To be concerned that my friends 7 year old is having trouble reading my DD's books

[milliec]

Message withdrawn

Milliec YANBU, a 7 year old should be able to read imo. If my 7 year-old child couldn't read with some confidence I'd expect the school to explain why/what is being done about it etc.
It's just unfortunate that you mention you dd's age in your post, you should have expected to be accused of bragging! But well done for encouraging her to read, as long as you're not pushing her than it's fantastic.

Sometimes they just can't be bothered. My ds can read one day and not the next. He's nearly 5. If your dd is showing interest in reading, that's nice and it probably means she will work fast because she's interested. In the end they all catch up. Doing well at school means lots of things - it's not all about reading.

PS - Wandering Trolley

If I was Milliec's friend, and she was always banging on about her gifted two year old and her wretched Peter and Jane books, and my son was only slowly getting the hang of reading or struggling a bit but the school were on to it, then I wouldn't confide in her either and would probably just say, 'he's doing really well and getting good reports', which is almost certainly the truth. He sounds a lovely, cuddly, willing little boy - a real sweetie. I'd be proud if he were mine.
I would not want her to be all sympathetic, cocking her head on one side, and say, 'Oh, poor little Peter isn't getting on very well with his reading compared to my Jane, is he?'

I've posted this before, But I'll post it again.

My dh didn't read until he was 7 or 8.

He has a tested IQ of over 150, 4 A grades at A level and a degree from Oxford university. He then went on to train as a fighter pilot in the RAF.

So not lacking smarts, not dyslexic, be was a boy.

I think this is erring on the smug under the guise of 'being concerned' but as ever, I'm happy to be wrong

Message withdrawn

I like Peter and Jane books because I have a nostalgic thing about them, and I love the illustrations, so I do understand about that.

well you are taking it very well, millie!

my children didnt read until they were around 7, because nobody taught them. Actually school doesnt start here until 7 anyway. I remain convinced that they will end up at Oxford, naturally.

It's prerogative.Your 2.7 year old DD should have corrected you on this.

Message withdrawn

think you lot have been very tough on millie. you parents of older children seem to have forgotten that as the parent of a toddler she doesn't have a clue about older kids. i think she was entitled to ask the question, because how was she to know that the majority view wouldn't ahve been to broach it with him.

whoever it was that posted about phonics may be onto something, and at least was trying to be constructive.

Message withdrawn

fwiw i think milliec has received many balanced consistent responses.imo no one unduly tough.

this isnt FluffyBunnyMumsnet post any ole thread and get an insipid don't want to be too tough answer. disagreeing with someone is not necessarily harsh, it is a dialogue after all.

i am sure milliec will get over the ignominy of it all, and live to post another day

no idea, millie, i am the mother of a toddler and therefore a moron in that regard. seems to be sounding out rather than old-fashioned learning, my niece was AMAZING on it, read much quicker than the conventional method and it seemed more constructive in the longer term as well.

i fookin' know it's not fluffybunnymumsnet, i'm just saying that the exponentially derisive snorting about showing off was based on a fairly thin premise.

millie - well done for taking it all on the chin

ORT - Oxford Reading Tree. A non-phonics reading scheme; still quite popular in many schools. Features main characters of Chip, Biff and Kipper and a dog called Floppy. Later int he series - about stage 5 you move into the Magic Key stories.

Phonics - it is the using of letter sounds and blends to make up the words, sounding out words. It is the recommended way of teaching children to rea at present.

So you don't teach letter names but the sounds: c-a-t so they blend to make cat. Not cuh-ah=tuh, which doesn;t work so well.

It moves away from too much sight reading - which is what the Ladybird read with me (?) scheme is based on - lots of repetition of sight word.

Jolly Phonics - has a website - uses synthetic phonics, as recommended. There are teaching materials and books to accompany it.

Although TBh with a 2yo I would forget any reading scheme at all. Just enjoy books together. Point out basic CVC words (ct, dog, etc) in normal books and enjoy the fun, informal stories within them. Reading scheme books are horrid ways of introducing stories and the love of books and reading in the whole TBH.

personally i woudl try not to teach my child to read before school, they'll be bored shitless when they get there.

We don't even know if the boy needs reading help.

Still think milliec should butt out.

Phonics is the way they teach reading - teach the sound of the letter - so 'ah' rather than 'ay', said 'ah ah ah ah' whilst pretending to have ants running all over your arm. Significant ones to be careful with are things like m which is 'mmmmmm' not 'muh'. The idea is they can then blend these letters to read more quickly, and it also should help their spelling as they use their phonics knowledge to start writing independently. ORT is Oxford Reading Tree aka Magic Key.

The phonics is all very well - dd could read using phonics before starting school, and is a very good speller (she is 4, and in last term at reception). I can see with her the phonics working really well, alongside the keywords (there are 45 keywords they should know by the end of Reception - things like 'are' 'you' 'the' which can't be done phonically.

Ds1 is an excellent reader - he is 6, in Y2, reading things like Horrid Henry, Swallows and Amazons. He learnt almost entirely by keyword (which is the P&J approach) - and still prefers to use sight words than phonics. He does use phonics for spelling, but actually is a very good speller, especially with difficult 'non-phonic' words like night/fight etc. This is because he reads lots, and I think he memorises the look of the words, rather than the rule. Interestingly he reads music in the same way - he doesn't say 'that is an A, here is an A on the piano, it's that note' he says 'something that looks like that on the music is this note on the piano or the violin'.

So they all thrive differently, which is why I think a variety of systems should be used. I think you should be careful about what you call the letters though, as if you call them 'ay bee cee' it could cause problems, equally 'mm, nnn' etc not 'muh' 'nuh'.

she could be reading at .7, i was. but it hasnt given me any specific advantages or signify anything amazing about me. in fact, i became so used to coasting through infant school that the habit never left me and i got way behind.

my 8 year old otoh reads very little, he has severe dyslexia (as well as hfa though that doesnt affect literacy). it's not the end of the world, much as i adore books and bemoan the lack of interest he has, the truth is kidsl gifted in different ways and he far exceeds anything i ever achieved in gymnastics, for example.

well of course she should butt out, or at least if she had actually butted in she should. in fact, all she did was ask about it on MN. she's not uttered a peep to the dad. nor will she, she's said. so, good advice, just badly framed imo.

Message withdrawn

I do think some of these answers are a little harsh!
FWIW- I could read at 2, and had finished the whole of the ladybird Peter and Jane reading scheme by the time I started school at 4 (my mum was a primary teacher, I loved reading, still do).
So- they put me into infant 2, I had to repeat infant 3 so as not to 'mess me up' later, and was put off learning, or rather working at it, for life!

DH on the other hand couldn't read properly until 8 or 9. He is dyslexic, and is a genius at mathematics.

We both have post-grad qualifications, and reasonably interesting careers.

DD (2.3) already knows all her letters, upper and lower case. I work fulltime, she is in nursery (care, not pre-prep setting)- I haven't sat down and drilled her- she has just picked them up- from books, posters, jigsaws, fridge magnets, wherever. Some children do learn these things earlier than others. BUT she can't do stairs/steps at all- was very late with all her physical milestones. Each child has different strengths. I'm sure she'll take inordinate amounts of time to learn other things (I still can't do long multiplication, or long division).

If you'd asked my son at 7 to read Peter and Jane he could not have done it.

He is now 8.4 and his teacher has just told me he has a reading age of 11.

Relax.