Banning hand held devices for children under age 12

27 posts / 0 new
Last post
AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568
Banning hand held devices for children under age 12

10 Reasons Why Handheld Devices Should Be Banned for Children Under the Age of 12?|?Cris Rowan

The American Academy of Pediatrics and the Canadian Society of Pediatrics state infants aged 0-2 years should not have any exposure to technology, 3-5 years be restricted to one hour per day, and 6-18 years restricted to 2 hours per day (AAP 2001/13, CPS 2010). Children and youth use 4-5 times the recommended amount of technology, with serious and often life threatening consequences (Kaiser Foundation 2010, Active Healthy Kids Canada 2012). Handheld devices (cell phones, tablets, electronic games) have dramatically increased the accessibility and usage of technology, especially by very young children (Common Sense Media, 2013). As a pediatric occupational therapist, I'm calling on parents, teachers and governments to ban the use of all handheld devices for children under the age of 12 years. Following are 10 research-based reasons for this ban. Please visit zonein.ca to view the Zone'in Fact Sheet for referenced research.

1. Rapid brain growth
Between 0 and 2 years, infant's brains triple in size, and continue in a state of rapid development to 21 years of age (Christakis 2011). Early brain development is determined by environmental stimuli, or lack thereof. Stimulation to a developing brain caused by overexposure to technologies (cell phones, internet, iPads, TV), has been shown to negatively affect executive functioning and cause attention deficit, cognitive delays, impaired learning, increased impulsivity and decreased ability to self-regulate, e.g. tantrums (Small 2008, Pagini 2010).

2. Delayed Development
Technology use restricts movement, which can result in delayed development. One in three children now enter school developmentally delayed, negatively impacting literacy and academic achievement (HELP EDI Maps 2013). Movement enhances attention and learning ability (Ratey 2008). Use of technology under the age of 12 years is detrimental to child development and learning (Rowan 2010).

3. Epidemic Obesity
TV and video game use correlates with increased obesity (Tremblay 2005). Children who are allowed a device in their bedrooms have 30% increased incidence of obesity (Feng 2011). One in four Canadian, and one in three U.S. children are obese (Tremblay 2011). 30% of children with obesity will develop diabetes, and obese individuals are at higher risk for early stroke and heart attack, gravely shortening life expectancy (Center for Disease Control and Prevention 2010). Largely due to obesity, 21st century children may be the first generation many of whom will not outlive their parents (Professor Andrew Prentice, BBC News 2002).

4. Sleep Deprivation
60% of parents do not supervise their child's technology usage, and 75% of children are allowed technology in their bedrooms (Kaiser Foundation 2010). 75% of children aged 9 and 10 years are sleep deprived to the extent that their grades are detrimentally impacted (Boston College 2012).

5. Mental Illness
Technology overuse is implicated as a causal factor in rising rates of child depression, anxiety, attachment disorder, attention deficit, autism, bipolar disorder, psychosis and problematic child behavior (Bristol University 2010, Mentzoni 2011, Shin 2011, Liberatore 2011, Robinson 2008). One in six Canadian children have a diagnosed mental illness, many of whom are on dangerous psychotropic medication (Waddell 2007).

6. Aggression
Violent media content can cause child aggression (Anderson, 2007). Young children are increasingly exposed to rising incidence of physical and sexual violence in today's media. "Grand Theft Auto V" portrays explicit sex, murder, rape, torture and mutilation, as do many movies and TV shows. The U.S. has categorized media violence as a Public Health Risk due to causal impact on child aggression (Huesmann 2007). Media reports increased use of restraints and seclusion rooms with children who exhibit uncontrolled aggression.

7. Digital dementia
High speed media content can contribute to attention deficit, as well as decreased concentration and memory, due to the brain pruning neuronal tracks to the frontal cortex (Christakis 2004, Small 2008). Children who can't pay attention can't learn.

8. Addictions
As parents attach more and more to technology, they are detaching from their children. In the absence of parental attachment, detached children can attach to devices, which can result in addiction (Rowan 2010). One in 11 children aged 8-18 years are addicted to technology (Gentile 2009).

