Slashdot Mirror


Do Children's E-Books Ruin Reading?

An anonymous reader writes "A fierce argument has begun over whether children are actually 'reading' new e-books or simply 'watching' them. As publishers pump increasing levels of interactivity into e-books, the New York Times and others argue that these highly-interactive, popular titles are ruining the purpose of reading. The NYT also worries that new e-book titles could distract kids from the tougher task of actually concentrating on literature: '[W]hat will become of the readers we've been: quiet, thoughtful, patient, abstracted, in a world where interactive can be too tempting to ignore?' Others, like Gizmodo, defend these new e-books, pointing at titles like Alice for the iPad, of which they blabber, 'For the first time in my life, I'm blown away by an interactive book design.' But, the NYT counters, 'What I really love [about traditional books] is their inertness. No matter how I shake Alice's Adventures in Wonderland, mushrooms don't tumble out of the upper margin, unlike the Alice for the iPad.'"

46 of 149 comments (clear)

  1. Non-issue by DavidR1991 · · Score: 5, Insightful

    Interactive books have been around for decades - books with sliding tabs, sound effects when you press little buttons - those kinds of things. So I don't think e-books along the lines of that Alice one are a problem at all

    What we should be concerned about is interactivity replacing the text rather than augmenting it. That's when it's a problem

    1. Re:Non-issue by illumnatLA · · Score: 3, Insightful

      I think, like TV, it's all about how the interactive books are used. If the interactive books are used primarily as a babysitter that's a problem.

      However, if the parent is interacting with their child while their child is interacting with the book, it's not really a problem. There's much more going on from a learning standpoint than just learning the words when a parent and a child read together. The social interaction is the important part.

      But... if the 'interactive book' is constantly used as a way for the parents to not have to interact with their child, it will breed the same bunch of moronic mouthbreathers as children who were brought up in front of the TV with little interaction from their parents. (Ok... that's a bit strong, but you know what I mean!) ;-)

      It seems to me that people often forget there's more to education than just memorizing facts and figures. The social aspect is equally important.

      --
      Web hosting that doesn't suck!Dreamhost
    2. Re:Non-issue by JamesP · · Score: 5, Funny

      Books for wizard kids (Harry Potter) have things that speak and move for themselves and the kids seem to do just fine.

      --
      how long until /. fixes commenting on Chrome?
  2. I want Textadventures! by SlothDead · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Why are there no textadventures/"choose your own adventure"-books for the kindle or any other ereader?

    Also, these interactive kiddie books might lead to the kindle 3 being like this: http://www.collegehumor.com/video:1910868

  3. Eh? by Securityemo · · Score: 2, Informative

    I can only speak for myself, but if you want to read a text, you read it? Any child should intuitively turn the illustrations off, or simply ignore them if they are distracting. Talking about the "pondering abstracted" reader or the "inertness" of books is just silly romanticism, text is text. And as a sidenote, I have ADD; I know the subject of distraction fairly well.

    --
    Emotions! In your brain!
    1. Re:Eh? by stormguard2099 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      While I agree that the submitter was being a bit romantic in his depiction of the reader, you shouldn't dismiss his ideas simply because of it. One of my favorite elements of reading static text without any added illustrations is you get to use your imagination to fill in the blanks! TV basically just hands you all of the artwork and scenery but when you read, all you get is the jist from the author and it's up to you to weave those descriptions together with your imagination into something.

      Adding all of these interactive elements robs children of the process of creating these images themselves. when they hear about XYZ in the story they willl just imagine the depictions that popped out of the margins in page 2 instead of their own mental image based on the description.

      To me, this has always been one of the greatest strengths of literature and I would hate to see the importance of this cast aside in favor of profits/"oh look shiney shiney" mentality.

