'Your Baby Can Read' Creator Says Experts From Top Universities Are 'All Wrong' (VIDEO, POLL)

The "Today" show investigated the popular "Your Baby Can Read!" kit, which claims to teach infants to read and has sold over a million units. The company's ads claim the kit is "based on science," while the "Today" show featured childhood experts who say otherwise.

When asked by "Today" if the babies in the "Your Baby Can Read!" series are, in fact, reading, a scientist from Harvard said, "No"; one from Tufts said, "It's an extraordinary manipulation of facts"; and another from NYU said, "I think it's misleading, I think it's false, and I think it raises false expectations."

Dr. Titzer, who has a PhD in "human performance" and says, "I'm not a traditional expert as far as reading," created the series and said these leading experts are "all wrong" about his program.

"Today" pushed Dr. Titzer, citing interviews with researchers from Harvard, Yale, Tufts, NYU, Cornell, and Penn who claim the program is false.

"They're all wrong," Dr. Titzer repeated.

Quick Poll

Can Babies Learn To Read?

Yes, they certainly can.

Absolutely not.

Probably.

Don't ask me, ask the experts!

Share your vote on Facebook so your friends can take this poll

WATCH:

Comments

[Amy Hughson]

04:00 PM on 11/04/2010

YBCR works. Thanks Dr. Titzer!
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wBdqWJllE&feature=related

[Amy Hughson]

03:59 PM on 11/04/2010

YBCR works! Thank you Dr. titzer.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wBdqWJllE&feature=related

[ValdaDeDieu]

12:14 PM on 11/04/2010

Of course babies can read--and parrot back words. Do they UNDERSTAND complexities conveyed by all written words--probably not. But I read very early...according to my parents, before I could walk. So unless I was a slow walker...(doesn't seem likely), I was one of those "baby-readers"...

It all depends on the child. Forcing a child to read, if they don't want to, or are not interested in it before it is developmentally crucial is perhaps detrimental. However, in my case, I was always fascinated by books (and still am)...

[David Hewitt]

01:52 AM on 11/04/2010

These experts - or at least some of the quoted ones - have apparently not actually investigated the program. It's extremely parent-intensive: you can't plunk your kid down in front of the TV and walk away. It's not Baby Einstein. It's a lot of drills and repitition and, yes, memorization. That's what learning is for kids, by and large. The program recommends very little TV time per day, but a lot of parental interaction.

Readers don't look at a word like "cat" and say "Khu - Ah - Tuh, oh it means Cat!"; you see the shape you've memorized, absorb it, and move on to the next word. Phonics vs. word memorization is and has been an ongoing paradigm battle, and some mix of the two is probably ideal.

It's not a program where your kid can read because you bought it and played the DVDs. Are the results overpromised? I don't know. But if all it does is get parents spending vast amounts of time with their kids, then he's earned his $200 as far as I'm concerned.

[David Hewitt]

01:57 AM on 11/04/2010

That being said, I have no intention of using it. I just don't think it's as bad as they're making it out to be.

[punctuateddisequilibrium]

10:57 AM on 11/04/2010

Despite the more measured response (I agree about parents spending more time with their kids), I think your conclusion is too hasty. Unanswered questions about whether the techniques he promotes are intrusive into "normal" developmental processes in damaging ways relate to big questions now being asked not only about reading but also about image processing involved in video technologies. You mentioned Baby Einstein: research has shown that that series fails to teach language for a simple reason. A critical factor in children's language acquisition is the child's observation of lip and mouth movements, which Baby Einstein doesn't provide (Cf. "Proust and the Squid, " Maryanne Wolf). Users of Baby Einstein did WORSE.

Kids like to hear the same books over and over as well as liking new ones. They go through a process of learning books by rote and gradually shift from rote memory to actual print recognition and that process somewhat parallels the speech acquisition steps and phases. All of this amounts to spending time with the kids, but without the "drills." Talk with kids, describe what's going on around them, read TO them and WITH them. Expose them to language but don't "expect" that they understand immediately: it's more a matter of having the words there often so that when they are ready for them, they will glom onto them. Titzer's "performance" orientation raises flags; I will investigate his claims further. I would not recommend them without better knowing the full scope .

Thanks for your comment.

[Read AloudDad]

08:11 PM on 11/03/2010

Instead of focusing on toddlers reading, we should be spending as much time reading aloud to our kids.

Grab some great new books and surprise your kids with an unexpected read aloud session during the day.

