# Opinions on these reading wands? (or whatever they are called)



## olien (Apr 21, 2008)

You know I see one for leap frog advertised on the Tv. The child runs the hand held wand over the words & the words are read out loud from the wand. KWIM?

My SIL got my 15mo one called Poingo.

I am so not into it. It seems like what is the point of 'reading' a book that way, when I can take him to story time at the library or I can read him a book out loud my self. Also he is young for that kind of stuff IMO.

Am I missing something??


----------



## JamesMama (Jun 1, 2005)

I think my DS might like it, but he's almost 5...at 15 months he wouldn't have gotten anything out of it. DS would love it because he's at the stage now where he WANTS to read the book himself but can only read a few words.


----------



## JessicaS (Nov 18, 2001)

It looks like it goes with certain books. I don't think they can use just any books with it. In the ad it looked liked they had Sponge Bob and Disney princesses, Dora and Diego, Pixar characters...ect

I don't see it as something I would purchase.


----------



## LynnS6 (Mar 30, 2005)

We had the Leapfrog Jr. or something like that - it was a gift. It worked OK, but you had to have a special cartridge and a special book, and it wasn't all that easy to use. I think the newer models are better.

But, I'm not a fan of electronic things like this, especially for very young children. My kids are 5 and 8 and do play on the computer. Today, they spent a fair amount of time typing in a story that we wrote together last night. That is productive use of electronics, IMO. The other kind of stuff wasn't all that great, as far as I was concerned.


----------



## SpiderMum (Sep 13, 2008)

I think they're goofy. Why not just read to your child? Seriously...I don't see why parents are so willing to put themselves out of a job with technology.


----------



## TinkerBelle (Jun 29, 2005)

My middle child had a Leapfrog and loved it. We found it at a consignment store, along with some books and found other books at yard sales, etc.

He has Autism and it seemed to help him with his reading.

I say to each their own. It never stopped us from reading to him, or his brothers.


----------



## KristyDi (Jun 5, 2007)

I don't really like them. So much of what makes a story good is about the flow of how the words fit together to crate the world of the story in your head. With a recorded voice reading one word at a time you lose the flow. Even stuff as simple as Dr. Seuss would be missing something without it's rhythm and flow. I don't see how the wands could mimic that.

I can see how they might help a kid with sight words or, even stretching the point, might help a kid decode words. But I think it might inhibit or even damage the fluency of their reading.

ETA: If the wand reads whole sentences or paragraphs it would be slightly better. There is research that shows that listening to a fluent reader while following along with the text can improve both fluency and comprehension. Of course none of this would apply to a 15 month old.


----------



## betsyj (Jan 8, 2009)

I'm not a fan. I see my son looking at his books and turning pages while babbling along. Then he sees something he recognizes (a CAT!! a DOG!!) and says the word aloud. He doesn't need some disembodied voice doing his thinking for him.

I know I also read recently that they are finding these types of products actually hurt a kid's creativity. I am off to try and dig up that article.

I also figure my kid is going to be exposed to enough electronic technology in his life that he and I can read books together the old fashioned way.


----------



## jammomma (Nov 17, 2008)

Sounds like a useless gadget that will eventually end up in a land fill. I would rather my kid have real books.


----------



## mamadelbosque (Feb 6, 2007)

I'm pretty sure you have to use certain books which are sure to be more expensive & out of budget for us, so I don't see how it'd be that usefull... If it could read *any* book then yeah, it might be cool, but I don't think thats how they work, so...


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Not really a fan. DS and DD both got one for xmas last year. They seem to like it because it reads for them ut I'd much rather read to my kid myself. Though sometimes I am just not able to (like when driving). You can get classic books with the leap frog one. DS like it at he is just learning to read. We took it for driving 60+ hours cross country and it helped stave off the boredom. Otherwise it hasn't gotten much more use. I wouldn't have bought them myself that's for sure.


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
Though sometimes I am just not able to (like when driving). You can get classic books with the leap frog one. DS like it at he is just learning to read. *We took it for driving 60+ hours cross country and it helped stave off the boredom*.

I was thinking the same thing. These hadn't been invented when my kids were small, but they had the first version of LeadFrog and it was a GREAT car toy. We do uber long trips to visit family, and goofy gadgets that we wouldn't bother with at home were super for little kids strapped into car seats.


----------



## Tilia (Nov 18, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SpiderMum* 
I think they're goofy. Why not just read to your child? Seriously...I don't see why parents are so willing to put themselves out of a job with technology.









So I can take a shower


----------



## gcgirl (Apr 3, 2007)

I think the one for older kids (the actual wand, not the chunky block for toddlers) is good. My niece has one, and she can check out LeapFrog materials from the library to use it with. It's nice because you can wand over each word individually, unlike with the toddler one, which just does a whole page - and THAT seems like mostly a waste. I could just read DS a book and have some quality quiet time with him, kwim?

I might get him a wand when he's older, but I won't get that toddler one.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SpiderMum* 
I think they're goofy. Why not just read to your child? Seriously...I don't see why parents are so willing to put themselves out of a job with technology.









What I do when I read a story (which we LOVE doing) and what the book does are totally different. The book is more of a game than a story. We just bought DD the Bugsby version yesterday for Christmas (made by V-Tech). She tried it at the store and loved it. Not so much because it reads a story. Actually, the story is just a small part of it. There's little activities on each page, like matching colours, or dressing the characters. My daughter loved how she could control how the story went, and liked doing the activities. It's not at all like listening to a real person read a story, nor do I think it's supposed to replace that (and I wouldn't want it to).

I bought it because, bottom line, it looked FUN (and isn't that what Christmas and childhood and wonderment are all about?). Sometimes people over think things too much. It's something I would have wanted when I was kid, she thoroughly enjoyed it when she tried it out, so why not? It's a game. Not some super serious piece of academic robot parent replacement technology.









ETA: DD is 3.5, and I think at 15 months it would have gone way over her head. In fact, the cartridges for the games all started at Pre-K.


----------



## philomom (Sep 12, 2004)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SpiderMum* 
I think they're goofy. Why not just read to your child? Seriously...I don't see why parents are so willing to put themselves out of a job with technology.









That's how I felt about all that Baby Einstein stuff. I mean... who doesn't have time to interact with their own child.


----------



## Cascadian (Jan 28, 2009)

I don't like them, but it doesn't have anything to do with interacting/not interacting with your kids...(I don't personally think that most parents on here would use it as a 1:1 substitute for interacting, any more than any other toy)

It just seems kinda...boring...and counterintuitive to the reading process. It's like giving a kid a calculator. Why bother trying to do math in your head or count things out on fingers when the gadget does it for you?

I could be wrong...but it isn't for me.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *philomom* 
I mean... who doesn't have time to interact with their own child.









LOL







Seriously? So the only time your kids play and do fun stuff is when you're directing it? Do you people really think a talking play book can REPLACE a parent? Anymore than any other toy or game that encouarages indipendent play? My 3.5 year old loves being indipendent, that, in and of self is a "game". One that can't be compared to the activities that people do together. Which is different.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

I think your kid is a little young.

I think they look neat and in a year or so my DD would probably love to have one. She's very independent and likes to have a way to check what she does. I can see that as part of what she pays with, she'd have fun reading along with the thing.

I don't think they replace a parent reading to a kid. They are just another kind of game in addition to parent time.

If you don't like it very much, then put it away and save it for long car trips or that week when you're sick with the flu.


----------



## mamatoablessing (Oct 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
LOL







Seriously? So the only time your kids play and do fun stuff is when you're directing it? Do you people really think a talking play book can REPLACE a parent? Anymore than any other toy or game that encouarages indipendent play? My 3.5 year old loves being indipendent, that, in and of self is a "game". One that can't be compared to the activities that people do together. Which is different.

Thanks for posting this. The idea of a toy replacing one on one interaction is a little dramatic. There are many toys out there that don't require parental interaction. These reading wands are no different. My kids have one and quite frankly, hardly ever use it. But when they do, it's all in fun and certainly not something I consider "educational". And definitely not a replacement for me reading to them or with them.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamatoablessing* 
Thanks for posting this. The idea of a toy replacing one on one interaction is a little dramatic. There are many toys out there that don't require parental interaction. These reading wands are no different. My kids have one and quite frankly, hardly ever use it. But when they do, it's all in fun and certainly not something I consider "educational". And definitely not a replacement for me reading to them or with them.

