Date: 19 Feb 15
By: Frank Gue, B.Sc., MBA, P.Eng.,
2252 Joyce St.,
It is to tear out one’s hair.
Just one para from today’s post on this subject said:
“Unlike other fields such as medicine or science such disagreements
would quickly be resolved by evidence and proofs of practice and not sink to ideological
quarrels that disrupt standard practice.”
Sadly, not true. One only wishes it were. Witness the inexcusable practice by most of the Main Stream Media (MSM) of actively suppressing good science in favour of junk science. In January, for instance, NASA (no less, and of all people) issued a press release claiming there is “no more doubt” about global warming, citing a tiny increase in global temperatures that is well within the errors of measurement of such things. This press release ignores several basics of statistical science and physics. The Hamilton Spectator (for one) printed the NASA junk science but will not publish an orderly, scientific rebuttal. (Disclaimer: I am not actively for or against global warming hypotheses; I just want them presented using sound science.)
Happens all the time.
Back to phonics and reading:
Despite mountains of evidence in favour of phonics, the so-called “progressives” cling grimly to proven failures. Constructivism, which is at the heart of “progressive” teaching paradigms, has been thoroly discredited by better critics than I. Educators who wish to be educated to that effect can do no better than consult the link below.
Final thought: ” … teaching phonics in University … “??? Let’s see – was it Grade 1 or Grade 2 when I was taught to read using phonics? Grade 1, I think. Can’t remember – it’s back 84 years. University? Saints preserve us – they’re the only ones who can, evidently.
Gotta sweep up that pile of hair ….