According to 2005 data from the Kaiser Family Foundation, 43 percent of children ages 4 to 6 have a television in their bedroom. The numbers are lower for younger children, but still suprisingly high and disturbing to many experts in child development, who note that several studies show correlations between bedroom TVs and lower achievement at school. (I don't have easy access to data for bedroom TVs with older children but will look it up. Stay tuned.)
Last week, BabyCenter.com opened an unscientific poll asking, "Does your child have a TV in his or her room?" When I checked the results this morning, about one-quarter of parents had responded that, yes, there is a TV in their child's bedroom. Does it belong there? That question has prompted hundreds of parents to chime in on the BabyCenter.com bulletin boards. Opinions run strong against the idea and many parents say that "no TV in the bedroom" is one rule they will stick by even as their children get older. But some parents say the context of their household (not to mention the layout of the house itself) plays a role. One mother wrote that her daughter has a TV with a DVD player in her room, but that the TV isn't hooked up for service. "She can only watch DVDs on it," she wrote. "On Sunday, she has movie time while I get the house cleaned."
See the Kaiser Family Foundation's 2006 report, "The Media Family," for several tidbits of interesting data and in-depth discussion of the topic. One surprise from their research, which I wrote about in my book, is that parents were putting the TVs in the bedrooms not because they didn't know what to do with extra TVs (which was expected to be the answer) but because they wanted to be able to use the TV in the family room for their own shows.
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
What are they listening to?
Disney has hired Arbitron to help it track the listening behavior of children and adolescents, according to Radio Ink and Cynopsis: Kids. As Cynopsis wrote, "This marks the first time that Arbitron will measure the radio listening behavior of kids and tweens."
So how much do teens listen to the radio in the first place? Here's some new data about online listening that provides some answers. Arbitron released some early results yesterday from its study, with Edison Media Research, about online listening habits. The company says that 33 million Americans age 12 or older listen to a radio station over the Internet during an average week (an increase from 29 million one year ago) and that there is also a strong connection between online radio listening and social networking sites.
So how much do teens listen to the radio in the first place? Here's some new data about online listening that provides some answers. Arbitron released some early results yesterday from its study, with Edison Media Research, about online listening habits. The company says that 33 million Americans age 12 or older listen to a radio station over the Internet during an average week (an increase from 29 million one year ago) and that there is also a strong connection between online radio listening and social networking sites.
Saturday, March 8, 2008
The brain at the Improv
Science News' Bruce Bower wrote a fascinating story this week about what might be happening within the brains of jazz musicians when they start to riff and improvise, creating their original music.
As Bowers writes, "when accomplished jazz musicians play free-form, their brain activity suggests a release of self-expression from conscious monitoring and self-censorship."
"What we think is happening is that when you're telling your own musical story, you're shutting down neural impulses that might impede the flow of novel ideas," says Charles J. Limb, of Johns Hopkins Hospital, who is himself a trained jazz saxophonist. He has collaborated in studying the topic with neurologist Allen R. Braun of the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders in Bethesda, Md.
This makes me wonder about children and their wellsprings of creativity. In formal schooling, and even in many out-of-school play experiences (like structured activities and certain types of electronic or interactive games) are children experiencing "conscious monitoring" and "self-censorship"? Are there certain activities (make-believe play away from parents, for example?) that let them break out of that?
As Bowers writes, "when accomplished jazz musicians play free-form, their brain activity suggests a release of self-expression from conscious monitoring and self-censorship."
"What we think is happening is that when you're telling your own musical story, you're shutting down neural impulses that might impede the flow of novel ideas," says Charles J. Limb, of Johns Hopkins Hospital, who is himself a trained jazz saxophonist. He has collaborated in studying the topic with neurologist Allen R. Braun of the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders in Bethesda, Md.
This makes me wonder about children and their wellsprings of creativity. In formal schooling, and even in many out-of-school play experiences (like structured activities and certain types of electronic or interactive games) are children experiencing "conscious monitoring" and "self-censorship"? Are there certain activities (make-believe play away from parents, for example?) that let them break out of that?
Wednesday, March 5, 2008
Toning down claims on cognitive benefit from baby videos
Several years ago, when Baby Einstein videos had become the hot gift item at baby showers around the country, the company's Web site was peppered with remarks about how much the videos help young children. For example, I printed a page on February 22, 2006 that started with this headline: "Baby Einstein videos appeal to curious little ones while helping with their development." One parent said that her 20 month old son watches the shows "anywhere from 5 to 10 times a day.... he is talking in sentences and has been for 2 months now. He also is learning his colors thanks to Baby Van Gogh!"
