In the Canadian Province of Quebec, it is illegal to advertise to
children under 13. And they mean it. This week, Saputo Inc., plead
guilty to twenty-two charges of violating the ad ban for using Igor
the Gorilla to market snack cakes in daycare centers. Similar charges
are pending against McDonald's, Burger King and General Mills.
Quebec's child advertising ban is wildly popular. A recent survey
found that nine out of ten Quebecers think that it is necessary to
control advertising targeting children. Most of the respondents
thought that the Consumer Protection Act (Loi sur la protection du
consommateur) banning advertising targeting children under 13 should
be enforced "more severely" (60%) or "as severely" (31%). For more
information, visit
http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/news/2009/01/junkfoodwars.html.
Friday, February 20, 2009
Saturday, November 29, 2008
Junk Food Ads Banned in UK
Children’s Programs Will No Longer Include Ads for Junk Food by Jan Zeiger
The UK's telecommunications regulator, Ofcom, recently passed new regulations that will end all junk food advertising to television viewers under the age of 16.
It’s no secret that young viewers are inundated with ads, many of which glamorize food and beverages which could be considered “junk” due to their high fat, sugar, or salt content. A recent study on food-related advertising found 130 food-related ads in about 100 hours of preschool programming. More than half of these ads were geared towards children, with most of them promoting sugary cereals and fast food. Also noted in the report was the fact that the advertisements appeared to be focused on gaining brand recognition rather than immediate sales. It seems that a main goal of ads that target children is to present the product as exciting or fun, resulting in a positive association with the recommended food or beverage.
This study was done on three television networks: PBS, Disney, and Nickelodeon. PBS and Disney consider their preschool blocks of television to be “Ad-Free” but frequently show logos and feature slogans and music of their sponsors which include McDonald’s and Chuck E. Cheese.
The UK is the first industrialized nation to ban television ads that encourage young children to consume junk food. While the ban won’t occur overnight, it will eventually include all programming geared towards children under the age of 16. The Center for Science in the Public Interest is in favor of such regulations and hopes that the US will follow suit. The United States currently has an organization that reviews ads targeted to children, but the Children’s Advertising Review Unit does not consider a product's nutritional value.
The CSPI teamed up with the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood in 2006 and threatened to sue Kellogg and Viacom (owner of Nickelodeon) over their marketing practices. This is in response to the Federal Trade Commission’s promise that it simply won’t place restrictions on ads aired during children’s programs. It is important to note that a new voluntary program, The Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, is designed to help promote healthier lifestyles among children. Voluntary participants of the initiative include Coca Cola, Campbell’s Soup, and Kraft Foods.
Sources:
Dr. Susan M. Connor, PhD. “Food-Related Advertising on Preschool Television: Building Brand Recognition in Young Viewers” Pediatrics. October 2006.
Center for Science in the Public Interest--2/23/07 press release
The copyright of the article Junk Food Ads Banned in UK in Children’s TV is owned by Jan Zeiger.
http://childrenstv.suite101.com/article.cfm/junk_food_ads_banned_in_uk
The UK's telecommunications regulator, Ofcom, recently passed new regulations that will end all junk food advertising to television viewers under the age of 16.
It’s no secret that young viewers are inundated with ads, many of which glamorize food and beverages which could be considered “junk” due to their high fat, sugar, or salt content. A recent study on food-related advertising found 130 food-related ads in about 100 hours of preschool programming. More than half of these ads were geared towards children, with most of them promoting sugary cereals and fast food. Also noted in the report was the fact that the advertisements appeared to be focused on gaining brand recognition rather than immediate sales. It seems that a main goal of ads that target children is to present the product as exciting or fun, resulting in a positive association with the recommended food or beverage.
This study was done on three television networks: PBS, Disney, and Nickelodeon. PBS and Disney consider their preschool blocks of television to be “Ad-Free” but frequently show logos and feature slogans and music of their sponsors which include McDonald’s and Chuck E. Cheese.
The UK is the first industrialized nation to ban television ads that encourage young children to consume junk food. While the ban won’t occur overnight, it will eventually include all programming geared towards children under the age of 16. The Center for Science in the Public Interest is in favor of such regulations and hopes that the US will follow suit. The United States currently has an organization that reviews ads targeted to children, but the Children’s Advertising Review Unit does not consider a product's nutritional value.
The CSPI teamed up with the Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood in 2006 and threatened to sue Kellogg and Viacom (owner of Nickelodeon) over their marketing practices. This is in response to the Federal Trade Commission’s promise that it simply won’t place restrictions on ads aired during children’s programs. It is important to note that a new voluntary program, The Children’s Food and Beverage Advertising Initiative, is designed to help promote healthier lifestyles among children. Voluntary participants of the initiative include Coca Cola, Campbell’s Soup, and Kraft Foods.
Sources:
Dr. Susan M. Connor, PhD. “Food-Related Advertising on Preschool Television: Building Brand Recognition in Young Viewers” Pediatrics. October 2006.
Center for Science in the Public Interest--2/23/07 press release
The copyright of the article Junk Food Ads Banned in UK in Children’s TV is owned by Jan Zeiger.
http://childrenstv.suite101.com/article.cfm/junk_food_ads_banned_in_uk
Wednesday, November 19, 2008
Target market: Children as consumers
What do you call a consumer who wants to buy everything you have, doesn't care what it costs and is less than five feet tall? A marketer's dream? Nope. You call them kids. -- AdRelevance Intelligence Report, 2000
Children are bombarded by brand messages almost from birth, including counting books for preschoolers that use M&Ms or Cheerios, exposure to brightly coloured and appealing branded packaging in the supermarket, movie and toy tie-ins in fast-food restaurants, product placement in movies, advertisements on television and the Internet, and pitches from entertainment and sports stars in a range of media. In fact, it's almost impossible to escape marketing messages. No wonder, then, that children as young as two are starting to recognize logos and request specific brands as soon as they begin to speak.
Children are a prime target for marketers. Not only do children today have more disposable income at younger ages, but they have significant influence over family purchases. YTV's 2002 Tween Report estimated that Canadian children aged 9 to 14 spend $1.9 billion and influence $20 billion in family purchases per year. Marketing experts call it "pester power," or the "nag factor" -- the ability to get kids to nag their parents to buy a specific product or take them to a specific restaurant. After all, if your child asks you for the latest toy 37 times a day for a week, the odds are that you'll eventually give in and buy it.
As a result, there is now a whole segment of the marketing industry devoted to figuring out how to sell things to kids. Children were first identified as a target market in the 1960s, and the concept has continued to increase in popularity, as shown by the recent explosion of books with titles like What Kids Buy and Why: The Psychology of Marketing to Kids; BrandChild: Remarkable Insights into the Minds of Today's Global Kids and Their Relationships with Brands; and Kidfluence: The Marketer's Guide to Understanding and Reaching Generation Y Kids, Tweens, and Teens.
The ages and stages of advertising
In Canada, the average child watches about two hours of television a day and sees more than 20,000 commercials per year. And marketers have become increasingly sophisticated, using research into developmental psychology to exploit children's age-specific vulnerabilities and make their messages that much more powerful:
Up to age four or five, most children don't understand that there is a difference between entertainment and advertising. They watch commercials and television programs with equal attention. Commercials aimed at this group often associate the product or brand with fun and happiness, rather than talking about actual product facts.
Children don't develop a concept of other people's beliefs, desires, and motives, known as "theory of mind," until they are at least six years old. It's difficult for children younger than seven or eight years old to understand that the intent of advertising is to get them to buy things. They also tend to take advertised claims about a product literally.
Tweens, age eight to 12 years, understand the purpose of ads but are still vulnerable to them. These children are starting to develop their sense of identity. "Aspirational" marketing targets their desire to be slightly older and seem more sophisticated than they are.
Teenagers are trying to differentiate themselves from their parents and fit in with their peer group. Marketing aimed at teenagers may focus on teens' insecurities, or it may take positive qualities such as their activism and desire to challenge conformity and repackage them in the form of cool, counter-culture brands.
Children with developmental disabilities or problems with impulsivity may be even more vulnerable to advertising messages than other children their age.
Professionals who work with children are becoming increasingly concerned about this onslaught. In 2003, the Canadian Paediatric Society issued a position statement on the impact of media on children and youth that raised several concerns about advertising. In 2004, a coalition of Canadian health groups led by the Centre for Science in the Public Interest called for a ban on advertising aimed at children 13 or younger. Quebec has already banned print and broadcast advertising aimed at children under 13, although children certainly see advertising from other sources as well.
Selling fat and sugar
Many activists consider food advertising to be a leading cause of the increase in overweight in children. A report released in December 2005 by the Institute of Medicine, Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity?, observed that in the United States alone, over $11 billion dollars a year is spent on marketing food and beverages to children. And the food advertised to children is generally less than nutritious: most of it is highly processed, rich in saturated fat, salt, and sugar, and poor in nutrients like fibre, vitamins, calcium, and iron. A study in the September 2005 issue of the American Journal of Public Health, which analyzed television commercials shown in the U.S. during programs children watch, found that:
Children are bombarded by brand messages almost from birth, including counting books for preschoolers that use M&Ms or Cheerios, exposure to brightly coloured and appealing branded packaging in the supermarket, movie and toy tie-ins in fast-food restaurants, product placement in movies, advertisements on television and the Internet, and pitches from entertainment and sports stars in a range of media. In fact, it's almost impossible to escape marketing messages. No wonder, then, that children as young as two are starting to recognize logos and request specific brands as soon as they begin to speak.
Children are a prime target for marketers. Not only do children today have more disposable income at younger ages, but they have significant influence over family purchases. YTV's 2002 Tween Report estimated that Canadian children aged 9 to 14 spend $1.9 billion and influence $20 billion in family purchases per year. Marketing experts call it "pester power," or the "nag factor" -- the ability to get kids to nag their parents to buy a specific product or take them to a specific restaurant. After all, if your child asks you for the latest toy 37 times a day for a week, the odds are that you'll eventually give in and buy it.
As a result, there is now a whole segment of the marketing industry devoted to figuring out how to sell things to kids. Children were first identified as a target market in the 1960s, and the concept has continued to increase in popularity, as shown by the recent explosion of books with titles like What Kids Buy and Why: The Psychology of Marketing to Kids; BrandChild: Remarkable Insights into the Minds of Today's Global Kids and Their Relationships with Brands; and Kidfluence: The Marketer's Guide to Understanding and Reaching Generation Y Kids, Tweens, and Teens.
