignore it. I have seen some people be not cool and tell kids they can't pretend that the farm animals are, in fact, alive. I agree that there is a wide variation to "creativity" in the M classroom and not everyone needs to play "house" or have a dress-up corner in order to get their creative jones met; but sometimes, when you're doing the seven chain, you're also playing ponies. At one school, the kids had some sort of underground thing about an imaginary pet parrot in the classroom. They named it and everything, but wouldn't tell the grownups anything about it.

I like the reality-based aspect of Montessori and the fact that everything she engages with is in fact, "real" - real knives, real needles, real art materials...but I think there's been a certain level of self-delusion about children's fantasy play. I haven't seen a classroom yet where there is either a)absolutely nofantasy going on or b)teachers not redirecting fantasy play.
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
#14 of 103 Old 03-24-2006, 03:31 AM
 
Lillianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
A few more thoughts...

"because in the mixed-age class, the child always wanted to do what the older children were doing even though he/she was not ready for it (example, a 3-year old who sees the older kids writing in notebooks and then wants to write in a notebook rather than just trace the sandpaper letters)."

This is exactly why it works so well. I am sorry to hear that your directress was maybe inept at guiding the child through this journey, but this is exactly how interest in the materials is stimulated and maintained. There is no way I could teach each child as much as s/he learns from working with the materials herself, and also what s/he picks up from the other children. In my experience, although I like to consider myself a strong guide, the materials and the other children come before the directress. That's why M talked to us about humility and respect. It certainly is something each person has to strive for in his or her own way, with all the ups and downs that entails. No one is perfect. We all stumble on our way.

"When the child was then put into a classic teacher-centred kindergarten where all the children learned as a group, the child was much happier because noone was doing something else, so there was no "I want to do what he's doing". Anyone have any experience with this?"

Great, if you want your child happy just to be following along with others...not that we shouldn't aspire to cooperate with a community. But isn't it more realistic to say, instead of everyone doing the same thing at the same time, each person contributes in his or her own way. Also, this feature is intentional for Montessori. There is only one of each activity especially because we want to offer the child the opportunity to develop his will, being strong willed is more about controlling your ability to wait, or modifying behavior in response to the group, etc, than about instant gratification of "desires".

"I think that even within the prepared environment, there is a certain rhythm to the day."
There is. We have studied the cycle of activity. There is a definite lull in the 3 hour work cycle called "false fatigue" that occurs quite regularly about 1/2 way through. When false fatigue hits, we ride the wave and see that the children are just beginning to take out their most challenging work of the day. When the child enters in the morning, each one has what we call an "orienting activity" that is settling to them and may be a moderate level of challenge. If given the full 3 hours consistantly, the child grows in his ability to challenge himself. This is currently being substantiated and documented.
Rathunde, K., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (in press). The developing person: An experiential perspective. In R.M. Lerner (Ed.), W. Damon (Series Ed.), Handbook of Child Psychology: Vol.1. Theoretical models of human development (6th ed.). New York: Wiley.
The results of the Montessori Education and Optimal Experience Study will also be described in a chapter entitled

My sweetie and I have a lovely little lady 07/02 and 3 cats
Lillianna is offline  
#15 of 103 Old 03-24-2006, 03:41 AM
 
Lillianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
sorry I'm having technical difficulties.

My sweetie and I have a lovely little lady 07/02 and 3 cats
Lillianna is offline  
#16 of 103 Old 03-24-2006, 03:43 AM
 
Lillianna's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 761
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
The results of the Montessori Education and Optimal Experience Study will also be described in a chapter entitled “The Developing Person: An Experiential Perspective.” The chapter will appear in the prestigious 6th edition of the Handbook of Child Psychology – Volume 1, Theories of Human Development, due out in March, 2006. Each new edition of the Handbook, published approximately every 8 to 10 years, is recognized as the definitive archival source on the most important theories in the field of human development. Montessori education and the results of the study are discussed in a section of the chapter on flow theory and education.

"children will have an easier time identifying the sound with the letter earlier rather than later in their childhood. "
the sensitive period for refinement of the senses and the sensitive period for language overlap, the child is capable of discriminating sounds and tones that are quite similar in pitch. The child can distinguish all 8 notes in the chromatic scale and 13 notes of the diatonic scale before the age of 6. I am really fascinated by child's discovery in music with M materials. As well as what is the most popular expression of understanding this concept: learning foreign languages.

