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

From: David Rovner <rovners_at_netvision.net.il>
Date: Wed Apr 6 08:30:00 2005

So, there is no absolute truth, Lisa ?

But, there can be no compromise on moral principles. In any compromise between food and poison, it is only death that can win. In any compromise between good and evil, it is only evil that can profit.

Cheers,
~ David

----- Original Message -----
From: "Lisa Crocker" <lisacrocker_at_adelphia.net>
To: <discuss-sudbury-model_at_sudval.org>
Sent: Wednesday, April 06, 2005 2:08 PM
Subject: RE: [Discuss-sudbury-model] variations on the model in practice

> 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
Received on Wed Apr 06 2005 - 08:29:01 EDT

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