"Your Baby Can Read" Does it Work? - Mothering Forums

Forum Jump: 
 
Thread Tools
#1 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 01:57 PM - Thread Starter
 
Nansense's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Does anyone have "Your Baby Can Read?" Like it? Not like it? Does it work? How much time per day?

Thanks!

eta: my kids are 3 1/2 & almost 5 so thinking it would be helpful since they want to learn to read now.
Nansense is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
#2 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 03:40 PM
 
meemee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norther California
Posts: 12,625
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
dont get taken in by the ads.

this is utter crap. imho.

babies need to spend their time exploring all their 5 senses.

they ARE going to read at 5 when it is developmentally appropriate.

why do you want them to read earlier. what good does it do them.

imho reading and writing even at 5 is the least important thing a child learns as they are learning so much else - how to interact in a group, how to deal with their feelings.

yes if you drill some babies will be able to repeat what you have taught them. but its rote repeatition - not learning. some children can spontaneously read on their own when they are infants or toddlers. that is their personality and you suppport them appropriately. plus you waste so much time on that when they could be learning something more appropriate and to their liking. something they could learn in one day at K might take them a few months as an infant.

yukh!!! if i remember the commercial right, they are so proud that you just plonk them in front of the tv and dont need to be there. :

 treehugger.gif Co-parent, joy.gifcold.gifbrand new homeschooling middle schoolerjoy.gif, and an attackcat.gif 
meemee is offline  
#3 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 04:37 PM
 
gcgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I agree with the PP. It's not important, necessary, or right to teach a baby to read. They'll get there. They have so many other foundational steps to master first. And reading one or two years early does NOT give them a leg up on the competition, so to speak.

I'd skip it. However, I did start my 16-month old on Starfall.com, just as a fun diversion for us to do together, not expecting him to learn anything...but he learned his letters in a few months. I actually stopped doing it because I was worried about pushing him too hard.

That kind of thing I don't mind, but pushing actual READING, that makes me uncomfortable.
gcgirl is offline  
#4 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 05:13 PM - Thread Starter
 
Nansense's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 77
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Thanks. I should clarify that my kids are 3 1/2 & almost 5... so well beyond the baby stage. I've been teaching letters and sounds, and short words to my ods, but wondered if this system would help. And no, I wouldn't plunk them in front of the tv without being there; would try to use the cards more.
Nansense is offline  
#5 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 05:18 PM
 
alexsam's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Posts: 3,191
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd maybe venture into the homeschooling forum. They probably have lots of ideas for various options that are developmentally appropriate for those ages .
alexsam is offline  
#6 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 05:32 PM
 
moondiapers's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2002
Location: Lakeport, California
Posts: 5,912
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
I would teach a 5yo to read, but not a 3 yo....do you realy want to explain profane bumper stickers to your toddler? FWIW, at age 5, my kids really enjoyed Hooked on Phonics.

Heather married to my highschool sweetheart 6/7/02 :cop: Mother to Dani age 14 and Timmy age 10 Nadia 1/29 :
moondiapers is offline  
#7 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 05:40 PM
 
cappuccinosmom's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: SW Pennsylvania
Posts: 5,447
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I'd say, the child who can learn to read *that* young, could probably also learn to read with some care and attention by his parents, and no special curriculum. You'll note they don't guarantee results.

For instance, it *might* "work" with my 2.5 yo. He started recognizing his own name last month (on his own), and can "read" it, and tell me the letters to write in the proper order. He's got two more words, but they're sight words as well, and that's what the program looks like it does. Introduces sight words, repeats ad nauseum, and a child with a brain like my youngest kid might become one of their poster children. My older two children are not like that though, and I doubt it'd be any use to them. I can't say that the program would necessarily benefit any child. It's one thing if a youngster develops and interest and ability to read early, on his own. It's another thing to push them.
cappuccinosmom is offline  
#8 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 08:13 PM
 
daytripper75's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2003
Location: Here, There, and Everywhere.
Posts: 1,503
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I work in the children's department of a large, public library. I have never met a family that cited it as useful.

