Drawing hearts is important work for many young children. Hearts aren’t too easy to draw, either. It takes practice to draw a passable, if not perfect heart, but the motivation is often high. I have watched the scenario unfold time and again in the early childhood classroom. One child (often a girl with an [...]]]>

Drawing hearts is important work for many young children. Hearts aren’t too easy to draw, either. It takes practice to draw a passable, if not perfect heart, but the motivation is often high. I have watched the scenario unfold time and again in the early childhood classroom. One child (often a girl with an older sibling) will sit at the table and begin drawing pages of seemingly effortless hearts. She will make pictures for her family, friends and teachers – adorned with colorful hearts and perhaps the phrase “I LOVE YOU” (spelled phonetically or traditionally). Inevitably, a peer will witness this awesome event and long to be able to draw hearts and send similar loving notes to friends and family. “How do you make a heart?” the child will ask the friend. “Can you show me?”

Thereupon the expert heart-drawer will be called to coach the inquiring friend about how this heart-drawing thing works. There will be some initial frustration – but through trial and error, peer-coaching and deep motivation, the art of heart-drawing will be passed to the new child. The excitement will spread as others join in…coaching and critiquing each other as the thrill of heart-making catches like wildfire. Now loving notes are made by many children for many loved ones over many days.

This process is particularly dear to my heart, as receiving daily love notes was one of the best parts of being an early childhood teacher. I simply loved getting the notes throughout the day – and relived the joy each night at home as I emptied my pockets – only to rediscover the day’s love notes (along with random paperclips, pattern blocks and acorns).

So, it was with a heavy heart (yes) that I watched a recent iPad drawing app demonstration. In the video, we see a young girl making pictures on an iPad. Colorful hearts, which she “stamps” on the screen, cover her “drawing”.  You see, I’ve begun asking proponents of technology in the early childhood classrooms to share with me the best examples of what they see as developmentally appropriate practice. This video was offered as an example, and in it we get a quick glimpse of the child drawing one lovely, awkward heart with her finger. When asked what she likes best, however, we aren’t surprised to hear her say, “I like the heart stamps.”

What’s the problem, then? For me the problem lies in how effortlessly the perfectly formed hearts cover the screen. They are all uniform in size and shape. Gone is the trial and error as a child truly gets a sense of the “heart-ness” of a shape as a child figures out: How do you get that symmetry? What works? What doesn’t? How can I get better?

Even using an actual stamp pad, or heart stencil, as many children do, leads to variations in the result. What happens if you press hard? Press lightly? Unevenly? What if your hand slips? How do all these affect the heart? It seems to me, tools such as actual markers, paper, stamp pads, stencils, scissors, etc… give children a wide berth for learning and exploring and making mistakes. Perhaps they build up resiliency and tenacity as they go through the process of trial and error to reach their self-imposed goal.

This iPad app, it seems to me, skips all of those important steps. It is so seductive and irresistible – with little effort from the child, hundreds of perfectly-shaped hearts pour onto the screen. It is an example of the quick and easy “gotta have it – and gotta have it now” mentality that is shaping our future generations. I wonder if a child who can make these perfect hearts with the iPad will now be less inclined to mess-around in the mucky and mistake-making (yet satisfying and community-building) process of heart-drawing.

Or, perhaps I am just being selfish. I’d much rather receive beautifully imperfect child-made love notes, one where the personal touch and quirkiness of each child is in evidence, then a page of perfectly shaped hearts where clearly the computer had more control over the final product than the child did. But that’s just me.

As I’ve stated before, I am all for assistive technology. Who isn’t? Assistive technology helps children and adults overcome communication hurdles and other disabilities, and I am all for older students and adults using technology as a tool. I do it everyday. But what I am NOT for is rushing our young children past real experiences – experiences which help them figure out who they are, what they are good at, and how they fit in the world. Using your own hands and mind to learn how to draw hearts and make one-of-a-kind loving notes for others is definitely a worthwhile pursuit.

See related post:
Real versus virtual…kayaks, cows and worms

Tweet

Follow

The lure of [...]]]> We were sitting around our campfire Saturday evening when my son said, “I’m glad we did this instead of watching TV.” I smiled and added, “Me, too.” It was our first campfire in many months, and we had a great time talking, laughing, watching the beautiful blaze, and toasting a few marshmallows.

