Reading Pedagogy at DCPS Elementary?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS only uses science of reading-aligned curricula.

To all the parents saying the OP is wrong simply because they listened to a podcast, you are actually the ones who are wrong .

No one is saying they're wrong because they listened to one podcast, they're saying one podcast does not make you an expert.

I’m Just going to repeat this for fun. I’m the OP and I actually studied this in college. Not an expert, but pretty familiar with the literature. It’s not new- been around for decades.

This is supposed to be surprising information?

Too hard to admit you were wrong, huh?

Try again! I'm the person who pointed out of course someone who took a college course was waxing philosophic. I am no the first poster. You think a great deal of yourself, no?

You didn’t say anything about a college course. This is the quote “ Their concern and the entire thread is silly. The navel gazing on pedagogy should preserved for EdD candidates.” Please show me where you said anything about à college course. What is your problem on here? A degree is slightly more education than a college course, lol. And yet —- I continually said I am not an expert, but I have read the literature on the subject and conducted research. So yes, I would say I am informed I like you. I like how you didn’t even address my comment about why it is actually an important topic to discuss in the context of schools that serve lower SES communities - bc you were obviously wrong. You don’t even seem to know what academic disciplines study this type of information. Part of the problem is that academia is stovepiped and applied linguistics academic aren’t collaboration enough with EdD candidates and vice versa.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS only uses science of reading-aligned curricula.

To all the parents saying the OP is wrong simply because they listened to a podcast, you are actually the ones who are wrong .

No one is saying they're wrong because they listened to one podcast, they're saying one podcast does not make you an expert.

And yet...OP's concern is well-founded.

Their concern and the entire thread is silly. The navel gazing on pedagogy should preserved for EdD candidates and others who spend their time outside classrooms. Parents who want to wax philosophic about this stuff in the context of DCPS are ignorant of the realities of public education, especially in DC. DC schools are filled with food insecure kids from unstable homes with parents and guardians that haven't been reading to them in utero. Educators in DC are triaging a ton of systemic and societal problems. These get worse as time goes on. If the wanna be public policy experts on this thread knew a darn thing beyond their under 5 year olds they'd realize how silly then entire discussion is. Instead, you all vomit the daily drivel of "deep thinkers" with 3 year olds who think they have a clue.

You people are insane. Not claiming to be an expert, but I ACTUALLY DID MY OWN PRIMARY RESEARCH ON THIS TOPIC. You people are out of control. Guess what? You know what makes HUGE differences for cognitive development in underprivileged children? READING TO THEM and TEACHING THEM HOW TO READ. It does more than even food security does. It has more of an impact than any other single variable. It’s amazing how much ROI simple programs like giving underprivileged families free books and simple tips and tricks like speaking to your kids constantly about every daily thing you do has for outcomes. Google “the word gap.” Then come back and tell me this is a ridiculous conversation to have. Not my fault you are ignorant on the topic. Not to mention the ridiculous notion that bc other kids are struggling I shouldn’t be concerned about the education of my own children. Lol, what?

It took you 153 words to admit that the most important thing to developing early reading success to to READ TO KIDS?

They are complimentary but not the same cognitive processes. This is why as an adult when you study a foreign language, you may be able to read it, but listening comprehension, and writing are nowhere near as easy. Another example is how children who are “passive speakers” of a language — usually bc their parents speak a language around them, but they don’t speak it back. They hear it enough to understand it, but they have a much harder time producing the language either in spoken or written form. The point is simply reading to a child is excellent for verbal skills, vocabulary, and abstract/conceptual thinking, but it will not teach a child to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

OP again - what is this podcast?? Not familiar but would be interested

Emily Hanford’s work is quite good. This series is a bit sensational, but it does show the rot in popular curriculum publishers.

It seems like most DCPS are trying to follow the research on the “science of reading” in K-2. Preschool literacy supporting activities are also important and these are things like hearing books and learning rhyming songs and finger play. Hand and finger strength and coordination are also key, this is achieved through play with stuff like clay and scissors.

None of this teaching has to be boring. It can all be playful and fun, even phonics. But it depends on the skill and delivery of the teacher. Unfortunately most teacher preparation programs don’t do a good job with this content yet.

https://features.apmreports.org/sold-a-story/

You may also enjoy the purple challenge.
https://thesweetscienceofreading.com/the-purple-challenge/

Thanks!! Am going to listen to it. It’s been so long since I’ve dug into this stuff and I really miss it.

[Anonymous]

Does anyone know if Ross, Hyde, Hearst, Key, and Janney focus on Fundations and Haggerty?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS only uses science of reading-aligned curricula.

To all the parents saying the OP is wrong simply because they listened to a podcast, you are actually the ones who are wrong .

