Summer, we are at the pool, relaxing. My son Asaf (19) looks around the pool eyeing many of adults on their smartphones. Not only adults but many. And yes, it did include me.
He says, "everybody complains about my generation, the way we focus on all things digital. Your generation is worse."
"You adapted every new technology quickly and thoroughly. You are the ones that afforded the first iPhones, tablets, and every little thing that comes out. You are the real YouTube generation because you had a choice, and you chose this!"
I love it when my kids have insights like this. And yes for a long time I have felt this way as well. I hear many adults calling for less use of technology in schools and at home. They reject the role technology can play at school feeling that it is just games, fun and not serious enough. They are afraid that our children will not move, not be creative. I admit that as adults, we have the obligation to protect our children even from the things we are doing/ have done. But at the same time we must remember that personal example is very influential. And so for me two questions remain as we educate the next generation:
1. If we lead by example, then we lead by showing appropriate and balanced uses of devices not lack of use. We must first look at ourselves and our practices. Do they mirror what we want our kids to learn or are we around the pool checking our smartphones?
2. We must ask ourselves what we are protecting our children/ students from? The old data about screen time is out of sync with digital realities and in many ways we still don't know much about the impact of new practices. Some like the American Academy of Pediatrics publishes concerns and limitations. They take the defensive approach if we don't know, let's not do it. This method works well for medicine, not so much for everyday well-being. The two questions that must follow are: what will kids be doing with this time? And what will they be missing if they do not have digital lives? Will they be ready to be citizens of the 21st century?
3. We must ask ourselves if when making an argument about screentime at school we are in fact making a class based argument. It may be that we are saying: "My middle class, son of a professional, student is getting enough digital exoerience and guideline at home therefore he and all other students do not need to spend time on it in school.
My son Asaf looked at me and added: "Yes, it's your generation, but it is especially you." I smiled: "I am ok with that." Later that evening, he was using three screens: A Netflix movie on the TV, a video game on his laptop, and the BBC news on his phone.
I wonder what his kids will do.
This blog focuses on ways that art, technology, and literacy can interact in all educational settings.
Showing posts with label children. Show all posts
Showing posts with label children. Show all posts
Thursday, July 30, 2015
Monday, May 13, 2013
E Readers and Young Students
At AERA I went to a superb session about the impact of e readers on young students engagement, vocabulary and reading success. The results were very positive. They are even more encouraging since tablets and other mobile devices have been making their way into a majority of homes.
Results show the impact of device on key multisensory behaviors of children’s engagement with ebooks. In general, mobiles appear to afford more looking and touching but less moving and gesturing than the desktop; none of the devices favored listening. Given the increasing role of haptic perception in digital reading, access to mobile devices may favor behaviors that nurture literacy motivation and participation, especially for less attentive children, and support ongoing engagement with ebooks for all children.
Here is the section description:
The surge in ebooks on a wide range of e-devices (whiteboards; touchscreens; mobiles) has dramatically increased their appeal as an option for shared reading with young children, although research evidence as to their impact on early literacy experience remains slim. This symposium contributes to the knowledge base on ebook reading in early childhood and lays the groundwork for further research that examines ebooks in the learn-to-read process in informal and classroom settings. Papers examine book vs ebook differences in parent-child reading, highlighting benefits and drawbacks; describe the technical adequacy/usability of an ebook quality rating tool; examine differences in device on engagement with ebooks; and report effects of temporal contiguity of picture/print in digital reading on vocabulary learning.
Research is emerging and soon we will be able to add to it. The greta thing is that the research produced is nuanced finding that some e books are better than others. We can actually identify the elements of good ebooks for young children including:
1. Limited interactivity (to not distract from the text too much)
2. Interactivity that is there should focus on main story features and relevant vocabulary
3. Device matters with increased engagement with truly mobile devices
4. E books can change the interaction between adult and child in dialogic reading and so requires a somewhat different training for adults.
Unique among all of it was the leadership of Kathy Roskos.
In her presentation she concluded:Results show the impact of device on key multisensory behaviors of children’s engagement with ebooks. In general, mobiles appear to afford more looking and touching but less moving and gesturing than the desktop; none of the devices favored listening. Given the increasing role of haptic perception in digital reading, access to mobile devices may favor behaviors that nurture literacy motivation and participation, especially for less attentive children, and support ongoing engagement with ebooks for all children.
Here is the section description:
The surge in ebooks on a wide range of e-devices (whiteboards; touchscreens; mobiles) has dramatically increased their appeal as an option for shared reading with young children, although research evidence as to their impact on early literacy experience remains slim. This symposium contributes to the knowledge base on ebook reading in early childhood and lays the groundwork for further research that examines ebooks in the learn-to-read process in informal and classroom settings. Papers examine book vs ebook differences in parent-child reading, highlighting benefits and drawbacks; describe the technical adequacy/usability of an ebook quality rating tool; examine differences in device on engagement with ebooks; and report effects of temporal contiguity of picture/print in digital reading on vocabulary learning.
