Gifted Issues Discussion homepage Forums General Discussion Infomercial: Your Baby Can Read - your thoughts...

So I'm dealing with a bit of insomnia and stumble upon this infomercial for a teaching program that claims all children can learn to read as infants/toddlers. The videos of babies responding to flashcards are pretty convincing. I understand current thinking that early reading is no longer a clear indicator of advanced intelligence bc many kids learn to read by sight words.
Are the kids in this infomercial of average abilities? Does this program level the playing field? Can we now make children gifted? If this program becomes popular and increases the number of early readers - will schools respond appropriately? How will this effect the gifted student? Will parents have to prove to educators that we weren't drilling our kids with flashcards trying to make them smart?
Just thought this would make an interesting discussion. Anyone out there actually use this program?

Haven't seen the infomercial (I'm in the wrong country for it) but programs that teach babies and toddlers to read have been around for many decades (the Glenn Doman book, Teach Your Baby To Read, which I think started it all, was published over 40 years ago); I don't think it's controversial that this works. (Famous last words...) Yes, any young child can be taught to read, given consistent instruction (and it doesn't have to be a lot: a few minutes per day). What's a (fallible, like them all) marker of high intelligence is spontanously learning to read, without being taught. But I think this is why those of us with spontaneously reading children get so much suspicion, and why it isn't treated as a definite marker of a bright child: early reading *is* something that can be achieved by parental choice.

In fact, before my DS was born, I did some reading around the topic with the idea that I'd make a rational decision about whether to teach him to read. I decided not to, basically on the grounds that it probably wasn't harmful, but why bother, when there was no hurry, plenty of other things to do in early childhood, easier in some ways to start school in step with the other kids, etc. Then he demonstrated that it isn't necessarily the parents' choice...

I cringe every time I see those commercials. I've not watched one in it's entirety. Do they show the infants/toddlers reading real books? Do they show that the infant/toddler comprehends what he/she is reading?

I guess it depends on how you define reading. I consider my kids readers when they can pick up a book, read it alone, discuss aspects of the story with me.

Yes, I know a friend who insists that early reading is through sight words. How do you define "early reading?" My middle son was reading at 2yrs old and while he had some sight words, he was definitely decoding w/out instruction beyond watching Leapfrog video 3x. My older son started reading later, about 4yrs old and he was definitely decoding w/out having been taught.

While early reading may be a marker of giftedness, later reading doesn't exclude giftedness.

BUt I agree, it will only muddy the waters for true gifted kids.

Very interesting. I had no knowledge of any such early reading programs. DS7 was a spontaneous early reader with no help beyond our reading books to him. Perhaps this explains why I get strange looks from the early reader's moms when responding to their inquires as to how I taught ds to read - um, I didn't, he just figured it out on his own.

I feel like such a hypocrite when these programs come up in conversation. The truth is, I think they are pretty awful. I don't think learning to read early is necessarily a good thing--and certainly not something that is worth slaving over. In fact, when "they" say the dreaded kids-even-out-in-reading-by-third-grade thing, I am pretty sure it is because of kids who learned to read through these programs. They likely do even out, because even though they may have a head start, early reading does not make them gifted. In fact, I am not aware of any benefit whatsoever from these programs.

The reason I feel like a hypocrite is that my 3 year old is a fluent reader. I feel like I can't tell people to wait to teach their kids to read when my DD3 reads whole books on her own, fluently, and with feeling and comprehension. Of course I did NOT teach her (though I did sometimes let her play around on Starfall).

Also, I have no opinion on whether all kids can be taught to read, but whenever I see early reading discussed in the literature as being a sign of giftedness, it is almost invariably distinguished as being self-taught early reading. So I presume that it is possible to teach a ND child to "read" early at least to some extent. I don't know how much work it takes...but I am pretty sure that regardless of how much work it is, it is all a waste of time.

Well said, I think exactly the same way except that I'm sure you can not teach all the kids to read that early as some kids struggle with reading when they are learning it in school. I have read (from this forum) that sometimes younger kids start with learning the sight words and then they somehow develop their own way of decoding the words, not necessary the typical phonics.

Maybe I'm weird but I rather have my DD2 watch something not educational than educational DVDs. As she is so advanced already she certainly does not need a DVD to teach her anything. I prefer her to enjoy a nice movie instead "learning to read". I can teach her anything she is interested in.

My 6 year old told me that these were for lazy mommies who don't want to read books to their kids...

Kudos to your 6yr old.

I LOATHE that commercial. Yes, it is impressive, but to me it's like learning another language or sign language, etc... i'm not sure the child who is learning can even tell you what the letters are...

I don�t have an issue with these types of DVDs. I think the consumer with the money to purchase this product is likely intelligent enough to evaluate the claims before purchasing. I also doubt this demographic would use this as a substitute for actual reading.

I have not seen the newest commercials, but I remember the old advertisements in which the professor used his own children and colleagues� children in the original product. (I would suspect that most professors� offspring are above average in intelligence.)

I have also viewed a DVD. It is a child�s video with sing- along and read- along. What is the difference between this and turning on DVD captions with a voice? Little really, except for size and the fact that the program is marketed for reading. There is also little difference between this and Leap Frog cartridges except for the method of delivery. I also don�t see a huge difference between this and Starfall, which is also aimed at early reading. Though Starfall is slightly more active because it uses a mouse rather than finger pointing to words, or singing along with a DVD. The DVDs are for profit, but I think Starfall sells products to go along with their sequence as well.

So what if somebody�s kid learns earlier. One of my kid�s teachers said that many parents think their kid is reading, but when evaluated they are not fluent. The school evaluates the child; they don�t take the parents� word.

My kid read at 2. Our child was exposed to some educational videos, but the main thing we did was read. When tested the evaluator said early prodigious reading, age 3 and below, was a more likely predictor of potential math ability.

It does work....

I know people that have used it. But teaching a child to read early doesn't make them gifted. It's just exposure. It's like a child that's raised in a home with 2 languages. By the time they are 4, they are generally fairly fluent in both. Are they gifted? No. It's just that they have been immersed in it since bitrth. Same thing with this program. If you look at the same flashcard everyday with a picture of the object, eventually you will recognize that word as being that object. It doesn't teach decoding and for the most part the kids that learn to read this way do so by association with the pictures in the stories. They still need to learn decoding when they get to school.