I have always been a great fan of the Look and Say or Whole Word method of teaching children to read. It is what I used on my own child successfully and I have also used it with many other children. Not everybody approves though. Here is Samuel Blumenfeld, a well know American educationist, on this way of teaching children:
It is known that by imposing Look and say (or whole word) teaching techniques on an alphabetic writing system, one can artificially induce dyslexia, thereby creating a learning block or reading neurosis. Reading disability is induced by the Look and Say method.....
Other writers have blamed the Look and Say method for an epidemic of illiteracy. Dear me, I seem to have made a terrible error. Fancy being responsible for all that dyslexia and illiteracy! Of course, none of this bothers me unduly, it is just that some people prefer to use phonics to teach reading, while others would rather use autonomous methods or Look and Say. The great difference is that when an advocate of synthetic phonics reads an article advocating Look and Say and criticising phonics or vice versa, he does not become furiously angry and take it as a personal attack. How different, how very different from the reaction of those who prefer autonomous methods!
When I wrote an article for a newspaper last year in which I said such things as that I believed that autonomous methods caused incalculable harm to the education of the children upon whom they were used, the reaction was interesting. I have read many similar statements about the methods I follow myself, without being at all concerned about it. My own methods of home education, after all, apparently cause dyslexia and illiteracy. Even a few days ago, someone commented here that I had 'defamed' autonomous educators in my articles. This is so strange that I am at a loss to know how to deal with it. I wonder what readers think I do when I read articles by people like Samuel Blumenfeld which say horrible things about my educational techniques? Well, to start with I don't contact those planning to publish his books and urge them not to publish any more of them. Nor do I contact the editors of magazines for which he writes in order to denounce him. I do not write to Congressmen and tell them that he is a dishonest fool. Nor do I invent stories about him and spread them across the Internet. The reason I don't do all these things is not because I am a pleasant and forgiving sort of person; I am nothing of the sort. It is because I realise that he is discussing an idea, not launching a personal attack on me. Do any readers honestly think that he has 'defamed' me in his books? Would I be justified in being angry and upset because he believes that children should be taught in a different way from that which I have myself chosen?
Debates on education often become quite heated. The late Ted Wragg for instance, referred to those who favoured the teaching of reading by phonics as 'phobics'! However nobody takes any of this personally. If I read that my own methods have done incalculable harm to the education of children, and I have actually read this in the Times Educational Supplement, then I am more likely to laugh at the hyperbole than begin a vicious campaign of character assassination against the author.
There is something profoundly odd about this. One can freely discuss all sorts of educational techniques with all types of people. One can exaggerate the virtues of one's own methods and lampoon the systems which others choose. This happens all the time in magazines, journals, newspapers, television and conferences. Those who espouse synthetic phonics demonstrate that people like me are responsible for all the dyslexia and illiteracy in the country. Those who agree with me show that the phonics merchants are idiots who are putting children off reading for pleasure. There is no animosity in any of this; if I meet somebody devoted to phonics, I am not going to snub him or tell others that he has 'defamed' me. It is only when one criticises or questions the efficacy of autonomous education that the venom and spite begin to flow. Some of the reactions which I have observed have honestly caused me to question the mental stability of those who are so bitterly angry about criticism of their educational methods. I mean, why would anybody get so worked up if somebody said she was hopelessly wrong in her approach? It happens as I say, to me, quite regularly and I don't even feel a slight irritation.
I am curious to know whether anybody can shed light on this curious phenomenon. It is certainly not all autonomous educators, but definitely enough to make it a feature of this type of education. At any rate, one never observes such behaviour in even the most fanatical supporter of synthetic phonics. In short, what is it with these people?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
I've started to read your blog since seeing you advertise it in the comments section of a recent newspaper article.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I have hesitated to comment so far, for fear of being accused of "Sloppy thinking".
I home educate, not autonomously, but not completely structured either. We fall somewhere in-between, working to a rhythm that suits us as a family. I half expect that phrase to make you cringe! In its simplest form we tend to do structured work in the mornings and afternoons are left free. My children are all primary school age.
I have many friends who do educate using unschooling or autonomous methods, and they have never been anything but kind to me, even when knowing that we don't share the same educational paths, but then I have never sneered at their choices. I have asked questions, I have expressed doubt that it would work for us, and still, no aggressive responses.
I think that you know you antagonise autonomous families, and I think you rather enjoy winding them up, which is a shame because it means you will never be able to enjoy true dialogue with these families.
Just because you don't understand something doesn't make it wrong. My husband is an Electronic Engineer and designs components for things such as space satellites and aircraft. I don't understand what he does in the slightest; just looking at the drawings baffles me. I rather think this is what autonomy looks like to you.
