Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“Reading from a screen is bad for our eyes. Let’s go get the same book from the library!”

It’s an entirely different experience to read from a book. There are studies on this. No blue light. You physically experience the progression of pages, etc. There is a tactile experience of turning pages, the book has a physicality to it, etc. People have also done studies on the same text read on different devices and the retention and paper books always win.

+1

Anonymous wrote:“Reading from a screen is bad for our eyes. Let’s go get the same book from the library!”

It’s an entirely different experience to read from a book. There are studies on this. No blue light. You physically experience the progression of pages, etc. There is a tactile experience of turning pages, the book has a physicality to it, etc. People have also done studies on the same text read on different devices and the retention and paper books always win.

“Reading from a screen is bad for our eyes. Let’s go get the same book from the library!”

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There is a tactile experience that reading actual books produces that makes it a much more immersive, sensory experience and studies show people retain more info when they read physical books versus that book on a screen.

Anecdotally, I have owned a Kindle for years and have felt like I never remembered the Kindle books well. It also didn’t feel satisfying to finish a digital book the way it did when I read a physical book. Our book club recently discussed this issue (a large group of big readers) and the sentiment was shared. Everyone felt that reading a physical book made it much easier to remember a story, then they felt that retention with an audiobook was slightly worse but still decent, and reading an e-book or Kindle was the least satisfying and hardest to remember. I switched back to reading paper books for myself recently as a test, and it’s amazing how much more enjoyable it is to read a real book - and how much better my memory of what I read is. My kindle is going to be collecting dust from now on. For kids, I would argue that real books are best. Mine get way too much screen time already at school as it is.

+1. Also, libraries have a ton of print books for kids. And you can place a hold on any book in your county’s library system (or even outside the county) and pick it up at your nearest library a few days later. It is so easy and I don’t know why so many supposedly educated people eschew the library.

+2 and there are studies to prove this for kids. Adults learned to read with paper books so shifting to kindle a preference. Kids don't have the primary foundation and studies find they just skim when on devices.

I wouldn't make it an issue before it's an issue! Though a kindle is a much better reading experience than a phone or tablet. Personally, for picture books a physical book would be better. For chapter books, kindle is great. The Libby app is one of my very favorite things. Both for kindle books and audiobooks.

Anonymous wrote:There is a tactile experience that reading actual books produces that makes it a much more immersive, sensory experience and studies show people retain more info when they read physical books versus that book on a screen.

Anecdotally, I have owned a Kindle for years and have felt like I never remembered the Kindle books well. It also didn’t feel satisfying to finish a digital book the way it did when I read a physical book. Our book club recently discussed this issue (a large group of big readers) and the sentiment was shared. Everyone felt that reading a physical book made it much easier to remember a story, then they felt that retention with an audiobook was slightly worse but still decent, and reading an e-book or Kindle was the least satisfying and hardest to remember. I switched back to reading paper books for myself recently as a test, and it’s amazing how much more enjoyable it is to read a real book - and how much better my memory of what I read is. My kindle is going to be collecting dust from now on. For kids, I would argue that real books are best. Mine get way too much screen time already at school as it is.

+1. Also, libraries have a ton of print books for kids. And you can place a hold on any book in your county’s library system (or even outside the county) and pick it up at your nearest library a few days later. It is so easy and I don’t know why so many supposedly educated people eschew the library.

Anonymous wrote:Why is reading on screens bad?

They will never pry that screen from his hands now. If he just loves to read then he would accept books in exchange for the screen.

There is a tactile experience that reading actual books produces that makes it a much more immersive, sensory experience and studies show people retain more info when they read physical books versus that book on a screen.

Anecdotally, I have owned a Kindle for years and have felt like I never remembered the Kindle books well. It also didn’t feel satisfying to finish a digital book the way it did when I read a physical book. Our book club recently discussed this issue (a large group of big readers) and the sentiment was shared. Everyone felt that reading a physical book made it much easier to remember a story, then they felt that retention with an audiobook was slightly worse but still decent, and reading an e-book or Kindle was the least satisfying and hardest to remember. I switched back to reading paper books for myself recently as a test, and it’s amazing how much more enjoyable it is to read a real book - and how much better my memory of what I read is. My kindle is going to be collecting dust from now on. For kids, I would argue that real books are best. Mine get way too much screen time already at school as it is.

I don’t limit reading on screens at all. My kids like both print and ebooks. They make matte screen protectors that are supposed to better for your eyes when reading on screens if you’re worried about that.

My 9-year-old son has a Kindle Kids that is an e-reader only, and it’s been great for him. He read almost exclusively on it for the first couple of months, but is back to a mix of print and e-book.

We don’t limit it the way we do other screens, except that it’s set to not work when he should be sleeping. I was worried about the backlight causing sleep issues if he uses it before bed, but it hasn’t been a problem.

I bet you will find that kids today do most of their in school reading on screens no matter what the topic. This is especially true in public schools since not that long ago they all invested millions in having devices for every kid, it would be a lot to expect them to go back to textbooks and paper worksheets now although I know some of that is still available.

You can try to protect your kids from the negative effects of screens but you can't change the fact that this is the future of their world. Everyone reads everything on screens and some of us actually read books too.

I think there’s a couple of issues here.

Contrary to prevailing DCUM wisdom, I don’t believe that screens are inherently bad. I think they’re basically just another form of media and that it is much more important to evaluate the content of the media than the way it is delivered. While books are wonderful, screens can provide experiences that books can’t. Certainly there is content on screens that is inadvisable for a 7 year old (or anyone), but the same is true of books, they’re just less accessible to 7 year olds.

The second issue is that the screen he is using is a tablet. I am no medical expert, but I sometimes wonder about the possible effects of the radiation that phones and tablets emit (and I’m currently typing this post on my phone 🤷‍♀️). Phones and tablets are new enough that I don’t think we can kbow yet what the effects of longterm exposure to close radiation, if any, might be. If this is a concern, you might see if a Kindle would work, but it wouldn’t have the color display or the ability to look things up on the internet. I think a Kindle would have significantly less radiation than a tablet, but would still produce some.

In short, if you’re worried about the corrupting influence of screens, I’d let him read as much as he wants and just monitor his content. If you’re worried about his physical health, consult his pediatrician and possibly research from reliable sources.

Why is reading on screens bad?

Yes, I limit reading on screens. We go to the library 2x a month and get a lot of new books out, so they constantly have new books to read. I have a time limit on the iPad, they can play games, watch tv or read books but that’s the limit for the day (30 minutes).

I’m more flexible of course if they are sick or while traveling but they rarely fight me on this, they’re used to it.

My 7 year old LOVES to read. Has recently been introduced to the library app on the the tablet and now wants to spend hours everyday reading. This is bad right? If this screen time even though it's reading. What to do? So weird to force a child from reading. Anyone else with this issue?