My sweetie and I have a lovely little lady 07/02 and 3 cats
Lillianna is offline  
#17 of 103 Old 03-25-2006, 09:52 PM
 
DashsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
I've been very happy teaching in public schools (Ontario & B.C. Canada) because I can take the best of all teaching methods and pedagogy and apply them as I see fit to meet the individual needs of EVERY student in my classroom. I use lots of Montessori, Reggio, Waldorf, methods but only pick and choose what works best for each student. That's the beauty of public school... the mandate is to teach to the individual learner and adjust accordingly to guide each child towards success.
It is wonderful that you are able to do this newmom22. I wish every school district trusted their teachers that much. Unfortunately, in some places in California and Oregon (and probably throughout the US) that is not the case. Often the language arts curriculum is determined by the school district and the teacher is not allowed to deviate from it. My MIL taught in a school district that used a very strict, scripted phonics based reading program (the worst I have ever heard of). The children were divided into groups depending on how well they read, and the different levels were sent to different teachers. The teachers literally had a script that they read to the students for the lesson. Each portion was timed. If a child, or the class didn't understand something, too bad. If a child was absent, too bad. There was no going back, or slowing down, or speeding up, or adjusting, or enrichment allowed. My MIL was told she was the best in her school at using this program, but she hated the program and thought it was the worst she had ever seen. She said kids fell through the cracks all the time because of it. Thankfully, the district abandoned the program after a few years and switched to something else.

I'm currently looking into different school options for my son (he'll be entering Kindergarten next year) and I always ask if they use a specific math or reading program. I want my child's teacher to be able to be flexible, and use her knowledge and training to teach my child.

cmlp, I don't know the difference between synthetic phonics, and analytic phonics, but I can explain how I was taught to teach letter recognition and sounds to a 1st grade Waldorf class and perhaps you could tell me if its either.

Like most things in Waldorf, you start with a story. The story will contain lots of examples of the letter you wish to teach. For instance, if you're teaching M you might tell a story about a magnificent magician that makes his home atop a mighty mountain. During the story, the children will be asked to participate in the adventure by following along with movement, clapping, making sound effects, etc. As much as possible those things should relate to the letter M. The children might be asked to "march to the mighty mountain" during which time everyone holds hands and follows the teacher who marches around the room and eventually marches 3 steps diagonally up, 3 steps diagonally back, 3 steps diagonally up, 3 steps diagonally back (an M shape). The children might be asked to help make the humming sound that they hear in the story while marching (mmmmmmmmmmmm). The story progresses day to day. Sometime during the week the children might be asked to paint a picture of the mighty mountain, and it will have 2 peaks. Originally the mountain will be painted to look like a mountain, but by the end of the week the letter M will be superimposed over the mountain. Only at the end of the week will the children will be told that this is the letter M and it makes the mmmm sound that starts the words mountain and march and magician. The teacher will do this for many of the letters, but eventually will just introduce a letter and it's sound. Ideally they should get to all the letters by winter break.

Judy mom to Dash (9), Corbin (7) and Will (3) :
DashsMama is offline  
#18 of 103 Old 03-25-2006, 10:51 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,586
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
In the 1840 Connecticut census one out of every 579 citizens was illiterate. By 1940 the literacy figure for whites was 97% and 80% for blacks. By the end of the 20th century 40% of blacks and 17% of whites can't read at all. Obviously there is more to this terrible down trend than just the methods of teaching reading, but the interesting thing is that during WWII, American public schools switched from teaching reading with phonics to nonphonetic methods.

I am currently teaching my DS to read using traditional phonics and he is picking it up at lightning speed. My DD learned to read at school (Waldorf inspired/intergrated day/multiple intelligences of Howard Gardiner public school) using a "whole language" mix of phonics, rhyming, sight reading and guessing, basically the PC and now preferred teaching method. She started being taught in 1st grade (kindergarten she was exposed to the Waldorf method of stories and rhymes with the letters). She is now in 2nd grade and still isn't a fluent reader, has little grasp of phonics, she doesn't tend sound out a word she doesn't know but will guess, and more often than not get it wrong. I am now having to go back to basic phonics with her. One reads for meaning, if decoding is difficult and an effort it will lead to frustration and in the end "to hell with it."

