Ice Berg: "psychiatrist" did they find an increase in consultations for relationship problems or behavior related to early and growing use of screens? Yes, psychologists and psychiatrists are now available for use much considered excessive video games and new social networks. Pol: Do you understand the anguish of parents on this subject or are you disproportionately? Parents have reason to be worried, but not for the reason they believe.
Binge screens in adolescence is generally not a sign of psychological disorders. However, it is true that the overcrowding of the screens may interfere with other activities, and parents need to regulate it. Tom: For how long should one day allow children to be in front of screens (computer, television)? The American Academy of Pediatrics in 1999 suggested a guide for parents: no screen before 2 years (the experts agree today to talk about 3 years), one hour per day between 3 and 6 years, 2 hours between 6-9 years and beyond 3 hours.
But it is real-time overall, including television, the computer to play the computer for work, the handheld ... Yan: Television and video games are part of their time and their lives. How not to put them on the sidelines without any ban them and get in conflict with their desire that seems to be in step with the times? Why do we say that parents should be consistent playing time? Because in adolescence, youth have not yet acquired the ability to regulate their own impulses.
They have difficulty following the decisions they deem most reasonable yet for them. That is why parents must ensure that video games only part of leisure time. But at the same time frame is totally inadequate. Because video games have many positive aspects and that parents have everything to gain interest in it.
When parents accompany an interest in their children's games, they know much more consistent with intelligence and efficiency. Without accompanying frame is as useless as to escort without framing. Both are indispensable. Latemotiv: A child in front of all these screens can go crazy? And lose the relationship to reality? Jlrenck: What benchmarks of space and time among youth glued to the windows "magic" by which - virtually - the distances are abolished, and immediately becomes the norm? Perceptible signs of "change", incompetence time and space, etc..
Have they been observed? The practice of video games, like the new social networks, changes the relationship with space, time, construction of identity, and instead we give to shared activities and solitary activities. But such a revolution has accompanied other major innovations as the invention of writing, and to a lesser extent, the distribution of books through printing.
New modes of operation identified in children and adolescents are neither better nor worse than those we are traditionally familiar. Culture screens is trying to replace that of the book. Given this upheaval, the percentage of children with mental disorders has remained stable, and they alone are at risk of developing diseases.
Do not confuse the sphere of activity in which a disease is identified with the cause of it. Dr. Olive: The screen is it comparable to the drug, both chemical (dopamine. ..) and psychologically? Elvira: The daily use of video games or the Internet can not it generate mechanisms addictive in children? I see that my children sometimes have trouble "win" if I do not invite them firmly.
In the 1990s, Aviel Goodman developed the idea that there is no substance addiction. But to date there is no expert consensus on the existence of an addiction to the Internet, virtual or video games. Why? Because most of these games are changing and they give more importance to the socialization via the Internet.
Obviously, human beings share love, or more precisely, chat, and we all know that. But we can not mean that there is an addiction to gossip. And that's what most of today's teenagers when they go on video games or social networks: a chat with their buddies. The only problem is with those who go to games to play alone.
That is why parents should always ask their kids: "do you play alone or with others?" Playing alone is most disturbing, and if the child says he plays with others, we must ask him if he plays with others he knows or he does not know. The most reassuring answer is when it finds the evening in his play of classmates he meets the day.
Adrien: Social networks are not they double-edged blades: on one side, the incredible opportunity to share that uses real-time, on the other, a boundary around a screen a certain loneliness facing the screen? In social networks, we are never alone, by definition. Especially since studies have shown that young people, unlike adults, found preferentially in these networks of people their age, they know otherwise.
Adults seek rather to meet strangers, with the desire to have adventures ... Rabbit: The screen does he risk not to replace the parent in terms of transmission standards and values? Long ago that children seek in the screens of benchmarks on how to become "great". Television and movies have always been such benchmarks.
And from there, everything revolves around the relationship children have with their parents. If they operate under clear rules and reliable, children give up quickly to implement the revenue it seems to find their screens. But if parents do not have such markers, or, worse, turn away from their children, they will obviously try to apply the models of the screens.
