Reading Wars: An Overview of the U.S. Educational Policy

Markus Budiraharjo(1*),

(1) Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta
(*) Corresponding Author

Abstract


Educational scholars generally agree that educational policies are inevitably regarded as one of the most contested areas in education. On the one hand, democracy requires more involvement on the part of the citizens. At the most ideal level, democratic mechanisms have been developed to allow more people to more fruitfully participate in decision making. It follows that the political mechanisms would entail better policies, which represent the voices of any people. On the other hand, politics seems to run against this ideal. Policy making is highly convoluted with economy and political trade-offs. Drawing on debates over the phonic vs. whole-language policies in the U.S. in the past four or five decades, this paper sets to discuss the complexity of politics and language policy. A growing awareness of the complexity of politics and policy making is certainly a pressing need for those working in the area of English Education.

Keywords


reading wars, English education, policy, politics, phonic-based instruction, whole-language, No Child Left Behind Act

Full Text:

PDF

References


Allington, R.L. (2009). Literacy policies that are needed thinking beyond No Child Left Behind. In J.V. Hoffman & Y. Goodman (Eds.), Changing literacies for changing times: An historical perspective (pp. 266-280). NY: Routledge.

Apple, M. (1979). Curriculum and reproduction. Curriculum Inquiry, 9 (3), 231-252.

Apple, W. (2009). Is there a place for education in social transformation? In H.S. Shapiro (Ed.), Education and hope in troubled times: Vision of change for our children's world (pp. 29-46). New York: Routledge.

Baines, L., & Foster, H. (2006). A school for the common good. Educational Horizons, 84(4), 221-228.

Borden, L.M., Stone, M., & Villarruel, F.A. (2004). Public policy and human development. Encyclopedia of Applied Developmental Science. SAGE Publications. Retrieved June 29, 2011 from http://www.sage-ereference.com/view/applieddevscience/n345.xml.

Chall, J.S. (1989). "Learning to read: The great debate" 20 years later: A response to 'Debunking the great phonics myth.' The Phi Delta Kappan, 70(7), 521-538.

Coles, G. (2001). Reading to read -"scientifically". Rethinking Schools Online, 15(4). Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.rethinking schools.org/archive/15_04/Read154.shtml

Costa, A.L. & Kallick, B. (2010). Getting used to: Rethinking curriculum for the 21st century. In H.H. Jacobs, Curriculum 21: Essential education for a changing world (pp. 210-226). Alexandria, VA: ASCD.

Diamond, J.B. (2007). Where the rubber meets the road: Rethinking the connection between high-stakes testing and classroom instruction. Sociology of Education, 80(4), 285-313.

Eldesky, C. (1990). Whose agenda is this anyway? A response to McKenna, Robinson, and Miller. Educational Researcher, 19(8), 7-11. Fowler, F.C. (2006). Struggling with theory: A beginning scholar's experience with Mazzoni's arena models. In V.A. Anfara & N.T. Mertz (Eds.) Theoretical frameworks in qualitative research (pp. 39-58). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publication.

Fullan, M. (1999). Change forces: The sequel. Philadelphia: Falmer Press. Fullan, M. (2001). Leading in a culture of change. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.

Garan, E.M. (2001). Beyond the smoke and mirrors: A critique of the National Reading Panel Report on phonics. Phi Delta Kappan, 500-506. Goodman, K.S. (1989). Whole-language research: Foundations and development. The Elementary School Journal, 90(2), 207-221.

Goodman, Y.M. (1989). Roots of the whole-language movement. The Elementary School Journal, 90(2), 113-127.

Harrison, C. (2010). Why do policy-makers find the simple view of reading so attractive, and why do I find it so morally repugnant? In K. Hall, U. Goswami, C. Harrison, & J.S. Soler (Eds.), Interdisciplinary perspectives on learning to read: Cognition, culture and pedagogy (pp. 207-218). New York: Routledge.

Hess, F. (2006). Tough love for schools: Essays on competition, accountability and excellence. Washington, DC: American Enterprise Institute.

Hess, F.M., & Petrilli, M.J. (2006). No Child Left Behind Primer. New York: Peter Lang.

