I know the obvious results of doing reading with your baby or toddler and I know the testimonials from people with babies and toddlers who are able to recognize quantities but how does that translate to older kids? I just want to hear the anecdotal success stories of what happens later.
Well, we did EL math with my elder son who is 6. He never really did seem to get the instant recognition down, but I think the early exposure to math combined with moving forward as he was ready has helped him to advance. As I said he is 6 and 1/2 of the way through saxon 5/4. He is doing division with remainders and other math on the 4th-5th grade level (he should be a young first grader). So I would say he is 3-4 years advanced.
We didn’t do math or much EL at all. My son read simple readers by 3 1/2 years so not particularly advanced compared to many of the babies/toddlers here. He is now 5 years 10 months and we will be finished Saxon 5/4 in a bit over a week. He has no problem with it and is now doing most of it independently including the new concept at the beginning of each lesson. He is also doing very well with bike/BMX riding and we did very little physical stuff at all. Wish we had done more then and now but life just goes by so quickly. My daughter also walked Just before 10 months yet we did no physical stuff and she even had very little tummy time.
Not sure what my point is. I guess just that there are results with or without intensive EL math or other subjects so it is hard to say what the cause is. I often wonder whether children are more advanced due to the specific flash cards/programs followed etc… Or more because of the expectation of advanced learning and the opportunities provided.
I have always wondered this about math as well as there are plenty of testimonials of people with babies reading but I don’t seem to hear so many of babies/toddlers doing more than choosing correct quantities of dots to some degree (not that it isn’t amazing would just like to hear whether more kids are going on to be advanced at math due to dot cards).
None of this actually answers your question …just my rambling thoughts lol
I did dot cards to my son since 3 to 7 months. Until 7 months, I finished number recognition to 40 and addition. Later (7 - 18 months) I did LM. In some rare testing events, he showed the right card.
Now (2,11) he can recognize 1, 2 and 3. If I show 4 or more, he says that it is 3. Or whatever. I demonstrate math (without testing) almost every day since he is 2.
My first kid (now 5) did not have early math of that level (I started any EL only after her 1.5 years) but her development was exactly the same. She recognized 3 when she was 2 years old. Although I I put much less effort in her number recognition.
I will continue math with my son. Currently, the only result from early math is his interest on numbers. Well, I will work on it 
It was a fun experience anyway
My son just turned 3 and he used to do well subtitizing numbers up until about 7 which he was doing when he was a young 2. Now he can only subtitize 4 or 5.
He is doing basic addition and subtraction. And he flew through all requirements of Pre-k math in less than a month. He is currently well into kindergarten (US) math. He might be more on an early first grade level though because we are all over the place. We have focused mostly on concepts and fact mastery. I have probably held him back and go slower than he would like. But he is well above age level.
As for testimonies… I have read, and viewed more than a few impressive success stories with math. For a while we had 3 strong math threads going. There were more than a few EL children doing extremely well, including but not limited to Cammie, Ella and Alex. At 4 I think Cammie and Ella were working on soroban and algebra.
Someone should ask aangeles (Ella’s mom) to reply. I don’t know if they did math or not, but Ella is like a golden standard amongst all the families on the board. She is, I think, a child that would’ve been precocious, with or without EL. She is such an inspiration to me and probably many other parents on this board.
Ella, if I recall correctly, can do mental math (anzan) soroban, and arithmetic (add, subtract, multiply and divide) math on about a 3rd or 4th grade level. She may or may not have started Algebra already. I know that her mom was going to order her some books (Hands on Equations, I think) and they looked into Beast Academy, which is an elementary math curriculum for advanced 3rd graders.
I have read the math threads mentioned and it actually supports my thoughts that EL math doesn’t produce the same results as reading. If we can name the children that are doing well in math than the results aren’t that great. Not to take anything away from those children. They are doing great and that is amazing!
