Anonymous wrote:A lot of this is developmental. It's not like it takes (for example) 18 months to learn, so if you start actively teaching at 3, they will be reading by 4.5, if you start at 5, then 6.5, if you start at 6.5, then 8, etc.
I would say, since there are so many components of literacy, it takes however many years old they are when they begin to read semi-fluently. So for a 4 yo, it took 4 years, and for a 7 yo it took 7 years.
Or the other way to look at it is by just dropping the whole idea of "how long it takes."
It's quite normal, barring learning differences (in all directions), to become a semi-fluent reader anywhere between 3-8, with 4.5-6.5 being the fat part of the bell curve. Of course there are exceptions.
Reading isn't exactly a "natural" activity, but it doesn't per se take a tremendous amount of direct instruction if the child is ready, developmentally, since we live in a highly literate world with lots of exposure.
The issue is more that the US takes the approach of actively teaching by 5, if not younger, when only about half of kids are really ready per se. So for some, it will seem to have taken 2-3 years to learn, when if they'd been older, it wouldn't have been automatic, but maybe taken 3-6 months. But we don't really meet kids where they are-- on either end of the spectrum.
This is me, above, and BTW-- I read pretty fluently at 3.5, DH at about 4.5. DD didn't get to the same level until 6.5 or 7. She is 8 now and she reads at about 1 full grade level ahead. When I was 8, I was reading at a high school or early college level. DH at her age was probably reading at exactly the same level she is now. It's not linear.