Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts
Showing posts with label reading. Show all posts

Monday, October 24, 2011

Is it true that boys find it harder to learn to read than girls?

Interesting article from Julia Eccleshare in the Guardian UK on the current state of research around male and female reading skills and development. I'm not sure I agree with her assessment in whole (it's too brief to know for sure), but I do suspect it has less to do with gender and more to do with how children are taught.

That said, when I was a wee lad learning to read, I didn't. The girls were learning by the time we were in Kindergarten but the boys were seeing who could run faster, who could swing higher (and then jump), or who could hit the tetherball the hardest.

Is it true that boys find it harder to learn to read than girls?


There is no scientific proof of gender differences in reading, but more boys than girls become either 'can but don't' or 'can't and don't' readers


Julia Eccleshare
guardian.co.uk, Monday 24 October 2011



Hidden code? ... primary one children learning to read at Menstrie Primary school, Scotland. Photograph: Murdo Macleod


There is no scientific proof of gender differences in reading and lots of boys do learn to read easily and do enjoy it. But what is known is that, once in the classroom and certainly under test conditions, more boys than girls become either "can but don't" or "can't and don't" readers. Often-cited reasons for this are sociological ones such as boys having fewer reading role models or boys being more interested in more active pursuits. 

The wealth of funny books such as Andy Stanton's Mr Gum titles, Dav Pilkey's Captain Underpants, Francesca Simon's Horrid Henry or Jeremy Strong's The Hundred-Mile-an-Hour Dog are all perfectly pitched to encourage boys to read. Additionally, the current vibrant climate for authors and readers to meet has been beneficial as boys relish meeting their favourite authors and are likely to become keener readers in the process.

Saturday, April 2, 2011

Academy of American Poetry - How to Read a Poem


For those who are not aware - April is National Poetry Month. I have been posting poetry here from time to time, but I will be posting more this month - maybe you will like what you see and want to explore more.

Poetry is a great form of literature. It's useful for contemplation, for self-exploration, and for simple enjoyment. But many people have never tried or been taught to read a poem, so I thought I'd post this article from the Academy of American Poets on how to approach and appreciate a poem.

How to Read a Poem
Reproduced in partnership with the Great Books Foundation
.

Reading poetry well is part attitude and part technique. Curiosity is a useful attitude, especially when it’s free of preconceived ideas about what poetry is or should be. Effective technique directs your curiosity into asking questions, drawing you into a conversation with the poem.

In Great Books programs, the goal of careful reading is often to take up a question of meaning, an interpretive question that has more than one answer. Since the form of a poem is part of its meaning (for example, features such as repetition and rhyme may amplify or extend the meaning of a word or idea, adding emphasis, texture, or dimension), we believe that questions about form and technique, about the observable features of a poem, provide an effective point of entry for interpretation. To ask some of these questions, you’ll need to develop a good ear for the musical qualities of language, particularly how sound and rhythm relate to meaning. This approach is one of many ways into a poem.

Getting Started: Prior Assumptions

Most readers make three false assumptions when addressing an unfamiliar poem. The first is assuming that they should understand what they encounter on the first reading, and if they don’t, that something is wrong with them or with the poem. The second is assuming that the poem is a kind of code, that each detail corresponds to one, and only one, thing, and unless they can crack this code, they’ve missed the point. The third is assuming that the poem can mean anything readers want it to mean.

William Carlos Williams wrote a verse addressed to his wife in the poem "January Morning,":

All this—
was for you, old woman.
I wanted to write a poem
that you would understand.
For what good is it to me
if you can’t understand it?
But you got to try hard—

Williams admits in these lines that poetry is often difficult. He also suggests that a poet depends on the effort of a reader; somehow, a reader must "complete" what the poet has begun.

This act of completion begins when you enter the imaginative play of a poem, bringing to it your experience and point of view. If a poem is "play" in the sense of a game or a sport, then you enjoy that it makes you work a little, that it makes you sweat a bit. Reading poetry is a challenge, but like so many other things, it takes practice, and your skills and insight improve as you progress.

Literature is, and has always been, the sharing of experience, the pooling of human understanding about living, loving, and dying. Successful poems welcome you in, revealing ideas that may not have been foremost in the writer’s mind in the moment of composition. The best poetry has a magical quality—a sense of being more than the sum of its parts—and even when it’s impossible to articulate this sense, this something more, the power of the poem is left undiminished.

