This is a terrific article by Nellie Bowles in the New York Times about the “digital divide.” Amazing that the newspaper of record printed three articles on the same day by the same author, all warning us about the dangers of screen addiction. Remember when public officials worried that rich kids had more access to technology than poor kids? Now, it turns out that students in affluent schools get small classes and experienced teachers, while kids in underfunded schools get technology. Not what was expected.
The parents in Overland Park, Kan., were fed up. They wanted their children off screens, but they needed strength in numbers. First, because no one wants their kid to be the lone weird one without a phone. And second, because taking the phone away from a middle schooler is actually very, very tough.
“We start the meetings by saying, ‘This is hard, we’re in a new frontier, but who is going to help us?’” said Krista Boan, who is leading a Kansas City-based program called START, which stands for Stand Together And Rethink Technology. “We can’t call our moms about this one.”
For the last six months, at night in school libraries across Overland Park, a suburb of Kansas City, Mo., about 150 parents have been meeting to talk about one thing: how to get their children off screens.
It wasn’t long ago that the worry was that rich students would have access to the internet earlier, gaining tech skills and creating a digital divide. Schools ask students to do homework online, while only about two-thirds of people in the U.S. have broadband internet service. But now, as Silicon Valley’s parents increasingly panic over the impact screens have on their children and move toward screen-free lifestyles, worries over a new digital divide are rising. It could happen that the children of poorer and middle-class parents will be raised by screens, while the children of Silicon Valley’s elite will be going back to wooden toys and the luxury of human interaction.
This is already playing out. Throwback play-based preschools are trending in affluent neighborhoods — but Utah has been rolling out a state-funded online-only preschool, now serving around 10,000 children. Organizers announced that the screen-based preschool effort would expand in 2019 with a federal grant to Wyoming, North Dakota, South Dakota, Idaho and Montana.
Lower-income teenagers spend an average of eight hours and seven minutes a day using screens for entertainment, while higher income peers spend five hours and 42 minutes, according to research by Common Sense Media, a nonprofit media watchdog. (This study counted each screen separately, so a child texting on a phone and watching TV for one hour counted as two hours of screens being used.) Two studies that look at race have found that white children are exposed to screens significantly less than African-American and Hispanic children.
And parents say there is a growing technological divide between public and private schools even in the same community. While the private Waldorf School of the Peninsula, popular with Silicon Valley executives, eschews most screens, the nearby public Hillview Middle School advertises its 1:1 iPad program.
The psychologist Richard Freed, who wrote a book about the dangers of screen-time for children and how to connect them back to real world experiences, divides his time between speaking before packed rooms in Silicon Valley and his clinical practice with low-income families in the far East Bay, where he is often the first one to tell parents that limiting screen-time might help with attention and behavior issues.
“I go from speaking to a group in Palo Alto who have read my book to Antioch, where I am the first person to mention any of these risks,” Dr. Freed said.
He worries especially about how the psychologists who work for these companies make the tools phenomenally addictive, as many are well-versed in the field of persuasive design (or how to influence human behavior through the screen). Examples: YouTube next video autoplays; the slot machine-like pleasure of refreshing Instagram for likes; Snapchat streaks.
“The digital divide was about access to technology, and now that everyone has access, the new digital divide is limiting access to technology,” said Chris Anderson, the former editor of Wired magazine.
Technology Is a Huge Social Experiment on Children
Some parents, pediatricians and teachers around the country are pushing back.
“These companies lied to the schools, and they’re lying to the parents,” said Natasha Burgert, a pediatrician in Kansas City. “We’re all getting duped.”
“Our kids, my kids included, we are subjecting them to one of the biggest social experiments we have seen in a long time,” she said. “What happens to my daughter if she can’t communicate over dinner — how is she going to find a spouse? How is she going to interview for a job?”
“I have families now that go teetotal,” Dr. Burgert said. “They’re like, ‘That’s it, we’re done.’”
