In the September newsletter, the perils of excessive use of electronic media by young children was discussed. We explored the physical and psychological effects of electronic media upon the developing bodies and psyches of children and found a consensus among researchers that these effects are indeed detrimental to youngsters. Yet, the market is flooded with electronic gizmos that are pitched to younger and younger children. The driving force behind such marketing is corporate greed.
     Mr. Rosemond's book, "The Diseasing of America's Children," discusses the pharmaceutical industry's interests in having as many children as possible diagnosed with ADHD, thereby allowing pharmaceutical companies to sell larger quantities of stimulants and other medications typically prescribed for that diagnosis. Similarly, toy and electronic manufacturers have a vested interest in having parents and educators believe that electronic devices best serve children's educational needs. Nothing could be further from the truth.
     School technology vendors have infiltrated the ranks of policy makers at all levels of government who are responsible for adopting and funding educational standards. During the Bush administration, high level officials noted that the administration's emphasis on testing and accountability, as detailed in the "No Child Left Behind Act," provides a lucrative market for technology vendors. As vendors promote their high-tech products as the key to education, there are many leaders in the field of technology who themselves question the efficacy of computers in classrooms. Among those leaders, Steve Jobs, co-founder of Apple Computer, stated nearly ten years ago, "I've probably spearheaded giving away more computer equipment in schools than anybody on the planet. But I've come to the conclusion that the problem is not one that technology can hope to solve. What's wrong with education cannot be fixed with technology. No amount of technology will make a dent." Now, a decade later, we are facing some of the worst crises in education ever. There are widespread teacher shortages, over-crowded classrooms, anxiety-ridden students, low academic performance, high drop-out rates, and increasing problems with school violence. Though there are more computers in classrooms, they have come at the cost of creative, eclectic, efficient education for our children, all the while boosting the profits of manufacturers and vendors of electronic media. Technology vendors tout their products as the answer to academic challenges and as the wave of the future in education. They market directly to children, establishing brand loyalty for their "hip" electronic products. They count on the fact that, despite the relatively high cost of their products, many parents will buy into believing that their children will be unable to compete and succeed in the modern world without early exposure to these devices. Vendors also know that modern-day parenting is, by and large, indulgent, and their direct marketing to children is therefore quite effective: Most children who express a desire, throw a tantrum or shed a tear, will guilt their parents into purchasing the items that "all my friends have."  
     Federal funding policies also feed into the gluttony of technology companies. For example, the federal Title I program has become a huge source of funding for computers in classrooms. Title I monies are distributed to schools that have high percentages of disadvantaged children from high-poverty neighborhoods. Although research overwhelmingly indicates that the poorest students are the ones to be most hurt by forced technology education, this fact has not deterred technology vendors from targeting Title I schools as a lucrative market for their products. These students would be far better served by using Title 1 monies to accommodate their primary needs, such as nutrition, hygiene, and attention.
     The technology standards proposed by the International Society for Technology in Education (ISTE), also contribute to the profits of private vendors. These standards advocate computers in preschool classrooms, and state that teachers can implement "developmentally appropriate" methods for applying "technology-enhanced instructional strategies" for children. Yet, there is absolutely no apparent correlation between the standards proposed by the ISTE and the hierarchy of children's biologically programmed development. The ISTE advocates the immersion of children in technology from age three, in order to assure technology literacy. The ISTE's conclusions are contrary to child development experts who have established guidelines for developmentally appropriate practice (DAP.) Since the ISTE has now ventured into the marketing of technology publications and services, and also sells corporate memberships for $5,000.00, and has recently branched out to marketing assessments and professional development materials in accordance with "No Child Left Behind" and its heavy testing requirements, it doesn't take rocket science to see where their interests lie: They lie with anything and everything that pads their company's profits, regardless worth or detriment to children, and with complete disregard to developmentally appropriate practice.
     Next month, developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) will be further discussed, mostly in terms of the "academania" that has gripped America's preschools and kindergartens, producing masses of children who are "burnt out" on school by the time they reach second grade.

      My book, the ABC's of Childhood-Active Play, Best Educational Practices and Consistent Discipline," researches and discusses electronic media use by children in depth.

For those interested in obtaining a copy of my book, please search by title at http://amazon.com or use the following direct link:
http://www.amazon.com/ABCs-Childhood-Educational-Consistent-Discipline/dp/143828411X/ref=sr_1_2?ie=UTF8&s=books&qid=1246285093&sr=1-2