2-year-olds reading?

"Chookie" wrote in message
news:ehrebeniuk-F3189A.20533614032008@news...
In article ,
"Donna Metler" wrote:

I'm a "native reader"-according to my parents, they realized I could
read,
as opposed to just memorizing books, at 2 1/2, when I read the headline
on a
newspaper. I entered kindergarten reading off the top of the test they
gave
at the time. So is my daughter, who began making comments indicating she
was
reading signs at 15-16 months, and by 2 could easily handle anything as
long
as the print was big enough. At 3, she can handle things that are labeled
for 2nd-3rd graders, but, again, print size is an issue, as is interest
level.
snipped
Is being at the top of the class in school really worth years of boredom
and
social issues?

FWIW, Donna (and I think I've mentioned it before), you would not have
been
able to prevent DD learning to read early even if you tried! And even if
you
succeeded in preventing early reading, it would not prevent her from being
bored and socially isolated from her age-peers. She's almost certainly
Exceptionally or more likely Profoundly Gifted.

Have you had a wander around the Hoagiesgifted site yet?

Hoagies and Davidson-Davidson is actually more helpful in some ways,
although I don't know that DD would qualify for their programs, or that I'd
want her in them (they're VERY focused on PG-and some of their ideas scare
me a little-basically, their feeling matches that of Herman Rubin's on
Misc.education-that PG kids should be pushed through academically as quickly
as possible. I'm willing to consider that DD entering Kindergarten at 4 1/2
instead of 5 1/2 is probably a good idea-but I'm unwilling to accept that
she should be doing high school level work by 8-9, and college level work by
12 or so). I'm also on a discussion board for parents of HG+ children, where
there are three children within a year of DD's age, all of whom had parents
say "Huh?? What??" at about the same time, so we can bounce ideas off of
each other, which has been more helpful.

I just wish some of these kids lived closer-we're scattered in multiple
countries and probably every state of the USA, but nowhere near playdate
distance. And I wish I lived in some of the areas these folks keep talking
about, where they have specialized "gifted" schools-sometimes even magnet or
charter schools which are state-supported, or where they have GT cluster
programs and even HG programs in the schools. IN my school system, there are
no services until 3rd grade, and it's a once a week pull-out, for any child
who scores over 129 on the OLSAT. Acceleration is pretty much unheard
of-and early entry is forbidden by state law. There are some nice programs
at the high school level-but the kid has to survive until high school to get
there!

We're going to try the private school route-and the staff at the one DD will
do pre-K at next year is willing to work with us, but they've told me that
they've never had a child as advanced as DD is before, and they're not
exactly sure what they can do. At 3, I really think that she'll just love
the large classroom with lots of things to do and that she'll especially
enjoy the "chapel buddies", where each younger group is paired with an older
class for regular activities. I don't expect her to learn anything academic
next year at school (and since it's only about 15 hours a week, counting
travel time, she'll have a lot of time to learn the way she has been so
far)-but hopefully it will give us an idea as to how she does in a "school"
setting so we can decide where to go from there, as far as traditional vs
homeschooling, early entry to kindergarten and the like.





--
Chookie -- Sydney, Australia
(Replace "foulspambegone" with "optushome" to reply)

http://chookiesbackyard.blogspot.com/

On Mar 14, 5:46*am, Chookie wrote:

snip

But I would expect, as for every other artificial skill, that there are people
who aren't wired for it to the extent that other people are. *When it's
reading, which is important in our society, we call them dyslexic, and try to
remediate The Problem. *Funny how we don't treat tone-deafness with the same
degree of concern. *

It's obviously because reading skills are important for many more
careers than musical ability is.

Music is closer to being a natural skill than reading is! *
There are no cultures I know of that are without music -- plenty that don't
have writing.

Name one such culture that you would want to live in. The high
standard of living people in the Western world enjoy would never have
been achieved without the accumulation of knowledge that written
language enables.

Of course, there are children who learn to read very early, or who really want
to learn to read. *There is no reason to prevent them. *There is also no
reason to inflict reading lessons on little kids who would rather be doing
something else. *

The "something else" for my 4yo son is often watching TV or playing
video games, in which case my wife and I have no qualms about making
him read or practice some math with us.

Think very, very carefully about why you want your child to
read early. *Most reasons I have heard relate to the parent's desire for the
child to Get Ahead in some way. *That is, it's all about the parent, not about
the child.

How does that follow? Successful people are more likely to be happy
people.