Maybe I should put away my DD's wooden dollhouse because when she plays with it she has one doll be the 'mama' and another doll be her and I am completely replaced!


----------



## Linda on the move (Jun 15, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *philomom* 
That's how I felt about all that Baby Einstein stuff. I mean... who doesn't have time to interact with their own child.









No body interacts with their child every minute that their child is awake. We shower, potty, cook dinner, etc. Most of us drive cars. Heck, some times we even surf the net or read a book, care for our other children, etc.


----------



## mamatoablessing (Oct 17, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
Maybe I should put away my DD's wooden dollhouse because when she plays with it she has one doll be the 'mama' and another doll be her and I am completely replaced!


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *mamatoablessing* 
Thanks for posting this. *The idea of a toy replacing one on one interaction is a little dramatic.* There are many toys out there that don't require parental interaction. These reading wands are no different. My kids have one and quite frankly, hardly ever use it. But when they do, it's all in fun and certainly not something I consider "educational". And definitely not a replacement for me reading to them or with them.

Yeah, totally. Some things are just FUN. A "reading" wand being one of them. Some people totally over think FUN, to the point that it morphs into some big ugly beast and the magic of being a kid playing with a FUN toy is lost because there's some political/ethical/moral baggage that goes along with it.

It's a TOY people. And you know, I'm all for some parents hating certain toys (I certainly have my "I wouldn't be heart broken if I accidentally stepped on it" list), but seriously, the whole line about nobody having time for their kids anymore because some families choose to have the odd toy that takes a battery and can be used independently is so









As I type my daughter is happily playing on the floor with her wooden, American made, vegetable dyed, building blocks. Alone. And I have no intention of playing with her. Because I'm going to make dinner. But a nice set of wooden blocks as a babysitter is so much better than a battery operated book, right?


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olien* 
My SIL got my 15mo one called Poingo.

I am so not into it. It seems like what is the point of 'reading' a book that way, when I can take him to story time at the library or I can read him a book out loud my self. Also he is young for that kind of stuff IMO.

Am I missing something??

It's for 3 to 7 year olds, so yes, your little one is way too young to get anything out of it. It might be worth packing it away and bringing back out when he's older. You could at least wait until then to make the decision to get rid of it or not.

That said, it's not something I would buy for my kids. It just seems silly and not particularly fun, and I don't like all the books that go with it. But if someone gave it to them, I'd probably let them play with it as long as they were old enough.


----------



## marisa724 (Oct 31, 2003)

One of these Tag readers came into our possesion as well, and frankly, it doesn't seem that fun, but it's not evil by any means. DS1 (age 5) will play with it occasionally, and really really likes one book about Star Wars (but then, anything Star Wars goes over big here).

It's nice for a sort of strange situation we've found ourselves in this year - DS is in public kindergarten in the afternoon, but when the district calls a half-day (for holidays, teacher training, whatnot) both the morning and afternoon classes go in for the morning session. One class is in the regular class with the teacher, and the other is in the library with a sub (they switch off who goes where). When his class is in the library, they can do the work that they'd normally do in their classroom, but they don't have any of the toys for centers/free play -- so they're allowed to bring in one 'quiet' toy from home. DS1 has brought his Tag reader and books, and it was a hit and had his classmates asking to borrow it as well.

That said -- I wouldn't pay a lot of money for it, I've gotten a couple of extra books for him with a coupon but it's not the Best Toy Ever. On the other hand, it hasn't kept him from reading lots of other books on his own, or having books read to him by mom or dad. There are lots of hours in the day for all kinds of activities (esp. when you wake up at 6 and refuse to go to bed till after 8!







)


----------



## staceychev (Mar 5, 2005)

There was some study that came out a year or two ago that said that the kids who were "learning to read" from Leap Frog type toys were actually not learning as well or as fast as kids who were being read to by adults. I got the impression that this was about kids whose parents mostly turned over reading to the technology, though. I can't imagine that it would be a detriment to kids whose parents also read to them often.

Grrr. Googled it and can't find it.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *staceychev* 
There was some study that came out a year or two ago that said that the kids who were "learning to read" from Leap Frog type toys were actually not learning as well or as fast as kids who were being read to by adults. I got the impression that this was about kids whose parents mostly turned over reading to the technology, though. I can't imagine that it would be a detriment to kids whose parents also read to them often.

Grrr. Googled it and can't find it.

You can find experts and research to back up most positions.

John Holt, for example, recommends not using "children's" books in any form, but simply reading text only adult books. But, I'd wager that many parents on this thread read their kids children's books.


----------



## snoopy5386 (May 6, 2005)

I asked for one for DD for christmas - she is 3.5. I figure better that than some other junky toy my dad would buy her instead. I see us using it in the car and perhaps for some quiet time when DD2 comes along in April.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *staceychev* 
There was some study that came out a year or two ago that said that the kids who were "learning to read" from Leap Frog type toys were actually not learning as well or as fast as kids who were being read to by adults.

Does that really surprise anyone?


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Does that really surprise anyone?









The only thing that surprises me is that people think that this kind of toy could be a substitute for a parent teaching a child.

Why can't it just be a fun toy?


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
The only thing that surprises me is that people think that this kind of toy could be a substitute for a parent teaching a child.

Why can't it just be a fun toy?

Exactly.


----------



## olien (Apr 21, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *KristyDi* 
I don't really like them. So much of what makes a story good is about the flow of how the words fit together to crate the world of the story in your head. With a recorded voice reading one word at a time you lose the flow. Even stuff as simple as Dr. Seuss would be missing something without it's rhythm and flow. I don't see how the wands could mimic that .

I agree

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Yeah, totally. Some things are just FUN. A "reading" wand being one of them. Some people totally over think FUN, to the point that it morphs into some big ugly beast and the magic of being a kid playing with a FUN toy is lost because there's some political/ethical/moral baggage that goes along with it.

It's a TOY people. And you know, I'm all for some parents hating certain toys (I certainly have my "I wouldn't be heart broken if I accidentally stepped on it" list), but seriously, the whole line about nobody having time for their kids anymore because some families choose to have the odd toy that takes a battery and can be used independently is so









As I type my daughter is happily playing on the floor with her wooden, American made, vegetable dyed, building blocks. Alone. And I have no intention of playing with her. Because I'm going to make dinner. But a nice set of wooden blocks as a babysitter is so much better than a battery operated book, right?

I'm the OP & I was looking more for insight on helping/damaging the learning of reading. Esp since my DS is only 15mo.

Honestly I never even looked at the product from the standpoint of just being a toy. Thanks

So, I think I may take some advice here & put it away for later. I see it requires a computer. Anyone else have one like that? Will it be a waste to put it away for 1 - 1.5 years - technologically speaking. I would hate to put it away & then find our computer isnt compatable any longer when I can give it away to someone now.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

I would not call them "damaging" because I just cannot imagine any child holding an interest in them long enough for too much damage to be done. You have to use special books that are quite boring IMO. This is not a toy I would buy my dd. If someone bought it for her, then she would be allowed to play with it, obviously. But all of the leapfrog stuff drives me bananas and I am lucky that no one has gotten dd any of it. The noise, the plastic waste, batteries, the expense.... Grrrrr..... I cannot say too much though because we did get dd an ipod with stories at a young age that only gets used during car trips and meetings that she gets dragged to....which adds up to an alarming amount of time in reality.

I was such a book-hog before I could read, I remember my exasperated mom sitting down with a stack of books, a tape recorder, and a bell. She made our own set of read-along books after I asked her to read Needle on the Wheedle one too many times.....

Someone mentioned that John Holt recommends reading adult books to children. I had not read that before but he might be on to something. We did read a lot of children's books to dd and by 5 she was reading on her own. At that point, I switched over to far more "adult" books to read with her. I find them far more interesting, so I am more likely to spend a lot of time reading with her and I like the way she picks up the vocabulary, complex sentence structure, and difficult comprehension. she does not always understand what is going on and I often stop to catch her up, but she seems very interested. Makes some sense to me anyway.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olien* 
So, I think I may take some advice here & put it away for later. I see it requires a computer. Anyone else have one like that? Will it be a waste to put it away for 1 - 1.5 years - technologically speaking. I would hate to put it away & then find our computer isnt compatable any longer when I can give it away to someone now.

