I appreciate the reading specialist saying to continue to read aloud. My child’s reading specialist gave me the same advice and we read together each night and it’s wonderful, even though she is third grade now and a very eager independent reader. I love sharing that time with her.

Definitely focus on writing: it's a skill that isn't well-taught in most schools, and it will pay tremendous dividends. There are programs like Writopia Lab and 826, but even keeping a journal or writing notes back and forth with a relative would be a great start. There are books with writing prompts, and the Hochman method is really good (get the book The Writing Revolution).

Agree with making frequent library visits and teaching kids how to talk to librarians and ask for recommendations. Even if your kid wants to read something less challenging or graphic novels or the same book 50 times, go for it--enjoying reading is great! Reading a book and watching the movie of it (in whatever order) can be very fun too--a good opportunity to think about plot, character, and other aspects of storytelling.

Finally, reading nonfiction and instructional texts is really important too. Recipes, articles about topics of interest, manuals for assembling a toy, that sort of thing.

Anonymous wrote:Reading specialist here:

No need to do anything to support your advanced reader besides continuing to give them plenty the highest-level fiction and non-fiction books, magazines, comics that have a subject matter that is still appropriate for their developmental age.

They will not "stall out". on their reading or miss some golden opportunity to become a reading genius. Lots and lots of wide exposure of appropriate subject matter will give all the background knowledge and vocabulary they need to become an academic super star later on.

Please remember to continue to read out loud to your child--maybe from books like The Hobbit or The Earthsea cycle by Ursula LeGuine or The Chronicles of Narnia. Just because they theoretically *could* decode these books independently doesn't mean that *should*. They still need to hear you read out loud so they can engage their imagination, hear the rhythm and syntax of the language and practice those higher level reading skills like prediction, character analysis, understanding theme and plotting. Plus, just assiociation of the joy and closeness that these shared readings will bring. This is an antidote to the HUGE drop off in reading for pleasure that I see by about 5th grade, even by our highest readers.

This. And the advice to do theater camps (Shakespeare, etc).

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say 5-6 grade levels ahead what do they mean and what are they basing that on. For instance, my kid’s EOY 2nd grade testing would put them at end of 4th grade placement-wise according to the iready table; however, it’s actually the 50th percentile+ for 6th graders EOY. Do people call that 2 grades ahead or 4 grades ahead? The former seems accurate anecdotally, the latter does not. Assuming the former is the definition, there is no world in which most UMC kids are 5-6 grade levels ahead per a PP. My kid has among the highest scores in her grade. There are 5 kids within a few points of each on iReady and 20 of each other on RI; there’s no one above that. I’m sure some grades have a superstar that ours lacks, but we’re at a good non-T1 school and there is no one who would qualify as 5-6 grade levels ahead, much less “most” UMC students.

At end of 2nd kids scores are at the mid year average for 9th grade in reading.

You are reading it wrong then if you're looking at iReady results. You need to look at the placement table iready produces to understand what it means. PPP is correct that it is the placement rather than percentage scores that matter because the exams are not equivalent. That PP's kid is 2 grade levels ahead NOT 4. If you're looking at RI/lexile scores, the results are even more misleading because those results inflate everyone. Ironically, I actually think it's a better measure of reading comprehension because it over values vocabulary which is key to comprehension and is short enough that fatigue doesn't set in. It inflates everyone's lexile score, so looking at average "lexile score" tables *not* coming from RI is totally inaccurate for gauging grade level.

What about MAP scores?

We are at a charter and find MAP scores really helpful with reading and comprehension on a national scale of where our child stands because it’s a standardized testing. Not only that but it’s great because it’s an adaptive test.

I don’t think DCPS schools do MAP testing.

All of those things are also true of iReady and RI, just FYI. National. Adaptive. Standardized tests.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say 5-6 grade levels ahead what do they mean and what are they basing that on. For instance, my kid’s EOY 2nd grade testing would put them at end of 4th grade placement-wise according to the iready table; however, it’s actually the 50th percentile+ for 6th graders EOY. Do people call that 2 grades ahead or 4 grades ahead? The former seems accurate anecdotally, the latter does not. Assuming the former is the definition, there is no world in which most UMC kids are 5-6 grade levels ahead per a PP. My kid has among the highest scores in her grade. There are 5 kids within a few points of each on iReady and 20 of each other on RI; there’s no one above that. I’m sure some grades have a superstar that ours lacks, but we’re at a good non-T1 school and there is no one who would qualify as 5-6 grade levels ahead, much less “most” UMC students.

