Help for a very advanced 2 year old

[Embassy]

This still doesn't change much of my answer. It is not either/or it is both/and. And I don't think this changes anything. Are you suggesting that because I do early learning activities i cannot focus properly on pretend play? You might need to clarify this for me.

 

 

I don't personally believe that a person can do both because they are very different philosophies.

 

Can you please define giftedness for me, as it may be true we are not talking about the same thing? Defining terms is always helpful especially as the term gifted is thrown around as loosely as ADD.

 

I think Linda Silverman does a good job:

 

So what is giftedness? The Moms are right. It is developmental advancement that can be observed in early childhood. But the child doesn't advance equally in all areas. As she asks what happens after you die and “How do we know we aren't part of someone else's dream?†she still can't tie her shoes! An eleven-year-old highly gifted boy got off the plane with his calculus book in one hand and his well-worn Curious George in the other. The higher the child’s IQ, the more difficulty he or she has finding playmates or conforming to the lock-step school curriculum. The greater the discrepancy between a child's strengths and weaknesses, the harder it is for him or her to fit in anywhere....

 

Gifted children and adults see the world differently because of the complexity of their thought processes and their emotional intensity. People often say to them, “Why do you make everything so complicated?†“Why do you take everything so seriously?†“Why is everything so important to you?†The gifted are “too†everything: too sensitive, too intense, too driven, too honest, too idealistic, too moral, too perfectionistic, too much for other people! Even if they try their entire lives to fit in, they still feel like misfits. The damage we do to gifted children and adults by ignoring this phenomenon is far greater than the damage we do by labeling it. Without the label for their differences, the gifted come up with their own label: “I must be crazy. No one else is upset by this injustice but me.â€

 

It’s time we took giftedness out of the closet and separated it entirely from the concept of achievement. It’s time we recognized it, valued it and nurtured it in our schools and in our families

 

 

This only matters in that this is the kind of thing that these programs, and Glenn Doman, may he rest in peace, advocated learning. Not all mom's on the BK site teach this kind of thing, they may teach other things. And so, it is really not so terrible. I am still waiting to see what all the fuss against early learning is about.

 

 

Early learning is great. Early learning, imho, is most appropriately and effectively done through play for most young children.

[Mrs.Post]

Thank you so much for this conversation. It is making me think and clarify some of my own assumptions. Even if I come to a different conclusion, this has proved fruitful.

 

I don't personally believe that a person can do both because they are very different philosophies.

 

I disagree with this statement. I see nothing in pretend play that precludes the addition of directed early learning activities. Nothing, Unless I am missing something, in which case you should point that out. Pretend play or make believe, is something children do and not something we need to teach. It is often best done without parents. We ruin things for them. If you are talking about a particular philosophy of education involving pretend play ( i did not glean that from the link you gave) then you may indeed be right. I don't know. The following is interesting however:

 

https://news.virgini...new-study-shows

 

There are mistakes that EL parents may be prone to making with their children. There is a wonderful book called, "Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child". I think there are things in there EL parents are more prone to do, but other parents with other bents are more prone to make other kinds of mistakes. We are all prone towards making mistakes somewhere. That doesn't mean you quit just because you may run onto trouble down the road.

 

“Fairy tales and folk tales are for children and childlike people, not because they are little and inconsequential, but because they are as enormous as life itself.â€

― Anthony Esolen, Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child

 

 

 

 

 

Levels of Giftedness

Level IQ Range Prevalence

Mildly (or basically) Gifted 115 - 129 1:6 - 1:44

Moderately Gifted 130 - 144 1:44 - 1:1000

Highly Gifted 145 - 159 1:1000 - 10,000

Exceptionally Gifted 160 - 179 1:10,000 - 1:1 million

Profoundly Gifted 180+ Fewer than 1:1million

Giftedness is found at several levels. The further a person's Intelligence Quotient is from the

norm of 100 IQ, the more complexities that person has. Issues are similar to those of a student

with an IQ much lower than the "average" person. it is difficult to fit into the expectations and

lifestyle of "average" folks when the IQ becomes extreme. More great information can be

found at Hoagies Gifted (www.hoagiesgifted.org/underserved.htm).

 

Read about the “bell-curve†at Hoagies Gifted (www.hoagiesgifted.org/underserved.htm).

People who perform at the 95th percentile or above in Cognitive Ability, Academic Ability,

Creative Thinking Ability, or Visual and Performing Arts ability are defined as Gifted by the

State of Ohio.

 

On Giftedness: 1. If your is the definition of giftedness, then I don't think any EL parents I know are attempting to do that. 2. You can create gifted kids by training them if you go by the classical definition. Now if you want to assume the whole is different based upon how your child sees the world, then you can cater to that and I don't think you will get arguments from the rest of us that you can have all the problems that will go with it.

 

However, even this definition does not preclude the development of giftedness. And I think everything I said earlier regarding giftedness stands. People who are advanced or above average or gifted do not remain that way for ever. Their proclivities towards certain behavior may last until adulthood, but that doesn't mean their giftedness does, especially if they do not continue to develop. This may not remain true for the profoundly gifted - the 180 or above. But for most of the gifted kids...in the 150 IQ and below range, the other kids will eventually catch up, especially if our gifted child is also lazy. The higher IQ kids that are my son's age have already caught up to him. In another few years the kids who are working hard will also catch up. My husband is a great example. His IQ is up there hovering between highly and exceptionally gifted. He never worked hard, Things came easily. He also had a hard time making friends. I suspect he is slightly autistic. By the time he was in grad school everyone else has caught up to him. We aren't taking about unchallenged hamburger flippers. Just regular kids who worked hard. He realized when he was in grad school that he wasn't anything special anymore. That was very hard for him to take. As he will tell you, "Work hard, you are not gifted forever." It may not fit with what you want to be true, but it is true. I recommend you to the Belin Blank Center at the University of Iowa. There is a ton of real research on this you may find interesting. Though, it is a little crushing I have to admit.

 

While I appreciate that you feel that EL is best done through play, I still don't have any proof that it is harming to a child. I can produce quite a bit of research that suggests some kinds of Early Learning activities do produce a measurable change in IQ. These studies are admittedly, not ideal. Or at least it would be better to have long term studies. But so far, I see no reason not to do EL with your child which is the reason for this thread in the first place.

[Embassy]

Thank you so much for this conversation. It is making me think and clarify some of my own assumptions. Even if I come to a different conclusion, this has proved fruitful.

 

I've enjoyed this discussion as well.

 

I disagree with this statement. I see nothing in pretend play that precludes the addition of directed early learning activities. Nothing, Unless I am missing something, in which case you should point that out. Pretend play or make believe, is something children do and not something we need to teach. It is often best done without parents. We ruin things for them. If you are talking about a particular philosophy of education involving pretend play ( i did not glean that from the link you gave) then you may indeed be right. I don't know. The following is interesting however:

 

https://news.virgini...new-study-shows

 

Thanks for the link. I'll have to find the original study to read further. They did note that pretend play skills may be a factor contributing to language skills. That is exactly what I observed professionally when I worked with young children. Working with them and promoting pretend play skills improved their language abilities. Language skills are the basis for reading skills which is another reason why I believe language should come first.

