U.S. CitiesCity-Data Forum Index
Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
 [Register]
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
View detailed profile (Advanced) or search
site with Google Custom Search

Search Forums  (Advanced)
Reply Start New Thread
 
Old 01-29-2014, 09:18 AM
bg7
 
7,698 posts, read 7,609,770 times
Reputation: 14990

Advertisements

Having grown up abroad in a poor household, I lived in a housing project, I see plenty of apologists here for parents who did not parent. My parents, both working in full time manual jobs which exhausted them, did take time to read to me, even if it was only a tabloid newspaper. And we did monthly go to the library (also free in our country). I ended up going the whole way, getting a PhD, because of their start. (My sibling had the same but went a different way - but he was given the chance to choose). Neither of my parents finished school. What they did recognize is that simply struggling to provide custodial care (food, water, clothes (always darned and re-darned!) and a roof) was not parenting, it was just the minimum. When parental TV-time or smartphone time takes precedence over reading with the child, that is no excuse. When self-manufactured drama and parents indulging their own "issues" comes before parenting the child that is no excuse. The nonsense post above declaring that "the type of parents who don't read have external event a), b) or c) preventing them from doing so" is grossly naive itself.

There are parents who cannot do what it takes (but these are few, this is where outside bodies need to do all they can), there are parents who do not do what it takes even though they could (these are plenty) and there are parents who do not know what to do (this is where informational outreach should be targeted and will give the most help), and there are parents who do know what to do and do it, by making it a priority. Making a priority is easier for some than others, of that there is no doubt, but its your child, so step up. 15 minutes reading? A single bed-time story?

Last edited by bg7; 01-29-2014 at 10:44 AM..
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message

 
Old 01-29-2014, 10:04 AM
 
4,750 posts, read 3,308,689 times
Reputation: 4919
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomparent View Post
Why can't we stick with sharing our personal experiences surrounding the issue of early reading? It is simply unnecessary and unfair to drag anonymous other parents into the discussion given they aren't here to explain or defend themselves.
Because you're a bad parent if you don't parent your child

ETA: And by sending kids who are insufficiently prepared for school to kindergarten, you're slowing down the learning speed of the classroom. Hence why American kids will never get ahead.

Yes, they're kids, but kids are A LOT smarter than we give them credit for.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 11:05 AM
 
3,932 posts, read 3,631,870 times
Reputation: 3044
Quote:
Originally Posted by Momma_bear View Post
Honestly, if you don't expect schools to teach your child to read what exactly do you expect them to do? Sports are not the reason these kids can't read well.

It isn't good to look down your nose at other parents simply because their children are not the best readers in the world. Sometimes kids who aren't doing well academically need something that they are good at to give them confidence. Sports, music or art can give these kids the confidence they need to keep on working academically. My son graduated high school with quite a few young men who didn't think they would have stayed in school if they couldn't play sports.

Since you have a child who has special needs I would think you could be a bit more compassionate to those who have problems in school. It isn't always a parent's fault when a child struggles in school.
We will just have to agree to disagree. I expect parents to take responsibility for ther OWN children. I do not expect parents to put all the focus on the their kids' teachers. It is because I have a kid with autism that I feel so passionate about this subject! I am learning skills and techniques that are used by our kid's spec Ed class and applying to our child's home routine. Home life is important! We are working on getting private therapy as well. What happens at HOME is very important. School cannot DO everything.

Back to my point about kids w/o DDs but are behind according to OUR school district's guidelines for reading. I stand by my assertion that parents need to focus on family life, reading together, providing a tutor if necessary and possible. If parents can find the money for soccer "lifestyle" then they can afford a tutor. When are parents going to intervene? Fifth or sixth grade when their kids are not able to finish homework assignments? This is what I am seeing in our upper midde class school. I believe the parents are responsibe for this and it IS happening.

BTW, I don't look down my nose at people but EXPECT parents to take RESPONSIBILITY. Children need guidance. Nobody made anybody in my hood have kids. People in my hood here in Portland, OR want to be their kids' friends rather than their parents. Parents need to step up to the challenge.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 11:13 AM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,806,022 times
Reputation: 27513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Pinkmani View Post
Because you're a bad parent if you don't parent your child

ETA: And by sending kids who are insufficiently prepared for school to kindergarten, you're slowing down the learning speed of the classroom. Hence why American kids will never get ahead.

Yes, they're kids, but kids are A LOT smarter than we give them credit for.
Kindergarten used to be optional and the only requirement was that we could tie our shoes
Now it seems they need to know how to read and write and be academically prepared to "go" right from the start.

