How did your early reader do in school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an early reader. One of five and I can tell you right now he has a HUGE advantage over his siblings. He learned how to read fluently and at a very high level by mid year of K. He reads everything and all the time. The amount of content and knowledge he has accumulated is huge. His vocabulary is also impressive for a first grader. He has learned so many science and history facts that he is light years ahead of many kids. His spelling is also at about a high school level now because of how much he reads. He corrects his oldest siblings spelling already. I have a couple late readers and the difference between the kids is very clear. It did not even out at 3rd grade. My point is, early readers often learn more and more about the world and have much higher knowledge than their peers.

Yeah, I agree with this. All the kids may eventually know how to read by 3rd grade but it does not actually even out. The early readers have a head start on other things and it carries through.

+1.

And you have more broad experience than an actual teacher with hundreds of students who learned to read at different points in their lives, so you know better. Got it.

So how does a third grade teacher know who was reading at 3/4 and who wasn't...?

[Anonymous]

I would not worry about teaching a pre-K kid if they weren't interested and didn't respond enthusiastically.

On the other hand, an early reader who enjoys reading is a great thing because what in the world could be negative about reading? It opens up new worlds, provides a path to information they are curious about, helps keep them entertained. I can't see any downside to an early reader unless they didn't like it and resisted.

Some people, as at least one PP said, prevent their kids from reading certain things until they are older. I guess that's a negative, although I let my kids read whatever they wanted, as did my parents.

[Anonymous]

I’m not you’re intended audience but I have relevant experiences.

My first was a very early talker, and just really bright, so I decided to teach her to read before she started school. She had no interest. I pushed it a lot before giving up. She was behind in kindergarten and in first grade, until DH gave her a more advanced book that actually interested her. Now she is in 7th and an extremely advanced reader.

Since I had a bad experience trying to teach DD tk read, I didn’t try to teach the next kid. He probably would have been great at it and he wanted to learn, but I just had no desire to teach him. He was in the top of his class by the middle of the year in K. He is in 4th and reads plenty of books written for adults.

I’d say if your kid wants to learn and you have the motivation, teach them. If not, don’t stress (although make sure your school isn’t doing balanced literacy).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I have an early reader. One of five and I can tell you right now he has a HUGE advantage over his siblings. He learned how to read fluently and at a very high level by mid year of K. He reads everything and all the time. The amount of content and knowledge he has accumulated is huge. His vocabulary is also impressive for a first grader. He has learned so many science and history facts that he is light years ahead of many kids. His spelling is also at about a high school level now because of how much he reads. He corrects his oldest siblings spelling already. I have a couple late readers and the difference between the kids is very clear. It did not even out at 3rd grade. My point is, early readers often learn more and more about the world and have much higher knowledge than their peers.

Couldn't he have also got this as a non-reader -- just reading with parents, for example? I've had several people tell me that my son has an impressive vocabulary, that he is bright, etc., and he can't read. He may recognize words like dog, no, yes, and his name.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have an early reader. One of five and I can tell you right now he has a HUGE advantage over his siblings. He learned how to read fluently and at a very high level by mid year of K. He reads everything and all the time. The amount of content and knowledge he has accumulated is huge. His vocabulary is also impressive for a first grader. He has learned so many science and history facts that he is light years ahead of many kids. His spelling is also at about a high school level now because of how much he reads. He corrects his oldest siblings spelling already. I have a couple late readers and the difference between the kids is very clear. It did not even out at 3rd grade. My point is, early readers often learn more and more about the world and have much higher knowledge than their peers.

Yeah, I agree with this. All the kids may eventually know how to read by 3rd grade but it does not actually even out. The early readers have a head start on other things and it carries through.

+1.

And you have more broad experience than an actual teacher with hundreds of students who learned to read at different points in their lives, so you know better. Got it.

So how does a third grade teacher know who was reading at 3/4 and who wasn't...?

And if the teacher doesn't know or can't know, then why is starting early better? Why does it matter at all?

So, right back at you.