Teach Sign Language Again?

Early Learning Teaching Your Child - Signing, Speaking, Languages
1

I am debating whether or not I should teach sign language to this second baby on the way.

We had a wonderful experience with it with Hunter, which I wrote about recently on my blog:

http://grhomeschooling.blogspot.com/2010/11/our-adventures-with-baby-sign-language.html

However, reading Glenn Doman’s How Smart Is Your Baby?, he recommends not to teach sign language to baby but rather encourages a verbal communication program. He believes that babies “talk” from birth, that the sounds they make are not “like” language but they ARE language.

So the communication program involves things like having conversations with your baby (that is, asking them questions and actually waiting for them to give an answer), repeating short rhymes for them daily (and then later letting them participate by leaving a word blank and letting them fill it in with their own sound), and choice boards, which is a large poster with squares containing words such as “yes”, “no”, “maybe”, “not now”, etc. and the babies are supposed to point to or look at the choice they want (you read the choices to them, of course).

I realize I am probably not doing the program any justice and it may sound confusing or strange. But nonetheless I was wondering what you all thought about his recommendation against sign language.

I do plan on doing the communication program with my baby, but should I then not do sign language? My main worry is that perhaps the sign language might slow down, or take away from, the verbal program. I know that it doesn’t do this in older babies, for example, it is proven babies who use sign language talk earlier (Hunter was talking like crazy by 16 months). But this whole newborn language thing is new to me, and I don’t know if it is “different” because of the baby’s young age.

Has anybody done the communication program with their tiny baby?

What do you think about doing, or not doing, sign language along with this program?

Your thoughts are appreciated!

2

I’d do both, because you can take sign language with you effortlessly where ever you go, being a “Doman-family” means you’ll already have other materials and things with you when you go out, and I’m not sure a conversation program as well as BOK, Reading and Math plus anything else you might be using is worth it.

I dont know much about this Doman program as I haven’t read that book yet…
But it sounds like something I’d do in a quick beat.

3

Is GD saying that using sign language interferes with speech development?

4

You always say what you’re signing while you’re signing it, so what’s wrong with it? You’re still talking just as much but adding an extra element. I say do both.

5

Twinergy:

Glenn Doman’s quote in the chapter The Language Development Program of How Smart is Your Baby:

“We live in unusual times. One part of society still thinks that babies understand very little while another part of society has discovered that very little babies can learn sign language. It is true that babies can learn sign language, and this gives them yet another option for communication. If you know sign language you should go ahead and teach your baby - he will learn quickly. If you have a member of your family who is deaf, it will be a great advantage for you baby to be able to communicate with that family member easily. However, if you do not know sign language or do not have someone in your household who is deaf, we propose that you use the precious time you have with your baby to teach him how to use a simple choice board instead of sign language. This will quickly give your baby another way of communicating and will bring you and your baby closer together.”

So, no, he never suggests that sign language may interfere with speech development. I think perhaps he is just suggesting that his method, a choice board, would be more useful, but he certainly doesn’t condemn signing or suggest it will slow down your baby’s speech.

I suppose I will probably do what I suspected I would do all along, and of course do both the language activities he suggests as well as sign language. I never thought it would slow my baby’s speech down, per se, in that the baby would talk later or something, but I guess I wondered if there was a reason for his suggestion.

I think I really read too far into that little paragraph in the book! Because, logically, I know that babies are ridiculously smart and doing all those things and more is not going to confuse or overstimulate them. And it’s true - I would be doing just as much talking and language, I would just be doing the signs along with it! I guess I am just a little nervous because this is my first time, with a Doman baby that is.

6

I definitely think you should do both. I did read somewhere (sorry can’t remember where it was) that stimulation through hands and fingertips in fact helps faster develop the area of the brain that is connected to speech. Therefore, rather than slow speech development, teaching sign language to a baby helps them to talk sooner. With our son we did both and he was clearly more advanced in his speech development than his non signing peers. And as you already know, the benefits of your baby being able to communicate with you before they can talk are enormous. Your baby is less frustrated and feels empowered to be able to let you know what they want. We only did basic signs and it just made for a much happier child. He was saying approx 100 words at 12 months and was using 3 word phrases at 16 months so I do not think signing delayed his speech development at all. It seems like Hunter also benefited in this way. Good luck!

7

Good question DomanMom, although Doman doesn’t suggest that sign language interferes with their speech development, I did read that section and feel that it did somewhat hint or imply that there may be a consequence and I completely disagree. I would definitely continue with sign language with Baby Number Two and maybe this time Hunter can help you teach too! (everybody benefits!) I think a choice board may be a good supplement and something you can use at home but personally I actually think there is more merit is signing that the board if you were only to do one. You are a fantastic Mum and I can’t wait to hear more about your journey! Good luck!

