Reading bands and does any of it really matter if the child can already read?

[learnandsay]

My daughter is too young to have encountered a reading band of any colour or type so she's reading ordinary books like The Cat in the Hat, Green Eggs and Ham and Where the Wild Things Are. Of course Dr Seuss' books are already a restricted new-reader vocabulary series of books, which Dr Seuss' associates Flesch and Hersey challenged Seuss aka Ted Geisel to write, in response to a much earlier public panic called Why Johnny Can't read. (I think it's followed up by Why Johnny Still Can't Read. I read up about the debate a while ago when I was learning about the argument between phonics and look and say adherents.)

Essentially what I'm saying is she reads whichever children's books are in the house, with some success and a fair amount of determination, when reading time comes along. Now, my question is this: When she gets to school in September will this continue? Or will she get put on some kind of graded reading system? I've got a strong feeling that if I don't agree with the books the school gives my daughter to read I'll just ignore them and send her into school with what I'd consider proper children's books of the kind you'd buy to read to your children or borrow from the library, not formulaic or bland books for reading learners. (On the other hand, of course, if I like the books and find them interesting and challenging for her, I'll read them with her whether they're part of a reading scheme or not.)

Sorry, to interrogate you, shot. It was dizzy who asked why read what you don't understand. You answered her question!

Ah, death of the author.

Possibly slightly too early to introduce that to the 4yo.

Maybe you could surreptitiously replace Biff & Chip at the beach with To The Lighthouse

It surprised me, actually. While reading Paddington to her she asked what a corridor was. I explained that it's like the hallway that Alice found herself in, with lots of doors leading off it. And my daughter was able to remember that Alice tried the key in all of the doors but that it only fitted in the small door at the end. She may well not have understood Carroll's social commentary, but she hasn't got nothing from the story. She can clearly relate to it on some level, even if it's only to understand what a corridor is. But I suspect that today's conversation won't be the last on in our house on the subject of Alice.

Shot, why would we want to waste our time on Woolf when there are so many WWII messages that have yet to be decrypted. That way she'll be learning to read and learning a trade both at the same time.

I can't comment on Alice as I've never read it!

From my point of view, comprehending a story (in this case a magical world of unusual characters and adventure that Alice finds herself in) is totally different from any historical/social commentary that the writer is making.

Your daughter will obviously take the story at face value whilst you as an adult may look for the deeper meanings behind it.

I hope you warned her that Alice was naughty in that she chased after a total stranger and drank some mind changing hallucinagen!

That's how I knew dd2 could read. she was only 3 and started reading 'to the lighthouse' over my shoulder. she had read the lion the witch and the wardrobe previously, but we thought she had just memorised the story. It was kinda funny, and a wee bit freaky. I had to be careful what I left lying around.

I think we're being a little unkind to both the authors and the children. Children do pick up on some of the circumstances surrounding the characters. One of my daughter's first questions about Maurice Sendak's Little Bear was where is his daddy? She asked, why hasn't Oliver Twist got any parents? She's developed some sense of law and order from listening to Toad's desperate adventures and she knows perfectly well what a magistrate does and she doesn't want to meet one. Knowing what magistrates do helped me to explain to her what judges do too. I can't remember why she needed to know that, off hand. Children's stories can be pretty useful for explaining the world around us.

Doesn't the story of Oliver Twist start with the mother dying in childbirth - that's fairly self explanatory, although not something I would particularly want my 3 year old reading about . Although I could be remembering wrong having not read Dickens for years.

OP, I have started and deleted several comments on this read, because maybe I can see a bit of myself in you with DS1, but having now had 2 children in the school system I have relaxed a lot with regard to school teaching.

DS1 went to school able to read - he learnt his phonics age 2 and had worked out how to blend them by age 3, once he saw a word he remembered it. I could read him long children's stories and he lapped them up. Yet, he insisted on reading the reading scheme books - and he went to a school where they made sure every child read every book on the list. By the end of reception they were giving him 6 books a night to try and get him through them to a level where he should actually be at. Yes a ridiculous sitation but DS wanted to read them. That is what his teacher said he must do. So he whizzed through his school books and then went on to read whatever he was reading for fun at home - varied from Magic Tree and Wishing Chair stories to Harry Potter (only number 1, the others were too old for him). His was a horrendous outdated reading scheme, I don't think he ever really got anything from it per se in terms of learning to read during reception and he left the school not long into year 1. It certainly didn't harm him reading 'easy' books, it didn't dent his ability to read. What he did learn was obedience - doing what the school asked him to do. And also I realised that for the first time your child is open to the attitudes of others and is as likely, in some cases more likely, to take what a teacher says as truth over and above what you say.