Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

It is ironic that you fail at reading comprehension. The question was: "What's the point of reading early if they don't understand? It doesn't encourage reading for pleasure. Better to wait until they learn because they are motivated."

I made my point very clear and I invite you to read it again.

I know you are trying to be mean and belittle what I said, but she was tested at a third grade level all around at the beginning of kindergarten by two teachers. So, these children do exist outside the one child you taught in your career.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

did this child understand the Africa book?

We didn't use the Africa text that year. Again. I'm not saying there aren't advanced groups. Of course the are, but every year there is a group of advanced kids in language arts or math (or both) but to have a child who stands out among that group is quite rare. I don't know though..,reading the posts in DCUM, seems like lots of folks think their kids are the top la-de-das at fill-in-the-blank: reading, math, science, WISC, testing, grades, reading, etc.

Even if you worked as a first grade teacher for 20 years, you still have not seen as many students as the traffic here at DCUM would present.

I'll speak for myself. I have no reason to lie, aggrandize, or err in my assessment (because it is not my assessment, DC has been assessed by teachers.) I am drawn to threads about early readers because it is both rare to see in real life, and people are never as blunt. I hem and haw around the subject in real life. Very few people know about DC's reading level, IQ scores, and unusual development--because it is distasteful to talk about such things in normal conversation. But, I can appreciate a good conversation about it online with others who've BTDT.

You seriously think the number of children/parents trumps the experience if TWO different 1st grade teachers on this question thread? Early readers are advanced but far from rare.

Yes. One of the first grade teachers just sounded ignorant, and I am in the field of education. She needs to be able to see beyond the scope of her experience. DCUM gets a lot of traffic, this small thread has seen nearly 1500 views. It only attracts those interested in reading in kindergarten--usually because they have an early reader. Really advanced early readers are rare by definition.

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

did this child understand the Africa book?

We didn't use the Africa text that year. Again. I'm not saying there aren't advanced groups. Of course the are, but every year there is a group of advanced kids in language arts or math (or both) but to have a child who stands out among that group is quite rare. I don't know though..,reading the posts in DCUM, seems like lots of folks think their kids are the top la-de-das at fill-in-the-blank: reading, math, science, WISC, testing, grades, reading, etc.

Even if you worked as a first grade teacher for 20 years, you still have not seen as many students as the traffic here at DCUM would present.

I'll speak for myself. I have no reason to lie, aggrandize, or err in my assessment (because it is not my assessment, DC has been assessed by teachers.) I am drawn to threads about early readers because it is both rare to see in real life, and people are never as blunt. I hem and haw around the subject in real life. Very few people know about DC's reading level, IQ scores, and unusual development--because it is distasteful to talk about such things in normal conversation. But, I can appreciate a good conversation about it online with others who've BTDT.

You seriously think the number of children/parents trumps the experience if TWO different 1st grade teachers on this question thread? Early readers are advanced but far from rare.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

did this child understand the Africa book?

We didn't use the Africa text that year. Again. I'm not saying there aren't advanced groups. Of course the are, but every year there is a group of advanced kids in language arts or math (or both) but to have a child who stands out among that group is quite rare. I don't know though..,reading the posts in DCUM, seems like lots of folks think their kids are the top la-de-das at fill-in-the-blank: reading, math, science, WISC, testing, grades, reading, etc.

Even if you worked as a first grade teacher for 20 years, you still have not seen as many students as the traffic here at DCUM would present.

I'll speak for myself. I have no reason to lie, aggrandize, or err in my assessment (because it is not my assessment, DC has been assessed by teachers.) I am drawn to threads about early readers because it is both rare to see in real life, and people are never as blunt. I hem and haw around the subject in real life. Very few people know about DC's reading level, IQ scores, and unusual development--because it is distasteful to talk about such things in normal conversation. But, I can appreciate a good conversation about it online with others who've BTDT.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

did this child understand the Africa book?

We didn't use the Africa text that year. Again. I'm not saying there aren't advanced groups. Of course the are, but every year there is a group of advanced kids in language arts or math (or both) but to have a child who stands out among that group is quite rare. I don't know though..,reading the posts in DCUM, seems like lots of folks think their kids are the top la-de-das at fill-in-the-blank: reading, math, science, WISC, testing, grades, reading, etc.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

did this child understand the Africa book?

Anonymous wrote:So, if there are no kids who are leaps and bounds above the others, what does that really tell you about children who decipher letters early other than they aren't rock stars? One teacher claimed these children were behind others in the long run. I'm just curious what research there is out there on this. Another claim was that comprehension was built with experience, so experience is really what children need in order to comprehend. What kind of experience though? What does the research say?

Anonymous wrote:I'm a first grade teacher at a school that has an AAP program. The problem with the above poster is that they fail to see that reading words is not the only point of reading. They have difficulty understanding how a child like that can read "at x level" but in testing doesn't test the way the parent thinks the child should. Kids do not have the life experiences at a young age to be able to fully grasp certain concepts. A few years ago my highest reading group read a story about Africa. No one in the group had the life experience in order to understand the author's intent because no one in the group had seen Africa, seen poverty, etc. Could they all read the text? Yes. That was not sufficient though.

Parents come to me and explain that Sally is reading Harry Potter, as a reference as to where Sally should be placed. Sally, however, has difficulty retelling (in a testing setting: the setting of the story, the story in order, a lot of detail, using connecting words) a non-fiction story, or difficulty making inferences, or difficulty explaining the author's intent, or difficulty making connections, etc.

This isn't about jealousy. It is clearly about touting her own kid's horn. Now if the question was: what was the highest level your child was reading in kindergarten and explain all the details you can surrounding it, the answer was appropriate. (I will say that of all my years of teaching, there was one child in all my high groups who ever was truly, truly beyond her peers. That isn't to say that many weren't bright and beyond the first grade level. This one child, however, stuck out in language arts with an amazing ability, which was not just decoding words as nearly all of the top tier readers can do).

Anonymous wrote:If it came naturally and fluently, she'll probably do great. If she received "instruction" pushing her, not so much.