No more parking them in front of the TV with a so-called smart baby dvd.
http://www.time.com/time/health/article/0,8599,1650352,00.html?cnn=yes
…
Led by Frederick Zimmerman and Dr. Dimitri Christakis, both at the University of Washington, the research team found that with every hour per day spent watching baby DVDs and videos, infants learned six to eight fewer new vocabulary words than babies who never watched the videos. …
Personally, I think my kid knows too many words.
What? Parenting should be done by parents?!?! Who knew?
What if the IQ of the parents is even lower than the IQ of the tv characters?
According to the article the babies learned more from the same speaker in person than they did on video. This is referring to those Baby Einstein type videos there was so much hype about.
ah, I see.
so, the dumber half of the world might want to go ahead and let their kids watch tv then =)
The problem with stupid people is they generally don’t realize they are.
We got a huge box of Baby Einstein DVD’s when our kid was born, from friend who swore that it was the only way their terribly collicky son managed to survive infancy. I think it was every one of the DVDs available, a box of like 15 or something. We took them back to Target and got $100+ in store credit… I just can’t imagine parking my kid in front of the television instead of reading to her. Our friends swear that their son knows words like “galaxy” and “gecko” from the videos, but I just don’t think the trade-off is worth it.
And Katy, I agree 100% - most stupid people just have no idea…
I just can’t imagine parking my kid in front of the television instead of reading to her. Our friends swear that their son knows words like “galaxy” and “gecko” from the videos, but I just don’t think the trade-off is worth it
Exactly! I have a fairly decent vocabulary, I’m quite sure I could teach a baby “galaxy” and “gecko”.
I suppose it sounded like a good idea and was well marketed. Suckers.
"ah, I see.
so, the dumber half of the world might want to go ahead and let their kids watch tv then =)"
Reminds me of the following
“Just think of how stupid the average person is, and then realize half of them are even stupider!” George Carlin
Does this have to be an “Either or” option? Seems to me that exposure to several different mediums is a superior approach than one. Certainly sitting a kid in front of a TV every waking moment of his/her life is not an optimal approach. But at the same time sitting in front of baby Einstein or whatever may be better than sitting in the rocker staring at the ceiling. A parent typically isn’t fully engaged with the child 100% of the time, some parents are rarely engaged with the child, sadly. During those times maybe Baby Einstein isn’t a bad choice. Heck I’ve even picked up a few Spanish words from Dora the Explorer and Diego.
Point is there is alot out there to expose your kids to. Whether that’s computer games, TV, video’s, music, reading, playing outside, going to the park, puzzles whatever they all serve a purpose. Any one over used is not a good thing, but most of them provide something of benefit.
~Matt
Seems to me that exposure to several different mediums is a superior approach than one.
Of course. But these programs claim to give your child superior vocabulary/cognitive skills and it seems that is exactly the opposite of what is happening.
Heck I’ve even picked up a few Spanish words from Dora the Explorer and Diego.
When my daughter was about 4 we were in line at a Starbucks and the personi n front of us ordered a “grande” whatever. She looked at me and asked “why is he speaking Spanish?”. She got that from Dora.
I agree. It’s NOT an either or kind of situation, although, yes, research does show that children need human interaction and the supplemental cues to learn language. But it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t watch ANY tv or videos. (And THAt idea doesn’t mean that Baby Einstein is the best video, either).
Teletubbies, in fact, is a good show for language acquisition–it’s nonsense to us, but it does help with the rythm of the language and teaches kids proper speech stream segmentation/statistical distribution.
But it doesn’t mean they shouldn’t watch ANY tv or videos.
Actually, I think it does mean that. I’m not sure about this study, but I seem to recall another study recently that concluded that infants and young toddlers should not be exposed to any television. The medium itself is harmful to their development. (I think the medium itself is harmful to all of our development, but I don’t have any research at hand to support that broader contention.)
I think the medium itself is harmful to all of our development
Tom,
I think that TV as we know it is in big trouble. For years know, I have wondered, who actually watchs TV. Few if any people in my family or circle of friends do. No one has time for it. No wonder, when I do turn it on, what I often see I find insulting and ridiculous. It really has been dumbed down to the lowest common denominator.