In that situation, I think I might pass it on to someone who could us it now.


----------



## betsyj (Jan 8, 2009)

Quote:

Why can't it just be a fun toy?
I would agree except that this particular "toy" is marketed as having a educational value and that is where I am not a fan.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olien* 
So, I think I may take some advice here & put it away for later. I see it requires a computer. Anyone else have one like that? Will it be a waste to put it away for 1 - 1.5 years - technologically speaking. I would hate to put it away & then find our computer isnt compatable any longer when I can give it away to someone now.

I think it at least works for the books it comes with without downloading anything. I guess you never know, but I think it's pretty likely it will still be compatible in a year or so. Might not be a bad idea to give it to someone who can use it now though if you don't feel compelled to keep it so you can bring it out when your SIL visits







.

But really, I think the whole download /cartridges issue with these things is a huge drawback. IMO, nothing beats a regular old book for reading. And as far as toys, I can think of a lot more fun things than one of these readers.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 

Why can't it just be a fun toy?

probably because it's not even that fun.
I think it is a misleading gimmick myself.
(and remember we own one!)

btw, did you know they actually TAG you when you go online to do the online download? Total marketing scheme if you ask me! We had to laugh at the irony of the product being called "TAG". (Seriously!







)


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olien* 
I'm the OP & I was looking more for insight on helping/damaging the learning of reading.

How on Earth could it damage the learning of reading? Unless you plan to NEVER pick up a "real" book ever again, sure. I don't get the fear of these things.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *betsyj* 
I would agree except that this particular "toy" is marketed as having a educational value and that is where I am not a fan.

Yeah, I have a problem with how stuff is determined to be "educational". Most of it seems to be educational because it lacks total and complete uselessness, and the fact that it comes with "books" (which are more like activities, at least the one we got) make that much more "educational". But I didn't get it to teach her to read, or to augment the reading we already do. It's a fun little toy that she enjoyed playing with. That's it.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

you may not have gotten it to teach your kid to read but MANY grandparents and parents DO! My children's grandma did!! I think the whole marketing IS in fact touting that these products will give your child a "head start", therefore implying they will help them learn to read quicker than if they don't use the toy.

I don't think it's a fear of these things rather than disgust. Our society has gotten too "busy". This is just one more thing to help a kid learn to read and learn by "plugging them in". I am not into battery operated toys though.

It may just be a fun toy to you but for MANY people who buy it I am betting think it's a true learning aid NOT just a fun toy.

Furthermore it COULD certainly impede a kids imagination for one thing. Also it really could (and can) cause a child to lack enjoyment of other books without the mainstream characters and what not. I have seen certain kids be so obsessed with characters that those are the books they enjoy furthering the hook of young kids into the marketing and brand loyalty! I am glad the TAG reader has classic books but I won't buy them. I'll buy the real book version instead. I don't really like a toy reading for my kid. It seems unnatural. (even if it is entertaining for them) just my choice.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
How on Earth could it damage the learning of reading? Unless you plan to NEVER pick up a "real" book ever again, sure. I don't get the fear of these things.

Yeah, I have a problem with how stuff is determined to be "educational". Most of it seems to be educational because it lacks total and complete uselessness, and the fact that it comes with "books" (which are more like activities, at least the one we got) make that much more "educational". But I didn't get it to teach her to read, or to augment the reading we already do. It's a fun little toy that she enjoyed playing with. That's it.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
How on Earth could it damage the learning of reading? Unless you plan to NEVER pick up a "real" book ever again, sure. I don't get the fear of these things.

I don't think anyone should lose any sleep over these things ruining their child for life, but I can see why someone might be concerned about what their child could potentially learn form one. Whether someone bought one to help teach their kid to read or not, that's what they were designed to do. That's what they are marketed to do. And IMO, sometimes a crappy teacher is worse than no teacher at all. It's difficult to relearn something you were taught how to do the wrong way. Anyway, I'm sure some of these are better than others.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
you may not have gotten it to teach your kid to read but MANY grandparents and parents DO! My children's grandma did!! I think the whole marketing IS in fact touting that these products will give your child a "head start", therefore implying they will help them learn to read quicker than if they don't use the toy.

I don't think it's a fear of these things rather than disgust. Our society has gotten too "busy". This is just one more thing to help a kid learn to read and learn by "plugging them in". I am not into battery operated toys though.

It may just be a fun toy to you but for MANY people who buy it I am betting think it's a true learning aid NOT just a fun toy.

Furthermore it COULD certainly impede a kids imagination for one thing. Also it really could (and can) cause a child to lack enjoyment of other books without the mainstream characters and what not. I have seen certain kids be so obsessed with characters that those are the books they enjoy furthering the hook of young kids into the marketing and brand loyalty! I am glad the TAG reader has classic books but I won't buy them. I'll buy the real book version instead. I don't really like a toy reading for my kid. It seems unnatural. (even if it is entertaining for them) just my choice.









Do you really think that a parent who bought this toy to "teach" their child to read isn't also the kind of parent who waits for kindergarten or grade 1 for a teacher to teach their kid how to read?

If you really think that this kind of toy could "impede" a child's imagination, I don't know what to say to you. In my experience, nothing can actually impede small children's imaginations. Some things will help guide or shape their imagination, but actually "impede"???


----------



## funkymamajoy (May 25, 2008)

My 2 1/2 year old pretends her reading wand is a princess wand (don't all princesses have wands?). She has no idea that it works with a book.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Yes most certainly impede if the child is soley exposed to characters and non stop television and video games. I have seen it happen! Sad but true! I know several children like this actually. As in they can not play imaginatively ON THEIR OWN. I most certainly attribute that to toys like this one (Among others and the things I listed above!). Hell, I know kids who can't even take a short car trip with out being plugged in. They don't know how to relax OR entertain themselves without something to help them do it. and yes i do view this toy as "plugging in". THAT is what i think impedes imagination. Not soley this toy alone but other factors as well combined with a toy that touts characters and doing the work for the kid, to make reading "fun".

That is just my view. It may not be your view and that's ok.

I am not sure what kind of parent buys this toy but I know I'm not one of them and I highly dislike it. That is all.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
Do you really think that a parent who bought this toy to "teach" their child to read isn't also the kind of parent who waits for kindergarten or grade 1 for a teacher to teach their kid how to read?

If you really think that this kind of toy could "impede" a child's imagination, I don't know what to say to you. In my experience, nothing can actually impede small children's imaginations. Some things will help guide or shape their imagination, but actually "impede"???


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
but I can see why someone might be concerned about what their child could potentially learn form one.

What could a child potentially learn from one that should be a cause for concern, though? I don't get it, honestly.

Quote:

Whether someone bought one to help teach their kid to read or not, that's what they were designed to do. That's what they are marketed to do. And IMO, sometimes a crappy teacher is worse than no teacher at all. It's difficult to relearn something you were taught how to do the wrong way.
I've never seen them marketed to TEACH a child to learn to read. In fact, if you go to their website, it says this; "Build a love of books and help build their future. Designed for curious toddlers, Tag Junior brings board books to life with playful sounds and activities, opening new worlds of learning that can take them just about anywhere."

And then there is a video of a little girl using the book WITH her mother, and her mother says on the video "I buy leap frog toys *because they make her laugh*".

Then for the regular tag (because the above was the tag junior) it says "Turn on a love for reading, turn on your child's future."

Colour me mainstream and a victim of The Man, but where in any of that is there a claim that these things TEACH children to read? To me it seems like they're intended goal is to inspire children to have a love of reading, which, compared to the umpteen hours of TV the average kid watches per week, or hours of video games, is not a horrible thing.

If someone is going to give my kid a novelty, and I'd much rather have one of these things than a Hanna Montana costume set, or a Bratz doll. For as long as there's been "educational" toys, there's been people who question the value of that education. I get that. I'm one of them. _But in the grand scheme of things_, compared to all the other (gimmicky) toys on the market, this is about as far from detrimental as I can think of.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
Yes most certainly impede if the child is soley exposed to characters and non stop television and video games. I have seen it happen! Sad but true! I know several children like this actually. As in they can not play imaginatively ON THEIR OWN.

