Under-seven 'too young' to read?

[Vale]

According to world learning expert Lilian Katz, if children are pushed into reading too early, form an impression of themselves as inept. Boys particularly!

I disagree with that.

I think it depends on the method you choose, for instance Glen Doman method is perfect for young children.

According to this method you should introduce reading as a game. Children have fun, they are not tested or forced to read when they do not wish to.

isn't the key word here "pushed"?

DD1 has somehow taught herself. she's 3 and is reading very very well. She has done jolly phonics at nursery but no one has taught her to "read".

she certainly doesn't seem too young.

Actually I agree, the dutch don't formally educate until the age of 7 for precisely those reasons.

My boy is 5, and has developed a real zest for reading, and is keen to to read anything he can get his hands on now! It makes him feel good and pleased with himself. At the moment it is the best thing he has going, as he is having a rough time in school (disruptive and bored) but at least he feels good about his literacy and numeracy.

but QS, do you think he is disruptive and bored because he is such a good reader and is ahead of his peers?
I am so worried about this with DD1. She doesn't start school until Sept 2008 yet she is already flying through the reading lists of a friend's child who is in Year 1.

Qs both of my dcs have taken to schooling really well and enjoy it (dd is 5) but, I still think that formal schooling takes place too early in this country.
And I really dislike the competitive element that is attached to learning.

I dont know, he only just cracked it recently. He gets 3 new books every week to take home, he has no problems with them, manages on first attempt, and the feedback I get is "excellent reading". But he is on stage 2 on the oxford reading tree (which is not very advanced), and I suspect they have to give him the whole series before they can move him up. He is reading much more complicated stuff on his own accord, he just picks whatever book on the shelf that looks appealing, to read bedtime story for his younger brother.

He struggled through reception, but suddenly it clicked back in July. He is bilingual though.

I am from Norway, we started school at 7. It has changed now, and the kids start school at 6. But only 4 days per week. Wednesday is spent either at home, or at the schools "after school play scheme" if you are working. My niece did not start reading or writing properly till she was 8.

Sorry forgot that (read you were from Norway on another thread). It's interesting to hear that you like schooling from 5, do you prefer it?

The actual article wasn't just about reading though, it was about formal schooling as opposed to learn through play.
If they have an aptitude for reading they will pick it up regardless of whether you (or a teacher) have started teaching them early.

Depends ont he child in my opinion

ds1 is 5 and abit, in year 1 and loves reading (and is extremely good at it)

BUT! and this is the key I think - ALL reading should started with a love of books and reading being the 'norm' at home. Good adult role models, particularly seeing men reading' is very important too.

does reading Grazia count?

that's all DD1 sees me read

Yes popsycal, you have put my feelings into words with that, I think.
Fwiw, ds (who's a teen) has always had an advanced reading age but, I think he would have had an advanced reading age regardless of whether he was formally schooled at 5 or 7. He wasn't coached into being an advanced reader iyswim.

We are overflowing with books at our house. Both our boys love books. As do I. I have a passion for books. In our house reading is the norm. My husband is putting our boys to bed most nights, and we are both up there reading with them, and letting our 5 year old read to our 2 1/2 year old. They enjoy being cuddled up in bed together reading. It is one of the nicest times of the day in our house!

Rantinghousewife. I think young children are like sponges. They have an immense aptitude for learning. Starting school early capitalizes on this. Reception at my sons school is mostly learning through play. But he has matured so much during his reception year. He was one of the youngest in his class, but has flourished academically. When he was at nursery, they said he was bored and understimulated. His mind has been challenged in so many ways. I can see the benefit for him very clearly.

On the other hand, the norwegian school system seems to be quite bad in comparison.
You start when you are six. You barely learn the alphabet during the first year, it is mostly play. My niece was still writing like my five year old do now when she was 9. And she is extremely intelligent. She could not read till she was 8, the progress was so slow. Parents are supposed to be doing a big bulk of the teaching. For example, in maths, they give new chapters as homework, so the children have to rely on the parents to help them trhough it, teach them, and then do the homework, and it is thereafter corrected in class.

The ones who read early and are fine with it are the ones for whom it has clicked early - and that's fine.

In general, I agree with Lilian Katz. DS, often described by teachers as 'very bright' was not an early reader, and even introducing reading as a game was a big turn off. he has always loved books and stories, but wasn't ready to read.
At 6.5 he is suddenly reading like a demon.

