Moving through reading levels

[Sneepy]

I'm curious as to what the current thinking is on moving through reading levels. DD2 is in y1 and her reading is coming along nicely. Her understanding is good as well as her technical. It seems to be the policy is to read every book in every level before moving on to the next--when DD1 was doing the scheme she was moved up as necessary. I just feel we are never going to get to the end if she has to read every book in every level!!

I suspect that some parents cannot distinguish the difference between what their child is capable of alone and with one to one attention/assistance!

You seem to use the word 'we' a lot when discussing your DD's ability.

well after reading your posts Bunny dont see the need, I will just trust her...but if she has got it wrong, hey ho....she is just human....

No, just bitch about it and complain on Mumsnet. After all that is going to achieve so much more than actually asking the teacher, isn't it? Oh wait...

Why assume that parents haven't already spoken to the teacher?

Parents probably become more interested in reading levels than other areas of the National Curriculum precisely because they are expected to spend more time on helping their kids learn to read than any other aspect of learning during the early years.

I suspect that some parents cannot distinguish the difference between what their child is capable of alone and with one to one attention/assistance!

That's precisely what the argument is about. OK. Well, how do we find that out? The most common example given is that the child can read Roald Dahl at home, but is reading some silly scheme book with only a few words per page at school.

What are the options?

The child is reading Dahl, but she can't understand it.
The child can't read Dahl and also she can't understand it.
The child can read and understand Dahl and yet somehow silly scheme books are still appropriate for her.
The mother can't understand Dahl.
The mother can't understand her daughter.
The mother can't understand reading.
Reading Dahl doesn't mean anything.
(Something I haven't thought of.)

It doesn't bother me. We have to read all the books before moving up to the next level - but we can have as many books as we like, so we have one every night. Until they get to a fairly high level, it only takes a few minutes to read one of the scheme books.

DS1 (Y1) and DS2 (YR) each read their scheme book to me or DH. Then DH reads them a story together. Then they go to bed. DS2 goes straight to sleep and DS1 has half an hour of reading to himself. The books he reads to himself are WAY more advanced than the reading scheme books. But I think the reading aloud is giving him different benefits - he is learning to read aloud with attention to punctuation and expression, showing the meaning. DH (teacher) refers to this as 'broadening his reading skills', whereas his more challenging solo reading is 'deepening' them.

I think I would be annoyed if he only got to bring one book home a week though - he can bring as many as he wants, and we have one nearly every night.

But how do you define 'understand'? DD could read the book, she could understand the basic plot, however I don't believe she could pick up on the nuances of the plot, etc because she doesnt have the life experiences and vocabulary required for that deeper understanding of the plot. We use simpler texts from school to look at the, slightly more obvious, subplots, so that she will be more able to properly understand Dahl when she reads it.

I'm happy that they aren't moving her on too quickly through the levels, tbh.

Clearly there are different levels of understanding which range from having no clue what the text means, for example when it's written in a different language, to being able to recognise the words, but still not grasp their full significance through being sure of their significance right up to being able to put forward several arguments (some better than others) about the words themselves and their meaning.

So, understanding happens at different levels at different times. (I don't think that's in dispute.) But having no understanding of Dahl would be appropriately observed of a monolinguistic French child having been given Fantastic Mr Fox printed in English.

I suspect that some parents cannot distinguish the difference between what their child is capable of alone and with one to one attention/assistance!

Really? What exactly are your suspicions based on I wonder?

I recently posted on bornfree's own thread about home/school reading disparities. My DD finished reception on white, level 10 and is now on Topaz, level 13 and has been level by her teacher as working comfortably within NC level 3. Just like bornfree's DD she's just finished Matilda and is now re-reading Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

The only reason this is possible is because in reception they assessed children using a benchmarking tool, all children were allowed to take at least one book home a night, sometimes more and usually 2 a weekend. They had incentives for the more reluctant reader (5 books read = a tiny prize).

What I am quite sure of is that if she went to a school where all the books in each level needed reading, then she wouldn't have reached level 13 by now. She needed the opportunity to achieve her potential, by allowing her to read often, not a rule that tries to keep as many children as possible at the same level.

I accept that some parents don't fully understand the difference between decoding skills v comprehension skills and may assume that because a DC can read their current level effortlessly then they should move up.

However, this pre-occupation with 'barking' at print that usually comes up on a thread like this really bugs me. Barking at print implies a lack of comprehension and I can't imagine that a child would do this for pleasure. I imagine a child would only bark at print if requested, like a performing seal. Therefore a child that chooses to read chapter books for pleasure must be understanding them to a greater rather than lesser degree. Further more a child can only read with expression if they understand what they are reading. If my DD is reading out loud I can tell if she doesn't understand a sentence fully because of how she reads it. I'm sure I'm not alone in being able to do this, despite 'only' being a mum.

A child that can 'perform' at a much higher level at home versus school is something that needs investigating to understand why, not just dismissing with the assumption that it's because the parent provides one to one attention, which, in any case, is very different from assistance.