9. Radiation emission
In May of 2011, the World Health Organization classified cell phones (and other wireless devices) as a category 2B risk (possible carcinogen) due to radiation emission (WHO 2011). James McNamee with Health Canada in October of 2011 issued a cautionary warning stating "Children are more sensitive to a variety of agents than adults as their brains and immune systems are still developing, so you can't say the risk would be equal for a small adult as for a child." (Globe and Mail 2011). In December, 2013 Dr. Anthony Miller from the University of Toronto's School of Public Health recommend that based on new research, radio frequency exposure should be reclassified as a 2A (probable carcinogen), not a 2B (possible carcinogen). American Academy of Pediatrics requested review of EMF radiation emissions from technology devices, citing three reasons regarding impact on children (AAP 2013).

10. Unsustainable
The ways in which children are raised and educated with technology are no longer sustainable (Rowan 2010). Children are our future, but there is no future for children who overuse technology. A team-based approach is necessary and urgent in order to reduce the use of technology by children. Please reference below slide shows on Zone'in Programs Inc. - Children of the New Millennium under "videos" to share with others who are concerned about technology overuse by children.

Problems - Suffer the Children - 4 minutes
Solutions - Balanced Technology Management - 7 minutes

The following Technology Use Guidelines for children and youth were developed by Cris Rowan, pediatric occupational therapist and author of Virtual Child; Dr. Andrew Doan, neuroscientist and author of Hooked on Games; and Dr. Hilarie Cash, Director of reSTART Internet Addiction Recovery Program and author of Video Games and Your Kids, with contribution from the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Canadian Pediatric Society in an effort to ensure sustainable futures for all children. (chart in link)

Debate - Should hand held devices be banned for children under the age of 12. How much time do you let your children on hand held devices (phone, tablet, ect)? How much time do you wish your child spent on these devices?

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Nope they shouldn't be banned. Parenting decision.

Time my kids spend...it varies. DD1 is on the spectrum and benefits a lot with her tablet and educational apps. DD2 uses it sparingly. Some days they don't use them or barely use them...some days is a little more (snowed in days for example).

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

I would strongly disagree with them being banned. However I think it is a good idea to limit screen time including hand held devices. My girls do use the kindle sometimes, but it is the TV that is more of a temptation. There are some wonderful learning apps on the Kindle that would be a great benefit.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

Oy.

Like anything, it's about how you use it. Technology isn't evil and it doesn't cause mental illness or addiction. Things like this just irritate me.

Yes, if you neglect your children and let little kids play Grand Theft Auto, you're asking for trouble. That's not about exposure to technology, that's about parenting.

Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 680

While I am not fond of kids having so much exposure to the screens, I am extremely not fond of this much government control. Talk about being restrictive and controlling.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4103

She's a pediatric occupational therapist, so she seems the damage these devices are doing to little kids who don't know better. She knows that the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Canadian Society of Pediatrics strongly advise limiting children's exposure in both amount and content, and she knows it's not working. We're raising a new generation that can't handle even a bit of boredom, don't want to watch something that isn't moving or blinking, don't want to listen to anything that doesn't have a soundtrack, and that expects to have constant interaction with everyone they know at all times. That's not good for the children, and it's not good for society in the long term.

I would absolutely support a ban. The "strong suggestions" aren't working. Parents are using smartphones as babysitters and video games to keep the kids quiet in the car. Little kids at the park should be playing with friends, not smart phones. Kids at lunch recess should be playing active games, not games on the internet. The sad thing is that this goes far beyond a parenting issue. At Weston's last checkup, the hearing test was a video game on a handheld device where you touch the animal on the side making the sound. A freaking doctor's office is putting a game on a handheld device into my child's hands and not much I can do about it except decline the hearing test, which was what I did. Even schools are putting kids in front of technology for longer periods of time than the guidelines suggest! I've argued against tablets in our classrooms but everyone else wants their kids to have the latest & greatest technology. And rather than simple tutorials, the tablets are filled with programs that look & act like video games. It's not an educational game, it's a game, period. You don't just work a math problem and mark the answer, you have to catch the correct number of flying rabbits. :rolleyes: Elementary kids, for the most part, do not need technology. It doesn't help them learn, and it can actually inhibit their learning because it inhibits their brain development in important ways. The only kids that technology has been proven to help, are those with a limited set of developmental disabilities, because the technology can be used to supplement their therapies because it's far cheaper than having one-on-one support all day, and it can be adapted to their individual needs far better, easier, and cheaper, than adapting classroom lessons to a dozen children.

