ExchangeEveryDay Past Issues

Young children's development is hampered with the use of computers. Children's brains develop in concert with their ability to explore the world through all of their senses. Children can become dependent on the instant, extraordinary visual rewards that a computer can deliver. Finally, adults can become dependent on computer use by children under the false pretense that children are learning and expanding their world.

There is considerable and expanding research that supports that synapse and brain density directly correlates to the sensory and physical input that children recieve in their youngest years. Chilren need to run, climb, jump, fall, smell, hear, taste, clap, pedal, swing, rock...in short, interact with their environment by adjusting their body and actions to what the physical environment, not to mention people, input. If a child is permitted to interact using limited physical skills (see, click, hear, click, think, click), leaving the rest of the body and senses unstimulated, I mantain that those synapses are pruned, leaving areas of the brain underdeveloped, thereby arresting development.

Computers are fascinating and yield fanatstic visual stimulation with very little physical effort. While this could be a motivation and benefit for some disabled children, maintaining the effort to actually learn and apply skills such as folding, cutting, coloring, painting etc... is not rewarded with equal end products. Children become discouraged at their skill level and rely more and more on the computer to reward their efforts if permitted.

Adults must interact with children, especially those who have difficulty with self-regulation. These are the very children who are most likely to be plopped down in front of a computer without the benefit of adults looking at alternative activities that would help a child SELF-regulate.

I say, why do they need what a computer has to offer before their body and brain have developed sufficiently to problem solve, physically and mentally interacting with thier physical world?

Although children should be have access to computer technology. I am not sure that it is necessary for three and four year olds. I found in our classroom if the computer was on some children would rather play on it then engage in other activities. I finally decided to take out the computer

This law sounds ideal but unfortunately the stiuations that single mothers have to endure are not taken into consideration by employers, courts, etc. Therefore, it is the children that end up getting hurt at the end. They live in poverty and usually are exposed to dangerous situations when left in the care of a stranger, underage siblings, or even alone.

this "sound off" fascinated me enough that i wound up writing an issues paper on the topic, attempting to consider both sides of the issue... i also spoke with a parent of a child with special needs that told me how computers in their ability not to "judge" accepted him in ways even a diversity camp could not or would not do...
that being said, i wonder what would happen if instead of training teachers on technology use, and instead of the high cost of technology purchases, we in the field dedicated that same effort and expense to anti-bias and inclusion work, to play, to investigating reggio, etc...
ultimately the question may be moot... perhaps technology will decide for us that it will be in our classes... perhaps technology will decide for us how children play and interact... perhaps technology will decide for us the nature of social interaction... perhaps technology already has decided...
clearly, we teachers do not have the unified voice to stop it...
the line was drawn in the sand years ago... we didn't pay attention then...
now corporations market in our schools, and in many places preschool is little more than a boot camp for k-12 systems... which are little more than a farm system for our corporate world...
play versus technology? how about humanity versus technology... and humanity has already surrendered.

People can "talk the talk" about computers, but in the numerous classrooms I visit as a consultant, I see blatant abuse of this medium. To a young child, computers provide, nothing more than as Diane Levin terms it, "screen time." Her insight is evident to the astute observer by the child's glassy-eyed gaze at the screen, resembling a mesmerized Zombie more than an intent learner. Most of the software is not open-ended and it's use is sedentary, so the "opportunity cost" is that the users aren't up and about being creative and exploratory. Although never admitted, teachers often employ the computer as a "babysitter," because it is a way of getting more "difficult" children to sit still. Thus, children are allowed to sit and stare as long as they want, relinquishing time that might be spent in more active/hands-on pursuits. Most crucially is the gross motor time children are not being provided as is evident in all the obesity research. If the money spent on computers was used for climbers, what a different message there would be for children and parents about priorities. None of us had computers at this age, yet we've managed to figure them out fairly well as the need arose. Ironically, exposure to computers now is a little bit like expecting them to learn Mores Code. By the time they will be old enough to practically use one, it will be outdated by the next generation of information technology. The "sexiness" of technology often lures in more advocates than it warrants. How refreshing it would be for our field to get even more excited about "scrounge art" or obstacle courses, since the effects of these types of activities have a much more lasting impact on a child's future potential.