I taught my 3-year-old to read like a 9-year-old

2025-05-2911:479692www.theintrinsicperspective.com

Tripling reading level through tutoring

Art for The Intrinsic Perspective is by Alexander Naughton

Over a year has passed since I began teaching my toddler—then two years old—how to read (a process chronicled here).

Now, I’m prepared to answer a burning scientific question that has kept absolutely zero researchers up at night: Can a three-year-old read The Hobbit?

Turns out: yeah, pretty much. Here’s Roman reading from Chapter 1:

In a hole, in the ground, there lived a hobbit. Not a nasty, dirty, wet hole, filled with the ends of worms and an oozy smell, nor yet a dry bare, sandy, hole, with nothing in it to sit down on or to eat: it was a hobbit-hole, and that means comfort.

Of course, there are still plenty of words he can’t read! While he could handle a lot of The Hobbit, I haven’t let him read the whole book himself (there’s too much violence, and the small font size, confusing names, and enough unknown words would likely wear him down). But for the class of books that he has any business reading alone, like early readers and chapter books, he can do so. He reads by himself for pleasure every day now, quickly and silently plowing through his growing library, and his decoding abilities have met the limits of his comprehension.

As you can tell, I’m quite proud of how well he’s done, to the degree I risk coming across as supercilious about the whole thing (now there’s a word he probably can’t read). A few months ago, I gave him the SDQA test, a simple way of determining reading level, and he got all the 3rd-grade-level words correct (so somewhere around eight or nine-year-olds).

Estimating reading level isn’t very meaningful from a practical perspective, however. Goodhart’s law of measures becoming targets has made vicious work of education. For example, in a study wherein researchers had college students read the first few paragraphs of Charles Dickens’ Bleak House, only 5% of English majors could passably describe what was going on.

Instead, I think the only literacy milestone worth caring about is whether a child reads for pleasure, because…

In the Adolescent Brain and Cognitive Development (ABCD) project, a cohort of over 10,000 children in the US was tracked longitudinally. A 2023 analysis of the data revealed that the earlier a child was reading for pleasure, the more this correlated with higher scores on cognitive tests and lower numbers of mental health issues, even after controlling for things like socio-economic status, such that…

…cognitive performance was better and the mental problems were lower in young adolescents with higher levels of early RfP [reading for pleasure].

Here is years of reading for pleasure plotted against a number of such outcomes.

In fact, the researchers found that reading for pleasure—and the more years spent doing so—may literally lead to larger brain volumes in adolescence.

Sun et al. (2023) (note how the effects are non-localized)

The positive effects showed up after controlling for genetics (as best one can, using genome-wide analyses in the full cohort). ABCD also had a participating set of 711 twins and, interestingly, estimations from the twin data revealed that, while early reading-for-pleasure does have a genetic component, the majority of the trait’s variance appears environmental.

Put it all together, and early reading for pleasure stands out in the scientific literature, in that it has (a) very broad cognitive benefits, (b) good empirical support for this class of thing, (c) has a large environmental component, and (d) actively replaces and competes with screen time, which is usually neutral or negative in the literature (in the ABCD cohort, screen time had an inverse correlation with reading for pleasure).

This last point, that reading for pleasure fills a certain time in the day, means I daily…

When I look back on my official reasons for teaching reading so early, oh, how naive I was! All pale in comparison to the true benefit.

Holy smokes, does early reading make parenting easier sometimes!

It’s all the advantages of an iPad, none of the guilt. You’ve unlocked infinite self-entertainment. Long drive? Bring a book. Or five. Roman toddles into restaurants clutching a book as a backup activity, and reads while waiting in boring lines. It’s also calming, and so helps with emotional regulation. Toddler energy descending rapidly into deviance? Go read a book! It’s a parenting cheat code. I don’t know if this alone justifies the hours spent, but it sure is one heck of a benefit.

Here’s a recent picture of him in his natural habitat, in one of his nooks (looking ever less like a toddler and more like a real little kid).

