What Makes AVKO’s Sequential Spelling Program Different:
| Traditional Spelling Program
| Sequential Spelling
|
Although AVKO does not present rules in its Sequential Spelling and other spelling materials (they are rather embedded in the program so that the children can pick them up automatically), we have materials available for parents and teachers to be able to teach the rules if they so desire.
The Whole Language School of Golf
Courtesy of
by Dr. Kerry Hempenstall
Dr. Kerry Hempenstall is an educational psychologist, lecturing in psychology at the Department of Psychology and Intellectual Disability Studies at the Royal Melbourne Institute of Technology in Victoria, Australia. Before becoming a psychologist, he taught school for many years and worked as a social worker with disabled children. He believes strongly that educational decision-making too often neglects empirical research findings in favor of fashionable but unsubstantiated approaches. His controversial articles in The Melbourne Age have made clear his concern for educational reform to ensure a better outcome for students at risk. His articles may be viewed at http://www.rmit.edu.au/browse;ID=lkoixu1se7qo;STATUS=A?QRY=Hempenstall&STYPE=PEOPLE
Well folks, here we are at the Whole Language School of Golf with our two founders - Smith and Goodman. What can you tell us about your method of teaching beginning golfers?
"Yes, well, our approach to teaching golf is more of a philosophy than a method. We consider that golf is an holistic experience which comprises more than the sum of its parts. Golf, to us, is an irreducible experience best learned by doing, so we enter all our novices in the Australian Open because that's authentic golf. Our role is that of motivator/facilitator, we empower our students to grow in golf. We do not teach skills, of course; even though some students request help with their swing, we explain that swing is only a sub-skill of golf, and to emphasize it out of the context of authentic golf is time-wasting or even harmful."
"We do like to see our learners practise their invented swing during the Open itself, of course; the principles of the swing are eventually induced by the learner who is highly motivated during an Open, but probably bored to tears and disheartened by artificially timetabled swing practice. Thus we (along with another former champion, "Jocular" Johnny Rousseau) consider that the swing will evolve naturally, that feedback is pointless and it may even damage the essential confidence that learners need if they are to take risks with their golf. Since golf is as natural as learning to speak, we allow it to develop, rather than forcing it - just as speech developed."
"Golf being such a natural pursuit, there is no need to demonstrate grip, stance, or even which end of the club is best to hold - gradually, through playing in authentic tournaments, the efforts of the novice will more and more closely approximate that of Greg Norman. If for any reason development is slow, probably caused by earlier misguided attempts at skill instruction, we provide entry into other golfing majors, such as Augusta, or St. Andrews - more immersion in real golf is the answer. Golf improvement depends largely on the learner's establishment of a self-regulating and self-improving system, not on anything an instructor provides."
"We also ensure that our students don't practise their chipping or bunker shots, as that involves fractionating the great game. Similarly, we consider driving ranges and putting greens are merely mind-numbing traps only used by old-fashioned, ignorant instructors who fail to understand the implications of the new research literature on preferred golfing styles."
"Golfing-for-meaning is our mantra, because of course golf is a very personal activity. Only by considering the golf experience from a developmentalist-constructivist-relativist perspective can we move away from the notion of goals prescribed autocratically from above. We believe that players can progress far beyond the shallow objectives of the ball-in-hole-in-minimum-strokes model which dominates in certain quarters. Our players are encouraged to achieve satisfaction of their own diverse needs, which may be markedly different from those of course-designers, or self-appointed traditionalists. The golfers transact with the course, bringing their own unique understandings and experiences to the event; they should not feel tied down by conventional notions of what the process should mean to the player."
"We also teach a revolutionary strategy in that we encourage our learners to disengage from the tyranny of the ball. The ball is only marginally relevant to the game, and is too often over-emphasised. It is, after all, only one cue to the deeper transacted meaning of the golfing experience. Students are sometimes bemused when we instruct them to pay as little attention as possible to the ball - just a quick glance is all that is needed as they stroll along the fairway (to ensure that their prediction is correct, and it is a ball not a cowpat). Striking any ball that meets the definition of a ball will do, it needn't be your own - in fact such an action is a genuine indicator of the degree to which your comprehension of the true potential of this exciting game is developing."
"How much success are we having with our up-to-date, golfer-centered philosophy? We have numerous anecdotes from dedicated teachers who find our approach so much more rewarding - they have no trouble engaging their students; they see the joy on the faces of the students; they are exhilarated to be part of this important redefinition of the essence of the game."