No one is saying they're wrong because they listened to one podcast, they're saying one podcast does not make you an expert.

I’m Just going to repeat this for fun. I’m the OP and I actually studied this in college. Not an expert, but pretty familiar with the literature. It’s not new- been around for decades.

This is supposed to be surprising information?

Too hard to admit you were wrong, huh?

Try again! I'm the person who pointed out of course someone who took a college course was waxing philosophic. I am no the first poster. You think a great deal of yourself, no?

You didn’t say anything about a college course. This is the quote “ Their concern and the entire thread is silly. The navel gazing on pedagogy should preserved for EdD candidates.” Please show me where you said anything about à college course. What is your problem on here? A degree is slightly more education than a college course, lol. And yet —- I continually said I am not an expert, but I have read the literature on the subject and conducted research. So yes, I would say I am informed I like you. I like how you didn’t even address my comment about why it is actually an important topic to discuss in the context of schools that serve lower SES communities - bc you were obviously wrong. You don’t even seem to know what academic disciplines study this type of information. Part of the problem is that academia is stovepiped and applied linguistics academic aren’t collaboration enough with EdD candidates and vice versa.

Also, unsure if you understand what philosophy is. Nothing in the originally post or any of my subsequent posts qualifies as philosophical. You have yet to make a single valid point. I would consider knowing a bit more about a subject next time before you else die to attack people and be obnoxious for no good reason.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

This isn't entirely true. There is evidence that early readers fare better in content areas, possibly because they spend more time reading for knowledge than later readers. I think framing early literacy instruction as "pushing academics" is also misleading. This might be the case some places, but there does not need to be worksheets or phonics drills. In reality, teaching young kids to read involves teaching a letter a week and making it really fun with songs and games and rich literature. Most children who do not have reading difficulties can learn to read easily at a young age.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

So true. Heck, one of the "up and coming" schools on this board that people think is a viable option has removed all picture books from their K classrooms. It's criminal.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

My niece goes to school overseas in a country in the top 5 academically. They have low-cost half-day preschool starting at age 3 with no academic component whatsoever. They do things like make paper dolls and pretend to sell them at a pretend store. This goes on until first grade when academics begin and they start full-day school. They don't even think about learning to read until first grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

This isn't entirely true. There is evidence that early readers fare better in content areas, possibly because they spend more time reading for knowledge than later readers. I think framing early literacy instruction as "pushing academics" is also misleading. This might be the case some places, but there does not need to be worksheets or phonics drills. In reality, teaching young kids to read involves teaching a letter a week and making it really fun with songs and games and rich literature. Most children who do not have reading difficulties can learn to read easily at a young age.

My IB poorly performing school absolutely pushes academics with worksheets, etc… and it’s not the only DCPS school I know that does this.

You are the one misleading people if you think that DCPS doesn’t do this and no many children do not learn to read early by introducing just letters. You actually need to do a whole lot more than that to be able to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DCPS only uses science of reading-aligned curricula.

To all the parents saying the OP is wrong simply because they listened to a podcast, you are actually the ones who are wrong .

No one is saying they're wrong because they listened to one podcast, they're saying one podcast does not make you an expert.

I’m Just going to repeat this for fun. I’m the OP and I actually studied this in college. Not an expert, but pretty familiar with the literature. It’s not new- been around for decades.

This is supposed to be surprising information?

Too hard to admit you were wrong, huh?

Try again! I'm the person who pointed out of course someone who took a college course was waxing philosophic. I am no the first poster. You think a great deal of yourself, no?

You didn’t say anything about a college course. This is the quote “ Their concern and the entire thread is silly. The navel gazing on pedagogy should preserved for EdD candidates.” Please show me where you said anything about à college course. What is your problem on here? A degree is slightly more education than a college course, lol. And yet —- I continually said I am not an expert, but I have read the literature on the subject and conducted research. So yes, I would say I am informed I like you. I like how you didn’t even address my comment about why it is actually an important topic to discuss in the context of schools that serve lower SES communities - bc you were obviously wrong. You don’t even seem to know what academic disciplines study this type of information. Part of the problem is that academia is stovepiped and applied linguistics academic aren’t collaboration enough with EdD candidates and vice versa.

OMG. It is like you took a course in vomiting academic word salad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

It’s not way too early. Waiting until 1st to start with phonics would be a disaster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

that’s nice - does that country have the same socio-economic disparities as DC? do they have an evidence based curriculum that goes through elementary? do they remove all SN from mainstream as a rule? do they put kids on a vocational track at 5th grade?

