Quantcast
An educational community
to connect teachers from every level.
Welcome to Teacher Lingo Sign in | Join | Help
in Search
     

Mysterious Teaching

Insights behind the perils of being a teacher

When should we teach children to read?

My oldest daughter (now 33) wanted to read when she was two.  So, I taught her.  I wasn't a teacher yet but the daughter of a teacher.  I made flash cards with the letters on them and taught her the sounds that the letters made.  Then I began to teach her to read.  By 4 she was reading the encyclopedia!  She reads voraciously.  She can read a book like "Gone With The Wind"  In less than 6 hours.  She had a special library card in high school that allowed her to check out 20 books a week!  I don't read that fast, believe me!
Now her oldest is 4 and she is trying to read.  She is doing pretty well.  I know that we require our Kindergarten kids to begin learning to read.  I always thought kinder was for learning the rules of getting on in school, but not any more.  Now they have curriculum!!!  I know my daughter had problems in school because she read so far above the other students.  It was a problems at times.  The teachers didn't know what to do with her.  At lease Molly is almost 5 so she won't be too far ahead.  But, the question still remains: When do we teach our children to read?
Kindergarten and preschool are turning into "getting ahead of the others" situations.  Is this good for the kids?  Is it to their advantage to learn to read so young?
In fourth grade we teach fractions and it is so hard for kids because it is often too abstract for them.  I wonder if we are pushing too hard to keep up with the other countries.  We educate ALL our children and they only educate their highest students and yet we are compared with each other.  When do these little ones get to be little?
Published Tuesday, June 05, 2007 3:44 PM by MysteryTeacher
Filed under:

Comments

 

nhshell said:

I agree that students are pushed to learn more things sooner.  Another part of this problem, I believe, is that not only we are asking them to learn things sooner, but that we are asking them to learn more things.  

I teach second grade.  Typically, four science topics are covered in a schoolyear, one per quarter.  However, in the next few years, the curriculum is expanding to cover eight different topics.  Due to our NCLB-required testing, science will be a subject on the test very soon.  Therefore, these students need to learn about more topics before this test.

I have two issues with this thinking.  First, I don't believe in teaching to the test.  Students should be taught in order to enrich their lives and to make them productive, lifelong learners.  Second, I think it is far better to teach a subject in depth instead of glossing across many topics.

June 6, 2007 6:56 PM
 

lsturr@musd20.org said:

You are so right.  I would rather we teach in depth than just a quick chapter in the science book.  It bothers me that we are doing the quick teach rather than really getting to the meat of the subjects.

June 7, 2007 12:38 AM
New Comments to this post are disabled. 


About MysteryTeacher

I am a wild, whacky, weird, wonderful woman and teacher. I am venturing into a previous life by teaching ELL this fall. I use to teach ESL years ago. I am excited, empowered, and employed. I love life.

This Blog

Sponsored Links

My Lesson Plans

    Syndication