Your Baby Can Read Programme- The Reading Whisperer™
Strongly Recommends That You
Do NOT Buy This Product

Read Australia™ - We use facebook like an interactive newsletter, please join us!

Questions? info@ReadAustralia.com

At Read Australia™ we aim to put forward research based programs, and to help parents and teachers understand why so many children fail and what we can do about it. Read Australia™ aim to share information and resources to encourage good practice- and to help you identify which children are most likely to fail and what you can do to prevent this. Through Read Australia™ you will learn how explicitly and systematically teach all children the skills required in order to develop phonological awareness. We would like to see a more effective partnership between teachers and parents- and are developing the 'Parents Aboard' Program so that you can help your child yourself.

Questions about Phonics? Email Trainer (Emma Hartnell-Baker BEd Hons. MA) - also known as The Reading Whisperer -for info!

Ask about synthetic phonics, and also useful info about various programs eg Jolly Phonics, THRASS, MultiLit, Phono-Graphix, Superphonics (Read, Write Inc) and more..
Looking for a Jolly Phonics workshop in Queensland? Click here to book places on Jolly Phonics workshops (Gold Coast QLD) or email us to request In-House Training. Click here if interested in becoming an Approved
Read Australia™ Reading Coach- teaching children to read and spell
using synthetic phonics.

• Article from the Reading Whisperer™ -

  Why Is the 'Your Baby Can Read' Program Being Investigated by the Federal Trade Commission?

  April 2011

• ---

   

• Thoughts about the Your Baby Can Read Program - from Emma Hartnell-Baker, also known as The Child Listener™ (A Voice for Kids) and the Reading Whisperer™
  
  

  ---

• I keep seeing the 'Your Baby Can Read' channel (I am in Australia) and had managed to avoid it. I had presumed that this is most likely a commercial product designed to help enthusiastic parents part with their cash in exchange for far reaching claims, and the belief they they are going to really help their child 'succeed' academically (with that being the main aim in life of course).
  
  Today I finally turned to the channel to watch. A passer-by could easily have mistaken this for a horror movie, with me peeking out behind a cushion hardly daring to watch. And, indeed, happy parents were there on my screen enthusiastically selling the wonders of this product; selling me, the viewer, the concept that they have somehow given their child the best start in life. An opportunity to 'learn to read' while still in diapers. Sounds great! Except that I have taught hundreds of children to read and spell (including 3 and 4 year olds) and have worked with older children who find this incredibly hard. I have studied and researched WHY so many children fail - and this program predominantly goes against what we know works for the greatest number of children, including those with learning difficulties.
  
  The longer I watched the more I realised that these children are simply being taught to memorize whole words (they do this by recognising the word shape and length etc). Something successful schools stopped doing as their 'main' teaching strategy many years ago - eg in the UK following the Rose Report (the same recommendations made within the AU Inquiry into the Teaching of Literacy 2005). If I had been able to visit these children (many shown on YouTube) the first thing I would have done is to show two similar words- 'horse' and 'house'. Most would not see a difference.
  
  Within our current education system we are often so focused on 'child based learning' and on constructivism (an established theory of knowing and learning rather than a theory of teaching) and teachers often do not realise that there is a serious lack of supporting evidence for its effectiveness in teaching children to read. Unfortunately this 'method' of teaching reading- the 'whole-language' approach to teaching and learning - reflects this philosophy of learning, and has been the predominant approach for early literacy teaching and learning throughout English - speaking countries (Pearson, 2000; Westwood, 1999, 2004). This approach assumes that children are inherently active, self-regulating learners who construct knowledge for themselves, with teachers needing to give little or no explicit decoding instruction. While this may be ok for many children there are around 20 - 30% who will fail. In QLD for example there are estimated to be around 20% of children who aren't reading to the expected level by the age of 10. If we can change the way we teach these children won't need that additional 1:1 help at the age of 8. Reading Recovery in Australia has been scrapped- why not scrap the reason for needing it in the first place as well? This group can also include children who are from disadvantaged backgrounds who often do not have rich phonological knowledge and phonemic awareness upon which to base new learning. Being taught using this 'whole language' method has the effect of compounding their disadvantage once they begin school. This is particularly the case for children from non-English speaking backgrounds, including Indigenous children where English may be their second or third language.So why do so many people advocate their method- and use it? Results show over and over again that this does not facilitate literacy development and achievement for ALL children.
  