Poems speak to us in many ways. Though their forms may not always be direct or narrative, keep in mind that a real person formed the moment of the poem, and it’s wise to seek an understanding of that moment. Sometimes the job of the poem is to come closer to saying what cannot be said in other forms of writing, to suggest an experience, idea, or feeling that you can know but not entirely express in any direct or literal way. The techniques of word and line arrangement, sound and rhythm, add to—and in some cases, multiply—the meaning of words to go beyond the literal, giving you an impression of an idea or feeling, an experience that you can’t quite put into words but that you know is real.

Reading a Poem Aloud

Before you get very far with a poem, you have to read it. In fact, you can learn quite a few things just by looking at it. The title may give you some image or association to start with. Looking at the poem’s shape, you can see whether the lines are continuous or broken into groups (called stanzas), or how long the lines are, and so how dense, on a physical level, the poem is. You can also see whether it looks like the last poem you read by the same poet or even a poem by another poet. All of these are good qualities to notice, and they may lead you to a better understanding of the poem in the end.

But sooner or later, you’re going to have to read the poem, word by word. To begin, read the poem aloud. Read it more than once. Listen to your voice, to the sounds the words make. Do you notice any special effects? Do any of the words rhyme? Is there a cluster of sounds that seem the same or similar? Is there a section of the poem that seems to have a rhythm that’s distinct from the rest of the poem? Don’t worry about why the poem might use these effects. The first step is to hear what’s going on. If you find your own voice distracting, have a friend read the poem to you.

That said, it can still be uncomfortable to read aloud or to make more than one pass through a poem. Some of this attitude comes from the misconception that we should understand a poem after we first read it, while some stems from sheer embarrassment. Where could I possibly go to read aloud? What if my friends hear me?

The Line

What determines where a line stops in poetry? There is, of course, more than one answer to this question. Lines are often determined by meaning, sound and rhythm, breath, or typography. Poets may use several of these elements at the same time. Some poems are metrical in a strict sense. But what if the lines aren’t metrical? What if the lines are irregular?

The relationship between meaning, sound, and movement intended by the poet is sometimes hard to recognize, but there is an interplay between the grammar of a line, the breath of a line, and the way lines are broken out in the poem—this is called lineation. For example, lines that end with punctuation, called end-stopped lines, are fairly simple. In that case, the punctuation and the lineation, and perhaps even breathing, coincide to make the reading familiar and even predictable. But lines that are not end-stopped present different challenges for readers because they either end with an incomplete phrase or sentence or they break before the first punctuation mark is reached. The most natural approach is to pay strict attention to the grammar and punctuation. Reading to the end of a phrase or sentence, even if it carries over one or several lines, is the best way to retain the grammatical sense of a poem.

But lineation introduces another variable that some poets use to their advantage. Robert Creeley is perhaps best known for breaking lines across expected grammatical pauses. This technique often introduces secondary meaning, sometimes in ironic contrast with the actual meaning of the complete grammatical phrase. Consider these lines from Creeley’s poem "The Language":

Locate I
love you some-
where in

teeth and
eyes, bite
it but

Reading the lines as written, as opposed to their grammatical relationship, yields some strange meanings. "Locate I" seems to indicate a search for identity, and indeed it may, but the next line, which continues with "love you some-," seems to make a diminishing statement about a relationship. On its own, "eyes bite" is very disturbing.

Hearing Creeley read his poems can often be disquieting, because he pauses at the end of each line, and these pauses create a kind of tension or counterpoint in relation to the poem’s sentence structure. His halting, hesitant, breathless style is immediately recognizable, and it presents writers with new ideas about meaning, purely through lineation. But many poets who break lines disregarding grammatical units do so only for visual irony, something that may be lost in performance. Among metrical, free verse, and even experimental poets of today, there are those who do not interrupt grammatical sense when reading a poem aloud as much as they interrupt it in the poem’s typography. What to do as a reader? Try a variety of methods. It’s fun to "Creeleyize" any poem, just to hear what the lineation is doing. But if the results seem to detract from the poem’s impact, in terms of its imagery or concept, drop the literal treatment of line breaks and read for grammar or visual image. Reading a poem several ways allows you to see further into the poem simply through repetition.

