I think it is great using various methods, so it will keep your child interested. But you do not have to. We are planning to use flashcards, but have not get around making them yet. But having LR curriculum made it easy to follow    so we are doing it aready!

[Isaac Newton]

As I reflected on my previous post about great scientific minds and belief in Intelligent Design, I realized that it lucked facts and references so to speak ( something I personally always look in posts, publications, etc.), but since it dealt with my personal experiences and referred to private conversations, general statement on what was my experience was all I could offer…

As I thought on that though, I felt that it would be a disservice not to bring into this discussion a comparison to my personal experience, however documented with facts, references and figures. I usually would not have a chance to write much, and probably would not visit back to this thread for at least a few days if not more ( life with the babe and travelling), but here are some pretty  neat facts, that I felt would be interesting to share, on great minds and Intelligent Design. ( Forgive me for typos, if there will be any)

   Isaac Newton (1642-1727), who discovered the law of gravity, formulated the three laws of motion, developed calculus, constructed the first reflecting telescope, and whom many consider the greatest scientist who ever lived, wrote an estimated 1,400,000 words on religion--more than on physics or astronomy. He wrote papers refuting atheism and defending the Bible; he believed in the Flood, a literal six-day creation, and the Ussher chronology (which dated Earth as a few thousand years old). Here are a few quotes from him:

   I have a fundamental belief in the Bible as the Word of God, written by men who were inspired. I study the Bible daily.

   All my discoveries have been made in answer to prayer.

   We account the Scriptures of God to be the most sublime philosophy. I find more sure marks of authenticity in the Bible than in any profane history whatsoever.

   How about astronomer Johannes Kepler (1571-1630)? Reasoning that the universe must be orderly if designed by God, he discovered the laws of planetary motion and conclusively demonstrated that the sun is the solar system's center. He explained that he was merely "thinking God's thoughts after Him" and said:

   I had the intention of becoming a theologian … but now I see how God is, by my endeavors, also glorified in astronomy, for "the heavens declare the glory of God."   

And:

   Since we astronomers are priests of the highest God in regard to the book of nature, it befits us to be thoughtful, not of the glory of our minds, but rather, above all else, of the glory of God.

   What of Robert Boyle (1627-1691), regarded as the father of modern chemistry, and whose name is wedded to the fundamental law of gas pressures? He determined that gases consist of particles, made early discoveries concerning vacuums, and even invented the first match.
   Boyle also read the Bible daily, was governor of a missionary organization, wrote The Christian Virtuoso to show that studying nature is a religious duty, and in his will established the "Boyle lectures" for the proving of Christianity.

   Then there was Francis Bacon (1561-1626), credited with developing the scientific method. He said:

   There are two books laid before us to study, to prevent our falling into error; first, the volume of the Scriptures, which reveal the will of God; then, the volume of the Creatures, which express His power.   

             Carolus Linnaeus (1707-1778), who laid the foundations of modern taxonomy, still known as the Linnaean system. He too was a believer. Isaac Asimov acknowledged that "Linnaeus himself fought the whole idea of evolution stubbornly." The Dictionary of Scientific Biography says of him:

   His view of nature was deeply religious; central to all his work was God's omnipotence…. "I saw," he wrote in the later editions of Systema natura, "the infinite, all-knowing and all-powerful God…. I followed his footsteps over nature's fields and saw everywhere an eternal wisdom and power, an inscrutable perfection."

Astronomer Sir William Herschel (1738-1822) discovered Uranus and built the greatest reflecting telescopes of his day. He said: "The undevout astronomer must be mad."

His son, John Frederick Herschel, who discovered more than 500 stars and nebulae, declared:

   All human discoveries seem to be made only for the purpose of confirming more and more strongly the truths that come from on high and are contained in the sacred writings."

   John Flamsteed (1646-1719), who made the first great map of the stars, was founder of the famous Greenwich Observatory, first Astronomer Royal of England--and a clergyman.

