Editing Whole language (section)

===State of the debate===
Despite these results, many whole language advocates continue to argue that their approach, including embedded phonics, has been shown to improve student achievement. Whole language advocates sometimes criticize advocates of skill instruction as [[reductionism|reductionist]] and describe the use of phonics as "word calling", because it does not involve the use of meaning. The United States National Reading Panel is criticized especially harshly by some in the whole-language community for failing to include qualitative research designs that show benefits for embedded phonics (the panel only considered [[Field experiments|experiments]] and [[Experimental techniques#Test markets|quasi-experiments]]). On the other hand, some parents and teachers have objected to the de-emphasis of phonics in whole-language based curricula (such as Reading Recovery) and have advocated for the removal of whole language from schools.<ref>{{cite web | url=http://www.nrrf.org/learning/reading-recovery-bites-the-dust-in-columbus-ohio/ | title=Reading Recovery Bites the Dust in Columbus, Ohio – Learn to Read, NRRF}}</ref>

In 1996, the California Department of Education led the way in returning to the teaching of phonics.<ref>{{Cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/22/us/california-leads-revival-of-teaching-by-phonics.html|title= NY Times 1996, California Leads Revival Of Teaching by Phonics|newspaper= The New York Times|date= 22 May 1996|last1= Times|first1= The New York}}</ref> By 2014, the department had clear guidelines for teaching children in phonemic awareness, phonics, and segmenting and blending.<ref name="auto1">{{cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter3.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter3.pdf |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title= English–Language Arts, Transitional Kindergarten to Grade 1, California Public Schools}}</ref><ref name="auto2">{{cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter4.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.cde.ca.gov/ci/rl/cf/documents/elaeldfwchapter4.pdf |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title= English–Language Arts, Pedagogy Grades Two and Three, California Public Schools}}</ref> The New York Public School System followed, and by 2015 had abandoned whole language, Embedded Phonics, and Balanced Literacy in favor of [[Synthetic phonics|systematic phonics]].<ref name="auto">{{Cite web|url=https://www.engageny.org/resource/new-york-state-next-generation-english-language-arts-learning-standards|title=2015 New York State Next Generation English Language Arts Learning Standards}}</ref>

Neuroscientists have also weighed into the debate, some of them demonstrating that the whole-word method is much slower and uses the wrong brain area for reading.<ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=25GI3-kiLdo |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/varchive/youtube/20211211/25GI3-kiLdo| archive-date=11 December 2021 |url-status=live|title=YouTube 'How the Brain Learns to Read' – Professor Stanilas Dehaene's short lecture (33 minutes) Oct 25, 2013|website=[[YouTube]]|date=25 October 2013 }}{{cbignore}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2010/01/03/books/review/Gopnik-t.html|title=Reading in the brain, Dr. Stanilas Dehaene, 2009 |newspaper=The New York Times |date=31 December 2009 |last1=Gopnik |first1=Alison |author-link=Alison Gopnik }}</ref> One neuroscientist, Mark Seidenberg, says "Goodman's guessing game theory was grievously wrong" and "the impact was enormous and continues to be felt". When it come to evidence supporting the whole-language theory, he emphatically states "There wasn't any". He is also especially critical of Smith's book, ''Reading Without Nonsense'', which suggests the following recommendation to help a struggling reader: "The first alternative and preference is to skip over the puzzling word. The second alternative is to guess what the unknown word might be. And the final and least preferred alternative is to sound the word out. Phonics, in other words, comes last." Seidenberg goes on to say that, although reading science has rejected the theories behind whole language, in education they are "theoretical zombies".<ref>Reading at the Speed of Light: How we Read, why so many can't, and what can be done about it, 2017, pp. 267–271, Mark Seidenberg {{ISBN|978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref><ref name="seidenbergreading.net|title">{{Cite web | url=https://seidenbergreading.net|title= Reading Matters: Connecting science and education}}</ref> Cognitive neuroscientist Stanislas Dehaene has said, "cognitive psychology directly refutes any notion of teaching via a 'global' or 'whole language' method." He goes on to talk about "the myth of whole-word reading" (also: [[sight words]]), saying it has been refuted by recent experiments. "We do not recognize a printed word through a holistic grasping of its contours, because our brain breaks it down into letters and graphemes."<ref>{{cite book|author=Stanislas Dehaene|title=Reading in the brain|publisher=Penguin Books|year=2010|isbn=978-0143118053}}</ref>

