Most kids learn to decode, but there are a few that don't. I've seen kids test using nonsense words that they are supposed to sound out; a child who decodes can do them easily, but a child who reads can't.

Comprehension is separate from reading ability. Kids can comprehend a far more complex story or informational topic than the can read. Ability to explain the story varies, but a child who understands the story can show that in some way. Retelling the plot, setting, theme is very dry, so a preschool age child is more likely to show that he understands by asking if he can make the same dish with mom that the kids in the story made or she pretends to do the same things that the puppy did in the story. The way that kids are tested for comprehension is one-size-fits-all, and younger kids are more likely to not be able to do that yet, but if they can discuss favorite parts of a book, ask and answer questions and have a full understanding of the book, they can both read and comprehend what they read.

By the way, yes, I've known several children who were reading by 5. I don't count picture books with short sentences on each page, as usually the child can figure out the plot before looking at the words. I'm more interested in whether a child can pick up a new text, without pictures or with longer passages with the pictures.

Anonymous wrote:My little angel pretended she could not read in K b/c she wanted to sit next to the girl with the shiny hair who really couldn't read. Many confused conversations with the K teacher.

I did the same thing in kindergarten. I was shy and my best friend couldn't read yet, so I pretended not to read for the longest time to stay in her group.

Reading and comprehension are two separate skills. I consider reading reading a new book that you have never seen before. Comprehension is at a different level. My child can comprehend but due to language issues cannot express it so most assume he is not comprehending when he is. Again, separate issues and poor teaching skills.

There is a difference between not understanding a book and not understanding a literary concept.

I agree with several pps. Retelling requires different skills in comprehension. You can absolutely understand what you read and enjoyed it while not do a good job retelling it.

Anonymous wrote:I think reading must include reading comprehension. In order to say we have sincerely read something, we have to have derived meaning from, it. Otherwise, you are simply decoding, and not reading. In other words, when we read, it has to make sense, otherwise we’re not really reading. Many children are decoders, not readers.

Do you think that these kids who are reading (or "reading") and enjoying the books are not deriving meaning from them? They have favorite books that they read and reread, they laugh at the funny parts, they use a word they learned from the book, they act out the stories, they encounter something in real life and say, "Oh, this is like in the book when..." -- but because they can't explain about the author's intent or describe the setting, they're not deriving meaning from them?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To many it just means picking up a new book and reading it with little trouble, but without comprehension, it's not reading to me. I think a reader is a child who picks up new text, reads it, can retell it in detail (not just using pronouns), and can identify the theme/plot, the setting, and the message/what the author was trying to say. Anything short of that is just parlor tricks to me. Something to show Aunt June when she comes to visit.

That would be grade 3 for some kids

That's sad. This is required by at least the end of 1st and many are doing in mid-1st grade. My K is doing this. She's was DRA 20 at the first parent teacher conference back in Nov.

OK. My kid was reading all of the Wizard of Oz books in first grade and E. Nesbit in second grade, and she still couldn't have told you the theme or "the message/what the author was trying to say" to save her life. Parlor tricks, I guess.

Without comprehension, reading is nothing more than tracking symbols on a page with your eyes and sounding them out. Imagine being handed a story written in Egyptian hieroglyphics with no understanding of their meaning. You may appreciate the words aesthetically and even be able to draw some small bits of meaning from the page, but you are not truly reading the story. The words on the page have no meaning. They are simply symbols. People read to understand. Understanding is always a part of the purpose. Without understanding, you are not reading.

And if you kid was tested for reading level, he or she would not test on Wizard of Oz or E. Nesbit level, despite his/her ability to know the words because he/she does not understand or comprehend the book.

She could comprehend and understand just fine. Not to mention that she enjoyed the books. She just couldn't explain about "themes". So I guess she wasn't reading?

But yes, I agree that she wouldn't (and didn't) test at those reading levels.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To many it just means picking up a new book and reading it with little trouble, but without comprehension, it's not reading to me. I think a reader is a child who picks up new text, reads it, can retell it in detail (not just using pronouns), and can identify the theme/plot, the setting, and the message/what the author was trying to say. Anything short of that is just parlor tricks to me. Something to show Aunt June when she comes to visit.

That would be grade 3 for some kids

That's sad. This is required by at least the end of 1st and many are doing in mid-1st grade. My K is doing this. She's was DRA 20 at the first parent teacher conference back in Nov.

OK. My kid was reading all of the Wizard of Oz books in first grade and E. Nesbit in second grade, and she still couldn't have told you the theme or "the message/what the author was trying to say" to save her life. Parlor tricks, I guess.