   Besides being a great statesman, Benjamin Franklin (1706-1790) invented the lightning rod, rocking chair, Franklin stove, and bifocal glasses. He organized the first U.S. postal service and first fire department. Some count Franklin as an unbeliever, but although he poked fun at dour ministers and entertained some doubts about the divinity of Christ, his belief in God was uncompromising. He stated:

   Here is my creed. I believe in one god, the Creator of the universe. That He governs it by His providence. That He ought to be worshipped. That the most acceptable service we render to Him is in doing good to His other children. That the soul of man is immortal, and will be treated with justice in another life respecting its conduct in this.   

He declared before the Constitutional Convention:

   I have lived, Sir, a long time, and the longer I live, the more convincing proofs I see of this truth--that God governs in the affairs of men. And if a sparrow cannot fall to the ground without His notice, is it probable that an empire can rise without His aid?…
   I therefore beg leave to move--that henceforth prayers imploring the assistance of Heaven, and its blessings on our deliberations, be held in this assembly every morning before we proceed to business….

   Some evolutionists like to call creationists "flat earthers." This is ironic since Christopher Columbus, famed for showing the world round, wrote:

   I prayed to the most merciful Lord about my heart's great desire, and He gave me the spirit and the intelligence for the task: seafaring, astronomy, geometry, arithmetic, skill in drafting spherical maps and placing correctly the cities, rivers, mountains and ports. I also studied cosmology, history, chronology, and philosophy.
   It was the Lord who put into my mind (I could feel His hand upon me) the fact that it would be possible to sail from here to the Indies. All who heard of my project rejected it with laughter, ridiculing me. There is no question that the inspiration was from the Holy Spirit, because he comforted me with rays of marvelous illumination from the Holy Scriptures….

   Shall we add to the list of believers Cotton Mather (1663-1728), the clergyman/Harvard president who introduced a smallpox inoculation; Jean Deluc (1727-1817), the Swiss naturalist who coined the word "geology"; or James Parkinson (1755-1824), the first physician to recognize the dangers of a perforated appendix, and to describe the disease named for him? We could also mention John Dalton (1766-1844), who revolutionized chemistry by developing the atomic theory; Benjamin Barton (1766-1815), who wrote the first U.S. textbook on botany; and chemist-physiologist William Prout (1785-1850), who was the first to identify basic foodstuffs as fats, proteins and carbohydrates. And does the famous painting The Last Supper not convey the faith of Leonardo da Vinci (1452-1519), considered by many the father of modern science?

   I hear some saying, "OK, OK, maybe a few of those old dudes had some smarts, but they were only religious because that was the prevailing view in their day. They lived before Darwin. If they had read The Origin of Species, they would have seen things totally different."

   But hold on. Most scientists in Darwin's time weren't thrilled with his theory either. Contrary to the popular impression, it was scientists, not theologians, who primarily opposed evolution in the nineteenth century.

The Catholic church, still smarting from its wrongful condemnation of Galileo, wanted no risk of another embarrassment. Although the church maintained an index of forbidden books, The Origin of Species and The Descent of Man were never placed on it. When Darwin died, the Anglican church even insisted he be given a hero's funeral and state burial at Westminster Abbey.

   On the other hand, 717 scientists, including 86 members of the Royal Society (Britain's most prestigious scientific organization), signed a manifesto entitled "The Declaration of the Students of the Natural and Physical Sciences." Issued in London in 1864, it affirmed their confidence in the Bible's scientific integrity.

   Of course there were several scientists whom evolution failed to convince. There were many others whose faith it could not shake.

Louis Pasteur (1822-95) probably saved more lives than any other scientist. He established the germ theory of disease and the process of sterilization; he isolated pathogens and developed vaccines to combat them--including rabies, diphtheria and anthrax. He also introduced milk pasteurization, which is named for him.
   Pasteur was also a humble Christian. He did not patent his discoveries, but gave them to society freely. Though tragedy marked his life--three of his children died young--faith sustained him. "Science," he said, "brings man nearer to God." And he observed, "The more I study nature," the more I stand amazed at the work of the Creator." In a series of experiments, Pasteur disproved the false notion, then pushed by evolutionists, that bacteria "spontaneously generate."