Quote:
Originally Posted by DashsMama
I'm currently looking into different school options for my son (he'll be entering Kindergarten next year) and I always ask if they use a specific math or reading program. I want my child's teacher to be able to be flexible, and use her knowledge and training to teach my child.
I honestly think that reading is a one to one task and is best done at home rather than being left to teachers at school whatever method they use.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#19 of 103 Old 03-26-2006, 03:36 AM
 
orca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: there and back again
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Traditional phonics are great and lots of kids thrive on those worksheets and booklets. There is a sense of satisfaction for many of them at having completed page after page of tidy letters and activities. My caution is that not all students learn this way- that’s why I’m such a big fan of multiple intelligences... Many children. particularly boys, need a more active, hands on approach in a familiar context. If direct instruction works for your kids, super! I think it is great that you are taking the time to work one on one with your kids. That in and of itself is the greatest indicator of literacy success!


Wife to Dh Mom to Ds (6) Dd (3)
and our brand new Ds
orca is offline  
#20 of 103 Old 03-26-2006, 02:36 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,586
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
Traditional phonics are great and lots of kids thrive on those worksheets and booklets. There is a sense of satisfaction for many of them at having completed page after page of tidy letters and activities. My caution is that not all students learn this way- that’s why I’m such a big fan of multiple intelligences... Many children. particularly boys, need a more active, hands on approach in a familiar context. If direct instruction works for your kids, super! I think it is great that you are taking the time to work one on one with your kids. That in and of itself is the greatest indicator of literacy success!

Teaching a child, boy or girl, to read with traditional phonics is quick and easy IME (limited ). In two weeks of very relaxed teaching DS is reading as well as my DD did in four or five months of 1st grade in school using a whole word/multi approach. I don't use much in the way of worksheets. We have one book with reading drills and reading passages and a workbook for writing and I will soon introduce a Waldorft style handwriting book. I am very careful not to over do it so he gets frustrated and bored, quite the opposite he takes great pleasure from reading a row of words. I am frankly not impressed with the early reader books I have they seem so trite and boring even for my just turned six year old. He is delighted at being able to read them though. As he seems to be grasping this quickly, hopefully we can move on to more interesting books soon.

I realize I am nit picking here, but I don't see what I am doing as direct instruction, for me direct instruction is the use of Pavlovian/Skinner behavioral methods in teaching, ie what the majority of the commerical/computerized reading programs utilize. I am merely doing what mothers have been doing for centuries, teaching their children to read which seems pretty "hands on" to me. We are not homeschoolers.... yet!

It is clear from research that the whole word method works well for 1st and 2nd grade, but once they need to start reading more advanced text, then it becomes problematic if the child doesn't have the basic phonics down. Fluency in reading requires cracking the symbol/sound code and trying to memorize whole words or guessing at meaning becomes a very difficult and often humiliating task for a child.

If you understand the reasons behind the whole word approach to teacing reading took place and how devisive it actually is, a few weeks of phonics and children are off and reading is well worth the effort.

I hear you about boys learning differently to girls and needing a more active approach. But why are boys failing in schools? Is it because they don't have the basic reading skills to allow them to learn? Could whole word reading methods be part of the problem rather than the cure? These are questions I don't have an answer for and are probably moving this away from the OP, but I think they are valid.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#21 of 103 Old 03-26-2006, 08:32 PM
 
DashsMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Portland, OR
Posts: 817
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by uccomama
I honestly think that reading is a one to one task and is best done at home rather than being left to teachers at school whatever method they use.
Agreed! My 5 year old is already able to decode words even though we have not done any type of formal reading instruction with him. We just read alot of stories and poems with him and talk about letters and numbers when he asks about them. I am convinced that even if we do nothing else, he will be reading before age 6.

Unfortunately, we will not be homeschooling. I am in favor of it. I simply do not have the temperment for it. So my son will be in a school and (assuming he is not in our local free school or Waldorf charter) will most likely have a reading program he will have to complete. It is very important to me that that program be a good one. I want his teacher to be able to change and/or suplement the program and do what she needs to in order to meet the needs of all her students. Curricula that teach to the middle (most of them) do a disservice to both the students who need more help, and the students who are advanced in their knowledge. For example, my nephew was reading at 3 years old (my sister taught him one on one, at home). He was reading at the 4th grade level by 1st grade but still had to do the incredibly boring phonics worksheets and read those awful phonics based books that only make sense if you look at the pictures. The teacher simply had no leeway to supplement the curriculum. My sister fought like mad to get him appropriate school work. Eventually the school agreed to let him go to a second grade class for his reading lessons. The work was still too easy for him, but it was better than the 1st grade stuff. Outside of school he could read what he wished of course. My point is, if you are going to send your child to school, make sure the reading curriculum is flexible.

