To be shocked that the national average reading age is 9-11

Children and young people don't read books any more. They are on their phones which use a different literacy and language.

No. There was the lower stream where they watched videos all the time (yes really!) the middle stream which I was in and the upper stream (I think that is what they called it). Our education was a joke and the middle stream often had no teachers - there seemed to be a shortage.

One day a guy came in to teach us maths and for the first time I understood long and short division (I know I am slightly off topic but this shows the shoddy education we got - no wonder I often truanted!!). Sadly he never came back!!!

Would you really write something like "long turm" or "neara" through? Those aren't just typos.

This doesn’t surprise me. I was “age graded” as having a reading age of 14, at 7. I’ve been an avid reader throughout my life and remain so. My husband is emphatically not and I wouldn’t be surprised if he fell into a significantly lower category of literacy.

We both have professional jobs, however it is sometimes stark how far apart our values are when it comes to reading and simply having knowledge for the pleasure of having it.

I think within the general population, he is more usual than I am. Many don’t see the value in having knowledge unless it has an immediate practical value.

If comprehension skills are low, it follows (especially in English) that spelling of words that sound the same (which the context within which they are used is not understood) will be spelt wrongly.

The ability to read is far more than reiterating words.
Reading widely for the love of reading in one's language, especially "world" languages like English, Spanish, French and Portuguese will contextualise one's comprehension and usage of said languages in a richer and far more complex way.

To read and understand different dialects, yet be able to easily switch and use "standard"/"received" English from one's English speaking country is a skill and a joy that keeps the brain supple.

Thus making it more receptive to recognising, and differentiating foreign languaged by sight, even if one may not understand the words.

This even goes for languages with a whole different calligraphy than what is used in Europe (including Russian and Greek).

This has worked for me with just an O'level standard of education, but coming from homes that always had books "high and low" in them and a father that bought the Daily Mirror Monday- Saturday and the Sunday Mirror and the Observer on a Sunday.

Between the two of them, my parents sent me to school knowing how to read and write.
Neither left school with qualifications, but were very intelligent due to their curiosity, code switching skills and love of reading and being able to communicate with ANYBODY.

You make an excellent case in point, OP.

Yes, I agree. To be honest, even in her simple books for very young readers, she used different adjectives and adverbs than just very basic formulaic ones.

I think a lot of it was snobbery and jealousy at how extremely popular her writing was - and maybe even people who couldn't grasp that she was writing for children, so it wasn't just a case of her assumedly having a low level of literacy herself.

Yes, she was unmistakably writing from a posh and privileged background, but I think she did use more challenging vocabulary and phrasing on many occasions. From some of the critics, you'd assume it was only ever "the cat sat on the mat" and "Billy has a blue bicycle; the bicycle is nice - Billy likes riding his blue bicycle".

It's probably more that we have very limited time to write communications. I write multiple clinical letters per day and only have a few minutes to complete them. They are well below what my usual spelling standards are and I don't always have time to go back and check. Our software does not do automatic corrections.

This is why The Sun (love it or loathe it) has a very simplistic writing style and is one of the biggest selling papers.

Functional literacy is a lot more than recognising symbols. It includes understanding simple and complex information, reading comprehension, being able to communicate in written form in a manner appropriate for the setting (i.e. not to write a letter to your employer starting with "hiyya, mate. How r u?"). If you give an academic text to an 11 year old, they will be able to read the words but they are unlikely to be able to make sense of what it is they are reading because their reading comprehension is at a lower level than an academic paper demands.
The Times newspaper writes at a reading comprehension levels of 11-year-old. Many other newspapers write for a lower reading age. Can't remember the research paper off the top of my head, unfortunately.

There is a big difference between recognising the word or being able to decode its sounds and being able to comprehend the meaning. Having a low reading age affects our ability to access adult life - letters/emails from the bank or advertising information, for example, in a meaningful manner.
Many people will tell you proudly that their child read Harry Potter when the child was 4 but it is about much more than reading the words; it’s about comprehending the nuance of the story and many of them don't, even at 11 or 12.
Modern books don’t use the wide range of vocabulary and their storylines are often more obvious than more traditional books which is also a problem because it doesn’t extend a child’s vocabulary which is compounding the problem, in my opinion.

This doesn't surprise me at all and it's clearly leading to poor writing standards.