It's the same thing today with everything they find on the Internet. If there is a difference, it is only in the fact that the Internet, they are not only in contact with models, but also to the community of peers, the so-called peers. So today, children are much more dependent on the models applied by their peers than in the past.
But, as in the past, parents' ability to provide reliable benchmarks and recurring remains essential. Mimie: I did not have TV at home, just a computer that my kids watch short cartoons. I pass for an alien but I say it's better that way. But it can also be double-edged ... More and more parents are concerned about the influence of the screens on their children prefer them to DVDs instead turning on a television.
The rules of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1999 must apply in the same manner as regards the screen time. But this formula has a considerable advantage: allowing the child to choose what it will look, to watch several times if he wants, which allows him to better understand the history and develop memory.
However, this choice may lead children to ignore the existence of soap operas or cartoons which his comrades will talk to him. But experience shows that children in this situation would do very well and there is no need for concern, especially since they always manage to watch TV with their buddies or ...
with their grandparents. If parents never FLASHING television, it is better that they explain to their child that is their choice but they are quite willing to still talk about what the child can also see that at home. Glagla: Adults are not they the first to give the "bad example" by passing themselves many hours each week to check emails or to share with their friends on social networks? A recent U.S.
study showed that children who watch more television are those whose parents watch more TV ... In other words, if parents want their children watch less, it is best that they start themselves by reducing their screen time. Regarding the use of networked video games, it seems that having a parent plays is quite a deterrent for the child to play: the game is indeed seen as a way to escape parents, and if they themselves are the players, the child remains at risk of being given advice that will prevent him from cultivating the illusion of escape the influence of parents, especially the father.
Finally, with regard to new social networks, young people will create their own territory, whatever the use that parents do their part. Finally, in my opinion, is more important to create moments in the family where everyone can talk about his own use the screens. And the moment it seems to be the evening meal together ...
no screen, just to mention the screens. Joe: What are the real inconvenience of excessive practice of screens in young children (3-6 years)? Can you describe exactly? Between 3 and 6 years, studies have shown that it is essential that the child has activities involving the use of his ten fingers.
That is why traditionally, children at this age was invited to make cuttings, folding, collages, coloring ... It is this activity of the ten fingers which allows the maturation of the brain regions that allow the apprehension of objects in three dimensions. Therefore it is best to avoid as much as possible to the child this age uses a console game that engages two or four fingers.
And should be banned altogether especially mobile consoles (Nintendo DS or PSP), which consume the attention of the child. Beyond the inconvenience principal reduction activities and reduced the time available to you. There are so many things to learn at this age. But we can not put on the same plane of a practice game and exploring websites.
For equal screen time, taking into account the type of activity is essential. All that socializes the child through the screen and everything that calls to ask questions and solve unforeseen problems, promotes its development. Conversely, all gaming activities repetitive, stereotyped, and more solitary, are disturbing.
Destouche: What do you have plans for national education, which is that ICT (information technology, communication, and education) invade the field of education and that schools become cyber-cafes? The faculty is not willing to let transform schools into cybercafes! However, the school has a role to play (such as parents, but differently from them) so that children are introduced to the best way to new technologies.
The school must explain to children at primary school the three basic rules of the Internet: whatever you put into it can fall into the public domain, all that is there will stay there forever, and all that 'there are is questionable, because it is impossible to identify images of reality falsified images.
The school also has a role to play in explaining to children the economic models behind Facebook, YouTube, Dailymotion ... and also the importance of the right to dignity and the right image. Before being a place where we use new technologies, the school should be a place where teachers know them enough to put children into custody against their dangers and pitfalls.
As for the use of new technologies in schools, the models are still under study. Today we are moving in two directions: first, the development of video games through which children can acquire useful learning (game called "serious games") and then use digital tools that children have, starting with their mobile phones and iPods.
The best way that they do not use these machines to escape the course is yet to compel them to work with! But we are only beginning such research. Anna: I see (my colleagues too) in my students 9 years of major difficulties in concentration and a marked tendency to zap. Is it related to video games and television? The brain of the new generations, and indeed all who are heavy users of new technologies, no longer works as before.
