or Connect
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Most young children are not read to on a daily basis.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Most young children are not read to on a daily basis. - Page 8

post #141 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
maybe I just haven't gotten there yet. I'm a big kid at heart though so I totally revel in their joy, and when it comes to playtime and fun I have no desire to say no. maybe its because my own childhood was so lonely, boring, and without interaction... in a way sometimes I feel like I am getting a chance to be a kids for the first time. Of course, I have to be mommy too, its a fine balancing act lol, I'm always Mommy first, but I'm definitely down to enjoy the things they enjoy.
I envy you. I don't do well at make believe and stuff, either. My kids (at least dd and ds1...ds2 is still mostly following his sister's lead) are/were very dictatorial about playing make believe and pretend exactly the way they wanted me to. I could only stand that for a very brief period of time.

I like spending time with my kids, just...hanging out. I like taking them for walks and answering their questions, and if I don't have a million other things to do (not often, I'll admit), I like having them bake with me and such. I love taking them to the park and being their audience and/or climbing around with them. I enjoy playing board games and card games with them (as long as they're not getting too upset over them). I just don't like having my brain pushed into reading at the right speed to speak out loud, or having my creativity and imagination put into the box they want it in. I actually thought, before I had kids, that I'd enjoy the being a kid part of it...but it just hasn't worked out that way on many fronts. I don't feel like I'm being a kid when I'm getting yelled at for saying the wrong lines or whatever.

I always wished I was more like you, especially when ds1 was an only child. I wasn't very good at playing with him. Fortunately, dd and ds2 like to play with each other, so it's not as big a problem for them that I'm not usually into it.
post #142 of 166
I read to all of my children all of the time.

My fondest memories of my childhood were when my Father read ghost stories at bedtime to me. He always complained that I would go to sleep before the end of the story...

Anyway, that is probably why I love to listen to www.coasttocoastam.com every night on the radio now.
post #143 of 166
my kids love to play AND fight with eachother lol

I think you do plenty with your kids. Sounds like you have a good dynamic with them. My husband thinks I should let the kids entertain themselves more. They do have independent playtime and I feel like I am not overbearing with the amount of time I spend with them. I include them in what I'm doing if they are intersted (cleaning - my son loves, cooking - my daughter loves) they love to go outside, and I love to just snuggle up with them and YES we own a TV and watch movies on it! Which I know some poeple view as the worst thing ever... before I had kids I said they would never watch TV but sometimes I need a break. Sometimes, we're all sick and I just want to lay in bed all day. Often we pause the movie and I add my own commentary LOL. I guess I got over being so against that when my I realized the little bit of TV my son was watching was actually helping him to talk (despite all the hands on play and speech therapy he wasn't responding to!)

Have you read playful parenting? I just read it, and a lot of it is what I already do so I guess its easy for me, though it changed the way I think about some things... but a LOT of what you just said, I really think you could benefit from reading from that book - learning WHY its important to play the things they want to sometimes, even if you dont like it. And I think it would help you understand why when you "play" you were getting yelled at for saying the wrong lines, and why (aside from the obvious) it isn't fun for you.

I am also a fast talker lol, I can read almost as fast as I can think (when I am thinking clearly anyway lol) and DD doesn't need me to read slow to learn. It's not a forced thing, for me, but I understand how it could be for some people. I don't think its the end all though, I just don't think its fair for the benefits of early reading to be denied.. or shamed. (nor do I think those who DONT read, but interact in other ways, should be shamed or led to feel inadequate in any way)
post #144 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
Have you read playful parenting? I just read it, and a lot of it is what I already do so I guess its easy for me, though it changed the way I think about some things... but a LOT of what you just said, I really think you could benefit from reading from that book - learning WHY its important to play the things they want to sometimes, even if you dont like it. And I think it would help you understand why when you "play" you were getting yelled at for saying the wrong lines, and why (aside from the obvious) it isn't fun for you.
I've been meaning to read it for a long time, but haven't got around to it. Maybe I'll do that. I don't mind the "wrong lines" thing on its own, but it's very frustrating when they tell me to be whomever, and don't tell me what I'm supposed to say...but everything I do say is wrong!

re: TV. We only use it for movies. However, we watch too many movies. We didn't watch them that often for a long time, but after we lost our little Aaron in '07, dh and I both found we were resorting to sticking in a DVD a lot more often than we had done previously. It's proving to be a hard habit to break, especially as the kids ask for movies a lot more often now.

