Is there room for discussion here?

[McDume]

I am interested in this belief that we should force-feed rudimentary education to our kids rather than allowing their cognitive abilities to mature naturally. And especially that it benefits our kids! I don't know what's right or wrong for any one child, I just suspect that teaching babies to mimic words and numbers like an ape and calling that 'learning' is self-deceiving. Good for the parents' egos, but ultimately damaging to the whole child. I have three kids -- 17, 13 and 8. Each has been raised under the tutelage of Janet Lansbury's RIE teachings, which is very much the opposite of the 'Your Baby Can Read' and 'Baby Einstein' school of thought. All three are quite brilliant, confident and authentic, and they don't get any of that from me! So, I assume it's the RIE training.

All that said, am I in the wrong place? Or is there room for discussion here? I'm not looking for a fight.

[McDume]

By the way, I am going to e-mail janet lansbury that I have potentially opened a can of worms here in case she starts getting unpleasant comments on her blog.

Good luck to us all.

[MySunshine]

You don't have to worry about Janet Lansbury getting unpleasant comments or emails...there is no reason for her to get anything unpleasant. Her RIE sounds very interesting as matter of fact, it sounds a lot like montessori for babies, which a lot of us here are true believers and have also applied the methods.
As far as "baby can read" and teaching baby math. I really suggest you to read more about the method that is being used and the purpose. I personally don't "force" my baby to learn anything he doesn't want to learn, I wouldn't even know how to do that. I m sure you know that very well being a mother of 3 children, they walk away if they don't like something or they just simply look away. I see these materials as things to stimulate my babys brain. I don't know what else to say, since I can see that you really got a wrong impression of the whole thing. Anyhow, welcome to the forum, please stick around and get to know this forum better.

[McDume]

Thanks for your response. It's very much appreciated. For the record -- I am the father of 3. Not the mother. Though, no less interested in parenting discussions.

[hypatia]

I googled her blog and it seems very interesting.
I agree on many points, and I disagree on some.

I don't think there is room for discussion though as parents will always do what feels right for themselves and their children. I don't think you can change someone's mind, especially virtually.
But the Internet is a great place to learn and discover what other people do.

[Lappy]

Hi McDume, and welcome to the BrillKids Forum!

Yes, of course, there's always room for discussion, and these types of questions and inquiries are very much welcome here. We wouldn't want to discourage any parent (mother or father) from asking questions about whether or not teaching is right for their children, and we are only eager to help you find the answers you are looking for.

Janet Lansbury's RIE classes look very helpful indeed - and I personally think that we believe in the same importance "playing" has in childhood education. As MySunshine says, we stress that children should never ever be forced to learn unless they show that they are enjoying it; otherwise, stop lessons temporarily, and look for other ways to make education more fun and interesting to your child.

I hope that you continue to post your opinions here, and we look forward to what you have to say - we have much to learn from your experience as a parent of 3, and perhaps we may have some useful information to offer you as well!

[McDume]

I think my inclination is more RIE - to let babies and toddlers lead the way, to trust their instincts and not interfere by placing our own (parental) aspirations and egos before the child's readiness... in all areas. Physical, emotional and cognititive. The video on Janet's blog post "Infant Play - Great Minds at Work" (or something like that) is quite eye-opening and compelling. The baby learns w/out interference or store-bought edutainment. And the results are clear in the 2-year old's amazing focus and ability. Again, without parental prodding or interference. I don't see where dancing/talking/singing letters and numbers make sense. What happens when the child raised on these videos or DVD's is faced with a book, and the letters aren't entertaining? I have all sorts of theories about the huge increase in Attention Deficit Disorder and videos, but I'm not a doctor, so...

Anyway, thanks for the welcome to this vibrant community.

[KL]

Hi McDume,

Welcome to our forum! Thanks for joining and posting your honest opinion - we certainly welcome it!!