The desire for a quick response, the fact of passing quickly from one topic to another, difficulty concentrating, all part of new ways of working. It is true that they are unsuited to mainstream education. But the problem is that there is no evidence to date that they are unsuitable to be required for the operation of each of us in ten or twenty years.
We already see young employees who are unable to concentrate on one task and move constantly from one to another to solve in parallel, not sequentially. It's very confusing for the old cadres who watch. But they manage to get the job done no worse than their elders, even if the method seems to confuse the logic that says we solve several different kinds of tasks one after the other.
That's the kind of paradox that we must accustom. Some American educators even suggest that the only thing we should teach students is the lineup of machines, for tomorrow will divide humanity into two: those who know how to use them (think of our smartphones today!) And those who can do it so badly that they will be quickly marginalized.
This is why teachers must commit themselves in the use of new technologies to measure the extent of the changes they impose on mental functioning and learning processes, and their relative hazards. Dido: How to choose the cartoons that may look small children from 2 ½ years? Remember, the Higher Audiovisual Council has taken over the slogan "No screen before 3 years." This does not mean that a child is threatened in its development if it looks half an hour or an hour of television per day.
But then there is always better to do, because at that age, what matters is that it can interact with Tech News Buzz surrounding a manner that involves all the senses. Television offers a reduced relationship to the sight and hearing. If a child never has the opportunity to watch programs that parents look for them, why does not he in effect from time to time a cartoon? But before the age of 3 years, and even a little beyond there understand anything anyway.
Only count the rhythm, which must be rather slow, and colors rather harmonious ... Tom: Do you think there an age limit for having a mobile phone? The age at which parents buy a cell phone to their child down more and more. It is not uncommon today to see children possess in CM1. The only thing I can tell parents is that the earlier a child has a cell phone, and soon he will move away from his parents.
From there, everything depends on leurchoix ...
Binge screens in adolescence is generally not a sign of psychological disorders. However, it is true that the overcrowding of the screens may interfere with other activities, and parents need to regulate it. Tom: For how long should one day allow children to be in front of screens (computer, television)? The American Academy of Pediatrics in 1999 suggested a guide for parents: no screen before 2 years (the experts agree today to talk about 3 years), one hour per day between 3 and 6 years, 2 hours between 6-9 years and beyond 3 hours.
But it is real-time overall, including television, the computer to play the computer for work, the handheld ... Yan: Television and video games are part of their time and their lives. How not to put them on the sidelines without any ban them and get in conflict with their desire that seems to be in step with the times? Why do we say that parents should be consistent playing time? Because in adolescence, youth have not yet acquired the ability to regulate their own impulses.
They have difficulty following the decisions they deem most reasonable yet for them. That is why parents must ensure that video games only part of leisure time. But at the same time frame is totally inadequate. Because video games have many positive aspects and that parents have everything to gain interest in it.
When parents accompany an interest in their children's games, they know much more consistent with intelligence and efficiency. Without accompanying frame is as useless as to escort without framing. Both are indispensable. Latemotiv: A child in front of all these screens can go crazy? And lose the relationship to reality? Jlrenck: What benchmarks of space and time among youth glued to the windows "magic" by which - virtually - the distances are abolished, and immediately becomes the norm? Perceptible signs of "change", incompetence time and space, etc..
Have they been observed? The practice of video games, like the new social networks, changes the relationship with space, time, construction of identity, and instead we give to shared activities and solitary activities. But such a revolution has accompanied other major innovations as the invention of writing, and to a lesser extent, the distribution of books through printing.
New modes of operation identified in children and adolescents are neither better nor worse than those we are traditionally familiar. Culture screens is trying to replace that of the book. Given this upheaval, the percentage of children with mental disorders has remained stable, and they alone are at risk of developing diseases.
Do not confuse the sphere of activity in which a disease is identified with the cause of it. Dr. Olive: The screen is it comparable to the drug, both chemical (dopamine. ..) and psychologically? Elvira: The daily use of video games or the Internet can not it generate mechanisms addictive in children? I see that my children sometimes have trouble "win" if I do not invite them firmly.
