Discretionary screen time - how much is too much?

With increased use of technology in many teenager's lives, some are spending a large proportion of their day looking at TV, computer, laptop, mobile phone and tablet screens. Heavy technology use is linked to fatigue, stress and depression in young adults (Thomée, Härenstam, & Hagberg, 2011). Furthermore, high levels of screen-time combined with physical inactivity are associated with a range of health issues for young people such as obesity, metabolic syndrome, and poor mental health (Graham & Hipp 2014). Although teenage boys are typically more active than girls (Hallal, Andersen, Bull, Guthold, Haskell, & Ekelund, 2012), boys report significantly higher levels of screen-time, making them susceptible to unhealthy weight gain and poor social and emotional well-being.

Although parents report being worried about their teenagers screen-based activities, they acknowledge computers and the internet as valuable learning tools (Turow, 1999). Many education providers such as Christchurch Boys' High School are placing an increased emphasis on using technology for student learning.

Recommendations for the amount of discretionary screen time (not homework related screen time) for teenagers varies. Netsafe recommend "Good Old Fashioned parenting" when setting boundaries for technology use:

• Setting boundaries as soon as a child gets their first device means it becomes normal for internet time to be limited in your household and less difficult to enforce later on.
• Parents can also model good behaviour, perhaps agreeing to no devices at the dinner table or after a certain time at night so emails and texts don’t disrupt family time.
• Moderation is key – try to make sure your children have plenty of other activities to balance the time they spend online. As a parent or caregiver you may be faced with anger and tantrums over this

The New Zealand Ministry of Education offers non-specific advice to parents regarding technology use for teens: “It’s a good idea to make sure your child’s ‘screen-time’ is balanced with other activities to ensure their health, safety and happiness” (NZMOE 2014). The New Zealand Ministry of Health has a more specific recommendation: “Guidelines recommend that children and young people (aged 5–18 years) spend no more than two hours in front of television, computers and games consoles per day (out of school time)” (NZMOH 2012). Interestingly The Canadian Paediatric Society has strict recommendations from a time before the current prevalence of technology: “No child should be allowed to have a television, computer or video game equipment in his or her bedroom" (CPS 2003).

Dr Aric Sigman recently created a report for Family First New Zealand analysing screen time in New Zealand youth. Sigman describes discretionary screen time as an emerging factor in child and adolescent health. His report highlights the dangers of too much discretionary screen time as a health and development issue. "Parents should be encouraged to monitor and control the time their children spend on hand-held computer games / media / tablets / smartphones with justification that discretionary screen time is now officially a health and development issue not merely a lifestyle / cultural one" (Sigman, 2015). Sigman recommends youth employ self-awareness and self-discipline and that 12 - 15 year olds do not exceed 1.5 – 2 hour/day of discretionary screen time and people over 16 years of age do not exceed 2 hour/day of discretionary screen time.

REFERENCES:

CPS (2003) Canadian Paediatric Society, Position Statement (PP 2003-01), Psychosocial Paediatrics Committee. Impact of media use on children and youth: Recommendations. Paediatr Child Health Vol 8 No 5 May/June 2003.

Graham, D., & Hipp, J. (2014). Emerging Technologies to Promote and Evaluate Physical Activity: Cutting-Edge Research and Future Directions. Frontiers in Public Health Front. Public Health.

Hallal, P., Andersen, L., Bull, F., Guthold, R., Haskell, W., & Ekelund, U. (2012). Global physical activity levels: Surveillance progress, pitfalls, and prospects. The Lancet, 247-257.

NZMOE 2014. Learning using digital technologies. Providing balance. November 14 2014. http://parents.education.govt.nz/secondary-school/ learning-at-school/learning-using-digital-technologies/

NZMOH 2012. Ministry of Health 2012. The Health of New Zealand Children 2011/12: Key findings of the New Zealand Health Survey. Wellington: Ministry of Health.

Sigman, Aric. We Need To Talk. Auckland: Family First New Zealand, 2015. Web. 31 Oct. 2015. Screentime In New Zealand.

Thomée, S., Härenstam, A., & Hagberg, M. (2011). Mobile phone use and stress, sleep disturbances, and symptoms of depression among young adults-a prospective cohort study. BMC public health, 11(1), 66.

