3rd grade -the great equalizer

[calandalsmom]

It's kind of sad, but having parents willing to take their kids along and who will take advantage of the opportunities presented *is* considered a privilege. It's not something that can be taken for granted.

 

Truly.

[calandalsmom]

I think no one was trying to lump you into " rich kid" category. They were applauding you for being involved and allowing your DC to pursue their interests. (Which, in your case, led to a vast amount of cultural exposure.) A lot of kids don't get those opportunities, and a lot of parents who are presented with the opportunities don't choose to take advantage of them. You rock, Mama!

 

Exactly.

[calandalsmom]

The local school readily admits that they have no 'average' students. They have a multimodal distribution that reflects the parents'/caregivers' educational attainment and worth placed on education by each of the cultures the students come from. it is very easy to predict what subgroups will succeed and it's very easy to call them privileged rather than admit that their culture values education enough to put the work in to acheive at high levels.

 

Wonder what they'd make of my marriage- college drop out mom home schools children of PhD. We qualified for free lunch, too. Guess we looked pretty funny on paper.

[Pretty in Pink]

My ds began reading, self-taught, at age 4. I was driving down the road one day and heard him quietly reading aloud street signs from the comfort of his carseat. He began reading chapter books before his fifth birthday (Magic Treehouse-style chapter books).

 

He has always been advanced in mathematics and reading, without any prodding or pushing on my part. He is average in other areas, so far as I can tell.

 

He consistently tests in the 99th percentile on standardized tests (both ITBS and CAT, though I am sure there is debate about the rigor of these exams vs. others and such).

[dirty ethel rackham]

Funny story - when I first moved here, a couple ladies invited me to join them on their daily walk. They, being moms of kids in public school, brought up this topic - how it all evens out by 3rd grade. Well, I didn't know to leave enough alone and I spouted my theory that, if you teach to the middle, they will end up evening out. However, if you teach to the individual where they are, they will continue to progress. Well, they never asked me to walk with them again. It took a while to remove my foot from my mouth on that one.

[Dolphin]

I realized I only set the poll for 5 and under as I was curious about the correlation between early readers and later reading ability. It would be interesting to include higher ages though.

 

 

My ds was a late reader. At the end of kindergarten he still was not even reading a bob book, and was at the bottom of his class in Reading (at a small private school) He "got" it over the summer and by Christmas of 1st grade he was reading a Magic treehouse book. By October of 2nd grade he was moved into the 3rd grade reading class. At the end of the school year I had his teacher give him a thorough reading assessment as I knew we would be homeschooling this year and I wanted to know where I should jump off for reading. He scored 100% through the 6th grade reading assessment (as high as she had)

 

So, he was a late reader

He is definitely reading above a 3rd grade level (and it is not just my opinion)

 

My dd has just turned 4 and is already working on her first Bob book. I think that every child is different. Some are going to read late and excel, some are going to read earl and excel. Others are going to struggle with reading their whole lives.

 

I think that we can not apply one theory to all kids, that is one of the reasons that a lot of us homeschool.

[Jenny in Florida]

I think no one was trying to lump you into " rich kid" category. They were applauding you for being involved and allowing your DC to pursue their interests. (Which, in your case, led to a vast amount of cultural exposure.) A lot of kids don't get those opportunities, and a lot of parents who are presented with the opportunities don't choose to take advantage of them. You rock, Mama!

 

Exactly.

 

I guess the problem I have with the word "privilege" is the idea that this is somehow something the kids fell into because they were lucky enough to be born to parents who could afford to provide it to them.

 

It makes me think of spoiled children of wealthy parents who have things handed to them that are not available to other children (and who don't understand or appreciate it).

 

My kids didn't get access to anything that wasn't readily available to other kids. They didn't have any advantage or "privelege" other than being born to parents who cared enough to make these things happen.

[Perry]

nm

Edited May 11, 2011 by Perry

[calandalsmom]

I guess the problem I have with the word "privilege" is the idea that this is somehow something the kids fell into because they were lucky enough to be born to parents who could afford to provide it to them.

 

It makes me think of spoiled children of wealthy parents who have things handed to them that are not available to other children (and who don't understand or appreciate it).

 

My kids didn't get access to anything that wasn't readily available to other kids. They didn't have any advantage or "privelege" other than being born to parents who cared enough to make these things happen.

 

I think you are thinking of a negative term - overprivileged and associating it with a neutral term - privilege.