Reading for pleasure was the lodestar that governed my entire teaching process. A lot of other “teach your child to read” methods are based on modular lessons and exercises, which makes learning to read separate from what it’s all about, which is enjoying books. Comparatively, I did it by mostly reading books together, because it turns out reading books is a skill in itself. Not only does this practice the attention span needed to follow through with a book until its end; more subtly, it practices the skills you, a developed adult, don’t ever notice. E.g., sentences in picture-heavy books sometimes start at the top of a page, sometimes at the bottom, sometimes they’re broken up in the middle between images, or are even inside them. So the reader needs to scan for where to start. Easy for you! But much harder for a three-year-old without prior practice. You, an adult, can physically hold books splayed open with different spines and thicknesses, and also you, an adult, can easily flip single paper-thin pages without messing up your spot. But if you’re three? So much of what we do effortlessly is invisible to us. Like how when encountering any new book, there are a few initial pages with tiny text about publishing and copyright. This is the most difficult material, and yet skipping it is not obvious to someone just learning to read. So to get better at reading books, you have to read books!

The details for anyone who wants to replicate this can be found in a series of guides: Part 1, Part 2, and Part 3, and the last part here. Privately, I’ve already worked with one person who wanted to get his own daughter reading early, and so far has had success. Eventually, I’ll put all these parts together in a book on the science and practice of (very) early reading, with edits and additions.

In Part 2, “Getting your child to love reading in 2024,” I discuss how, if the goal is reading for pleasure, then you must have books front and center in terms of daily entertainment. I also discuss the practicalities of setting up a daily “school time” (starting at less than 10 minutes a day, expanding to ~30 minutes a day by the end of the process).

In Part 3, “The BIG GUIDE to teaching LITTLE PEOPLE how to sound out words,” I overviewed how to start and progress with phonics. I also detailed my approach to “blending” sounds, one of the most difficult steps, as well as how to play a “sentence completion game” I developed, which is useful for mastering simple phonics before early readers get introduced.

I took inspiration from my historical research on “aristocratic tutoring,” but I also pulled what’s effective from the science of learning, like how…

Side note: I still read to Roman every night. Together, we’ve worked our way through many classics of children’s literature (favorites include The Wonderful Wizard of Oz and Peter Pan).

One night, we came across a character posing this riddle: "If you were to combine the movement of a circle and the movement of a line, what would you have?"

I asked Roman to guess. Without hesitation, he said, “A swirl." I was surprised, since that was just about the given answer: A spiral.

Anyway, a spiral represents the ideal Platonic structure for learning, via its combination of a circle (return) and a straight line (progression). And the modern science of learning tells us that “spiral learning” is indeed incredibly effective, because it automatically builds in spaced repetition—the review and reminder of what’s been learned, spaced out at ever-increasing intervals. Such “interleaving” that mixes old and new things is vastly more effective than the “block learning” of most traditional classrooms.

The power of spaced repetition has been known for 150 years. It replicates and has large effects. So why is spaced repetition (or even its more implementable form of spiral learning) not used all the time in classrooms? No one knows!

One reason might be that “memorizing” has become a dirty word in education (the “rote” part has become implicit). Yet all learning involves memory: it’s a spectrum, which is why spaced repetition improves generalization too (really, it improves learning anything at all). The second reason is that the “block model” of learning (learn one thing, learn the next) is much easier to implement in mass education; just as a factory, by being a system of mass production, is made as modular as possible, so too are our schools.

Unbounded by such concerns, I could go two steps forward, one step back. But I needed a set of phonics-based early readers that was large enough to trace a spiral. After completing simple phonics (described in Part 3), Roman could read “The cat sat on the mat” (slowly), but not “the feline reclined on the carpet.” Luckily, I was pointed to Julia Donaldson’s Songbirds Phonics books. Julia Donaldson is a renowned children’s book author, so unlike other phonics-based progression books, her set is well-written, with good illustrations, clever nods for parents, and an appropriate air of delight. They’re good books, in other words. This matters immensely, since the whole point is getting the kid to love books!

I took the Donaldson books and quite literally traced out a massive Archimedean spiral. If you had charted our progress from session to session, it would have looked like this: originating in the middle with the simplest Stage 1 books, more books were added, repeating for a time but then becoming rarer and rarer in the procession, making way for newer books. We started with goals like reading a single book in a single session. By the end, he often read three or four books.

So much re-reading didn’t feel unnatural because, as any parent can tell you, toddlers love to re-read books (and re-watch movies, and re-play games, ad infinitum).