Students, Computers and Learning.

The recent OECD report titled “Students, Computers and Learning: Making The Connection” gained considerable media attention. An excerpt from the report stated “…countries which have invested heavily in ICT for education have seen no noticeable improvement in their performances in PISA results for reading, mathematics or science.” The report further noted that technology can be distracting for students and there are significant concerns about plagiarism. Many media outlets reported on this document with headlines such as: “Don't bother buying computers for schools, says OECD report and Schools wasting money on computers for kids: OECD.

At a time when Christchurch Boys' High School has just begun its journey in to students using their own computers as part of their education, these headlines are discouraging. However when one digs deeper in to the report there are some interesting revelations:

“The report leaves many questions unanswered. The impact of technology on education delivery remains sub-optimal, because we may overestimate the digital skills of both teachers and students, because of naïve policy design and implementation strategies, because of a poor understanding of pedagogy, or because of the generally poor quality of educational software and courseware”.

Director of eLearning at CORE education Derek Wenmoth asks "is the apparent lack of 'difference' in achievement attributable purely to the affordances of the technology, or is it more to do with the wider issues of teacher and student digital skills, pedagogical practices, assessment regimes etc.?"

It would be foolish to “throw out the baby with the bathwater” and give up on technology in education. Technology is an important part of most people’s work, home and social lives and is certainly an important aspect of education in New Zealand. In 2015 many Primary and Secondary Schools are asking students to bring their own technology to aid their learning and many Tertiary institutions offer online and blended learning courses. The report gives a timely reminder that computers are not a panacea for education. Two of the greatest creators of computers are firm believers of this: 

Computers are only beneficial for learning when the technology is used effectively as part of good teaching and learning practice. “We know that technology can really enhance good teaching, but the key ingredient is the good teaching to start with. [Technology is] more an amplifier and it’s a tool for good teachers rather than a magic wand which transforms bad teachers into good ones. We see that the best teachers tend to use it moderately” (Chowdhry, 2015).

Pedagogy and e-Learning

Noelene Wright’s 2010 five-year international literature review provides valuable insights for effective teaching practice to eLearning classes. Wright explains that technology in classrooms becomes an effective tool for teaching and learning when the technology is deliberately used in relation to appropriate and targeted pedagogical practices. Wright also finds a strong consistently reported desire for 21st century students to work with peers to learn collaboratively and socially, to problem solve and talk together about what they need to learn. In these kinds of learning environments, students rather than teachers are at the centre of the learning experience. The teachers’ role becomes one of a facilitator to afford opportunities, rather than the expert at the front of the room. Teachers must use student-oriented co-constructive pedagogies where students work collaboratively with interactive problem-solving ways of teaching and learning which foster co-operation. These pedagogies appear to lead to effective learning and better teacher/student relationships over time. These ideas link consistently to the New Zealand Curriculum’s focus on connection and active involvement as 21st century citizens.

Many of the teaching strategies Wright mentions can be developed with technology such as collaborating and constructing knowledge with OneNote Class Notebook, but others are more effectively achieved without the use of technology. Social interactions and talking through complex issues with critical thought may be better suited to class and group discussion. John Hattie’s research from 2009, reinforces yet again that the teacher and their teaching approach holds the greatest influence on a student’s educational outcomes.

REFERENCES:

Chowdhry, A. (2015). Computers in classroom have 'mixed' impact on learning: OECD report. Retrieved October 6, 2015, from http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/national/education/computers-in-classroom-have-mixed-impact-on-learning-oecd-report/article26373533/

OECD (2015), Students, Computers and Learning: Making the Connection, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris.

Pelgrum, W. J., & Plomp, T. (2002). Indicators of ICT in mathematics: Status and covariation with achievement measures (pp. 317-330). Springer Netherlands.

Wenglinski, H. (1998). Does it compute. The relationship between educational technology and student achievement in mathematics. Princeton, NJ: ETS.

Wenmoth, Derek. 'Does ICT Assist Learning?' Derek's Blog 2015. Web. 6 Oct. 2015.

Wright, N. (2010). e-Learning and implications for New Zealand schools: A literature review. Ministry of Education.