This question came as a result of a discussion my other half and I had. we’re both well for teaching kids as early as possible, but he just asked what becomes of these kids later, say in their teenage years. Do they slow down and just remain above average? I suppose they’ll just be able to learn faster than their peers but it got me thinking and I just want people’s opinions on this especially people who have older children who were taught early.
Thank you.
I asked a similar question a while back when I first started. CLick on the link below to read it:
http://forum.brillkids.com/teaching-your-child-to-read/early-reader-later-in-life/
Once I asked to my blog friends, at which age they started to read. I was very surprised that average of those who responded was at 4.
Here is the poll, it is in Latvian, the last row is “don’t remember”.
http://klab.lv/users/kihelkonna/137911.html
My blog friends are between 20 and 45, and they are rather intelligent and successful persons.
Among these 5 which read at 3, there are 2 Phd’s, 2 very clever persons (in terms of phylosophy and literacy) but without particular professional success, and one person I don’t know.
Among these who learned at 4, all the persons I know are very clever and interesting (because I choose to read their blogs), and also very successful professionally. The same I can say also about persons which started to read at 5; I don’t see big difference but may be these “at 3” are more tended to research.
I think, “reading at 3” means also other early learning.
p.s.
my conclusion was that early readers like to write blogs
(literacy skills + interesting views)
but with late reading we can avoid graphomany.