The ideal age to start reading and the Classical Method

[Passan]

I know the Bauers promote teaching reading as early as age 3, and that children should be reading fluently by age 6. However, I've been reading books such as "Endangered Minds" and "Your Brain on Childhood" that highlight studies that show the ideal age to learn reading is age 6, and to start at 4 or 5 can actually create poorer readers in the long-term, although they may be faster out of the gate at the get-go.

 

Personally, I learned to read in grade 1 when I was 6 years old and I went on to achieve a MA in English Language. I always planned to teach my children to read at that age. I had never even heard of children learning to read in kindergarten until I read the WTM. It's the only book on the classical method I've read, so my questions are - is pushing early reading a classical thing, or just a WTM? And did you wait to teach reading, push it early, or just follow your child's lead? I started to teach my child reading at age 3, and she has done really well, but we have just paused at the CVC level (she's now 4) and I'm wondering if I should just back off completely, now that I've read more theories about children and reading. I can definitely tell that reading is "work" for her at this stage - she is capable, but it takes a lot of concentration and well, she woudl rather just play lego or colour. I don't want to create any negative associations with it. She is smart and I know she can pick it up easily at age 6 if we wait.

[desertflower]

I don't have an answer to all your questions, but I would wait with your 4 yo since she is viewing this as work.  I would follow her lead. 

 

ETA:  Sorry, I didn't mean to sound so short.  This is just what I do because.....

 

I didn't know what I was doing with my oldest child.  He is most certainly capable and I pushed when he was 5 because I wanted to get him reading.  I thought this would make my life so much easier since I was planning on 3 more kids back to back (I started late having kids.).  Well, there were some tears.  I backed off and did a different program (All About Reading a kinesthetic approach).  This he liked, but he also thought it was a waste of time.  lol  So, we went back to Phonics Pathways.  Just once or twice a week and while he was on a trampoline or running around.  ;)

 

I then discovered this forum and learned from other moms to go with what my child wants.  And because of that my middle child loves to do her phonics lessons.  Practically begs for it.  This is the approach I'm going with with my last child. 

 

Good luck.

[HomeAgain]

We did streamlined reading.

 

When other parents were teaching the ABCs, we slowly introduced sounds along with plastic, lowercase letters (and didn't worry about letter names).  I gave my kid lots of visual-spatial puzzle toys and started watching for signs that his brain could break down whole to parts and make parts-to-whole connections. I gave him things that were very similar (like paint chips that were various shades of the same color) to put in order from lightest to darkest or match two of the same.  Once I could see him doing them easily, I introduced connecting/blending sounds.  It took 3 months from that point for him to read fluently.

 

Montessori gives the sensitive period for reading from ages 3-6, when children become interested enough to want to learn to read and should be given the tools to explore it.  That's a 4 year age span if you think about it.  Some kids could be doing it much earlier than others, but everyone learns to read on their own time, when they are interested and ready.  And their method of introduction is what we based ours off of: start with parts-to-whole work, sound and visual discrimination work, and introduce sounds, not names.  Names are introduced later when a child starts learning how to alphabetize or spell.  It brings the process down to a nice, orderly progression that you just walk through with the child instead of introducing 'new' all the time. 

[Mama Geek]

Dd is only 6 so take it with a grain of salt, it is about balance.  To spend 5 o4 10 minutes a day teaching a 3 year the basics of reading doesn't take away from them playing and learning lots of other things.

 

Dd just turned 6 and read Black Stallion in about a week on her own, just because she wanted to.

 

For a long time we did stuff on a whiteboard with dry erase markers because dd really enjoyed that.

Edited July 22, 2016 by Mama Geek

[lanalouwho]

My son is 5.5 and in kinder. He wants to know how to read, but doesn't really want to work to learn. So we do about 5 mins a day, and stop when he seems frustrated or uninterested. I'm not pushing it now, but eventually I will. Reading is not an easy thing to learn, and he will be required to work at it next year.

 

Sent from my HTCD200LVW using Tapatalk

[Kiara.I]

I strongly believe it has to do with the individual child and not a particular age, just as walking and talking do. I am not impressed by the authors who try to tell me that my naturally early readers are handicapped because I didn't remove all books from their presence for a year and a half!