      --
      http://greenobyl.com/ please.... think of the children!!
    2. Re:Eh? by hedwards · · Score: 2, Informative

      I couldn't read for a number of years because books are not very well suited to the purposes of actual reading. Between the migraines and difficulty tracking lines on the page, it was pretty much a non-starter. At least with electronic books of various sorts there's ways around that. Whether by changing the spacing to be more appropriate or by making the portion of text stand out more as the page progresses automatically. Perhaps in the future even tracking eye movement to keep things in sync.

      There's always been and always will be a small minority of literature romanticists that insist that the way it was done was perfect, when in fact it was badly broken for a sizable portion of the populace and mostly served to create an elite. It's sort of like how somehow it's terrible to have books on tape, because you're being deprived of the serious discomfort of having to hold a book in an awkward position and risk the neck damage that encourages.

  4. My 3 month old... by garcia · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I don't consider myself a parent with any real life experience, being that I have only been one for 3 months, but I have some observations on how my son interacts with certain physical items in his new world:

    1. He is not permitted to watch TV.
    2. We read books to him a lot.
    3. He listens to a lot of music tailored towards children (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nIueuNdB2oM)

    While he has some attention for books, especially ones where my mother recorded herself reading them and we play it for him while he listens, he has an amazing attention span for my iPhone or the TV. He will go out of his way to crane his neck around to look at the TV if it happens to be on (we don't watch much TV) or physically move himself to look at the TV if he is in a device which allows for him to do that.

    I'm guessing that either he's fucking weird (certainly possible considering his parents) or all children love to watch shit. While he gets excited when I come home from work, it's nothing like he gets when he's watching my parents on Google Video Chat. If he's going to feel excited via a particular medium then I say I'm all for it--especially if it helps one particular child learn better than others.

    1. Re:My 3 month old... by WarwickRyan · · Score: 4, Insightful

      He's three months old.

      Of course the TV's interesting, it's making full of sounds, colours and moving stuff.

      Just buy (or make) him a Hanging Mobile.

    2. Re:My 3 month old... by CrimsonAvenger · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I'm guessing that either he's fucking weird (certainly possible considering his parents) or all children love to watch shit. While he gets excited when I come home from work, it's nothing like he gets when he's watching my parents on Google Video Chat. If he's going to feel excited via a particular medium then I say I'm all for it--especially if it helps one particular child learn better than others.

      He's not weird. Or no weirder than normal.

      He likes to look at things, check. He's still learning to see, so any NEW thing will be interesting to him.

      He's more interested in watching your parents on GVC, check. You're one of the two most important things in his universe. But you're old news compared to this little picture that talks and looks like Granma and Grampa. Though frankly he'd be just as interested in total strangers - he's after NEW.

      The only problem with TV will come when you decide to use it as a babysitter. At that point, it becomes bad. Until then, it's just more novelty for the wee lad.

      While he has some attention for books, especially ones where my mother recorded herself reading them and we play it for him while he listens

      He's too young for books, other than as more NEW stuff.

      That said, mother reading to him is better than mother recording things for him to listen to later.

      Starting in about two years, you'll have your chance to start him on a lifetime of reading. There's pretty much one simple way to do that - read. Not necessarily to him, though that certainly helps. But if he sees you and his mother sitting down to an evening of reading most every night, he'll want to do it too. And once he starts, he'll never stop....

      --

      "I do not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it"
  5. Ruining the purpose of reading? ABSOLUTELY! by denzacar · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Same way picture books have been ruining reading these last couple of centuries.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
    1. Re:Ruining the purpose of reading? ABSOLUTELY! by grumbel · · Score: 2, Insightful

      And lets not forget the Gutenberg Bible, with all those fluffy birds and decorations, who's supposed to concentrate on reading the text?

      If one day all books come in highly interactive forms and every child has an iPad, I might start to worry, but at the moment almost no child has an iPad and fully interactive books are a rarity compared to normal books.

    2. Re:Ruining the purpose of reading? ABSOLUTELY! by Yvan256 · · Score: 4, Funny

      Yah, just like computers have been ruining writing these past couple of decades.

      Tell me about it. Some people don't even know what paragraphs are anymore.

