社区黑料

Join our zero2eight Substack community for more discussion about the latest news in early care and education.

Screens are everywhere these days. So, it seems, is the debate surrounding their role in children鈥檚 development. 

Much of the conversation about how much and what type of screen time is appropriate for young kids is focused on the use of digital technology at home, under the purview of a child鈥檚 parents and primary caregivers. But the reality is that a of children age 5 and under spend at least part of their week in an early care and education setting, where screen time may be less visible, but is often present in some form. And when communication between parents and early educators falls short, young children may end up spending more time with screens than experts recommend 鈥� and their parents intend. 

In early learning environments, screen use varies widely, said Rebecca Parlakian, senior director of programs at Zero to Three, a nonprofit focused on early childhood development. Some settings are screen-free, while others set parameters like time limits or restricting screens for educational use only, and others allow children to watch movies or short videos for entertainment. 

鈥淒epending on who cares for your child and what the practices are, it could go the whole range,鈥� Parlakian said.

Although expert guidance around screen time has begun to move away from offering clear duration-based limits, there is still a large body of research informing best practices around children and digital media 鈥� and that research emphasizes the importance of in-person, hands-on and relational interactions for young children. But often, program staff and parents are not communicating with one another about how much or what kind of screen time a child is getting in each environment, said Kate Blocker, director of research and programs at Children and Screens: Institute of Digital Media and Child Development. 

鈥淲e have to acknowledge that has to apply across the contexts they鈥檙e in and is not repeated,鈥� Blocker said. 鈥淭he communication gaps are really real, I think.鈥�

Although some states are beginning to whether and how screens can be used in early care and education settings, a program鈥檚 approach to screen time is more often driven by the philosophy and preferences of its owner or director. In the absence of clear, cohesive guidelines for the field, that can be a daunting task, said LaTonya Richardson, owner and director of The Academy of Learning and Early Care, a licensed, nationally accredited family child care program in Jacksonville, Florida. 

鈥淭echnology in early childhood is not a black-and-white thing,鈥� Richardson said. 鈥淲e need clearer guidance, and we need realistic goals.鈥�

Many of the best-known early childhood advocacy and membership organizations do offer some recommendations for programs around screen use. The National Association for Family Child Care, for example, includes guidelines for 鈥渢elevision and computers鈥� in its , including limits of 30 minutes of screen time per day for children over age 2 and none for those who are under 2. But the field lacks a set of go-to guidelines that all program leaders and staff can reference, much the way that many families view the from the American Academy of Pediatrics. 

Instead, Richardson said, her approach has evolved over the years as she鈥檚 learned in real-time what works well for children and what doesn鈥檛. 

Today, she and the other two teachers in her program use some technology with the 12 children they serve 鈥� who range in age from 7 months old to 5 years old 鈥� but they keep it brief and reserve it for times when a screen can add something to the learning experience. 

鈥淭echnology is used as a tool, not as a replacement for teaching,鈥� she said. 鈥淲e believe children learn best through play, conversations and movement.鈥�

When screens come out, Richardson said, they are used with intention. 

Earlier that week, one of the program鈥檚 teachers used a tablet during circle time to play short videos of a few nursery rhymes the group had recently read together. It was intended to recap the lesson and deepen the children鈥檚 understanding of the stories, Richardson said. 

One video was of Humpty Dumpty. In it, the kids could see Humpty Dumpty falling, in motion. They could watch as he cracked into several pieces. Another video was of Jack and Jill. The children were able to see Jack and Jill tumbling down the hill. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 to give them something else than we鈥檙e already doing so they can see and feel and interact in different ways when we鈥檙e using the tablet,鈥� Richardson explained. 

The older kids can also access a tablet to practice concepts like counting or the alphabet. Her staff limits this activity to five minutes at a time. 

鈥淚f a child wants to see the tablet, they know now, when they see the hourglass, 鈥楳y time is up.鈥� There鈥檚 no getting upset. They put it down and move on to the next thing,鈥� she said. 鈥淚t鈥檚 all about guidance, support and making sure everyone鈥檚 clear on what the role is when it comes to using those devices.鈥�

It helps when those messages are communicated consistently across both home and school settings, Richardson added. 

At one point, she held a workshop for families to help them understand what healthy technology use looks like for young children, and to understand the trade-offs of granting their kids screen time at home. Some parents expressed that their children were getting into the car after pickup demanding a tablet, and they didn鈥檛 know how to set boundaries. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 not to shame any parents,鈥� Richardson said of the workshops and resources her program provides to families. 鈥淚t鈥檚 to work with them so they can work with us.鈥�

At the Primrose School of Evergreen, a private early learning program located in the heart of Silicon Valley, parents overwhelmingly view technology as a positive, said owner Bejal Patel. 

The preschool is part of Primrose Schools, a national chain of more than 500 early care and education centers. Patel鈥檚 center is piloting a new learning app from Primrose Schools called Balanced Learning that will be made available to all programs this fall. The app was designed for children ages 3, 4 and 5 and is intended to complement the hands-on activities and lessons that children are working on in the classroom. 