There would have to be a reasonable exception for safety, though. Now that my daughter is riding the bus here & there without an adult, she needs to have a way to stay in touch with us. She has a very basic flip phone, no camera, no games, no internet.

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

"Spacers" wrote:

I would absolutely support a ban.

Why is it ok for your way of parenting to be forced on everyone else's children? Would you be in support of it if it went the other way? A law requiring all children spend at least 2 hours a day on technology? Like it or not, it is the way that the world is going and children will need to learn how to be comfortable around technology. Wouldn't you want to be the one who decided what you felt was best for your child?

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4103

This isn't "a way of parenting." These devices are doing physical, emotional, and sometimes psychological damage to very young children. We've banned letting parents drive around with their kids not in seat belts, we've banned smoking in cars with children, we've banned letting your kids cut school, all of which could be argued as "a way of parenting," but we've banned them because as a society we felt the alternatives were too damaging. And the evidence is mounting, very quickly and very strongly, that these devices and the programs on them are no good for young kids. If we're concerned about protecting the future generation's lives, lungs, and educations enough to ban those things, why aren't we concerned enough about their bodies and brains to ban these handheld devices?

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Yep, I'm always the lone wolf on banning smoking in cars even though I think it is awful.

I am for banning things that can cause immediate harm. Not wearing a seat belt can cause immediate harm.

Things like this could detriment my daughter's ability to achieve...all it will do is have people saying their kid has a disability.

There are plenty of things that can cause long term damage. Being a crazy sports parent for one.

I think getting so involved in everyday decisions is not good. If a child misses so much school, it is neglect and can be investigated. If I let my child stay home one day just to have a fun day when they aren't sick, that is a parenting choice.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4103

"Jessica80" wrote:

Being a crazy sports parent for one.

I'd be good with banning those, too. :biglaugh:

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

Well, maybe I'll go for the crazy sports parents

And pageant moms. Wink

Just kidding.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

And then let's ban soda for kids, and Doritos too.

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

"Spacers" wrote:

This isn't "a way of parenting." These devices are doing physical, emotional, and sometimes psychological damage to very young children. We've banned letting parents drive around with their kids not in seat belts, we've banned smoking in cars with children, we've banned letting your kids cut school, all of which could be argued as "a way of parenting," but we've banned them because as a society we felt the alternatives were too damaging. And the evidence is mounting, very quickly and very strongly, that these devices and the programs on them are no good for young kids. If we're concerned about protecting the future generation's lives, lungs, and educations enough to ban those things, why aren't we concerned enough about their bodies and brains to ban these handheld devices?

Completely banning all hand held devices is way over the top and just as unhealthy as over use. Neither you or any one else has any business telling me that I can or can not let my child play on my phone or kindle. It is your "opinion" that a child should have zero access to technology. That is not the prevalent opinion at this time. Even if it was, it is no one else's business. Unless there was hard evidence (there is not) that technology caused tumours in children or some other concrete prove that it was seriously physically harmful it is very offensive to think that you know better than a parent what is best for their child. If you do not want someone else to come in and tell you exactly how to parent your children, then you have no business telling someone else how to parent their child.

All of that aside, I disagree that a zero tolerance approach to technology is the best answer. A child that goes their entire childhood without learning how to use a phone, computer, tablet, or any technology at all will be at a serious disadvantage in a modern technological world. Today's jobs require a knowledge of technology. Balance is the key here. No technology at all is just as harmful to a child as a child that sits and spends hours a day on technology.

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

I was joking about soda, but that is guaranteed 100% harmful to kids. So why not ban that, really?

KimPossible's picture
Joined: 05/24/06
Posts: 3319

Oh my god this futile attempt to prevent everyone from doing something harmful to their kids EVER at the expense of our right to simply and independently parent our children HAS TO STOP.

STOP IT! Its beyond irritating. Its infuriating. And obnoxious. And arrogant.

Need i continue?

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

Kim, you must continue, because I'd enjoy a good Kim rant.

Spacers's picture
Joined: 12/29/03
Posts: 4103

"AlyssaEimers" wrote:

Completely banning all hand held devices is way over the top and just as unhealthy as over use. Neither you or any one else has any business telling me that I can or can not let my child play on my phone or kindle. It is your "opinion" that a child should have zero access to technology. That is not the prevalent opinion at this time. Even if it was, it is no one else's business. Unless there was hard evidence (there is not) that technology caused tumours in children or some other concrete prove that it was seriously physically harmful it is very offensive to think that you know better than a parent what is best for their child. If you do not want someone else to come in and tell you exactly how to parent your children, then you have no business telling someone else how to parent their child.

