Part of life with little kids is alphabet content. The alphabet is a key element in early literacy, so it makes some sense that authors and toy-designers stuff it in anywhere it might fit. But this surfeit of alphabet content can feeling a little overwhelming.
Plus, there’s the issue of ‘x.’
Yes, ‘x’ is in the English alphabet, and yes, we have to learn it.
But there really aren’t very many words that start with ‘x.’ And there are none that you use everyday, unless you’re a radiologist (X-ray), percussionist (xylophone), or botanist (xylem).
There’s an alphabet-based puzzle in our house designed around the premise of an animal for each letter. This works fine (save for the inclusion of “unicorn”—which we’ll no doubt have fun explaining in a few years) until getting to ‘x,’ where we get X-ray fish.
Now, I’m not saying this isn’t a real animal.
It’s just something that two well-educated adults—me and my wife—had never heard of before.
I struggle with this insistence on structure. I understand it, of course, but my preference is for the alphabet content that’s honest with itself about ‘x,’ drawing on words that contain the letter rather than begin with it. The insistence on X-ray fish and xemes and xylophones clouds the other purpose of this content, which is to inform children about the world around them.
(Don’t get me started on how the content diet of American children is replete with lions, giraffes, penguins, and a zoo’s worth of exotic animals—which they’ll never encounter in the wild—but comparatively bereft of squirrels, deer, and other suburban denizens. This is another post entirely.)
So when I encounter alphabet content that highlights ‘x’ with a word like eXclaim or taXi, I feel a little bit better. Xylophones are great, but I doubt they will be an option in my son’s middle school orchestra.
Taylor Coe 