One of those families are the Brownsbergers, who had long banned smartphones but recently also banned the internet-connected television.
“We took it down, we took the TV off the wall, and I canceled cable,” said Rachael Brownsberger, 34, the mother of 11- and 8-year old boys. “As crazy as that sounds!”
She and her husband, who runs a decorative concrete company, keep their children away from cellphones but found that even a little exposure to screen time changed the boys’ behavior. Her older son, who has A.D.H.D., would get angry when the screen had to be turned off, she said, which worried her.
His Christmas wish list was a Wii, a PlayStation, a Nintendo, a MacBook Pro and an iPhone.
“And I told him, ‘Kiddo, you’re not gonna get one of those things,’” Ms. Brownsberger said. “Yeah, I’m the mean mom.”
But one thing has made it easier: Others in what she described as a rural neighborhood outside Kansas City are doing the same thing.
“It takes a community to support this,” she said. “Like I was just talking to my neighbor last night — ‘Am I the worst mom ever?’”
Ms. Boan has three pilots running with about 40 parents in each, looking at best practices for getting kids off phones and screens. Overland Park’s Chamber of Commerce is supporting the work, and the city is working to incorporate elements of digital wellness into its new strategic vision.
“The city planner and the chamber of commerce said to us, ‘We’ve seen this impact our city,’” Ms. Boan said. “We all want our kids to be independent, self-regulated device users, but we have to equip them.”
The Privilege of Choices
In Silicon Valley, some feel anxious about the growing class divide they see around screen-time.
Kirstin Stecher and her husband, who works as an engineer at Facebook, are raising their kids almost completely screen-free.
“Is this coming from a place of information — like, we know a lot about these screens,” she said. “Or is it coming from a place of privilege, that we don’t need them as badly?”
“There’s a message out there that your child is going to be crippled and in a different dimension if they’re not on the screen,” said Pierre Laurent, a former Microsoft and Intel executive now on the board of trustees at Silicon Valley’s Waldorf School. “That message doesn’t play as well in this part of the world.”
“People in this region of the world understand that the real thing is everything that’s happening around big data, AI, and that is not something that you’re going to be particularly good at because you have a cellphone in fourth grade,” Mr. Laurent said.
As those working to build products become more wary, the business of getting screens in front of kids is booming. Apple and Google compete ferociously to get products into schools and target students at an early age, when brand loyalty begins to form.
Google published a case study of its work with the Hoover City, Ala., school district, saying technology equips students “with skills of the future.”
They concluded that its own Chromebooks and Google tools changed lives: “The district leaders believe in preparing students for success by teaching them the skills, knowledge, and behaviors they need to become responsible citizens in the global community.”
Dr. Freed, though, argues these tools are too relied upon in schools for low-income children. And he sees the divide every day as he meets tech-addicted children of middle and low-income families.
“For a lot of kids in Antioch, those schools don’t have the resources for extracurricular activities, and their parents can’t afford nannies,” Dr. Freed said. He said the knowledge gap around tech’s danger is enormous.
Dr. Freed and 200 other psychologists petitioned the American Psychological Association in August to formally condemn the work psychologists are doing with persuasive design for tech platforms that are designed for children.
“Once it sinks its teeth into these kids, it’s really hard,” Dr. Freed said.
And the rich hire their own fire-fighters in California…concierge medical practices…private schools with real teachers, facilities and rich curriculum…proposals to build private toll roads…private investment instead of public investment…private water companies…and on and on and on……privatization really means the rich get to live decently while the rest take on all the risks of life. Capitalists tried this out in the 19th century. It didn’t work then for the vast majority, and it’s not working now for most of us. It makes sense if one believes only the rich are “worthy.”
