Baby Can Read Program

Nikki - posted on 04/08/2010 ( 23 moms have responded )

36

22

4

Hi Ladies! Does anyone have experience of knowledge of the Baby Can Read program? My sis-in-law has been looking into this program for her son but has gotten very mixed feedback from many people with "hear-say". Please let me know what you know about their program, how it works, and if it was beneficial or not to you. thanks

MOST HELPFUL POSTS

Erica - posted on 04/09/2010

26

4

3

My cousin just started using it with his one-year-old and he says it's a miracle. My feeling as a teacher is that it's an unnatural way for a child to develop. I feel like it would train the brain to read in a way that would not allow the child to figure out how to read unmemorized words later on in life. I can't tell you how many 6th graders I get that still have trouble sounding out words! This makes them uncomfortable as readers.

Danielle - posted on 04/18/2010

22

42

0

BTW, I am a 5th grade reading teacher, and was completely AGAINST this program to begin with! Teaching pre-school for a couple of years, and watching how fast young children learn is quite amazing. I know the advertisements focus on "memorization" and parents not "have to do a thing, but let my child sit in front of the TV." However, if you were to actually view the videos and read the parent guides provided, there is a strong emphasis in limiting the time a child should watch TV and parent involvement/modeling. As I mentioned in my previous post, there is much teaching of phonetics, word endings, and rhyming words at the end of each video.
In the end, I can honestly say Dr. Titzer, the video creator, actually uses the same tactics we use in the public schools for older kids. I say you take the 30-day challenge by watching the videos and going through the materials yourself, and THEN decide.

Danielle - posted on 04/18/2010

22

42

0

I have been using the Your Baby Can Read Program with my daughter for over a year (since she was 8 months old). At 22 months, she can actually sight read some words (examples: tongue, point, keys, elephant). On top of this, she is starting to figure out phonetics. (And yes, they DO cover phonetics at the end of each video!) When I read books to her, she will see a word that starts with the letter "b," and make the "b" sound. Her vocabulary is strong for her age, and she is speaking is small sentences now. Akemi also shows understanding of and uses plural forms of words and possessive nouns in her speaking.
I work one-on-one with my daughter. She sits on my lap, and I model with her how to repeat the words, follow the arrow as it sounds the words out, and participate in actions/songs. There are flash cards that I utilize and make games out of. All this does take a while, and must be done daily. The more the parent participates with the child and models the words, the more the kiddo will take away. Of course, all this is re-inforced with parent-child reading and random teachable moments wherever you go.

Delora - posted on 04/18/2010

59

26

1

I teach 2nd grade. I was against the program in the beginning. I did order the program around Christmas because my 2 year old has a speech delay. I am using the program to expose him to words without the expectation or want of him reading this early. I don't think it is at all developmentally inappropriate. Children aren't force to sit for hours. The dvd is about 10-15mins and 20mins if you let them watch the word games at the end. It mostly just says words and then shows a child doing something to match the word. It does include books with words and flash cards. If you do the flash cards it takes 2 minutes. The dvd also sings common childhood songs. I think that it isn't forced and really just doing what I am doing anyway. It just helps them link childhood experiences to written language. I think if you use the program as an experience and not with the mind frame that you are going to force your baby to sit and read at a 3rd grade level at 2, then the program is good. Any experience that will expose children to words is not harmful. It is like reading to an infant. You aren't expecting them to read it back, but repeatively reading a book is why at 3 they will start to read a Dr. Suess book. At first it isn't because they are reading, they have just memorized the story and are repeating it back to you. Through that process they are pointing to words and eventually figure out that what they are saying means the same as the words on the page. If your sister is wanting the program to make her children advance, then I say no this isn't the program for you. If she is looking for something to help expose her children to words and begin them on a journey to understanding that letters make words and represent what we say, then this program will give her what she wants.

Sidney - posted on 04/10/2010

8

19

0

My mother is first grade teacher and she feels that this program is excellent. The first step in reading is memorization, whether it be letters or simple words. Any familiarization to language is a plus.

23 Comments

View replies by

Sol - posted on 05/11/2010

1

27

0

What I did with my daughter, when she was still 6 month old, was basically to read storybooks dramatically to her. Now she is 1 year & 7 months old and she is really fond of books! She mumbles & acts as if she knows how to read. I felt that developing their interest in Reading should be the start. And when she's ready, any Reading program introduced to her would harness her innate skill.