Read Aloud Dad

www.ReadAloudDad.com

[fem56]

06:46 PM on 11/03/2010

Well my kids were doing advanced calculus when they were babies. They also spoke Chinese and about a dozen or two other languages-I think anyway. Unfortunately they forgot all of it by the time they were 18 months. I suppose I could make a mint patenting my system.

[Jerome Morrow]

01:11 PM on 11/03/2010

Strong hair.

[patmweav]

12:33 PM on 11/03/2010

reminds me of global warming deniers and creationists.

[canttouchthis]

10:43 AM on 11/03/2010

IMO: I don't think the program gives babies the ability to read, like say a 5 year old, but here's what I think happens you put your baby in front of this program and he/she looks at it long enough and eventually he'll start recognizing words he's heard for e.g. the word 'Dog' might be heard and he'll recognize it because he's heard it before, now if you have a dog at home that makes it easier for him to realize 'Dog' is the name of your pet because that is the physical representation of that word/sound he keeps hearing. Now as for traditional reading I don't believe any program can give a baby the ability to string words together to form a sentence and understand what the sentence means, I don't believe a baby can look at a book and read, 'fun with Dick and Jane'.

[Greenchilistew]

10:40 AM on 11/03/2010

Looking to an expert in “Human Performance” for advice on how to teach your children to read seems rather like going to an auto mechanic for proctological concerns and remedies.

Titzer is playing upon parents’ heartfelt desire to maximize their children’s chance of success. What parent wouldn’t give anything to help their child to excel? But if their children do not truly read years earlier than predicted, how many parents will realize that they’ve even been scammed, especially when their “expert” in the field is Titzer?

Titzer simply recognized the fact that many parents are prepared to buy any product that claims to give their children a head start in any sphere of development, with or without adequate testing and research to back up those claims.

[Greenchilistew]

10:25 AM on 11/03/2010

When your defense is “I know more than ALL of the experts in the WORLD!” on a given subject, yet you fail to demonstrate even basic understanding in that subject, it is not very convincing.

It could be that Dr. Titzer, with NO expertise in early childhood learning or reading, is totally right and EVERY other bona fide expert in the field at the best universities in the world are ALL wrong.

Or it could be that Titzer is a fraud who came up with a really profitable scam.

Which seems more likely?

[Amy Hughson]

04:34 AM on 11/03/2010

YBCR works. Thank you, Dr. Titzer.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E1wBdqWJllE

[MagicManDoneIt]

04:14 AM on 11/03/2010

It's funny, I'm not an expert at an elite university, but I knew this was bunk the first time I saw it. Rote memorization was the first thing I thought of watching the commercial. My nine year old nephew was incredulous that it was real if that tells you anything. Reading/verbal skills are just one facet of intelligence, why push it that early? My mom read to me out of the newspaper when I was three and she said I was able to start picking up bits even then, but it didn't make me a genius. Anyone taken by this racket deserves what they get.

[canttouchthis]

10:45 AM on 11/03/2010

hear, hear

[McHale Ann Haiman]

12:09 AM on 11/03/2010

what's wrong with babies just being babies? If you have a genius baby that can actually read, congrats, but I don't believe that you can just force a child into reading. How would anyone expect a baby to actually pay attention to dull videos? Plus, it says babies can read, many even before they can speak? Well, then how do you know? Plus there are many great bonding opportunities from reading to your child and teaching them to do the same. Not to mention that if you can't make adults better reader, then how can you make babies actually read sooner?

[canttouchthis]

10:49 AM on 11/03/2010

Why we Americans (some of us anyway) keep falling for scams like these is beyond my comprehension. Maybe if YBCR was in circulation when I was a baby I'd understand.
I mean we fall for the most obvious rackets, it's incredible.

[thewirah]

10:40 AM on 11/04/2010

What's even more surprizing is that even after watching this video with comments from experts, 15 % of people still think babies can learn to read.

[fem56]

11:30 PM on 11/02/2010

One of the best things we ever did for our kids was not forcing them into early reading. We read to them a lot and had books laying around for them to look at. They learned how to recognize the letters of the alphabet at age two after we bought some plastic letters at a garage sale. This was expected because kids are learning langage at very rapid rate and repeat everything!be careful what you say in front of a two year old! He is right that children absorb so much at this age but are they truly reading? They memorize the shape of written words just like they can memorize the shape of other common objects and letters of the alphabet but they are not reading. Good thing! Babies and toddlers need to be exploring their world through their senses. Sadly people buysuch kits thinking that they are giving their kids a leg up in this competive world. Guys like this prey on this desire. Save your money and check out books from the publc library and make a big pot of play dough with them. They will learn more of lasting value from making the play dough than they will from this kit.