Does it matter?

/

A few months ago I was rambling on to my dad about some parenting decision I had made. My dad, being generally uninterested in parenting-related topics, listened patiently, and then replied that he had never spent any time thinking about these things and did I really think any of this mattered? 

It is a fair question. I’ve been thinking about it, wondering with each post I write if and how any of it matters. I admit that sometimes even I feel like rolling my eyes at the energy we put into parenting. Who cares?! In the bigger picture, does it really matter that one mother feeds her kids organic millet muffins and doesn’t let them play with battery operated plastic toys, while another mother encourages her kids to play with the latest iPad math app while they snack on oreos? Are these parenting trends just creating a platform for bored, intellectually-deprived parents to relentlessly judge each other? Or perhaps they simply provide some sort of scale for us to assess our success in a generally thankless job.*

When I consider the bigger picture of real world problems (war, poverty, hunger) and devastating tragedies (loss of child, disease, shootings), which seem to be hitting closer to home these days, I lose interest in organic anything. We all love our children and are doing the best we can for our families. Who cares about the details? Besides, I’m pretty sure my Disney-deprived child and the 5-year-old neighbor who knows all the Disney movies by heart will have similar lives. Most likely they’ll both finish high school, have hobbies they enjoy, go to college, get married, have children, be good friends for life and look back on childhood happily, reminiscing about how crazy their respective parents were. This scenario has existed for generations, regardless of the current parenting trends and debates. It doesn’t matter. 

Except that it does matter. It matters on a global level. It matters for society. 

To take an extreme example, which probably does not apply to the readership of this blog but makes a point, the rise in childhood obesity and diabetes is a direct result of our society’s eating and exercise habits, which reflect parenting decisions about nutrition, screen time, and physical activity. 

An example that is probably more relevant is Lori Gottlieb’s attribution of the increase in depression and anxiety to protective, helicopter parents who overindulge their children. These children, who were given endless choices and had their problems solved for them, are now depressed and anxious, which, she claims, directly reflects parenting decisions. 

A recent article by Kim John Payne discusses the long-term results of super-structured kids, and warns that “subjecting a child to a life of super structured and fast-paced activity in order to prepare him/her for the world is a well-meaning falsehood and a more than serious mistake.” Extrapolating from Payne, depriving children of the opportunity to play has a negative effect on the development of creativity, which in turn inhibits our nation’s capability in innovation and problem solving. Therefore, the parenting decision to sign a child up for piano, French, soccer, ballet, swimming, and chess, in other words, the decision to subscribe to a super-structured environment for children, does impact the direction and effectiveness of our society. 

On a much darker level, allowing children to watch movies, TV, commercials (many of which show violence) and play video games in which shooting, bombs, car crashes, etc. are graphically presented (as opposed to leaving it up to the imagination of the child, and thus keeping it imaginary) may be contributing to the increase in violence. 

On a more philosophical side, given Carr’s convincing theory that information technology shapes cognitive development, decisions about if, when, and how often we allow our children to use the internet and other technological tools are already influencing intellectual and cultural evolution, and not for the better.

So, yes. I believe parenting choices do matter. This doesn’t mean any given parenting choice is right or wrong, nor does any given choice reflect how much a parent loves his/her child. It’s not about my decision to save Disney movies for when my children are much older, or let my children decorate (and eat) a store-bought, non-organic cake with m&ms for a birthday celebration. Any discussion at that level tends towards judgment, superiority complexes, friction in friendships, and mommy-wars. But we should be thoughtful about how we are raising and educating our children. We have a responsibility to consider the effects of trends on child development and on society as a whole. Discussions about parenting should continue. 

It does matter.

(And if I’m wrong, at least thinking about it will stimulate those of us who are indeed intellectually deprived in our parenting role.)

*No, I don’t think all parents are intellectually-deprived and judgmental, nor do I believe parenting is thankless. But I do believe these sentiments exist on some level at some point in time for most parents, and are therefore worthy of mention here. 

An Anti-App Rant

/

My sister recently asked me if I would ever come right out and write how I really feel about certain topics. In real life, I’m opinionated and not very quiet about it, but I have tried to make this space a place where I keep things neutral. My goal is to share my parenting experiences, thoughts, and challenges in a way that doesn’t alienate or offend anyone. Where I have a strong opinion, I try to express it through questions rather than statements. It is an exercise for me and I enjoy the challenge.

But… sometimes I do long to just go off on a good, old fashioned rant, complete with sarcasm and italics for emphasis. My sister’s prompting tempted me. Then she sent me a link to this article and now I can’t resist. This article is over the top and deserves an over the top response.

If you are pro-technology for young children and think apps are the greatest thing ever, go hang out with Rage Against the Minivan (she’ll provide hours of entertainment) and come back here another day. If you are anti-technology for young children, read the article and join in!

Here goes.

…………………………………………. 

