YBCR Bad press and law suit, what is up? what do you think??

[DannyandAmy]

Everything the complaint says, "there is no evidence of..." HAS evidence! That is what is most upsetting, as we are all witnesses of the evidence, our children!

"Your Baby Can Read pressures parents by urging them to seize a “short window of opportunity” for reading that begins in infancy despite that there is no evidence that any such “window” exists—or to support any of Your Baby Can Read’s pseudoscientific claims."

This research university filing this complaint clearly has not done enough research. Pathetic.

Would be grateful to sign a petition for Dr. Titzer.

[KL]

Looks like Dr. Gentry ruffled some feathers after posting his latest blog on this subject.

Susan Lin and Josh Golin, directors of the CCFC, posted a response on his blog:

http://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/raising-readers-writers-and-spellers/201104/is-there-baby-can-read-witch-hunt/comments#comment-152141

I loved Dr. Gentry's response! A must-read!

[waterdreamer]

Looks like everyones taking of their gloves in this one. I'm glad Dr. Gentry called Susan Lin on her misleading comments

[Ayesha Nicole]

Anyone read this research study that includes Dr. Robert Titzer?:

Citation
Database: PsycARTICLES
[Journal Article]
Knowing in the context of acting: The task dynamics of the A-not-B error.
Smith, Linda B.; Thelen, Esther; Titzer, Robert; McLin, Dewey
Psychological Review, Vol 106(2), Apr 1999, 235-260. doi: 10.1037/0033-295X.106.2.235

Abstract
The A-not-B error is one of the most robust and highly studied phenomena in developmental psychology. The traditional Piagetian interpretation is that the error reflects the immaturity of infants' understanding of objects as permanent entities. More recently, the error has been interpreted in terms of changes in representation, in memory, in spatial knowledge, and in inhibitory processes. Each account may be partially right but none offers a unified account of the many accumulated facts about this error. This article presents and tests a new unified explanation. The authors propose that the perseverative reach back to A is the product of the processes that take a hand to a location in visual space: the body-centered nature of the spatial code, memories for previous reaching activity, and the close coupling of looking and reaching. The results from 6 experiments support this explanation. The results are used to challenge the idea of knowledge independent of and distinct from behavior. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

http://psycnet.apa.org/journals/rev/106/2/235/

found .pdf online: > http://www.sv.uit.no/seksjon/psyk/pdf/Audrey4_2004.pdf

* * *

Citation
Database: PsycINFO
[Journal Article]
The influence of reminder trials on contextual interference effects.
Shea, John B.; Titzer, Robert C.
Journal of Motor Behavior, Vol 25(4), Dec 1993, 264-274.

Abstract
Examined the proposition of the elaboration explanation for contextual interference that more than 1 task is present in working memory when multiple tasks are practiced in a random schedule but that only 1 task is present in working memory when multiple tasks are practiced in a blocked schedule. Three motor tasks were performed as fast as possible in either a random or blocked practice schedule in 2 experiments involving a total of 88 university students. Acquisition performance was slower for the random practice conditions than for the blocked practice conditions. A blocked practice condition with a beneficial acquisition and reminder task order pairing performed faster during both acquisition and retention than a comparable random practice condition. (PsycINFO Database Record (c) 2010 APA, all rights reserved)

http://psycnet.apa.org/psycinfo/1994-20259-001

* * *

and a reference to his other publication is mentioned here:

Publications
A search of the PsychInfo database reveals three publications which include Titzer as an author. Titzer was one of four co-authors of a paper which was published in Psychological Review; the paper was published in 1999 and was titled "The task dynamics of the A-not-B error." The other two citations in PsychInfo include his dissertation, which concerned the infant's understanding of the visual cliff; and a paper he co-authored in 1993 entitled "The influence of reminder trials on contextual interference effects."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Robert_Titzer

[kauaiheidi]

Somewhat off topic, but given the debate over the definition of “reading” and whether YBCR kids are really “reading” I thought it was interesting that the US Citizenship and Immigration Services considers reading sight words to be really reading.
I know someone who recently took the Naturalization Test and became a US citizen.  The Naturalization Test includes an English Test with a Reading Portion.   You must be able to read a sentence correctly to demonstrate an ability to read English and be eligible for naturalization.  To help you prepare, the US Citizenship and Immigration Services provides a Reading Vocabulary List containing ALL the words found in the English Reading Portion of the Naturalization Test.  There are about 70 words on the Reading Vocabulary List.

[TeachingMyToddlers]

<a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/ZPqJ4jb1RI8&rel=1" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/ZPqJ4jb1RI8&rel=1</a>

Why aren't pieces like this  ever highlighted, only the negative stuff? Oh right, because controversy is what sells. This youtube video has been up for a year with only 76 views.

[Skylark]

"Why aren't pieces like this  ever highlighted, only the negative stuff? Oh right, because controversy is what sells. " Agree with that! Papers usually will publish anything negative and shocking, even if totally unfounded, on their front pages, and then you see rebuttals and apologies ( if any!) in small announcements on the back

Plus anything that stands out from a norm is always criticized ... Sad

[Skylark]

Kauaiheidi, loved your comment! Good point!

[Kimba15]

"Why aren't pieces like this  ever highlighted, only the negative stuff? Oh right, because controversy is what sells. " Agree with that! Papers usually will publish anything negative and shocking, even if totally unfounded, on their front pages, and then you see rebuttals and apologies ( if any!) in small announcements on the back

Plus anything that stands out from a norm is always criticized ... Sad

I totally agree Skylark! I also find though the more something gets critisised, the more people look into something and not everyone believes the hype of the news. I hope this has boosted sales for YBCR and more people are teaching their children to read!

[kauaiheidi]

I can't believe Your Baby Can went out of business >

I used YBCR (along with PP, Little Reader, Readeez, Reading Bear etc) and my daughter easily learned to read.  I also like their Your Child Can Read and we listen to their Spanish CD in the car. 

My daughter just turned 4 and she still loves books.

Here is a video i posted previously of her reading when she was younger

http://youtu.be/CxmS1nQVsno

[DadDude]

I didn't see this until just now: http://www.ftc.gov/opa/2012/08/babyread.shtm

The "Your Baby Can" company settled with the FTC, which is now persecuting Dr. Titzer in court.

I think I'm going to write to my Congresscritters about this one. This is a waste of government time and money, and really an abuse of power.

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: 460
• Online Ever: 826
• (January 22, 2020, 12:09:49 AM)

Users Online

• Users: 0
• Guests: 274
• Total: 274