    3. Re:Ruining the purpose of reading? ABSOLUTELY! by quall · · Score: 2, Informative

      If that was a pun at my post then you should know that this site formatted it that way. It was full of paragraphs when I typed it out.

    4. Re:Ruining the purpose of reading? ABSOLUTELY! by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Informative

      Should have selected Plain Old Text rather than HTML.

      You can set your default text layout in your preferences.

  6. The equation of truth by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    Children + new technology = loss of childhood dreams

    Don't we all know this from episode I?

    1. Re:The equation of truth by AnonymousClown · · Score: 5, Insightful

      Children + new technology = loss of childhood dreams

      That's an interesting point.

      Consider this, when you see an image of a character, you're seeing what someone else's imagination came up with on how it looks. For example, how many of you see a movie adaptation of a book only to have them cast an actor that looks nothing like you imagined it?

      With picture books or multimedia or whatever, the authors are replacing the child's imagination with their own. The child may have something better or something they like more or...I don't know.

      I think the picture books or any multimedia system is replacing a child's imagination - it's not active.

      That's why books to movies usually suck: our imaginations are usually better than what Hollywood can come up with - Starship Troopers for one.

      I'm not creative enough on how to explain it further.

      --
      RIP America

      July 4, 1776 - September 11, 2001

    2. Re:The equation of truth by Trahloc · · Score: 2, Interesting

      Sorry, can't resist. Using Starship Troopers as your example of book to movie adaptations is horrible. They're nothing alike, quite literally. It's more of a 'hey this movie resembles this book too much to avoid being sued, lets license it'. I read the book and hated the movie the first time I watched it. Once I realized they had absolutely nothing to do with each other aside from 'bugs in space' I found the movie to be much more enjoyable. Heinlein was brilliant and I can't wait for the day someone makes *real* movies based on his books. I'd love to watch several movies featuring Lazarus Long, although I think the prudes of the world would have an issue with him. ;)

      --
      The Goal: A long simple life filled with many complex toys.
    3. Re:The equation of truth by Hal_Porter · · Score: 4, Insightful

      Paul Verhoeven said "We always called action movies fascist, so we thought it would be interesting to make a real fascist movie" and that "the point of this movie is that war makes fascists of us all". He said he read part of the book but hated it. Still the society in the movie has the same rules as the society in the book. The fact that he portays that society as fascist means the movie is a satire of the book, and also of the American idea that war can be won without a moral cost for the victors. This last one is a key thing to Verhoeven - films like Black Book show how corrupting war can be, even for the most morally justified side.

      Of course if you have a sense of humour and an ability to see the flaws in plans for utopian society whilst still being able to appreciate the good ideas you can enjoy both. Like Marx Heinlein gets in some good jabs at democratic societies, and like Marx the alternative he suggests would be a nightmare if implemented.

      Still it's interesting that people that believe in Heinlein's blueprint for a society seem to always be viscerally hostile to the movie that satirizes them. That makes me think the movie's point that the society described in the book is fascist has some truth to it. It seems very unlikely that the society that Heinlein describes would allow a movie like Starship Troopers to be made.

      Actually Starship Troopers the movie seems scarily prescient of the War On Terror.

      "Some say that western incursions into the Middle East have provoked the muslims and a live and let live policy would be preferrable"

      "I'M FROM NEW YORK AND I SAY KILL 'EM ALL!"

      Of course, luckily we lived in a good old fashioned democracy with universal suffrage. And democracies are quite happy with films that poke fun at them.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    4. Re:The equation of truth by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Interesting

      "Like Marx Heinlein gets in some good jabs at democratic societies, and like Marx the alternative he suggests would be a nightmare if implemented."

      Alright - first, allow me to point out that Heinlein's world in Starship Troopers represents a relatively stable world, AFTER they emerge from the real nighmare of anarchy.

      But, that wasn't your point, nor is it mine.

