North Dakota Babies
Options
Your baby can read.....
Has anyone heard of this? DH and my FIL and BIL keep telling me I need to get this for G, but I am thinking I can teach her how to read on my own. Anyone have any experience with this?
I guess I need to do some research and familarize myself with the program before I make a decision....
This discussion has been closed.
Re: Your baby can read.....
A friend of mine nannies for an 18 month old and she said she just plays it for her while she has lunch and she's noticed a difference. I don't know much more than that.
Sounds pretty cool though if it really works.
Started TTC Nov. 2011
1st clomid cycle June 2012- No response :: HSG August 2012- Left tube blocked, right tube clear :: 2nd clomid cycle Aug. 2012 BFN :: 3rd clomid cycle Sept. 2012 :: BFP Sept 30th :: DS born 6/15/13 :: BFP #2 7/29/14 M/C 8/5/14 :: BFP#3 10/20/14 DD born 7/1/2015 :: Applied to be surrogate April '17 :: Transferred 1 Embryo for IFs Dec. '17 :: Surro Babe born 9/11/18 :: Started 2nd Journey May '19 :: Transferred 1 Embryo for new IFs 9/24/19 :: HB 138 at 6w6d
I actually read something one time that said this makes it harder for kids to learn how to read. The program is just memorization, they're not actually learning why certain letter combinations make certain sounds or anything like that, they are just memorizing pictures of words.
Let me see if I can find more info.
This is exactly what I have heard. It teaches kids memorization of the word, but makes it harder for them to actually learn how to read. I'm sticking with traditional methods.
~Kimberly & Eric~ April 21, 2008 ~Tensing Pen ~ Negril, Jamaica ~ My Blog: One Sunset at a Time
This exactly!
My MIL is a college professor of Child Development and early childhood education and I have heard her rant about this. She has nothing good to say about it and also says it can make it harder for them to actually learn how to read.
This. I'm really skeptical of this product. Babies brain development is meant follow a certain path in a timeframe. Whenever we think about trying to speed things up, I wonder what it does to the brains NATURAL course of developement. I'm not saying you shouldn't stimulate learning, I just think this particualr program may set unrealistic expectations and urge the brain to focus on something it is not quite ready for.
In the end I believe what you end up getting is word/picture recognition. Which is not really reading. It's like when you see pets who can do math. Pets can't do math. they just learn the association between the question and answer that gets them the treat.
I know a lot of people disagree with me on this, but I think a lot of other professionals working in child development feel the same way. maybe?
I was thinking this too. However being a Kindergarten teacher, the first way to teach a child how to read is memorization, however we do a lot more to continue to teach the letters/sounds etc...
I have so many materials at my disposal working in an elementary school, that I told DH I could do a better job teaching her to read when the time comes, but the IL's are pushing this on me, and I wanted some more info to throw back at them lol....
Thanks for the info ladies!!!
We're doing a lot of playing around with sounds - consonant and vowels.
This made me think back to when I taught K. Some parents would bring their kid the first day and be so proud that their child could recite their ABC's. What really made a difference is the kids who knew the letter sounds.
ETA: I still think it looks cool when somebody shows a baby a word and they can recite it!
If they think it's so important let them get it! Doesn't mean you have to use it. lol. Sorry if that sounds mean... sometimes that's just the only way to get people off your back.
To piggy on the phonetics part of which several girls also mentioned, I can tell you from doing many cogntive and learning disability assessments for my job, I have noticed a big difference between kids who learned to "sight read" vs. kids who learn to read phonics.
In general, the phonics kids have an easier time on the testing portions that require reading since many of the words that are prompted to them to read are meant to be "new" to them. The phonics readers can sound out the new words, the sight readers struggle.
Obviously I'm not stating a cause and effect thing, just something I have observed in my own work. There are a lot of other factors that influence the particular kids I test.
haha this exactly!!The kids come into me singing the ABC's but I show them a letter and they have no idea what it is!!!
I need to ask my mom how she taught me to read. I know she didn't have something like this and I was reading by 4 years old.
Jeff has mentioned getting this after seeing the commercials but I've also heard that things like this aren't necessarily the best way to go
I was planning on going this route because I knew how to read when I entered kindergarten. So my parents did something right. My mom is a huge reader and I know she read to me a lot when I was little. I think she also got books and read them to me and then later had me read them to her. Then she would put new books in the mix (Dr. Seuss was great for this) and see if I could read them and help me along to some extent. I'm horrible at phonics though, always have been. (Maybe it's related to how I learned to read) At the same time the only time it came up was in 2nd grade when that was my major deficiency. Technically they were supposed to hold me back for it (or at least that was my impression based on the story) but the teacher found no reason for it because I was excelling in reading and spelling. Now days if there's a word that I have problems pronouncing, I go online to something like Merriam-Webster's web page and they have the words pronounced for you to hear and mimic.
I think I'd be more willing to say "I want to teach little one sign language to start them" and go from there. It's a different thing obviously but at the same time it's looked at positively by everyone I've talked to and it will also make you look proactive. Good luck!
I'm a bit late in the game on this one, but I had a little kid when I was working at HWAC who could read PERFECTLY! He was maybe 3 and one day we were walking around and I was showing him the different buildings at the center and he stopped in front of one building, looked right at the sign, and slowly yet perfectly pronounced "Pet Encounter Therapy". His nanny said the Mom used My Baby Can Read but also read to him for an hour every night. I was AMAZED!
We then when inside and he walked around and read every sign on the animal cages for me ("Whites Tree Frog", "Sheila the Blue-Tongued Skink", "Hansel the Bearded Dragon", etc.).
So I think My Baby Can Read by itself may not be a great idea but combine it with lots of one-on-one Mommy Time with books and encourage reading and you've got a good combo!
This and I wanted to add that it is a crock of bologne.
How funny that the commercial is on as I'm reading this. lol I thought about it for dd, but then I called my aunt. She taught 1st grade for 37 years and said that those kids aren't reading any more than they're reading when they're looking at picture books. She said it teaches the child that the "picture" they see on the card is a certain word, just like you teach them that a picture of a bear is a bear. She wouldn't recommend it to anyone. She said, if anything, to run your finger under words as you're reading to a child and to work on things like "B sounds like buh." My dd just turned 3 and knows upper & lower case letters as well as their sounds, just by doing what my aunt says. She can also "sight read" her favorite bedtime book.... or maybe she just memorized it. lol
We're actually thinking of getting Muzzy for her to learn a language, although I am guessing it's similar to Your Baby Can Read in the sense that it only teaches phrases to repeat. I don't know anyone that has it, though, so I can't say for sure.