Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
The reason we have more ADD cases is due to the fact that reporting in todays day and age is much better, and also is taken more serious. There is also a good amount of over diagnoses going on in that field as well. Regardless ADD is a chemical issue in the brain that is not going to be suddenly triggered by computer use. As for your first point, what does it hurt to allow the child a different level of stimulation? Why is it when we grew up watching tv was find, playing video games were fine, but now suddenly using an iPad might be damaging?
Interestingly, neuroscientists are beginning to find that computer use is changing our brains
Fourteen-year-olds who were frequent video gamers had more gray matter in the rewards center of the brain than peers who didn't play video games as much -- suggesting that gaming may be correlated to changes in the brain much as addictions are.
Although the vast majority of today’s educators and teachers grew up with the understanding that the human brain doesn’t physically change based on stimulation it receives from the outside—especially after the age of 3 — it turns out that that view is, in fact, incorrect.
Based on the latest research in neurobiology, there is no longer any question that stimulation of various kinds actually changes brain structures and affects the way people think, and that these transformations go on throughout life. The brain is, to an extent not at all understood or believed to be when Baby Boomers were growing up, massively plastic. It can be, and is, constantly reorganized. (Although the popular term rewired is somewhat misleading, the overall idea is right—the brain changes and organizes itself differently based on the inputs it receives.) The old idea that we have a fixed number of brain cells that die off one by one has been replaced by research showing that our supply of brain cells is replenished constantly. The brain constantly reorganizes itself all our child and adult lives, a phenomenon technically known as neuroplasticity.
Whether the changes are beneficial or harmful is still in question, but the fact is that using computers does change the brain.
Whether the changes are beneficial or harmful is still in question, but the fact is that using computers does change the brain.
Thanks for the articles. It should come as no surprise that computers and video games are chaning our brains. Our brains are designed to adapt to our environment. The part about the portion of the brain associated with addiction being larger is kind of scary but it explains alot about the students I teach who just can't seem to unplug (and people like me who can't stay off of boards, lol).
I also agree on the jury being out on whether or not the changes are good or bad. I guess it depends on what kind of thinkers you want in the future. I'm kind of partial to people who can use their brains and don't require a pop up screen that says "GREAT JOB!!" or some other digital reward to know they've actually done something right. I'm just amazed that my students have no clue as to how to assess their own work. They need someone else to tell them if they did something right or wrong. They're absolutely lost until that feedback comes. I am seeing glimmers of hope though. I've been refusing to answer the question "Did I do this right?" other than to ask "Do you think you did it right?" and I have a few students who can actually tell me if they did it right or made a mistake. We're moving in the right direction.
So? Computers are here. Why does that mean 3 yo's should be learning to use them?? What's the advantage? And are you sure there's no harm?
I don't know that teaching young kids with computers hurts (but I can speculate this may be part of the increase in ADD diagnosis as it conditions kids to expect fast paced, color graphics and instant feedback) but I know it has not helped. If it's not helping, why waste the money?
What I see lacking in my students is imagination and the ability to self assess their work. Non computer based play and learning lend themselves to teaching both. My students need someone else to tell them when they do things right. THAT is a serious flaw that could stem from learning on computer programs with instant feedback. Without that feedback, some of my students are crippled. I don't give it. If they ask my opinoin on what they just wrote, I ask "Would you like me to grade this now?". They just look at me dumbfounded and don't know what to do. They can't assess the quality of their own work and I refuse to do so without putting a grade on it. A few are learning to self assess but most are just lost. They need that pop up screen that says "Good Job" or they don't know whether they're right or wrong. IMO, if you can't tell me what you just did is right, you don't know the material.
I'm not a teacher and if your experience is pretty universal I can understand your concerns. When I was in school (80s and 90s) we were expected to assess and correct our work BEFORE we handed it in. My 13 year old is expected to do the same and will sometimes turn in four drafts before handing in a final paper. As a newspaper reporter, I could never hand in an assignment without editing it several times even though it will edited again before going to print.
On an unrelated note, I can't imagine being a teacher today and having to figure out if my students lifted material from a website.