Beliavsky wrote:
On Mar 14, 5:46 am, Chookie wrote:

snip

But I would expect, as for every other artificial skill, that there are people
who aren't wired for it to the extent that other people are. When it's
reading, which is important in our society, we call them dyslexic, and try to
remediate The Problem. Funny how we don't treat tone-deafness with the same
degree of concern.

It's obviously because reading skills are important for many more
careers than musical ability is.

Music is closer to being a natural skill than reading is!
There are no cultures I know of that are without music -- plenty that don't
have writing.

Name one such culture that you would want to live in. The high
standard of living people in the Western world enjoy would never have
been achieved without the accumulation of knowledge that written
language enables.

Of course, there are children who learn to read very early, or who really want
to learn to read. There is no reason to prevent them. There is also no
reason to inflict reading lessons on little kids who would rather be doing
something else.

The "something else" for my 4yo son is often watching TV or playing
video games, in which case my wife and I have no qualms about making
him read or practice some math with us.

Think very, very carefully about why you want your child to
read early. Most reasons I have heard relate to the parent's desire for the
child to Get Ahead in some way. That is, it's all about the parent, not about
the child.

How does that follow? Successful people are more likely to be happy
people.

Or is it the other way around? Causation/correlation, and all that.
Perhaps we should be striving to make our children happy, above all.

Clisby

Hoagies and Davidson-Davidson is actually more helpful in some ways,
although I don't know that DD would qualify for their programs, or that I'd
want her in them (they're VERY focused on PG-and some of their ideas scare
me a little-basically, their feeling matches that of Herman Rubin's on
Misc.education-that PG kids should be pushed through academically as quickly
as possible. I'm willing to consider that DD entering Kindergarten at 4 1/2
instead of 5 1/2 is probably a good idea-but I'm unwilling to accept that
she should be doing high school level work by 8-9, and college level work by
12 or so).

I wouldn't be desperately concerned about her doing one subject on the
side at a high level and not be drilled for exams in that subject,
finding a balance of challenging work along with other activities and
what not may have it's advantages.

I went through school 1 year ahead, but with a birthday fairly early in
the year, it was more accidental due to moving and late enrolling than
planned, but I did do a moderate amount of maths at home, though iirc
with minimal parental involvement. When I think back to what text books
I was using at what point, I was doing high school work at 8 or 9. My
parents had no interest in making me do party tricks by getting maths
GCSE (taken at age 16 in the UK) at a young age, but equally believe I
could have done it and I know myself from the topics I was working on
for pleasure that I could have. I suspect had my parents not been
teachers and I'd not has such easy access to resources I'd actually have
been more frustrated.

I think a saving grace for me was having strong interests outside of
academics, though ultimately that led to spending the last couple of
years at school fairly light on the work front, whilst dancing for hours
most days and still left school with the top grades, this didn't stand
me in good stead for university though, not that that matters much to me
as guess what I spend more time doing, I'm using the dance far more than
anything else I learnt at that phase of life - my biggest frustration is
that I was discouraged from pursuing dance further, I doubt I could
have performed professionally, but I could happily have been a dance
teacher and even attempted to fit in some training in that on the side.

So don't dismiss completely some kind of acceleration along with
enrichment, enrichment seems to be in vogue at the moment, but my mum is
finding that whilst good in theory, there is only so much of that you
can do and to a certain extent it even triggers acceleration - it was
enrichment by asking extra questions on coursework that had me self
accelerating with calculus for example.

Cheers
Anne

First graders are normally 6 years old. Are you sure about being only 5
in the 1st grade? There are other reasons besides academic reasons to
wait. Remember, your son can still learn at home it's called unschooling
and he'll probably learn faster and easier at home. So I'm suggesting he
not repeat Kindergarten, but instead just stay home a year maybe two.

I knew a very unhappy boy who is smart as a whip, but because he was the
youngest in his class with an Aug birthday, he was emotionally and
physically younger... and I'm not referring to emotionally immature but
rather just experience and interest wise. Physically he was out of sync
with the other boys in his class. He loved basketball but was the worst
player on his school class team even though he was tall, his growth
spurts were out of whack with his coordination and it spoiled his desire
for playing basketball. I had other friends whose son was in the same
city's recreational league and this boy would have excelled in that
league in his proper age group. Anyway, this boy had a very bad
emotional year that year. I'd say that physically he felt inferior and
that impacted his schoolwork as well.

Please remember there will be some first graders that are already 7 yrs
old and those kids will be the leaders of the class, emotionally and
physically.

You might want to think about whether you son will want to play HS
sports, and sports might get him a scholarship. School should be fun too.

