After reading a couple of threads which questioned the success of Doman math, I had written to the Institutes asking for a few clarifications. Ms Katie Doman has replied back which I am posting below.
These were the questions I had asked them:
-
I came to understand that the ability to recognize quantity is not retained mostly beyond 2-1/2 years. I wonder why this is not mentioned in the “Teach your baby math” book?
-
Many parents who have religiously followed the Doman Math Program say that their child is not able to “verbalize” the answers to any given equation. Again the math book does not reveal anything about the inability to verbalize. I have also seen a video of IAHP-trained children doing math where Ms Janet Doman shows the equation on cards and gives 2 options on cards and the child chooses the correct answer between the two options. Why is the child not able to verbalize?
-
Many parents who followed the full Doman Math Method religiously and who have had great success with it initially, suddenly realize that their child “loses” the ability to do instant math. How does that happen? Why does that happen?
-
Can you please share with us some videos of your IAHP-trained children doing math? I know there are 100s of them, but there are hardly any videos available on the internet to prove the success with the Doman Math Program. If you could share the videos, it would serve as a great inspiration for us.
-
We as a family adore Dr. Glenn Doman and all his works. We do not doubt that the math program does not work entirely. The program definitely works great for some children, but why does it not work for all children?
This was the reply I received:
[i]
Thank you so very much for your letter. We are always appreciative of reports of significant success with children who are following our programs.
Concerning your problems with the Math Program – I am not sure what edition of the “Teach Your Baby Math†book you have been working with, but I am guessing it is an early edition. Most of your questions are answered in the latest edition. It was quite extensively revised for the 2005 edition, published by Square One Publishers.
Point 1. On page 89 of this edition it says, at the top of the page: “Beyond two years of age, recognizing quantity or true value gets harder every year.†This is amplified on pages 175 and 176 in the chapter about when to begin teaching dots. Near the bottom of page, an analysis of the question of age relation begins: “The ability to recognize real value or quantity is definitely strongest between the ages of birth and thirty months. The dot cards are really a baby’s domain. This does not mean that a child older than thirty months does not have any chance of learning the quantity cards, but it does mean that the chances of his doing so are much less.â€
Point 2. Chapter 12 in the new edition points out that the baby does not have the visual acuity to begin a dot program for the first month or two of life. It then describes how to do he program if you are starting with a three to six month old, and then in a separate section it discusses starting with a six to twelve month old, and following that is a section on starting with a twelve to eighteen month old. Very few children in the first two categories have the muscular development for speech, and many in the third group are not yet talking well either. As chapter 12 continues, it talks about the verbal responses which may be expected from a child who has started on the dots between eighteen months and two and a half years. That is on page 175.
Point 3. No one knows why, in the words of the book, “The ability to recognize real value or quantity is definitely strongest between the ages of birth and thirty months. The dot cards are really a baby’s domain.†But we do note the fact, as quoted above from the book.
Point 4. Chapter 12 in the new edition offers a partial answer to your question about why the program works better for some than for others: it relates to how early the program is started. As to why success with the dots program is linked to age in such a limiting way, we have not found anyone who knows the answer. We do know, however, that researchers have recently found that children who have developed a strong sense of what scholars call “number sense†or “numerosity,†the ability to recognize quantity, are statistically more likely to have success with “school math.†A report on a study which claims to have learned this ‘for the first time†I found in the October 2008 issue of the Dana Foundation’s report called “Brian in the News.†Dr. Peggy McCardle of the National Institutes of Heath, which funded the study, called this link “really stunning.†This only shows that she knows nothing of the thirty year record of The Institutes success with school math of children whose parents have used the Dots Program with their babies.
It would be wonderful if someone among our zealous parents might have a personal connection of some kind with the N.I.H., or Dr. McCardle, so that we could get some long overdue recognition for what Glenn recognized over 30 years ago.
Trusting all of the above has been helpful.
P.S. You might be interested to know that Glenn will be 90 years old next month. Unfortunately, he has sustained a devastating short-term memory loss – he still lectures (using cards). He is truly a “champâ€.[/i]
I haven’t had the time to check the version of the book. Will do so and get back soon. Meanwhile, you can share your views on this.