8

Thank you for your reply DomanMom. I haven’t read the book you are referencing, but I have read about stimulating early language development in NurtrueShock. Here is an article summarizing NS chapter 10. I do recommend reading the book because it goes into more detail especially on how to identify the different stages of speech development. After reading that and considering the lack of early results I got with sign language I might also consider skipping it if I were having more kids. But I now know 500+ signs would probably get better early results if I gave it another chance. However I think SL might have other benefits besides early communication including introducing a child to a second language if 2 languages aren’t already spoken at home. This is why I decided to continue using sign even after my kids are speaking in paragraphs.

P.S. Congratulations on the new pregnancy.

9

I think if you do the sign and say the word your are reinforcing comunication. :biggrin:

10

I’m doing the language program in How Smart is Your Baby? and I love it! My two month old baby coos for yes and is silent for no in response to a handful of questions, including: “Are you hungry?” “Do you have a burp?” “Do you need to go poopoo on the toilet?” (we’re doing elimination communication) and “Do you want tummytime (inclined infant crawling track) / a story / a song / to hear your poem?” People think that she’s not really understanding and communicating, but she definitely is.

That said, I will introduce sign language in a few months. I think it’s a good compliment to the program and more versatile than the choice boards (which I will also use, especially until she’s coordinated enough for signs). I think Doman’s only concern was the time sign language might take. I would assume he means the time for the parents to learn it, since it won’t take any more of the child’s time to sign as well as speak. Since you already know sign, I can’t imagine any downside to it. I’ll have to take the time to learn sign, but she still sleeps a lot, so I have a little time for preparation.

11

I suspect Doman is simply discouraging parents from spending hours learning to sign when a choice board works, too. It would certainly be less effort for a non-signing parent to write half a dozen words than learn dozens of signs. Just a thought :wink:

I had very little success with the early communication program - I think I did give up too easily, but my son made absolutely no attempt to respond in any way and after a couple of weeks I let it go. I continued to speak clearly to him and ask questions, but didn’t bother with the other bits. I do think I should have perservered - at 14 months (just about ;)) he has only two words, food and bath, and will sign ‘more’ thanks to sparkabilities - I never did signing as I couldn’t find any BSL resources. I have now, though, and am starting in the new year :smiley: He does babble a lot and practices lots of sounds, so maybe I am just expecting too much :ohmy:

I think that if you are confident in the signs, you should go for it! I’m sure it can only benefit your very lucky baby!

12

I whole heartedly believe that you should do both. We did a little bit with sign language but only heard about Signing Time recently (thanks to your blog post!). And we have added those to the list of things to buy for Josiah.

Something else to consider is that signing can help your child learn and understand words in many languages. It could be yet another way to show that there are many words that mean the same thing, supposing you sign as you introduce new languages just like you would with english.

And thanks a ton for your blog, DomanMom! You were my first inspiration for early childhood education. :slight_smile:

13

I agree with the others - you should definitely do both. Sign Language has enormous benefits above and beyond speech development. Noted benefits of teaching children Sign Language:

* More rapid development of language skills compared to children who do not learn to sign
* Helps to establish critical social skills
* Learning a second language provides bilingual advantages in future
* Facilitates communication between parent and child and improves cooperation
* Provides infants with a means of communicating their needs and thus reducing frustration and tantrums
* Enhances bonding between parent and child
* Fun physical activity that helps to develop self-esteem in children
* Provides additional benefits when taught to special needs children
* Increases IQ points between 8 to 13 points which has long lasting effects

Also, in Brain Rules for Babies, John Medina says that there are studies suggesting that teaching Sign Language to your child may even boost your child’s cognition by 50%:

"Gestures and speech used similar neural circuits as they developed in our evolutionary history. University of Chicago psycholinguist David McNeill was the first to suggest this. He thought nonverbal and verbal skills might retain their strong ties even though they’ve diverged into separate behavioral spheres. He was right. Studies confirmed it with a puzzling finding: People who could no longer move their limbs after a brain injury also increasingly lost their ability to communicate verbally. Studies of babies showed the same direct association. We now know that infants do not gain a more sophisticated vocabulary until their fine-motor finger control improves. That’s a remarkable finding. Gestures are “windows into thought processes,” McNeill says.

Could learning physical gestures improve other cognitive skills? One study hints that it could, though more work needs to be done. Kids with normal hearing took an American Sign Language class for nine months, in the first grade, then were administered a series of cognitive tests. Their attentional focus, spatial abilities, memory, and visual discrimination scores improved dramatically—by as much as 50 percent - compared with controls who had no formal instruction."

So yeah, I’d definitely teach my kids Sign Language. In fact, I started it up again even though my oldest is nearly 4 and very articulate already.