I didn’t bother optimizing this process much. I just went with my gut about whatever he needed to practice, or when he was ready for a new book and thus often new phonics rules. To teach the rules explicitly, I also used spaced repetition: an iPad flashcard app stored sets of words that reflected different simple phonics rules (like “car, bar, star,” etc., for “ar”). Occasionally, I would notice him stumbling over some rule we had already covered, and so we’d quickly review the relevant set of words just to brush up (I didn’t track or optimize this review).

Following this spiral, doing flashcards when it felt needed, and adding in non-Donaldson books that were phonically simple enough (e.g., Hop on Pop), was enough to get to the final stage, wherein…

The choice to become lazy was made consciously, on purpose. I was increasingly dissatisfied while trying to teach the phonics of complex words; e.g., “ought,” “though,” “through,” and “plough.” Say those aloud and you’ll see why. Therefore, I don’t recommend highly advanced phonics. Rather, phonics is like the training wheels on a bike. Great at the early stages, but the goal is to take them off.

So once he felt ready, I decided to stop teaching phonics. I ditched the flashcards and the spiral of re-reading. We switched to general early readers, like Frog and Toad, and rarely repeated anything. When Roman made mistakes or ran into new words, I simply told him how to pronounce the word then and there, rather than explicitly teaching the rules to those words. The only remaining spaced repetition was asking him, before proceeding to the next page, to find in the text any words he’d mispronounced (“Can you find ‘special?’”), just to quickly reinforce the correct version.

I was nervous about this abandonment of phonics. I suddenly didn’t have to do anything other than select our early reader(s) for the day and sit with him. All the learning began to unfold internally; I had no access to it. Yet the momentum was there. Via the magic of the human brain extrapolating from limited data, funded not with billions of dollars worth of compute but with a thermodynamically-efficient budget of raspberries and chicken nuggets, he just got better and better with every session, until my presence was unnecessary for anything but advanced books.

That’s not to say this whole process was easy! Just that it got easier. Teaching reading is front-loaded, in that decoding simple words and blending them together is where a lot of structure and thought is needed. But by the end we were just reading whatever looked fun, and my role became correcting errors. Looking back on the whole process, what mattered most was that I made it fun and interesting and committed mental time and energy to the session, and that we did it regularly. In this, it resembled many other things in the world, where the hardest part is showing up and trying.

Here’s a compilation of what the entire progression looked like:

Have there been any negative effects?

My main worry was that this would cut into his imaginary play. But he quickly settled into a healthy state wherein his reading occurs at will and freely, in his many chosen nooks. So he dips in and out during the downtime at the house, while otherwise playing outside in the yard, building stuff, fiddling with action figures and toys, putting on his costumes, making up games with his sister, or doing activities resembling typical preschool stuff (sensory play, puzzles, mazes, activity books, volcano sets). His mother is teaching him to write his letters and draw, so he can spell out simple messages now, like birthday cards and well-wishes (e.g., while drawing a thunderstorm he’ll write “BOOM” over the top of it). How much he reads every day depends on the circumstances and his mood. Sometimes it’s hardly at all, because he’s at the beach or distracted by a new toy or has some long-running imaginary game. Some rainy days he reads a ton. Filling a toddler’s day is hard work—their hours are not our hours, and successfully getting a toddler from 6AM to 7PM is rarely a question of “How can I squeeze in this thing, we’re fully booked!” but usually more like “Oh god, dinner is in an hour, I’m beat, and they’re already getting insane!”

Did teaching early reading require any sort of coercion?

No. By far the most common problem was that he enjoyed our sessions too much and would be mad when they ended. I eventually bought a 30-minute hourglass for him to flip at the start, which helped created an official ending when the sand trickled out. Getting him out to “school” (we did it in my office, which sits in the backyard) was basically never a problem. Toddlers and kids love schedules and rituals, and once “school” was in that category, it was just something we did every day. I always brought snacks, and so he’d chomp on berries or toast or whatever else (you can learn to read with your mouth full). He’s still young enough to unconditionally love getting attention from his parents, and he had me all to himself for a solid chunk of time.

Of course, occasionally, classic toddler issues would crop up. I’m not claiming the process was easy 100% of the time. Teaching anything serious and hard (and reading is hard) requires at least some authority; otherwise you can’t ever say “Okay, stop dropping goldfish on the rug and giggling like a maniac for no reason, let’s pay attention and try again, I know you can do it.” You have to hold the line that, ultimately, you are there to learn. But I was no taskmaster—we spent a lot of time discussing what we were reading (sometimes called “dialogic reading”), giggling, acting things out, and just chatting too. I’m going to do this same process with my daughter and am actively looking forward to it.