I'm with Popsycal. It depends on the child. We never pushed either of them, just read to them both. We also have a house full of books and they are both used to seeing their parents read for pleasure

Dd was teaching herself to read at 3. She would have been bored waiting till 7.

Ds has really struggled and is only now making progress at 7, so for him waiting would have been a good idea

Ah QS, that is food for thought, I will admit. Nice to hear the thoughts of someone who has been through both systems.

dd2 is 5 and hardly reading. She is very reluctant to even attempt her reading books from school (often won't even look at the words) so we have a go but without making a big deal of it. Her teacher says not to worry, just keep reading to her and be positive about any effort she does make. If no progress is made by Easter they will consider putting her in a small group for intensive teaching with a TA.

Same with ds1 MB. We have never pushed him to read at all. He is the youngest in the class and,so his teacher tells me,is streets ahead of the others. For me though, it is his love of reading that is important - not his ability. With a love of reading,you will go along way,IMO and it will eventually 'click' when you are ready. Age 3 for some, 7 for others.

I think a child will learn to read when they are ready and more importantly, when they are interested.
The Doman method is basically just flashcards...why not learn to read in context and quite frankly, why does a baby need to learn to read? A baby that can identify the word 'CAT' is just looking at the shape of the word as if it were a picture, there is no reading involved.
Doman, in my opinion is for highly pushy mothers/fathers.
Kids will learn to read when they are ready and when they do that they will enjoy it far more than a child that is pushed into it.
TM...mum of a very early self taught reader.

I think children from literate households can "pick up" reading but some people never buy books. Their houses contain barely any reading material and their mothers didn't take them to libraries when they were toddlers for singalong sessins. The level of school action/intervention might well be regarded as "pushing" by some but may be necessary if there is to be any advance in children from unbookish households.

Loving books is fine and to be welcomed. But many children leave primary school not reading accurately. For them, not being illiterate is the goal not adoring novels.

formal education in Belgium doesn't start until the age of six, and then progress is fairly fast, and from what I've seen, the general standard of education in Belgium is higher then the general standard in the UK. Which is one of the reasons why we live in Belgium - the schools here are just so good.

I don't see any reason to push a child any younger into learning how to read and write. But I can see how it may make some children hate school.

This isn't suppose to be a boasting post - although I am quite chuffed with dd. Dd is nearly 3 and can read all the words which are in "Dear Zoo" and "The Very Hungry Catepillar". In other words, she can recognise words such as "puppy", "giraffe", "elephant". I am convinced that this is because I have read these two books every night to dd since she was about 18 months. We read other books - for instance, I've just finished reading "Room on the Broom", "The Snail and the Whale" and "No Matter What" but dd always asks for Dear Zoo - even when she's ill.

My point: I truly believe that exposure to books at an early age gives children a head start in reading. I don't mean toddlers should be expected to read the book, but if YOU, the parent read to your children often, I believe they will "pick up" words. I should also thank BookStart by the way. My own reading skills have improved, as has my ability to read a book beyond the first chapter before giving up! If it weren't for BookStart, the idea of reading a bedtime story just would not occured to me. I didn't have books when I was young, the ones I had were gifts from friends or unwanted freebies. Not once did any of my parents ever read to me. It's only now that I have my own children, I realise just how much I have missed out, the missed opportunities and the losses. So quite frankly, I disagree with "world learning expert Lilian Katz". If you deny children the opportunity to read from an early age, you are robbing them of the chance to open their minds and imagination and scope. Pretend play is all very well - I certainly did a lot of that - but reading good books opens up alternative opportunities to learn about the world around them.

Nobody is saying "children under 7 should not read" just that they should not be in formal education. Their education should be play based and interest lead. This is not new, studies from Scandinavia and other part of Europe have been showing this for decades.

Children who have an aptitude and interest in reading (or numbers, or science, or whatever) will pick it up naturally if they are in a fun and stimulating learning environment, where their interests and ideas are valued and discussed, and where play is valued as the most valuable learning skill the child will ever have.

Formal education of very young children is, imo, stifling creativity, not closely related to reality and is therefore 'surface' learning as opposed to 'deep' learning (eg rote learning), often boring, distracts children from their most important job and learning experience (PLAY!), and is just plain unesesary.

Saying that a 4 year old in the UK can read and enjoys it is missing the point.

Astrophe - I agree with nearly all of your post. But am a little confused by the last sentence. Maybe I am missing the point - but what point is being missed if a 4 year oldwho can read actually enjoys reading?