The teacher is not aware of my DD's reading level

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I watched a documentary about Finnish schools whose students undergo a sinlgle test throughout the entire school. The reasoning is that the teacher should know without any testing where each student is.

I spend more time with DD than the teacher. Why would you assume I don't know her reading level? I do. I don't need fancy tests to know, but just to prove the point at school she is testing for 2nd grade level.

So why on Earth would you be sending toddler books for her to read? I can only attribute that to a mistake.

I assumed - and still assume - you don't know her true reading level. Parents always spend more time with their children. Parents have also usually spent more time reading with their children. Parent have NOT spent more time reading with their children with a notepad writing down every single word that comes out of the child's mouth, including 'uhs'. Parents are often not taking the book away and saying to the child, "Now John, retell the book to me." If the parent is doing this, most likely the parent is untrained and will accept a SUMMARY and not a retelling. They are completely different.

And...just to prove "the point at school" as you so sweetly point out, if she's "testing for 2nd grade level" then the teacher is already aware of her reading level, no? Schools don't usually test kindergarteners beyond the end of the first grade level. Anyway, you seem to know everything. We were trying to help explain to you how reading levels work, but you go ahead and teach the teacher a lesson or two.

OP, the PP is telling you the DCUM rules:
1) You are not allowed to think that your child is doing anything more than "average" or "grade level". If you think your child is ahead, you must be wrong.
2) If you disagree with a teacher about anything, you are wrong, and you are one of those "snowflake" parents.

But in real life, my kid's teacher has been wrong about her reading level all year. Which I gently questioned and advised about, and she ignored. Then the counselor had the reading specialist work with my child, and what do you know? My kid's reading level was exactly what I thought it was and the teacher was completely wrong. By two entire grade levels.

I will certainly give the teachers can be wrong but that most of the time parents are very clueless about how to accurately assess reading ability. or that it will not destroy a child to read a really easy book in one minute and then go on to read something that is more interesting or challenging to them. its equivalent to children having to learn to play scales in order to learn to play an instrument it's not the fun part but it's a necessary building block to developing skills

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Sorry, you don't get it. First, there's no writing involved at this age. It is a simple question, "why do you think the author would write a story like this?" If you think asking a kid a higher level of thinking kind of question (versus, Curious George gets into trouble, doesn't he?) is such a burden, I feel kind of sorry for your kid.

Sounds like OP thinks her child is on a reading level that would require writing responses.

There's no such thing in K. My kid is MCPS and at a level O (so mid-late third grade level). They do not have required written responses.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I watched a documentary about Finnish schools whose students undergo a sinlgle test throughout the entire school. The reasoning is that the teacher should know without any testing where each student is.

I spend more time with DD than the teacher. Why would you assume I don't know her reading level? I do. I don't need fancy tests to know, but just to prove the point at school she is testing for 2nd grade level.

So why on Earth would you be sending toddler books for her to read? I can only attribute that to a mistake.

I assumed - and still assume - you don't know her true reading level. Parents always spend more time with their children. Parents have also usually spent more time reading with their children. Parent have NOT spent more time reading with their children with a notepad writing down every single word that comes out of the child's mouth, including 'uhs'. Parents are often not taking the book away and saying to the child, "Now John, retell the book to me." If the parent is doing this, most likely the parent is untrained and will accept a SUMMARY and not a retelling. They are completely different.

And...just to prove "the point at school" as you so sweetly point out, if she's "testing for 2nd grade level" then the teacher is already aware of her reading level, no? Schools don't usually test kindergarteners beyond the end of the first grade level. Anyway, you seem to know everything. We were trying to help explain to you how reading levels work, but you go ahead and teach the teacher a lesson or two.

OP, the PP is telling you the DCUM rules:
1) You are not allowed to think that your child is doing anything more than "average" or "grade level". If you think your child is ahead, you must be wrong.
2) If you disagree with a teacher about anything, you are wrong, and you are one of those "snowflake" parents.

But in real life, my kid's teacher has been wrong about her reading level all year. Which I gently questioned and advised about, and she ignored. Then the counselor had the reading specialist work with my child, and what do you know? My kid's reading level was exactly what I thought it was and the teacher was completely wrong. By two entire grade levels.