 

You and I have a very different philosophy here. I'm saying that the focus of parents and early educators should be on guiding pretend play skills rather than separating out academics. Yes, basic pretend play doesn't need to be taught (for many children), but adults can contribute. Even playing with older siblings who are better able to expand the play sequences is beneficial. For example, if your child comes to you with a toy cup and wants you to drink you can take the opportunity to expand their play skills by making something different happen. As you are drinking you can pretend to spill your drink and then go through the clean-up process with your child. Now the child's play sequence can extend from making the drink to bringing it to someone to spilling a drink to cleaning it up. It expands the sequence and gives a child more possibilities to explore next time he or she plays with the toy cup. The child might also extend it to anything that can spill. Eventually, the child will engage in pretend play sequences that can last for hours. Academics don't have to be excluded. You can teach counting or the alphabet in natural encounters. Instead of "What letter is this?" it can be "I see an A. Hmm...I see another A! I like As."

 

 

There are mistakes that EL parents may be prone to making with their children. There is a wonderful book called, "Ten Ways to Destroy the Imagination of Your Child". I think there are things in there EL parents are more prone to do, but other parents with other bents are more prone to make other kinds of mistakes. We are all prone towards making mistakes somewhere. That doesn't mean you quit just because you may run onto trouble down the road.

 

By EL, are you referring to parents who teach babies to read through things like flashcards or a video? I would call myself an EL parent, but I don't even come close to going about it that way. I even worked for an Early Learning Program after graduate school and the only way I worked with young children was through play.

 

On Giftedness: 1. If your is the definition of giftedness, then I don't think any EL parents I know are attempting to do that. 2. You can create gifted kids by training them if you go by the classical definition. Now if you want to assume the whole is different based upon how your child sees the world, then you can cater to that and I don't think you will get arguments from the rest of us that you can have all the problems that will go with it.

 

However, even this definition does not preclude the development of giftedness. And I think everything I said earlier regarding giftedness stands. People who are advanced or above average or gifted do not remain that way for ever. Their proclivities towards certain behavior may last until adulthood, but that doesn't mean their giftedness does, especially if they do not continue to develop. This may not remain true for the profoundly gifted - the 180 or above. But for most of the gifted kids...in the 150 IQ and below range, the other kids will eventually catch up, especially if our gifted child is also lazy. The higher IQ kids that are my son's age have already caught up to him. In another few years the kids who are working hard will also catch up. My husband is a great example. His IQ is up there hovering between highly and exceptionally gifted. He never worked hard, Things came easily. He also had a hard time making friends. I suspect he is slightly autistic. By the time he was in grad school everyone else has caught up to him. We aren't taking about unchallenged hamburger flippers. Just regular kids who worked hard. He realized when he was in grad school that he wasn't anything special anymore. That was very hard for him to take. As he will tell you, "Work hard, you are not gifted forever." It may not fit with what you want to be true, but it is true. I recommend you to the Belin Blank Center at the University of Iowa. There is a ton of real research on this you may find interesting. Though, it is a little crushing I have to admit.

 

 

It seems like your definition of gifted is a bright individual who works hard. If you don't continue to work hard then the edge is gone, correct? If that is what you are talking about then we are discussing two very different things. Here is a comparison of bright and gifted. I do agree that many bright children may have IQ test scores that identify as gifted.

 

While I appreciate that you feel that EL is best done through play, I still don't have any proof that it is harming to a child. I can produce quite a bit of research that suggests some kinds of Early Learning activities do produce a measurable change in IQ. These studies are admittedly, not ideal. Or at least it would be better to have long term studies. But so far, I see no reason not to do EL with your child which is the reason for this thread in the first place.

 

You have suggested that one would need to continue to work hard to keep up the IQ score. Is it really a change if it is dependent on something else? I'm an advocate for early learning too and I believe the OP has an intense child that is thirsty for learning. I had one of those. I say had because now he can meet his own needs for learning. Kids like that can drain your energy because they need constant stimulation/learning to be happy with life. I think especially for kids like that, the need for a wide and solid foundation of play skills is important. While I did help my son's pretend play skills, they have always been a weaker area for him. And now as he approaches 6th grade he can read high school and college texts without a problem, but his imagination skills are still a weak area. I delayed any formal instruction for him until he was 5.5 and it hasn't hampered him academically. However, if I had jumped on the academic bandwagon much earlier, I'm sure the development of his imagination would be more limited.

[SKL]

It should not take hours to "teach" a child how to "pretend play." If the child isn't doing this fairly spontaneously, then how is "pushing" this kind of learning any better than any other "pushing" at that age? When a child is developmentally ready, she'll do this without a parent "focusing" on it for x time every day. The idea of parents deciding what their kids' play should look like is more scary to me than the idea of flashing them a few sight words now and then.

[Embassy]

It should not take hours to "teach" a child how to "pretend play." If the child isn't doing this fairly spontaneously, then how is "pushing" this kind of learning any better than any other "pushing" at that age? When a child is developmentally ready, she'll do this without a parent "focusing" on it for x time every day. The idea of parents deciding what their kids' play should look like is more scary to me than the idea of flashing them a few sight words now and then.

 

No, the teaching happens in moments that arise. The hours are what the child does by himself/herself or with others.

[Tanikit]

This is an interesting discussion. For me though I am realising that children are all individuals. Both my children are bright - no testing for giftedness has been done - but they are so so different. The first was terribly active from the time she was born - rolled, sat, crawled and walked very early but she also spoke early and reached every single milestone very early (her fine motor was also advanced but much less so than the rest of the milestones) She absorbed things incredibly fast with hardly any repetition. I did do early learning with her - I have flashcards though I have never "flashed" them - I have shown them to her while driving in the car or at bath time where she could dump them in the water and stick them on the tiles, she did jigsaw puzzles very early and her imaginative play also happened very early - she is still highly imaginative. There is no ways I could have done what I see on youtube videos when teaching children to read - she would not have sat still and she would have got irritated and distracted - even now her homeschooling is done while she rides bikes down our passage and she never ever sits still (she would be diagnosed ADHD in our schools, though I do not believe she is - she justs needs a more energetic method of learning and less repetition)

 

My second daughter is much quieter. I can take her to my elder childs dance and gym lessons and she will sit quietly watching - she is so content that the teachers at these classes have commented on it. So while there I read books to her and use bottle top letters to do phonics with her because she likes it. She is showing imaginative play early and I believe that it has been "taught" to her by her older sister who has shown her how to act as other characters and even told her what to do on occassion - "stand there and bark, you are a dog, or we are being clowns now stand on that table and turn around 3 times" - sometimes she is just copying and doing as she is told, but it seems that this has taught her to take on other characters and imagine things as it is more spontaneous now. My second is much more advanced with fine motor skills than my eldest, her physical milestones have been slightly earlier than normal, but much more on a normal level and her speech has felt delayed compared to my eldest, but in actual fact it is also slightly advanced and is becoming more advanced as she ages.

