Thursday, November 30, 2006
Standing up for standards?
For some time now conservative commentators and politicians have been arguing that there is a literacy crisis in this country. Claims of falling standards have been widespread. With regards to the teaching of reading, the argument that there needs to be a renewed focus on phonics has been put forward. The Australian newspaper, in particular, has been very vocal in support of this argument. This recent opinion piece, for example, was supported by an approving editorial. Its author also approvingly refers to another commentator, who regularly writes for the newspaper.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20735845-13881,00.html
Support for an extreme phonics based approach in this country has come despite increasing evidence from the US which shows that students drilled in phonics are not learning to effectively comprehend what they read as they move into high school, and are not well equipped to cope with extended texts and content area reading.
http://www.carnegie.org/results/10/
The OECD PISA results confirm that Australian 15 year olds are achieving higher reading comprehension test scores than their US counterparts.
All of this makes what follows a laughable but timely cautionary tale.
Last Saturday, I submitted to The Australian the following letter to the editor. This was written in response to the suggestion made in that day's editorial that the Australian arm of the US publishing giant Scholastics is left-leaning in its policies and practices.
Saturday’s editorial on censorship left me alarmed. It appears that the long march of the left through our cultural institutions has extended to Scholastic, the world’s largest publisher of children’s books.
This multinational has a corporate mission to help children around the world to read and learn. But parents and teachers should be alert to the dangerous, left-leaning propaganda it is pedalling. Two titles given prominence on the corporation’s US web site give the game away: ‘Clifford the Big Red Dog’ and ‘I Spy’. And could that be a stick of gelignite ‘Captain Underpants’ has down the front of his jocks?
I was beginning to think that the editor’s criticisms of the ‘soft left’ were beginning to verge on the paranoiac. Not now. Where do I enlist for the culture wars?
This is what was published on the following Monday:
Your editorial on censorship left me alarmed. It appears that the long march of the Left through our cultural institutions has extended to Scholastic.
This multinational has a corporate mission to help children around the world to read and learn. But parents and teachers should be alert to the dangerous, Left-leaning views inherent in the publishing world.
I raised the issue of my argument being entirely altered in the editing process with the letters editor on the Monday. (It must be said that he had not been working over the weekend.) I received the following reply:
You are quite right (How the tone of yr letter was so completely misread puzzles me, to say the least).
I'm happy to publish a clarifing letter tomorrow. I can compose something and send it to you for your approval or you can send something to me. Whichever suits
Regards and apologies
To its credit, The Australian did publish a clarifying letter (but not an apology).
There is a clear message here about the place of comprehension in the reading process. Reading is so much more than word recognition and the blending of sounds.
There is probably also a parable to be found about having your own house in order before you start talking about falling standards elsewhere.
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20735845-13881,00.html
Support for an extreme phonics based approach in this country has come despite increasing evidence from the US which shows that students drilled in phonics are not learning to effectively comprehend what they read as they move into high school, and are not well equipped to cope with extended texts and content area reading.
http://www.carnegie.org/results/10/
The OECD PISA results confirm that Australian 15 year olds are achieving higher reading comprehension test scores than their US counterparts.
All of this makes what follows a laughable but timely cautionary tale.
Last Saturday, I submitted to The Australian the following letter to the editor. This was written in response to the suggestion made in that day's editorial that the Australian arm of the US publishing giant Scholastics is left-leaning in its policies and practices.
Saturday’s editorial on censorship left me alarmed. It appears that the long march of the left through our cultural institutions has extended to Scholastic, the world’s largest publisher of children’s books.
This multinational has a corporate mission to help children around the world to read and learn. But parents and teachers should be alert to the dangerous, left-leaning propaganda it is pedalling. Two titles given prominence on the corporation’s US web site give the game away: ‘Clifford the Big Red Dog’ and ‘I Spy’. And could that be a stick of gelignite ‘Captain Underpants’ has down the front of his jocks?
I was beginning to think that the editor’s criticisms of the ‘soft left’ were beginning to verge on the paranoiac. Not now. Where do I enlist for the culture wars?