This article represents exactly what I abhor about our society: technology geared for adults, packaged for kids. It’s not that I believe a young child should never ever play with an app. In certain situations it may be useful, for example, on a plane ride across the country with a two-year old (but please turn down the sound so others don’t have to listen to it!), a long car ride with squabbling siblings, or an out-of-the-blue work call from your boss during the witching hour. But Kit Eaton’s enthusiasm over apps for babies and toddlers indicates it is not a once-in-a-while-desperate-to-keep-my-kids-quiet kind of thing.  

So here are my enthusiastic responses:

…aimed at babies from 3 months up, and the interface is simple enough that older babies will be able to play by themselves.

For a three-month old?! Their eye sight is just developing and you want to put them in front of a little screen with artificial, bright light and flashing images? Infants need natural light and they need to develop their sight for the scale and distances that exist in their physical world. At least let them develop their vision before you bombard them with “rapid-fire scene changes.”

Which brings me to your next point:

Younger babies will like the rapid-fire scene changes.

Excellent. Train them early to have a short attention span and be limited to shallow thought processing. Rapid-fire scene changes do not give people, especially young children, the chance to process. If you really want them to learn, slow everything down and limit the amount of information. 

Sometimes you just need five minutes of calm while your baby settles down, so try Talking Tom Cat…It’s noisy, cute and teaches your babies about interactive graphics — certain to be a big part of their lives.

Yes, sometimes we all need five minutes of calm. But rather than distract your (probably over-stimulated) child from the settling process with even more noise, why not help him/her learn techniques to soothe him/herself? Maybe sing a quieting down song? Maybe rock your baby and let the slow motion calm you both? To put it bluntly, maybe you could parent your child instead of letting a machine do it at a time he/she needs you the most! And is it really a good time to “teach” your baby when he/she is trying to settle down?

Apps can even replace a baby rattle.

Why do we need to replace a baby rattle? It is perfect for a baby and meets them exactly where they are developmentally: they can hold it and it rattles when they shake it. If you, as a 20-30 something, are bored with a rattle, then you play with the app and let the baby play with the rattle.

For bedtime, there are many options out there. Lullaby!, a $1 iOS app, is a great bet. It’s all about soothing your child to sleep with quiet versions of classic songs, and it includes a sleep timer and an alarm clock. It also has a soundboard, great for amusing babies with calming noises before bed — older babies can probably enjoy this alone.

I’ll simply translate this paragraph: Get this app and you won’t have to do bedtime anymore! No more reading books! No more singing songs! No more bonding! Hooray!

I’ve found it best to think of the hundreds of baby-centric apps as sophisticated tactile toys for the 21st century.

Oh yes, let’s indulge our kids with hundreds… because kids need hundreds of something. And in the phrase “sophisticated tactile toy,” does ‘sophisticated’ mean ‘fake’? What exactly is ‘tactile’ about the apps?

And so as not to completely bash this article, I agree 100% with one of the last sentences:

I’ll also add one bit of advice: move your TV.

To conclude, rather than getting all excited about the hundreds of apps you can use to create a baby arcade that will get you out of parenting, why don’t you get yourself an app? I recommend “BabyApp.” This app will cry, tell you it loves you, say funny things from time to time, sleep, interrupt you when you are reading or talking on the phone, and respond to up to 10 different voices of your choice. And you can turn it off! It has a picture of a baby that is generated from pictures of you, so it really resembles you! It can be programmed to grow over time, or you can keep it at your favorite age! It only costs $5!!

………………………………………….

Whew. I’m done. 

What are your thoughts on baby-centric apps? Hopefully only anti-app folks read this, because if you are pro-app, this was a very obnoxious post. 

 

In Vermont...

/

We have been here for two weeks now and are busy settling in. We have reached the “functional” stage of unpacking and have lost all motivation to finish:

But our living room looks quite nice, if you ask me. In fact, I love the living room. Something about the blue walls (after eight years of rented apartment white walls that we never painted since we were sure we would be moving to Vermont at any moment) and the staircase that make me feel very happy. 

Here is looking at the living room from the doorway:

 

Please excuse the mess. I haven’t cleaned up yet this evening. See those stringy things hanging above the couch? Those are decorations that Katherine made to make the living room “more fancy.” Because we are only renting this house for a year before we hopefully find a permanent home here, we decided not to unpack our books and pictures. So the walls are a bit plain. Luckily Katherine is decorating for us. In case you can’t see the detail - here is a close up. They are made from wrapping paper.

 

And one of my favorites, here is the view from the kitchen window:

A dream come true. I can watch the kids play in the yard while I make dinner. In DC it was always a tradeoff: take kids to playground because they desperately needed to get out of house or stay home and get through my list of things to do. The playground almost always won because the satisfaction of getting through my list was never worth the consequences of keeping 3 kids inside a small apartment in the middle of the city all afternoon. But now, here in Vermont, I can open the kitchen door and singsong, “Outside you go, my loves!” Well, maybe it isn’t quite that perfect - I do need to go out with them, but I don’t have to pack up for a trip to the playground (water, snack, spare clothes, potty, etc.), and I can pop in to check something on the stove if I need to. 

