Pediatricians update digital media recommendations for kids

It's not so bad to hand your child an iPad once in a while depending on how it's used. Playing a game together or Skyping with Grandma? That's OK. Helping your little one calm down or trying to keep peace in the house? Not so much.

New guidelines announced by the American Academy of Pediatrics today say parents not only need to pay attention to the amount of time children spend on digital media -- but also how, when and where they use it.
For children ages 2 to 5, media should be limited to one hour a day, the statement says, and it should involve high-quality programming or something parents and kids can view or engage with together. With the exception of video-chatting, digital media should also be avoided in children younger than 18 months old.
"Digital media has become an inevitable part of childhood for many infants, toddlers and preschoolers, but research is limited on how this affects their development," says one of the lead authors of the statement Jenny Radesky, M.D., a developmental behavioral expert and pediatrician at University of Michigan C.S. Mott Children's Hospital.
Radesky coauthored the statement for children ages 0-5 with Dimitri A. Christakis, M.D., M.P.H., of Seattle Children's Hospital. The AAP also put out a separate policy statement the same day for older kids (ages 6 to teenage).
"In children over three, the research is solid: high-quality programs like Sesame Street can teach kids new ideas. However, under three, toddlers' immature brains have a hard time transferring what they see on a screen to real-life knowledge," Radesky says. "We don't yet know if interactivity helps or hinders that process."
"What we do know is that early childhood is a time of rapid brain development, when children need time to play, sleep, learn to handle emotions, and build relationships. Research still suggests that excessive media use can get in the way of these important activities. Our statement highlights ways families and pediatricians can help manage a healthy balance."
Why limit screen time
Too much time using digital media in the wrong way is linked to children's quality of sleep, child development and physical health, the statement notes. (Heavy media use in preschool is associated with small but significant increases in body mass index.)
The guidelines recommend banning digital media use an hour before bed, turning off devices when not in use and keeping bedrooms, mealtimes and parent-child playtime screen free.
Although there are specific instances when using digital media as a soothing tool is helpful, such as on airplanes or during medical procedures, parents should also avoid using media as the only way to calm down children, authors note. Using devices as a common soothing strategy may limit children's ability to regulate their own emotions, Radesky says.
"We have to be realistic about the ubiquity of digital media use. It is becoming ingrained in our culture and daily life. For this reason, it is even more important that parents help their children understand the healthy ways to use media from the earliest ages," Radesky says.
"Videochatting with grandparents, watching science videos together, putting on streaming music and dancing together, looking up new recipes or craft ideas, taking pictures and videos to show each other, having a family movie night … these are just a few ways media can be used as a tool to support family connection," Radesky says.
Radesky notes that it is crucial that adults interact with children during use, to help young children apply what they're seeing on the screen to the world around them. Research shows that for the youngest children -- ages 18-36 months -- this is essential, she says.
Authors acknowledge that well-designed TV programs such as "Sesame Street" may help improve literacy and social outcomes for children ages 3 to 5. But many apps parents find under the "educational" category are not evidence based and include little input from developmental educators.
Parents may want to limit their own screen time, too, the authors say. Heavy parent use of mobile devices is associated with fewer verbal and nonverbal interaction between parents and children and may be associated with more parent-child conflict.
Pediatricians are also encouraged to help parents be "media mentors"- role models and guides for how to pick good digital content. Doctors have an opportunity to educate families about brain development in the early years and importance of hands on social play for language cognitive and social emotional skills. They can also guide parents to resources for finding quality products.
"Pediatricians have the opportunity to start conversations with parents early about family media use and habits,'" Radesky says. "We can help parents develop media use plans for their homes, set limits and encourage them to use devices with their children in a way that promotes enhanced learning and greater interaction."
The takeaways
Here's a breakdown of the new AAP guidelines for parents of children 0-5 years:
• Avoid digital media use (except video chatting) in children younger than 24 months.
• If digital media is introduced to children between 18 and 24 months, choose high-quality programming and use the media with your child. Avoid solo use by the child.
• Do not feel pressured to introduce technology early. Interfaces are so intuitive that children will figure them out quickly once they start using them.
• For children ages 2 to 5, limit screen use to one hour a day of high-quality programming. Watch with your child and help them understand what they are seeing.
• Avoid fast-paced programs and apps with lots of distracting content or violence.
• Turn off TVs and other devices when not in use
• Avoid using media as the only way to calm your child. This could lead to problems with limit setting and ability to self-sooth and regulate emotions.
• Test apps before your child uses them, and play together.
• Keep bedrooms, mealtimes and parent-child playtimes screen free. Parents can set a "do not disturb" option on their phones during these times.
• Set a rule: No screen time an hour before bed.
• Consult the American Academy of Pediatrics Family Media use plan.
• Ask your pediatrician if you need help.

Read More

Students have trouble judging the credibility of information online, researchers find

When it comes to evaluating information that flows across social channels or pops up in a Google search, young and otherwise digital-savvy students can easily be duped, finds a new report from researchers at Stanford Graduate School of Education.

