Jul
02
Why do a lot of parents have their kids reading when they are only a year old?
By
Isaac Vulcger questioned:
I keep seeing all these adds on tv about how babies are being taught how to read by their parents when they are still under 2 years ancient. Why do adults feel this is necessary? I mean, what is the point of a baby reading when their 15 months ancient? just to impress other people?
The Parenting Aspergers Resource Guide
I keep seeing all these adds on tv about how babies are being taught how to read by their parents when they are still under 2 years ancient. Why do adults feel this is necessary? I mean, what is the point of a baby reading when their 15 months ancient? just to impress other people?
The Parenting Aspergers Resource Guide
I imagine they believe it will offer their child some advantage in life.
i dont see a prob
The earlier the better.
they cant really read, just looking at words makes them more comfortable with reading later in life! yes… it is necessary. u will have opinions an i will have mine! sorry if i come across edgy, thats just me. i get carried away in my opinions!
There is this need in parents, to have smart, successful children. They feel, that if they can get there children as early as possible, they will be smarter and whatnot. Every parent, deep down, is neurotic, that their child is going to grow up and be unsuccessful. Having their children read at a ridiculously early age gives them reassurance.
Its most likely because the parent wants the childs brain to develop well. Like forming words at a young age can enhance the brain so the child learns more. Grasping knowledge at a young age is excellent for progress.
The ability to read is awesome. It isn’t just about memorization, it is an ability to know the world around them. Reading is as vital (or more vital!) then hearing and talking. Reading opens the door to books, the internet, games etc. It is very very empowering.
I reckon it is vital that children are well rounded. The focusing on playing piano etc. is silly. But reading is different. It is a language. Just like math and verbal communication is. I see nothing incorrect with emphasizing those so long as all the other bases are covered as well.
The earliest I heard about was an 18 month ancient who could read. She could read books on a 4rth grade level. Both of her parents had PhD’s in linguistics though. She could read and comprehend the books at just 18 months ancient. She was tested on this ability using that day’s newspaper by the anchor woman on national TV… so yeah, some babies can do it!
They aren’t – I highly doubt even if those kids can read they can comprehend what they are reading. I want them to stay a kid for as long as they can. They have plenty of time to learn to read for the 12 years they are in school 9 months a year.
Guess what? You can do the same thing at home. You want your kids to delight in reading? Do what my mom did, I Like reading and intend to do the same for my children. She read to me, she talked to me and sung to me when I was small, she would walk around the house when I was fussy pointing to objects and saying their name. She would pick up blocks and say the colors. She would count objects in a row. I was reading at 4. No it’s not 2, no it’s not 8 months. It’s 4 though and I am still reading to this day.
You sound like the type to not approve of me teaching my one year ancient 3 languages. Am I right? The reason is to not take away their youth, but to help them get a head start in life and to build their confidence. When a child learns something new, their face lights up. They get excited and are proud of themselves. My daughter claps for herself. Why wouldn’t I want to give her that feeling of accomplishment from an early age?
These ads are geared to parents that want their children to be smart. Most parents want to give their children a head start, and companies will dupe people into paying huge bucks for nothing.
There is nothing incorrect with trying to give your child everything you can, but some things are more vital than others. There is no point to a baby reading at 15 months. And since most children develop at different rates early on, these kids will probably average out when they reach school.
There is more to reading that placing word to picture/action. I’ve seen these products, and they seem to be nothing more than memorization disguised as reading. Young children’s brains are geared to memorize, but a right genius is someone that can take the information they receive, and give you more.
Here is an except from an article on child genius’s:
“Stanford University psychology professor Carol Dweck, who studies child development, says memorization is not a sign of genius.”Children come wired to make these associations to learn,” Dweck said…
Dweck cautioned though that “it’s not what you would call a prodigy. A prodigy is someone who has a deep precocious understanding of something — of numbers, words, music. They reckon in new ways, invent things.”
Therefore a 15 month ancient that can “read” is not a genius, or any smarter than one that cannot(simply b/c of the reading). The same goes for a 4 year ancient that can read Lord of the Flies. A genius is the 4 year ancient that can read as well as tell you what Golding was saying with his use of symbolism.
Babies reading is just a gimmick. Parents want geniuses, and will pay anything for it. Its the same for people that want to lose weight, they’ll try the most absurd gimmicks.
I’m with you. Really UNNECESSARY!
Just helping there child learn… I say If it works fine but don’t force it!
My 22 month ancient son is content with looking and pointing out objects in his books