Thoughts on early reading pros/cons?

I'm considering starting to use flashcards to teach DS to read using
something like Glenn Doman's programme - i.e., spending seconds or at most
a few minutes per day doing it, and always stopping if DS isn't interested
right then. I know some people are vehemently anti such programmes. I'm not
very clear on why, but I'd like to understand before I decide whether to go
ahead.

Let's assume everyone agrees that

- one should never pressure a reluctant baby into spending any time on
this;

- one should not spend more than a few minutes per day, so as not to take
too much time away from other activities.

Are there still reasons for not doing this? If so, what are they?

FWIW where I'm coming from is that I learned to read early using flashcards
myself and feel positive about it - reading has been a major pleasure as
far back as I can remember. That's why I'm considering this at all.

(I have googled the arguments against the Domans based on criticism of
theit intensive programmes for "brain injured" children, that lead to
people saying "don't give them your money" - but I'd be making my own
flashcards, so that doesn't apply.)

Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

On Sun, 21 Mar 2004 18:31:13 GMT, Sidheag McCormack
wrote:
I'm considering starting to use flashcards to teach DS to read using
something like Glenn Doman's programme - i.e., spending seconds or at most
a few minutes per day doing it, and always stopping if DS isn't interested
right then. I know some people are vehemently anti such programmes. I'm not
very clear on why, but I'd like to understand before I decide whether to go
ahead.

I see no problem with it at all. But I'm all for learning at any age
) For a baby/toddler, it's all fun and games. I've never had any
experience with the flashcards used on babies as young as yours so I
don't know how effective they are.
I taught my older two to read, and I think I will start earlier with
my third (not this early though, maybe around 2 or so with the actual
teaching). I use a homemade phonics program.
There was someone a few years ago on mkb who said she taught her son
to read not by teaching the alphabet...but by teaching the letter
sounds of each letter and later teaching the letter name. That's an
interesting concept.
Marie

Sidheag McCormack wrote in message
s.com...
I'm considering starting to use flashcards to teach DS to read using
something like Glenn Doman's programme - i.e., spending seconds or at most
a few minutes per day doing it, and always stopping if DS isn't interested
right then. I know some people are vehemently anti such programmes. I'm
not
very clear on why, but I'd like to understand before I decide whether to
go
ahead.


Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003
I started #1 (she's exactly 3 yrs older than Colin: good choice on b'days!)
at about 18 months and she's now a reasonable reader. She learnt her first 3
words (mummy, daddy, her name) very quickly, within less than a week. When
she's interested she'll learn 1-2 new ones a day, then we'll have periods
where she really doesn't want to at all, and so we don't do them. The real
high point was at just after 2yrs when she started picking the words she
knew out of a sentence, like if I was reading the paper. We do them when she
asks only now, which is a few times a week, or she'll copy the words either
on the computer or by hand.
I wouldn't even consider flashcards yet. The novelty of them was what really
got her going as she got interested in letters, if you introduce them too
early I'd suspect they'll be less interested as it's nothing new. I'd say at
minimum they need to be able to repeat the word back to you. (unless there's
a speech problem or something) I'd wait and see whether words interest him.
If he's more interested in digging up the back garden you'll both get
frustrated if you try and pin him down to looking at flshcards.
For the time being just read lots of books and if he's interested in books
being read to him at 18 months, then try the flashcards, but if he's not
interested then don't worry about it.
Interesting thing I've noticed is that #1 reads/writing in mirror writing
with no difficulty at all. I find it harder than she does!
Debbie

Are there still reasons for not doing this? If so, what are they?

IMO, if a child is 'wired' to be an early reader (and many kids who are
entirely bright in every way are NOT so wired), there are any number of ways to
stimulate reading interest/ability that are far more fun and interesting than
sitting around with flashcards. Like, say ... reading and looking at books
together.

(FWIW, I was an early reader too. I don't remember exactly when I learned to
read, but it was well before kindergarten. I learned to read from reading
books/being read to. Shaina was a slightly early reader, but not
extraordinarily so. She started reading the summer before kindergarten. She
grew up in a house full of books, attended a preschool with plenty of
academics, was read to frequently ... but her brain just was not ready to make
the leap into reading until she was 5 1/2. Once she made that leap, however,
she progressed very quickly, and quickly was reading several years above grade
level, where she remains to this day. (She's in 6th grade now.) All without
flashcards.

I just can't see the point in it. Reading is a pleasure whether one starts at
a year, with flash cards, or at 4 or 5 or 6, by reading books.

(And the kids at the preschool where I work, all range in age from 2 through 5.
None are reading yet, beyond a handful of sight words for the oldest. All LOVE
to be read to, and love looking at books, so get much pleasure out of books
that way. A child doesn't have to be able to read by himself to enjoy books.
(And, IMO, for babies and toddlers, there is surely MORE pleasure in sitting in
Mommy's lap and talking about books together than sitting alone and reading
cold text.)


Naomi
CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator

(either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
reply.)

Marie wrote:



There was someone a few years ago on mkb who said she taught her son
to read not by teaching the alphabet...but by teaching the letter
sounds of each letter and later teaching the letter name. That's an
interesting concept.
Marie

That's how it's done in Montessori programs (or, at least, it used to
be.) My brother was an AMI-certified Montessori teacher, and that's
where I got the idea when I was teaching my daughter.

