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.
Unfortunately, too many people put too much stock in early reading when it means nothing.
Actually, early literacy does have a number of highly researched and well-documented developmental benefits.
It isn't necessarily an indicator of continued accelerated academic performance, definitely isn't a predictor of high achievement in all academic domains, etc. But the statement that early literacy has no benefit or value isn't, in fact, true.
Actually, early literacy does have a number of highly researched and well-documented developmental benefits.
It isn't necessarily an indicator of continued accelerated academic performance, definitely isn't a predictor of high achievement in all academic domains, etc. But the statement that early literacy has no benefit or value isn't, in fact, true.
Not to split hairs here, but I'd imagine there is a difference in the operationalized definition of early literacy vs. early reading that would be an important distinction in this argument. I'd think early literacy would include both reading ability/reading comprehension and writing fluency. In my mind, that takes rote memorization of words out of the equation and allows for correlations that just wouldn't pan out otherwise.
I'd never suggest that early reading wasn't correlated with other benefits, but I think defining it as early literacy allows for more positive correlations with developmental benefits.
My grandson can read fluently (K level), and will not be 4 until next month. I've been working with him all summer, and he's been doing My Baby Can Read since a toddler. He can spell also. Worlds like "mountain", and his first and last names. Problem is, he misses the cutoff of Kindergarten for his school by six weeks and can not enter Kindergarten until he is almost six. That is in TWO years. By that time (with the way I am working with him) he'll probably be at second grade level. He can recite the alphabet FORWARD and BACKWARD.
What do you think we should do? His dad knows the school superintendent. Testing to get him in Kindergarten early is my opt, but they probably cannot do it. Or wait a year and skip Kindergarten to get into first grade? There is a local Montessori, but it is beyond their means financially. Daughter wants to home school him to keep him from "dumbing down", but I think he needs a classroom setting with other kids.
I spend a lot of time with him, and he does seem to enjoy learning (we make it fun). He LOVES reading, numbers, and letters, and spelling. He plays UNO. At three!!!
Should I cut back on my teaching and let him watch TV? Am I making him go too far too fast? His Mom read at age 4, and I took her to the library, but I didn't seem to push her.
Don't cut back on teaching, keep on introducing him to new subjects, make him curious about the world. I would be against skipping him 2 grades because I believe that would stunt his emotional growth and his ability to relate to his peers.
It's no secret that fluency and comprehension are two different things.
I'm just not sure where the idea that if the brain is stimulated in the ways that the act of reading stimulates the brain at an early age, that means there is going to be a correlating drastic loss of cognition at a later age. It seems like that poster thinks that you only have so many years built in of cognitive ability, and if you start "using your brain"* too early, you're going to run out of brain and get dementia...all because you could identify words at three or four!! That isn't how it works.
*Interesting, too, is the idea that babies and toddlers somehow aren't "using their brains."
I don’t think this is a fluency, decoding, or comprehension thing. I think it’s a sight word thing.
I have my M.Ed. in reading with a reading specialist cert and have no idea where the ideas about early reading, cognition, and dementia are coming from. We’re born using our brains. Most connections are made in infancy so I’m not sure about the not using the brain thing either.
I have my M.Ed. in reading with a reading specialist cert and have no idea where the ideas about early reading, cognition, and dementia are coming from. We’re born using our brains. Most connections are made in infancy so I’m not sure about the not using the brain thing either.
I am going to respond since people are mis-constructing what I said.
People are quoting "using their brain", I thought it was obvious after several comments that I meant using their brain for intellectual processes like reading, That is a fundamental difference there. I could use my brain to figure out how to climb a tree myself, and using it to understand from a book how another person climbed a tree. The first is a living process, the second an abstract one.
At least people know how certain things are appropriate at some age and not so appropriate at others. Bodybuilding is fine when a person is young and strong, not so when they are either too young or too old. You wouldn't let a child watch whatever they want on the internet, etc. I think everyone can see teaching a one year old to read is just stupid, but can't see the same is true at three. Some "learned" people have talked about how the experiences we have in the first years of life have an effect later in life, even old life.
The idea came from thinking persons, so you can either start thinking on your own or you can wait for some scientist to validate it. This is like discussing colors with a color blind person, there is nothing to discuss, you either see it or you don't. What I find appalling is that people are too rushed to dismiss/ridicule something they know nothing about. Whatever happened to open minded!
"The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively, not by the false appearance things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice."
ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER
Funny Schopenhauer felt into the same error, but that's a different topic.
Actually, early literacy does have a number of highly researched and well-documented developmental benefits.
It isn't necessarily an indicator of continued accelerated academic performance, definitely isn't a predictor of high achievement in all academic domains, etc. But the statement that early literacy has no benefit or value isn't, in fact, true.
I said it means nothing. It's not an indicator of intelligence, high achievement, nor is it an indicator of continued accelerated academic performance. Unfortunately, too many parents think it does mean something when it doesn't. The ability to read is developmental and it happens between the ages of 3 and 6 1/2 depending on the child. It is normal for kids to do some things early and some late. Many things parents think mean something don't mean anything.
I am going to respond since people are mis-constructing what I said.
People are quoting "using their brain", I thought it was obvious after several comments that I meant using their brain for intellectual processes like reading, That is a fundamental difference there. I could use my brain to figure out how to climb a tree myself, and using it to understand from a book how another person climbed a tree. The first is a living process, the second an abstract one.
At least people know how certain things are appropriate at some age and not so appropriate at others. Bodybuilding is fine when a person is young and strong, not so when they are either too young or too old. You wouldn't let a child watch whatever they want on the internet, etc. I think everyone can see teaching a one year old to read is just stupid, but can't see the same is true at three. Some "learned" people have talked about how the experiences we have in the first years of life have an effect later in life, even old life.
The idea came from thinking persons, so you can either start thinking on your own or you can wait for some scientist to validate it. This is like discussing colors with a color blind person, there is nothing to discuss, you either see it or you don't. What I find appalling is that people are too rushed to dismiss/ridicule something they know nothing about. Whatever happened to open minded!
"The discovery of truth is prevented more effectively, not by the false appearance things present and which mislead into error, not directly by weakness of the reasoning powers, but by preconceived opinion, by prejudice."
ARTHUR SCHOPENHAUER
Funny Schopenhauer felt into the same error, but that's a different topic.
Since the age of 3, I've used the word misconstruing in that sort of sentence.
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.
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.