      I question whether that "nightmare" of Heinlein's world is any worse than what we have today. I mean, look at the United States. Unemployment is over 20% http://www.shadowstats.com/ It seems that more people get welfare in various forms than actually work in this country. We see at least one state nearly paralyzed with the issue of illegal aliens. 1 in ten adult males are incarcerated and/or in the "criminal justice" system as a parolee, probation, or whatever.

      The world in which 'Starship Troopers' is based actually looks pretty appealing to me.

      But then, one man's meat is another man's poison, right? In Heinlein's world, I have already earned my citizenship, and I have the right to look down on the mere peons. In our world, here and now, there are any number of people who have more rights than I have, and my service to my country means just about squat.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    5. Re:The equation of truth by Hal_Porter · · Score: 3, Insightful

      If you served in the US military, you swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution. Using force to disenfranchise non veterans - and that is the only way to do it - is not doing that.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
    6. Re:The equation of truth by Lord+Bitman · · Score: 2, Insightful

      It seems that more people get welfare in various forms than actually work in this country

      That's a bit like saying "more people eat vegetables of various types than actually eat meat in this country"

      That is to say, it's horseshit for more than a handful of reasons, and one doesn't even exclude the other to begin with (nor does each "form" exclude other forms, and percentages don't work like that)

      --
      -- 'The' Lord and Master Bitman On High, Master Of All
    7. Re:The equation of truth by extrasolar · · Score: 2, Insightful

      "In our world, here and now, there are any number of people who have more rights than I have, and my service to my country means just about squat."

      Are you going to actually substantiate your outrage or are you going to give us the outrage? This is sounding like an OReilly rant more than anything else.

      So, first, who has more rights than you do? And are you suggesting that your service to your country gives you more rights? What service? Military? I respect military men, but they don't get more rights than I do. Sorry. I have a thing.

    8. Re:The equation of truth by BlackBloq · · Score: 2, Insightful

      Unemployment is at 9.9% in the USA. Not your 20%.
      In October 2009, 70.1 percent of 2009 high school graduates were enrolled in colleges or universities, a historical high.
      ttp://www.bls.gov/
      You should try reading more than science fiction. One state (Arizona) is paralyzed by moronic and unjust laws that the whole USA is freaking out over. If the united states government would have invested all your money into your country's natural disasters and tech and jobs instead of shooting Arabs in some dusty asshole of a desert you would be fine. USA needs less military assholes not more. And the reason service to your country is currently meaningless its because the war in IRAQ is meaningless. USA is currently less safe then before 911. Due to the thousands upon thousands of enemies made in the war. Now the enemies of the USA have a vendetta of blood from actual experience not just some religious fanatic fanning the flames of discontent. Can't we just have a beer and get along!?! Oh wait no booze allowed to the Muslims! I guess That's why they are so pissed off!

    9. Re:The equation of truth by ultranova · · Score: 2, Insightful

      I question whether that "nightmare" of Heinlein's world is any worse than what we have today. I mean, look at the United States.

      Yes, waging a genocidal war where billions die on behalf of a military dictatorship and which will likely end with the extinction of at least one intelligent species is far worse than having 20% unemployment rate, social welfare, and even *gasp* illegal immigrants. Any other dumb questions?

      Dunno about the prison thing, thought.

      --

      Forget magic. Any technology distinguishable from divine power is insufficiently advanced.

    10. Re:The equation of truth by Runaway1956 · · Score: 2, Insightful

      The US constitution? In Heinlein's world, the constitution doesn't exist. I'm moving, because I like the laws in his world better.

      --
      "Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
    11. Re:The equation of truth by Hal_Porter · · Score: 2

      Well you said you'd served in the US Military. In which you case you swore an oath to uphold the US Constitution. Also using force to overthrow the US constitution is treason if you are a US citizen.

      E.g.