I will certainly give the teachers can be wrong but that most of the time parents are very clueless about how to accurately assess reading ability. or that it will not destroy a child to read a really easy book in one minute and then go on to read something that is more interesting or challenging to them. its equivalent to children having to learn to play scales in order to learn to play an instrument it's not the fun part but it's a necessary building block to developing skills

The problem is that it makes the kid think reading/school isn't fun. Some kids might not mind. (I didn't mind as a kid, I just liked being really awesome at stuff that was too easy for me.) But my kid minds. She really likes being challenged and doesn't like when stuff is too easy. Let's use that piano/scales analogy then. If during your piano lesson you're only allowed to play scales, but sure on your own time after your lesson you can play what you want, what do you think your attitude about piano lessons would be? My kid started to really not like school. Then, finally (2 months before the end of the year) when they got her level right finally, she likes school again. Huh.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You know, I watched a documentary about Finnish schools whose students undergo a sinlgle test throughout the entire school. The reasoning is that the teacher should know without any testing where each student is.

I spend more time with DD than the teacher. Why would you assume I don't know her reading level? I do. I don't need fancy tests to know, but just to prove the point at school she is testing for 2nd grade level.

So why on Earth would you be sending toddler books for her to read? I can only attribute that to a mistake.

I assumed - and still assume - you don't know her true reading level. Parents always spend more time with their children. Parents have also usually spent more time reading with their children. Parent have NOT spent more time reading with their children with a notepad writing down every single word that comes out of the child's mouth, including 'uhs'. Parents are often not taking the book away and saying to the child, "Now John, retell the book to me." If the parent is doing this, most likely the parent is untrained and will accept a SUMMARY and not a retelling. They are completely different.

And...just to prove "the point at school" as you so sweetly point out, if she's "testing for 2nd grade level" then the teacher is already aware of her reading level, no? Schools don't usually test kindergarteners beyond the end of the first grade level. Anyway, you seem to know everything. We were trying to help explain to you how reading levels work, but you go ahead and teach the teacher a lesson or two.

OP, the PP is telling you the DCUM rules:
1) You are not allowed to think that your child is doing anything more than "average" or "grade level". If you think your child is ahead, you must be wrong.
2) If you disagree with a teacher about anything, you are wrong, and you are one of those "snowflake" parents.

But in real life, my kid's teacher has been wrong about her reading level all year. Which I gently questioned and advised about, and she ignored. Then the counselor had the reading specialist work with my child, and what do you know? My kid's reading level was exactly what I thought it was and the teacher was completely wrong. By two entire grade levels.

I will certainly give the teachers can be wrong but that most of the time parents are very clueless about how to accurately assess reading ability. or that it will not destroy a child to read a really easy book in one minute and then go on to read something that is more interesting or challenging to them. its equivalent to children having to learn to play scales in order to learn to play an instrument it's not the fun part but it's a necessary building block to developing skills

The problem is that it makes the kid think reading/school isn't fun. Some kids might not mind. (I didn't mind as a kid, I just liked being really awesome at stuff that was too easy for me.) But my kid minds. She really likes being challenged and doesn't like when stuff is too easy. Let's use that piano/scales analogy then. If during your piano lesson you're only allowed to play scales, but sure on your own time after your lesson you can play what you want, what do you think your attitude about piano lessons would be? My kid started to really not like school. Then, finally (2 months before the end of the year) when they got her level right finally, she likes school again. Huh.

I should add, my child is identifiably of an underrepresented minority group. I have no idea, but do wonder whether that led the teacher to unconsciously expect less from her and allowed this mistake to persist so long.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In MCPS there is a writing component to all DRA levels above 16. Being able to actually read the book is only half the battle, so books will seem "easy" for a long time. Its fine though because from an "easy" book she can learn things about story elements, character traits, determining central theme, interpretation etc. and a lot about writing. There is much more than just being able to read the book.

This may be true in your school, but is not true in K in my MCPS school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In MCPS there is a writing component to all DRA levels above 16. Being able to actually read the book is only half the battle, so books will seem "easy" for a long time. Its fine though because from an "easy" book she can learn things about story elements, character traits, determining central theme, interpretation etc. and a lot about writing. There is much more than just being able to read the book.

Well, they are not doing this kind of analysis at our K. Neither do they write about books they've read. They answer questions about what the have read, at best.

Writing competent starts at level 20 I believe (second grade levels).

Not PP, but that's not true at my school. My kid is in third grade levels (in K) and no writing component.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We had the same problem with our DD in K. She went in there reading chapter books aimed for 9-12 year olds and was beyond anything they had in the classroom. She used to sit and read stories to the other children, during "choice time" which they loved but always struck me as weird.

Our K teacher tried to get harder books from the library for her, but it was actually the librarian who was resistant and trotted out the "no chapter books for K" rule. So ultimately there was zero challenge for our child in K. She enjoyed it but it was effectively a wasted year.