 

I can't spell either one apparently from my use of the spell check on this thread.;)

[Jenny in Florida]

I think you are thinking of a negative term - overprivileged and associating it with a neutral term - privilege.

 

I can't spell either one apparently from my use of the spell check on this thread.;)

 

From a dictionary:

 

priv·i·lege

 

–noun

 

a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed only by a person beyond the advantages of most: the privileges of the very rich.

 

 

2. a special right, immunity, or exemption granted to persons in authority or office to free them from certain obligations or liabilities: the privilege of a senator to speak in Congress without danger of a libel suit.

 

3. a grant to an individual, corporation, etc., of a special right or immunity, under certain conditions.

[calandalsmom]

Well if you are bound and determined to be insulted by the fact that you have absolutely provided your kid with more cultural experiences than most people, then feel free to be bothered by it.

 

Im not sure why its so upsetting to you to be told that your kids have been privileged to have parents who care enough to arrange these experiences for them.

[calandalsmom]

I'm just wondering what the point is of pointing it out.

 

I think the point is pretty clear when we are talking about kids and education.

 

Having educated parents who seek out information and experience for their kids is invaluable. It is probably, IMO, the one biggest factor in whether or not kids develop a love of learning, and possible of academic success.

[calandalsmom]

I guess you are looking for a disagreement then. Enjoy! Im done!

[Heather in WI]

You know, based on the poll almost all the kids are reading above 3rd grade level...wonder if that is perception or reality.

 

My current third grader learned to read when he was 5. He is reading The Fellowship of the Ring; I marked that he's reading above 3rd grade level. I assume that's the case with others, too. :)

[Jenny in Florida]

Well if you are bound and determined to be insulted by the fact that you have absolutely provided your kid with more cultural experiences than most people, then feel free to be bothered by it.

 

Im not sure why its so upsetting to you to be told that your kids have been privileged to have parents who care enough to arrange these experiences for them.

 

I'm not insulted by the fact that I've worked hard to be a good mother and to let my kids pursue their passions, or even that someone acknowledges that.

 

What irks me a bit is that the word you've chosen to use (and the rather terse comment in which you first used it) implies things about my family that simply aren't true. Using that word in this context also, to me, gives other people an easy out, a way to walk away from such conversations thinking, "Well, I don't have to worry about those kinds of things, because her kids are just privileged."

 

I don't believe that having parents who care about them and try to give them opportunties to do things they enjoy is or should be considered a "privilege" for children.

 

But I think I've done more than enough to derail this interesting thread already. So, I apologize for the disctraction, and I'll get out of the way now.

[BlsdMama]

However, the fact remains that my children having had these experiences does not necessarily mean they are economically "priveleged." In the city in which we live it is very possible to find these opportunities without spending lots of money.

 

 

Entirely OT, but I think we're seeing a wrong translation of the word simply because it's often paired with another word and given a poor connotation.

 

"The privileged rich..." And it's often said with a sneer and given to take "spoiled." Really, it doesn't mean that at all.

 

From a dictionary:

 

priv·i·lege

 

–noun

 

a right, immunity, or benefit enjoyed only by a person beyond the advantages of most: the privileges of the very rich.

 

 

 

While it can certainly be defined as "belonging to an elite class" it also means "to enjoy a benefit by a person beyond the advantages of most." The example they gave happened to be of the economically well-to-do, however, I honestly feel that many experiences of the homeschooled child DO indeed equate to privileges... Things enjoyed beyond that of regular children.

 

To me it is a PRIVILEGE simply to be homeschooled. It is a privilege to have many hours out of doors. It is a PRIVILEGE to have a mother instruct you one on one. It can entirely have NOTHING to do with money invested.

 

Jenny your children ARE privileged. They are privileged to have parents willing to invest the time and the effort involved in seeking out and attending these events. :) But, that, of course, doesn't imply for one moment that they are spoiled or of an elite economical class. :) Only that they have benefits which the average child does not, not necessarily because of money, but also because of unwillingness or inability for the parent to provide the time, the transportation, or simply the willing body. Our son Christian is PRIVILEGED to have a father that is deeply involved in his activities. It isn't a matter of $$ but simply because his dad is willing to invest the time & energy in his interests, not many children have that. He's privileged.

Edited May 11, 2011 by BlsdMama

[BlsdMama]

You know, based on the poll almost all the kids are reading above 3rd grade level...wonder if that is perception or reality.