 

I think the discussion of whether giftedness is bred or nurtured is a waste of time - the fact of the matter is that both affect it in a huge way - a child who has the potential to be a genius and yet is totally neglected and poorly fed as a baby will probably not reach the levels they might have had they been born in an area where they received adequate nutrition, love and attention. This is easy to understand - the same goes for children with less potential - in the right circumstances they will do better than in neglected cases. What is less clear is that a child of high potential can be born into a very well off family and provided with every material thing needed both to enhance their health and to enhance their education and still fail to reach their potential - this could be as a result of emotional issues, nutritional deficiencies that are less obvious, being trapped by security issues and not being able to see the world because perhaps their parents think that being around "poorer" people will do them no good and therefore they miss out on many relationships that could have taught a lot. In this day and age we also have to think about whether handing all information to children via the internet does not also stop creative thought and invention.

 

Finally there is the issue of personality, drive and motivation - my eldest would rather invent, hates workbooks and wants learning to be hands on. My youngest loves workbooks, loves the acquisition of knowledge. I doubt either is more gifted than the other - it may appear so on IQ tests one day - but really they are just individuals with different goals, different experiences and different ways of experiencing the world.

 

As for the play story - all parents decide what their child's play will look like - we mustn't kid ourselves - some parents provide certain toys that others do not, some set up play areas that encourage one play over another, some send their kids into a garden with whatever happens to be there (equipment or dirt), some put technology on display and encourage it, some will take part when their child builds jigsaws but not when they play act or vice versa, some take their children on field trips and to the park where they also encourage their child to either try everything or leave them to play on only one thing - I think it would be very wise for any parent to actually sit and think about how they affect their child's play - because every parent does it whether they mean to or not and it would be better if the parent were happy with what they are actually doing and aware that that is what they are doing. I think the parental influence on play is highest when the child is a toddler than later, but it is still there because of approval vs disapproval subtle or not.

[Kerileanne99]

"I see nothing in pretend play that precludes the addition of directed early learning activities. Nothing, Unless I am missing something, in which case you should point that out. Pretend play or make believe, is something children do and not something we need to teach. It is often best done without parents. We ruin things for them. If you are talking about a particular philosophy of education involving pretend play ( i did not glean that from the link you gave) then you may indeed be right. I don't know. The following is interesting however:

 

https://news.virgini...new-study-shows[/"

 

Thanks for this link Mrs. Post. I have read the book 'Montessori: The Science Behind the Genius', which is written by the author (Angeline Lillard) of the study discussed. She really downs a wonderful job of highlighting how and why Montessori philosophy works well for many, many children...

 

I also have trouble believing that Early Learning (as in a computer program, flashcards, etc.) is not consistent with play-based learning. In my experience, whatever we happen to be learning just naturally becomes incorporated into my dd's play. Her experiences and the information she gleans from her 'lessons' become tools to hugely expand her repertoire of imaginative play.

For example, as in the example above outlining a child's tea-party, and how a parent might choose to 'spill the tea' to add more depth...my child, now 3.5, who has been learning about famous paintings, geography, French, etc., might decide to have her tea party in a tea room in the Louvre in Paris. So, yes, maybe I will be a guest at her party and can help widen her scenario (spill my tea?).she will kindly help me clean it up, at which point decide we are late! Oh, no! Now she might decide she has to choose between a trip to the Eiffel Tower or going to view the Mona Lisa....

 

This is what her 15 minute computer lesson (curled on a sofa with mommy), a few YouTube videos, and a book or two might do for her pretend play! Of which she loves and begs for more.) I just cannot see how that is harmful in the least, or is any different from simple pretend play...both child led, but...

 

 

[SKL]

Of course parents influence play, but the above poster implied that if you spend 10 minutes a day playing around with sight words, you will not have enough time to teach pretend play. Since most babies/tots have hours of free play time each day, I was pointing out the absurdity I see in that thought. And also the way it was worded sounded so formulaic. Yes, of course I provided my kids' play castle etc in the hope that they will play with it. Then I sat back and watched to see what they'd do. If they never did anything with it for months and months, I might initiate a play session one time or maybe twice. If it didn't catch on I'd let it be, watching to see what does interest each particular child. Is that very strange?

[Kerileanne99]

Of course parents influence play, but the above poster implied that if you spend 10 minutes a day playing around with sight words, you will not have enough time to teach pretend play. Since most babies/tots have hours of free play time each day, I was pointing out the absurdity I see in that thought. And also the way it was worded sounded so formulaic. Yes, of course I provided my kids' play castle etc in the hope that they will play with it. Then I sat back and watched to see what they'd do. If they never did anything with it for months and months, I might initiate a play session one time or maybe twice. If it didn't catch on I'd let it be, watching to see what does interest each particular child. Is that very strange?

 

Not strange in the least:)!!! I actually agree that this is as it should be.

 

I was trying to point out that I really disagree with the idea that doing a few minutes with flashcards or computerized flashcards, in no way precludes or hinders 'pretend' play. In fact, I would argue that it only serves to enhance it, for the reasons I provided in the example I gave.

And for what it is worth, I think that attempting to shape or push or alter a child's unstructured imaginative play is MUCH worse than 'subjecting' them to a a few minutes of flashcards.

[andreasro]

Not strange in the least:)!!! I actually agree that this is as it should be.

 

I was trying to point out that I really disagree with the idea that doing a few minutes with flashcards or computerized flashcards, in no way precludes or hinders 'pretend' play. In fact, I would argue that it only serves to enhance it, for the reasons I provided in the example I gave.

And for what it is worth, I think that attempting to shape or push or alter a child's unstructured imaginative play is MUCH worse than 'subjecting' them to a a few minutes of flashcards.

 

 

 

I agree. My oldest has been doing pretend play since he was able to speak just few words. He loved telephone talks so he started with that. We just got into his 'game' guided by his rules. At 2 and 2 months he started learning Spanish with Little Pim DVD. And after a while I've seen he has learnt more pretend play from that video. As he is brain injured developing normally (with no mental or physical delays) but still a child with congenital brain malformations (corpus callosum disorder among them) I was very suprised to see his makes associations! And every time we've been using short flash card sessions (that he loves BTW) with different methods, his brain made connections. After years of using flash cards or DVD's on and off I am very surprised and happy that his brain is functioning normally despite he's missing parts of the brain, despite his partial corpus callossum.

