To be very sceptical about the 'Your Baby can Read' program?

[michaelschumacherismygod]

My MIL has suggested that I buy this for my 7 month old son. Obviously I want to do the best for my son but I am just not sure if this is the best way for him to learn to read, whole word approach rather than phonics, watching TV for half an hour a day and large portions of his day dedicated to this system. However my MIL thinks I am being unreasonable and should pay the £150 for the program.

Would appreciate your opinions/experience, thanks!

In the 70s I bought a book called 'Teach Your Baby to Read' by an American called Glen[n] Doman.My then 18month old dd was pointing to letters of the alphabet and eagerly picking out the initial letter of her name.My ds then 6 started it by pointing out letters to her in the early mornings when he 'played school' with her before we were up.By the time she was 2 she could read single words and make phrases eg 'the blue ball' using flash cards.At 3 she could read the 'Naughty Little Sister' books.By 6 she read 'the Railway Children'
If your child loves words etc early reading is a great gift.

It was in the paper only yesterday that there is no advantage in early reading. The whole point of reading is to enjoy books! No one can tell at 10yrs whether your DC has been reading since they were 2 yr or only from 7 yrs-and no one cares! Join the library and enjoy books with your DC.
Why does a baby need to read? There is no point in merely decoding-they need the understanding to go with it.

I have the mental picture of a baby reading 'zebra' (easy enough to do phonetically) and not even knowing that it is an animal! Talk to your baby, read books and look at pictures with your baby, take them out and about, but they do not need to decode letters!

Why is early reading a great gift? I don't see that that follows.

Well, recognizing words can be an important way to learn language -- think of the pictogram-based languages. Are Chinese kids not reading?

I read from a very early age. I loved it, it was all I did. I yearned for books, coveted them, and acquired them in great number. I was reading stuff like Crime and Punishment at 9, I read it in Russian at around 16 years' of age. In and of itself, no advantage, but early reading was part of a whole picture of prodigious language acquisition at an early age.

It shaped my schooling (never took part in English classes at school) and I guess it helped me stand out academically.

catrinm "
Incidently my DH was useless at primary school, then got a science degree from Oxbridge and a phd now so........ "

Well, I'll add to your scientific study of one. I wasn't useless at school but got an Oxford degree etc. But I ain't no great shakes, no sir. Oxford certainly taught me I am distinctly average.

I wish, wish, WISH I had been talented at maths.

to frigatebird. Early reading for me was an enormous gift. My little treasure, my gateway (out of an abusive family atmosphere). I was proud of myself, I could tuck myself up with a book. I had friends, I had imagination, self esteem. I had the pride of my parents (when I didn't on the whole have a lot else from them).

What's wrong with that. What's wrong with that happening to a child a year or two before others, especially given you'd probably not say the reverse about a child learning late?

There is a great range of development and a great range of talent. Sometimes I feel that we are too ready to piss on someone's bonfire if they are at the advanced end, but commiserate if they are at the other end of the spectrum. Why not just celebrate the diversity?

But spending lots of cash on some telly based product in the hope that your kid will end up a prodigy

It isn't a great gift for a baby, cuddling up to mum and sharing a book is a great gift-not being asked to perform as soon as they come out of the womb! The only advantage that I can see is in the 'competitive mummy stakes'-the sensible ones will just quietly ignore you.
Thank MIL -and some time later tell her the baby chewed them-that is what babies do!

oops, "...prodigy ... is a waste of time."

Disclaimer: Early reading can lead to writing like a blind, thumbless, chimp in the dark.

oh dear reading these posts I'm now worried that my DD is behind - knows most letters but no recognition of words and not much on sounds either. she's not quite 3. crazy.

mind you it's that emotion these companies play on isn't it - being desperate for your DCs to do well!

I was an early reader. I was wheeled out by my parents as a party trick at tender ages, a little toddler reading aloud from The Times.

I actually think it was not a gift at all. A gift would have been for me to learn and explore gently, all in my own time, about letters but also about ... oh I don't know, sport and music and relationships and running around and maths and hitting my brother over the head and cuddling up to mummy and building dens etc. etc.

Not saying books aren't fab etc. etc. But hot-housing, especially littlies, isn't for me or my DD.

Is there any real point teaching your child to be able to do something like reading Shakespeare by the age of 6? I mean, children at that age might be able to decode the words, might be able to even tell you the oultine story, but don't have the maturity to actually understand the concepts and values within the story.

Fascinated by the poster who was reading at secondary level aged 3. Secondary level, from what I understand from dd and her friends, is things like Middlemarch. Or interminable vampire stories. Or Sherlock Holmes. So how can a 3yo understand what is going on in that kind of book? To me, it's not reading if you don't understand it.

I can understand a mature 9yo reading Crime and Punishment and getting something out of it. But a 3yo?

I made a comment about hothousing earlier. I think flashcards and reading schemes are nonsense.

BUT... my Dad was a librarian and we didn't have a TV until I was about 9. I learnt to read at about 3, and have been an avid reader ever since.

I identify with mippy saying that she felt she had to dumb down to fit in with her peers at primary school. We had just moved and it was the only way I could fit in.

