Is it on parents to teach kids to read?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Listen to the "Sold a Story" podcast. It's horrifying. You definitely need to take on reading instruction at home

Please understand that lots of teachers know how to teach phonics and even tried to teach it despite the higher ups pushing Lucy Caulkins and other crap.

Years ago, my school got a grant and a trainer from the American Reading Company came to our school. She was there all day for a month “training” the primary teachers. It was an awful program. At the end of the month, I told my principal I would not be teaching kids how to read using “strategies” like “look at the picture” and “look at the first letter of the word.” She said my refusal would be reflected in my professional duties. I started looking for another school but thankfully she left our school at the end of the year.

Nobody listens to the teachers. We have next to no power at all in regards to curriculum, pacing, etc. Thankfully the science of reading is currently in vogue so my students are learning how to read the right way without me having to close the door and hide my materials.

My kids were technically in a Lucy Caulkins school but all teachers supplemented with phonics instruction, including phonics homework.

[Anonymous]

I’m a combo of self-taught with encouragement from a seasoned kindergarten teacher. I learned to read at 4.

My DC began kindergarten with rudimentary reading skills and all learned mostly with my help and not via FCPS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Former teacher and MCPS parent. I had to teach my third grader to read myself and bought a bunch of phonics books and drilled it into her in kindergarten, first and second because their old curriculum (Benchmark) was total crap. It taught the kids to guess words based on the picture and other garbage strategies to learn to read that are not grounded in evidence. My kid entered K knowing all letters and their sounds and some sight words and learned nothing from the Benchmark curriculum. It was a joke - instead of simple Bob type books to learn to sound out words she would come home with complex stories and paragraphs they expected the kindergarteners to guess read.

Half way through the kindergarten year I took control and got her additional support in school through the reading specialist who uses RGR and did nightly sessions with her that she cried through sometimes, but she is reading very well now. It’s absolutely ridiculous that MCPS ever used the Benchmark literacy curriculum and they screwed a generation of kids whose parents did not have the resources I did to teach their child.

I’m somewhat pleased about CKLA but the texts in 3rd are super dry, old fashioned, and boring. And they don’t read long form texts or books as a group from what I can gather which is also problematic, but at least they are using phonics now.

YEs! This is exactly what my kid was doing. Guessing based on the picture, or context, or figuring out the first letter and guessing based on that. He is pretty bright, so was able to guess correctly most of the time, which really hurt him in the long run. It was complete BS, teacher was never concerned and always said he was above grade level in reading, and moved him along to the next letter level on a regular basis. I also have to say the books that were leveled seed so random. These were picture books, graded readers, and non-fiction books just sharpied with the reading level on them, not part of a comprehensive literacy/phonics curriculum. And this is a top public in a wealthy district where each classroom has an aide. I can't imagine what reading instruction is like in a lesser public without resources.

I’m not sure you’d find too many schools that are “lesser” in their teaching methods.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but most people do it before K. So then in K they can pick up whatever the school does teach.

My oldest was a covid K kid, and we homeschooled and then went to private for 1st and 2nd. He could read at age 4. Started my second in public K, but had learned to teach her before then. So, I can say that private schools are generally much better at teaching reading than public, but in both cases you should do it at home before starting K.

Should do what exactly? Most kids go to preschool, pre-k and Kindergarten. They are plenty ready with their alphabet, their books, workbooks, reading at home, coloring, arts and crafts, letters and words everywhere.

I think the only ones not reading are just slower to read and it’s nobody’s fault. Everyone wants the 99th percentile for their kids instead of where they actually are presently. It’s not a problem to do more at home but it can’t be all these schools that don’t know how to teach.

[Anonymous]

I taught both of my girls to read and we did it the old fashioned way. They read before K and my eldest is a voracious reader with an amazing vocabulary in HS. My youngest struggles a bit in 3rd grade but she is more into sports than books. She does ok though.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but most people do it before K. So then in K they can pick up whatever the school does teach.

My oldest was a covid K kid, and we homeschooled and then went to private for 1st and 2nd. He could read at age 4. Started my second in public K, but had learned to teach her before then. So, I can say that private schools are generally much better at teaching reading than public, but in both cases you should do it at home before starting K.