I also campaigned against the changes in the law, even though we are registered with the LA. I did this because I believe it to be a huge waste of time and money, and I can prove from personal experience that this is so.
I deregistered my two sons from school at the same time but only ever got paper work for one child. I even telephoned the LA and spoke to the EWO several times and still, even after promising that I would get the paperwork for both, nothing has been sent. That was 18 months ago. Even though I have done my best to be "seen", one of my children still isn't in the system. If the system was compulsory, this would still happen, probably even more so as the limited resources available would be stretched even further.
I worked to much the same system as you describe, that is to say structured work in the morning and then the afternoons free for other stuff. We also spent many days on outings and so on. The question which I was puzzling over was the ferocity directed by some autonomous educators against those who disagree with them. For instance, there have been a number of attempts to get this blog closed down. People like Mike Fortune-Wood of HE-UK have contacted blogspot and told the most outrageous lies in these attempts. The same thing has happened with newspapers for whom I have written. It is this desire to try and shut anybody up who does not really think that autonomous education is terribly effective that I find odd.
ReplyDeleteSimon wrote,
ReplyDelete"it is just that some people prefer to use phonics to teach reading, while others would rather use autonomous methods or Look and Say."
Do you see 'autonomous methods' as another way to teach reading? Where does this idea come from? As autonomous educators we have used a mixture of look and say and phonics (varying proportions with different children). What method in particular are you thinking of when you list 'autonomous methods' along with Look and Say and phonics?
"When I wrote an article for a newspaper last year in which I said such things as that I believed that autonomous methods caused incalculable harm to the education of the children upon whom they were used, the reaction was interesting."
Well for a start the people who criticise particular methods of teaching reading usually base their views on research results. Your criticisms were based on personal opinion, there is a difference.
"If I read that my own methods have done incalculable harm to the education of children, and I have actually read this in the Times Educational Supplement, then I am more likely to laugh at the hyperbole than begin a vicious campaign of character assassination against the author."
Would you feel the same if that person were attempting to prevent you choosing that teaching method for your child? The method that you know from experience is best for your child. You are not comparing like with like. I suspect you educated your child at home partly because you disagreed with the methods used in schools and they way they were carried out. How would you feel if someone tried to impose just those methods on you in your home? This was what you did when you argued against autonomous education and for greater regulation that would have made AE at least very difficult and arguably impossible.
I used the example of the difference in approach to methods of teaching reading as an analogy. A better case in the general field of education might perhaps be the difference between child centred classrooms and whole class teaching. These varying theories in the classroom make a great deal of difference to my choice as a parent. For example, I might want to send my child to a school where whole class teaching takes place and be unable to do so because all the schools are using open plan, child friendly classrooms. You say:
ReplyDelete" Would you feel the same if that person were attempting to prevent you choosing that teaching method for your child? "
In fact this is precisely what happens all the time when people are sending their children to school; people advocating different styles of teaching are restricting the choice of the parents. This still does not result in people organising campaigns of vilification against those who champion one sort of classroom arrangment over another!
It can be annoying to find that you are unable to send your child to a school using the methods which you might favour, but it simply does not end up in the sort of unpleasantness in which some autonomous parents seem to specialise.
Well... I think
ReplyDeletea) Simon chose a particularly sensitive time to make his points in public (particularly in the press) when everyone was feeling very angry/unsettled by the whole Badman thing.
b)Despite the above, I cannot see why there shoud be this anti-Simon campiagn. He may be wrong/misguided - but that doesn't make him mad or bad. It also doesn't invalidate the fact that he was until recently a life long home educator, and all this talk of him just being on the lists because he is a journalist is just rubbish - he was clearly there for ages as a home educator. In fact banning him has had the opposite effect - when he was on the lists he didn't use the postings publically; now he is banned he does refer to them; so that achieved a lot, didn't it? Anyone who actually read his original contributions in the press should be aware that the whole issue was that he didn't use the positive examples of successful AE that were described on the lists...so why get banned for not doing that!
c)I don't agree with Simon on lots of things (ie the whole legislation thing) but again, that doesn't invalidate everything he has to say.
d) All of us have had a narrow escape for the Badman legislation. We do need to behave with a bit of dignity sometimes; that includes Simon and his opponents....
Ducking.....
"Despite the above, I cannot see why there shoud be this anti-Simon campiagn. He may be wrong/misguided - but that doesn't make him mad or bad."
ReplyDeleteI agree. My comments above were just suggested answers to the questions Simon asked. Whilst I strongly disagree with Simon's opinions on AE I hope that I can resist making it personal, despite his comments feeling very personal to me. They strike at the heart of our families lifestyle, unlike discussions or choices about which method is used to teach reading or classroom teaching styles.
"Anyone who actually read his original contributions in the press should be aware that the whole issue was that he didn't use the positive examples of successful AE that were described on the lists...so why get banned for not doing that!"
