Cover not available

In:All Things Morphology: Its independence and its interfaces
Edited by Sedigheh Moradi, Marcia Haag, Janie Rees-Miller and Andrija Petrovic
[Current Issues in Linguistic Theory 353] 2021
► pp. 415–430

Get fulltext from our e-platform
JBE logo with link
PDF logo with download linkDownload Book PDF
EPUB logo with download linkDownload Book EPUB
authorization required

Chapter 22
A primer for linguists on the reading wars

 | Southern Oregon University
Published online: 25 August 2021
DOI logo with link
https://doi.org/10.1075/cilt.353.22bat
Abstract
As linguists and teachers, we may be asked our opinions on contentious issues of reading instruction such as phonics versus whole language. This chapter reviews debates about reading instruction in the United States, introducing the relevant concepts, issues, research, and personalities to linguists. The chapter begins with a look at pre-nineteenth century views on reading and nineteenth and early twentieth century practices. The mid-twentieth century publication of Why Johnny Can’t Read led to renewed interest in phonics and in linguistics-based reading materials. At the same time, another linguistically-inspired approach, whole language, was being proposed. Today, we have a politically fraught landscape of what are often described as ‘reading wars.’ The chapter ends with a set of recommendations for navigating this landscape.
Article outline
  • 1.Teaching reading in the nineteenth century (and before)
  • 2.See Dick run
  • 3.Rudolph Flesch and Doctor Seuss: The Fish and the cat
  • 4.From “Let’s Read” to Project Literacy
  • 5.Whole language
  • 6.Who’s right? Research and meta-studies
  • 7.Politics as usual, and conspiracies too
  • 8.How to read the reading wars: Beyond name calling
  • Acknowledgements
  • References
References (48)
References
Adams, Marilyn Jager. 1990. Beginning to read: Thinking and learning about print. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Association of Masters of the Boston Public Schools. 1844. Remarks on the seventh annual report of the Hon. Horace Mann, Secretary of the Massachusetts Board of Education. Association of Masters of the Boston Public Schools. Boston: C. C. Little and J. Brown.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard. 1942. Linguistics and reading. The Elementary English Review 19(4). 125–130 & 19(5). 183–186.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bloomfield, Leonard & Clarence L. Barnhart. 1961. Let’s read: A linguistic approach. Detroit, MI: Wayne State University Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Blumenfeld, Samuel L. 1996. The whole language/OBE fraud: The shocking story of how America is being dumbed down by its own education system. Boise, ID: Paradigm Publishing.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Bond, Guy & Robert Dykstra. 1967. The cooperative research program in first-grade reading instruction. Reading Research Quarterly 2(4). 5–142. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Brinkley, Ellen & Constance Weaver. 2005. Phonics, literalism and futuristic fiction: Religious fundamentalism and education policy. In Leslie Poynor & Paula Wolfe (eds.), Marketing fear in America’s public schools: The real war on literacy, 93–110. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Carlinsky, Dan. 1981. A story (it’s true) of a Geisel with a view. Arizona 14(June). 48–53.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chall, Jeanne. 1967. Learning to read: The great debate. New York: McGraw-Hill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1989. The role of phonics in the teaching of reading: A position paper prepared for the Secretary of Education. Washington, DC: Office of Educational Research and Improvement. ERIC ED328899.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Chomsky, Noam. 1970. Phonology and reading. In Levin & Williams, 3–18.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Elson, William H. & William S. Gray. 1930. Elson-Gray basic reader pre-primer. The Philippine Islands, Scott Foresman & Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Flesch, Rudolph. 1943. Marks of readable style; a study in adult education. New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1955. Why Johnny can’t read, and what you can do about it, New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1981. Why Johnny still can’t read: A new look at the scandal of our schools. New York: Harper & Row.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fries, Charles. C. 1963. Linguistics and reading. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Fries, Charles. C., Agnes C. Fries, Rosemary G. Wilson & Mildred K. Rudolph. 1966. Merrill linguistic reading series. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Geisel, Theodore. 1957. The cat in the hat. New York: Houghton Mifflin.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Goodman, Kenneth. 1967. Reading: A psycholinguistic guessing game. Journal of the Reading Specialist 6(4). 126–135. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1982. Language, literacy and learning. London: Routledge & Kegan Paul.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, William. S. 1953. Preliminary survey of methods of teaching reading and writing. Paris: UNESCO.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, William S. 1955. Phonics versus other methods of teaching reading The Reading Teacher 9(2). 102–106.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Gray, William. S., May Hill Arbuthnot, Eleanor Campbell & Keith Ward. 1940. Fun with Dick and Jane. Chicago: Scott, Foresman & Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hanford, Emily. 2018. Hard words: Why aren’t kids being taught to read? APMReports. Online: [URL]. (12 December, 2019.)
