What is the highest reading level in your kindergarten class?

[Anonymous]

University newsletter article that sums up previous research on this. It basically says most every PP on this thread right.
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/june91/june9112.html

Yes, there is evidence that early readers continue to do well: "The results of several longitudinal studies have confirmed that precocious readers continue to be good readers. By the fifth or sixth grade, the typical precocious reader has continued to achieve in reading at a level well above the national norms, and precocious readers who are cognitively normal virtually never turn into below-average readers.

But lots of kids who learn to read later learn to read just as well within a few years: "with time and instructional support, many later bloomers catch up."

Children who can "read" well don't necessarily understand what they are reading: "Some children may begin reading at an exceptionally early age because they are especially adept at breaking the code of print. These same children are not always especially well endowed with the aspects of verbal intelligence that underlie comprehension of sophisticated texts."

On the other hand there was the big New Zealand study that showed no advantage to reading early. "Children who learn to read at age five are unlikely to be better readers than children who learn to read at seven, according to new research."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

It is ironic that you fail at reading comprehension. The question was: "What's the point of reading early if they don't understand? It doesn't encourage reading for pleasure. Better to wait until they learn because they are motivated."

I made my point very clear and I invite you to read it again.

I know you are trying to be mean and belittle what I said, but she was tested at a third grade level all around at the beginning of kindergarten by two teachers. So, these children do exist outside the one child you taught in your career.

Please disclose what county you are in, in which two teachers tested your child at the beginning of kindergarten at "a third grade level all around?" Hell, disclose what school in which this occurred.

Crickets?

Do you realize how stupid you look? It happened. She has two full time teachers in Kindergarten and the assessment took two days. They stopped at L on the first day and the next day decided M was a good spot for lessons, but she was reading well even at much higher levels. One of her teachers commented on her amazing memory for details. Here in the USA.

I am going to stop feeding you now, because I am realizing you are just a troll.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:University newsletter article that sums up previous research on this. It basically says most every PP on this thread right.
http://www.gifted.uconn.edu/nrcgt/newsletter/june91/june9112.html

Yes, there is evidence that early readers continue to do well: "The results of several longitudinal studies have confirmed that precocious readers continue to be good readers. By the fifth or sixth grade, the typical precocious reader has continued to achieve in reading at a level well above the national norms, and precocious readers who are cognitively normal virtually never turn into below-average readers.

But lots of kids who learn to read later learn to read just as well within a few years: "with time and instructional support, many later bloomers catch up."

Children who can "read" well don't necessarily understand what they are reading: "Some children may begin reading at an exceptionally early age because they are especially adept at breaking the code of print. These same children are not always especially well endowed with the aspects of verbal intelligence that underlie comprehension of sophisticated texts."

On the other hand there was the big New Zealand study that showed no advantage to reading early. "Children who learn to read at age five are unlikely to be better readers than children who learn to read at seven, according to new research."

Thanks for the link.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

It is ironic that you fail at reading comprehension. The question was: "What's the point of reading early if they don't understand? It doesn't encourage reading for pleasure. Better to wait until they learn because they are motivated."

I made my point very clear and I invite you to read it again.

I know you are trying to be mean and belittle what I said, but she was tested at a third grade level all around at the beginning of kindergarten by two teachers. So, these children do exist outside the one child you taught in your career.

Please disclose what county you are in, in which two teachers tested your child at the beginning of kindergarten at "a third grade level all around?" Hell, disclose what school in which this occurred.

Crickets?

Do you realize how stupid you look? It happened. She has two full time teachers in Kindergarten and the assessment took two days. They stopped at L on the first day and the next day decided M was a good spot for lessons, but she was reading well even at much higher levels. One of her teachers commented on her amazing memory for details. Here in the USA.

I am going to stop feeding you now, because I am realizing you are just a troll.

NP here...but seems like most responders agree your are off base,

Ah...yes, 2 different teachers spent 2 days assessing one child...I've only ever heard of a teacher and aide in kindergarten...what aide does assessments? What county and state are you in?

Look, you clearly want to feel your child is superior...when she is probably an advanced reader...period. TRUST me...others will catch up. My DD in kindergarten was a very advanced reader...but she had a group who was pulled with her for enrichment several times a week. THERE WERE OTHERS of like ability. You don't want to hear that...

What the hell is "L" and "M"?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

It is ironic that you fail at reading comprehension. The question was: "What's the point of reading early if they don't understand? It doesn't encourage reading for pleasure. Better to wait until they learn because they are motivated."

I made my point very clear and I invite you to read it again.

I know you are trying to be mean and belittle what I said, but she was tested at a third grade level all around at the beginning of kindergarten by two teachers. So, these children do exist outside the one child you taught in your career.