The lure of the screen is always there – and finding ways to stay present in the actual world can be a challenge. We know that preschoolers spend 32 hours a week outside of school engaged in screens (Zimmerman, Christakis and Meltzoff, 2007). That is one of the reasons it was disheartening to hear about the school district in Auburn, Maine that is spending $200,000 to give every incoming kindergartner an iPad. The Superintendent Tom Morrill is quoted as saying, “What we’re seeing is that this is an essential tool — even more important than a book. It’s a learning tool they need to have.”  Wow, more important than a book. Morrill is excited about new apps that are being developed for the iPad, so I wonder: where is the evidence that children will actually learn anything with them? (You can click below to watch the CNN story about the iPads for kindergartners, but be warned: a commercial will play before the news story begins.)

$200,000 is a lot of money. What would you spend it on? I would hire more assistant teachers to read one-on-one and in small groups. These real-live grown ups could form relationships with the kindergartners and help the teachers find just the right book to spark the individual interests of each student. And, I would definitely spend some money on blocks. Unit blocks, mini unit blocks, large hollow blocks – you name it – I’d get them into the kindergarten classrooms. Because, you know what?  A set of unit blocks lasts a lifetime. The unit blocks can be used to teach children in all areas of the curriculum. Don’t believe it? Take a look the  chart below from The Block Book, edited by Elisabeth Hirsch, a wonderful resource for supporting quality block play. (You should be able to click on the photo to enlarge it enough to read the words.)

I know that when new technology is rolled out, there is not always the technical support or time for professional development for on how to incorporate this technology into the daily curriculum. Teachers are often left to their own devices – such as finding a willing and able colleague to help along the way. Inevitably, when technology snafus arise – and they always arise – there is no tech person to call, or there is a long wait to get the help they need. And I wonder, in two years time, when the iPads are passe and new technology comes along, what then?

Time in the classroom is short. What will the iPads replace for these kindergartners? Socializing? Learning to read facial cues? Manipulating real-world materials? Time with real books? These are necessary endeavors which are already threatened. Rushing young children into the digital, virtual world is misguided at best and potentially harmful. I know plenty of grownups who never touched a computer until college age, and now as adults they use computers as tools in their everyday work. In terms of the digital divide in young children’s lives (the gap between who has access, and who doesn’t, and what they are consuming for their “digital diet”), I worry more about access to quality play opportunities, both in school and after school, and access to safe, accessible local playgrounds.

If any of these ideas ring true for you, and you’d like to do something to help keep young children grounded in real-world play and playful learning, I urge you to take some time today to read the latest draft of the National Association for the Education of Young Children’s position statement Technology in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth through Age 8. There is a brief open comment period until May 31st*. I am confounded by the current draft, which continually calls for “developmentally appropriate practices” and acknowledges many of the potential down-sides, yet still advocates strongly for digital technology and interactive media in early childhood settings. I had to laugh (or I would’ve cried) when reading their recommendations for infants and toddlers. “Technology tools that infants and toddlers might use must be safe, sturdy and not easily damaged. Just as toddlers tend to chew on their books, children under 2 are very likely to chew on technology tools.” Is this really the direction we are heading in? Make sure your baby’s iPad is chew/drool-proof?

*Update 12:00 p.m. 5/10/2011: Thanks to Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood for requesting that NAEYC extend the comment period  – the deadline is now May 31st. (Formally May 13th.)

Tweet

Follow

I was hoping she’d knock the marketing giant flat on its exploitative keister and that her book would make a strong and irrefutable case against Disney’s shameless and relentless marketing to young girls – opening parents’ [...]]]> Peggy Orenstein’s book CINDERELLA ATE MY DAUGHTER wasn’t the book I hoped it would be – it was better.

I was hoping she’d knock the marketing giant flat on its exploitative keister and that her book would make a strong and irrefutable case against Disney’s shameless and relentless marketing to young girls – opening parents’ eyes to all harmful stereotypes that Disney foists on our young girls and boys. I was hoping for a lambasting.

