Reception teacher told us not to read everyday

[TeaJunky]

Ok, so dd started bringing books home. She initially brought the purple level with no words then progressed onto pink quite quickly. She reads her school reading (phonics) book to me everyday and as the reading book is changed only once a week, she began to find this boring quite quickly.

I wrongly assumed that she is perhaps ready for something more challenging and I wrote this in her reading record.

Dd's reception teacher called me in at the end of the day and proceeded to show me the whole reading scheme on the trolley and explain that it only consisted of 500 words and the whole point of it was to achieve fluency blah blah (I already know all this). She said dd had been tried out on some 'harder' books and struggled with them hence she stayed on pink.
That was fine by me, so I suggested that she perhaps needed a new book more often as she read everyday. The teacher said 'really, don't read everyday because it can get boring really quickly'.
I pointed out that it actually wasn't me pushing dd to sit down and read, it was her bringing her book bag from her room and literally dragging me onto the sofa to read - she said 'honestly, don't let her do it everyday'

What ?!

The second thing that worried me about the whole conversation was the fact that the reading scheme only went up to level red, so the whole of the reading scheme was only three levels; purple (pre words), pink and red. She said that's the highest they can go in reception on the scheme.

Am I right to feel that this is a very limiting and pre-determined scheme with no room for differentiation or individual progression?

This is a highly thought of school and we are happy with everything else but the whole reading convo we had seems so bizarre.

thoughts ?

If she could recite the whole of the Potter collection and perhaps Anderson too, plus Dr Suess, I would then check her word correspondence with some other author.

Equally horrified, btw, by the idea that by reading lots of books and 'finishing all the books available in that band' there should be any idea that the children should move up UNLESS they are ready to. Again, it is the teacher's and school's job to ensure that that child accesses as much 'printed matter' at an appropriate level to rehearse their reading skills at that level for as long as they need to.

As soon as you embark on the 'well, since you've finished all those books then you'll have to read the next ones up' game, then you are moving away from the only justification of reading schemes, which is that they provide rehearsal material at the right level for the children to take the next steps in their reading...

Well quite, teacher.

'Recite'....and there it is. The word which sums up your whole belief system. 'Recite'. I can recite my ten times table...I can't recite Hamlet yet I studied it at degree level...

I say this genuinely and not to offend, I read your posts with a heavy heart because at the centre of your 'war' with the school system is a child.

It has nothing to do with the child. Real books would solve the problem at a stroke.

does the school send home "imaginary books"

It has everything to do with your child. Your child is being robbed of the opportunity to enjoy texts at her own level. She is reading for the sake of it- texts way over her understanding.

I could go on all night about our different opinions in learning to read but above all else I keep thinking you must be robbing your child of her enjoyment of school. I'm sure she aware of your ongoing battle with the school and that 'mummy knows far more than those teachers' type attitude must be quite confusing when you're 5/6 :(

That what I asked earlier mrz...what is column's idea if a non-book. If its a book, it's a book.

anything that isn't Beatrix, Hans Christian or Theodor apparently

What do you know about my child's understanding?

I know that a child of 5 cannot understand Dickens and that us what you tried to make us believe. For some reason asking your child to 'recite' centuries old literature makes you feel she's clever.

Sad that you also don't think her teacher knows anything about her understanding either. As I said upthread, you'd be much more suited to home schooling. You said earlier that you think teachers want it to 'my way or the highway'...you're projecting be aide it is, on fact YOU that wants it your way. Simple- teach her at home.

• because...

I really hope column doesn't do that. I think it would be far more damaging for her child's later happiness than these silly battles with school.

Then of course you know that a 5yo can't understand Shakespeare. Would you like to go on record listing what else 5yos can't understand?

DD is a bloody good reader, If I spent time with her, she could get a basic understanding of Shakespeare. However, I wouldn't insist she read it independently. She wouldn't get anything out of it at the moment. She reads school books 'below' her reading level to develop her independent comprehension, she reads books at her reading level at home and I would happily let her try harder books if she wanted to, but she doesn't want to because she likes to enjoy what she is reading.

Column, I'd be fascinated to read some of your old threads - you seem to have a chip on your shoulder bigger than the Eiffel Tower!

If a level students attend lessons to discuss the (adult) themes in dickens and Shakespeare then yes, I'll go on record to say I don't believe your child understands what she's reading independently. If she does, let her sit her gcse next year aged 6.

Don't infer that I belittle the achievements of 5 year olds or don't recognise how gifted children can be- I absolutely do. I just don't believe your child read dickens, fully understanding and enjoying it at 5. Neither did her own class teacher but then according to you she knew nothing either!

I think you might understand mathematical concepts - and/or play chess well - as a precocious 5 year old. But understanding of literature for adults depends on being able to access adult life experience.

Absolutely, Frau. It's why L6 maths in Y6 is a perfectly reasonable attainment for more able children, but L6 reading is rarer - because the ability to really comprehend / empathise with more advanced texts requires maturity and emotional engagement, not just decoding / reciting skills.

I'm not sure dickens is appropriate material for a 5 year old even if they were world's youngest genius. Take Oliver Twist, domestic violence, murder, child abandonment and child poverty to name a few themes. That's what I meant when I said you're robbing her of the opportunity to access texts she understands. You immediately went on the defence. Chip on the shoulder much??

In YR DS's teacher had the "we only change books once a week" rule. We just did lots at home. I spent far too much money on reading books, but I felt it important as wanted DS to keep progressing with his reading.

Then the school was OFSTEDed, had rather a lot to improve, a new head came in and hooray, hooray, books are now changed at the pace of the child. Oh yes, DD has been given books from October rather than January as well . Works well for DD, we tend to do two a week which is about right for her.

So.....yes, you will be holding kids back if you only give them one reading book a week- not all parents will have the funds and/or inclination to get more themselves. To get better you need to practise and should be able to practise at your own rate.

Hear, hear!

Well, I suppose teaching fyos about domestic violence, murder, destitution and hanging is one way of introducing Dickens. I suppose to do Shakespeare we could continue with the murder, add a bit of incest and drown a couple of dukes in barrels. I probably wouldn't go about it that way. But let's face it, we're all different. I play chess with my 5yo too, as a matter of fact. Funnily enough we haven't discussed any of Garry Kasparov's strategies or any of the Fischer/Spassky matches. But, hey. The night is young yet...

It's what dickens and Shakespeare is about. Have YOU read them??