S/O: what to do, given that so many schools use Lucy Calkins?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the poster from the Lucy Calkins thread with the 1st grader who is very smart but is struggling with reading and writing.

She is not behind in reading, per se, but given that she tested at 135 FSIQ on the WPPSI with no dips in abilities, I’m not thrilled that she’s currently only able to read level D/E books with some assistance from me.

Her writing is more concerning, though. Her school uses the Handwriting without Tears program, but she still forms letters in very non-conventional ways and often reverses them. I know that’s not out of the range of normal, but she’ll turn 7 in October. My understanding is it’s only normal through 7.

She is in speech therapy and receives Orton-Gillingham tutoring. We also have a neuropsych eval scheduled for October.

I know we will end up learning a lot from that eval, but if there aren’t underlying issues like dyslexia or dysgraphia, how do we make sure she reaches her potential for reading and writing? We can keep up with tutoring, but how effective will that be, if it’s being undermined by ineffective classroom instruction?

Her school seems to use a combination of LC and more phonics-based approaches. Moreover, it seems like switching schools might not help, since so many of them use LC to some extent.

OMG you seriously need to chill. It’s not a switch on and off at 7. There’s a lot of brain wiring that need to happen for reading to click, and some education experts think we push it too soon here in the US, traumatizing all the kids whose brains aren’t quite ready at 5 or 6, and turning them off reading. In Finland, they don’t START teaching reading until 7 and Finnish kids score among the highest in tests of reading proficiency.

Even children who start reading young may not master other important elements u til much later. My eldest started reading at 2. Taught himself after he figured out letter,phonics. But his ability to create pictures in his mind while he read didn’t totally click until late second grade. He has an IQ of 157.

You sound conscientious but also highly anxious. Level D/E at her age is fine. High IQ is not essentially correlated with precocious reading ability. All kids converge around age 8/9 and that’s when you can start seeing the giftedness emerge. My eldest now reads super fast and with unusual comprehension and understanding of emotional nuances.

Please get help for your anxiety now before you damage your child.

The learning specialist at her school and her O-G reading tutor flagged concerns. She also has moderate to severe articulation issues, which is why she’s in speech therapy.

But thanks for your “concerns” about my anxiety.

And no, all kids do not converge at age 8/9. Some kids have underlying issues. Abilities differ. This whole notion all kids will eventually end up on the same level is completely misguided.

[Anonymous]

Pp again, ignore the poster who says you are damaging your child. You are not. As many as 20% of US students have dyslexia (keep in mind it’s a spectrum, and also manifests in many different ways), and so many kids are not diagnosed until 3rd, 5th, or even later after they’ve been struggling for years because the standard school response is “they’re fine, this is normal, they’ll catch up.” Sometimes that’s true, and sometimes it very much isn’t. You are absolutely doing the right thing by getting a full eval and doing O-G intervention. *If* you personally are struggling with such anxiety that it becomes debilitating or your child starts to pick up on it, sure, talk to someone. But barring that level, it sounds to me like you’re doing everything right, you have a reasonable concern, and you are taking appropriate action to address the concern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the poster from the Lucy Calkins thread with the 1st grader who is very smart but is struggling with reading and writing.

She is not behind in reading, per se, but given that she tested at 135 FSIQ on the WPPSI with no dips in abilities, I’m not thrilled that she’s currently only able to read level D/E books with some assistance from me.

Her writing is more concerning, though. Her school uses the Handwriting without Tears program, but she still forms letters in very non-conventional ways and often reverses them. I know that’s not out of the range of normal, but she’ll turn 7 in October. My understanding is it’s only normal through 7.

She is in speech therapy and receives Orton-Gillingham tutoring. We also have a neuropsych eval scheduled for October.

I know we will end up learning a lot from that eval, but if there aren’t underlying issues like dyslexia or dysgraphia, how do we make sure she reaches her potential for reading and writing? We can keep up with tutoring, but how effective will that be, if it’s being undermined by ineffective classroom instruction?

Her school seems to use a combination of LC and more phonics-based approaches. Moreover, it seems like switching schools might not help, since so many of them use LC to some extent.

I'm not sure if you will like this suggestion, but our DCPS school uses a phonics-based "science of reading" curriculum, and strict "fundations" for letter learning, and its extremeley effective. It's a Title 1 school, and they had 90% of the Kindergarteners reading at or above grade level last year. I'm very very pleased. Public school has it's pros and cons and i'm sure is a bit more chaotic than the private world, but in this situation they are excellent.

DCPS changed to Science of Reading relatively recently. I am very happy to hear it is going well. Virginia General Assembly also now has mandated transition to Science of Reading for all of its public schools, in a bi-partisan vote and Governor signed it immediately. AFAIK, Maryland has not mandated Science of Reading just yet.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the poster from the Lucy Calkins thread with the 1st grader who is very smart but is struggling with reading and writing.

She is not behind in reading, per se, but given that she tested at 135 FSIQ on the WPPSI with no dips in abilities, I’m not thrilled that she’s currently only able to read level D/E books with some assistance from me.

