As many of you know, we have an article dedicated to the topic Why Teach Reading Early? on BrillBaby:
http://www.brillbaby.com/teach-baby/why-teach-reading-early.php
Well, back in June I wrote a post on my blog, entitled The Pros and Cons of Baby Education, in which I embedded the now-famous video of 17-month-old Elizabeth Barrett reading on the Today Show.
The most amazing thing is that Elizabeth’s parents never taught her to read. All they did - apart from talk to her, read to her and do all the “normal” things parents do - was teach her sign language as a baby, and let her watch the program Signing Time. Elizabeth is one unusually gifted child.
Then, yesterday, I received a comment on my blog from Katy Barrett, Elizabeth’s mother! The thing is that Katy is against teaching babies to read. She also stresses that she would not like parents to put unreasonable expectations on their children by expecting them to be like Elizabeth. (I don’t think any of us does!)
You can read my blog post here: http://brillbaby.com/blog/?p=31
This is what Katy wrote:
[i]While we are happy to encourage all parents to read and interact with their children, WE DO NOT SUPPORT OR ENDORSE THIS OR ANY OTHER PROGRAM which claims to teach all babies to read. Elizabeth has some special capacities for learning which extend far beyond only reading. It is not fair to hold every child to such a standard. Further, we are skeptical of any program which deconstructs language/reading to a point which may sacrifice comprehension or, simply, the joy of bonding through books.
We’re not trying to undermine the efforts here, but we are understandably leary of any site which uses our daughter’s image to promote and sell products.[/i]
Here’s what I wrote in response:
[i]Hi Katy, great to have you with us! Congrats on your exceptional little girl. I’m sorry that you feel we are using her to promote our product. Actually this post is about the DEBATE surrounding early learning, and in particular early reading instruction. That’s why I didn’t mention any actual products in it.
I agree that it is exceptionally rare for a 17-month-old to be able to read phonetically without ever having been taught. But it is becoming less and less rare for children under the age of two to be able to read phonetically (sounding out words they’ve never seen before). It’s just that getting there normally requires teaching. (Is it a good idea for parents to teach their baby? Depends on your point of view - and that’s why there’s a debate!)
As for sacrificing comprehension while teaching reading, I guess you are referring to Glenn Doman-style flash cards. We mention this type of teaching on BrillBaby, which aims to be a comprehensive source of information on everything to do with early learning. However, our own software product (Little Reader) and certain DVD products (not by us) DO teach the meanings of words. More importantly, children have a lot of fun using LR - and bonding with their parents in the process! Feel free to take a look at the testimonials on BrillKids.[/i]
I ended by inviting her to join the forum… so who knows? We might even hear from her on this thread! :biggrin:
In the meantime, what do you guys think?
Maddy