 

As for Montessori, I think it's one of the best methods of bringing up a responsible, independent and fully aware of his body and environment child, even at an early age. And I would say the same about Doman method as long as we combine the Doman intellectual program with the physical one. After years of watching a special needs child developing I have come to his and others ideas that working with and stimulating the body is directly connected to working with and stimulating the brain.

 

One thing I need to mention is that Doman, in his "How Smart Is Your Baby?", starts by teaching the parents that a baby learns using all senses and you should teach him the same. Flashing cards or flashing words on a screen is only a part of the teaching and it builds up the database stored in one specific part of the brain related to language. If you read Richard Gentry's book 'Raising Confident Readers' he speaks about 3 brain areas involved in language. This database is one of them.

 

As others wrote here, you flash the cards and the same words and concept are reinforced by experimenting, watching for real, touching, smelling, hearing how they sound etc. This is a balanced way to teach, in my opinion, and it does not impair a child's capability of pretend play or anything else, no matter how early you do it. On the contrary. My 1 year and 3 months old is the living proof, for me (just like my special needs miracle) that teaching a child early both intellectually and physically brings joy to the child and the entire family and makes learning much easier and more enjoyable over the years. My oldest loves to learn about everything and anything and he kept his love for learning - and the MRI this year will show us how did his brain react physically to what happened through the years. I suspect his corpus callossum developed. But this is for another thread.

[Tanikit]

"Of course parents influence play, but the above poster implied that if you spend 10 minutes a day playing around with sight words, you will not have enough time to teach pretend play. Since most babies/tots have hours of free play time each day, I was pointing out the absurdity I see in that thought. And also the way it was worded sounded so formulaic. Yes, of course I provided my kids' play castle etc in the hope that they will play with it. Then I sat back and watched to see what they'd do. If they never did anything with it for months and months, I might initiate a play session one time or maybe twice. If it didn't catch on I'd let it be, watching to see what does interest each particular child. Is that very strange?"

 

Yes, don't worry I wasn't attacking you - I feel both sides of the story need to think about how they influence play - in actual fact it is the ones who do NOT do early learning who most need to be aware that they influence their child's play - when early learning is done then parents take responsibility for what they are doing and showing their children - when I leave my child to "just play" as many people put it then usually I am not taking responsibility for what happens in that play time even though I have influenced it. This perhaps is a bit unfair to those who do not do what they call formal early education - many of them do play with their children and teach them while playing, many of them do provide the best toys they think will stimulate their child - but they need to take responsibility for this and say: I have chosen these things as I believe they are best for MY child. Then I will say: I have chosen what I do as I believe that this is what is best for MY child. And then we can all stop attacking one another and saying someone is hurting their children - I do not believe that anyone on these boards is out to harm their child... everyone wants to do what is best for their family... and every single one of us will make mistakes or could have done things better. Really why do we fight over this so much - would we have a similar fight over whether our two year old goes to a Moms and Tots group or not?

[SKL]

Really why do we fight over this so much - would we have a similar fight over whether our two year old goes to a Moms and Tots group or not?

I was wondering the same thing. I think the words people sometimes choose trigger our insecurities. If a person says "I personally do not find value in doing that with my child" it would be received better than "that damages children and is a complete waste of time." I could understand it if this were some extreme torture we were talking about, but a few minutes of exposure to ABC vs. XYZ ought to be viewed as a simple parenting choice. After all, if product ABC is that problematic or worthless, the parents using it will soon figure this out.

[SKL]

And for the record, my kids were not exposed to early reading programs and hardly had any screen time (still don't have much). I couldn't even stomach Dora or Letter Factory. I just don't like people talking in such extremes over something so minor.

[Embassy]

I also have trouble believing that Early Learning (as in a computer program, flashcards, etc.) is not consistent with play-based learning. In my experience, whatever we happen to be learning just naturally becomes incorporated into my dd's play. Her experiences and the information she gleans from her 'lessons' become tools to hugely expand her repertoire of imaginative play.

For example, as in the example above outlining a child's tea-party, and how a parent might choose to 'spill the tea' to add more depth...my child, now 3.5, who has been learning about famous paintings, geography, French, etc., might decide to have her tea party in a tea room in the Louvre in Paris. So, yes, maybe I will be a guest at her party and can help widen her scenario (spill my tea?).she will kindly help me clean it up, at which point decide we are late! Oh, no! Now she might decide she has to choose between a trip to the Eiffel Tower or going to view the Mona Lisa....

 

This is what her 15 minute computer lesson (curled on a sofa with mommy), a few YouTube videos, and a book or two might do for her pretend play! Of which she loves and begs for more.) I just cannot see how that is harmful in the least, or is any different from simple pretend play...both child led, but...

 

The example I gave was not connected to an age, but it was most appropriate for a typically developing 2-2.5 year old. Your child is in a different stage. I agree that reading books or watching videos about a topic is a way a 3.5 year old can involve new topics into her play. Going places and doing new things is another great way to help expand a preschooler's pretend play skills.

 

Hanen has an article called The Land of Make Believe. It talks about the stages of pretend play development and describes how a parent can be involved. Many parents do these things without even thinking about them.

[La Condessa]

Hanen has an article called The Land of Make Believe. It talks about the stages of pretend play development and describes how a parent can be involved. Many parents do these things without even thinking about them.

 

 

Are these ages he gives in this article really accurate for normal?

 

[Embassy]

Are these ages he gives in this article really accurate for normal?

 

 

Yes, I think they are pretty accurate for a typically developing child.

[Paige]

However, even this definition does not preclude the development of giftedness. And I think everything I said earlier regarding giftedness stands. People who are advanced or above average or gifted do not remain that way for ever. Their proclivities towards certain behavior may last until adulthood, but that doesn't mean their giftedness does, especially if they do not continue to develop. This may not remain true for the profoundly gifted - the 180 or above. But for most of the gifted kids...in the 150 IQ and below range, the other kids will eventually catch up, especially if our gifted child is also lazy. The higher IQ kids that are my son's age have already caught up to him. In another few years the kids who are working hard will also catch up.

 

Giftedness and achievement are 2 different things. Achievement and motivation can change. A gifted child can be easily surpassed in the classroom by a motivated bright child who is not gifted. I'd suggest that it happens very often because gifted children often do not feel like working according to someone else's goals and plans and are often not motivated by what motivates others.

 

It's hard to tell if the kids who have caught up to your son are also gifted but were late bloomers, or didn't care before now, or if the work is such that any bright, intelligent, and motivated student would be able to perform well. It's not too hard for 5th graders to score 100% on their math tests- the ceiling is 100%. There's no place for the gifted child to out perform. It's another thing if your 5th grader is given the chance to do calculus, is scoring 100% on those tests, and the other kids have caught up to that. I don't think that will happen.

 

Someone with a properly scored and accurate 150 IQ- other kids won't catch up. That is 5 standard deviations from the average and very significant. Maybe someone with a score of 120 will blend in with the crowd but the 150 will not.