At end of 2nd kids scores are at the mid year average for 9th grade in reading.

You are reading it wrong then if you're looking at iReady results. You need to look at the placement table iready produces to understand what it means. PPP is correct that it is the placement rather than percentage scores that matter because the exams are not equivalent. That PP's kid is 2 grade levels ahead NOT 4. If you're looking at RI/lexile scores, the results are even more misleading because those results inflate everyone. Ironically, I actually think it's a better measure of reading comprehension because it over values vocabulary which is key to comprehension and is short enough that fatigue doesn't set in. It inflates everyone's lexile score, so looking at average "lexile score" tables *not* coming from RI is totally inaccurate for gauging grade level.

What about MAP scores?

We are at a charter and find MAP scores really helpful with reading and comprehension on a national scale of where our child stands because it’s a standardized testing. Not only that but it’s great because it’s an adaptive test.

I don’t think DCPS schools do MAP testing.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say 5-6 grade levels ahead what do they mean and what are they basing that on. For instance, my kid’s EOY 2nd grade testing would put them at end of 4th grade placement-wise according to the iready table; however, it’s actually the 50th percentile+ for 6th graders EOY. Do people call that 2 grades ahead or 4 grades ahead? The former seems accurate anecdotally, the latter does not. Assuming the former is the definition, there is no world in which most UMC kids are 5-6 grade levels ahead per a PP. My kid has among the highest scores in her grade. There are 5 kids within a few points of each on iReady and 20 of each other on RI; there’s no one above that. I’m sure some grades have a superstar that ours lacks, but we’re at a good non-T1 school and there is no one who would qualify as 5-6 grade levels ahead, much less “most” UMC students.

At end of 2nd kids scores are at the mid year average for 9th grade in reading.

You are reading it wrong then if you're looking at iReady results. You need to look at the placement table iready produces to understand what it means. PPP is correct that it is the placement rather than percentage scores that matter because the exams are not equivalent. That PP's kid is 2 grade levels ahead NOT 4. If you're looking at RI/lexile scores, the results are even more misleading because those results inflate everyone. Ironically, I actually think it's a better measure of reading comprehension because it over values vocabulary which is key to comprehension and is short enough that fatigue doesn't set in. It inflates everyone's lexile score, so looking at average "lexile score" tables *not* coming from RI is totally inaccurate for gauging grade level.

What about MAP scores?

OP's child is not a judgement on your children. But even for kids who are merely bright, DCPS isn't exactly outdoing itself in terms of providing academic options. I think there are a lot more parents in DC who are kidding themselves that everything is ok and their kids are totally receiving appropriate academic instruction than there are parents who think that their bright kids are geniuses.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say 5-6 grade levels ahead what do they mean and what are they basing that on. For instance, my kid’s EOY 2nd grade testing would put them at end of 4th grade placement-wise according to the iready table; however, it’s actually the 50th percentile+ for 6th graders EOY. Do people call that 2 grades ahead or 4 grades ahead? The former seems accurate anecdotally, the latter does not. Assuming the former is the definition, there is no world in which most UMC kids are 5-6 grade levels ahead per a PP. My kid has among the highest scores in her grade. There are 5 kids within a few points of each on iReady and 20 of each other on RI; there’s no one above that. I’m sure some grades have a superstar that ours lacks, but we’re at a good non-T1 school and there is no one who would qualify as 5-6 grade levels ahead, much less “most” UMC students.

At end of 2nd kids scores are at the mid year average for 9th grade in reading.

Ooooookay. So here are a few books at the official 9th grade reading level:
Brave New World
To Kill a Mockingbird
Catcher in the Rye
March, by John Lewis
I Know Why the Caged Bird Sings.

