1,000 Words

If a picture is worth 1,000 words, what are 1,000 words worth?

What if some of them are nonsense?

What if some of them are lies?

The Wilson Reading System is coming out with the 4th edition of its lucrative 12-level scripted product.

Morphologeeze

Here are some pictures of what Wilson has made publicly available, annotated.

 

Because I have no more words.

We can do better than this.

We must.

14 Comments

  1. shawnamay says:

    I can’t believe the number of errors! And they are not minor ones, but errors that will cause a lot of confusion.

    • Yup. Because the Wilsons aren’t endeavoring to study, understand, and present accurate information about the language.

      They’re looking to ride their cash cow all the way to Morphology Town.

      Mark my words: their next edition in a few years will be all about etymology, which will be, by then, all the rage in those circles.

      • Barbara Wilson has been trailing my work for years, though she won’t admit it. Many of her trainers have come to my workshops; I have even been hired by Wilson Partner Schools and that’s stirred the poop pot. I’m quite confident that you didn’t show them word sums with equals signs or represent base elements with hyphens on both ends or pretend like kids have to learn all of the “letter-sounds” before they can study morphology.

        This has been going on in Dyslexia Industry circles for years. I’ve seen IDA presentations and materials where people claim they “do word sums” or “do morphology” only to present *tion or equals signs or other baloney.

  2. KSH says:

    This definitely bothers me. It feels quick and dirty, like an add-on solely to jump on the morphology train. The Wilsons came to one of our presentations last year and I hope they didn’t get these ideas there…

  3. Traci says:

    Ha! I will check it out. I only get calls for Orton here;)

    Sent from my iPhone

    >

  4. Gretchen says:

    I wish I could read your comments in purple. I use a similar O-G program with the same phonograms. I’d like to understand your concerns, so that I can consider how/what I need to adjust in order to make my own teaching more correct. G

    • If you click on each photo, you can see it larger. Also, use an actual computer instead of a phone. If you still can’t see it on a computer, then enlarge your screen view.

      The word “phonogram” is not really a thing. It’s not a linguistic term, not scientific. It’s just a an uttered thing recorded in some way. It could be a word. It could be a recording. It could be a grapheme or a syllable or a rime. It’s very confused.

      All OG-based / phonics programs are phull of phonological phalsehoods. But hey — you are in luck! If you’d “like to understand [my] concerns,” there is a whole 8 years of writing here on this website for you to read through. I have explained my concerns over and over and over! The understanding is yours for the taking, free of charge — so get reading.

  5. The lexical amputees one is extra sad.

  6. shawnamay says:

    Gretchen, LEX also has an intro class to SWI that will build your understanding! Just wait, it is a revealing journey.

  7. chefmom98 says:

    I want to teach my 5 year old nephew to read. Suggestions?

  8. Wendy lesoski says:

    Thank you for teaching and clarifying and “calling out” the errors! Your work and passion are appreciated by so many!!

  9. Jasmine says:

    I love the comparison with your comments pointing out the truths.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *