Do you depend on your school to teach your child how to read?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:When we toured private schools last year, I was struck by the fact that several of them said "we don't teach reading in pre-K and we urge you not to push your kids to learn to read until kindergarten."

The rationale was that pre-k would be spent learning letters and phonics -- and that the child's motivation to read would come naturally by kindergarten. One teacher said, "don't substitute your motivation for theirs."

That really resonated with us. So, we continue to read every night to DC, but I have never tried to teach him to read or pushed him to. And now, I do see the first stirrings of his interest in reading.

I'm going to let the schools do their job. I'll just continue to respond to DC's questions and interests -- at his pace.

I like the "don't substitute your motivation for theirs" line. When we were on the tour circuit last fall, there was always at least one parent who panicked when s/he saw the letters on the classroom wall. "My child already reads. DC doesn't need to learn letters." To a tee, the teacher responded as if no parent had ever said this before and talked about the various components involved in the fundamentals of reading, why all children benefit from exposure to phonics, sowing the seeds of comprehension, etc. Some parents stopped and listened. Others responded that the teacher did not understand, "no, our DC is reading. What you are talking about is different." Probably apropos to drop the "don't substitute" line at that point.

[Anonymous]

My child's four and in a nursery school. He's beginning to read - taught himself apparently. He can read very simple books from home and the library (we go to the library several times a week). His teachers think it's great and encourage him, but I don't think that they are actively teaching him yet. And I don't do anything but read a lot of books to him. We used to sound out letters, especially at the beginnings of words, but that's it.

I wouldn't know the first thing about teaching my child how to read!

[Anonymous]

Who do all children benefit from exposure to letters and phonics, if they are already reading?

[Anonymous]

With regard to the Don't substitute line-kids who start reading early are self motivated. I had one early reader, one not interested. I don't see how I would have stopped the one from reading or forced the other.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:With regard to the Don't substitute line-kids who start reading early are self motivated. I had one early reader, one not interested. I don't see how I would have stopped the one from reading or forced the other.

Right. I don't think folks here are suggesting that children who are early readers should be prevented from reading. The fundamentals of reading involve many elements. Simply because a child is reading doesn't mean the child has mastered comprehension, truly grasps phonics, etc. S/he can still read on his/her own, or when the class breaks into small groups. There are whole theories on how "duplicity" isn't necessarily redundant but actually reinforces early learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Who do all children benefit from exposure to letters and phonics, if they are already reading?

I assume you meant why, not who, as my answer is predicated on the former. Some early readers are engaging in site memorization. They recognize the word, but they don't necessarily know the word. They can't necessarily spell the word when hearing it, only when seeing it on the page. Learning phonics helps them recognize what are the various letters that can combine for similar sounds. Fat, pharmacy, kugel, coin, etc. My DC is reading, but not really as she is still not able to make these distinctions.

I am not a reading specialist. But when my DD started reading early, I talked with her teachers and did some research. The reading curve can actually be much longer at this age (4) than for a six year old who may go from sounding out every letter and word in a sentence to reading (and comprehending) chapter books in a matter of weeks. The gap closes very quickly in first grade except for those few unfortunate ones who require more instruction.

[Anonymous]

This is a reassuring thread. DS is in K and only this year has learned letters/sounds. He's made a lot of progress but it is unnerving to see kids reading already. Good to know that this is a process and that it's natural for some kids not to click until first grade. Like many others, he's been resistant to "working at" learning to read. We read to him all the time and always have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is a reassuring thread. DS is in K and only this year has learned letters/sounds. He's made a lot of progress but it is unnerving to see kids reading already. Good to know that this is a process and that it's natural for some kids not to click until first grade. Like many others, he's been resistant to "working at" learning to read. We read to him all the time and always have.

We were told by a respected education specialist that reading usually "starts to click" sometime between K and 2nd grade, and that when it starts to click within this period usually is not relevant to how strong a reader your child will be in the future. She stressed that, in her view and based on research she had reviewed, parents often over-emphasize teaching their child to read at the early ages at the expense of reading to their child, and that those "early reader" children can have poorer reading comprehension down the road than children who are read to frequently.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:This is a reassuring thread. DS is in K and only this year has learned letters/sounds. He's made a lot of progress but it is unnerving to see kids reading already. Good to know that this is a process and that it's natural for some kids not to click until first grade. Like many others, he's been resistant to "working at" learning to read. We read to him all the time and always have.