Cassie - posted on 05/01/2010

50

5

7

We have the program but don't use it religiously with our son. (He used to watch the videos on the way to & from the babysitter, but that was then.) What I do like about it is: 1) My son likes the videos (but he likes a lot of others, too). They teach him words, songs, gestures, and there are no commercials or anything commercial in them. 2) He likes the sliding flashcards - a lot! 3) He likes the books, especially the one with the sliding words. We let him make the decisions about when he wants to watch/read/play with the flashcards. We keep it child-centered, rather than You-Baby-Can-Read-Centered. I think of it as a learning tool, something that he will get use out of for a while.

Jeannette Torres - posted on 05/01/2010

29

18

0

I use the program and it is excellent. Tristan starter responding (reading) to the video by 9 mo. and speaking out the words by 14 mo. He is now bearly 17 mo. and he is recognizing how to say words he has never seen before and make sure to points them out when he sees them when I READ WITH him. I read to my son every night and he enjoys it most of the time. The deal with the program is to do it With your child as a starter point. I was skeptical if it would work of be worth the money and believe me it is. My husband was so proud of Tristans progress now he is always teaching him new vocabulary as it comes up in everyday life. We all enjoy the benefits of early speaking and understanding.

Jeni - posted on 05/01/2010

11

31

0

I have a good friend who used "Teach Your Baby to Read", a parent resource book not a video. She used flashcards and a magnadoodle to teach sight words to her daughter at around 2 yrs. This child is now in 3rd grade and has been an exceptional reader. However, she struggles with lack of challenge in school (she attends a small private catholic school) and reads way beyond her grade level. Is this due to learning to read young or is she just naturally gifted? Hard to say...

I worked with my daughter to read in preschool because she was showing interest and learning on her own. I picked up "Dick and Jane" books and used those. My second daughter started reading Dick and Jane at 3 & 4 yrs...no special reading program, just lots of exposure to books and a natural desire to read. I opted to send them a language immersion school since they could already read & write in English before kindergarten. Both children are a full grade level ahead in reading...in two languages!

Alison - posted on 04/22/2010

2

5

0

Yes, babies can learn to read, but they tend to burn out later; they are way better off playing with real things, (not virtual,) like shape toys, beginning puzzles, different textures. Above all, read to your baby, sing songs, and do fingerplays - wait to teach reading till your baby starts to notice letters on cereal boxes, etc. "Baby reading" is a party trick, and does not correlate with academic excellence later on.

Gaby - posted on 04/21/2010

8

9

0

I homeschooled all three of my children, and am totally sold out on Glen Doman's Teach Your Baby to Read program (as well as math and general knowledge). I am a teacher, and I've taught kids who have learned sight reading first and then phonics and those who never learned sight reading, only phonics. The children who learned to sight read first have excellent comprehension, read fluently, understand what they read, add intonation, etc. I'm not saying kids who learn phonics first can't do that, it's just that sight reading kids do it sooner and faster. There is no way around it, phonics must be taught in order for us to continue learning words in life as well as spelling, but it's such a big difference if they can read by sight already.
I'm not familiar with using a DVD, but I would tend to agree with those who say it's important to do that kind of thing WITH your child. It's learning, it only takes a few minutes a day, and it's bonding as well.
I don't agree with those who say that babies and young children don't need to read! It broadens their perspective, it helps them learn on their own, and you have no idea how happy I was when I could put my three year old down with a good book and know she's not getting into 'trouble' while traveling, waiting at the doctor's, visiting friends, etc. If you have any doubts, I highly recommend Glen Doman's books and web site.

Sarah - posted on 04/17/2010

15

1

2

Let babies be babies and let teachers teach! It's not necessary for a baby to know how to read... they need to explore, explain and experience! Giving your baby prior knowledge and experiences will develop the ability to make connections when the time comes. Why are we in such a hurry for our babies to grow up?

User - posted on 04/17/2010

1

0

0

Just dont know why you wouldn't let a child learn to read in the natural developmental stage....why does a 1 year old need to know how to read? What happens when he's in first grade? He's reading at college level? How does that help him socially? Parents, here's the thing. READ TO YOUR CHILDREN EVERY DAY. And teach them sounds and letters as they become more developmentally ready for it. Then when they enter school, READ TO THEM EVERYDAY SOME MORE...and then have THEM READ TO YOU....find out what they like to read about.......don't put unrealistic demands on your children. I've been teaching for 14 years and the best way to help your child read is TO SPEND TIME READING WITH THEM....and it's free.

