Discussion 2 (Week 7)

Discuss your opinion on the differences among the whole-word and phonics/decoding approach. Provide examples

In my opinion, the whole-word approach is way more effective than the phonics/decoding. It was proven that the phonics approach pose many problems to children. However, the whole-word approach is more suitable to children their memory is capable in storing more words, an it also make more sense to them if they were taught to relate the words with the meaning.

I think phonic approach is better compared to whole word approach.

i agree with both of you. better learn and focus on the meaning of words first than the sounds.. it is in my opinion a necessity to understand the language before you start to talk.

I believe Phonic approach would be a better options for children to learn new words because usually, when instructing the children using this approach, teachers and parents often do it in an immediate context which will make the acquisition of words much more meaningful. Children can relate the word Apple with the fruit at the same time recognizing the sound realized by the alphabets.

Moreover, in the context mentioned above, children can pick up a word and its sound faster because they often do it best with hands on approach. They might arranging the magnetic alphabets while listening to the alphabets song or simply llok around the class for signs and spot familiar words and letter patterns. Through this experience, children would be able to make connections with the alphabets that they learn. thus, solidifies their memory retention upon learning the new words and sounds.

If Phonic approach is conducted in a systematic way, according to the curriculum plus with hands on experience or induction, this approach can be proven to be more reliable and comprehensive compared to the whole word.

I agree with the saying that Whole-word method is easier to practise than phonics. One thing is certain that whole-word focuses on the meaning of the word, which is the basic need when it comes to reading; to know the meaning. Phonics prioritise on getting the sound and knowing the sound right, then, the meaning will follows. It may take a while for the child to grab the meaning in a short period of time compared to whole-word which focuses on the meaning. For example the word "cat"...if the word is learned through whole-word method, the child can immediately process how that particular word is pronounce and what it means. Using the same word in phonics/decoding method, the child will focus learning the phonemes one by one before knowing the meaning; the focuse is mainly on the phonemes. For phonics, the sounds of phonemes comes first but for whole-word, the meaning comes first.

I think that the main difference between the two approaches is the main focus of each method. The Phonics Approach focuses more on the sound of letters and letter combinations; whereas the Whole-word Approach focuses on whole word meaning. Therefore in the Phonics Approach, the principle is that a student will recognize a word by it's sound and pronunciation; on the other hand in the Whole-word Approach, a student will learn how to identify a word based on predicting the meaning of a word instead of decoding letter-sound correspondences).

For example,

In the Phonics Approach, to learn a new word, each sound of the letter must be first acquired and then combined to produce the sound of the word.
The problem with this is that certain sounds like the /ed/ in past tense verbs will not be pronounced accurately.

In the Whole-word Approach, to learn a new word, words will be recognized in its full form (like a Chinese character) and therefore even if the letters in a word is jumbled up, as long as the first and last letter is in the same position, students are still able to predict the whole word in its actual form.

A phonetic approach breaks down reading into its smallest parts and gradually adds on large peices or parts to form words.The students learns letter-sound relationships and is taught word attack skills in order to decode unfamiliar words as well as spelling rules and generalization of the language.

In my opinion, phonics instruction emphasises direct instruction in letter-sound associations. Researchers suggested into use these associations in reading new and familiar words more effectively if provided systematically and balanced with instruction in both letter-sound associations and letter sequence-rhyme associations. Other than that, phonics instruction may be best delayed until children have developed the necessary vocabulary and skills.

On the other hand, whole language instruction (also known as “literature-based literacy instruction” or “language experience instruction”),emphasises child-centered instruction, teacher empowerment, integration of reading and writing as opposed to direct instruction in isolated skills. Direct instruction in letter-sound associations is not actually necessary for young children to learn letter-sound associations and may not even be appropriate for young children.
A whole language approach seems to be more effective prior to formal reading instruction.

In my opinion based on from what I read, Phonetic reading instruction applies this theory; children are taught to dissect unfamiliar words into parts and then join the parts together to form words. By learning these letter-sound relationships the student is provided with a decoding formula that can be applied whenever they encounter an unfamiliar word.

Whole-word learning is less focused on rules and repetition than is phonics. It stresses the flow and meaning of the text, emphasizing reading for meaning and using language in ways that relate to the students' own lives and cultures. Whole language classrooms tend to teach the process of reading, while the final product becomes secondary. The "sounding out" of words so central to phonics is not used in whole word learning. Instead, children are encouraged to decode each word through its larger context.

The different between this approach is Phonics-based reading programs tend to build better pronunciation and word recognition. The phonics formulas can be applied again and again, and will help a child with spelling far more than the memorization and guesswork of whole language. If only taught phonetically, however, a child may have difficulty understanding the full meaning of a text, due to the constant breaking down of words into parts. Phonics critics also state that the rules and rote learning it entails are stifling and may cause children to develop the attitude that reading is a chore meanwhile whole-word is thought to provide a better understanding of the text, and a more interesting and creative approach to reading. However, whole language learning may come at the expense of accuracy and correctness. A child might be awarded high marks for "overall language use," even if he or she has misspelled many words

When I was learning Mandarin in school, we were taught to read a word by using the Whole-Word approach. This enables us to read the word without actually knowing the meaning. We were then only be taught using the phonics approach. This enables us to understand the meaning of each characters of the phrase.

Discuss your opinion on the differences among the whole-word and phonics/decoding approach. Provide examples

phonics/decoding approach is a process in determining meaning from written form which is taught to small children. children are taught to recognize sounds of the letters and the sounds of combined letters. the ability to speak will help them to utter the sounds then followed by meaning. however, this method might lead a children's attention instead of producing meaningful sounds, he/she will produce meaningless sounds. learning sounds without knowing the meanings will bore the children. it is also a difficult process to a children whom just learnt how to obtain speech as their pronunciations might reach the right sounds or pronunciations of the words taught.

in the other hand, whole word approach is a way of teaching children new words through communication. this is a natural way where parents or someone older will utter the words together with the meaning of the words. the conductor of this process will show the children the meaning of the words by showing them. in this process, children will need to have the ability of memory to identify and memorize the data given to them. this will slowly develops the children's enthusiasm in learning new words as they know the meaning of the words and they know how to pronounce the words properly instead of pronouncing new words without knowing the meanings.

sorry for the late reply, again, i am having problem with my profile

as for me, whole-word learning is far more effective than phonics. whole-word learning focuses more on the meaning of the words whereas phonics focuses more on the letters sound and combination. I think it is easier to learn the meaning and only then learn how to pronounce it in the correct way because not all can process or adapt way to pronounce the words fast;for some, i takes time.
but i believe that using the whole-word and phonics approach for kids would be better as they pick up new words and the sound faster and their memory in language learning is far more better than adult.

Whole language advocates believe that all children will learn to read naturally, just as they learn to talk and walk; that simply immersing children in good books is all that is necessary to produce fluent and capable readers. Phonics advocates, on the other hand, believe that all a child needs to become a fluent reader is a healthy dose of phonics in kindergarten and/or 1st grade, that is, exposure to a sequential and explicit phonics program that teaches the alphabetic code and how it works to represent speech.