One thing we believe firmly is that we should keep an open mind to all things, and that includes ourselves!

Having been in this field for a while now, we're quite familiar with many of the objections raised against early learning. Actually, most issues boil down to a misunderstanding of what we're saying, and for the most part, you will find that we actually agree to many things!

What we probably agree with:

1. Babies should not be forced to learn

2. Play is very important to babies

3. Don't just plonk your baby in front of the TV, but take the time to INTERACT with your baby

4. Many parents can and do put excessive pressure on their children, and 'lose the plot'. They forget that the most important thing is that the baby should have fun learning, and to treat it as a bonding opportunity, and that results should not be the focus but be a 'side-effect' if it happens.


What many people don't realize (in our opinion only, of course):

1. Babies can learn skills such as reading even before turning 1 (there's debate related to phonics though, I know - see below)

2. The earlier you teach, the easier it is (Not just because of how the brain develops, but also because as babies, with so little they can do, whatever you show them they would tend to lap it up, compared to later ages where they start to have more and more interests and distractions, by which time it would be so much more difficult to teach.)

3. Therefore the earlier you teach, the more fun and joyful it would be. Many parents (like myself) find that our babies absolutely LOVED the lessons. In my case, Felicity loved it so much I was the one who had to stop the lessons after she went through many categories of words in succession.

4. A lot of the misunderstandings people have often stem from the assumption that it's an 'either/or' scenario, when it is in reality 'both/and'.

For example, "Babies should be playing!"  Well, who says we don't let them play? In fact, not only do they play a lot (like with toys), but esp as babies, as far as the babies are concerned, they are 'playing' when they are learning! In any case, people think that all we do all day is to make them learn, when in reality these lessons take just a few minutes.

"They should learn phonics, not whole words!".  Well, who says we don't teach phonics?
In reference to your saying that babies mimic like an 'ape' and that's not really learning, babies start by learning whole words (they cannot read phonetically at first), but they soon start to decipher the phonetics code themselves intuitively and naturally just like how they decode rules of grammar from just listening to enough of it.  You don't have to specifically teach a native speaker to add an 's' to plural words, for example. After a while, they just 'get it'. Similarly with phonics.  The only difference is that babies can start getting a grasp of reading much ealier than if we rely solely on traditional phonics, and even then, we start to get them to understand phonics on an intuitive level even before we teach them the alphabet (which we eventually will do, of course).

Actually, these issues, as well as many others, are discussed on www.brillbaby.com, as well as in our free ebook "Everything You Need To Know About Teaching Your Baby To Read".

One last issue, regarding 'child-led' or 'parent-led'.  Well, again, why not both?? Why does one have to have a monopoly?  When I teach my daughter, very often it would revolve around the things which interest her. But if that was what I solely relied on, then she would be missing out a great deal of stuff which she may otherwise have been interested in had it been introduced to her. I believe that even the pro-child-led people would agree that parents still have to take the lead to some extent.  If we keep to the principle that learning must remain joyful and fun, then I'm sure you'll find that whether or not you call it child-led or parent-led, it would make little difference (if any at all).

anyway, welcome again, and look forward to hearing more of your thoughts!

[patreiche]

First of welcome to the forum! We welcome new members and I do not think your ideas differ that much from ours.

Now on to the debate!

If you read our posts I think you will find we think play is very important.
Our lessons we attempt are only a very small part of the day.
We do not believe in over stimulation but I am not sure we take it to the extreme of the method you suggest.
I do believe that most parents here gear their lessons to their child's interest, otherwise they tend not to pay attention.


I think my first impression about the method you suggest must be wrong. You do not want to stimulate the child at all? You do not want to teach anything? You want the child to learn everything on their own? Is this your method? Many children have been raised this way and these are the very children the system tries to find and help because they are way behind in their development. Certainly they will be independent, because they have not been nurtured at all.


