Have you taught your pre reception child to read ?

[HelloDolly]

Our school asked us not to do anything with the children, ie letter work or reading, so the children all start from the same point.

I personally think this is awful, my daughter knows 21 letters without the pictures and I had fully intended to get started with basic words this summer but don't know what to do know.

I didn't teach DS to read, assuming that he would learn in reception. At the end of reception he ability to read was no better than at the start. I taught him to read over summer between reception & Y1 and now he's doing very well (still is in Y1)and reading Horrid Henry books by himself.

As such, if my DD is interested, i will teach her to read pre-reception - but i won't push it if she's not interested.

I taught DS2 to read before Reception because he was very keen; he had asked me at 2.5, but I ignored it, though I had the sneaking suspicion that he already recognised some words when I taught him. I didn't teach DS1 because he didn't show the same interest at the same age.

I agree with other posters that it's nonsense to even pretend that the children will all come in with the same skills and, even if they did, children pick up reading at such different rates that the advantage of the 'level playing field' would be pretty short lived.

If your daughter wants to learn, I would go ahead and teach her. I'd recommend Jolly Phonics too, because if she gets a good grounding in that, whatever method the school teaches won't undermine it.

dd knew all her letter sounds and was starting to sound out simple cvc and then a few 4 letter words. The majority of her class were at a similar point or had at least some idea of the basic phonics, having been through the nursery year, although they did then revise all the letter sounds and consonant blends with Jolly Phonics in the first term whcih did her no harm . The preschools usually work towards whatever the local schools teach next and there will be a wide range of ability in the new intake anyway, regardless of what they may have said.

If you feel your child is ready and interested focus on the letter sounds and prereading skills such as looking for signs as you go around the shops. You can't undo what she already knows so personally I'd focus on completing and reinforcing that.

Well said, Blu. When I've spoken with teachers who say please don't stress about teaching your children to read before school, they are not being lazy or jobsworth.

I didn't teach DD1. She seems to be absolutely fine, and absolutely adores reading and writing. I am completely confident that her adorable teacher is rather better at literacy than me, frankly.

No. My children are dyslexic so bit different though. I guess if they showed an interest then fine. I think it's very obvious when children themselves are ready to learn. Sadly mine are terrfied of letters

ours read early largely because we are a book obsessed household and they just picked it up from all the stories we read to them - a lot of the children's first books are alphabet books anyway (and those Dr Seuss books which ours loved) and you can pick up phonetic pronounciation from there.

Having said that, we were regarded with much suspicion by the teachers. We were even cornered once and asked how we had taught them and subtlely told not to push them (if they knew us they'd realise we are the least pushy people possible!). One of dd's friends recently said to her 'you only read better than me because your mum taught you to read before you started school' so we were obviously the talk of the other parents aswell.

No, I never taught my DD (in reception now) to read and she is doing really well - far exceeded my expectations in her first year(so in hindsight as I have such low expectations, just as well I'm not her teacher .

DP is in a bit of an arse today as a mum of a girl in reception at the same school, told us yesterday that her dd has started to get spelling homework. That caused great angst for DP (i.e. is my DD not bright enough for spellings????) , but my attitude is, she's only 5, I don't really want her to have homework at that age.

yes I should say, having said about the reading, that neither of mine could write a single letter before they started school.

They simply weren't interested in writing but were in reading.

Every child is different and if your child is interested in books/letters there's no harm reading lots of books to them and pointing out signs, names on envelopes etc.

And mine were the same about writing, Foxinsocks, which is what DS2 has spent his Reception year concentrating on.

yes that is exactly what happened with dd singersgirl and ds (who starts in September) looks like he will go the same way

havent read all posts but am probably going to get my head bitten off here.....

I agree with the school.

Our school said the same thing. They said it was because some children are taught it 'differently' and then they have to 'unteach' them and then 'teach' them and thats much harder and takes much longer. If all children start at the same point and are a 'clean slate' then it is much easier for the teacher and the children. Also, if a child knows a lot more than the others they can then get bored and start to mess around and again, that isnt good for the child, other children or the teacher.

Obviously, you cant stop your child picking things up naturally if they want to learn stuff but personally, I wouldnt actively try and teach reading and writing at home before reception.

there's very little fuss made about those who start school being able to write (and as far as I can see, that's often more common than being able to read)

you can't stop children learning if they want to and as for children messing about because they know more than the others, there are some children who are 5 and some who have only just turned 4 in reception so there's already a massive gulf between the abilities of children anyway and a good reception teacher knows how to handle that (and why I take my hat off to teachers because it must be incredibly hard to manage a reception class!)