Quote:
I am also a fast talker lol, I can read almost as fast as I can think (when I am thinking clearly anyway lol) and DD doesn't need me to read slow to learn. It's not a forced thing, for me, but I understand how it could be for some people. I don't think its the end all though, I just don't think its fair for the benefits of early reading to be denied.. or shamed. (nor do I think those who DONT read, but interact in other ways, should be shamed or led to feel inadequate in any way)
I'm a fast talker, and a very fast reader. I just don't do well reading out loud. I guess I read a little faster than I talk, and I end up getting tongue-tied unless I slow it down quite a bit. Once I've slowed it way down, I just get frustrated.

I think it's great when people read to their kids. I think it's even better if they do it a lot, and their kids love it. I just don't like the way it's become a big parenting test in our society. Mind you, a lot of things seem to go that way these days.
post #145 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I've been meaning to read it for a long time, but haven't got around to it. Maybe I'll do that. I don't mind the "wrong lines" thing on its own, but it's very frustrating when they tell me to be whomever, and don't tell me what I'm supposed to say...but everything I do say is wrong!
that might BE the game though. the game may be everything you say is wrong, no matter what you say. you;d have to find a way to play into that and make it fun for you and more fun for her. read the book, it will give you a new insight! (okay not trying to command you lol, but I just think it would help you understand that, and make you feel better about it... before i read that book I think my feelings would have been hurt on some level by that)

Quote:
re: TV. We only use it for movies. However, we watch too many movies. We didn't watch them that often for a long time, but after we lost our little Aaron in '07, dh and I both found we were resorting to sticking in a DVD a lot more often than we had done previously. It's proving to be a hard habit to break, especially as the kids ask for movies a lot more often now.
i found this to be true when I was pregnant with DS2. I think the TV issue could be another thing entirely. we dont have cable. dh and I watch a few movies together each week. I watch a movie with the kids every day. I notice the more I let them watch the more they want to watch, which is why we limit it - except when we are sick - which probably is no excuse to some, but its my saving grace!


Quote:
I'm a fast talker, and a very fast reader. I just don't do well reading out loud. I guess I read a little faster than I talk, and I end up getting tongue-tied unless I slow it down quite a bit. Once I've slowed it way down, I just get frustrated.
I can understand that. I think we all have our "things". My son has sensory issues which effect his speech. not the same thing as what you experience, but kind of the same in theory. I also can't stand washing the dishes because they are dirty and water and dirt irk me. messes irk me. So it takes a lot for me to join them in their world when they are being messing.

Quote:
I think it's great when people read to their kids. I think it's even better if they do it a lot, and their kids love it. I just don't like the way it's become a big parenting test in our society. Mind you, a lot of things seem to go that way these days.
THIS I totally agree with. I think there needs to be a balance between parents understanding just how much a baby can learn, how important it is to talk to them, and to teach them even if they can't show you they understand - the things they are interested in. it needs to be done in a supportive way though. parents shouldnt be made to feel bad because they dont do everything perfect. or because their child doesnt like something society says they "have" to do.
post #146 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
i didnt say the window to learn to read closes at age 4. that the window of which it is EASIEST for a child to learn to read starts to close at age 4. and the same is true for second languages and sign languages. its harder to learn as a child or adult then it is to learn as an infant or toddler. this isn't new, it's been known for a long time. I'm surprised by anyone who doesn't already know this about language development.

And how is it pushing kids? I am pushing my child because I RESPOND to HER interested and ENCOURAGE her in something SHE loves?
I was referring to the link you posted, not your practices.

I think people (read: companies) really misuse the research on reading in order to promote their products to parents who are so eager to do everything right.