   Lord Kelvin (1824-1907) was, according to the Encyclopedia Britannica, "foremost among the small group of British scientists who helped to lay the foundation of modern physics." He established a scale of absolute temperatures, with degrees "kelvin" named for him; supervised laying of the first Atlantic cable, for which he was knighted; held 21 honorary doctorates, published more than 600 scientific papers, and patented 70 inventions.
   As Chairman of England's Christian Evidence Society, Lord Kelvin said:

   I have long felt that there was a general impression in the non-scientific world that the scientific world believes Science has discovered ways of explaining all the facts of nature without adopting any definite belief in a Creator. I have never doubted that that impression was utterly groundless. [Lord Kelvin, address of 23 May 1889, quoted in Stephen Abbott Northrop, A Cloud of Witnesses (c. 1899; reprint, San Antonio: Mantle Ministries, 1988), 460.]

   Kevin opposed Darwinism and published a paper refuting uniformitarian geology. He said: "Over-whelmingly strong proofs of intelligent and benevolent design lie around us … the atheistic idea is so nonsensical that I cannot put it into words. And:

   Mathematics and dynamics fail us when we contemplate the earth, fitted for life but lifeless, and try to imagine the commencement of life upon it. This certainly did not take place by any action of chemistry, or electricity, or crystalline grouping of molecules under the influence of force, or by any possible kind of fortuitous concourse of atoms. We must pause, face to face with the mystery and miracle of creation of living creatures. [Mathematical and Physical Papers, Lord Kelvin (Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1911), quoted in Thomas G. Barnes, "Physics: A Challenge to 'Geologic Time,'" Impact 16 (July 1974): 1-2.]

   Joseph Lister (1827-1912) saved countless lives by developing antiseptic surgery through the use of disinfectants. ("Listerine" is named after him.) He invented dissolving stitches and the wiring of broken bones. He was knighted, made president of the Royal Society and president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science.
   Lister was the son of devout Quakers, and would declare "I have no hesitation in saying that in my opinion there is no antagonism between the Religion of Jesus Christ and any fact scientifically established."   

             Samuel F.B. Morse (1791-1872) invented the tele¬graph and Morse Code, built the first camera in America, and founded the National Academy of Design.
   A dedicated Christian, Morse established one of America's first Sunday schools and supported missionaries. He said:

   The only gleam of hope, and I cannot underrate it, is from confidence in God. When I look upward it calms my apprehensions for the future, and I seem to hear a voice saying, "If I clothe the lilies of the field, shall I not also clothe you?" Here is my strong confidence, and I will wait patiently for the direction of Providence. [Northrop, 327.]

   
   The first message he sent by telegraph was: "What hath God wrought."

   Through experiments, James Joule (1818-1889) proved the law of energy conservation, and determined the mathematic relationship between an electric current's energy and the heat it gives off. The joule, a unit of energy measurement, is named for him. He said: "It is evident that an acquaintance with natural laws means no less tthan an acquaintance with the mind of God therein expressed."

   Though born a slave, George Washington Carver (1864-1943) became one of the world's greatest agricultural scientists. Working at the Tuskegee Institute, an Alabama school for Afro-Americans, he developed over 300 products from the peanut and 118 from the sweet potato. He showed both black and white farmers how to better utilize land, and revitalized the South's economy. He did much to improve race relations, and was also an accomplished artist.
   Like Pasteur, Carver patented none of his discoveries, but gave them away. He turned down an offer from Thomas Edison to leave Tuskegee and work at 60 times his pay. In 1940 he donated his life savings to the Institute. A devout Christian, Carver taught his students from the Bible, in a class that met on Sundays from 1907 until his death. He said:

   The secret of my success? It is simple. It is found in the Bible, "In all thy ways acknowledge Him and He shall direct thy paths." [William J. Federer, America's God and Country: Encyclopedia of Quotations (Coppell, Tex.: Fame Publishing, 1994), 98]

   So to figure out that science harmonizes with the Bible, you don't have to be a rocket scientist--but you might ask one. Wernher von Braun (1912-1977) was director of NASA's flight center; he oversaw the team of scientists that sent the first American into space, and masterminded the moon landing.
   An active Christian, von Braun prayed for the safety of those on the manned missions he planned. He observed: "There are those who argue that the universe evolved out of a random process, but what random process could produce the brain of man or the system of the human eye?" He would not have agreed with the whip hand given evolution in today's classrooms: "To be forced to believe only one conclusion--that everything in the universe happened by chance--would violate the very objectivity of science itself."