This is what was published on the following Monday:
Your editorial on censorship left me alarmed. It appears that the long march of the Left through our cultural institutions has extended to Scholastic.
This multinational has a corporate mission to help children around the world to read and learn. But parents and teachers should be alert to the dangerous, Left-leaning views inherent in the publishing world.
I raised the issue of my argument being entirely altered in the editing process with the letters editor on the Monday. (It must be said that he had not been working over the weekend.) I received the following reply:
You are quite right (How the tone of yr letter was so completely misread puzzles me, to say the least).
I'm happy to publish a clarifing letter tomorrow. I can compose something and send it to you for your approval or you can send something to me. Whichever suits
Regards and apologies
To its credit, The Australian did publish a clarifying letter (but not an apology).
There is a clear message here about the place of comprehension in the reading process. Reading is so much more than word recognition and the blending of sounds.
There is probably also a parable to be found about having your own house in order before you start talking about falling standards elsewhere.
Saturday, November 25, 2006
Clifford: a big, RED dog?
If readers of editorials published in The Australian throughout 2006 still need any convincing of the all-pervasive cultural influence of the soft-left in this country, then today's editorial should decide matters for them. Apparently, the major international educational publisher Scholastic pursues a left-leaning publishing policy, and is soft on terror:
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20816387-7583,00.html
This editorial has left me alert and alarmed. It ineluctably establishes that the long march of the left through our cultural institutions has extended to the Australian arm of the world’s largest publisher of children’s books.
This multinational has a corporate mission to help children around the world to read and learn. But parents and teachers should be alert to the dangerous, left-leaning propaganda it is pedalling. Two titles given prominence on the corporation’s US web site give the game away: ‘Clifford the Big Red Dog’ and ‘I Spy’. And could that be a stick of gelignite ‘Captain Underpants’ has down the front of his jocks?
I was beginning to think that criticisms in The Australian of the ‘soft left’ were beginning to echo 'reds-under-the bed', cold war style paranoia. Not now. Where do I enlist for the culture wars?
http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20816387-7583,00.html
This editorial has left me alert and alarmed. It ineluctably establishes that the long march of the left through our cultural institutions has extended to the Australian arm of the world’s largest publisher of children’s books.
This multinational has a corporate mission to help children around the world to read and learn. But parents and teachers should be alert to the dangerous, left-leaning propaganda it is pedalling. Two titles given prominence on the corporation’s US web site give the game away: ‘Clifford the Big Red Dog’ and ‘I Spy’. And could that be a stick of gelignite ‘Captain Underpants’ has down the front of his jocks?
I was beginning to think that criticisms in The Australian of the ‘soft left’ were beginning to echo 'reds-under-the bed', cold war style paranoia. Not now. Where do I enlist for the culture wars?
Sunday, November 19, 2006
Just who are you calling airhead?
The problem with catch-phrases is that while they are attention-grabbing, they can quickly turn around and bite you on the bum. I am thinking here of the fun punsters have had on the front of t-shirts with the Nike ‘Just Do It!’ slogan, or the ironies some Australian comedians have found in the advertising slogans state governments have dreamed up to promote the attractions of their particular part of the country.
A week or so ago, The Australian gave space over to an extract from a new book by a former deputy editor, Shelley Gare. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20876,20735845-28737,00.html
Gare’s book is called The Triumph of the Airheads - and the Retreat from Commonsense. In the extract she pushes a familiar line, decrying the influence on education of poststructuralist deconstruction, postmodernism and constructivism. The usual sweeping generalisations are made: standards are lower today, grammar is no longer taught, kids can’t spell…. and so on, ad infinitum.
Gare reserves the soubriquet ‘airheads’ for those who ascribe to these theories. These deluded individuals, she suggests, are the enemies of ‘common sense’.
But is this not a case of the pot calling the kettle black?
