Good or Bad?
This was a conversation started in another thread and I didn't want to hijack the tread by continuing the debate there.

I think teaching kids to read is a great tool in communication. We talk about the words, the pictures, they get practice saying new words, they learn new vocabulary, and they have fun doing it.

Kids younger than 5 can learn to read by sight but cannot learn to read by phonetics. The sight reading does not reduce their ability to learn phonetics. If done right children taught to read by sight will naturally develop the decoding skills used in phonetics.

I use flash cards with my kids. I have just the word on one side and a picture and the word of the other side. We speed through both sides. They are given time to look at them and handle them. I have them all laminated so they will hold up. They love doing them and have learned to read many of the words. I look at it as a step above labeling everything which I also do. I also view it as a step up from books that label pictures with a one to one correspondence. Both of these latter techniques have been used to teach reading for years.

I don't use any of the electronic based supplements but have begun to make books to correspond with the words and give them more exposure to the words as well as exposure to seeing them in sentences.

I'm just wondering others' takes on this type of program.

Reply

Your baby can read, but should she? No, IMO. Your baby should coo and drool and learn how to sit up, crawl, learn how to walk, play patty-cake, learn that he/she is loved, learn how to love, feel secure. Read? No, your baby has 13 long years in school to learn that. A reading baby is not developmentally appropriate imo.

Can a 3 or 4 year old learn to read? Maybe, but really why should they? unless they really want to and are developmentally ready to. They have a long, long time to learn how to read, let them play with toys, learn how to socialize, learn their colors and shapes, let them paint and glue and cut and color. I find the earlier and earlier approach to formal education ridiculous!

Reply

Here is a really good article on the subject from Psychology Today.

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/...can-read-overb

Reply

I completely agree.

Reply

i agree. i taught kindergarteners and first graders to read (including my own) with no problems and they never spent their time using flash cards and remembering words beforehand. they should learn comprehension, decoding, vocab, etc as they learn to read and that program offers none of that.

my professors all spoke badly of these "reading programs" and as teachers with years of experience who all held doctorates and taught hundreds of kids to read, i trust them over some guy trying to sell flash cards or an overly anxious parent. i don't see why a one or two year old would need to read - kids are expected to BEGIN learning to read in kindergarten - even the "smart ones."

Reply

Babies should be engaged with their entire body and all their senses. "Lessons" on reading are completely inappropriate at this age for many of the reasons listed above and in the other thread.

Why would we want a baby to read? So the parents can brag?? I just don't get it. It does not make a baby smarter. And there seems to be evidence that it may even cause difficulties when the child starts to actually read (not recognition, sounding out words and such...).

JMHO

Reply

here we learn holistically (sp?) we have an all encompassing learning environment where we learn as we go. We do not do flash cards (sight words) until they are long gone from my house. I focus on crawling, walking, shoes, coats, etc,... not reading. Here they learn how things feel taste smell and sound. They learn that mushy things sometimes taste good and sometimes not. They learn how crawling on tile and carpet are the same but different. They learn so many things,... I think that reading is just rushing,.. and refuse to do it. Our "circle time " which I hate that term, lol. we dont sit in a circle, only learn about circles, so I dont call ours circle time. We call it sharing time. We share our time together learning about things. We share songs, observations, ideas and concepts. I think that while the early years are the perfect window for learning language,.. it should be verbal. I feel the same about babies reading as I do infants potty learning,. but there are people who do it. But Its not for me.

Reply

i don't think people realize what sight words really are. that's not meant as an insult...i didn't know until the time came in my training to start teaching children to read. before that, i would assume, like most people that sight words were any words a child could recognize by just looking at them -and they are....BUT there are only a select "few" words that are supposed/meant to be "sight words."

it's called the dolch list - there's a diff. list according to grade, but it's basically the most common words that appear in text "I, do, not, to, a" etc. you can get a copy of it online. if you WANT to teach kids sight words with cards or through games...use that list and those words. it's mostly words that have no "rules."

kids need to learn to read - LEARN...not memorize words, and they aren't capable of learning/comprehending the "rules of reading" until kindergarten/first grade. then, they still don't need any special cards or anything else. they need age appropriate books and someone that knows the basic rules. once again, i didn't know the rules until i was learning how to teach reading.

one example (which only a 5/6 year old could understand) is:

"i do not like to ride a bike." "i, do, not, to, a" are all TRUE sight words. hopefully they know these already or will know them very quickly when learning to read.

the other words "like, ride, bike" can be taught with one simple rule (assuming they already know letter sounds which they should). that would be "when there's an e on the end...the e "pinches that i and makes it say it's name..iiiii!"

so, if they know the e on the end makes the vowel long (or say it's name) they not only can read like, ride, and bike.....but they can read mice, rice, dice, nice, etc. even if you're not there.....

same rule applies with the other vowels. "made" the e "pinches the a and makes it say it's name...aaaa" made, fade, wade, cave, etc.

there are always exceptions to every rule, but for the most part - the rules apply and kids in k/1st are able to understand them. therefore, they'll be able to decode words for the rest of their lives (i'm still coming across words i've never seen, and i didn't have a flashcard for them, but i can read them). there are many rules - that's just one example.

sorry for the long lesson, but i've done it/seen it/know it works - and in a LOT less time than it would take to try to get a child to MEMORIZE words by sight that were never intended to be remembered.

