How to tackle the presence of a computer in my DS's nursery room and its affect on DS?

[catchafox]

My DS is 2.6. We don't let him use the computer at home. We don't have an Ipad. He watches one or two short (10 min DVDs) at home every other day. I love computers and technology - I just don't want him becoming stuck on them too early.

In his nursery - which is wonderful, and we are v v happy with it - where he is 2 x a week, there is a computer in his room. I assume it's part of the Early Years programme. They show various programmes/educational stuff. They do lots of stuff with the kids, so I know it's not on all the time.

The other day we were told when we picked him up that he was very keen to get on it. They insisted he was only for five minutes (at a time?) and others wanted it, so they took turns. I made it really clear to the key worker that it's the last thing I want him to do while there. She really understood.

Today my DH dropped him off and he went straight to the computer.

I understand this is not everyone's bug bear, but this really concerns me.

I know I have to trust that the nursery hear my views but do I speak to them further about it? Ask them their policy on how long its on for? What we do about him if he is really grabby for it?

Thanks noble for the link its really interesting I definitely see the distinction being made between passive screen time and interactive learning. It's annoying that even the experts are not giving the right info.
The article is still not claiming interactive media is good for them
'Unstructured playtime is more valuable for the developing brain than any electronic media expo- sure.'
I suppose we all just do what each of us believes is best for our own children.

Amiee- it is an area that hasn't been researched in much detail yet, there has been a lot of research looking at technology with older children and stuff with younger children starting to come out but nothing definative - that said most of what I have read for my dissertation seems quite positive about the use in moderation.

she has a vtech chidlrens camera, which yes is a toy. I would not buy her a real digital camera at the age of 5, because it is not old enough to be responsible for it.

Each to their own. I haven't slated anybody else's reasons, just given my own.

An innotab is a toy, an ipad isn't. Two very different things. My point is, that I don't think that expensive gadgets are childrens toys. Computers are educational, the same as toys and books. Everything has its place. DD will not fall behind, there is plenty of time yet for her to get into computers. She knows how to use one. When she can read properly and use the keyboard properly etc, then she can use the computer more often.

I love computers myself, but I do not want her becoming addicted at the age of 5 as some of her friends are.

This is an age old argument on MN and everybody always has very varying opinions on the subject.

They defined electronic media as watching a programme though, not anything interactive. They just don't talk about it at all. I think because it's so new, the research isn't there. It is a very different kettle of fish to watching TV though - the report talks about toddlers not understanding what they are viewing, but with a game, if they don't understand what they are doing, it usually won't work.

Sorry Skye I can't follow your logic at all.

Sky, basically it seems like you are buying a series of toys to replicate the experience of an iPad, while simultaneously saying that iPads aren't good for children.

sirzy thanks that's really interesting to know. Is there types of interactive tech that is better/worse than others. I'm thinking DS style games vrs iPad interactive learning apps for example. I realise you probably don't know if there isnt much research but I'm really interested in this area and would love to pick your knowledgable brains.

re. impact on eyesight - I do not know how evidence-based this is, but an ophthalmologist told my friend the Nintendo DS was positively good for her little boy's squint. Child was four at the time. Apparently the guy said it would encourage his eyes to work together.

The 'too much close work damages your eyesight' idea is generally said to be untrue, but I think there have been some studies showing an association. Certainly adults are advised to take screen breaks of 15 minutes in every hour - I've no idea how evidence-based that is, either, but presumably should be much higher rate of break-to-screen-time for children.

This is all theory though, in real life ds (10) moves from the laptop in the study to the Kindle fire on his lap in the sitting room to the TV... I do try to interrupt his screen time with other stuff too, but vaguely hope that different focal distances and positioning of the equipment will be better than just sitting staring at one device for hours on end...

I haven't seen anything yet which focuses on specific. The main pattern I have spotted is that educational things are more likely to have a benefit than just gaming (which is pretty obvious really!)

I am saying that an ipad is not a toy, it was not designed for children. An innotab is a toy, yes that replicates an ipad, but it is a very different thing.

I would not give her an ipad because it is not a toy and very expensive. Her dad gave her the DS because he didn't want it any more. We bought the camera because she wanted a camera. The innotab was her main Christmas present because it cost £65 which is a lot of money.

Those things are totally aimed at children. An ipad isn't, although obviously you can get apps for children to play on it.

I don't let her use my iphone because she moves all of the icons all over the place. I wouldnt let her use an ipad if I had one, for the same reason. These things are work tools to me, not childrens toys. That is my point.

But that is a competly different thing than this thread is about. It is looking at the effect of the technology on children and in that sense it makes no difference whether they are playing on an innotab or a leappad!

It's ridiculous to argue that DC who have limited or no computer time as small children will be disadvantaged. I am not that old but I did not encounter computers (other than as glorified typewriters) until I got my first job. Technology is much easier to use now than it was in the 1990s, and by the time the OP's 2 year old is grown up it'll probably take no skills to use it at all. Even my 70-something father who never listens to instructions and didn't use a computer till he retired can force a PC to do more or less what he wants - the only issue he had was finding the mouse fiddly, and now you don't even need that.

I can see that banning something makes it attractive, however.

edam I don't think that it is fair to say that it is "generally said to be untrue" - I would say rather that studies in different populations have had differing results, if that makes sense.

I know for example that a large study of myopia progression in Singaporean children didn't find a significant correlation between no. of books read and increased myopia. But then a pretty large study in Australia (abstract here specifically identified longer periods of continuous reading or particularly close work as associated with increased myopia.

