On electronic toys
Sep. 17th, 2007 11:42 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
conuly
Somebody offLJ posted about taking away the battery toys from her young child, and I commented agreeing with her, pointing out that these toys can't be really played with, they only entertain a kid.
And the thing is, I look at these toys, and I see a few things that irritate me or concern me.
1. I see a lot of toys where the fun is in the nonelectronic component, and it seems that the battery operatedness has just been gratuitously added on. This may not be specifically detrimental to a kid's development, but it's sure irritating to me. Like, at the SICM they have a ball pounder that lights up. Why not get a wooden one that doesn't light up? It's just as much fun.
2. I see, even more than that, a lot of toys where, if they were used properly, they'd be educational - but they're not. They're given to children too young to use them properly, and whose parents don't sit down and show them. Like, a toy that says the letters of the alphabet when you press them (in lieu of the adults doing the same thing) could be educational, if the kid doesn't just randomly hit the buttons six at a time and too fast to hear anything, and switch from the letter to the sound to the word option every five seconds. Naturally, of course, this is how kids use these toys.
3. And of course, I see people who buy "educational toys" and then leave those toys to do the educating. But they've just moved from one electronic babysitter to another. I keep on saying it - you don't learn to count (no matter what you may think of your two-year-old's abilities in this area!) from pressing buttons that recite the numbers for you in seven different languages. You learn to count by being given things to hold and count - like blocks, or cups, or dolls. And that goes for nearly everything.
Have I said this before? I must have.
And the thing is, I look at these toys, and I see a few things that irritate me or concern me.
1. I see a lot of toys where the fun is in the nonelectronic component, and it seems that the battery operatedness has just been gratuitously added on. This may not be specifically detrimental to a kid's development, but it's sure irritating to me. Like, at the SICM they have a ball pounder that lights up. Why not get a wooden one that doesn't light up? It's just as much fun.
2. I see, even more than that, a lot of toys where, if they were used properly, they'd be educational - but they're not. They're given to children too young to use them properly, and whose parents don't sit down and show them. Like, a toy that says the letters of the alphabet when you press them (in lieu of the adults doing the same thing) could be educational, if the kid doesn't just randomly hit the buttons six at a time and too fast to hear anything, and switch from the letter to the sound to the word option every five seconds. Naturally, of course, this is how kids use these toys.
3. And of course, I see people who buy "educational toys" and then leave those toys to do the educating. But they've just moved from one electronic babysitter to another. I keep on saying it - you don't learn to count (no matter what you may think of your two-year-old's abilities in this area!) from pressing buttons that recite the numbers for you in seven different languages. You learn to count by being given things to hold and count - like blocks, or cups, or dolls. And that goes for nearly everything.
Have I said this before? I must have.
![[identity profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/openid.png){kind=small}
Re: A curious question
Date: 2007-09-19 02:08 am (UTC)My impression of the child was he's bright, intelligent and curious about *everything*. When nobody was paying attention to him, he'd babble aloud in nonsense sounds (maybe they make sense to him?) but when people try to actively engage him in words he clammed right up.
My impression of the mother was she's just this side of freaking out that her kid isn't holding up to some kind of standard of progress. Not knowing a damn thing about child development, maybe she's freaking for a reason. *shrug*
You were the first person I thought of to ask, given your wonderful nieces!
Re: A curious question
Date: 2007-09-19 02:25 am (UTC)But no, if he's not making words to people at two, I'd be concerned. Maybe not actively *worried* - I know of too many people who didn't speak until they were quite late, and were Just Fine, and if he's as bright as you think I would be inclined to think he'd find a way to patch it up eventually - but I'd definitely be trying to help the process along there.
You know, it's interesting you bring this up. I'll make a post.