 

Introduce sounds of a couple of letters as early as you like. If the child immediately grasps it and asks for more, provide more. When the child doesn't want to do it, stop. Strew it through life, as long as there's no major resistance.

 

At six, if the child isn't reading yet, you can probably reasonably "teach" it, as in expect a certain amount of targeted work on it daily.

 

Sent from my Nexus 5 using Tapatalk

[EKT]

I don't get the impression SWB is insisting your child needs to read by a certain date. But classical education is fundamentally language-based, so learning to read is obviously a priority. (TWTM itself comes across as sort of strict, but I've seen SWB speak and listened to lots of her lectures, and in those contexts, she supports responding to the real, actual child you are homeschooling, not a hypothetical one. I suspect she would encourage you to read aloud to your child constantly and then strike while the iron is hot whenever he or she shows an interest in reading.) 

 

And following the child is what I ended up doing.... It's funny, when I first started homeschooling, I was taking a Waldorf-inspired approach, and was fully prepared not to teach my children to read until age 7 or even later. The only "problem" was that they both started reading early and insisted on reading instruction around age 4/4.5. Both were fluent readers by age 5. This was not what I meant to do; it's just who they were! 

 

I think, too, any classical household is likely to value books and reading in general. Kids being raised in such an environment are likely to see reading as an ordinary part of life, making reading at early ages more likely. (I know my younger daughter started reading even earlier than my oldest, simply because she wanted to do what the rest of us were doing. Nobody pushed her; she just wanted to become a reader.) 

 

ETA: In a nutshell, I don't think there is an "ideal" age. I think you mix a house full of books + tons of reading aloud + respect for the human child in front of you, and the reading will come when it comes. (Assuming, of course, there are no disabilities, etc.)

Edited July 22, 2016 by EKT

[Dinsfamily]

I'm working on teaching my 4th reader. The other 3 have been as different as they could be. I had one that I taught at 4 using only the SWR method, one that taught himself at 2, and one that lacked motivation (not ability) and is just now getting to grade level at 8. #4 looks like he'll be reading fluently by 6.

 

I've learned to follow their lead. I was worried about my 3rd guy but if I had pushed him, it could have been disastrous. But he is doing so well now and loves to read for fun. I've had to also learn to watch my expectations. His older brother was attempting to read the Hobbit at 8 and he is reading Nate the Great. HOWEVER, he loves it and that is more important to me at his age. I focus on reading rich read alouds to him which will bridge that gap. I'm thankful that I let him go at his own pace and kept my frustrations from him.

 

All that to say, I don't think you should push at a young age. Some kids are totally ready at 3, some aren't until 7. Some will start and stop or take a long time to reach fluency. It has nothing to do with future school performance in most cases.

 

Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

[strange_girl]

It really all depends on the child, and that's true whether you are a classical homeschooler, a Charlotte Mason homeschooler, a Waldorf, homeschooler, or an unschooler.

 

My oldest taught herself to read before she turned 4. She was passionate and focused about it and I did not try to hold her back. I followed up with phonics because I wanted her to have the tools to keep moving forward, but she was the driving force.

 

My second already knew his letters and sounds when I set out to teach him, from listening carefully to his older sister's lessons. He was a breeze to teach and reads very well and with good understanding at 7.

 

My youngest is 4. We are doing Pre-K or K4 with him this year. He is very different from his older siblings and has very little interest in letters and reading. Neither does he really enjoy being read to. So, I am expecting him to take longer than the other two, and that will be okay. We will go at his pace. When he is 6, if he has not yet learned, I will no longer give him an option. We will do short, age-appropriate lessons at that time whether he's interested or not. :laugh:

[Shoes+Ships+SealingWax]

I strongly believe it has to do with the individual child and not a particular age, just as walking and talking do.

^^This^^

If a child is asking to learn to read; teach them. If they get frustrated, hit a wall, or it becomes drudgery; take a step back. If they want to stop; stop. If they continue to have difficulty for an extended period despite an obvious desire, have them screened for visual or reading disabilities.

 

Not all children are developmentally ready to read at a young age. Some are. Early readers are not "pushed" into it, except in rare cases; they are simply ready sooner. I think pushing a child who is not ready & holding back a child who is ready are equally destructive. Follow the child.