I feel for the K teachers who have such a huge range to deal with but ultimately their target seems to be teaching to the middle and bringing the slower readers up to that. The advanced readers are left to their own devices.

Even the advanced readers have a peer group. You can see from the posts to this one question alone confirm that.

P.s. Wasted year? You do know kindergarten is about a lot more than reading, right?

Er yup, thanks for pointin' that one out. Idiot.

Looks like you missed learning some things yourself in kindergarten, like how to treat others...

I learned quite recently that if you patronize people, there is a chance they will take offence. what you wrote was completely patronizing

Retread your post. I stand by what I said, both times. I wasn't patronizing, but pointing out that I'm sure your kid learned lots of things in K rather than it being, as you summed it up, a "wasted year."

Well you're wrong because after 3 weeks of 1st grade she was moved up to 2nd. She wasted a year in K on so many levels its not even funny. And you couldn't possibly know that because you don't know us.

Lie

God's honest truth.

Mmm kay, dear

Not PP, but why would you say she's lying (other than because you just don't want to believe her). Some kids do skip grades, even in MCPS, even now. I have a friend whose daughter had a very similar experience. I also had that experience, though years ago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's not the problem. The problem is that you said you don't need to any formal assessments to know your daughter's level.

I don't. I know how fluently she reads. I know which words are difficult for her and she sight words she has memorized. I know which sounds she's getting right and which she's struggling with. I know what she comprehends and what she does not.

You don't need to constantly test children to know where they are. If you pay attention to them, you know exactly where they are.

So I don't approve of excessive testing in our schools. It's a crutch, and instead of serving as means to an end it takes over as a main focus.

I agree you know how fluently she reads. I do not agree that if you "pay attention" you can just know where they are. You won't have any idea of a child's comprehension without the necessary tools, background and information on how to determine her comprehension. But yes, I do think you are able to assess her fluency. It is great she has that down! Do you really consider 1-2 reading tests a year as "constantly" testing them? First you're upset the teacher doesn't know your kid's level and then you're upset if they are "constantly tested." Which is it?

Not PP, but I definitely disagree that you can't know what the kid comprehends. I don't think you need to have a teaching certification to be able to assess your own kid's reading comprehension. Sure, some parents probably aren't capable, but a reasonably smart parent is going to be able to do it with a little effort. It's not rocket science, regardless of what the M. Ed. holders might want to tell you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP thinks the teacher does not think her child is as smart as OP thinks she is.

Travesty. A wasted year for this poor, gifted child who is "learning" nothing but how to line up against the wall at times. Tsk, tsk. Crying shame.

Maybe OP is right. Given the size of most MCPS K classes, especially if OP's kid isn't a behavior problem, the teacher probably doesn't know her well at all. I know my kid's teacher doesn't. I've never understood the nastiness and resentment directed at kids who are "ahead" of grade level. It's like "how dare they think they're so smart". Well, they are. That's not a crime. They're allowed to want to do work on their level. All kids are.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

That's not the problem. The problem is that you said you don't need to any formal assessments to know your daughter's level.

I don't. I know how fluently she reads. I know which words are difficult for her and she sight words she has memorized. I know which sounds she's getting right and which she's struggling with. I know what she comprehends and what she does not.

You don't need to constantly test children to know where they are. If you pay attention to them, you know exactly where they are.

So I don't approve of excessive testing in our schools. It's a crutch, and instead of serving as means to an end it takes over as a main focus.

I agree you know how fluently she reads. I do not agree that if you "pay attention" you can just know where they are. You won't have any idea of a child's comprehension without the necessary tools, background and information on how to determine her comprehension. But yes, I do think you are able to assess her fluency. It is great she has that down! Do you really consider 1-2 reading tests a year as "constantly" testing them? First you're upset the teacher doesn't know your kid's level and then you're upset if they are "constantly tested." Which is it?

Not PP, but I definitely disagree that you can't know what the kid comprehends. I don't think you need to have a teaching certification to be able to assess your own kid's reading comprehension. Sure, some parents probably aren't capable, but a reasonably smart parent is going to be able to do it with a little effort. It's not rocket science, regardless of what the M. Ed. holders might want to tell you.

