Do really bright early readers always stay ahead of the game?

[imaginaryfriend]

I suddenly got curious as there seem to be quite a number of mums on MN who describe their children as reading chapter books before the age of 5.

Equally there seem to be a lot of people who say their child (often boys) are verys low readers in Reception but by Y1 / Y2 are reading anything / everything.

So ... do the early readers stay ahead of the others who are catching up? Does everyone end up on roughly the same level? Or do the early readers 'burn out' and start to slow down at some point?

Yes, I burnt out

Relatively speaking

I suppose once you can read then you can read and there's no further you can go with that. You can choose different subject matters to read but that's more difficult to compare and contrast at the school gates.

However, i'd say that my early reader is still very good academically at a number of subjects. he's yr 3.

Is that how you got frayed?

For most children, by secondary school, often earlier, you can no longer tell which children were the early readers and which found reading more challening at the start.

No, not at all. I was (inadvisably) reading Jilly Cooper at 8 (my mother didn't know I could read it) and that's stayed about my reading level since.

Message withdrawn

DS bright, could read early

Got complacent,

Still slightly ahead of the game but not nearly so much as when he was younger

So there's actually probably no real long term advantage to early reading?

I was a quick reader - I loved it. And stayed ahead all the way through. My sister didn't take to it and then stayed behind all the way through school.

Personally I think it was all about pigeon holes. I was praised so much by all and sundry that I developed confidence, my sister was the opposite. She is very clever and practical, but not academic. I have no common sense, but all the qualifications and accolades you could need.

I think the key therefore is to build confidence in a childs natural abilities, and not allow the school curriculum to dictate your childs own view of their place in society (i.e. below par, second best etc).

Exactly IF. It uis like many things. Some children are just a bit earlier at reading than others; it actally has little to do with overall intelligence, etc. Just like a child who learns to run early than another may not end up being a champion athlete, etc.

Hi IM! I would be interested to know what others think but I would have thought that surely there is an advantage to being able to read early. In order to learn you need to be able to read - otherwise the teacher is just telling you stuff. When you can read you can find out for yourself and surely the more you read the more you learn to comprehend (if you can read and are not very good at comprehension). I guess perhaps it is because of comprehension that other children catchup?

I go in to y1 and 2 and 3 to help read, and the slow ones in all those classes have caught up quite a bit. But equally some are still lagging behind, reading very easy text. I think once they can work and sound out the words they will 'fly'. In y6 when i went in there, they were all similar readers but the higher up groups read more complicated text, and deeper stories, such as more things to think about and discuss and question. my 13 yo was always very good, and stayed on 'top table' throughout. A good reading skill seems to help them with all the other subjects too. He's lost a bit of interest now in secondary, but still loves a good mooch round the bookshop for new titles, which is great. He will read thick novels if they catch his eye, and he will enjoy them.

Early reading can be a good thing for other subjects, most definitley. Kids that read early as usually thought of by teachers to be bright, this may not be the case and they level off as other children catch up.

DD was below average until year 4 on target then went off the scale (reading age wise) by year 6.

Once they are fluent, no where else to go except to read and understand challenging texts.

Actually there is apparently a problem that many early readers don't have the comprehension to go with it. Not sure why - perhaps as they rush through decoding and reading the words, rather than taking in the actually meaning of the book. Good reader does not alwyas mean good comprehension - very important to keep checking that the comrehension is there. Infact with early, fluent readers it is often better tos spend the parent/child reading session, not actually reading so much - but talking about the book, what is it about, what is happening and why, what might happen next adn why, what do they thing of it, who might the book be recoemmended to, etc.

Very true Hulababy- well said!

DD1 was reading chapter books at 5. She was ahead of her class by a long way. By the end of year 4 most had caught her up.

DD2 was later to read and she too had caught up with where her big sister had been at the same age.

Good point Potpourri. An early reader can receive the praise and encouragement to give them confidence to do well. I'm as strong believer that in Education and other walks of life a bit of praise can go a long way.

If a child struggles it can knock that confidence and they write themselves off. Such a shame when a bit of careful handling is all that's needed.

'ahead of the game'?

How about reading as a pleasurable activity in its own right, rather than an early heads up on the old CV.

I have heard the reading with little comprehension thing called 'barking at the page' by teachers in the past. Dd1 is a very good reader and is classed as being the same level as another child in her class who can cope with the same kind of books (according to her teacher). But dd can read with expression and obviously understands the text and the other child 'barks' (as his parents told us). So, to my mind, they aren't at the same level (not that it matters - and I'd be saying this if it was the other way round, not just cos she's my dd). Later up the school system, when the reading becomes more analytical then I would say it doesn't matter what stage the child was at early on. It's the quality of their reading that will matter at that stage: the ability to deduce and 'read between the lines'.

(Although, to be perfectly honest, the best thing about reading 'early' is just the joy of being able to read independently and for pleasure).

These are really interesting replies. Thanks.

I can see how comprehension is at least as important as reading the words effectively.

Hi ANMHI by the way.

It helps if they are an early reader but slow but sure often does better in the end! Reading for pleasure is the important thing and I agree with Moomin it is the ability to deduce and read between the lines that is important.

I'm feeling a bit guilty now actually as I'm forever telling dd to stop discussing what's happening in the picture and to read the words instead! She can spend hours on each page sometimes.

My ds is a brilliant reader (year 2 - reading harry Potter and anything else I let him) He's a cleer boy, but not exceptional and I am absolutely sure that everyone else will catch up. He's a good reader because he LOVES reading, not because he' particularly bright.

In the same way, my dd was a freakishly early talker. She was in the local paper and everything - holding conversations at 10 months. It was huge fun - but she is averagely bright now - clever but not exceptional.

It's important to distinguish between cicruc tricks and genius. A lot of people find this hard.

Circus tricks, even.

I could read fluently by the age of 3 - peaked at about 6 and been in decline ever since.
am fairly perfect and averagly bright.
although never had to study for exams.
babys however have turned my brain to slosh - that and the drugs and red wine.
so in answer no i don't think being early reading doesn't lead to forever geniusness.