I have thought about this question before though. Brillkids has a membership of over 100 000. If only 10% of those people ever post that would be 10 000 (and you would think that people who are using and having success are likely to make up the majority of those people who do hang around and post so the results are already skewed to more positives but anyway… ). In the general population it is considered that somewhere from 2 - 5 % of children are highly gifted and 1% exceptionally gifted. So of that 10 000 we should have up to 500 highly gifted children running around and 100 exceptionally gifted and that is just the normal populatioin not ones who are actively interested in EL. Granted not all of those are going to be gifted in math but there should be more than 3 (and I’m sure there is but they just haven’t posted - but not in the numbers there should be).
Now I would agree that Brillkids and EL does help produce bright or advanced children particularly in EK and reading (and probably now in music). But as my point in my earlier post - my children have had little direct EL in the form that Doman and others promote but they would still be considered bright or advanced. I am not at all arguing against EL. I completely believe in it and wouldn’t be here otherwise (skewed population??) but I believe (and could quite happily be wrong) that it simply increases a child’s IQ from where it would have been up another 10 or so points. So we still end up with a bell curve it is just moved up a little and I would argue (with nothing to support my argument lol ) that it pushes the middle up more than the ends.
Do I think that is worth it?? Absolutely! Especially for the diabled/special needs population that Doman created his program for initially. But again take a child with an IQ of less than 78 and push them up 10 points and they will be testing within the (low) normal population.
Anyway, enough rambling. I do believe in EL wholeheartedly and am not trying to take anything away from it (or from those children who are doing exceptionally well in Math). I just wonder that we don’t see more results.
Jenene, I have had those same thought also
So here are my thoughts on it.
Firstly NO the people posting are not the ones having the most success and hanging around. After a while here you will start to notice the same occasional posters who’s kids are doing amazing things. Kids who were at a basic level and suddenly 6 months later are 4-5 year olds doing Saxon 5/4! It is hard to spot at a glance but you get to know people and their kids and then you see the once getting results arnt always posting BECAUSE they are busy teaching lol Ella Cammie and MANY others are doing advanced grade 3/4/5 math at ages 4/5 even a few 3 year olds here are doing grade 4.
I think math beyond subtilizing and memorization of facts is a mostly logic based subject so you can lay a good foundation but until your child gets to the left brain stage they are not going to be able to manipulate numbers at a grade 3 up level. this is usually around age 4 in EL kids.
I also think that there isn’t enough information here on the forum to help parents get their kids beyond looking at dots. Well there wasn’t but perhaps all our toddler math threads over the past 6 months have fixed that. I should probably fix that one myself as an early years math teacher… :wub: So parents are showing the dots but then don’t know what else to teach. Dots are all good but are not a math program in it’s entirety. The dots help cement number quantity understanding and that is a very important thing but it wont alone make your kid good at math. It WILL give them a boost or head start over their peers with less number understanding. Not just a little boost either, my son got dots for only 4 months and he is a whizz at understanding math even if he cannot subtilize or even do the math question, he can understand it all! He understands what multiplication means at age 4. Not just memorized the times tables but has complete understanding because of the dots.
So now after all that what is actually possible is way more than what my kids can do. We put in minimul effort here, we have a busy sports life so math isn’t a priority but I have one child who didn’t use the dots and she is working one year above grade level ( she is a bit stuck there and I havnt yet found the missing piece to move her forward…perhaps she needs the dots now! But I plan to get her started on Saxon 5/4 this year Age 7 but at a slower pace) my son who starts this year in kindergarten is working at a grade 1-2 level and my oldest is working 2-3 years above grade level. Doing grade 5/4 Saxon in grade 3 and finding it too easy.
Accelerating in math is easy if you know how. If your kids are under age 3 give them dots and memorize all their math facts to 12, addition, subtraction, multiplication and devision. Flash cards until they know 9x9 is 81 instantly. ( use multiplication in minutes to teach that in a fun way!)
The forum is scewed because ultimately teaching reading is more useful and loads of fun and parents here have the confidence to teach it. teaching math leaves lots of parents wondering where to even start. 