It has been a few years since I was involved in teaching, but I don't remember any of the professionals being concerned about a "window closing" at age 4. It becomes an issue around grade two or three.

You have to understand the background of a lot of the research; it comes from the 'war' between presenting whole-word recognition and using a phonetic approach. So people went out and proved that kids could be taught phonetic units early, and that knowing the phonetic units was helpful in learning to read fluently. That's true. And certainly pre-reading activities are helpful and important.

(Those of us who learned to read spontaneously at age 3 without phonetic instruction, like me, didn't read this study before doing so. )

But most studies showed that if you are teaching reading the optimal instruction period is around age 5 for most kids, where the basic phonetic units can be absorbed by most kids in about 16 weeks. Actual reading fluency comes later than that.

The best predictor of literacy is even later, like age 8 or 9. There was a fairly extensive Canadian study done where they found if they remediated reading before age 9, but even as late as 10 or 12 years old. the differences almost disappeared.

http://www.statcan.gc.ca/daily-quoti...61205a-eng.htm

I can bet where this idea of the 4 year old window comes from though; the baby-genius machinery. They use "early reading" as vaguely as they want.

And I think that's kind of criminal. People need to be careful about what the agenda is when research is presented.

As far as your comment goes about jealousy, nope. My son is starting to read at 3.5; he had about the same sight vocab as your daughter does at 2, but he got into other things.

So no, not jealous and also not worried about the "window." Hey, knock yourself out, but I hate to see parents pressured about some specific age, especially when it's not actually that well supported (as far as I know).
post #147 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by GuildJenn View Post
(Those of us who learned to read spontaneously at age 3 without phonetic instruction, like me, didn't read this study before doing so. )
I was thinking during this whole thread that dh and I were probably both 5 when I self-taught reading. But...I was probably 4 and dh must have been. We were both already reading when we started kindergarten, and dh's birthday is in September. Mine is June, so it's possible I learned in the couple months before kindergarten, but...

And, that was OT, but it's interesting how it suddenly clicked, at age 40 that I was probably reading at an earlier age than I've always assumed. DD, otoh, will be 6 in May, and she's not quite reading yet. I'm sure she's been read to more than I was, too. She just gets too frustrated (low tolerance for frustration seems to be in our genes) to take it all in, even though she is interested.


Super Glue Mommy - With respect to this:
Quote:
i found this to be true when I was pregnant with DS2. I think the TV issue could be another thing entirely. we dont have cable. dh and I watch a few movies together each week. I watch a movie with the kids every day. I notice the more I let them watch the more they want to watch, which is why we limit it - except when we are sick - which probably is no excuse to some, but its my saving grace!
I know exactly what you mean. I'm so glad we don't do commercial tv, as the ads drive me nuts, and feed a desire for a bunch of junk that my kids barely know exists as it stands. OTOH...I've been pregnant, breastfeeding, post-op, or grieving (or some combination of 2 or 3 of these) constantly since '02. I think I'm just too tired to parent at quite the level I'd like. We'll see how things go once baby-under-construction arrives. I'm really hoping for an easy-going one like ds2 this time!
post #148 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Storm Bride View Post
I was thinking during this whole thread that dh and I were probably both 5 when I self-taught reading. But...I was probably 4 and dh must have been. We were both already reading when we started kindergarten, and dh's birthday is in September. Mine is June, so it's possible I learned in the couple months before kindergarten, but...

And, that was OT, but it's interesting how it suddenly clicked, at age 40 that I was probably reading at an earlier age than I've always assumed. DD, otoh, will be 6 in May, and she's not quite reading yet. I'm sure she's been read to more than I was, too. She just gets too frustrated (low tolerance for frustration seems to be in our genes) to take it all in, even though she is interested.
My parents noted these things. They also used to bring me out as a party trick.

I really think a lot of it is personality, growth, and also learning style.

It kind of stands to reason that a child with a great visual memory may learn to read without formal phonetic instruction whereas a child with big auditory skills may just need phonics to take off, and all kinds of other combinations, and different skills kick in at different ages with different kids. My husband learned to read relatively late but he is a much more careful reader than I am; I had to train myself to slow down.