I think all children are different. Children have a wide variety of interest. I do not think any one method of teaching will work for all. For the best benefit a wide variety of methods should be used. Early education is important and love and nurturing is equally important. I certainly think that a certain amount of free time for the child to explore is important.

Even though this group promotes early education, we do not promote torturing the child with endless lessons. I am sure as with any system a parent can overdo it. I think for the most part the parents and grandparents here are a group of very caring individuals that only want to provide the best opportunities for their children. I would say the best method is a mixture of both methods. I think that most parents here probably incorporate sometime for what you suggest. My first impression of the method you suggest is that the child could use a little more nurturing and a little guidance on learning. I do not think all children are capable of learning totally on their own.

[McDume]

Okay, I was going to leave this alone, but since you've been nice enough to take the time to respond... 

My goal as a father has always been to nurture active learning -- but NOT teach. It just seems that when we try to accelerate any aspect of our babies' natural development, we risk undermining the next.

Babies and toddlers are intrinsically motivated to learn. This has been my experience as a dad, and my observation with scores of other infants and toddlers in Janet Lansbury's parenting classes. The long-term studies I've read (certainly not exhaustive, but I have seen a few over the years) suggest that aggressive early teaching can create a relationship of distrust between parent and child, low self-esteem as they mature, and any academic advantage disappears by 3rd grade (U.S.). I can probably pull those studies up if anyone's interested.

Can you point me to any long term scientific study that supports the kind of immersive early education you advocate? 

[PY]

Hi McDume,
I agree in some points with you, not all of them. Like you said it is important to GUIDE THE CHILD in his childhood like Maria Montessori said I practice some Montessori with my two years old...I think is important children to discover nature in a experimental way. I totally agree with that.
I am going to answer from my personal experience with my daughter, since she was a baby her favorite toys are books..even if I never told her that. She discovered they are fun for her that is why she calls them toys, same think with her flashcards. She loves to find words she can read in the books points at them and she claps her hands...etc..
Like I said she has fun practicing and signing her phonics, she asks me to practice with her.
As many books as we can read we probably never  have an answer. wHY? Children are different, they learn in different ways, I DO NOT FORCE MY CHILD TO SIT IN A CHAIR AND LEARN HER ALPHABET and if she doesn't know it I get mad and frustrated!!
Like Janet Lansbury's says in her blog. I respect her opinion but It is important to be able to open your mind in new ways that let you try new activities with your children besides watching a ball roll in a carpet which I do evryday with my daughter.

We have fun learning to read and recognize words maybe you should try and you will understand a little bit more.I can give you ideas to start from.
It is easy to talk about something we don't know ....we haven't experiment...it is easy to let our children play with plastic toys all day long...but also it is funner to spent time with them in the floor and play with toys and other tools that help her undertanding better the world.


YOU SAID: I have three kids -- 17, 13 and 8. Each has been raised under the tutelage of Janet Lansbury's RIE teachings, which is very much the opposite of the 'Your Baby Can Read' and 'Baby Einstein' school of thought. All three are quite brilliant, confident and authentic, and they don't get any of that from me! So, I assume it's the RIE training.

This is what I mean Every child is different , every father and mother at the end beleive their child is the smartest child in the world.

Again this is only my point of view. I respect yours and I agree in some points, I have read tons of books, I have read every books talks about Montessori Program I could found in my town library and amazon as well. And I promise I will review more the REI training to educate myself better about that topic.

Thank you so much for giving us your point of view and your time.
Karma to you
py

[McDume]

Hi PY! Thanks so much for your POV... I just did a little reading on Maria Montessori, and it seems her very clear admonition to parents was: "Follow the child". And, yes, that is precisely what RIE suggests and what I learned in RIE parenting classes.

Also, for the record, I don't believe "my children are the smartest in the world". But I am satisfied that they reach their full cognitive potential, and as they have gotten older, they have retained a natural hunger for learning, are inquisitive, and confident enough to ask questions and make mistakes. I believe that is because they have never had to perform for my wife or me. 