Before we moved, I had ideas of what it would be like in Vermont. Housing is less expensive, but groceries and coffee are not. We don’t live across from two French horn players, nor are there leaf blowers roaring through the neighborhood three times a week. I love the quiet. No ants in our kitchen, but lots of Daddy Long Legs. Katherine and Clara have named them Alex. We see that Alex everywhere. I haven’t found those three extra hours in the day, so I still find myself staying up until midnight trying to get everything done. I really miss my friends, but like our old neighborhood, everyone here is very friendly, there are good coffee shops, and it has a small community feel.  All in all, we are settling in happily. Slowly we are making this our home. 

Early Literacy: Other Countries & Conclusion

/

[This is the final post in a five-part series on early literacy.]

I haven’t spent any time observing pre-school or early grades classrooms in other countries and it is difficult to get a good sense of how things are done by searching the internet. However, from talking to friends and reading over a few sites, it seems our early-literacy focused society could stand to take a look at when children of other countries learn to read. 

Here are a few points about Finland’s educational system curriculum, taken from the Finnish National Board of Education:

  • Compulsory education starts in the year when a child has his/her seventh birthday
  • Pre-primary education is provided minimum 700 hours per year, maximum 4 hours a day.
  • The objective of basic education is to support pupils’ growth towards humanity and ethically responsible membership of society and to provide them with the knowledge and skills needed in life. 

Regarding pre-primary Education:

The general principles set forth in the core curriculum emphasise the child’s individuality and the significance of active learning and the importance of acting as a group member. Pre-primary education is based on the child’s own knowledge, skills and experiences. Its focus is on play and a positive outlook on life. From the educational point of view, working methods that accustom children to teamwork are of the utmost importance. Another central consideration is to promote the child’s own initiative and to emphasise its significance as the foundation for all activities.

The methods and activities in pre-primary education are as varied and versatile as possible. The core curriculum does not divide instruction into subjects or lessons, but it does include various subject fields and objectives. These subject fields are: language and interaction, mathematics, ethics and philosophy, environmental and natural studies, health, physical and motor development and art and culture.

Note there is not a single mention of literacy - from a country with one of the highest literacy rates. 

In Sweden, it is a similar story:

Sweden’s attitude to teaching nursery children seems incredibly relaxed and informal. There’s little structured learning, play is paramount… 

Most Swedish children who leave pre-school at six can’t read or write. Yet within three years of starting formal schooling at the age of seven, these children lead the literacy tables in Europe.

Again, a play-based curriculum for preschool and kindergartner. Literacy instruction begins at age seven.

To conclude this series, I would argue that we do not have adequate evidence to justify an early-literacy curriculum. Furthermore, I would argue that early-literacy instruction results in a significant loss of imaginative and physical play time for children age five and under. 

The type of evidence that would justify an early-literacy curriculum would show that (1) early learners have a long-term advantage in literacy skills as compared to non-early learners and (2) the decreased time spent on imaginative and physical play had no negative long-term effect on cognitive and physical development. Only when research-based evidence for both of these conditions has been shown should we move forward with an early-literacy curriculum. In the meantime, I sure wish we could hold off on the early-literacy and follow the Finnish and Swedish models: let young children play!

What are your opinions on this topic? 

Guest Post: Baby-Led Weaning

/

This post is by my little sister. She recently introduced me to baby-led weaning and we are just starting it out with Alexandra. I love the concept, so I asked her to write about it, and then gave her a hard deadline and started nagging reminding her regularly. She also writes over at myrtlebird.

Eating family dinners is very important to me. Growing up, that was the one time of day our whole family came together. We had sit-down dinners every single night without fail. There were no special kids’ meals (my mother cooked delicious and complex meals every night—I have no idea how she did it), no microwaving your own Chef Boyardee if you got hungry early (not having a microwave helped on that front), and pretty much no leaving the table until everyone was done eating and talking, unless there was some serious homework that needed to be done. Those were formative hours spent at the dinner table, and I am determined to provide the same for my family. But planning ahead and following through have never been my strong suits, so when my baby was ready to eat solid foods,  I couldn’t imagine how I was going to put dinner for three on the table every night (not to mention breakfast and lunch). 

Earlier in the year I had purchased a blender because I knew that’s what people did—they made delicious and healthy purees that offered their babies a variety of colors and nutrients. Peas, sweet potatoes, avocados, squash….all wonderfully nutritious, and all things that I had never prepared for myself. Let’s be honest: if I had gone that route, I would have pureed things with gusto for about three days before I got too lazy to clean off the blades or run the dishwasher or until the fresh produce started to rot and breed fruit flies (see composting disaster). Then what? 