[The Governess]

Yes... It depends on the child. I have one that learned to read fluently at 3, and another that did not gain the same level of fluency until third grade. They both love to read and read often. I think the most important thing, rather than setting an ideal age, is to foster a love of reading in the home. We did a lot of read-alouds, our house is full of books, and my kids see adults reading as a regular part of our days. Literature is a big component of our lives, and I think this more than anything else creates successful readers, because the kids put a high value on reading. So I would say, classical education means creating a literature-rich environment and guiding your child to participate in it according to their individual development.

[Jandy]

I'm coming up to this for the first time with my 3-year-old - I'd read some of the things saying learning to read at 6 or 7 was as good or better than learning younger, so I was fully prepared to wait until then (even though I learned to read at 4; I don't even remember not knowing how to read), but my daughter is fascinated with letters and numbers. She points them out everywhere, on our shirts, on signs, in books, makes Ts and Xs and Vs with coffee stirrers at Starbucks, etc. So I'm kind of gently introducing letter sounds and stuff as she's interested - we'll see where we end up. She's not one for drilling or working on stuff like this in a structured way, so I'm not even trying anything formal.

The one thing that I'm now stressing about is all the things I'm seeing (here and elsewhere) that kids should learn the sounds of letters before the names. It's already too late for that! She already knows all the names and can identify them all (capitals anyway; she doesn't know the lower-case ones yet).

[ReadingMama1214]

I've only taught one to read, but I've followed her lead. She started reading on her own (cvc words) at 3.5 and we started doing phonics for 10-15 minutes a day shortly before she turned 4. It's very simple and some days we just play games and don't do a structured letter.

 

For example, yesterday she made up her own game where she put all of our letter tiles in a dump truck and then said "the truck is too full of letters, we need to build words" and then tried to build words and added silent e on the ends. There was a lot of nonsense words.

 

We do follow a curriculum, but take lots of breaks and do other activities. I agree that doing 10-15 minutes of reading a day won't take away from play time. If she seems stuck on a concept, we pause and take time to review and play games. It's very laid back. But If she hadn't started reading, we probably would have held off another year on phonics/reading instruction.

[strange_girl]

 

The one thing that I'm now stressing about is all the things I'm seeing (here and elsewhere) that kids should learn the sounds of letters before the names. It's already too late for that! She already knows all the names and can identify them all (capitals anyway; she doesn't know the lower-case ones yet).

 

Don't worry, Jandy :thumbup1:  Both of my readers have learned the letter names before the sounds, and it didn't hinder them at all. Just like a cat is named a cat but says 'Meow", they can learn that a letter has both a name and a sound.

[blondchen]

I'm teaching my third child to read now. I started them all at 4, because they were excited to learn, and because I wanted them to be able to enjoy books on their own, if they could. We use OPGTR, which can go at whatever pace you choose. My current 4yo doesn't sit still for as long as her sisters did, so her lessons are about 5-10 minutes, and we often do only a partial lesson from the book. I do as much as I think she's ready for, and we keep it relaxed and fun.

 

I think it's absurd that it somehow damages a child to learn to read "too soon". Forcing a child whom you discover isn't ready is one thing; introducing a child to sounding out letters is entirely another. If the child IS capable, and especially if he/she is eager, it opens up a whole new world.

 

The one thing that I'm now stressing about is all the things I'm seeing (here and elsewhere) that kids should learn the sounds of letters before the names. It's already too late for that! She already knows all the names and can identify them all (capitals anyway; she doesn't know the lower-case ones yet).

Don't stress about that. It doesn't matter.

[fralala]

I haven't read the books you refer to, but to my mind Theories About Children Learning to Read are very, very important for early elementary teachers in institutional settings and are not meant (unless perhaps you are totally on the Waldorf side of things) to say, "Parents, don't give your kids any clues about decoding or phonics."

 

I can't see that telling my preschooler that the letter "M" says "mmmmmmm" creates any more negative associations than telling her "That part of an elephant is a tusk, and there is the trunk"-- she's not going to grow to hate reading any more than she will despise elephants. I'll happily snuggle her and teach her basic phonics, but I'd never send her to a preschool that taught phonics-- I do think there's a big difference between teaching reading in a homeschool and in a school school.