      From the book

      With national governments in collapse at the end of the XXth century, something had to fill the vacuum, and in many cases it was the returned veterans. They had lost a war, most of them had no jobs, many were sore as could be over the terms of the Treaty of New Delhi, especially the P.O.W. foul-up - and they knew how to fight. But it wasn't revolution; it was more like what happened in Russia in 1917 - the system collapsed; somebody else moved in. The first known case, in Aberdeen, Scotland, was typical. Some veterans got together as vigilantes to stop rioting and looting, hanged a few people (including two veterans) and decided not to let anyone but veterans on their committee. Just arbitrary at first - they trusted each other a bit, they didn't trust anyone else. What started as an emergency measure became constitutional practice in a generation or two.

      "They knew how to fight" implies that they used force to set up their system. Also if this happened in the US they have clearly abrogated the constitution they swore to defend. They have committed treason.

      Ironically enough what happened in Russia in 1917 was not that "the system collapsed and someone else moved in". Or not just that. The was a revolution in 1917 which set up a liberal Provisional Government committed to free elections. It was then hijacked by the Bolsheviks - a well armed minority like Heinlein's veterans - who abolished parliament and set up a dictatorship where only non Bolsheviks were disenfranchised.

      Incidentally societies like this don't have lots of cool technology like power armour and FTL. They tend to stagnate technologically, produce little literature of note and tend to have a high death toll from famine and low level civil war. They also tend to lose wars to democracies - e.g. the Soviet Union versus Finland. Basically they are crap.

      --
      echo -e 'global _start\n _start:\n mov eax, 2\n int 80h\n jmp _start' > a.asm; nasm a.asm -f elf; ld a.o -o a;
  7. Etude & Cat In The Hat by buckhead_buddy · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I see it similar to the Etude music player on the iPhone. It's a MIDI player that highlights the notes on the sheet music and on a simulation of a piano keyboard as the music is being played.

    The Cat in the Hat eBook has several modes, one of which highlights the text as a voice reads the words. Another of which lets the kid touch something in the drawing, says the word and highlights it in the text (if it's in the passage on that page).

    Neither replaces an audio performance (like an iTunes song or an audio book), and neither of which replace the physical static medium (like a piece of sheet music or a book), but both make a nice interactive presentation to help the viewer's brain make the connection of these very different sensations.

  8. They're just a tool. by syousef · · Score: 4, Insightful

    Tools can be used badly. That's nothing new either. You can use a TV to watch amazing documentaries, or crappy reality TV and "talk" shows like Jerry Springer. Kids can use it to watch garbage, or educational programming.

    Interactive books are no different. They can be inert. They can distract from reading, or they can aid the reading process. There are fundamental differences between paper books and ebooks but blaming the format for poor execution is just weak. Since they can be more complex it becomes harder to differentiate, but that's what you have to do as a consumer....and there's nothing like word of mouth in mothers groups and in the school yard to help in that area.

    --
    These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
  9. Video games by digitalderbs · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I got into programming and computers through video games.

  10. A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer by at.drinian · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Anyone who thinks that interactive books can't be a force for good needs to go read Neal Stephenson.

    1. Re:A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer by smegmatic · · Score: 3, Insightful

      you're citing a fiction book as evidence?

  11. Diamond age by toxygen01 · · Score: 2, Interesting

    My guess is we're approaching Neal Stephenson's Diamond Age "A Young Lady's Illustrated Primer", at least in terms of technology.
    The Primer also reacts to its owners' environment and teaches them what they need to know to survive and grow
    some more info on his ideas about "mediatrons" as he calls them: http://www.technovelgy.com/ct/content.asp?Bnum=214

    e-ink, e-paper, ipad, not only technology changes, but the way people are educated too. now that they will have interactive textbooks, studying is not only going to be faster, but even more fun. anything from physics, chemistry, biology is going to be not only described, but shown. encarta of size of your palm. fantastic.

    indeed, I think some books will be better off left as they are now. the main reason behind this is imagination and fantasy of reader. if you are shown everything, then there is barely some space for you imagination to fire up. it might be fun to roll and twist your ipad, but it might be even funnier to have all those characters shaped up by your imagination instead of imagination of the artist who worked on it. but this applies to less extent than the former case with textbooks. i guess it's great technology to have in overall.