Please disclose what county you are in, in which two teachers tested your child at the beginning of kindergarten at "a third grade level all around?" Hell, disclose what school in which this occurred.

Crickets?

Do you realize how stupid you look? It happened. She has two full time teachers in Kindergarten and the assessment took two days. They stopped at L on the first day and the next day decided M was a good spot for lessons, but she was reading well even at much higher levels. One of her teachers commented on her amazing memory for details. Here in the USA.

I am going to stop feeding you now, because I am realizing you are just a troll.

NP here...but seems like most responders agree your are off base,

Ah...yes, 2 different teachers spent 2 days assessing one child...I've only ever heard of a teacher and aide in kindergarten...what aide does assessments? What county and state are you in?

Look, you clearly want to feel your child is superior...when she is probably an advanced reader...period. TRUST me...others will catch up. My DD in kindergarten was a very advanced reader...but she had a group who was pulled with her for enrichment several times a week. THERE WERE OTHERS of like ability. You don't want to hear that...

What the hell is "L" and "M"?

"You're"... Typing with 2 fingers on an iPad=typos.

[Anonymous]

L and M are probably levels in Fountas and Pinnell/Guided Reading Levels. Here's an example of a chart to help - there's several classification systems for reading level.

http://www.readinga-z.com/readinga-z-levels/level-correlation-chart/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:L and M are probably levels in Fountas and Pinnell/Guided Reading Levels. Here's an example of a chart to help - there's several classification systems for reading level.

http://www.readinga-z.com/readinga-z-levels/level-correlation-chart/

Even the chart doesn't say L and M are at a third grade level. If this were true, she would state the county and state in which she lived. I'm not trying to beat someone down who clearly has issues to be so emotionally wrapped up in her kid's self stated/perceived/believed abilities, as she is obviously troubled enough...

[Anonymous]

I'm sure there are school systems that have the time to test children individually like this. Just because here in the DC area with classes well above 25 doesn't mean there aren't other schools much smaller with the time to do this. Outside of DC I hear about public schools in the 15-20 range all the time with no special ed, FARM, or ESOL students. Even here there are private schools of 10 kids in a class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure there are school systems that have the time to test children individually like this. Just because here in the DC area with classes well above 25 doesn't mean there aren't other schools much smaller with the time to do this. Outside of DC I hear about public schools in the 15-20 range all the time with no special ed, FARM, or ESOL students. Even here there are private schools of 10 kids in a class.

There may well be but this person doesn't want to disclose it nor does she want to hear anything but that her child is well above and beyond. Two first grade teachers commented as did many other parents about how advanced readers often level off and slower readers catch up. (That is precisely why most advanced academics don't start until third grade.)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure there are school systems that have the time to test children individually like this. Just because here in the DC area with classes well above 25 doesn't mean there aren't other schools much smaller with the time to do this. Outside of DC I hear about public schools in the 15-20 range all the time with no special ed, FARM, or ESOL students. Even here there are private schools of 10 kids in a class.

There may well be but this person doesn't want to disclose it nor does she want to hear anything but that her child is well above and beyond. Two first grade teachers commented as did many other parents about how advanced readers often level off and slower readers catch up. (That is precisely why most advanced academics don't start until third grade.)

I am not sure why it bothers anyone whether or not the PP's child is advanced. I am a school psychologist and the vast majority of advanced readers do not level off. There are kids who enter kindergarten decoding AND comprehending at a third grade level and above. It is silly to say the student doesn't comprehend a book because they can't somehow relate it to their own limited life experience. The vast majority of those kids do not stagnate for three years while the others catch up. They continue to progress, however, the difference is not so apparent. Anyone can tell the difference between reading at a kindergarten level (which is not really reading) and reading at a second grade level (you can read and understand beginning chapter books like Frog and Toad to slightly harder chapter book Junie B. Jones / Magic Tree House). However, it is much more difficult to tell the difference between reading at a third grade level and a fifth grade level, so it appears that everyone has leveled off. There are a few students who enter kinder without knowing any letter sounds and are fluent readers by the end of kindergarten and have caught up to the earlier readers by second grade or so. They tend to have attended play-based preschools AND have well-educated parent who have read to them since they were very young. The vast majority of students in the U.S. do NOT catch up if they are not reading at grade level in first grade; they fall further and further behind. Anyone interested in the research should Google Mark Stanovich and the "Matthew Effect".

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure there are school systems that have the time to test children individually like this. Just because here in the DC area with classes well above 25 doesn't mean there aren't other schools much smaller with the time to do this. Outside of DC I hear about public schools in the 15-20 range all the time with no special ed, FARM, or ESOL students. Even here there are private schools of 10 kids in a class.