All of that aside, I disagree that a zero tolerance approach to technology is the best answer. A child that goes their entire childhood without learning how to use a phone, computer, tablet, or any technology at all will be at a serious disadvantage in a modern technological world. Today's jobs require a knowledge of technology. Balance is the key here. No technology at all is just as harmful to a child as a child that sits and spends hours a day on technology.

First of all, it is not just my "opinion" that young children should have zero access to technology. It's been the recommendation of every pediatricians' group in the developed world for the past many years. Not a single pediatricians' group has ever said, "The use of technological devices is a good thing and should be encouraged for all children." Not even close. The only children that technology has been shown to helpful rather than detrimental are those with certain developmental or learning disabilities. The fact is that these devices alter brain development and they alter the child's natural desire to run around & play, learn to entertain themselves, and learn to interact with others. Can "good parenting" counteract all of that? No.

Children are not going to go their whole childhood without learning that stuff. They're going to go 8 or 10 or 12 years, and no, that will not be a disadvantage at all in their adult lives. There are plenty of adults who went 30 or 40 or 50 years without technology who have had no trouble learning it at an appropriate time in their lives.

And balance doesn't always mean some of both things. Sometimes balance means introducing something in a way that doesn't disturb the rest of your life, i.e. nothing of it for a while, then a little bit of it, and then a little more, and then finally full access to it. We actually do that with pretty much everything else that we introduce to our children without really thinking about it because there is a natural developmental curve, and we seem to have lost the good sense about this when it comes to technology. Parents simply are not controlling their children's access to these devices despite all the recommendations, the warnings, the advice about how young brains develop, they just want more & more & more technology for their kids. And that is what needs to stop.

Joined: 08/17/04
Posts: 2226

But Stacey, most of the issues that they are seeing are resulting from parenting issues.

1. Not knowing what their child is viewing (parenting issue)
2. Not monitoring how long they are on it.
3. Allowing open access in their bedrooms vs. a common area
4. Not making sure child is getting enough sleep, so either not following through with when they are sleeping and not taking devices away at night.
5. Obesity because they are not outside. I think this is a big factor in obesity but I also think that bad food choices, general lack of family activities for exercise are also major points too.

I still think the point is for education. It's not up to society to ban these things...it's up to the parents and their medical professionals to address things properly. If a child is coming to school sleepy everyday that warrants a convo with parents. If a child is obese, it warrants services from their pcp.

AlyssaEimers's picture
Joined: 08/22/06
Posts: 6568

"Spacers" wrote:

First of all, it is not just my "opinion" that young children should have zero access to technology. It's been the recommendation of every pediatricians' group in the developed world for the past many years. Not a single pediatricians' group has ever said, "The use of technological devices is a good thing and should be encouraged for all children." Not even close. The only children that technology has been shown to helpful rather than detrimental are those with certain developmental or learning disabilities. The fact is that these devices alter brain development and they alter the child's natural desire to run around & play, learn to entertain themselves, and learn to interact with others. Can "good parenting" counteract all of that? No.

Children are not going to go their whole childhood without learning that stuff. They're going to go 8 or 10 or 12 years, and no, that will not be a disadvantage at all in their adult lives. There are plenty of adults who went 30 or 40 or 50 years without technology who have had no trouble learning it at an appropriate time in their lives.

And balance doesn't always mean some of both things. Sometimes balance means introducing something in a way that doesn't disturb the rest of your life, i.e. nothing of it for a while, then a little bit of it, and then a little more, and then finally full access to it. We actually do that with pretty much everything else that we introduce to our children without really thinking about it because there is a natural developmental curve, and we seem to have lost the good sense about this when it comes to technology. Parents simply are not controlling their children's access to these devices despite all the recommendations, the warnings, the advice about how young brains develop, they just want more & more & more technology for their kids. And that is what needs to stop.

Show me the study that says that children should have zero access to technology until past age 12.

There are PLENTY of older people that feel at a huge disadvantage to the younger generation in the work place because they did not grow up with and learn to use computers. Both my In Law, parents, pastor and his wife, and just about anyone I know of that age.

It is 100% a personal preference and no one at all has any business governing it. This is the land of the Free. Not the land where every single aspect of life is dictated. The idea that anyone at all thinks that this is reasonable is a little out of scope for me. I mean how would you do it? Have video cameras in every home watching every moment of a childs life reporting to some agency that decided if a parent is breaking any rules?

mom3girls's picture
Joined: 01/09/07
Posts: 1537

We LOVE technology in this house, we would not be happy with a ban (not sure government should be banning things like this that do not cause damage in most cases) All four of our children have Kindle Fires (all my girls bought their own, and one gave the brother her old one when she bought a new one) I get a report on used of them every week. Last week our kids used their kindles for a total of 42 hours combined. 40 of those hours were spent reading books. I LOVE it, they can get onto our library system website, find books in their reading levels and download them, any time of day, and time of the week. Even the 4 year old can pick out books, he loves looking at the library site (I love that I will never have late fees again or worry about losing books)
Responsible parents set boundaries for everything, technology included.
AT the school I teach at, I have never seen a child not go play on recess. There are kids that will take books out to read, but that has always happened (I spent many hours at school reading on the playground)

Stacie, there are many studies that show how technology is positively impacting classrooms. As teachers, we know we are preparing kids for jobs that may not exist yet. We have to teach them how to learn, instead of rote memorization.
Archived: Effects of Technology on Classrooms and Students

Joined: 03/08/03
Posts: 3189

And anecdotally, my kids LOVE technology, love the iPad and my phone and love TV and Netflix, and guess what? They still love playing outside, and playing role playing/pretend games, and seeing their friends, and talking to people. They interact with their friends, and other adults, and each other. And they make up elaborate games together. And then they play on the iPad again.

Joined: 05/13/02
Posts: 414

This family would not be happy with a ban on technology. My kids are like Laurie's - they love TV, iPads, and *gasp* video games! They also will spend hours playing outside, and have no issue with obesity. Actually, one of my boys could stand to tack on 15-20 lbs. My oldest son is very into technology, and is taking as many computer/video courses in high school as he can.

What's kind of funny is that no one would say a word if a kid spent hours reading a book....but put that book on an iPad and suddenly it's frowned upon.

Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 680

I can completely understand the concerns. I limit screen time, these days it's none except the rare occasion, which hasn't happened in a long time. They are just busy otherwise and don't even think about it due to being offered alternatives. But I truly believe my kids would never talk, interact, or play without being offered alternatives they enjoy. However, banning something is taking away privileges we can monitor ourselves and decide where to draw our own lines. I am not fundamentally against most things like technology. I use my own tv as a teaching tool...I project from the computer to it so they can all see and hear lessons, cool youtube videos, and whatever else is super neat. Anyway, tangent.

We can't live in such a way that every single choice is made for us. We should have standards about our lives, broadly written, live within them somewhere as we feel comfortable. We can't allow the government to decide for us every thing that is right, wrong, good, or bad. It is crazy as it is with literally HOW much has to be permitted/licensed. People can't hardly make a living without going through mountains of red tape. It's amazing how restricted we are to be a country of proclaimed freedom.......to save ourselves from ourselves because the government thinks we're so incompetent. I am sure according to the experts we are incompetent based on the below post, but even still...no banning. no extreme measures. Let us decide.

The other thing is...

Experts have warned about tv for so long. But is it really feasible or sane to ban tv? I mean how would all of this banning even work? Would the NSA or someone put up surveillance to see whose tv is getting a signal then do a raid if have enough reason to believe there may be some kids inside watching Bugs Bunny? I mean, really, how would this work..wth tv or iPad?? If a teacher hears of a kids coming to school telling he played whatever game out there, his teacher is going to call... CPS? CPS have more important things on their hands that it's just not possible and it's an abuse of them to assume they have a role in this with SO much other horrible things out there. I'm out of idea of how this would really, truly work. It's an insane idea to ban something like this.

"Spacers" wrote:

She's a pediatric occupational therapist, so she seems the damage these devices are doing to little kids who don't know better. She knows that the American Academy of Pediatrics and the Canadian Society of Pediatrics strongly advise limiting children's exposure in both amount and content, and she knows it's not working. We're raising a new generation that can't handle even a bit of boredom, don't want to watch something that isn't moving or blinking, don't want to listen to anything that doesn't have a soundtrack, and that expects to have constant interaction with everyone they know at all times. That's not good for the children, and it's not good for society in the long term.