  12. Only a matter of time by qpawn · · Score: 2, Funny

    Next thing you know, they'll start making movies out of these books. Gasp!

  13. Get a foreign language channel with cartoons... by denzacar · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Get a foreign language channel with cartoons. Or two. Or three. Languages, that is. Probably at least as many channels as well.

    My cousin was speaking English almost as good as her native language (Bosnian/Serbian) by the time she was 5-6 years old from all the Cartoon Network she watched.
    Basically, she was speaking a foreign language before she learned to read or write.
    She is now studying to be a professor of English.

    Also, when your kid starts to read, don't shun the comics in favor of books.
    If possible, get him some comics in the foreign language he is picking up from the cartoons.
    Amazon has international sites, holding books in the local language. But there are also online communities that scan comics. Even those in "foreign" languages.

    --
    Mit der Dummheit kämpfen Götter selbst vergebens
  14. Seriously by celibate+for+life · · Score: 3, Insightful

    I don't know why or how this trend started: to consider human beings (specially children) so delicate and fragile that every minor thing has the potential to ruin someone's mind forever. Traditional reading won't get outdated because it's a very efficient way to get high amounts of information in non-sequential order. So even if your children like to play with animated bleep-bloop books, they will eventually learn to read real books because they will need to. Necessity has been helping individuals and the entire species accomplish things since the dawn of time.

  15. What did we do before we had reading? by EmagGeek · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Before humans invented written text, we learned by watching and listening. That's what we are programmed to do - watch and listen. Hell, how do we learn to speak? We listen to other people do it, and watch their lips move, and then mimic that as we listen to ourselves try to reproduce those sounds.

    In many respects, interactive audio/visual methods are a more natural way for humans to learn than reading text.

  16. A bit premature no? by Simulant · · Score: 2, Insightful

    Or do enough kids have iPads now to make this a real concern? (who the hell buys their still learning to read kid an iPad anyway?)

    Based on my own experience, I'd say that audio books (and of course TV) are more of a problem. My daughter has been surrounded by books and read to for her entire 8 years yet she is falling behind in reading. (though she's ahead in comprehension or vocabulary/) She'd prefer to listen to a book than read it herself and we've, regrettably, made this too easy for her to do. Much like TV (which she doesn't watch much of at home.... only on weekends and never live TV with commercials), I now find myself in the position of having to limit her intake of audio books from the library in a bid to motivate her to actually read for herself. I would think that interactive books, as long as they don't read the entire text, are an improvement over the totally passive experience of listening/watching.

  17. I thought reading was about developing imagination by abhikhurana · · Score: 3, Interesting

    Call me old fashioned but one of the reasons I have always enjoyed reading traditional books is because the author only drops the hints at what the world in the book looks like but I actually paint the complete picture. This is the same reason why most movies based on books don't do well, because it is extremely difficult to compete with what we imagined that world to be in the detail and besides the imaginary world is individual to each reader. No two worlds probably look the same.

    Unfortunately, the more we get into the interactive books which try to replace the written word with pictures (or even the ones which try to augment it), the more would we be limiting our imagination and seeing it from someone else's eyes, which almost certainly would result in less "different" people in the world. Most of us on slashdot are evolutionists and we do appreciate that it is this difference which results in our species evolving. Hell, it could be that Da Vinci etc. probably started looking at flying because they had heard or read fairy tales where humans flew, which then one day was realised by incremental advance in science. So in some ways, we would be limiting our potential by relying more on the visual medium rather than imagining the world.

  18. Big surprise. by demonlapin · · Score: 4, Interesting

    Yes, folks, idiotic blather about how to raise a genius has come to the iPad. Ask people who have grown kids: they are who they are. There is astonishingly little you can do to change them. A rich environment beats a poor one, and you shouldn't starve or beat your children. Aside from that, just enjoy knowing them.