In the 1990s, Aviel Goodman developed the idea that there is no substance addiction. But to date there is no expert consensus on the existence of an addiction to the Internet, virtual or video games. Why? Because most of these games are changing and they give more importance to the socialization via the Internet.
Obviously, human beings share love, or more precisely, chat, and we all know that. But we can not mean that there is an addiction to gossip. And that's what most of today's teenagers when they go on video games or social networks: a chat with their buddies. The only problem is with those who go to games to play alone.
That is why parents should always ask their kids: "do you play alone or with others?" Playing alone is most disturbing, and if the child says he plays with others, we must ask him if he plays with others he knows or he does not know. The most reassuring answer is when it finds the evening in his play of classmates he meets the day.
Adrien: Social networks are not they double-edged blades: on one side, the incredible opportunity to share that uses real-time, on the other, a boundary around a screen a certain loneliness facing the screen? In social networks, we are never alone, by definition. Especially since studies have shown that young people, unlike adults, found preferentially in these networks of people their age, they know otherwise.
Adults seek rather to meet strangers, with the desire to have adventures ... Rabbit: The screen does he risk not to replace the parent in terms of transmission standards and values? Long ago that children seek in the screens of benchmarks on how to become "great". Television and movies have always been such benchmarks.
And from there, everything revolves around the relationship children have with their parents. If they operate under clear rules and reliable, children give up quickly to implement the revenue it seems to find their screens. But if parents do not have such markers, or, worse, turn away from their children, they will obviously try to apply the models of the screens.
It's the same thing today with everything they find on the Internet. If there is a difference, it is only in the fact that the Internet, they are not only in contact with models, but also to the community of peers, the so-called peers. So today, children are much more dependent on the models applied by their peers than in the past.
But, as in the past, parents' ability to provide reliable benchmarks and recurring remains essential. Mimie: I did not have TV at home, just a computer that my kids watch short cartoons. I pass for an alien but I say it's better that way. But it can also be double-edged ... More and more parents are concerned about the influence of the screens on their children prefer them to DVDs instead turning on a television.
The rules of the American Academy of Pediatrics in 1999 must apply in the same manner as regards the screen time. But this formula has a considerable advantage: allowing the child to choose what it will look, to watch several times if he wants, which allows him to better understand the history and develop memory.
However, this choice may lead children to ignore the existence of soap operas or cartoons which his comrades will talk to him. But experience shows that children in this situation would do very well and there is no need for concern, especially since they always manage to watch TV with their buddies or ...
with their grandparents. If parents never FLASHING television, it is better that they explain to their child that is their choice but they are quite willing to still talk about what the child can also see that at home. Glagla: Adults are not they the first to give the "bad example" by passing themselves many hours each week to check emails or to share with their friends on social networks? A recent U.S.
study showed that children who watch more television are those whose parents watch more TV ... In other words, if parents want their children watch less, it is best that they start themselves by reducing their screen time. Regarding the use of networked video games, it seems that having a parent plays is quite a deterrent for the child to play: the game is indeed seen as a way to escape parents, and if they themselves are the players, the child remains at risk of being given advice that will prevent him from cultivating the illusion of escape the influence of parents, especially the father.
Finally, with regard to new social networks, young people will create their own territory, whatever the use that parents do their part. Finally, in my opinion, is more important to create moments in the family where everyone can talk about his own use the screens. And the moment it seems to be the evening meal together ...
no screen, just to mention the screens. Joe: What are the real inconvenience of excessive practice of screens in young children (3-6 years)? Can you describe exactly? Between 3 and 6 years, studies have shown that it is essential that the child has activities involving the use of his ten fingers.
That is why traditionally, children at this age was invited to make cuttings, folding, collages, coloring ... It is this activity of the ten fingers which allows the maturation of the brain regions that allow the apprehension of objects in three dimensions. Therefore it is best to avoid as much as possible to the child this age uses a console game that engages two or four fingers.