Excellent. So is this: Technology Is a Huge (and profitable) Social Experiment on Children
One aspect of “reform” is all about undermining and deprofessionalizing teaching. The so-called reformers also typically oppose unions. TFA, fake schools of education like Relay and technology have all been inserted into education to accomplish this goal. All of these so-called reforms have not been launched to improve the quality of education. They are being marketed as “innovative,” but they are really cheaper and lower quality instruction than what is found in typical public schools. Cyber instruction is the lowest quality and least expensive of all. These tools are being used to reduce the cost of education for the poor and working class.
Many of the leaders of “reform” are the wealthy. Many of the supporters of privatization are not seeking to improve outcomes for poor students. They are selfishly looking to reduce their tax burdens, and some states have been furthering this goal by offering tax credit vouchers while the federal government offers tax credits for some charter school investments.
Working families are slowly waking up to the fact that “reform” is a huge hoax designed to destroy democratic, locally controlled public education. The goal is to allow the wealthy to make money off other people’s children while they send their own children to elite private schools.
Exactly right. Choice is a poor substitute for fully funding education.
When I was on the job hunt in October, I briefly put my resume–big mistake, this, incidentally–up on Indeed. One day during this I received 180 emails with job offers, and about 20 percent of them were from “e-learning” companies. The descriptions on their come-ons, almost routinely, contained words like “exciting,” “innovative,” “cutting-edge,” and “effective.” Needless to say I deleted them all. But I did pause to reflect on the credulity this kind of language presupposes.
Then I realized: no, these are not cynical marketers (ok, so maybe they are): these are people who really do believe their own nonsense.
Which makes them, for me at least, really scary people.
If anyone here knows a child, whose family cannot afford a laptop for their child, please contact Laptops for Kidz.
http://www.laptopsforkidz.org/
The organization provides FREE, reconditioned computers for children.
Do explain Charles, HOW the families that can’t afford a laptop will be able to afford the the connection for the WiFi? These kids don’t need laptops…. they need teachers, they need parents who make a living wage, they need decent food to eat, they need a decent place to call home. NEED and WANT are 2 very different things.
The organization provides the computers. The organization will also assist in aiding the family to have internet access. (I agree it makes no sense to give a child a computer that they cannot use).
I do not dispute that children need teachers. Of course, families with adequate financial resources, and good jobs are a noble goal.
A child that is not computer literate, and does not have internet access, is at a terrible disadvantage.
Point and click is pretty easy to learn. Google entry is easy to figure out….it’s the ability to decipher all the crap that is the “learning”. No computers are needed and NO child will be left behind without a computer in their home. In fact, I think the children without computer access have more advantages and better social skills than children who are connected ALL THE TIME.
Preach it, Lisa!
The Chromebook Kids are being subjected to
FAKE TEACHING!
Capitalism seems to not be working any where for Americans. When people in this country have to witness a 20 year old kardashian girl making billions and being called a “billionaire” then something seems to not be working in our system.
People respect people who earn their dollars but when people like the kardashian family are earning billions then something is very wrong.
“He worries especially about how the psychologists who work for these companies make the tools phenomenally addictive, as many are well-versed in the field of persuasive design (or how to influence human behavior through the screen)”
This is reminiscent of how psychologists made the tools for and the American Psychological Association made the excuses for torture under the Bush/Cheney regime.
Some psychologists apparently take the Hypocritic Oath when they get their degree: “Do no harm to fascists and corporations”
So I get the main point of this article. I do however, also get some of the advantages of screens over print. I just downloaded and started to read Les Miserables from Gutenberg. I would never have done that with a bookstore or a library because of the cost and convienence of the matter. It seems to me that the problem is that kids are using their screens to play fortnite instead of read.
The solution for this problem is that we need to have more contact with teachers, not less. The more students can afford to read, the better. But to get them to read Lord Jim rather than play games requires more adult oversight, to engage, stimulate discussion (maybe some of it on line), and interpret. To put it more generally, technology requires more and better trained teachers, not fewer.
I agree that tech requires more teachers not fewer.
Tech is a teaching tool (one of many), not a teacher replacement.