The kids I know certainly like their video games and other electronic media, but they also spent a lot of time outside camping, playing in the snow, or building forts in the woods. It's up to parents to monitor their screen time and it appears some parents are too distracted by their own iPhones and IPads to do this.
For those interested in this topic, there is a really great research study on media use in children available here: http://www.kff.org/entmedia/upload/8010.pdf - it focuses on 8-18 year olds, though not 3 year olds.
Whether the changes are beneficial or harmful is still in question, but the fact is that using computers does change the brain.
The brain is very plastic and many studies show that it can be molded by environmental exposures.
I have a child who was born with a very rare brain disorder (she's missing a part of her brain). It could result in severe cognitive delays. We were devastated by the prenatal diagnosis and did as much research as we could before she was born to see how we could help her.
Several studies showed that music, especially Mozart, could help the brain form important connections and in effect, help it rewire itself. The missing part of her brain will never magically appear, but other parts of the brain, if strengthened could compensate for it.
We began playing classical music from the time she was born in addition to constantly talking to her and exposing her to things (nature, interesting places, animals, etc.) She has developed normally, hitting all of her milestones and doing well socially. Last time we went to visit her pediatric neurologist for a check up she said we didn't have to come back unless we had a concern. She's developing so typically that the neurologist said that other than the MRI results, there's no evidence of any disorder.
It would be interesting to study if computer exposure could have a similar effect on the brain. So far she hasn't been exposed to computers other than when she sits on her big sister's lap and watches You Tube videos.
Oh, and by the way, she's a very musical child. She began snapping her fingers to a musical beat at around 9 months and can imitate rhythms very well.
You can use your imagination on a computer...if you're writing the software....or composing music....or writing a paper. 3yo's aren't doing any of these. They're watching colorful animations that popped up when they gave the appropriate canned response. No imagination required.
Even if they can, it's not needed. Give a 3yo a big box to play with and watch their imatination take off. No computer required.
The point is, a computer isn't necessary to teach imagination and could be counter productive. It could also be counter productive WRT a child's ability to actually learn in school without high resolution graphics and may be why Johnny is diagnosed with ADD four times as often here as abroad.
Just out of curiosity, should 3 year olds not be allowed to watch TV either? I'd think that an iPad would be much better to stimulate creativity than plopping them in front of the tube- and kids have been watching TV for years now. Or it just new technology you don't like?
Just out of curiosity, should 3 year olds not be allowed to watch TV either? I'd think that an iPad would be much better to stimulate creativity than plopping them in front of the tube- and kids have been watching TV for years now. Or it just new technology you don't like?
The American Pediatric Association recommended that children under 2 should not watch any tv at all in 1999. They have since become a bit less stringent on this however.
Pediatricians should become educated about the public health risks of media exposure through workshops and written materials. All state chapters and/or districts that have not done so should schedule a media education program for their members.
Pediatricians should begin incorporating questions about media use into their routine visits, including use of the AAP's Media History form.27 This tool enables youth and parents to examine their media use habits and allows pediatricians to focus on areas of concern and offer counsel and support.
Advice to parents should include the following:
encouraging careful selection of programs to view
co-viewing and discussing content with children and adolescents
teaching critical viewing skills
limiting and focusing time spent with media
being good media role models by selectively using media and
limiting their own media choices
emphasizing alternative activities
creating an "electronic media-free" environment in children's rooms
avoiding use of media as an electronic baby-sitter
I recommend you get her blocks to build with, puzzles to solve and toys she needs to use her imagination to play with. There's plenty of time for plugging her in later. Let her develop her motor skills, problem solving skills and her imagination first. While I am in complete agreement with you I would also like to add by 3 they have a typical grasp of their Gross motor as well as fine motor. While what you suggested is mandatory being that toddlers around this age learn through exploring which extends to all learning areas ( Art, science, mathematics) using a tablet, leap frog or vtech "toys" can only improve their eye to hand dexterity and sharpen their critical thinking skills since in reality they are problem solving but in a different way.