[Mrs. A]

 

The one thing that I'm now stressing about is all the things I'm seeing (here and elsewhere) that kids should learn the sounds of letters before the names. It's already too late for that! She already knows all the names and can identify them all (capitals anyway; she doesn't know the lower-case ones yet).

It's not a big deal at all. If she knows the letter names already it's just that much easier to teach her the sounds. So if she knows the letter A you just tell her "A can make 3 different sounds - /a/ /A/ and /ah/. That's it. She'll get it. :)

 

 

I agree with those who've said that it's very individual. My eldest didn't read fluently until the age of 7 despite much hard work on my part. My second child started to read fluently just around her 5th birthday with no input from me at all, aside from what she'd observed me doing with her brother. My current 6 year old is just taking off and she's doing fine. If I'd tried to start her early there probably would have been tears.

 

Look at your own child and decide based on what she is ready for. Theoretical children in books will never live in your house no matter what you do. ;)

[ReadingMama1214]

We are also using The Ordinary Parents Guide to Teaching Reading. Along with BOB books, Nora Gaydos readers, elephant and Piggie books, and simple readers from the library

[Jandy]

I haven't read the books you refer to, but to my mind Theories About Children Learning to Read are very, very important for early elementary teachers in institutional settings and are not meant (unless perhaps you are totally on the Waldorf side of things) to say, "Parents, don't give your kids any clues about decoding or phonics."

 

I can't see that telling my preschooler that the letter "M" says "mmmmmmm" creates any more negative associations than telling her "That part of an elephant is a tusk, and there is the trunk"-- she's not going to grow to hate reading any more than she will despise elephants. I'll happily snuggle her and teach her basic phonics, but I'd never send her to a preschool that taught phonics-- I do think there's a big difference between teaching reading in a homeschool and in a school school.

 

This is a really good and helpful distinction.

[Kat w]

NO! :) teaching them to read earlier that that is not a true classical thing.

 

It's 6or older even. The idea is to create a love for learning and books. To make or push a child to read younger than this IS harmful.

 

The socratic method does not reach that early.

Which is the true classical method.

 

It is to paces with YOUR child and done gently. Phonics based and stay there til you've got it down, but daily introducing the child to great works of literature that are age appropriate.

 

Blueberries for sal, Alice in wonderland ( the unabridged version, on audio)

 

To stretch and expose your child to great works of lit is a daily venture and fun and sweet :)

 

It will expand their minds, vocab, understanding of the greater works.

 

Esp if you have a boy. They tend to start later . girls have a more natural fondness of words haha.

 

I would look at memoria press if I were you. They are well,...I recommend reading their philosophy.

 

But don't push, expose him to good books both read aloud and books on audio, and stay phonics based.

 

Unless he has a learning challenge. You will be fine . pushing? Leads to a child who grows up to loathe reading.

 

And how ya gonna get thru college with such an aversion to reading and writing? That and math is all college us.

 

Not to mention, the workforce.

What we do now matters.

 

Talk alot about the books you've read or listened too. Twll him your fav part and how cool you think it is.

 

Act out blueberries for sal.

Allowing him to explore it? He will own it. And look forward to more :)

[Kat w]

Oh, and make blueberry muffins ir pancakes. Yum. Lol

They will like that and develop his love of books.

 

That's where the motivation comes from.

[Kat w]

I want to add one more thing here, that I think is really important .

 

Ravi zacharais who is a philosopher , wrote a paper ( I think it was his doctoral thesis but not 100% sure, been awhile.

 

But he wrote a paper entitled "The Dying Art of Thinking"

I read this many years ago when I was first homeschooling .

 

It talks about, noone is taught to absorb, process and most if all, hoe to THINK!

he opens with an amazing story if a man sitting in his office at his desk staring our the window. The man was later having trouble at work, getting in trouble for what? ...thinking.

 

We have lost that in today's society . when we are learning to read, we have to ponder, THINK, absorb. Listening to the great works beings us to that point. THINKING about it.

If we can't think, we can't absorb, if we can adsorb, we can't empliment , etc.

 

The child needs to process the English language . what to do with it and...what he thinks of it.

