Because babies have so many more important things to do with their time than learn to memorize words.
I'm a big fan of memorization - at the right age! My kids loved memorizing songs and chants when they were 3 and 4, so in preschool and kindy I taught them songs naming the planets, the continents and all the countries of Africa, as well as their ABCs. (No real reason for Africa - we just enjoyed the tune.) I'm presently helping a seventh grader memorize his multiplication tables. But I don't see any reason for an infant who hasn't even yet learned to speak to be put in a darkened room, in an empty pen, with their only stimulation coming from a machine. Unless it's nap time, I suppose. But my babies preferred to nap in front of the fireplace, or in Grandma's arms.
The difference is you're not teaching it to babies. ALL reading has some memorization involved. One of the best ways to teach "sight words" is with flashcards.
It's not the memorisation that is the problem. That helps with comprehension. But reading words and comprehending them ARE different. Without the comprehension reading isn't a skill. My two oldest are far above their peer group for reading AND comprehension. I don't hold them back. But if they weren't comprehending the material, then I would. My 12 year old is doing To Kill a Mockingbird for his English studies right now. He is technically grade 7. But his work is grade 10. Why have him read an English text he doesn't comprehend just because he can read it? He's had the reading ability to read To Kill a Mockingbird since he was 8. But there is no way he would have comprehended the themes and subplots of a novel like that back then. Sure, teaching an interested child to read at a young age is fine, especially when it involves one on one interaction with your child rather than a dark room with no personal interaction at all, but what 9 month old says to their parent, "Mummy, I want to learn to read?" Teaching a baby to read has very little to do with the best interests of the baby and far more to do with the elitist snobbery of parents.
Ok, I admit it. Throw rotten tomatoes at me if you want, but I own this program, and I like it. Tyler watched NO tv for his first year, then I introduced this program, 20 minutes per day for a couple months to see what would happen. Obviously we weren't doing it as much as they say you should, and we didn't do the sliding book thing very much. He learned really quickly what was coming next on the video. I bought the rest of the set just before I lost the motivation to keep at it. Every now and then I get it out now, but not too much. More than reading, which was just going to be a party trick anyway, I liked how it got him talking and seemed to teach him words. I think the lack of Tv in general gave me more time to work with him on other stuff and as a result, he was singing his ABC's and recognized all numbers, colors, shapes, and almost all capital letters before he turned 2. could a video have done that, yes, but so can interacting with parents. To address some misconceptions I've seen discussed in this thread: Baby Einstein videos were garbage, and the BOOK written by the YBCR people even points out the difference. On the BE vids, the music, pictures, words don't match. For example, you'd be listening to Twinkle Twinkle, while looking at a pig with a blue ball. WTH does that teach? YBCR videos show the word Bubble and a kid blowing Bubbles. Who brought up a darkened room for YBCR watching? Nothing says anything about YBCR happening in a dark room. How do you all feel about Signing Time videos? I felt like a failure for not getting them for my kids and have considered getting them now that we have a new baby and watch TV constantly anyway. It's more memorization, but it's useful. My first 2 years parenting were in Hawaii where parenting was pretty much a competitive sport. Now that we live in rural Nebraska, it's so much different. I like it better here in a lot of ways, including the lack of opportunities to overschedule my kids, but at the same time, it would be nice to have some mom friends who at least have HEARD of Signing Time. To address
I read completely by 3, and my parents didn't even attempt to teach me. I learned a lot from reading books. My sister is 11 years older than me, and I would read her school books. I'd read encyclopedias, dictionaries, bibles... every book I could find. Yes, conventional school was very boring to me, and I already knew all the things they were attempting to teach. But that meant that I could go to class just long enough to turn in whatever work was required for the day, and then go off and learn on my own, as well as live life. Reading didn't stop me from "being a kid" at 3, and I had time to "be a kid" at 10 as well (although that isn't as much of an issue when you homeschool...). The thing is, what they are saying is ADD/ADHD, is the inability to sit still and listen to a teacher all day. That's a skill I admittedly don't have, but also that I don't really want my kids to have. I want them to want to do something else; I'd rather they do things in short bursts. Because in real life, most of the time, do you sit there and do one thing? No, you stop what you're doing to attend to a baby or etc. if you stay at home, or to take care of something else, answer a phone, etc. if you work. In real life, you (or at least, I) rarely set out a schedule like "8 - 9, clean the kitchen" or "8 - 9, answer the phone" and actually do that and only that. My 2 year old daughter started picking up words on her own, and then I started having her watch Your Baby Can Read (and since I watch it with her, my 3 month old watches it too, so we'll see what it does to him), which helped her pick up more words. She jumps around, sings along to the songs (there IS music in them), and mimics what they are doing (pretends to blow bubbles or etc.). And although Teach Your Child to Read in 100 Easy Lessons seems to work much better (we recently starting doing that too and she's learning to actually read any word, rather than memorizing the few words in YBCR), Your Baby Can read doesn't do any harm imo, if you do it right - watching it with the child and interacting with them while they watch it.
I've enjoyed Signing Time the few times I've seen it on tv. When dgs was tiny we taught him some baby signs, and boy! did it help communication! DD also taught her dd some baby signs, and that helped her immensely too. Both kids have given it up now that they talk fluently, but I highly recommend it for babies who can't talk yet... You have to start very early, so they can pick it up and use it when they need it.
OK, going into Teacher Mode here, lol! My background is working with severely handicapped children, specifically those with physical disabilities such as Cerebral Palsey or Severe Brain Injury. A good number of years ago, I took a FANTASTIC workshop dealing with communication. Basically it said that most of the behavior problems with this population really isn't BEHAVIOR, but COMMUNICATION. Many of these folk cannot communicate effectively. They want something, you've no idea what it is, and they get frustrated trying to tell you. As a result, they act out in frustration. The ability to communicate is POWER. With one word, you have the power to manipulate your environment. Giving a handicapped person a means of communication gives them to ability to control what's going on around them to some degree. I believe that its the same with children. I think that much of the "terrible twos" is actually due to a child's inability to communicate what they want. You can prevent much of the behavior problems of this age by giving the child a means of communicating. And "baby sign" does that to a certain degree. I mean, if a child wants a cookie, and is pointing to a cabinet and grunting or making some verbal noise, it could be ANYTHING in that cabinet. And you're picking this, that and the other thing, none of which are what SHE WANTS, and she's getting frustrated with you for not understanding what is so OBVIOUS to her and finally she starts pitching a fit. Using a sign for "cookie" would prevent all of that! Also, rather than preventing children from talking, I find it interesting that studies show that non-verbal children actually INCREASE in their verbal skill when they start learning to sign.
True. Signing is an awesome tool to promote language development in children with and without language problems. It gives a child a tool to communicate while they are learning how to talk. It actually works to motivate a child to talk because they have experienced the rewards and joys of communicating. I've personally used signing with many children in my previous life as a speech therapist. I've used it with my kids too, but not to a huge degree. Signing Time is a great video series.
Signing time.. nope don't watch them either. My kids learn/will learn sign language when they have a strong background in speaking. Garrett began learning in 4th grade, the others will when they get about there too. We have a deaf friend that we only see a few times a year, but just by being around him they have learned a lot (ok so it's mostly about 4X4 trucks and car and truck shows because that is where we know him from, but still they learn a lot).
