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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Also, what's with accusing people of lying just because their experience is outside of the norm? Are you the same PP who accused the mom with the kid who skipped a grade of lying? That's so weird. YOu do know that just because something is *unlikely* doesn't mean it's impossible, right?

[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'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

One more thing: This is why I've never accepted the whole "snowflake" pejorative. I mean, yeah, they are all snowflakes. Isn't that what that means -- they're all different, just like snowflakes, if you look closely enough? They are! Every kid has something cool/different/weird/interesting about them. For God sakes, we shouldn't act like that's negative!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

And this: "Excuses, alibis and wild cover-up stories chased each other around Harry's brain, each more feeble than the last."

And this: ""Danger lies before you, while safety lies behind,
Two of us will help you, whichever you would find.
One among us seven will let you move ahead,
Another will transport the drinker back instead,
Two among our numbers hold only nettle wine,
Three of us are killers, waiting hidden in line.
Choose, unless you wish to stay here forevermore,
To help you in your choice, we give you these clues four:
First, however slyly the poison tries to hide
You will always find some on nettle wine's left side;
Second, different are those who stand at either end,
But if you would move onwards, neither is your friend;
Third, as you see clearly, all are different size,
Neither dwarf nor giant holds death in their insides;
Fourth, the second left and the second on the right
Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Also, what's with accusing people of lying just because their experience is outside of the norm? Are you the same PP who accused the mom with the kid who skipped a grade of lying? That's so weird. YOu do know that just because something is *unlikely* doesn't mean it's impossible, right?

I'm the poster whose DD skipped 1st grade. With regards the accusation of lying - I was under the impression there's a misanthropic, possibly male, poster who ghosts around all the sites just trying to stir things up a bit and this was some of his work. Its a bore more than anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Fine, don't believe me. I actually never use the word gifted, because I know it's a charged word and I think it's kind of meaningless. But what I said was true. Because you can't imagine it, it must be impossible. And I guess her teachers, father, grandparents are all wrong too and you are right even though you've never even met her. But I have no reason to "tell myself that". I'm not invested in it, I'd be happier if she wasn't like this to be honest. It would certainly be easier. But she is, and I love her for who she is, and I think it's really pathetic that you would feel the need to try to pretend she's messed up because she's just different this way. She's a delight, there's nothing wrong with her that she understands those concepts, she wants to understand the big questions about life and everything. The truth of my daughter's life is like nails on a chalkboard to you? I think that's a problem with you, not a problem with her or me. I hope you aren't a teacher. Luckily my DD's teachers have been able to see her for what she is and accept and enjoy her.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

And this: "Excuses, alibis and wild cover-up stories chased each other around Harry's brain, each more feeble than the last."

And this: ""Danger lies before you, while safety lies behind,
Two of us will help you, whichever you would find.
One among us seven will let you move ahead,
Another will transport the drinker back instead,
Two among our numbers hold only nettle wine,
Three of us are killers, waiting hidden in line.
Choose, unless you wish to stay here forevermore,
To help you in your choice, we give you these clues four:
First, however slyly the poison tries to hide
You will always find some on nettle wine's left side;
Second, different are those who stand at either end,
But if you would move onwards, neither is your friend;
Third, as you see clearly, all are different size,
Neither dwarf nor giant holds death in their insides;
Fourth, the second left and the second on the right
Are twins once you taste them, though different at first sight."

You do know that parts from a riddle, right? So it's meant to be puzzled over and pondered over? And yes, my kid was capable of puzzling over that and making meaning from it at four. I grant you it's unusual, but it is true. But go ahead and don't believe me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Also I'm not sure why you're so aghast that I have no kid level response re suicide. I have the response at MY kid's level. She guided me to where she was in her understanding and I answered her questions. There's nothing wrong with that. She understands it is a terrible thing and an awful mistake and waste of life that we would never do. And the people who do it have terrible problems and if she ever thought about it or felt that way to tell us. But that's really unthinkable for you I guess. It's good you're not her parent because it sounds like you would tell her to stop asking questions and that she can't read the books she wants to. Also, I love her just the way she is, so go to hell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Also, what's with accusing people of lying just because their experience is outside of the norm? Are you the same PP who accused the mom with the kid who skipped a grade of lying? That's so weird. YOu do know that just because something is *unlikely* doesn't mean it's impossible, right?

I'm the poster whose DD skipped 1st grade. With regards the accusation of lying - I was under the impression there's a misanthropic, possibly male, poster who ghosts around all the sites just trying to stir things up a bit and this was some of his work. Its a bore more than anything.

