The Jury Is Still Out on the Effects of Whole Language and Language Experience Approaches for Beginning Reading: A Critique of Stahl and Miller's Study

attempted to compare the effectiveness of whole language/language experience with that of basal reader approaches. Because longitudinal data (i.e., third grade and beyond) were not included in the study, however, the significance of the small differences found is unknown. Stahl and Miller also go beyond their data or fail to exploit it for alternative interpretations. Finally, they fail to discuss the broad goals of whole language approaches, which include not only the development of reading but the development of writing. Critique of Conclusions and Data Analyses Stahl and Miller's conclusion that whole language/language experience programs are more effective in kindergarten than in first grade is misleading. In the readiness level comparisons, 17 were in favor of whole language/language experience pro-grams, 2 were in favor of basal reader programs, and 14 were nonsignificant. At the first-grade level, 13 comparisons favored basal reader programs, 9 favored whole language/language experience programs, and 43 were nonsignificant. A difference of 4 instances surely was not significant, and in fact no significance level wa