Well-intentioned program could hurt some students

I would like to offer an argument in opposition to Jennifer Anderson’s April 12 letter in support of Nevada’s “Read by Three” program.

Though reading is important, education is more than the ability to interpret characters printed on a page — which may appear to some to be only something to remember and regurgitate. Early in my schooling — not yet being aware of etymology to solve my problem with “cat” versus “kat” and why “knife” required a “k” — I sometimes accidentally dropped word lists critical to spelling and reading in the creek on the way home from school.

Fortunately, my education began in a one-school district and more than one criterion determined student retention. Later, a state law was enacted that required my school to be taken into a large school district. The biggest change for me was a sixth-grade standardized test. Being placed two grades behind in language showed I ought to have given word lists more thought. My math result was better. I may not have known the word algebra or known what a linear equation was, but I apparently had the ability to make educated “guesses” on math problems and tested four grades ahead in math.

Had a “Read by Three” program been in place, I would never have been promoted to the fourth grade. Perhaps I would never have gone to college if held back. I do know, however, that by the time I was completing my bachelor’s degree, I had caught up, scoring above average on the verbal portion of the Graduate Record Exam.

Just maybe, as in my case, holding back all students not reading at grade level by the third grade is not always the best option.