By Elizabeth Hayes
New research has found that teaching infants to read sooner, rather than later, doesn't actually make them better readers.
The study, by an Otago University researcher, is casting doubt on the common New Zealand belief that youngsters should be taught to read when they start school at five.
"Earlier is better - that seems to be the approach that's taken in both academia and outside," says Dr Sebastian Suggate. "It would it would be good if we could actually re-examine that question and use this research as a stimulus to find out what really is best for children to be doing at age five."
Dr Suggate studied the reading abilities of over 400 children. He compared those from state schools with children from the Rudolf Steiner system, which doesn't teach reading until age seven.
He found late starters had the same reading abilities as those who started at five years by the time they left primary school.
"I think that the time which they are spending when they are not involved in formal reading instruction, they are probably developing good language skills which lay the foundation for them to develop later reading skills," says Dr Suggate.
It is a theory which supports the Rudolf Steiner school of thought - the school focuses on a child's creativity and play, bringing in formal education later on.
Angela Oswald sent her children there and would like to see the teaching methods picked up in more state schools.
"It forms an incredibly strong foundation for then the formal reading process, and it happens with joy and more easily and quicker when they start to read later," she says.
Dr Suggate also believes the findings may come as a relief to some parents who believe forcing their youngsters to read will make them literary geniuses in the future.
"I think it would be nice for people to put less pressure on children to achieve academically at a young age," says Lydia Suggate.
Dr Suggate hopes his three years of research will be picked up by schools in the future.
3 News