Reading as Subset of Communication
January 6th, 2009Over at Game Theorist, Joshua Gans writes about the Slate article, “Reading isn’t Fundamental.” Gans believes the article starts well, by noting the concern some parents have seeing other kids read before theirs do. He thinks the article does well to point out that reading is a learned, unnatural skill with many variables. The Slate article, though, goes on to offer suggestions on teaching kids to read, a gaffe Gans adroitly points out:
one would think that the Slate article might be a call for rationality and an alleviation of blame. No such luck. Right away it falls into a standard trap: children learn to read at different rates (a good true fact) and if parents are worried here is a thousand things you can do to overcome it (a bad conclusion).
Gans makes the sharp and useful distinction between reading and communication:
The issue is not ‘love of books’ but ‘love of communication’ and reading is just a part of that. You need to read to communicate in society and that is the primary consideration.
My own anecdotal experience backs up his analysis. 5+yo Drake has been reading for about a year, but his early reading is not reflective of his communication skills; in fact, they seem to be inversely related. His communication skills right now, especially with peers and in periods of stress and transition, are relatively delayed, and this has resulted in difficulties both at home and at preschool.
I echo Gans’ conclusion to other parents. Don’t push early reading or be overly impressed by it, since it may in fact run counter to the more useful and important skills of general communication. I’d go further to say that playing with kids (something I’m not good at) is likely to be better for development than reading to them (something I do all the time).