Research is emerging and soon we will be able to add to it. The greta thing is that the research produced is nuanced finding that some e books are better than others. We can actually identify the elements of good ebooks for young children including:
1. Limited interactivity (to not distract from the text too much)
2. Interactivity that is there should focus on main story features and relevant vocabulary
3. Device matters with increased engagement with truly mobile devices
4. E books can change the interaction between adult and child in dialogic reading and so requires a somewhat different training for adults.
Labels:
aera,
book,
childhood,
children,
dialogic,
digital,
early,
ebook,
engagement,
interactive,
interactivity,
ipad,
ipod,
reader,
reading,
roskos,
tablet,
technology,
text,
young
Saturday, March 30, 2013
Art and Sensory Overload- A Floridian Note
This past week I visited Florida with my kids. One day we chose to go to Young at Art an active arts experience in Davie Fl. It was a great facility with a lot of materials, styles and sensory inputs to explore. The place offered a plethora of art ideas from digital media, to architecture, plastic arts and visual arts. It also included music (mostly through percussion) and drama.
I was really looking forward to sharing this experience with my kids, but the place actually made it difficult to do that. What welcomed us was a wave of sights sounds and materials that overwhelmed not just my older than the mean senses but my kids (7,9, and 16) and their cousins (4,6,8). Every time I tried to stay at one point to explore in depth and create the eye of the child I was with at the time was immediately drawn to a different sound or sight beyond what we were doing. In a way the place was an invitation to not attend to anything but instead just move through the space constantly stimulated but never truly attending to any one thing.
I love art/science spaces designed for learning and I agree that we do not need stuffy old museum in which you have to stay quiet and not touch anything. But this option was so far the other side- that it serves to reinforce the idea that this generation of kids needs to be constantly bombarded with new inputs. This isn't true in any way but if we only create such experiences our kids and students will come to expect them. Just like my undergraduate students expect lecture, powerpoint presentations and letter grades. They are not wrong to expect them, it is what they grew up with. These are schemas that are usable even if not the most efficient.
The over-stimulation of spaces (real or digital) designed for kids may create a short attention-span generation, but this development is in direct conflict with the way our brains are designed. We can attend to only a few things at a time and develop deep understanding only given the time to focus on one thing without disruptive sensory inputs.
I was really looking forward to sharing this experience with my kids, but the place actually made it difficult to do that. What welcomed us was a wave of sights sounds and materials that overwhelmed not just my older than the mean senses but my kids (7,9, and 16) and their cousins (4,6,8). Every time I tried to stay at one point to explore in depth and create the eye of the child I was with at the time was immediately drawn to a different sound or sight beyond what we were doing. In a way the place was an invitation to not attend to anything but instead just move through the space constantly stimulated but never truly attending to any one thing.
I love art/science spaces designed for learning and I agree that we do not need stuffy old museum in which you have to stay quiet and not touch anything. But this option was so far the other side- that it serves to reinforce the idea that this generation of kids needs to be constantly bombarded with new inputs. This isn't true in any way but if we only create such experiences our kids and students will come to expect them. Just like my undergraduate students expect lecture, powerpoint presentations and letter grades. They are not wrong to expect them, it is what they grew up with. These are schemas that are usable even if not the most efficient.
The over-stimulation of spaces (real or digital) designed for kids may create a short attention-span generation, but this development is in direct conflict with the way our brains are designed. We can attend to only a few things at a time and develop deep understanding only given the time to focus on one thing without disruptive sensory inputs.
Saturday, July 9, 2011
And What about Architecture?
Yesterday I happened to go to the Joslyn in Omaha. I was struck by the collection and the superb way it was displayed but more than anything I was struck by the architecture. I admit to having a soft spot for architecture and everyday design, but I have not payed enough attention to the potential in education. Architecture is inherently interdisciplinary part engineering, part technology, part art, part social science. It is all around us, yet we do not spend much time teaching or learning it...
In early education the urge to build is always evident. Young children often build in blocks, Lego and assortments of other toys. As they get older these urges to build and create seem to be channeled to the world of play, while school becomes the serious place of thinking and being academic using our heads but not our hands, solving all problems in the abstract giving up on the trial and error process. Yes I am channeling a bit of Sir Ken Robinson here. While I do not think he is right about everything we definitely can find common ground here!
So my thought for the day is that with some thought we can integrate design process and architecture into our curricula- enhancing them while opening new avenues of creativity and thought for our students and for ourselves!
In early education the urge to build is always evident. Young children often build in blocks, Lego and assortments of other toys. As they get older these urges to build and create seem to be channeled to the world of play, while school becomes the serious place of thinking and being academic using our heads but not our hands, solving all problems in the abstract giving up on the trial and error process. Yes I am channeling a bit of Sir Ken Robinson here. While I do not think he is right about everything we definitely can find common ground here!
So my thought for the day is that with some thought we can integrate design process and architecture into our curricula- enhancing them while opening new avenues of creativity and thought for our students and for ourselves!
Labels:
architecture,
art,
ARTS,
build,
children,
creativity,
education,
Joslyn,
lego,
omaha,
robinson,
teacher
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)