Reply

ditto!

no baby should be reading IMO....just crazy those who spead the money on something like this.

let children BE children!

Reply

"My" babies don't read but we do try to teach them a few words in sign language. We do "hungry", "thirsty", "tired", "mom", "dad", "thank you", "please", and "hello". Helps with the "communication frustration" I don't force any of them to learn, I just do it casually and soon enough they pick it up and use the signs. ALL my kids from age 2-5 use the please and thank you signs without even thinking about it. They just do it 'cuz they are used to it.

Reply

We use sign language too. Some day I hope to be a Japanese immersion day care and I'll still do ASL.

I am helping them explore their world completely. Reading is automatic for us and we do it so often throughout the day I think it's a good thing to help children make more and more sense of their world and expand their knowledge.

I do it to enrich their vocabulary. I give them 10 different cards a week which adds up to 500 new words a year. I could care less if they can actually read them. The point is to let them learn if they want to. I'm offering them a way to explore their world more fully without reliance on adults. I love it when they look at books that I never read to them and read some of the words trying to decipher the story.

I also wanted to make it clear that this takes 20 seconds to do so I am in no way preventing them for developing in other areas. I spend about 5 minutes with each child individually daily doing words, quantity recognition, and a book. We talk, laugh, and enjoy ourselves.

"Your baby should coo and drool and learn how to sit up, crawl, learn how to walk, play patty-cake, learn that he/she is loved, learn how to love, feel secure."
Babies are capable of way more than this. They love new things and learning 500 new words a year is a great place to start.

Reply

I wish I HAD done something like this with my sons when they were toddlers! My oldest has had the most difficult time learning his sight words, and I really think I missed a valuable teaching window when he was 2 and 3 years old. He's 10 now, and is still way behind on reading, and of course that affects every other subject too. My 8 year old was behind when he started kindergarten, although he picked it up quicker than my oldest. I've been doing daycare since my youngest was 11 months, and she's 3 now. She knows so much more than her brothers did at that age because of the things we do at circle time. Reading, writing, counting, adding, subtracting -- all in very short sessions, all with lots of fun, practical examples, but all completely necessary skills for kindergarten. I don't believe a "baby" can read with comprehension, but I do think any pre-reading skills you can teach that baby can't be a bad thing!

Reply

I have little vocab cards and flash cards...basically the kids just tell me what the picture is of and thats it. They love doing it and learn new words for pictures.

All I meant by my comment is why spend that darn much money for something so silly. You can easily get the same effect from other things. That was all I meant. To each his own..but IMO its a gimmick.

Reply

Im new to this forum and already find topics that I have a issue with too! Its nice to see both sides though .

With saying this I had a parent with whom wanted me to have their 22 month old sit with his bottle and watch "Your baby can read" a few times a day. They told me they give him his evening bottle and sit him on the couch to watch it. Mind you the child was 22months, still on infant formula and was given a bottle (my options of cups, trainers, weaning proved nothing) during the day and night. Due to this insistence I had to add a area in my contract on TV education. It states that children would not watch TV (educational or not)more than half hour each daycare day if at all as I feel children learn better with hands on education. This is IMO and what they do with their children on their time is not of my concern.

These parents used this as a "babysitter" and then expected their child to come out above average. They couldnt figure out why their son wasn't learning the words when "he watches the show at least twice a day". If you use this as a teaching tool ALONG with hands on learning and coaching then they may have seen progress. I have not personally used the cds they gave me so I'm just using my opinion. Placing the almost 2 yr old on the couch with a bottle in front of the TV isn't going to teach anything. In fact I had many setbacks with this child and when they finally left my care do to re-locating to the mothers home country I was enthralled.

To each parent and educator their own and if I decide to try it I might have a different idea to back it. All the kids in my care seem to being doing pretty good at their own pace.

Reply

Yikes!
erin's daycare...
My brain stopped working when I read "22 month old with bottle"......
Oh brother!.....what do they it will be easier to transition a 2 year old from a bottle to a cup?!!!! Good luck with that!
Where do these parents come from?

Reply

The mother was Austrailian and the father was American. My son was weaned off the bottle at a year almost on the dot and I always told them I was trying with cups during the day with their son but they never seemed concerned with that as they were with him working on his "reading". Before they left the mom said "I was thinking of trying to potty train him before we re-located but then he might regress when we get there". How about first trying to get him off the bottle AND then work on the other things like potty training or reading or even doing simple tasks like engaging me? That wouldve been better but they were....off....

Because of them I had to add things with my contract about educational videos and other more pressing issues. Like fleas.

Needless to say, the kid STILL couldnt read after a year on his parents "program". I dont blame that specific educational system though...

Reply

It does work. I've seen actual babies who can read.

But, it takes work, every day... every day, the baby needs to watch the videos and work with the flash cards.

I, personally don't see the point. I'd rather just let a baby be a baby and explore the whole world, and I think an hour or more a day out of their little lives is too much.

I probably wouldn't do it with my own child, but I don't think it's absolutely wrong. We parent how we choose, and I don't see a benefit, or a drawback to it really.

Reply

My son was reading before he was two years old.... something he did all on his own. Along with being autistic he has Hyperlexia... this was a huge blessing to him and us as he didn't develop any sort of functional verbal language until he was nearly 5 years old... so we were able to do a lot of communicating with him through the written word.

Reply