Clisby

"Sidheag McCormack" wrote in message
s.com...
I'm considering starting to use flashcards to teach DS to read using
something like Glenn Doman's programme - i.e., spending seconds or at most
a few minutes per day doing it, and always stopping if DS isn't interested
right then. I know some people are vehemently anti such programmes. I'm
not
very clear on why, but I'd like to understand before I decide whether to
go
ahead.

Let's assume everyone agrees that

- one should never pressure a reluctant baby into spending any time on
this;

- one should not spend more than a few minutes per day, so as not to take
too much time away from other activities.

Are there still reasons for not doing this? If so, what are they?

FWIW where I'm coming from is that I learned to read early using
flashcards
myself and feel positive about it - reading has been a major pleasure as
far back as I can remember. That's why I'm considering this at all.

(I have googled the arguments against the Domans based on criticism of
theit intensive programmes for "brain injured" children, that lead to
people saying "don't give them your money" - but I'd be making my own
flashcards, so that doesn't apply.)

Be aware that the really intensive Doman programs have been linked to the
development of learning and emotional disabilities in the children they are
trying to help. A few seconds or minutes a day won't hurt (and the newer
editions of the books have relaxed the time spent dramatically), but you'd
be better off sitting with the child on your lap and actually reading books,
not words in isolation. It is likely that what you remember positively is
the time spent with the parent, not the methodology.


Sidheag
DS Colin Oct 27 2003

"Sidheag McCormack" wrote in message
s.com...
I'm considering starting to use flashcards to teach DS to read using
something like Glenn Doman's programme -

A good book: _No Time for Jello_ by Berneen Bratt


i.e., spending seconds or at most
a few minutes per day doing it, and always stopping if DS isn't interested
right then. I know some people are vehemently anti such programmes. I'm
not
very clear on why, but I'd like to understand before I decide whether to
go
ahead.

Let's assume everyone agrees that

- one should never pressure a reluctant baby into spending any time on
this;

- one should not spend more than a few minutes per day, so as not to take
too much time away from other activities.

Are there still reasons for not doing this? If so, what are they?


It is much more fun and enjoyable to have the baby cuddled on your lap with
a book that you look at together.

In fact sometimes (especially early on), the books do not have to have
words, but lovely pictures. Sometimes great learning comes when you ask the
child about the page... like what kind of sound an animal makes (one child
loved a baby animal book, and another like _Mr. Brown Can Moo, Can You?_).
Then there are books that just have silly things and it is fun for a child
to discover them (like Wiesner's _Tuesday_).

Childhood is a journey, not a race.

"HCN" wrote in message
news:P3q7c.55042$1p.911363@attbi_s54...

Childhood is a journey, not a race.

Amen!!

Also, reading is not just decoding words or recognizing sight words. I had
many students who could decode words beautifully and had great fluency, but
they couldn't tell you one single thing about the material they just read.
Reading is the interactive process of contructing *meaning* using print,
pictures, background knowledge, etc. Decoding and sight words are just a
part of that process.


--
JennP.

mom to Matthew 10/11/00
remove "no........spam" to reply

In fact sometimes (especially early on), the books do not have to have
words, but lovely pictures. Sometimes great learning comes when you ask the
child about the page..

This is a good point. There are SOO many wonderful books out there for babies
and toddlers -- books aimed at that very age group -- books that assume that
the child is NOT reading independently. What is the 'benefit' in skipping past
this entire time frame, to rush the child into being able to 'read' long books
full of words?

One of the favorite books at the preschool, esp. among the 2's and 3's is
"Rosie's Walk." Very little text, very simple story. (Rosie the hen takes a
walk around the farm and is pursued by a fox, who, of course, gets into all
sorts of trouble while Rosie blithely enjoys her walk and returns home to the
henhouse 'in time for dinner.' And they love the book not because of the 50 of
so words of text, but because we talk and laugh about what happens to the fox.
The kids themselves tell the story on each page, laughing about how he becomes
'a pita sandwich' when the flour falls on him' and "oh oh! Here come the bees"
when he knocks over the bee hives." How would learning to read the story all
by themselves help that process?

And some of the older kids (4's and 5's) who can't yet read, are at the point
where they can memorize the stories, including some of the actual text, and
'read' the books, going from page to page, telling the story, often virtually
verbatim. They love doing it. Gives them a great sense of accomplishment. But
seem to have no real interest yet in sounding out words, which is perfectly
fine. They'll do it when they are ready. I point with my finger as I read, so
they can follow along if they wish, but they usually prefer to look at the
pictures. (The preschool doesn't do much with real academics.)

Your son has his whole life to enjoy reading books. Let him spend his first few
years enjoying books aimed at his age.




Naomi
CAPPA Certified Lactation Educator

(either remove spamblock or change address to to e-mail
reply.)

Sidheag McCormack wrote in message ws.com...
I'm considering starting to use flashcards to teach DS to read using
something like Glenn Doman's programme -

snip

Are there still reasons for not doing this? If so, what are they?

I was a very early reader (not because anyone deliberately taught
me, but because I picked it up on my own) and although reading is
one of the central pleasures of my life, it *did* have a downside
in my opinion. The elementary school I attended didn't really
have the organization to deal with a reading kindergartener, and
so they sort of alternated between making me do the learn-to-read
exercises which I hated because I was beyond them, and letting
me sit in a corner and read, which did wonders for my reading but
maybe wasn't so good in other ways.

I honestly don't know if my parents could have stopped me from
learning, but in my case it's been a mixed blessing. None of
which means there's anything wrong with the flash cards, just
that there's also nothing wrong with learning to read at the
'normal' time and there may even be some social gain involved.

Beth