You think it's acceptable for him to use only his negative impressions of AE but ignore any positive impressions? Or maybe Simon would disagree with you and suggest that there are no examples of successful AE, certainly you would believe this to be the case after reading his articles (and there would have been no need to break confidences to change this impression).
"I don't agree with Simon on lots of things (ie the whole legislation thing) but again, that doesn't invalidate everything he has to say."
Of course not. But after reading his conversations on email lists and then his articles I would question his ability to stand back and take a neutral point of view of anything that he has strong feelings about from the start. He seems unable or unwilling to understand the basics of AE. If he struggles to understand and explain something he has read so much about, it must raise doubts about his ability to understand other issues. I'm not saying, by the way, that he must agree with the views and methods of autonomous educators, just be able to understand and describe them accurately, something he has demonstrated his failure to do repeatedly.
(a different Anonymous)
ReplyDeleteAnonymous said: "He seems unable or unwilling to understand the basics of AE."
He's still demonstrating his lack of understanding of autonomous education in this post: what on earth are "autonomous methods" of teaching reading? He's had AE explained to him so many times now that his failure to grasp it does start to look deliberate.
Julie said: "Simon chose a particularly sensitive time to make his points in public (particularly in the press) when everyone was feeling very angry/unsettled by the whole Badman thing."
I don't think Simon chose the time to publish his articles. But he could have written very different ones. The ones he did write were inaccurate, extraordinarily insensitive to his fellow home educators, and potentially very damaging, when the government were doing everything they could to turn public opinion against us. I'm not surprised that people felt angry and betrayed.
"We do need to behave with a bit of dignity sometimes; that includes Simon and his opponents...."
Agreed. Public bickering and name-calling doesn't do anyone any favours. Simon has a penchant for "naming and shaming" people who really don't deserve such treatment. He is an expert at telling half-truths which put them in a bad light. He does it to individuals and to autonomous educators in general. He clearly feels that he is justified in taking revenge for what they have done to him, but he fails to see that their anger and sense of betrayal stems directly from his treatment of them in his articles.
He might have guessed that passages such as this:
"The most popular educational method used by those who withdraw their children from school in this country is known as autonomous education and involves nobody teaching children anything at all! I believe this peculiar technique is causing incalculable damage to the thousands of home educated children upon whom it is used."
and this:
"The problem lies not so much with those who teach their children at home as with those who don’t teach them - strange as it may sound, a very large number of parents who have withdrawn their children from school are opposed on ideological grounds to teaching them anything at all. They are the so-called autonomous educators"
would not make him popular with autonomous educators, especially at such a sensitive time, when many of them had painstakingly explained their philosophy and methods to him in answer to his questions, and when they are all just doing the best they can for their children.
Julie says-) All of us have had a narrow escape for the Badman legislation. We do need to behave with a bit of dignity sometimes; that includes Simon and his opponents....
ReplyDeletewhat are you on about Julie narrow escape i told you we would win! we can behave how we like as we won and Simon?Balls/badman lost!
I did not talk of "autonomous methods" of teaching reading. I said;
ReplyDelete"some people prefer to use phonics to teach reading, while others would rather use autonomous methods or Look and Say."
This is an ellipsis, in which you, the reader are expected to make sense of the text by supplying the missing words. If written out in full it would read something along these lines;
"while other(people would wish to use other educational techniques such autonomous learning) methods or Look and Say"
It can be difficult to communicate meaning to those unfamiliar with the use of ellipsis and the various figures of speech and conventions which I tend to use.
I don't intend to get drawn into a long debate here. You say;
" Simon has a penchant for "naming and shaming" people who really don't deserve such treatment."
These two people really named and shamed themselves when they began writing to newspapers to lie about me and spreading untruthful rumours on the Internet. They have been free enough with my name; I see no reason why I should scruple to mention theirs.
Actually, this whole myth which has arisen that I criticise by name those who dare to disagree with me is an interesting example of how if enough lies are told, or mud thrown, some of it is bound to stick. I was absolutelu enchanted when an anonymous poster above claimed that I am an expert in using half truths to put others in a bad light. Well, let's just stop and consider this for a moment.
ReplyDeleteWhen somebody like Kelly Green posts on the Independent's website the following;
"I would also like to point out that there is a lack of full disclosure in this opinion, as Mr. Webb failed to reveal his ongoing relationship with Mr. Badman through the Unicef Children Families Health and Education Directorate."
Now what should my reaction be to this? It is a deliberate lie and I am sure that Kelly Green knew as she typed it that she was telling a lie. The clear intention is to smear me and discredit what I am saying. This is not even a half truth, it is a complete and utter falsehood invented by this woman. Should I be coy about naming Kelly Green on this blog? Would this be regarded as naming and shaming? Surely, the result of this would be that anybody could make up any lies about me and tell them all over the place without my being able to explain the truth? This is of course pretty much what has happened. The people whom I have named here are not those with whom I disagree. They are those, like Kelly Green, who have invented outrageous and contemptible lies about me and then tried to tell these lies to as many people as possible.
