Updated: October 13, 2015
Originally Published: October 12, 2015
My 5-year-old has developed a fascination with the iPad. While I’ve installed a few games for him, his favorite feature is the voice dictation software. He speaks into the mic with great care, crafting sentences like, “I am could you please type that could you please type out I am a pirate.” His enthusiasm for the iPad is relentless; he adores it to the point where I sometimes regret introducing it.
Now, my 2-year-old has caught on to the allure of the iPad as well. He eagerly reaches for it whenever we leave it unattended, and he’s already figured out how to swipe to unlock it.
The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) once recommended no screen time for children under 2, and limited time for those over 2. However, these guidelines were established before interactive apps became commonplace for young children. Are interactive apps potentially “better” for kids than passive screen time? I wonder, with some hope.
I often feel a pang of guilt when I hand my children my phone or the iPad, usually because I need to accomplish something—like filling out forms at the DMV or attending a dermatology appointment—that isn’t suitable for little ones. The iPad might very well be the reason I manage to keep my driver’s license and get a clean bill of health from my dermatologist. I just hope it’s not doing them too much harm, because let’s face it, I really need it.
The guilt is real. Research on the effects of different types of screen time on children is still in its infancy. Is watching Sesame Street any better or worse than engaging with an interactive app? As reported by Mia Johnson in ArsTechnica, that kind of research is only just beginning, largely due to the rapid evolution of interactive apps, the challenges of designing lab studies that mirror real-world scenarios, and the difficulty in recruiting children for studies. (Busy parents aren’t typically eager to haul their kids to labs for observation without compensation.)
However, Dr. Sophie Garcia, an assistant professor in the Human Development and Family Studies Department at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, is investigating this very issue, as noted by Johnson.
To start, it’s important to understand why the iPad captivates young children more than television. Interactive apps exploit kids’ natural inclination toward “contingency.” For example, if they throw toys on the floor and you pick them up, they find it delightful and continue the behavior. Interactive software amplifies this experience. When they swipe and the iPad lights up, or tap an app to see it launch, they are utterly fascinated.
Dr. Garcia is researching whether this sense of contingency enhances learning compared to passive viewing. Her findings indicate that for toddlers as young as 2 years old, engaging with an app aids in learning. However, for children aged 30 months and older, the learning outcomes from a video match those from an interactive program. Johnson notes, “This finding in particular carries significant implications. Engaging children actively with the screen may mitigate the well-known video deficiency effect. Perhaps screens can provide valuable learning experiences for children under two after all.”
Still, she emphasizes that lab settings may not accurately reflect real-world usage. Not all apps that captivate our kids will necessarily teach them anything meaningful. We might inadvertently choose apps that are too easy or too challenging, rendering them ineffective for learning. Generally, children tend to learn best through in-person interactions. Therefore, researchers underscore the importance of monitoring how kids use technology instead of relying on it as a digital babysitter. Johnson asserts, “A tablet should be utilized as a tool to foster interaction with your child, rather than replace it.”
But that doesn’t solve the dilemma of needing a moment to fill out forms at the doctor’s office, or needing a few minutes to prepare dinner. My best approach is to thoroughly research the most educational apps for my kids and use them sparingly. It’s comforting to know that not all screen time is created equal. When I’m truly in a bind—or stuck in a waiting room—there’s likely an app for that.
For more insights on parenting in the digital age, check out this blog post. And if you’re looking for an excellent resource on home insemination, visit Cleveland Clinic’s page. Additionally, consider browsing Make A Mom for reputable at-home insemination syringe kits.
Summary
Navigating the digital landscape for our kids is complex. Interactive apps may offer benefits over passive screen time, but parental oversight remains crucial. It’s essential to choose educational apps wisely and use technology to enhance interaction rather than replace it.
Leave a Reply