As an aside to my story...My sister didn't bother to teach either of her younger, girls to read early. She had had such a nightmare fighting with the school to get the appropriate materials for her son, that she didn't want to go through that hastle again. Both her girls learned to read at school, with their teachers, and they are doing just fine.

Judy mom to Dash (9), Corbin (7) and Will (3) :
DashsMama is offline  
#22 of 103 Old 03-26-2006, 08:58 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,586
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by DashsMama
Unfortunately, we will not be homeschooling. I am in favor of it. I simply do not have the temperment for it. So my son will be in a school and (assuming he is not in our local free school or Waldorf charter) will most likely have a reading program he will have to complete. It is very important to me that that program be a good one. I want his teacher to be able to change and/or suplement the program and do what she needs to in order to meet the needs of all her students. Curricula that teach to the middle (most of them) do a disservice to both the students who need more help, and the students who are advanced in their knowledge. For example, my nephew was reading at 3 years old (my sister taught him one on one, at home). He was reading at the 4th grade level by 1st grade but still had to do the incredibly boring phonics worksheets and read those awful phonics based books that only make sense if you look at the pictures. The teacher simply had no leeway to supplement the curriculum. My sister fought like mad to get him appropriate school work. Eventually the school agreed to let him go to a second grade class for his reading lessons. The work was still too easy for him, but it was better than the 1st grade stuff. Outside of school he could read what he wished of course. My point is, if you are going to send your child to school, make sure the reading curriculum is flexible.
I hear you! I am not am homeschooler either, but this is the issue I have with government-run dumbed down schools that have to teach to a curriculum designed to produce worker drones. I am not putting my DS into 1st grade in PS, he's going to a private comtemplative elementary school next full and I am seriously considering homeschooling DD#2. My eldest only has two more years of high school, but that is a whole other set of problems!

Fingers crossed you get your DS into the school of your choice.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#23 of 103 Old 03-26-2006, 11:01 PM
 
orca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: there and back again
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Ahh...if only I give give you a definitive answer! Unfortunately, there is no right answer to your questions. Over the years the tried and true teaching methods get repackaged and “sold” as the newest methodology. The pendulum swings and everyone jumps on whatever bandwagon is deemed most progressive and effective.

IMHO both approaches are necessary and required for literacy to become a foundation of lifelong learning. My concern is “programs” that claim to fix whatever learning deficiency your child (or a class) has. In my experience there is no such program and teachers (or parents) must be astute enough to pick and choose the best qualities from many programs to suit each individual need. This is also why I am an advocate for public schooling because many private schools have their own agendas and expensive “programs” that they advertise. The onus is then on the child to understand and learn in a style that might not always suit their needs. Jolly Phonics & Letterland (to name a few) are phonics programs that I have personally seen and used but, while they try to be as multi sensory as possible, they still miss the boat when it comes to making meaningful connections with young children. For example, very few 4 or 5 year olds would have any idea who “Inky ink pot” is. The lesson then is hijacked by a conversation explaining what an ink pot is. It is hard enough to corral and focus 25+ kids attention spans, let alone with a tangent like that one... KWIM?

I am certainly not anti-phonics! I am just an advocate for a balanced approach to literacy that includes choices embedded in the learning process. I have many, many strategies and games for teaching phonemic awareness, but when it comes to applying that knowledge I feel it is best done in a “whole” or balanced context. To that end, a student led approach is necessary in order for the teacher (or parent) to know where to go next. Packaged programs progress regardless of student comprehension or individual differences.

Uccomama: it sounds like you have a handle on all this and are allowing your kids to self direct their learning! To clarify, any kind of formal instruction that requires a teacher to talk, model or demonstrate and the student to follow, copy or reproduce pretty much falls under the umbrella of direct instruction. It is absolutely necessary and not at all a bad thing! My point was that some kids balk at direct instruction because they want to discover and play and do their own thing rather then listen to the teacher (or parent) for an extended period of time. (And we all know kids like that!)

I don’t even know where to start on the whole boys vrs. girls thing.