And should be banned altogether especially mobile consoles (Nintendo DS or PSP), which consume the attention of the child. Beyond the inconvenience principal reduction activities and reduced the time available to you. There are so many things to learn at this age. But we can not put on the same plane of a practice game and exploring websites.
For equal screen time, taking into account the type of activity is essential. All that socializes the child through the screen and everything that calls to ask questions and solve unforeseen problems, promotes its development. Conversely, all gaming activities repetitive, stereotyped, and more solitary, are disturbing.
Destouche: What do you have plans for national education, which is that ICT (information technology, communication, and education) invade the field of education and that schools become cyber-cafes? The faculty is not willing to let transform schools into cybercafes! However, the school has a role to play (such as parents, but differently from them) so that children are introduced to the best way to new technologies.
The school must explain to children at primary school the three basic rules of the Internet: whatever you put into it can fall into the public domain, all that is there will stay there forever, and all that 'there are is questionable, because it is impossible to identify images of reality falsified images.
The school also has a role to play in explaining to children the economic models behind Facebook, YouTube, Dailymotion ... and also the importance of the right to dignity and the right image. Before being a place where we use new technologies, the school should be a place where teachers know them enough to put children into custody against their dangers and pitfalls.
As for the use of new technologies in schools, the models are still under study. Today we are moving in two directions: first, the development of video games through which children can acquire useful learning (game called "serious games") and then use digital tools that children have, starting with their mobile phones and iPods.
The best way that they do not use these machines to escape the course is yet to compel them to work with! But we are only beginning such research. Anna: I see (my colleagues too) in my students 9 years of major difficulties in concentration and a marked tendency to zap. Is it related to video games and television? The brain of the new generations, and indeed all who are heavy users of new technologies, no longer works as before.
The desire for a quick response, the fact of passing quickly from one topic to another, difficulty concentrating, all part of new ways of working. It is true that they are unsuited to mainstream education. But the problem is that there is no evidence to date that they are unsuitable to be required for the operation of each of us in ten or twenty years.
We already see young employees who are unable to concentrate on one task and move constantly from one to another to solve in parallel, not sequentially. It's very confusing for the old cadres who watch. But they manage to get the job done no worse than their elders, even if the method seems to confuse the logic that says we solve several different kinds of tasks one after the other.
That's the kind of paradox that we must accustom. Some American educators even suggest that the only thing we should teach students is the lineup of machines, for tomorrow will divide humanity into two: those who know how to use them (think of our smartphones today!) And those who can do it so badly that they will be quickly marginalized.
This is why teachers must commit themselves in the use of new technologies to measure the extent of the changes they impose on mental functioning and learning processes, and their relative hazards. Dido: How to choose the cartoons that may look small children from 2 ½ years? Remember, the Higher Audiovisual Council has taken over the slogan "No screen before 3 years." This does not mean that a child is threatened in its development if it looks half an hour or an hour of television per day.
But then there is always better to do, because at that age, what matters is that it can interact with Tech News Buzz surrounding a manner that involves all the senses. Television offers a reduced relationship to the sight and hearing. If a child never has the opportunity to watch programs that parents look for them, why does not he in effect from time to time a cartoon? But before the age of 3 years, and even a little beyond there understand anything anyway.
Only count the rhythm, which must be rather slow, and colors rather harmonious ... Tom: Do you think there an age limit for having a mobile phone? The age at which parents buy a cell phone to their child down more and more. It is not uncommon today to see children possess in CM1. The only thing I can tell parents is that the earlier a child has a cell phone, and soon he will move away from his parents.
From there, everything depends on leurchoix ...
- The Social Network (Fincher) - les espaces du réseau (19/10/2010)
- Adrienne BORNSTEIN - PARIS, France - Graphic Designer (27/02/2011)
- Memorable Gigs People and Places Jon Hammond (09/02/2011)
- Memorable Gigs People and Places Jon Hammond (09/02/2011)
- Memorable Gigs People and Places Jon Hammond (09/02/2011)
No comments:
Post a Comment