Reading at a certain grade level

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Also, because often math and reading ability are innate--i.e., our child started reading at a very early age without being taught and also doing advanced math at an early age without being taught (DC is now in 2nd grade doing 5th-grade math). Yet in DC's independent school, DC is still challenged in science, for example, because that is a topic that is inherently less innate--for example, DC still needed like everyone else to learn about what a hypothesis is, etc. Likewise with art, music, etc. A more content-driven subject is different than an often-innate ability in something like math. Not that skills in reading and math aren't taught, but much differently than in reading and math.

I think what you might be talking about is how vocabulary driven science and social studies are. Not that reading and math are innate, but tin eth early years they are driven by neurology -- in reading, does the child have the neurological ability to manipulate phonemes? In math, does the child have the neurological ability to have number sense and hold a mental representation of 2 numbers at once. The ability to do these things develop in different children at different ages, and teaching can only accelerate things so much.

Still, a 5 year old can be taught vocabulary words used in discussing art, civics, and science. However, to be able to handle concepts at the more abstract level of a 13 year old? Formal logic, ability to formulate abstract hypothesis? That child would truly be operating at a very sophisticated level for a 5 year old. If he really is able to do so, I do think he is exceptionally gifted. I'd be surprised that a child with such an intellect wasn't yet reading and would keep an eye on him.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If the basics are lacking, reading and mathematics, how can anyone take on social studies or science. One needs to walk before you run.

Many schools waste too much time using inefficient means to teach the basics, unfortunately.

Then when kids are still below grade level in reading and math, they continue those same inefficient measures.

Unfortunately, after about third or fourth grade, kids improve their reading levels by improving their content vocabulary. Any fourth grade reader should be able to open up a high school textbook and decode the words. The different between 4th grade reading and 9th grade reading isn't how hard the words are to sound out, it is understanding what all those words mean.

After kids reach about a third or early fourth grade reading level, knowledge of content -- civics, history, economics, geography, all the branches of science -- is the key determinant of who will be reading "on or above" grade level.

K-2 years should teach reading much more efficiently than most of them do, and be sure to have time for 1 hour of social studies and one hour of science each day.

[Anonymous]

It's not a marker of "genius". It does, however, mean that the child in K really has no need to sit through the daily lessons in K on letter sound relationships, nor the first grade lessons on decoding simple words, and so on.

Just as a child in K who can do fourth grade math doesn't need to have those basic lessons, either.

Exactly. The issue is that the K-2 curriculum is all about teaching a child to read and then becoming a fluent reader. The way it was explained to me, K is "reading readiness". 1st is "really learning to read" and 2nd is "becoming a fluent reader". So if your kid is already a fluent reader in K, then that is potentially a LOT of time in K-2 spent on stuff that they already know. Some schools emphasize writing instead during that time, which is fine, but since about half of the early elementary day is spent on reading and writing, knowing what your school does to differentiate for advanced readers can be a real issue.

And I think that referencing a specific reading level is just shorthand.

[Anonymous]

PP exactly!

And I have actually had a friend tell mer what her child's teacher said -- that second grade was a "holding year". Kids who already knew how to read were basically just supposed to wait an extra year, for the rest of the kids to catch up. They read a lot at their desks, went to the library for independent reading. Now, this is in upstate New York, I'm sure schools down here aren't that bad, but still.

[Anonymous]

- that second grade was a "holding year"

15:06 here, that was pretty much my DD's exact experience in FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

- that second grade was a "holding year"

15:06 here, that was pretty much my DD's exact experience in FCPS.

I know others in FCPS that had that experience in 2nd grade. Thankfully my DC was in a Young Scholars class and had compacted math to keep things challenged.

[Anonymous]

The 2nd grade "holding year" is interesting. My dd's MCPS elementary school 2nd grade teaching team is supposed to be the "weak link" of the school.

[Anonymous]

FCPS parent year. 2nd grade would have been a holding year for my DC too, except we got an outstanding teacher who went out of her way to challenge my child. DC is in a GT Center and thriving. I think it's more the exception than the rule though.