With poets who use techniques drawn from music—particularly jazz, such as Michael S. Harper or Yusef Komunyakaa—or poets like Walt Whitman who employ unusually long lines, there may be another guiding principle: breath. Some poets think of their words as music flowing from a horn; they think of phrases the way a saxophonist might. Poems composed in this way have varied line lengths but they have a musicality in their lineation and a naturalness to their performance. They may have a recognizable sense of measure, an equivalent duration between lines, or, for the sake of contrast, one rhythmic pattern or duration that gives way to successive variations.

For some poems, visual impact may also be important. In "shaped poetry," as well as many other types of writing that are meant to be seen as a painting might be seen, the line is determined by its placement in space. Some visually oriented poets present real challenges in that the course of the poem may not be entirely clear. Visual choices presented by the poet may be confusing. Sometimes the arrangements of words on a page are intended to represent different voices in a dialogue, or even a more complex discourse on a subject. Overlapping and layering might be the poet’s intent, which no single voice can achieve. It’s best to be aware that poems with multiple voices, or focuses exist and, again, looking for the inherent rules that determine the shape of the poem is the best approach.

Remember that the use of these techniques, in any combination, pushes the words of the poem beyond their literal meanings. If you find more in a poem than the words alone convey, then something larger is at work, making the poem more than the sum of its parts.

Starting the Conversation

We mentioned earlier that encountering a difficult poem is like a game or sport, say rock climbing, that makes you work a bit. The idea of finding handholds and footholds and ascending one bit at a time is apt. But some climbs are easier than others; some are very easy. You may enjoy an easy climb for a while, but you may also find that you want a bigger challenge. Reading poetry works the same way, and, fortunately, poets leave trails to help you look for the way "up" a poem. You’ll have to do some work, hard work in some cases, but most of the time, the trails are there for you to discover.

At the Great Books Foundation, we believe that the best way to discover and learn about a poem is through shared inquiry discussion. Although your first experience of the poem may be private and personal, we think talking about the poem is a natural and important next step. Beginning with a focus question about the poem, the discussion addresses various possible answers to the question, reshaping and clarifying it along the way. The discussion should remain grounded in the text as much as possible. Responses that move away from what is written into personal anecdotes or tangential leaps should be gently urged back into analyzing the text. The basis for shared inquiry is close reading. Good readers "dirty the text" with notes in the margins. They make the inquiry their own. We encourage you to write your own notes in this book.

Talking Back to a Poem

It would be convenient if there were a short list of universal questions, ones that could be used anytime with any poem. In the absence of such a list, here are a few general questions that you might ask when approaching a poem for the first time:
  • Who is the speaker?
  • What circumstances gave rise to the poem?
  • What situation is presented?
  • Who or what is the audience?
  • What is the tone?
  • What form, if any, does the poem take?
  • How is form related to content?
  • Is sound an important, active element of the poem?
  • Does the poem spring from an identifiable historical moment?
  • Does the poem speak from a specific culture?
  • Does the poem have its own vernacular?
  • Does the poem use imagery to achieve a particular effect?
  • What kind of figurative language, if any, does the poem use?
  • If the poem is a question, what is the answer?
  • If the poem is an answer, what is the question?
  • What does the title suggest?
  • Does the poem use unusual words or use words in an unusual way?

You can fall back on these questions as needed, but experience suggests that since each poem is unique, such questions will not go the necessary distance. In many instances, knowing who the speaker is may not yield any useful information. There may be no identifiable occasion that inspired the poem. But poems do offer clues about where to start. Asking questions about the observable features of a poem will help you find a way in.

We’ll now bring inquiry to bear on two very different poems, each of which presents its own challenges:

Text and Context

Some people say that a poem is always an independent work of art and that readers can make full sense of it without having to use any source outside the poem itself. Others say that no text exists in a vacuum. However, the truth lies somewhere in between. Most poems are open to interpretation without the aid of historical context or knowledge about the author’s life. In fact, it’s often best to approach a poem without the kind of preconceived ideas that can accompany this kind of information. Other poems, however, overtly political poems in particular, will benefit from some knowledge of the poet’s life and times. The amount of information needed to clearly understand depends on you and your encounter with the poem. It’s possible, of course, even for someone with a deep background in poetry to be unaware of certain associations or implications in a poem. This is because poems are made of words that accumulate new meanings over time.

