Editing Whole language (section)

{{Short description|Approach to teaching children to read}}
{{Reading}}
{{Use dmy dates|date=December 2023}}

'''Whole language''' is a philosophy of reading and a discredited{{refn|Sources:<ref name="Castles">{{cite journal |last1=Castles |first1=A. |last2=Rastle |first2=K. |last3=Nation |first3=K. |title=Ending the Reading Wars: Reading Acquisition from Novice to Expert |journal=Psychological Science in the Public Interest |date=2018 |volume=19 |issue=1 |pages=5–51 |doi=10.1177/1529100618772271 |pmid=29890888 |doi-access=free }}</ref><ref name="Adams">{{cite book |last1=Adams |first1=M.J. |title=Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learning about Print |date=1996 |publisher=MIT Press |location=Cambridge, MA}}</ref><ref name="Gough">{{cite journal |last1=Gough |first1=P.B. |last2=Hillinger |first2=M.L. |title=Learning to read: An unnatural act. |journal=Bulletin of the Orton Society |date=1980 |volume=30 |pages=179–196|doi=10.1007/BF02653717 |s2cid=143275563 }}</ref><ref name="Seidenberg">{{cite journal |last1=Seidenberg |first1=Mark |title=The Science of Reading and Its Educational Implications |journal=Language Learning and Development |date=2013 |volume=9 |issue=4 |pages=331–360 |pmc=4020782 |pmid=24839408 |doi=10.1080/15475441.2013.812017 }}</ref><ref name="psychologytoday">{{cite web |last1=Ludden |first1=David |title=Whole Language or No Language? Something is rotten in the state of literacy education |url=https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/talking-apes/201507/whole-language-or-no-language |website=Psychology Today |publisher=Sussex Publishers, LLC |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref><ref name="LDOnline">{{cite web |last1=Moats |first1=Louisa |title=Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Reading Instruction |url=http://www.ldonline.org/article/6394/ |website=LD Online |publisher=WETA Public Television |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref><ref name="NIFDI">{{cite web |last1=Hempenstall |first1=Kerry |title=Whole Language! What was that all about? |url=https://www.nifdi.org/news/hempenstall-blog/441-part-1-whole-language-what-was-that-all-about |website=National Institute for Direct Instruction |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref>}} educational method originally developed for teaching [[literacy]] in English to young children. The method became a major model for education in the United States, Canada, New Zealand, and the UK in the 1980s and 1990s,<ref name="NIFDI" /> despite there being no scientific support for the method's effectiveness.{{refn|Sources:<ref name="Castles"/><ref name="Adams"/><ref name="Gough"/><ref name="Seidenberg"/><ref name="psychologytoday"/><ref name="LDOnline"/><ref name="NIFDI"/>}} It is based on the premise that learning to read English comes naturally to humans, especially young children, in the same way that [[Language acquisition|learning to speak develops naturally]].<ref name="Goodman1">{{cite book |last1=Goodman |first1=K.S. |title=Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. In H. Singer & R.B. Ruddell (Eds.) Theoretical models and processes of reading. |date=1970 |publisher=International Reading Association |location=Newark, D.E.}}</ref><ref name="Smith">{{cite book |last1=Smith |first1=Frank |title=Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. |date=1971 |publisher=Holt, Rinehart & Winston |location=New York}}</ref><ref name="Lyon">{{cite journal |last1=Lyon |first1=Reid |title=Why Reading Is Not a Natural Process |journal=Educational Leadership |date=1998 |volume=5 |issue=6 |pages=14–18 |url=http://www.ascd.org/publications/educational-leadership/mar98/vol55/num06/Why-Reading-Is-Not-a-Natural-Process.aspx |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref>

Whole-language approaches to reading instruction are typically contrasted with [[phonics]]-based methods of teaching reading and writing. Phonics-based methods emphasize instruction for decoding and spelling. Whole-language practitioners disagree with that view and instead focus on teaching meaning and making students read more.<ref>{{Cite web|url=http://archive.org/details/UnderstandingReading-FrankSmith|title=Understanding Reading|author=Frank Smith|via=Internet Archive}}</ref> The scientific consensus is that whole-language-based methods of reading instruction (e.g., teaching children to use context cues to guess the meaning of a printed word)<ref name="Smith" /><ref name="LDOnline" /><ref name="Seidenberg" /> are not as effective as phonics-based approaches.{{refn|Sources:<ref name="Moore">{{cite web |last1=Moore |first1=Terrance |title=The Verdict is In: Phonics is the Way to Teach Reading |url=http://ashbrook.org/publications/oped-moore-04-verdict/ |website=Ashbrook Center |publisher=Ashland University|date=4 January 2004 |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref><ref name="Hoover">{{cite web |last1=Palmaffy |first1=Tyce |title=See Dick Flunk |url=https://www.hoover.org/research/see-dick-flunk |website=Hoover Institute |publisher=Stanford University |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref><ref name="Hamilton">{{cite news |last1=McDonald |first1=James |title=The ruinous legacy of whole language |url=https://www.thespec.com/opinion-story/4619392-the-ruinous-legacy-of-whole-language-/ |access-date=29 January 2019 |publisher=Hamilton Spectator |date=8 July 2014}}</ref><ref name="NIFDI" /><ref name="Stanovich">{{cite journal|last1=Stanovich|first1=Keith|date=1994|title=Romance and reality|journal=The Reading Teacher|volume=47|pages=280–291}}</ref><ref name="LDOnline" /><ref name="psychologytoday" /><ref name="Seidenberg" /><ref name="Adams" />}}