 

I don't recall where I read it, but I like the description of giftedness as being different and not just more of the same. It's like you have a bunch of cars driving 55mph down the interstate. The average cars are sticking to the speed limit, some are below the limit, quite a few are going 5-10mph over the speed limit, and the really, really bright and motivated kids are speeding down at 100mph! Then, you have the gifted children and they are not even on the road. Some are flying so fast in a jet that you can barely see them go by, some are floating slowly in hot air balloons, and others are virtually hidden in their submarines and you never know they are there. They do not all look the same or travel at the same speed. Some may actually be traveling quite a bit slower than people on the highway. What they have in common, however, and what makes them different from bright advanced children, is that they aren't even on the road.

[SKL]

 

I don't recall where I read it, but I like the description of giftedness as being different and not just more of the same. It's like you have a bunch of cars driving 55mph down the interstate. The average cars are sticking to the speed limit, some are below the limit, quite a few are going 5-10mph over the speed limit, and the really, really bright and motivated kids are speeding down at 100mph! Then, you have the gifted children and they are not even on the road. Some are flying so fast in a jet that you can barely see them go by, some are floating slowly in hot air balloons, and others are virtually hidden in their submarines and you never know they are there. They do not all look the same or travel at the same speed. Some may actually be traveling quite a bit slower than people on the highway. What they have in common, however, and what makes them different from bright advanced children, is that they aren't even on the road.

My youngest is messing up on math this week because she has no idea how to approach something she doesn't know. I looked over her optional math "homework" that she was going to turn in this morning, and put aside to re-do later, because it was pretty much all wrong. I mentioned it to her, and she said it was so easy, she didn't want to waste time thinking about it. (??) There are times when her struggling, average-IQ sister gets a higher grade because she is used to having to work at stuff. While I'm sure my youngest is gifted, I'm not sure she'll get into the gifted program, considering the way she approaches schoolwork. (And she's stubborn too, to make things more interesting.) But how can I blame her, when there's hardly ever anything she actually needs to "learn" at school?

[robbyjo]

Wow, thank you everyone! I didn't realize that this thread fired up so many people. I had thought I would elicit about 10 answers or so. I am sorry for indirectly causing all the disagreements among us. I hope that everybody could learn from all the discussion.

 

I'll try my best to provide further background and reply your answers that I've read. The answers I marked "Like" mean that I've read them. I haven't read everything yet. I'll try to resume the answer soon.

 

We have been investing a lot of time reading the books with her. We noticed that she took fancy of books ever since she could flip on her back by herself (~4 month old). It so happened near a book and she decided to flip the book open by herself. By about 10 month or so she loved one book ("I love you through and through") and knew when to show up her fingers or toes. By now, we have over 100 books, about a dozen wood puzzles (plus one box of puzzles by Infantino), many educational toys from Leap Frogs or V-Tech or Be, many flashcards.

 

The "teaching session" (if you will) typically starts with a toy or a book or a set of flashcards, with which we try to teach a concept (or words) or two. It was pretty easy back then because we can teach very "basic" stuff to her. For example: the alphabets, numbers and counting, animals and their sounds, colors, shapes, simple verbs, the names of common items, body parts, combining adjective (e.g., pink square sponge, yellow triangle button). But now, she knows all of them. The pronunciation is still generally off (e.g., pronouncing "orange" as "osange" or "octagon" as "occagon"). We're trying to fix that, although we realize that it might take some time.

 

Right now, we are opting for activity books, as suggested by some of you. Namely, the sticker activity books---she's fond of them. They seem to work for now. From them, she does learn a lot---primarily about new words. (She learned the word "centipede" from that type of books). She could do that maybe 4-5 pages at a time, 2-3 times a day, before getting bored. Then, she switches to something else---be it tea party, pretend writing (more like scribling instead), banging her toy drum or keyboard, or simply bothering her mom (my wife is SAHM, I'm the breadwinner). The latter is usually the mode---she keeps her mom's attention fixed to her. She's very energetic, generally cheerful and extroverted, and can be very dominant in a group of slightly older (3-4 yo) children. She could drain our energy fast.

 

I tried to teach her music using her meow keyboard or xylophone, but to no avail. Nevertheless, whenever I play a familiar tune, she'd sing. She naturally picks up dancing. We didn't teach her (we're not dancers at all), but every time she listen to some music, she'll dance and try to sing the song. She gets the intuition of doing some pirouette (typically on baroque music) or even flamenco (on latin music). We didn't teach her pirouette and she had never seen any before performing some. That really baffled us. On flamenco, she saw the dance once on Youtube and intuitively "gets" the feel. So, maybe we'll send her to a dance school nearby in the near future.

 

We noticed a regression on counting lately---she's counting everything to three (regardless of the quantity shown). It's because we often count to three before doing many things. We're trying to remedy that.

 

We are also focusing on getting her behaved. Without good behavior, she'll be a problem outside. She's still unable to ask things politely. For example: When she asks for "crayon", she would say: "Croyn!" If we don't listen to her, she'll repeat that word louder and louder, with a demanding face. We discipline her quite some time and told her to say "Please!" but it doesn't seem to work. We think we just need some time. Oh, also the tantrums. We're getting more of the "terrible 1.5" than the "terrible 2".

 

On nature: The closest thing we did is to go to the zoo. She was disappointed that she couldn't see a giraffe. Going to the zoo also solved some of the confusion. For example: At one point, she pointed to a picture of a seahorse and said, "Seahorse, seahorse neigh!" I said, "No, seahorses don't neigh. Horses neigh." She said, "Seahorse horse, horse neigh." So, when we got to the zoo, we showed her what seahorses look like and she got it.

 

On involving her to cooking: Umm... we'll try. I personally feel it's too dangerous.

 

On gardening: Sadly, we live in an apartment. Maybe a portable garden or some chance playing outdoors.

 

On library: Yes, we gradually bringing her to the library (once a week). But see my mention of the behavior problem above.

 

On multiple language: Yes, she picks up several Indonesian words (our native language). She even picks up a few Chinese ones, too. We're somewhat apprehensive to teaching multiple language at once at this point because we don't want to cause confusion on her. There's a study on this issue (that multiple language kids develop language skills slower in early childhood), I just can't find the reference at this point.

 

On reading: She's been able to read for months now. The most complex phrase she recognizes is "cookie monster". (I do blame Sesame Street for that :) ). We are certain that she could read because she read a few words like "bat" correctly. (It had no picture and she had never seen any bat pictures before). We're always teaching her to read, phonics way. In the last month or so, we hook her up to the show "Super Why" and it seems to be very helpful with her reading skills. Yes, I think you're right, dmmetler, that once she's able to read, we can't completely shield her.