  Yes, the young brain has the capacity to memorize these words- and even to link them with meaning ie see 'wave' and do the action. However this is really no more than a gimmick. This does not teach a child to read, and certainly not to spell. It could do more harm than good for many- and parents can start pushing children into something they are developmentally not ready for. We don't expect them to start running at the age of 6 months- so it would be laughable to buy trainers and start manually moving their legs back and forth quickly in a quest to develop an olympic runner. As a literacy trainer I find it laughable that parents are being encouraged to believe that babies can 'read'. Moving legs back and forth in the air quickly isn't running- and memorizing words isn't reading.
  I noted while watching the promotional 'Your Baby Can Read' channel that many of these children aren't babies at all- as the program title would suggest. The program name was a major concern of mine, and why I avoided the channel for so long. Children need to learn to speak before learning to read- ie how we represent our language on paper. Babies begin to develop language/ speech at different rates- but most 'babies' aren't able to even 'say' the words on the flash cards:-) I would be happier with the product being called 'Your toddler can learn to memorize printed words'....far more honest advertising.
• 
  
  We know that around 20 -30% of children will find reading and spelling to be one of the most difficult things they ever do (research cited here shortly) - often due to poor phonological awareness. We must teach these children explicitly and directly using (synthetic) phonics if we are to help them before they completely 'switch off'. The problem is that many don't recognise who these children are until already failing- with 'phonics' being used as some type of remedial program. Instead, bearing in mind the other 70% or so of children ( the lucky ones) will learn however we teach them, why not just teach all to 'de-code'- and to develop phonological awareness from the very beginning?
  Our focus at Read Australia™ is predominantly to prevent difficulties - and to help those children who are most likely to struggle. This can be ANY child- in any social group etc. We try to avoid anything that is likely to hinder their progress eg teaching children to look at 'whole words' in the initial stages of reading acquisition, rather than their parts. We avoid anything that teaches children that reading and spelling is mainly a matter of memorizing whole words- or guessing the word from the pictures. It is around the end of Year 1 when we really realise that these children are falling behind- because the human brain can only memorize a certain number. Without de-coding skills the children then struggle as they can no longer rely on their memory skills.
  
  I support parents who want the best for their children, however language development (and verbal intelligence) in the early years is far more important than teaching them sight words- often sadly used like a party trick to impress an audience. (Again this raises concerns for me - as this can give children the wrong message about which parts of learning they should be most proud- but I'll leave that for another article)
  I would rather parents read, rhyme and sing with their children- and engage in meaningful dialogues. Ask questions- help them expand their vocabulary and develop verbal intelligence. Develop creativity, encourage imaginative play.........faciliate independence and the self-confidence that allows them to get things 'wrong' - and to be self-motivated enough to look for different answers. Show them that the process is what is important- not just the results- or 'getting it right'..
  
  As an early years educator I work on listening for sounds in words very early on with children- alongside their individual language development. So when they can say the word 'cat' they can also learn to hear the sounds in cat ie c+a+t (sounds not letter names) I will also start looking for the pictures of those sounds in our environment and in words when sharing books- ie the picture of the sound 'buh' looks like this b (focus on lower case) In the early years I help children learn that we read words from left to right, and that the sounds in the words correspond with the sounds we make with our mouths when saying them aloud. We listen for how many sounds there are in words- and what phonemes/ digraphs etc are used to represent them. The children listen to words 'sounded out' slowly (ie blending) and we manipulate sounds. (what word would be say if we took the 'r' out of 'frog' etc. ) Basically developing phonological awareness- teaching using synthetic phonics- amd making it meaningful as it relates to the words they are speaking. So (other than their name) the first words I would be teaching are words that they can de-code- using a small number of sounds. For example in Jolly Phonics the sounds ''s,i,n,p, a, t' are introduced because the children can learn to reading and spell numerous words using those sounds. It doesn't have to be those sounds though. What is important here is that the child is learning at his own pace- and that is it fun. Yes, I have taught many very young children to read and spell- based on learning the 'code'. I am not against early learning- far from it. However this needs to be developmentally appropriate - and not at the cost of other types of learning.
  
  While on the subject of reading using synthetic phonics, there are many great decodable 'readers' out there - eg Read, Write, Inc.
  (Click here to order in Australia- type 'Read, Write Inc' - or 'Superphonics'- into search box for readers, sound cards, workbooks and more from this author)
  
• There are even FREE decodable readers now available- eg from Fantastic Phonics or from SPELD SA.
• 
  I do not recommend introducing 'readers' to children that they can't de-code (according to the sounds they have been learning.) These 'readers' should be consolidating what they are learning. So when I see children 'reading' books I question what the parent means by this exactly. Most are simply pointing to whole words after memorizing. Yes, there is some value- but if they can do this why not actually teach them how to read and spell accurately?
  
