RE: [Discuss-sudbury-model] variations on the model in practice

From: Lisa Crocker <lisacrocker_at_adelphia.net>
Date: Wed Apr 6 08:08:00 2005

Yes, Rich, it sure does - if I can find time I shall have to find the
newsweek article of which I speak....because of course my sense is that the
AAP is always quite conservative in their opinions, and so this particular
statement likely does not accurately reflect the information found in the
study...but, alas, the information is available somehow I am sure - and I
think sometimes these kinds of issues get decided in ourselves by a feeling
we get when we hear or read information on a subject, sometimes it rings
true and sometimes it rings bogus. Just like the Sudbury Valley philosophy,
I am sure that if I really looked around, I would find a pile of "studies"
or essays of personal experiencees that may support not using a Sudbury
approach, but that doesn't ring true to me, in my heart, so I am not going
to persue those documents (the same is true with Waldorf, a plethora of
negative info can be found on the Waldorf Critics Archive if one wants
it)..anyway, I guess we can be convinced of anything by others' "real"
information and true experience, we still end up relying on what our heart
(and head!) says to us is true, at least for us. So it is for me with
television and video games, and I emphasize that I am talking about young
children here, not pre-teens and older.

However, I certainly see the point about true democracy, and always did.

-----Original Message-----
From: discuss-sudbury-model-admin_at_sudval.org
[mailto:discuss-sudbury-model-admin_at_sudval.org] On Behalf Of Richard Berlin
Sent: Tuesday, April 05, 2005 8:30 PM
To: discuss-sudbury-model_at_sudval.org
Subject: Re: [Discuss-sudbury-model] variations on the model in practice

> (althnough, I do think there is sufficient material suggesting that
> television viewing has unhealthy impacts on baby, toddler, preschool,
> and young viewers,and the American Academy of Pediatrics came out with
> an official position statement on this last year as a result of a
> landmark study that was published in Newsweek

The AAP statement is at

     http://www.aap.org/pubed/ZZZGF8VOQ7C.htm?&sub_cat=1

and says in part

"Television affects how your child learns. High-quality, nonviolent
children's shows can have a positive effect on learning. Studies show
that preschool children who watch educational TV programs do better on
reading and math tests than children who do not watch those programs.
When used carefully, television can be a positive tool to help your
child learn.

"For older children, high-quality TV programs can have benefits.
However, for younger children it's a very different story. The first
two years of life are especially important in the growth and
development of your child's brain. During this time, children need
good, positive interaction with other children and adults to develop
good language and social skills. Learning to talk and play with others
is far more important than watching television.

"Until more research is done about the effects of TV on very young
children, the American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) does not recommend
television for children younger than two years of age. For older
children, the AAP recommends no more than one to two hours per day of
quality screen time."

This seems very different from the assertion you seem to be making
above that TV has unhealthy impacts across the board.

-- Rich

_______________________________________________
Discuss-sudbury-model mailing list Discuss-sudbury-model_at_sudval.org
http://www.sudval.org/mailman/listinfo.cgi/discuss-sudbury-model
Received on Wed Apr 06 2005 - 08:07:58 EDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Jun 04 2007 - 00:03:11 EDT