The ages and stages of advertising
In Canada, the average child watches about two hours of television a day and sees more than 20,000 commercials per year. And marketers have become increasingly sophisticated, using research into developmental psychology to exploit children's age-specific vulnerabilities and make their messages that much more powerful:
Up to age four or five, most children don't understand that there is a difference between entertainment and advertising. They watch commercials and television programs with equal attention. Commercials aimed at this group often associate the product or brand with fun and happiness, rather than talking about actual product facts.
Children don't develop a concept of other people's beliefs, desires, and motives, known as "theory of mind," until they are at least six years old. It's difficult for children younger than seven or eight years old to understand that the intent of advertising is to get them to buy things. They also tend to take advertised claims about a product literally.
Tweens, age eight to 12 years, understand the purpose of ads but are still vulnerable to them. These children are starting to develop their sense of identity. "Aspirational" marketing targets their desire to be slightly older and seem more sophisticated than they are.
Teenagers are trying to differentiate themselves from their parents and fit in with their peer group. Marketing aimed at teenagers may focus on teens' insecurities, or it may take positive qualities such as their activism and desire to challenge conformity and repackage them in the form of cool, counter-culture brands.
Children with developmental disabilities or problems with impulsivity may be even more vulnerable to advertising messages than other children their age.
Professionals who work with children are becoming increasingly concerned about this onslaught. In 2003, the Canadian Paediatric Society issued a position statement on the impact of media on children and youth that raised several concerns about advertising. In 2004, a coalition of Canadian health groups led by the Centre for Science in the Public Interest called for a ban on advertising aimed at children 13 or younger. Quebec has already banned print and broadcast advertising aimed at children under 13, although children certainly see advertising from other sources as well.
Selling fat and sugar
Many activists consider food advertising to be a leading cause of the increase in overweight in children. A report released in December 2005 by the Institute of Medicine, Food Marketing to Children and Youth: Threat or Opportunity?, observed that in the United States alone, over $11 billion dollars a year is spent on marketing food and beverages to children. And the food advertised to children is generally less than nutritious: most of it is highly processed, rich in saturated fat, salt, and sugar, and poor in nutrients like fibre, vitamins, calcium, and iron. A study in the September 2005 issue of the American Journal of Public Health, which analyzed television commercials shown in the U.S. during programs children watch, found that:
- An average of 10.6 food commercials were shown per hour, meaning that a child who watches two hours of television per day would see nearly 8,000 food commercials per year.
- Eighty-three per cent of the advertisements were for convenience foods, fast foods, candy, and soft drinks, compared to only 2% for fruits and vegetables.
- Commercials showed snack-time eating more often than breakfast, lunch, and dinner combined.
- A 2000-calorie diet made up of the foods in ads aimed at children would give more than the recommended daily value of sodium and would contain 171 g (nearly 1 cup) of added sugar.
- Most characters in the advertisements were of average weight, no matter what or how much they ate.
Food manufacturers and advertisers urge physical exercise and media literacy through programs such as Long Live Kids, developed by Concerned Children's Advertisers. They also argue that it's up to parents to watch what their children eat and teach them healthy habits. "Sure they should," say Kelly Brownell and Katherine Battle Horgen in their book Food Fight, "but look at what interferes. Parents try their best, but it is no contest between them and pressures to eat unhealthy food…. A few parents prevail in the face of this pressure, but they are dwindling in number." While physical exercise, media literacy, and moderation are all good things, it's foolish to ignore the impact of food marketing on children.
Psychologist Susan Linn, author of Consuming Kids: The Hostile Takeover of Childhood, goes further. She writes, "Marketing products by feeding into children's 'need to be in control' exacerbates an ongoing, normal tension in family life that arises as children move from the total dependence of infancy to the independence of adulthood." She argues that advertising aimed at kids deliberately undermines the parent-child relationship, both by encouraging children to nag their parents for what they want, and by portraying parents and other adults as either absent or incompetent.
Protecting kids from marketing messages: What parents can do
- Start young. Children are influenced by marketing from a very young age.
- Limit children's exposure to advertising on television and on the Internet. Don't allow them to have televisions or Internet-enabled computers in their rooms, and limit TV time to one or two hours per day.
- Talk to your kids about how advertising works and what advertisers are trying to accomplish. Explain that advertising is a multi-billion dollar business whose goal is to get people to buy things, and that they are very good at it.
- Encourage kids to think critically about marketing messages. You can start as small as you like: last year a Grade 6 math class in Thunder Bay, Ontario debunked a "fun fact" on a package of Smarties, which claimed that Canadians eat enough Smarties each year to circle the earth 350 times. They found that in order for the claim to be true, either the earth would have to be a lot smaller, or each Smartie would have to be 3.5 metres in diameter.
- Help kids to understand the strategies used by advertisers. Talk with kids about specific ads: "How do you feel about the people in the ad? Do you want to be like them? Why or why not? Does the ad make you feel uncool for not owning the product, or that you'll feel good about yourself if you buy the product? What are some other ways you could get those feelings, without buying the product? Has the ad used any ambiguous words or impressive-sounding facts and figures to make the product sound better than it is? At the end, did the announcer say anything like 'some assembly required' or 'batteries not included'?"
- Explain about product placement: if characters in a movie or TV show are using a particular brand, the advertiser probably paid a lot of money for it to be there.
- Discuss how your kids can be smart, responsible consumers by knowing what is good for them and what isn't, what is good for the environment and what isn't, and what is good value for money.
- Educate children about nutrition using Canada's Food Guide. Discuss whether eating only things you see on TV makes for a healthy, balanced diet. Make a distinction between "everyday" foods and "sometimes" foods.
- Before going grocery shopping, decide exactly what you plan to buy, including snacks and treats. Having a list that you and your kids have discussed ahead of time makes it easier to avoid impulse purchases and set limits in the store.
- Monitor your own media habits and buying habits, and change them if necessary. Children pick up early on what's important to their parents.
- Make sure TV, Internet, and video game "screen time" is balanced with family time, active, creative play, playing outdoors, reading, and other activities without marketing attached.
- Know that you're probably not alone. Share your concerns about advertising with other parents. You may be able to find other parents who feel the same way you do, and you may be able to settle on consistent rules for TV-watching.
Robin MarwickMedical Writer, AboutKidsHealth
Talking to Kids about Advertising
Today's kids have become the most marketed-to generation in history, due to their spending power and their future influence as adult consumers. By talking to kids about advertising - how it works and how they're targeted - we can help them to become more savvy as consumers and more resistant to the pressures to be "cool."
Here are some tips on talking to kids about advertising.
Start young.
Until the age of six or seven, children have difficulty distinguishing advertising from reality and may not understand that ads are there to sell something. In fact, children watching TV often find the commercials more engaging than the programs! Talking to children about advertising from an early age encourages them to become active - not passive - consumers of commercial messages.
Explain how advertising works.
Talk about how the job of marketers is to play on human insecurities by creating ads that imply their products will improve our lives and bring us happiness. Have kids make a list of the good things in their lives (the things they value) and then make a list of the things they wish they could buy. Have them compare the "real life" list with the "wish" list. Do they think the things on the wish list will bring them happiness? If so, why?
Point out the tricks of the trade.
Explain that advertisers use many methods to get us to buy their products. Some common "tricks of the trade" include pulling on our heartstrings by drawing us into a story and making us feel good; using misleading words, such as "the taste of real . . . ," "studies have shown" and "for a limited time only"; making exaggerated claims about a product; and using cartoon characters or celebrities to sell products or brand names.
Explain how marketers target young people.
Look for examples of how marketers try to build brand loyalty in young children. Talk about cross-marketing - show how the release of a new kids' movie is usually preceded by a huge marketing campaign involving tie-in toys, fast food, clothing and books. Explain how marketers target image-conscious pre-teens and teens with messages about being "cool" and attractive.
De-construct food advertising.
Most food advertising aimed at kids is for fast food, candy and pre-sweetened cereals. Point out misleading language in food commercials, such as a description of a sugary cereal that is "part of a nutritious breakfast" or "natural fruit roll-ups" that don't contain any fruit. Explain how food is prepared by special artists to look perfect in ads. Talk about how fast food restaurants use tie-ins with popular movies and TV shows in order to attract kids.
Talk about the value of money.
One of the most important lessons we can teach our children is how to be smart about money. Our consumer culture promotes spending over saving, so we have to counter that message on a regular basis by discussing purchasing decisions and money-management skills with kids.
Discuss how to be a wise and responsible consumer.
Show kids how to comparison shop, read reviews and investigate warranties. Talk about the effect of mass consumerism on the environment. Encourage them to think about ways they can cut down on buying non-essential consumer products.
Media Awareness Network
Here are some tips on talking to kids about advertising.
Start young.
Until the age of six or seven, children have difficulty distinguishing advertising from reality and may not understand that ads are there to sell something. In fact, children watching TV often find the commercials more engaging than the programs! Talking to children about advertising from an early age encourages them to become active - not passive - consumers of commercial messages.
Explain how advertising works.
Talk about how the job of marketers is to play on human insecurities by creating ads that imply their products will improve our lives and bring us happiness. Have kids make a list of the good things in their lives (the things they value) and then make a list of the things they wish they could buy. Have them compare the "real life" list with the "wish" list. Do they think the things on the wish list will bring them happiness? If so, why?
Point out the tricks of the trade.
Explain that advertisers use many methods to get us to buy their products. Some common "tricks of the trade" include pulling on our heartstrings by drawing us into a story and making us feel good; using misleading words, such as "the taste of real . . . ," "studies have shown" and "for a limited time only"; making exaggerated claims about a product; and using cartoon characters or celebrities to sell products or brand names.
Explain how marketers target young people.
Look for examples of how marketers try to build brand loyalty in young children. Talk about cross-marketing - show how the release of a new kids' movie is usually preceded by a huge marketing campaign involving tie-in toys, fast food, clothing and books. Explain how marketers target image-conscious pre-teens and teens with messages about being "cool" and attractive.
De-construct food advertising.
Most food advertising aimed at kids is for fast food, candy and pre-sweetened cereals. Point out misleading language in food commercials, such as a description of a sugary cereal that is "part of a nutritious breakfast" or "natural fruit roll-ups" that don't contain any fruit. Explain how food is prepared by special artists to look perfect in ads. Talk about how fast food restaurants use tie-ins with popular movies and TV shows in order to attract kids.
Talk about the value of money.
One of the most important lessons we can teach our children is how to be smart about money. Our consumer culture promotes spending over saving, so we have to counter that message on a regular basis by discussing purchasing decisions and money-management skills with kids.
Discuss how to be a wise and responsible consumer.
Show kids how to comparison shop, read reviews and investigate warranties. Talk about the effect of mass consumerism on the environment. Encourage them to think about ways they can cut down on buying non-essential consumer products.
