5 minute read
Too Much Screen Time Remains An Issue
Too Much Screen Time Remains An Issue
By Tom Northrup
“The cost of a thing is the amount of...life which is required to be exchanged for it, immediately or in the long run.”
—Henry David Thoreau (Walden, 1854)
The Anxious Generation by Jonathan Haidt is, in my opinion, one of the most insightful, deeply researched, and important books of this century.
Parents, educators, and middle and high school students would be well served to not only read it, but to have ongoing cross-generational conversations about its content and recommendations. Then reread it and repeat the cycle.
Mike Wipfler, a friend, former colleague, and parent of two young children, will again join me for a conversation to discuss this book.
TOM: Throughout my life as a parent and educator it seems that “screen time” has been a major topic. A half century ago, it was about television’s impact on children and families. Marie Winn’s The Plug-In Drug (1977) was important in shaping my understanding of the challenges that this medium was presenting and how we adults should address them at home and in school.
Rereading it today, Winn’s concerns and counsel have held up very well. From the onset, she noted that, “There is, indeed, no other experience...in a child’s life that permits so much intake while demanding so little outflow.”
The author emphasized that children watching television over 50 hours a week are not having real life experiences that prepare them to be responsible adults. Mike, what are your thoughts on the challenges and effects on children and families of the smartphone compared to television?
MIKE: I certainly agree that The Anxious Generation is essential reading about the impact smartphones have had on families and schools. But Haidt argues that the impact of smartphones has been amplified because their emergence coincided with another change in society—an increase in parental fear surrounding the real world. He observed that parents are now over-protecting their children from that world while under protecting them from this revolutionary technology. A bad combination.
Together, these forces have led to a monumental shift from “play-based childhoods” to “phone-based childhoods.” On average, pre-teens now spend about 40 hours a week on screens, and 13- to 18-year-olds spend closer to 50 hours a week. That demographic was spending a lot of time in front of screens before smartphones, but in the last ten years, pre-teens and teens are spending an additional two or three hours in front of screens per day.
This is no surprise. It’s common knowledge that tech companies work hard (and have been successful) to develop apps, algorithms, and functions meant to hold users’ attention.
The fact that many preteens and teens spend as much (or more) time on screens as their parents spend at work should cause us all to pause and consider whether this is really the childhood that will prepare them for their adult lives?
TOM: I love Jonathan Haidt’s two simple frameworks to express his major concerns and the challenges for us to address: the emergence of “a phone-based vs. play-based childhood” and parents “over-protection (of children) in the real world and under-protection in the virtual world.”
Both Winn and Haidt note that excessive “screentime” robs children of the necessary time they need for play. Both explain in depth the crucial role that free play has in developing autonomy and competence. Winn stated that, “Child’s play is serious business in spite of its lack of ‘seriousness.’”
Nearly 50 years ago, in The Plug-in Drug, Winn was less concerned with the content of television programming. Her primary worry was that the time spent in front of a screen robbed children of time for more fulfilling activities. My memory of that time was that most families began to limit their children’s TV time–during the school week, an hour a day and on weekends a little more. And, I knew a few families who chose not to have a television in their home.
MIKE: Also, let’s remember that Marie Winn was concerned about a heavy, unwieldy box usually placed in a common space of the home. When children left the house, or even the room, they left the technology behind. Not so with smartphones; most teens take their phones everywhere (pre-teens too, if they have a phone), and that’s a problem.
Engaging in conversation with friends, peers, and acquaintances is important developmentally, but it’s hard work and includes some risk. Phones are the path of least resistance and the option that many people prefer over the hard work of beginning and maintaining a conversation. Furthermore, the omnipresence of the phone with all its notifications (the average teen gets 192 notifications per day, or one every five minutes they’re awake), makes it incredibly difficult for teens to keep their focus and to stay in the moment.
Sherry Turkle, author of Reclaiming Conversation, the Power of Conversation in a Digital Age succinctly and eloquently defines today’s reality: “We are forever elsewhere.”
TOM: As with every technological advancement, we experience a trial and error period and begin to understand the benefits and unintended negative consequences. I believe Haidt has provided a comprehensive, yet easily understood synthesis of the pros and cons of the smartphone for children, parents, and schools.
The author offers four very specific recommendations for all of us to consider as we learn to take advantage of the best of technological advances while managing the toxicity of them. He is optimistic, as am I, about our desire and ability to do this.
MIKE: Let’s discuss his recommendations in our conversation for the next edition of ZEST.