Instead, Orenstein offers the reader a deeply nuanced, thoughtful and honest look into her personal journey of parenting her young daughter through the princess years. As a mother of only boys, I appreciated the chance to enter into the complicated world of raising a happy and confident daughter in our current “girlie-girl culture”. Orenstein looks at American Girl dolls, Bratz dolls, Hannah Montana, Britney Spears, Internet chat rooms, Greek myths and more, taking the time to see what is behind the headlines and what the research is telling us. She talks to other parents about the choices they are making for their daughters. Orenstein helps illustrate that as your child moves from preschooler to tween, teen and beyond, the choices you make and why you make them will help shape how your daughter sees the world – and sees herself in the world. The book is sort of a wake-up call to wake-up and be present in your daughter’s media life.

For a terrific interview with Orenstein, check out the podcast and transcript of her hour with Healthy Media Choices’ Mary Rothschild. Here is a powerful excerpt from the interview where Rothschild hits the nail on the head and helps crystalize the message that Orenstein is sending us:

Mary Rothschild: This is one of the keys, I think – intentionality. Being intentional, even if you decide to let all the Princess stuff in.  Whatever you decide for your family, being intentional makes all the difference in the world. The child (senses it).

Peggy Orenstein: That’s actually a great way for me to put it, so I appreciate your telling me that.  When I talk about it, I’m going to say that, if you don’t mind. I can’t tell you what decisions to make for your child but, whatever you do, to provide context. I wanted to start a conversation and I wanted to provide some context and information so that parents could make their choices more wisely, but  I guess what that does mean is make them intentionally. If you’re going to let your daughter get the twenty-one-piece Disney Princess makeup kit, know what you’re doing. That’s fine. That’s your choice. That’s your right, but know what you’re doing.

Be intentional about your choices. Good advice for parents of boys, too. For the full podcast and interview please check out Healthy Media Choices.

Tweet

Follow

The first was an essay by Micheal Levine, The iTot Challenge: Getting Young Children Ready in the Jetsonian Age published in the Huffington Post. Michael Levine [...]]]> I probably shouldn’t write this post today – because I am so agitated. Two related essays I’ve read in the last day or so have really got me irked.

The first was an essay by Micheal Levine, The iTot Challenge: Getting Young Children Ready in the Jetsonian Age published in the Huffington Post. Michael Levine works for Sesame Workshop. The folks that bring us DVDs for babies and now offer iPhone and iPad apps for toddlers and preschoolers. Sesame Workshop also sells Elmo covers for your iPhone and Cookie Monster covers for your iPads. Clearly, they know that there is money to made marketing the newest screens to our youngest citizens. Too bad screen-time is habituating, and the more kids are tuned-in the harder it is for them to turn off their screens. Sesame Workshop doesn’t seem to be worried about that.

Specifically, Levine is the Executive Director of the Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop. From their website: “The Cooney Center is an independent research and innovation lab that catalyzes and supports research, development, and investment in digital media technologies to advance children’s learning.” So is it surprising that their recent report, Learning, is there and app for that? reads like a “How to” manual?  How to exploit parents’ trust, how to empty their pockets and how to immerse their toddlers in virtual (instead of actual) experiences.  (They would say the report is aimed at documenting the learning potential of developmentally appropriate apps.)

Here are some snippets from the report:

How can apps successfully sustain young children’s interest and learning?
Interest in the apps can be fleeting, but factors such as developmentally appropriate and fresh content, shortened wait times, humorous activities, incentives, goals, and parental involvement can help to sustain interest.

And from the “Implications for Industry” section:

• Provide goals and incentives: Keep them coming back.

• Provide something old and something new: Using familiar characters and brands may be a way of engaging kids with new apps and gaining the trust of their parents.

I am so skeptical, I can’t believe the motivation here is to really try to understand the learning potential of iPhone and iPad apps and not tapping into emerging markets.

So then, after getting all worked up (and depressed) I then came upon an announcement from the Erikson Institute:

Samuel J. Meisels, president of Erikson Institute, and Barbara Bowman, Irving B. Harris Professor of Child Development and co-founder of Erikson Institute, hosted 30 national leaders at a roundtable discussion on January 31 exploring issues and potential partnerships for a national framework for excellence in children’s media.

The Fred Rogers Center for Early Learning and Children’s Media at Saint Vincent College organized the invitation-only event. Attendees included leaders in media research, media literacy, child development, education, entertainment and educational media, policy, and philanthropy.