A 2nd grader who reads and truly understands those books-- in the amount of time a 9th grader would be given-- and can meet the 9th grade ELA standard for complexity and completeness of written response, is truly a genius. Knowledgeable, mature and insightful far beyond their years. Hardly anyone could meet that standard. What we do have here in DC is a lot of bright little kids who are early fluent readers, and whose parents' understanding of grade level and testing is so un-informed that they think their child is much smarter than the child actually is.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:When people say 5-6 grade levels ahead what do they mean and what are they basing that on. For instance, my kid’s EOY 2nd grade testing would put them at end of 4th grade placement-wise according to the iready table; however, it’s actually the 50th percentile+ for 6th graders EOY. Do people call that 2 grades ahead or 4 grades ahead? The former seems accurate anecdotally, the latter does not. Assuming the former is the definition, there is no world in which most UMC kids are 5-6 grade levels ahead per a PP. My kid has among the highest scores in her grade. There are 5 kids within a few points of each on iReady and 20 of each other on RI; there’s no one above that. I’m sure some grades have a superstar that ours lacks, but we’re at a good non-T1 school and there is no one who would qualify as 5-6 grade levels ahead, much less “most” UMC students.

At end of 2nd kids scores are at the mid year average for 9th grade in reading.

You are reading it wrong then if you're looking at iReady results. You need to look at the placement table iready produces to understand what it means. PPP is correct that it is the placement rather than percentage scores that matter because the exams are not equivalent. That PP's kid is 2 grade levels ahead NOT 4. If you're looking at RI/lexile scores, the results are even more misleading because those results inflate everyone. Ironically, I actually think it's a better measure of reading comprehension because it over values vocabulary which is key to comprehension and is short enough that fatigue doesn't set in. It inflates everyone's lexile score, so looking at average "lexile score" tables *not* coming from RI is totally inaccurate for gauging grade level.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t most UMC kids 5-6 grade levels ahead in reading?

Teacher here. Not even close.

NP. Agree! There is a lot of mediocrity in the UMC children. Their parents are raising a fantasy.

As opposed to what? Where do you think all the brilliant children are hiding?

There just aren’t many brilliant children. Or brilliant people in general. Every other parent in DC thinks their child is “advanced”. By the end of my kids school journey in DC , nearly every one in their social academic cohort was on the same level. Pure fantasy.

Academic differences get more pronounced as kids get older. Maybe if your "social academic cohort" was all kids whose parents have graduate degrees and you're defining "same level" extremely broadly, this is the case. But my kids are at a title 1, and it's unfortunately not the case that the kids struggling when they're younger catch up.

Sometimes, but this thread is about super-early readers. In my experience, there's a wide range of age when kids learn to read, and the first half of that range doesn't correlate closely with academic results in upper elementary. My DD, who learned to read at 3, is a bright child, but her friends who learned at 5 or 6 are doing equally as well as she is now that they are all 10 years old. What seemed like a big gap has closed. Kids who are still struggling to read at 7 or 8 are a different thing. Super-early fluency just doesn't predict that much compared to early fluency.

Sure. But if the kid is actually 5-6 grade levels ahead at, say, 6, they're ahead of most middle schoolers in DC and more than a few high school students. Unless you're in one of a handful of schools, there are not many kids who are closing that gap over time.

Right, but most kids who test that high on fluency are not actually fully reading at a grade level 5-6 levels ahead. Even if their parents think they are. They don't have the attention span, comprehension, ability to draw inferences, appreciation of context, etc. Nor do they have the ability to formulate a response, especially a well-organized written response. They may get a high MAP or iReady score on fluency, but they are not meeting the overall ELA grade level standard. And middle schoolers, even if they're below grade level on testing, often do have the ability to interpret a text (even if they need an audio version) that exceeds a bright preschooler's ability, because they are older and more mature and experienced.

Here's an example. A 5-year-old who can read a page of Harry Potter aloud with some mispronunciations is very bright, yes. But they probably understand it on the level of Dumbledore = good and Snape = bad. An on-grade middle school reader would be thinking about things like how Harry isn't a very good boyfriend to Cho, about how Petunia Dursley is nasty but she's also really afraid and grieving, the socioeconomic differences between the Weasleys and the Malfoys, how profoundly sad what happened to Neville's family is, and things like that. Same book, same words, but different thoughts in the kid's head. And the ability to read the words at a young age doesn't match up that closely with the ability to do a thoughtful and nuanced reading later. My DD1 was a super-super-early reader but I know it doesn't mean that much. My DD2 read at the typical age of 6, but she is a FAR more thoughtful and attentive reader than DD1 ever was. And that's what really matters.

Most kids in DCPS are like neither of your kids, so if you chill out and wait for the other kids to catch up, it will not happen.

