It’s Giving Call Center Vibes
How much screen time should elementary students have?
In a recent chat with my sister, she mentioned an ongoing drama between two cousins. On the one hand, the new mother relies on a tablet to engage her two year old with educational apps and doesn’t see the need to enroll in an early childhood program because “he’s learning on the iPad.” On the other hand, “That’s absolutely absurd. That’s way too much screen time.”
After a quick Google search, it’s pretty clear that “all day,” is too much screen time for a two year old. This got me thinking about school age children. In response to COVID school closings, nearly all public school students were assigned a laptop to proceed with instruction at home. Whereas, prior to March of 2020, most one-to-one digital device programs in schools were limited to special use cases.
I asked a third grade teacher recently how much time her students spend on their laptops. After a quick glance at her daily schedule outline on the white board she replied, “about two hours a day.” This is close to the time recommended by the American Academy of Pediatrics and others. So what do students do the rest of the day? Turns out they are just looking at a larger screen. Many instructional programs provide teachers with detailed slide decks and videos to aid with program compliance and pacing. When we add in the time spent watching the teacher deliver a PowerPoint, the time students spend in front of a screen almost doubles.
During a recent school visit I sat in with the school’s leadership team as they discussed the implications of a skill-based reading and mathematics computer program. Students at this school were required to complete a series of lessons each week and attain at least a 75% completion score for each activity. These “Personalized Learning Paths” are intended to align student proficiency with the requirements of annual state assessments. This supposed correlation to increased student achievement is highly desirable for school administrators, who themselves are held accountable for the school’s overall success on these high stakes exams. Each month, admin prints out a report showing rankings among the teachers listing their fidelity to this program. Those numbers are displayed in the teacher’s lounge and there is frequent conversation about who’s class’s ranking fell and grew during each period. As a result, teachers place a significant amount of weight on ensuring their students spend the appropriate amount of time on this program. With all this emphasis you’d be convinced that this program did in fact do what has been advertised.
Conversely, the mantra in the halls is one of sacrifice. A strategist, recounted a classroom visit where the teacher burst into tears because they couldn’t effectively meet their program goals while also providing essential one-on-one and small group instruction. Tears! Because they knew the pedagogical perspective that was best for kids but they also knew the expectation for top scores on the big data graph. Yet again, screen time trumps authentic student/teacher interaction.
To aid me in refreshing my understanding of current trends in instruction, I reached out to a long time friend and colleague. To my surprise, unlike the swift change momentum in the private sector, professional learning in the public realm remains unchanged. After more than a decade since the adoption of the, oft controversial, Common Core State Standards, not much has changed in the objective of professional development around standard based instruction. And, certainly not much has changed in our understanding of the theory and practice of learning.
Learners develop their understanding of language and early mathematical concepts by moving through a flexible continuum of concrete to representational to abstract exploration. For example, first one uses their senses to develop an understanding of an apple. They touch, smell, taste, see, and even hear the attributes of an apple. Shortly thereafter, they make connections from the real apple to a visual representation of an apple in print or digitally. Then once that connection is solid they are prime to explore the word APPLE, apple in its abstract form. As we know reading comprehension requires background knowledge. At this point, a child can form an image of an apple when they read the word apple because they have had countless experiences with apples in concrete and representational form. Similarly, children use their fingers to begin the complex understanding of our base-ten numbering system.
If we know what the learning progression is, why do we skip guiding children in developing their concrete understanding? Data is King. And, when data receives exaggerated priority, it becomes vastly easier to measure minutes spent on a program, than the complex spectrum of unique momentary examples of learning. If you’ve ever worked in customer service, or any office really, you recognize this over reliance on the quantifiable rather than the qualitative.
Yes, computers and screens are vital in the modern learning environment. But, are the passive digital experiences more important than deep learning, creativity, relationship building, fun and rest. I don’t think so. If you are involved in the learning landscape of a young person, ask yourself “Do I want to do that?” If the answer is no, then allow yourself the opportunity to change that paradigm and recognize the screen as a tool not a replacement for the art, science, and serendipity of learning.
This is one of the big reasons we've continued to homeschool. For elementary aged students at our local school, screen time begins when the kids walk in the door, as the kids work on a learning app while children are arriving. Convenient for the teacher who doesn't have to manage the settling of littles, sure, but destructive to socialization I think. For us screen time is an actual hindrance to mental health with an 8 year old with extreme nervous system sensitivity. When we (used to) have more than a few days in a row of the mere 2 hours the consequences were extreme, and unsettling for everyone. Although this is antecdotal I think in our world of screen time since birth many families just don't know it's the screen time. They may think the outbursts are medical, environmental or something else. Of course they can be all wrapped up in one but I think it's wise for all of us to think strongly about how often we are leaning on virtual spaces while the value in the connection of real life is devalued. Thanks for the post!