News on television and early language development

Not in front of the children?

The Australian government is set to issue draft guidelines advising parents and carers to prevent children under two from watching television. The guidelines will be issued following findings from a range of researchers who were looking at the potentially negative impact of TV on the development of children’s brains.

Recent research in Australia has found that young children spend more time watching television than any other activity. The average four-month-old gazes at the box for 44 minutes every day. The guidelines claim that screen time for young children “may reduce the amount of time they have for active play, social contact with others and chances for language development”, and may also “affect the development of a full range of eye movement [and]…reduce the length of time they can stay focused”.

Jo Salmon, one of the researchers who informed the Australian government’s draft guidelines claims that “children aged six to 30 months who are watching television have less developed vocabulary, display more aggressive behaviour and have poor attention spans”. While there is no official evidence that so-called educational programming is harmful, she goes on to say “I really would not put my young one under two in front of a television. Generally, the evidence that’s out there says it could be detrimental”.

Dr Michael Rich, director of the influential Center on Media and Child Health at Boston Children’s Hospital agrees, describing how nowadays parents are highly tuned to what they feed their children’s bodies but are less careful about what they feed their minds. He describes how, "although there is good television that children can learn consciously from at a later age, scientific studies show younger children are not able to consciously learn from television".

Experts in child development have found that three things optimise brain development: face-to-face interaction with parents or carers; learning to interact with or manipulate the physical world; and creative problem-solving play. They claim that electronic screens do not provide any of this and that at the most basic level, then, time spent watching TV has a displacement effect and stops children spending time on other, more valuable brain-building activities.

The Australian government’s advice is also supported by the recommendation of the American Academy of Pediatrics that under-twos are not exposed to any television time. Dr Dimtri Christakis at Seattle Children’s Research Institute found that for every extra hour watching DVDs, 8-16-month-olds learned six to eight fewer words than children who spent no time in front of the screen. While Marie Evans Schmidt at the Centre for Media and Child Health found that even just having television on in the background while under threes play with their toys disrupted their attention span even when they appeared to pay little attention to it.

While there is a paucity of evidence that television is beneficial to early cognitive development, there are studies that show it is not as influential as the educational status and income of parents. Schmidt found that an apparently negative relationship between TV viewing and cognitive development disappeared when she factored in the mother’s education status and household income – parents’ education and finances mattered more. “TV viewing is an outgrowth of other characteristics of the home environment that lead to lower test scores”, said Schmidt. Other research suggests these include less mother-and-baby interaction and less reading to children.

In response to this original article, Eileen McCarthy (Programme director, KidsCo) responded with a letter describing how, although the Australian government report was commendable in stressing how important it is to ensure children are happy, active and engaged, it ignored the educational potential of television. She goes on to argue that “if children watch the right programming, which entertains them and offers educational benefits – be that dance, song or any other interactive element – television can play an important role in a child’s development”.

She also describes how “the fact is children enjoy watching television and are rarely more engaged than when watching their favourite shows. Instead of banning TV, we should be tapping into it – using broadcast media to teach children subtly. Monitoring what children are watching would surely be more effective than banning TV altogether. Education shouldn’t just be in the classroom; it needs to happen constantly throughout a child’s day”.

(The Guardian, 14 and 17 October 2009)

Is TV delaying child development?

New research published in the latest edition of Archives of Paediatrics & Adolescent Medicine suggests having the TV on may impair young children's development by reducing the amount of conversation between infant and adult, BBC's Clare Murphy reports.

This study, conducted by Dimitri Christakis from the University of Washington, found that when the TV was audible - either on in the background or being watched - the volume of words spoken and sounds made by either adult or child reduced considerably. Every hour the television was on parents said between 500 and 1,000 fewer words to their children. The report states that "these results may explain the association between infant television exposure and delayed language development."

300 children aged between two months and four years were recorded by the research team on several days every month over two years. The study does not differentiate between TV being watched or background TV or examine the kind of programmes that were on. It did find that overall, adults barely spoke to children when the TV was audible.

