Gap Between Perception and Reality in College Readiness Remains Wide
This year’s edition of a school curriculum survey shows that the gap between high school... Read More
by Julia Steiny I study kids and families when I’m out in public, and recently observed this crazy-making family: Dad pushed a double stroller with a young toddler and a girl who looked too old to be caught dead in a stroller. Not that she was complaining. Mom brought up the rear with another stroller, [...]

by Julia Steiny
I study kids and families when I’m out in public, and recently observed this crazy-making family:
Dad pushed a double stroller with a young toddler and a girl who looked too old to be caught dead in a stroller. Not that she was complaining. Mom brought up the rear with another stroller, carrying an obvious middle child.

Julia Steiny
On this lovely fall day in the midst of a lively neighborhood’s commercial street, all three kids were Gone, Elsewhere, deeply engrossed in hand-held screens — phones, games, tablets, whatever. Forget present-time experience; forget observing the world around them; never mind eye contact, smiles or exchanges with other humans.
My head screamed: You nicely-dressed, probably well-meaning parents are wrecking your kids! Do you know what the long-term effects of screen time are?!
If the parents had been smacking them around, passersby might at least have called the cops. Hardly anyone has the nerve to intervene in community misbehavior any more, at least not when kids are involved. And letting children get sucked down the rabbit hole of e-entertainment is parental misbehavior. Facts are stacking up.
This past October, a coalition of some of my favorite early-childhood advocates — the Alliance for Childhood and Susan Linn, among others — published an analysis of the current research about the effects of electronics on young children. Their report, Facing the Screen Dilemma: Young children, technology and early education, is a frank condemnation of the impact of electronics on the mental and physical health of little kids. Couched in the upbeat tones of early-childhood educators, the authors conclude, with certainty, that electronics of all kinds need to be introduced very carefully, and only as kids get older.
They write, “There is no evidence to support the popular view — heavily promoted by companies that sell electronic media — that children must start early if they are to succeed in the digital age. …Great innovators in the computer industry like Bill Gates and Steve Jobs did not even experience computers until they were about 12. But both had wide experiences with hands-on learning when they were young. Gates was a Cub Scout, and Jobs spoke of his love for tinkering with the inner workings of radios and televisions as a boy.”
About 12 years old seems right to me. Middle school is an ideal time to add electronics to the toolkit of learning. For younger kids I would make the singular exception for charming, and only charming, movies.
Consider just this sampler of the report’s facts, which are scrupulously footnoted. By all means, examine their sources:
* Modern science confirms what the early childhood community has known for years — that infants, toddlers and young children learn through exploring with their whole bodies, including all their senses. And yet:
* Twenty-nine percent of babies under 1 year watch TV and videos for an average of 90 minutes. (?!!) Sixty-four percent of children 12 – 24 months watch TV and videos averaging just over 2 hours.
* Extensive screen time is linked to a host of problems for children including childhood obesity, sleep disturbance, and learning, attention, and social problems. And time with screens takes away from other activities known to be more beneficial to their growth and development. This applies to children of all ages.
* For preschoolers, watching just 20 minutes of a fast-paced cartoon show has been shown to have a negative impact on executive function skills, including attention, the ability to delay gratification, self-regulation, and problem solving.
* Games and digital activities that limit children to a predetermined set of responses have been shown to diminish creativity.
“Diminish creativity?” Aren’t we supposed to be the land of innovators? We’re actively crippling our own emerging talent.
* Exposure to media violence is linked to aggression, desensitization to violence, and lack of empathy for victims. Media violence is also associated with poor school performance.
‘Nuff said about the mind-numbing, socially-corrosive effects of screen time like video games.
Of course computers are superb tools when used actively, laboriously, to solve problems. Who among us does not regularly put them to work researching all kinds of questions, including how to get from here to there? They’re fabulous.
But they’re not for young children whose bodies and beings are hardwired to upload the realities of their immediate worlds. Let them learn, according to their natures, not according to advertising’s genius at selling stuff. Children need trees, friends, bikes, like that. In time, kids will pick up basic computer skills with frightening agility, so there’s absolutely no need to start early.
The report laments the successful efforts in the 1980s to ease laws limiting marketing to children. As a result, advertising, movies and TV now shape kids’ desires and imaginations, overwhelmingly. “In 1983 companies were spending $100 million annually targeting children. Now they are spending over $17 billion.”