Luckily I found the book Baby-Led Weaning with this advertisement on the cover: No Purees, No spoon-feeding, no struggle! Right away I was hooked. I can’t say it better than the book itself, so here are some excerpts:

“This is what typically happens in BLW:
— The baby is included in family mealtimes, where she watches what others are doing and is offered the chance to join in.
— Nobody “feeds” the baby; when she is ready she starts handling food and taking it to her mouth herself (at first with her fingers, and later with silverware).
— To start with, food is offered in pieces that are easy to pick up (babies soon learn how to handle a range of sizes, shapes, and textures).
— It’s up to the baby how much she eats and how fast she eats it. It’s also up to her how quickly she moves on to a wider range of foods.
— The baby continues to have milk feedings whenever she wants them, and she decides when she is ready to begin reducing them.”

What I really like about BLW is that it gives the baby independence and autonomy at mealtime. BLW “makes picky eating and mealtime battles less likely (when there is no pressure on babies to eat, there is far less opportunity for meals to become a battleground)”. It’s important to me that the baby grows up to appreciate food as a blessing and to never use it as a tool for getting attention or control. I have known several people who, as late as college, could not stop eating when they were full because they felt compelled to finish what was on their plate. They said they had been raised to clear their plates as kids and as a result had no sense of when to stop otherwise. Other than being forced to take three bites of creamed spinach every night*, my sister and I were never made to keep eating if we were not hungry. Dinner was presented: if we were hungry, we could eat; if not, then not. I can assure you that there were battles at the dinner table, but they were almost never about food.

We started BLW at six months and the baby took to it immediately. It was as if she had been sitting down to meals her entire life. She tries anything we put in front of her and she looks at us back and forth as we converse. She has no idea that she is learning how to eat or that she is any different than we are. Sitting down to dinner as a family is my favorite part of the day. BLW even makes going out to restaurants easier because I don’t have to bring a special snack for her or hope that there is a kids menu. She just eats pieces of whatever I order, and I am forced to choose healthier options for myself as a result. So far it’s working great, but my husband points out that we have only been doing this for three months and we really have no idea how it will turn out. 

A couple behaviors (for the parents) that I’ve found helpful in this endeavor are:

— Place food in front of the baby and then be patient. If she eats it, great, if not, no problem. We don’t expect her to eat any amount—we don’t even hope that she does. It’s totally up to her. There’s no disappointment or frustration that way. Besides, for the first few months, most of the “eating” is really “playing”. Not a whole lot gets into their mouth but they have a great time exploring new textures and colors.
— Assume that it is natural for a child to eat food. It’s good that they eat, yes, but it’s not a “good job”. They are supposed to eat. As soon as they are praised for eating, they have the power to disappoint by not eating. 



*nobody else in my family remembers this.

 

Early Literacy: In the Classroom

/

[This is the fourth post in a five-part series on early literacy.]

The purpose of this post is to take a look at the (pre) literacy activities that take place in early childhood classrooms, in other words, how a child spends his/her time when it comes to language arts instruction. (The purpose is not to describe or critique how literacy is, or should be, taught.) 

To get an idea of what 3-5 year olds are doing in their classrooms, I talked to two teachers. Sarah teaches young children in a public school that aims to have children start reading in kindergarten, and Angela teaches young children in a school that begins literacy instruction in first grade. I asked them to tell me about what young children in their schools are doing. 

Sarah’s School

Teaching pre-literacy skills begins in pre-k, where children are expected to learn the letters and read and write their name. In kindergarten, children learn to read and write words and sentences. A reading test is administered at the end of kindergarten to ensure the rising first graders are capable of reading simple words and sentences. By third grade, reading instruction is complete and children are expected to read to learn. To meet these literacy goals, language arts is a main component of the pre-k and kindergarten curriculum. Here is a snapshot of what might take place in a pre-k and kindergarten classroom at Sarah’s school:

In a pre-k classroom…

Children are taught phonemic awareness and the alphabet. From what I understand from talking to parents with children in these classes, children learn that “bee” starts with a “b” sound, “cat” starts with a “k” sound, etc. Teachers may point out the sounds words start with and ask the children to identify the letter that makes that sound. This is done with pictures, objects, and stories during a dedicated circle time, through coloring in pictures that have the word-initial letter printed at the top, and during other activities throughout the day. For example, a teacher may point out a bird while on the playground and ask a child what sound “bird” starts with, and then ask another child what letter makes that sound. Children are also taught the alphabet song and to recognize and produce printed letters. 

In a kindergarten classroom…

Children have 90 minutes of uninterrupted language arts instruction. During this time, children may sing the alphabet song, listen to a story and answer comprehension questions, then sit at a desk and complete a worksheet. Early in the year children practice writing upper and lowercase letters and identifying “sight words,” such as matching the picture of the cat to the word “cat.” Further into the school year, a worksheet may have sentences such as, “I like to______, I like to eat_____, I like to play______.” The worksheets progress from drawing to writing, with an early worksheet requiring the child to draw a picture of what they like, then moving to selecting a word from the word bank at the bottom of the worksheet, to writing in the word, and finally writing the entire sentence. As they move through the school year, the children will read simple printed stories and answer simple questions, such as “Find the word ‘said’; What letter does ‘said’ start with?”