Liz Attenborough, director of Talk To Your Baby at the UK's National Literacy Trust, agrees that the permanent presence of the TV in the background is something parents should try to reduce. She said, "Even if you think you're not paying attention to it, you probably are - and this may well interfere with how much you speak with to your child. The TV shouldn't be on all the time.

"But we are lucky to have some high-quality children's programmes in the UK. They are usually well thought-out, often featuring a clear, single voice, and incite children to make responses," she said.

"Of course we need to be aware of the problems TV can pose, but equally we don't want to throw the baby out with the bathwater."

Read more about the research

(BBC News, 2 June 2009)

Is TV really so bad for our babies?

New research in France has caused the French Government to ban channels from promoting even the benefits of educational programmes aimed at under-threes (and may even force dedicated preschool channels to carry warnings.) The research claims that preschoolers who watch TV are at risk from delayed language learning,reduced concentration, increased agitation and sleep disorders. Yet Annabel Meggeson for Mother & Baby weighs up the evidence to determine whether we really should switch off the TV for good.

Dr Aric Sigman, Associate Fellow of the British Psychological society, reminds us that the "first two years in a baby's life are considered critical for development. At that age, a child's brain is being moulded into shape. And how it's moulded is a direct response to what that child may or may not be doing. The problem with TV is that it shows children things that are more interesting than real life. This subverts their natural development, particularly when it comes to creativity and attention. Instead of learning to respond in real time, they get used to a heightened reality and the less satisfying real life becomes."

Yet there are other psychologists who agree that television can be used as an educational tool. These professionals remind parents to share the television viewing experience with their children, to engage in chit chat about the programme and to snuggle up. The physical contact is great for bonding.

Much of the argument about the potential harm in television watching pertains to children under the age of two. Most experts agree that when a child is a bit older, watching television has many benefits. Emma Citron, child psychologist, said, "It empowers them by providing access to different worlds - after all, they can't read a newspaper or surf the internet - and it presents useful information in a way parents sometimes can't." Meggeson concludes that in moderation, television is ok.

(Mother & Baby, January 2009)

The effects of infant media usage: what do we know and what should we learn?

A review of research published in January 2009 in Acta Paediatrica (98(1):8-16) concludes that allowing toddlers to watch TV that is designed to help their development can actually delay or damage it. The review covered 78 research papers over the last 25 years, and shows that no studies to date have demonstrated benefits associated with early infant TV viewing. Read the abstract

(ECU Bulletin, 2 February 2009)

France alerts UK to TV danger

Nursery World reports that the French broadcasting authority Conseil Superior Audiovisuel (CSA) has passed on concerns to Ofcom following a report which hlighlighted the effect television programmes can have on the development of children aged under three. The CSA report, published in July 2008, found that watching television delayed a child's language, reduced their concentration, caused passivity and increased sleep disorders. The Ofcom spokesperson said, "Ofcom is an evidence-based regulator and at present there has been no evidence supplied to Ofcom that proves such content is harmful to minors. However, Ofcom has asked the CSA for any research which supports their concerns."

(Nursery World, 16.10.08)

French ban TV marketing for babies

The Telegraph reported on a ban by the French broadcast authority preventing TV channels from marketing shows to under threes. In addition warning messages for parents will also be on foreign baby channels broadcast in France, such as Baby TV.

The high audio visual council said it wanted to protect children under three from the effects of television. Any foreign channel with programmes for babies will have to broadcast a message saying, "Watching television can slow the development of children under three, even when it involves channels aimed specifically at them."

The ruling quoted health experts who emphasise the importance of interaction with people as crucial to development. The ruling said, "Television viewing hurts the development of children under three years old and poses a certain number of risks, encouraging passivity, slow language acquisition, over-excitedness, troubles with sleep and concentration as well as dependence on screens."

However, Gary Oranim, chief executive of BabyFirstTV disagreed and said the channel encourages parents to make sure TV is part of a balanced schedule. He was quoted as saying, "One of the reasons we created BabyFirstTV is that we thought there was no good programming for babies on TV, and according to the research that is out there, most of the babies are watching TV anyway."

Read the full article at www.telegraph.co.uk/news/

(Telegraph, 21.08.08)

Background TV is bad for young children's development, says study

A report in the Guardian highlighted research which suggests that background TV has an impact on the quality aand quantity of play in young children and may slow their development.

