Teaching your baby to read. Anyone read this?

[Lexiejack]

Found a book called how to teach your baby to read that's got amazing reviews and I'm
Going to try with DS (2.4) and DD (1.1) but was wondering if anyone has tried it and had any success?

If it is the Glenn Doman method, though, I must say I can think of more interesting things you could both be doing!

It's a fact that some teachers don't bother and as we live in a shitty area with overcrowded classes I'd like to try and teach them to read. Very sorry if that pisses some people off but I was under the impression that mumsnet was there for support? I want my children to succeed and i don't want to rely solely on teachers for that. It's nothing against teachers or the education system at all

But that's exactly my point. There are so many things you can do with your child in their early years that won't be covered by a teacher. Why waste your time doing something that will be covered by people who know what they're doing?

And really, if you don't have faith in your child's future teachers then you have bigger issues than teaching your child to read.

Having read some of the more recent replies, I have no problem with the casual approach that alana describes. It's when it's organised in any form that it seems unneccesary to me.

"It's a fact that some teachers don't bother"....

I'm sorry, but that doesn't really go with not having anything against teachers or the education system. Some might have lots of children with other problems, and not enough support, but do you really think some teachers don't bother to teach children to read?

It's the main thing they do for an entire year in reception.

Lexie, go for it. Over many years of education (and ongoing, as IMO it always is) the best thing I've found is to learn a range of learning skills. You wouldn't use the same single method to teach things later in their education (at school, at home, to drive, at work...it goes on) so why not try different things early on. If you all hate it, stop. It's not like you're sending them off to university yet!

As to the teachers here who say they'd rather not have readers in their intake; I'm gobsmacked. Surely having a love of learning/reading is a Good Thing? Or is it to do with Added Value? I'm in the midst of a teaching qualification myself, but for adults, so I appreciate it's a bit different, but seems alien as a concept tbh.

Your eldest child is just turned 2. How on earth can you make any informed judgement on his future teachers?

some teachers don't bother with reading??

Are you kidding me? Where are you getting this misinformation from?

MN is here for support and for unvarnished truth.

You are spending time doing something completely unnecessary because you don't trust trained professionals to do it properly.

Are you a control freak in other areas of your life too?

jennie "Surely having a love of learning/reading is a Good Thing?"

yes, of course it is. That is not the same thing as being a fluent reader at 3.

Wowzers! Amazing how strongly people feel about this...everyone seems to know best, such is the way with MN sometimes.

Well, I have read the book (Teach your baby to read) and thought about it with DS but decided not to bother. He is now 4.5, will start Reception in September and will learn to read then, or carry on learning to read (he's started some phonics this year in nursery and can read some simple words already).

I can see both arguments- the yes, why not!! and the, no, they don't need to read, they can be doing all sorts of other stuff. My parents used this book to teach us. We could all (3 children) read before school. To me though, it wasn't a natural step in my parenting/the way I interact with my children to start any sort of system with flashcards etc. I can see maybe with some people like my parents it was great fun and my Mum says my brother especially got lots out of reading young.
However....drum roll.............there is the other perspective that I have got from my sister who lives in Sweden where they don't teach children to read until 6 or 7 and where they have much higher literacy rates than UK at age 11 (ie they catch up and overtake UK children). I think their reasoning for starting later is that the brain (generally) is not ready for reading until this age and if you start at this age then all children will be ready and able to pick it up easily. Some children are just not ready- and it's not their fault, it's a brain development thing, at a younger age so you risk putting them off reading if you start too young and they struggle.
Have fun, am sure you will.

You may teach them to read. But it might cost them their love of learning.

Imo our system concentrates on reading at too young an age as it is. Loads of kids aren't ready and struggle. Some are turned off education for life. All because reading is a cheap, "easy" way to teach a class of thirty.

Explore their interests with them, that is encourage their love of learning, and reading will come when they are ready.

I'm surprised to hear that teachers prefer DCs to arrive in reception unable to read. That is not my experience at all. Nor was it my mother's experience when I started school in the early 1970s reading confidently.