Unfortunately, it is now being marketed in schools primarily as the latter.
I find it hard to read books online. Articles ok. Posts ok. But not books. I like the tactile sense of holding a book in my hand. That too.
You sound just like my twelve year old, who rarely removes her nose from a book and thinks the library superior to every other place. She loves to post comments on her classroom chat room, but she wants to read the books on paper.
Yes, your daughter and I think alike. I predict great things for her. She is independent.
I’m an avid reader. I read a lot of books and have been reading them since the late 1950s but I tried an e-reader. I even own two or three Kindles but don’t know where they are gathering dust because I haven’t used on in several years. I gave up. They turned out to be another tech pest with the updates and plugging in to charge the battery.
There is an old adage that says, “keep it simple” and there is nothing simpler than a book printed on paper that doesn’t require updated software and charging a battery so you can keep using it.
I have 16 books stacked by my computer that I want to write review for but I have another 16 books stacked on another table waiting for me to read them. I love books, real book stores and libraries but I have no love of an Apple iStore or a Best Buy.
I find that I retain more information when I read an actual book rather than a book online. I can easily remember page cues or numbers if I need to go back and reread or relearn something. This has been a proven fact. I want my kids to read actual books instead of ebooks and both have shown problems with retaining information from online text books.
Reading Books online is not a satisfying experience for me. I like to flip back and forward when resding anything, depending on MY purpose as well as the book itself. I like to write Notes in the margins and highlight Words and passages. When I do readi an ebook, while I can highlight and write short notes I find that online highlighting and writing notes to be cumbersome.
The tactile feel of a writing implement is more satisfying. I have spoken to kids about this and they prefer books. It’s more transportable and no worries if the book is dropped.
This electronic world has it’s downfalls. That screen is not a panacea; that screen actually keeps many from progressing.
I also worry about online books and other printed materials going POOF…it’s that easy to erase. I do worry about online materials just disappearing with one stroke…DELETE.
I am with Diane.
Btw, my husband’s work is developing attitude determination control systems for stuff in space and to collect data from space events as well. His work is on many missions. One is Kelpler to give as an example. He NEVER reads a book, a magazine article, or newspapers online. He says that online stuff is harder to read and takes up too much of his time. Plus…that blue light from the screen is awful stuff. It will diminish eyesight.
As I read, I underline passages and lines that I love.
If I am reviewing the book, it helps me find the lines I might quote.
If it is a truly wonderful book, there is so much underlining that it doesn’t help me at all.
The book right now that I have covered with ink and stars is Eve L. Ewing’s “Ghosts in the Schoolyard.”
When I have some time, I will write a review here.
Diane: you sure know how to appeal to a father, sending his daughter a compliment. She is pretty special. She already has a bigger vocabulary than I had when I went to college. Still, as we all know, teachers who point their students toward higher things are important to development. This is why I claim that, especially in the use of technology, we need more teachers, not fewer.
Lloyd: the only advantage I can see on an e-reader is that I tend to lose my books. And of course, the how to videos when you have to fix something.
LisaM: I agree about the retention thing.
I’m a bit confused: Do you lose your e-books or paper books?
Any child who loves books is definitely on the right track.
Something about a book
Something about a book
Makes you take a look
Something about a page
Sets the mental stage
Something about the feel
Something about the weight
Makes a book quite real
Sometimes even great
Nothing about a screen
Makes you want to read
Nothing about the scene
Fills a human need
E-books versus P-books:
https://www.newyorker.com/magazine/2013/07/29/e-book-vs-p-book
Lloyd: if I were to be honest, I lose everything. I lose books. I lose files on my computer. I lose my7/16 wrench. For some reason, I rarely lose my iPad, but it’s time is coming.
Are you sure you lose them like in lost forever or are they just misplaced somewhere else in the house?
Way back in the 1970s, the late Marva Collins (founder of the Westside Preparatory School) said “Things don’t teach, Teachers teach”. She was right then ,and her words still ring true.
