You need to have your kids read outside of school

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

NP - no, that's not what it takes. There's research on this stuff. I'm not discouraging anyone from reading to or with their kids, but this level of investment in reading isn't necessary for most kids to become strong readers. They don't need to love reading for pleasure, because reading for pleasure isn't a virtue. Good for you, glad all this worked for your kids, but for all the parents of young kids who read this and think, there's no way I could do all that, you don't have to.

You DO need to pay attention to how well your kids are reading and if they're struggling still in first grade, do something about that.

Reading for pleasure may not be a virtue, but it sure is a good way for them to accelerate their reading ability.

Sure. But that reading regimen is extreme, said as someone who loves reading for pleasure, and has from a young age. Kids have other interests, families do other things. Again, I'm all for reading - but what's described is one person's experience. There are other ways to increase the chance that kids read for pleasure that don't involve extended parental involvement.

I thought the main point of the post was that reading to/with kids beyond the early childhood years is important. Is that extended parental involvement? Is that not typical?

You think it's typical that parents read novels to their kids through elementary school? Daily? That a family reading for 30 minutes together in the same room, also daily, is typical? Seriously?

I don’t think family reading is typical, but yes I absolutely thought UMC parents were reading novels to their elementary age kids. We do, our parents did, our friends did and do. Happy to be corrected in my impression but yes I’m shocked if this isn’t typical.

Shocked? Lol.

We're UMC. I even have a Ph.D., go figure! DH and I read to all of our kids from a very young age, some novels to our oldest especially - because we had the time - but that petered out as they got older. Maybe by first or second grade? We put them to bed by sitting and talking about their days or whatever else. If they wanted a book, sure, but frankly by the time our older two were in second grade, they wanted to read themselves in bed. They're in eighth and sixth grades now and most nights, we have to tell them to put the book down and go to bed.

As I noted in a different post, our youngest has dyslexia, so we do still read to him nightly (he's in fourth). I hope someday he'll want to read for pleasure, but he's wired differently.

My larger point is that, no, most kids do not need years and years of being read to to become strong readers. I've seen that very clearly, up-front, with two kids who learned to read with no special intervention and one who struggles mightily, despite being a super smart kid. Would more kids benefit from being read to for longer? Sure. But that's not what's being discussed in this thread.

That actually makes more sense to me and is less shocking, lol. PP had claimed that parents were abandoning reading aloud to kids once kids could read *at all* and advocated for nightly novel reading. If kids are picking up the nightly novel reading without parental involvement, I don’t think many people are going to find a deficit there.

To my understanding, PPs were advocating for reading novels to your kid throughout elementary school, i.e., well past the age when most kids can read at all, let alone read novels.

My issue is with anyone who insists that regular family novel reading for the duration of elementary school, is *required* ("what it takes") for kids to become strong readers. It's not. It's both too much for most kids and not enough for some kids. Those with dyslexia need much more structured intervention than being read to, even if what's being read to them are novels. In fact, this idealized vision of cozy reading being What Kids Need *doesn't* align with evidence-based reading instruction, but it's what a lot of educators thought was needed before the Sold a Story podcast and some other information came to light.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

NP - no, that's not what it takes. There's research on this stuff. I'm not discouraging anyone from reading to or with their kids, but this level of investment in reading isn't necessary for most kids to become strong readers. They don't need to love reading for pleasure, because reading for pleasure isn't a virtue. Good for you, glad all this worked for your kids, but for all the parents of young kids who read this and think, there's no way I could do all that, you don't have to.

You DO need to pay attention to how well your kids are reading and if they're struggling still in first grade, do something about that.

Reading for pleasure may not be a virtue, but it sure is a good way for them to accelerate their reading ability.

Sure. But that reading regimen is extreme, said as someone who loves reading for pleasure, and has from a young age. Kids have other interests, families do other things. Again, I'm all for reading - but what's described is one person's experience. There are other ways to increase the chance that kids read for pleasure that don't involve extended parental involvement.

I thought the main point of the post was that reading to/with kids beyond the early childhood years is important. Is that extended parental involvement? Is that not typical?

You think it's typical that parents read novels to their kids through elementary school? Daily? That a family reading for 30 minutes together in the same room, also daily, is typical? Seriously?

I don’t think family reading is typical, but yes I absolutely thought UMC parents were reading novels to their elementary age kids. We do, our parents did, our friends did and do. Happy to be corrected in my impression but yes I’m shocked if this isn’t typical.

