Interesting thought, PP.

Teacher, can you expand on your previous post? Why don't you want parents helping their kids learn to read (when they are also doing other things with them like playing and exploring.)

We actually do all of these things together... I have an active child, so we do math while playing sports, read ingredients while cooking dinner, etc. We rarely sit and drill. Perhaps you are just talking about the parents that solely drill and not the ones that integrate learning through all activities.

Please clarify. Thanks.

Anonymous wrote:NP here. I taught my DD letter sounds, alphabet and reading as well... probably about 30 minutes a day and through songs, games (i.e. scavenger hunts looking for letters), crafts (letter art from pasta) and reading books before bedtime.

I don't understand what issue teachers have with parents helping their kids to learn to love learning (and through the process - read.)

I would think teachers would want parents to be their partners in education. Teaching is hard enough with kids whose parents don't try to foster a love of learning.

Not the teacher posting here. Evidently, parents are screwing up her curriculum and their kids by not properly teaching them how to learn to read.

NP here. I taught my DD letter sounds, alphabet and reading as well... probably about 30 minutes a day and through songs, games (i.e. scavenger hunts looking for letters), crafts (letter art from pasta) and reading books before bedtime.

I don't understand what issue teachers have with parents helping their kids to learn to love learning (and through the process - read.)

I would think teachers would want parents to be their partners in education. Teaching is hard enough with kids whose parents don't try to foster a love of learning.

Anonymous wrote:I'm the teacher. You would be surprised at the kids who " learned" to read because mom spent hours with them on sounds and letters instead of helping them learn to build, explore, and play.

Did they "learn" to read, or did they learn to read?

But I don't know why I would be surprised. I taught my children to read. And yes, I did spend "hours" with them on sounds and letters -- because that was part of teaching them how to read. Hours total, not hours a day. There was still plenty of time in the day for them to build, explore, and play.

I'm the teacher. You would be surprised at the kids who " learned" to read because mom spent hours with them on sounds and letters instead of helping them learn to build, explore, and play.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher who has taught K and first, I can tell you that plenty of kids blossom and pass the early bloomers. Sometimes the early bloomers have been "trained" and not taught. A natural curiosity and enthusiasm is much preferable to early reading.

Oh, give me a fu&king break. As if early readers are generally NOT curious or enthusiastic as a whole. Such crap.

I was an early reader and I always lived to read and lived to learn. I taught DS to read early and he still loves to read. He has always been very enthusiastic about school and partly, I think it's because he does well.

Yes, late readers seem to catch up by third grades and it's not a big deal either way. But don't imply that early readers are less curious or less enthusiastic learners. How ridiculous.

Well she is the teacher so she must know. I love it when people feel like they can speak for everyone. It is even more surprising that a teacher would make such a generalization. Please don't let my DDs has that teacher. Please!!!!

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher who has taught K and first, I can tell you that plenty of kids blossom and pass the early bloomers. Sometimes the early bloomers have been "trained" and not taught. A natural curiosity and enthusiasm is much preferable to early reading.

Oh, give me a fu&king break. As if early readers are generally NOT curious or enthusiastic as a whole. Such crap.

I was an early reader and I always lived to read and lived to learn. I taught DS to read early and he still loves to read. He has always been very enthusiastic about school and partly, I think it's because he does well.

Yes, late readers seem to catch up by third grades and it's not a big deal either way. But don't imply that early readers are less curious or less enthusiastic learners. How ridiculous.

Anonymous wrote:As a teacher who has taught K and first, I can tell you that plenty of kids blossom and pass the early bloomers. Sometimes the early bloomers have been "trained" and not taught. A natural curiosity and enthusiasm is much preferable to early reading.

These things are not mutually exclusive.

As a teacher who has taught K and first, I can tell you that plenty of kids blossom and pass the early bloomers. Sometimes the early bloomers have been "trained" and not taught. A natural curiosity and enthusiasm is much preferable to early reading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No.