I’m not saying DCPS is perfect. Lord knows it is not. But one thing DCPS truly excels in is K-1st literacy. The parents who are distressed at “pushing academics” in K are the same ones moaning about “lack of differentiation” in middle school.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

My niece goes to school overseas in a country in the top 5 academically. They have low-cost half-day preschool starting at age 3 with no academic component whatsoever. They do things like make paper dolls and pretend to sell them at a pretend store. This goes on until first grade when academics begin and they start full-day school. They don't even think about learning to read until first grade.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

This isn't entirely true. There is evidence that early readers fare better in content areas, possibly because they spend more time reading for knowledge than later readers. I think framing early literacy instruction as "pushing academics" is also misleading. This might be the case some places, but there does not need to be worksheets or phonics drills. In reality, teaching young kids to read involves teaching a letter a week and making it really fun with songs and games and rich literature. Most children who do not have reading difficulties can learn to read easily at a young age.

My IB poorly performing school absolutely pushes academics with worksheets, etc… and it’s not the only DCPS school I know that does this.

You are the one misleading people if you think that DCPS doesn’t do this and no many children do not learn to read early by introducing just letters. You actually need to do a whole lot more than that to be able to read.

I am PP. I am a reading specialist and OG certified. I did not say that prek worksheets don't happen and I did not say you ONLY need to teach letters to read. Lots of early childhood educators do it correctly--phonemic awareness games, engaging read alouds, fun ways to teach letter sounds and blending, etc. Another benefit to early literacy is that you catch struggling students early on so you can provide the appropriate intervention. I teach so many 3rd and 4th grade students with dyslexia who would have benefitted from earlier identification and intervention.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Lord, every parent listened to that podcast and now deems themself a reading specialist.

Agree! It’s comical. They’ve “done their own research” and now are experts.

Sadly the parents who’ve listened to the Sold a Story podcast are more educated than most curriculum decision makers.

-OG tutor who does know the research and cleans up damage from poorly-informed schools

Not the OP. I don't get the hype about PK3 reading, really even K reading. Some might read in PK, K, or even 1st and 2nd and it can come out fine. DC1 didn't really read till end of first and is a super strong student. DC2 read fairly early and in depth by start of first - a thoughtful student, especially in humanities, but not super strong.

Reading is so critical, but doing it early isn't necessarily a predictor of anything.

This. If you read and talk to your kids during the early years, then it’s fine as long as your schools reading curriculum has a phonics component.

DS school taught phonics but also had writers workshop to encourage creative thoughts and writing. It doesn’t have to be either/or.

Kids with above foundations learn to read at their own pace. DS was just starting to read CVC words in the spring of K. Then a bulb just went off and his reading skyrocketed. Towards the end of summer (we did encourage reading daily over the summer), DS was reading late 1st grade and when school started in 1st he was reading at 2nd grade level. Now in 3rd, he is reading/comprehending at 5th grade level.

Some kids read early because they are pushed by their parents. Some kids read later. By 3rd grade, late kids catch up and it evens out.

I agree it isn’t essential to push for early reading. And I think formal instruction should wait until 1st grade. But it is really important for teachers and parents to be really clear about the typical developmental sequence of reading skills. Things like phonemic awareness and phonics are important steps on the path to being a skilled reader.

It is also possible to identify the 1 in 5 kids who are dyslexic by the end of K if you are monitoring these skills. Waiting until the 3rd grade to try to figure out why reading hasn’t “clicked” virtually guarantees most of those kids will never catch up.

Why wait until 1st grade? DCPS would be really negligent if they did that. They have a lot of kids who can’t waste a year of formal instruction.

DCPS pushes academics way too early in ECE, especially at the title 1 and lower performing schools. It is not developmentally appropriate at all. At these younger ages, talking, plating, building curiosity, exploring, etc….is what is needed. It’s not phonics or worksheets.

Studies have shown no long term gains of pushing academics early.

This isn't entirely true. There is evidence that early readers fare better in content areas, possibly because they spend more time reading for knowledge than later readers. I think framing early literacy instruction as "pushing academics" is also misleading. This might be the case some places, but there does not need to be worksheets or phonics drills. In reality, teaching young kids to read involves teaching a letter a week and making it really fun with songs and games and rich literature. Most children who do not have reading difficulties can learn to read easily at a young age.

My IB poorly performing school absolutely pushes academics with worksheets, etc… and it’s not the only DCPS school I know that does this.

You are the one misleading people if you think that DCPS doesn’t do this and no many children do not learn to read early by introducing just letters. You actually need to do a whole lot more than that to be able to read.

yes, I know what would be appropriate for a Title 1 school in DC: do NOT try to teach the kids to read! Teaching kids to read in K is not equitable. Rich kids in private schools and in Finland get to play around until 1st grade. Academics are racism.