You said "Isn't reading the kind of thing that should be taught by parents before the kid even goes to school?". Since most countries start school at either 5 or 6, 5-6 is implied in that statement.
> If you are not ready to read at 5 before school, why would you be ready to read at 5 in school?
You wouldn't. 5 is probably too early for most kids, less than than 5 is too early for an even greater number of kids. 3 months is 5% of a 5-year-old's life. Starting 3 months before starting school, which is probably already too early, isn't going to be helpful for most students.
>If that's the argument, school should just start later.
School probably should start later. In Finland, one of the highest ranked school systems, kids start at 7.
>I am not really seeing that parental interference is not needed.
Where did you get that? I said most children shouldn't be forced to learn to read before they go to school--not that parents should never teach their children.
>This is a tautology.
No, it's not that children won't learn to read before they are ready. It's that forcing them to try to learn before they are ready is actively harmful.
>but I am very sure that people should be able to comfortably read by grade 6, and I'm similarly very sure that the educational system alone won't accomplish that.
You said "Isn't reading the kind of thing that should be taught by parents before the kid even goes to school?". Since most countries start school at either 5 or 6, 5-6 is implied in that statement.
> If you are not ready to read at 5 before school, why would you be ready to read at 5 in school?
You wouldn't. 5 is probably too early for most kids, less than than 5 is too early for an even greater number of kids. 3 months is 5% of a 5-year-old's life. Starting 3 months before starting school, which is probably already too early, isn't going to be helpful for most students.
>If that's the argument, school should just start later.
School probably should start later. In Finland, one of the highest ranked school systems, kids start at 7.
>I am not really seeing that parental interference is not needed.
Where did you get that? I said most children shouldn't be forced to learn to read before they go to school--not that parents should never teach their children.
>This is a tautology.
No, it's not that children won't learn to read before they are ready. It's that forcing them to try to learn before they are ready is actively harmful.
>but I am very sure that people should be able to comfortably read by grade 6, and I'm similarly very sure that the educational system alone won't accomplish that.
You're arguing against points I'm not making.