 

 

I think it's reality but do remember you're polling homeschoolers. The average child does NOT have a reading mentor, willing to painstakingly teach basic reading skills. They do not have a teacher that has one on one time for them each day. The average child does not have a school that can change curricula as needed in order to fit the needs of the individual child.

 

Frankly, yes, homeschooled children are usually reading above the average or at least AT skill level by 3rd/4th grade. So the question isn't:

 

Are almost all homeschooled children ACTUALLY reading at or above average?

 

The question should be:

How could the education system implement proven techniques by the homeschooling community to insure that almost all children could achieve these same results?

[snickelfritz]

You know, based on the poll almost all the kids are reading above 3rd grade level...wonder if that is perception or reality.

 

 

 

With the labeling on the back of books, AR lists, online reading tests, etc... It's pretty easy to determine how your kids are reading compared to their peers.

[Ester Maria]

I heard the 3rd class argument in regards to "many kids seem accelerated or 'gifted' prior to then, but that 3rd class is the 'great equalizer'.

 

Meaning, some kids aren't any "brighter" than the kid sitting next to them - they are just on a different timeline. And that, by 3rd class, this process tends to "be equalized" for whatever reason.

Even though the topic is specifically about early readers, yes, I agree with this.

 

Children come to schools from a plethora of initial positions - initial biological background, but also initial home cultures. Many children were, in a lack of a better expression, "systematically invested in", usually those from more priviledged socioeconomic background. They were usually worked with, spent time with, engaged with in various activities which gently nurture intellectual capacities as well, read too, etc. On the other hand, many children do not come with that initial background.

 

What happens is that as a result many kids appear bright in the first grade, and many kids appear dumb or merely average, while in reality, this says more about their nurture than about their nature. It is really, really hard to differentiate between nurture and nature with such small children unless you have a SERIOUS exception, one of those kids that are basically geniuses (we are not even talking percentages here, very often it is only promilles). So, a 6 year old tackling a text on criminal justice and discussing it with you and getting algebra - yeah, a genius. But, a 6 year old reading on a 3rd grade reading level and getting 2nd grade math, etc.? You cannot tell yet. It may be the result of a loving and nurting home environment... or an exceptional kid.

 

So they talk of this 3rd-4th grade "equalizers" where you can start telling when it was early nurture, and when you are really dealing with an exceptional nature (albeit not so exceptional to appear as genialty), or a mix of both. For a lot of kids school content or just overall cognitive finesses expected at this level tend to dramatically become less "intuitive" and kids begin to "struggle" - i.e. they sort of "go back" to the level of their peers because their early nurture can no longer "hold" them through it so easily. Cognitively, they are about the same, they were only accelerated and thus appeared on a different timeline, like you describe.

 

Now, outside of the sphere of institutional schooling, it would be really interesting to see how much of that evening out is the institution thing (and all social, etc., implications of institutionalized schooling), and how much of it is really cognitive thing: i.e., there are some "problematic" points even to the basic scheme described above.

 

Reading level is less equalized, especially in the time of the lowering of school standards (where very often totally average kids may appear bright too, even for longer period than 3rd-4th grade), but then again, reading level is tied to general knowledge and understanding level (inseparable from education on the whole). In many countries there is no such concept as "reading level" (part of the reason why there is such a concept in the first place in anglophone countries is that crazy language of yours ;) which is much more difficult to decode than, say, Italian) or the "need" to understand such and such profile of texts in X grade - those things are considered inherently tied to education as such.

 

So yeah, evening out DOES happen, at least in large numbers in institutional schooling, BUT, when it comes to exceptional kids (not appear-exceptional ones), they are unfortunately lumped together with the rest, while being different. They, obviously, do not even out, unless you purposely withdraw educational opportunities from them - which, from what I hear, some schools do :glare:.

 

I have friends who are elementary teachers in plethora of various profile schools and all of their experience goes straight along those lines (and they are definitely those that encourage differentiated work, approach kids on their level if possible, etc.). Evening out just happens... but not with everyone. If you have a truly exceptional kid, they will not enter the same "box" of the supposed average development. And the critical period for differentiating between the two does seem to be about 3rd-4th grade.

 

I lack distinct professional jargon to explain these things, so all of this sounds incredibly amateurishly, but my experience and experiences of other people I talked to about this really point to that direction.

 

Mine were 3-4 for Italian and about-5 for English, both reading past 3rd grade material in both languages when they were "in" 3rd grade.

Edited May 12, 2011 by Ester Maria

[Paige]

With the labeling on the back of books, AR lists, online reading tests, etc... It's pretty easy to determine how your kids are reading compared to their peers.

