见闻

rainbow

whitecoral+-->引用:whitecoral 感谢您看得仔细，也计算得准确，我的孩子确实快10岁了，他现在也就是属于“小聪明”一级的孩子，就是视觉功能比较突出，现在可以进行快速阅读，每看一眼看懂一页就对没有任何问题，关于他的阅读速度有多快，我说可以告诉大家，但是我相信没人相信。他现在阅读2万多字的文章，就需要半分钟，而且理解得非常正确。计算能力也很好，已经到初中的水平了，看一眼题（包括应用题）立即选出答案，我还没看清题呢。其他方面没有什么可说的，不可能跟美国研究所的那些孩子相比，不会表演，也不会体操。孩子达不到这样的高度，是家长没有办法进行更多方面的训练。我的训练方法没有特殊的，就是按照书上的要求做的，每天5组，每组5张卡，因为他不看每天闪的第三次，就闪两次。看减法看到第8天就不看了，就换成乘法看，遵循在孩子不看看之前就停的原则（我认为这条原则是压倒一切的排第一）。而且我相信他不看了就他看会了，就换“新花样”。我没有电脑给孩子闪百科，我做用纸卡做，按照书上的规定做，上书市买便宜的书剪了帖。现在我就省事了，他现在可以自己看全本的书了，就不用再做卡了。我觉得在给孩子训练的过程中的心态是最重要的，闪卡，点，图，就是生活的一部分，就好像一天给他吃三顿饭一样平常，不能急功近利这点很多的妈妈（爸爸）的共识。冰冻三尺非一日之寒，孩子的发育是需要时间的。我开始训练的时候我根本就没想到他能获得现在的阅读速度和理解水平，我想这是坚持的结果。开始的时候的时候也走弯路，这点我说了。doman的孩子们并不早早地就去上大学，虽然他们有这个能力，他们愿意跟同龄的孩子在一起活动。但是也不排除个别的课程去周边的大学选课，美国的教育制度允许这样。孩子们从研究所的小学毕业前后这段时间，他们需要去为残疾的孩子服务至少一年的时间（他们通常选择去墨西哥或者巴西），也要协助比年龄小的孩子学习。然后在17-18岁的时候去上大学。或者有的孩子先去工作，看看到底自己喜欢什么样的工作，然后再选相关的专业进修。因为聪明，脑子好用，何时开始都可以轻松应付。我也同意这种观点：学位，地位的高低，财产的多少不是评判一个人是否成功的标准，他是否活的高兴才是最重要的。Doman本人和她女儿以及另外的研究所的高级工作人员是来过北京讲课的。

我很相信搂主的孩子能快速看书的能力，因为我在孩子一岁前就发现他有这种能力了，当然他看的是字体大的东西，越接近零岁的孩子开发这种能力越容易。不过心里有点疑问，您的孩子现在上学是按年龄上普通的年级吗？我不否认孩子更喜欢和同龄的孩子玩，但象这种几分钟就可以看完一本课本的孩子，和同年龄的孩子一起上课，他们应该会觉得这些知识太简单无聊。他们还喜欢上那样的课吗？

Lucas Mommy

油油妈010+-->引用:油油妈010 我总觉得DOMAN BABY会在创造力上有所局限. 这些SUPER BABY会否因这种训练模式, 而在逻辑思维上有些不足?

有没有成年后的SUPER BABY的报道呢?

Hi,

前幾天我正好看到一篇由一位曾經是DOMAN KID寫的文章﹐也許可以解答各位關於SUPER BABY的疑問。其實在<<HOW TO TEACH YOUR BABY TO READ>>的書上載一些70年代就用DOMAN方法的父母寫給IAPH的信﹐很鼓舞人心。我每次碰到疑問﹐都會看回去書。我覺得作為父母﹐只是可以給孩子多一點知識的想法促使我們去用DOMAN的方法。就這么單純而已﹐又何必去想那麼多呢﹖所以當我看到同同媽媽在“新加坡家園物
語”上的文章之後﹐就立即找書﹐買書﹐讀書﹐買卡﹐作卡﹐做PPS, 三個禮拜後開始教9個月大的孩子。

以下是 DOMAN KID  CINDY 的文章

Howdy gang, (Sorry if I double sent this, but Sarah unsent it right as I was sending it, and I don't know if it actually went out or not...ahh the joys of little helping hands...)