Her writing is more concerning, though. Her school uses the Handwriting without Tears program, but she still forms letters in very non-conventional ways and often reverses them. I know that’s not out of the range of normal, but she’ll turn 7 in October. My understanding is it’s only normal through 7.

She is in speech therapy and receives Orton-Gillingham tutoring. We also have a neuropsych eval scheduled for October.

I know we will end up learning a lot from that eval, but if there aren’t underlying issues like dyslexia or dysgraphia, how do we make sure she reaches her potential for reading and writing? We can keep up with tutoring, but how effective will that be, if it’s being undermined by ineffective classroom instruction?

Her school seems to use a combination of LC and more phonics-based approaches. Moreover, it seems like switching schools might not help, since so many of them use LC to some extent.

I'm not sure if you will like this suggestion, but our DCPS school uses a phonics-based "science of reading" curriculum, and strict "fundations" for letter learning, and its extremeley effective. It's a Title 1 school, and they had 90% of the Kindergarteners reading at or above grade level last year. I'm very very pleased. Public school has it's pros and cons and i'm sure is a bit more chaotic than the private world, but in this situation they are excellent.

DCPS changed to Science of Reading relatively recently. I am very happy to hear it is going well. Virginia General Assembly also now has mandated transition to Science of Reading for all of its public schools, in a bi-partisan vote and Governor signed it immediately. AFAIK, Maryland has not mandated Science of Reading just yet.

OP here. We are in Maryland, so I’m not sure a switch to MCPS would help. We also love the school otherwise.

We have back to school night tonight. I plan to ask specifically about why they have not switched to science of reading.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Band together and make them get rid of it! Isn’t that our right? With all the tuition money we pay?!

Your only right is to remove your kid from the school if you don't agree with the methodologies it uses.

[Anonymous]

OP, if you do not want to switch schools then you need to supplement/tutor. That might be at home with a Phonics centered curriculum you buy or it might be at someplace like Kumon (which teaches reading in addition to math).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Band together and make them get rid of it! Isn’t that our right? With all the tuition money we pay?!

Your only right is to remove your kid from the school if you don't agree with the methodologies it uses.

Ok then. That is what I will be doing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:OP, if you do not want to switch schools then you need to supplement/tutor. That might be at home with a Phonics centered curriculum you buy or it might be at someplace like Kumon (which teaches reading in addition to math).

Oh gosh, please don't think kumon will help in any way

[Anonymous]

First get a neuropsych eval and see what you're working with. Find your child an OH tutor and go from there. Do not send your kid to a dual language school like JDS - learning Hebrew for a child struggling to read might be so hard for them. If your child does have a LD there are plenty of tutors and/ or private schools that might be a better fit. McLean school is lovely and has been wonderful for my son so far. I credit the school for catching him up and turning him into a book worm.

[Anonymous]

My DC had a 146 IQ at 4 years old and just had another test at 18 years old. IQ is now around 110, which is completely average. ADHD diagnosis at age 11. Are WPSSI/IQ tests at age 3 and 4 for private school entry even accurate?!?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the poster from the Lucy Calkins thread with the 1st grader who is very smart but is struggling with reading and writing.

She is not behind in reading, per se, but given that she tested at 135 FSIQ on the WPPSI with no dips in abilities, I’m not thrilled that she’s currently only able to read level D/E books with some assistance from me.

Her writing is more concerning, though. Her school uses the Handwriting without Tears program, but she still forms letters in very non-conventional ways and often reverses them. I know that’s not out of the range of normal, but she’ll turn 7 in October. My understanding is it’s only normal through 7.

She is in speech therapy and receives Orton-Gillingham tutoring. We also have a neuropsych eval scheduled for October.

I know we will end up learning a lot from that eval, but if there aren’t underlying issues like dyslexia or dysgraphia, how do we make sure she reaches her potential for reading and writing? We can keep up with tutoring, but how effective will that be, if it’s being undermined by ineffective classroom instruction?

Her school seems to use a combination of LC and more phonics-based approaches. Moreover, it seems like switching schools might not help, since so many of them use LC to some extent.

OMG you seriously need to chill. It’s not a switch on and off at 7. There’s a lot of brain wiring that need to happen for reading to click, and some education experts think we push it too soon here in the US, traumatizing all the kids whose brains aren’t quite ready at 5 or 6, and turning them off reading. In Finland, they don’t START teaching reading until 7 and Finnish kids score among the highest in tests of reading proficiency.

Even children who start reading young may not master other important elements u til much later. My eldest started reading at 2. Taught himself after he figured out letter,phonics. But his ability to create pictures in his mind while he read didn’t totally click until late second grade. He has an IQ of 157.

You sound conscientious but also highly anxious. Level D/E at her age is fine. High IQ is not essentially correlated with precocious reading ability. All kids converge around age 8/9 and that’s when you can start seeing the giftedness emerge. My eldest now reads super fast and with unusual comprehension and understanding of emotional nuances.