 

On praising: Yes, we're always stressing on the effort ("good job"). No sign of perfectionism so far, although she seems to show some preference on trivial stuff (e.g., j must come after i, regardless of the words being spelled)---I won't say it's obsessive-compulsive yet.

 

On science lesson: None so far. Umm... help?

 

On math lesson: Other than numbers 1-20 and counting, none. Help? We're trying to teach her addition, but see the recent regression problem above.

 

On people's perception on "pushing the kid": Yes, this is my thought as well. People around me have been saying, "Hey, she's just 2, relax, have her play. Let her by herself. Don't teach her anything." Well... Am I wasting her talent by "letting her by herself"? She likes being taught---although a brief while at a time (15-30 min).

 

On playgroup: My wife takes her to a MOPS event about once a week---typically allowing the kids to play. Yes, she doesn't fit her age. She even dominates 3-4 year olds (being bossy and always seizing the effective leadership of the group). To think that she's just a lovely 22 month old kid! :lol:

 

On schooling OR homeschooling: We are still debating on that, but we're inclined to do homeschooling for now. We're in MD, we're not very cognizant of the laws pertaining to the homeschooling yet. We do have church friends who are willing to coach us.

 

On labeling everything: We'll do that. Thanks for the suggestion.

 

On structured vs. unstructured learning: Whoa! Yeah, I didn't realize the big divide! I can see the pros and cons in each.

 

----

 

Miscellanea:

 

I'll check "Teach Your Child to Read in Just 10 Minutes a Day". I did read "Raising Confident Readers" (See my other thread on resources).

 

I'll also check Brillkids Little Reader, Little Musician, and Soft Mozart. Playdough is also an excellent suggestion.

[Tanikit]

Thanks for the update. It sounds like you are doing loads of things with your child. Which parts do you think she likes best?

 

I think when it gets to these discussions people assume how they live is how others live - for example the gardening issue - I do however think if you can get your child out as much as possible that will help - do you have places like aquariums or parks or any area where she can run off some energy? At 2 many children are highly active - even if you have her doing dancing (not formal, just movement to music like you says she does) or jumping up and down inside it will help some.

 

As for the behaviour issues - it sounds like she is a perfectly normal nearly 2 year old - it is unlikely you will "fix" this - she will outgrow it. Things are easier with a second child when you realise it is all just a phase they go through. As for the counting I also wouldn't worry about that - it is also not something you need to fix and it is not really regression either - she could even be playing you to see your reaction or she could just enjoy those numbers more than the rest. Just keep counting things for her. Addition for small children is easily taught with toys they already have - you have to do most of the work and not test her. So you just keep saying the sums: "look, you have 3 teddies and one wants to go for a walk - there he goes, now how many are left, lets count them..." and so on. She may not show you she manages addition - but one day you might find her playing by herself with her toys and copying you and speaking to herself under her breath... who knows.

 

If you want to do things for science then try to find things she sees around her - plant a potplant/beans in cotton wool and teach about plants needs (you can even do experiments with this, but if she has never thought about this it is probably best not to start showing her what happens to plants when they have no sun if she doesn't know what happens when they are in the sun. Teach her about the water cycle by drawing stripes of water on tiles in the sun and watching it evaporate. You can start the basics of physics by letting her throw things and watch them fall, roll things, play with toys cars on ramps etc - just let her experiment before dropping in any scientific terms - you can extend her vocabulary without long explanations that she will likely not find very interesting. Show her the clouds outside, measure rain if you can (hang something out the window to catch it if its possible). Let her play with water - floating, sinking, just plain splashing, and also things like rice or sugar (you can teach what solids and liquids are like this)

 

Cooking shouldn't be dangerous - they do not need to be near a stove at all - bake something and let her mix the ingredients, chop the soft vegetables with a plastic knife, try to butter bread, teach her to pour from a jug and stir with a spoon... these are all age appropriate and not dangerous.

 

Enjoy her. Don't worry if she seems to go backwards and forwards at times - that is normal 2 year old behaviour. Sounds like she has a loving family.

[Mrs.Post]

Wow, thank you everyone! I didn't realize that this thread fired up so many people. I had thought I would elicit about 10 answers or so. I am sorry for indirectly causing all the disagreements among us. I hope that everybody could learn from all the discussion.

 

These discussions need not start arguments - disagreements are not a bad thing. I have enjoyed this conversation. And when people challenge my assumptions, it makes me think. I hope this is one of the skills we are teaching our children when we give them a classical education. There is an end to this kind of education - meaning we want to get somewhere with it, not just say, "Oh, I'm classically educating my child." One of the ends should be to be able enter into public discourse without getting bent out of shape, and be able to make an argument for your position, change your mind if necessary, and to do so without calling names.

[Uff Da!]

For language: check out Song School Latin, Song School Spanish, and Song School Greek. We were able to do Song School Latin orally with my little guy and it works great for kids who love music. Latin has deepened the kids understanding of language, not confused them. I am not certain if Song School Greek or Spanish could be done orally.

 

Our library has something where the songs are song first in English and then in Chinese. It's not as thorough as the Song School curriculums, but if you want me to hunt down the title for you, I will. My eldest LOVED those CDs.

 

Please ignore typos- I'm on my phone.

[Maela]

I don't have the time to read all the posts, but wanted to say that my daughter was the exact same at that age. We read and read and read some more! She loved being read to! That's about all we did. That and lots of counting, adding/subtracting with objects. At three, She loved it when we wrote out words that she could sound out. It was a game to her.

 

There's nothing wrong with doing academics early if they're having fun and ASKING for it. We also played (especially outside) a lot!

[robbyjo]

Hi:

 

Thank you everyone. I am resuming my answers. I am still not finished with reading all the answers. I'm so overwhelmed. Thank you. I will resume my answers later.

 

On some "memorization program": Actually we found that such programs work for my child, at least for a while (at 10-14 month, "Your Baby Can Read"). Back then, she absorbed a lot of new words using pictures as cue. Such programs are not really teaching reading, but they do introduce quite a lot of new words. So, I personally feel somewhat mixed about it. Many other programs, such as Baby Einstein or Brainy Baby, are of little value beyond entertainment value. Check the resource thread on some of the things we've tried. Using such programs, we knew that she'd understood around 100 words or so by 13 month. So, they're useful to some, but not to all. Also---I think I read it somewhere---we need to engage the tot when watching such programs in order for them to be effective. That means, pausing and rewinding the video as necessary, talking to the kid, etc.

 

On the passion to read: Yes, I agree. We cannot force the little tikes to read. We just need to jumpstart their passion.

 

On structured vs. unstructured: Wow. I can see the pros and cons in each. I am personally leaning toward the structured approach because of two things: a) overall sense of direction, and B) allowing us to do recall past lessons in an organized manner (aka. Spaced Repetition). I understand that the method is highly dependent on the kids.

