This is a question that often gets asked or, more commonly, "My baby can't even walk yet! What could he possibly get out of a music class? Shouldn't we wait until he can do more things?"
The short answer: the earlier you start, the better!
The long answer:
While the nature of this question is completely understandable, it is flawed logic. It would be like asking, "Well, shouldn't we wait before she can read more words before reading books?" or "Shouldn't we wait until he can take more steps before we can try walking?"
I make this point not to sound snarky. As I said, it is completely understandable why parents should ask this question. You paid money for the music class and all your child is doing is sitting there, or maybe even crying through the whole session! My point is to underscore the fact that children--especially babies--learn by observing and then by doing. Presenting the book to the child and letting her flip the pages... reading out loud to her and letting her hear the rhythm of language... reading words from pages with only words and no pictures... these are all things that babies, with time, slowly start to piece together. They start to understand the value of symbols on a page.
The same is true for music. Yes, a young baby will mostly watch at first. But this does not mean that he or she isn't learning. Far from it! They are absorbing a massive quantity of information for someone their age. Babies start learning how to walk by being held by their parents. They will feel the rhythm of the movement and eventually try and imitate that movement. So imagine how much they are learning when they feel their parents move to the beat of music!
Observation must take place before action can follow. Even adults follow this same pattern. You would never just charge into a bar already dancing. You would enter the building, see that this bar has line dancing, maybe watch to see if you know how to do the dance, then you would join in.
The short answer: the earlier you start, the better!
The long answer:
While the nature of this question is completely understandable, it is flawed logic. It would be like asking, "Well, shouldn't we wait before she can read more words before reading books?" or "Shouldn't we wait until he can take more steps before we can try walking?"
I make this point not to sound snarky. As I said, it is completely understandable why parents should ask this question. You paid money for the music class and all your child is doing is sitting there, or maybe even crying through the whole session! My point is to underscore the fact that children--especially babies--learn by observing and then by doing. Presenting the book to the child and letting her flip the pages... reading out loud to her and letting her hear the rhythm of language... reading words from pages with only words and no pictures... these are all things that babies, with time, slowly start to piece together. They start to understand the value of symbols on a page.
The same is true for music. Yes, a young baby will mostly watch at first. But this does not mean that he or she isn't learning. Far from it! They are absorbing a massive quantity of information for someone their age. Babies start learning how to walk by being held by their parents. They will feel the rhythm of the movement and eventually try and imitate that movement. So imagine how much they are learning when they feel their parents move to the beat of music!
Observation must take place before action can follow. Even adults follow this same pattern. You would never just charge into a bar already dancing. You would enter the building, see that this bar has line dancing, maybe watch to see if you know how to do the dance, then you would join in.
Comments
Post a Comment