Now I would agree that Brillkids and EL does help produce bright or advanced children particularly in EK and reading (and probably now in music). But as my point in my earlier post - my children have had little direct EL in the form that Doman and others promote but they would still be considered bright or advanced. I am not at all arguing against EL. I completely believe in it and wouldn't be here otherwise (skewed population??) but I believe (and could quite happily be wrong) that it simply increases a child's IQ from where it would have been up another 10 or so points. So we still end up with a bell curve it is just moved up a little and I would argue (with nothing to support my argument ) that it pushes the middle up more than the ends.
See my thoughts are very similar. I don’t have a study to back this up but I do know that being exposed to more language and having educated parents does boost IQ. I figured EL was about a 10 point boost if anything. I don’t think it will make typically developing kids gifted or turn them into geniuses but it can maybe give them a little boost to work at an accelerated pace and they may be bright afterwards. I was wondering if it could do the same with math as reading though and that is harder to tell. Some of the stories I hear sound like gifted kids and some are probably more typical kids.
My son (who had math since 3 months and now can recognize only 1, 2 and 3) has very vivid imagination. He is very creative. I think, maybe there is something to do with his right brain EL. But maybe he has just another genetic design.
My imagination is very low. My daughter (now 5,5) is very similar to me but I tried to improve her creativity and it seems that I succeeded. But the creativity of my son (2,11) is surprising me every day.
It is not possible to evaluate the outcome of one single EL activity. These parents who do early math, they continue other EL activities later. Even if they do not teach directly, they have a different attitude to information they give to their kids.
My husband’s brother’s wife believes, that 4 year old kids must be able to count to 3. She is really satisfied that her son (4,5) can count to 3 and no more. This is an attitude we will never achieve. If she would adopt my son - that would be a correct experiment. (Joke.)
I have so many thoughts on this… but I will try to just address a few lol
Firstly, I agree with Frukc, a true experiment is just not possible and, as I said in my first post, I wonder how much is due to the environment of expecting children to learn and providing them the opportunity whether or not you flash dots or run 20 miles a day as per Doman. I always think of my children and our life as ‘normal’ or ‘typical’ and think that we don’t do much EL as such. But then I have to remind myself - how many parents provide the opportunities for their 2 year old to be able to write their name independently and start telling time or how many parents encourage and help their 4 year old learn all the countries of the world and their flags. Probably not too many 
Another consideration is that my husband and myself were both early readers, were considered advanced, have dual degrees, consider education very important etc… Chances are our children are going to be advanced regardless of whether or not we do formal EL. But would they have been finishing Saxon 5/4 before they are officially ready to even begin grade 1 - highly unlikely.
I also look at my son and wonder just how much further ahead he would be if he had been the first (or only) child and then a 5 year or so gap before the next one (totally theoretical I know). I know without a doubt that he would be much more advanced than he is now. Anyone know what the percentage of highly/exceptionally gifted children is that are only children??? (We adopted our first child with brain damage and autistic behaviours at 15 months so I never had the chance to try that theory out)
Again, I wholehearedly support EL but I am still to find evidence that it does more than increase a child’s ‘natural’ IQ a few points which is great but I don’t see it producing a bunch of Einsteins or nobel prize winners. And that is even for those children who have been through The Institute (I always think of some weird sci-fi type experiment when I say that). But maybe that is not the point?? But if it is not than there are a lot of other methods that produce bright children as well, some of whom don’t even read until 9 years or older (although highly unlikely if they are in the school system and not reading). I really do wonder again how much is simply parent’s attitude and the environment (couple with ‘good’ genetics) rather than flashing dot cards or such. But, of course, being exposed to a forum such as this and Doman’s ideas does increase my expectations of my child and therefore influences what I am exposing him to which in turn advances him even further than his ‘typical/normal’ peers.
Manda, a good point also that maybe parents don’t know what to do after dots/equations (whereas once a child is reading you just provide them with more books lol ). This is not something that I have ever really considered. Isn’t it just ‘normal’ to know how to teach early math?? But, similar to you, I’m an early primary teacher so to me it is normal and just something we do without need for formal programs and curriculums and what I think of as ‘proper’ EL…
Sorry to take this topic off Dot Math and onto more general EL stuff :biggrin: but while everyone else is discussing these are the types of topics I like to wonder and discuss and I don’t find too many (any??) people I know that are interested.