Consider this situation, a true story, of a poet who found a "text" at the San Mateo coast in northern California. As she scrambled over rocks behind the beach, near the artichoke fields that separate the shore from the coast highway, she found a large smear of graffiti painted on the rocks, proclaiming "La Raza," a Chicano political slogan meaning "the struggle." She sat down and wrote a poem. Why? her poem asked. I understand, she wrote, why someone would write La Raza on the side of a building, or on public transport. There it would be seen and would shout its protest from the very foundations of the oppressive system. But why here, in nature, in beauty, so far from that political arena. Couldn’t you leave the coast unspoiled? Then, one evening while reading the poem in Berkeley she got her answer. A man came up to her and asked her, "Do you want to know?" "I beg your pardon," she said. "Those fields," the man went on, "were where Chicanos had been virtually enslaved, beaten, and forced to live in squalor for decades." The landscape was not innocent of political struggle. The text was not out of place.

Embrace Ambiguity

Here’s a tricky issue: the task is to grasp, to connect, to understand. But such a task is to some degree impossible, and most people want clarity. At the end of class, at the end of the day, we want revelation, a glimpse of the skyline through the lifting fog. Aesthetically, this is understandable. Some magic, some satisfaction, some "Ahhh!" is one of the rewards of any reading, and particularly the reading of poetry. But a poem that reveals itself completely in one or two readings will, over time, seem less of a poem than one that constantly reveals subtle recesses and previously unrecognized meanings.

Here’s a useful analogy. A life partner, a husband, a wife—these are people with whom we hope to constantly renew our love. Despite the routine, the drone of familiarity, the daily preparation of meals and doing of dishes, the conversations we’ve had before, we hope to find a sense of discovery, of surprise. The same is true of poems. The most magical and wonderful poems are ever renewing themselves, which is to say they remain ever mysterious.

Too often we resist ambiguity. Perhaps our lives are changing so fast that we long for stability somewhere, and because most of the reading we do is for instruction or information, we prefer it without shades of gray. We want it to be predictable and easy to digest. And so difficult poetry is the ultimate torment.

Some literary critics would link this as well to the power of seeing, to the relationship between subject and object. We wish the poem to be object so we can possess it through our "seeing" its internal workings. When it won’t allow us to "objectify" it, we feel powerless.

Torment, powerlessness—these are the desired ends? Well, no. The issue is our reaction, how we shape our thoughts through words. We have to give up our material attitude, which makes us want to possess the poem. Maybe we’ve bought the book but we don’t own the poem. We have to cultivate a new mindset, a new practice of enjoying the inconclusive.

Embracing ambiguity is a much harder task for some than for others. Nothing scares some people like the idea (even the idea) of improvisation as a writing or analytical tool. Some actors hate being without a script; the same is true of some musicians. Ask even some excellent players to improvise and they start to sweat. Of course, actors and musicians will say that there is mystery in what they do with a script or a score, and it would be pointless to disagree. The point, after all, is that text is mysterious. Playing the same character night after night, an actor discovers something in the lines, some empathy for the character, that he or she had never felt before. Playing or listening to a song for the hundredth time—if it is a great song—will yield new interpretation and discovery. So it is with great poetry.


From Modern American Poetry, selected and edited by Joseph Coulson and Peter Temes (Great Books Foundation, 2002). Copyright © 2002 by the Great Books Foundation. Used by permission.

Monday, January 17, 2011

Tom Matlock - Reading Dr. Seuss Aloud

http://muchbetternow.com/wp-content/uploads/2009/03/dr-seuss.jpg

Cool post from last week by Tom Matlock over at The Good Men Project. Most of us have struggled with public speaking - it's the number one fear of Americans - so this is a cool way to begin dealing with it - AND reading to our children is a great way to spend quality time with them and build a relationship.

When I was a kid, my favorite part of the day was when my mother or father would read to me at bedtime. No matter what else happened in our house, we were surrounded by books and encouraged to read them. I still have one of the books of bedtime stories, The Twilight Hour - love that book.

Reading Dr. Seuss Aloud

When Tom Matlack needed to improve his public speaking, he started small—really small.