It's unfortunate that some kids have crappy parents. But I'm not Ok with the only viable solution to this being to ban the production of gimmicky toys so the kids with neglectful crappy parents can't "plug them in". Because that's what it reads like. "I don't like these toys because SOME parents don't actually teach their kids or read to them, so we should get rid of ALLLLLLLLL the toys that enables parents to be neglectful". That's ridiculous.

While we're at it, lets ban cars because SOME parents don't use car seats.

And lets ban junk food because SOME parents let their kids eat it too much.

And lets ban cable TV because SOME parents use it as a babysitter.

Come on..


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

who said anything about banning it? The OP wanted opinions on the product did she not?

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
It's unfortunate that some kids have crappy parents. But I'm not Ok with the only viable solution to this being to ban the production of gimmicky toys so the kids with neglectful crappy parents can't "plug them in". Because that's what it reads like. "I don't like these toys because SOME parents don't actually teach their kids or read to them, so we should get rid of ALLLLLLLLL the toys that enables parents to be neglectful". That's ridiculous.

While we're at it, lets ban cars because SOME parents don't use car seats.

And lets ban junk food because SOME parents let their kids eat it too much.

And lets ban cable TV because SOME parents use it as a babysitter.

Come on..


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
It's unfortunate that some kids have crappy parents. But I'm not Ok with the only viable solution to this being to ban the production of gimmicky toys so the kids with neglectful crappy parents can't "plug them in". Because that's what it reads like. "I don't like these toys because SOME parents don't actually teach their kids or read to them, so we should get rid of ALLLLLLLLL the toys that enables parents to be neglectful". That's ridiculous.

While we're at it, lets ban cars because SOME parents don't use car seats.

And lets ban junk food because SOME parents let their kids eat it too much.

And lets ban cable TV because SOME parents use it as a babysitter.

Come on..










Who the heck said anything about banning anything? The OP asked for opinions. You said your kid likes it, and you think it's a wonderful toy. Great! Why can't other people have a different opinion about it without it making them some mindless AP/NFL drone who is the victim of MDC groupthink?


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
But I'm not Ok with the only viable solution to this being to ban the production of gimmicky toys so the kids with neglectful crappy parents can't "plug them in".

I totally agree with your opinion on banning stuff just because some people misuse/overuse/etc them.....

But I had to break this part of your post out to say something totally off topic









I DO wish they would ban the production of gimicky toys because:

1. They are a waste of resources.
2. They hurt my eyes and ears.
3. They go into landfills after very little use.
4. They encourage kids to become media-slave-consumeristic-zombies.

Rant over


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Who the heck said anything about banning anything? The OP asked for opinions. You said your kid likes it, and you think it's a wonderful toy. Great! Why can't other people have a different opinion about it without it making them some mindless AP/NFL drone who is the victim of MDC groupthink?

Ok, boycot? I mean, why the need to attribute many children's inability to play imaginatively on their own to "*soley* exposing kids to characters and non stop television and video games" and toys like this? Did anyone express any desire to do that? Going that route is a major red herring. This toy is not damaging because SOME people will rely on it to teach their kids to read in lieu of interacting with them.

I mean, if that's your conviction against the thing, OK, fine. But it's kind of a silly argument in general. Just as silly as saying that going to McDonalds once in a while is bad for you because the people who eat there every day are unhealthy. Well duh!


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
I totally agree with your opinion on banning stuff just because some people misuse/overuse/etc them.....

But I had to break this part of your post out to say something totally off topic









I DO wish they would ban the production of gimicky toys because:

1. They are a waste of resources.
2. They hurt my eyes and ears.
3. They go into landfills after very little use.
4. *They encourage kids to become media-slave-consumeristic-zombies.
*
Rant over









The bolded is my problem with this thread. That a TOY can encourage a kid to be/do anything. The people in my kid's life have a far greater impact over her desire to be and do things than any toy. The problem is not the toy. It is the people who buy it and allow it to be used. Unfortunately, those people can't be guided to do better by their kids by limiting their choice in toys! In fact, I think limiting choice to influence people's behavior or parenting would be far more damaging.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

How do you know it's not damaging your child? Have you done a study on it? How do you know in 10 years battery operated toys WON'T be seen as damaging as television? You don't. None of us do. Also, while we are talking damage~ these plastic gimmicky toys ARE certainly damaging the EARTH. Which in turn damages us all. I mean if you want to get literal.

I agree with whomever above stated you have your opinion an I have mine and we both should be allowed to express it without getting jumped on.

I get that you think this toy is wonderful. I just don't personally.

YOU are the one making the analogies to cars, junk food and McDonalds,etc.

I was saying in combination with the marketing of characters, nonstop television AND video games it certainly can damage a kid. SOME kids. Probably not ALL kids. But I have seen it happen! (as in relation to battery operated toys, tv and video games- and yes I am sure it is the parents influence of course.) No one suggested anything as far as the OP is concerned or what she will do or what YOU do, just stating merely WHY we don't like the product as well as our OWN personal experiences with it.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Ok, boycot? I mean, why the need to attribute many children's inability to play imaginatively on their own to "*soley* exposing kids to characters and non stop television and video games" and toys like this? Did anyone express any desire to do that? Going that route is a major red herring. This toy is not damaging because SOME people will rely on it to teach their kids to read in lieu of interacting with them.

I mean, if that's your conviction against the thing, OK, fine. But it's kind of a silly argument in general. Just as silly as saying that going to McDonalds once in a while is bad for you because the people who eat there every day are unhealthy. Well duh!


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 

I get that you think this toy is wonderful. I just don't personally.









Wonderful would be a stretch. I'm just not afraid of it. It's a toy.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Who's said they were afraid of the toy? I mean really? Are we not allowed to express our opinion without being told we are afraid of it?

Yes it's a toy but a crappy one at that. (Totally not worth the $ IMHO when you could go to the library for FREE).

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 







Wonderful would be a stretch. I'm just not afraid of it. It's a toy.


----------



## betsyj (Jan 8, 2009)

Well geez now I feel I have to defend not liking it. I am not afraid of it. I just find it to be a waste of money and find the marketing behind it to be bothersome.

I mean if someone got it for ds I wouldn't run screaming from the house in fear ya know? I would just give it to the reseller shop.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
I'm just not afraid of it. It's a toy.









I don't think looking at something critically has anything to do with fear.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
I don't think looking at something critically has anything to do with fear.

And I don't think finding the odd battery opperated TOY as benign has anything to do with not having time to interact with my kid, either.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *betsyj* 
Well geez now I feel I have to defend not liking it. I am not afraid of it. I just find it to be a waste of money and find the marketing behind it to be bothersome.

I mean if someone got it for ds I wouldn't run screaming from the house in fear ya know? I would just give it to the reseller shop.


Why would you give it away? Why not let your kid play with it? That's where it feels like there's an element of fear.

If there's nothing to fear from the toy, then what would be wrong with letting your child play with it occasionally and maybe have some fun. Or maybe they would think it's dumb and it would never leave the shelf.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
And I don't think finding the odd battery opperated TOY as benign has anything to do with not having time to interact with my kid, either.

Me neither.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

I think you are taking peoples opinions of the toy a bit personal. No one is judging you. Remember MY Kids have this toy too! Am I judging myself now for the Grandma's choice in gifts? Certainly not. I just dislike the toy for the reasons I've stated. I have seen battery toys be detrimental as well and merely stated so. No one gave any opinion on YOUR personal parenting or otherwise.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
And I don't think finding the odd battery opperated TOY as benign has anything to do with not having time to interact with my kid, either.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

well my kids have these and I have not taken it from them. I am not sure where FEAR came up? Stupid and mindless yes, fear no. My rule is I simply don't replace batteries of ANY battery toy that comes through my door. (though Grandma has caught on now and sends extras)

btw I will admit I have seen my kids turn into little zombies with this toy (especially my sensory seeker) it caused a lot of whining at home actually when it was time to put it away or when the batteries died. In the car though it was entertaining while driving cross country twice. I still have it but will probably give it too my nephews (Who play with probably 90% battery operated toys) though we are getting a battery charger for our camera so they will be welcome to use those batteries I suppose. (not sure if they are the same)..

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
Why would you give it away? Why not let your kid play with it? That's where it feels like there's an element of fear.