Mother of two. : 4/05 and 1/07 Wife of one. : 7/01
daytripper75 is offline  
#9 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 08:26 PM
 
meemee's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Norther California
Posts: 12,625
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 22 Post(s)
nansense when my dd was in K she was having problems because she is a whole language learner and not a phonetic person. i could see she hated phonetics, but she needed it instead of looking at a word and guessing it - taking pot shots in the dark.

so i paid thru my nose and bought her a subscription to www.headsprout.com she didnt want to learn from me and her school was too slow. i bougth only the first 40 lessons. even before reaching 30 she got the skills she needed, and by first grade was reading at a 5th grade level (however that is her genetics - her whole dads side of the family were early readers or slow in the beginning and then taking off). dd was a reluctant reader and if i could have homeschooled her i probably would not have introduced reading till she was ready which i would imagine would have been between 8 and 10.

however if your ds is not having problems in school i would leave it. the pace they have at k and first grade are ok.

 treehugger.gif Co-parent, joy.gifcold.gifbrand new homeschooling middle schoolerjoy.gif, and an attackcat.gif 
meemee is offline  
#10 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 08:53 PM
 
gcgirl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Posts: 2,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by Nansense View Post
Thanks. I should clarify that my kids are 3 1/2 & almost 5... so well beyond the baby stage. I've been teaching letters and sounds, and short words to my ods, but wondered if this system would help. And no, I wouldn't plunk them in front of the tv without being there; would try to use the cards more.
Well, that's different, for sure. I'm still not sure I'd spend the money on the program since there are "programs" out there that are FREE! I second the PP who said to look on the homeschooling forum. That's where I learned about Starfall.

I don't think 3.5 is too young to start the basics, but I wouldn't push it at that age, of course.
gcgirl is offline  
#11 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 09:05 PM
 
jenfl's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Location: Central Florida
Posts: 2,000
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
To my understanding, "Your Baby Can Read" is really basic, just teaching recognizing certain word shapes, basically. They can't take that knowledge and grow it out to reading other words.

At that older age, you're best going with some sort of phonics program. Teach letter sounds at home, play games to figure out what words begin and end with, play with Starfall, etc. There's lots of stuff in the Homeschooling area about teaching reading at the preschool age.

Jen, former sys admin and current geek , wife to DH , SAHM and Montessori homeschool teacher to DD "Nugget" (05/07) and new arrival DS "Sprout" (03/31/10)
jenfl is offline  
#12 of 23 Old 12-26-2009, 11:33 PM
 
lindberg99's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2003
Posts: 2,799
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by cappuccinosmom View Post
I'd say, the child who can learn to read *that* young, could probably also learn to read with some care and attention by his parents, and no special curriculum. You'll note they don't guarantee results.

For instance, it *might* "work" with my 2.5 yo. He started recognizing his own name last month (on his own), and can "read" it, and tell me the letters to write in the proper order. He's got two more words, but they're sight words as well, and that's what the program looks like it does. Introduces sight words, repeats ad nauseum, and a child with a brain like my youngest kid might become one of their poster children. My older two children are not like that though, and I doubt it'd be any use to them. I can't say that the program would necessarily benefit any child. It's one thing if a youngster develops and interest and ability to read early, on his own. It's another thing to push them.
That's what I think too. A lady at my youngest's gymnastics class was going on about how the program taught her 3 yo to read. I think her child probably would have started reading around then anyway. My middle child started recognizing words at 2.5 and knew quite a few words by 4...I'm sure if I had used the cards with him, I would think it was from that. My youngest is starting to read now in kindergarten. And I bet he wouldn't have gotten anything out of doing a program like that earlier. He just didn't have the interest in letters that my middle child did.
lindberg99 is offline  
#13 of 23 Old 12-27-2009, 12:18 AM
 
Anastasiya's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2006
Posts: 1,485
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcgirl View Post
I did start my 16-month old on Starfall.com....
Thank you for this! My 5 year old is finding it fascinating! I had no idea it existed.....
Anastasiya is offline  
#14 of 23 Old 12-27-2009, 07:15 PM
 
leighi123's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2007
Location: Indialantic, FL
Posts: 1,311
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by jenfl View Post
To my understanding, "Your Baby Can Read" is really basic, just teaching recognizing certain word shapes, basically. They can't take that knowledge and grow it out to reading other words.
This is not true.

It is the initial idea, and only used in the very begining but it expands from there.


I got it for my ds, we dont use the videos, and he plays with the cards on his own or with me, they are nice flashcards, but he reads books on his own far more.

