Are Schools Expecting Our Kids to Read Too Early?
New brain research reveals that the tasks taught in a typical kindergarten curriculum are not appropriate expectations for the brain of a typical five year old. Neither the language centers for reading nor the processing centers responsible for what we see as self-control are fully developed. The pressure for American education to improve is high and has led to the trend of pushing reading instruction in kindergarten instead of first grade, and changing from a half day to full day to accomplish that. This push has caused an increase in reading disabilities and behavorial issues and puts the successful education of our nation’s children at risk.
As an example of the reasoning behind the trend, a small rural school district in central PA used to give two choices for kindergarten: half and full day. After comparing the test scores of the two sets of children at the end of a year, the district concluded that the children in a full-day program “learned more,” and based on that, now require all children attending kindergarten to a full-day and the task of learning to read. Of course children who received twice as much instruction learned more! But that fact does not equate to full-day kindergarten as better for children or a good reason to change educational policy.
Some doctors, educators, and researchers are concerned that the rationale for teaching reading in kindergarten is not based on research about how the brain develops cognitively. Most 5 year old’s brains consist of only the brain’s right hemisphere’s language center; the portions of the brain needed for many of the complex tasks of reading reside in the not-yet-developed left hemisphere’s language center.
To process written language, each hemisphere of the brain controls distinct aspects of the process. Susan Johnson, MD, a pediatrician and certified Waldorf educator, asserts “children should be taught to read only when their neurological pathways for doing so have fully formed.” Requiring kids to learn to read before
these functions of the brain are all present is unreasonable and results in negative consequences on children’s educational experiences. However, this is exactly the reality in the US educational system. Our nation has bought into the notion that educating earlier will lead to smarter, more productive kids.
Lessons from other countries’ educational choices
A look around the world reveals some interesting food for thought. Countries of the UK have, for over a century, begun schooling the year children turn five, with some starting at four. But the past few years has brought Britain to question their policy, due simply to looking at their outcomes versus most other European countries that start at six or even as late as seven, such as the Scandinavian countries. Instead of that later start revealing a lag in students’ capacity and pace of learning, the opposite is true; these students not only catch up and excel, but Finland’s students surpass their counterparts in the Americas, Europe and even Asian by earning the top overall scores in the world in reading, science and math in the last PISA assessments. The United States finds itself in the middle muddle in such comparisons. Attempts to improve education show the US beginning to emulate the UK and other countries whose early start has proven to be a liability, instead of following the steps of the top performers whose educational expectations follow the pace of brain development, giving their kids the best natural advantage to success.
Liked it
Published in: Family
Dawn Blanchard, PhD, RN | Apr 20, 2010 | Reply
Interestingly, John Dewey, the father of American Education, firmly believed that a child does best when he does not begin formal schooling until age 8. He believed strongly in the importance of family interrelationships, family values and team work. He deemed character and commitment to be on par with academic excellence, and, for Mr. Dewey, these qualities were best learned in the home.
Having lived in the inner city for 13 years, I came to view Head Start as a good program, not because of its academic emphasis, but because it kept small children out of unlivable home situations. Head Start, for many children, became their only source of stability.
I really appreciate Renee Lannan’s scientific investigation of this most important subject. It gives those who believe in their “gut” that keeping their children home is best, physiological evidence that they are on the right track. I would like to add that children do not see perfectly till about age 6 nor do their fine motor skills allow them good penmanship until that age either.
In the political climate of dwindling resources, we can rest assured that a good home trumps the high tuition private pre-school and govenment-run child care centers hands down.
Rebecca Hoffman | May 17, 2010 | Reply
I think we highly underestimate what children can do. I think the biggest problem is in the teaching method, not in the ability or inability to learn.
I taught 3 of my children to read before they even started school. My son was able to read at a second grade reading level at only 4 1/2 yrs old, and he did not read ANYTHING only 2 months earlier. He just turned 6 last month and is in Kindergarten and is reading at the third grade level. (The novel he is reading to himself right now is “Percy Jackson and the Lightning Thief”.) The other 2 children that I taught are currently in 2nd and 4th grades and are 2 and 3 years ahead of their grades for reading as well. Because they have such high mastery in their reading skills, they are able to excel in all their studies.
In my opinion, schools are wasting time with sight word memorization and even in teaching the alphabet. Learning how to SAY the letters is not useful at all. The SOUND the symbol makes is what matters most. Phonetic reading is the logical way to learn. I used a book called “Teach your child to read in 100 easy lessons”. It can be found at just about any bookstore. I HIGHLY recommend it!!!
Amy | May 18, 2010 | Reply
I agree with Rebecca! My son just turned 6 and started K in Sept. where he was already reading on a 3rd grade level. Some kids are ready earlier and that is ok. The important thing is to know your child and their strengths and weaknesses. The big problem with schooling these days in my opinion is that there’s too much generalizations based on a child’s age. Let’s assess their capabilities rather than their age please!
As for Dawns’ comments I do agree as parents we are the REAL teachers of our children. The schools can only just help really. A positive home life is essential to success.
Amy | May 18, 2010 | Reply
I agree with Rebecca! My son just turned 6 and started K in Sept. where he was already reading on a 3rd grade level. Some kids are ready earlier and that is ok. The important thing is to know your child and their strengths and weaknesses. The big problem with schooling these days in my opinion is that there’s too much generalizations based on a child’s age/gender. Let’s assess their capabilities rather than their age or sex please!
As for Dawns\’ comments I do agree as parents we are the REAL teachers of our children. The schools can only just help really. A positive home life is essential to success.
Mary Patricia Bird | May 18, 2010 | Reply
When I was renting part of a house from a single mother of 3 children, we discussed how her children were learning to read. Actually, we didn’t think they were learning to read so much as memorize. That was 20 years ago; 12 years ago when my oldest daughter was learning to read it was such a chore. She hated it, couldn’t do it, homework was so stressful every night. Incidentally, that same child developed an ulcer from grade 2 math. I think today’s teaching methods need to be revised. Children learn better when learning is fun.