[cliffy]

Are you saying the current research argues against teaching children the ability to read at a young age?

While forcing children to learn is not ideal, sometimes intrinsic motivation doesn't flourish in the individual naturally. How would you deal with a child that never wants to learn how to read?

[teslabox]

> How would you deal with a child that never wants to learn how to read?

All children will eventually come around to the idea that reading is useful. Some children are traumatized by do-gooders trying to force them to learn how to read before they're ready.

As I said in another comment here, "I think John Taylor Gatto pointed out that some children learn to read when they're 2, some when they're 8, and by the time they're 12 you can't tell the difference."

[cliffy]

There are adults who are illiterate and still resist the idea that they would be better off if they learned how to read.

I agree there's a level of proficiency that, once reached, seems to be sufficient to tackle most reading challenges.

If you can read at 2, then you've 10 years of reading experience on the 12 year old who just learned. It doesn't necessarily make you a better reader, but you've had access to a much wider range of information and knowledge that the 12 year old couldn't access.

It seems objectively better to encourage your children to learn to read at the earliest age possible.

[bcoates]

Early child education evidence is a whole complicated thing in itself, but programs shifting first reading instruction younger do not show benefits at older age, and school systems that put the expected literacy age much later than most Americans would expect don't underperform.