Group items tagged

There is a concern in some quarters that children’s activities with screens will replace their reading of books. There is a concern that the habit of skimming digital texts will carry over to reading on paper. These are valid concerns but they are not substantiated by research and they omit the important role of context and individual readers in driving change.

There could be a difference because of the way gains were measured (methodological reasons) and/or because of how gains were defined (theoretical reasons).

there’s still no longitudinal data about digital reading. As she put it, “We’re in a place of apprehension rather than comprehension.” And it’s quite possible that the apprehension is misplaced: perhaps digital reading isn’t worse so much as different than print reading

they also need different sorts of training to excel at each medium. The online world, she argues, may require students to exercise much greater self-control than a physical book. “In reading on paper, you may have to monitor yourself once, to actually pick up the book,” she says. “On the Internet, that monitoring and self-regulation cycle happens again and again.

Our new research into digital reading has found that young people who are the most engaged with reading are more likely to read both on paper and on screen than their peers who have low engagement with reading

Pupils eligible for free school meals and boys with the lowest levels of reading engagement are two of the groups most likely to benefit from using digital formats

young people who read above the level expected for their age read fiction both in print and on screen

pedagogy (i.e., teaching practice) and not the medium (i.e., technological tools and resources, such as whiteboards, hand-held devices, blogs, chat boards) that made a difference in learning, stating that instructional media are “mere vehicles that deliver instruction but do not influence student achievement any more than the truck that delivers our groceries causes changes in our nutrition

there was no proof to show that a medium was capable of ensuring that pupils and students could learn more or more effectively. He saw the medium as a means, a vehicle for instruction, but that the essence of learning remained—thankfully—in the hands of the teacher

it is not the medium that decides how effectively learners learn

Well into the nineteenth century, British and American writers, critics and religious leaders regarded novel-reading with a great deal of skepticism.

If our concerns about the enfeebling impact of the Internet and social media aren’t quite as gendered, they’re still grounded in a world view that regards the cultivation of individual morality, intellect, and productivity as a matter of public interest—and that regards shifts in personal media consumption as potentially inimical to the production of smart, informed, and upstanding citizens. But the history of the novel shows that it’s possible for us to move beyond this suspicion—though it took two centuries for novels to move from objects of derision to an accepted part of the modern reader’s diet.

Novel-reading was once regarded as an idle occupation, just as Internet use is now.

a lot of such arguments employ the sexy word "brain" and so sound scientifically objective, but they are really socio-cultural arguments

So there needs to be a further demonstration that the "deep-reading brain" is something worth valuing. And this is never going to be a (neuro)scientific argument; it's a cultural argument.

This kind of paternalistic fatalism seems ably refuted by sales of Young Adult blockbusters

I never limit my kids’ screen time. I do, however, require reading time, outdoor play time, and physical toy time. The difference between limiting screen time and requiring non-screen time is subtle, but substantial. It emphasizes the positive benefit of other activities rather than scolding the screen.

I spend a lot of time making sure my children don’t get too heavily absorbed in any one way of perceiving. I do this by paying enough attention to what games my kids are playing that I can ask them to switch games. That’s right, not all games are the same. Each one has unique narrative properties. Each one has particular mechanics that inadvertently teach a specific way of making meaning of the world. Gaming is not a singular way of being. Parenting gamer-kids is not just about monitoring the on/off switch.

Consider Minecraft. Like most kids these days, mine play it all the time. I’ve written about the good things my kids learn by playing. I love the free sandbox creativity. I think it strengthens a sense of systems thinking. But I’m also worried that so many kids develop an almost obsessive relationship to the game.

a few guidelines to help understand how the study’s findings can be of practical use to students, and teachers who are looking to improve digital literacy in their classrooms

The internet has democratised access to information but in so doing has opened the floodgates to misinformation, fake news, and rank propaganda masquerading as dispassionate analysis.

read laterally, leaving a site after a quick scan and opening up new browser tabs in order to judge the credibility of the original site

Facebook’s plans for two ambitious projects: one to develop a system for letting you type with just your thoughts, and another to let you “hear” using vibrations on your skin. This would be done through brain-computer interfaces — devices that can read neural activity and translate it into digital signals, and vice versa

Facebook’s goal is to develop something it calls a “brain click — a way to complete tasks in augmented reality using your mind. You could brain click to dismiss a notification that popped up on your AR glasses, for example

letting people type with their thoughts

Too often, designers of educational materials and activities simply add a thin layer of technology and gaming over antiquated curriculum and pedagogy

But I’m also sure that some students found it very discouraging and disempowering. And the activity put an emphasis on questions that can be answered quickly with right and wrong answers — certainly not the type of questions that I would prioritize in a classroom.

In many cases, the skeptics apply very different standards to new technologies than to “old” technologies. They worry about the antisocial impact of a child spending hours working on a computer, while they don’t have any concerns about a child spending the same time reading a book. They worry that children interacting with computers don’t spend enough time outside, but they don’t voice similar concerns about children playing musical instruments. I’m not suggesting that there are no reasons for concern. I’m just asking for more consistency.

My husband and I never made a conscious decision to not limit screen time for our kids; we simply didn’t worry about it.

Our screens don’t isolate us from one another – they are another medium through which we interact.

technology is not mysterious. It doesn’t freak them out. It doesn’t control or oppress them. It’s a tool. They do homework on their iPads. They read books on e-readers for school and pleasure. They play games, watch videos, and chat with friends. It’s not a big deal. Screen time, for us, is still time spent together

At what point does a leisure activity turn into an addiction?

In the modern developed world, the dominant leisure activity is watching television, followed by other leisure activities like sports and entertaining friends. There’s no evidence that game playing is more dangerous than these other leisure activities

People watch television for far more time than they play video games. In the U.S., people watch an average of 4.5 hours of TV every day. That’s more time than they spend reading, relaxing, socializing, participating in sports, playing digital games and using computers – combined.

Playing video games is not addictive in any meaningful sense. It is normal behavior that, while perhaps in many cases a waste of time, is not damaging or disruptive of lives in the way drug or alcohol use can be

These areas of the brain — those that produce and respond to the neurotransmitter dopamine — are involved in just about any pleasurable activity: having sex, enjoying a nice conversation, eating good food, reading a book, using methamphetamines.

the way we’re taught from a young age to evaluate and think critically about information is fundamentally flawed and out of step with the chaos of the current internet.

It’s often counterproductive to engage directly with content from an unknown source, and people can be led astray by false information

the best way to learn about a source of information is to leave it and look elsewhere, a concept called lateral reading.