Shocked? Lol.

We're UMC. I even have a Ph.D., go figure! DH and I read to all of our kids from a very young age, some novels to our oldest especially - because we had the time - but that petered out as they got older. Maybe by first or second grade? We put them to bed by sitting and talking about their days or whatever else. If they wanted a book, sure, but frankly by the time our older two were in second grade, they wanted to read themselves in bed. They're in eighth and sixth grades now and most nights, we have to tell them to put the book down and go to bed.

As I noted in a different post, our youngest has dyslexia, so we do still read to him nightly (he's in fourth). I hope someday he'll want to read for pleasure, but he's wired differently.

My larger point is that, no, most kids do not need years and years of being read to to become strong readers. I've seen that very clearly, up-front, with two kids who learned to read with no special intervention and one who struggles mightily, despite being a super smart kid. Would more kids benefit from being read to for longer? Sure. But that's not what's being discussed in this thread.

That actually makes more sense to me and is less shocking, lol. PP had claimed that parents were abandoning reading aloud to kids once kids could read *at all* and advocated for nightly novel reading. If kids are picking up the nightly novel reading without parental involvement, I don’t think many people are going to find a deficit there.

To my understanding, PPs were advocating for reading novels to your kid throughout elementary school, i.e., well past the age when most kids can read at all, let alone read novels.

My issue is with anyone who insists that regular family novel reading for the duration of elementary school, is *required* ("what it takes") for kids to become strong readers. It's not. It's both too much for most kids and not enough for some kids. Those with dyslexia need much more structured intervention than being read to, even if what's being read to them are novels. In fact, this idealized vision of cozy reading being What Kids Need *doesn't* align with evidence-based reading instruction, but it's what a lot of educators thought was needed before the Sold a Story podcast and some other information came to light.

If you read the original post, it talks about how obviously kids also need to be taught HOW to read, and doesn't claim that reading to your kids will help them learn to read. Kids have to be taught to read using a phonics-based curriculum, all kids should be tested for dyslexia and other IDs in 1st grade or thereabouts and provided with additional support to overcome those challenges. No one is suggesting you can will those problems away by reading to them.

The point is that in order to acquire a love books and a will (and stamina) to read full novels on their own, they need to experience what that looks like, and the best way for kids to acquire that experience is for their parents to read them full novels. Otherwise your kid may never even attempt to read a novel as difficult as, say, Little Women or Lord of the Rings, because they will initially find the language difficult and they will have no experience with the extremely big payoff to sticking with it.

I also don't think 30 minutes of being read to by a parent is "too much" for any kid. In what way? If it's a good book, they will enjoy it. Heck, I listen to audio books as an adult all the time. No one is harmed by being read to. It's pleasurable.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

NP - no, that's not what it takes. There's research on this stuff. I'm not discouraging anyone from reading to or with their kids, but this level of investment in reading isn't necessary for most kids to become strong readers. They don't need to love reading for pleasure, because reading for pleasure isn't a virtue. Good for you, glad all this worked for your kids, but for all the parents of young kids who read this and think, there's no way I could do all that, you don't have to.

You DO need to pay attention to how well your kids are reading and if they're struggling still in first grade, do something about that.

Reading for pleasure may not be a virtue, but it sure is a good way for them to accelerate their reading ability.

Sure. But that reading regimen is extreme, said as someone who loves reading for pleasure, and has from a young age. Kids have other interests, families do other things. Again, I'm all for reading - but what's described is one person's experience. There are other ways to increase the chance that kids read for pleasure that don't involve extended parental involvement.

I thought the main point of the post was that reading to/with kids beyond the early childhood years is important. Is that extended parental involvement? Is that not typical?

You think it's typical that parents read novels to their kids through elementary school? Daily? That a family reading for 30 minutes together in the same room, also daily, is typical? Seriously?

I don’t think family reading is typical, but yes I absolutely thought UMC parents were reading novels to their elementary age kids. We do, our parents did, our friends did and do. Happy to be corrected in my impression but yes I’m shocked if this isn’t typical.

Shocked? Lol.