Media Awareness Network
Tuesday, October 28, 2008
why choose carefully what we are showing to our children?
Children re-enact what they are watching.
Observe your children, if you show them Dora, they will certainly play Dora after screening it.
If you show them Cow-boys and indians, they will play those... etc...
That is why it is so important to choose carefully which programs you are showing to them. In a collectivity, if you show children scary or violent programs, it will excite them. And I do consider some classics to be violent and scary, most Disney are!
Seeing Bambi loose his mother or Dumbo being so badly treated, makes many children uncomfortable (a very healthy reaction of course). They will have to expel those feeling by acting up. It is a natural way to "digest" those images.
If the collectivity, let's say, a school, for example, because it is raining outside, show a positive program, one with only good message and no scary images. You can be sure that the children will feel good after screening it, and certainly re-enact those good images.
Mary Poppins is a good example. It suggests great ideas and good feelings.
I believe that no collectivity and particularly school should ever show programs with a violent or scary side. Plus, considering that most of the children in America are watching too much TV and movies already at home, and certainly not much documentaries, school seems to be the best place to show them great documentaries which help them discover new facts and probably make them think about the subject, eventually speak about it with their teacher after.
Observe your children, if you show them Dora, they will certainly play Dora after screening it.
If you show them Cow-boys and indians, they will play those... etc...
That is why it is so important to choose carefully which programs you are showing to them. In a collectivity, if you show children scary or violent programs, it will excite them. And I do consider some classics to be violent and scary, most Disney are!
Seeing Bambi loose his mother or Dumbo being so badly treated, makes many children uncomfortable (a very healthy reaction of course). They will have to expel those feeling by acting up. It is a natural way to "digest" those images.
If the collectivity, let's say, a school, for example, because it is raining outside, show a positive program, one with only good message and no scary images. You can be sure that the children will feel good after screening it, and certainly re-enact those good images.
Mary Poppins is a good example. It suggests great ideas and good feelings.
I believe that no collectivity and particularly school should ever show programs with a violent or scary side. Plus, considering that most of the children in America are watching too much TV and movies already at home, and certainly not much documentaries, school seems to be the best place to show them great documentaries which help them discover new facts and probably make them think about the subject, eventually speak about it with their teacher after.
Sunday, October 26, 2008
media education
We are continuing our media education using cartoon without the sound, then with it... as explained in the precedent post. The children are used to it, they are living it as a game and getting better and better at it.
As I said, this exercice create reflex in the way they watch the TV. Their attention is not only global, they do perceived details. Being aware of those make them watch videos or TV programs differently.
The idea is to give the children the media education we get in film school!
As I said, this exercice create reflex in the way they watch the TV. Their attention is not only global, they do perceived details. Being aware of those make them watch videos or TV programs differently.
The idea is to give the children the media education we get in film school!
Friday, August 29, 2008
Media class
I believe in media education, the same way I believe in teaching kids how to swim in order to feel safe near water.
So today we started one of our media class, I used a bugs bunny cartoon, those cartoon are great to work on.
The exercise is simple, showing the cartoon without the sound first and asking the kid to tell the story.
Then showing the cartoon and asking what he noticed, what seemed different?
Now, beside the picture what can we notice in this cartoon: sound effect, voices, music.
So we watch ones again the cartoon focusing on the voices, the tone of the voices, the intonation....
Then we watch it again focusing on the sound effects, kids usually really like that part :-)
it is also a good occasion to explain to them how those sound are made, that someone is making them. And even let them try making some.
Then we watch it again focusing on the music, joyful music? Sad? Scaring?
And explain that music is there to accentuate emotion.
What is the purpose of all that?
Make the children aware of everything involved in a cartoon, and then in any other fiction. That way their perception will be sharp and complete.
This little exercise repeated over and over will create reflexes the same way you learn how to push the brake when it is time too.
This exercise is what film student are doing in film school.
For me, media education is essential in this so visual world.
So today we started one of our media class, I used a bugs bunny cartoon, those cartoon are great to work on.
The exercise is simple, showing the cartoon without the sound first and asking the kid to tell the story.
Then showing the cartoon and asking what he noticed, what seemed different?
Now, beside the picture what can we notice in this cartoon: sound effect, voices, music.
So we watch ones again the cartoon focusing on the voices, the tone of the voices, the intonation....
Then we watch it again focusing on the sound effects, kids usually really like that part :-)
it is also a good occasion to explain to them how those sound are made, that someone is making them. And even let them try making some.
Then we watch it again focusing on the music, joyful music? Sad? Scaring?
And explain that music is there to accentuate emotion.
What is the purpose of all that?
Make the children aware of everything involved in a cartoon, and then in any other fiction. That way their perception will be sharp and complete.
This little exercise repeated over and over will create reflexes the same way you learn how to push the brake when it is time too.
This exercise is what film student are doing in film school.
For me, media education is essential in this so visual world.
Thursday, August 28, 2008
Making commercial
My children did not see commercials yet but they love to make fakes ones!
But what is a commercial: it is a Television advertisement.
"The vast majority of television advertisements today consist of brief advertising spots, ranging in length from a few seconds to several minutes (as well as program-length infomercials). Advertisements of this sort have been used to sell every product imaginable over the years, from household products to goods and services, to political campaigns. The effect of television advertisements upon the viewing public has been so successful and so pervasive that it is considered impossible for a politician to wage a successful election campaign, in the United States, without use of television advertising." (http://www.answers.com/topic/television-advertisement)
This is exactly what I explained to my 6 years old children: commercials exist to make you do what they want instead of what you want, they exist to create needs that you would never have without them. And for all that, they lie. They got it and it makes them laugh, so they love making some fake ones.
What is the idea in all that: making is taking control. Knowing, understanding what a commercial is, how it's made and for what goal, will build a kind of protection against its influence.
This is part of this media education I believe essential to give to our children today, in this world where Television has such a big part of the life of many families.
But what is a commercial: it is a Television advertisement.
"The vast majority of television advertisements today consist of brief advertising spots, ranging in length from a few seconds to several minutes (as well as program-length infomercials). Advertisements of this sort have been used to sell every product imaginable over the years, from household products to goods and services, to political campaigns. The effect of television advertisements upon the viewing public has been so successful and so pervasive that it is considered impossible for a politician to wage a successful election campaign, in the United States, without use of television advertising." (http://www.answers.com/topic/television-advertisement)
This is exactly what I explained to my 6 years old children: commercials exist to make you do what they want instead of what you want, they exist to create needs that you would never have without them. And for all that, they lie. They got it and it makes them laugh, so they love making some fake ones.
What is the idea in all that: making is taking control. Knowing, understanding what a commercial is, how it's made and for what goal, will build a kind of protection against its influence.
This is part of this media education I believe essential to give to our children today, in this world where Television has such a big part of the life of many families.
Friday, May 23, 2008
first contact with cinema
French inventors Louis Lumière and Auguste Lumière were technologically and artistically of great importance to the development of cinema.
A demonstration of the Edison Kinetoscope in 1894 inspired the Lumiere brothers toward motion pictures.
By the following year, Louis had created and patented the cinématographe, the device that changed the face of early cinema. A combination camera, projection device, and printer, the hand-cranked cinématographe differed from Edison's camera in that it was relatively compact and easy to transport while Edison's was cumbersome, noisy, and used 48 frames per second as opposed to Lumière's 16.
With the cinématographe, the brothers were able to chronicle daily events outside the studio.
Their first such film, La Sortie des Usines (1895), filmed workers leaving the Lumière factory at day's end. They made 19 more little films including the famed L'Arrivee d'un Train en Gare, and Les Repas de Bebe, as well as the early slapstick film L'Arroseur Arrosee (Watering the Gardener).
As my children were not yet exposed to cinema, movies, I started by showing them Lumieres movies!
So they were able to appreciate, "l'arrivee du train en gare de la Ciotat" noticing all the details! They were particularly interested to see that people were dressed differently and that there were no cars.
Georges Méliès was a French filmmaker famous for leading many technical and narrative developments in the earliest cinema.
He was very innovative in the use of special effects. He accidentally discovered the stop trick, or substitution, in 1896, and was one of the first filmmakers to use multiple exposures, time-lapse photography, dissolves, and hand-painted color in his films.
Because of his ability to seemingly manipulate and transform reality with the cinematography, Méliès is sometimes referred to as the "Cinemagician."
My children ADORE Melies movies! They are a lot of fun to watch, silent movie full of magic and fantasy. They appreciate particularly "sorcellerie culinaire" (1903) et "La conquète du pole" (1912)
I believe that it is important to start a story at the beginning.
The same way we usually start to read the alphabet before reading words, it makes sense to have our first contact with cinema with the first movies ever done. I believe that it does help to apprehend this audiovisual language as well as he does help to differentiate fiction from reality.
We finished this first contact with cinema screening "Entr'acte" by Rene Clair (1984).
For this production, the Dadaists collaborating on the project invented a new mode of production: instantanéisme. The complete film takes about 20 minutes using such techniques as watching people run in slow motion, watching things happen in reverse, looking at a ballet dancer from underneath, watching an egg over a fountain of water get shot and instantly become a bird and watching people disappear. The cast included cameo appearances by Francis Picabia, Erik Satie, Man Ray, and Marcel Duchamp.
My children laugh a lot during this screening, particularly looking at the ballet dancer from underneath, they first did not see what it was, then they noticed the feet, and that was the beginning of a long laugh. They like the movie and it was a lot of fun to watch it with them.
A demonstration of the Edison Kinetoscope in 1894 inspired the Lumiere brothers toward motion pictures.
By the following year, Louis had created and patented the cinématographe, the device that changed the face of early cinema. A combination camera, projection device, and printer, the hand-cranked cinématographe differed from Edison's camera in that it was relatively compact and easy to transport while Edison's was cumbersome, noisy, and used 48 frames per second as opposed to Lumière's 16.
With the cinématographe, the brothers were able to chronicle daily events outside the studio.
Their first such film, La Sortie des Usines (1895), filmed workers leaving the Lumière factory at day's end. They made 19 more little films including the famed L'Arrivee d'un Train en Gare, and Les Repas de Bebe, as well as the early slapstick film L'Arroseur Arrosee (Watering the Gardener).
As my children were not yet exposed to cinema, movies, I started by showing them Lumieres movies!
So they were able to appreciate, "l'arrivee du train en gare de la Ciotat" noticing all the details! They were particularly interested to see that people were dressed differently and that there were no cars.
Georges Méliès was a French filmmaker famous for leading many technical and narrative developments in the earliest cinema.