You're missing the point. Some of them will catch up. Enough of them, at most schools, to form a peer group. Some of them won't. But OP's child will not always be as much of an outlier, because early fluency just doesn't mean that much. And OP's child has plenty to learn in DCPS despite early fluency.

Look at how many schools have, say, a solid group of third graders getting 5s on the PARCC ELA. It is absolutely not "most schools." They wouldn't have a peer group at any charter or DCPS in my ward.

I'm sorry about your ward. And yet it's not "most" schools. But in my ward, Ward 5, they absolutely would. I'm not sure what you consider a "solid group", and I'm going to use 4th grade because 3rd graders are less experienced test-takers so the PARCC is less accurate. I would say a "solid group" is 3 or more children. So here are some examples of 4th grade PARCC scores at schools in various wards other than Ward 3.
Bancroft ELA: 23 4s and 12 5s.
Barnard ELA: 17 4s and 7 5s.
Beers ELA: 9 4s and 3 5s.
Brent ELA: 40 4s and 15 5s. Brent Math: 44 4s and 8 5s.
Bruce-Monroe ELA: 18 4s and 3 5s, Math 13 4s and 4 5s.
ITDS ELA: 19 4s and 14 5s (and they have two classrooms per grade so I'm not understanding how a classroom with seven kids scoring a 5 isn't good enough). ITDS Math: 18 4s and 7 5s.
LaSalle-Backus ELA: 12 4s and 4 5s.
Ludlow-Taylor ELA: 11 4s and 16 5s.
Marie Reed ELA: 15 4s and 11 5s. Marie Reed Math: 14 4s and 4 5s.
Maury ELA: 21 4s and 29 5s. Maury math: 34 4s and 5 5s.
Payne ELA: 13 4s and 12 5s.
Powell ELA: 14 4s and 4 5s.
Ross ELA: 4 4s and 11 5s (and there's only one classroom per grade, right?)
Ross Math: 8 4s and 4 5s.
SWW@FS ELA: 10 4s and 6 5s.
SWS ELA: 21 4s and 6 5s. SWS Math: 18 4s and 7 5s.
Seaton ELA: 8 4s and 2 5s.
Thomson ELA: 16 4s and 2 5s.
Thomson Math: 10 4s and 2 5s.
Two Rivers ELA: 16 4s and 3 5s.
TRY ELA: 13 4s and 5 5s.
Tyler ELA: 17 4s and 6 5s
Van Ness ELA: 10 4s and 4 5s.
Yu Ying ELA: 27 4s and 14 5s. Math: 20 4s and 5 5s.
Watkins ELA: 28 4s and 7 5s. Math: 28 4s and 8 5s.


Now I realize these scores are not great, but those are numbers that likley produce a peer group. You'll say oh, but those are mostly 4s. But even if you take only half the 4s, or 1/3rd of them, to get the almost-5s, it's still a peer group. It's odd to think a child testing a 5 cannot be a peer of a child testing a 4. They might be just a few points apart on the more granular PARCC scale, or they might be strong on a subclaim where your child is weak. My child, the aforementioned DD1, fell just short of a 5 in ELA on the PARCC despite being, in the words of her HRCS 3rd grade teacher, the best 3rd grade reader he ever had, and 99th percentile MAP and iReady scores. Because 3rd graders don't test that well-- it's their first go-round. So I'm sorry that whatever ward you live in doesn't have any schools with good scores-- really, I am. But you absolutely can have a peer group at any number of elementary schools, if you open your mind to the idea that your child can learn from being in a group with children whose total score isn't quite a 5. I know it sounds like a crazy idea, but it's true.

OMG. Ok. A super high score on a preschool or K test does *not* equal an average score on a middle school test. You are totally misunderstanding the test result tables!

You can see some sample questions here. https://www.testprep-online.com/iready-test The type of question asked, the nuance of the question, the complexity of the language, everything, increases as you go up the grades. In a math test, the upper grades tests have concepts that aren't presented at all on the lower grades tests. You cannot just take a numerical test score and apply it across all the grades. That's not the way the test is built.

