Age of Reading?

[Barrister]

I turned out fine.

Oh come on, do it! I did half the work.

Poor Grey Fox - he can't even be insulted even when he asks for it.

[DGuller]

Poor Grey Fox - he can't even be insulted even when he asks for it.

Maybe he couldn't read your insult?

[Grey Fox]

Pity thyself

[Queequeg]

Next up: Spellus and/or CC who will claim they learned to read when they were two weeks old.

Had a lot of trouble learning how to read.  I went to a Jewish preschool in one of the more academically-oriented bits of the planet, and I think a lot of my intellectual anxieties/interests stem from inferiority issues I had in Pre-School. 

That said, I was reading Asimov's Chronology of the world by Third Grade, and basically memorized it.

[crazy canuck]

I believe I learned to read in kindergarten, which means probably around the age of 4.

Next up: Spellus and/or CC who will claim they learned to read when they were two weeks old.

I was never that delayed in my learning.

[crazy canuck]

What is concerning for us is that Carl was born in mid December, making him the youngest one in his class. His cousin, born three weeks later, is the oldest one in her class - born early January.

A year makes a big difference at this age.

That year will always make a big difference in some things.  But not his school work.  I was a late December baby and was always the youngest.  Where I experienced the biggest difference was in Athletics.  I was always competing against older kids.  I often wonder how things would have worked out if I had been in been able to play against kids my own age.

Funny story, when I was in grade 10 I was 14 and starting for the senior team - playing with and against kids that were 17-18.  I was shooting around on an outdoor court one weekend when some members of the junior school team (some grade 9s) showed up.  I played them one on five and beat them.  One of them sarcastically said, "too bad you can't play like that against kids your own age".  He was only a couple months younger then me.....

[Caliga]

I was never that delayed in my learning.

I think of you as cc, not CC.  I think of Banana as CC, whom I should really think of as DSB now.  In conclusion, nick changing BLOWS. 

The only thing I know about your childhood is that you drank like a whole tanker truck full of milk every day. 

[Barrister]

I was never that delayed in my learning.

I think of you as cc, not CC.  I think of Banana as CC, whom I should really think of as DSB now.  In conclusion, nick changing BLOWS. 

The only thing I know about your childhood is that you drank like a whole tanker truck full of milk every day. 

I keep forgetting what DSB/CC's nic on Kapland was... 

[Josquius]

The normal age, 4-5 or so.
Kids who learn to read early are generally nought special, its best to just let them wait till school.
My mam (a teacher) often observes the kids that come in already knowing how to read usually don't end up being the ones who are top of the class- its the parents doing in teaching them to read, not any special intelligance on the kids part afterall.

[MadImmortalMan]

That Baby Can Read crap they push on TV annoys me.

All that stuff is garbage. It's been repeatedly proven that reading to your kids is much more effective than any of those babysit-my-kid-and-teach-them-shit videos.

I entered kindergarten at age 4 and could read before that.

[grumbler]

And make functional illiterates later on right?

The sooner the better Malthus.

Why? This is a silly concept, that learning earlier makes one better. It's simply not true.

Anecdotally, I learned to read when I was three and was reading chapter books by first grade. I'm still an avid bibliophile. However, my brother and sister didn't learn to read until they were in first grade (which was the norm). Both are extraordinarily successful business folks, read nearly as avidly as I do now, and are very articulate.

Of my own children, I had two learn to read at five, one at three, and one at six. They've all tested very well on standardized tests in Reading and English. They all love to read, and they're all perfectly happy with a book in their hand.

As for the homework thing, when the kids were in preschool they had "book bags" that came home with them. The idea was that we would read the books to the kids, write down that we did so, and the kids would draw a picture showing what they thought of the story. The intent was to encourage parents to read to the kids. I hated them. The stories were stupid, the kids hated the whole process, and overall, it turned all of us off from homework for quite a while. Instead of reading them silly books, we started in with Harry Potter and the Sorcerer's Stone at bedtime.

Dunno why you would bring facts into the discussion.

The fact of the matter is that there is plenty of evidence to show that "the later the better" when it comes to schools teaching kids how to read.  Kids that learn on their own earleir are not disadvantaged, but kids that feel a compulsion to learn to read before they are developmentally ready can suffer from this for life.

[Malthus]

That year will always make a big difference in some things.  But not his school work.  I was a late December baby and was always the youngest.  Where I experienced the biggest difference was in Athletics.  I was always competing against older kids.  I often wonder how things would have worked out if I had been in been able to play against kids my own age.

Funny story, when I was in grade 10 I was 14 and starting for the senior team - playing with and against kids that were 17-18.  I was shooting around on an outdoor court one weekend when some members of the junior school team (some grade 9s) showed up.  I played them one on five and beat them.  One of them sarcastically said, "too bad you can't play like that against kids your own age".  He was only a couple months younger then me.....

Yeah, but aren't you a giant? No fair, having to play against giants. 

[Barrister]

Yeah, but aren't you a giant? No fair, having to play against giants. 

He is, and I think his story is a little disingenuous that way...

[Jacob]

The fact of the matter is that there is plenty of evidence to show that "the later the better" when it comes to schools teaching kids how to read.  Kids that learn on their own earleir are not disadvantaged, but kids that feel a compulsion to learn to read before they are developmentally ready can suffer from this for life.

That's really interesting.  Would you care to elaborate?

For my part, I think I was 7 when I learned to read.

[Berkut]

The difference between jake and melanie in their reading is striking.

Jake learned to read very easily, loves it, and reads like crazy. He is in 4th grade now, and has read all the Harry Potter books twice. The hardest thing is finding him new things to read. He is currently on his second run through the Percy Jackson books. He loves fantasy, and reference books, like the Guiness Book of World Records, or books about science and scientists, as long as they are sufficiently "cool".

Melanie loves to be read to, but does not seem to much care for reading itself (1st grade). She will certainly do it if asked, and she is pretty much required to read 20 minutes a day for school, although she gets to pick the book, and being read to counts as well, so we try to divide it up. I imagine at some point it will click and she will figure out how to enjoy reading, and then it will take off.

It doesn't really bother me either way - the elementary school certainly stresses how critical reading skills are, but they don't seem to really find beating the kids up over it to work, so they seem to be pretty good at leading them, rather than pushing.