He was very innovative in the use of special effects. He accidentally discovered the stop trick, or substitution, in 1896, and was one of the first filmmakers to use multiple exposures, time-lapse photography, dissolves, and hand-painted color in his films.
Because of his ability to seemingly manipulate and transform reality with the cinematography, Méliès is sometimes referred to as the "Cinemagician."
My children ADORE Melies movies! They are a lot of fun to watch, silent movie full of magic and fantasy. They appreciate particularly "sorcellerie culinaire" (1903) et "La conquète du pole" (1912)
I believe that it is important to start a story at the beginning.
The same way we usually start to read the alphabet before reading words, it makes sense to have our first contact with cinema with the first movies ever done. I believe that it does help to apprehend this audiovisual language as well as he does help to differentiate fiction from reality.
We finished this first contact with cinema screening "Entr'acte" by Rene Clair (1984).
For this production, the Dadaists collaborating on the project invented a new mode of production: instantanéisme. The complete film takes about 20 minutes using such techniques as watching people run in slow motion, watching things happen in reverse, looking at a ballet dancer from underneath, watching an egg over a fountain of water get shot and instantly become a bird and watching people disappear. The cast included cameo appearances by Francis Picabia, Erik Satie, Man Ray, and Marcel Duchamp.
My children laugh a lot during this screening, particularly looking at the ballet dancer from underneath, they first did not see what it was, then they noticed the feet, and that was the beginning of a long laugh. They like the movie and it was a lot of fun to watch it with them.
Friday, March 14, 2008
Disney No Longer Marketing Baby Einstein Videos as Educational
As a result of CCFC’s Federal Trade Commission complaint, Baby Einstein has completely redesigned its website and is no longer making educational claims about its DVDs and videos. In 2006, CCFC filed an FTC complaint against Baby Einstein for making false and deceptive claims about the educational value of their products. In December, the FTC decided not to take enforceable action against Baby Einstein when the company promised to “take appropriate steps to ensure that any future advertising claims of educational and/or developmental benefit for children are adequately substantiated.” Since no substantiation exists, Disney will not be able to claim that the videos have educational value.
We are deeply troubled that the FTC failed to hold Disney accountable for years of deceptive marketing; essentially, the FTC is telling corporations that it’s okay to lie to parents because if you get caught there will be no consequences as long as you promise not to do it again. At the same time, we are proud that CCFC’s complaint spurred substantive changes to the Baby Einstein website. Gone are claims such as the description of Baby Wordsworth as a “rich and interactive learning experience that … fosters the development of your toddler’s speech and language skills,” or that Numbers Nursery will “help develop your baby’s understanding of what numbers mean.”
Thanks to all of you who urged the FTC to act on our complaint and shared your experiences with Baby Einstein with the Commission.
The FTC’s response to CCFC is available at http://commercialfreechildhood.org/actions/lettertoccfc.pdf.
The FTC’s response to Baby Einstein is available at http://commercialfreechildhood.org/actions/babyeinstein.pdf.
CCFC’s original complaint against Brainy Baby and Baby Einstein is available at http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/babyvideos/ftccomplaint.htm.
We are deeply troubled that the FTC failed to hold Disney accountable for years of deceptive marketing; essentially, the FTC is telling corporations that it’s okay to lie to parents because if you get caught there will be no consequences as long as you promise not to do it again. At the same time, we are proud that CCFC’s complaint spurred substantive changes to the Baby Einstein website. Gone are claims such as the description of Baby Wordsworth as a “rich and interactive learning experience that … fosters the development of your toddler’s speech and language skills,” or that Numbers Nursery will “help develop your baby’s understanding of what numbers mean.”
Thanks to all of you who urged the FTC to act on our complaint and shared your experiences with Baby Einstein with the Commission.
The FTC’s response to CCFC is available at http://commercialfreechildhood.org/actions/lettertoccfc.pdf.
The FTC’s response to Baby Einstein is available at http://commercialfreechildhood.org/actions/babyeinstein.pdf.
CCFC’s original complaint against Brainy Baby and Baby Einstein is available at http://www.commercialfreechildhood.org/babyvideos/ftccomplaint.htm.
Saturday, March 08, 2008
High school musical and commercial
Many people seem to think that my children are not aware of the TV world because we are not watching TV. Well, don’t forget merchandising :-)
They know about Dora as there are many Dora products everywhere and they did even read one or two stories of Dora. (I cite Dora as it seems to be the favorite character of K student)
They know Superman and Spiderman as well, thanks to their leap pad.
And since yesterday they know about High School Musical!
They were lucky enough to see the play! On stage! And the cast was all kids!
I felt they were so lucky to live this experience.
Plus because we were there really early, they go a chance to see some of the rehearsal! How the kids had to warm up their voice, to remember where they will have to stand at this specific moment of the play… How they were themselves joking around, very instructive.
Then, when the musical started, they were all playing their part. My kids were fascinated.
I am happy that they could see everything involved: the musician playing the music on our right, the light beings turn on and off, the set being changed over and over following the story, the cast changing costumes from one scene to another…
The story was going on, but everything was changing in just one place, not like in real life and must faster than in real life. Little concept that need to be assimilated in order to make the difference between real and not real.
As I said before we are not watching TV and therefore we are not watching commercial. But I did explain to them what a commercial is: well, people trying to make you spend your money buying things you do not need but they need to sell you because they want your money.
So, we decide to shoot our own commercial :-)
Hands-on, isn’t’ that the best way to apprehend things, to understand how that works?
They know about Dora as there are many Dora products everywhere and they did even read one or two stories of Dora. (I cite Dora as it seems to be the favorite character of K student)
They know Superman and Spiderman as well, thanks to their leap pad.
And since yesterday they know about High School Musical!
They were lucky enough to see the play! On stage! And the cast was all kids!
I felt they were so lucky to live this experience.
Plus because we were there really early, they go a chance to see some of the rehearsal! How the kids had to warm up their voice, to remember where they will have to stand at this specific moment of the play… How they were themselves joking around, very instructive.
Then, when the musical started, they were all playing their part. My kids were fascinated.
I am happy that they could see everything involved: the musician playing the music on our right, the light beings turn on and off, the set being changed over and over following the story, the cast changing costumes from one scene to another…
The story was going on, but everything was changing in just one place, not like in real life and must faster than in real life. Little concept that need to be assimilated in order to make the difference between real and not real.
As I said before we are not watching TV and therefore we are not watching commercial. But I did explain to them what a commercial is: well, people trying to make you spend your money buying things you do not need but they need to sell you because they want your money.
So, we decide to shoot our own commercial :-)
Hands-on, isn’t’ that the best way to apprehend things, to understand how that works?
Friday, February 22, 2008
Old-Fashioned Play Builds Serious Skills
I think the following article is worth thinking about it:
Old-Fashioned Play Builds Serious Skills
by Alix Spiegel
you can read this article and listen to the talk on NPR here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19212514
Morning Edition, February 21, 2008 · On October 3, 1955, the Mickey Mouse Club debuted on television. As we all now know, the show quickly became a cultural icon, one of those phenomena that helped define an era.
What is less remembered but equally, if not more, important, is that another transformative cultural event happened that day: The Mattel toy company began advertising a gun called the "Thunder Burp."
I know — who's ever heard of the Thunder Burp?
Well, no one.
The reason the advertisement is significant is because it marked the first time that any toy company had attempted to peddle merchandise on television outside of the Christmas season. Until 1955, ad budgets at toy companies were minuscule, so the only time they could afford to hawk their wares on TV was during Christmas. But then came Mattel and the Thunder Burp, which, according to Howard Chudacoff, a cultural historian at Brown University, was a kind of historical watershed. Almost overnight, children's play became focused, as never before, on things — the toys themselves.
"It's interesting to me that when we talk about play today, the first thing that comes to mind are toys," says Chudacoff. "Whereas when I would think of play in the 19th century, I would think of activity rather than an object."
Chudacoff's recently published history of child's play argues that for most of human history what children did when they played was roam in packs large or small, more or less unsupervised, and engage in freewheeling imaginative play. They were pirates and princesses, aristocrats and action heroes. Basically, says Chudacoff, they spent most of their time doing what looked like nothing much at all.
"They improvised play, whether it was in the outdoors… or whether it was on a street corner or somebody's back yard," Chudacoff says. "They improvised their own play; they regulated their play; they made up their own rules."
But during the second half of the 20th century, Chudacoff argues, play changed radically. Instead of spending their time in autonomous shifting make-believe, children were supplied with ever more specific toys for play and predetermined scripts. Essentially, instead of playing pirate with a tree branch they played Star Wars with a toy light saber. Chudacoff calls this the commercialization and co-optation of child's play — a trend which begins to shrink the size of children's imaginative space.
But commercialization isn't the only reason imagination comes under siege. In the second half of the 20th century, Chudacoff says, parents became increasingly concerned about safety, and were driven to create play environments that were secure and could not be penetrated by threats of the outside world. Karate classes, gymnastics, summer camps — these create safe environments for children, Chudacoff says. And they also do something more: for middle-class parents increasingly worried about achievement, they offer to enrich a child's mind.
Change in Play, Change in Kids
Clearly the way that children spend their time has changed. Here's the issue: A growing number of psychologists believe that these changes in what children do has also changed kids' cognitive and emotional development.
It turns out that all that time spent playing make-believe actually helped children develop a critical cognitive skill called executive function. Executive function has a number of different elements, but a central one is the ability to self-regulate. Kids with good self-regulation are able to control their emotions and behavior, resist impulses, and exert self-control and discipline.
We know that children's capacity for self-regulation has diminished. A recent study replicated a study of self-regulation first done in the late 1940s, in which psychological researchers asked kids ages 3, 5 and 7 to do a number of exercises. One of those exercises included standing perfectly still without moving. The 3-year-olds couldn't stand still at all, the 5-year-olds could do it for about three minutes, and the 7-year-olds could stand pretty much as long as the researchers asked. In 2001, researchers repeated this experiment. But, psychologist Elena Bodrova at the National Institute for Early Education Research says, the results were very different.
"Today's 5-year-olds were acting at the level of 3-year-olds 60 years ago, and today's 7-year-olds were barely approaching the level of a 5-year-old 60 years ago," Bodrova explains. "So the results were very sad."
Sad because self-regulation is incredibly important. Poor executive function is associated with high dropout rates, drug use and crime. In fact, good executive function is a better predictor of success in school than a child's IQ. Children who are able to manage their feelings and pay attention are better able to learn. As executive function researcher Laura Berk explains, "Self-regulation predicts effective development in virtually every domain."