 

That's if you assume that the reading lists, tests, labels, are an accurate reflection of a true norm for that grade level. It assumes that because it says a RL 3.6 on the book that the average 3rd grade, 6th month student is at that level. I really don't think that is true in most schools. I think reading levels, like clothing sizes, are getting vanity sized. Maybe, kids are just reading more at a higher level than they used to, but even if that is true, the reading levels need to be adjusted to the current average. Or, it could be that the reading level average is being brought down by outliers with significantly low scores. Maybe using a modal measure that looks at what kids that age choose most often would be more accurate.

 

I also don't think you can judge if a student is reading proficiently by how quickly they turn pages in an unusual environment. I am a very fast reader, for example, but I read slowly in offices because I am not really paying attention to my book a lot of the time and I'm distracted by other people, what may be on tv, and I'm keeping an ear out for my name.

[elizabeth]

yes, the word is privileged.

 

Ouch.

[calandalsmom]

Ouch.

 

Why?

 

This person posted, stating her child was enjoying Indian food on his way out the door to opera.

 

She acknowledged how different this is from the average. Hot dogs and little league.

 

She posted her college age dd isthe only one in her class to have had these culturally enriching experiences.

 

These children are not living an average existance.

 

No one is critiquing the opportunities provided to them. Quite the opposite.

 

 

To pretend naming this is somehow insulting after introducing it and

expounding on it is a little confusing.

 

 

 

It is an advantage. And it is the sort of advantage no institution can really make up for between 9 and 3 five days a week.

[snickelfritz]

That's if you assume that the reading lists, tests, labels, are an accurate reflection of a true norm for that grade level. It assumes that because it says a RL 3.6 on the book that the average 3rd grade, 6th month student is at that level. I really don't think that is true in most schools. I think reading levels, like clothing sizes, are getting vanity sized

 

I also don't think you can judge if a student is reading proficiently by how quickly they turn pages in an unusual environment. I am a very fast reader, for example, but I read slowly in offices because I am not really paying attention to my book a lot of the time and I'm distracted by other people, what may be on tv, and I'm keeping an ear out for my name.

 

I can only speak to my child. I know she reads proficiently, because I have her spend time reading to me and ask her questions about it. And if a child was only reading a little ahead (3.1 when they are really 2.6), I would agree with your premise. When the child is consistently reading books labeled as 2, 3, or more years ahead....one (or at least, me) assumes they probably really are ahead.

Edited May 12, 2011 by snickelfritz

[joannqn]

I voted learned to read at age 5 and reads above average in 3rd grade. I forgot to vote for my daughter which would have been the same except that she was reading at that level at age 4.

 

Both of my children are still well above grade level.

[Dmmetler]

FWIW, when I taught in an urban public school, most of our students could NOT read books above their grade level as leveled by AR. So in that school, at least, a grade 3.6 on a 3rd grader was considered a good thing.

 

In the private school my DD attended last year, a 3rd grader reading at a 3rd grade level would probably be receiving private tutoring or be considered a candidate for retention, because the expectation is that the students will be above grade level in everything, basically from day 1 (which is why they tend to wait to enter kids in K until they're 6, and retain a LOT of kindergartners).

 

In my homeschool group, there seem to be two groups of people-people who pulled their kids from public schools because their kids were advanced, and people who pulled their kids from public school because their kids were behind. So a book at a 3rd grade level might be read by a 6 yr old or a 12 yr old-but probably not by an 8-9 yr old who is officially in 3rd grade.

 

And I do think the WTM boards are a skewed sample-like a previous poster, I gravitated to the WTM (and to the other curricula I'm using) BECAUSE they were good fits for my DD, and that meant accommodating the fact that her skills aren't all on one grade level. There were many, many curricula out there that weren't a good fit for this reason. If doing all books with "grade 1" on the cover had been a good fit for DD, I probably wouldn't be on the WTM boards at all-or at least, not nearly as much.

[angela in ohio]

That's often true in schools and in children who are taught by sight reading. I don't think it appleis to a homeschool where parents (fully) teach phonics and provide challenging reading material.

 

And I do think you will find homeschooling kiddos (on average) ahead in reading. Even the non-academic homeschoolers I know have dc who read more than the average child.

Edited May 12, 2011 by angela in ohio

[Embassy]

I just posted another poll here It would be interesting to look a little more into the actual reading level range for 3rd graders here.