 

On non-linearity of learning: We are keenly aware that learning is non-linear. But with accelerated learners, all of us here know it's not only non-linear, it's more like multiple non-linear tracks running in parallel, TURBO mode. :lol: This is why I said "like shoveling anything into [the tot's] brain". It's so hard to keep up.

 

On asynchronous learners: Thank you for all the insights. We certainly grow to appreciate the struggle that you have to deal with. We are learning from you.

 

On screen time: My daughter gets about 1 hour screen time a day, strictly educational-only. Right now, the "diet" is either 2 episodes of "Super Why" or 1 episode of "Sesame Street" or some other things, plus some Youtube kid-friendly music videos for her to dance with.

 

On pretend play: Yes, I agree that pretend play is very important. I think the more important thing is connecting the learned knowledge base into the reality, which can be achieved through variety of activities, including pretend play. I mean, getting my daughter to the zoo is worth much more than showing her a boat-load of flashcards about animals. She intuitively knows that fish lives in the water and that seahorses don't neigh despite the -horse ending. I am not sure how the parents can meddle with pretend play. I suppose parents can play along as passive participants? Or even expand the scenarios, like Wehomeschool said.

 

On making kids genius: No, we are not making kids genius. We're just feeding their insatiable appetite for knowledge, I mean, curiousity. I tend to agree that we can do both learning and playing at the same time.

 

On learning "length": It consumes virtually all her waking time, at about 15-30 minutes per activity. So, we switch from one activity to another, all throughout the day (except nap, meal time, bath time, and other routines). Basically, my wife cannot do anything while my daughter is awake; not even doing chores. Interestingly enough, my daughter seems to be willing to help (but sadly, not capable just yet). I am wondering if you folks could tell a bit more of your typical day.

 

On Doman method: Okay, this is the first time I heard about this method. I gathered info from here and here (along with their accompanying links). There are some suggested books in these links. I am wondering if anyone could give me further information? Thanks.

 

On giftedness, just chipping in: I think there are multiple dimension of intelligence. It has been established. Hence, IQ, as a single measure of intelligence, is of limited use. I would say that, by extension, giftedness also have multiple dimension. Hence, we see things such as asynchronous learning problem, etc. Like other traits, intelligence is highly influenced by nurture and as such may fluctuate over the lifetime of the individual. Nevertheless, there is a big genetic component on intelligence (IIRC, some 50% to 70%), which tend to be stable over time.

 

On parental "pushing": We tend to see opportunities for us to teach our kid anything. Such opportunities may arise from pretend play or other activities. So, it's not that we are "pushing" the kid. It's more of trying to engage the kid all the time, and at the same time form bonding with the kid.

 

----------

 

Edit: I finally catch up with reading everything! :)

 

Upon continuing to read the answer: I need to read about Montessori and Doman's books. I'll make sure I'll order them.

 

On structured vs. unstructured: It seems it can be summed up with "it depends on the kid". And no one size fits all.

 

On motivation: I think motivation plays a key role in the child's further intellectual development. With passion, time really flies like an arrow, and, before long, they achieve mastery of skills they desire (i.e., The 10,000-hour rule, which unfortunately are being debated).

 

On what we like best: Yes, we're doing a lot of things with our kid. We make sure that she's learning all the time she's awake. The part I personally love best is when she understands what has been taught.

 

On behavior: Thank you for the suggestion. I guess this calls patience when dealing with such issues. We will keep teaching her to be polite, saying thanks, etc. I hope that it will click soon.

 

On math: That's a good idea. We tried that for a while. It didn't work. We'll try again.

 

On science: We'll try to get hands-on science stuff (gardening or what not) for her. Thank you for the great idea.

 

On multilingual songs: We'll check on these Song School CDs. Thank you.

 

Thank you for your kind words and great ideas, everyone!

[La Condessa]

On math lesson: Other than numbers 1-20 and counting, none. Help?

 

When she shows more interest in early math topics, one resource you might find helpful is Mathematical Reasoning Beginning 1 (age 3) and 2 (age 4). It's great for cuddling up with a little one on the couch, and it doesn't require much writing ability from the kids. My older daughter absolutely loved the first book when she found it as an older two-year-old, and I've finally given in and started it with my current 2.5 year-old.

 

May I also suggest that you sart speaking to your daughter in your native language? It is true that an average kid exposed to two languages might be a little later before reaching proficiency in both languages, but I really don't think you need to worry that it will put your precocious little one behind.

 

[Maela]

 

On learning "length": It consumes virtually all her waking time, at about 15-30 minutes per activity. So, we switch from one activity to another, all throughout the day (except nap, meal time, bath time, and other routines). Basically, my wife cannot do anything while my daughter is awake; not even doing chores. Interestingly enough, my daughter seems to be willing to help (but sadly, not capable just yet). I am wondering if you folks could tell a bit more of your typical day.

 

My typical day with DD was similar. We played with her a lot! She loved it of course, but it was exhausting (for me) to be doing activity after activity or game after game. Now I think I should have left her alone a little bit more - to play by herself sometimes; not only to give me a break, but also because I think it's good for kids to have some time to themselves. That's just my opinion though.

Now with DS (who is three and a half and not quite as precocious as DD, but still very smart) this is what our day looks like: when he wakes up, I read a book to him right away - he loves that. We cuddle on the couch for a bit. Then he's on his own for a couple of hours while we all get ready. Of course he's not completely alone - we're in the house with him - and some of the time he's playing with his sister.

When we're all ready, we go outside to work in the garden (which means he's going around eating all the ripe raspberries, strawberries, and blueberries). Or we'll go to the park. Sometimes I'll play with them at the park, and sometimes I'll sit on a bench and read. When we come back inside, we do our "school time". Since DD officially started homeschooling, he wants his schoolwork too. So I switch back and forth between DS and DD. DS and I will work on sounding out CVC words on the chalkboard - he loves this! And counting and the pre-Explode the Code books. Then lunch, and then I read a few books to them. Then quiet time in their room for 30-60 minutes. After that they help me do chores and then we play a board game together. Then DS is own his own again until dinner time. At bedtime, he gets a few more books read to him.

 

I can't remember if you said your daughter was your only/first child? I know it might be a bit different with an only, but I still think I could have encouraged DD to play on her own a bit more. Also, I DS isn't super advanced like my DD is, so that might be different too? I just wanted to help you out because you asked what a typical day was like for us.

[Maela]

 

May I also suggest that you sart speaking to your daughter in your native language? It is true that an average kid exposed to two languages might be a little later before reaching proficiency in both languages, but I really don't think you need to worry that it will put your precocious little one behind.

 

I agree!!

[Embassy]

A typical day for my daughter at that age:

 

Playing next to me most of the day. Sometimes I would get down and play with her. I had about 10 different toy boxes and other small containers that I rotated when she requested or when she showed signs of boredom. She would watch videos that interested her - some educational, but nothing junky. She was exposed to two different foreign languages through videos as well. She enjoyed pretending to talk in one of those languages. She would occasionally play with some of her brother's school items, but most academics came through conversations during play or during kitchen dance sessions. We had those Leapster Fridge Phonics sets and she would put in a letter and dance around to the song about the letter and the sound. This child is intense, but not intense in the "need to fill me up with information" intense.