鈥淭here鈥檚 so much external content that might be fun and flashy … but we鈥檙e trying to get kids to think critically, solve a real-world problem,鈥� said April Poindexter, head of curriculum and innovation at Primrose Schools, about the new learning app. 鈥淪o it requires active engagement.鈥�

One experience children may have on the app, she said, would reinforce a learning unit on gardening and pollinators. In the classroom, children may learn about gardening and taking care of the earth. Outside, they may plant seeds and tend to the school鈥檚 real garden. In the app, they can read further about pollinators or design their own pollinator garden based on information found in the app. 

Another app experience, Poindexter said, offers children an opportunity to view short videos about age-appropriate social challenges, such as starting a new school, and then use a handheld mirror to observe their own facial expressions. 

鈥淚t鈥檚 all designed to be short, sweet, brief and very purposeful to what they鈥檙e learning,鈥� Poindexter said. 

Primrose centers, she added, do not use any digital media for entertainment and do not introduce any children under age 3 to screens. 

Patel, the owner of the Primrose location in Silicon Valley, said that aligns with her school鈥檚 approach. 

鈥淪creens don鈥檛 enter classrooms until preschool,鈥� she said. 鈥淚nfants and toddlers 鈥� that鈥檚 non-negotiable. At this age, we know there鈥檚 no app that can replicate what a caring adult and a sensory bin can do for a 2-year-old鈥檚 development. When children reach preschool age, that鈥檚 where technology enters, but very carefully.鈥�

Children may use the Balanced Learning app up to twice a week, for no more than 15 minutes, Poindexter noted. 

Patel acknowledged that the transition away from the app can be a challenge for children and staff, but noted that, 鈥渨e鈥檙e fighting neurochemistry, not kids.鈥� 

Children get a two-minute wrap-up cue on the app. Patel鈥檚 staff also offer verbal reminders and try to empower the children by letting them turn the tablet off and put it away themselves. Sometimes the kids try to bargain for more, Patel said. They鈥檒l say, 鈥淚 just want to finish this,鈥� Patel said. 

鈥淲e鈥檝e given our teachers certain things to say, like, 鈥業 know it鈥檚 hard to stop,鈥欌�� she said. 鈥淲e always try to positively redirect a child into doing something else.鈥�

Sometimes there is a disconnect between that approach and what happens at home. Some parents, Patel said, may give their child an hour or two to watch whatever they want. 

鈥淲e do sometimes get worried that we have to start all over again [when] Monday hits,鈥� Patel said. 

Still, despite these challenges, Patel feels strongly that children in the program benefit from having some exposure to technology, rather than none at all. 

鈥淭he best thing is to not pretend that this thing doesn鈥檛 exist,鈥� she said. 

She offered an analogy. If a child is not allowed to have any cake on his birthday for the first 10 years of his life, and then is given a cake on his 10th birthday, he might be inclined to eat the whole thing. Whereas if he鈥檇 had one slice of cake each year on his birthday, he may have learned how to consume the sugar in moderation.

鈥淵ou鈥檙e teaching the kid to learn things in small quantities,鈥� she said. 鈥淯sing the iPad or screen time for smaller chunks is better than not having limits.鈥�

Blocker, of Children and Screens, offered a counterpoint. 

鈥淚 think it鈥檚 important to acknowledge there鈥檚 no evidence that a lack of technology is bad,鈥� she said. 鈥淭here鈥檚 no research to indicate that not having it in there is a problem.鈥�

Blocker and other child development experts pointed out that screens are not the primary risk here. It鈥檚 actually what screens are replacing 鈥� hands-on learning, real-world experiences, free play and close caregiver interactions 鈥� that is the bigger concern. 

鈥淓very minute a child is spending on a device isn鈥檛 spent on serve-and-return or physical development,鈥� Blocker said. 鈥淩esearch is pretty clear young kids don鈥檛 learn as well from screens. What is the screen taking away? That鈥檚 one primary challenge: making sure it鈥檚 not displacing vital developmental inputs.鈥�

Parlakian, at Zero to Three, would not necessarily suggest that technology should be absent from early care and education programs altogether, but noted that when it is present, it must be used thoughtfully and intentionally. That kind of approach, though, places the burden on already-overextended program leaders and teachers. 

There may be value in children seeing a concept they’re learning about come to life in a video. Children may understand the book 鈥淭he Very Hungry Caterpillar鈥� better if they get to pair it with a video of a butterfly emerging from its chrysalis, she said. But there is no place, Parlakian feels, for screen use that is strictly for entertainment in early care and education programs. 

鈥淟ife is entertainment for young children,鈥� she said. 鈥淭here should be plenty to explore, experiment and solve in their setting.鈥�

Did you use this article in your work?

We鈥檇 love to hear how 社区黑料鈥檚 reporting is helping educators, researchers, and policymakers.