Kincheloe, J. (1991). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. Bristol, PA: The Falmer Press, Taylor & Francis Inc.

McNeil, J.D. (2009). Contemporary curriculum: In thought and action (6th Ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.

Meyer, R.J. (2003). Captives of the script - killing us softly with phonics: A critical analysis demonstrates that scripted phonics programs hold students and teachers as curriculum hostages. Rethinking Schools Online, 17(4). Retrieved October 8, 2011 from http://www.rethinkingschools.org/archive/17_04/capt174.shtml Moorman, G.B., Blanton, W.E., & McLaughlin, T. (1994). The rhetoric of whole language. Reading Research Quarterly, 29(4), 308-329.

National Reading Panel. (2000). Teaching children to read: An evidence-based assessment of the scientific research literature on reading and its implications for reading instructions, reports of the subgroups. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Retrieved September 20, 2011 from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publica nrp/upload/report.pdf

No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Title I: Improving the Academic Achievement of the Disadvantaged. (2001). Washington DC: National Clearinghouse for Bilingual Education, George Washington University. Palmer, P. J. (1998). The courage to teach. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass. Pearson, P.D. (1989). Reading the whole-language movement. The Elementary School Journal, 90(2), 230-241.

Pearson, P. D. (2004). The reading wars. Educational Policy,18(1), 216-252.

Perlstein, L. (2008). Tested: One American school struggles to make the grade. New York: Holt.

Shaker, P. (2008). Education, policy and politics. Encyclopedia of Social Problems. Sage Publications. Retrieved June 29, 2011 from . Shannon, P. (2007). Reading against democracy: The broken promises of reading instruction. Portsmouth: Heinemann.

Shannon, P., Edmonson, J., Ortega, L., Pitcher, S., & Robbins, C. (2009). Fifty years of Federal Government involvement in reading education. In J.V. Hoffman & Y. Goodman (Eds.), Changing literacies for changing times: An historical perspective (pp. 251-265). NY: Routledge.

Slavin, R.E., & Cheung, A. (2005). A synthesis of research on language of reading instruction for English language learners. Review of Educational Research, 75(2), 247-284.

Smith, F. (1992). Learning to read: The never-ending debate. The Phi Delta Kappan, 73(6), 432-435, 438-441.

Sunderman, G. L. (2006). The unraveling of No Child Left Behind: How negotiated changes transform the law. Cambridge, MA: The Civil Rights Project at Harvard University.

Taubman, P.M. (2009). Teaching by numbers: Deconstructing the discourse of standards and accountability in education. New York: Taylor and Francis.

Wilson, S.M., & Tamir, E. (2008). The evolving field of teacher education: How understanding challenge(r)s might improve the preparation of teachers. In M. Cochran-Smith, S. Feinman-Nemser, D.J. McIntyre, & K. Demers (Eds.), Handbook of research on teacher education (3rd ed. pp. 908-935). New York: Association of Teacher Education.

Yatvin, L. (2000). Minority view. In 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. Rockville, MD: National Institute of Child Health and Human Development. Retrieved September 20, 2011 from http://www.nichd.nih.gov/publications/nrp/upload/report.pdf




DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt.v15i1.314

Refbacks

  • There are currently no refbacks.


Copyright (c) 2017 Markus Budiraharjo



Indexed and abstracted in:

     

 

 

LLT Journal Sinta 2 Certificate (S2 = Level 2)

We would like to inform you that LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching has been nationally accredited Sinta 2 by the Ministry of Education, Culture, Research and Technology of the Republic of Indonesia based on the decree  No. Surat Keputusan 158/E/KPT/2021. Validity for 5 years: Vol 23 No 1, 2020 till Vol 27 No 2, 2024

  

 

This work is licensed under CC BY-SA.

Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 4.0 International License

 

Free counters!


 LLT Journal: A Journal on Language and Language Teaching, DOI: https://doi.org/10.24071/llt, e-ISSN 2579-9533 and p-ISSN 1410-7201, is published twice a year, namely in April and October by the English Language Education Study Programme of Teacher Training and Education Faculty of Sanata Dharma University, Yogyakarta, Indonesia.