trisher
In response to your oh so familiar and unscientific defence of 'whole words' , and the old and erroneous chestnuts about 'phonics' I would suggest that you read 'Reading in the Brain' by Stanislaus Dehane. Not a teacher at all, but a nueroscientist who set out to examine the 'reading mechanism' in the brain.
A bit of familiarity with eye movement research would help, too.
I've been debating 'phonics' for nearly 20 years now and nothing you can say or recommend to read is unfamiliar to me!
according to your theory all children in all schools should now be reading at a really good level, but they aren't, currently a substantial number of people have the literacy level of below 11 years. It is over 20 years since the first phonics programme was introduced into schools, so there should be some evidence of its effect.
Phonics is much older than whole word, you know. Whole word learning was developed in the 19th C for teaching deaf children to read because they couldn't 'hear' the discrete phonemes in words. It's so odd that teachers cling fiercely to its methods!
It is also much longer than 20 years ago that the first phonics programmes were reintroduced in schools. Jolly Phonics was around in the 1980s. However. Just because programmes existed it doesn't mean that they were used. As an ex teacher you should be well aware of that.
And the National Literacy Strategy from the late 90s, which was supposed to inform all teaching of 'literacy,' completely marginalised phonics teaching in favour of whole word/look and say. Any so called 'phonics' in it was completely dire.
Even with the mandating of structured phonics instruction for the teaching of reading by the tories in 2012 the fact that teachers are not properly trained in it, with so few unis doing it properly and so many unis staffed by phonics sceptics and denialists, it's not surprising that materials, such as GG13s 'barth' idiocy are common and that some children still don't get a full and proper understanding of how to read and spell the written word.
When you refer to 'people' having a level of below 11 years you fail to tell me what age group you're referring to. I think it might be better to reserve judgement until the 2012+ generation are being studied, post education...
Most adults below the age of 50 were recipients of the Whole Word, or mixed methods mode of teaching reading. They have a high level of illiteracy.