As with much educational commentary in this country in recent times, Gare tends to offer anecdote as verifiable proof of a larger social trend. Where data exists, for example the PISA results relating to the reading comprehension of 15 year olds, she criticises the test instrument for not doing what it was never set up to do (ie test spelling and grammar). This is a line that The Australian has been running for some time: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20658123-2702,00.html
I am not sure when ‘informed commentary’ became a synonym for vacuity in this country’s media. However, in the spirit of post-modern ‘playfulness’, something which well and truly gets Ms Gare’s back up, I am willing to fit with the times, embrace the trend and give it a go myself.
Here are two short pieces about subjects that have recently been on my mind.
Venerable Educational Institutions Have Failed the Elite
Talking to a German newspaper reporter earlier this year, the leader of the free world, Harvard educated President George W. Bush says, "The point now is how do we work together to achieve important goals. And one such goal is a democracy in Germany.”
Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who graduated from the University of Sydney with a Bachelor of Laws, slides into postmodernist relativism and declares that a promise can be either ‘core’ or ‘non-core’.
Leader of the Opposition in the Australian parliament, Kim Beazley, a product of Oxford University, confuses Karl Rove with Australian television personality Rove McManus.
Prominent international socialite Paris Hilton, who attended the ultra-exclusive Dwight School in the US, explains that French is the only language spoken in Europe.
Eton educated Prince Harry wears a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party for a lark.
Do you see the trend?
Throughout the western world, prestigious educational institutions, many charging exorbitant fees, have been producing generations of ignorant, insensitive and hapless clowns.
One can only ponder how things might otherwise have been for these poor individuals if they had been exposed to the rigours of a spell in an under funded state high school or regional redbrick university.
Action is needed, and it is needed urgently. Let us not forget the fall of Rome and the collapse of the Ancien Regime in France. We ignore the lessons of history at our peril.
I say bulldoze the ivy clad institutions responsible for the intellectual decline of our social betters.
What is needed is a voucher system that would give the rich and powerful access to a decent, state funded education. Market forces alone have clearly failed to ensure that some of our oldest and most prestigious institutions provide a high standard education.
OUTRAGE AS OECD TEST EQUATES LITERACY WITH COMPREHENSION
Deluded educators who have suggested that Australian students are amongst the most literate in the world have been discredited by incisive criticisms of the OECD PISA reading test.
The much vaunted claim that Australian students are amongst the most literate in the world has been cast into doubt by the shocking revelation that this test ignores the fundamentals of spelling, and instead promotes the lunatic idea that reading comprehension is a necessary skill for success in life.
The idea that reading comprehension, understanding written texts and applying that knowledge, is important has been dismissed by journalists as modish faddism- a ‘new age life skill’. It is a significant ‘failure’ on the part of the PISA test that it ‘does not examine the correct use of language’.
At the time of writing, it was yet to be revealed how a test that is run in 40 different countries and in a number of different languages could assess correct spelling.
The fact that Italian, for example, has about 45 different letter-sound combinations, and Spanish even fewer, while English has over 300, has been dismissed as post-modern relativism, designed to discredit the international standing of the English language.
What do Australian educators have to hide when they suggest, as one did at a recent conference of English teachers, that past a certain level, Italian and Spanish schoolchildren rarely make spelling mistakes, while in English some remarkably intelligent people, who on every other measure are highly literate, remain poor spellers?
Pointing out that many renowned authors, including Jane Austen, Charles Darwin Robert Lowell and Scott Fitzgerald, have been poor spellers is mere humbuggery.
Spelling by itself can, and should be, taken as a measure of literacy. Constructivist approaches that let our children be creative in their spelling need to be replaced by historically proven methods, such as drilling in word lists.
Australia does not need children who can think about, understand, evaluate and apply what they read. The future prosperity and security of this proud nation rests on a citizenry which can recite what it has been told to recite.
A week or so ago, The Australian gave space over to an extract from a new book by a former deputy editor, Shelley Gare. http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20876,20735845-28737,00.html
Gare’s book is called The Triumph of the Airheads - and the Retreat from Commonsense. In the extract she pushes a familiar line, decrying the influence on education of poststructuralist deconstruction, postmodernism and constructivism. The usual sweeping generalisations are made: standards are lower today, grammar is no longer taught, kids can’t spell…. and so on, ad infinitum.