====One district's experience: Bethlehem PA====
In 2015, Jack Silva, the chief academic officer for Bethlehem, Pennsylvania, discovered that a lot of students in his district were struggling with reading. In 2015, only 56 percent of third-graders were scoring proficient on the state reading test. Silva conducted a survey of reading instruction methods that were being used. The predominant approach, he learned, involved the use of methods based upon a whole-language philosophy. In response, the Bethlehem district invested approximately $3 million on training, materials, and support to help its early elementary teachers and principals learn the science of how reading works and how children should be taught, focusing on phonics instruction. At the end of the 2018 school year, after the phonics-based re-training, 84 percent of kindergartners met or exceeded the benchmark score.<ref name="NPR">{{cite news |last1=Hanford |first1=Emily |title=Why Millions Of Kids Can't Read, And What Better Teaching Can Do About It |url=https://www.npr.org/2019/01/02/677722959/why-millions-of-kids-cant-read-and-what-better-teaching-can-do-about-it |newspaper=NPR.org |publisher=NPR |access-date=29 January 2019}}</ref>

====Adoption of some whole-language concepts====
While rancor continues, much of whole language's emphasis on quality literature, cultural diversity, and reading [[Guided reading|in groups]] and [[read aloud|to students]] is widely supported by the educational community due to its benefits of increased comprehension.<ref>{{cite web |title=Benefits of Reading Aloud |url=http://www.readingrockets.org/article/reading-aloud-build-comprehension |publisher=ReadingRockets.org |access-date=6 July 2018|date=24 April 2013 }}</ref> The importance of motivation, long a central focus of whole-language approaches, has gained more attention in the broader educational community in the last few years. Prominent critic of whole language Louisa Cook Moats has argued, however, that the focus on quality literature, diversity, reading groups, and motivation are not the sole property of whole language.<ref>Moats, L. C. (2000). ''Whole language lives on: The illusion of "Balanced Reading" instruction.''  Washington, DC: Thomas B. Fordham Foundation.</ref>  She and others contend that these components of instruction are supported by educators of diverse educational perspectives. As one report states, "Reading materials must be carefully chosen so as to be at the right reading level. Phonics instruction cannot stand alone".<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.bccpac.bc.ca/upload/2016/05/reading_breaking_through_barriers.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.bccpac.bc.ca/upload/2016/05/reading_breaking_through_barriers.pdf |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title=Reading: Breaking Through the Barriers- Copyright ©2009 Catherine Abraham and Joyce Gram}}</ref> Moats contends that the principles essential to whole language, and those that render it ineffective and unfit for reading education are: a) children learn to read from exposure to print, b) hostility to drilling in phonics and other forms of direct instruction, and c) the tendency to endorse the use of context-clues and guesswork to decipher a word rather than phonemic decoding.

====Balanced literacy====
Since 1996, "[[Balanced Literacy|balanced literacy]]" has been suggested as an integrative approach, portrayed by its advocates as taking the best elements of both whole language and code-emphasizing phonics, something promoted by Adams in 1990. In 1996, the California Department of Education described the balanced approach as "one which combines the language and literature-rich activities associated with whole language with explicit teaching of the skills needed to decode words—for all children."<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.ericdigests.org/2000-3/reading.htm|title=Balanced Reading Instruction. ERIC Digest|website=www.ericdigests.org}}</ref><ref>{{cite news|url=https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/22/us/california-leads-revival-of-teaching-by-phonics.html|title= NY Times 1996, California Leads Revival of Teaching by Phonics|newspaper= The New York Times|date= 22 May 1996}}</ref> In 1997, the department called for grade-one teaching of concepts about print, phonemic awareness, decoding, and word recognition, as well as vocabulary and concept development.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/elacontentstnds.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/https://www.cde.ca.gov/be/st/ss/documents/elacontentstnds.pdf |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title=English–Language Arts Content Standards for California Public Schools}}</ref> In 2014, the department stated, "Ensuring that children know how to decode regularly spelled one-syllable words by mid-first grade is crucial". It went on to say that "Learners need to be phonemically aware (especially able to segment and blend phonemes)".<ref name="auto1"/> In grades two and three, children receive explicit instruction in advanced phonic-analysis and reading multi-syllabic and more complex words.<ref name="auto2"/>