My deepest apologies, but I'm only a couple hours away from a hundred and fifty people showing up at my home all weekend for a medieval reenactment, so I can't do this response justice right now. Plus, I'm a little too annoyed to be terribly diplomatic, so I'll just go ahead and apologize in advance to everyone I offend today. Maybe some of the other knowledgeable parents on the list can fill in the gaps for me.

First, Doman's "teaching a baby to read" has never been about actually reading. It's designed to stimulate growth of the neural pathways that perform the reading function. The idea is to grow a strong network of neural pathways that will then be utilized throughout a person's life to actually read with. Yes, at some point along the way, kids (even little kids) with excellent reading centers in the brain will start to read. That's great! But that's the end product of a well developed reading center in the brain. Doman is about creating the area in the brain. How the kid chooses to use it and when is up to the child and the parent.

I'm a Doman kid and technically, I'm a genius. I don't care for the term particularly, but the IQ tests label me that way. I entered the University of Michigan honors college as a sophomore at 15, speak four languages fluently, majored in Russian and East European Studies with a minor in subatomic particle physics, was an Olympic caliber swimmer, played piano seriously, showed horses internationally, etc. Was the youngest female pilot in the history of the Air Force (turned down U of M law school to fly jets), and now am a published author of fiction novels. The list goes on, but I think I've made my point. (Somebody please archive this post, because I hate writing out that list of stuff, even if it is necessary from time to time.)
I'd rather be measured by my compassion for humanity, my love of my family, and the decency by which I try to live my life, but now and again, I suppose it's helpful to trot out the resume to make the point that the real gift of being a Doman kid is that Doman kids can accomplish anything they want to in life.
As an aside, Ben Newell didn't know the fighter planes at age 16, but he did correctly identify for that same film crew all the dot cards he was shown -- both to his and his mom's total shock. He hadn't seen those since he was two, either. Funny, but the film crew neglected to use that segment of film.

There is a certain political incorrectness in the U.S. to the whole idea of encouraging moms to stay at home and be full time moms these days. I don't have time to debate the pros and cons of that today, but perhaps this program was slanted a bit by that.

Pardon my bluntness on this next point, but here goes. There is an inherent dislike of genius in this country. Everyone wants their kids to be popular and/or athletic, but very few people will openly aspire for their kids to be brilliant. There has, as long as I can remember, been a backlash against anyone who helps children to be extremely educated and/or intelligent. My parents faced it, I faced it as a kid, and now I face it as a parent. I don't know if this stems from the idea that it's somehow elitist to aspire to genius, or if it's fear that someone will get further ahead than you or your kid, or it it's just meanness toward the person who stands out from the crowd intellectually. My guess is that this is the crux of the attitude the television show took with them to their week at IAHP.

There no doubt are a few parents out there who relentlessly badger their kids, who force them to perform, and who cause no end of emotional and psychological problems in their kids. But, accusing all parents who augment this nation's pitiful education system by teaching their kids of doing such damage to their children is plain ridiculous. It'd be like accusing every Arab-American in this country of being a terrorist. It's so unfair it borders on criminal to make such generalizations. However, that generalization is made over and over with regard to parents who want their kids to have a first-rate education. I, for one, am sick and tired of it.

I dare any school in this country -- ANY school -- to show me 100% of its students, up to half of whom started life brain-injured, do the things the kids at the Evan Thomas School do. Let's see those other kids do a full length Shakespeare play before the age of 13, AND be proficient gymnasts, AND be proficient musicians, AND speak several languages, AND do high-school and college level math, AND love to read and learn, AND run 10K races for fun, AND be great swimmers and bikers, AND be decent, compassionate, humane people. When some television program can show me that, I'll be happy to consider alternative methods for teaching my children.