In a nutshell, I believe that most schools are not designed for the realities of children and “childhood”. That said, girls tend to be more interested in co-operative learning and compliant behaviour. Teachers (being mostly female in the early grades) reward this behaviour consciously or unconsciously so the positive feelings and early cycle of success continues. In my experience boys just physically can’t sit still for the inordinate amounts of time we ask them to in a school setting, which leads to reprimands, discipline and tension. The solution? Teachers who use centres, (I'm Canadian...that's how we spell it...) play based learning and hands on learning with manipulatives etc. allow boys ( and plenty of girls!) to feel some sense of control over their learning environment and, more importantly they get to move, move, move!

I feel like I have gone way off topic here... I hope that is what you were looking for.

Wife to Dh Mom to Ds (6) Dd (3)
and our brand new Ds
orca is offline  
#24 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 01:54 AM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,586
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
newmom22, thanks for your thoughtful reply to my post! I do agree with yo for the most part. I am just not comfortable with using reading programmes, although I am not familiar with the ones you mentioned, I honestly think the old fashioned phonics method provides the solid base a child needs. Obviously, the English language being what it is, basically a Germanic language (with some Romance influences here and there) using Romanize phonics make it somewhat less easy to learn than say Italian phonetically and you do need to learn the many exceptions. I guess I am somewhat disillusioned with the whole word method, given the fact DD has never grasped phonics and I am having to redo it with her before its too late.

I think we are talking at cross purposes with the term direct instruction, I understand the term in the Skinnerian animal behavioural methods of direct instruction, not one on one teaching. My DS won't sit for more than 20 minutes at a time for reading, but that is fine with me if he would rather go jump on the tramp or something, I can understand that!

Interestingly, DS's Kindergarten teacher copied some pages from Michael Gurian's book, "Boys and Girls Learn Differently," for the parents to read this weekend. One of the reasons why we chose to put him in private school next year is he will be in a class of 15 mixed 1st and 2nd graders with two teachers, one male (Montessori trained) and one female (Waldorf trained), a great deal of their teaching is kinesthetically based, especially math which I think is especially great for the boys. Not a worksheet in sight too!

Oh, don't worry about your English spelling, I was born and brought up in the UK (went to private schools), so you are writing in my native tongue. I usually have to change my spelling for these boards (I didn't bother this time).

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#25 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 07:30 AM - Thread Starter
 
RomanGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Across the pond
Posts: 1,996
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Well, I have been "reading" to my toddler since she was 4 months old. We also have started nursery rhymes, which she loves. I certainly do not believe that my showing her books, singing her songs and reciting rhymes is mutually exclusive with teaching her to read using the phonics method.

What's more, from what I have seen of the whole word approach, it can and is also taught using a very boring, "rote" approach. Back when my nieces and nephews were younger, I went home to Saskatchewan one Christmas. My niece was 6 at the time and was learning how to "read". She very showed me her "worksheets". Each sheet had eight words on it, in large letters. She pointed to each word and "read" it to me.

In actual fact, she had not learned to read at all. She had memorized the words on the worksheets and that's all. She read the word "mat" but when I replaced the "m" with a "b" to spell "bat", she didn't know what the word said. What's more, she was not reading any books and there was nothing else other than these worksheets that she had been learning to read from.

I told my sister that her daughter could not read at all in actual fact that she had just memorized words. My sister said "I know, that's the method they use here.

The whole word approach also invented the most boring readers going: Dick and Jane, which noone uses anymore because they are just soooo boring.

In Montessori, children learn to read using a sythetic phonics approach and none of the sensorial methods used to teach this are what I would call rote or uninteresting (they cannot be, given that it is the child that has to decide to do the activity and if the activity is boring, the child won't do it for very long). First the sandpaper letters (for a 3-year old, this is not boring), then the moving alphabet, then writing in a notebook. What's more, most Montessori classrooms have books in them which even the youngest children are free to peruse.

I guess I just don't buy the argument that learning to read by phonics is by definition uninteresting and whole word is not.

Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
Actually, my understanding of phonemic awareness is that it is the application of phonics based skills. Our spoken language is made up of discrete words, which are made up of syllables, which themselves are made up of the smallest units of sound, called "phonemes. " Phonics can be taught in a creative, playful way but it almost always is relegated to the workbook domain. You can look at the phonics approach as a bottom/ up approach to literacy. For some kids that works, but since only 25% of the English language is actually spelled phonetically it can be a totally irrelevant teaching strategy for a lot of kids.
As with all Indo-=European languages, written English is at its base, phonetic, even if there are a million exceptions and exceptions to exceptions. English also happens to have more words than any other Indo-European language and probably more words than any language in the world. If you ever want to be able to write and read scholarly English, you really do have to have the ability to sound out words that you don't know.

Roman Goddess, mom to J (August 2004) and J (April 2009).    h20homebirth.gif signcirc1.gif
RomanGoddess is offline  
#26 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 07:43 AM - Thread Starter
 
RomanGoddess's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Across the pond
Posts: 1,996
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by flyingspaghettimama
I have to agree with Linda, and I'm a montessori mama. I think most of the children I've seen in various M schools do engage in a wide variety of fantasy play, whether the teacher wants to admit to it or not. If they know they're not supposed to be doing it, they just take it underground, baby!
I think there has been a huge misunderstanding of the role of fantasy in Montessori. As far as I know (and Montessori educators, please correct me if I am wrong), Dr. Montessori never said that children should not be allowed to engage in fantasy. She said that adults should not IMPOSE fantasy on children but should instead introduce children to as much reality as possible. In fact, from what I understanding from having just read the Montessori Method, the children in a Montessori classroom have the freedom to do what they want in the prepared environment, as long as they are not disturbing others or breaking the rules of grace and courtesy. She describes a scene where one child stands on a table a pretends to be the teacher while the other children watch her, and notes that in a traditional classroom, this child would be reprimanded, whereas in the Montessori classroom, she would be left alone as the child clearly had leadership skills and was using them.

It should also be noted that fantasy is NOT the same thing as IMAGINATION or CREATIVITY. The Montessori method encourages the latter two as much as possible and in fact many educators argue that it is adult-imposed fantasy that stifles imagination and creativity. When you show your child Winnie-the-Pooh, the next time he thinks of a talking bear, he will think of Winnie. When you show your child Disney's Cinderella, this is the Cinderella that she will always visualise, not her own Cinderella.

In fact, creativity is at its best when you know as much about the real world as possible. To fly a spaceship to the moon, you can be the most creative when you know as much as possible about space, the earth, the moon, the sun, etc. The more you know, the more you can use your imagination and your creativity. The less you know, the more limited you are.

Finally, I think one of the most important reasons that Dr. Montessori choose to limit adult-imposed fantasy was out of a certain respect for children. Most young children do not understand the difference between reality and fantasy. This means that when you tell a child fabrications, you are essentially lying to the child and this is not showing a lot of respect for the child. And there are so many wondrous REAL things in the world that there really is no need to make it anything up.

Roman Goddess, mom to J (August 2004) and J (April 2009).    h20homebirth.gif signcirc1.gif
RomanGoddess is offline  
#27 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 11:52 AM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cmlp
I think there has been a huge misunderstanding of the role of fantasy in Montessori. As far as I know (and Montessori educators, please correct me if I am wrong), Dr. Montessori never said that children should not be allowed to engage in fantasy.
She did say that, but there does seem to be the impression at the very traditional M schools that we've been with that a "normalized" classroom does not have children playing Pegasus and Gorgon (or rabbit family, or let's go to the moon with the red rods or whatever) during the three-hour work period. During the cutting paper exercise, the little bits of paper are not to be talking to each other or turning into airplanes.

I think different teachers have different levels of tolerance. I don't expect a teacher to teach them how to fantasize or pretend with them...but backing off a little regarding the child-initiated play is preferable to me.
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
#28 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 02:23 PM
 
orca's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: there and back again
Posts: 358
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Uccomama: One of the best traditional phonics programs I’ve ever used is “McCracken Phonics” Their Spelling Through Phonics is a must have if you prefer that style, I highly recommend it. I use a great deal of that program in my teaching practice and find that the chalkboard games are particularly motivating for young learners. I hope my previous post was clear that I think Jolly Phonics and Letterland are a waste of time. Also look up Boxcars and One Eyed Jacks, a Canadian company that specialises in gaming and learning through play. Their On a Role to Spelling and More is jam packed with dice games and activities that teach phonetic awareness and general literacy skills (adverbs etc...) They also have about a dozen game books for Math that are totally based on play with cards and dice. My classes LOVE them and I can go weeks and weeks without using any paper in my classroom with these games. They make great homework packs as well since most families love the “whole family” aspect of playing a game for homework! At the very least, they are a super way to reinforce skills if your dd’s teacher uses lots of worksheets.