There may well be but this person doesn't want to disclose it nor does she want to hear anything but that her child is well above and beyond. Two first grade teachers commented as did many other parents about how advanced readers often level off and slower readers catch up. (That is precisely why most advanced academics don't start until third grade.)

I am not sure why it bothers anyone whether or not the PP's child is advanced. I am a school psychologist and the vast majority of advanced readers do not level off. There are kids who enter kindergarten decoding AND comprehending at a third grade level and above. It is silly to say the student doesn't comprehend a book because they can't somehow relate it to their own limited life experience. The vast majority of those kids do not stagnate for three years while the others catch up. They continue to progress, however, the difference is not so apparent. Anyone can tell the difference between reading at a kindergarten level (which is not really reading) and reading at a second grade level (you can read and understand beginning chapter books like Frog and Toad to slightly harder chapter book Junie B. Jones / Magic Tree House). However, it is much more difficult to tell the difference between reading at a third grade level and a fifth grade level, so it appears that everyone has leveled off. There are a few students who enter kinder without knowing any letter sounds and are fluent readers by the end of kindergarten and have caught up to the earlier readers by second grade or so. They tend to have attended play-based preschools AND have well-educated parent who have read to them since they were very young. The vast majority of students in the U.S. do NOT catch up if they are not reading at grade level in first grade; they fall further and further behind. Anyone interested in the research should Google Mark Stanovich and the "Matthew Effect".

This is completely, completely against what I've been taught in my education (masters degree in education), my experience in teaching (both first and third grades), and the continuing education courses I've taken. For what it is worth, we would not consider Junie B. Jones or Frog and Toad to be advanced literature on a third grade level. I think the above poster is the sock puppeting mother of the kindergartener.

[Anonymous]

What's with the antagonism PP? The school psychologist did not say Junie B. Jones/Frog and Toad was "advanced literature" or on a "third grade level." She said they were second grade books, which seems right according to leveled reading charts. Not really sure what your issue is with her post.

She made a lot of very reasonable points and is clearly an expert in this subject matter. For instance, there are studies that back up her points about how it's really hard to catch up if you're still behind by the 5th grade.

[Anonymous]

I don't know the highest but I'm sure my kid is the lowest since he can't read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm sure there are school systems that have the time to test children individually like this. Just because here in the DC area with classes well above 25 doesn't mean there aren't other schools much smaller with the time to do this. Outside of DC I hear about public schools in the 15-20 range all the time with no special ed, FARM, or ESOL students. Even here there are private schools of 10 kids in a class.

There may well be but this person doesn't want to disclose it nor does she want to hear anything but that her child is well above and beyond. Two first grade teachers commented as did many other parents about how advanced readers often level off and slower readers catch up. (That is precisely why most advanced academics don't start until third grade.)

I am not sure why it bothers anyone whether or not the PP's child is advanced. I am a school psychologist and the vast majority of advanced readers do not level off. There are kids who enter kindergarten decoding AND comprehending at a third grade level and above. It is silly to say the student doesn't comprehend a book because they can't somehow relate it to their own limited life experience. The vast majority of those kids do not stagnate for three years while the others catch up. They continue to progress, however, the difference is not so apparent. Anyone can tell the difference between reading at a kindergarten level (which is not really reading) and reading at a second grade level (you can read and understand beginning chapter books like Frog and Toad to slightly harder chapter book Junie B. Jones / Magic Tree House). However, it is much more difficult to tell the difference between reading at a third grade level and a fifth grade level, so it appears that everyone has leveled off. There are a few students who enter kinder without knowing any letter sounds and are fluent readers by the end of kindergarten and have caught up to the earlier readers by second grade or so. They tend to have attended play-based preschools AND have well-educated parent who have read to them since they were very young. The vast majority of students in the U.S. do NOT catch up if they are not reading at grade level in first grade; they fall further and further behind. Anyone interested in the research should Google Mark Stanovich and the "Matthew Effect".

This is completely, completely against what I've been taught in my education (masters degree in education), my experience in teaching (both first and third grades), and the continuing education courses I've taken. For what it is worth, we would not consider Junie B. Jones or Frog and Toad to be advanced literature on a third grade level. I think the above poster is the sock puppeting mother of the kindergartener.

That poster listed those as 2nd grade examples...

[Anonymous]

I was a very, very early and advanced reader, even further ahead than PP above in kindergarten. I wish it had been downplayed instead of being a source of bragging rights for my mom. The early reading overshadowed my academic progress and looking back, I think I had comprehension problems that were ignored. I had to essentially re-train myself to read in college and it was not very pleasant.