We're UMC. I even have a Ph.D., go figure! DH and I read to all of our kids from a very young age, some novels to our oldest especially - because we had the time - but that petered out as they got older. Maybe by first or second grade? We put them to bed by sitting and talking about their days or whatever else. If they wanted a book, sure, but frankly by the time our older two were in second grade, they wanted to read themselves in bed. They're in eighth and sixth grades now and most nights, we have to tell them to put the book down and go to bed.

As I noted in a different post, our youngest has dyslexia, so we do still read to him nightly (he's in fourth). I hope someday he'll want to read for pleasure, but he's wired differently.

My larger point is that, no, most kids do not need years and years of being read to to become strong readers. I've seen that very clearly, up-front, with two kids who learned to read with no special intervention and one who struggles mightily, despite being a super smart kid. Would more kids benefit from being read to for longer? Sure. But that's not what's being discussed in this thread.

That actually makes more sense to me and is less shocking, lol. PP had claimed that parents were abandoning reading aloud to kids once kids could read *at all* and advocated for nightly novel reading. If kids are picking up the nightly novel reading without parental involvement, I don’t think many people are going to find a deficit there.

To my understanding, PPs were advocating for reading novels to your kid throughout elementary school, i.e., well past the age when most kids can read at all, let alone read novels.

My issue is with anyone who insists that regular family novel reading for the duration of elementary school, is *required* ("what it takes") for kids to become strong readers. It's not. It's both too much for most kids and not enough for some kids. Those with dyslexia need much more structured intervention than being read to, even if what's being read to them are novels. In fact, this idealized vision of cozy reading being What Kids Need *doesn't* align with evidence-based reading instruction, but it's what a lot of educators thought was needed before the Sold a Story podcast and some other information came to light.

If you read the original post, it talks about how obviously kids also need to be taught HOW to read, and doesn't claim that reading to your kids will help them learn to read. Kids have to be taught to read using a phonics-based curriculum, all kids should be tested for dyslexia and other IDs in 1st grade or thereabouts and provided with additional support to overcome those challenges. No one is suggesting you can will those problems away by reading to them.

The point is that in order to acquire a love books and a will (and stamina) to read full novels on their own, they need to experience what that looks like, and the best way for kids to acquire that experience is for their parents to read them full novels. Otherwise your kid may never even attempt to read a novel as difficult as, say, Little Women or Lord of the Rings, because they will initially find the language difficult and they will have no experience with the extremely big payoff to sticking with it.

I also don't think 30 minutes of being read to by a parent is "too much" for any kid. In what way? If it's a good book, they will enjoy it. Heck, I listen to audio books as an adult all the time. No one is harmed by being read to. It's pleasurable.

Related: a lot of parents get stuck on reading "age appropriate" books to kids and think this means you have to read them books with simple language. Nope. You can read them far more advanced books as long as the content is appropriate.

I know a lot of parents who read books like Unicorn Academy or Magic Treehouse to their kids. I think this is a waste of time. Those books are written specifically for young *readers*. The language is simplified so that a kid relatively new to reading can read it and stay engaged without getting frustrated. But if the parent is reading, read something harder! Something your kid would never be able to get through on their own but with a fantastic story. It's also okay if they don't understand every word. Tell them to stop you and ask if they don't understand something, but also they will figure out a lot of the language themselves.

We always sought to read books 2-3 grades above their reading level whenever we could. Again, the content has to be appropriate and not everything is. But also having a parent read it can make certain books less scary or upsetting. You read Charlotte's web to your kindergartener and you prepare them for the ending and talk it through with them. It's okay. It widens their horizons.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

Sorry doesn't ring true to me. My parents never ever read to me and I devoured books as a kid. Read everything I could get my hands on. I didn't want to be read at or to, I read myself. You can't force kids to love reading. They either do or they don't.

I'm the PP and I was like you -- loved to read even though my parents never read to me, was an advanced reader in elementary.

But I went to school in a school system that assigned a lot of novels, forced me to read and think about classic (and challenging) books, and had high expectations for my reading and writing ability. Our kids are not in that environment. Plus they have the distraction of handheld screens everywhere, especially at school.

I also disagree that kids either love reading or don't. Would you say the same about music or movies? Some people just can't watch movies, that's how it is? I think as long as kids can find a way to experience the pure pleasure of reading a really engaging story, they will love it. The problem is that many kids lag behind in reading ability or have learning disorders to overcome, and this makes reading arduous and unpleasant. By the time they are proficient in reading, they have negative associations with reading and don't seek out engaging texts (or resort to graphic novels because they are easier to read) and therefore never "level up" in the kinds of books they read, and just don't experience the pleasure of reading challenging but very engaging literature.