A child can not expect to play with blocks and see what works and what doesn't all day long, they can only cut so much paper while learning to use scissors for so and dramatic play can only go on for so long, in combination ( natural exploratory play and using a tablet) is positive.Point in fact, computers are now common in pre-k programs.
Something you might want to take note of is the fact we've been plugging kids in at 3 for well over two decades now and education, in the united states, is worse than it's ever been. Teaching kids early isn't working. All it accomplishes is the companies who market this stuff making a lot of money. Seriously, kids got a better education before we started plugging them in at 3. Let your child do what 3 year olds do best. Let her play. Plugging her in at 3 is not only not necessary, it may be detrimental. I don't think it's a coincidence that we keep pushing education on younger and younger kids with worse and worse results. Just because a child is capable of delivering a conditioned resonse, at 3, doesn't mean they've actually learned anything. Pavlov's dogs could do that.
This is not due to the use of electronic gadgets or toys.
This learning decline actually is a direct derivative of cut backs in Education sector. This usually occurs in elementary, jr high and HS.
The cutback of learning programs that were offered back in the day.
The reality that less teachers are employed yet mandated to have 30 students in a single classroom. Point in fact other countries have employed the use of electronics as a supplement to education, Even Montessori schools use PC'S with appropriate programs of course.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ivorytickler
The point, which you missed, is it, certainly, hasn't helped. I do think that teaching kids early is detrimental because everything you pull down displaces something they would have learned in its place even if they do learn it and, many times, kids learn things better, and faster, if we just wait until they are ready to learn it. Your sister is one person. Declining scores are something to be concerned with because they're declining. They were better before. That means something is changing. If the tests actually measure what we want students to learn, it's changing for the worse. Again scores are lower because of cutbacks in education, plain and simple. What you are referring is education as it pertains to the old days.
Back in the day when I was in school I had P.E., MUSIC, ART and all of these programs that feed the mind, smaller class sizes, more one on one attention, these factors play a huge role in development of children.
For I.E. I taught for Headstart for years as we all know this is a income eligible program for impoverished children in order to give them access to early education.
For years these programs were county/state funded or "blended" programs.The education is top notch, children have qualified teachers meaning they either possessed a associates or a bachelors degree in ECE, there were many tools developed to ensure the children were getting an optimum education. There were certain mandatory learning centers required and a pc WAS one of them since we have had to shift to the computer age.
Our class size is appropriate to again optimum learning with toddlers being 4 to 1 ratio and pre-k 20 to 2.
In other privately owned programs this is determined by the owner of the program or chain owned programs.
Teaching 3 year olds with technology has been going on for 20+ years. Where are the results? If it's not yielding results, is is worth the money? All I see happening here is companies making a lot of money off of parents who don't realize that what they're buying is not helping. There is nothing to support that early learning with technology yields one iota of positive results. It just costs parents money they could be putting into Jr's college fund. These electronic programs cannot hurt as long as it is geared towards education and in moderation this is different than xbox or handheld electronic toys.
Again these methods have been used in pre-k programs and do help children. They prepare children for elementary and jr high where THEY will be introduced to pc's and I feel that anything to help children learn faster is a good thing.
It sounds like this is a personal choice you have made and this is fine however to tell someone that this is wrong? Is wrong.
Seriously people, you have better things to do with your money than buy software for 3 year olds. One issue with this mentality is that kids start school thinking they must be entertained to learn. THAT is a problem throughout school. They are being conditioned from a very young age to have constant visual and audio input that is colorful and exciting. This is being done while the brain is still undergoing major construction. And then we wonder why Johnny can't sit still in school.... Again this is false. There are different types of learning styles.
I.E., Audio, visual, auditory and kinesthetic.
Some children need to hear the lesson in order to absorb, some need to see lessons and methods on the chalk/wipe board, some need to click their pencil/pens or move in order to learn.
Teaching as much it has advanced many teachers still "teach" cookie cutter" and not all children learn the same.
Learning off of a program at an early age that is entertaining is a natural way to go since children will learn better when the lesson is enjoyable even route learning can be tolerable when taught in a fun way.
I am dead serious. Let 3 year olds play. Let them develop motor skills, let them learn to get along with others, let them do puzzles and paint pictures...let them be kids. There is plenty of time to plug them in later if you decide that's what needs to be done. Personally, as a teacher, I wish they'd stop plugging kids in. It makes it hard to teach them in a classroom and, from what I can see, it doesn't do one ounce of good. I don't know if plugging kids in at 3 is why our scores are lower. I just know it has not helped improve anything. So what if your 3 year old can parrot back a conditioned response to get a reward (exciting feedback). Pavlov's dogs could do that. Will your 3 year old be able to think when he reaches my class? Getting my kids to think is like pulling teeth. They want the easy answer. They want immediate feedback. They are UNABLE to assess the quality of their own work because they NEED the feedback of a screen telling them they got it right and they lack imagination. I question the logic of conditioning kids like this and that is all you're doing when you park a 3 year old in front of a computer. Well, that and making the software manufacturer rich. I'm sure they appreciate that. I'm also sure the money would do Johnny more good in Johnny's college fund. Kids at 3 DO PLAY AND LEARN THROUGH PLAY IF THEY ARE ENROLLED IN A GOOD PROGRAM.
As I stated I was a teacher for headstart and early headstart for years as well as being a validator and using tools like ecers and iters, ensuring that certain manipulatives, experiences were being offered and implemented by all teachers and classrooms county wide.
CHILDREN really only have use of the PC during "free choice" and even then the time is limited. My philosophy is to allow children different experiences, knowledge is power.
To continue to use Pavlov as a reference is premature since his methods are also used succesfully in behavior mod which ot's use al the time and actually assists special need children cease from engaging in stimming behaviors.
Route learning is boring let us both be very blunt and honest, the way it is taught needs to have more appealing implementation.
I will state again that what you pose are different issues with complex answers.
State budgets
cognitive delays
learning styles
demographics
poverty
All of these key factors determine the decline in the education system, I hardly think that allowing one's child to use an IPad is detrimental..there are bigger fish to fry imo.
Even if kids are learning the material being taught at 3, it will be at the expense of something else they should have learned but didn't because their brains were tied up learning what was being taught. My real concern though is what are we doing to their brains when we park them in front of a computer and condition them for colorful graphics and immediate feedback. I'd much rather see a 3 year old engaged in play that requires imagination. IMO, that is teaching them to use their brains. Teaching them to parrot back a conditioned response just reduces them to the level of Pavlov's dogs.
One of the most successful early learning programs is the Montessori program. Please note that computers are not used. What is used is imaginative play. Children are encouraged to explore and experiment on their environment. They are encouraged to use their brains. I am not convinced that any of the early learning software/hardware out there accomplishes anything besides making the money for the manufacturer. Putting the money towards a trip to the zoo might have better and longer reacing impact. Montessori has it's drawbacks.
It lacks structure and does very little for preparing children for kinder their very first taste of formal education.
Not to say that these children enrolled in Montessori programs do not learn however they are lacking the structure that goes along with being part of the real world.
I have worked with teachers thathave had montessori students in their class and they ca always spot them asap. I will be forever grateful that my kids went to day care. They didn't even have a TV on for the 8 hours a day they were there and I was too busy to plug them in. They had a few toys and a few sofware packages but they didn't really take to them. Interestingly, both of my kids can do something most of my students cannot. They can self assess the quality of their work. In my students, I see an EXTREME need for feedback every step of the way. The most frequently asked question in my class is "Did I do this right?". I suspect that this need may be rooted in having spent countless hours with gadgets and software that gave immediate feedback. The kids never had to ask themselves the question "Did I do that right?" so they don't know how to make that assessment. This could also explain the demand for rubrics to be handed to students. (rubrics are a grading tool teachers use to keep themselves consistent while grading large amounts of material). They were never intended to be check lists for the students. One thing students should be learning is how to self assess their own work. I have few students who can do that. Unless you can provide actual data that can back this up? It is baseless.
I am currently employed with a homeless shelter as an educational specialist and serve k-6th and I am very disenchanted with the way the schools are run today.
