There are many printed books available in market. Some have real photos of animals, fruits, vegetables, transportations, etc., while some are drawn & colored by hand while some are cartoon type characters.
Does it make any difference in teaching the child using any of above books.
Real is best because it helps a child learn to associate the words with images in real life.
I too agree with nhockaday’s opinion. real pictures are best. if we show kids the real picture of one thing & then the cartoon picture of the same thing they tend to get confused & as a result take more time to recognize it.
I like real better. Whenever we get library books I care about the illustrations more than the story for the most part. Some drawings are so unrealistic that it must be confusing.
Maybe i can help here, i was teaching my child using pictures of real objects, i also read to her our home make books using photos, eg a chair, we show her her rocking chair, her baby chair, resturant chair when we go out to eat, and how home dinning chair. She somehow likes chairs and table …always pointing and saying chair when she sees one, recently we were in the bookstores looking over some cartoon drawings and there were some tables and chairs and other stuff in it, although its our first time looking at such cartoon drawings and very weird looking chairs, she happily pointed to it and said chair …
it surprises us, because we didn’t expect her to grasp the concept of what constitutes chair … she sees enough types of chairs to know what constitutes it and even from a terrible looking cartoonist chair… that she saw for the very first time …
For my books and flashcards I took pictures of his toys, items, clothing etc. He likes the bright colors better than blk/wht but according to others blk/wht photos or drawings enhance their intelligence?
It is best to show real pictures first. Familiarity of the objects around them become very easy.
Showing the cartoon and drawing counterpart of such objects will not be a problem afterwards as they already know what it looks like for real. They can recognize it even if it is not precisely drawn. :yes:
real is better I’m agree!
but many books have got a very realistic pictures that baby can’t confused it with real things, I hope,
I don’t know why some objects are made with a silly colour (for example a yellow tree or a blue sun…)
I saw that my son could find the same thing from books in his ambient (enviroment) even when they weren’t properly egual or similar.
ed
real for sure better
Thanks to all for their inputs. Though I too felt that Real photos are the best ones to teach, but the following changed my opinion.
There are many books & Flash cards available from known and reputed publishers, which have sketched / drawn and painted images. When i spoke to couple of parents & teachers and the publishers, i too got mix response. Some of them informed that using a mix of both - real and unreal photos lets the child see the same thing in different ways, and identifies immediately the object, though it may be of different color / shape / size.
It develops his brain and absorving power to recognize the basic concept, its features & characteristics, which actually identifies the object - be it table, chair, car, animal, bird…
It also improves their imagination skills(there is no real study, but some teachers informed this).
When they start drawing / sketching, they highlight the object by its properties. Our drawing is not good, but still they identify what we have drawn.
This made me think again, and i started showing accordingly, mix images to my child. She is able to recognize from both, as well as in real world too. But am not able to confirm if it enhanced her skills or not. I think we can study if she is better than others in recognizing fast and correct.