50 children were studied aged 12, 24 or 36 months, and although they did not seem to pay attention to the TV programmes, their play episodes were on average 30 seconds shorter. Focused play was also affected, with the time when a child is most attentive being 25 per cent shorter (about 5 seconds).

Dr Tiffany Pempek, a child pyschologist from Georgetown University who worked on the study highlighted that the ability to focus attention is an important predictor for later development.

Read the full article at www.guardian.co.uk/society/2008/jul/15/children.schools

(Guardian, 15.07.08)

Read more about the research

(Nursery World, 04.10.07)

MPs urged to ration TV for children

The BBC website reported that psychologist Dr Aric Sigman is advising MPs that the amount of time children spend watching TV should be rationed. The article highlighted that Dr Sigman argues that children under three should not watch any TV.

It was reported that Dr Sigman would like government to provide parents with daily guideline amounts of how much TV children should be watching. His concerns were being voiced at a Children and the Media conference at the House of Commons.

Dr Sigman was quoted as saying: "Providing general guidance on whether infants should be watching television and how much time children should spend in front of the screen is hardly radical. Screen medica must now be considered a major public health issue and reducing television viewing must become the new priority for child health"

However, Grege Childs from the Save Kids' TV campaign was also quoted in the article and saw banning television for under threes as 'unrealistic and unnecessary', and the focus should be on the quality of programmes.

He said "There are plenty of studies that indicate the educational value of programmes for children (and) the socialisation value in the way that they create conversations rather than destimulate them."

(BBC website, 23.04.07)

The 15 ways in which too much TV wrecks your child's health

The devastating extent to which watching television damages children's health is spelt out in a report today. It lists 15 ways that over-exposure to TV can harm youngsters - from fuelling obesity and shortsightedness to causing premature puberty and autism.

Author Dr Aric Sigman, who reviewed 35 academic studies, said the findings implicated televison in 'the greatest unacknowledged health scandal of our time'. Dr Sigman claimed that, based on national viewing figures, the average child will have spent a full year watching television by the time they are six.

More than half of three-year-olds have TVs in their bedrooms. Dr Sigman, an associate fellow of the British Psychological Society, said that children under three should not be watching any television at all and parents should only introduce it 'judiciously' after that.

He recommended that between the ages of three to five children should watch no more half an hour of 'good quality programming' a day.

(Extracted from Daily Mail, 19.02.07)

To view the full report visit http://www.iob.org/userfiles/File/1260.pdf

Toddlers 'will learn nothing from TV'

The notion that young children can learn productively by watching television is widely dismissed by scientists who study the developing brain. The time between the ages of 6 months and 3 years is accepted as a critical phase for learning skills such as language, and research suggests that this is best accomplished by interaction with adults.

A study by Patricia Kuhl, of the University of Washington, in Seattle, for example, has found that children aged 10 months learn sound patterns easily by playing with an adult, but learn nothing at all by watching the same adult performing the same games and exercises on a television screen.

Similar research has shown that in young children, watching television, videos or DVDs is no substitute for real encounters with adults and other children. Sarah-Jayne Blakemore, of the Institute of Cognitive Neuroscience at University College London, said that the best evidence suggested television for toddlers was a waste of time. "There is a body of research showing that, in a variety of contexts, young children learn optimally with another human, rather than with a video of a human," said Dr Blakemore, the co-author, with Professor Uta Frith, of The Learning Brain.

Dr Blakemore added: "If an infant is watching TV for an hour a day, then fine. So long as they are also playing with adults and children for most of the day, it is not going to do them any harm, though it will do no good either."

(Mark Henderson, Science Correspondent, The Times, 12.05.06)

Don't' blame TV for ADHD symptoms

Does watching the flickering lights and frenetically changing pace of some children's TV programs affect a child's brain enough to cause symptoms of attention deficit hyperactivity disorder? Not likely, new research suggests.