In addition to language arts instruction, pre-k and kindergarten children have math instruction, music, physical education, recess, time for classroom “centers” (sand table, housekeeping, blocks, drawing/painting, etc.), and imaginative play.

Angela’s school 

Children do not learn how to read or write until first grade. Children continue learning to read through fourth grade, at which point they begin reading to learn. 

In the pre-k and kindergarten classrooms…

In terms of pre-literacy activities, teachers work to develop phonemic awareness. Children learn songs, verses, and finger games that incorporate rhyme and specific consonant/vowel sounds. Often sound patterns correspond to finger, hand, and whole body gestures that the children act out together. Children also listen to stories that include rich language and infrequent words. In other words, the language used to tell the stories is not simplified. Stories may focus on certain sounds to develop awareness of those sounds, but the main purpose of story telling is to allow the child to imagine the world in which the story takes place.  Children do not learn to read or write letters or words, nor do they use worksheets. 

However, the majority of the school hours are spent on activities that require movement, balance, physical awareness, and imaginative play. Children spend at least half the day outside running, climbing trees/jungle gyms, swinging, walking on balance beams, jumping rope, digging in the sand box, etc. Indoor play centers around building blocks, rocker boards, play kitchens and houses, drawing and painting, baking, etc. 

 

The above descriptions are just snapshots. They are intended to give a feel for what children in these classrooms are doing, not provide a daily schedule or detailed account of all the activities children do throughout the year. 

The questions I’d like to consider now are: What are we losing with early literacy? What are 3-5 year olds not doing with their time because of the focus on early literacy? Developmentally, is reading the most appropriate skill to be focusing on? 

The children in the school that includes (pre) literacy instruction spend a lot less time exploring their world through play and physical activity. Two to three hours of each school day is spent sitting still working on a cognitive skill, often in the form of a constrained task with pre-determined responses. That adds up to 10 -15 hours a week of unimaginative desk time… for 3-5 year olds. 

I haven’t dug into the research on child development during these ages, but I would say there is enough physical and cognitive growth taking place naturally that adding instruction is not necessary. In other words, plain old exposure to language through stories and songs, and opportunity for imaginative play provides a very rich and stimulating environment. Furthermore, because the natural world offers so much to a young child, taking time away from it in order to provide (pre) literacy instruction may actually inhibit a child’s cognitive and physical growth. 

To summarize, the question isn’t whether 3-5 year olds are capable of learning to read (many are), but rather whether learning to read is the best use of their time. I think we need to consider the possibility that early literacy is disadvantageous. Before we become too entrenched in an early literacy curriculum, we owe it to our children to ask and answer these questions.

In next week’s post I’ll write about what literacy curriculums in other countries look like and conclude this series.

Wynken, Blynken, and Nod (Book)

/

Wynken, Blynken, and Nod one night
   Sailed off in a wooden shoe—-
Sailed on a river of crystal light,
   Into a sea of dew.
“Where are you going, and what do you wish?”
   The old moon asked the three…

 

I love this bedtime poem. It is magical and calming at the same time, and the imagery is beautiful. Reading it aloud gives the feeling of being gently rocked in a wooden boat. 

In this particular book, illustrated by Giselle Potter, there is a candle in the child’s room. On one page it is lit and then on the following page it appears just blown out. Katherine and Clara like to be the ones to “blow” out the candle as I turn the page.

Three little fisherman sailing the nighttime skies… a perfect story to settle a wee one’s mind before sleep.

Early Literacy: Review of the Research

/

[This is the third post in a five-part series on early literacy.]

I am not a specialist in literacy, child development, or early education, but from my (somewhat cursory*) look at the research in this area, I’ve come to the following conclusion: a lot of work has been done on factors that contribute to literacy development, but very little work has been done on age effects and literacy. That is, we know what skills and abilities a person needs in order to develop literacy skills, but we don’t know if/how the development of these skills and abilities is affected, or constrained, by age.   

I won’t go into what skills and abilities are needed for literacy because that is not the focus of this post. But for those interested in reading about it, I think the Handbook of Early Literacy is probably a good place to start. As for studies on the role of age and literacy, there are few, and they tend to focus on either children of low-income families or children with speech delays.  I did come across one study, Phillips et al. (1996), that showed early literacy predicted higher reading proficiency. However, this study looked at reading proficiency of the students when they reached fourth grade. Therefore, they are basing their conclusions on students who are nine years old and just transitioning from learning to read to reading to learn. In order to look at “ultimate attainment” of reading ability based on the age at which instruction began, studies need to look at differences among children who are at least ten years old. 

In the article, Starting school at age seven ‘can boost pupil’ reading skills, the author, Graeme Paton, critiques the British education system for beginning reading instruction at age five. Paton points out, “Academics suggested that infants given more time to naturally develop their language skills in the early years had a better foundation when they started conventional tuition at seven.” He cites a recent study showing that not only do students who start reading before age six not have an advantage over students who begin reading at age seven, but students who don’t begin reading until age seven show an advantage over their early reader peers by age 10.  I decided to read the original studies cited by Paton to determine whether these statements are representative of the data. 

