Reading in P1? Need perspective

[HauntingMyWay]

I'm quite nervous posting this incase I'm seen as thinking DD is a genius. I don't.

DD (4) started P1 in August. She learns the words in her word box easily and is confident with the sounds they have done so far.

We read together every night. For about a month we have been getting early readers from the library and we read one of these and then I read a 'chapter' book.
The early readers take 5-7 days and she can read them independently. Learning by sight and rote mostly I'd expect but in the past week she is sounding out words and making sensible attempts. Also we play word games and she can read so many of the words out of context.

Anyway... her school reading books as so simplistic in comparison with little scope for word games. She just reads it and wants to move on to something else.

So:
Are these books essential foundations to learning to read?

Is she in danger of losing interest in reading in school as they are too simple?

When should individual reading levels be assessed and catered to by the teacher?

Thank you so much if you read all that. She is my first and I want to do right by her. Not pushing but not ignoring her needs either.

[CecilyP]

Really, mrz? You must have had a very English-heavy timetable - what was the reason for that? How did your school manage to fit in other subjects? When I did my O levels, we just had 5 x 40 minute lessons to cover both English Language and English Literature.

[mrz]

Well it didn't seem English heavy but we studied language and literacy as separate subjects just as we studied biology, chemistry and physics as 3 subjects and pure and applied maths as separate subjects I only studied 1 MFL at O level plus art, history, domestic science and RE

[CecilyP]

Yes, we studied language and literature as separate subjects too, but that sounds like 10 lessons of English, but only 2 each for all of the other subjects.

[mrz]

I seem to recall just one lesson of art, Domestic Science and RE CecilyP

[mrz]

and obviously no course work in those days

[KitKatGirl1]

Can't remember how many hours of lessons for English GCSE (long time ago, as in the first couple of years of them) but we read 5 texts including 2 Shakespeares, a Hardy, an Austen and one twentieth century. They do one text now...

[maizieD]

I recollect that we had a similar selection of texts to cover, plus some poetry.

Mind you, as I recall, we did spend two years covering the GCE syllabus and, being grammar school, we were the 'top' 15% of our peer group. There are children taking GSCE English now who would not have been expected to tackle it at all in the 60s & 70s. But I would have thought that at least top set children would be expected to read entire novels now.

I also would say that I loathed most of the classic novels (and Shakespeare) we covered in the 5 years up to GCE but at least it gave us familiarity with the language, grammar and style of those earlier writers. So no fear of tackling them when older. Which I, for one, am very glad about as I have had great pleasure from 'classic' literature over the years (though I've never managed to force myself to read The Mill on The Floss again )

[KitKatGirl1]

Mill on the Floss is wonderful. You should revisit.

They do indeed read much harder novels at my grammar school in yr 9 than they do for the actual GCSE course. Think The Collector, Treasure Island and Jane Eyre followed by To Kill A Mockingbird...