(about 90 percent) were in favor of systematic phonics and against theprevailing "look and say" method, which they considered harmful.Following is one quote from this study that is of particular significance:"First, as a matter of routine practice, we need to include systematic, code-oriented instruction in the primary grades, no matter what else is also done. This is theonly place in which we have any clear evidence for any particular practice."In 1983, Harvard professor Jeanne Chall reaffirmed her previous research findings and recommended that teacher training be changed to require the teaching ofintensive, systematic phonics, essentially the same approach that had been used successfully before the "look and say" method was introduced.In 1985, the U.S. Department of Education released a report prepared by the Commission on Reading titled "Becoming a Nation of Readers," which once againconfirmed the obvious:"Classroom research shows that, on the average, children who are taught phonics get off to a better start in learning to read than children who are not taughtphonics. . . . The picture that emerges from the research is that phonics facilitates word identification and that fast, accurate word identification is a necessary butnot sufficient condition for comprehension. . . . Thus, the issue is no longer, as it was several decades ago, whether children should be taught phonics. The issuesnow are specific ones of just how it should be done."In 1991 another major study was released by the Center for the Study of Reading at the University of Illinois, titled "Beginning to Read: Thinking and Learningabout Print: A Summary," by Marilyn Jager Adams. This study is of particular interest to teachers, because it once again reaffirms the need to teach the Englishlanguage as a system, and suggests that well-developed concepts about the form and function of print, including rapid recognition of letters, awareness of soundsin spoken words, and ric...