Gare reserves the soubriquet ‘airheads’ for those who ascribe to these theories. These deluded individuals, she suggests, are the enemies of ‘common sense’.
But is this not a case of the pot calling the kettle black?
As with much educational commentary in this country in recent times, Gare tends to offer anecdote as verifiable proof of a larger social trend. Where data exists, for example the PISA results relating to the reading comprehension of 15 year olds, she criticises the test instrument for not doing what it was never set up to do (ie test spelling and grammar). This is a line that The Australian has been running for some time: http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/story/0,20867,20658123-2702,00.html
I am not sure when ‘informed commentary’ became a synonym for vacuity in this country’s media. However, in the spirit of post-modern ‘playfulness’, something which well and truly gets Ms Gare’s back up, I am willing to fit with the times, embrace the trend and give it a go myself.
Here are two short pieces about subjects that have recently been on my mind.
Venerable Educational Institutions Have Failed the Elite
Talking to a German newspaper reporter earlier this year, the leader of the free world, Harvard educated President George W. Bush says, "The point now is how do we work together to achieve important goals. And one such goal is a democracy in Germany.”
Australian Prime Minister John Howard, who graduated from the University of Sydney with a Bachelor of Laws, slides into postmodernist relativism and declares that a promise can be either ‘core’ or ‘non-core’.
Leader of the Opposition in the Australian parliament, Kim Beazley, a product of Oxford University, confuses Karl Rove with Australian television personality Rove McManus.
Prominent international socialite Paris Hilton, who attended the ultra-exclusive Dwight School in the US, explains that French is the only language spoken in Europe.
Eton educated Prince Harry wears a Nazi uniform to a fancy dress party for a lark.
Do you see the trend?
Throughout the western world, prestigious educational institutions, many charging exorbitant fees, have been producing generations of ignorant, insensitive and hapless clowns.
One can only ponder how things might otherwise have been for these poor individuals if they had been exposed to the rigours of a spell in an under funded state high school or regional redbrick university.
Action is needed, and it is needed urgently. Let us not forget the fall of Rome and the collapse of the Ancien Regime in France. We ignore the lessons of history at our peril.
I say bulldoze the ivy clad institutions responsible for the intellectual decline of our social betters.
What is needed is a voucher system that would give the rich and powerful access to a decent, state funded education. Market forces alone have clearly failed to ensure that some of our oldest and most prestigious institutions provide a high standard education.
OUTRAGE AS OECD TEST EQUATES LITERACY WITH COMPREHENSION
Deluded educators who have suggested that Australian students are amongst the most literate in the world have been discredited by incisive criticisms of the OECD PISA reading test.
The much vaunted claim that Australian students are amongst the most literate in the world has been cast into doubt by the shocking revelation that this test ignores the fundamentals of spelling, and instead promotes the lunatic idea that reading comprehension is a necessary skill for success in life.
The idea that reading comprehension, understanding written texts and applying that knowledge, is important has been dismissed by journalists as modish faddism- a ‘new age life skill’. It is a significant ‘failure’ on the part of the PISA test that it ‘does not examine the correct use of language’.
At the time of writing, it was yet to be revealed how a test that is run in 40 different countries and in a number of different languages could assess correct spelling.
The fact that Italian, for example, has about 45 different letter-sound combinations, and Spanish even fewer, while English has over 300, has been dismissed as post-modern relativism, designed to discredit the international standing of the English language.
What do Australian educators have to hide when they suggest, as one did at a recent conference of English teachers, that past a certain level, Italian and Spanish schoolchildren rarely make spelling mistakes, while in English some remarkably intelligent people, who on every other measure are highly literate, remain poor spellers?
Pointing out that many renowned authors, including Jane Austen, Charles Darwin Robert Lowell and Scott Fitzgerald, have been poor spellers is mere humbuggery.
Spelling by itself can, and should be, taken as a measure of literacy. Constructivist approaches that let our children be creative in their spelling need to be replaced by historically proven methods, such as drilling in word lists.
Australia does not need children who can think about, understand, evaluate and apply what they read. The future prosperity and security of this proud nation rests on a citizenry which can recite what it has been told to recite.