"Scores? You ask? Unfortunately that question is very revealing of your failure to keep up with modern research. You are still dominated by out-dated reductionist models of golf. One cannot validly and reliably keep scores without interfering in the golfing process; scores do not reflect all that is entailed by golf; they fail to capture more than the most miniscule element of the whole game. Scores are likely to be used to compare golfer to golfer - which is an unconscionable intrusion on the innate developmental trajectory of each individual seeker of golf prowess."
"We anticipate our philosophy will sweep the golfing world. It is new, innovative, flexible - everyone's a winner. And we won't stop there either. We already have plans to take on swimming coaching for beginners, using our proven immersion techniques. The sky's the limit - Hey, Kenny G., have you thought about using our approach for beginning skydiver training?"
| Where Do I Start? |
| Dear Folks,
I wrote to you a while ago about the best books to order for my sons. Thank you for your reply.
I have some further questions. After looking at your web site, I am not really sure just what I should order.
Could I explain my situation again. I cannot remember if I did before or not. I have 2 sons still at school at home. The elder of the 2 is 14 y/o. His reading is still very limited, but is really wanting to read. I would say his level is about gd 2-3. He has had major speech problems in his early years. Even now he does not trust his words to tell us exactly what he is meaning.
I am sure you know the problem of wanting to read, but not wanting baby stories. I was wondering if I could suggest the best way that I could help him. I was looking at your keyboarding lessons. Our son finds Mavis Beacon too hard. I have been using an old typing book that I had when I went to school. (remember typewriters?) He finds this better. Your typing method while teaching reading seems to be good.
I do need spelling books and was wondering what else you would suggest. I am trying to do it with a limited budget and would like to spend money wisely.
Thank you for your time.
Glenys T.
ANSWER: Certainly the Individualized Keyboarding will help your son a great deal both in learning the keyboard and in learning the patterns of English spelling.
If It Is To Be, It Is Up To Me To Do It will give him a rather fast boost in self-confidence. The first seven lessons are on the website.
Word Families in Sentence Context is a great little method of learning all kinds of things about reading while concentrating on specific patterns. The sentences may check out on a computer grade level as between 2nd and 3rd grade, but they are anything but babyish.
You might want to spend 15 minutes to a half hour a day, having him practice reading aloud for expression. The purpose will be to prepare him for either babysitting kids or being ready to read to his own kids after he gets married. Make these books FUN rhyming books such as Green Eggs and Ham or Silverstein's Where the Sidewalk Ends or A Light in the Attic. With these, you should model for him. You read a line or a page with great expression and changing voices. He then either repeats what you read or reads the next. Playing with the voice, with the tone of voice, the pitch and the speed is really important for the meaning! And for enjoyment! Teach him to have FUN, FUN, FUN.
You might also want to have him practice his handwriting for fifteen minutes a day. I would recommend using the freebie on our website, Starting at Square One. The important thing is that he is never just to copy letters that are in words. He must know the word he is copying, even if it is only for the moment he knows it because you told him what the word is. |
| Whole Language What It Is, What It Isn't by Mary Bowman-Kruhm, Ed.D. |
Whole language back in the 1960s and 70s was called the psycholinguistic approach to reading. Thankfully, that name gave way to the term whole language, which more accurately describes it, as well as being a lot easier to spell. What is whole language? Whole language is
It is not a program for teaching reading.
Some people long for whole language to be a program. "Tell me how to teach whole language," they beg. These are rigid people who delight in having educational methods spelled out. You know them:
Some people, such as those described above, will never embrace a whole language approach. And they shouldn’t. They will be most comfortable with a structured program which lays out short-term objectives concretely and gives specific activities for first testing, then teaching, and then re-testing those objectives. And they can best teach that with which they are comfortable.
Some students also benefit from such structured programs. Many students, especially those identified as having learning problems or for whom other strategies have not worked, need this type of sequential and orderly program. But, unless they are teaching such students, many teachers like to do their own thing. They are adept at adopting and adapting strategies and techniques and plans to meet the needs of their students. For these creative souls, whole language is an approach to teaching reading that provides them with the orientation to reading they seek. And many students thrive in reading the varied materials that are part of a whole language approach to reading.
Advocates for phonics and skills (i.e., teaching by objectives) models continue to criticize the whole language model as having caused reading problems for many students. An aside that seems relevant here, even if I am being very foolish to get into the middle of the whole language/phonics/skills debate: Prior to whole language many, many students had reading problems. Some critics of whole language make it sound as if whole language created an atmosphere in which students haven’t learned to read. Not true. The phonics and skills models did not work for everyone. While some students may not learn to read through a whole language approach, whole language initially gained support because the phonics and skills models did not work for large numbers of students.
Then, as now, a good teacher must look at his or her students, assess need, and make appropriate recommendations and instructional decisions. Basically, most aspects of the three models are similar. The differences are in degree and in how teachers carry them out in the classroom.