Tell me, anonymous above who accused me of dealing in half truths, what do you think would be a way for me to set the record stright about these lies? Kelly Green is happy to name me and lie about me, why on earth should I not respond by exposing her lies? I am curious to know what your response to this will be.
""while other(people would wish to use other educational techniques such autonomous learning) methods or Look and Say""
ReplyDeleteBut bracketing "autonomous methods" between two methods of teaching reading when both of those methods can be used within autonomous education is strange to say the least. Anyone new to the idea of autonomous education would have no chance of divining your intended meaning and to someone who does it looks as though you don't understand AE. My understanding is that ellipsis should be understandable from the accompanying text. Thus in 'Roger ran a marathon yesterday; Sharon did too.' the missing information that Sharon ran a marathon yesterday is obvious from the context. This is not at all the case in your example because you are mixing particular methods of teaching reading with a teaching/learning style.
"autonomous learning) methods"
ReplyDeleteThere are no autonomous learning methods beyond "child-led" learning. Every possible learning method can be part of autonomous education and this is something you repeatedly fail to grasp. I have known AE children who have chosen phonics for reading, Kumon for maths or even school. AE does not rule out any particular method of learning anything. The only difference is that the child chooses what to learn and chooses the method.
And I thought that I was pedantic! Most grown up readers bring a certain amount of knowledge to the text. We write in different ways for different audiences, assuming different types and extent of knowledge. In this case, I rather assumed that those reading the text would be able to gauge from what I had written when talking of formal instruction in reading, that I intended to compare and contrast it with the sort of informal acquisition of literacy described by Paul Goodman in the sixites and morte recently by Alan Thomas. It was to this which I was alluding when I mentioned " autonomous methods".
ReplyDelete"But bracketing "autonomous methods" between two methods of teaching reading when both of those methods can be used within autonomous education is strange to say the least."
Not at all strange. One might say, "Some people eat cheese, others prefer to fast or drink milk instead." Here, two methods of ingesting food and drink are bracketing the case of somebody who does neither. I shall bear in mind in future that not all my readers are bringing to the text the same level of prior knowledge and reading experience. Tell me, are either of you two anonymouses the one who accused me of using half truths?
"In this case, I rather assumed that those reading the text would be able to gauge from what I had written when talking of formal instruction in reading, that I intended to compare and contrast it with the sort of informal acquisition of literacy described by Paul Goodman in the sixites and morte recently by Alan Thomas. It was to this which I was alluding when I mentioned " autonomous methods". "
ReplyDeleteThen you should have used the phrase 'informal learning'. This is very different from autonomous education and certainly makes more sense in this context though even informal learning could include aspects of the other two methods. Obviously informal learning can also form part of autonomous education but is not essential. My impression is that some children, possibly those on the autistic spectrum, much prefer structured approaches, for instance. The use of 'autonomous methods' in this context really does suggest that you do not understand autonomous education and there is nothing pedantic about it.
"Not at all strange. One might say, "Some people eat cheese, others prefer to fast or drink milk instead." Here, two methods of ingesting food and drink are bracketing the case of somebody who does neither."
I'm sorry but ellipsis is defined as the 'deliberate omission of a word or of words which are readily implied by the context.' Your phrase suggests that the 'autonomous method' is a different and distinct way of teaching someone to read along with Look and Say and phonics but this is not the case at all. Your food example would be more correct if you could say, "Some people eat cheese, others metabolise carbohydrates, or drink milk instead." Why do you find it so difficult to admit error?
"Tell me, are either of you two anonymouses the one who accused me of using half truths?"
No.
"Why do you find it so difficult to admit error?"
ReplyDeleteI love it! Classic, "When did you stop beating your wife?" question. I think that I have expended enough energy on this and I suspect this exchange could go on for ever. I hope that we both understand what was being said now?
I do, I'm not so sure about you.
ReplyDelete"I have always been a great fan of the Look and Say or Whole Word method of teaching children to read. It is what I used on my own child successfully and I have also used it with many other children."
ReplyDeleteI hope you also taught her some phonics or that she has been able to pick it up herself. I was taught by they Look and Say method and my spelling has always been atrocious (thank goodness for spell checkers). However, it improved significantly after teaching one of my children to read with phonics. He kept forgetting words learnt through Look and Say but found it much easier if he could build up the words through phonics. This allowed him to read more and his sight vocabulary has grown rapidly as a result. His spelling is so much better than mine and a sibling's who learnt through Look and Say.