Screens and tots: pull the plug or power up?

Are dire warnings about the impact of television on young children infecting our views on everything digital? Sarah Jones investigates

A typical day at Mangere Bridge Kindergarten might involve children documenting their play dough creation with a digital camera or researching a recipe on the internet.
They might be investigating life in the vegetable patch with a digital microscope, using software to make a comic, or helping compile the latest post on the kindergarten's blog. 
“Giving children the opportunity to use ICT and see what it can do is important to us,” says teacher Carol Hartley. 
But not everyone agrees. Technology and preschoolers is a fraught topic. The debate began as soon as the first tv sets were turned on. A long-term study by Otago's Multidisciplinary Research Unit reported in 2005 that the more television you watch as a child, the poorer your educational prospects will be. Findings like this have parents pulling the plug.

Saving play
The arguments against exposing your young child to excessive time in front of the tube - be it the computer or the television - are familiar enough. The screen encourages a sedentary and isolated lifestyle, replaces more useful activities, overstimulates developing brains and instantly gratifies. 
However, there's less credible evidence about the impact of screen time on children than you'd think, given the attention that this issue attracts. Much is in the form of short-term studies and surveys. It's also hard for research to keep up with the pace of technological change.
In search of straight answers and realistic advice, journalist and mother Lisa Guernsey delved into the research and interviewed many psychologists, scientists and media producers. Her book, Into the Minds of Babes: How Screen Time Affects Children from Birth to Age Five, confirms some of the age-old warnings but also finds much that flies in the face of conventional wisdom.

Content matters
There's no black and white for Guernsey. How children take in and process information will vary from child to child, she points out. The attitude a parent or teacher brings to the screen affects whether a child will learn from it. And the quality of the content matters. Bearing all this in mind, her investigation points to something of a dividing line between the under and over twos. 
“We've learned that babies do not comprehend images the way adults do, that they are still trying to work out the connections between symbols and objects, between pictures and the real thing. And we've learned that babies and toddlers are not yet ready to absorb much more than the here-and-now, not typically comprehending sequential narratives until after age two,” she writes. 
For children up to age three, she says that actions observed in real life may be easier to understand than the same actions shown on screen. 
Over the age of two, children can engage with narrative - they are not zombies in front of the screen - and have been shown to learn from television programmes when they are well designed.
Well-designed means the right level of language and action and a context that is potentially understandable to children. Dialogue, narrative and characters' actions are consistent. The story is linear, the pace is slow and steady, and “calls for participation” hold children's attention and provide an opening for learning. 
Are all screens created equal? Compared with the largely silent, passive experience of watching TV, wouldn't interactive media have a greater chance of actively engaging children in learning? Yes, this can be the case. But interactive programming is not always an improvement over video. Pointless interactivity and limited pathways can thwart learning. The more children can control the experience, the more they respond to it. 

A balanced lifestyle
While the debate over screen media rages on, early childhood educators like Carol are starting from an entirely different premise. They integrate technology into preschoolers' play. Their focus is on children creating their own content and using ICT to investigate, collaborate, communicate and reflect. Mangere Bridge uses open-ended, creative software on their computers, and they don't use games, educational or otherwise. 
Technology doesn't substitute for play, but extends and supports play. “It's not a matter of technology supplanting the sandpit, but taking technology into the sandpit,” explains Ann Hatherly, who leads the team of early childhood facilitators at CORE Education. 
“Some educators think we shouldn't be using technology because it takes children away from real experiences,” she says. “Yet talking over Skype to gran who lives in India is a real experience for that child and will mean that when she finally gets to meet her, they could already have a well established, albeit virtual, relationship.”
“Why would we deny children access to something that's so useful and that's part of everyday life?” asks Carol. “A balanced lifestyle is what we are aiming for ourselves and for the children.”

Learning with technology
Ann and her team have found that ICT-based activities can enhance children's learning - from literacy learning and communication skills to a range of affective domain outcomes such as confidence, motivation and sense of belonging. 
She cites the story of one four-year-old, who was encouraged to photograph the mouse house she was making out of blocks and create a storybook on the computer. Out of this process, she gained some distance and a new perspective on her creation. She visualized the next steps for her building and modified it several times further in a way that her teacher felt she would not have were it not for technology's mediating role. 
The teacher's leap of faith was to put the camera in the hands of the child. “Our research shows that learning and social connection outcomes are greater when children use the technologies themselves or when they have some measure of control over which, how and why ICTs are used.”
It's not really about which technology is used, but how it is used. The benefits are dependent on the pedagogical and social contexts. “ICT is often praised or maligned as if it alone determines the quality of experience that results from its use,” she says, “but ICT has no inherent pedagogical value until people get involved.”

Managing the media
Marketing hype from industry and the complexities of distinguishing good from bad make technology a difficult issue for both parents and educators. It would be unfortunate if we shut the door on the sorts of opportunities that Carol and her colleagues are exploring. We need sensible solutions to manage young children's budding relationship with ICT. 
Solutions include avoiding long periods of time in front of the screen, high-quality design and age-inappropriate content. We need to identify the technologies that demand more from the child - that are 90% child and 10% tool - and have a clear purpose for using them in the first place. We need to talk with children about what they are seeing and hearing and doing, and help them to process it. 
It's every family's decision. Abstention isn't an option for mine - ICT is too embedded in our lives. When my toddler clamours for my tablet, she wants to see photos of herself and her family and friends. She wants to make music and watch videos of lions on the savanna. I find it hard to argue with that.