In the 2009 study looking at 2006 PISA (Programme for International Student Assessment) data, Suggate looked at reading proficiency in 15-year-olds from 55 countries, with the age of school entry ranging from age four to age seven. The data showed no significance difference in reading proficiency at age 15 among any of the age-of-entry groups, nor did entry age predict reading achievement for any given country. This study controlled for a number of social and economic characteristics, but one major limitation, as noted by the author, is the unknown cultural factors that may have played a role. 

Addressing these limitations, Suggate et al. (2012) conducted a more controlled and focused study. The authors looked at reading proficiency over the first six years of schooling of children who started reading instruction at either five or seven years of age. By age 11, differences in letter naming, non-word, word, and passage reading, and decoding had disappeared between the two groups, and interestingly, students who began reading instruction at age seven outperformed the students who began reading instruction at age five in reading comprehension. The authors conclude, “Around age 10, children learning to read at seven had caught up to those learning at 5. Later starters had no long-term disadvantages in decoding and reading fluency. For whatever reason, the later starters had slightly better reading comprehension.”

As with any research question, it is important to conduct replication studies to ensure the results are reliable and generalizable. Based on the limited number of studies I found on age effects in literacy, there is a lot of work to be done before we understand the optimal age to begin teaching reading. However, from what I have read, I would conclude, at the very least, that staring earlier does not provide an advantage over starting at age six or seven. 

In next week’s post I will write about what happens in pre-kindergarten and kindergarten classrooms that incorporate reading instruction and those that do not. Specifically, I will explore how children spend their time and consider the development of skills - other than literacy - that typically take place during these early childhood years. 

*Feel free to email me additional references on this topic!

References

Neuman, S. B., & Dickenson, D. K. (Eds.) (2011). Handbook of early Literacy, Vol. 3. The Guilford Press: New Yok, NY.

Paton, G. Starting school at age seven ‘can boost pupil’ reading skills. The Telegrpah. June 24, 2012. http://www.telegraph.co.uk/education/educationnews/9289480/Starting-school-at-seven-can-boost-pupils-reading-skills.html

Phillips, L. M., Norris, S. P., Mason, J. M. (1996). Longitudinal Effects of Early Literacy Concepts on Reading Achievement: A Kindergarten Intervention and Five-Year Follow-up. Journal of Literacy Research, 28, 173-195.

Suggate, S. P. (2009). School entry age and reading achievement in the 2006 Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA). International Journal of Educational Research, 48, 151-161.

Suggate, S. P., Schaughency, E. A., & Reese, E. (2012). Children learning to read later catch up to children reading earlier. Early Childhood Research Quarterly.

Early Literacy: In Our Culture

/

[This is the second post in a five-part series on early literacy.] 

I would like to start this series with at look at how prevalent the push for early literacy is in our culture. Sometimes it seems that every conversation I have with other moms of three- and four- year olds turns to reading and the skills their kid is learning in school. Just the other day I went to a birthday party and a mom began telling me how much she loved her son’s school because he was learning so much and she was so happy that he was “finally reading.” He’s four. 

On a parenting listserv, I see posts all the time from parents looking for ways to enhance their toddler’s academic skills. For example:

I would be interested in a play-based math tutor for my toddler as well. There are a wealth of story hours and rhyming songs to prepare for reading readiness, but I find it much harder to gain exposure to math skills, which I think are equally if not more important… If anyone knows of a toddler math facilitator, eg. someone who can take a systematic approach to making math skills fun, please let me know.

And another:

I want to help her to continue to learn things to prepare her for school, i.e. letters, numbers, reading, etc. So my thought is, is there anyone out there that tutors this age? … I’m talking about once a week for an hour. I realize she’s just 3ish and I don’t feel the need to have her graduate Harvard in a couple of years but I would like her to have the educational component that she had at daycare.

Toddler math facilitator, tutor for a three-year-old… Posts like these are common. Why do parents feel pressure to get their three-year-olds reading and doing math? 

Perhaps the pressure stems from the focus on these skills in daycares and preschools. Here are excerpts from the websites of a few daycare and preschool programs for children under the age of five. Please note that I have selected (and bolded) the references to literacy and academic skills in order to make my point - these programs do also emphasize play, outdoor time, etc. 

AppleTree Early Learning Public Charter School

… implements a research-based instructional program that supports the development of young children’s language, literacy, and behavioral skills as well as their understanding of the world around them. 

Bright Horizons Early Education & Preschool

Our hands-on toddler program promotes the development of age-specific skills in children ages16 months to 3 years by: creating learning centers that include language and reading, math, fine motor, art, dramatic play, science and sensory exploration, and outdoor learning. Our preschool program for three to five year-olds engages children intellectually, physically, emotionally, and socially, inspiring curiosity and creativity by: targeting developmental and academic milestones in the areas of language and literacy, mathematical reasoning, and scientific investigation.

