Facebook and Mindset of Loneliness

False sense or edited lives.  I'm out of it for now.  Deactivating my account saves me time and controversy from malicious wares entangling my life right now.

Better to focus on research and tasks I need to conclude. Dei gloriam.

Great Chinese Songs

As a way to open a new year, listening to the language of the heart and soul, before that of the mind and mouth.

)

from rain,

to flowers.


)



then Fireworks in the month of the God of war (wage peace)...


)

Fruits

In celebrating 200 years of the Restoration of the Society of Jesus



this will be a good prelection video when talking to those who would enter the high school. it's important that students keep the end goal in mind -- after 6 years in High School, we expect a more human, reflective, other-oriented excellent person

Early Childhood & Technology Exposure

My insight to – Is It Possible to Shield My Baby From Technology?

Jeana Lee Tahnk, http://techupdates.com/go/731157#

I find this article revealing with its proposition that children under two (2) years should not be exposed to screens.  The main argument being there’s no greater benefit to real human or social-environmental interaction.

With the pervasiveness of technology, I share Ms. Tahnk’s doubt whether babies and toddlers can really be protected from technology exposure.  Indeed, as early as pregnancy, today’s generation, gen z or i-gen, are exposed early to technology.  There are two sides to this argument and one side says technology that is intelligent helps in children’s development, say the learning of language.  The opposite side would claim the authenticity of human interaction is lost and there is a seeming abandonment of the adult responsibility to look after, interact or bond with the child which is compromised by adults in the name of convenient technology replacement.

We’ll I suppose the latter argument is the extreme.  The best use of technology really is to supplement our human efforts, use it as a tool to enhance our being human instead of replacing some human aspects like interaction.

Ms. Tahnk brings up a recent study to assert protecting children under two from early exposure (more so abandon them to) screen-interactive technology.  But I do share her worry, that, it seems impossible to do.  This is a point I wish to contest as really the deciding factor here still is the role and authority of the adult.  Limits have to be set and this is done by the adult.  If conscious effort is made, then the adult can control how much time and when do we expose the kids to what type of technology.  Technology will reach and encroach into our children’s lives.  But as adults, we still have to set and enforce the limits.

According to Ms. Tahnk, Common Sense Media claims, “38% of kids under the age of two have already used a mobile device, even though the American Academy of Pediatrics discourages use of any screens for kids in the first two years of life. In addition to studies showing long-term effects on attention span, creativity, writing and communication skills”.  It does make a lot of sense that for babies, interaction with real people is so much more valuable than interacting with screens however close to real these screens recreate human experience.

My readings on Mashable (www.techupdates.com) took me to a link on, “Are Interactive Toys Interfering With Child Development?” by Travis Andrews (http://mashable.com/2014/02/25/interactive-toys-development/) where two new Apps, the Winston Show and Foo Pets are presented.  There’s a lot of fun and learning available on these two Apps, the first one responds and talks to the child that uses it, the second provides the child with a virtual pet which he can do a lot of things with like he would with a real pet (from feeding to playing), but apparently they also have their downsides, as it seems they replace the real experience of interaction either with a person or a pet, with virtual substitutes.

Travis Andrews does insist that there is no hard research to support that adverse effects result from early childhood exposure to screens but he cannot keep his own reservation when he says "that certainly doesn't mean that interacting with an iPad can approximate interacting with a human."

Apparently, it still is an ongoing study whether exposing children to media or specifically allowing them to use tablets and apps, even as these are designed for their needs, at an early age is good or harmful.  I will take the side of Ms. Tahnk though that toddlers under two should have minimal exposure to tablets with interactive apps and maximum exposure to caring humans and a concrete environment. Now as children grow older, Mr. Andrews word would be good enough, that children’s use of technology specifically tablets with interactive apps should be subject to limit and guidelines.  

As adults, we should set the goal of using technology as an effective tool to enhance our children’s learning experience, not as replacement of our roles as ultimate conductors and facilitators of learning.

-30-