Why bother with phonics? Why not just memorize sight words from the beginning?

That could work. But starting with phonics has some advantages: (a) it gives a sensible progression with clear mastery levels, and (b) helps them conceptualize that words are “chunks,” which helps generalizing later, even if they never learn precisely why some “chunk” is pronounced the way it is (most adults don’t know this either). More generally, toddlers are sort of like AIs—they will overfit. Phonics means you know for sure what they’re learning. I personally wouldn’t want this process to be a black box from the beginning. It’d be easy to get stuck, and you wouldn’t know why.

Are you sure he’s not just memorizing the books?

Yes, I’m 100% sure. Especially now—he can pick up any random book in the children’s section of the library and read it—but I was sure even back when we were primarily working with a constrained set of books by one author. Still, it’s a real concern. Toddlers have incredible memories. In the early stages of the process, the distinction between memory and learning was indeed blurry. Early on, he probably memorized chunks of many of the Julia Donaldson books—if not to the point of being able to recite them verbatim, at least to the point of being deeply familiar with them. However, due to delaying early readers until he could decode the simple sentences I generated, which were different each time (via the sentence completion game in Part 3), he always understood the point was actually sounding out the words, even if he knew them already ahead of time. Familiarity was often good, not bad, for learning. A new book is a stimulating experience! Where do you look? The images are distracting and toddler-brain-melting in their novelty. Re-reading was key, in that the real learning could take place after he had dealt with its content as a book qua book and so could look beyond that and pay close attention to the letters.

Do you plan to continue an accelerated education via tutoring?

Yes, for the foreseeable future. Now that reading is finished, we’ve moved on to math in our morning sessions. I’ll write more about this, too (right now it involves 100 tiny plastic ducks). Our local school system here is not the best, and he’s not attending preschool. This gives us plenty of time to find a situation that works for him. But for now, he’s focused on being a kid: he has a good social life, attends events daily, like public classes hosted by local organizations, and has an extended family and friend group. I’m keeping my eye out for interesting microschools, tutoring experiences, and things of that nature. If anyone knows any exciting educational opportunities in Boston, the surrounding areas, or Cape Cod, let me know. Same goes for someone in the area who’d be right for a well-paid and travel-compensated part-time tutoring/nanny position for a kid (or kids) like this.

“Teaching early reading is unfeasible for everyone to do, because X, Y, and Z.”

True. This isn’t right for everyone. There’s no one path. Plenty of kids learn to read in traditional school (albeit usually later) and then read for pleasure plenty.

Does reading so early single him out?

I’m sensitive to this concern. As of now, I don’t think he has a clear conception of how, e.g., his friends can’t read, or that he can read better than some kids three times his age. He’s still the same person, just one who reads a lot. He’s aware that adults like that he can read, but he’s mostly too shy to show off to strangers. Nor does he, in the blithe ignorance of the young, always notice its effects.

For instance, a couple of months ago we went on a humble errand to the pharmacy of our local CVS. Roman had been reading in the car, so he brought along a book almost as big as he is and stood mumbling the words as we waited. Standing primly in line behind us happened to be an older well-put-together woman, who had about her the matronly and bookish air of a former teacher—exactly the kind of woman you’d find at the desk of your local library. At first she smiled and took his reading as a novelty, but as time went on she leaned closer to listen, curious. This occurred several times, as if to confirm. Then, unable to contain herself, she declared aloud with amazement, “He’s actually reading!” to everyone around. It was said in the tone of needing to attract attention to this thing, this unexpected thing, unfolding in front of you in, of all places, CVS. She didn’t take her eyes off of him after that, smiling and occasionally blinking as if in bewilderment. Having soon gotten what we came for, we left. But as we passed by on the way out, and she kindly looked down at him tottering past, I saw that she was quietly, in the concealed and unobtrusive manner of someone unused to doing so in public, wiping away tears.


Read the original article

Comments

  • By randunel 2025-05-2912:529 reply

    I have two children roughly OP's age, they couldn't possibly be more different in terms of motricity, senses, intelligence, etc. Polar opposites.

