What is the highest reading level in your kindergarten class?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has been almost 40 years so I do not recall the highest level of reading in my kindergarten class.

I can tell you that I was so excited to be a reader so I could go into Mrs.Small's class with the Raggedy Ann curtains for reading time, instead of Mrs. Higginbotham's class with the non readers or the other teacher where the kids who didn't know their letters went.

Mrs. Small was the only teacher with Raggedy Ann curtains, and I was so sad to have Mrs. Higginbotham for my main teacher because she had boring decorations in her room like Sesame Street which was for babies.

My most vivid and best memory of kindergarten was the day I was sent to Mrs. Small's Raggedy Ann room for reading time.

Well, that and the day is was my turn to turn the projector for the Curious George movie and the day Mrs. Higginbotham taught us to make a swan out of the number two and a lion out of the number five during math class.

They trump the one bad memory of my first day of school when Mrs. Higginbotham accidentally put me in the walker line when I was supposed to ride the bus home.

I tested as a highly gifted child from a very well regarded pediatric neurologist, and those are the only lasting memories I have from kindergarten.

Translation, Larla will be okay no matter how high the reading groups go in kindergarten.

Really and truly.

I love you. Let's be friends. Also, can you teach me to make a lion out of the number 5?

Yes please! I can picture the #2 swan but can't figure out the #5 lion.
Please don't leave us hanging!

[Anonymous]

Im on reading level S.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP here...i pulled my old notes out from a class i took and (if i can read my handwriting) see that there was a study that said that differences in early literacy abilities did not distinguish reading ability by second grade.

Don't have my book to look it up...

So your notes say all students read exactly the same from 2nd grade until forever? I'd ask for a tuition refund.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

My child was not reading at all, 2 of her friends were reading full novels more typical for 4th/5th/6th grade. Now in middle school she reading fluently and her comprehension is as good or better than the early reading peers. Some kids struggle more with comprehension, she might not be typical, but in any of the early years classes there is a wide span of reading level. Many bright kids who become academically successful might not be the most advanced reader in the first couple of years. Some advanced readers seem to be aided by reading below their level to work on some things. (how to decipher totally unfamiliar words they'll encounter in more complex material, especially technical nonfiction, reading slightly simpler books to work on comprehension, plot, character, etc. Some of those issues seem easier to grasp taking a step down in level.)

As a K and first grade teacher, I observed that the really early readers often struggled with comprehension. I think it was a result of being pushed to decipher letters.

FOrmer teacher, too: It's also because at 6 years old they are not developmentally ready to read for understanding 10 year old situations. They may be able to read higher level vocabulary, but they have no clue of the meaning.

That is a problem with book selection.

[Anonymous]

I saw this thread pop up and vaguely remembered it. Turns out I posted 3 years ago about DD in kindergarten. She was the 5yo that really enjoyed reading. She is now 8. We moved, and after testing she was placed in 4th grade and does literacy with 5th grade. She still loves reading. She wakes up early in the morning so she can read before school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Funny, the teacher didn't tell me how the other kids were doing.

This. I was more focused on my own kid.

[Anonymous]

Bottom line -- kindergarten reading level means almost nothing.

Absolutely true.

Former K and First grade teacher and parent.

Even reading level in the Fall of first grade means little. Back in the day, I taught many kids who were not reading until January. Some ended up in the top group by May. What is important? That the kids understand the world around them. Reading means nothing if you cannot comprehend what you are reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Bottom line -- kindergarten reading level means almost nothing.

Absolutely true.

Former K and First grade teacher and parent.

Even reading level in the Fall of first grade means little. Back in the day, I taught many kids who were not reading until January. Some ended up in the top group by May. What is important? That the kids understand the world around them. Reading means nothing if you cannot comprehend what you are reading.

I am not sure it means nothing. The top reading kids (who started reading when they were 3 to 4) in my son's class are still the top reading kids now they are 8.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Bottom line -- kindergarten reading level means almost nothing.

Absolutely true.

Former K and First grade teacher and parent.

Even reading level in the Fall of first grade means little. Back in the day, I taught many kids who were not reading until January. Some ended up in the top group by May. What is important? That the kids understand the world around them. Reading means nothing if you cannot comprehend what you are reading.

I am not sure it means nothing. The top reading kids (who started reading when they were 3 to 4) in my son's class are still the top reading kids now they are 8.

I believe that. But I doubt that they are the *only* kids in the top reading group in third grade. That's what people are saying - not that the top readers suddenly stop being good reading and stop loving books. But that just because you aren't in the top group in K really doesn't mean diddly for where you'll be in 3rd. For some kids, especially ones who have been read to and have developed a love of books, once the decoding part "clicks" they are off and running and catch up quickly with the top kids.
Obviously this doesn't happen to all kids, but the point is that K reading group isn't predictive.

[Anonymous]

I believe that. But I doubt that they are the *only* kids in the top reading group in third grade. That's what people are saying - not that the top readers suddenly stop being good reading and stop loving books. But that just because you aren't in the top group in K really doesn't mean diddly for where you'll be in 3rd. For some kids, especially ones who have been read to and have developed a love of books, once the decoding part "clicks" they are off and running and catch up quickly with the top kids.
Obviously this doesn't happen to all kids, but the point is that K reading group isn't predictive.