   Physicist David Brewster (1781-1868) began the science of optical mineralogy, invented the kaleido-scope, and was founder and president of the British Association for the Advancement of Science. He said: "Knowledge, indeed, is at once the handmaid and the companion of true religion. They mutually adorn and support each other." On his tombstone was written: "The Lord is my Light."

   Shall we add Joseph Henry (1797-1878), who invented the electromagnetic motor and galvanometer, was first secretary and director of the Smithsonian Institution, president of the American Association for the Advancement of Science--and always prayed for divine guidance during any experiment? Or Nobel Prize winner Lord Rayleigh (1842-1919), co-discoverer of argon, helium, and the other "noble" gases, who wrote: "The works of the Lord are great, sought out of all them that have pleasure therein." Nobel Prize-winning physicist Robert A. Millikan (1868-1953), though critical of fundamentalism, said he would still choose it over atheism: "The God of science is the Spirit of rational order, and of orderly development. Atheism as I understand it is the denial of the existence of this spirit. Nothing could be more antagonistic to the whole spirit of science."

These are just a sampling of a few great minds, and it illustrates the point that I was trying to make earlier but through their own words and actions...

Sorry, if it was a long ,  !

Hope it helps...

[Richard Milton]

 

Secular researcher Richard Milton summarized the current world situation:

"Darwinism has never had much appeal for science outside of the English-speaking world, and has never appealed much to the American public (although popular with the U.S. scientific establishment in the past). However, its ascendancy in science, in both Britain and America, has been waning for several decades as its grip has weakened in successive areas: geology; paleontology; embryology; comparative anatomy. Now even geneticists are beginning to have doubts. It is only in mainstream molecular biology and zoology that Darwinism retains serious enthusiastic supporters. As growing numbers of scientists begin to drift away from neo-Darwinist ideas, the revision of Darwinism at the public level is long overdue, and is a process that I believe has already started." (Much more so, a decade later...)

- Richard Milton, Shattering the Myths of Darwinism (Rochester, Vermont: Park Street Press, 1992, 1997), p. 277.

My experiences are actually even more up to date  I guess I am a bit young for "Newsweek in 1987" article      And the people I mentioned in my previous post are not one of a thousands of the ones who got their doctorates and became units in statistics, but rather distinguished and known scientist who stand on their own in their areas of research.

I can not say about all scientists, neither I really took time to look at the statistics field by field.

What I wrote came from my personal experience, and as a result of thoughtful and in-depth discussions with number of leading EU scientists ( not from English speaking countries), thats all. So sharing this, may be considered just a personal observation.

However, it does explain why I came to conclusions and beliefs that I did; why I am open to Scientific Evidence, and therefore accept and wholeheartedly support the Intelligent Design theory. And I hope these personal observation will be of interest and help to those who after reading them, will consider to analyse and study the presenting evidence with open minds and will let that evidence lead them to conclusions.

But most of all, lets have fun teaching or little ones about beauty, diversity and fascinating complexity of this world. There is so much to discover, and no doubt as they discover new things every day, these discoveries will speak for themselves. After all there got to be a Designer..

