Because our excellent pediatrician has informed us of the literature on developmental delays due to screen time.

Exactly. Some people seem to think anytime a child uses a screen that the child is learning. What are they missing when they stare at a screen?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:What's wrong with screens at the elementary school level? They're wonderful, high-interest learning tools. Your child will use Promethean boards, chrome books, and iPads to research and plan writing assignments. They'll record themselves reading throughout the year so they can hear progress. They'll help update websites, record podcasts to share with parents, create powerpoint presentations, graph results, and practice basic facts at their own pace. Technology is not a bad thing!

And then the teachers will suggest to the parents to limit screentime at home. Well if they're using iPads and Smartboards in school, and they have to get on Blackboard to get to their assignments and use online textbooks, when the hell are they supposed to enjoy a half-hour of downtime in front of the TV?

Thanks, schools, for so much damn screentime.

You seem to think screen time is bad. Why?

Because our excellent pediatrician has informed us of the literature on developmental delays due to screen time.

Waldorf schools

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's wrong with screens at the elementary school level? They're wonderful, high-interest learning tools. Your child will use Promethean boards, chrome books, and iPads to research and plan writing assignments. They'll record themselves reading throughout the year so they can hear progress. They'll help update websites, record podcasts to share with parents, create powerpoint presentations, graph results, and practice basic facts at their own pace. Technology is not a bad thing!



In my view, "high-interest" is what's wrong with these learning tools.



Except, your view isn't supported or valid.

And here you have it. OP, welcome to DCUM.

Ha! Except that wasn't me! There's more than one of us who share this apparently unsupported view! Gasp.

OP, there are lots of Montessori schools in the area. And one Waldorf school.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
What's wrong with screens at the elementary school level? They're wonderful, high-interest learning tools. Your child will use Promethean boards, chrome books, and iPads to research and plan writing assignments. They'll record themselves reading throughout the year so they can hear progress. They'll help update websites, record podcasts to share with parents, create powerpoint presentations, graph results, and practice basic facts at their own pace. Technology is not a bad thing!



In my view, "high-interest" is what's wrong with these learning tools.



Except, your view isn't supported or valid.

And here you have it. OP, welcome to DCUM.

Seneca Academy. No screens through second grade. Need a flash drive in 3rd though.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:You crunchy Moms will need to get it through your heads that computers and tv are used at schools. If you want none of that for your precious, I suggest an Amish school.

No need. A gnome-believing school will work too, for people who can afford the tuition.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/my-waldorf-student-son-believes-in-gnomes-and-thats-fine-with-me/274521/

OP here -

I probably am a bit of a hippie, but I"m cool with my kid learning a pretty old-fashioned way from books, teachers, and peers, just as I said in an earlier response. DC is in an urban public pre-K program right now, mixed-age class with other 4-6 year olds, and no screens. Grades 1-2 above him, no screens. They use screens in 3-4 to learn coding. I'm fine with that.

...What I observed were screens as an option in a center, screens as something to hold the kids' attention instead of circle time (!). Not okay to me and frankly to all of you defending it - it shouldn't be okay with you either! It's kindergarten. I'm not arguing against screens across the board, I'm arguing against them for early childhood ed. If there is downtime to be filled, the kids should go outside and run or something.

Anonymous wrote:You crunchy Moms will need to get it through your heads that computers and tv are used at schools. If you want none of that for your precious, I suggest an Amish school.

No need. A gnome-believing school will work too, for people who can afford the tuition.

http://www.theatlantic.com/national/archive/2013/04/my-waldorf-student-son-believes-in-gnomes-and-thats-fine-with-me/274521/

Anonymous wrote:

^^^Did you post this on the wrong thread?

No. This thread went off-topic. Go back and read.

The OP: "Does this exist anywhere in the DC Metro area? (Or in DC schools themselves?) I was sort of appalled to see screen (computer, ipad) use in kindergarten classrooms in ACPS schools - I'm coming from out of state where these tools are not used until later years."

How does testing for educational standards relate to this?

Potomac Crescent Waldorf School

You crunchy Moms will need to get it through your heads that computers and tv are used at schools. If you want none of that for your precious, I suggest an Amish school.

^^^Did you post this on the wrong thread?

No. This thread went off-topic. Go back and read.

^^^Did you post this on the wrong thread?

The testing for educational standards is not proven science. The punishment that goes with poor results has made teaching rote and dull. Teaching kids to fill in bubbles should not be considered education.

There is a balance in there somewhere.

But, there is no proof that higher standards result in better education. It just means that the teachers will teach to get those on the line over the line. The bright kids and the really slow kids who have no hope of passing are not getting the attention they should.