Example One: Whole language people believe a reader makes minimal use of graphics, using the visual array on the page only enough to get meaning. In a phonics or skills model, the print is of major importance and meaning is pretty much assumed.
Example Two: In teaching, say for instance character development in a story, the whole language teacher might use a story map, a web, a reading guide, have the students act out parts, write a paragraph, etc. The skills teacher would have the students answer questions about the characters and perhaps have a class discussion after reading the story.
Experienced teachers are way beyond the stupid argument of whole language vs. other models. While the beginning teacher may need to resort to orthodox, time-honored, and safe teaching techniques, the experienced teacher feels free to pick and choose from a varied menu of teaching strategies, according to student needs. Experienced teachers, both elementary and secondary, regular and special education, use so many whole language-oriented activities that the argument is a moot one. One need only look at the basic components of a whole language model and see that whole language not only can be but is indeed translated from theory into substance in many of today’s classrooms.
What are the characteristics of a whole language model? Here are the basics and, in brackets, a few examples of the ways teachers translate them into classroom activities:
Meaning is at the core of the reading process; one reads to think and to comprehend. [trade books, Internet, games]
Who is a practitioner of a whole language approach? A teacher who, based on the above characteristics, develops lessons which have sound goals and objectives and uses meaningful activities that motivate and involve students to reach those goals and objectives.
How do you now assess yourself and your teaching?
Building a Better Vocabulary the Lazy Man's Way
by Don McCabe
Before anyone can successfully embark upon a program to improve his/her vocabulary, s/he must be completely convinced that it will be worthwhile. After, all, why spend the time and the effort necessary to learn words if the new words will not help in any way?
Secondly, a person must be completely convinced that s/he CAN learn those "big" words like my favorite graffito: "ESCHEW OBFUSCATION."
Although it is important to know that increasing one's vocabulary is beneficial and possible, it is far more important to learn to LOVE WORDS. It's important to learn that WORDS can be FUN, to learn to feel the power, the joy, and the humor in words that can increase the joys of living. If a person feels this way about words, s/he will enjoy learning words. It will be a pleasure.
And it won't matter very much what method the person uses. They will all work for a person who loves words. No method of learning new words has much chance for success if the person hates "big" words.
Some people have developed rather extensive vocabularies very successfully and easily by buying and using many, many cheap-well, comparatively cheap-vocabulary building books. Others have managed to accomplish the same thing by keeping little notebooks into which they jot down every new word that they encounter. Still others have acquired a vast word horde by simply reading and making a game out of trying to puzzle out the meanings of words either before they look them up or even without looking them up in a dictionary.
The most important element in building a vocabulary is the desire. When teachers, newscasters, or other adults use some silly academic euphemism, sesquipedalianism, or polysyllabic bit of arcane jargon, a typical response is: "He's just showing off his vocabulary." Rather than admit our ignorance and our need to learn, we often accuse the other person or writer of knowing too much. Now isn't that silly?
Yet, that is the way I was at one time. When I graduated from high school, I thought I knew everything-at least everything worth knowing. So when I encountered words that I just knew I had never seen before and wouldn't ever see again, I actually thought the writers were showing off. Now, I may still prefer simple straight forward writing to the academic, but I have learned that at eighteen I didn't know everything that was worth knowing. Once again, I am learning and enjoying learning.
Although it seems to be natural to accuse others of showing off when we don't understand them because it protects us from feeling inferior, it isn't right. We shouldn't feel insulted by the usage of a word we don't know. Instead, we should feel challenged.
And isn't that the way we react when we encounter a new slang word that pops up out of nowhere but we hear it everywhere. We actually signal our computer brain to figure out what the word means and how to use it. We are just "jiving" ourselves if we think we can learn the meaning of "jive" by looking it up in an ordinary dictionary.
This desire-this signaling of the computer brain to learn a word-can be easily accomplished if we read with a pencil. We should underline every word we don't understand. After the fourth or fifth time that we have underlined the same word, one of two things is liable to happen. First, we're quite liable to know the word now because our computer-brain solved the problem for us. Second, we're quite liable to ask somebody what the word means now because we are really sort of mad at ourselves for not figuring out what the word means. Or, heavens to Betsy, we might even use the dictionary. Personally, I eschew dictionaries, because I find their definitions to be more obfuscating than helpful. But, I have been known to be so mad that I have opened mine, and learned because I wanted to learn. And, by the way, remember good writers eschew obfuscation.
If a politician says he eschews obfuscation, you know he's using those big words so that nobody will understand exactly where he stands.
Posts
All Comments