Of course my curiosity was peaked. Who was invited? What did the conversation entail?

Meisels welcomed the roundtable participants to the institute. “Rapid advances in technology and in digital and social media are transforming how young children are taught and how they interact with the world,” says Meisels. “But what is the best role for these new technologies and media in early childhood settings? How should parents, teachers, and others who care for young children respond to the world of technology? Erikson has committed itself to helping answer these important questions.”

I know the Erikson Institute does good work – and has been doing so for decades. So I was dismayed and disheartened when I saw the photo and read that Michael Levine was one of the invited guests. Arrrrgh. Of course he will push hard for the expansion of toddler and preschool apps into homes, cars and classrooms. Was there anyone at the table who is skeptical of the value of digital media in the hands of two-year-olds, or who is worried enough about the implications on brain development, or the fact that screen-time is habituating, or that healthy childhood play is severely threatened that they are working to stem this digital tide? My hope is that it was a vigorous and healthy debate . But even my eternally-optimistic self doesn’t believe that happened.

I am so discouraged today – that the best thing I can think to do is turn off this darn computer and go play (unplugged) with my sons.

Tweet

Follow

Is it just me or does the iPad seem to be on everyone’s mind these days? This morning on NPR’s Morning Edition, the iPad was described as “widely popular”. Yesterday in the NY Times, the article Math that Moves: Schools Embrace the iPad, looked at the advantages of using iPads in the classroom. It [...]]]>

Is it just me or does the iPad seem to be on everyone’s mind these days? This morning on NPR’s Morning Edition, the iPad was described as “widely popular”. Yesterday in the NY Times, the article Math that Moves: Schools Embrace the iPad, looked at the advantages of using iPads in the classroom. It seems that many educators are falling for the light weight and portable size, the large touch screen, the wealth of apps and the “coolness” factor. I’ve also heard from educators that the battery-life is fantastic. You can go the whole school day without recharging. I suppose that is an advantage if you are using an iPad at school.

I’m not an expert on iPads, for sure. I don’t own one, and have only played around with them a couple of times. Maybe – just maybe – they might be a great tool for older elementary, middle school or high school students. I can’t say for sure. Maybe they are great for differentiating instruction, as some of the folks in the NY Times article claim, but I have big doubts.  I worry whenever a computer replaces a human teacher. Call me old fashioned, but human interaction is a BIG part of how I learn and how I know lots of kids learn.

What I do know, however, is that when I see clusters of kindergartners or preschoolers clamoring to get a view of an iPad, I cringe. I worry when I see them huddle on the rug and looking down at a screen to play a game, instead of looking at each others’ faces. I know that learning how to interpret emotions in yourself and others is a big part of being in kindergarten. It’s really hard to do that, if not impossible, if you spend your time looking at a screen. I know that the actual world is way more important than the virtual world for little ones who are learning about cause and effect and problem solving. I also know that a love of books comes from the social and emotional connections of snuggling with a friend and turning pages, and talking with a teacher about the books he loves, and hearing interactive stories from live human beings who never quite tell the story the same way each time.  Reading Winnie-the-Pooh on an iPad just doesn’t have the same tactile and emotional appeal. (I can see the advantage – way down the line. I have an adult friend with allergies. She loves books but hates the mold and dust. She likes the digital option. I get that. But can you really cultivate that love of books digitally?)

Knowing that screen time is habituating, it worries me that children even younger than kindergarteners are spending time with the iPad screen. In fact, I heard a story about a mom who brought her older toddler in for preschool screening. One of the questions that parents had to answer: “Does your child put three or four words together?’ If the parent answers “yes” to this question, they are asked to give an example. One mom said yes, that her child does put words together, and her example was, “Me want Daddy iPad”. So there it is – perhaps the first sentence this little one has put together on his own. “Me want Daddy iPad”. That really worries me. There is a time and a place for the virtual world -  and early childhood isn’t it.

Note: For more information about the research on young children and screens, check out this letter written by the folks at Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood and Alliance for Childhood, and signed by 80 or so early childhood experts. The letter was sent to  NAEYC  and the committee on re-drafting their Technology and Young Children Position Statement. It is chock-full of relevant information and research.

Tweet

Follow