A first-rate education opened innumerable doors for me and has allowed me to contribute in a meaningful way to the world around me. What's so wrong with doing the same for my child, be it via Doman's methods or someone else's?

People like the producers of this television show seem to hold the theory that if the American school system was good enough for them, then it's good enough for everyone. Parents are told to keep their nose out of the experts' way so the "experts" can educate our kids. Is it just me, or has anyone else noticed that the education system those experts run in this country sucks?

I expect a whole lot of experts' noses are out of joint that a growing number of parents are not satisfied with the experts' system any more. But that's tough. I've got a child to educate and prepare for the future as well as I can, and I don't have time sit around waiting for the experts to get their act together.

The folks at IAHP don't expect everyone to embrace everything they have to say about education. They expect bits and pieces of it to be controversial, because some of what they advocate and have researched does fly in the face of traditional thining about learning and education. But I think they have a right to expect fair coverage by the media.

I've seen this piece before, and I'll be blunt again. It was anything but fair. Regardless of whether the producers were right or wrong in their opinions about IAHP, I am bothered by media members who slant their coverage and don't impartially cover their subject matter. These folks can love or hate Doman's methods as they see fit, but I object to their using their media coverage to editorialize in the guise of documentary coverage.

So, the bottom line for me is, who cares what some TV program said about Doman one way or the other? For that matter, who cares what anyone else says about it? [size=12 My neighbors, friends, and in-laws aren't responsible for educating Sarah, but I am. I've seen great results in my child, and I'm satisfied that I'm helping her and not harming her. That's all that matters.

maxi

whitecoral+-->引用:whitecoral 感谢您看得仔细，也计算得准确，我的孩子确实快10岁了，他现在也就是属于“小聪明”一级的孩子，就是视觉功能比较突出，现在可以进行快速阅读，每看一眼看懂一页就对没有任何问题，关于他的阅读速度有多快，我说可以告诉大家，但是我相信没人相信。他现在阅读2万多字的文章，就需要半分钟，而且理解得非常正确。计算能力也很好，已经到初中的水平了，看一眼题（包括应用题）立即选出答案，我还没看清题呢。

恕我无知，DOMAN的书中好象没有提到如何教宝宝速读，您所说的一目十行是您按照通常的DOMAN方法自然而然所达到的结果，还是用了其它特别的DOMAN方法? 楼主能不能说明一下?

whitecoral

我是doman“迷信”者，不相信别的方法可以让我的孩子达到现在的水平。借鉴他的东西然后变形成自己的东西太多了。doman的<How to teach your baby to read>书中的提到了homemake book制作的，我就是遵循字卡，词组，短语，句子，家制书的顺序进行的。当然如果要达到特别高的水平还是需要专业老师的指点的，最初起步的时候就遵循书上的方法就行。刚刚看见rainbow的提问，抱歉延迟回答。他对于小学的东西，确实觉得无聊，但是跟同龄的孩子在一起还是能学到很跟其他的人学不到的东西的。在他笑话同龄孩子无知的时候，我们经常教教育他，每个人都有过人之处。他自己本身也不喜欢人别叫他诸如“神童”之类的话，他觉得神童是天生的，是不劳而获的，而他自己是练出来的，是自己和家人努力的结果。

maxi

谢谢whitecoral的答复，我的确是在问您有没有用其它特别的DOMAN方法，但我的意思不是指变了形的DOMAN方法，我指的是DOMAN书中还没有介绍的DOMAN方法。DOMAN的书中是写了自制书的方法，而且要求把自制书念给孩子听，大家都知道，阅读时发声会影响阅读速度的，即使念书的速度再快，也比不上眼睛的扫瞄和思想的速度，阅读速度很快的人，头脑中应该不会有文字转化为声音的过程。您孩子在阅读方面已经达到了很高的水平，我想，要达到这样高的水平，光靠逐字逐句的念书的训练方法是很难实现的(不否认这是必要的方法)，因此，DOMAN必定还有其它未公开的训练方法，不知道我的猜测是否正确?

好运妈

想起了1月份在恩宇听课时的情景，近百人的会场里，多数都是脑损伤孩子的家长，他们不远万里来听课，都是听说了一些doman方法才来的。但是，当一个9岁的孩子给大家现场表演阅读时，大家还是不相信，现场我听到的议论很多，说就这么一下就看完了？不是在做秀吗？这样的孩子该上几年级啊？怎么能融入社会呢？等等。其实，我以前也是听说过经过doman训练的孩子具备的快速阅读能力，但是从来没亲眼见过，那天见了，我相信这样的教育结果，但是同时我也理解为什么现场那么多家长不相信，如果从来不了解此方法的人的确很难相信。 以我两年多的实践体会，doman方法如果光是看一遍书就开始操作、甚至再发挥一些的话，是很容易不得要领。尤其是如果只读了台湾出的中文版，就更容易曲解了此方法。许多问题是需要在实践中去不断的读原著。如果有条件要听课，才能操作得法。但是，如果不想用太多的时间去研究方法，也不是全职妈妈，不能完全按照此方法来操作的话，也可以从其中借鉴很多经验来教孩子，可以达到事半功倍的效果。

szanny

知道我开始用杜曼的原动力是什么？我的理想就是早早教会多多自己会看书，什么书都成，不用我一本一本反反复复地给她讲n多年，呵呵。

Cat

好运妈+-->引用:好运妈 想起了1月份在恩宇听课时的情景，近百人的会场里，多数都是脑损伤孩子的家长，他们不远万里来听课，都是听说了一些doman方法才来的。但是，当一个9岁的孩子给大家现场表演阅读时，大家还是不相信，现场我听到的议论很多，说就这么一下就看完了？不是在做秀吗？这样的孩子该上几年级啊？怎么能融入社会呢？等等。其实，我以前也是听说过经过doman训练的孩子具备的快速阅读能力，但是从来没亲眼见过，那天见了，我相信这样的教育结果，但是同时我也理解为什么现场那么多家长不相信，如果从来不了解此方法的人的确很难相信。 以我两年多的实践体会，doman方法如果光是看一遍书就开始操作、甚至再发挥一些的话，是很容易不得要领。尤其是如果只读了台湾出的中文版，就更容易曲解了此方法。许多问题是需要在实践中去不断的读原著。如果有条件要听课，才能操作得法。但是，如果不想用太多的时间去研究方法，也不是全职妈妈，不能完全按照此方法来操作的话，也可以从其中借鉴很多经验来教孩子，可以达到事半功倍的效果。

都在说doman的中文版没有尊重原著，到底什么要害地方没有尊重原著，哪位高手妈妈能给我们简要说说吗，zhoulinman,whitecoral 还有贤妻良母，你们都看过原版吧，帮帮忙吧？！我想王宝星不会故意歪曲原著，如果是他这样的老师都没有理解原著，我们这样英文很一般的妈妈，即使费力看了原版，也不一定能很好理解。如果doman这么难让人理解，那也是他的悲哀。

xmlee

对呀，能不能交流一下原版在什么地方有悖于原著呢？我们现在看的可都是台湾版的，我所知道的就是台湾版的阅读将原来的“横”的方式改成了“竖”式的，还有没有其它方面重大的改变呀。这跨国交流就是比较麻烦呀。

好运妈

个人看英文原著的感觉，阅读的和数学的书一般人都可以读，体能的书可能一些部分生词多些。

doman的阅读的书翻译成其他语言（法语、西班牙语、日语等）时，都会在阅读的具体操作部分有调整，关于字卡片等的制作方面。据说，日语的那套书翻译的最好。