The Importance of Self-Regulation
According to Berk, one reason make-believe is such a powerful tool for building self-discipline is because during make-believe, children engage in what's called private speech: They talk to themselves about what they are going to do and how they are going to do it.
"In fact, if we compare preschoolers' activities and the amount of private speech that occurs across them, we find that this self-regulating language is highest during make-believe play," Berk says. "And this type of self-regulating language… has been shown in many studies to be predictive of executive functions."
And it's not just children who use private speech to control themselves. If we look at adult use of private speech, Berk says, "we're often using it to surmount obstacles, to master cognitive and social skills, and to manage our emotions."
Unfortunately, the more structured the play, the more children's private speech declines. Essentially, because children's play is so focused on lessons and leagues, and because kids' toys increasingly inhibit imaginative play, kids aren't getting a chance to practice policing themselves. When they have that opportunity, says Berk, the results are clear: Self-regulation improves.
"One index that researchers, including myself, have used… is the extent to which a child, for example, cleans up independently after a free-choice period in preschool," Berk says. "We find that children who are most effective at complex make-believe play take on that responsibility with… greater willingness, and even will assist others in doing so without teacher prompting."
Despite the evidence of the benefits of imaginative play, however, even in the context of preschool young children's play is in decline. According to Yale psychological researcher Dorothy Singer, teachers and school administrators just don't see the value.
"Because of the testing, and the emphasis now that you have to really pass these tests, teachers are starting earlier and earlier to drill the kids in their basic fundamentals. Play is viewed as unnecessary, a waste of time," Singer says. "I have so many articles that have documented the shortening of free play for children, where the teachers in these schools are using the time for cognitive skills."
It seems that in the rush to give children every advantage — to protect them, to stimulate them, to enrich them — our culture has unwittingly compromised one of the activities that helped children most. All that wasted time was not such a waste after all.
Related NPR Stories
Old-Fashioned Play Builds Serious Skills
by Alix Spiegel
you can read this article and listen to the talk on NPR here: http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=19212514
Morning Edition, February 21, 2008 · On October 3, 1955, the Mickey Mouse Club debuted on television. As we all now know, the show quickly became a cultural icon, one of those phenomena that helped define an era.
What is less remembered but equally, if not more, important, is that another transformative cultural event happened that day: The Mattel toy company began advertising a gun called the "Thunder Burp."
I know — who's ever heard of the Thunder Burp?
Well, no one.
The reason the advertisement is significant is because it marked the first time that any toy company had attempted to peddle merchandise on television outside of the Christmas season. Until 1955, ad budgets at toy companies were minuscule, so the only time they could afford to hawk their wares on TV was during Christmas. But then came Mattel and the Thunder Burp, which, according to Howard Chudacoff, a cultural historian at Brown University, was a kind of historical watershed. Almost overnight, children's play became focused, as never before, on things — the toys themselves.
"It's interesting to me that when we talk about play today, the first thing that comes to mind are toys," says Chudacoff. "Whereas when I would think of play in the 19th century, I would think of activity rather than an object."
Chudacoff's recently published history of child's play argues that for most of human history what children did when they played was roam in packs large or small, more or less unsupervised, and engage in freewheeling imaginative play. They were pirates and princesses, aristocrats and action heroes. Basically, says Chudacoff, they spent most of their time doing what looked like nothing much at all.
"They improvised play, whether it was in the outdoors… or whether it was on a street corner or somebody's back yard," Chudacoff says. "They improvised their own play; they regulated their play; they made up their own rules."
But during the second half of the 20th century, Chudacoff argues, play changed radically. Instead of spending their time in autonomous shifting make-believe, children were supplied with ever more specific toys for play and predetermined scripts. Essentially, instead of playing pirate with a tree branch they played Star Wars with a toy light saber. Chudacoff calls this the commercialization and co-optation of child's play — a trend which begins to shrink the size of children's imaginative space.
But commercialization isn't the only reason imagination comes under siege. In the second half of the 20th century, Chudacoff says, parents became increasingly concerned about safety, and were driven to create play environments that were secure and could not be penetrated by threats of the outside world. Karate classes, gymnastics, summer camps — these create safe environments for children, Chudacoff says. And they also do something more: for middle-class parents increasingly worried about achievement, they offer to enrich a child's mind.
Change in Play, Change in Kids
Clearly the way that children spend their time has changed. Here's the issue: A growing number of psychologists believe that these changes in what children do has also changed kids' cognitive and emotional development.
It turns out that all that time spent playing make-believe actually helped children develop a critical cognitive skill called executive function. Executive function has a number of different elements, but a central one is the ability to self-regulate. Kids with good self-regulation are able to control their emotions and behavior, resist impulses, and exert self-control and discipline.
We know that children's capacity for self-regulation has diminished. A recent study replicated a study of self-regulation first done in the late 1940s, in which psychological researchers asked kids ages 3, 5 and 7 to do a number of exercises. One of those exercises included standing perfectly still without moving. The 3-year-olds couldn't stand still at all, the 5-year-olds could do it for about three minutes, and the 7-year-olds could stand pretty much as long as the researchers asked. In 2001, researchers repeated this experiment. But, psychologist Elena Bodrova at the National Institute for Early Education Research says, the results were very different.
"Today's 5-year-olds were acting at the level of 3-year-olds 60 years ago, and today's 7-year-olds were barely approaching the level of a 5-year-old 60 years ago," Bodrova explains. "So the results were very sad."
Sad because self-regulation is incredibly important. Poor executive function is associated with high dropout rates, drug use and crime. In fact, good executive function is a better predictor of success in school than a child's IQ. Children who are able to manage their feelings and pay attention are better able to learn. As executive function researcher Laura Berk explains, "Self-regulation predicts effective development in virtually every domain."
The Importance of Self-Regulation
According to Berk, one reason make-believe is such a powerful tool for building self-discipline is because during make-believe, children engage in what's called private speech: They talk to themselves about what they are going to do and how they are going to do it.
"In fact, if we compare preschoolers' activities and the amount of private speech that occurs across them, we find that this self-regulating language is highest during make-believe play," Berk says. "And this type of self-regulating language… has been shown in many studies to be predictive of executive functions."
And it's not just children who use private speech to control themselves. If we look at adult use of private speech, Berk says, "we're often using it to surmount obstacles, to master cognitive and social skills, and to manage our emotions."
Unfortunately, the more structured the play, the more children's private speech declines. Essentially, because children's play is so focused on lessons and leagues, and because kids' toys increasingly inhibit imaginative play, kids aren't getting a chance to practice policing themselves. When they have that opportunity, says Berk, the results are clear: Self-regulation improves.
"One index that researchers, including myself, have used… is the extent to which a child, for example, cleans up independently after a free-choice period in preschool," Berk says. "We find that children who are most effective at complex make-believe play take on that responsibility with… greater willingness, and even will assist others in doing so without teacher prompting."
Despite the evidence of the benefits of imaginative play, however, even in the context of preschool young children's play is in decline. According to Yale psychological researcher Dorothy Singer, teachers and school administrators just don't see the value.
"Because of the testing, and the emphasis now that you have to really pass these tests, teachers are starting earlier and earlier to drill the kids in their basic fundamentals. Play is viewed as unnecessary, a waste of time," Singer says. "I have so many articles that have documented the shortening of free play for children, where the teachers in these schools are using the time for cognitive skills."
It seems that in the rush to give children every advantage — to protect them, to stimulate them, to enrich them — our culture has unwittingly compromised one of the activities that helped children most. All that wasted time was not such a waste after all.
Related NPR Stories
Sunday, December 23, 2007
no time for TV
Oh well, this is what is happening in my home. We came back from a visit to friends and I was just thinking about a nice video of Caillou which present Christmas in every country of the world. But my kids started to play, play, play. They were inventing a big story and ones again, no time for TV.
In fact, beside videos I am getting from the library to illustrate some lessons, like the one about volcano or the one about dinosaur, we rarely have time for TV or entertainment videos. And I am never going to tell them “stop playing and come watch some TV”
It makes senses, isn’t it?
In fact, beside videos I am getting from the library to illustrate some lessons, like the one about volcano or the one about dinosaur, we rarely have time for TV or entertainment videos. And I am never going to tell them “stop playing and come watch some TV”
It makes senses, isn’t it?
Monday, October 29, 2007
What happen to the parents who say:No daily TV in the classroom?
Oh well, hard to believe, but sadly true: the well mannered and focus and nice student who is getting along well with everyone including the teacher got kick out of the class!
Why? Because the Kindergarten teacher hate the mom!
Why? Because the mom asked her to not show TV to the children on a daily basis!
Chocking?
Oh yes, very chocking! How that can be possible that a teacher careless of the happiness of the children? Poor parents, they did not know what to do when they learned how much the teacher hated the mom, so they trusted the principal of the school who proposed to change the student of class. They wanted to find a peaceful solution for all, and most of all they did not have the experience.
And it is getting worse! The nice little student became extremely unhappy in his new class, this new class which combines Kindergarten and first grade was taking away from him not only a familiar environment that he loves, his friend, his teacher, his sister, but was also taking away all the fun of kindergarten! No more hands on activities for him, no more choice time where he was so happy to play with all his friends, no more social studies, no more center activities! All the fun went away. And a happy little dude that everyone loves became a very unhappy child trying to keep his smile to give the change to all those adults surrounding him.
And then, when the parents went back to the principal telling him how miserable their son was and how much this change was a mistake, how much this class was wrong for him, this one was cold and rude and just said: I will not change him!
Letting their son becoming more unhappy everyday was not an option, so those nice parents, who love their children enough to care about their happiness, left that school that was obviously led by a principal who does not care at all of the wellbeing of the children….
Why? Because the Kindergarten teacher hate the mom!
Why? Because the mom asked her to not show TV to the children on a daily basis!
Chocking?
Oh yes, very chocking! How that can be possible that a teacher careless of the happiness of the children? Poor parents, they did not know what to do when they learned how much the teacher hated the mom, so they trusted the principal of the school who proposed to change the student of class. They wanted to find a peaceful solution for all, and most of all they did not have the experience.
And it is getting worse! The nice little student became extremely unhappy in his new class, this new class which combines Kindergarten and first grade was taking away from him not only a familiar environment that he loves, his friend, his teacher, his sister, but was also taking away all the fun of kindergarten! No more hands on activities for him, no more choice time where he was so happy to play with all his friends, no more social studies, no more center activities! All the fun went away. And a happy little dude that everyone loves became a very unhappy child trying to keep his smile to give the change to all those adults surrounding him.
And then, when the parents went back to the principal telling him how miserable their son was and how much this change was a mistake, how much this class was wrong for him, this one was cold and rude and just said: I will not change him!