While previous studies have linked early television exposure to attention problems, a new study in the March issue of Pediatrics failed to find a connection between ADHD and TV viewing habits. "TV is designed to capture our attention and move us quickly from one subject to the next. The question is, does the young brain become different because of this?" asked study co-ordinator Tara Stevens, an assistant professor in the department of educational psychology and leadership at Texas Tech University. Stevens said that from this study, it appeared that was not the case. And, as far as ADHD symptoms were concerned: "It was clear that the relationship with TV viewing was close to zero."

She was quick to point out that she and co-author Miriam Mulsow weren't advocating TV viewing in children, however. But she added: "I think these findings take a little bit of the pressure off parents. It's very likely that you did not do something wrong to make your child develop ADHD."

The researchers randomly selected two samples of 2,500 children each from the Early Childhood Longitudinal Study - Kindergarten. That study includes 22,000 youngsters who started kindergarten during the 1998-1999 school year. Information is collected from the children, parents and teachers. For the new analysis, only information from parents and teachers was included.

The researchers looked at the children's behaviour during their first year of kindergarten and then again near the end of first grade. They included information on television exposure, any limits placed on TV viewing, parental involvement, socioeconomic status and symptoms of ADHD. They found no association between television exposure and symptoms of ADHD. They also found that parental involvement - such as the amount of time parents spent in children's activities that didn't involve TV - didn't have a link to ADHD symptoms.

Stevens said it's important to note that the children who showed ADHD symptoms hadn't been diagnosed with ADHD. Also, she said, at least one previous study that found an association between TV and ADHD included much younger children, so it's possible that results may be different for a child under three who watches lots of TV. That's because the brain is much more 'plastic' or changeable the younger a child is, she said. So, TV viewing at two or three years of age may have more of an effect than TV viewing at five or six.

Seeking to explain why previous research found an association between television viewing and ADHD and the new study did not, Stevens said parents of hyperactive children may use TV as a babysitter more than other parents, simply because they need a break or need to capture their child's attention while they make dinner or take a shower.

Dr Jess Shatkin, director of education and training at the New York University Child Study Centre, said he wasn't prepared to fully accept the new findings. "This is a thoughtful and interesting study, but there's not enough data to support the idea that we shouldn't be cautious about kids' exposure to all media. This doesn't change anything I would tell parents."

The bottom line for parents, he said, is 'all things in moderation'. Some educational TV may be good for some children, Shatkin said, but 'what's good for one isn't necessarily good for another'.

(www.forbes.com, 06.03.06)

Television is here to stay

Television is here to stay: a statement of the obvious, perhaps, 60 years after it began. But too often people imply that all would be well with the world if television just went away, and we believe we have to face it in a more responsible way.

When we started the Talk To Your Baby campaign at the National Literacy Trust in 2003, the most frequent response was that surely all the problems with children's poor communication skills could laid at the door of television. We don't think that is necessarily the case, and there are multiple social and cultural factors contributing to why it is such a problem now. Television undoubtedly contributes, but used responsibly it can aid young children's language learning.

The reality is that television is not just in every home but increasingly in many young children's bedrooms. EastEnders is currently the most watched show among British four-year-olds. It is the unsupervised watching of inappropriate programmes that can lead to problems.

We commissioned a research review, which showed how little investigation there has been on television watching for the under-twos. There is, though, some evidence suggesting that under-twos cannot cope with high levels of stimulation. A study by Dr Dimitri Christakis in Seattle concludes that children under two should not be allowed to watch any television at all, as it can lad to over-stimulation and poor concentration skills. Dr Christakis suggests that under-twos who watch three hours of television a day are 30 per cent more likely to develop Attention Deficit Disorder. Children who are exposed to unrealistic and unnatural levels of stimulation at a young age, he says, continue to expect this in later life, leading to difficulty dealing with the slower pace of school and homework.

Quality counts
For children aged two to five, however, it is clear that high quality educational programmes designed for this age group can enhance language development. In the UK we are lucky that we have good quality, carefully prepared programming suitable for the early years to watch. Programmes with a single gentle voice, for example, are most suitable for very young children, as multiple voices are extremely confusing in the pre-school years.

