Michael Paul Goldenberg wrote: > >As I've suggested here previously, the problem with the "back to basics" >mentality is its inability to adequately determine just how FAR BACK we >need to go.
I suggest we seriously consider "The Horn Book". If is was good enough for the colonists it is good enough for todays kids ;-)
The problem with "back to basics" is it is usually led by people who know nothing about the current strategies, and are unable to articulate what "the basics" are.
Who's basics? What is so basic about them? Is there evidence that more that one fourth of the fourth grade students could read at grade level when they were taught this way? What is reading at "grade level"?
This is true for math, language arts, and any other curriculum area that strives to renew itself.