And little fuss seems to be made about those who already start knowing their numbers and how to count. Some children started last September in DS2's reception class recognising and understanding numbers beyond 100, others didn't recognise any numbers at all. Some could read a bit, some knew all their letters but couldn't read, and some didn't know any letters at all.

You can't stop a child learning if they want to and, although of course you don't have to actively teach them, I don't see why I would deliberately not teach my child something he had asked to learn.

I have not taught DD to read. She has shown interest in letters, can write her name and knows some CVC words. I have the Jolly Phonics workbooks and we have done letter sounds and played matching words and picture games.
To be honest, she is now bored with it and much prefers riding her bike or playing make believe games in the playhouse and having dolly/teddy picnics.
Time before school is so precious, and summer is for fun. I won't be dusting off the Jolly Phonics workbooks until September.

Yes, I agree with the school too!

My school also told us this, I started teaching my DS to read but then stopped after the advice. In the first term in reception my DS took to reading very fast which surprised us all, he is still in reception and nearly on year 2 books (ORT).

I would leave it, there is really no rush, they all get there in the end.

I have a friend who's DD was taught to read before reception and is obviously way ahead of his peers (on year 2 books). But her mum keeps complaining of how bored and unchallenged she is. I must say, my DS is constantly complaining of being bored.

So please take the advice of the school.

Don't know if the system is different in England to up here in Scotland but I am horrified and confused at the number of parents seemingly stressed out about teaching their children to read before going to school.

If you're reading to your child and they ask questions, sure answer them but it wouldn't even occur to me to teach my child to read if I was planning on sending them to school.

I am a primary teacher myself, although not working at the moment. IMO there is so much expected of them when they do go to school that I would be doing everything to encourage them to enjoy themselves before they get there.

Also I think they start earlier in England too, don't they? Can't see why you'd want to start formal teaching younger than 4

I agree, Gillian 76. Didn't do anything on reading with DS1 or DS2 before they started in Reception, but they learned really quickly, especially DS2. I don't think it's even vaguely necessary to start before then.

Also, in many parts of the world they don't go near school til 6 (much more sensible way of doing it IMO). Then after a few years, they end up streets ahead of our children.

I wouldn't actively teach a preschool age child to read unless they were clamouring to be taught, but that's not because I think it will make it hard for the school, it's because I don't agree that reading is an appropriate thing for all (most) preschool children to be learning and that they should be following their own interests through play at this age. If one of their interests is learning how to read, then fine. But there are not many children who are that interested unless given a good old push at this age.

Children who are educated at home and left to make their own decisions about what they learn and when, often teach themselves in a very short time aged about 8 or 9. The only reason we put such emphasis on early reading is because the current school system requires it, so the pupils can sit and learn from books rather than from human beings.

Well, one of DS2's interests was 'learning to read', perhaps because he has an elder brother who could read already. It wasn't one of DS1's interests.

I don't know why so many people assume that learning to read is not enjoyable - for many (of course, not all) children it is. It took me 5 minutes a day to teach my DS2 something he wanted to learn. He had 11hrs55mins left awake every day to explore the world and do all the other things he was interested in, so I really don't think I deprived him of a normal childhood!

My brother's interests at 3 included teaching himself to tell the time and reading 4-digit numbers off lampposts - I'm sure not all 3 year olds enjoy those (neither of mine did) but he thought it was fun.

I agree with F&Z's posts entirely about her reasons for not teaching a child to read, but I really don't agree with the reasons given by HelloDolly's school.

Though I don't agree that in the current school system children are expected to learn from books, rather than human beings, at an early age. Maybe by 12 or so, but certainly in the first 4 years of primary school it's all teacher led.

Yes, singersgirl, that's the bit where they're teaching them to read. After that they can leave them to the books

Yes, maybe, F&Z. I'm certainly not that keen on the current educational system (which is why I lurk, but am far too scared to post, on the HE section. Anyway, bit of a hijack, so apologies to all.

My ds was reading fluently by school age and even given her vision probs, dd looks like she will be reading in the next year. (She is 3.5) as she is just automatically joiing u the letters she knows, the sounds they make and coming up with some recognition of words. She can pick the words out of newspapers the tv, anything
So just let he lead you with what she wants
I certainly would never trust a school to teach my child to read FWIW

Ooh no, don't go and post on the HE section, singers girl - they are vicious over there