That's interesting, Takver, thanks for linking. Maybe it is the intensity of reading. Would be intrigued if there was another study that examines time spent with hand-held screens (tablets/smartphones/gaming etc.) and adjusts for other factors like reading.

Agree, it would be very interesting. I'm sure that it will get taken into account over time as future studies take place.

Mountain/molehill.

^^^ this, sheesh.

am blind as a bat and was a bookworm as a child, but my Mum's also v. shortsighted and reads a lot, so who knows which is cause and which effect...?

Good article about children and computers. Worth the read.

I definitely agree Edam, in fact I think it is even more complicated than that, as there is an argument that those prone to shortsightedness are drawn to close work from an early age as they can focus there better (not sure I'm explaining that well).

Given we have a family history of early and rapidly progressing shortsightedness esp on DHs side our inclination was to avoid anything that could potentially make it worse. Its not something that would worry me if we didn't have that background as myopia is so strongly family linked already.

duchesse, that's a great article.

(As an interesting aside, I read 90% of the article thinking it was written by a woman, then got to the techno-dad bit & realised it was a bloke. Do I possibly know too many sarky female techies . . . ?)

Interesting article, duchesse and I agree that a lot of kids that I teach know bugger all about computers (often a computer that they declare to be 'broken' can be fixed by plugging the monitor in) and are dreadful for letting other kids know their password then declaring that they've been 'hacked' when someone uses their account (no, you've just been an idiot).

I don't think it's necessarily a bad thing that computers are closed systems these days, that you don't need to know how to change your video card or install drivers - those things in the past were more of a source of frustration and wasted time than anything else. Back then, a lot of people learned how to use a computer from playing computer games, the bloody things always needed more memory than you had, or a super VGA video card when yours was a crappy VGA.

But yes, simply using a computer doesn't make you computer literate. Neither does being scared of them, or heavily restricting their usage. One colleague in my department was handed an iPad and was literally too scared to do anything with it, in case she did something wrong. Doing something wrong is the first step to learning how to fix it.

thanks for that link duchesse, interesting read. I made the same assumption as Takver, that it was a woman, and was surprised that it was a man. Perhaps because we headed here from MN where the default assumption is female? Or maybe because it was a teacher and our default assumption for teacher is 'female'? (I wasn't aware mine was, just trying to work out why I'd made an assumption.)

skyeskye - regarding cameras and 5 being too young for a real camera, we got ds1 a real digital camera as his main Christmas present when he was 4, mainly because I wanted to reclaim mine! I looked at the kiddy cameras like the vetch one but the pictures they took (going back 4 years so might be better now) were fairly rubbish and there was hardly any storage.

Almost 4 years on, his £50 camera (got a half price bargain) is still going strong and he can take great pictures on it. He knows it's an expensive grown up camera that he has to take great care of, just like mummy takes care of her cameras. He knows his way round all the features on his camera and all of mine, his granny's, his great aunt's and his aunt's too. He's now confident enough with cameras to pick up most cameras and use them if say we are out with friends and they want a picture of themselves. and I love looking through his pictures - obvious he has a lower viewpoint than I do but he has a great eye for pictures and ends up with great but quirky set of shots.

It's also taught him to respect and care for technology - kids I've known that had a rough and tumble camera first took much longer to be careful with their first real cameras or to do much more than point and shoot.

I think its the same for all technology and young kids, it's a bit like alcohol. Give it to them early, make them respect it from the start, see it as normal and something to have in moderation and they grow up and don't go off and binge and overindulge as soon as they can if it's seen as a very desirable but forbidden thing.

Oh and excellent article duchesse

Completely agree with what he says - but I'm biased as we're one of the geeky family 5% as we have a raspberry pi and dh has a couple of kids coding environments set up on the family pc that the dc (8&5) both like using. Ds2 (5) can't really read yet, he's still at a fairly basic level, but he can use the programming environment to string small program's together to animate a cartoon character and has got his head around the structuring of code even if he can't type it off his own back yet. And he's starting to learn about settings - he knows he's not allowed to use the ipadvor iPhone without turning off wifi first. we also have Mavis beacon typing tutor on there as one of the games they are encouraged to play so that hopefully by the time they hit secondary school they will be competent touch typists. I remember seeing a sonic (?) game come out for the ds that had a keyboard and had the ulterior motive of teaching touch typing; I was hoping a wii version would come out but haven't seen one (which reminds me, must go and check again). But how completely sensible - a game kids love to play and pick up touch typing for free while you play. Win win all around.

Apparently the raspberry pi was developed because Cambridge Computer science department got fed up of people turning up to do computer science thinking the 'knew' programming when in fact all they could do was throw a few web pages together. I know it has now evolved into so much more - but it was created just so there was something around like the old spectrum and BBC computers that you had to program yourself if you wanted them to do something and to get kids to realise that they can

Absolutely agree with you OP.
My ds2 who is only 14 months has had way more exposure to screens than his older brother by virtue of having an older brother. It is the one thing he is most likely to hit or bite for, he jumps up and down wildly if there is one in the immediate vicinity, he is clearly enthralled by it. We let him go on a few things and would be hard pressed not to as his grandparents think an iPad is the key to babysitting young children but there is no way it compares to experiential learning with 3d objects and human interaction and even more than television, it can make the everyday seem full and mundane.

I'm surprised at the reaction here. Many on MN view television as some sort of poison. Once everyone thought of it as an amazing early learning g tool now though its educational potential is great for older children it is pretty much discouraged in the early years. What's the difference? So called interactivity?

Someone above said 'but a blackboard is boring'. It shouldn't be to a toddler. A tube of toothpaste or a toilet roll should be a source of much fun to a toddler. Real world first,, cyber world later.