TeachingmyKids definitely show your child dot cards if that is what you want to do but don’t think that is the only way to advance your child in math. And maybe you will have great results with dots or maybe not but it is all learning and growing the nueral connections as Doman says and hopefully you are having fun. But don’t just leave it at dots as there is so much more to math and I think you will see more success if you show/teach other things as well. Manda’s list of what to focus on was great so no need for me to repeat it :biggrin: And of course those other math threads were full of great information (but I’m sure you would have looked at them already). But I think your question is not whether or not you should do them but whether it is worth doing them and are you likely to see reward for the time spent. Slightly different question and to that I really don’t know. Maybe it improves children’s ability to picture quantities but I’m not convinced that this lasts beyond the early toddler years. Maybe it provides a foundation for later math learning. Probably but I’m sure there are many ways to do that.
Hope this disconnected post made some sense :wub:
I definitely think that it would be very easy to correlate all of the reading success stories in this forum with efficacy of specific programs like LR, and lack of significant math success stories to somewhat less effective programs like LM…but in my opinion the truth is much more complicated than that.
Reading programs like LR and YBCR are designed to actually get gets reading, and very quickly. In addition, parents are fairly confident in their ability and the need to focus on reading, so they tend to devote a great deal of time to teaching all aspects of it.
On the other hand, EL programs for math, especially subitizing programs such as Doman and LM are designed to teach very basic numeracy and awareness…it is a great start, and worked for us in that Alex seemed to ‘come out of it’ with a great understanding of quantities and was raring to go. But even that is a simplification, as during the time we were doing ‘dots’ we constantly and consistently did math, talked about math, counted, etc…everyday, all day.
So my thoughts on EL and math lead me back to a question I asked a year ago in the toddler math forum:
What percentage of EL time do you devote to math activities (even just counting!) compared to reading and other subjects? It is very easy to assume that many of the kiddos doing exceptionally well in math must just be gifted and so some probably are! But if you look at those children and read the posts about them, another thing stands out. Their parents have devoted a good deal of time/made it a priority!
Often it is not just the ‘gifts’ of the child but what their parents tend to put more emphasis on at a very young age. Tiny tots will soak up anything you throw their way, as evidenced by this amazing forum…and some parents tend to focus more time/effort/resources on different things.
If you want your child to be advanced in math, make it a priority! I don’t think ‘dots’ are the ONLY way to go. In fact, if resources are limited LM or Doman dot math would be the program I would give a miss to…but would make up for that by making daily math a big part of life.
Math is as much a part of our day as anything else. Mostly in the form of MANY math games and activities, many of which I have discussed in the various math threads. But it does work, and I see Alex progressing daily. Even during reading time we have a huge selection of math literature books, and it is astounding how much she picks up from those, things we won’t be covering for a long time. Much of it seems to be random collections of facts, like how many sides a Hectagon has, or how to determine which sides of triangles are opposite, adjacent, or a hypotenuse. Until fantastic connections are made and her enthusiasm skyrockets!
So do I really think that LM started it all? Yes and No. Designating a portion of your day to math and showing your child that YOU think it is just as important as reading and Other EL is probably the most important. Maybe LM is just as good for teaching the parent that, and providing the child with a fantastic understanding of quantities. And relative quantities! Alex got pretty good at subitizing quantities up to ten, but LM gave her a fantastic estimation skill…even now, I can show her pictures of dots whose quantities are within 1-5 of each other. So if I show her two cards, one with 85 random dots, and one with 89 dots, she can very quickly glance and tell me which is more or less. Still a very valuable skill, and one I bet lots of LM exposed kids are good at.
The biggest benefit to doing EL math is providing them with the confidence and language of mathematics. This is a huge impetus for accelerating math, and, like most people, kids like to do what they feel like they are good at. Of course, ensuring a proper mindset is half the battle, and this is what helped for us.