If there's nothing to fear from the toy, then what would be wrong with letting your child play with it occasionally and maybe have some fun. Or maybe they would think it's dumb and it would never leave the shelf.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
Why would you give it away? Why not let your kid play with it? That's where it feels like there's an element of fear.

If there's nothing to fear from the toy, then what would be wrong with letting your child play with it occasionally and maybe have some fun. Or maybe they would think it's dumb and it would never leave the shelf.

Are you afraid of everything you don't like and decide to give away? I doubt it. I am quite certain that people can not like something _and_ not be afraid of it all at the same time.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
well my kids have these and I have not taken it from them. I am not sure where FEAR came up? Stupid and mindless yes, fear no. My rule is I simply don't replace batteries of ANY battery toy that comes through my door. (though Grandma has caught on now and sends extras)

btw I will admit I have seen my kids turn into little zombies with this toy (especially my sensory seeker) it caused a lot of whining at home actually when it was time to put it away or when the batteries died. In the car though it was entertaining while driving cross country twice. I still have it but will probably give it too my nephews (Who play with probably 90% battery operated toys) though we are getting a battery charger for our camera so they will be welcome to use those batteries I suppose. (not sure if they are the same)..

I guess it seems really consumerist to artificially shorten the lifespan of a toy by not replacing the batteries. That makes the thing get close to useless.

Maybe I've spent too much time with people who actually have nothing to be able to do that. Try playing soccer with some kids who have turned an empty car oil bottle into their soccer ball and this kind of thing stops mattering.

We don't buy very much stuff. So if my kid gets a battery operated toy (which she's gotten a few of) then we're going to get as much use out of them as possible. It seems very wasteful to either ignore the toy or just give it away.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Are you afraid of everything you don't like and decide to give away? I doubt it. I am quite certain that people can not like something _and_ not be afraid of it all at the same time.

I can understand the not liking it. There are plenty of toys I "don't like". I can't understand having enough stuff to just give it away.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Well our preference is NOT battery operate toys. Our families know this but yet keep on giving them.

I will feel no qualms about passing it on. If you view that as wasteful then that is YOUR prerogative. I find it wasteful to be given plastic battery operated toys to begin with. (not to mention the manufacturing and labor practices)

My kids DON'T have a lot of toys either. Very few in fact. They still won't miss it I can guarantee that.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
I guess it seems really consumerist to artificially shorten the lifespan of a toy by not replacing the batteries. That makes the thing get close to useless.

Maybe I've spent too much time with people who actually have nothing to be able to do that. Try playing soccer with some kids who have turned an empty car oil bottle into their soccer ball and this kind of thing stops mattering.

We don't buy very much stuff. So if my kid gets a battery operated toy (which she's gotten a few of) then we're going to get as much use out of them as possible. It seems very wasteful to either ignore the toy or just give it away.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

It's not about having enough stuff, it's about our FAMILY'S preference. We are trying to raise non consumeristic, earth destroying kids that are addicted to certain "brands" or characters.. These types of toys certainly don't help with any of that.












Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
I can understand the not liking it. There are plenty of toys I "don't like". I can't understand having enough stuff to just give it away.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
I think you are taking peoples opinions of the toy a bit personal. No one is judging you.

It was pontificated up thread that people no longer have time to interact with their kids because of toys like this. If it can be stated that not liking this TOY isn't about fear, why can't it be stated that liking it isn't about not having time for one's kid?


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

oh and another example. My MIL went out and got DS a DVD player this weekend while she was visiting. (because we don't have a tv) A PORTABLE one he can watch when he wants. HE's 5!!!!!! YES I took that right away as it causes him BIG problems and sensory overload and he is not able to self regulate (case in point he started hitting RIGHT away which is a habit we have tried hard to curb due to sensory issues). Am I'm afraid of that too? Or should I just let him have it and turn into a little raging monster?

Anyway that was rhetorical question I am not expecting an answer and I am done with this thread.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
It was pontificated up thread that people no longer have time to interact with their kids because of toys like this. If it can be stated that not liking this TOY isn't about fear, why can't it be stated that liking it isn't about not having time for one's kid?

because no one said a thing resembling being fearful of this toy?


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
It seems very wasteful to either ignore the toy or just give it away.

Yes, teaching anti-consumerism to your kids by opening disliking gifts to the point of giving them away or selling them so they can be replaced with something more "appropriate" never made sense to me.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
It's not about having enough stuff, it's about our FAMILY'S preference. We are trying to raise non consumeristic, earth destroying kids that are addicted to certain "brands" or characters.. These types of toys certainly don't help with any of that.









So you plan to raise non consumeristic kids by teaching them that it's perfectly OK to simply discard things they don't like rather than figuring out a way to use them.

I don't see how that could work. That seems like teaching kids to go ahead and waste things they don't personally see as valuable.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Yes, teaching anti-consumerism to your kids by opening disliking gifts to the point of giving them away or selling them so they can be replaced with something more "appropriate" never made sense to me.

***


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

who said anything about discarding them? we will give them to someone who WILL actually use them and want to waste their money on the batteries.

and yes I teach my kids about the wastefulness of plastic.

it actually does work.

my kids would much rather play outside or with OTHERS than plastic crap anyday.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
So you plan to raise non consumeristic kids by teaching them that it's perfectly OK to simply discard things they don't like rather than figuring out a way to use them.

I don't see how that could work. That seems like teaching kids to go ahead and waste things they don't personally see as valuable.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
It was pontificated up thread that people no longer have time to interact with their kids because of toys like this. If it can be stated that not liking this TOY isn't about fear, why can't it be stated that liking it isn't about not having time for one's kid?

I believe someone was talking about these types of toys _in general_, not about some random parent who has the odd battery operated toy for their kid. No one here said that if a parent has one of these toys then they by default don't have time for their kids. We have a couple battery operated toys here (even some Baby Einstein ones







), and I took no offense to the remark. I let my kid watch TV too and took no offense the comment about TV because I know they were no talking about me.

Yet, it has been either stated outright or not so subtly implied that not liking these toys makes one silly and fearful and that giving them away makes them an ungrateful wasteful consumerist with no concept of the conditions that some people live under in the rest of the world.


----------



## betsyj (Jan 8, 2009)

Quote:

Why would you give it away? Why not let your kid play with it? That's where it feels like there's an element of fear.
Honest to goodness!! Because I don't like those kinds of toys.

The OP asked for opinions. I gave mine-I don't like "educational" electronic toys that are tied into products very much. Just like I don't like Baby Einstein or Disney or Hannah Montana. I am not afraid of these things, I simply don't think we need them in MY house.


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

one last thing maybe you should show yourself the EFFECTS of the plastic toys on the environment and other HUMANS. yet I should just accept it and continue to use it in good conscious? NOT.








http://www.chinahush.com/2009/10/21/...tion-in-china/


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 
who said anything about discarding them? we will give them to someone who WILL actually use them and want to waste their money on the batteries.

and yes I teach my kids about the wastefulness of plastic.

it actually does work.
*
my kids would much rather play outside or with OTHERS than plastic crap anyday.*


I find the bolded very offensive for what it implies about parents and kids who choose to practice "moderation" rather than extremism.

As I look around our living room, I see a nice mix of plastic toys, wooden toys and fabric toys. Sometimes we buy plastic because either the durability of a wooden version or the cost makes it the better choice. I see nothing to be gained by buying a wooden toy that's going to be easily snapped and broken by my child (like the doll house furniture). But my eyes keep landing on the crappiest toys we have and they are all wood...

We have a Noah's Ark set that annoys my child because none of the lovingly hand carved by a local artisan animals look like an actual animal. So she refuses to play with them because they just make her mad. We have a painted wooden pull toy rabbit which was well loved, but now just looks sad because much of the paint has chipped off. The paint on that thing would chip off every time it got bumped into a wall which happens alot when a little kid pulls something after them.

And then I see the most played with toys... They are out infront of the TV where my 3yo sits and plays while watching treehouse sometimes. There are lovely wooden blocks and Lego all mixed together. But I guess singing along to Dora has entirely impeded her imagination and prevents her from being creative...


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Yet, it has been either stated outright or not so subtly implied that not liking these toys makes one silly and fearful and that giving them away makes them an ungrateful wasteful consumerist with no concept of the conditions that some people live under in the rest of the world.

It has nothing to do with not liking these toys. I have plenty of toys I don't like. It has to do with the "concern" for these toys, especially when coupled with the red herring that over use/misuse can cause problems for some kids. Isn't that true for a lot of things? Tv, junk food, etc.

Scrutinizing educational toys with the mindset that RELYING on educational toys to _learn_ basic reading skills, is... well, stupid. No one has expressed any desire to rely on these toys for the sole source of eduction, so using that as an argument for not liking them, or for being concerned makes no sense.

And, I totally the get the distaste for how educational toys are marketed. Really do I. But perhaps my ambivalence for these kinds of things is because I'm not really a boycotter at heart? I mean, it's not going to TEACH my kid to read. Got it. If I RELY on it to teach my kid to read, she might fall behind or have troubles in other areas. Got it. So with that in mind, I don't understand the _concern_, which does sort of read as slight bit of fear (but then again, I'm not worried about brain damage from TV's either, so take that with a grain of salt).


----------



## zipworth (Jun 26, 2002)

Computers are plastic.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zipworth* 
Computers are plastic.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
It has nothing to do with not liking these toys. I have plenty of toys I don't like. It has to do with the "concern" for these toys, especially when coupled with the red herring that over use/misuse can cause problems for some kids. Isn't that true for a lot of things? Tv, junk food, etc.

Well we do junk food and TV here, and I'm still "concerned" about these types of educational toys. I don't see what one has to do with the other. I'm selective about what junk food my child gets at home, and I am discriminating about what TV she watches. Seems logical to me that I should be concerned about what toys she plays with. But color me a cowering stupid ingrate if you like because I've got to go get my baby who just woke up.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *zipworth* 
Computers are plastic.


And extremely environmentally toxic when they are "recycled"....


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

I have no opinion on the reader thing-ys, but I'm wondering: Do the folks that object to the reader thing-y also object to audio books? A parent recording a book? For all ages or just littles?


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

computers are also a necessity to do certain jobs. plastic battery operated toys not so much.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chfriend* 
I have no opinion on the reader thing-ys, but I'm wondering: Do the folks that object to the reader thing-y also object to audio books? A parent recording a book? For all ages or just littles?


That's a great question.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
Well we do junk food and TV here, and I'm still "concerned" about these types of educational toys. I don't see what one has to do with the other. I'm selective about what junk food my child gets at home, and I am discriminating about what TV she watches. Seems logical to me that I should be concerned about what toys she plays with.

But we're past basic concern and have moved right on through to "but SOME kids turn into little consumerist unimaginative zombies!".









Seriously, buy it. Don't buy. Like it. Don't like. I don't care. But latching on to WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO and using that as a reason not to like something (similar to how bumbo seats cause deformed hips) is, as someone up thread mentioned, extremism.

Anyway, this is getting old. I have more gimmicky Christmas shopping to do. Next stop POWER WHEELS JEEP. She is going to love that giant hunk of TWELVE VOLT battery opperated plastic!


----------



## rainbowmoon (Oct 17, 2003)

I really think if you could step back from your own issues you will see it is a valid concern. (consumerism and marketing to kids) It is to many of us here at MDC anyway, though not all obviously.

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
But we're past basic concern and have moved right on through to "but SOME kids turn into little consumerist unimaginative zombies!".









Seriously, buy it. Don't buy. Like it. Don't like. I don't care. But latching on to WORST POSSIBLE SCENARIO and using that as a reason not to like something (similar to how bumbo seats cause deformed hips) is, as someone up thread mentioned, extremism.

Anyway, this is getting old. I have more gimmicky Christmas shopping to do. Next stop POWER WHEELS JEEP. She is going to love that giant hunk of TWELVE VOLT battery opperated plastic!


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Nevermind....off topic.


----------



## bugginsmom (Aug 4, 2005)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *chfriend* 
I have no opinion on the reader thing-ys, but I'm wondering: Do the folks that object to the reader thing-y also object to audio books? A parent recording a book? For all ages or just littles?

This is a great question and since I have just come to this thread I will put my opinion here. We don't do battery operated learning toys ala leapfrog, etc. We do use audio books from the library. My son loves to listen to the long chapter books and when we have long car drives (think 3+ hours to visit the inlaws) he will listen to a book on tape since obviously I can't read to him while I drive. Audio books have inflection, tone, and a regular reading cadence to them that the learning toys I have encountered do not. Once my son can read the more complex books I am not sure how much we will use audio books, but for now it helps bridge the gap between his reading ability and his comprehension level. Also, I read chapter books to him all.the.time when we are home...often we will sit and read a 90 page chapter book before bed so he is definitely getting enough reading from me, whenever he wants it...just not in the car!


----------



## SomedayMom (May 9, 2002)

My inlaws have a deep deep love for all things Leap Frog. Every birthday, every holiday.

I don't actually believe they are educational. My older son is learning to read in much better ways and not from this thing.

But my honest gauge of whether a toy stays or not is if my child enjoys it. It's not what *I* think of the toy. It's not all about my ideals. I watch him with it and if he thinks it is fun and it's not going to cause him physical harm it stays.

Most of our leapfrog stuff has moved on to a more appreciative home b/c my boys do not enjoy it. This Tag thing though? He seems to think it's fun. So we have one. I think it's annoying, but it's not about me. It is kind of nice on long trips.


----------



## Cascadian (Jan 28, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *SomedayMom* 

I don't actually believe they are educational. My older son is learning to read in much better ways and not from this thing.

But my honest gauge of whether a toy stays or not is if my child enjoys it.


Hmm...different experiences. I love the company...the LMAX taught my DD to read a week before she turned 3. I'm not into pushing my kids to do anything at that age, so while we did lots of reading, ambient word posters, etc. etc. I wasn't doing flashcards or anything actively obnoxious like that. She loved the little graphics, cartoons, games...and I'll be darned, it taught her to read (no, not just recognize sight words). It opened up her world.

And *my* honest gauge of whether a toy stays is totally if she likes it or not. WTH is the point otherwise?







If this were so, my house would be covered in gender-neutral wooden blocks crafted by magical gnomes in a primeval forest from sustainable wood, yadda yadda yadda.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Oh nevermind. There's no point.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Yooper, we have rechargeable batteries. Tossing batteries in the trash is definitely a HUGE concern for us. We don't have much that needs batteries, but even from a cost stand point, it's so much more economical to use rechargeable.

And Riverscout, I don't celebrate plastic toys (well, except for the jeep, but I've wanted one for her long before she was born







). In the case of this book I have only questioned the concern that it will damage or impede childrens ability to read. This thread has taken a million turns, and unfortunately didn't turn out well, for my part I'm sorry. But back on the first page, my only point was to illustrate an electronic book A.) will not replace me as a parent, and B.) is not going to impede my kids ability to read BECAUSE this book is not her sole source of reading material. It's a _toy_. A _game_.

I don't get people's _concern_ over this book. Is all. Like it or don't like it. But the concern I do not get. I really don't.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
But back on the first page, my only point was to illustrate an electronic book A.) will not replace me as a parent, and B.) is not going to impede my kids ability to read BECAUSE this book is not her sole source of reading material. It's a _toy_. A _game_.

I don't get people's _concern_ over this book. Is all. Like it or don't like it. But the concern I do not get. I really don't.

Okay, so I'll leave out environmental concerns about limited-life disposable battery-operated plastic toys, general dislike of annoying electronic toys and/or "educational" toys, and concerns about marketing to young children (Poingo books are all Disney including a Hanna Montana one







) and solely focus on those two points A)potential to replace parents and B) potential to impede reading ability.

****DISCLAIMER: The thoughts below are all my opinions and how I see these types of products and how that relates to me and my kids. They are not based on any evidence but rather my own gut which is what I am assuming those that do like them are basing their opinions on as well. I am not implying anything about any parent who may have purchased or allowed one of these items for their children nor am I implying their children have been damaged in any way.****

I'll start with A) potential to replace parent. Now while I don't think this reader could come in and replace me altogether and that I would never read to my child again, I'm concerned that it could eat into some of the time I get to spend reading to her because she would be having that need/want met by some electronic device. Would that necessarily happen? I don't know, but I see it as a potential problem, thus it arises concern.

Which leads me to B) potential to impede reading. If I were reading to her less, and this thing was reading to her more, I'd be concerned that her reading ability may be at least affected if not impeded. Also, I'm concerned about some of the activities that some of these things have on them in addition to just reading the stories. I don't care for the way a lot of these "educational" toys present information, and I think in some cases it can be detrimental.

To be clear, I'm not afraid of these toys. I'm certain my daughter would not be irreparably harmed if she played with one. But I think they are less than ideal to say the least and would strongly prefer that she not have one. If she chose to keep one that someone gave her, I'd probably let her, but I could see the potential for me having to actively mitigate the effects and having to impose some limits.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
I'll start with A) potential to replace parent. Now while I don't think this reader could come in and replace me altogether and that I would never read to my child again, I'm concerned that it could eat into some of the time I get to spend reading to her because she would be having that need/want met by some electronic device.

Again, it's a toy, and it is not at all like being read to by a real person, so I don't understand how it can meet that need, much less cut into time being read to by a real person (any more than playing with a puzzle or any other toy?).

I also think it's kind of comical that it's now being referred to as an "electronic device" instead of a toy. I guess it sounds far more plausible that it would meet a child's reading needs/wants that way, than to just say your kid "likes to play with a toy". LOL

Agree to disagree I guess. I think it's benign and fun. You think it has the potential to reduce your child's desire to be read to by a real person, thus impeding the learning process by having that need met by an "electronic device".

I think a lot of toys can be detrimental if it's given enough thought. Exersaucers have been frowned upon because of potential musculoskeletal problems, but I often wonder if there were a wood and organic cotton version that sported chemical free natural rubber toys if it would be a complete hit among MDC members.

I also think there's an intellectual element to the reason toys are disliked, especially when talking to the "mainstream". It's like there needs to be a "real" reason to dislike a toys, especially to the inlaws, rather than just saying they hate it because it's plastic and takes batteries. I think this carries over to the natural philosophy as a whole, and I wonder how many people would really think things are _that_ detrimental if they stripped away their personal convictions. Once in a while I'm willing to let go of my personal convictions for a bit of benign fun, and in the process am able to recognize that yes, while it's plastic and takes batteries, and that no, I normally don't really like those kinds of toys, that's not as dangerous and detrimental as the group think would have me to believe. And I'm also completely willing to accept that this makes me an NFL sell out. One thing I am not is hard on myself for allowing the odd peice of "junk" to come through the door. Having said that, as I sit and type this, I can't really think of a single toy that has batteries in it. Oh wait, she has an electric key board.

I dunno, I think it takes too much energy to analyze toys this much, and considering the fact that we have a pretty modest electronic array of toys I just can't convince myself to devise a reason to hate something simply because it's mainstream (because in order to come up with a reason aside from it being plastic and taking batteries, that's what I'd have to do.. the learning issues would be a big stretch for me).

Anyway, rant over, now I'm done. I don't get the concern, and to answer the OP'ers question one more time, I'm kinda "meh.. whatever, it's a toy" on the whole subject.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
Again, it's a toy, and it is not at all like being read to by a real person, so I don't understand how it can meet that need, much less cut into time being read to by a real person (any more than playing with a puzzle or any other toy?).

I also think it's kind of comical that it's now being referred to as an "electronic device" instead of a toy. I guess it sounds far more plausible that it would meet a child's reading needs/wants that way, than to just say your kid "likes to play with a toy". LOL

Agree to disagree I guess. I think it's benign and fun. You think it has the potential to reduce your child's desire to be read to by a real person, thus impeding the learning process by having that need met by an "electronic device".

I think a lot of toys can be detrimental if it's given enough thought. Exersaucers have been frowned upon because of potential musculoskeletal problems, but I often wonder if there were a wood and organic cotton version that sported chemical free natural rubber toys if it would be a complete hit among MDC members.

I also think there's an intellectual element to the reason toys are disliked, especially when talking to the "mainstream". It's like there needs to be a "real" reason to dislike a toys, especially to the inlaws, rather than just saying they hate it because it's plastic and takes batteries. I think this carries over to the natural philosophy as a whole, and I wonder how many people would really think things are _that_ detrimental if they stripped away their personal convictions. Once in a while I'm willing to let go of my personal convictions for a bit of benign fun, and in the process am able to recognize that yes, while it's plastic and takes batteries, and that no, I normally don't really like those kinds of toys, that's not as dangerous and detrimental as the group think would have me to believe. And I'm also completely willing to accept that this makes me an NFL sell out. One thing I am not is hard on myself for allowing the odd peice of "junk" to come through the door. Having said that, as I sit and type this, I can't really think of a single toy that has batteries in it. Oh wait, she has an electric key board.

I dunno, I think it takes too much energy to analyze toys this much, and considering the fact that we have a pretty modest electronic array of toys I just can't convince myself to devise a reason to hate something simply because it's mainstream (because in order to come up with a reason aside from it being plastic and taking batteries, that's what I'd have to do.. the learning issues would be a big stretch for me).

Anyway, rant over, now I'm done. I don't get the concern, and to answer the OP'ers question one more time, I'm kinda "meh.. whatever, it's a toy" on the whole subject.









You know I don't spend a lot of time worrying about these things. I was merely explaining what my possible concerns were with these types of toys because you seems so perplexed. I don't lose sleep over it. I'm not some kind of toy extremist like I mentioned early. I don't complain about the toys my inlaws give the kids. I just don't like these particular types of toys. I have no idea why that seems to bother you so much or why you seem so dead set on dismissing everyone who does not feel like you do or why you seem to be assuming everyone here is some kind of drone who can't think for themselves. I'm sorry I even bothered to try and have a rational discussion with you.


----------



## RoadBuddy (May 19, 2005)

I'm not crazy about these and won't buy one. I prefer more natural sounding language, and most of the books are too commercial character-based for my taste. If one were given to me and I couldn't return it (my ILs take everything out of the box and set it up before gifting - they have bad memories of a kid screaming for a toy that they couldn't get to work), I'd be OK with DS using it some. I'd make sure not to change how much I read to him, though.

I used to really dislike LeapFrog, but now I think they have a (small) place. My DS has the Fridge Phonics and taught himself the letter sounds from it. He knows all the sounds and is combining them. Not reading (he's only 2.5), but certainly saying sounds of letters he sees. This is something I wouldn't have thought to teach a 2 year old, but he really latched onto it and loves the letter magnets. So I do believe these toys can be "educational", and I support educational toys assuming they aren't forced upon an uninterested kid and aren't replacing other kinds of play (artistic, musical, physical, imaginative, etc).


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
You know I don't spend a lot of time worrying about these things. I was merely explaining what my possible concerns were with these types of toys because you seems so perplexed. I don't lose sleep over it. I'm not some kind of toy extremist like I mentioned early. I don't complain about the toys my inlaws give the kids. I just don't like these particular types of toys. I have no idea why that seems to bother you so much or why you seem so dead set on dismissing everyone who does not feel like you do or why you seem to be assuming everyone here is some kind of drone who can't think for themselves. I'm sorry I even bothered to try and have a rational discussion with you.

I was really under the assumption discussions could be had even though people disagreed. I'm sorry for assuming that.


----------



## chfriend (Aug 29, 2002)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *Cascadian* 
If this were so, my house would be covered in gender-neutral wooden blocks crafted by magical gnomes in a primeval forest from sustainable wood

I know this was meant snarky, but it brought up such a lovely image.









I do wish there were more "gender-neutral" toys 'cause my dd's aren't fans of the obnoxious pink all "girl" toys are made off.

And we have that great gnome tree house that we got second hand.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
I was really under the assumption discussions could be had even though people disagreed. I'm sorry for assuming that.

You're kidding right? This is your idea of disagreeing? IMO you are being incredibly dismissive.


----------



## North_Of_60 (May 30, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *riverscout* 
You're kidding right? This is your idea of disagreeing? IMO you are being incredibly dismissive.

No.







I'm not trying to be dismissive, but at the same time I'm not going to feign acceptance of an opinion I disagree with. But if my trying to discuss our opinions on this toy went too far, I'm really sorry.


----------



## riverscout (Dec 22, 2006)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *North_Of_60* 
No.







I'm not trying to be dismissive, but at the same time I'm not going to feign acceptance of an opinion I disagree with. But if my trying to discuss our opinions on this toy went too far, I'm really sorry.

I don't expect anyone to feign acceptance of my opinion. But IME, people don't have to agree in order to be respectful of each other's opinions. And I generally take offense when people make fun of my wording my calling it "comical." Thanks for the apology though. I think I'm done with this thread as well as this place.


----------



## Yooper (Jun 6, 2003)

Well, I will say it. I don't like them because they are plastic, garish, loud, obnoxious, and use batteries







And relatedly, they become obsolete quickly and therefore cannot be enjoyed by more than a few (at best) children whereas most of the toys I would choose for my dd can (and have) been used over and over. Some for decades. Some are even *gasp* plastic.

I do not sit around rejecting toys based on what they are made of, if they need batteries, or how loud they are. Lord knows dd's violin has done as much ear damage as any toy possibly could. But I do look at the whole picture and weigh the cons (annoyance, waste, etc....) vs the pros (fun, pleasing to the senses, dd's interest, etc...) when making the rare toy choice. This wand thing, and almost everything I have seen that Leapfrog puts out has far more cons than pros for us. If dd came to me and said this was a toy she really really wanted, I would likely try to find one for her. But since that is not the case, yes I certainly would discourage a grandparent from buying one. I would not toss it or take it away if it was gifted anyway, but I certainly would have no problem rehoming it if dd showed the amount of interest I suspect she would, which is little.

I do not feel the toy itself is "dangerous" but my instinct does tell me that this is not the sort of toy I would like dd to have a lot of. I cannot give any scientific reason why it might be harmful for learning or imagination. But, yeah, I do wonder what the point is when I can do the exact same thing with her using a book from the library and no own voice. No landfill or batteries involved.

My instincts go into OVERDRIVE when I walk through a toy aisle and find it almost completely packed with character/movie/brand related items. Luckily this is rare. We do not shop at box stores and do not have a TV so dd has no idea this stuff is out there. It was not a conscious decision on our part to isolate dd from this stuff, it just happens that our lifestyle choices put her (and us) in a position of not even seeing this stuff. Almost all of our friends, dd's friends, and family are the same. So, really this debate is "theoretical" for us. Dd is too old for most of this sort of thing anyway. There is plenty of scientific research that does indeed show that this sort of marketing and complete take-over the of toy (and cereal, clothing, you name it) industry does effect children negatively. Will one little toy do it, no. But every time one gets bought, it just adds to the momentum that seems unstoppable. Call it extreme, but I do vote with my dollars.


----------



## JL83 (Aug 7, 2009)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *RoadBuddy* 
I'm not crazy about these and won't buy one. I prefer more natural sounding language, and most of the books are too commercial character-based for my taste. If one were given to me and I couldn't return it (my ILs take everything out of the box and set it up before gifting - they have bad memories of a kid screaming for a toy that they couldn't get to work), I'd be OK with DS using it some. I'd make sure not to change how much I read to him, though.

I used to really dislike LeapFrog, but now I think they have a (small) place. My DS has the Fridge Phonics and taught himself the letter sounds from it. He knows all the sounds and is combining them. Not reading (he's only 2.5), but certainly saying sounds of letters he sees. This is something I wouldn't have thought to teach a 2 year old, but he really latched onto it and loves the letter magnets. So I do believe these toys can be "educational", and I support educational toys assuming they aren't forced upon an uninterested kid and aren't replacing other kinds of play (artistic, musical, physical, imaginative, etc).

Maybe it has to do with the kind of child you have.

My DD would play with the Leap Frog fridge magnets (present) for 20 minutes at a time before she was 2. We would see her playing with them and get out the wooden letter set we have (also a present) and set that up on the coffee table and want to play letter games with her. We were even willing to sing the same stupid song the game did. But she's a really independent kid and liked being about to do it herself. We tried putting away the fridge game and she gave up all interest in letters. She knew all her upper case letters before she was 2.

Some kids would rather not do something than not be able to control it.


----------



## olien (Apr 21, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *JL83* 
So you plan to raise non consumeristic kids by teaching them that it's perfectly OK to simply discard things they don't like rather than figuring out a way to use them.

I don't see how that could work. That seems like teaching kids to go ahead and waste things they don't personally see as valuable.

OP here. Wow! Did this thread take some crazy turns. I love MDC









Well, I have given the darn thing away to someone who is in a financial mess & thrilled to have something to give to her 4yo. (who BTW loves Cars which is one of the books)

As far as the above post goes, since my DS is only 15mo & has never even seen the toy I'm not that worried about teaching the wrong message, although if he was older I probably would agree.

Thanks everyone!


----------



## mom2reenie (Nov 14, 2006)

I am a huge leapfrog fan and bought the Tag for my 5 year old nephew. I know he will love it!!! Leapfrog is the one toy we hang on to and if I see one at a yard sale for a decent price, I'll pick it up.

DD learned to read thanks to the leapfrog vidoes. I have a speech disorder and knew I couldn't adequately teach her. She was crying at age 2 because she couldn't figure out how to pronounce words, so we found a way to lessen that frustration and encourage what she wanted to know. DD also has sensory problems and the leapfrog toys were the only ones that didn't overwhelm her.

There has been many electronic/battery operated toys in the house that have been ignored, use sparingly, but all of our leapfrog toys have been well loved.

Funny enough, I just send dh on a Wendy's run because they have leapfrog toys in their happy meals--LOL.


----------



## Down2Earth (Jan 23, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *olien* 
I agree

I'm the OP & I was looking more for insight on helping/damaging the learning of reading. Esp since my DS is only 15mo.

Honestly I never even looked at the product from the standpoint of just being a toy. Thanks

So, I think I may take some advice here & put it away for later. I see it requires a computer. Anyone else have one like that? Will it be a waste to put it away for 1 - 1.5 years - technologically speaking. I would hate to put it away & then find our computer isnt compatable any longer when I can give it away to someone now.

I see you already gave the toy away but here is what I wrote yesterday but didn't have time to post because of my DD's fussing.









My niece is 6 yo and she has one. I thought it was pretty neat because she was so excited about it. And my DH was really intrigued by it and studied it until he found out how it works. The one my niece had would read the individual words or you could have it read the whole page. And it would also have funny things like sound effects and dialogue if you touched the pictures.

To the OP: Just keep the toy even if you put it away for a couple of years. I think you do have to download something. I don't own one so I'm not sure how it works. I would follow the directions/download/do whatever to get the thing working, and then I would put it away. Then when you have a long car/plane trip you could pull it out and have a really fun toy. (And why spend money on something else in a couple of years when you already own this?)

But if you make sure it works now then you don't have to worry about your computer or technology changing later. Seriously, I have an ipod that I haven't plugged into a computer in almost FIVE YEARS!

Personally, I don't think I would get it for my DD without a lot of begging and saving up of allowance! I don't like the licensed character books. And the books are $16 EACH! I would rather not let my DD know they exist and just get our books for free from the library. This is also why I didn't buy a Kindle.









Quote:


Originally Posted by *Yooper* 
I was such a book-hog before I could read, I remember my exasperated mom sitting down with a stack of books, a tape recorder, and a bell. She made our own set of read-along books after I asked her to read Needle on the Wheedle one too many times.....









This cracks me up! And I can totally see having to do this in a few years. My DD is 1yo and already asks me to read the same book upwards of four times in a row. This gives me some good ideas.


----------



## lonegirl (Oct 31, 2008)

Quote:


Originally Posted by *rainbowmoon* 

I am not sure what kind of parent buys this toy but I know I'm not one of them and I highly dislike it. That is all.

I am the type of parent who would buy it. I am also one who encouraged his grandma to get him the Leapster2 last Christmas.







He loves it. I attribute some of his knowledge from it too (the leapster). By 26 months he knew the sounds that all the letters make the difference between upper and lowercase letters and how to write them. The one game has him tracing letters and it has caused his love of letters and spelling to grow. He writes his name on everything he can and loves to practice his letters and numbers all the time.

We do not have the reader but I have been contemplating it.

Oh btw he would be a child that would often be considered "plugged in" he has his own itouch, nintendo ds, leapster 2 and loves the wii and xbox 360...he is amazing at DJ Hero, Dance Dance Revolution, Guitar Hero and the Drums on Rock Band Beatles... his hand-eye coordination is better than many teens and adults I know...he loves imaginative play....and is a very typical 3 y/o.


----------

