Lably
Skip to content

Whole language

Approach to teaching children to read

  • 20 min read
  • 4 chapters

Related on Lably

Through Philosophy, Literacy and Phonics

Whole language approaches to reading instruction are typically contrasted with the far more effective phonics-based methods of teaching reading and writing. Phonics-based methods emphasize instruction for decoding and spelling. Whole language practitioners disagree with that view, instead focusing on teaching meaning and making students read more. 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) are not as effective as phonics-based approaches. Rejection of whole language (and its offshoot, balanced literacy) was a key component in the Mississippi Miracle of increased academic performance across the Southern United States in the 2010s and 2020s.

Overview

Whole language is an educational philosophy that is complex to describe, particularly because it runs counter to research fields including education, linguistics, psychology, sociology, and anthropology (see also Language Experience Approach). It can be viewed as being founded on the educational philosophy of John Amos Comenius in the early 17th century. Yetta Goodman has also cited the contributions of John Dewey, Lev Vygotsky, Louise Rosenblatt, and Ashton Warner, among other writers, in the development of the whole language movement. One description of whole language is "a concept that embodies both a philosophy of language development as well as the instructional approaches embedded within, and supportive of that philosophy".

Several strands run through descriptions of whole language. These include:

  • focus on making meaning in reading and expressing meaning in writing;
  • constructivist approaches to knowledge creation, emphasizing students' interpretations of texts and free expression of ideas in writing (often through daily journal entries);
  • emphasis on high-quality and culturally diverse literature;
  • integrating literacy into other areas of the curriculum, especially math, science, and social studies;
  • frequent reading;
  • reading and writing for real purposes;
  • focus on motivational aspects of literacy, emphasizing the love of books and engaging reading materials;
  • meaning-centered whole– to part-to-whole instruction where phonics are taught contextually in embedded phonics (different from synthetic phonics or analytical phonics); and
  • emphasis on using and understanding the meaning-making role of phonics, grammar, spelling, capitalization, and punctuation in diverse social contexts.

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. Research psychologist Keith Stanovich has asserted, "The idea that learning to read is just like learning to speak is accepted by no responsible linguist, psychologist, or cognitive scientist in the research community." In a systematic review of the reading research literature, Louisa Moats concluded that "Almost every premise advanced by whole language about how reading is learned has been contradicted by scientific investigations". Harvard professor Jeanne Chall surveyed the research on literacy and conducted her own classroom observations and found that the "code-emphasis method" (phonics) produces substantially better readers, not only in the mechanical aspects of reading but also in terms of reading for meaning and reading for enjoyment, contrary to the claims of whole-language theorists.

Sign in to keep reading

3 more chapters are free with a Lably account.

More in Education