Reba Early Learning Center

Our literacy areas in each classroom include many materials for writing, books, and a computer. In addition we create a print rich classroom with stories dictated by children, written information related to the topic the class is exploring, and labels including the children’s names. We encourage children to use literacy materials in all other learning areas during their play. A child may writte SV or ask a teacher to write SAVE to make a sign to put on a block structure to make sure that it is not knocked down.

TotSpot Preschool

TotSpot Preschool incorporates  and Handwriting Without Tears® into the daily curriculum. The weekly lesson plans created by the teachers will emphasize a theme, letter, number, color and shape. The students will also have the opportunity to explore math and science concepts.  Music and movement, group games, journaling and cooking crafts are also a part of the curriculum. Field trips may be scheduled at the discretion of the teachers to further explore and reinforce concepts learned in selected units. TotSpot Preschool maintains a very low student/teacher ratio to allow for optimal learning and individualized instruction. Students are assessed throughout the year to determine areas where additional help may be needed. Parents are encouraged to be involved in classroom parties, events and field trips and are welcome in the classroom to observe or volunteer!

I certainly don’t intend to criticize these programs as they do appear to be well-rounded and nurturing, I only wish to highlight the presence of teaching literacy skills, as well as a focus on other academic instruction, that typically occurs in early childhood programs. 

But perhaps the most obtrusive push for early literacy comes from the toy industry. “Educational toys” that will help your young child learn to read are all over the place. And here I do intend to do a little bashing… Actually, I don’t need to write anything, the toy descriptions say it all. I’ll just highlight the gems.

Tag Junior Get Ready for Preschool

Get set for preschool! Between the ages of three and five, children acquire the skills necessary for school. This bundle helps toddlers explore books and build confidence as they begin their reading journey toward academic success. 

 

The LeapFrog Text and Learn is designed to let little learners play in a grown-up way. Children can exchange text messages with their puppy pal Scout and check Scout’s planner to see what his week entails in the pretend browser mode. Other learning modes offer practice with letter matching, shape identification and QWERTY keyboard navigation through silly animations and sound effects. Children also explore letter names and sounds. 

 

Teach My Toddler is the iParenting award-winning, first all-in-one pre-school learning system for toddlers 18 months+. The kit has 17 teaching tools to help toddlers master the basics; alphabet, numbers, shapes and colors. Each section is fully-coordinated with a total of 5 puzzles, 4 board books, 4 posters and 4 sets of flashcards. The tools are neatly organized in a portable and storable carrying case. The aim of Teach My Toddler is to give toddlers a head start and to encourage one-on-one time between toddlers and their parents, grandparents and caregivers. It only takes 20 minutes a day, making Teach My Toddler the ‘smart’ educational toy for toddlers.   

It’s not just plastic, battery operated toys that push toddler literacy. We have a lovely set of wooden blocks… with the alphabet carved into them.

 And these fine nesting boxes, which we also have and love! 

Even products that are not specifically designed to teach toddlers to read can’t help but sneak in the letters. Like these floor mats. 

I think I’ve made my point. Our culture places great importance on teaching literacy skills early. 

If parents, early childhood programs and the toy industry all believe in the importance of developing literacy skills in 1-5 year olds, surely there must be an abundance of research supporting this drive, right? Next week I will take a look at the research on early literacy, specifically on studies that investigate the long term benefits of teaching literacy from an early age.

Spoiler alert: there are no such studies.

...when we live in Vermont.

/

We have been looking forward to moving to Vermont for years. It has lived in our minds as an idyllic, peaceful, rural place. Stars at night. Trees. Lots of trees. Real winters with enough snow for snowshoeing and sledding. Not-too-hot summers. Kind, like-minded people. It has also, over time, become the potential answer to all our current problems and gripes. 

“We won’t have to deal with traffic… when we live in Vermont”

“It won’t be so expensive… when we live in Vermont”

“We’ll be closer to family… when we live in Vermont”

These statements are actually true. But lately “living in Vermont” has evolved into the solution to everything, and I’m a little worried we got carried away with our expectations… 

…To the two French horn players who live across the street and practice the same scales six hours a day, every day we say, “Bet we won’t live across the street from French horn players when we live in Vermont!”

…To the hundreds of ants that swarm on our kitchen counters we say, “Well, our house in Vermont won’t have an ant problem!” 

…To the leaf blowers that come roaring through our neighborhood twice a week to blow the one little leaf on the sidewalk (because, God forbid a piece of nature touch the cement!) we say, “No leaf blowers in Vermont!”

…When it gets to be 11pm and we still haven’t done half the things on our to-do list we say, “There are three extra hours to each day in Vermont!”