I agree with gollum. The simple plots / subplots / jokes / ironies that take place in the very short reading scheme books are all practice for understanding more complex books in the fullest sense.

DS1 (6) can read quite complex books. But he definitely doesn't have the fullest possible understanding of them - some of the jokes and references go right over his head, he doesn't necessarily predict plot twists that a more experienced reader will, nor does he necessarily infer things about a character that are being subtly signalled from the text. All of that comes gradually, through reading experience and also life experience.

The shortness of the scheme books are one of their good points, it means that you get a 'whole' story quickly, and they get a sense of the plot as a whole.

Correct, columngollum.

This question then comes: 'At what level of understanding of Dahl is it reasonable for the school to give Dahl as a school reading book?'

I would suggest that it is when the child is able to read and understand the words, and also understand much of the subplot. Unless your goal is simply to have a child decode the words, their reading book should be of a level that they can pretty much understand what is happening and why . Yes, the parents can choose to have the child reading harder books at home, but on the understanding that, probably, much of the plot will pass them by.

I am not going to give DD Dahl to read alone at home at the moment because I know she won't understand the subplots and reasons for events without help. She could read and understand it at a superficial level, but I don't want her to read it now and then decide that she's read it and not try it again when she's older.

Really? What exactly are your suspicions based on I wonder?

Care to elaborate?

bunnyjo, diamondage did elaborate quite a lot.

Galena, quite true (the school wouldn't necessarily have to give Dahl. I think most mums in that position just want something less silly than the book in the bag.)

But to follow your point: at what point would it be reasonable for the school to give Dahl? Fantastic Mr Fox, The Enormous Crocodile, Minpins

early on

James Giant Peach/Chocolate Factory shortly thereafter

Later Twits, Matilda and BFG

The reason I think the school should give Dahl later and in a different order from mum giving the books is because the school is (possibly) going to probe a lot deeper and more thoroughly into the type of understanding that the child has of the text. (Bearing in mind that not all schools do such probing on a regular basis.) Some children are probably getting perfectly discussable books without the appropriate level of discussion, after all, discussing every long book in detail would take more time than there is.

Perhaps, in this respect, (for parents who understand textual analysis,) they are in a better position than the teacher is to gauge the child's level of understanding, precisely because they have the time that the teacher does not.

Not on what my suspicions are based on, she didn't.

And I actually, by and large, agree with your more recent posts, collumngollum.

Of course the school does not have to give out Dhal but a stage 6 ORT?

• Barking at print implies a lack of comprehension and I can't imagine that a child would do this for pleasure

matilda is quite a chunky book for a young reader. I think its obvious when a child is enjoying the book, laughing out loud uncontrollably for a good while when Matilda sticks her Fathers hat on his head all day is a good clue for me.

I suspect that some parents cannot distinguish the difference between what their child is capable of alone and with one to one attention/assistance!

Bunny, asking My dd questions about the text is not assisting her. Its me finding out how much she understands about what she is reading.
She reads alone, on the way to school, in school, on the way home, any time she has to wait for something, before she goes to bed.

I simply duck in and get her to read to me so I can make sure she is understanding whatever book she has picked up at that time.

You Bunny just sound like the sort of teacher mind set us parents with good readers stuck on ridiculously low levels are up against.

It does not matter what anyone says, or proves, there is a cast iron refusal to accept that any child might be on the wrong level.

Easy, very very easy to see why this sort of mentality frustrates so many parents.

and why we have to vent on here

diamondage

As ever a very eloquent post, I don't see how anyone can disagree with it.

despite 'only' being a mum

Apologies Bunnyjo I posted before rushing off to a school concert.

My question is very literal, I am wondering what experiences / evidence have led you to your conclusion?

My experience of young readers is limited, although more than 'just' a mum because I've helped out at school listening to young readers (R - yr 2).

I've still never heard a child barking at the print, despite the fact that I ask questions about the text that children can't always answer. I view that as learning and the idea that children must only read texts that they fully understand seems as daft to me as the idea that you'd start a child off reading the Financial Times. Learning through and whilst reading is possible with all genres and surely it's the whole point? Even with guided reading children can learn from each other.

I remain of the view that parents not supporting children by hearing them read at home is far more of a problem than parents having unrealistic expectations of their child's ability. Although arguably the latter is a greater problem for teachers ..... at least those employed at a school which has a read every book in the stage policy. I have formed my views by my experiences and I am genuinely interested in how you've reached yours.

bornfree you are most kind

But how do you define understand?

Perhaps there is a misconception that children must only read within their allocated band.

In fact children can read within a range of bands. Many formal texts about how to assess a child's reading and allocate a band or level explain exactly this explicitly. This includes Accelerated Reader who have banded a huge range of real books via lexile measures (children are given a band but AR acknowledge that children can read both above and below their level. It is schools that are promoting the idea that dear Jonny can't possibly read the level (or two above).

Once a child has learnt the basics (let's say orange level) then at the bottom limit of their level 'range' are books that would be considered too babyish and simplistic for the child to now enjoy, nor would they learn new vocabulary or, possibly, new concepts.

