Meet the Other Phone. Child-safe in minutes.

Meet the Other Phone.
Child-safe in minutes.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Telly addicts

Richard and Judy- Babies reading as young as 9 months!!!

79 replies

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:15

Did anyone else see this? Ds is 3 months and i'm tempted to get the Dvd. I think giving your child a head start is great.

OP posts:
Onlyaphase · 28/02/2008 18:16

I saw a little bit of it and was very impressed. DD is 16 months old now, wish I had seen this earlier

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:17

Trying to get a link to the website but I think it's too busy as i can't get on the page.

OP posts:
southeastastra · 28/02/2008 18:19

yes saw it. it doesn't teach them to read though does it, just to recognise words.

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:20

That's not too late, there was also a two year old featured who can read propper books and understand them! Her parents were saying that books are her favourite toys.

OP posts:
Kindersurpise · 28/02/2008 18:21

youtube video of a one year old reading.

Tbh, I do not see why you would want your DC to read at that age.

I am against any kind of hothousing. How many hours do children have to work to learn this. They should enjoy their childhood, they will be adult long enough.

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:22

Isn't that what reading is? They read the words and then could associat (sp) to the body part.

OP posts:
Hulababy · 28/02/2008 18:22

But why? What's the point? Can't we just let babies be babies?

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:24
  • associate
OP posts:
Kindersurpise · 28/02/2008 18:24

My DD could recognise the word IKEA from about a year, did not mean that she knew that the letters I K E A makes the sound IKEA. She recognised the shape of the word, like recognising the shape of a duck.

Mercy · 28/02/2008 18:25

It is possible to read or rather recognise words but not understand their meaning (afaik).

RubyRioja · 28/02/2008 18:27

This reply has been deleted

Message withdrawn at poster's request.

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:27

can't see the harm if they enjoy it. Especially if it helps them have a head start. Spose its just the same as babies walking or talking early, they're encouraged to learn something new. I guess it depends on the parents and child really.

OP posts:
Hulababy · 28/02/2008 18:27

Isn't it just recognising the shape those letters make, rather than reading - i.e. decoding each letter sound to make up a word? I'd be interested to see if that little gil could still "read" the words if they said "claps" rather tan "clap", "toes" not "toe" for example - could she still decode the letters to know the meaning?

Kindersurpise · 28/02/2008 18:29

RR
That was DD's second "word"

Hulababy · 28/02/2008 18:29

But walking and talking early are not the same IMO. They are natural development stages. You can't force the child to do them.

Whereas the reading is something that has to be enforced through a great deal of parent holding up flashcards and repetition.

TBH some of the children on YouTube doing this reading don't look that happy or like they are having fun, more than they are being strapped into highchairs and being asked to perform.

Mercy · 28/02/2008 18:31

Dd still confuses the Mothercare 'M' symbol with the t Macdonalds one!

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:31

There was a 15 months old actually reading off the cards words like, blueberry, daddy etc. He knew what they ment but i see what you mean about the IKEA thing.

OP posts:
peachygirl · 28/02/2008 18:31

ruby rioja and kinder surprise this IMHO does count as reading or at least the very early preparation skills for readers. With children who are reluctant to read or have difficulties reading books of familiar images can be made - it's called enviromental print I think. I not an expert on this but it's just another way of using images (as you would perhaps use flashcards) but for some children they might be more meaningful too

needmorecoffee · 28/02/2008 18:32

head start to what? Tedious national curriculum and dumbed down exams? For heavens sake let them be babies.
Reading at 9 months will not lead to Oxbridge ffs, but possibly unhappy over-pushed child.

Hulababy · 28/02/2008 18:33

LittleMissBliss - if they changed the cards to read "blueberries" and "daddies" do you think they could still read them? Reading is not just recognising the shape of the word but decoding the letters within the word.

LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:33

each to thier own...

OP posts:
LittleMissBliss · 28/02/2008 18:35

not sure i wasn't actually there just repeating what i saw on a t.v programme.

OP posts:
southeastastra · 28/02/2008 18:36

when my son was a toddler he could recognise arsenal, wood green, turnpike lane etc because he spent so long on the picadilly line

filthymindedvixen · 28/02/2008 18:36

Ds2 could recognise lots of words at 18 months but has plateaued out rather disappointingly at 7

Lulumama · 28/02/2008 18:36

i think it is a bit, well, silly really..... IMO. children read at their own pace.. a head start is a bit of a myth, IMO, they read super early or not.....most children eventually attain a similar level, a very few will be G&T, and they would be that without flashcards or early reading

there is so much early pressure on children, and we can avoid adding extra.. lots of fun games to do, if you want to help them along, but when they are babies,it just seems a bit too much

Swipe left for the next trending thread