Does the focus on phenomena-based learning (PBL) for science parallel the disaster of whole language learning?
In elementary school, whole-language learning was the preferred way to teach kids how to read. I had no phonics instruction. Instead, I sat in groups with other students looking at words and pictures in Dick and Jane books. Our teacher grouped us according to reading ability with different positions corresponding to the cars on a train. There were those in the engine who were the top readers. Behind them were ‘pretty good’ readers in multicolored cars, down the line ending with the struggling readers in the caboose. I was a caboose reader. I hated being in the caboose but honestly, reading mystified me. I was better with math and numbers, which is likely why I chose a career in the sciences when I got older. I finally learned to read, and I love books so much that I started my own publishing company. Still, to this day, I occasionally have difficulty sounding out words and struggle to spell many words correctly.
The whole-language learning movement began in earnest in the early 1970s but goes back as far as the early 1920s with the introduction of progressive education. Progressive education comes from constructivist and holistic philosophical theories(1). Learning happens in a student-driven, student-centered approach in a progressive educational framework. Leading the way for progressive education was John Dewey, a former schoolteacher. Critics of the whole language learning approach, including Noah Webster and Horace Mann, favored phonics and the word method. By the early 1960s, schools essentially went back to phonics, only for the pendulum to swing again in the early 1980s when whole language learning became the favored teaching method for reading.
The bubble recently burst on whole-language learning again with articles denouncing whole-language learning as a solo approach to teaching kids to read. As it turns out, scientific research shows that students don’t just absorb the ability to read by looking at pictures and words but must be formally instructed on how letters fit together to make sounds. In other words, students also need to learn phonics. Whole language learning has a place in helping students learn to read. Rich and varied content that is interesting and engaging is critical for assisting kids in learning to read. Combined with the right amount of phonics instruction, it can provide a much-needed balanced reading approach.
When I look at the educational landscape for science education, I see a similar situation. All the books, standards, and curricular programs focus on the progressive educational method of phenomena-based learning. But research shows that students need more than just observing phenomena and asking questions about them to understand what is happening from a scientific perspective. To build a knowledge base, students need to learn the correct vocabulary for the phenomena they observe. Students also need to have this vocabulary presented to them in the correct sequence and within the proper context to have a scaffold or place to add new terms and concepts that will yield a deeper understanding. It is no service to the student to show them the phenomena of adding two liquids together that bubble, fizz, or explode if they don’t also know the terms atoms, molecules, and chemical reactions. Textbooks, particularly in the elementary grades, further confuse students by avoiding the correct terms or using generic words that won’t make sense in high school or college.
We would do well to learn from history and pay attention to the generations of students who struggled to read because of an educational fad that pushed out more effective methods of teaching students how to read.
(1) The Content Of Science: A Constructive Approach To Its Teaching And Learning by Peter J. Fensham; Richard F. Gunstone; Richard T. White, all of Monash University, Australia. · 2012