Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing many of you are not acknowledging is that many kids are getting too much screen time at home to acclimate to low tech or no tech classrooms.

My kids get very little screentime at home and NO handheld devices. They are good at handling boredom without screens because they've been doing it all their lives. At school, they are sometimes given an option of screens during free periods and they never choose them -- they will choose books or games or building toys instead.

But so many kids are being placated at home with screens from a very young age. Those kids be one very hard to deal with in a low tech environment because they have no emotional regulation skills without screens.

You can't solve this with extra aids (especially not young, inexperienced aids). The kids are arriving at school already trained to rely on screens to get through the day. Teachers spend a lot of time with kids, but nowhere near as much time as parents do. If you can't convince parents to stop using phones and tablets as babysitters, you are setting teachers up for failure no matter what you do.

A major reason Montessori schools do well with no tech is that they have families with buy in. The kind of family who chooses Montessori is likely already limiting screens at home. And when families get into Montessori communities, the message of limiting tech, letting kids be bored, letting them figure out things on their own, gets reinforced at school, at home, AND in the community of parents around the school. You have full buy in.

It is very hard to create that but in at regular DCPS schools. I think that's a bigger obstacle than staffing, teacher buy in, even curriculum and Central Office obstacles.

Sorry but you are making excuses for DCPS.

Many charters are no screens in younger kids and yes they have low income and at risk kids (group who tend to use more screens earlier) and do fine.

I would argue that these kids especially need to be exposed to play based, hands on activities all day at school more.

I agree about making excuses. Districts and schools are not being transparent about the use ed tech. If they were, I’m confident there would be more pushback from public school parents.

Ed tech companies are for profit. Improve student outcomes will always be secondary.

There is often way less tech in non-title 1 schools but every dcps school has to have some starting in K because of iReady, and they are trying to bring tech down to Pre-K to ‘prepare’ them for K. It’s funny how DCPS tries so hard to prepare for the next grade they don’t prepare them for the one they are currently in or honor developmental stages.

And plus a million -these big tech companies are absolutely for profit and are using our children to essentially experiment on.

I asked every school’s open house I went to about how much tech they used but framed it like I wanted tech. I was thankful when my top 3 did not use too much. But I was surprised when some schools said it varies by teacher or an hour + a day.

I don’t know why this is surprising. K is way too academic and too much tech in DCPS, especially in title 1 schools. Now they are mandating this be applied to prek and 3 and 4 year olds.

Also, they might say they don’t use too much tech but you really don’t know. The teachers know how much though.

If you don’t want tech, then you need to look at schools that use none.

You won’t be able to tell at a DCPS school -they are all mandated to use a smartboard.

I play music on there for naptime and my students have asked me why I don’t ever play anything on the TV besides when it’s time to sleep…

So even young children recognize that’s basically what it is. I’m confused why we really have one in ECE. I guess you can use it for a schedule board or indoor recess (I have access to the gym).

Honestly I also hate it’s right in the center of the room, it makes it the focal point.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:One thing many of you are not acknowledging is that many kids are getting too much screen time at home to acclimate to low tech or no tech classrooms.

My kids get very little screentime at home and NO handheld devices. They are good at handling boredom without screens because they've been doing it all their lives. At school, they are sometimes given an option of screens during free periods and they never choose them -- they will choose books or games or building toys instead.

But so many kids are being placated at home with screens from a very young age. Those kids be one very hard to deal with in a low tech environment because they have no emotional regulation skills without screens.

You can't solve this with extra aids (especially not young, inexperienced aids). The kids are arriving at school already trained to rely on screens to get through the day. Teachers spend a lot of time with kids, but nowhere near as much time as parents do. If you can't convince parents to stop using phones and tablets as babysitters, you are setting teachers up for failure no matter what you do.

A major reason Montessori schools do well with no tech is that they have families with buy in. The kind of family who chooses Montessori is likely already limiting screens at home. And when families get into Montessori communities, the message of limiting tech, letting kids be bored, letting them figure out things on their own, gets reinforced at school, at home, AND in the community of parents around the school. You have full buy in.

It is very hard to create that but in at regular DCPS schools. I think that's a bigger obstacle than staffing, teacher buy in, even curriculum and Central Office obstacles.

Sorry but you are making excuses for DCPS.

Many charters are no screens in younger kids and yes they have low income and at risk kids (group who tend to use more screens earlier) and do fine.

I would argue that these kids especially need to be exposed to play based, hands on activities all day at school more.

I agree about making excuses. Districts and schools are not being transparent about the use ed tech. If they were, I’m confident there would be more pushback from public school parents.

Ed tech companies are for profit. Improve student outcomes will always be secondary.

There is often way less tech in non-title 1 schools but every dcps school has to have some starting in K because of iReady, and they are trying to bring tech down to Pre-K to ‘prepare’ them for K. It’s funny how DCPS tries so hard to prepare for the next grade they don’t prepare them for the one they are currently in or honor developmental stages.

And plus a million -these big tech companies are absolutely for profit and are using our children to essentially experiment on.

I asked every school’s open house I went to about how much tech they used but framed it like I wanted tech. I was thankful when my top 3 did not use too much. But I was surprised when some schools said it varies by teacher or an hour + a day.

I don’t know why this is surprising. K is way too academic and too much tech in DCPS, especially in title 1 schools. Now they are mandating this be applied to prek and 3 and 4 year olds.

Also, they might say they don’t use too much tech but you really don’t know. The teachers know how much though.

If you don’t want tech, then you need to look at schools that use none.