You're right. I'm ignoring from now on. My Harry Potter at 4 kid and your grade skipping kid are just going to have to live without his/her approval. No loss

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Also I'm not sure why you're so aghast that I have no kid level response re suicide. I have the response at MY kid's level. She guided me to where she was in her understanding and I answered her questions. There's nothing wrong with that. She understands it is a terrible thing and an awful mistake and waste of life that we would never do. And the people who do it have terrible problems and if she ever thought about it or felt that way to tell us. But that's really unthinkable for you I guess. It's good you're not her parent because it sounds like you would tell her to stop asking questions and that she can't read the books she wants to. Also, I love her just the way she is, so go to hell.

I would respond but you're too angry.

[Anonymous]

The teacher absolutely can get your child's reading level wrong. This happened to my son in kindergarten. To be fair, she started him out at the right level, but failed to adjust after he made a huge leap in a short amount of time. Even when I pointed it out to her, he continued to receive books considerably below his level. It irritated me, but I didn't make a big deal about it, he read the book she sent home in like a minute and then I had him read an appropriate book.

She tested his level again at the end of the year and told me that she was surprised at how high he was. I wonder if part of it was that she didn't want to adjust her reading groups.

It taught me a valuable lesson though that you have to be involved in your child's education because you have one (or two or three...) children and the teacher has 22.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

I'm 38 and don't understand this 100% or have firsthand experience of it. But I can read it. Am I illiterate?

You have 34 more years of life experience than a 4-year-old. You're also probably better at abstract thinking than a 4-year-old.

But if you want to think that a 4-year-old is comprehending Harry Potter and the Deathly Hallows, go ahead. Clearly this child will be ready for Crime and Punishment by age 5, and If This Is A Man by age 7.

I'm not the 38yo PP (I wish), but I'm perplexed that you can't believe that this is true. It is. There's a vast diversity of humans out there, and some of them are really unusual. One of mine is. Kids who are different don't deserve to have their experiences invalidated or dismissed. They're different. FWIW, I think that one reason she's like that is just genetic -- it's how my DH's parents describe him as a kid too. But part of it is she is/was SUPER inquisitive, about big, adult, philosophical and scientific topics. And we gave her real answers. We tried kid-level answers, but she wouldn't accept them and keep questioning in more and more precise ways until we couldn't blow her off. So she learned the stuff she was interested in. Now, she is absolutely not at that level in other areas (math, social). But when it comes to reading/critical thinking, she's probably ahead of most 10 year olds.
I'm not bragging, fyi. I love my other kid (who's not like this) just as much and think she's just as awesome. Of course my kids are my favorite, but I think all kids are awesome. I've worked with kids a lot, and I just really like kids. If you allow yourself to see them for who they are and not try to fit them in a box of what you think all kids are like, they are really interesting.

If your 4 year old understands suicide, it isn't because she's gifted. The best example I can give is that my child at 4 knew about monocles because we were reading a book about different eyewear. She would appear to have more knowledge than other 4 year olds about monocles at the time, not because she was gifted, but because she had learned about them whereas maybe another 4 year old had learned about eagles or turpentine or gargoyles on that particular day. Your child didn't learn about suicide because she was gifted or inquisitive any more or less than any other kid. Damn shame you feel it was appropriate because you think she was ahead of most 10 year olds. 4 year olds don't have the life experiences to understand Harry Potter. If you gave non-kid level answers about suicide/death wish - well, I got nothing. Just nothing in response.

No, a 4 year old isn't reading Harry Potter and understanding it - but you can tell yourself that. Like I said, it is like nails on a chalkboard when someone says their 4/5 year old is reading Harry Potter.

Also I'm not sure why you're so aghast that I have no kid level response re suicide. I have the response at MY kid's level. She guided me to where she was in her understanding and I answered her questions. There's nothing wrong with that. She understands it is a terrible thing and an awful mistake and waste of life that we would never do. And the people who do it have terrible problems and if she ever thought about it or felt that way to tell us. But that's really unthinkable for you I guess. It's good you're not her parent because it sounds like you would tell her to stop asking questions and that she can't read the books she wants to. Also, I love her just the way she is, so go to hell.

I would respond but you're too angry.

If she had to stop to ask what it means, she didn't understand when she read it, and presumably it was like this frequently with the text. If she didn't have to ask what it meant when reading it, in what context were you having a discussion about suicide with her at an unrelated time? I think it is great for a kid to read any book but would hope that she'd reread one above her life experience level when older to truly understand it as it was intended. I also imagine she saw the movie first or someone explained it to her first or along the way.