Anecdotally, my ds could read by the time he started school - I did little with him formally, it was more about sharing books and him asking what road signs said and so on. All very child-led. Several years on, his attainment academically is fine - but nothing remarkable. Come to think of it, neither's mine...

He never, ever reads fiction for pleasure, sadly.

His father couldn't read until he was about 7 (no dyslexia issues) and didn't read a novel until he was in his mid-teens - but went on to get a very good Eng Lit degree. He has written academic papers, and written professionally.

I wouldn't set too much store by early reading, basically.

I have never read the book, and i'm not a big fan of really don't like formal early education. In fact, all my children are home educated and so we don't do ANY formal education.
However, DD2 could read, fluently, at 3. She is now 4 and reads to herself constantly. Ds1 could read at 5, and is a fairly keen reader, and Ds2 didn't read until he was 6, but now (at 10) reads any time his eyes are open.

Flying onion I think you misunderstand me.

For ME (and this as of course all anecdotal) being a fluent reader at 3 (well probably a bit younger - I'm another one who can't remember being unable to read) was a big step to developing a lifelong love of both reading and learning.

There's only one of me; I'll never know if I would have been the same if I'd learned to read with Janet & John/Biff & Chip/ladybird books or whichever reading scheme I was given at 4/5/6/27. It was a false start for DB and our parents did other things with him.

Just because someone chooses to do/not to do a particular thing (educationally or not) does not validate it/invalidate it for everyone, and I would also point out that it doesn't prevent them doing other things in parallel or series.

The OP was asking for experiences of one method (ok maybe a little out of fashion right now, but flashcards are one of those that comes and goes and age range varies) and I gave her mine. There was a lot of judgement from people who hadn't done it though

I'm so of all those with avid readers.

I don't worry too much - I imagine ds is taking after his father in not really enjoying fiction (yet). It's a shame though.

Sorry, didn't mean to post that yet! Anyway.....I think that, despite dd's early reading, by the time they are all about 8 it will all have balanced out. DD learnt to read by being read to, and by having any questions she asked about sounds etc. being answered. We certainly have NEVER done flash cards or much phonics. She learned to LOVE reading, as did the boys, by growing up in a house where reading is valued, where time is given to lay under a tree/ on a bed/ in a den with a book. There is a real difference between a child who CAN read and a child who DOES read, and I would be really wary of any approach that takes the fun out of reading. Right now, your children don't make a value judgement about what is a 'fun' activity and what is an 'educational' one, and by formalising reading I think you run the risk of turning them off it. Share stories, read to them, sing together, learn rhymes, play games, and reading will come soon, or it won't. I don't think you can, or should, force it.

I am studying a for a psychology degree and have just done a module on Child psychology and development. We looked into learning to read and the stages that children go through as they learn to recognise words by their shape and size (as they would recognise a picture or a symbol), through to knowing the sounds of the letters in order to truly 'read' the words. I think that in teaching them to read early on is little more than getting them to recognise certain words in the same way that they would recognise a picture. Like when a child recognises a shop logo or a food brand. They can't actually read the word, they have just recognised it. Nothing wrong with this, I suppose, but I'm not sure what advantage it would give them.

Of course, some children will learn to read earlier than others, just as some will walk sooner than others. I picked up reading very quickly in school without any real prompting. I still love to read and do so every day. I read to my children every day, too. I think that creating an environment where books are used regularly and enjoyed is much more important than trying to teach a child to read early.

My mum taught me to read with Peter and Jane Ladybird Books when I was 4 and 5. I remember really enjoying these books and was really keen. By the time I started school I already knew how to read. I think it depends on the child. My son is 3 and I haven't pushed him to learn to read. He loves being told stories. My mum gave me a Ladybird Book just after his third birthday, but since he wasn't really interested I've put it away for later. He's more interested in learning numbers. I think at a young age you need to let the child take the lead- if they're interested teach them a bit but make it fun and non-pressurized, if they're not then don't push it and do something they're interested in.

the best thing you can do is encourage a love of books - with you reading lots

Hi Lexiejack, I was taught to read using this system and now I am using it to teach DC who is 3. It takes about 15 mins a day, so it does not take away any of the sandpit or running round or playing teasets time. However, it is something we really enjoy doing together, which I really appreciate as I do not have the same interest in playing with sand for an hour as she does (I know, I am a Terrible Mother). If you both enjoy it, what's the worst that can happen?