Hart, John. 1570. A methode or comfortable beginning for all vnlearned, whereby they may be taught to read English: In a very short time, vvith pleasure: So profitable as straunge, put in light, London: I. H. Chester Heralt.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Hersey, John. 1954. Why do students bog down on first R? Life 36(21). 136–150.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Huey, Edmund. B. 1908. The psychology and pedagogy of reading: with a review of the history of reading and writing and of methods, texts, and hygiene in reading. New York: Macmillan.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
International Reading Association. 1997. The role of phonics in reading instruction. Newark, Delaware: International Reading Association.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Labov, William. 1970. The reading of the –ed suffix. In Levin & Williams, 222–245.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lamkin, F. Duane. 1955. An analysis of propaganda techniques used in “Why Johnny Can’t Read”. The Reading Teacher 9(2), 107–117.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Lemann, Nicholas. 1997. The reading wars. Atlantic Monthly 280(5). 128–133.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Levin, Harry & Joanna R. Williams (eds.). 1970. Basic studies on reading, New York: Basic Books.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mann, Horace. 1841. Lecture on the mode of preparing and using spelling books. Boston: William D. Ticknor.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 1844. Seventh annual report of the Secretary of the Board. Massachusetts Board of Education. Seventh annual report of the Board of Education. Boston: Dutton & Wentworth.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Matthews, Sharon. 2005. Who gets to play? How and why reading researchers were left out of the No Child Left Behind Act. In Leslie Poynor & Paula Wolfe (eds.), Marketing fear in America’s public schools: The real war on literacy, 51–61. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
McGuffey, William. H. 1879. First eclectic reader (revised edition). Cincinnati: Van Antwerp, Bragg & Co.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Morgan, Judith & Neil Morgan. 1995. Dr. Seuss & Mr. Geisel: A biography. New York: Random House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
National Early Literacy Panel. 2008. Developing early literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel. Washington, DC: National Institute for Literacy.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
National Reading Panel. 2000. Report of the National Reading Panel: Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instruction: Reports of the subgroups. Washington, D.C.: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development, National Institutes of Health.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Nel, Philip. 2007. The annotated cat: Under the hats of Seuss and his cats. New York: Random House.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Rayner, Keith, Barbara R. Foorman, Charles A. Perfetti, David Pesetsky & Mark S. Seidenberg. 2001. How psychological science informs the teaching of reading. Psychological Science in the Public Interest 2(2). 31–74. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Smith, Frank. 1971. Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York: Holt, Rinehart & Winston.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
. 2004. Understanding reading: A psycholinguistic analysis of reading and learning to read. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Snow, Catherine E., M. Susan Burns & Peg Griffin (eds.). 1998. Preventing reading difficulties in young children. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Strauss, Steven L. 2005. The linguistics, neurology and politics of phonics. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum. Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Venezky, Richard. 1970. Regularity in reading and spelling. In Levin & Williams, 30–42.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Witty, Paul A. & Robert A. Sizemore. 1955. Phonics in the reading program: A review and an evaluation. Elementary English 32(6). 355–371Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Yatvin, Joanne. 2005. Making whole language disappear: How the National Reading Panel worked its magic. In Leslie Poynor & Paula Wolfe (eds.), Marketing fear in America’s public schools: The real war on literacy, 81–91. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.Google Scholar logo with link to Google Scholar
Mobile Menu Logo with link to supplementary files background Layer 1 prag Twitter_Logo_Blue