Should do what exactly? Most kids go to preschool, pre-k and Kindergarten. They are plenty ready with their alphabet, their books, workbooks, reading at home, coloring, arts and crafts, letters and words everywhere.

I think the only ones not reading are just slower to read and it’s nobody’s fault. Everyone wants the 99th percentile for their kids instead of where they actually are presently. It’s not a problem to do more at home but it can’t be all these schools that don’t know how to teach.

Except for the 2E dyslexic kids who are 99th percentile and can’t read.

[Anonymous]

That's what I've always thought, OP. If you wait for the teacher to do it, you're going to wait a long time.

[Anonymous]

Other than reading to my kids, I didn’t do anything to teach them.

My older DD was reading probably the summer after K (I don’t really remember). She’s in 6th grade now and is reading a few years ahead of grade level / can read anything really (it’s more about finding content that interests her). My younger one seemed like she wouldn’t get it in first grade. Then, right around her 7th bday (winter of first grade) it all clicked. She’s in 2nd now and loves reading and reads well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I don’t think any teachers say this. In my experience teachers tend to be optimistic and take a wait and see approach unless there are major, obvious problems. The problem with that situation is that parents are blindsided later on and then it takes much more effort to catch up.

I mostly agree with this.

Separately, 1:1 or 1:2 is - by far - the best way to teach early reading. Only 1 kid can read out loud to the teacher at a time. With 25-30 kids in a 1st grade public school class, there just is not enough time to teach anything 1:1 or 1:2.

So teachers do what they can to present the material, given the class sizes and instructional setup School Administration gives them. Some kids will pick it up, but other kids will not, in that kind of setting.

At later grades if a kid is not reading at least minimally, and that might be very minimal indeed, then the kid should get identified for pull-outs with a reading specialist. But, by the time that happens, the damage is done and the kid is way way behind. Catch up is much much harder than keep up.

[Anonymous]

PP again. By "early reading" above, I mean at the "Bob Book" level or what used to be called pre-primers.

Kids who already are good at phonetic decoding and are able to learn the many sight words as they are introduced often can learn reasonably effectively in a group setting. 1:1 is still the easiest way to learn, and that is why so many parents engage to give their kids that 1:1 reading out loud time.

[Anonymous]

Cmon, OP. Is this a question? Yes, parents are supposed to teach their kids to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I taught both of my girls to read and we did it the old fashioned way. They read before K and my eldest is a voracious reader with an amazing vocabulary in HS. My youngest struggles a bit in 3rd grade but she is more into sports than books. She does ok though.

My son has a learning disability (the non verbal one) but his vocabulary testing was always in the 99th percentile, always grades ahead. He uses words I’m not familiar with. No teaching on my part we just went to the library and book stores. Mostly book stores a lot. His reading ability also was several grades ahead. He credits all of the adult comic books he read. And of course his teachers deserve credit. They picked great books for the students to read.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yes, but most people do it before K. So then in K they can pick up whatever the school does teach.

My oldest was a covid K kid, and we homeschooled and then went to private for 1st and 2nd. He could read at age 4. Started my second in public K, but had learned to teach her before then. So, I can say that private schools are generally much better at teaching reading than public, but in both cases you should do it at home before starting K.

Should do what exactly? Most kids go to preschool, pre-k and Kindergarten. They are plenty ready with their alphabet, their books, workbooks, reading at home, coloring, arts and crafts, letters and words everywhere.

I think the only ones not reading are just slower to read and it’s nobody’s fault. Everyone wants the 99th percentile for their kids instead of where they actually are presently. It’s not a problem to do more at home but it can’t be all these schools that don’t know how to teach.

Except for the 2E dyslexic kids who are 99th percentile and can’t read.

I know about learning disabilities getting in the way of all the real strengths the kid has. It sucks.

[Anonymous]

About 30% of kids will learn to read no matter if they were taught properly. Studies are mostly consistent about this.

Its the other 70% - a clear majority - that do need explicit instruction using proper methods - Science of Reading.

[Anonymous]

What school district are you in OP? ACPS uses a phonics based curriculum for reading.