    My first said her first words at 9 months old, "ba" for ball, bath, and 2-3 more meanings, and made a repeated sound pointing towards the object of interest, sound which cannot be described in words. Before the age of 1 we had amassed over 50 words, most up to 3 syllables, a handful had more. Same for walking, fine motricity, etc. She reads at 5 years old.

    My second only started saying single syllable words at 1y10m, started walking similarly later, and isn't able to do at 1y10m most things that my first was already able to do before being 1yo, so the delay between them is higher than 100%, more than double.

    Same family, same teaching style, etc, only 3 years apart.

    The ability to teach your child to do something depends almost entirely on the child, your teaching abilities don't seem to matter much, they simply copy you. All that matters is that you are present and offer them the attention they need.

    • By Freak_NL 2025-05-2913:172 reply

      Genetics and a bit of dice rolling. That's the biggest part of the equation it seems. I have only one specimen to work with (and I am not inclined to create more), but he was reading at 4 and currently at 6 reads at a 3rd or 4th grade level, despite still being stuck in kindergarden until September.

      Sure, we read to him, and we make him read aloud to us too, but we're really just catalysts. He can make himself comfortable in a chair or on a sofa and read comics (Donald Duck, Asterix, etc.) for hours without any prompting (which, honestly, is a really nice feature to have on a child). I expect we'll be able to coerce him onto autonomously reading suitable books in addition to comics by next year too.

      I do strongly believe that him seeing us read, and being surrounded by (actual paper) books helps. It means he grows up in an environment where books are normal, not just something you must grapple with because of school.

      I don't like the heavy training implied by the article though. I want to raise a kid who likes reading, not one who will resent being pushed to read.

      • By acquisitionsilk 2025-05-2914:441 reply

        I wonder if it's merely some language or cultural difference, and I don't mean it as a snipe at all, but may I just say - software products have "features", human beings have traits! Maybe it's a confusion based on the fact that human beings as well as traits also do have "features", but that refers to things like having tiny ears.

        Having a very strong liking for sitting reading books for long periods is a lovely trait, but it certainly is not a feature (I would say!).

        • By BobaFloutist 2025-05-2915:47

          I think it was intentionally playful language, not a language difference.

      • By WillAdams 2025-05-2914:41

        One thing which I tried to do with my kids, after exhausting all the classics (Narnia, _The Hobbit_, _The Lord of the Rings_, Susan Cooper's _The Dark is Rising Pentalogy_ --- highly recommend the latter for folks who have not read it) was to read biographies in chronological order --- as a dry run I did American Presidents (which did great things for my understanding of the ebb-and-flow of American history, since I would try to read an adult biography in advance in anticipation of questions).

        The intent was to then go back to the beginning of human history and read biographies of notable persons in chronological order --- unfortunately, my wife's work schedule changed, so that bedtime reading quit happening --- probably my kids were about to age out of this anyway, but it was an interesting endeavour, and one which I have been meaning to take up again for my own sake. EDIT: and, if I should ever have grandchildren, inflict on them.

    • By pc86 2025-05-2912:562 reply

      Are they the same sex? I seem to recall a study where there are some - not huge, but statistically significant - differences in first onset of movement vs. language in boys vs. girls.

      • By perlgeek 2025-05-2913:551 reply

        The common wisdom is that that girls often speak earlier than boys.

        • By pc86 2025-05-2914:23

          Yeah and anecdotally this is what I've noticed in our family and our friends' families at a pretty high percentage.

      • By randunel 2025-05-2914:05

        My youngest is a boy, indeed.

    • By HPsquared 2025-05-2913:12

      Biologically it's not double, you need to add 9 months to both. Then it's not 12m vs 22m, it's 21m vs 31m. Still a big difference but not twice as fast, just 48% faster overall.

      Brain development starts very soon after conception.

    • By viraptor 2025-05-2912:561 reply

      Yeah, one off examples don't really mean much when people talk about anything kids related. In this case additionally because hyperlexia exists. (https://www.healthline.com/health/hyperlexia) Maybe the methods worked, maybe you got lucky, maybe the kid learned despite what you did. Who knows.

      • By pc86 2025-05-2913:102 reply

        I see this "yeah well that's an anecdote so let's just ignore it" claim a lot but it doesn't hold water in my opinion. Most glaringly, the article almost immediately links to peer-reviewed scholarly research about the effects of reading for pleasure being initiated at various times in development relative to the average. N > 10,000, not that big N is itself a positive measure but it certainly doesn't hurt.