Letting their son becoming more unhappy everyday was not an option, so those nice parents, who love their children enough to care about their happiness, left that school that was obviously led by a principal who does not care at all of the wellbeing of the children….
Monday, October 08, 2007
Television harms our children and families in many ways.
Parents, you will love this article which summarizes many researches:
Breaking Out of the Box. Turn Off TV. Turn on Life. By Ann Vorisek White Web Exclusive
The average American child watches four hours of television every day, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.1
Videotapes and video games add to the amount of time children spend staring at a screen. How does all this viewing affect us?
Television harms our children and families in many ways. Before TV, meals were a time for families to reflect upon the day and linger in peace or lively discussion over home-cooked meals. Today, most American families regularly watch television during dinner.2
Mealtimes are hurried, with children and adults eating in silence, eyes glued to the screen, or gobbling down their food in order to return to the family room to resume their interrupted television watching.
Childhood illnesses and injuries leading to bed rest used to be special times for bonding and family rituals. We can recall books that were read to us or quiet games that we played while recovering from chicken pox or a broken leg. Today, sick children spend their days watching videos and television.
In the past, holiday gatherings found children playing outdoors and adults gathered in lively discussions. Today, children are more apt to gather around the television or computer than to take up a game of kick-the-can or capture-the-flag. In fact, some family gatherings seem to revolve around TV, with Thanksgiving dinners prepared to suit the timing of football games.
As a result of the many hours they spend in front of the TV, children are in effect being parented by network producers rather than by their own parents. Television teaches children that rude, irresponsible behavior is not only acceptable but also glamorous. Children learn about sex and violence apart from their consequences, emotional attachments, and responsibilities. They learn to act impulsively, without reflection or advice from elders. Qualities such as wisdom and processes like thinking through a problem are difficult to express on a television screen, especially when the medium depends on sensationalism and shock rather than character and insight.
US Surgeon General David Satcher stated in a 2000 report on youth violence that violent television programming and video games have become a public-health issue and that "repeated exposure to violent entertainment during early childhood causes more aggressive behavior throughout a child's life.3
The American Psychological Association (APA) notes that children who regularly watch violence on television are more fearful and distrustful of the world, less bothered by violence, and slower to intervene or call for help when they see fighting or destructive behavior.4
A Los Angeles Times story reported that 91 percent of children polled said they felt "upset" or "scared" by violence on television.5
A University of Pennsylvania study found that children's TV shows contain roughly 20 acts of violence each hour.6
After watching violent programs, the APA reports, children are more likely to act out aggressively, and children who are regularly exposed to violent programming show a greater tendency toward hitting, arguing, leaving tasks unfinished, and impatience.7
The first two years of life is when the greatest and most rapid development of the brain occurs. As all parents know, a child's mind is different from an adult's, and the differences go beyond children's innocent and often poetic perceptions of the world. While the adult brain has two distinct hemispheres, the infant brain is a single receptacle of sensory experience in which neither side has developed or overpowered the other. Until they learn language, children absorb experience using a kind of nonverbal "thinking," characterized later in the brain's development as a right hemispheric function. When language begins, each hemisphere seems to be equally developed. In its structural and biochemical sense, the brain doesn't reach its full maturation until about age 12.
By maturation, the left hemisphere typically develops as the dominant side, controlling the verbal and logical functions of the brain, while the right hemisphere controls spatial and visual functions. For many years, such development was thought to be genetically predetermined and unaffected by life experiences. Today, however, this belief has changed. Although the acquisition of language appears to be universal, we now recognize that the abilities required for expression and reasoning are not automatic. Watching television threatens the development of these abilities because it requires a suspension of active cognition.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children under the age of two not watch TV or videos, and that older children watch only one to two hours per day of nonviolent, educational TV. Young children watching TV are routinely described as transfixed, passive, and nonverbal. One of television's appeals for parents is that it serves as an immediate way to silence and sedate active toddlers. But such nonverbal absorption does more than simply relax and amuse preschoolers. Language spoken by actors on TV does not have the same effect as real-life language experiences. The Journal of Broadcasting reported that language skills among American children declined as TV viewing time increased.8
In real life, conversation is reciprocal and participatory; it allows time for reflection, questions, and encouragement. Television, however, is a one- way street, and you had better stay glued, ask no questions, and take no time for thought, because the next scene will appear in seconds and there is no rewind. As a result, children learn not to think but to remain passive and unresponsive to whatever stimulus appears before them. Television conditions them to absorb images without mental effort and to expect rapid change. Since young children's questions and imaginations are the cornerstone of their learning processes, remaining unresponsive hour after hour, day after day, year after year surely affects their intellectual, emotional, and moral development.
Fantasy play, a critical component of childhood, allows children to explore different situations with varying responses and outcomes. While books and storytelling nourish fantasy play, fantasy watching does not foster the same reaction. The US Department of Education reported that 81 percent of children ages two to seven watch TV unsupervised,9 which means that young children enter a world of fantasy without the guidance and oversight of an adult. Research by the Yale University Family Television and Consultation Center reveals that imagination decreases as TV watching increases.10
TV teaches children to be amused by its images instead of encouraging kids to create their own. It dulls the mind by the power of its fast-moving pictures, supplanting the mental activity necessary to follow in the mind's eye a book or a storyteller's tale. The Yale Center reports that complex language and grammar skills are directly linked to fantasy play, and that children who create fantasy play are more tolerant, peaceful, patient, and happy.
Many children become habituated to TV by their parents, who desire a break from their child's activity and attention. However, the short-term benefit of a quiet, mesmerized child may actually lead to a greater dependence on adult supervision by creating children who are less capable of amusing themselves. By supplanting their imaginations, creating fast-paced pictures, and transforming active minds into passive recipients, TV teaches mental lethargy.
For a child raised on hourly doses of TV, boredom is a common component of later childhood. In refusing to use TV during the preschool years, parents may save themselves from constantly having to create amusements for their children.
The best way to keep TV from becoming an issue with children, of course, is not to begin using it. If a TV is present in the home, it is vital to establish clear rules on its use and to maintain these rules. Never make TV a reward or a punishment; this only heightens its power. When starting the withdrawal from TV, explain why you are making these changes and that it is not a punishment. The first month will be the most difficult. Children may cry or plead, but you can remain firm if you keep in mind that you are freeing them from an addiction.
It is also imperative that you help your children learn how to fill the time that they formerly spent watching TV. Work with them to nurture interests, discover hobbies, and explore new possibilities. Begin a nightly read-aloud for the entire family. Take walks after breakfast or dinner. Share your hobbies-sewing, knitting, baking bread-with them. Learn to play instruments and make music as a family. Encourage children to help with work around the house and yard. Visit neighbors and relatives. Tell stories and pass on your family history. Build a birdhouse. Go bowling. Go sledding. Finger paint. Color. Practice yoga together. Involve your children in the daily activities of the house, and encourage yourself and your family to rekindle the flame of exploration and discovery, away from the draw of the flickering blue screen.
NOTES
1. American Academy of Pediatrics, "Television and the Family" (June 1999), http://www.aap.org/.
2. D. A. Gentile and D. A. Walsh, Media Quotient: National Survey of Family Media Habits, Knowledge, and Attitudes (Washington, DC: National Institute on Media and the Family, 1999).
3. "NAPNAP Supports Surgeon General on TV/Video Stance," press release, National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners, Cherry Hill, NJ, February 2, 2000.
4. American Psychological Association, "Violence on Television" (report), http://www.apa.org/.
5. "Living in Fear," Los Angeles Times , August 23, 1998 .
6. G. L. Gerbner, M. Morgan, and N. Signorielli , "Living with Television: The Dynamics of the Cultivation Process," in J. Bryant and D. Zillman, eds., Perspectives on Media Effects (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1986).
7. See Note 4.
8. Gary W. Selnow and Erwin P. Bettinghaus, "Television Exposure and Language Development," Journal of Broadcasting 26 (Winter 1982): 1.
9. US Department of Education, "Strong Families, Strong Schools : Building Community Partnerships for Learning" (report), 1994.
10. Dorothy Singer, J. Singer, and D. Zuckerman, Use TV to Your Child's Advantage: The Parent's Guide . Yale University Family Television Research and Consultation Center , 1998. npin.org/library/1998/n00049/n00049.html
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Baldwin, Rahima. You Are Your Child's First Teacher . Celestial Arts, 2000.
Bennett, Steve and Ruth. 365 TV-Free Activities You Can Do with Your Child . Bob Adams, 1991.
Healy, Jane M. Failure to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children's Minds-For Better and Worse. Simon and Schuster, 1998.
The Killing Screens: Media and the Culture of Violence (video recording). Sut Jhally, executive producer and director. Media Education Foundation, 1994.
Liebert, Robert M. The Early Window: Effects of Television on Children and Youth. Pergamon Press, 1988.
Mander, Jerry. Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television. Morrow, 1978.
Minow, Newton . Abandoned in the Wasteland: Children, TV, and the First Amendment. Hill and Wang, 1995.
National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners (NAPNAP), 1101 Kings Highway North, Cherry Hill, NJ 08034, 856-667-1776, http://www.napnap.org/.
National Institute on Media and the Family, 606 24th Avenue, Suite 606 , Minneapolis , MN 55454 , 888-672-5437, http://www.mediaandthefamily.org/.
Postman, Neil. The Disappearance of Childhoo d. Delacorte Press, 1982.
Trelease, Jim. The Read-Aloud Handbook . Penguin Books, 1985.
TV-Turnoff Network, 1611 Connecticut Avenue, NW 3A, Washington , DC 20009 , 202- 518-5556, http://www.tvturnoff.org/.
US Senate Judiciary Committee Staff Report , "Children, Violence, and the Media," 1999.
Wilkins, Joan Anderson. Breaking the TV Habit . Scribner, 1982.
Winn, Marie. The Plug-In Drug . Penguin Books, 1985.
For more information about television, see the following articles in past issues of Mothering : "Television and Film Entertainment," no. 50; and "Preventing TV Addiction: Ten Hints for Parents," no. 31.
Ann Vorisek White lives with her husband, Harry, and their two cats in the Berkshire Mountains of Connecticut . She has a master's degree in library science and is a children's librarian in Litchfield County .
This article was published in:
http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/consumerism/turn_off_tv.html
Breaking Out of the Box. Turn Off TV. Turn on Life. By Ann Vorisek White Web Exclusive
The average American child watches four hours of television every day, according to the American Academy of Pediatrics.1
Videotapes and video games add to the amount of time children spend staring at a screen. How does all this viewing affect us?
