It’s amazing to me that a pedagogical ideology would obscure awareness of opportunities to teach and learn. If it were theory, it would be pliable to some degree. This SoR stuff is not good for teaching readers, eh?
Yes, maybe not so scientific... Even the most ardent SOR advocates seem to at least acknowledge the other influences. But, as you note, they obscure these possibilities.
They do acknowledge them. The problem is the firewalls they construct. They were talking about Beck’s model of vocabulary, prior knowledge but when the rubber hits the road the only defensible pedagogy demands that kids run every single word through the phonological loop before they can access any other source (cueing systems, semantic systems, long term working memory).
I appreciate how you would approach the reader situation, Terry. Start with where students are in interest, background knowledge, etc.
It’s amazing to me that a pedagogical ideology would obscure awareness of opportunities to teach and learn. If it were theory, it would be pliable to some degree. This SoR stuff is not good for teaching readers, eh?
Yes, maybe not so scientific... Even the most ardent SOR advocates seem to at least acknowledge the other influences. But, as you note, they obscure these possibilities.
They do acknowledge them. The problem is the firewalls they construct. They were talking about Beck’s model of vocabulary, prior knowledge but when the rubber hits the road the only defensible pedagogy demands that kids run every single word through the phonological loop before they can access any other source (cueing systems, semantic systems, long term working memory).