I do think reading at home is important, but it needs to suit the family.
post #149 of 166
Interesting thread (as I drag my feet about reading a story to my 6-year-old!) : I'm pretty sure that many parents aren't reading to their kids regularly because they. just. don't. like. doing. it. Count me in that camp and I LURV reading!

I agree with a lot of the critiques on the picking apart of the actual statement (ie. the relevance of being read to every night, etc).

Thank you to those posters who commented on other markers of significance, such as whether the parents read and whether books/reading/learning is valued in the household.

Schools could do more to encourage reading. There seems to be a trivialized/hollow encouragement of reading - just like the statement at the start of the thread provides an over-simplified "tick box" to good parenting. One previous poster mentioned outright discouragement of reading by teacher as it related to recess. But beyond this, many teachers discourage kids from reading materials they do not feel are "worthy" (magazines, comic books, etc.). Despite calls for differentiated instruction, a lot of what my daughter reads in school is banal and boring compared to what she chooses at home. Good thing it's not dulling her enthusiasm! I see way too much homework in the early grades that is boring, BORING repetitive formulaic worksheet after worksheet. . . all. year. long. Perhaps the enthusiasm for learning demonstrated by Ms. Frizzle (who I hate, BTW) could be adopted by more elementary teachers.

BTW, Storm Bride, I still think I you. As usual - great posts!
post #150 of 166
i think the idea comes from knowing the way the brain develops during the first few years of life, and knowing that information its more naturally obsorbed during that time, especially in consideration to langues (spoken, signed, and now they believe written - and I do to)

My standpoint is, I don't think the information is wrong, I don't think they are saying the wondow closes at 4, I think they are saying the window for when it is easiest to learn naturally STARTS to close at age 4. Not that its not easy to learn at other ages,, or that it wont happen at other ages, or that its an indicator of having a baby genious, or anything like that.

The only aspect I agree with is that it shouldnt be forced on the child, and that if a parent simply doesn't want to do it, and their child has no interest anyway, that doesn't mean they are falling short as parents. Some parents are too sensitve though. I'm not saying thats a bad thing, I'm just saying not ALL parents find this information to be pressuring or judgemental. Some of us just find it interesting. I dont think I'm less of a parent to my son because I don't work with him on reading. No early reading program promoters have left me feeling that way. Yet, perhaps they leave other parents feeling that way. I know people who feel like failures just because they didnt breastfeed for example. (and no one in any way made them feel bad about their decision) Should breastfeeding advocates not share the benefits of breastfeeding because someone might feel bad? should the facts not be known? many children are formula fed and they have wonderful loving parents who don't fall short. Of course, I dont agree with people "bashing" women who formula feed, or parents who don't read every night to their child, but I am not against sharing information about the benefits of those things either.

I can agree to disagree though, because we could probably just keep going back and forth about how wrong this is and not get anywhere. I agree on some points, but not others. I would be really sad if they stopped providing information on the benefits of things to parents, because some of us like that information. I understand some don't. or some are negatively effected. What about the parents and children who are positively effected by it though? I vote for a middle ground - where the information can be presented and not stigmas or pressure attached. I doubt that will happen, since people want to sell things and make money - but this is life, unfortunately. I think what parents need more is support, not reading material. Some parents are confident though, and aren't adversely effected to hear about the benefits of doing some things, and are comfortable in choosing to do some of those things but not others. I am not willing to sacarafice my right to knowledge just because someone else is going to be hard on themselves. I wish they wouldnt be - but like I said what those parents need is support, not less information.
post #151 of 166
Can the OP go back and change the title of this post please?

52% is no way 'MOST' children. If you had 100 people in a room and 52 raised their hands you wouldn't call that most people would you? Half is much less dramatic isn't it?

Can I raise the issue of parental lack of skills again? This kind of research is just another guilt trip for middle class educated parents who already have so much to feel guilty about. What is needed is more acceptance and non-judgemental help for those who want to be able to read comfortably and can't. Where is the encouragement for story telling? The focus is always on books and lots of people perceive that books are expensive or that you have to be special to go into a library.

