Christophe Grandsire scripsit:

> You are the one who claimed top-down methods were the best to teach everyone
> spelling.

Not at all!  I claimed they were a workable method of teaching writing, at least
when properly applied, and I certainly never meant anything I said (except for
the remarks about Friere) to extend past English/U.S.

> Your only argument in favour of the top-down method, that it works with adults,
> is already weakened by the fact that it's proven that children and adults have
> completely different approaches to learning,

"Different" is not "completely different".  My real argument is against
over-generalizing, not for or against any specific result.
I am not against rote learning for children, nor against systematic teaching
of particular points.  I do think that people, children or adults, learn better
when the subject-matter is connected to their concerns.

> Do you have any interest in raising the level of illiteracy among
> American children?

Certainly not.  Illiteracy is a huge social cost.  For example, it
prevents one from enjoying such .sigs as the one attached to this message.

Her he asked if O'Hare Doctor tidings sent from far     John Cowan
coast and she with grameful sigh him answered that
O'Hare Doctor in heaven was. Sad was the man that word
to hear that him so heavied in bowels ruthful. All      [log in to unmask]
she there told him, ruing death for friend so young,
algate sore unwilling God's rightwiseness to withsay.   _Ulysses_, "Oxen"