Without comprehension, reading is nothing more than tracking symbols on a page with your eyes and sounding them out. Imagine being handed a story written in Egyptian hieroglyphics with no understanding of their meaning. You may appreciate the words aesthetically and even be able to draw some small bits of meaning from the page, but you are not truly reading the story. The words on the page have no meaning. They are simply symbols. People read to understand. Understanding is always a part of the purpose. Without understanding, you are not reading.

And if you kid was tested for reading level, he or she would not test on Wizard of Oz or E. Nesbit level, despite his/her ability to know the words because he/she does not understand or comprehend the book.

But you can have comprehension without being able to describe the "theme" or "the message" of the book. High school students are often working on understanding theme.

I've seen this on DCUM before, that early readers are mere decoders and aren't really reading. My 5 year old can Mercy Watson, the Kingdom of Wrenly, the Wayside School books and comprehend them. Can he retell them? No, or only to a limited extent. But retelling is a different skill than comprehension. Does it matter? Not at all, except to a couple DCUM posters.

I think reading must include reading comprehension. In order to say we have sincerely read something, we have to have derived meaning from, it. Otherwise, you are simply decoding, and not reading. In other words, when we read, it has to make sense, otherwise we’re not really reading. Many children are decoders, not readers.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To many it just means picking up a new book and reading it with little trouble, but without comprehension, it's not reading to me. I think a reader is a child who picks up new text, reads it, can retell it in detail (not just using pronouns), and can identify the theme/plot, the setting, and the message/what the author was trying to say. Anything short of that is just parlor tricks to me. Something to show Aunt June when she comes to visit.

That would be grade 3 for some kids

That's sad. This is required by at least the end of 1st and many are doing in mid-1st grade. My K is doing this. She's was DRA 20 at the first parent teacher conference back in Nov.

OK. My kid was reading all of the Wizard of Oz books in first grade and E. Nesbit in second grade, and she still couldn't have told you the theme or "the message/what the author was trying to say" to save her life. Parlor tricks, I guess.

Without comprehension, reading is nothing more than tracking symbols on a page with your eyes and sounding them out. Imagine being handed a story written in Egyptian hieroglyphics with no understanding of their meaning. You may appreciate the words aesthetically and even be able to draw some small bits of meaning from the page, but you are not truly reading the story. The words on the page have no meaning. They are simply symbols. People read to understand. Understanding is always a part of the purpose. Without understanding, you are not reading.

And if you kid was tested for reading level, he or she would not test on Wizard of Oz or E. Nesbit level, despite his/her ability to know the words because he/she does not understand or comprehend the book.

I classify my 5 year old as still "learning to read" -- which, to me, means she can take an age-appropriate book she has never seen and can read half and half she stumbles over & has to sound out. If she read all of them without stumbling I would classify her as "being able to read"

My little angel pretended she could not read in K b/c she wanted to sit next to the girl with the shiny hair who really couldn't read. Many confused conversations with the K teacher.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To many it just means picking up a new book and reading it with little trouble, but without comprehension, it's not reading to me. I think a reader is a child who picks up new text, reads it, can retell it in detail (not just using pronouns), and can identify the theme/plot, the setting, and the message/what the author was trying to say. Anything short of that is just parlor tricks to me. Something to show Aunt June when she comes to visit.

That would be grade 3 for some kids

That's sad. This is required by at least the end of 1st and many are doing in mid-1st grade. My K is doing this. She's was DRA 20 at the first parent teacher conference back in Nov.

OK. My kid was reading all of the Wizard of Oz books in first grade and E. Nesbit in second grade, and she still couldn't have told you the theme or "the message/what the author was trying to say" to save her life. Parlor tricks, I guess.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:To many it just means picking up a new book and reading it with little trouble, but without comprehension, it's not reading to me. I think a reader is a child who picks up new text, reads it, can retell it in detail (not just using pronouns), and can identify the theme/plot, the setting, and the message/what the author was trying to say. Anything short of that is just parlor tricks to me. Something to show Aunt June when she comes to visit.

Evidently most kids aren't readers until they're 9 or 10.

I don't know what school your kids go to but mine are in regular old public school and this is required by 1st grade. They've both read 2 to 3 grades above their reading level but even at 1st grade this is what their teachers were looking for to be "on level." By 2nd they were required to be able to write what they read which is a skill in and of itself. So no, not 9 or 10 yr olds. More like 6+

Then "retell in detail, identify the theme/plot, the setting, and the message/what the author was trying to say" must mean something different at your kids' school than at mine in MCPS.

Now it's true that under the old MCPS curriculum, my child got a lot of drill in first grade on describing the setting. But memorizing how to describe the setting ("The setting is Brad's house, in the daytime, in the rain") isn't really a meaningful indicator of reading ability for me.