Have you read Boys and Girls Learn Differently? I read it a number of years ago and don’t remember being particularly impressed with Gurian’s ideas. If I remember correctly he proposed putting boys at the front of the class because they “need” louder voices and direct supervision. Boys should be given “competitive” activities and singular tasks, whereas girls should be left to work co-operatively and complete activities as a group. It didn’t sit so well with me, but I may have a jaded memory of the book. I have it in the crawl space...maybe I’ll go dig it out and reread it!

Cmlp: I don’t want to appear argumentative, but the example you gave of your niece’s work is 110% phonics. “Word families” (hat, bat, mat, cat) are a strategy for teaching phonemic awareness. Nothing in your post was even close to an example of whole language instruction. Except the description you gave of what you are doing with your own child!!! Also, the Dick and Jane readers you mention were very much phonics based primers (as they were called in the day) Dick and Jane’s only departure from being exclusively phonics based was the addition of a vocabulary component so the readers placed a secondary emphasis on phonics. Hence, the “look, look, look” repetition. I definitely agree that those readers were artificial and not very representative of most children’s reality. Authors like Dr.Suess also fall into the category of using predictable rhymes to reinforce phonemic awareness. The whole “would you eat it with a mouse, would you eat it in a house” is the epitome of phonics instruction. I suppose I prefer to use children’s books that speak to the children’s experiences and provide pleasure through beautiful story telling and illustrations. A few popular examples would be books by Maurice Sendak (Where the Wild things are), Robert Munsch- great Canadian author (Paperbag Princess etc) or Eric Carle (Very hungry Caterpillar).

I’m starting to feel like a squeaky wheel here, but I feel like whole language is being misunderstood. Whole Language is based on three premises: one, that learning to read is as natural as learning to speak, and essentially involves the same mental processes. Two, that reading is best learned in the context of reading natural pieces of literature, e.g.; poems, chants, and stories with refrains. Three, that reading is best learned "from the top down" since only 25% of our words can actually be read phonetically. The remaining 75% require learning that is in context, rather then isolation, so that children can make connections between letters, sounds and meaning.

I do go on don’t I?? Anyways, don’t fool yourself into thinking that phonics=reading and whole language =memorisation. It just simply is not true.

Wife to Dh Mom to Ds (6) Dd (3)
and our brand new Ds
orca is offline  
#29 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 04:04 PM
 
Mirzam's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Resistance Free Earth
Posts: 7,586
Mentioned: 3 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 126 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
Uccomama: One of the best traditional phonics programs I’ve ever used is “McCracken Phonics” Their Spelling Through Phonics is a must have if you prefer that style, I highly recommend it. I use a great deal of that program in my teaching practice and find that the chalkboard games are particularly motivating for young learners. I hope my previous post was clear that I think Jolly Phonics and Letterland are a waste of time. Also look up Boxcars and One Eyed Jacks, a Canadian company that specialises in gaming and learning through play. Their On a Role to Spelling and More is jam packed with dice games and activities that teach phonetic awareness and general literacy skills (adverbs etc...) They also have about a dozen game books for Math that are totally based on play with cards and dice. My classes LOVE them and I can go weeks and weeks without using any paper in my classroom with these games. They make great homework packs as well since most families love the “whole family” aspect of playing a game for homework! At the very least, they are a super way to reinforce skills if your dd’s teacher uses lots of worksheets.
I am going to check out McCraken Phonics, Boxcars and One Eyed Jacks, thanks for the suggestions. I am doing this blind in all honestly. I am using Turbo Reader with both children, but we are going slowly and only when they want to do it. DD doesn't use many worksheets at school, although more than I would like, as I mentioned above it is a public focus school using a mix of Waldorf, Intergrated Day and the Mulitple Intelligences of Howard Gardner, and an arts based curriculum, so worksheets are kept to a minimum.

