No matter what happens, or how bad it seems today, life does go on, and it will be better tomorrow.
-Maya Angelou (1928-2014), American poet, writer
In her article, "'I Want My Baby to Read': Supporting Parents in Guiding Early Language and Literacy Development," which serves as the basis for the new Exchange Out of the Box Training Kit, "Supporting Parents in Guiding Early Language and Literacy Development," Bisa Batten Lewis lists "just a few" of the many reasons why teaching babies to read is not good practice:
- It's not developmentally appropriate.
- There is no need to rush.
- Babies don't read; they memorize!
- Reading instruction is too formal for babies who learn best through play.
- Other areas of development suffer.
- Reading early will not make your baby a genius.
Out of the Box Training Developing Empathy to Promote Equity
|
Perhaps a child resists classroom routines or expectations, a team member rubs you the wrong way, or a parent challenges program practices. Sometimes, difficult moments offer us rich opportunities, especially when a deeper sense of empathy gives us insights and tools to respond productively. Explore diverse aspects of empathy as a powerful tool for enriching relationships, exercise your empathy skills, and foster a culture of equity and understanding in your early childhood environment.
|
Comments (4)
Displaying All 4 CommentsPennsylvania, United States
I hope we understand 'babies' to mean preschoolers, as well. If we just let the children develop, share conversation, read them stories, let them have experiences, move their bodies, let them explore the world through their play---reading will happen. We don't need formal curricula and inappropriate academic lessons. We need time and we need to listen to the children.
boston, ma, United States
And let's not forget the research that shows that early readers fare no better than late readers in the end. Early readers does not equal better readers. Everyone catches up and reaches their potential if we teach them to read when their brains are ready for it, sometime between the ages of 4 and 7. I am an early literacy specialist, but my daughter did not read until age 7. I wasn't worried at all and now she is a slightly above average reader at age 12.
New Hampshire, United States
I agree wholeheartedly, but thought it rather ironic that you chose to pair this thought with the quote about "setting our goals high, because we know that most people are capable of more than they do or are." So I think that is where some parents and "educators" get tied up--are infants capable of reading?? Some like to think that if they push hard enough and long enough they are!
Parkersburg, West Virginia, United States
AMEN! Finally, the concept of reading for the sake of "high stake" testing is being challenged. The whole child needs to develop physically, emotionally and cognitively to be able to thrive as a lifetime learner. it has been known for years that the order of learning is 1-Episodic (actual experiences to form memories); 2-Procedural (recall of previous events and results) 3-Semantic (use of symbols/language to communicate). Why have schools and GOVERNMENT regulators demanded "instant readers" or else? All people learn and this happens at various rates, but the physical and neurological connections, which establish emotions, perceptions and abilities for balance, rhythm and crossing the midlines(corpus collsum of the brain) of the body and brain in concert to build the neural pathways for reading and language acquisition skills MUST occur through physical activity leading to higher order thinking skills. Unfortunately, 85% of people remain at tactile kinesthetic and literal levels of controlling their environment. 15% reach some level of application and thinking and designing ways to control the environment. Basically, early reading "demands" contributes to dumbing down people!!
Post a Comment