Yes, electronic distractions free parents to take a stroll — or to make dinner or spend time on themselves — without being interrupted by a fussing child.
But the cost down the road is a tsunami of kids, from all economic brackets, who are fat, passive, irritable, oppositional, disengaged and addictive.
As a culture, we have an amazing wealth of ways to wreck kids. For too long, adult interests have trumped kids’. Where and how will this stop?
Julia Steiny is a freelance columnist whose work also regularly appears at GoLocalProv.com and GoLocalWorcester.com. She is the founding director of the Youth Restoration Project, a restorative-practices initiative, currently building a demonstration project in Central Falls, Rhode Island. She consults for schools and government initiatives, including regular work for The Providence Plan for whom she analyzes data. For more detail, see juliasteiny.com or contact her at juliasteiny@gmail.com or c/o GoLocalProv, 44 Weybosset Street, Providence, RI 02903.
This year’s edition of a school curriculum survey shows that the gap between high school... Read More
It wasn’t that long ago that parochial education in the United States seemed like it was on... Read More
Although discipline numbers appear to be better this week in Denver, according to teachers and... Read More
More groups are saying that the time and expense dedicated to standardized testing is having... Read More
Plan your career as an educator using our free online datacase of useful information.
Comments
[...] by EducationNews.org — A recent report shows how extensive screen time is linked to a host of problems for [...]
THIS IS SUCH AN IMPORTANT ARTICLE. IF YOU THOUGHT GLOBAL WARMING WAS GOING TO TAKE A WHILE TO FIX, CONSIDER HOW LONG IT WILL TAKE TO CORRECT THE CONSEQUENCES OF A GENERATION OF KIDS WHO ARE UNEMPATHETIC, ONE DIMENSIONAL AND UNDERSKILLED.
I didn’t touch a computer until I was in college (they were hard to come by in the ’80′s). Yet I still made a career of systems design, software development, consulting and sales. Ironically, the skills needed to succeed in this arena come from problem solving learned by working with your hands, making up games and exploring your world. Not from apps-in-a-can. No app can contain the vast wonder that exists in your own backyard.
If they don’t develop an interest in the world around them when they are young, they perhaps never will. Is this why we see kids who grow up without empathy and without sufficient skills to make wonderful contributions to their communities/society?
Sheesh! My kids don’t need apps. They need to taste, smell, hear and feel the world with all their senses. They do not need to be spoon fed entertainment. They are in late elementary & early middle school and have no iphone, touch, pad, android, video game blah blah blah. They are straight A kids who are interesting to talk to, funny and get on great with other kids.
My mantra is “all in good time” when it comes to technology. This two cents, from a computer professional parent.
The UNNOTICED, SUBTLE Destroyer and Robber of the MOST PRECIOUS thing that we ALL HAVE – REAL TIME with our Loved ones – Our SPOUSES, CHILDREN and EXTENDED FAMILY – Also with FRIENDS and STRANGERS.
I have sat on the Underground in London and observed so many people of ALL AGES with Earphones plugged in and Eyes CLOSED as they DISAPPEAR into a CYBER-WORLD of SOLITUDE and ISOLATION. One wonders WHAT the END-RESULT will be ? ? ?
Jobs and Gates did not experience computers until they were 12!! Duh, there were no personal computers when they were 12, they invented them later in their lives.
No one said computers were invented when Gates was a child. If you read carefully–the author is just making the point that not having computers during that era contributed to the success of these innovators because they were exploring the world around them–not the world inside a computer.
Paul, FYI, computers have been around since the ’50′s… personal computers came along in the age of Gates and Jobs, but they didn’t invent them. Hardware vs. software.
The main point of that was Jobs and Gates learned plenty and were highly successful computer innovators without being immersed in the technology as kids. “Duh” is socially rude and simple-minded. And then you missed the point anyway.
A very apt article for young parents
[...] in Julia Steiny: The Jury’s In, Screen Time Hurts Little Kids Share this:TwitterFacebookLike this:LikeBe the first to like [...]
What is your take on younger kids Skyping with grandma and grandpa?
Okay, so Skyping with Grammy is a good thing. But precisely what’s cool about Skyping is that you have the feeling of having sat down and had a conversation, seen their faces and real reactions. No, no mirror neurons, but in this case technology facilitates a more personal, less abstract contact with someone not living in cyberspace. The technology promotes the sort of conversation that promotes empathy. So yes, there is an exception.