To have some sympathy with 'competitive parents'

[NorhamGardens]

My youngest is in reception. I was told at parents evening the other evening that others are 'streets ahead' of DC in terms of reading. DC can read simple sentences such as 'John sat down on the bed' at this stage and is 4 years old. I fully believe they are the brightest of my bunch too. (I have much older children and a Y2).

The rational part of me says that DC is doing extremely well, I have every confidence in them.

I'd be lying if I said there was part of me that isn't thinking I should be doing some frantic work with DC so they can 'catch up'. Is this how 'competitive parenting' begins? I am noticing an increasing pressure to do push children on faster earlier and earlier.

All NS children learn to read, and the age at which they do so is not particularly indicative of anything.

Be competitive (if you have to) about the stuff that not all NS children will ever accomplish!

One mum asked my DD what level she was on, DD told her, and she replied "Oh well, I'm sure you'll catch up with *** soon!"

I really couldn't give a flying fruit what level my DC's are on as long as they ENJOY reading - far more important IMO.

Avoid competitive parents like the plague - they're bad for your health!

Interesting posts. My youngest has been 'taught' by my older ones, simple sounding out. It's a bit hit and miss and they can read simple words that make a v short sentence, nothing extraordinary probably put it too strongly in OP. I am pretty relaxed as a parent and from memory the others couldn't do this at this stage, my Y2 got to this level at the start of Y1 or thereabouts I think..the memory dims..:)

Anyway, the teacher did indeed say others were 'streets ahead' in the guided reading groups. I am a fairly wise old bird, or like to think I am, but I can imagine as a new parent I may be a bit daunted or sign up for Kumon or something to be honest. Yes, we are in an affluent area but it isn't a particularly 'affluent' school if that makes sense.

daft teacher (as well as unprofessional). She'll only make her job harder by encouraging parents to compete.

"I have noticed an increasing number of posts on here that say their child was reading at 2 ... But it is interesting, I don't think it used to be this way."

My child (23 months) started to read a good while back and I'm now teaching her. Well, when I say teaching her, lots and lots of reading, playing with letters, phonics. Not forced (because you can't, it's impossible to drill an under 2 year old) and no pressure and not tied in with praise or otherwise (I don't do praise/punishment anyway)

I feel definitely in the minority, I would NEVER bring it up with another parent in real life, for fear of being pilloried as some hothouse parent (whatever they are).

Now in my mother's day (early 70s), it was fairly routine to teach your child to read before school. She taught me at about 2 and I was reading independently at 2-1/2 on. I certainly wasn't the odd one out, either.

otchayaniye I don't think you can really be in the minority? How else did this group of others get to be 'streets ahead'? They didn't expose themselves to print at such young ages.

Not judging you, it sounds as if you enjoy sharing this activity. What motivated you to begin with? I haven't had the time but wouldn't think to push phonics, letters etc with a 1-2 year old.

I've wondered for a while whether the child that starts ahead, stays ahead? Certainly the ability groups in my children's schools didn't change much all through the primary years, right from Y1.

I would be really concerned about a teacher saying that. My partner teaches reception in a very affluent "outstanding" school. He has 2 out of 30 reading. Some know all the phonemes and some are learning them. If your son is reading simple sentences he is in fact ahead of most kids of his age. The teacher should know this.

I find so many people here have such amazing recall of being under 4. I have no memories at all and no idea whether I could read before starting school. I only have one or 2 memories of infant school; mainly sticking crayons up my nose and eating pasta for the pasta pictures. I was definitely one of the top readers in my class by juniors though.

I'm not 'pushing'. That's a loaded word. Do you 'push' painting? Baking? Playing with toys? No, well, learning about words, reading and how they fit together to form sounds and connected meaning is no different. My daughter is absolutely thirsting to know about this.

She's been asking to read from 18 months. As in 'mummy I want to read, what does this say'. That direct. She's been picking out letters and trying them out, making their counds for months.

I am under no illusions that early reading equates to academic success. That said, I read very early and was reading Crime and Punishment at 11 (and in Russian at 16). It's my thing. Always has been my thing. And my father was addicted to books. It was a pathology. Same with my husband. We're both Oxbridge language graduates so I guess reading materials and access to them will always be a priority for us. Because learning to love reading and the world it opens up when your brain is elastic and like a sponge is a great gift.

She started talking at 9 months. In the great scheme of things that makes no difference, as almost all NT kids do end up talking sooner or later.

I have picked up on a prevailing attitude: That any formal learning is deemed a bit of a chore, something to be endured a bit, so that you shouldn't 'force' it too young.

Just as they clap their hands, manipulate wooden bricks, ferret out bits of glass in the garden, ask you a thousand 'why this, why that' questions. It's all learning. So I just don't get why there is a stigma against teaching them to read before pre-school.

Thanks for not judging me though

I always find it hilarious that folk get so het up about such things.
Far far better to enjoy books and stories and reading, than be 'ahead' in recognising the word dog at three.

I think you can enjoy books and reading and imaginative worlds AND recognise the word 'dog' at three (is that advanced though, wouldn't have thought so)

It's not a zero-sum game.

I agree that reading any learning shouldn't be as goal-oriented as it sadly is.

Of course recognising the word 'dog' would be 'advanced' for a three year-old, given that most three year-olds can't read.

"I have picked up on a prevailing attitude: That any formal learning is deemed a bit of a chore, something to be endured a bit, so that you shouldn't 'force' it too young"

IMO formal learning shouldn't start at a very young age, it is far better to learn through play and different experiences.

But that is just me.

Litchick - I so agree that it is much more important to enjoy the stories (and to have actually understood them) than to be able to decode early.

My DD (nearly 6) (who is not a fluent reader in either of her two languages) was chatting away to me, entirely spontaneously, about the different school experiences of David Copperfield and Jane Eyre on the metro to the opera the other night, and then came home at 11 pm and recounted the story of the opera in English (when she had spent the evening entirely in French). I'm perfectly happy with her progress, thank you!

I have three DCs they were all treated the same, had the same, initially, had the same amount of encouragement and books.

The first could read at 4 and remained academically in the top 10%

The second could read at 7 and remained academically well below average.

The third could read at 2 and up until now has remained in the top 1%.

I spent considerably more time, trying to teach the middle one than the others.

You do not need any time to teach a 2 year old to read, you cannot stop them IME.

Otch, ah now I can see where you are coming from :).

Literature and 'words' also a passion in our household whilst not formally taught to the children young perhaps this happens anyway? Books everywhere, literally :)

Pagwatch - "never at an interview or any important moment in your life were you asked 'what was your reading level in infant school'."

This is true. And it makes me sad. My primary school reading level was probably my finest moment.

[Pootles off to write on her CV "1979-1981 - very advanced at reading"]

Your youngest sounds fine. If I were in this situation the only thing I would be concerned about is the effect it might have on their confidence if they genuinely are much further behind than the rest of the class. I find this hard to believe that the rest of the class are so far ahead.

was reading the Times at 9 months

You should see my CV