Our research review also revealed that young children are often unable to watch age-appropriate programming, as older siblings command the remote control. We all also need to remember to turn the television off when a programme has finished. Having it on permanently in the background can hinder listening skills. But its greater impact is in the distraction it causes to adults who are, as a result, less likely to talk and play with their children.

It is clear that allowing young children to watch too many adult and general audience programmes can be confusing for them. When Sesame Street was being created, research found that pre-schoolers needed to make sense of what they watched, far more than they needed all-singing, all-dancing entertainment to hold their attention. Young children don't watch when they are stimulated and look away when they are bored - they watch when they understand, and look away when they are confused.

Watch together - then turn it off
It is actually more useful for young children to watch videos of children's programmes, as the repetition fosters a certain familiarity with particular programmes and encourages anticipation and involvement. The best way for young children to watch television is in small bites, and with adult involvement. If you talk about a programme with the child after watching it, children are likely to gain more from the experience. And if you turn the television off when the programme has ended, the child is more likely to go and play - inspired by the programme, entertained by the characters, and probably singing the song as well.

We all need time to relax, and be entertained, and it is fine for children to enjoy watching television -some of the time. By itself, television is neither the cause not the answer to language issues. What is important is that parents and carers are aware of the pros and cons of television watching, and maximise the opportunities whilst diminishing potential risks.

(Practical Professional Child Care, October 2005)

The mean time spent watching television during childhood and adolescence is significantly associated with leaving school without qualifications, and negatively associated with attaining a university degree. This is according to a study report, Association of Television viewing during childhood with poor educational achievement, by Robert Hancox, Barry Milne and Richie Poulton, which was published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine in July 2005.

The study investigated concerns that watching too much television may have a negative impact on education. It concluded that television viewing in childhood and adolescence is associated with poor educational achievement by 26 years of age. It stated that excess television viewing in childhood may have long-lasting adverse consequences for educational achievement and subsequent socioeconomic status and well-being.

For more information on the report go to www.archpediatrics.com

(Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, July 2005)

Children's television viewing and cognitive outcomes

TV viewing by under-twos may have no benefits at all, and may in itself be harmful to the subsequent cognitive development of children. This is according to a study by Dr Dimitri Christakis and DR Frederick Zimmerman of the Department of Pediatrics at the University of Washington, which was published in the Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine in July 2005.

The study was conducted by investigating cognitive development of children of ages 6 and 7 years, against hours of television viewed per day before the age of 3, and at ages 3-5 years. It used data from a nationally representative data set and regressed four measures of cognitive development.

Analysis of the data suggests to Zimmerman and Christakis that television watching by very young children does not help their cognitive development, and may be associated with adverse cognitive outcomes. These associations, they argue, are likely to be directly or indirectly causal, because the data included extensive controls on other factors that might affect cognitive development such as parental ability and input. There is evidence to suggest that in children aged 3-5 years, television watching may have a beneficial effect on outcomes of reading recognition and short-term memory, although not on mathematics ability or reading comprehension.

The quality of the television watched has a great impact on what its effects are, and high-quality television specifically aimed at young children will have a much more beneficial effect than that which is not. The study says it aims to look at the effects of TV watching on a population level, ie in terms of what children are actually watching, which is often not appropriate or aimed specifically at them. The study was conducted in America, where there is a greater tendency for children to watch large amounts of low-quality television, so its overall effects may appear to be more negative than they would be in other countries such as the UK, where there is different programming and a somewhat different television culture. The study admits that 'the results here are specific to the programming and cultural context of the United States'.

It is telling that the same quality of television which seems as though it may have some useful effects when watched by children ages 3-5, appears to have none when watched by those under 2. Television watching and its effects are intimately bound up with many other factors in child development, so we do need to remain realistic about how great an effect television itself has. In addition we need to be realistic about what people's lifestyles are like in the modern world, and the extent to which television pervades these lifestyles.

The report concludes that there are modest adverse effects of television viewing before the age of 3 years on the subsequent cognitive development of children. It says that the results suggest that greater adherence to the American Academy of Pediatrics guidelines that children younger than 2 years not watch television is warranted.

