Time student study topics to their development

2013-01-08 14:41:08

Q. Thanks for doing this column. I love it! Here's my question:

When we entered kindergarten in our Orange County well respected school district, we were told that today's students are at least one year ahead of where we were 30 years ago. Now that my children are in middle school, I've asked why they aren't reading Edgar Allen Poe, John Steinbeck and Mark Twain – classics that I read in middle school.

The answer shocked me: today's students can't read at that level. What's going on? How do our students go from being ahead of the curve in kindergarten to being behind it in middle school?

A. I would say the first half of your observation is absolutely correct. Today, we see many students come into kindergarten already reading, and the curriculum is asking us to move the children about a year ahead of a traditional pace seen when we were kids and earlier.

This is mainly in the areas of reading and math. We ask kids to read earlier and start operations in math earlier, but does this truly mean they are more educated? The answer is, of course not. Think of some easily recognized, educated figures throughout history, like Abraham Lincoln who had very little schooling, or Benjamin Franklin, who disliked math altogether. Would we have made these men smarter by starting a subject earlier? I really do not think so.

So, why would a child start out ahead, but not be able to comprehend above grade level in middle school? I think my answer might get me in trouble, but I will give it anyway. In a push to have children over-perform as youngsters, we forget to develop the whole child.

Parents and even schools love when kids can read early. The children read titles before they are developmentally ready to deal with themes and literature becomes formulaic and not something to be understood or internalized. If you hear parents bragging that a very young child is reading titles better suited to middle school, these kids are not really ahead and may very well find themselves behind in middle school. They will say, later, that they "already read that" when they had no background or experience to understand the dilemmas or themes.

Do I think we should stop teaching kids to read at an earlier age? No, but I do think we need to educate the whole child no matter how early they read. If we decide to lay the foundation earlier, as we are doing now, then we need to start building a broader base. We also need to understand that kids that read later can be just as bright, so skills need to be accessible to all at their own pace.

The other subjects – science and social studies, art and music – are equally important and we cannot forget to give all kids building blocks in language arts and math even if kids show signs of early skill development. The introduction of the Common Core, which is a national movement to get states on board together in teaching the same basics, is a movement I am excited about so long as it does not remove the classics. Literature does give students the experience and background knowledge needed to become truly educated.

There is one other piece important to note here: I would normally include some material from those authors in middle school – such as Steinbeck's short stories or Twain's "The Adventures of Tom Sawyer." Other materials I would save for high school, when students are more mature. That, for example, is the best time for an in-depth look at Huckleberry Finn.

I'm trying out Twitter now, so if you would like to weigh in on this topic online, follow me there, too.

Contact the writer at https://twitter.com/goasktheteacher or goasktheteacher@yahoo.com.

© Copyright 2010 Freedom Communications. All Rights Reserved.
Privacy Policy | User Agreement | Site Map