Whole Word rarely works. It expects children to memorize words as graphic designs, which is exceedingly difficult to do.

Please note, there is nothing special about our words that makes them easy to memorize. Memorizing 1000 sight-words is comparable to memorizing 1000 paintings, flags, cars, monuments, or movie stars. Indeed, memorizing English sight-words is probably more difficult than memorizing all these other categories of objects.

I'm always trying to think up quick ways to explain this difficulty, especially to young parents. I believe I've got a good one here. As a thought experiment, let's think of the 100 people you know best. We'll put their pictures in a projector and flash them randomly on the screen at one per second. Do you think you will be able to name them at that pace? First names are good enough.

Keep in mind that we're talking about only 100 names; these are the people you know best in the whole world; and presumably there are lots of differences to jar your memory--gender, age, hair color. And one per second is slower than reading speed. But I'll bet you won't be able to name those pictures, no, not even for a minute or two.

Memory is capricious. A person you know can come into the room, and your mind goes blank. You turn to somebody and say, “Uh, you know, that guy in accounting...What's his name?” Happens all the time, right? But during those blank seconds, a lot of pictures flash by.

Now let's suppose it's not your favorite 100 people, it's just 100 people. And you have to memorize their names to the point where you have instant recall of 100 strangers. Doesn't that sound like a tremendous amount of work? But this is basically the task thrown at little children in first grade, when they are shown their first Dolch List.

Do you know what happens? Many children master the material only in a half-baked way, but the teachers pretend the students can “read” and pass them along. Many children just give up, because very quickly it becomes evident to the children that 100 words is only the beginning. The teachers clearly expect this process to go on and on and on.

So now, to put this in the terms of the thought experiment, suppose you have to memorize the names of 500 strangers, then 1,000 strangers... Seriously, do you think you could do this? Ever? Or you would even attempt to do this?

Bottom line, if you have a photographic memory, you might be able to do it. But no ordinary child could. And 1,000 is still only the BEGINNING. Basic literacy in English requires that you know at least 5,000 to 10,000 words.

Do you have some sense now of how hopeless this project is? Even if you could memorize a few hundred names per year, you would still be illiterate all the way through high school!

Meanwhile, children who learn Phonics can read real books in the second and third grades. Phonics is basically a big bag of mnemonic devices to help you recognize what you are looking at. To put it in the terms of our thought experiment, it's as if our photographs have initials in the corner or nicknames or post-it notes. The memory needs all the help it can get.

Whole Word is impractical because it relies 100% on information you can retain indefinitely in your brain. You are always on your own, whether it's a picture of that old friend from high school or a new word such as faradic. You have the names in your brain or you don't. Phonics might be described as user-friendly--there are lots of clues and reminders to help you along. Whole Word is user-hostile. It's a method, I'm convinced, perpetrated by insensitive dummies.

(For a printable chart comparing the claims of the competing methods, please see 37: Whole Word versus Phonics on Improve-Education.org.)