That reminded me of a story I read in one of the Digests a little while back, cant remember exactly which one but the story stayed in my memory, I thought it was neat, it went something like that:

   "Many years ago Sir Isaac Newton had an exact replica of our solar system made in miniature. At its center was a large golden ball representing the sun, and revolving around it were smaller spheres attached at the ends of rods of varying lengths. They represented Mercury, Venus, Earth, Mars and the other planets. These were all geared together by cogs and belts to make them move around the "sun" in perfect harmony.
   One day as Newton was studying the model, a friend who did not believe in the Biblical account of creation, stopped by for a visit. Marveling at the device and watching as the scientist made the heavenly bodies move in their orbits, the man exclaimed, "My, Newton, what an exquisite thing! Who made it for you?"
   Without looking up, Sir Isaac replied, "Nobody."
   "Nobody?" his friend asked.
   "That's right! I said nobody! All of these cogs and belts and gears just happened to come together, and wonder of wonders, by chance they began revolving in their set orbits and with perfect timing."
... He made the point!"  And so did I...

But that is why it is fun, no need to argue, proove or debate. All those things our little ones will be learning about the world around them, will speak for temselves. So I do not worry about that 

Such a good news! Looking forward

[It did not left me confused, it just reinforced my natural curiousity, desire to search for answers and study. It made sense.]

Oh, so cute    He does look like a monkey a bit 

Anyway, dont really have a chance to follow the discussion with travelling, but definetly would suggest "The Priviledged Planet" documentary.

On the first glance, though, it does not look, like your, Chris's posts have much to do with baby's /children education or trying to look for tips or share your own experience, rather like trying to start a debate

I am pretty sure that parents here know what they teach their children, and are busy with that instead

As for me, having medical education and coming from the family of scientists, it makes sense to teach my baby ID principals. And, yes, I will definetly introduce Evolution, in due time, so she would know what some people read in some textbooks, among so many other theories, How high of a priority will be given to it? Probably not too high, as it is just one of many different things she will be learning, but enough for her to explain and reason things, when she is asked about it. It would not even come to my mind to actually teach that theory to my child.

Even my parents, who were higly educated and respected scientists, encouraged me to not pay much attention to the Evolution theory, when I studied it in school ( they were not believers, so religious beliefs had nothing to do here), my dad, who was a physicist, spent a few hours telling me that it is simply not mathematically feasable ( I loved our math discussions with dad!), and explained to me that even though we may not know exact answer as far as origins of species and Earth, I should look elsewhere for it, not to the Evolution theory. It was simple as that! It did not left me confused, it just reinforced my natural curiousity, desire to search for answers and study. It made sense.

So for those who for one reason or another does not teach Biblical Creation, I would say this is a good example of how to present it. It definetly worked in my case, and later, when I was old enough to make my own choice, I made an informed decision.

Later in life, as I asked many of our family friends ( some are leading scientists in EU, members of the National Academies of Science) about Evolution and Intelligent Design, none of them had confidence in Evolution theory, all were definetly persuaded in ID, since not all of them were Christians, not all of them held Biblical beliefs on the Creation of the World. But Intelligent Design was defiently a choice.

Those were the people who studied biology, microbiology, nuclear energy indepth. I also heard from a few of our family friends how it was their studies that led them to believe in Intelligent Design.

Have to run to be with my baby now, but hope it helps! 

Check out this thread http://forum.brillkids.com/general-discussion-b5/progression-of-introducing-new-subjects/

It has plenty of answers and ideas, as we had the same discussion a little while ago here. Hopes this is a help!

Feel free to ask questions, I found it is a great opportunity to drow from resources and experiences of others, -- truly priceless!

And have a good luck and lots of fun with your baby!

excellent post, momtomany!    k2u

[Co-op schooling]

Co-op schooling

Here is another, albeit not so common schooling option. I've been in a few situations where I've seen it working, and when it does work, I must admit results can be impressive. However, there are also plenty of "cons" and "things to consider"


Parents send their children to a parent-run cooperative school, or pool resources between two or more Homeschooling families for the education of their children. This method can also include tutors, outside classes, virtual/online schools, etc.