Here are some sample tests so you can compare.

https://www.fullertonsd.org/cms/lib/CA50010905/Centricity//Domain/1630/iReady_Sample_Diagnostic_Items_Math.pdf

https://www.testprep-online.com/iready-test

Anonymous wrote:When people say 5-6 grade levels ahead what do they mean and what are they basing that on. For instance, my kid’s EOY 2nd grade testing would put them at end of 4th grade placement-wise according to the iready table; however, it’s actually the 50th percentile+ for 6th graders EOY. Do people call that 2 grades ahead or 4 grades ahead? The former seems accurate anecdotally, the latter does not. Assuming the former is the definition, there is no world in which most UMC kids are 5-6 grade levels ahead per a PP. My kid has among the highest scores in her grade. There are 5 kids within a few points of each on iReady and 20 of each other on RI; there’s no one above that. I’m sure some grades have a superstar that ours lacks, but we’re at a good non-T1 school and there is no one who would qualify as 5-6 grade levels ahead, much less “most” UMC students.

At end of 2nd kids scores are at the mid year average for 9th grade in reading.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Aren’t most UMC kids 5-6 grade levels ahead in reading?

Teacher here. Not even close.

NP. Agree! There is a lot of mediocrity in the UMC children. Their parents are raising a fantasy.

As opposed to what? Where do you think all the brilliant children are hiding?

There just aren’t many brilliant children. Or brilliant people in general. Every other parent in DC thinks their child is “advanced”. By the end of my kids school journey in DC , nearly every one in their social academic cohort was on the same level. Pure fantasy.

Academic differences get more pronounced as kids get older. Maybe if your "social academic cohort" was all kids whose parents have graduate degrees and you're defining "same level" extremely broadly, this is the case. But my kids are at a title 1, and it's unfortunately not the case that the kids struggling when they're younger catch up.

Sometimes, but this thread is about super-early readers. In my experience, there's a wide range of age when kids learn to read, and the first half of that range doesn't correlate closely with academic results in upper elementary. My DD, who learned to read at 3, is a bright child, but her friends who learned at 5 or 6 are doing equally as well as she is now that they are all 10 years old. What seemed like a big gap has closed. Kids who are still struggling to read at 7 or 8 are a different thing. Super-early fluency just doesn't predict that much compared to early fluency.

Sure. But if the kid is actually 5-6 grade levels ahead at, say, 6, they're ahead of most middle schoolers in DC and more than a few high school students. Unless you're in one of a handful of schools, there are not many kids who are closing that gap over time.

Right, but most kids who test that high on fluency are not actually fully reading at a grade level 5-6 levels ahead. Even if their parents think they are. They don't have the attention span, comprehension, ability to draw inferences, appreciation of context, etc. Nor do they have the ability to formulate a response, especially a well-organized written response. They may get a high MAP or iReady score on fluency, but they are not meeting the overall ELA grade level standard. And middle schoolers, even if they're below grade level on testing, often do have the ability to interpret a text (even if they need an audio version) that exceeds a bright preschooler's ability, because they are older and more mature and experienced.

Here's an example. A 5-year-old who can read a page of Harry Potter aloud with some mispronunciations is very bright, yes. But they probably understand it on the level of Dumbledore = good and Snape = bad. An on-grade middle school reader would be thinking about things like how Harry isn't a very good boyfriend to Cho, about how Petunia Dursley is nasty but she's also really afraid and grieving, the socioeconomic differences between the Weasleys and the Malfoys, how profoundly sad what happened to Neville's family is, and things like that. Same book, same words, but different thoughts in the kid's head. And the ability to read the words at a young age doesn't match up that closely with the ability to do a thoughtful and nuanced reading later. My DD1 was a super-super-early reader but I know it doesn't mean that much. My DD2 read at the typical age of 6, but she is a FAR more thoughtful and attentive reader than DD1 ever was. And that's what really matters.

Most kids in DCPS are like neither of your kids, so if you chill out and wait for the other kids to catch up, it will not happen.

You're missing the point. Some of them will catch up. Enough of them, at most schools, to form a peer group. Some of them won't. But OP's child will not always be as much of an outlier, because early fluency just doesn't mean that much. And OP's child has plenty to learn in DCPS despite early fluency.

Look at how many schools have, say, a solid group of third graders getting 5s on the PARCC ELA. It is absolutely not "most schools." They wouldn't have a peer group at any charter or DCPS in my ward.

This. Most schools don’t even have most kids, majority on grade level let alone above.

That is the reality.