Terry



Beliavsky wrote:
On Mar 12, 7:13 am, (Beth Kevles) wrote:
Hi --

A wise person once told me that it doesn't matter when a child learns to
read. What matters is how far they go before they stop wanting to
learn.

A child who is reading at a much lower level than his classmates will
be hampered in all subjects and may reject school entirely. Parents
will try to avoid putting their children in this situation.
Conversely, I think my eldest son should be in 1st grade next year and
not repeat kindergarten, even though he will be only 5yrs 2mo this
September, because he is already reading (and doing arithmetic) at a
1st grade level.

In article , Yankee_NLPer says...

First graders are normally 6 years old. Are you sure about being only 5
in the 1st grade? There are other reasons besides academic reasons to
wait. Remember, your son can still learn at home it's called unschooling
and he'll probably learn faster and easier at home. So I'm suggesting he
not repeat Kindergarten, but instead just stay home a year maybe two.

I knew a very unhappy boy who is smart as a whip, but because he was the
youngest in his class with an Aug birthday, he was emotionally and
physically younger... and I'm not referring to emotionally immature but
rather just experience and interest wise. Physically he was out of sync
with the other boys in his class. He loved basketball but was the worst
player on his school class team even though he was tall, his growth
spurts were out of whack with his coordination and it spoiled his desire
for playing basketball.

So - wait until he matures into himself. This happens at different rates.

One of my neighbor's kids was pretty much a Little League prodigy in early
grades. He's still pretty good, but what his wise coach warned him about has
come to pass - don't get too swole a head about it because the little shrimps
he's playing with and against now - some of them get as big and good as him as
the years go by.


I had other friends whose son was in the same
city's recreational league and this boy would have excelled in that
league in his proper age group. Anyway, this boy had a very bad
emotional year that year. I'd say that physically he felt inferior and
that impacted his schoolwork as well.

Please remember there will be some first graders that are already 7 yrs
old and those kids will be the leaders of the class, emotionally and
physically.


Please remember that this is a one-time decision that has ramifications every
single school year after that!!

Those already 7 year olds will be the bored 4th graders, the 8 graders who are
hanging out with high school kids because they're both interested in girls and
they other 8th grade boys are not, and the 19 year olds who haven't graduated
high school yet, and may not as they're anxious to get going on their adult
lives.

This is really bad advice. Redshirting boys was all the rage in my area some
time back, encouraged some by teachers who were concerned about perfomance on
high stakes testing in 4th grade. The more 10 year olds sat down to those, the
better the grade. But the research on late starting/holding back doesn't
support good outcomes. And seeing the results, parents in my area by and large
are not doing that anymore.


You might want to think about whether you son will want to play HS
sports, and sports might get him a scholarship. School should be fun too.


Yea - I grew up in Texas (one county over from where "Last Picture Show" was
filmed) where football was king and they wanted everyone on the team to be
shaving if they could. Not really a good idea for the huge number of kids who
aren't sports prodigies.

Banty

Anne Rogers wrote:

Hoagies and Davidson-Davidson is actually more helpful in some ways,
although I don't know that DD would qualify for their programs, or
that I'd want her in them (they're VERY focused on PG-and some of
their ideas scare me a little-basically, their feeling matches that of
Herman Rubin's on Misc.education-that PG kids should be pushed through
academically as quickly as possible. I'm willing to consider that DD
entering Kindergarten at 4 1/2 instead of 5 1/2 is probably a good
idea-but I'm unwilling to accept that she should be doing high school
level work by 8-9, and college level work by 12 or so).

I wouldn't be desperately concerned about her doing one subject on the
side at a high level and not be drilled for exams in that subject,
finding a balance of challenging work along with other activities and
what not may have it's advantages.

I think the key is letting the child determine what is of
interest. Personally, I don't see reading as much of an issue
either way. Reading isn't an end in itself, but a tool to get
access to other knowledge. It's tricky having a very advanced
reader in that you have to manage the reading material (finding
age appropriate material at the child's reading level can be a
challenge) and manage the classroom experience (so that the child
isn't having to pretend to be years behind herself), but I don't
think there any real worry about advanced reading in general. It's
also the case that even among kids of normal ability, there's wide
variation in reading ability over the early years. I think that's
one of the easier things to deal with.

When it comes to other areas, maybe her passion will turn
out to be an academic area, or maybe it will be some extracurricular.
For me, I loved that even the advanced programs at school required
little enough effort that I had plenty of time free to pursue other
areas seriously. While I went through the usual social angst, I
was rarely bored out of my mind because I had plenty else to do.
I think it was challenging for my parents to keep up with my
schedule, but I was happy as a pig in mud, largely. I did have
fairly accommodating elementary school teachers (which I think
is more challenging these days now that they're all worried about
NCLB issues--I think I spent most of 5th grade in the library
rather than in my classroom, which would probably be difficult
to arrange now).