 

Denying the child the staring out the window times is not beneficial . causes us to be at a handicap if you will.

 

To learn to read, requires alot of THOUGHT and processing. Simply getting through the material at hand is not the goal, ir what should be done. Fostering a love for books an learning and thinking...that's the goal.

 

Let him take it at his pace. After all, isn't this why were all homeschooling ?

:)

 

I recommend everyone read his paper. It's on the web. That's where I got it. I still have it in a notebook. :)

I refer back to it sometimes :)

Cuz sometimes I need to be reminded I this...i wanna get thru the material and why is it taking so long haha.

 

Cuz,.....they...are...thinking :)

Edited July 23, 2016 by Kat w

[...................]

I would not wait till 6. Instead I would watch your child. You will see when she is really ready. She will be interested in letter sounds and books and trying to read them on her own, and asking you "what is this word mommy"

While pointing to specific word on the page

 

(Not to be confused with pretend reading which can happen as early as one or even earlier)

 

She will also have a good attention span. If she can stand on a stool in the kitchen and hang out and remain interested while baking cookies (and follow through until the first batch is on the tray)....if she sits through story books for at least 15 minutes, remaining still and interested, if she likes educational toys and completed age appropriate puzzles (easy ones, you know ten or 15 pieces), if she colors well (not necessarily by any rules but holds the crayon properly and finishes the picture whether it's in the lines or not, is finished), if she enjoys a few Walmart workbooks here and there...

 

These are all signs she is ready to read. IMO for most kids it'll be between 4.5 and 6.5 depending on the kid and earlier for most girls than most boys.

[8filltheheart]

You need to find your own answer.  If you want to read about the perspective of no academic seat work before K, keep reading.  If you want to do preschool, skip the rest.

 

I have taught 8 kids to read and not one of them spent any time doing preschool and all started learning their letters, numbers, and reading in K.  All of them ended K at different levels of reading.  I had one who was reading books like Charlotte's Webb in just a few hours.  My rising 1st grader can read books like Stuart Little.  I had other kids (dyslexic) who struggled with learning to read all the way through 4th grade.

 

My perspective is for the long term.  I believe that early childhood s far better spent using their imaginations, playing, and exploring. My personal POV is that higher order critical thinking skills are developed through play and that learning their letters is a low level knowledge skill that can wait. (Developing critical thinking skills is my number 1 priority in our homeschool.)  No, I don't think they need to spend any time, not even 15 mins per day, learning their letters, etc.  Learning their letters and sounds has been mastered very easily for all of my kids (even my dyslexics). Blending sounds to make words has only been a problem for dyslexics.  My other kids have had no problem learning how to read.

 

FWIW, my kids have all been accelerated by high school, some significantly so. (Ironically, my most severe dyslexic graduated from high school incredibly advanced. :) )  

 

That is what has worked for our family.  I have some pretty amazing adult children in my life, so absolutely zero regrets about my approach from my perspective.

 

 

[8filltheheart]

FWIW, I read to my kids all of the time. Bed time stories are/were precious mommy time and they guard(ed) it like a prized treasure. None of them (have) ever wanted to go to bed for any reason without bedtime stories.   :)

Edited July 23, 2016 by 8FillTheHeart

[MeaganS]

I'm teaching my 3rd to read. I was influenced by WTM in my philosophies, but I have adjusted a lot, especially for my oldest dd who has several learning disabilities, so I wouldn't consider myself a hard-core WTMer, but it is the philosophy that is most in line with what I subscribe.

 

I've tried teaching them all starting at almost 4 years old. The older two were what I considered fluent before their 6th birthdays and dd4 is well on her way (might even be fluent by her 5th birthday). It has been a relatively painless process that has taken me 10 minutes a day with each of them. They played apps that taught them letter sounds and beginning blending and then I was more formal from there on. They have also listened to audiobooks at bedtime for years and we read scriptures together nightly. That's not counting stories read to them. Language and books have always been a big part of our family culture, it was natural for them each to want to know how to read. I occasionally had to push a bit, but I never encountered over-negativity and always backed off if the child seemed too frustrated to continue on a given day. Given all this, I don't see a point in waiting for some arbitrary number. If they can learn to read at 4, why not? My 5 year old, especially, loves to read. She's recently taken off and is spending an hour or more of her free time nowadays reading for fun. I'm so glad she has that option as it makes her happy.