A few months before, however, a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, titled "A Teacher in the Living Room?," raised questions about just how much these videos really teach. There was no scientific research to back up claims of educational value, the KFF said.
In May 2006, an advocacy group called Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against Baby Einstein and Brainy Baby, which had started selling its baby videos in 1995. (Ten years later, the Brainy Baby catalog featured a "brain power pack" including videos called "Left Brain" and "Right Brain.") The marketing messages from these companies, the CCFC said, were "deceptive and false."
For a year and a half, the trade commission remained silent on the question. And in the meantime, the national conversation about baby videos became a bit more feisty -- and sometimes a little hostile. As I've reported on in my blog (an older post is here), in my book and in an opinion piece for the New York Times, this has meant at least two things to parents. They now have a heightened sense of guilt about their screentime choices (which is both good and bad), and they are armed with new skepticism about educational messages on boxes of DVDs (a positive development, I'd venture).
Video makers have been taking note. Last year, Baby Brainy changed its tagline from "... a little genius in the making" to "...learning for a lifetime." And as the commercial-free childhood group reported in its newsletter last week, the new Baby Einstein web site is "no longer making educational claims about its DVDs and videos." (The trade commission, by the way, declined to act on the complaints, stating in a letter dated December 5, 2007 that both companies "have agreed to take steps to ensure that any claims of educational and/or developmental benefit for children are substantiated.")
Whether these changes will slow the popularity of baby videos is an open question. Some parents did seem to eat up those promotional messages about cognitive development, as the early testimonials show. Will they avoid these videos now that words like "educational" are no longer emblazoned on the packaging. Or will they simply decide to try them anyway, still intrigued enough to see what happens? Parents love the thrill of seeing how much young children pick up and learn from the world around them, and in so many homes today (yes, mine included, for better and worse) imagery and sounds on a video are part of that world.
What is still to be untangled is the question of how, and if, these videos change the way babies learn... whether because parents are using them as a jumping-off point for conversations (like books) or because they are letting them become surrogates (like babysitters) or because they alter the daily routine (like the hubub of modern life in general) or because they are a source of more noise (like background TV) or because they bring new music to a house (like audio CDs). There is still so much to learn about how new forms of media are altering the landscape of learning for our little tots.
A few months before, however, a report from the Kaiser Family Foundation, titled "A Teacher in the Living Room?," raised questions about just how much these videos really teach. There was no scientific research to back up claims of educational value, the KFF said.
In May 2006, an advocacy group called Campaign for a Commercial-Free Childhood filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission against Baby Einstein and Brainy Baby, which had started selling its baby videos in 1995. (Ten years later, the Brainy Baby catalog featured a "brain power pack" including videos called "Left Brain" and "Right Brain.") The marketing messages from these companies, the CCFC said, were "deceptive and false."
For a year and a half, the trade commission remained silent on the question. And in the meantime, the national conversation about baby videos became a bit more feisty -- and sometimes a little hostile. As I've reported on in my blog (an older post is here), in my book and in an opinion piece for the New York Times, this has meant at least two things to parents. They now have a heightened sense of guilt about their screentime choices (which is both good and bad), and they are armed with new skepticism about educational messages on boxes of DVDs (a positive development, I'd venture).
Video makers have been taking note. Last year, Baby Brainy changed its tagline from "... a little genius in the making" to "...learning for a lifetime." And as the commercial-free childhood group reported in its newsletter last week, the new Baby Einstein web site is "no longer making educational claims about its DVDs and videos." (The trade commission, by the way, declined to act on the complaints, stating in a letter dated December 5, 2007 that both companies "have agreed to take steps to ensure that any claims of educational and/or developmental benefit for children are substantiated.")
Whether these changes will slow the popularity of baby videos is an open question. Some parents did seem to eat up those promotional messages about cognitive development, as the early testimonials show. Will they avoid these videos now that words like "educational" are no longer emblazoned on the packaging. Or will they simply decide to try them anyway, still intrigued enough to see what happens? Parents love the thrill of seeing how much young children pick up and learn from the world around them, and in so many homes today (yes, mine included, for better and worse) imagery and sounds on a video are part of that world.
What is still to be untangled is the question of how, and if, these videos change the way babies learn... whether because parents are using them as a jumping-off point for conversations (like books) or because they are letting them become surrogates (like babysitters) or because they alter the daily routine (like the hubub of modern life in general) or because they are a source of more noise (like background TV) or because they bring new music to a house (like audio CDs). There is still so much to learn about how new forms of media are altering the landscape of learning for our little tots.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
