The Whole Language Learning Approach: A Comprehensive Overview

Oftentimes, the early elementary school years are envisioned with primary colors, making friends, hands-on learning, classroom number lines, and ABCs. At the core, however, are the early stages of reading comprehension. Students need to be able to read texts and make meaning from those texts, forming the basis for all learning that occurs later. The debate around the best way to teach students to learn to read has become known as ‘the reading wars,’ with two primary positions: phonics advocates and whole language advocates.

Understanding the Core Principles of Whole Language

The Whole Language Approach to reading was developed on the premise that infants develop oral language skills by communicating - it isn’t explicitly taught. Whole language is a ‘top down’ approach that focuses on meaning and comprehension, rather than a ‘bottom-up’ approach (like phonics) that teaches foundational skills in isolation. This discredited teaching philosophy focuses on teaching kids to read by immersing them in written materials and instructing them to use context and background knowledge to read words.

Key Tenets of Whole Language

Advocates for Whole Language state that not all students need explicit phonics instruction to learn to read. They argue that the focus should be on reading comprehension, which is the ultimate goal of reading instruction. Proponents of this methodology believe that if students are immersed in high-quality texts and given ample opportunities to engage in reading, they will indeed learn to read. The whole language approach of situating language learning in the life experiences of the students offers a real alternative to the use of ditto sheets and workbooks. Whole language advocates believe that more learning takes place when material is presented in a context that is meaningful to the learner.

Historical Context and Evolution

The “whole language” approach got its start in the 1800s through Horace Mann, a politician who is today widely known as “the father of American education.” A fierce advocate for literacy and education, Mann warned against teaching children to sound out words letter by letter because he worried that it would distract them from the words’ meaning. As the American public education system grew and developed, many educators followed Mann’s lead and taught children to memorize the appearance of words instead of teaching them to decode the letters.

Rise and Fall of Whole Language

With a literature focus, whole language immersed students in reading and writing, operating under the assumption that learning to read comes naturally, and students would gain the phonics skills they needed within the context of their reading. By the 1950s, the whole language approach was considered the “conventional wisdom” of teaching students to read, asserting that children should read for meaning from the very beginning by memorizing sight words and using context and picture cues. By the 70s and 80s, whole language remained the predominant literacy method in public schools. Consequently, literacy rates remained largely stagnant. The whole language approach wasn’t until the 1980s, however, that whole language truly took off in American classrooms. Myriad studies, including a National Reading Panel review of more than 100,000 studies concerning how kids learn to read, have thoroughly refuted the idea that kids will learn to read through discovery alone and contradict the efficacy of whole language instruction.

Emergence of Balanced Literacy

In the 1990s, a new approach arose: balanced literacy. The term originated in California in response to low reading scores, with the intent of incorporating elements of both whole language and phonics. According to Fountas and Pinnell (1996), balanced literacy is a “philosophical orientation that assumes that reading and writing achievement are developed through instruction and support in multiple environments using various approaches that differ by level of teacher support and child control.” In other words, balanced literacy looks to balance several aspects of instruction, not just skill-focused and meaning-focused instruction, but also reading and writing, teacher-led and student-led activities, and whole-group, small-group, and independent configurations. Since its conception, balanced literacy has become the most commonly taught approach in American schools: 72% of teachers report balanced literacy is the instructional method they use most often in their classrooms.

Criticisms and Controversies

Attempts to empirically verify the benefits of whole language have repeatedly resulted in evidence that whole language is less effective than phonics-based reading instruction.

The "Guessing Game" Approach

During early literacy instruction, when students approach a word in text that they do not know, they are encouraged to look at the first letter, look at the pictures, think about the context of the sentence, and guess. Good readers did not skip unknown letters or words (as recommended by the whole language approach) but processed all the visual information in the text. Further evidence showed that to become a strong reader, children needed strong phonemic awareness skills. Theorists such as Ken Goodman and Frank Smith at that time advocated a "guessing game" approach, entirely based on context and whole-word analysis. It is worth noting that neuroscientist Mark Seidenberg, one of the many critics of whole language and Balance Literacy, writes that Ken Goodman's "guessing game theory" had no supporting evidence and "was grievously wrong".

Reliance on Cueing Systems

Whole-language rests on the belief that good readers skim and scan the page, using phonics only when absolutely necessary. As a result, classroom materials rooted in whole-language ask us to teach students to use context, meaning, and even pictures instead of decoding printed words. The catch is, it’s called decoding because English is actually a code- 26 letters representing 44 speech sounds - and good readers have cracked that code. Struggling readers exhibit “reading behaviors” rather than actually reading; they skip words and use context and meaning to guess words on the page.