Rebbecca - posted on 04/16/2010

13

77

1

I agree with many of the posts- it is teaching babies to memorize, not "read." On top of that studies have shown that the "gifted" preschoolers are usually on the same level as the rest of the "typical" children by the time they reach 4th grade. So if your sis-in-law wants to turn her baby into a neat party trick, go for it. But I say turn off the tv and get out Goodnight Moon. Your child should be inspired by you, not a DVD.

Kelley - posted on 04/15/2010

2

27

0

As a primary teacher in New Zealand, i am not aware of the programme, and agree with all posts in different aspects. I think that the knowledge of basic sight words and phonics need to go hand in hand .... one approach is not necessarily better than the other, but together they are fantastic - giving all children the opportunity to use a learning style that suits them! I also believe that teaching young children to "read" before they are ready could have the opposite effect and put the child off books - read to them and let them enjoy books and reading will come too!!

Becky - posted on 04/14/2010

7

4

0

Well the program is based on memorization of the word not the phonics of letters. So the only problem that I can see is the fact that they don't recognize the letter and sounds just the sight of the word. If that makes since. I had a child that could sight read but she didn't know the phonics of words. Which could; not saying it will, but could cause problems as she gets older.

[deleted account]

I agree with most of the aforementioned posts. I think that watching a DVD to supposedly learn how to read just seems to go against everything that I, as a teacher, have learned about development and how to teach reading. Especially when our chidlren are so young, and we in the teaching world already see too many children who watch way too much television and expect to be entertained constantly, I don't agree with this method. If you're really bent on the "Whole Language" approach of memorization and seeing words in context rather than phonetic learning (which, I personally think that a happy medium of these two approaches are necessary), then why not use flashcards and books with a lot of repitition?

Sidney, for me the issue is not so much about what/how the program teaches it as much as it is that it's too much T.V.! I'm glad that your child has learned so much, but there isn't a way to do it withouth the television? There are plenty of children who come into Kindergarten knowing how to read and haven't used this program. It''s not the only solution, nor do I think it's a good one.

Sidney - posted on 04/11/2010

8

19

0

I think its a little harsh to place a form of judgement on someone who allows their child to learn from a video. The purpose of the program is not meant for you to stick your child in a room by themselves and not interact with them. It is of just as much importance to actually sit down with your child and read together, which is heavily pushed in the actual program. My 20 month old has learned a lot from video's, but I guess that's just sad.

Just out of curiosity to those who disagree with such a learning style as this program... when you read now do you sound out every word? Or have you memorized what thousands of words look like? The program emphasizes the sound of the word, what the word means, and then the memorization of the word. How is this not how we ultimately read as adults.

Melanie - posted on 04/11/2010

31

9

1

I taught my 2 school age children to read by reading to them at bed time every night (we almost never missed a night). Now I read to my 2 year old every night. I wouldn't trade that for the world. I'm sure this program works for many people, but there is something very sad about learning to read from a video. Parents can teach their children to read by just reading to them. It's free, easy, fun, and it works. I have seen as a teacher that almost every successful reader was read to by a parent, sibling, grandparent, etc. during those early years.

Sidney - posted on 04/11/2010

8

19

0

It all goes hand in hand. A child must first memorize what each individual letter is and then correlate it to words. Children on a daily basis memorize words such as and, the, etc. I have watched my mother teach children with severe learning diasbilities using a similar style. They grow up to be exceptional readers and have no trouble within their academics. While every child is different, ultimately the foundation of reading is memorization.

Jennifer - posted on 04/11/2010

7

28

2

I agree, I don't think it's a good way to learn to read. Reading should be taught with letter sounds, not just memorization.

Jessica - posted on 04/09/2010

14

13

1

I dont have personal experience, but I agree with teh previous post. I dont know how well it will work in teh long run if they are not learning phonis and letter sounds. I am an early childhood teacher and I dont like the idea of the program.

Join Circle of Moms

Sign up for Circle of Moms and be a part of this community! Membership is just one click away.

Join Circle of Moms