This is a fabulous book that dissects the use of television and video media by children ages 0-5. Guernsey holds equally the voice of a diligent researcher, looking at existing scientific evidence, and of a concerned parent. It calls to question assumptions that have been made.
On one side, in 1999 the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) recommended no screen time for children under two with little research to back it up. On the other, we have seen an increase in television shows that value education and development.
She divides parents into two categories, the “whatevers” and the “worriers”. She sees that these often fall along lines of class and privilege. While most of her own inquiries are done in the middle and upper-middle class, she does visit the homes of poor and immigrant families. She sees that in poorer families may not have as much flexibility to keep their children away from media since they often share smaller spaces and may rely on the television for cultural connections.
Research on baby videos (such as Baby Einstein) that are marketed as products that will help your baby’s brain develop is just beginning, following strong market demand that led Disney and Sesame to create their own products.
So far, what they have learned it that small amounts of screen time will probably not help with brain development for children under two. At that age, babies do not have the perception skills to interpret what they are seeing. The author says that they will probably get more out of watching a parent fold laundry and much more out of being spoken to. But it probably won’t hurt them, either and for some parents, it may be the only way to safely occupy their children to make dinner or take a shower. What they may be negatively affected by is background television. In this case, the active engagement of parents tends to decrease and also the children will simply hear less because of the background noise. Because of these two factors, children’s learning opportunities are greatly reduced.
For older children, some television shows and video games fare better as tools to build learning, reasoning and social skills. Most interesting findings, in my opinion are that the age appropriateness of a show has as much to do with structure as it does content. Those of us that have nostalgia for Sesame Street and the Muppet Show will be disappointed to hear that children 3-5 respond the most positively to a short show with a linear, structured and interactive plotline. Some of the shows mentioned are Dora the Explorer, Dragon Tales and Blues Clues.
Additionally, she warns parents to be wary of anything that contains violence. There is some evidence that children who see violence are less cooperative. Surprisingly, even violence that results in resolution is problematic.
“…they came to realize that the “be nice, be good” messages at the end of some children’s programs were not getting through to young viewers. The resolution was drowned out by the usually more-engaging scenes of conflict that drove the plot.”
Ultimately choosing the media in the family is really tricky, particularly if there are young children of varying ages. A show that may benefit and be age appropriate for a 6 year-old will most likely not be for a 2 or 3 year-old. And in the end, it is parent interaction that is always going to benefit a child the most.
Although I have done my best to summarize many of Guernsey’s findings, I highly recommend this book for those interested. The book provides an inroad to understanding how kids learn by looking at the ways they do and do not respond to screen time.
She delves deeply into the studies and describes them in minute details to help the reader picture exactly what is happening, which I found fascinating. Additionally, she does a good job of incorporating her own experience and is very practical about using television as a respite. She supports the studies through follow-up interviews to experts in an attempt to address the questions as thoroughly as possible. Since the research really is relatively new, there are times that she hits a dead end because the findings are just not there yet.
