
As we push academics and curriculum further and further into
childhood it is important that we step back a bit and look at what
developmentally appropriate practice looks like for our youngest
learners. Good choices for infants and toddlers do not involve
electronics and high technology; they involve simple, real-world
experiences, and lots of one-on-one interaction with mindful
caregivers.
Yet, there are plenty of good intentioned (and not so good
intentioned) people who would have you believe that even the
youngest children require technology to learn. Some even think
pre-infancy is the best time to start assisting children with their
learning. The makers of the BabyPlus Prenatal Education System (http://www.babyplus.com/)
claims it helps children hit developmental milestones earlier,
enhances intellectual abilities, increases attention spans, improves
school readiness, and more—all before a child leaves the womb. Just
shell out $150, strap the thing over your womb, and play the
curriculums, “16 naturally derived sounds that resemble a mother's
heartbeat.” According to the BabyPlus website, “The rhythm of the
sounds increases incrementally as the pregnancy progresses. The
BabyPlus sonic pattern introduces your child to a sequential
learning process, built upon the natural rhythms of their own
environment.”
Although listening to mother’s actual heartbeat and the
actual natural rhythms of their environment was OK for us and our
parents (and all of human history until this device hit the market),
it now appears we even have to enhance the prenatal environment to
make sure children get a leg up on the competition. This company and
many others attempt to make parents and caregivers feel guilty, as
if children not exposed to their products are deprived and destined
to become slack jawed, drooling, fools instead of super achievers.
However, maybe…just maybe…the quest to create super babies is
a bit misguided.
Maybe the best way
to prepare babies to one-day take over the world is to let them be
babies and use of all the inborn learning strategies they came with.
Maybe we can forget about the prenatal learning devices, and
the Leapfrog Lapware, and the teach-your-baby-to-read silliness, and
the computers, and the DVD’s, and the TV, and the fancy swings and
exersaucers.
Want research that supports avoiding these things? Here you
go:
·
According to The Timing
and Quality of Early Experiences Combine to Shape Brain Architecture
from the Center on the Developing Child at Harvard
University, "There is no
credible scientific data to support the claim that specialized
videos or particular music recordings (e.g., 'the Mozart Effect')
have a positive, measurable impact on developing brain
architecture,” and, “Well-documented, scientific evidence of the
negative impacts of deprivation on brain circuitry does not mean
that excessive enrichment produces measureable enhancements in brain
architecture.” (http://www.ecdgroup.com/docs/lib_005471954.pdf
)
·
According to the Executive Summary of
Fool’s Gold: A Critical Look
at Computers in Childhood published by The Alliance for
Childhood, “Those who place their faith in technology to solve the
problems of education should look more deeply into the needs of
children. The renewal of education requires personal attention to
students from good teachers and active parents, strongly supported
by their communities.” (http://www.allianceforchildhood.org/publications
)
·
According to the American Academy of Pediatrics, children under two
years of age should be exposed to
NO screen time and,
“Although certain television programs may be promoted to this age
group, research on early brain development shows that babies and
toddlers have a critical need for direct interactions with parents
and other significant care givers (eg, child care providers) for
healthy brain growth and the development of appropriate social,
emotional, and cognitive skills. Therefore, exposing such young
children to television programs should be discouraged.” (http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;104/2/341
)
·
As for the overuse of swings and other devices to contain small
children (something University of Maryland professor of kinesiology
refers to as “containerized kids”), well respected infant care
authorities Emmi Pikler and Megda Gerber, recommend babies should
never be placed in positions they cannot get into themselves.
(http://www.rie.org/ and
http://www.parentingworx.co.nz/fantastic-reading/emmi-piklers-8-guiding-principles
)
Many babies will grow into adults who drive cars--and some of
them will become adults who use chainsaws--but we know better than
to give them these technologies before they are developmentally
ready. We need to be as mindful when it comes to television,
computers, and other technology. Our babies will one day be ready
for these things, but exposing them in infancy is not
developmentally appropriate.
So, what is developmentally appropriate for say a nine or ten
month old? How about these things:
·
Lots of time in the arms of a caring adult listening, looking,
touching, smelling, and tasting the world around them.
·
Plenty of opportunities to explore the world on their own and at
their own pace, time where they can build muscle strength, hone
muscle control, and develop new physical skills.
·
Exposure to their immediate universe and frequent chances to engage
the world within a few blocks of where they sleep and eat. Safe
chances to engage their physical environment with all their senses.
Babies are born with an innate curiosity and a drive to
learn, our job is to provide opportunities and assure their safety.
Mothers and families have done this quiet effectively for hundreds
of generations. All of humankind’s greatest achievements came from
people who used to be babies—and the overwhelming majority of them
were never exposed to prenatal learning devices or high-tech
teaching gadgets. When it comes to developmentally appropriate
practices for babies, think low-tech and focus on consistently
feeding all of their senses a steady diet of new and interesting
morsels from their surroundings.