This doesn’t make sense. First of all, since there’s no such thing as a “twenty-fourth grade”, it would be impossible for someone to read at that level. You can’t measure something to a level that doesn’t exist.
Second, being able to read like a thirty-year-old is no particular accomplishment. Plenty of thirty-year-olds wouldn’t crack open a book unless their lives depended on it.
And, speaking as someone who’s been in twelfth grade and someone who’s been thirty (I’m 31 now), I would not say that my reading level has significantly changed in that amount of time. When I was in twelfth grade, I took AP English Literature and read a lot of classic novels, modern literature, as well as poetry and plays. I don’t think my ability to understand, say, Waiting for Godot or Ulysses has increased any in that time, nor has my reading speed increased. (Although it is possible that my life experiences have made reading literature richer and more enjoyable. However, that is something that can only be achieved by the passage of time and not by an increase in reading skills.)
If anything, I have become a slower reader, because I was trained in college and then in grad school to be more analytical and critical of what I’m reading.
I don’t mean to crap all ove the thread but seriously, are there any other normal people like me out there? You know, the ones that weren’t reading Heigel at age 3 or commenting on Locke’s essays at age 2? Do you really think that you’re all mutants or is this just some massice game of one-upmanship?
I’ve been around here for a long time and I don’t really recall posters doing this until relatively recently.
I could be wrong but my brain tells me that the majority of posters in these types of threads have brown eyes for the obvious reasons. They should also be wearing boots.
And yes, I know there’s no “24th grade” (or was it 18th?). That’s why I said off the charts in my first post.
My WAG is that they just used the same algorithm past the… you know what? Never mind. I cannot fathom the minds of standard testing, and I probably never will. All I can tell you is that I started out as a non-reader and became a very good reader.
I don’t remember not knowing how to read, but I’ll have to double-check with my parents as to what age I was when I started. The story is that we were in the car and I read the words of a billboard as we drove past it; at first they thought I was just remembering it from having heard someone else read it in the past, but then they realised I was actually able to read it myself. I also remember a story about them coming home one night to a shocked babysitter who asked them “Do you know she can read?” So it must have been unusually early.
I’m not necessarily the best reader though, I tend to get easily distracted and often don’t absorb things that I read.
This is nothing new. People like to be special. I’m personally torn about threads like these. I think one common unifying characteristic of Dopers is that we have an obviously high verbal intelligence, so it makes sense that a lot of us would start reading from an early age. I see no reason to disbelieve these claims.
On the other hand, I don’t see the point of feigning ignorance about when most people learn to read. If you’re reading at an early age, you’re going to be constantly compared to other kids and by default know when they typically learn to read. Your teachers and relatives will heap you with praise and you will be set apart in some kind of alternative reading program. You would have been unable to get through grade school without a deep and abiding understanding that reading at age 3 is not typical, so I don’t buy the premise of the OP.
I’m also not convinced that early reading is a sign of genius. I was an early and advanced reader and writer and I am not a genius. I may have been the best writer among my peer group then, but I have plenty of competition now. And I’m definitely limited in my capacity to grasp mathematics, science, and economics. Nowadays I routinely meet people who think on a level I can only strain to reach. I guess what I’m saying is that people are probably vastly overestimating the importance of learning to read at an early age.
I suspect that some of this is an artifact of parental anxiety. These days, and indeed for the last generation or so (but I think it is getting worse), parents suffer intense anxiety if their kids are not somehow advanced or exceptional in some manner easily demonstratable to others. Reading is a favorite.
This leads to a lot of pushing by parents to elicit these exceptional characteristics. Think of classes teaching pre-verbal babies sign language, so they can get a head start (not saying there aren’t good reasons to do this, but from what I’ve seen of my fellow-parents, a large part of it is “pushing” in this way which I am not convinced is a good idea) … in some cases it may be successful in getting kids to do stuff earlier than they might otherwise; but I think sometimes it is successful only in a “Clever Hans” sort of way - with a lot of parental supervision. There is a certain amount of wishful thinking and self-delusion, particularly where people are recalling what their parents said about them as babies. My own son is almost 4 and already I’m a bit hazy on when he had various achievements. I read to him every night and we spell out words together, but he’s not reading yet; I did not read at that age, either.
The thing is, allegedly from what I’ve read the science does not support the notion that early reading is any sort of proxy for intelligence.
Oh, for crap’s sake. Yes, there are plenty of “normal” people out there, and a lot of them have posted in this very thread. Recognizing words at age 2 and reading at age 3 are on the early side, but it’s not that unusual. You’d think that people were in here claiming that they were doing brain surgery in kindergarten or something. I was an early reader but I don’t talk about it on the SDMB because of the amount of shit you inevitably take for having the audacity to claim that you were reading before all the “normal” kids were.
It isn’t the shit that any one person gets, it’s the disconnect that happens when so very many claim to have been ‘exceptional’ in exactly the same manner.
Naturally, some people genuinely were exceptional. The problem here is that there is a very wide range of what people consider to be “reading”. Combine that with reliance of possibly fallible parental memory and a strong pride incentive, and one would expect some puffery in self-reported results … any one is not disappointed.
I learned to read when I was about four and a half years old. My older sister was in the first grade, and I would look over her shoulder as she practiced her reading, putting her finger under each word as she sounded it out. After a bit of this, the patterns started coming together and making sense.
The Firebug’s 28 months old now. Can sing most of the alphabet song, and can recognize maybe half or more of his letters. Probably has an idea of the sounds of most of that half or so. He’s a good ways from reading, yet, but that’s fine. He’s smart, loves books, and we love reading to him. When he’s ready, he’ll pick it up in a hurry.
My mom said I began reading around late two, early three. My sister began reading around late five, early six. It made absolutely no difference in our ability to succeed in school or as adults. Hell; it made no difference in our ultimate ability to read (we can both read anything you can put in front of us). The only difference is that I’m a slightly better speller.
A range of dates is normal for any milestone, I think. My mom initially freaked out until she realized this.
I suppose it’s too late to ask now what exactly you mean by “reading” when you claim you were reading at age two.
Personally, my mom held James Joyce’s Ulysses up to her naked belly when she was pregnant with me and I read it through her skin using the light of a strong lamp.
I was reading well before Kindergarten - I think I could read simple words when I was 3.
My son is 27 months right now, and recognizes more than half the alphabet. He knows the sounds some of the letters make, too, but not always reliably. I don’t consider this reading, and I don’t know how to help him make the cognitive leap between where he is now and, “hey, letters make up words!” but he’s only 2 so I’m not worried about it right now.
He is also WAY into numbers. As in, he is at this moment sitting in front of one of our many digital clocks, exclaiming every time a number changes. “Ooh! ooh! Number 9!” “ooh! Ooh! Two number ones!” Etc. It’s very exciting when a new hour rolls around!