Please get help for your anxiety now before you damage your child.

The learning specialist at her school and her O-G reading tutor flagged concerns. She also has moderate to severe articulation issues, which is why she’s in speech therapy.

But thanks for your “concerns” about my anxiety.

And no, all kids do not converge at age 8/9. Some kids have underlying issues. Abilities differ. This whole notion all kids will eventually end up on the same level is completely misguided.

You previously presented your child has having a high FSIQ and having no dips in abilities. You said you were dissatisfied with her reading level given that she's smart. You did not share that she had been flagged as having reading issues.

Of course that's a different case. If she does have such issues, it's not about reading being taught poorly at her school(s). It's about meeting her special needs. You presented her as smart and underperforming potentially due to poor instruction at her school. Now it's because she has may have underlying learning disabilities.

Yes, most neurotypical kids do converge on reading around age 8/9. I certainly should have qualified that to except neurodivergent children. However, you were quite disingenuous in how you presented your daughter's reading challenges. If your OG reading tutor has flagged concerns, there's clearly something else besides poor curriculum/teaching going on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My DC had a 146 IQ at 4 years old and just had another test at 18 years old. IQ is now around 110, which is completely average. ADHD diagnosis at age 11. Are WPSSI/IQ tests at age 3 and 4 for private school entry even accurate?!?

No they're not. IQ doesn't stabilize until after age 5. It's why the WISC-V is considered a more accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m the poster from the Lucy Calkins thread with the 1st grader who is very smart but is struggling with reading and writing.

She is not behind in reading, per se, but given that she tested at 135 FSIQ on the WPPSI with no dips in abilities, I’m not thrilled that she’s currently only able to read level D/E books with some assistance from me.

Her writing is more concerning, though. Her school uses the Handwriting without Tears program, but she still forms letters in very non-conventional ways and often reverses them. I know that’s not out of the range of normal, but she’ll turn 7 in October. My understanding is it’s only normal through 7.

She is in speech therapy and receives Orton-Gillingham tutoring. We also have a neuropsych eval scheduled for October.

I know we will end up learning a lot from that eval, but if there aren’t underlying issues like dyslexia or dysgraphia, how do we make sure she reaches her potential for reading and writing? We can keep up with tutoring, but how effective will that be, if it’s being undermined by ineffective classroom instruction?

Her school seems to use a combination of LC and more phonics-based approaches. Moreover, it seems like switching schools might not help, since so many of them use LC to some extent.

OMG you seriously need to chill. It’s not a switch on and off at 7. There’s a lot of brain wiring that need to happen for reading to click, and some education experts think we push it too soon here in the US, traumatizing all the kids whose brains aren’t quite ready at 5 or 6, and turning them off reading. In Finland, they don’t START teaching reading until 7 and Finnish kids score among the highest in tests of reading proficiency.

Even children who start reading young may not master other important elements u til much later. My eldest started reading at 2. Taught himself after he figured out letter,phonics. But his ability to create pictures in his mind while he read didn’t totally click until late second grade. He has an IQ of 157.

You sound conscientious but also highly anxious. Level D/E at her age is fine. High IQ is not essentially correlated with precocious reading ability. All kids converge around age 8/9 and that’s when you can start seeing the giftedness emerge. My eldest now reads super fast and with unusual comprehension and understanding of emotional nuances.

Please get help for your anxiety now before you damage your child.

The learning specialist at her school and her O-G reading tutor flagged concerns. She also has moderate to severe articulation issues, which is why she’s in speech therapy.

But thanks for your “concerns” about my anxiety.

And no, all kids do not converge at age 8/9. Some kids have underlying issues. Abilities differ. This whole notion all kids will eventually end up on the same level is completely misguided.

You previously presented your child has having a high FSIQ and having no dips in abilities. You said you were dissatisfied with her reading level given that she's smart. You did not share that she had been flagged as having reading issues.

Of course that's a different case. If she does have such issues, it's not about reading being taught poorly at her school(s). It's about meeting her special needs. You presented her as smart and underperforming potentially due to poor instruction at her school. Now it's because she has may have underlying learning disabilities.

Yes, most neurotypical kids do converge on reading around age 8/9. I certainly should have qualified that to except neurodivergent children. However, you were quite disingenuous in how you presented your daughter's reading challenges. If your OG reading tutor has flagged concerns, there's clearly something else besides poor curriculum/teaching going on.

I was not being disingenuous at all. We are in the process of figuring out what is going on.

Everyone on this thread seems to get that except for you.

[Anonymous]

I’m going to let you in on a little secret: private schools aren’t for “smart” kids. This city has a high concentration of “smart”kids and those really smart kids? They probably go to public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’m going to let you in on a little secret: private schools aren’t for “smart” kids. This city has a high concentration of “smart”kids and those really smart kids? They probably go to public.

This is such BS. First of all, only 10% of kids go to private school, so probability would dictate that any given kid “probably” goes to public.

Second of all, there’s nothing to suggest that private schools aren’t for smart kids.

Third, how is this relevant to this thread?