I was announced as the new Chief Financial Officer of the Providence Journal with operations all over the country and over 3,000 employees. I was 30 years old and had proven myself gifted in behind-the-scenes manipulation. However, as the public face of perhaps the most important company in the state, my new role would place me in full view.

I panicked.

A week after the announcement, I stood at a lectern in an empty Brown classroom on the east side of Providence. A middle-aged woman, the head of Brown’s drama department, sat in the front row. She had a smile as big as the great outdoors; a large pair of reading glasses dominated her beady eyes. “Go ahead,” she said. “Read your financial report like you were presenting to a bunch of Wall Street analysts.” I didn’t bother to explain that we were a private company. My heart felt like it was going to bungee-jump out of my chest. I couldn’t breathe. When I opened my mouth, I simply spat out a few words, hyperventilated, then mumbled a few more. I was about to be exposed.

“Okay, that’s enough,” she said, walking to the lectern where I was sweating profusely. “You can’t speak and hold your breath at the same time, Tom.”

For the rest of the session, she had me do nothing but breathe in and out.

“Do you read to your kids at night?” she asked when the session finally ended. The question stung me. I worked and I drank. I had more important things to do than read to my kids. Yet, in that moment, with that simple question, I realized who I had become. I looked her straight in the eye and lied: “Of course.”

Read the whole article.

Sunday, January 2, 2011

Yes! Magazine - Guys Read, Curriculum and Resources

http://img1.fantasticfiction.co.uk/images/h0/h2340.jpg

Getting boys to read can be one of the great challenges of raising a boy, or teaching one. Yes! magazine has posted some resources for parents and teachers to help get boys interested in reading.

The Guys Read site and project is founded by Jon Scieszka, author of one of my favorite and one of the most popular kids' books, The Stinky Cheese Man and Other Fairly Stupid Tales. Any boy who doesn't like this book has no sense of humor. He's also the author of another of my favorite books, The True Story of the Three Little Pigs by A. Wolf.

Guys Read

Guys Read

VISIT WEBSITE: Guys Read

Jon Scieszka is perhaps known best as author of The Stinky Cheese Man and Time Warp Trio. He also is the founder of Guys Read. After 10 years teaching elementary students and 15 years as an author, Jon noticed boys aren’t too crazy about reading. This observation is substantiated by U.S. Department of Education reading test scores that show for the last 30 years, boys score worse than girls in every age group, every year.

Guys Read is a positive force in getting boys to read. Its main strategy? Finding text guys want to read and letting them choose what they want to read. In addition to an incredible reading list recommended by guys, Guys Read offers other resources, practical information, and humorous inspiration to help …. guys read.

Guys Read: About

Guys and Reading

About Guys and Reading explores the landscape of boys and literacy and why boys may have trouble with reading.

EXPLORE: About Guys Read

Guys Read: Books

Books That Guys Read

Books for Guys is the place to visit for finding a book for guys. Teachers, librarians, booksellers, parents, and guys have contributed to this collection, and it keeps growing. You can find books by the usual method – title, author, and subject. What’s most appealing are the categories outside the usual sports, adventure, and war. Try: "At Least One Explosion," "Outer Space, but with Aliens," and "People Being Transformed Into Animals!".

EXPLORE: Guys Read Virtual Vault of Good Books

Guys Read: Listen

Guys Listen

Guys Listen acknowledges that for some boys - reluctant or voracious readers—, tuning into an audiobooks is more appealing than sitting down and flipping through print pages. Guys Listen expands the reach of Guys Read by recommending great nonfiction and fictional story audiobooks . It is a collaboration of National Ambassador of Literature for Young People Jon Scieszka and middle school media library specialist Rose Brock, and Listening Library.

EXPLORE: Guys Listen

VISIT the Guys Read website for more resources and inspiration to help boys become self-motivated, lifelong readers.

Guys Read began when author and former elementary school teacher Jon Scieszka noticed a lot of boys aren’t too crazy about reading. Jon, who grew up in a family of six boys, wants to motivate boys to read by connecting them with material they’ll want to read and in ways they like to read. Guys Read offers many resources to get boys to read, including a long and luscious list of books that guys like, recommended by librarians, teachers, parents, and …. guys.