  19. At least they're reading something by mingsy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    E-books are just a tool to engage those students who would otherwise not read. Start worrying when the kids aren't reading at all.

  20. Who said anything about reading? by Bob_Who · · Score: 2, Insightful

    If you want a kid to read, you'll have to figure out the Dr.Suess first

    Or just get the deluxe ebooks that are like popping "Shreck II" DVD on the nursery color TV. The nanny cam can read the smelly midget an ebook. After that, reading won't matter as much anymore. .

  21. Parenting crap again by ledow · · Score: 2, Insightful

    It's always the same "This is slowly killing my child / making them stupid, I want it banned." or something along those lines... just stop your kids doing it. Especially, in this case, because it would be reliant on an enormously expensive piece of hardware in order to operate - they are not going to be sneaking into the bookshops on the way home and picking up an eBook reader illicitly to stop you knowing. If you have doubts about it, stop them doing it and do, I don't know, parent-y things like... erm... encouraging them to read books, praising them when they learn a new word, switching OFF the TV when they've had too much (and no, TV itself isn't bad - don't bring up children who when they hit adulthood are *DYING* to watch TV to see what all their friends are talking about - banning TV outright is just delaying their inevitable obsession with the "forbidden") and saying No to them.

    My child is 18 months. She *does* get transfixed to the television when her favourite program is on. That's why she gets a few hours a week and that's that. Then we switch it off and she doesn't burst into tears because she's not addicted to it. If you have a long car journey, you take two or three books with you - she will spend the *entire* trip engrossed in them, looking at every page, pointing out all the objects that she knows, learning the words for the ones she doesn't and she won't feel "deprived" or "bored" just because she only has books. When she learns to read, though, a habit of deliberately *choosing* a book to take out on a trip with her (as she currently does) will make the transition all that much easier.

    Reading, picture books, comics, TV, radio, interactive software, things scrawled in crayon on the back of scrap paper, they are all just media. If you use them correctly, and proportionally, they all have a role to play in a child's development. If you don't, and just let the kid have completely free choice, of course they will ALWAYS choose the thing that's least effort - TV or some book that "reads to them" so they don't have to do this complicated pattern-recognition thing that dad wants them to do. That's fine occasionally and, yes, occasionally you do have to let them just be kids and have a day off of making them all the "horrible" stuff like learning to read, or tidying their room and so those times they can do things like interactive books and software or just veg out in front of the TV (we all do it, in moderation for the majority of us, so we can't be martyrs here and claim to be perfect and always do everything that we would want our children to see us do).

    Let them have a life, and stop bloody micro-managing their exposure to the world. So long as they are doing the stuff you want them to do elsewhere, let them have their time off. To a child, learning to read is hard work on an enormously difficult but boring task, so after they've had a few hours of doing that give them some time off with whatever they want to do that's not hurting anyone else - video games (the age for violent ones is up to the individual parents, but you will not *turn* them into mass-murderers once they have acquired a sense of right and wrong), building Lego castles, scribbling on bits of paper, making a frame for the TV with tinsel and glue (with your permission), stamping on ants in the garden, whatever, it doesn't really matter. That's their time off, the same way that even university students, or 80-hour-week workers have time off. Just make sure that if you're worried they aren't reading enough, that you give them that TOO, at some other time, and by *your* rules.

  22. Translation by Dirtside · · Score: 3, Informative

    Translation: "It's new and different, and I'm frightened by it."

    --
    "Destroy science and religion. Science would re-emerge exactly the same; but not religion." - Penn Jillette, paraphrased
  23. What happened to reading? by AnAdventurer · · Score: 2, Funny

    If I want interactive "reading", I'll use the internet and post a inflammatory remark at slashdot.

    --
    6.8SPC TR of 550, l xwind at 6, drift rt at 26" drops 77". AT has 503 ft-lbs at 1403 fps. FT 0.86