For Daddy’s Xmas present, Alex ‘presented’ him his gift…she had learned all of her multiplication table facts with the multiplication.com materials (through 9), and then decided she wanted to memorize through 12! Both of us are very, very proud of course. But the thing I am MOST proud of? SHE did it. SHE wanted to practice and hear new stories, and would take the cards and her flashlight to bed for her allowed ten minutes. SHE giggled and whispered and kept the secret from daddy as a surprise.
That means more to me than any of the math she has learned :yes:
Thanks, Keri, for your perspective. Every time I reread your question about math and reading time, it inspires me to do more math. But I do wonder if Doman math has “hidden benefits,” the things you described. I did Doman math with Big Girl A, and I would have said I didn’t see results. She can’t subitize, and that’s the most visible part. BUT… a few months before she turned 2, we started MEP level R. It’s made for 4-5 year olds, and she has no trouble with it. We got Right Start for Christmas; Level A is for kindergarteners. She does that just fine, too. (She can’t do first-grade level Jump Math, though.) Is that a result of Doman math? I wouldn;t have said so, but maybe it is.
I find this a really interesting topic and I’ve been thinking a lot about it over the past few days.
I would certainly say that I do not have a child who is gifted at maths! Some may remember my regular posts about how to motivate a reluctant toddler to get involved in maths! I think it’s interesting to try to work out what “EL” in maths means - from reading this forum it does seem to vary quite widely, probably more than teaching reading. Perhaps this is because there is less consensus about what and how to teach young children. I did LM with my oldest from when she was about 6 months until she refused to watch it any longer at just under 2. I’m not sure she ever learned to subsitize large numbers but she certainly developed a familiarity with the concept of numbers and learned to read numbers very early. We also counted regularly to 20 up and down when brushing her teeth and lots of other counting games. Now she can subsitize to 5 (although 4 and 5 are harder if not arranged in a helpful pattern) and to 10 if using a RS abacus or some other format using 5 plus another number (the RS yellow is the sun worked wonders!)
So from the Doman perspective, I’m not sure how much we gained, but it certainly started me on the path to being interested in maths. It probably also gave her an initial confidence and understanding of the concept of number at the very least. And EL doesn’t just mean babies and flashcards does it? With all the discussions in the toddler maths threads, I still think that teaching 2 and 3 year olds is quite early compared to standard. I have learned A LOT about maths in the past 6 months - reading Marshmallow math, Kitchen table math and Jump math has really helped me understand some of the steps involved in learning math. For teachers this is old news, but for me it’s been a very interesting journey. I think I’ll do much better with my younger son - I must remember to get him started early though!
My personal perspective is that in terms of progress in maths, Keri has hit the nail on the head, I’m not sure that being gifted is anything like as important as how much time, energy and enthusiasm is devoted to the subject. My DD’s enthusiasm has never been great, but I’ve maintained a very positive approach and she’s now quite enthusiastic to re-start RSA (we have currently re-named it “Cheerio Rightstart”!) again after a month or so break when we did other maths approaches, mainly using the ipad. I emphasize it’s’ importance everyday, perhaps even more than reading as she will do this very naturally and easily. When you read the Mindset and the Moshe Kai threads, it convinces me that it’s really the time and effort dedicated to any subject that’s more important than anything else. I have observed that many of the children who are excelling in math and other subjects seem to have a real enthusiasm and concentration ability that must be so important for developing these skills. Other kids (like mine) have lower enthusiasm and concentration but I do believe can still do great things if we work on fostering this - it may take a little longer but that does not mean that we cannot still make great progress. Certainly when I compare my reluctant mathematician at 3.5 years to most of her peers at nursery, she is way ahead. They were amazed that she was subsitizing the answer in a dice game last week! My expectations for what is even possible far outreach other parents that I know and this in itself I think is important (as long as it doesn’t turn into pressure in a negative way). My younger son at 17 months is also showing enthusiasm for maths - he’s been counting at nursery much to their amazement.
Oh dear. How sad that that is all they expect at nursery considering what is so easily possible!
It takes so little time to teach them more than that. Sigh.
:mad: :mad: >:( :mad: off to change the world! :biggrin: