Group items tagged

When you separate the different types of screen out, the effects start to vary.

Passively watching TV is not the same as learning to read on a touchscreen, which is not the same as killing monsters on a console

First of all, lumping all screens into one category is not helpful. "Screen time is a really enticing measure because it's simple – it's usually described as the number of hours a day using screen-based technology. But it's completely meaningless,"

"Children will learn from what they watch, whether that means learning letters and numbers, slapstick humour or aggressive behaviour,

But they found no effects at all for those who played computer games.

"The best research suggests that the content children view is the best predictor of cognitive effects,"

The study found that all the children enjoy reading more when they look at stories using books and a touchscreen compared to just books.

But they found no effects at all for those who played computer games

rise in BMI

hard to tease apart whether screen time actually causes the effects or whether they are linked in some other way

"It is impossible to determine with certainty that TV is causing obesity, and it is likely that other factors are involved in the complex problem of childhood obesity,

Her own studies have shown that children who struggle to learn using books often made more progress with iPads.

research in schools also found that iPads made children more cooperative and helped quieter kids to speak up

children receive immediate feedback

children who watch age-appropriate, educational TV programmes often do better on tests of school readiness.

What is becoming clear is that it's not the technologies themselves we should be worried out but how they are used and how people interact with them

A lot of it is common sense. Don't unthinkingly hand over your device. There are educational apps whose benefits are backed up by research, says Flewitt.

Five hours sitting in front of the TV is not the same as 5 hours of some TV, a couple of hours playing on Dance Dance Revolution or some other kind of active game, followed by a Skype session with a grandparent.

second group, most of the kids chose to take the test

Ninety percent of the kids who heard “you must be smart” opted not to take it.

second test

equally as hard as the first one

third test was given

The first group of students who were told they were smart, did worse.

The second group did 30% better.

Eight Steps Toward Healthy Leadership

Help them take calculated risks. Talk it over with them, but let them do it. Your primary job is to prepare your child for how the world really works. Discuss how they must learn to make choices. They must prepare to both win and lose, not get all they want and to face the consequences of their decisions. Share your own “risky” experiences from your teen years. Interpret them. Because we’re not the only influence on these kids, we must be the best influence. Instead of tangible rewards, how about spending some time together? Be careful you aren’t teaching them that emotions can be healed by a trip to the mall. Choose a positive risk taking option and launch kids into it (i.e. sports, jobs, etc). It may take a push but get them used to trying out new opportunities. Don’t let your guilt get in the way of leading well. Your job is not to make yourself feel good by giving kids what makes them or you feel better when you give it. Don’t reward basics that life requires. If your relationship is based on material rewards, kids will experience neither intrinsic motivation nor unconditional love. Affirm smart risk-taking and hard work wisely. Help them see the advantage of both of these, and that stepping out a comfort zone usually pays off.

Multitasking, or "continuous partial attention" as Linda Stone has called another form of attention-splitting, or "hyper attention" as N. Katherine Hayles has called another contemporary variant,2 are not necessarily bad alternatives to focused attention. It depends on what is happening in our own external and internal worlds at the moment.

As students become more aware of how they are directing their attention, I begin to emphasize the idea of using blogs and wikis as a means of connecting with their public voice and beginning to act with others in mind. Just because many students today are very good at learning and using online applications and at connecting and participating with friends and classmates via social media, that does not necessarily mean that they understand the implications of their participation within a much larger public.

ut how to participate in a way that's valuable to others as well as to yourself, I agree with Yochai Benkler, Henry Jenkins, and others that participating, even if it's no good and nobody cares, gives one a different sense of being in the world. When you participate, you become an active citizen rather than simply a passive consumer of what is sold to you, what is taught to you, and what your government wants you to believe. Simply participating is a start. (Note that I am not guaranteeing that having a sense of agency compels people to perform only true, good, and beautiful actions.)

I don't believe in the myth of the digital natives who are magically empowered and fluent in the use of social media simply because they carry laptops, they're never far from their phones, they're gamers, and they know how to use technologies. We are seeing a change in their participation in society—yet this does not mean that they automatically understand the rhetorics of participation, something that is particularly important for citizens.

Critical consumption, or what Ernest Hemingway called "crap detection," is the literacy of trying to figure out what and who is trustworthy—and what and who is not trustworthy—online. If you find people, whether you know them or not, who you can trust to be an authority on something or another, add them to your personal network. Consult them personally, consult what they've written, and consult their opinion about the subject.

Finally, crap detection takes us back, full circle, to the literacy of attention. When I assign my students to set up an RSS reader or a Twitter account, they panic. They ask how they are supposed to keep up with the overwhelming flood of information. I explain that social media is not a queue; it's a flow. An e-mail inbox is a queue, because we have to deal with each message in one way or another, even if we simply delete them. But no one can catch up on all 5,000 or so unread feeds in their RSS reader; no one can go back through all of the hundreds (or thousands) of tweets that were posted overnight. Using Twitter, one has to ask: "Do I pay attention to this? Do I click through? Do I open a tab and check it out later today? Do I bookmark it because I might be interested in the future?" We have to learn to sample the flow, and doing so involves knowing how to focus our attention.