At the other end books start to become such hard work that it is no longer enjoyable for the child because they don't understand enough of the vocabulary, have to decode too many of the words, or the sentences are too long so meaning is lost and so on.

In between these two points lie many, many books. Personally I've never understood why books aren't banded by genre - DD finds the long technical words contained within information books hard work, though she loves them and chooses them often. Other children are adept at this but struggle more with the inference required for higher level story books.

As for understanding all the nuances, well that's what re-reading books is for. Recently DD's become quite obsessed interested in dinosaurs, so asked us to read Katy and the Dinosaurs several times. She got different things out of it this time round, just like when we first read it I got to brush up on my own dinosaur name pronunciation.

A love of reading is what matters, it doesn't matter if that means a child is read to for years because their own decoding skills are behind. Nor should it matter if a child picks up reading early.

I just really object to slowing progress in a blanket manner by insisting all the books in a level are read. Where is the differentiation it that?

Columnm, just to clarify:

I do believe that schools exist where every book must be read.

As I say, there is one in the town I live and work in.

I am, professionally and personally [as the parent of two extremely able readers, both of whom were accelerated but also supported in a wholly appropriate way] suprised that ANY exist, since I cannot think of any educational justification for it.

I can think of educational justifications for moving through boiok bands a little more slowly than some parents might like - because with a detailed whole class view and all the assessment tools I have at my disposal I can identify that there are skills that the child needs to consolidate / acquire at that moment and know that they are better consolidated / acquired using books that they can decode relatively fluently. It is hard to acquire a new skill - e.g. skimming and scanning for relevant information friom a non-fiction text, or empathising with a character, or inferring emotion from subtle clues - when also having to use the skill of decoding to its utmost, or when struggling with the sheer length or plot copmplexity of a book.

However, that is NOT a justification for a blanket 'every book must be read' policy, far from it. If a child has excellent e.g. inference skuills and ther ability to decode / reading stamina takes a huge step forward, then jumping several levels to aopply those skills to newly-appropriate books is exactly the rght thing to do.

Dahl, Morpurgo, Anne Fine, Dick King-Smith, Dolfer etc are all intergated into our banding scheme, at different levels to reflect the fact that all of those writers write for a range of audiences. It isn't appropriate to give 'The Granny Project' to children who have just read 'Louis Loudmouth' - despite being by the same author. They are in totally different book bands as a result.

Diamond, all of our children have a huge range of 'contact with books' - books to share with buddies from younger classes, books I read to them, boojks we study in depth in English, books we skim for information across the curriculum, books we read in guided reading, books they hear on tape or from audio websites, library books they read for pleasure, class books they read during wet play times etc etc (and that's just at school).

Their banded independent readers are one part of that reading diet, designed to achieve specific things - but they are only a part, not the whole.

has anyone mentioned the process by which teachers decide to move children onto new, more difficult books? From what I witnessed after 5 years as a parent helper over two different schools and several different ks1 teachers is that they all allocate some TA time to assess the children. Not all children get assessed every time. in fact it can take weeks for your child's turn to come around and then it depends on how well they do that day with the TA. Parents book comments barely get noticed / may only be observed in passing when checking that reading was done at home.
As far as I have see this is the main reason children can find themselves stuck on a book band long after they seem to be capable of at least tryinga harder levek.

(And I also assume, and frequently re-uiterate, that children should read other material other than their banded book at home - they just record both in their diaries: 'Beano. 20 minutes reading Hobbit. 2 pages of reading book to Mum'

Dal, with us, every child is read with in guided reading every week, rotating around TAs and the class teacher. Any child making good progress is noted [the guided reading books are from within similar levels to the individual readers - often higher, because it is supported reading, but sometimes lower to explore a specific skioll in depth, so we can extrapolate from guided reading performance to individual reader elevels IYSWIM], then tested 1:1 within that week to assess whether their individual reader level should also be changed.

Guided reading groups are mixed up every half term to ensure that a child who has made extyra progress is then grouped with appropriate others to use appropriately levelled d books for guided reading too.

I can think of educational justifications for moving through boiok bands a little more slowly than some parents might like

Putting aside the often talked about parents who believe that bookband levels are some sort of competition

and focussing on serious parents, I'm not sure which speed parents would like but I do think they worry understandably about the Dahl/silly scheme book difference.

As long as there's good meaningful dialogue between the teacher and the parent when a Dahl/ss_readingbk schism opens up, then I think parents can deal with the difference. But too often, in my experience and from what I hear, there is a poor dialogue or none and the parent is simply left bemused by the glaring gap.

And the poor dialogue goes something like this:

parent: there is this gap
teacher: that's the way we do things
parent: yes, but there's this gap
teacher: that's the way we do things
pa... (oh, what's the use?)

As long as there's good meaningful dialogue between the teacher and the parent when a Dahl/ss_readingbk schism opens up, then I think parents can deal with the difference. But too often, in my experience and from what I hear, there is a poor dialogue or none and the parent is simply left bemused by the glaring gap

^ yep