Countering the central tenets of the myth by exposing the research upon which it is supposedly based, Bruer finds, "Apart from eliminating gross neglect, neuroscience cannot currently tell us much about whether we can, let alone how to, influence brain development during the early stage of exuberant synaptic formation." And contrary to the myth, up-to-the-minute research actually informs us of the remarkable plasticity of the brain and its power to continue learning throughout life. Perhaps most insidiously, "the Myth rejects strong genetic determinism in favor of early neural-environmental determinism.... The argument is but one rhetorical move away from an early-environmental version of the Bell Curve."
Less a tool for parents than a fascinating case study for students of political science or public relations, The Myth of the First Three Years slams the policy machine that has hijacked the new neuroscience and redirected it to finance a new wave of entitlements. --Brian J. Williamson --This text refers to an out of print or unavailable edition of this title.
I am a parent of a 2 and 4 year old, and at no time was I exposed to the myth of the first 3 years, nor of the belief that the first 3 years of a child's life have life-long... Read morePublished on July 21, 2012 by Brian Kodi
Falls into the category of:
Things we all thought were true and based personal and government decision making on but were not really true or had none of the supporting... Read more
This book is terrible.It provides an excuse to many parents who pay little or no attention to their young children.The man is not even a doctor! Read morePublished on April 2, 2001 by Nancy Farkas