Validation is normal meaning the child wants to know they are doing a lesson correctly children doubt at times especially if they are not getting a response from their educator.
I oversee the afterschool program and some children come without HW everyday and I am wondering why Ihave not received a call from their respective teacher? Shouldnt this child be failing?
I recently had a family of 3 children that NEVER HAVE HW.
My tutors not only assist with HW but they do spelling tests, quizzes in math and english.
This family is too poor to own such luxuries as an ipad or a pc.
The 9 year old boy was reported not knowing any sight words past the second grade level. How is he passing or not in resource?
After speaking to his mother she stated the school has pretty much given up on him.
I had an 11 year old who stated his teacher stopped giving him hw because they gave up.
He had dr suess memorized but couldnot grasp any concepts prevalent to his age group and peers.
My point? It is relatively simple to blame technology for the decline of actual learning however as I stated in my latter posts it is not always technology that contributes to this,
There are other factors that may be the culprit.
It is hard to learn when a child has missed a great deal of school due to familial issues, abuse, displacement, and ect.
One thing you need to remember is the manufacturers of these products are out to make money. Believe it or not, books, puzzles and imaginative play still work like they always have. No one is marketing them because there is too much money to be made in technology.
Just out of curiosity, should 3 year olds not be allowed to watch TV either? I'd think that an iPad would be much better to stimulate creativity than plopping them in front of the tube- and kids have been watching TV for years now. Or it just new technology you don't like?
There is little difference between computer time and TV time at age 3. There is no reason a 3 yo needs to watch TV. What do you think are the benefits of a 3 yo watching TV? I can't think of any.
My argument against teaching 3 yo's with technolgy is simply that the money spent on technolgy would do more good put into a college fund. There is no benefit to parking a 3 yo in front of a TV, computer or ipad. They don't need it. It doesn't help them develop and it might hurt. IMO, all should be, severely, limited. If I had it to do over again, I'm not sure I would have turned on the TV for my kids. I woudn't have bothered with computer software for them. That was a waste of money. I am very glad my kids went to day care where there was no TV or computer to worry about. Their days were filled with constructive and imaginitive play. Like many parents, I bought into what they were selling. I worried my kids were missing out because they didn't get that computer time. Now I'm glad they didn't. I wonder how many fewer hours my kids spent in front of the tube or computer (Both are mindless entertainment for the most part at 3) because I worked. That turned out to be a nice benefit to working. As a new mom, I just didn't know better. They were selling educational TV and educational software and, in hindsight this was stupid of me not to realize THEY were just trying to get my money, I bought into it. Fortunately, we didn't have the time to follow through.
The questions that must be answered are: How much TV, computer, ipad, whetever time does a 3 yo need? What are the benefits of getting this time with technology? Are there any risks to using tecgnology at this age? In hind sight, I'm convinced the answers are: Zero mintues, there are none and there is a strong possibility.
Seriously, I wonder if our insistance that preschoolers watch TV and play on computers has anything to do with the fact that we diagnose kids with ADD four times as much as other industrialized nations (someone tried to claim we just diagnose better now but I'm not talking comaring to countries without medical care. I'm tallking about other industrialized nations that have the means to diagnose ADD). I'm concerned that it is our practice of sitting kids in front of a TV or computer for a couple of hours a day and having the TV on in the background half the day causing this. I don't think they cause ADD. I think that that kids just can't concentrate for long because they're used to rapidly changing colorful graphics and instant feedback. I think we may be conditioning our kids to seek constant input. Given that that is NOT our current education or work model, this could be a problem. One solution is to change the education model. We could always do away with schools and just park kids in front of the very computer we've already conditioned them to before their 4th birthday. Of course then we have to ask what kind of workers they'll be in the future....
Last edited by Ivorytickler; 02-26-2012 at 04:46 AM..
TV isn't the evil people think. TOO MUCH tv isn't a good idea though. I still remember a lot of what I learned on Sesame Street . How many of you still sing the information learned on the Schoolhouse Rock "commercials" . It is just another way to get information.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
. How many of you still sing the information learned on the Schoolhouse Rock "commercials" 
. It is just another way to get information.