Pros:
•   Most of the pros for homeschooling will apply.
•   Students may be more inspired to learn and study alongside their friends and peers, and can inspire each other to learn and make progress.
•   More social interaction for students.
•   Increased professionalism. (Providing the school maintains a good standard in structure, scheduling, organization, punctuality, etc.)
•   Teachers' time and efforts will benefit more children.
•   Teachers are able to focus more fully on teaching, if they are in a setting removed from daily home life.
•   Teachers can concentrate on one or two grades, rather than multiple grades simultaneously.
•   More possibility for assistance, camaraderie, and mentoring amongst teachers. This can improve the quality of teaching and aid in preventing burnout.
•   Children can benefit from more variety in teachers.
•   More materials and facilities may be available through participating families pooling their resources.
•   Less familiarity.

Cons:

•   Some of the cons to homeschooling will apply—especially those related to whether the outcome of a non-traditional education is sufficient to prepare a student for his or her chosen future.
•   Requires considerable manpower, resources, and commitment from the families involved.
•   Requires considerable communication and organization between families.
•   Commuting to and from school takes time, coordination, and resources.
•   Costs for things such as facilities, transportation, and meals, in addition to the usual educational needs.
•   The need for uniformity and organization can remove some of the flexibility and individuality that homeschooling enables.
•   Potential for lack of  some parental involvement in education.

Things to consider:

•   Is it an option in your situation? Is there a co-op families school in your city, or other Homeschooling families near enough who would want to co-op?
•   Will the school deliver? Are enough personnel available to manage and staff it efficiently? Will it stay solvent, keep good records, and provide good education?
•   Do you believe that this school will provide your children with a better education than they would be able to receive through other available methods? Is the educational standard higher or lower than what you'd find in a traditional school in your city?
•   Are there capable teachers available for each of the grades or groups involved?
•   Is your family committed to provide the finances required for participation, as well as to fulfill any other school-related obligations (such as homework, additional tutoring, contributing personnel, etc.)?
•   Will you be able to devote the needed time and attention to communication and coordination of school-related issues that arise?
•   Will you be able to have frequent communication with the teachers and school in order to stay involved with your children's education, and provide your children with the necessary parental support? (Those tutored and teached by other teachers in the co-op school)
•   Is commuting to and from the school each day practical and safe?
•   Unless the school is registered and approved, the educational activities at the school will probably still be considered homeschooling, legally speaking. In this case, the homeschooling considerations would apply: Are there legal impediments to homeschooling in your country? Or governmental requirements you would need to be prepared to comply with, such as annual examinations?
•   What are your children's opinions on attending this school? Are they happy with the idea of attending, or do they have another preference?
(Many of the "Things to Consider" list for homeschooling will also be relevant here.)

Hope it helps! I am sure there are more points, but these are the ones that were mentioned so far, and they make pretty comprehensive list.

Thanks for the inspriational anecdote!!

Any stories of about when your children started to "pop" or respond to early education??

That would be great to hear! Lets share! Ours is still a little young, so far it is an act of faith. But she surely loves her "school time" 

That's great! Which country you are talking about? Just curious 

Good point about stay at home parent. In our work we were able to combine working and schooling, and quite a bit of travelling. But it does take a lot of planning for sure. And the parents that does most of the teaching, does have to dedicate a reasonable amount of time for planning and teaching.

Valid and important point!

And here are some References ( these parts had links, so instead of pasting the article, I just give the reference, I think it works better for everyone  )

Eliot, Lise What's Going On in There? (New York: Bantam Books, 1999)

http://www.babycenter.com/pregnancy/

Leach, Penelope Babyhood: Stage by Stage, from birth to age two: How Your
baby Develops Physically, Emotionally, Mentally (New York:Alfred A. Knopf,
1998

Time Magazine Special Report February 3, 1997 Vol. 149 No. 5 Nash,J.
Madeleine Fertile Minds

Sunday,February 16, 1997
http://www.news-observer.com/2little2late/stories/day1skygraphics.html
Critical Windows of Opportunity

Hope this is a help, and hope it was OK to share it like that 

Will be interesting to know what everyone thinks. I still got to look into all the information, but it does seem very interesting. I am glad that Right Brain Kids team was so kind to aswer all these questions!

[Infant eye development – Part 6 - one to two years old]

Infant eye development – Part 6 - one to two years old

What are my baby's visual abilities from one to two years old?