Lexie i'm sorry you've had a tough time in response to your post! i don't have a strong opinion either way, but it sounds to me like you are a caring mother who wants the best for her children so i'm not sure why anyone has a problem with that! as is sometimes the way with conversations online, unfortunately sometimes people get misunderstood for one reason or another.
all the best :)

Don't apologise on my behalf, thank you.

The OP started the conversation, has only answered the questions she wanted to and has completely failed to give any good reason why she is doing this or what is to be gained. If she wasn't going to take part in the debate, why bother asking?

But as you can see, plenty of other people were able to contribute intelligently. MamaChoo for example, said far more in the post above yours than the OP managed in the whole thread. And she didn't feel the need to slag off the entire teaching profession.

We might not have all agreed, but it was an interesting thread even without the input of the person who started it.

'It's the main thing they do for an entire year in reception.' Actually its not - or not in any reception classes I've taught/worked in. There are a huge number of focuses, most of the learning is (for now at least) child-led and based around learning through play. Most reception classes I've been in have 10-15 mins per day phonics teaching and around 15 mins 2-3 times per week group reading. There isn't the time for much else. If parents don't practise phonics and read with their children most days then children just don't learn to read confidently (IME). Having said that, most of my teaching was done in inner-city schools with moderate levels of deprivation, so some children came knowing no nursery rhymes, rhyming, or alliteration and had no idea how to play with language in a way that would develop their pre-reading skills (the odd one didn't know how to hold a book :().

I think the problem with 'leaving it to the teachers' is that you may get a fab teacher who can cope with the huge levels of differing abilities in their class and get them all reading fluently (in which case they will differentiate for the already-reading children to keep them motivated), or they will struggle to do so (in which case you'd be better off making sure they're learning to read at home).

I was taught to read (as was my older brother) using the flashcard method - my parents said they put cards on main objects 'chair' card on chair etc. And I was reading fairly fluently by 3 and I definitely have a love of reading. My DS (2.8) knows the phonemes and letter names - phonemes because I read him the Dr Seuss ABC (wonderful alliterative rhymes - I read it using phonemes - 'Big Mmm, little mmm' etc), which was his favourite book for a few months. Letter names he learned through singing the ABC song. So learning to read doesn't have to be onerous, should be enjoyable and (IMHO) gives children a flying start when they start school.

sorry Gwendoline wasn't trying to apologise on anyones behalf, i was just sad she wasn't feeling supported.

Some children enjoy flashcards. Really do enjoy them. I know because I loved doing them. I can remember pestering mum to do them and having a lot of fun with it. I can remember doing them out in the garden of our first house and pinning them on the climbing roses, and we moved just after I was 3yo.
Don't see why people get so indignant about it really. You can choose to, or choose not to, I suspect it makes little difference in the end to the majority of children, so not worth getting worked up about.

Personally I dont see the point in anything so formal at such a young age. Children have plenty of time for that when they get to school age (and even then there isn't a lot of it in the early years)

I could read before I started school, and still love to read now. My parents didn't make any effort to 'teach' me. They just encouraged my natural interest in books.

I fear that for some children forcing a scheme on them at such a young age could have the opposite effect to the one the parent desires and puts the child off reading.

DS is 19 months and can count to 10 because he has heard me doing it lots but never in an effort to teach him to count simply because I count things as part of daily play. Similarly he loves to have stories read to him and to sit and 'read' books but I would never force either upon him at such a young age.

Children learn so much through songs, games and general day to day play no need to make any more than that imo.