Why on earth shouldn't you teach reading if you jolly well feel like it?

[learnandsay]

Is it really all that bad?

Another viewpoint: reading isn't rocket science. Rather than making it into this huge milestone that has to be laboured over intensively at home, you could just leave it till your kids have matured a bit (you know, the way you're supposed to with potty training) and let them learn it in due course. I do of course realise that in MN world everyone else's child is champing at the literacy bit aged three but I for one am not blessed with such paragons.

Doesn't it look more like rocket science to the people who are struggling with it?

Well, yes, if they're three.

I don't know how anybody can answer this, but what does it look like to the ones who are forty three and can't do it?

My personal informed-by-anecdote opinion is that often children who struggle at things are being asked to try too soon. I know that I treated my own dd as a project-(not long out of a very high pressure job) - and was, in retrospect, far too proactive. My second child who, as my wise mother advised, was allowed to grow up automatically, had a much easier life and did everything at about the same time, and in some cases earlier than his "pet child" sister.

Please please please just have fun with your little ones, when they get to school it's all literacy literacy literacy, numeracy numeracy numeracy. If your children find learning to read fun then by all means do it with them, but it's not essential. Early years teachers are much more interested in their spoken language, self help skills etc.
As I said earlier, everyone is different and every child's idea of fun is different. They have such a long time ahead of them of formal learning, make the most of the freedom pre school years!
The most helpful pre reading skill to help with at home is to read, read, read and then read more stories to your children. They learn the difference between print and pictures, the layout of a book, hear the excitement in your voice as you tell the story, hear punctuation, sentences and the build up of anticipation.

It was never ever important to me to try to teach my kids to learn to read before they went to school.

All I ever wanted to do was to help them to love books and stories.

Why do anything other than that??

Shipwrecked, you are so right.
Just to reiterate- early years teachers will have no problem at all with your child reading or not reading on their first day at school.

I can assure you that illiteracy at four or five does not guarantee illiteracy at 43. You're jumping to conclusions.

Agreed it doesn't. But I was actually asking how much like rocket science does reading look to an illiterate 43 yr old? (And not anything else.)

My DD says one of the most important things that I taught her was that reading was fun, it was something that Mummy loved doing and so was automatically something she wanted to master.

We both still love books and have far too many for the size of house. We also both have kindles with 500+ books on them.

I learnt to read at about three, not because my Mother actively taught me but because we were read to and it was seen as a good thing to do. I read everything I could lay my hands on and still do. I read the newspaper at aged eight and got quite a lot of sex education from page 3 of the Telegraph. It was much more graphic 40 years ago.

I think it has stood me in good stead, I can read and take in information quickly so now I'm doing an OU degree, it isn't as hard for me as for people who don't enjoy reading.

Yes, the love of reading is something so valuable to instill.

I have two very different children who both grew up in a house full of books with adults who were prolific readers. One loves reading and devours books (at least one a week) the other reads one or two books a year ...

But I was actually asking how much like rocket science does reading look to an illiterate 43 yr old? (And not anything else.)

I think it looks like rocket science to any person of any age who can't do it. But, of course, they won't be joining this conversation...

learnandsay lots of our children arrive unable to "talk", for some point and grunt is their best means of communicating a need.

Ds started school unable to talk (didn't speak fluently until 7) but could read and spell independently he still managed 8 decent GCSEs.

Hmm...ds2 is 4 and starts school in sept.
He knows
Numbers up to 20 and all his letter sounds.
He can also write his name, And most numbers up to 20.
He quite likes to copy random words he sees, so things like toshiba :) And his brothers name.
My eldest son is severely dyslexic, and didnt go through this developmental stage so I have no idea what I am doing!
He has learnt his letter sounds from watching Alphablocks and his numbers from numtums (cbeebies was a lifeline for me last year when I herniated a disc in my back and couldn't move much for 3 months) we watched a lot!
I have always read to him and still do.
He also likes the story apps on the iPad.
He learnt how to form letters from using the hairy letters app and numbers from a timmy time app!
I have no idea where he is compared to other kids his age, but I know he is far more advanced than ds1 was at the same age :(
His drawing is pretty good too :)

I've heard of delayed speech but I've never heard of "a lot" of normal 4yo children who can't speak.

Surely you can provide a wonderful, varied, rich (and lots of other adjectives) reading experience for your children, but you can't actually teach or instil a love of reading, can you? Your children either love it or they don't but at least they can do it.

I think the key thing is that the child does not fall too far behind in class. Where my DC1 went to school there were several ability groups in the class (as is usual) and if you were less good than the others at reading you were in one of the bottom groups. That meant that you also got easier maths etc. Being in a bottom group really sapped her confidence. By teaching her to read myself she was able to go up through the groups, and became much happier and more confident.

I don't know if our school has groups but I think it might have the potential to mess kids up for life.

My DC group them according to ability from reception.

But I don't think any of the reception kids have twigged, but they certainly do when they get to yr1.

The problem is if the school tries to label the children in reception year these labels stick like glue and become self fulfilling prophecies.

I learned that the hard way with DD.

In her recep class there were about 6 obviously bright kids who could read at the start. The teachers singled out these bright sparks in the first term of reception and put the class into groups by ability and by year 5 those same children were still the ones who were on top table or top group. Because they had been asked to do the harder work right from the start so their skills then progressed faster than the others all the way through school.

I'm trying to teach DS to read before he starts reception because I don't want him to miss out like DD did. I eventually took her out of that school and in the right environment she has fulfilled her potential away from the labels at the other school. DS is not going to that school but I still worry after seeing it first hand.

learnandsay you are assuming all parents talk to their children

Groups are attainment groups in reception and key stage 1. Children are regularly moved between groups and just because a child is bottom group in reception doesn't mean that they are damned.

A September born girl is miles ahead of an August born boy at the start of reception and it would be silly for both of them to do be doing the same work.
Reception is mostly learning through play so being in the bottom group does not damn a child.

A good school allows for flexiblity between groups well into key stage 2.