By a year old, your child sees almost as well as an adult. All her visual abilities have emerged (depth perception, color vision, well-controlled eye movements and fine acuity). At eighteen months old, your toddler's sensory and motor maturation is complete for the most part. Now she concentrates on the higher mental skills.

Within the first few months of this time, your baby will begin to walk.
Her new upright posture will afford her a fresh vantage point from which
to view and interact with the world. She has become an expert at grasping,
pinching, pulling and throwing objects. Because of her trailblazing mobility, her need for new visual stimuli remains very high throughout this year. When she first learns to walk she will enjoy a number of fascinating objects that are small enough for her to carry around. By eighteen months, when she may be able to look over her shoulder while walking, she will probably enjoy a toy that she can watch while she pulls it along behind her.

Your baby will continue to enjoy looking at picture books during this time. She will be pleased to look at almost anything, no matter what the complexity.  If she enjoys flash card activities, you can intersperse formal learning times with more physical play or a walk.

[Infant eye development – Part 5 – Nine to Twelve months]

Infant eye development – Part 5 – Nine to Twelve months

What are my baby's visual abilities from nine to 12 months?

By nine months, all your baby's visual abilities have emerged (depth perception, color vision, well controlled eye movements and fine acuity). By one year old your baby's visual apparatus are almost fully tuned and she sees a world of rich colors, textures and depth. New visual skills quickly improve until by one year old, your baby's vision is very nearly as good as an adult's.

By ten months, your baby's hand-eye coordination is remarkably mature.
She can sit on the floor and play, lean forward to grab a toy and even scurry across the room to grab a handful of dog fur. She will crave constant but slight variety in the objects that you give her to touch, grasp and manipulate.

Your baby will continue to enjoy looking at picture books during this time. She will be pleased to look at almost anything, no matter what the complexity. But when reading to her, it is preferable to use simple, bold, brightly colored images. The more that you can read to her, the faster she will be able to associate images, letters and number symbols with spoken words. You can try using large flash cards with your baby now. You might paint animals, objects, letters and numbers on these cards. Then as you hold them, say their names as your baby looks at them. With more formal lessons such as this, it is important to allow your baby to tell you if she is ready for these games. She will show no interest, or will get cranky if you try to play too long. If she enjoys flash card activities,
you can intersperse formal learning times with more physical play or a walk in the park.

[Infant eye development – Part 4 – Three to nine months.]

Infant eye development – Part 4 – Three to nine months.

What can my baby see from three to six months?

Between two and eight months of age the number of neurons in your baby's visual cortex are multiplying into the trillions. New visual skills quickly improve until your baby's vision is very nearly as good as an adult by her first birthday. By three months your baby begins to see the purple and yellow/green hues as well as the red and green ones. Your baby will probably prefer these primary colors in their purest and brightest versions. Given a choice, she might choose bright red and blue over yellow-green and purple. By four months she can remember and categorize all the primary colors. She has an easier time remembering color than shapes at this time.

Depth perception depends on two eyes working together. By three and a half
months your baby will be seeing in 3-D because her eyes will have developed this ability to work together. Between three and six months your baby is able to anticipate the position of a steadily moving object. Prior to this time she was merely able to follow the direction of the object. This is a major visual landmark because it marks the period when your baby actually begins to choose where to look.

What are my baby's visual abilities from six to nine months?

By six months all your baby's visual abilities have emerged (depth perception, color vision, well controlled eye movements and fine acuity). Her hand-eye coordination is maturing quickly. She is now able to reach out and grasp most everything that she wants. It is important to remember that during this period your baby will still want to explore everything she sees with her mouth. Her mouth is an organ of exploration which she uses to verify most everything that she can see, grasp or touch. It is critical to keep her play areas clean and put few limitations (within reason) on her oral explorations.

At six months your baby can almost crawl and can probably sit but not balance alone. These new positions mean that your baby will want new and more varied visual stimuli. She will crave constant but slight variety in the objects that you give her to touch, grasp and manipulate. If she seems to grow bored with the objects and pictures that you give her in a particular room, try putting these same things in a different place, and she may find renewed interest in them.