The Myth of Reading as a Natural Process

One founding belief of whole-language is that reading is a natural process so, if students are exposed to good literature and develop a love of reading, they will learn to read. This belief has been disproven by reading research and by the number of students across our country who are not strong readers, both of which tell us that exposure and the desire to read is not enough. Reading researchers estimate that just 5% of students learn to read relatively effortlessly. Most students require instruction to learn to read. The belief that students will learn to read by reading often results in decisions that minimize time spent on direct instruction and maximize time devoted to independent reading, even in the primary grades.

Read also: Engaging All Brain Parts

The Science of Reading and Its Implications

On the other side, phonics advocates maintain that students must have a way to decode unfamiliar words. The most recent movement in reading instruction has come to be known as The Science of Reading. Some mischaracterize it as a synonym for phonics instruction and nothing more. However, the Science of Reading more accurately refers to the body of research that has been conducted across different fields of study, including neuroscience, cognitive science, education, developmental psychology, and other fields that have examined how children learn to read and what practices are critical to reading instruction.

Key Components of Effective Reading Instruction

In 1997, the National Reading Panel was formed at the request of Congress. Their goal was to examine the research in reading instruction and determine what is effective in teaching students to read. In 2000, a National Reading Panel determined effective reading instruction requires five key concepts: phonemic awareness, phonics, fluency, vocabulary, and comprehension. Structured literacy, on the other hand, doesn’t leave learning up to chance. Its experts focus on the roles of language, word recognition and decoding, and the underlying phonological processes that support reading and spelling. Structured literacy helps all students improve their reading skills, but it is especially helpful for kids who struggle with reading. They’ll move on to sound-symbol correspondences-the relationship of the letters in the alphabet to the sounds they produce-and learn them one at a time. All of these skills will be taught in a diagnostic way.

Bridging the Gap Between Research and Practice

There is still much work to be done to translate the research into practice. A large gap still exists between research and practice. We know that instruction in the Big 5 is essential AND it should be integrated. The difficulty in finding clearly communicated information and research on implementing Science of Reading instruction affects teacher buy-in. As we continue to grow our knowledge in effective implementation of reading instruction, future recommendations will add to the current Science of Reading base.

Practical Examples and Classroom Applications

Instead of providing instruction on the structure of written English, whole-language materials focus on reading behaviors, asking beginning readers to emulate skilled readers. But researchers estimate that just 35% of students learn to read with such broad instruction. Reading behaviors will not turn into actual reading until a child has unlocked the written code.

Identifying Whole Language Strategies in the Classroom

Most primary-grade teachers teach phonics because we know it supports our students’ reading and spelling. And many of us also believe that if we incorporate phonics into our instruction, we are by definition not whole-language teachers; we are “balanced literacy” teachers. But whole-language beliefs are so pervasive and so entrenched in education that they continue to serve as the basis for a majority of instructional materials and professional development offerings. As a result, many of us have unknowingly created whole-language classrooms with “word study” added in the name of “balance.”

Here’s a quick self-check: You might unknowingly be teaching whole-language strategies if …If in your classroom you have:

Reading Strategies posters such as Skippy the Frog/Hop Over, Take a Guess and Sail On, Flippy Dolphin/Try a Different Sound.
A leveled library and the expectation that students select books from labeled book bins for large chunks of time devoted to independent reading.
Posters that equate book browsing with reading (e.g., “Good readers read the pictures.”)
A reading block that has students spending most of their time reading independently after they have seen you model “what good readers do.”

If you teach:

Beginning and struggling readers using predictable pattern texts that have spelling patterns they haven’t learned yet.
Lessons such as “guess the covered word,” “Picture Power,” and ‘Skippy the frog” so that students have strategies to avoid decoding words.
Phonics by selecting spelling patterns from Guided Reading books.
By prompting students, “Does that look right/make sense/sound right?” when they misread or are trying to figure out a word.

If you believe:

We learn to read by reading.
Learning to read is a natural process, like learning to speak.
The rules of English are too complicated to be worth teaching.
We read by orchestrating meaning, syntax, and visuals.
We only use phonics to read unfamiliar words.
We empower students by equipping them with lots of strategies to tackle tricky words.

Moving Towards Evidence-Based Instruction

In order to teach all of our students to read, we need to be able to spot whole-language materials and to replace them with those grounded in current reading research. We can bring equity to reading instruction by using materials that:

Do not describe learning to read as a natural process.
Do not perpetuate the myth that students will learn to read by reading or by emulating skilled readers.
Do not instruct us to have students guess words rather than sound them out.

Long-Term Impact and Significance

Providing effective literacy instruction to all students is a key piece in raising NAEP test scores, but more importantly improving lifelong literacy. Reading comprehension affects all aspects of adult independence - such as understanding the financial consequences of owning a credit card, understanding potential side effects of different medications, being able to understand an employee handbook, etc. Educators have a significant opportunity to make a lasting impact on student success, independence, and self-direction.

tags: #whole #language #learning #approach