 

My oldest child needed constant stimulation to be happy. He would talk and talk and talk about his interests and want to know everything. Even as an infant he would cry and cry when he was bored - believe me that came easy to him.. Around age 2 I did many of the same things with him that I did with my daughter, but he needed more one on one play time with me or my husband. I also showed him how to use the computer (internet) at a young age and he learned so much from educational sites. It was important that he learn to feed his hunger because there was no way I could satisfy him and stay sane. We talked a lot. He asked questions and I asked questions. We thought and pondered many things. Out of all my kids he was the least imaginative and he needed the most input from me when playing (adapting and expanding his play sequences). I didn't start any formal academics with him until he was 5.5. He had already taught himself to read basic things by then and when I started instruction with him he jumped ahead several grade levels in a few months. Last year when I had him tested the examiner that specialized in gifted testing was shocked at his reading comprehension abilities. My point is that focusing on play, thinking, and asking questions during his preschool and toddler years didn't slow down his academics. They just progressed much quicker when he started them formally.

[Jackie]

Some random suggestions from my daughter's favorites:

 

On math - we started RightStart Level A at age 2 with my daughter. It teaches using manipulatives and games rather than worksheets and was very age-appropriate for DD when taken at a slow pace.

 

On cooking - I'm doubting people meant to have her use the stove and oven. DD loves to measure and stir. We make muffins, cookies, lasagna, and so on, but she knows that once it is time for it to go in the oven it becomes "the grown up part" of making it. We do my hand over her hand with a handheld electric mixer. I gave her a butter knife to slice up a banana, and then we dipped the slices in plain yogurt and covered them in granola, laid them out on a cookie sheet and froze them for a healthy homemade snack that she could make herself. I think next I'll teach her to spread her own peanut butter on toast so I can stop doing it for her :)

 

On science - you could switch out some of the episodes of Super Why for episodes of Sid the Science Kid, which is my DD's favorite. If you want projects, look at either the Clifford or Magic School bus sets here: http://www.theyoungscientistsclub.com/retailstore/ and you can usually find 50% off deals on the year-long subscriptions to Magic School Bus club online.

[robbyjo]

Hi all:

 

Thank you so much for your suggestions. Sorry for being so late to respond to you all. I have been pretty busy lately.

 

 

@mmconde: I will make sure we try Mathematical Reasoning Beginning. We are currently teaching her our native language as well.

 

 

@Maela: Thanks for letting us know your typical day. It would be great if she could play by herself. So far she wants us to accompany her. Maybe it is because she is an only child. But it will soon change since we learned a few days ago that we are expecting. :)

 

 

@Embassy: Thanks for letting us know your typical day as well. Wow, two languages at a time is very intense---and that is through videos! (I need to tell my wife about that since she's completely not convinced if videos could do any good for that end). Are the videos educational? May I know what they are?

 

We also have Leapster Fridge Phonics (both the one- and three-letter versions), but somehow my daughter isn't terribly enthusiastic about it. She already knows her letter, but she is yet to make connections from letters to words to concepts. She seems to memorize the shapes of the words pretty well. I knew this because she consistently mistakes "one" with "some" (which look alike in Arial font), and when we switch to a different font, she is somewhat confused. We are trying to get her to make such connection.

 

Thank you for the suggestion for visiting online sites. I just hope that my daughter wouldn't bang the mouse or keyboard when I let her use them.

 

 

@Jackie: I've been pondering on RightStart Math. I'm still a bit concerned about the small pieces that could potentially choke her. I will give it a try.

 

Thank you for telling us a story about the cooking experience. It sounds fun. I will ask my wife to introduce her with something. It seems she is more into making a mess whenever she is in the kitchen.

 

She's hooked on Super Why---I think we've finished watching all episodes through Amazon Prime. The bad thing is that nothing sticks from viewing the show, except perhaps the ABC song by the Pig. So far, Super Why feels more like an entertainment. We decided to switch gear and reintroduce the show later. As for Sid the Science Kid, she's not terribly interested. Perhaps she hasn't understood much of the dialog yet. I will check out Clifford and Magic Schoolbus. Thanks.

 

 

Here's our typical day:

She gets up between 8-9 am. She goes to potty immediately (she's potty trained at 20 month and the only time she wears a diaper is during the night sleep). She gets some breakfast (typically a bowl of oatmeal with raisins and soymilk). Then, she gets a multivitamin (Rainbow Light Nutristars).

 

She plays with us (well, my wife) for about 1 hour (pretend play, drawing, dancing or read books), and then watch an educational video for another hour. Then play again until about noon, then lunch. Then nap between 1 to 4 pm. The cycle starts over until I come from work at about 7:30 (about her dinner time), from which it's mostly learning various stuff (new words, concepts, counting) or fun play (hide and seek, play tag, etc) until sleep time at 9-9:30pm. Whenever she's awake, she needs constant face time. If we sort of ignore her (by doing chores or whatnot), she'll harp on us.

 

I realize that we need to be very creative on our playtime. So, I'll try to incorporate the excellent suggestions that you all have written in this thread.

 

 

Thank you all!

[boscopup]

If we sort of ignore her (by doing chores or whatnot), she'll harp on us.

 

 

Include her in the chores. Give her a spray bottle with water and a wash cloth and let her have at it. :) Or give her a duster or a hand vacuum or something. There is sooooo much little ones can "help" out with while we do our chores. They can absolutely be involved. My kids were emptying the dishwasher as young as 18 months old (though at that age, I got the sharp knives really quick first... now my 4 year old says, "I'll get the sharp knives first!" :lol:).

[Embassy]

@Embassy: Thanks for letting us know your typical day as well. Wow, two languages at a time is very intense---and that is through videos! (I need to tell my wife about that since she's completely not convinced if videos could do any good for that end). Are the videos educational? May I know what they are?

 

 

It depends on what you expect the videos to do. Kids need interaction to build their language skills so the videos won't be effective for language learning unless you look at it as a piece of the puzzle. Look how long kids hear their native language before they start talking. I use the videos in a similar way. I use them to expose a child to the language - the sounds and the rhythm mostly with a little vocabulary built along with it. Many older learners of a foreign language have an accent, but younger ones do not This is because a child's sound system is better able to hear and separate the nuances of sounds. I mostly use the videos as a way to train their sound system so that when they start to study the language they will be better able to hear the difference between sounds that are not found in their native language. When you hear the difference between sounds, it will be much easier to pronounce them. I find it much easier to teach a language after my kids have had a couple years of exposure with videos.

 

I mostly use non-educational kids shows that are in another language. Youtube is a great resource. My library has a bunch too.