We just go to the library a lot and he loves books so reads all the time, especially anything with real pictures of animals in it, so I try to find those books. He can read his name, everyone in the family's names and a few other words, all of things he likes or sees often. I also put up lables on certian things, like by his pet fish I put the fish's name and the word fish etc.

Mostly he has picked up stuff on his own, and he likes it so I just go by his lead. I was reading kids books at 2yrs old and had a high school reading level in 2nd grade, my mom just read me a lot of books and I learned on my own!
leighi123 is offline  
#15 of 23 Old 12-27-2009, 10:50 PM
 
PoppyMama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: In my own delusions.
Posts: 3,126
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1 Post(s)
Oh the horror of having a baby who can read. That would be like having a newborn who can walk. I'm just not ready for that sort of thing.
PoppyMama is offline  
#16 of 23 Old 12-28-2009, 05:33 AM
 
gypsymama2008's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 124
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I honestly think the best way to teach your child to read is to just read to your child (Mem Fox has written an excellent book about this called Reading Magic) If your children do watch DVDs I suppose there could be worse movies for them to watch, but considering the price I would pass on it. Just read to your children and they'll learn to read just fine.

Stay-at-home Mama to my fabulous DD (10/08)  and DS (9/12) and wife to my just-as-fabulous DH

gypsymama2008 is offline  
#17 of 23 Old 12-28-2009, 01:46 PM
 
Heidi74's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 217
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gypsymama2008 View Post
I honestly think the best way to teach your child to read is to just read to your child (Mem Fox has written an excellent book about this called Reading Magic) If your children do watch DVDs I suppose there could be worse movies for them to watch, but considering the price I would pass on it. Just read to your children and they'll learn to read just fine.
I agree with this. Read to them a lot, and make the books accessible to them. Stock up on simple picture books with lots of repetitive text and let them "play" with reading in their own time. Point out words, letters and sounds as you go about your daily activities. Play with rhymes, and demonstrate how to sound out simple words. (Sounding out certainly doesn't work for everything though, so don't "overfocus" on it.) Let them play with magnetic letters on the fridge, and similar activities...if they choose to do so themselves. Just make these types of language activities possible. Most importantly, though...read, read, read to your kids, and let them see you reading as well.
Heidi74 is offline  
#18 of 23 Old 02-01-2010, 08:51 AM
 
babygirlie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 855
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
LOVE IT. I can't remember when we started but maybe around 4 months? She was utterly bored by the 20 minute fisherprice dvd about a ball. However completely enthralled with all the words on the your baby can read video. She loves the dvd's. She's 9 months now and she is still all eyeballs when it's on. I've even been guilty of letting her watch it like 5 times in a row when I was cleaning something rough and she never fussed and watched it every time.

It's not a regimine as people are making it sound. He recommends no tv but to show the 20? minute video twice a day for several months. Then try the next dvd. There's only like 3. There are songs and word games and colors on there too. She loves the songs.

It's not a do or die type of thing. It seems to me the same as sesame street without all the boring parts. This really is her favorite video, more than elmo or barney on sprout tv. I do admit she likes her some tv and I am working on keeping it off more. She's a thinker and pays close attention to the boring-est of adult tv so I need to keep it off more. (by adult I mean news, horror flicks etc not ADULT)

I also have cards (you can get the dvd's cheap on ebay and just buy some flashcards at walmart for a buck in the book section up front) and she gets super excited over those too. She can't talk (she's 9 months) but waves her hands and gets super excited and grunts when i show her a new color. I haven't tried laying them out and having her point or anything. I'm not too worried about it. We do it for FUN. She finds it exciting, much more than toys. I also do it on a whim.. nothing structured. And definately not everyday.

I am not out to have the smartest baby on the block but these are things she finds FUN. She finds puppets etc pretty boring. I see nothing wrong with nourishing a developing mind who is eager to learn rather than "dumbing" them down for the sake of NOT learning. Doesn't make sense to me.