 

And from a purely practical standpoint, homeschooling multiple children is just easier if the older kids can read instructions.

[Blink]

For children in a typical public school, the ideal time to start reading seems to be kindergarten. My 7-year-old entered 1st grade completely unable to read, and the whole year was a struggle for him. 

 

For homeschooled children, I don't think there is an ideal age. Or, that age depends on the individual child. My oldest son, for example, became extremely interested in books and reading when he was 3. He would ask me to read to him for hours, constantly asked "what does this say?", started "reading" books he'd memorized to his younger siblings, and picked up a few dozen sight words from the books I'd read to him. Because I'd been warned about the perils of children learning to read by sight ( :001_rolleyes:), I started pointing out the letter sounds to him and getting him to sound out words - "Great job reading 'frog'! You know that it says /f/ /r/ /Å/ /g/. Can you make the sounds by themselves with me? /f/ /r/ /Å/ /g/ Now blend them together! Frog! What if we take away the r? What does f-o-g say?, etc." He loved sounding out words, like he'd figured out a magic code, and was reading 2nd/3rd grade books within a few weeks. 

 

My next two kids loved being read to, but were content to let me or their big brother do the work. I started teaching them to read in kindergarten, at age 5.5. Both picked things up fairly easily, but at their own pace, and were fluently reading by 6 and 7. For children who don't show exceptional interest or specifically ask to learn to read, I agree with 8FillTheHeart that kindergarten is plenty early. 

[LMCme]

I'm relatively early in the homeschooling journey, so take what I write with a grain of salt, but my take is that learning to read early is not harmful unless it is a huge drain on time or energy.  I taught my 3 year old the sounds of letters (only much later did he learn their names) and when he was able to blend easily worked with him on that.  We did phonics for 10 minutes a day starting when he was four or so.  I was responsive to his reaction to it, and we changed approaches a few times, but insisted that we spent that 10 minutes a day on it.  Sometimes he didn't like it.  Sometimes we did work with him jumping on the bed or literally climbing a wall.  Sometimes he outright refused and I told him he had to anyway.  And some days, when he got something, he didn't want to stop and we just kept going after our ten minutes were up.

 

Now he can read.  And he loves reading.

 

All of which is to say that while I realize the current theory is that if they don't love every step of the process they might develop "bad associations" and "be turned off  from reading", I don't think this is true.  I think that mastery is a true pleasure, and that that requires regular practice.  One of the most important lessons we can teach our young children is that steady work, even if you don't "like" it, pays off with a joy you couldn't have had if you didn't do that regular, steady work.  I think this virtue (which some call industry) is very worthwhile in itself.

 

All of that said, I think it is important if you are teaching your child phonics early that you still read aloud a lot without forcing him to try to read any words.  Most reading skills have nothing to do with phonics.

 

Best,

LMC

[SilverMoon]

.

Edited September 6, 2023 by SilverMoon

[MotherGoose]

I'm coming up to this for the first time with my 3-year-old - I'd read some of the things saying learning to read at 6 or 7 was as good or better than learning younger, so I was fully prepared to wait until then (even though I learned to read at 4; I don't even remember not knowing how to read), but my daughter is fascinated with letters and numbers. She points them out everywhere, on our shirts, on signs, in books, makes Ts and Xs and Vs with coffee stirrers at Starbucks, etc. So I'm kind of gently introducing letter sounds and stuff as she's interested - we'll see where we end up. She's not one for drilling or working on stuff like this in a structured way, so I'm not even trying anything formal.

 

The one thing that I'm now stressing about is all the things I'm seeing (here and elsewhere) that kids should learn the sounds of letters before the names. It's already too late for that! She already knows all the names and can identify them all (capitals anyway; she doesn't know the lower-case ones yet).

Just keep following her lead. My first was about 3 when she started asking me what words said, constantly, and doing things like what you described. She also knew the letter names first. We went ahead slowly and steadily, and she figured it out pretty quickly. But we stopped when she was tired. 3, 4, and 5 year olds are still babies. :). I didn't get that with my first one either.