The report, released this week by the Stanford History Education Group (SHEG), shows a dismaying inability by students to reason about information they see on the Internet, the authors said. Students, for example, had a hard time distinguishing advertisements from news articles or identifying where information came from.
"Many people assume that because young people are fluent in social media they are equally perceptive about what they find there," said Professor Sam Wineburg, the lead author of the report and founder of SHEG. "Our work shows the opposite to be true."
The researchers began their work in January 2015, well before the most recent debates over fake news and its influence on the presidential election.
The scholars tackled the question of "civic online reasoning" because there were few ways to assess how students evaluate online information and to identify approaches to teach the skills necessary to distinguish credible sources from unreliable ones.
The authors worry that democracy is threatened by the ease at which disinformation about civic issues is allowed to spread and flourish.
"Many of the materials on web credibility were state-of-the-art in 1999. So much has changed but many schools are stuck in the past," said Joel Breakstone, the director of SHEG, which has designed social studies curriculum that teaches students how to evaluate primary sources. That curriculum has been downloaded 3.5 million times, and is used by several school districts.
The new report covered news literacy, as well as students' ability to judge Facebook and Twitter feeds, comments left in readers' forums on news sites, blog posts, photographs and other digital messages that shape public opinion.
The assessments reflected key understandings the students should possess such as being able to find out who wrote a story and whether that source is credible. The authors drew on the expertise of teachers, university researchers, librarians and news experts to come up with 15 age-appropriate tests -- five each for middle school, high school and college levels.
"In every case and at every level, we were taken aback by students' lack of preparation," the authors wrote.
In middle school they tested basic skills, such as the trustworthiness of different tweets or articles.
One assessment required middle schoolers to explain why they might not trust an article on financial planning that was written by a bank executive and sponsored by a bank. The researchers found that many students did not cite authorship or article sponsorship as key reasons for not believing the article.
Another assessment had middle school students look at the homepage of Slate. They were asked to identify certain bits of content as either news stories or advertisements. The students were able to identify a traditional ad -- one with a coupon code -- from a news story pretty easily. But of the 203 students surveyed, more than 80 percent believed a native ad, identified with the words "sponsored content," was a real news story.
At the high school level, one assessment tested whether students were familiar with key social media conventions, including the blue checkmark that indicates an account was verified as legitimate by Twitter and Facebook.
Students were asked to evaluate two Facebook posts announcing Donald Trump's candidacy for president. One was from the verified Fox News account and the other was from an account that looked like Fox News. Only a quarter of the students recognized and explained the significance of the blue checkmark. And over 30 percent of students argued that the fake account was more trustworthy because of some key graphic elements that it included.
"This finding indicates that students may focus more on the content of social media posts than on their sources," the authors wrote. "Despite their fluency with social media, many students are unaware of basic conventions for indicating verified digital information."
The assessments at the college level focused on more complex reasoning. Researchers required students to evaluate information they received from Google searches, contending that open Internet searches turn up contradictory results that routinely mix fact with falsehood.
For one task, students had to determine whether Margaret Sanger, the founder of Planned Parenthood, believed in state-sponsored euthanasia. A typical Google search shows dozens of websites addressing the topic from opposite angles.
"Making sense of search results is even more challenging with politically charged topics," the researchers said. "A digitally literate student has the knowledge and skill to wade through mixed results to find reliable and accurate information."
In another assessment, college students had to evaluate website credibility. The researchers found that high production values, links to reputable news organizations and polished "About" pages had the ability to sway students into believing without very much skepticism the contents of the site.
The assessments were administered to students across 12 states. In total, the researchers collected and analyzed 7,804 student responses. Field-testing included under-resourced schools in Los Angeles and well-resourced schools in the Minneapolis suburbs. College assessments were administered at six different universities.
Wineburg says the next steps to this research include helping educators use these tasks to track student understanding and to adjust instruction. He also envisions developing curriculum for teachers, and the Stanford History Education Group has already begun to pilot lesson plans in local high schools. Finally, the researchers hope to produce videos showing the depth of the problem and demonstrating the link between digital literacy and informed citizenship.
"As recent headlines demonstrate, this work is more important now than ever," Wineburg said. "In the coming months, we look forward to sharing our assessments and working with educators to create materials that will help young people navigate the sea of disinformation they encounter online."
The research was funded by a grant from the Robert R. McCormick Foundation. Besides Breakstone and Wineburg, co-authors included Stanford researchers Sarah McGrew and Teresa Ortega.
An executive summary of the report is available

Read More

FREE TRUTH ABOUT DRUGS INFORMATION KIT FOR EDUCATORS

Exclusively for educators, law enforcement officers and other drug prevention specialists who teach students 11 years of age and above in classroom, group instruction or community learning settings.
Your free kit includes:

• The Truth About Drugs booklet, the centerpiece of the 13-booklet The Truth About Drugs series;
• The Foundation for a Drug-Free World, a video introduction to the Foundation, and our drug awareness-raising tools you can put to immediate use: the award-winning “They Said, They Lied” PSAs and a preview of The Truth About Drugs: Real People, Real Stories documentary.
• The Truth About Drugs Program Guide.

One free kit per educator—includes free shipping. To receive your free kit, fill out the form to the right.

If you cannot, for any reason, honor the basic agreement to use this kit to promote drug education activites in your area—and provide documentation of usage—the Foundation for a Drug-Free World can, at the discretion of its officers, exercise the option to ask for shipping charges.

Read More

HAPPY NEW YEAR2014

My wishes for you, great start for Jan, Love for Feb, peace for March, No worries for April, fun for May, Joy for June to Nov, happiness for Dec. Have a lucky and wonderful 2014

Read More