If parents keep reading to kids through elementary, you can fix all these problems. You can provide your kids with the classic and challenging literature that MCPS will not. You can show them what it feels like to read a longer novel start to finish, and the pleasures associated with this task. You can give them a break from their own reading challenges that can make reading feel like a chore, while still building their vocabulary, experiencing advanced story structure, etc.

If people really don't have the time for 30 minutes of reading a night with kids, you could maybe approximate this with audio books. But I think it's better if parents read with kids because I've found that this makes it easier to ensure kids are following the story, to stop and answer questions about what words mean or what is happening, and to ensure the reading material is age appropriate and not too scary or boring.

I have 3 kids. Read to all of them. One loves to read, one hates it, and one prefers to build intricate Lego structures and stages battle scenes and draws a lot. They are who they are. They are all great readers but they don't all love to read or do it for fun.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

Sorry doesn't ring true to me. My parents never ever read to me and I devoured books as a kid. Read everything I could get my hands on. I didn't want to be read at or to, I read myself. You can't force kids to love reading. They either do or they don't.

I'm the PP and I was like you -- loved to read even though my parents never read to me, was an advanced reader in elementary.

But I went to school in a school system that assigned a lot of novels, forced me to read and think about classic (and challenging) books, and had high expectations for my reading and writing ability. Our kids are not in that environment. Plus they have the distraction of handheld screens everywhere, especially at school.

I also disagree that kids either love reading or don't. Would you say the same about music or movies? Some people just can't watch movies, that's how it is? I think as long as kids can find a way to experience the pure pleasure of reading a really engaging story, they will love it. The problem is that many kids lag behind in reading ability or have learning disorders to overcome, and this makes reading arduous and unpleasant. By the time they are proficient in reading, they have negative associations with reading and don't seek out engaging texts (or resort to graphic novels because they are easier to read) and therefore never "level up" in the kinds of books they read, and just don't experience the pleasure of reading challenging but very engaging literature.

If parents keep reading to kids through elementary, you can fix all these problems. You can provide your kids with the classic and challenging literature that MCPS will not. You can show them what it feels like to read a longer novel start to finish, and the pleasures associated with this task. You can give them a break from their own reading challenges that can make reading feel like a chore, while still building their vocabulary, experiencing advanced story structure, etc.

If people really don't have the time for 30 minutes of reading a night with kids, you could maybe approximate this with audio books. But I think it's better if parents read with kids because I've found that this makes it easier to ensure kids are following the story, to stop and answer questions about what words mean or what is happening, and to ensure the reading material is age appropriate and not too scary or boring.

I have 3 kids. Read to all of them. One loves to read, one hates it, and one prefers to build intricate Lego structures and stages battle scenes and draws a lot. They are who they are. They are all great readers but they don't all love to read or do it for fun.

How old are they?

[Anonymous]

As a big reader and parent of 4 teen/young adult kids, I’m just stopping in here to say that this thread gives me hope.

Yes, MCPS is a mess and phones are terrible etc etc. But all you parents reading to your kids and bring thoughtful and respectful talking about it in this thread? This is NOT terrible. In fact, it’s nice!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

Sorry doesn't ring true to me. My parents never ever read to me and I devoured books as a kid. Read everything I could get my hands on. I didn't want to be read at or to, I read myself. You can't force kids to love reading. They either do or they don't.

Sorry, not in my culture. Most of us had parental involvement, study time at home was sacrosanct, and we all read for pleasure. To be supersmart and well read was a flex. No wonder my people are killing it here. No achievement gap here.

Your people self selected to come here.

This.
There's plenty of illiterates in "her culture", they just don't have parents who can hack an H-1B and afford to move. But boy, is she proud of her incredible achievements!😆

Indeed. And yet…winning bigly and outcompeting on English, Math, jobs, education and buying McMansions.

[Anonymous]

What about divorced families? Kids are not in one home to have any kind of reading schedule. To think that they will be read to is too much of an ask from the parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

NP - no, that's not what it takes. There's research on this stuff. I'm not discouraging anyone from reading to or with their kids, but this level of investment in reading isn't necessary for most kids to become strong readers. They don't need to love reading for pleasure, because reading for pleasure isn't a virtue. Good for you, glad all this worked for your kids, but for all the parents of young kids who read this and think, there's no way I could do all that, you don't have to.