I received an email from a public sector organisation recently with the following howlers:
Thankyou (sic) fore (for)
neara (nearer)
Long turm (long-term)
todays (today's)

The sender may well have dyslexia but surely a big organisation could arrange adaptive software or other support to ensure there's a basic standard of literacy in their comms to service users?

The two Mastermind rounds are starkly set at two very different levels: the specialist subject round is indeed often tough for the typical person (presumably, that's the whole point); but the general knowledge round often features laughably simple Tipping Point-style questions.

I don't think the specialist round is particularly tough if you know about the subject, especially bearing in mind that the contestant has had the opportunity to 'revise' their subject beforehand. Occasionally there are specialist rounds that happen to be about things I'm interested in, and I usually score at least as well as the contestant without having practised at all. I think the two rounds are of comparable difficulty.

It would be interesting to know what it should be if a reading age of 10 is considered bad, because it doesn't go up very high as far as I remember, is 16 years the limit? And is it stable or does what's considered a 10 year olds reading age increase as literacy standards improve? Does the average adult need to read better than the average 10 year old? Once you can read fluently isn't that sufficient? Why does it need to be higher?

Q: Which of these (clear and mutually exclusive options) applies to you - A, B or C?

A: Yes!

@DalzielOrNoDalzielAndDontPascoe I find the 1% club shocking too. Particularly as the questions are focused on reasoning and not general knowledge.

The reading age statistic is shocking too. Has this declined in recent years? Or would the average adult reading age have been the same 10, 20 or 30 years ago?

I have to say this is why I encourage DDs to read for pleasure and make sure they see me reading my books too. We've also made sure we only have analogue clocks in the house and in their bedrooms after I read the statistic that lots of teenagers can't tell the time unless it's on a digital clock. These skills are important and it's worrying if we're starting to lose them as a society in general.

When I was 10 I was a voracious reader and consumed all books, those written for adults as well as children. I don’t think I was unusual. So I don’t really understand what a reading age much older than 10 would look like anyway?

It’s a huge problem in secondary. And should never be left as the English Department’s issue. Most secondary teachers have little, if any, training on how to teach reading.
The reading age of some GCSE papers can be as high as 16 (not just English, in fact it’s mainly Science papers). The students who leave primary behind find themselves falling further and further behind.
It’s a contributory factor to many social problems.

Were you for some reason inappropriately put into a very low ability class?

Janet & John - or Roger Red Hat and Billy Blue Hat as we had - are definitely not aimed at typical 10yos, are they?!

I sometimes enjoy Enid Blyton books as a guilty pleasure - Famous Five and Five Find-Outers rather than Noddy (as if that makes it much loftier!!).

I still have my old Enid Blytons and re-read them from time-to-time. EB has been criticised for her simplistic language, which might be true for the books aimed at beginner readers, but the vocabulary in the books she wrote for older children is quite advanced - I noticed the word 'expostulate' in one of her books, for example.

Part of my job is to send forms out to people to choose and option and sign. These forms are quite wordy, and the customers are sent a letter with them saying call me if you have any questions. The amount of people that either sign the forms without ticking a box to choose an option or tick all the boxes and sign is ridiculous, it’s clear to me when speaking to customers that their either didn’t read the forms or didn’t understand them.

Are they accounting for people whose first language isn't English, for example - they might be very advanced readers in their first language, but less competent in English.

That's definitely a pertinent point to throw into the mix - although it never ceases to amaze me how many people who have English as a second, third or even fourth language seem to have a better level of comprehension in reading it than a great many - quite possibly most - native English speakers.

I think it's frequently a modern, very common and widespread mindset, and often an active behavioural choice; and not just inherent level of ability.

Now I cannot remember how old I was but must have been around 10 as we moved from Kent to Surrey around that time so changed schools. The class were reading Janet and John. I could not believe it! At home I was reading my Dad's books on sci fi and the Occult!

Janet and John was for little kids! It was boring and wishy washy colours from what I remember!

I was taken out of class (by a teacher that hated me although I was not a bad kid - very shy and quiet) and put in speech therapy class as I did not pronounce TH but said F - exactly like the rest of the bloody school (near Croydon). I was helping the rest of the kids in the class to read for fuck's sake. The only thing I was shit at was Maths!

Can we have a link to the declaration in the OP please.

Also baring in mind the actual quite high expectations in standards for reading as regards 10 year olds in this country it needs to be remembered that children then go onto GCSEs which have increased standards and 68% apparantly passed last year.

Maybe because we’re pushing them to early and take the joy out of it