by Andy Rementer @ TechnoTuesday.com
{ 0 comments }
Posts tagged as:
computers
Computer Games are Good for Kids, Parents Say (Microsoft-commissioned survey of parents). Commenter “WinTard” says,
I would agree. My kid has been playing with computers since age 1, starting with Mother Goose. It allows them to familiarize themselves with a critical tool that will be necessary for their future success in the 3rd millennium and 21st century. And it develops an interest and passion for something worthwhile.
The major source of calamity in our society is people plodding through life without direction or objectives. And idle, bored minds turn to nasty things…
How did our civilization ever prosper in the days before computers?
Why do so many parents get this so wrong? Idle, bored minds eventually turn toward imagination and creativity. Parents need to read Richard Louv and Jane Healy.
There is plenty of time for kids to acquaint themselves with technology. They don’t need a mouse shoved into their hands at one year or even five. Jane Healy, who has studied kids and computers thinks age 7 is a good time to introduce kids to computers. Young kids should be exploring the real world with all of their senses. They really don’t need the distraction of computers.
When did your kids start using computers? Do you think what they have learned will be a major factor in their success in life?
{ 2 comments }
Minister: Wii the best boost for children’s intelligence. Really?
OK, not really. But that’s what the headline says. In the lead sentence in the article, it’s clarified a bit: “CHILDREN who play computer games will do better at school than those who just sit and watch television.“.
In other news, caterpillars are more nutritious and kids prefer eating them over eating rabbit poo.
This minister claims that he has “witnessed progress” in his three-year old and he attributes it to using the computer. I wonder how this kid compares to the three-year-olds who are reading books with their parents and spending a lot more time outdoors exploring the real world.
Speaking of reading books, this MP should read FAILURE TO CONNECT: How Computers Affect Our Children’s Minds — and What We Can Do About It
One commenter replies: “How about the children who play board games, who read and who go outside and play? Oh of course we don’t have any children like that anymore in Britain.” They sure to seem like a species nearing extinction sometimes, don’t they.
{ 0 comments }
…or technology makes our lives better… worse… better… worse…
The recent post on television made a point that people will disagree until the cows come home about if television is good or bad. Or if it makes us smarter or dumber. But it’s not about the technology. It’s about how the technology is used. Television can bring educational material to you that you just can’t get in your local schools. That’s fantastic. But you can also get 24/7, inane Disney channel programming that can sap the life out of your family and reduce the kids to zombies who come back alive and freak out when you yank the plug. That’s horrible.
People continue to argue for one side or the other of that debate as if devices can change you, and as if there is one right answer.
Perhaps it’s not the devices (TV, computers, video games, cell phones) that actually change people. Maybe those devices merely accentuate or exacerbate a person’s preexisting tendencies to be distracted, waste time, and avoid doing other important and more productive things. If the person’s tendencies are towards being responsible and being focused on the right things, then they will make good use of the device.
A laptop, in the hands of an intelligent, motivated, focused person will allow the person to do wonders as they work towards goals. The same laptop in the hands of an unmotivated slacker that suffers from ADD will probably only get used playing online games, watching YouTube videos, and IMing their friends all day long.
In the end, they’re just tools to be used, and then can be used positively or negatively. Does it make sense to blame the tool for the outcome?
{ 2 comments }