Learning your abc's IS memorization, so saying they are not learning "phonics" and scoff at it seems silly. She will learn that too but the beginning of learning to read is a LOT of memorization even as we read now we are not sounding it out but seeing the first few letters and have memorized the shapes and made assumptions of what word most likely comes out. Of course she will learn phonics and of course if she doesn't want to watch the dvds anymore she doesn't have to but for us she is absolutely thrilled with them and there's no garbage and fluff and propaganda in it. It's very simple. It shows a baby clapping and says can you clap? Do you know a baby? Very cute things she adores. And I even learned the second verse to twinkle twinkle little star :P

I should also add there is a lot of association with it like B sounds like ball base blue etc etc and looking at adding things like "ing" or "ed". So it's not JUST words thrown up but a little bit of everything including colors and numbers. It is definately not military teaching. but then again maybe I'm doing it wrong :P Who cares. If she gets it she gets it if not I have several years to worry about it in the future

but my stand alone review as video for videos sake.. awesome!
babygirlie is offline  
#19 of 23 Old 02-01-2010, 12:21 PM
 
betsyj's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2009
Posts: 628
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gypsymama2008 View Post
I honestly think the best way to teach your child to read is to just read to your child (Mem Fox has written an excellent book about this called Reading Magic) If your children do watch DVDs I suppose there could be worse movies for them to watch, but considering the price I would pass on it. Just read to your children and they'll learn to read just fine.

I had to quote gypsymama again but she is so right. You don't need high priced videos to teach your kid to read.

What matters most is reading aloud to your child every day, having his or her books at an accessible level, and letting him or her see you reading and enjoying books.
betsyj is offline  
#20 of 23 Old 02-01-2010, 12:56 PM
 
AFWife's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Location: Texas
Posts: 5,083
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
My parents had their own janitorial service when I was growing up and I used to go with them...I'd sit in a stroller with my books on tape. (Remember those? They were Disney based mostly) Apparently, I taught myself to read after a few years of that... No gimmicks, no "magic tapes"

My parents also would read with me every night.

Kas (24), Helpmeet to Stefan (25), Mom to Franklin Gaudelio 4/15/09, Jonathan Boswell 1/2/11
AFWife is offline  
#21 of 23 Old 02-01-2010, 01:02 PM
 
Youngfrankenstein's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Posts: 2,225
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Quote:
Originally Posted by gcgirl View Post

I'd skip it. However, I did start my 16-month old on Starfall.com, just as a fun diversion for us to do together, not expecting him to learn anything...but he learned his letters in a few months. I actually stopped doing it because I was worried about pushing him too hard.

.
I always tell people that the internet taught dd to read. Starfall was a fun sight for her and it taught her how to read. She was 4.

Mama to 4. winner.jpghomebirth.jpg
Youngfrankenstein is offline  
#22 of 23 Old 02-01-2010, 01:06 PM
 
bnhmama's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: Missouri
Posts: 555
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
You'd be MUCH better off plunking the money down on a batch of great books.

Yes, children memorize words and even remember them by sight. However, there's a HUGE component missing-comprehension. You can show a child ANY Picture/word/whatever a million times and say the word and they are likely going to memorize it. That's basic brain development. The more times something is repeated, the more likely the baby is to remember it.


FYI: I work with parents and children from Birth-five.
bnhmama is offline  
#23 of 23 Old 02-01-2010, 02:05 PM
 
velochic's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Dreaming of the Bavarian Alps
Posts: 8,198
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
I think that more than learning to read, babies need interaction. There's a reason that it's not recommended to have babies watch ANY TV at all. Babies learn best from people, not screens. I think it's great to have the tools available and interact with your child, but if they'd rather play with trucks than letter, let them. Those trucks are teaching a valuable lesson, too.

We had some magnetic letters for dd and she knew all of her letters at 19 months - she had never seen a video in her life at that time, but we read a lot. It was just interest and asking and interacting. Then she just stopped being interested in letters and moved on to something else (puzzles and building, I think). I didn't push it. I knew she'd do it when she was ready. She was 4 before she started showing any additional interest and we got her some early readers. Then, without any prompting, the summer before Kindergarten she just started reading without me even knowing. Before I knew it, she was reading proficiently. It CLICKED. She is now the best reader in her grade and reads anything from her level to several grades above her. I didn't do anything... at all... other than read to her a lot and provide the tools. (She does attend a private language immersion school, so they were teaching her pre-reading skills for the target language, not English. Practice for English was all at home until 1st grade, but we didn't use a "program".)

I think the synapses have to develop and until they do, there isn't any amount of forcing a child to do something before they are developmentally ready. It's a waste of money, time, and probably patience. I've seen the ads and it looks like a rather ridiculous program. JMHO.
velochic is offline  
Reply

User Tag List

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page


Forum Jump: 

Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off