Exactly. And, all kids in the top reading group in K do not remain there.

There's an interesting article about Early Childhood Education today in WAPO. It is geared more to the disadvantaged and Head Start type programs. Basically, it says the early gains don't last.

Having taught Title I and also a more diverse population, I believe that the gains from those programs don't last because they are skipping other important areas. You can "train" a child to read early, but there are so many more important things.

I am not condemning early readers or those of you who have kids reading early. Some of this comes spontaneously. However, if Mom is not talking to her kids about the world around them (things so many of us take for granted), the child does not benefit from being taught the alphabet. As a former K and 1 teacher, I would much prefer the kids coming to school knowing the names for fruits rather than the letters of the alphabet.

I think that along with required pediatric evaluations and vaccinations, every family should go home with a book and basic instructions of how to talk to their kids.

For example: leaving the hospital--a reminder that it is good to tell your baby how much you love him and how wonderful he is--along with the importance of good nutrition.
At first appointment, a reminder that it is good to talk calmly to your child and to hold him and cuddle.
Next appointment, give the parent a simple book to look at. Talk about walking around the house and speaking to him about the world around him.
Etc.

Some people do not know to do this.

[Anonymous]

My kid was reading at 3rd grade level by the time he was four. He was way ahead of everyone else in k. He's now 2nd grade and still the strongest reader in his elementary school. He's never had any issue with comprehension. You'll likely say he's a dime a dozen one D.C. area but that absolutely has not been our experience - he's been very much an outlier.

His sister is now in K and she isn't reading yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

It is ironic that you fail at reading comprehension. The question was: "What's the point of reading early if they don't understand? It doesn't encourage reading for pleasure. Better to wait until they learn because they are motivated."

I made my point very clear and I invite you to read it again.

I know you are trying to be mean and belittle what I said, but she was tested at a third grade level all around at the beginning of kindergarten by two teachers. So, these children do exist outside the one child you taught in your career.

Please disclose what county you are in, in which two teachers tested your child at the beginning of kindergarten at "a third grade level all around?" Hell, disclose what school in which this occurred.

Crickets?

NP this is my child too. It was the school principal and it was in DC and she was 4 and not yet in kindergarten.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It has been almost 40 years so I do not recall the highest level of reading in my kindergarten class.

I can tell you that I was so excited to be a reader so I could go into Mrs.Small's class with the Raggedy Ann curtains for reading time, instead of Mrs. Higginbotham's class with the non readers or the other teacher where the kids who didn't know their letters went.

Mrs. Small was the only teacher with Raggedy Ann curtains, and I was so sad to have Mrs. Higginbotham for my main teacher because she had boring decorations in her room like Sesame Street which was for babies.

My most vivid and best memory of kindergarten was the day I was sent to Mrs. Small's Raggedy Ann room for reading time.

Well, that and the day is was my turn to turn the projector for the Curious George movie and the day Mrs. Higginbotham taught us to make a swan out of the number two and a lion out of the number five during math class.

They trump the one bad memory of my first day of school when Mrs. Higginbotham accidentally put me in the walker line when I was supposed to ride the bus home.

I tested as a highly gifted child from a very well regarded pediatric neurologist, and those are the only lasting memories I have from kindergarten.

Translation, Larla will be okay no matter how high the reading groups go in kindergarten.

Really and truly.

I love you. Let's be friends. Also, can you teach me to make a lion out of the number 5?

Yes please! I can picture the #2 swan but can't figure out the #5 lion.
Please don't leave us hanging!

[Anonymous]

Love the swan and lion. Thanks for sharing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I believe that. But I doubt that they are the *only* kids in the top reading group in third grade. That's what people are saying - not that the top readers suddenly stop being good reading and stop loving books. But that just because you aren't in the top group in K really doesn't mean diddly for where you'll be in 3rd. For some kids, especially ones who have been read to and have developed a love of books, once the decoding part "clicks" they are off and running and catch up quickly with the top kids.
Obviously this doesn't happen to all kids, but the point is that K reading group isn't predictive.

Exactly. And, all kids in the top reading group in K do not remain there.

There's an interesting article about Early Childhood Education today in WAPO. It is geared more to the disadvantaged and Head Start type programs. Basically, it says the early gains don't last.

Having taught Title I and also a more diverse population, I believe that the gains from those programs don't last because they are skipping other important areas. You can "train" a child to read early, but there are so many more important things.

I am not condemning early readers or those of you who have kids reading early. Some of this comes spontaneously. However, if Mom is not talking to her kids about the world around them (things so many of us take for granted), the child does not benefit from being taught the alphabet. As a former K and 1 teacher, I would much prefer the kids coming to school knowing the names for fruits rather than the letters of the alphabet.

I think that along with required pediatric evaluations and vaccinations, every family should go home with a book and basic instructions of how to talk to their kids.

For example: leaving the hospital--a reminder that it is good to tell your baby how much you love him and how wonderful he is--along with the importance of good nutrition.
At first appointment, a reminder that it is good to talk calmly to your child and to hold him and cuddle.
Next appointment, give the parent a simple book to look at. Talk about walking around the house and speaking to him about the world around him.
Etc.

Some people do not know to do this.

These are great suggestions!