[Myrddin]

You certainly have the "goods" in that post. I often wonder what constitutes "reading at grade level". I was hauled off to be tested when I was in 2nd grade. The counselor told my teacher and parents that my vocabulary and reading level was at 8th grade. That testing occurred in Chula Vista, CA in 1963. I might have tested higher, but I was bored with the process. Nobody bothered to explain why this nutball was grilling me. I refused to discern the variations of "chilly vs chile vs Chile". That was enough to get the insufferable woman off my back. I tolerated the hours my parents spent leafing through the dictionary and drilling/grilling me. That had a purpose that was explained before the process started.

[achilles2000]

"I often wonder what constitutes "reading at grade level"."

That is a very good question. When I discovered that teaching children to read using a good phonics curriculum is a relatively trivial exercise and my children began reading everything, I began to wonder that myself. In other words, the boys were far ahead of what passes "grade level" in the ever-so-wonderful suburban district that we live in, and the question that I had for myself was whether this was a real achievement or just the intellectual equivalent of a normal child winning the 100 yd dash at the Special Olympics. So...I went to the local homeschool store and got used copies of the first edition (1836) of McGuffey's Readers (Mott Media reprint) and discovered that what passes for grade level today was far surpassed by those poor children in the 1830s and beyond who lacked central heat and air, indoor plumbing, electric lights, adequate medical care, certified teachers trained in the latest "learning strategies", expensive school buildings, and, most tragically of all, world-class school sports facilities (you say you don't have $100 million in district sports facilities? How can you expect little Rugbert to learn?).