You DO need to pay attention to how well your kids are reading and if they're struggling still in first grade, do something about that.

Reading for pleasure may not be a virtue, but it sure is a good way for them to accelerate their reading ability.

Sure. But that reading regimen is extreme, said as someone who loves reading for pleasure, and has from a young age. Kids have other interests, families do other things. Again, I'm all for reading - but what's described is one person's experience. There are other ways to increase the chance that kids read for pleasure that don't involve extended parental involvement.

I thought the main point of the post was that reading to/with kids beyond the early childhood years is important. Is that extended parental involvement? Is that not typical?

You think it's typical that parents read novels to their kids through elementary school? Daily? That a family reading for 30 minutes together in the same room, also daily, is typical? Seriously?

I don’t think family reading is typical, but yes I absolutely thought UMC parents were reading novels to their elementary age kids. We do, our parents did, our friends did and do. Happy to be corrected in my impression but yes I’m shocked if this isn’t typical.

Shocked? Lol.

We're UMC. I even have a Ph.D., go figure! DH and I read to all of our kids from a very young age, some novels to our oldest especially - because we had the time - but that petered out as they got older. Maybe by first or second grade? We put them to bed by sitting and talking about their days or whatever else. If they wanted a book, sure, but frankly by the time our older two were in second grade, they wanted to read themselves in bed. They're in eighth and sixth grades now and most nights, we have to tell them to put the book down and go to bed.

As I noted in a different post, our youngest has dyslexia, so we do still read to him nightly (he's in fourth). I hope someday he'll want to read for pleasure, but he's wired differently.

My larger point is that, no, most kids do not need years and years of being read to to become strong readers. I've seen that very clearly, up-front, with two kids who learned to read with no special intervention and one who struggles mightily, despite being a super smart kid. Would more kids benefit from being read to for longer? Sure. But that's not what's being discussed in this thread.

That actually makes more sense to me and is less shocking, lol. PP had claimed that parents were abandoning reading aloud to kids once kids could read *at all* and advocated for nightly novel reading. If kids are picking up the nightly novel reading without parental involvement, I don’t think many people are going to find a deficit there.

To my understanding, PPs were advocating for reading novels to your kid throughout elementary school, i.e., well past the age when most kids can read at all, let alone read novels.

My issue is with anyone who insists that regular family novel reading for the duration of elementary school, is *required* ("what it takes") for kids to become strong readers. It's not. It's both too much for most kids and not enough for some kids. Those with dyslexia need much more structured intervention than being read to, even if what's being read to them are novels. In fact, this idealized vision of cozy reading being What Kids Need *doesn't* align with evidence-based reading instruction, but it's what a lot of educators thought was needed before the Sold a Story podcast and some other information came to light.

If you read the original post, it talks about how obviously kids also need to be taught HOW to read, and doesn't claim that reading to your kids will help them learn to read. Kids have to be taught to read using a phonics-based curriculum, all kids should be tested for dyslexia and other IDs in 1st grade or thereabouts and provided with additional support to overcome those challenges. No one is suggesting you can will those problems away by reading to them.

The point is that in order to acquire a love books and a will (and stamina) to read full novels on their own, they need to experience what that looks like, and the best way for kids to acquire that experience is for their parents to read them full novels. Otherwise your kid may never even attempt to read a novel as difficult as, say, Little Women or Lord of the Rings, because they will initially find the language difficult and they will have no experience with the extremely big payoff to sticking with it.

I also don't think 30 minutes of being read to by a parent is "too much" for any kid. In what way? If it's a good book, they will enjoy it. Heck, I listen to audio books as an adult all the time. No one is harmed by being read to. It's pleasurable.

Related: a lot of parents get stuck on reading "age appropriate" books to kids and think this means you have to read them books with simple language. Nope. You can read them far more advanced books as long as the content is appropriate.

I know a lot of parents who read books like Unicorn Academy or Magic Treehouse to their kids. I think this is a waste of time. Those books are written specifically for young *readers*. The language is simplified so that a kid relatively new to reading can read it and stay engaged without getting frustrated. But if the parent is reading, read something harder! Something your kid would never be able to get through on their own but with a fantastic story. It's also okay if they don't understand every word. Tell them to stop you and ask if they don't understand something, but also they will figure out a lot of the language themselves.