On the other hand, if she turns out to have a passion about
a particular academic area of interest, then I think you nurture
that and deal with the fallout in having to deal with the educational
system accordingly--not in an attempt to get the child pushed through
ASAP so they can get on to "bigger and better" things, but simply
in order to allow her to follow her passion where it leads, as you
would with any other child. You'll likely have some challenges
finding an appropriate path through the educational system, but
ultimately something usually works out.

I think a saving grace for me was having strong interests outside of
academics, though ultimately that led to spending the last couple of
years at school fairly light on the work front, whilst dancing for hours
most days and still left school with the top grades, this didn't stand
me in good stead for university though, not that that matters much to me
as guess what I spend more time doing, I'm using the dance far more than
anything else I learnt at that phase of life - my biggest frustration is
that I was discouraged from pursuing dance further, I doubt I could
have performed professionally, but I could happily have been a dance
teacher and even attempted to fit in some training in that on the side.

I was fortunately to be able to continue both through
university. It took some looking to find top notch programs
in both areas of interest at a place where the logistics of
pursuing both majors weren't too ugly, but it worked out very
well in the end for me, and I still use both areas.
My eldest son is considering doing much the same with
dance and academics, particularly since it might well end up
that his dance could financially subsidize his academics. He
may well have a dilemma coming up soon in deciding between a
highly competitive, very high work load magnet school vs. his
community high school. Even if he gets into the former, he's
leaning towards the latter so that he has the time to pursue
dance as seriously as he'd like. (As a total aside, I was
peeking last night as he was learning some of Tharp's and
Baryshnikov's "Push Comes to Shove" and it was just so darned
adorable to see him moving like that.)

Best wishes,
Ericka

"Donna Metler" wrote in message
I'm willing to consider that DD entering Kindergarten at 4 1/2 instead of 5
1/2 is probably a good idea-but I'm unwilling to accept that she should be
doing high school level work by 8-9, and college level work by 12 or so).

Hopefully she doesn't get burned out. We've discussed this before, but I
certainly wouldn't be planning this gifted situation until I was sure she
was truly gifted. I have read that most kids catch up to one another in
about 3-4th grade.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

Sue wrote:
"Donna Metler" wrote in message
I'm willing to consider that DD entering Kindergarten at 4 1/2 instead of 5
1/2 is probably a good idea-but I'm unwilling to accept that she should be
doing high school level work by 8-9, and college level work by 12 or so).

Hopefully she doesn't get burned out. We've discussed this before, but I
certainly wouldn't be planning this gifted situation until I was sure she
was truly gifted. I have read that most kids catch up to one another in
about 3-4th grade.

Honestly, I don't think there's any doubt in the world
about this kid, and I think it's essential to start learning
about options and marshaling resources so as not to be blindsided
when the time comes that a decision needs to be made.

Best wishes,
Ericka

On Mar 15, 6:52�am, "Sue" wrote:
"Donna Metler" wrote in message
I'm willing to consider that DD entering Kindergarten at 4 1/2 instead of 5
1/2 is probably a good idea-but I'm unwilling to accept that she should be
doing high school level work by 8-9, and college level work by 12 or so).

Hopefully she doesn't get burned out. We've discussed this before, but I
certainly wouldn't be planning this gifted situation until I was sure she
was truly gifted. I have read that most kids catch up to one another in
about 3-4th grade.
--
Sue (mom to three girls)

Well, obviously they don't ALL catch up to each other. They catch up
more or less to others of about the same level of talent, that's all.
In other words, for every A. who is reading well at 3.5, there is a B.
who can't yet read but is just as clever, who by 3rd or 4th grade will
match A's performance *then*. But both A and B will be waaaaaay above
3rd or 4th grade reading level -- not at the same level as everyone
else.

I think we're going to see another wave of superbaby products, if that
news story about the 17-month-old is any indication (people keep
saying she learned to read from Signing Time, which is a gross
exaggeration and really not what the parents said at all, as far as I
could tell). Unfortunately it's something that's happened over and
over: people who market a superbaby product find ONE kid who actually
does something extraordinary (usually because the child was *already*
extraordinary) and that story becomes a selling point. It's a great
pity. I can only hope the Signing Time people come to their senses and
realize that their product is good enough to be successful on its own
merits, and doesn't NEED the superbaby marketing. But naturally no one
can resist a little free buzz.

--Helen