The [[New York City Department of Education|New York Public School]] system adopted balanced literacy as its literacy curriculum in 2003.<ref>{{Cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2003/08/03/education/new-york-s-new-approach.html|title=nytimes.com/2003/08/03|newspaper=The New York Times|date=3 August 2003|last1=Traub|first1=James}}</ref> However, in 2015, it began a process of revising its English Language Arts Learning Standards, calling for teaching involving "reading or literacy experiences" as well as [[phonemic awareness]] from pre-kindergarten to grade 1, and phonics and word recognition from grade 1 to grade 4.<ref name="auto"/>

Other states, such as Ohio, Colorado, Minnesota, Mississippi, and Arkansas are continuing to emphasize the need for instruction in evidenced-based phonics.<ref>{{Cite web|url=https://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Operating-Standards/Table-of-Contents/Instruction/Phonics|title=Rules for Phonics, Ohio}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee-District-Resources/Approved-List-of-Research-Based-Reading-Instructio/Reading_Competencies.pdf.aspx |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://education.ohio.gov/getattachment/Topics/Early-Learning/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee-District-Resources/Approved-List-of-Research-Based-Reading-Instructio/Reading_Competencies.pdf.aspx |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title=Reading Competencies, Ohio}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://education.ohio.gov/Topics/Learning-in-Ohio/Literacy/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee/Third-Grade-Reading-Guarantee-Teacher-Resources|title=Third Grade Reading Guarantee Teacher Resources &#124; Ohio Department of Education}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.cde.state.co.us/coloradoliteracy/elementaryteacher-literacystandards|title=Elementary Teacher Literacy Standards, Colorado Department of Education, 2016}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.revisor.mn.gov/statutes/cite/120B.12|title=Sec. 120B.12 MN Statutes|website=www.revisor.mn.gov}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://education.mn.gov/MDE/dse/stds/|title=Academic Standards (K-12)|website=education.mn.gov}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/r.i.s.e.-arkansas|title=Reading Initiative for Student Excellence, arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/RISE_Arkansas/RISE_Arkansas_2018_Report_REV2.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://www.arkansased.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/RISE_Arkansas/RISE_Arkansas_2018_Report_REV2.pdf |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title=A New Chapter for Arkansas Students, 2018 Report}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/SCIENCE_OF_READING.pdf |archive-url=https://ghostarchive.org/archive/20221009/http://dese.ade.arkansas.gov/public/userfiles/Learning_Services/RISE/SCIENCE_OF_READING.pdf |archive-date=9 October 2022 |url-status=live|title=The Science of Reading, RISE, Arkansas}}</ref><ref>{{cite web|url=http://www.arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services/r.i.s.e.-arkansas/its-all-about-meaning|title=It's all About Meaning, arkansased.gov/divisions/learning-services, 2018}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web|url=https://www.mdek12.org/ESE/literacy/resources-for-teachers|title=Resources for Teachers &#124; The Mississippi Department of Education|website=www.mdek12.org}}</ref>

Critics of balanced literacy have suggested that the term is a disingenuous recasting of whole language with obfuscating new terminology.<ref>{{cite web| url=http://www.ldonline.org/article/6394/|title=Whole Language Lives On: The Illusion of Balanced Reading Instruction – LD Online }}</ref> Neuroscientist Mark Seidenberg, a proponent of the science of reading and the teaching of phonics, writes that, "Balanced literacy allowed educators to declare an end to the increasingly troublesome 'wars' without resolving the underlying issues", and that "Balanced literacy provided little guidance for teachers who thought that phonics was a cause of poor reading and did not know how to teach it".<ref>Reading at the Speed of Light: How we Read, why so many can't, and what can be done about it, 2017, pp. 248 & 266, Mark Seidenberg {{ISBN|978-1-5416-1715-5}}</ref><ref name="seidenbergreading.net|title"/>

[[No Child Left Behind]] has brought a resurgence of interest in phonics. Its "Reading First" program addresses the reading deficiency in elementary students and requires that students must be explicitly and systematically taught five skills: phonemic awareness, phonics, vocabulary, comprehension, and fluency.<ref>{{cite web| url=https://education.findlaw.com/curriculum-standards-school-funding/the-no-child-left-behind-act-s-reading-requirement.html|title=No Child Left Behind: Reading Requirement}}</ref> During the 2000s, whole language receded to marginal status, and continues to fade.{{citation needed|date=March 2022}}