We always sought to read books 2-3 grades above their reading level whenever we could. Again, the content has to be appropriate and not everything is. But also having a parent read it can make certain books less scary or upsetting. You read Charlotte's web to your kindergartener and you prepare them for the ending and talk it through with them. It's okay. It widens their horizons.

I disagree that the easier stuff is a waste of time for parents to read. If it’s what the child wants to pay attention to, that’s great. Also, in our house we’ve found it motivating: child soon realizes s/he can read this independently. I do agree with the value of reading tougher stuff to them, though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It is so much better now in ES and MS that they have CKLA. We endured C2.0, Benchmark, and Study Sync -- they were all awful. But there is a marked difference with a strong curriculum. But of course, it doesn't mean that kids shouldn't read on their own -- they aboslutely should.

My kids still aren’t reading actual books. Even with supposed enriched ELA at our home school

[Anonymous]

Let kids be kids. They have a bright future regardless of what they learn or not learn. Great leadership will not let this country sink.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

Sorry doesn't ring true to me. My parents never ever read to me and I devoured books as a kid. Read everything I could get my hands on. I didn't want to be read at or to, I read myself. You can't force kids to love reading. They either do or they don't.

I'm the PP and I was like you -- loved to read even though my parents never read to me, was an advanced reader in elementary.

But I went to school in a school system that assigned a lot of novels, forced me to read and think about classic (and challenging) books, and had high expectations for my reading and writing ability. Our kids are not in that environment. Plus they have the distraction of handheld screens everywhere, especially at school.

I also disagree that kids either love reading or don't. Would you say the same about music or movies? Some people just can't watch movies, that's how it is? I think as long as kids can find a way to experience the pure pleasure of reading a really engaging story, they will love it. The problem is that many kids lag behind in reading ability or have learning disorders to overcome, and this makes reading arduous and unpleasant. By the time they are proficient in reading, they have negative associations with reading and don't seek out engaging texts (or resort to graphic novels because they are easier to read) and therefore never "level up" in the kinds of books they read, and just don't experience the pleasure of reading challenging but very engaging literature.

If parents keep reading to kids through elementary, you can fix all these problems. You can provide your kids with the classic and challenging literature that MCPS will not. You can show them what it feels like to read a longer novel start to finish, and the pleasures associated with this task. You can give them a break from their own reading challenges that can make reading feel like a chore, while still building their vocabulary, experiencing advanced story structure, etc.

If people really don't have the time for 30 minutes of reading a night with kids, you could maybe approximate this with audio books. But I think it's better if parents read with kids because I've found that this makes it easier to ensure kids are following the story, to stop and answer questions about what words mean or what is happening, and to ensure the reading material is age appropriate and not too scary or boring.

I have 3 kids. Read to all of them. One loves to read, one hates it, and one prefers to build intricate Lego structures and stages battle scenes and draws a lot. They are who they are. They are all great readers but they don't all love to read or do it for fun.

How old are they?

What difference does it make? They are late elem school and high school. Not 6 yr olds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Re reading to our kids- most educated, UMC read to their kids, at least until their kids read to themselves instead. The top 10% of kids are performing just as well as ever. It's the floor that's dropping out. The posters on here are not the ones at issue.

Also - why the dig on graphic novels? My kids are voracious graphic novel readers. For a few years, that was 90% of what they read. They are now in 7th and 9th and 10% of what they read are graphic novels. My nephews (same ages) were/ are the same- and I don't know too many other 13/14 yo extroverted/sporty boys still reading for fun. The study cited by the NYT (if that's what the OP is referring to) even suggests that fiction (and by extension fictional graphic novels) has unique benefits and that "non-fiction may involve fewer opportunities for developing linguistic skills, creativity, imagination, theory of mind, and/or emotion regulation." https://www.cell.com/iscience/fulltext/S2589-0042(25)01549-4

But to the main point - yes- I don't know why schools are not having kids read novels anymore in middle and high school. It is ridiculous. My kids are reading about 2 books a year for school, if that.

Graphic novels are fine for pleasure or in the appropriate grade. People here are saying that it's not appropriate as the anchor text in Honors English 9.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm going to give a piece of advice about raising readers based on my experience:

You need to read to your kids way more, and way longer, than most people do. You also need to start reading them novel length books earlier.