Sunday, May 30, 2010

Marsha Lucas, PhD - Why Early Reading Is Bad for Your Child | Early Brain Development

http://www.hensleys.net/photos/121007SchoolPartyDaddyReadBoys.JPG
Read to them, but don't make them learn to read until they are ready.

This isn't exactly an article about men or boys, except that it is. I have some personal experience with this topic (and I think other parents of boys - more so than girls - will have had similar experiences), so I figured I might have some insight that makes this excellent post by Dr. Marsha more concrete.

And by the way, Dr. Lucas's blog - ReWire Your Brain for Love - is one of my favorite reads, so check it out if you aren't already familiar with her work (she also author of a forth-coming book by the same name).

Dr. Lucas argues in this post -Why Early Reading is bad for your child | Early Brain Development - that trying to make our children read at such a young age effectively short-circuits their brain development. When kids are young, the primary goal of brain development is centered around consolidating attachment and interpersonal wiring, not learning to read.

First and foremost: The fundamental task of early childhood isn’t learning to read, or to “get ahead” for school, or to impress the neighbors, or to give the folks something to brag about. Encouraging children to surge ahead beyond their real developmental needs leaves them with some really sludgy clean-up to grapple with later on.


The most important task of early childhood is experiencing a healthy, secure attachment in which the child’s caregivers are attuned to the child’s inner state and respond in a contingent manner.

Let me say that again. What kids need from the get-go is a parent who “gets” them, who pays attention to what’s going on inside them, and who responds to them in a way that’s actually related to what the kid is feeling.

Healthy, secure, attuned attachment gives kids some much deeper “advantages” in life than whether they learn to read early (and learning to read early doesn’t actually give them any advantages, anyway – which I’ll get to in section II below).
OK, so this part was not a part of my childhood experience. I am proof of why it's crucial to be with your kids and provide them with secure attachment.

I ended up with some ambivalent attachment (especially toward my mother - more avoidant with my father), which eventually forced me to seek therapy so that I could stop sabotaging relationships (lack of trust, neediness, inability to share my feelings) and self-destructing with drugs and/or alcohol.





You can see the issues with avoidant attachment and ambivalent attachment in these images. The ambivalent attachment has been the bigger issue for me, at least before doing a few years of good therapy - this combination, but especially the avoidant attachment, is sometimes diagnosed in adults as schizoid personality disorder.

Dr. Lucas points out that there are huge advantages - at least a dozen of them - to a healthy secure attachment:

The research on attachment shows that there are a number of benefits which last a lifetime, including but not limited to at least the following dozen:

  1. The ability to sustain attention
  2. Better management of physical reactions to emotions – leading to improved immunity and fewer stress-related illnesses
  3. Less anxiety
  4. Better relationships with childhood peers, and healthier relationships as adults
  5. Fewer behavioral problems
  6. Increased capacity for empathy
  7. Greater ability to regulate mood (for example, calming down from excitement, or not getting caught up in frustration)
  8. Enhanced skills in communicating emotions in healthy ways
  9. Greater confidence and self-esteem (and it isn’t just based on performance and grades, but rather a sense of abiding and healthy self-worth)
  10. Better able to generate alternative solutions to interpersonal conflict
  11. Enhanced insight into themselves, and others
  12. Better modulation of fear, allowing for a willingness to explore and take on growthful challenge
Attachment failures such as those I experienced are the reason people come to therapy with Dr. Lucas - not because they did not learn to read at age three. And I would add that Dr. Daniel Siegel has made it clear - in Mindsight and other books - that we can repair these attachment failures through mindfulness practice (as well as good therapy).

On the bright side, my parents did not force me to learn to read at a young age. In fact, when I started kindergarten, I could not read and had no interest in sitting down to learn how to read. I wanted to play on the swings, ride bikes, play tag and whatever else it was I did when I was five years old.

What was true for me seems also to be true for most boys when they start school (from the PBS Parents site Understanding and Raising Boys):
The average boy is less mature than the average girl when he starts school. By school age, the average boy is less mature socially, less verbal, and more active than most of the girls. "We ask too much of boys developmentally in the early years and they taste too much failure and frustration in school," says Michael Thompson, Ph.D.