        There are certainly times where "this is an anecdote" is useful commentary, even though everybody knows what an anecdote is. But I don't think this is one of those times.

        • By viraptor 2025-05-2914:12

          I meant the method, not the benefits - that one kid reading at 3yo doesn't say anything about the method used. Also, that paper classifies early as starting reading between 0-7yo. Also, in twin studies they show quite high heritability compared to environment impact (which is higher to be fair). Also the impact they showed was between early reading and positive outcomes, but it doesn't show that (simplifying) you can make kids read earlier in some ways.

          So it's an interesting study, but it's not really discussing "How I taught...". It's (simplifying) "do early readers have better life", not "can you use method to give kids better life via earlier reading". (Which may still be true!)

    • By Jedd 2025-05-2913:044 reply

      Is that just the phenomenon of subsequent children leveraging the benefits of a slightly older sibling? Combined with some training of the parents by the first child, and therefore a significantly different mindset being exhibited towards the second child.

      > The ability to teach your child to do something depends almost entirely on the child ...

      Is this a summary of your personal experience or are you citing research?

      • By xattt 2025-05-2913:162 reply

        I can second the OP. Children can be wildly different, and development can be influenced both ways. The age gap between children also matters.

        Yes, children can piggyback off the achievements of their older sibling in social development and play.

        However, I found that I am unable to devote as much time with my second child because my attention is split.

        • By Jedd 2025-05-302:27

          Your third sentence seems to agree with my suspicion - subsequent children get less attention. (Though I reiterate my belief that some of the apparent developmental difference is because second children don't need to be as communicative as the first child.)

          The sibling comments here primarily echoed a similar sentiment, while agreeing that there's variation and assuming that's just random, while also tacitly confirming that 2nd-child tended to perform less well.

        • By wiredfool 2025-05-2914:251 reply

          First Child: ooh I know nothing. Nothing works. Second Child: Ok, We've got this. Except, No, completely different. Third Child: At least we've got the range. No. No you don't.

          Big issue we had with the first was that he was reading several years above grade level, and we ran out of interesting things for him to read that were age appropriate. When they can read the Hobbit at 7, but are scared, it's really difficult.

          Of course, he's now reading things like type theory and scares me with Nix advocacy, so I guess it all comes around.

          • By WillAdams 2025-05-2916:071 reply

            A great follow-one to _The Hobbit_ is Susan Cooper's _The Dark is Rising_ --- my kids also enjoyed H. Beam Piper's _Little Fuzzy_ (and its sequels).

            • By wiredfool 2025-05-2916:191 reply

              (To be clear, child in question is now 20)

              The problem was coming up with enough to read that wasn't too scary when he was young. Even the Hobbit was rough. Harry Potter is downright scary. Book series were falling in a week. We never had Christmas present books that lasted till New Year's.

              I'm pretty sure that we have The Dark is Rising, but it was never one that was a reread, if they ever got through it. I've read the Little Fuzzy and other H Beam Piper books, and they're a little 50's to really let a young kid loose on.

              Terry Pratchett worked, specifically the Bromeliad Trilogy. Eragon was ok. There was a set of Wings of Fire. And bookshelves of others that are gone by now.

              • By WillAdams 2025-05-2916:59

                My youngest is 21.

                See my comment elsethread:

                https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=44126584

                The problem of course is "the newspapers in utopia are boring" (to paraphrase Mark Twain) and "tales of the land of the happy nice people" doesn't make for much of a story.

                Another couple of books which I enjoyed sharing w/ my kids were _Divers Down! Adventure Beneath Hawaiian Seas_ and _The Adventures of the Mad Scientists Club_ (and various sequels).

      • By randunel 2025-05-2914:06

        > > The ability to teach your child to do something depends almost entirely on the child ...

        > Is this a summary of your personal experience or are you citing research?

        Strictly personal experience, not just my own kids, but also personally observed.

      • By timcobb 2025-05-2913:13

        Nope, it's "just" genetics...

      • By kayodelycaon 2025-05-2914:01

        Nope. I’m the older brother and I’ve always been further ahead developmentally.

        Which is somewhat ironic because I’m the one that’s bipolar.

