Reading at 9 months? What do you think?

Avatar for coloradomom2b
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Reading at 9 months? What do you think?
4
Fri, 07-28-2006 - 10:56am

Here is the news article. I'm dying to hear your thoughts.

Children learning to read when they are nine months old
written by: Carrie Mc Clure Reporter
posted by: Jeffrey Wolf Web Producer
Created: 7/27/2006 10:19 PM MST - Updated: 7/27/2006 10:38 PM MST

DENVER - Imagine seeing your child reading his first words around the same time you witness his first steps, or hear him talk for the first time.
One doctor says his new method of learning can teach children to read by nine months old.
Dr. Bob Titzer is the founder of "The Titzer Method." It's a multi-sensory, interactive approach to literacy education."If babies can learn English or Japanese or Spanish, why wouldn't they learn the written form of language at the same time?" said Titzer.
His proof, he says, is in his students.Denver mother Melanie Zuckert says she and her husband have been teaching the Titzer Method since their 17-month-old twins, Audrey and Aidan, were just six months old."When my kids started doing it, it was amazing!" said Zuckert. "Children are capable of more than what we give them credit for."
The Titzer method primarily focuses on videos, where a word is displayed on the screen as it is said aloud.In a short period of time, says Titzer, children will start to recognize the words they're seeing on a daily basis."It goes from recognizing some blob or shape to phonetic reading over about a six or nine month period," he said.
Titzer says children can start to learn to read by nine months, and can read a book on their own by 18 months old."There are long-term studies showing that the earlier the child is taught to read, the better the child reads and the more likely the child will actually want to read," said Titzer.He says 90 percent of the brain is developed by the age of five, the normal time many children start to learn to read. However, he argues by then, it's too late."When you learn later in life," he said, "you're learning at a low level whether you realize it or not."
Zuckert's twins can recognize about 35 words, and she plans on continuing the program with them. "I wasn't expecting geniuses," she said, "but I thought it was a fun way for us to interact with them and for them to get exposure to the written language as soon as possible."Some early child development experts don't necessarily buy into the idea that learning to ready that early is an advantage.They argue that it was once believed that children who learned to sign had an advantage over children who did not. However, they say studies show that by the time children reach Kindergarten, all of the children, those who learned to sign and those who did not, were on an equal intellectual level.
They say more studies need to be done to prove that early readers will have a long-lasting advantage over kids who learn to read at school.

Here is a link to the program's website:
http://www.infantlearning.com/

Feb 09 Siggy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Sat, 07-29-2006 - 12:39pm

I'd heard about this previously. I'm not sure reading is the correct term for it. Reading means comprehension of the topic, understanding the ideas from the words. I can't say I believe children this young can comprehend what they read. I do agree they can learn to recognize words the same way they recognize objects.

Sherry

 

Avatar for coloradomom2b
iVillage Member
Registered: 03-26-2003
Sun, 07-30-2006 - 8:27am

I agree with you on many points. First, I also believe that these kids aren't reading. They recognize the shape of the word "cat" as much as they would recognize the shape of a circle. They aren't really reading, and I don't see how it would help them to decode later. The founders claim that it will improve their reading later, but I'm not sure I agree with that. Will the students be resistant to decoding words after just "recognizing" words? I don't know. I also completely agree with this statement:
"Maybe I see this like I see stage parents, pagent parents or the ones who push their kids in sports. They want their children to seem different and special so that it reflects on them. It builds their ego more than it will ultimately benefit the child." This is so true for so many parents and this program is a way to get those parents even earlier.

My DS started reading at 3.5 years old. I have tried very hard to keep him from reading, which probably sounds crazy! He is highly motivated and figured it out early. He asks a lot of questions. I let him guide how much he can do. I don't want to push him because, even though I love to read, there is so much more to life at 4 than books! KWIM? I also don't want to be perceived as that "pushy teacher-mom" who insists her child is the smartest and best in the class.

As far as sign goes, we taught two signs to DS. Most of the time, though, my DH was very insistent that DS speak as clearly as possible. Not because he's a jerk, but mostly because he couldn't understand anything DS said. So, DS learned early to speak clearly with no baby talk. He has always spoken better than many of his peers and people comment on it. I think that sign is good in small doses. But, if you are teaching your kids sign instead of speaking, what motivation will they have to ever speak well and improve their language skills? I'm fine with a limited amount of sign, but not as a replacement for language skills.

Tamie

Feb 09 Siggy

iVillage Member
Registered: 03-24-2003
Sun, 07-30-2006 - 9:36am

I agree with your comments.

Sherry

 

iVillage Member
Registered: 10-03-2004
Sun, 07-30-2006 - 5:02pm

I also don't see how this will help a child with reading later in life. There is more to reading that word calling. Somtimes I would like for people would relax. I went to a workshop Tuesday that confirmed, again, that most kids will learn to read no matter what program they are taught with. I highly doubt they had this program in mind though. Why push your child


crazy