I remember at high school there was a sort of aptitude test. It was multiple choice, so not all that accurate. I got 100% in both maths and english and an educational pyschologist was sent in to establish why I was underachieving. By that point I had lost interest and just wanted to make friends.

It is only during my adult life that I have rediscovered my love of learning.

There's a lot to be said for natural progression. The gifted will be recognised... whatever their field.

Englandallen and Mrsbadger - I think we're on the same team ;)

I'm just saying that starting early doesn't = better outcomes (infact starting early probably = worse long term outcomes, as demonstrated by the differencein Scandi vs UK education).

Yes, CatrinM, really. Why would I exaggerate? You don't know me, you're not going to be impressed if I lie.

I was reading my sister's O-level set texts at six, because we shared a bedroom and I was bored. Not to say I had any idea what they were about, though. Before then I used to read her Jackie mags until my mother was asked if I could have a cleavage too, and then she decided they were 'unsuitable'. My brother and sister used to make me read things to show off to friends which was really annoying.

"I can understand a mature 9yo reading Crime and Punishment and getting something out of it. But a 3yo?"

'Secondary level' covers 11-16, does it not?

I don't remember reading many 'adult' books then simply because I didn't have access to them, but at 8/9 my favourite books were Hitchhiker's Guide, the Adrian Mole series, (oddly) Lern Yerself Scouse, and Sword in the Stone. Also I begged my parents to get Smash Hits for years and they didn't let me until I was seven because it was too 'old', but they were happy for me to read the Telegraph magazine. The thing is, there aren't many books for infant school children reading at adult or near-adult levels. I didn't do many of the reading schemes at school because there was no point, but I still wanted to read about Biff and Chip and Kipper.

My boyfriend was an early reader too but didn't really read much for fun until a teacher gave him Catch 22 when he was fourteen.

Incidentally, my mum is most likely dyslexic for what it's worth. She grew up at a time when people didn't know much about such things, but from what she tells me and her problems with spelling and writing (she often spells words several different ways in the same letter) it sounds very likely to me. It's such a shame because she's really underconfident about it and feels like it makes her stupid.

150 quid, seriously? Bloody hell. A friend of mine swears by this system, but I had no idea it was so expensive. I've always been dubious, because who wants to stick their small baby in front of the television with flash cards? That's not good parenting!

BigWeeHag, how do you read if it's different from other people? I read very early as well (2) but I think I read like everyone else. Although perhaps I don't. I do know that I 'think' via the written word a lot. A dyslexic friend of mine tells me she has to sound the words out silently in her head to be able to read them, and non-dyslexic friends agree that they sort of do the same thing, only more rapidly.

I hear words when people speak to me, and visualise the written version in my head in order to comprehend them. If it's a word I don't know how to spell (an unusual name, usually) I often can't 'hear' it properly - I won't retain the sounds if I don't have a spelling to go with it.

I think I might be a freak, though.

Oh, I should say, my friend's son is 21 months and can't read any more than my 18 month old daughter can; but she tells me that he's been able to recognise letters and words since earlier than a year old, and I have no reason to doubt her. Mine couldn't have cared less about books and words at a year old. Maybe it's personality, or maybe the system did make a difference. Either way, I suspect it'll all be equal in a year.

Well, I wouldn't spend £150 on a system. Some kids do read early but usually because their parents read to them and they ask how.

My niece was reading well at three but my sister always has her head in a book, her house is a library, so I guess it runs in some families.

I'd just make sure your lo is having fun, read to him a lot and if he wants to read, he'll tell you.

I've fuond something i posted on a similar thread a while age!

"When I had just left work and was still a bit driven, I bought a book and flashcards called Teach Your Baby to Read" for my dd and we tried it for a while. You had to hold up the cards and say with loads of expression "THIS says DOG!!" and stuff like that.

At the age of about 15 months, dd batted the card out of my hand and said "Dis says Silly!"

I binned the lot. She learned to read in the normal course of events - and does not appear to have been scarred by her mother's PFBness."

If a DC is going to learn to read early they will learnto read early. My DH was a fluent reader at 3 by looking at the words as his parents read to him (they didn't tell him to look at the words). You can't hold them back if they naturally learn it. Someone is making a huge amount of money out of anxious parents! Seeker's DD had the right attitude and will go far!!

Yeah, but mippy, 8 to 9 is a huge difference from 3. Hitchhikers Guide at 9 doesn't sound at all unusual; dd had certainly read the whole series by then and she started reading later than all her friends (but picked up quickly).

Ime a mature 8 to 9 yo is someone you can hold an adult conversation with and who can understand most adult concepts; a 3yo is not.

Anyway, learning to read really early is certainly not the only way to get good at reading at a later age. Dd was later than all her friends, hadn't really learned her letters before the end of infants, but two years later was reading Tolkien. I taught myself to read at 5, but was reading "big" books within a few months.

Anyway, there's a huge difference between self-taught prodigious readers (which all these posters are) and forcing your baby to sit through flashcards, which in most cases will be ahead even of comprehension. Disclaimer: I taught DS2 to read at just over 3 because he asked me and I thought "Why not?"

If they ask you, then they are ready. I have yet to see a baby ask to learn to read! A 3 yr old can see the advantages-a 7month old can't!