Screentime at School in Kindergarten

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We are new to MCPS this year and my son is in kindergarten at a reputable ES.

I'm getting the impression the majority of his day is spent either watching a screen (Smartboard), watching YouTube videos, and time spent on his Chromebook. It all seems very excessive and also very misaligned with what we know about placing limits on screen time. He even told me they watched Cat in the Hat in art class as a "reward". He also voiced his teacher has only read a book aloud to them once this year, and instead, he watches YouTube videos of other people reading books. I don't think reading out loud to children should be considered old-fashioned, given the immense body of research that says read-alouds by adults is actually an invaluable way to become a better reader.

Is this just a post-COVID reality? Or is anything being done to address this? And if not, what can be done to address these sorts of things? I'm a teacher and it boggles my mind that there doesn't seem to be much uproar on this issue. a

Most teachers obviously don’t want to be bothered with actually teaching children. Your child is getting dumbed-down. Sad, sad, sad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Calling bullsh@! on you being a teacher OP. If you were, you’d know that children are not the most reliable narrators. You’d also know how to go about getting a better sense from the teacher themselves.
All that said, I see teachers relying on videos for read alouds more frequently now than a few years ago. I think part of it is due to resources they developed during virtual instruction and hard copies of books not being available (in classroom/school library) so it’s easier to find a video then look for an alternative title that fits their need.
Again, if you were a classroom teacher I think you’d understand this.
—elementary teacher

This seems like a ridiculous reason/excuse to not read to the kids.

Please tell me education in MCPS hasn't come to this for Kindergarteners where teachers are too effing lazy to read a book to a bunch of five year olds. As a kid that used to be the highlight of my day - my ACTUAL teacher reading the book. Sad, sad, sad.

I think teachers choose it when they don't have the book available. Or it's during dismissal so the teacher is doing other activities

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are new to MCPS this year and my son is in kindergarten at a reputable ES.

I'm getting the impression the majority of his day is spent either watching a screen (Smartboard), watching YouTube videos, and time spent on his Chromebook. It all seems very excessive and also very misaligned with what we know about placing limits on screen time. He even told me they watched Cat in the Hat in art class as a "reward". He also voiced his teacher has only read a book aloud to them once this year, and instead, he watches YouTube videos of other people reading books. I don't think reading out loud to children should be considered old-fashioned, given the immense body of research that says read-alouds by adults is actually an invaluable way to become a better reader.

Is this just a post-COVID reality? Or is anything being done to address this? And if not, what can be done to address these sorts of things? I'm a teacher and it boggles my mind that there doesn't seem to be much uproar on this issue. a

Most teachers obviously don’t want to be bothered with actually teaching children. Your child is getting dumbed-down. Sad, sad, sad.

LOLOL so bitter

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m one of the “maniacs” above. I’m not irate about YouTube readalouds themselves, but what they represent: the sweeping acceptance that digital substitutes are acceptable when they are a net negative and everyone knows it! Readalouds are probably one of the least problematic substitutions. See PP’s great point about math manipulatives. See the proliferation of app assessments. Encanto screenings at celebrations. On and on.

I don’t blame teachers for any of it. Edutech is a big business, as is curricular design, as is IT support…and Covid just accelerated the trend. meanwhile Silicon Valley execs send their kids to tech-free schools.

I teach in another MD district. We are required to use the various platforms a minimum amount each week per student. Amplify, iReady, Zearn, etc. Results of usage are sent to principals weekly and the rankings are shared during principal meetings. No principal wants to be at the bottom of the list so they come back to school and create incentives for classes to use these platforms. It's considered personalized learning and the time is built into our schedule but we have so much to cover during the day that was often don't get to it.

This is so dystopian.

Like the PP said. This is big business and there is money to be made.