Schools, not boys, have changed. Children are now taught to read in kindergarten when many young boys are not as skilled verbally as girls. "At age five, many boys are not ready to learn to read," says teacher Jane Katch, author of Under Deadman's Skin. "When I began teaching in the '70s, children were not expected to read in kindergarten. Some first grade teachers actually preferred that children learn the alphabet in first grade, where they could learn to do it 'the right way'!"
To be fair, it was mostly the girls reading when I was in kindergarten (1972), while the boys played. However, I managed to get through first grade without learning to read - and well into second grade. The teachers thought I was developmentally disabled - not to mention hyperactive (as an adult I was finally diagnosed with ADD) - and I was put in the "slow room" with other slow learners, all of whom were boys.

So I did not learn to read until I was seven years old - however, by the time I was nine years old, my teachers wanted to move me up two grades (from 4th to 6th) because I was bored and disrupting the class. That year I also was tested for and admitted to a "talented and gifted" program.

The downside of this experience was that I experienced a great deal of ridicule and shaming in 2nd grade for not being able to read. As I got older, I became hyper-aware of how I was perceived by others, which I have no doubt contributed to developing social anxiety disorder.

Anyway, it turns out that the research shows that children really are not ready to read until age six or seven, so there was nothing slow about me.

Dr. Lucas presents some compelling research in support of this approach:

And another thing: Early reading doesn’t do much for your child’s success in school, and there’s evidence that it may even be detrimental.

Let’s take a look at a few points in that regard – and note that this list is only a few of many reasons why early reading is a lousy deal for your child.

  • Louise Bates Ames, PhD, a superstar in child development and the director of research at the world-renowned Gesell Institute of Child Development, stated that “a delay in reading instruction would be a preventative measure in avoiding nearly all reading failure.” Leapfrogging necessary cognitive developmental skills — and asking a young brain to do tasks for which it isn’t truly ready — is asking for trouble with learning.
  • The brains of young children aren’t yet developed enough to read without it costing them in the organization and “wiring” of their brain. The areas involved in language and reading aren’t fully online — and aren’t connected — until age seven or eight. If we’re teaching children to do tasks which their brains are not yet developed to do via the “normal” (and most efficient) pathways, the brain will stumble upon other, less efficient ways to accomplish the tasks — which lays down wiring in some funky ways — and can lead to later learning disabilities, including visual-processing deficits.
  • The description of brain development on which the “Your Baby Can Read” program rests its questionable claims is remarkably flawed, confusing language acquisition with reading. They state: “A baby’s brain thrives on stimulation and develops at a phenomenal pace…nearly 90% during the first five years of life! The best and easiest time to learn a language is during the infant and toddler years, when the brain is creating thousands of synapses every second — allowing a child to learn both the written word and spoken word simultaneously, and with much more ease….” There is a huge and unsupported leap here from language acquisition – which is definitely an important developmental task, necessary for connecting to one’s outer world – and reading, which is a very different neurological and cognitive task, and one which is not developmentally appropriate for a baby or toddler’s brain.
  • Does early training really get you anywhere? There is a classic study of twins which was done by another pioneer in child development, Arnold Gesell, PhD, MD. He studied a pair of toddler twins, who were not yet able to climb stairs. For the study, one of the twins was given daily practice and encouragement to climb stairs, and the other twin had no stairs to practice on. After six weeks of practice, the “trained” twin could climb the stairs, and the “untrained” twin could not. However, within one week of being given the opportunity to climb stairs, the untrained twin completely caught up with the trained twin’s stair-climbing ability.
  • The whole idea that learning to read early gives children — or our educational system, or our economy — an “advantage” is not based on empirical evidence. If you look at the US and Britain, you see the trends toward earlier reading and increasingly less successful educational systems. On the other hand, the majority of children in Finland begin instruction in reading at age seven — two years later than here in the US (and even later than the folks at “Your Baby Can Read” would have you start). The outcome? Finnish students not only catch up to their earlier-starting counterparts, but they surpass the United States, other European countries, and Asian countries as well, with top overall scores in the world in reading, science, and math. Oh, and the Finnish do attend preschool, but it isn’t “academic” in nature — it emphasizes social development and exploration.
So if your child, especially your boy, is not interested in learning to read at an early age, that's normal. And trying to make your child, especially your boy, learn to read when s/he is three or four years old may end up costing them developmentally later on.

What they really need is loving attentive parents who give them attention, mirroring, and affection. Play games, be physical, but just be there - and this means fathers, too.