Again, I would be very interested in any research that exists demonstrating positive longterm results from 'teaching' babies. I have never found anything but will admit maybe I haven't looked hard enough. 

Help?

[DadDude]

There is certainly room for discussion here.  But saying "I'm not looking for a fight" is very ironic in a post in which you accuse the people you're talking about of "force-feeding" knowledge to their children, of going against "nature" (whatever that means), of self-deception, of damaging their children for their own egos--well, brother, it looks to me like you have started the fight.  But maybe you did not know that these are fightin' words.  They are all assumptions you're making, which some of us think about a lot, but apparently, you didn't know that.  Anyway, if you actually believe all these things, you’ll find that you’ll have to make your case.  You think that showing flash cards to a child who requests them, or who responds happily to them, is force-feeding?  Why do you think so?

Again, I would be very interested in any research that exists demonstrating positive longterm results from 'teaching' babies. I have never found anything but will admit maybe I haven't looked hard enough.

I couldn't agree more.  Everything is so disappointingly anecdotal; educationists and psychologists, whom you would think would be interested in studying the phenomenon, haven’t taken it up.  Why not?  Perhaps it's because, if they find that these programs do work, they will have to rethink a lot of what they think they know in these fields.

Anyway, though, Robert Titzer of Your Baby Can Read fame has told me he knows of four studies under way, and the non-profit that I work for is in planning stages for another.

[Nikita]

All I know is my parents unwittingly followed the method you love, leaving me to occupy myself with minimal resources, and I feel very disappointed they did not make more of an effort with me. I feel they did not love me and value me enough to go beyond that "no effort on their part" approach. Free play has it's place Some of the time, every day, but I would happily have chosen flash cards and musical instruments and sign language video watching if they had been offered to me. BUt of course, they weren't. And I was to babyish, uneducated and physically incapable of sourcing these resources for myself. Why do I do these things for my kids? It's because I wish that's what my parents had cared enough to do for me. I envy my kids their wide variety of resources!!
And I aim to be a better parent than my parents. My older kids did not receive the resources my younger kids receive, though still far more than I received, and they envy their younger siblings!!

[hypatia]

"My goal as a father has always been to nurture active learning -- but NOT teach."

Did you ever sing to your child? did you even told them 'this is a yellow flower', or 'give me your left hand'?
All this is called teaching. Whenever you interact with a child, the moment she is born, you are teaching, and your baby soaks all the information. So our difference is simply whether we want to teach them a little or more...

My daughter watches a few Little Reader slides once a day (for about 4 minutes), when she asks for it and we cuddle, and sees animals, listens to the sound they make and gets to see written words! Should I NOT show her a written word because governments worldwide decided a child should learn how to read at 5 or 6? But then is it OK with your theory to teach her the name of an animal or its sound? Shouldn't I wait until a teacher does the work for me?

People who usually say things such as 'let kid be kid' have this idea that teaching & learning is boring (because painful: you play for 5 years of your life and all of a sudden you are meant to stay still in a classroom and pay attention to things you couldn't care less about!) and relates to bad memories from school they'd rather spare their children from ('He'll have enough of this once he goes to school..')

The idea for me is that once my daughter has a great grasp of maths for example (which i don't, and i suffer now as an adult) then 'learning' won't be a painful experience linked to failure, and her life will be facilitated.

I speak two languages and chose to teach her both (and even a third) so that I never get to hear in the future 'Why didn't you teach me French? I so wish i could speak another language..' I hear grown-up saying this all the time...

document.getElementById('recent_loading').style.display = 'none';document.getElementById('recent_page_box').style.display = '';

Page: 1/4  

Loading...

Members

• Total Members: 214772
• Latest: addisonjones

Stats

• Total Posts: 110526
• Total Topics: 19136
• Online Today: 522
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 435
• Total: 435