I think the issue isn't whether a parent can generally determine if a person comprehends what the kid is reading. Obviously that isn't hard. A parent cannot determine what reading level a child is on based on the DRA, however. That is because the DRA requires extensive training in how to administer it and it isn't just thinking your kid is getting the basic understanding of the story. For example, if you said to your kid, "How does this story relate to another text that you've read?" and your kid answered, "This story is about 3 bears and we read a story last week about 3 little pigs. They are both about animals that number three and are in the same family." - will you know how to rate that answer? Again, you will have a general idea but will NOT know what DRA level your child is on. So I agree with your statement that a parent will know if the kid is comprehending, that isn't what we were getting on the OP for. We were telling the OP'er that she can't know her DD's reading level just because she reads with her. She might know that her DD reads fluently or that her DD has good inflection or has a basic understanding of this or that book. But she can't possibly know what her DD's DRA level is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP thinks the teacher does not think her child is as smart as OP thinks she is.

Travesty. A wasted year for this poor, gifted child who is "learning" nothing but how to line up against the wall at times. Tsk, tsk. Crying shame.

Maybe OP is right. Given the size of most MCPS K classes, especially if OP's kid isn't a behavior problem, the teacher probably doesn't know her well at all. I know my kid's teacher doesn't. I've never understood the nastiness and resentment directed at kids who are "ahead" of grade level. It's like "how dare they think they're so smart". Well, they are. That's not a crime. They're allowed to want to do work on their level. All kids are.

The nastiness and resentment is not directed at kids who are above grade level. For one thing, there isn't any resentment. The nastiness is directed at posters whose attitude is:

1. I know more about education than my child's teacher
2. my child is so advanced that it is learning nothing at school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think that OP thinks the teacher does not think her child is as smart as OP thinks she is.

Travesty. A wasted year for this poor, gifted child who is "learning" nothing but how to line up against the wall at times. Tsk, tsk. Crying shame.

Maybe OP is right. Given the size of most MCPS K classes, especially if OP's kid isn't a behavior problem, the teacher probably doesn't know her well at all. I know my kid's teacher doesn't. I've never understood the nastiness and resentment directed at kids who are "ahead" of grade level. It's like "how dare they think they're so smart". Well, they are. That's not a crime. They're allowed to want to do work on their level. All kids are.

The nastiness and resentment is not directed at kids who are above grade level. For one thing, there isn't any resentment. The nastiness is directed at posters whose attitude is:

1. I know more about education than my child's teacher
2. my child is so advanced that it is learning nothing at school

I don't think any posters have said they know more about education than the teacher. They HAVE said they knew better what their child's level was than the teacher. Having had that experience and having been proven right, I know that's possible. Whether a child is so advanced they learn "nothing" at school is obviously an overstatement. I mean, I have a doctorate, but if I went to Kindergarten for a year, I'm sure I'd learn some things I don't know. But that doesn't mean it's appropriate to put me at that level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP here. Who said anything about a race? I just want my child to be challenged at school. I don't care if she's ahead of your Karla or not.

It sounds like you are in horse race constantly comparing you DD and her number if awards with other children.

Also, as to our four year old friend, can you accept the idea that not four year olds are the same and some might be gifted?

Of course four-year-olds can be gifted. But there is still a lot of Harry Potter that a four-year-old will miss, simply because a four-year-old is four. What is even the most gifted four-year-old going to make of this paragraph, for example?

"It doesn't mean defeating death in the way the Death Eaters mean it, Harry," said Hermione, her voice gentle. "It means... you know... living beyond death. Living after death."

But they were not living, Harry thought: they were gone. The empty words could not disguise the fact that his parents' mouldering remains lay beneath snow and stone, indifferent, unknowing. And tears came before he could stop them, boiling hot and then instantly freezing on his face, and what was the point in wiping them off, or pretending? He let them fall, his lips pressed hard together, looking down at the thick snow hiding from his eyes the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them.

No offense, but one of my two kids would have had no problem with that at 4. The other one wouldn't get most of it. But one of them totally would. She wouldn't know "mouldering", but other than that, yeah, fine. She's an odd kid (wonderfully), but all the "life after death / nothing after death" stuff was a big issue for her at 4 and the rest of it would have been no problem.

No offense taken. Because. It.simply.is.not.true. "...the place where the last of Lily and James lay, bones now, surely, or dust, not knowing or caring that their living son stood so near, his heart still beating, alive because of their sacrifice and close to wishing, at this moment, that he was sleeping under the snow with them."

Your four year old understands the decaying of human remains, what happens to souls, having a suicide/death wish? Ah - makes total sense now.

I have no reason to lie about this. IT's true. She totally "got" all of that at 4. Not even "almost 5", but really just 4. I'm not OP and have nothing to prove. I don't care whether you believe me or not, but it's true. My kid is an outlier, for sure. But I'm sure she's not the only one. To be fair, if you knew us (her parents) it would probably surprise you less.