The first two may be true, but there probably are leaf blowers in Vermont. I’m still holding on to hope that there are three extra hours to each day. But even if there are no leaf blowers in Vermont, there will surely be something else. As I prepare for my fantasy Vermont to meet reality Vermont, I wonder what I should expect. 

 

And now some more pictures of our lovely neighborhood, the places that can’t be matched anywhere else… not even in Vermont.

 Jay & Michael at Monkeys’ Uncle. 

 

Hot chai lattes.

 

 Eastern Market.

 

 “Fountain Park”

 

I love this building, even if the library inside isn’t living up to its potential.

Stop by Monday for the second post on Early Literacy!

 

Moving!

/

We are moving in one week. We are leaving DC, where we’ve lived for longer than I’ve lived any place other than my childhood home (and I’ve lived a lot of places). There are so many things I love about our neighborhood - our friends, the playgrounds, nutella lattes, Eastern Market, spring gardens, all the fountains, the walk to the capitol… But we don’t want to live in the city. We want to live way out in the country. And so we are moving. This has been our plan for years and we are finally making it happen. 

Right now we are in the midst of our “lasts” and our goodbyes. My last metro ride home from work, our last dinner at our favorite Indian restaurant, our last trip to the Botanic Gardens, goodbye to friends I’ve known since my first day of grad school, goodbye to dear friends we’ve known since our oldest child was a newborn, goodbye to classmates and neighbors, and the super friendly man selling StreetSense on the corner of Penn and 7th.

Even though I’m anxious to look forward and focus on the move, I’m making an effort to hold back and savor these last couple of weeks. I’m trying to let myself feel the sadness of leaving what has truly been home for seven years. 

I thought it might be nice to post a few pictures (or maybe a lot of pictures) of all the places we love here. I’ll start with a few of the landmarks. I’ll sure miss being able to walk to them!

Reflecting Pool at Capitol.

 

Capitol in snow.


Jefferson Memorial during cherry blossom season.

 Baseball with friends at National Monument.

Pictures from around our neighborhood up next!

Early Literacy: Series Introduction

/

[This is the first post in a five-part series on early literacy.] 

Early literacy* has become a trend in the U.S. and most people seem to think that earlier is better. Pre-schools and daycare centers advertise curricula that focus on developing pre-reading skills, the toy industry markets products as educational, many claiming to help your child learn to read, and six-year-olds are expected to be able to read when they enter first grade. I’ve even seen posts on our local listserv from parents seeking reading tutors for their three-year-old. 

I understand why this “early literacy” movement has taken over our education system. We want to improve our nation’s literacy rates, support No Child Left Behind, and compete with other nations’ educational standards. But we have a responsibility to our children to be thoughtful about their education and we are failing to ask some very important questions.

First, what are the goals of early literacy? Is the goal to have all six-year-olds reading at a certain level or is it to improve overall literacy rates in our country so that more adults read better? 

Second, when is a child developmentally ready to read? Are we spending three years teaching 3-5 year olds to read when a seven-year-old can learn to the same ability in one year?

Third, is there a critical period for reading? Do early readers end up better readers as adults than non-early readers? If yes, at what age does the long-term advantage disappear? 

Fourth, what are we losing with early literacy? What are 3-5 year olds not doing with their time because of the focus on early literacy? Developmentally, is reading the most appropriate skill to be focusing on? 

Fifth, what are our other options? Surely pushing early literacy isn’t the only way to develop strong literacy skills. Many countries with literacy rates similar to or higher than our own (Finland, Sweden, Japan, Australia, to name a few) don’t begin teaching children to read until age six or seven, when mandatory schooling begins. What are 3-5 year olds in these countries doing?

These are the questions I will address in this series in order to better understand the benefits and drawbacks of the early literacy approach. Here is a brief outline of the posts. 

  • Early literacy in our culture
  • Review of the research
  • Literacy in the classroom
  • Literacy in other countries
  • Conclusion & discussion

 

*I understand people may use this term differently, so I would like to clarify what I mean when I use the terms “early literacy,” “pre-literacy,” and “pre-reading.” “Early literacy” refers to the ability to read/write at an early age (by ‘early’ I mean ages 3-5, and by read/write, I mean words, if not sentences), whereas “pre-literacy” refers to the period of time before a child has the ability to read, so typically ages 0 - 4-6. “Pre-reading” is synonymous with “pre-literacy”. Under these definitions, the term “pre-literacy skills” refers to skills that are developed in preparation to teach a child to read, such as learning the alphabet, raising phonemic awareness, and learning to write and recognize printed letters. The term “teaching early literacy” refers to teaching children ages 3-5 to read and write words and sentences. 

Early Literacy

/

Katherine is often asked if she knows (or is learning) how to read. I do wish people would stop asking this question. It is starting to get awkward when she says “no” because they expect her answer to be “yes”. They look to me for an explanation - why isn’t your five-year-old reading? My answer is always the same: Katherine’s school begins reading instruction in first grade. This is a simple answer, but of course I have a lot more to say about it.

Every Monday this month I will post about Early Literacy… stop by and join in!