And the funny thing about all this ?
Past generations are more educated and have retained more of what they learned decades ago compared to recent high school graduates.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 12:07 PM
 
3,932 posts, read 3,631,870 times
Reputation: 3044
Quote:
Originally Posted by HappyTexan View Post
Kindergarten used to be optional and the only requirement was that we could tie our shoes
Now it seems they need to know how to read and write and be academically prepared to "go" right from the start.

And the funny thing about all this ?
Past generations are more educated and have retained more of what they learned decades ago compared to recent high school graduates.
In our state of Oregon, Kinder is not required. I agree that kindergarten should not be focused on reading and writing. My older child WAS ready to read and when assessed in the beginning of first grade, her teacher assessed her at a third or fourth grade level. Reading has been a very organic process for our older child. Learning a variety of subjects in side and out of school environment is her passion. Her younger brother is kinder in spec Ed as he is on autism spectrum. He JUST started to be able to focus while I read to him. This is because of his school so I am glad for early intervention services in our district. I do think non DD kids could benefit from the structure my son son receives from spec Ed. Structure at home seems to me a good idea to get kinder and first graders ready to read and to provide interest in reading. I would not have been worried if my older child wasn't reading early but I regularly meet a good number parents that seem clueless about their childrens' lack of progress with reading and their kids are in the second or third grade. It's kind of scary since poverty and lack of education are not factors or these parents.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 12:15 PM
 
Location: Great State of Texas
86,093 posts, read 69,806,022 times
Reputation: 27513
Quote:
Originally Posted by Yankeemama View Post
In our state of Oregon, Kinder is not required. I agree that kindergarten should not be focused on reading and writing. My older child WAS ready to read and when assessed in the beginning of first grade, her teacher assessed her at a third or fourth grade level. Reading has been a very organic process for our older child. Learning a variety of subjects in side and out of school environment is her passion. Her younger brother is kinder in spec Ed as he is on autism spectrum. He JUST started to be able to focus while I read to him. This is because of his school so I am glad for early intervention services in our district. I do think non DD kids could benefit from the structure my son son receives from spec Ed. Structure at home seems to me a good idea to get kinder and first graders ready to read and to provide interest in reading. I would not have been worried if my older child wasn't reading early but I regularly meet a good number parents that seem clueless about their childrens' lack of progress with reading and their kids are in the second or third grade. It's kind of scary since poverty and lack of education are not factors or these parents.
Apathy is what circulates among the middle class.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 12:22 PM
 
3,932 posts, read 3,631,870 times
Reputation: 3044
[quote=HappyTexan;33238039]Apathy is what circulates among the middle class.[

The funny thing about the area I live in is that the parents are "involved" in every area of their kids' lives and are very vocal politically and God forbid, your neighbor does NOT compost! These same parents are apathetic about their kids' academic progress which seems odd since they are very involved in other ways. I see this in other upper-midde class communities all over so it seems like a trend with my generation of parents. I am mid-40's BTW.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 01:11 PM
 
Location: Ohio
229 posts, read 262,163 times
Reputation: 450
My son started school in the UK, aged 4 - proper full-time school, learning a full academic load, with school uniforms, sitting still at desk, etc etc. He was reading pretty well by October break and fluently at a chapter book level by Christmas, before his 5th birthday, not because he's somehow magic but because that's the norm there, at least it is in districts populated by educated middle-classers.

My daughter started school in Switzerland, aged 4. She did 4 mornings a week (Wednesdays off), home for lunch for 2-3 hours, back to school for just two afternoons; probably half the hours my son did. For two years, her curriculum actively involved NOT picking up a pencil - it's all learning through play, socialising, music, sport, arts, outings and so on; Swiss families are discouraged from starting academics at home during this time. She started learning to read in French aged 6, then switched to English (her native tongue) aged 7 when we moved here. She was halfway through 2nd grade then, and is now in 4th grade, aged 9, and her reading has gone from c-a-t to effortless As in comprehension, decoding, etc.

Her teacher tells me she's reading very well for her age, but frankly compared to my son polishing off all the Harry Potters before he was 7, she looks miles behind to me. I know, however, that when my son went into his Swiss class at aged 8, they were all reading those books with one illustration and a sentence per page, yet by age 10 or 11 they were on very challenging books, so I'm sure she'll be choosing something a bit more taxing than Wimpy Kid and Ramona in a couple of years.