Quote:
Have you read Boys and Girls Learn Differently? I read it a number of years ago and don’t remember being particularly impressed with Gurian’s ideas. If I remember correctly he proposed putting boys at the front of the class because they “need” louder voices and direct supervision. Boys should be given “competitive” activities and singular tasks, whereas girls should be left to work co-operatively and complete activities as a group. It didn’t sit so well with me, but I may have a jaded memory of the book. I have it in the crawl space...maybe I’ll go dig it out and reread it!
I have only read a few pages, the ones DS's teacher sent home with his class weekly newsletter. She sent home the sections on brain gender differences, developmental gender differences and the "Ultimate Preschool and Kindergarten Classroom for Both Boys and Girls". I honestly don't see much difference in the learning style of DD and DS (two years apart in age), except DS has more kinetic energy (wiggles his legs etc). Could that be because he is a boy or younger or just a different kid?!!!

Quote:
Also, the Dick and Jane readers you mention were very much phonics based primers (as they were called in the day) Dick and Jane’s only departure from being exclusively phonics based was the addition of a vocabulary component so the readers placed a secondary emphasis on phonics. Hence, the “look, look, look” repetition. I definitely agree that those readers were artificial and not very representative of most children’s reality.
Newmom22, here's an interesting bit of info on Dick and Jane, this relates to the whole word movement that took place in the middle of the last century: Here is a quote from John Taylor Gatto's book, An Underground History of American Eduction:

Quote:
[Samuel] Blumenfeld does the student of American schooling a great service when he compares this original 1930 Dick and Jane with its 1951 successor: “In 1930, the Dick and Jane Pre-Primer taught 68 sign words in 39 pages of text, with an illustration per page, a total of 565 words--and a teacher’s Guidebook of 87 pages. In 1951, the same book was expanded to 172 pages with 184 illustrations a total of 2,603 words-- and a Guidebook of 182 pages to teach a sight vocabulary of only 58 words!”
I have the modern compendium reprint which I presume is based on the 1951 version, and it is plain awful, a child would go nuts reading:

"Go, go, go".
"Go, Dick go".
"Go, go, go"
"Help, help".
"Jane".
"Dick! Dick! Look, Dick."
"Oh, Dick! Help Jane. Go help Jane." (You get the picture....!)

It most certainly doesn't utilize phonetics and the repetitions are mind numbing.

Here is what Dr Seuss had to say about "Cat in the Hat" in an interview in 1981:

Quote:
I did it for a textbook house and they sent me a word list. That was due to the Dewey revolt in the twenties, in which they threw out phonics reading and went to a word recognition as if you’re reading Chinese pictograph instead of blending sounds or different letters. I think killing phonics was one of the greatest causes of illiteracy in the country.

Anyway they all had it worked out that a healthy child at the age of four can only learn so many words in a week. So there were two hundred and twenty-three words to use in the book. I read the list three times and I almost went out of my head. I said, “I’ll read it once more and if I can find two words that rhyme, that’ll be the title of my book.” I found “cat” and “hat” and said, the title of my book will be The Cat in the Hat.

Rainbow.giftstillheart.gifsmile.gif

 

"If you find from your own experience that something is a fact and it contradicts what some authority has written down, then you must abandon the authority and base your reasoning on your own findings"~ Leonardo da Vinci

Mirzam is online now  
#30 of 103 Old 03-27-2006, 05:14 PM
 
flyingspaghettimama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Posts: 4,486
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by newmom22
Cmlp: I don’t want to appear argumentative, but the example you gave of your niece’s work is 110% phonics. “Word families” (hat, bat, mat, cat) are a strategy for teaching phonemic awareness.
No - cmlp was saying that the girl had simply memorized the words, as evidenced that when cmlp tried changing an initial letter, the girl could no longer "read" the word as she could not either sound it out nor recognize the word. The original worksheet did not have a word family on it - cmlp changed it from mat to bat, to test the girl's actual decoding ability.

http://jan.ucc.nau.edu/~jar/Reading_Wars.html
"In the 1950s the Dick and Jane readers used a "whole word" approach to teaching reading where words were repeated on each page enough times that, according to behaviorist research, students could remember them."

This article has a great overview of phonics vs. whole language debate, within the framework of behaviorist/constructivist approaches. Although honestly, I think it's like the mommy wars - somewhat trumped up. I really don't get why in the real world, teachers don't blend the two and why there needs to be certain "camps" with battle lines drawn... Yes, many kids need help with decoding the word, breaking them down and sounding them out. But ALL children definitely need to hear great literature, practice writing, and play with words. Montessori definitely achieves this, in my mind.
flyingspaghettimama is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off