It is obvious to me that this is how the wealthiest 0.1 percent plan to keep their children and grandchildren in charge and wealthy — the creation of a new aristocracy that will always inherit their wealth and power no matter how incompetent and corrupt they become until civilization comes crashing down and also buries them in the ashes.
I’ve read enough history over the decades to know that this is the flawed formula that has repeated itself for millennia and is one of the major reasons why great civilizations always fail.
Wealth buys power and that power corrupts in every way even the ability to reason rationally. When Trump claimed he was a “stable genius” that was the ultimate evidence his mind is totally corrupt. Individuals like Trump with too much power is why civilizations fall.
The rich apparently get that relational skills are what matter most in child development. However, some of them just want to sell stuff regardless of the impact. On the other hand, they have the privilege to suffer from high anxiety rather than the everyday worries of food, shelter, clothing and health care.
Since a lot of the comments above are about reading, please indulge me in sharing this passage from David Maraniss’s “Once In A Great City: A Detroit Story”, a wonderful history of the city in 1963. Although this is long, I thought some of you might like this excerpt about the disparate personalities who made the early history of Motown, how…
“…connecting these was the least appreciated and perhaps most important factor of all: the music teachers and program in the Detroit schools.
“Talk to musicians in Detroit and odds are they will recall—vividly and fondly—the teachers who pushed them along. Paul Riser came to Motown in 1962 as a trombone player straight out of Cass Tech, a social naif among the older cool-cat jazzmen of the Funk Brothers house band, but also a musical prodigy with skills at reading, writing, and arranging scores that he had learned in the public schools. Harold Arnoldi, the music teacher at Keating Elementary, plucked him out of the crowd at age seven and become a mentor and father figure to Riser, helping him get instruments at a discount and encouraging his development. Then, at Cass Tech, Riser rose under the guidance of Dr. Harry Begian, who inculcated in his music students the classics and fundamentals. ‘He was like a military drill sergeant, but he did it from his heart,’ Riser recalled. ‘I didn’t understand what he was doing until I graduated years later and got a degree. I was able to laugh about it, his discipline. Harry Begian treat us as ladies and gentlemen and got us ready for the marketplace, attitude-wise, discipline-wise. I sat first chair trombone at Cass Tech, and he saw something in me, again, just as Arnoldi did. That got me ready for Motown.’
“For Martha Reeves, the public school influence traced back to her music teacher at Russell Elementary School. ‘Emily Wagstaff, a beautiful little German lady whose accent was so think I could barely understand what she was saying,’ Reeves later recalled. ‘She pulled me from class five minutes before tick-tock and chose me as a soloist. My public school teachers had the biggest hearts and they were patient, and they could choose. They could pick out the stars and know they can instruct them and fill out their greatness.’ At Northeastern High her music teacher was Abraham Silver, who, much like Begian at Cass Tech, had a capacity to teach music theory as well as direct a choir and infused his students with an appreciation for the classics and fundamentals. Freedom through discipline: once they learned the fundamentals they could move freely into the genres of jazz, pop, and rhythm and blues.
“Reeves later remembered how Silver singled her out and then nurtured her. ‘He went through the whole choir section to see who could sing Bach arias. My name was Reeves, I was near the end. Some others did pretty good but no one really nailed it. So I stood up with my knees knocking. I nailed it. I had never heard of Bach. Or I had maybe heard it on the radio. One of my favorite pastimes as a teenager was listening to symphonic music and trying to hit some of the high notes.’ Decades later, recalling the scene, Reeves hit those soprano notes beautifully. ‘So I did learn a lot listening to symphonic music. But Bach was a new name to me. Hallelujah! We were the first choir at Northeastern to be recorded. And the first choir from Northeastern to sing at Ford Auditorium. The first time I appeared before four thousand, four hundred people. I was seventeen, about to graduate. And that was one of the biggest thrills I can remember in my teenage life, to hear that applause. It was not just for me but for the entire choir, but I was the soloist. No microphones. You had to throw your voice. Abraham Silver. He taught us not only how to sing but how to read it. That made a big difference. That we learned how to read notes. That we did it correctly.’”
There’s an old book, “Four Arguments for the Elimination of Television” by Jerry Mander (no I’m not making that up!) that considers the PHYSICAL effects of ingesting so much radiant energy through our eyes when exposed to screens for long periods. You NEVER hear discussion or research on this point, just on the cognitive effects of technology. Also anything by Neil Postman (especially “Amusing Ourselves to Death”) critically evaluates the negative effects of techno-culture.
This is an important and overlooked point. Perception mediated by emitted light from a screen is different from perception mediated by reflected light from a surface. Proofreading is more accurate on print than on a screen. Most of us spend more time perceiving the world from reflective surfaces and knowledge acquired from and synthesized from all of our senses. Hi definition screen images are no substitutes or living in the world, touching and holding things, lifting them and moving around, caressing surfaces and the rest.
DeVos is obviously much more important than spending money on public schools that are underfunded. She is the wealthiest of all the cabinet members and we have to waste taxpayer money on her. Trump always picks the best. [He has endorsed Pelosi.]
…………………………..
DeVos’ ‘Extreme’ Security Costing Taxpayers $20m: Report
Education Secretary Betsy DeVos is getting around-the-clock security that could cost taxpayers $19.8 million through September of 2019, according to figures obtained by NBC News. No other Trump Cabinet member receives such extreme levels of armed protection, the network reports, but the Justice Department says the expensive request was granted due to “threats” aimed specifically at DeVos. The protection was granted in February 2017, a few days after DeVos was blocked by a handful of protesting parents and teachers from entering a school in Washington, D.C. “The order was issued after the Department of Education contacted administration officials regarding threats received by the secretary of Education,” the Justice Department said in a statement. The cost of the security was $5.3 million in fiscal year 2017 and $6.8 million for fiscal year 2018, according to the U.S. Marshals Service. The estimated cost for fiscal year 2019 is $7.74 million, making a total of $19.8 million if the protection continues to September 2019.
While spending heavily on DeVos’s personal security, the Trump administration has targeted the Education Department for deep budget cuts. Recently, the administration announced a blueprint to merge it with the Labor Department as a way to further slash costs.
The $12.1 million that U.S. taxpayers have already paid for the extra security DeVos receives would have paid for 1,968 Pell Grants for low-income college students for the upcoming school year or 268 new elementary teachers in Kansas, based on an NBC review of salary averages in the state.
Read it at NBC News
Devos really has just been a complete disaster for education no matter how you slice the cake or count the money. This woman has been a complete failure regarding the ability to operate our schools in this country.
The ONLY reason Devos is still in the position of sec of education is that she and her family – as we all know – have donated several millions of dollars to the GOP and this has allowed Devos to keep a grip on her position.
However, does anyone in this country, whether a democrat or a republican think that Devos has done well for our students in this country? Devos has been a snake in the grass on several issues and mainly the issue of student loans where she has been a real creepy dog to students who were scammed of their money.
Further, she has done absolutely zero for our public school students which make up approximately 85-90 percent of the students in America but rather she has continued her ugly march of trying to convince everyone how great school choice and charter schools are. The problem Devos has faced is the fact that she has ZERO education experience. ZERO education background in her University studies as well.
So, the fact that Devos has tried to convince people who work in education – (people who are teachers, administrators in schools, counselors and social workers in schools and education scholars) how school choice is the answer to our education issues. However, most experts in the field as well as data that has been documented from past “experiments” indicate that Devos’ dream of school choice is nothing but a pipe dream and really in plain English it just does not work well.
However, because Devos is use to getting whatever she wants and has yes people all around her telling her oh how great her idea is. However, when Devos became sec of ed. she realized that she really knew nothing about education except for her vivid wild dreams about it.