School is not the answer either. The things that support reading are things that happen at home and within our communities. If you look around our towns and cities you see more people texting, gaming or talking on mobile phones that you do reading newspapers or books or even talking to other people. People are driving cars and not reading as well.

I don't know if this is so in the US but over here audio books are very popular and lots of children we know (admittedly home schoolers) listen to books that they wouldn't be able to read themselves for stamina or vocab reasons or just because they want to play with lego while they listen.

Literacy is much more than just reading as other posters have said and if we get hung up on the developmental skill for decoding words then I think we miss a whole lot of the picture.
post #152 of 166
Most is more then half. Last time I checked 52 was more then half of 100 people. So yes, most is accurate.
post #153 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
I sense a bit of jealousy in some of these posts really to accuse parents who teach their willing interested children to learn to read as being pushy.
*blink* What? Wow. Ok.
post #154 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy
I can agree to disagree though, because we could probably just keep going back and forth about how wrong this is and not get anywhere. I agree on some points, but not others. I would be really sad if they stopped providing information on the benefits of things to parents, because some of us like that information. I understand some don't. or some are negatively effected. What about the parents and children who are positively effected by it though? I vote for a middle ground - where the information can be presented and not stigmas or pressure attached. I doubt that will happen, since people want to sell things and make money - but this is life, unfortunately. I think what parents need more is support, not reading material. Some parents are confident though, and aren't adversely effected to hear about the benefits of doing some things, and are comfortable in choosing to do some of those things but not others. I am not willing to sacarafice my right to knowledge just because someone else is going to be hard on themselves. I wish they wouldnt be - but like I said what those parents need is support, not less information.
Very well said. I believe in the benefits of reading, but only if the parent and child enjoy it. Once something becomes a chore, it is not enjoyed. I did read some posts about reading logs and as much as my dd and I like to read I CAN'T STAND reading logs. However, a friend of mine likes them b/c she said it helps keep her on track w/her kids : We all have different ways of helping our children succeed and bottom line is we can only do what fits our own families. Reading all the posts was really food for thought.
post #155 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by 1xmom View Post
I did read some posts about reading logs and as much as my dd and I like to read I CAN'T STAND reading logs.
yeah, this.

I love to read, my kids love to read, and it's a rare day when I don't read to at least one child.... but then I have four so I can see how smaller families could easily not read daily, and I don't think that's a negative thing.

All that said, I am all of a sudden annoyed by DS's reading log for kindergarten. We totally forgot this last week to list any books and I got a note from the teacher saying we needed to be reading every day, and writing down the titles. It just made me hate listing all the books we read this weekend, because I know we read daily, and felt defensive that the teacher seemed to be implying that we didn't read for a whole week and (maybe) that the reason I do read to my son is because it's part of his homework. huh?

I do agree that 52% is MOST, because it is more. Whether or not that is an accurate account, who knows.

I said earlier that *I* first mis-interpretted the title of this thread as to mean that most children are not read to on a regular basis, which is not what the claim is. THAT would make me sad, skipping days here and there, is not a big deal. And I get that other's weren't read to as children and now love books or what-have-you so it's clearly not the only influence. I also agree that what is most important is that your children see YOU reading for enjoyment. DH rarely does this and I think the fact that my kids know how much I get out of reading, helps keep their interest in books alive.
post #156 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Novella View Post
Schools could do more to encourage reading. There seems to be a trivialized/hollow encouragement of reading - just like the statement at the start of the thread provides an over-simplified "tick box" to good parenting. One previous poster mentioned outright discouragement of reading by teacher as it related to recess. But beyond this, many teachers discourage kids from reading materials they do not feel are "worthy" (magazines, comic books, etc.). Despite calls for differentiated instruction, a lot of what my daughter reads in school is banal and boring compared to what she chooses at home.
:
I'm so glad I already loved to read before we started doing regular reading in school. In all of school, I think we read one book that I really enjoyed, and maybe two or three short stories. The rest of it was just soooo boring. A lot of it was also kind of creepy. DS1 read The Veldt (think it's by Ray Bradbury, but maybe not) last year, and I vaguely remember reading it in school, as well. I don't like the way it's written and it's really unpleasant. IMO, it's not a piece of writing that's calculated to foster interest in reading.