  Alongside having their own 'readers' they are also of course sharing books with siblings and adults- we want them to see us reading, to share stories and to become aware of environmental print etc.

• 
  
  When I speak of early 'reading' and 'spelling' these are (for me) the main concepts ie:
  
  * that the words we speak are made up of sounds.
  * that these sounds can be represented on paper - and together become 'words'. Words can then be used to form sentences and so on- with the text used for a number of reasons- to tell a story, to record information etc
  * that sounds are represented on paper from left to right
  * that we form pictures of sounds/ letters on paper in ways that makes writing easier (and will be quicker and neater) - ie from top to bottom and flowing across the page.
  * that some sounds in spoken language can be represented using more than one letter, and in different ways ('f' could be ph, ff etc)
  * that some sounds on paper can be spoken in different ways depending on the other sounds in the word - eg 'ow' as in cow or as in 'tow'
  * that some words can't be de-coded and must be learnt (eg yacht)
  
  If children learn 'the code' then they don't need to rely on memory,- and can not only be great readers but also proficient when spelling nonsense and unfamiliar words. In fact this is recognised as being so important that 'non words' are now included within the UK, within spelling tests (see this article- and note that I strongly disagree that children will find this task hard- if they are being taught the code- or that this is not worth doing as the words have no 'meaning'. In the early stages learning to read and spell words actually has far more to do with the mechanics of the alphabet code than the meaning of the words. Ensuring that 'nonsense' words are included sends the message that synthetic phonics is important- and this is something I would hope more would embrace)
  
  Yes, many children will learn to read using sight words-combined with other skills- ie the whole language approach. However if they can learn in this way then, to be honest, they can learn in any way- and won't have difficulties later on. They could start later on- or use a different method- and still be just a 'good'.
  I start developing phonological awareness and a love of the written word early on- being careful to make sure I am working at the child's level and that he is having fun. My focus on helping children to become effective and positive learners. As a parent I don't necessarily trust that my child is going to have fantastic teachers, so why not teach them to read and spell even before school if ready? I don't see this as pushing my child but more as a preventative measure. I do have a valid concern that not all teachers have the knowledge they need, in order to teach ALL of the children in their class to read and spell with confidence. This is not a slight on teachers- more so on University degree content (or lack thereof) and quality teacher professional development. Also the lack of time teachers are allocated to actually teaching reading and spelling; whole class teaching does not help each individual and there isn't the funding needed to supply early years teachers with the support staff they need to ensure that every child succeeds. Literacy is different to most subjects as outlined earlier- the children who will find it difficult need direct, explicit instruction in the alphabet code. The children who will struggle won't 'just pick it up' - they won't 'just catch' up. If this was the case literacy achievement wouldn't be so poor in so many schools and in so many countries. What is worrying for society is that delinquency and poor literacy achievement are known to be so interlinked; with several US prisons actually predicting future intake on year 3 and 4 reading scores! We are failing too many children, even though we know that if we use a preventative approach and teach children directly and explicitly in the early years, with a focus on phonological awareness, then we could change this.
  
  This is in part why 'Read Australia™' was created- to offer parents and teachers the information they want- as most WANT to offer our children the best chance of succeeding. And learning to read and spell is something every child deserves.
  However teaching them to recognise 'whole words' when very young isn't the answer- and why I have written this article..
  
  

• 'Your Baby Can Read' is a great marketing ploy, and there can be benefits as this can develop the parent child bond.
  Many children will love the attention they get when adults cheer and clap their 'success'.
  And many may develop a love of the written word because of this positive attention- if, of course,
  they succeed. My concern- as I work with many children who struggle, and who have low
  self-esteem because of it, is that this will not only confuse many children but give them the wrong message about what reading and spelling is. It also sends out the wrong message to parents
  who are only looking for ways to help their children- and can inadvertently do just the opposite.

So if you want to help your child learn to read early - which is highly recommended (with 7 being our 'red alert' age) then please work with us- we will help you do so with the least amount of financial outlay as possible. YOU are their best resource, and to help you help your children we are offering low cost and free training, along with free resources. Help us help every child learn to read - to at least their expect reading age- by 7 (and ideally 6)

Emma Hartnell-Baker BEd Hons MA Special Educational Needs

You can also see an article I wrote for
Ezine on the same subject here