I think you underestimate the draw of the magic box.
I have to admit to a bit of hypocrisy on the issue. I go through phases when I’m blissfully TV-free, then there’s something on I want to watch, and the next thing I know, I’m watching something every day.
I am quite sure that my IQ drops significantly when I’m watching. Always, when I start watching again, I’m shocked by how stupid most programming is. It’s an insult to the intelligence of any thinking person. After a week or two, I don’t even notice anymore.
You’d be surprised, I think, how much television kids watch. I don’t mean school age kids, who watch ungodly amounts of TV on a daily basis, either. Even kids under the age of two or three average a couple of hours each day.
Tom,
Same. My watching tends to revolve around sports events - Tour de France, Stanley Cup Play-offs, World Cup and European Soccer Cups, Olympic Games etc . . then it’s TV orgy.
TV for the kids is nuts. My son watchs a minimal amount - a few hours a week at the most and mostly sports events. There are much better things for them to be doing than sitting in front of a TV at any age.
There’s only like 10-15 vocab words on each of these DVDs, and they’re usually farm animals, colors, etc.
I would HOPE that a developing infant would know more vacabulary than what’s on these DVDs … of course, I hope it’s better vocab than they learn from Fear factor (I saw a poll that it the #1 show for 4-6 year olds) or whatever else their parents are watching.
I could (and did/do) teach my kids more nature vocab words with one trip to the lake than they would learn in watching the one DVD 50 times.
To me it seems to be common sense. Our 2mo watches Baby Neptune while he swings (and we get some house stuff done), but I would think many kids would learn a lot more vocab by watching cartoons even.
One video I would support over and over is Leap Frog’s “The Letter Factory”. My 3yo son after watching this video for the 3rd time went outside with sidewalk chalk and WROTE his ABCs – of course, the N and Z were backwards, but still). I thought I might be losing my mind, until my nieces (4 and 2.5) watched it a few times and new their ABCs (they get much less educational stimulation than my son does). My 3yo daughter already knows her letter recognition and phonemic awareness from these videos. I have purchased them for our kindergarten classes. Kindergarten typically spends much of te year getting everyone to know their ABCs and the sounds they make. I’m not encouraging them to just show a video everyday (but that would likely work, and work well), but whenever they need 20 minutes to prepare for something, or instead of giving the kids seat work, etc.
The video features an observation of the letter being drawn (cartoon animation), the sound the ltter makes, and an animation that makes it unforgetable). For example, the A’s get scared by a monster and yell “Aaaaaaah”. The “A” says “Ah”. The C’s are shivering and cuh-cuh-cuh-cuh-cold. The “C” says “Cuh”. The sequence is brilliant, and the kids remember it (most importantly).
Those with pre-reading kids should definately pick it up. We have since bought a “blending letters” and “counting” LeapFrog video. My 3yo watches them at night as she’s laying down. All I can say is they work, and work well with what the parent is teaching, and are easily built upon.
Just wanted to point out to everyone that there’s usually plenty of time in the day to have ones’ child both watch a Baby Einstein video ***and ***still converse with them.
Not quite sure why this typically gets boiled down to an either-or propostion.
*EDIT - looks like I didn’t need to “remind” MJuric. My bad - I’m still working on my first cup-o-java this am!!
Yes I agree, there is time to do both. When I need 10-15 minutes to shower, laundry or whatever, baby einstein works just fine. My kids are doing good.
I disagree–I think things CAN be gained from TV. It just requires NOT zoning out. TV can be a source of information, and a good stepping off point for conversation and discussion. Do I think infants can learn language from it? No, not really. Or not entirely, I suppose. Look at hearing kids of non-speaking deaf parents who were forced to use the TV for early language exposer. They often have language delays.
TV can’t REPLACE human contact in terms of language acquisition and child development…but it can be supplemental.
And, FWIW, my graduate adviser let her kids watch TV, and she’s a specialist in language acquisition and development. 