So no, I don't believe there is a 'boat', or a 'window', or that it remotely matters whose 3 year old was hothoused. They all level out in the end, according to their abilities and the opportunities given them. But personally, I much prefer the early years education my daughter had. It was vastly better for her overall development and was a wonderful introduction to school. No one ever came out of her classroom sobbing out of sheer exhaustion, like I often saw in my son's first year.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 01:18 PM
 
17,848 posts, read 9,795,525 times
Reputation: 17329
Quote:
Originally Posted by nana053 View Post
Phonics can be very useful for teaching reading, but it should not be imposed on able readers who come to school already reading for understanding. Reading has two parts. The first is recognizing the words on the page and the second is understanding the meaning of the words.
Phonics is essential for true, robust reading ability. The fact that a phonetic language uses symbolical alphabet to designate the sounds of vocal language elements, rather than each word as a unit having a single meaning is what differentiates phonetic written languages like English from pictographic writing like Chinese and ancient Egyptian. It's not necessary for people to learn thousands of written symbols in order to read the language and apply it to its vocal version.

If one knows phonics, one can relate any written word to its spoken form. Someone who knows phonics can sound out ""supercalifragilisticexpialidocious" and recognize it when he hears it spoken (even if he doesn't sound it out quite correctly). To someone without phonics, such a word as pseudoephedrine is unparsable gibberish. Without phonics, it could just as well be @##$$%^^&@!#.

Quote:
Dyslexic children understand well when they listen, but decode poorly. Hyperlexic children decode very well, but understand poorly (my autistic grandson has been decoding since he was 2, but is only beginning to understand what he reads now at 9).
Those cases don't make up the majority of children, nor do they make up the majority of non-readers. Those are special problems that can and should be handled as such.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
 
Old 01-29-2014, 01:41 PM
 
3,932 posts, read 3,631,870 times
Reputation: 3044
Quote:
Originally Posted by kodokan View Post
My son started school in the UK, aged 4 - proper full-time school, learning a full academic load, with school uniforms, sitting still at desk, etc etc. He was reading pretty well by October break and fluently at a chapter book level by Christmas, before his 5th birthday, not because he's somehow magic but because that's the norm there, at least it is in districts populated by educated middle-classers.

My daughter started school in Switzerland, aged 4. She did 4 mornings a week (Wednesdays off), home for lunch for 2-3 hours, back to school for just two afternoons; probably half the hours my son did. For two years, her curriculum actively involved NOT picking up a pencil - it's all learning through play, socialising, music, sport, arts, outings and so on; Swiss families are discouraged from starting academics at home during this time. She started learning to read in French aged 6, then switched to English (her native tongue) aged 7 when we moved here. She was halfway through 2nd grade then, and is now in 4th grade, aged 9, and her reading has gone from c-a-t to effortless As in comprehension, decoding, etc.

Her teacher tells me she's reading very well for her age, but frankly compared to my son polishing off all the Harry Potters before he was 7, she looks miles behind to me. I know, however, that when my son went into his Swiss class at aged 8, they were all reading those books with one illustration and a sentence per page, yet by age 10 or 11 they were on very challenging books, so I'm sure she'll be choosing something a bit more taxing than Wimpy Kid and Ramona in a couple of years.

So no, I don't believe there is a 'boat', or a 'window', or that it remotely matters whose 3 year old was hothoused. They all level out in the end, according to their abilities and the opportunities given them. But personally, I much prefer the early years education my daughter had. It was vastly better for her overall development and was a wonderful introduction to school. No one ever came out of her classroom sobbing out of sheer exhaustion, like I often saw in my son's first year.
This is a very interesting post. Our district has goals that I am on board with, so to speak, but we have no classroom limits in Oregon, so with 30-35 kinder students in a class you have to wonder what happens with the kids who need more one-on-one attention. I don't see the one-on-one help (without an IEP) when I volunteer and that is unfortunate. I have realized that putting my kids in public schools with lack of funding means I have to help with my kids education at home. I also volunteer in class weekly so that helps me keep everything in perspective. There are just no easy answers, really.
Reply With Quote Quick reply to this message
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.

Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.


Reply
Please update this thread with any new information or opinions. This open thread is still read by thousands of people, so we encourage all additional points of view.

Quick Reply
Message:

Over $104,000 in prizes was already given out to active posters on our forum and additional giveaways are planned!

Go Back   City-Data Forum > General Forums > Education
Follow City-Data.com founder on our Forum or

All times are GMT -6. The time now is 02:42 AM.

© 2005-2018, Advameg, Inc.

City-Data.com - Archive 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 14, 15, 16, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 22, 23, 24, 25, 26, 27, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, 33, 34, 35 - Top