By nine months, your baby can sit and play on the floor using both hands to manipulate her toys. At the same time that she sits independently, she learns to crawl across the room for other visual feasts. This expanded locomotion means that she will be craving additional things to look at and more objects to exercise her developing hand-eye coordination. By eight months old, your baby begins to learn by watching you demonstrate things. For instance if you take out crayons and draw in front of her, she may not be able to draw anything but she will show definite signs of attempting to mimic you.

[Infant eye development – Part 3 - Birth to 3 months]

Infant eye development – Part 3 - Birth to 3 months

What can my baby see from birth to three months?

Everything that passes before your baby's eyes for several months after birth will have a lasting impact on her visual abilities for the rest of her life. Her eyes received little stimulation in the dark recesses of your womb. At birth, her visual structures are in place, now she merely needs to learn how to use them. Her fuzzy starting point may allow her just the right amount of visual experience without overloading her brand new equipment. In fact, her restricted vision may make it easier for her to begin the immensely complex task of coordinating vision with touch, since the only things she can see clearly are within her reach.

Your baby's vision is pretty foggy at birth. If you had to navigate your world through a steamed window, it might be much the same. She can see from the tip of her nose to about nine inches away from her. When she is nursing or being held, your face is the perfect distance for her developing eyes. Her vision is in fact perfectly suited for learning what her new family members look like. Amazingly, your baby can recognize your face within minutes after birth. She could even distinguish your face from a gallery of photos. For the next two to three months she will like to look at faces or drawings of faces more than anything else. Newborns have been found to be able to identify the gender of other babies, provided they are moving. Even more remarkably, they can do this when the babies are cross-dressed!

Your newborn doesn't see out of the center of her eyes as adults do....instead, she sees from the periphery. Because of this, you might consider hanging mobiles beside her and about nine inches away from her, rather than directly above her. She can see some color, reds and greens particularly, but she prefers the sharp contrasts of black and white designs. Faces give her the perfect visual stimuli. When she looks at a face, the hairline and chin provide a bold, contrasting frame for her peripheral vision. In experiments, babies less than an hour old will turn
their head and eyes farther to follow a correct drawing of a human face than they will to follow a face whose features have been rearranged.

Your baby's eyes are surprisingly good at perceiving slow movement, even  though they will move in jerky steps. Her eyes will tend to fall behind the object they are trying to track. Your newborn is motivated to stare at everything she can see, especially if she has never seen it before. She even has the good sense to grow bored with things she has been looking at for a long time. A word of caution: extremes of sound, movement and light are stressful for your baby in her first tender weeks. It is possible that a bombardment of visual stimulation could prove stressful for her as well.

From six to eight weeks your baby will look an equal amount of time at familiar things and new ones. By two months she will much prefer to examine objects that she has not seen before. At two months your baby can see more from the center of her eyes, so you can hang a mobile above her about 8 - 15 inches from the bridge of her nose. She can see the difference between many different faces now, and can watch more of their internal features, like the nose and mouth. Her eyes can track much more smoothly now. If you talk to her and move your head at the same time, you will get a smile more easily than if you stay stationary and silent. Before she gives you a smile, she will first make an observation of your
whole face, going from hairline to chin and then returning her gaze to your eyes. She probably will not recognize you if you present your face in profile or if you are wearing a hat.

By two months, your baby will gaze at you for long periods of time. Her gaze may even get stuck because of visual wiring changes going on in the brain, and you may have to rescue her from time to time. When this happens you can just change her position or give her something new to look at. She can distinguish between pairs of colors now, if the objects she is viewing are very bright and very large. Purples and yellow-green hues are still hard for her to see. Your baby loves to look at large bold pictures. Your friends might think it's too soon, but you can try sitting with your tiny baby in your lap and showing her a big picture book.

The period from two to three months is a critical time for manual-visual learning. Your baby's body begins to uncurl from the fetal position and her hands begin to reach out and explore her world. She discovers her hands and will stare at them with fascination for hours. Now she can hold and manipulate objects and is ready for a lot more play and stimulation.