[melmichigan]

I have one third grader who just starting reading this last year. She is currently at a 3rd grade level. Her twin started reading between 4 and 5 (depending on the definition) and is reading at a 6th or 7th grade everyday and a little higher at times depending on the content. At the speed my younger twin is progressing I imagine she will catch up by 5th grade.

 

Our public schools do not encourage early reading, just stick with the crowd is the motto.

 

(I used the Scholastic Wizard to determine reading level. :) )

Edited May 12, 2011 by melmichigan

[My3Monkeys]

I think an early reader is likely to stay ahead of grade level, but I don't think starting reading reading later will make a child permanently behind the early ones.

 

Dd1, though through no lack of trying on my part, was a very reluctant reader. I think she maybe met the "reader" qualifications at 7. She's 3rd grade now and reading maybe a year above grade level. It seems like her reading ability makes jumps rather than being at a steady pace.

 

Ds met the reader qualifications at late 5 or maybe early 6. I was MUCH more relaxed about teaching him to read and he picked it up much easier and quicker than dd. He's still only 6 so I'm not sure what his long term reading skills will look like.

 

Now for myself, my mom says that my school didn't really teach us to read until 2nd grade. I turned 8 in April of that year and remember getting Ramona Quimby, Age 8 for my birthday. I quickly read through the rest of the series which all seem to be 3.5- 5th grade reading level. By 4th grade my teachers were commenting on the levels of the books I was choosing for book reports. At least anecdotally, a child who learns to read "late" can certainly catch up with early readers.

[yellowperch]

My 11 yo was a later reader (for complicated reasons--eye probems, immersion in a foreign language, etc.) He was a mid-1st grade reader at the begining of 3rd grade. In fifth grade he is above grade level, and an avid reader. He and his sister are reading the Warriors series together, and he's also reading the Hobbit.

 

9 yo read at 4, read books such as the Poppy series, Freddie the Detective, an Mrs. Piggle Wiggle in kindergarten, and at 9 is reading Ivanhoe, the Time Machine, cereal boxes and comics.

 

7yp read at 4 and is reading the Warriors series and the Benedict Society. My guess is at 9 she'll be reading whatever she pleases.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

My kids were readers at 5.5, 4, and 6.5-7 years old respectively.

 

There is a huge gap between what my youngest reads (Magic Tree House for example) and what his brothers read at the same age (Redwall or Harry Potter).

 

More importantly they have had more years reading higher level stories and non fiction texts, where he's been limited to read alouds or audiobooks. So they had much deeper and wider knowledge of ancients or of the Merle ages at the grammar level than he has. So much more of his time has been on mastering reading rather than reading to learn.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

This was my experience with our older two. I was told that they should get more kindergarten level books because they were in kindergarten and must just be decoding the 2nd grade books they were gobbling up.

[Sebastian (a lady)]

You know, based on the poll almost all the kids are reading above 3rd grade level...wonder if that is perception or reality.

 

There wasn't an option for below 3rd grade level. All the answers are at or above level.

[Staci in MO]

It's been my observation that early readers continue to improve and remain good readers.

 

But, it doesn't necessarily follow that a child who learns to read late is doomed forever to poor reading ability.

 

Dd learned to read almost effortlessly at age 5. It was like she woke up one day and knew how to read. Now 12, she reads very well.

 

For her older brother, though, it was a different story. At the beginning of third grade he was plodding through "Frog and Toad" and I thought I was a homeschool failure. An experienced homeschooling mom talked me down from the ceiling and told me to keep plugging along. By the end of third grade he was reading the Narnia books independently. We've done TOG since his 5th grade year, and he's always handled the reading just fine. He's now 14, and he's up in his room now reading "Of Mice and Men" (which isn't necessarily a difficult read, but he does enjoy reading and comprehends well).

 

I can think of several examples of "late" readers who eventually became excellent readers who enjoyed reading. But when I think of all the early readers I know, they all remained good readers and stayed ahead of the pack.

[LisaKinVA]

My older three all read between 4-5yrs old My oldest son can easilly read adult non-fiction, but prefers to read drivel in his spare time (Star Wars novels from his dad's collection). My oldest dd is a voracious reader, and is usually reading 3-4 books at one time (like my mom). She will read anything from Eragon to Elsie Dinsmore, Anne of Green Gables to Grandma's attic. She is interested in books..period. She is 9. My younger DS was reading Magic Treehouse books in K, alongside the Human Body Book (adult-level).