I don't know if I knew any math at that point, but I feel like I could probably count up to 5.
I don't know if I knew any math at that point, but I feel like I could probably count up to 5.
But I was the oldest, so neither of them figured out that was unusual until my pre-k teachers pulled them aside after my first day and were like, "Did you know smeej can read? Not look at pictures and make up a story. Lots of kids do that. I mean books without pictures." My folks thought nothing of it.
Even now, I'm told the way I read is weird. I don't read a word at a time. I read blocks of text several lines long all at once. I don't have to subvocalize each word.
In the end, it all comes down to how this child is developing, not how some abstract theoretical child "ought" to develop.
The trouble with schooling is that it's trying to make one size fit too many. Separating classrooms by ages instead of educating children in flexible cohorts based on interest and skill makes kids who develop later--or even just who are chronologically younger than most of their classmates--feel "dumb," but it doesn't have to be that way.
There's no reason any child needs to learn at the same pace as any other, or even that children need to learn subjects in some sort of balance.
It might simplify things for the instructors, and their instructors, but it happens at the expense of the children.
Hello, spirit brother!
> Separating classrooms by ages instead of educating children in flexible cohorts based on interest and skill makes kids who develop later--or even just who are chronologically younger than most of their classmates--feel "dumb," but it doesn't have to be that way.
I agree this would be superior to what we have (here in the US.)