We were told by a respected education specialist that reading usually "starts to click" sometime between K and 2nd grade, and that when it starts to click within this period usually is not relevant to how strong a reader your child will be in the future. She stressed that, in her view and based on research she had reviewed, parents often over-emphasize teaching their child to read at the early ages at the expense of reading to their child, and that those "early reader" children can have poorer reading comprehension down the road than children who are read to frequently.

Yes. This is great holistic reinforcement that reading is about more than a kid reading a book. Does the child understand? How does the child's reading comprehension progress over time? Is the child able to discern common roots in words, etc? My DD read early but was not really interested in books other than to identify roots, etc. She had no real interest in a narrative. Her DB, now at the same age, is only beginning to spell out words he sees and ask what they are. Yet he can sit for an hour at night while you read chapter after chapter. She now enjoys books and I hope that his passion continues after he learns to read himself.

[Anonymous]

My kids were late readers. I did not teach them to read at home. Unlike many parents, I actually discouraged them from learning to read by focusing their attention on other things. They are advanced readers now, ahead of most of their peers, including the kids who read very early. We have lots of books at home, read to them every day, but did not teach letter sounds unless they asked. Once they learned to read, they picked up speed rapidly.

I worry when I see parents pushing their kids to read early. Sometimes those kids are unimaginative and too goal-focused at an early age. My kids are hugely imaginative, and I credit that in part to our reading to them constantly practically from birth onward, and to our NOT pushing them at all.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:My kids were late readers. I did not teach them to read at home. Unlike many parents, I actually discouraged them from learning to read by focusing their attention on other things. They are advanced readers now, ahead of most of their peers, including the kids who read very early. We have lots of books at home, read to them every day, but did not teach letter sounds unless they asked. Once they learned to read, they picked up speed rapidly.

I worry when I see parents pushing their kids to read early. Sometimes those kids are unimaginative and too goal-focused at an early age. My kids are hugely imaginative, and I credit that in part to our reading to them constantly practically from birth onward, and to our NOT pushing them at all.

A poster on another thread flipped out when I posted that early reading is not a predictor of anything. The poster replied with all kinds of links to reports on children who were poor readers were less likely to finish school, etc. The poster couldn't grasp that a child who begins reading at six may jump from reading sentences aloud to polishing off chapter books in weeks. A child who begins reading at 4 may simply be a child who began reading at 4. The child may not necessarily be gifted, etc. I don't mean this in a bad way, but I think a lot of parents do not grasp that becoming a good reader involves many factors. Pushing a kid who reads early may result in the child feeling pressure, losing interest, or missing the necessary skills needed to master reading.

[Anonymous]

Yes. My child learned in Arlington in first grade. That's when he was ready, and that's when he learned.

No point in pushing to early. You probably can succeed at teaching reading a bit earlier, but at what cost? (hating reading comes to mind...)

There is a lot your kids need to learn about books and reading that can be done without actually forcing reading. Just read to your kid and let it happen when it should.

[Anonymous]

I wasn't a poster who posted links to reports on children who were poor readers less likely to finish school. However, what I do find interesting is that people are such ideologues on this issue. The idea that every child who reads early is destined to crash and burn, have poor reading comprehension, hate reading, etc etc I think is way overblown. My experience is that my early reader still loves reading, and guess what? She does in fact understand what she reads.

[Anonymous]

If anybody can point me to a study on early readers, I'd appreciate it. I've tried googling and haven't found any studies so far.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes. My child learned in Arlington in first grade. That's when he was ready, and that's when he learned.

No point in pushing to early. You probably can succeed at teaching reading a bit earlier, but at what cost? (hating reading comes to mind...)

There is a lot your kids need to learn about books and reading that can be done without actually forcing reading. Just read to your kid and let it happen when it should.

I've been following this thread, but am a new poster. It's nice to hear comments like yours. I admit I have absolutely no background in education and no older kids. But it just seems intuitive to me that encouraging a love of learning should come first, and the actual learning comes with it or later. I wouldn't want to push my kid to read. This actually was a complete 180 reversal for me, as I'm pretty militant about education and was one of those pregnant moms thinking about teaching my child to read in the womb. But new "chill" attitude seems to be working really well with my DC, who runs to bring me books to him to read, and has most of them memorized. Because he "loves" them, not because I push.