Most MC and UMC parents read to their kids nightly until school age. But they mostly read picture books, and the tendency is to stop reading on e kids can read a picture book themselves, around K. They might still "read together" but the focus will be on encouraging the child to read to them. I actually think pushing kids to read aloud to parents is when many kids stop enjoying books, because reading aloud is much harder than just reading, and especially for a new reader, it can feel like a chore.

Instead, I would encourage parents to continue to read to their kids, and to start reading chapter books as soon as their kid can tolerate it (choose extremely engaging books so that the lack of pictures will bother them less, and the excitement will sustain interest over multiple nights as you read).

And then keep reading. If you read good, engaging novels to kids, they will develop an interest in reading no matter what. Yes you also separately have to support reading skills. If they aren't getting proper phonics instruction in school, do a program like Hooked on Phonics at home. They need 10-15 minutes a day, minimum, of phonics instruction until it clicks. But that's different from reading for pleasure, and if you want your kids to read independently for pleasure, you have to read to them in a way that shows them how mature, more advanced books can be pleasurable.

I would read TO your kids as long as possible, all the way through elementary ideally. Even after you stop reading to them, I'd suggest keeping up the habit of reading together, and spending 20-30 minutes each evening as a family reading in the same room, even if you are all reading different books. No screens except a e-book reader.

This is what it takes.

Sorry doesn't ring true to me. My parents never ever read to me and I devoured books as a kid. Read everything I could get my hands on. I didn't want to be read at or to, I read myself. You can't force kids to love reading. They either do or they don't.

I'm the PP and I was like you -- loved to read even though my parents never read to me, was an advanced reader in elementary.

But I went to school in a school system that assigned a lot of novels, forced me to read and think about classic (and challenging) books, and had high expectations for my reading and writing ability. Our kids are not in that environment. Plus they have the distraction of handheld screens everywhere, especially at school.

I also disagree that kids either love reading or don't. Would you say the same about music or movies? Some people just can't watch movies, that's how it is? I think as long as kids can find a way to experience the pure pleasure of reading a really engaging story, they will love it. The problem is that many kids lag behind in reading ability or have learning disorders to overcome, and this makes reading arduous and unpleasant. By the time they are proficient in reading, they have negative associations with reading and don't seek out engaging texts (or resort to graphic novels because they are easier to read) and therefore never "level up" in the kinds of books they read, and just don't experience the pleasure of reading challenging but very engaging literature.

If parents keep reading to kids through elementary, you can fix all these problems. You can provide your kids with the classic and challenging literature that MCPS will not. You can show them what it feels like to read a longer novel start to finish, and the pleasures associated with this task. You can give them a break from their own reading challenges that can make reading feel like a chore, while still building their vocabulary, experiencing advanced story structure, etc.

If people really don't have the time for 30 minutes of reading a night with kids, you could maybe approximate this with audio books. But I think it's better if parents read with kids because I've found that this makes it easier to ensure kids are following the story, to stop and answer questions about what words mean or what is happening, and to ensure the reading material is age appropriate and not too scary or boring.

I have 3 kids. Read to all of them. One loves to read, one hates it, and one prefers to build intricate Lego structures and stages battle scenes and draws a lot. They are who they are. They are all great readers but they don't all love to read or do it for fun.

How old are they?

What difference does it make? They are late elem school and high school. Not 6 yr olds.

The whole point is reading to them well past when they are 6 years old, so that's why. The implication is that if you'd continued reading to them throughout elementary instead of deciding "oh well some kids just don't like books" then all of your kids would be independent readers instead of just the one who happened to like it without you supporting it much.

Lots of skills are like this. You can let your kids self-select into sports or playing instruments, but some families will find a way to encourage such that all their kids ultimately do it. That's why you see families where all the kids are HS athletes or they are all proficient at piano and violin. It's not an accident -- their parents cultivated that interest instead of just waiting to see which kids naturally gravitated towards those activities.

Well reading is similar. Sure, some kids will like reading no matter what. But you can turn just about any kid into a reader with the right support, just like just about any kid can become proficient at dance or soccer or music if you really prioritize it and find ways to get your kids engaged and willing to do it. And parents also doing these activities will make it much more likely kids will do them too, I've noticed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:What about divorced families? Kids are not in one home to have any kind of reading schedule. To think that they will be read to is too much of an ask from the parent.

What?