I would absolutely support a ban. The "strong suggestions" aren't working. Parents are using smartphones as babysitters and video games to keep the kids quiet in the car. Little kids at the park should be playing with friends, not smart phones. Kids at lunch recess should be playing active games, not games on the internet. The sad thing is that this goes far beyond a parenting issue. At Weston's last checkup, the hearing test was a video game on a handheld device where you touch the animal on the side making the sound. A freaking doctor's office is putting a game on a handheld device into my child's hands and not much I can do about it except decline the hearing test, which was what I did. Even schools are putting kids in front of technology for longer periods of time than the guidelines suggest! I've argued against tablets in our classrooms but everyone else wants their kids to have the latest & greatest technology. And rather than simple tutorials, the tablets are filled with programs that look & act like video games. It's not an educational game, it's a game, period. You don't just work a math problem and mark the answer, you have to catch the correct number of flying rabbits. :rolleyes: Elementary kids, for the most part, do not need technology. It doesn't help them learn, and it can actually inhibit their learning because it inhibits their brain development in important ways. The only kids that technology has been proven to help, are those with a limited set of developmental disabilities, because the technology can be used to supplement their therapies because it's far cheaper than having one-on-one support all day, and it can be adapted to their individual needs far better, easier, and cheaper, than adapting classroom lessons to a dozen children.

There would have to be a reasonable exception for safety, though. Now that my daughter is riding the bus here & there without an adult, she needs to have a way to stay in touch with us. She has a very basic flip phone, no camera, no games, no internet.

Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 680

[QUOTE=mommydearest]This family would not be happy with a ban on technology. My kids are like Laurie's - they love TV, iPads, and *gasp* video games! They also will spend hours playing outside, and have no issue with obesity. Actually, one of my boys could stand to tack on 15-20 lbs. My oldest son is very into technology, and is taking as many computer/video courses in high school as he can.

What's kind of funny is that no one would say a word if a kid spent hours reading a book....but put that book on an iPad and suddenly it's frowned upon.[/QUOTE]

Exactly!!!

I love that I can put books on the iPad because a lot of times we don't have access to books. I can't just go to the library. Mostly we have book stores here filled with American books but I don't feel like maintaining such a collection in my home.

Technology is not an enemy.

Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 680

"mom3girls" wrote:

We LOVE technology in this house, we would not be happy with a ban (not sure government should be banning things like this that do not cause damage in most cases) All four of our children have Kindle Fires (all my girls bought their own, and one gave the brother her old one when she bought a new one) I get a report on used of them every week. Last week our kids used their kindles for a total of 42 hours combined. 40 of those hours were spent reading books. I LOVE it, they can get onto our library system website, find books in their reading levels and download them, any time of day, and time of the week. Even the 4 year old can pick out books, he loves looking at the library site (I love that I will never have late fees again or worry about losing books)
Responsible parents set boundaries for everything, technology included.
AT the school I teach at, I have never seen a child not go play on recess. There are kids that will take books out to read, but that has always happened (I spent many hours at school reading on the playground)

Stacie, there are many studies that show how technology is positively impacting classrooms. As teachers, we know we are preparing kids for jobs that may not exist yet. We have to teach them how to learn, instead of rote memorization.
Archived: Effects of Technology on Classrooms and Students

I completely love this post. The kinds of knowledge and methods of teaching we have access to due to technology is awesome. Everyone shouldn't be punished due to others' choices. I really take time to enrich the kids with various things they tend to ask about. I get that this isn't my kid sitting down glued to a game for hours, but the other enrichment opportunity / ability would be taken away from us nonetheless.

mom3girls's picture
Joined: 01/09/07
Posts: 1537

Dh and I were talking about this last night. He teaches middle school and has some kids that he sees the negative effects of to much screen time. These are also the kids that drink soda, are allowed to stay up late at night and rarely have parents interacting with them. So which one of these is the cause of negative behavior? I would say all combined.

Joined: 05/23/12
Posts: 680

I tend to agree with this Lisa. I think probably these kinds of households have a lot of issues. When I worked for CPS it was NEVER just one thing to solve. Everything was interconnected and complicated, webs of crazy spun all over.