Kindergarten is never boring.

It is the best grade of the entire school career. Why would anyone want their kid to pass that year?

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that some kids really have that drive and thirst for knowledge early on? It's not about rushing. Instead, it's about listening to your child and being their advocate. How many times does a person have to say, "Each child is different." Don't be a hater or be so quick to criticize just because you don't believe or don't relate.

Because I can now say as a parent of a 3rd grader, that those advanced kids change so much once there is real skill and initiative needed.

It is really true that it evens out by 3rd grade. Kids that read themselves chapter books in K mean nothing.

So the advanced kids become slow or average and then the slow ones become geniuses. Does that make you feel better to make those generalizations? Ok. Way to go, mom.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No.

Kindergarten is never boring.

It is the best grade of the entire school career. Why would anyone want their kid to pass that year?

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that some kids really have that drive and thirst for knowledge early on? It's not about rushing. Instead, it's about listening to your child and being their advocate. How many times does a person have to say, "Each child is different." Don't be a hater or be so quick to criticize just because you don't believe or don't relate.

Because I can now say as a parent of a 3rd grader, that those advanced kids change so much once there is real skill and initiative needed.

It is really true that it evens out by 3rd grade. Kids that read themselves chapter books in K mean nothing.

Even if your DD doesn't test into MCPS through the early entrance process, private school is an option. Lots of people do that. If you move to public after private kindergarten, she'd still go back to kindergarten in public but would be assessed after a few weeks for a promotion. If you transfer in second grade she will go in on grade level.

Every kid is different. Starting early is absolutely the right thing for some kids. For other kids, it's not the right thing. Talk to your kid's preschool teachers, apply for Early Entrance to Kindergarten, see if she gets in -- and then decide if it's the right decision for your particular kid. Who knows? Maybe they won't even accept her! Then you won't have to decide!

My dd (not oldest or youngest in her class) was doing basic reading before starting kindergarten. The teacher was good about assessing and making sure dd was challenged in reading. I could really see the growth. My dd was not ahead in math, so she needed what she learned in kindergarten to be on grade level at the end of the year. The other thing about reading is around 2nd grade it gets tougher. Even if your kid is great at decoding, there is more emphasis on both reading comprehension and writing about plot, summary, main idea, giving supporting examples etc. I found my kids didn't move as fast with reading levels once they got to 2nd grade.

I had one daughter test in early (fall birthday) and in her situation she has been in preschool with older kids and was holding her own socially and her verbal skills and verbal reasoning was right there at the top of the kids in her class. I didn't want to put her back a year when we moved preschools. We also started to see if you didn't keep her engaged she could be talkative/lose focus. There was some other things we were looking at with how she behaved with younger kids and older kids and felt socially for several reasons it would work out better with her being in the class with older kids but having opportunities to interact with younger kids. It's really hard to know how things will turn out but I think if you have any doubts about moving ahead, don't do it. I've known several people that have moved their kid ahead and like someone else said they looked at the personality, maturity, social skills, as well as the academics and felt confident of the decision and have not looked back.

Good luck.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No.

Kindergarten is never boring.

It is the best grade of the entire school career. Why would anyone want their kid to pass that year?

Why is it so hard for some people to understand that some kids really have that drive and thirst for knowledge early on? It's not about rushing. Instead, it's about listening to your child and being their advocate. How many times does a person have to say, "Each child is different." Don't be a hater or be so quick to criticize just because you don't believe or don't relate.

I totally relate.

I had a kid (youngest in the class though) who tested off the charts and was reading fluently when he started K.

Kindergarten is about so much more than academics. It is truly the best year of school. Your child will not be bored. There will always be something fun to do in kindergarten, and something to challenge each child, be it social skills, reading silently, handwriting, art projects, music class where you are learning real music, PE, eating in the cafeteria, learning a science lesson, etc.

In this area especially, smart well prepared kindergartners are a dime a dozen.

Your child will not be bored, and will not be alone.