[Anonymous]

I would love to see a no- or low-tech charter enter the space. it could totally flip because that’s not what “ambitious” parents want—or maybe there’s a silent majority desperate to backtrack

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see a no- or low-tech charter enter the space. it could totally flip because that’s not what “ambitious” parents want—or maybe there’s a silent majority desperate to backtrack

Especially one that was committed to teaching calligraphy and used stone tablets instead of these high-tech methods like interactive and adaptive learning.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see a no- or low-tech charter enter the space. it could totally flip because that’s not what “ambitious” parents want—or maybe there’s a silent majority desperate to backtrack

I would love to see this, and would have loved to have the option to sign up my early ES kid. The tech is not necessary in early elementary school at all, and plenty of us would argue that it is detrimental in the long term.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I would love to see a no- or low-tech charter enter the space. it could totally flip because that’s not what “ambitious” parents want—or maybe there’s a silent majority desperate to backtrack

I would love to see this, and would have loved to have the option to sign up my early ES kid. The tech is not necessary in early elementary school at all, and plenty of us would argue that it is detrimental in the long term.

There's nothing special about tech. Once upon a time, books were tech. Luddites need to get over it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’m one of the “maniacs” above. I’m not irate about YouTube readalouds themselves, but what they represent: the sweeping acceptance that digital substitutes are acceptable when they are a net negative and everyone knows it! Readalouds are probably one of the least problematic substitutions. See PP’s great point about math manipulatives. See the proliferation of app assessments. Encanto screenings at celebrations. On and on.

I don’t blame teachers for any of it. Edutech is a big business, as is curricular design, as is IT support…and Covid just accelerated the trend. meanwhile Silicon Valley execs send their kids to tech-free schools.

I teach in another MD district. We are required to use the various platforms a minimum amount each week per student. Amplify, iReady, Zearn, etc. Results of usage are sent to principals weekly and the rankings are shared during principal meetings. No principal wants to be at the bottom of the list so they come back to school and create incentives for classes to use these platforms. It's considered personalized learning and the time is built into our schedule but we have so much to cover during the day that was often don't get to it.

This is so dystopian.

Like the PP said. This is big business and there is money to be made.

And the textbook industry isn’t? Those textbooks parents long for were serious money machines, with minor changes being made to “update” the material so schools had to buy new ones every few years. It was an absolute machine that schools were inevitably locked into.

Not saying MCPS couldn’t do better with the consistency and availability of online curriculum resources, but going back to a dependence on physical textbooks isn’t the answer.

[Anonymous]

There is, indeed, something “special” about the early Ed tech. It’s bad for children’s nervous systems, eyesight, hand development and social skills. That the only comparable societal shift you can point to is “books” shows the uncharted territory we’re in.

If it needs clarification, a tech-free charter would be for *young* children, not teens. Computers and AI and social media are a reality no one can avoid, but you are way too eager to sell your kids’ childhoods and health to the highest bidder. I just don’t get why… this is anonymous so it’s unclear if you even have children.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:There is, indeed, something “special” about the early Ed tech. It’s bad for children’s nervous systems, eyesight, hand development and social skills. That the only comparable societal shift you can point to is “books” shows the uncharted territory we’re in.

If it needs clarification, a tech-free charter would be for *young* children, not teens. Computers and AI and social media are a reality no one can avoid, but you are way too eager to sell your kids’ childhoods and health to the highest bidder. I just don’t get why… this is anonymous so it’s unclear if you even have children.

I remember reading that people said the same things about books.

[Anonymous]

Books evolved over more than a thousand years before they became mass. People’s lives, eyes, hands, schools, communities had time to adapt and assess. Do you not see the difference in rapid onset? My mom’s childhood tech exposure was a landline phone at her neighbor’s house she used a few times per year. Her grandchildren have the potential to spend 30% of their waking hours interfacing with technology designed to addict them.

[Anonymous]

Lots of boomer energy in this thread.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Books evolved over more than a thousand years before they became mass. People’s lives, eyes, hands, schools, communities had time to adapt and assess. Do you not see the difference in rapid onset? My mom’s childhood tech exposure was a landline phone at her neighbor’s house she used a few times per year. Her grandchildren have the potential to spend 30% of their waking hours interfacing with technology designed to addict them.

LOL, Back in those days most people didn't have indoor plumbing either. Do we need a thousand years to acclimate to that too?

[Anonymous]

Do you get addicted to indoor plumbing? Does running water cause myopia or repetitive stress injuries to the hands? Some of you are so committed to believing it’s harmless to tether your kids to tech for hours a day. I get that it’s easier, I get that it can’t be wholly avoided. But it’s sad that you are so blasé about children’s well-being.

This is a large-scale, profit-driven experiment with your children (if you have them) as the test subjects.