    • By darkwater 2025-05-2913:03

      More or less same here, both girls, now 10 and 7. The 10yo started reading pretty good at 4.5yo on her own, now she reads books for teenagers since a couple of years, the 7yo is more or less OK for her age (probably having her side by side with her sister doesn't help us to be fair).

    • By selimnairb 2025-05-2913:47

      Came here to say this. Well said. Also language skills and reading have a complicated relationship. My daughter was saying sentences like “no suppository for me!” when she was two (she had constipation issues). But is now seven and while she still has excellent verbal skills, reading is coming slowly for her, though she can read and is making progress, it’s just slower than her classmates. Her school district has high standards (students on average read at two years above grade level). However, I wonder if this push to have kids read at younger and younger ages is not appropriate and harmful at some point. We were warned by our OT upon entering kindergarten that the curriculum will have the kids do things that are not developmentally appropriate. Also, my daughter has a mid spring birthday, so she’s 6 months younger than many of her classmates, which at this age still matters I think.

      I think the theory is that it’s okay if the bucket overflows, at least it’s full. However, I worry that pushing kids to do too much too early can make it hard for them to build confidence and enthusiasm for reading and learning in general.

    • By yoko888 2025-05-2914:291 reply

      [dead]

      • By danbender 2025-06-108:40

        I loved reading that. 100% this. Accompanying our little ones and appreciating their perspective.

  • By flkiwi 2025-05-2913:34

    Our kid effectively taught himself to read very early. We had been reading to him at every opportunity, and I think he teased out what was going on and, on some level, decided to learn on his own. He's been reading well above his age level for years now. As the OP mentioned, one of the primary short term benefits is that this child is, comparatively, a breeze to parent. If he gets frustrated, he goes and reads. If he gets bored with playing a video game, he goes and reads. He appears to be a well-adjusted kid with a close and functional friend group--within the limits of the COVID generation anyway--and he gets on fine with kids who aren't big readers. It's his thing, his intellectual space.

    One thing OP didn't address directly is that the most significant lesson of watching our kid on this journey has been learning on a practical level how early individuality and complex reasoning show up. Before I was a parent, I thought kids were blobs where parenting unlocked skills. Since becoming a parent, I've learned that kids, on some level, are experiencing frustrations and joys that are shockingly similar to adults' and that a lot of their development isn't just bits and pieces turning on over time but affirmative effort on their part. I don't know why that should be surprising given we're the same species, but it really struck me that this little person on some level realized he couldn't read, wanted to, and learned. That affected other areas of our parenting, e.g., addressing his frustration as if it were a rational human response to a challenging situation from his perspective rather than irrational childhood reaction. (Note: He's still a child and we don't parent him as if he's an adult, but we have subtly adjusted our approach to be more ... I don't know, respectful of his individual motivations as a thinking, feeling person with comprehensible goals and desires, even if the underlying support infrastructure is still a bit in flux.)

  • By j2kun 2025-05-2914:042 reply

    I have been trying to teach my 3 (now 4) y/o to read and while he's getting it, the process is very slow and he won't try reading on his own except to look at the pictures.

    On the other hand, he finds numbers delightful, can add two digit numbers and knows his multiplication table up to 10, loves squares and square roots, and can do simple algebra problems in his head (equivalent to solving 3x+1=28). He once sat by himself with his blocks for an hour figuring out all the triangular numbers ("step squad" numbers) that he could make with the 200 blocks he had.

    I think you just have to try different things and see what the kid latches on to. Lego, drawing, music, whatever. Reading is not the only way to activate your brain, and I think peer pressure is a big part of why kids want to learn to read once they get to school. That and there are just too many ways to be entertained these days (video, audio, toys, etc.) while reading takes true grit.

    • By jonhohle 2025-05-2914:11

      My oldest son was similar and when he did start reading he wouldn’t stop. We restricted screen time but never books (until he was up all night reading, rushing through work to read, etc.).

      You may want to look into having your son tested for gifted services when he reaches school age and if he’s highly gifted and your district offers it, enroll him in a comprehensive gifted program. Someone with abstract reasoning like that may benefit from a modified educational environment.

    • By 11101010001100 2025-05-2914:09

      Similar story here. Kid is very happy to talk numbers.

      IMO logic is something that is not directly taught, so I'm happy to fill this hole as a parent.

HackerNews