I think the author of this piece is really trying to help his struggling child succeed. To that point, right out of the gate, we learn that his child was, "[...] significantly behind his class in handwriting, letter reversals and spelling." In addition, we learn that his child was also receiving additional help from his teacher, in order to help bring him up to his learning level and potential. Finally, the author later notes that, "[...] I'm taking an hour per day with this."

That said, while I understand the overall sentiment of your comment, it comes across as condescending in this specific case. We're not talking about a parent that is grinding his child through hours and hours of flashcards, with no opportunity to play outside; we're talking about a parent that is trying to help his child succeed and be at the same level of his peers, by taking 1 hour a day to work through a learning routine.

Before starting flashcards, parent-teacher conferences were endless variations on, "I know your son is brilliant, but we have a real problem here." Before starting flashcards, my son would look at his homework and have meltdowns because he didn't know any of it. (I'd prefer a system in which a grade 1 kid didn't have homework, but that's an issue for another discussion.)

I started the routine to fix that problem. Of course once I am doing this routine anyways, I want it to be effective and pleasurable. And since it is a fairly large piece of my life, I have put a lot of thought into how to do it well. But this effort is "get my kid on track for his abilities", and not "make my kid a star".

I was not motivated by an abstract fear of consequences that he might face some day. I was motivated by the consequences that I saw him actually experiencing.

That said, while I do not personally value spelling, I do think it is valuable for him to understand the power of regular review for establishing mastery of material.

It's not unique to the USA - the French could tell you a thing or two about the Championnats d'Orthographe....

I agree with your point though. There is a telling moment in the OP, where it says that the son's reward for working the flashcards is the parent reading him books beyond his reading level. What is the point of spelling words ahead of your reading level? Spelling prowess comes from repeated exposure to written words[1]. It's called "reading" and I can't see any reason (aside from stupid standardised testing) that a kid's spelling ability needs to be ahead of their reading level.

[1] This is if why you are a perl programmer the word "pearl" starts looking wrong.

Edit, due to comments below:

The question is why are teachers asking for words to be spelled essentially out of context. I just can't think of a good reason because the only way you can learn them is by flashcard games, and like the comment above, I just can't see how it is a good use of a kid's time. I certainly do not blame the parent for making sure their kid does well at school, I just don't see the sense of school being this way.

Take the word, oh I don't know. Serialization. Or hypervisor. Or encryption. Most people here can spell them (I assume!) even though you were never required to learn to do so at school - you have learned by sheer exposure. You also know that the opposite of encryption is not unencryption, but decryption, and a decrypted message is not the same as an unencrypted message. Now of course there are linguistic reasons for all this, but the point is that you know these things because you encountered these words in context.

A kid that reads a Star-Trek tie-in is sure to be able to spell "teleportation". Yes, you can also teach a kid to spell that out of context with a flash card. But why? I just don't get it.

[Disclosure: frustrated non-native English speaker who had to teach a first grader to spell "reduce, reuse, recycle" this week, gaaaaah].

With that said, let me clarify a couple of potential misconceptions.

The words that I am teaching my son are not beyond his reading level. In fact they are taken from lists of words that he is expected to be able to read, and was asked to spell on tests in his classroom. His spelling winds up beyond his grade level simply because most kids his age don't know most of those words.

The only connection between the reward activity (reading) and the flashcards is that I use the first to make the second pleasurable. I'm not reading to him because it is good for him, I'm reading to him because he enjoys it. I'd be happy playing with marbles instead. I don't put words from the story into the flashcards - he has enough other stuff that he actually needs to learn which is higher priority.

The reward is that he gets read to, read something he isn't yet able to read on his own because it's ahead of his reading level. The reward is enjoying some good fiction, nothing to do with learning how to spell words from this more-advanced text.

" There is one branch diligently taught in a backwoods school. The public mind seems impressed with the difficulties of English orthography, and there is a solemn conviction that the chief end of man is to learn to spell. "'Know Webster's Elementary' came down from Heaven," would be the backwoods version of the 'Greek saying but that, unfortunately for the Greeks, their fame has not reached so far. It often happens that the pupil does not know the meaning of a single word in the lesson. This is of no consequence. What do you want to know the meaning of a word for? Words were made to be spelled, and men were probably created that they might spell them. Hence the necessity for sending a pupil through the spelling-book five times before you allow him to begin to read, or indeed to do anything else. Hence the necessity for those long spelling-classes at the close of each forenoon and afternoon session of the school, to stand at the head of which is the cherished ambition of every scholar. Hence, too, the necessity for devoting the whole of the afternoon session of each Friday to a "spelling-match." In fact, spelling is the "national game" in Hoopole County. Baseball and croquet matches are as unknown as Olympian chariot-races. Spelling and shucking[10] are the only public competitions."

Spelling is important for a few reasons:

1. It creates a good first impression, if that impression is delivered in written form. (How many times have you degraded your opinion of someone because of a misused "your"?)

2. It broadens your ability to communicate because you can now focus on the message rather than remembering how to spell a word, or limiting yourself to words you can spell.

3. Perhaps most importantly, the rote memorization of unruly spellings is a great precursor to the rote memorization that is required to be competent in math. You can phonetically/use rules to determine how to spell "computer", but you need to memorize "receive", "sufficient" and "seize".

Again, not suggesting that this requires spelling competitions per se, but that spelling should not be discounted.

I had very hard time spelling words when I was at the beginning of the primary school. That didn't improve much but yay, we have spellcheckers now. And I have a Mensa membership and MA in computer science.

Also, algebra by flash cards? Is algebra something to remember and forget? I think you should learn it more like you learn to ride a bike not like the spelling. Physics obeys math. By getting math you are getting intuition about how world works and by remembering how to spell words you are getting a way of making yourself more understandable ... sometimes ... in writing ... without spellchecker.

Oh. And you might do well in a spelling competition (which is useless).

We have spelling competitions in my country too. They have written form. Most famous one had over 50 thousands participants over the course of 15 years. All competitors of given year write at the same time half a page of dictated text. Only 5 people in history of this competition didn't make any mistake in their text. Perfect should never be your target. Because even if task seems simple the difference between perfect and almost perfect is most likely luck.

You shouldn't overdo helping your kids. I know two parents who overdid this and their kids were doing extremely well but only up to the point when those parents stopped coaching them. One lasted till the end of primary school, other lasted till the end of the college.

Apart from all I said kudos for successfully helping your kid.