I was also a major comic book junkie when I was younger (I still have about a thousand of them around here). I got negative comments on that, but those comics also provided me with the vocabulary that enabled me to beat my teacher in a spelling bee in seventh grade. If they (schools, for example) want people to love to read, maybe letting them read what they love would be a good place to start?
post #157 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
I think they are saying the window for when it is easiest to learn naturally STARTS to close at age 4.

I did a little googling about teaching babies to read, and I think I understand better what "window" you are talking about. This is comparable to EC (elimination communication) in my mind. There is a window when the child is passively learning, and EC or introducing words are mostly in the parent's control. That window closes early, yes.

But, after that window closes, another opens. For most dc, between the age of 2-3 (for potty learning) or 4-7 (for reading) there is another window where they understand what they are learning, are independently motivated, and it just "clicks". This second window is when their brains are primed to learn the skill, and it can happen with extremely little effort. The reading and potty learning may happen later than in the baby-learning version, but the process may happen in a much shorter time period (go from sounding out words to reading chapter books in a couple months, or go from 100% diapers to 100% potty in one day, for example).

Whether one method or the other is easier is subjective, imo. For me, it is easier to wait until the dc is ready to take on these skills on their own, and it happens with very little effort for child or parent. For others, it is easier to consciously work on these skills when the dc are babies so that it just becomes a way of life.
post #158 of 166
I really admire mothers who EC. I think its one of the most ultimate acts of being in tune and respectful towards a child.

Some may see this as pushing a child, but if the baby likes it I don't see it that way. The age of potty training gets later and later. Admittedly, my eldest are 3 1/2 and 2 and neither are potty trained. I feel like I missed my window with DD at 15m-18m. she was soooo ready then and sometimes going independently. But I was pregnant and decided to put it off. now she seems unconcerned with the concept. not unwilling, but her interest in it is lost.

I dont think its really a matter of which is easier, but when its easiest to learn naturally. and the benefits are undeniable. not that a child wont be successful without learning things like using a potty, reading, or second languages early in life, but that learning them early in life is more natural to them, and does have great benefit.

The way a child learns to read, or use a potty, or learn a language, is very different in baby.toddler years then in child.adult years. I think thats where they come up with the term naturally. its not really something they have to be "taught" so much as it is something they "figure out". The understanding of these things is on a much more basic level. I think if done correctly, these things would be less stressful to a child.
post #159 of 166
Quote:
Originally Posted by Super Glue Mommy View Post
My standpoint is, I don't think the information is wrong, I don't think they are saying the wondow closes at 4, I think they are saying the window for when it is easiest to learn naturally STARTS to close at age 4. Not that its not easy to learn at other ages,, or that it wont happen at other ages, or that its an indicator of having a baby genious, or anything like that.
I'm puzzled by this. I just finished writing my lecture for the development of reading that I'm going to give on Wednesday, and no where did I come across information that age FOUR was a 'window of opportunity' for reading. As a matter of fact, knowing what I do about child language (it's considerable), I'd say that this is unlikely.

5-6-7 is more likely to be the optimal 'window', based on the necessary language skills (solid oral language skills, a vocab of 5000-6000 words, metalinguistic skills to be able to recognize parts of words, patterns in words, and enough attention to be able to take it all in).

The next leap is about 3rd- 4th grade where school become less about reading to gain fluency and more about reading to get content. This isn't so much a window of opportunity as it is a need to be able to keep up with the increasing language demands, the increasing complexity of text, and a variety of genres.

OK, back to your regularly scheduled debate....
post #160 of 166
up to age 4 is a window for natural learning - not just reading. This is not the same as school taught learning, or adult led learning. this is when "submersion" learning works very naturally and easily.
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Parenting
Mothering › Mothering Forums › Mom › Parenting › Most young children are not read to on a daily basis.