Television harms our children and families in many ways. Before TV, meals were a time for families to reflect upon the day and linger in peace or lively discussion over home-cooked meals. Today, most American families regularly watch television during dinner.2
Mealtimes are hurried, with children and adults eating in silence, eyes glued to the screen, or gobbling down their food in order to return to the family room to resume their interrupted television watching.
Childhood illnesses and injuries leading to bed rest used to be special times for bonding and family rituals. We can recall books that were read to us or quiet games that we played while recovering from chicken pox or a broken leg. Today, sick children spend their days watching videos and television.
In the past, holiday gatherings found children playing outdoors and adults gathered in lively discussions. Today, children are more apt to gather around the television or computer than to take up a game of kick-the-can or capture-the-flag. In fact, some family gatherings seem to revolve around TV, with Thanksgiving dinners prepared to suit the timing of football games.
As a result of the many hours they spend in front of the TV, children are in effect being parented by network producers rather than by their own parents. Television teaches children that rude, irresponsible behavior is not only acceptable but also glamorous. Children learn about sex and violence apart from their consequences, emotional attachments, and responsibilities. They learn to act impulsively, without reflection or advice from elders. Qualities such as wisdom and processes like thinking through a problem are difficult to express on a television screen, especially when the medium depends on sensationalism and shock rather than character and insight.
US Surgeon General David Satcher stated in a 2000 report on youth violence that violent television programming and video games have become a public-health issue and that "repeated exposure to violent entertainment during early childhood causes more aggressive behavior throughout a child's life.3
The American Psychological Association (APA) notes that children who regularly watch violence on television are more fearful and distrustful of the world, less bothered by violence, and slower to intervene or call for help when they see fighting or destructive behavior.4
A Los Angeles Times story reported that 91 percent of children polled said they felt "upset" or "scared" by violence on television.5
A University of Pennsylvania study found that children's TV shows contain roughly 20 acts of violence each hour.6
After watching violent programs, the APA reports, children are more likely to act out aggressively, and children who are regularly exposed to violent programming show a greater tendency toward hitting, arguing, leaving tasks unfinished, and impatience.7
The first two years of life is when the greatest and most rapid development of the brain occurs. As all parents know, a child's mind is different from an adult's, and the differences go beyond children's innocent and often poetic perceptions of the world. While the adult brain has two distinct hemispheres, the infant brain is a single receptacle of sensory experience in which neither side has developed or overpowered the other. Until they learn language, children absorb experience using a kind of nonverbal "thinking," characterized later in the brain's development as a right hemispheric function. When language begins, each hemisphere seems to be equally developed. In its structural and biochemical sense, the brain doesn't reach its full maturation until about age 12.
By maturation, the left hemisphere typically develops as the dominant side, controlling the verbal and logical functions of the brain, while the right hemisphere controls spatial and visual functions. For many years, such development was thought to be genetically predetermined and unaffected by life experiences. Today, however, this belief has changed. Although the acquisition of language appears to be universal, we now recognize that the abilities required for expression and reasoning are not automatic. Watching television threatens the development of these abilities because it requires a suspension of active cognition.
The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children under the age of two not watch TV or videos, and that older children watch only one to two hours per day of nonviolent, educational TV. Young children watching TV are routinely described as transfixed, passive, and nonverbal. One of television's appeals for parents is that it serves as an immediate way to silence and sedate active toddlers. But such nonverbal absorption does more than simply relax and amuse preschoolers. Language spoken by actors on TV does not have the same effect as real-life language experiences. The Journal of Broadcasting reported that language skills among American children declined as TV viewing time increased.8
In real life, conversation is reciprocal and participatory; it allows time for reflection, questions, and encouragement. Television, however, is a one- way street, and you had better stay glued, ask no questions, and take no time for thought, because the next scene will appear in seconds and there is no rewind. As a result, children learn not to think but to remain passive and unresponsive to whatever stimulus appears before them. Television conditions them to absorb images without mental effort and to expect rapid change. Since young children's questions and imaginations are the cornerstone of their learning processes, remaining unresponsive hour after hour, day after day, year after year surely affects their intellectual, emotional, and moral development.
Fantasy play, a critical component of childhood, allows children to explore different situations with varying responses and outcomes. While books and storytelling nourish fantasy play, fantasy watching does not foster the same reaction. The US Department of Education reported that 81 percent of children ages two to seven watch TV unsupervised,9 which means that young children enter a world of fantasy without the guidance and oversight of an adult. Research by the Yale University Family Television and Consultation Center reveals that imagination decreases as TV watching increases.10
TV teaches children to be amused by its images instead of encouraging kids to create their own. It dulls the mind by the power of its fast-moving pictures, supplanting the mental activity necessary to follow in the mind's eye a book or a storyteller's tale. The Yale Center reports that complex language and grammar skills are directly linked to fantasy play, and that children who create fantasy play are more tolerant, peaceful, patient, and happy.
Many children become habituated to TV by their parents, who desire a break from their child's activity and attention. However, the short-term benefit of a quiet, mesmerized child may actually lead to a greater dependence on adult supervision by creating children who are less capable of amusing themselves. By supplanting their imaginations, creating fast-paced pictures, and transforming active minds into passive recipients, TV teaches mental lethargy.
For a child raised on hourly doses of TV, boredom is a common component of later childhood. In refusing to use TV during the preschool years, parents may save themselves from constantly having to create amusements for their children.
The best way to keep TV from becoming an issue with children, of course, is not to begin using it. If a TV is present in the home, it is vital to establish clear rules on its use and to maintain these rules. Never make TV a reward or a punishment; this only heightens its power. When starting the withdrawal from TV, explain why you are making these changes and that it is not a punishment. The first month will be the most difficult. Children may cry or plead, but you can remain firm if you keep in mind that you are freeing them from an addiction.
It is also imperative that you help your children learn how to fill the time that they formerly spent watching TV. Work with them to nurture interests, discover hobbies, and explore new possibilities. Begin a nightly read-aloud for the entire family. Take walks after breakfast or dinner. Share your hobbies-sewing, knitting, baking bread-with them. Learn to play instruments and make music as a family. Encourage children to help with work around the house and yard. Visit neighbors and relatives. Tell stories and pass on your family history. Build a birdhouse. Go bowling. Go sledding. Finger paint. Color. Practice yoga together. Involve your children in the daily activities of the house, and encourage yourself and your family to rekindle the flame of exploration and discovery, away from the draw of the flickering blue screen.
NOTES
1. American Academy of Pediatrics, "Television and the Family" (June 1999), http://www.aap.org/.
2. D. A. Gentile and D. A. Walsh, Media Quotient: National Survey of Family Media Habits, Knowledge, and Attitudes (Washington, DC: National Institute on Media and the Family, 1999).
3. "NAPNAP Supports Surgeon General on TV/Video Stance," press release, National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners, Cherry Hill, NJ, February 2, 2000.
4. American Psychological Association, "Violence on Television" (report), http://www.apa.org/.
5. "Living in Fear," Los Angeles Times , August 23, 1998 .
6. G. L. Gerbner, M. Morgan, and N. Signorielli , "Living with Television: The Dynamics of the Cultivation Process," in J. Bryant and D. Zillman, eds., Perspectives on Media Effects (Hillsdale, NJ: Erlbaum, 1986).
7. See Note 4.
8. Gary W. Selnow and Erwin P. Bettinghaus, "Television Exposure and Language Development," Journal of Broadcasting 26 (Winter 1982): 1.
9. US Department of Education, "Strong Families, Strong Schools : Building Community Partnerships for Learning" (report), 1994.
10. Dorothy Singer, J. Singer, and D. Zuckerman, Use TV to Your Child's Advantage: The Parent's Guide . Yale University Family Television Research and Consultation Center , 1998. npin.org/library/1998/n00049/n00049.html
FOR MORE INFORMATION
Baldwin, Rahima. You Are Your Child's First Teacher . Celestial Arts, 2000.
Bennett, Steve and Ruth. 365 TV-Free Activities You Can Do with Your Child . Bob Adams, 1991.
Healy, Jane M. Failure to Connect: How Computers Affect Our Children's Minds-For Better and Worse. Simon and Schuster, 1998.
The Killing Screens: Media and the Culture of Violence (video recording). Sut Jhally, executive producer and director. Media Education Foundation, 1994.
Liebert, Robert M. The Early Window: Effects of Television on Children and Youth. Pergamon Press, 1988.
Mander, Jerry. Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television. Morrow, 1978.
Minow, Newton . Abandoned in the Wasteland: Children, TV, and the First Amendment. Hill and Wang, 1995.
National Association of Pediatric Nurse Associates & Practitioners (NAPNAP), 1101 Kings Highway North, Cherry Hill, NJ 08034, 856-667-1776, http://www.napnap.org/.
National Institute on Media and the Family, 606 24th Avenue, Suite 606 , Minneapolis , MN 55454 , 888-672-5437, http://www.mediaandthefamily.org/.
Postman, Neil. The Disappearance of Childhoo d. Delacorte Press, 1982.
Trelease, Jim. The Read-Aloud Handbook . Penguin Books, 1985.
TV-Turnoff Network, 1611 Connecticut Avenue, NW 3A, Washington , DC 20009 , 202- 518-5556, http://www.tvturnoff.org/.
US Senate Judiciary Committee Staff Report , "Children, Violence, and the Media," 1999.
Wilkins, Joan Anderson. Breaking the TV Habit . Scribner, 1982.
Winn, Marie. The Plug-In Drug . Penguin Books, 1985.
For more information about television, see the following articles in past issues of Mothering : "Television and Film Entertainment," no. 50; and "Preventing TV Addiction: Ten Hints for Parents," no. 31.
Ann Vorisek White lives with her husband, Harry, and their two cats in the Berkshire Mountains of Connecticut . She has a master's degree in library science and is a children's librarian in Litchfield County .
This article was published in:
http://www.mothering.com/articles/growing_child/consumerism/turn_off_tv.html
Tuesday, October 02, 2007
Childhood TV Viewing a Risk for Behavior Problems
Here is a new article just published, which is warning parents and educator about the risk of nurturing TV viewing habits. This article was published in numerous medical website like http://www.physorg.com/news110427509.html
For Immediate Release: October 1, 2007
Childhood TV Viewing a Risk for Behavior Problems
Timing of Media Exposure Plays a Vital Role in Outcomes
Daily television viewing for two or more hours in early childhood canlead to behavioral problems and poor social skills, according to astudy of children 2.5 to 5.5 years of age conducted by researchers at the Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health.
The Hopkins researchers found that the impact of TV viewing on a child's behaviorand social skills varied by the age at which the viewing occurred.
More importantly, heavy television viewing that decreased over timewas not associated with behavior or social problems. The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends that children under age 2 watch no television while children age 2 and older are limited to no more than two hours of daily viewing. The study is published in the October2007 issue of Pediatrics. "A number of studies have demonstrated negative effects of heavy television viewing. However, timing of exposure is an important consideration as reducing viewing to acceptable levels can reduce the risk of behavioral and social problems," said Kamila Mistry, MPH,lead author of the study and a doctoral candidate in the Bloomberg School's Department of Population, Family and Reproductive Health.
For the study, the research team analyzed data for 2,707 children collected from the Healthy Steps for Young Children national evaluation. Parents were surveyed about their child's television viewing habits and behavior at 2.5 and at 5.5 years of age. Sixteen percent of parents reported that their children watched two hours or more of television daily at 2.5 years of age (early exposure), while 15 percent reported that their children watched two hours or more of television daily at 5.5 years of age (concurrent exposure). One in five parents reported that their children watched two hours or more of television daily at both 2.5 years and at 5.5years of age (sustained exposure). Sustained exposure to television was associated with behavioral problems. However, early exposure that was subsequently reduced was not a risk for behavior problems. Concurrent viewing was associated with fewer social skills, while sustained and early viewing had less of an impact on social skill development. The study also found that having a television in the child's bedroom at 5.5 years of age was associated with behavioral problems and poor sleep. Forty-one percent of the children included in the study had a television in his or her bedroom."Children who reduced their viewing by 5.5 years of age were not at greater risk for behavior and social problems," said Cynthia Minkovitz, MD, MPP, senior author of the study and associate professor with the School's Department of Population, Family andReproductive Health. "It is vital for clinicians to emphasize the importance of reducing television viewing in early childhood among those children with early use.""Children's Television Exposure and Behavioral and Social Outcomes at 5.5 years: Does Timing of Exposure Matter?" was written by Kamila B.Mistry, MPH; Cynthia S. Minkovitz, MD, MPP; Donna M. Strobino, PhD;and Dina L. G. Borzekowski, EdD.Data collection for this research was supported by the Agency forHealthcare Research and Quality, the Commonwealth Fund.
Saturday, September 29, 2007
the use of television in the classroom
These days my main worry is the use of TV in the Kindergarten class of my children...
It is such a chock for me when my kids come home telling me “what was on TV today”
In their class, TV is used as a relaxing time… Well, is TV really relaxing?
Many researches prove that it is not…
Happily I am not the only parents concerned by the use of TV in the classroom. For their defense, the teacher show us how good the quality of the programs are, and this is true, they are showing good programs, so we can feel safe on the content.
Unhappily, the content is one side of the question, the HOW a program is screened is a major issue. Leaving a child “relax” in front of the television should not happen in school. This “attitude” is far from being educational, even with the best content ever.
On the other end, the children could learn to become active viewers! Dr. Faith Rogow explains that very well in her article “Don't turn Off the Lights: Tips for Classroom Use of ITV” (http://www.myetv.org/education/k-12/resources/classroom_tv.cfm)
Here is a copy of the article:
There are lots of ways to watch television and our purpose for viewing has a significant impact on what we take away from the experience. Most TV viewing is for entertainment and relaxation, and that's fine--unless we want people to remember what they've seen. Television can be a powerful educational tool, but it we want our students to absorb specific content from what they see, we need to give them a model for viewing that is active and critical. For starters,
It is such a chock for me when my kids come home telling me “what was on TV today”
In their class, TV is used as a relaxing time… Well, is TV really relaxing?
Many researches prove that it is not…
Happily I am not the only parents concerned by the use of TV in the classroom. For their defense, the teacher show us how good the quality of the programs are, and this is true, they are showing good programs, so we can feel safe on the content.
Unhappily, the content is one side of the question, the HOW a program is screened is a major issue. Leaving a child “relax” in front of the television should not happen in school. This “attitude” is far from being educational, even with the best content ever.
On the other end, the children could learn to become active viewers! Dr. Faith Rogow explains that very well in her article “Don't turn Off the Lights: Tips for Classroom Use of ITV” (http://www.myetv.org/education/k-12/resources/classroom_tv.cfm)
Here is a copy of the article:
There are lots of ways to watch television and our purpose for viewing has a significant impact on what we take away from the experience. Most TV viewing is for entertainment and relaxation, and that's fine--unless we want people to remember what they've seen. Television can be a powerful educational tool, but it we want our students to absorb specific content from what they see, we need to give them a model for viewing that is active and critical. For starters,
- view from videotape rather than real-time broadcasts
- don't be constrained by programs; only use the segments you need
- don't use the television as a babysitter
In addition:
- Think about what you are trying to accomplish. If you can achieve your goal without using video, you may want to reconsider your use of TV. However, video can help accomplish things you can't do any other way. TV does the following very well:
- Spark interest in a new subject area. Imaginative and quick paced video can inspire your students to pursue a subject.
- Demonstrate something you can't show any other way, such as a satellite's view of changing weather patterns, the inside of a human body, a math concept that involves motion of 3-D geometry, the sounds and sights of a rainforest, the sound of various accents in a foreign language, a chemistry experiment that is too dangerous or too expensive to do in the classroom, etc.
- Enrich content by demonstrating new applications or insights.
- Practice a skill such as note taking, problem solving, predicting, listening, etc.
- Review a lesson you have already presented so the students can hear and see it in a different way.
- View actively - Think of the TV as a teacher. Do you turn off the lights when you talk ? Would you be satisfied with a class that sat and stared at you for thirty minutes without responding or interacting? The TV can't act as teacher if students aren't active. Interactive viewing requires three simple steps:
1. Prepare -let students know why they are watching, what to look for, or what you will ask when the video is over. The younger the student, the more detailed the description should be of what they are going to see.
2. Participate - View interactively. Sing along, answer questions aloud as they are posed, pause to discuss possible outcomes or solutions before the video presents them, pause to check for comprehension, pause to predict action, write down clues, etc.
3. Connect to other activities - Bring the video lessons off the screen and into the classroom or home by choosing follow-up activities that connect the viewing experience to hands-on exercises or real-life experience. With younger students, be sure to explain the connections between the video and the activities you do.
Copyright: Insighters Educational Consulting 1997
Faith_Rogow@wskg.pbs.org
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Please Teachers, do not show TV in class as a daily routine
We all know how difficult and challenging it can be for parents to protect their children from Medias influences.
Raising a child TV free or aware of the potential effect of TV is a big challenge in this world where TV is everywhere.
So I felt really bad when I learned that TV programs were shown to the children in their school on a daily basis. And what kind of programs?
No cartoon please.
School is a learning environment; I would expect a school to nurture the love for books, to encourage children to satisfy their needs for imaginary tales through books!
Not by turning on the Television: This totally passive way to satisfy their need for escape.
I would understand the use of TV as a tool, a tool to show documentaries which illustrate a subject reviewed in the classroom.
I would eventually understand a video with songs to stimulate their interests.
I would understand a video of cartoon ones in a while as the subject of a discussion in the class.
But showing every day cartoons for 20 minutes! Please do not do that.
Listening to a tape would be a lot better. Some children could close their eyes, relax and imagine their own images and some other would do the same with their eyes open. In any case it would be a lot more relaxing; any studies would show that to you.
Please teachers, do not do that to our children.
Raising a child TV free or aware of the potential effect of TV is a big challenge in this world where TV is everywhere.
So I felt really bad when I learned that TV programs were shown to the children in their school on a daily basis. And what kind of programs?
No cartoon please.
School is a learning environment; I would expect a school to nurture the love for books, to encourage children to satisfy their needs for imaginary tales through books!
Not by turning on the Television: This totally passive way to satisfy their need for escape.
I would understand the use of TV as a tool, a tool to show documentaries which illustrate a subject reviewed in the classroom.
I would eventually understand a video with songs to stimulate their interests.
I would understand a video of cartoon ones in a while as the subject of a discussion in the class.
But showing every day cartoons for 20 minutes! Please do not do that.
Listening to a tape would be a lot better. Some children could close their eyes, relax and imagine their own images and some other would do the same with their eyes open. In any case it would be a lot more relaxing; any studies would show that to you.
Please teachers, do not do that to our children.
Wednesday, August 08, 2007
Educational Videos May Not Make Baby Brainy, Study Finds
Researchers at the University of Washington have found that the videos marketed by Baby Einstein, Brainy Baby and other producers of videos for infants may not make babies smarter and could even have the opposite effect, according to The Seattle Post-Intelligencer.
Such videos could actually slow language development, the study revealed.
The report, released on Tuesday, concluded that for every hour children spent watching those programs, they understood an average of six to eight fewer words than infants who didn’t watch them, the Post-Intelligencer reported.
The babies exposed to the videos also got scores on language skills tests that were 17 percent lower than those of the babies who weren’t.
“We don’t think there is any evidence that it is good for development at all,” study co-author Andrew Meltzoff told the Post-Intelligencer.
But the negative impact on growth seemed to depend on the ages of the children. Babies 8 to 16 months old who watched the videos seemed to have delayed retention of vocabulary, whereas those 17 to 24 months old weren't affected.
read article at: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/326708_babytv08.html
Such videos could actually slow language development, the study revealed.
The report, released on Tuesday, concluded that for every hour children spent watching those programs, they understood an average of six to eight fewer words than infants who didn’t watch them, the Post-Intelligencer reported.
The babies exposed to the videos also got scores on language skills tests that were 17 percent lower than those of the babies who weren’t.
“We don’t think there is any evidence that it is good for development at all,” study co-author Andrew Meltzoff told the Post-Intelligencer.
But the negative impact on growth seemed to depend on the ages of the children. Babies 8 to 16 months old who watched the videos seemed to have delayed retention of vocabulary, whereas those 17 to 24 months old weren't affected.
read article at: http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/local/326708_babytv08.html
Friday, March 02, 2007
question of the day: image of death
What about seeing image of death on TV?
When my kids screened this amazing documentary series about Homo Sapiens, they saw 2 of them drowning.
The images where soft but "real". I mean by real, that it was not a cartoon, or a glamorized death from a movie.
It was simple, like most of the time in real life. but thoses scenes raised many questions from my daughter and many discussions around death, as, when watching meat of fish in the plate: "is this dead?" "what was this when it was alive?"
Since those scenes, death stays the main question.
I did interrogate myself about the experience.
Was it too early for them to witness such images?
Well, my conclusion was no. And I rather have them get those healthy reactions, being puzzled, even a little uncomfortable with this first contact with human death.
I would not have like for them to see it in a cartoon or a movie, and do not even notice...
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