For more information on the report go to www.archpediatrics.com

(Archives of Pediatrics & Adolescent Medicine, July 2005)

New book argues that popular culture is not dumbing down our youth

A new book argues that popular culture is not dumbing down our youth; far from it. TV and video games are becoming more complex and more challenging.American academic and writer Steven Johnson, who teaches at New York University, argues that one of the most pervasive and wrong-minded modern myths is that popular culture is becoming dumber and making us more stupid. The opposite is true, he says.

'Everything Bad is Good for You: how popular culture is making us smarter', by Steven Johnson, is published by Penguin Press

(TES Friday, 20.05.05)

Too much TV "turns children into bullies"

Four-year-olds who watch excessive amounts of television are significantly more likely to become bullies, scientists reported in April 2005. Emotional support and interaction as well as mental stimulation during formative years were found to reduce the risks of later aggressive behaviour in children by around a third.

American children aged six to 11 who were categorised as bullies watched an average five hours of television per day compared to the 3.2 hours watched by non-bullies. Dr Frederick Zimmerman, of the University of Washington, Seattle, and lead author of the study, said: "Maximising cognitive stimulation and limiting television-watching in the early years of development might reduce children's subsequent risk of becoming bullies."

The researchers, whose work was published in the journal Archives of Pediatrics and Adolescent Medicine, studied 1,266 American four-year-olds. They found that the average amount of time spent watching television was 3.5 hours per day. Bullies watched on average five hours per day and non-bullies 3.2 hours.

(Telegraph, 5 April 2005)

Totting up a winner

If the number one social crime is smoking and the second eating too much cake, the third must, by a country mile, be allowing the under-fives to watch television. Not a week goes by without a new piece of research revealing the debilitating effects of parking tots in front of a screen for hours on end; a form of abuse which leads inevitably first to attention deficit disorder and then couch potato syndrome. The report linking smoking to children's television can only be moments away.

So imagine my delight when just last week my own contribution to the soaring statistics of delinquent toddlers began to show disturbing signs of becoming obsessed with television. A character on the eminently suitable CBeebies show Storymakers (it's set in a library! They make books! No one smokes!) called Superbaby was the culprit, and a chance mention of this in the office revealed another, similarly obsessed two-year-old. Further investigation uncovered more addicts. A small baby doll in a cape, superimposed on a primary-coloured cartoon background, flying around looking for sad people to help has transfixed the target two-year-old age group and that's not as easy as it might sound.

Superbaby ("she's super, she's dooper, she really is a trooper, Superbaby!"), makes only fleeting appearances among the large cast of characters that appear in Storymakers, but she's the only one to be aimed squarely at the bottom end of the two- to five-year-old target audience. Producer Tony Reed, aware of the huge span of ability, interest and awareness in that range, felt the show was skewing too old as it entered its fourth series and wanted to balance it with a story aimed at the younger ones. He began with picture books for two-year-olds and the knowledge that television for little ones means saying what you see and illustrating it, ideally with specially commissioned music to hold the story together. The idea of a superhero who's also a baby, doing good in exchange for a hug, pleased the team who felt it was witty enough to amuse the older audience and could also work for the tots.

As with all great childhood cult series, there's a shortage of supply. Only 15 four-minute episodes of Superbaby exist - it's relatively expensive for CBeebies, with its animation and special music, but it's judged to have worked well for the very, very young, insofar as the channel can tell. Clare Elstow, who heads the BBC's pre-school unit, points out that Barb doesn't have boxes or viewing diaries for the under-fives, so CBeebies is one of the last bastions of television not governed by the demon ratings. Perhaps that's why instinct, experience, quality and charm still feature largely in the production decisions.

Instead of numbers, the commissioners and producers rely on a network of nurseries, pre-schools and carers around the country to research their ideas. They have plenty of advisers, literacy guidelines, curriculum basics and early learning goals, but essentially this very expe rienced group of people learned how to make television for toddlers by spending their working lives trying to see through their eyes.

Since the launch of CBeebies, the BBC has produced the toddler juggernauts Balamory, the Shiny Show and Tikkabilla from scratch. Along with the big out-of-house commissions, Teletubbies, Tweenies and Fimbles, these shows have enough core learning principles to gladden the heart of any reviewer from the Department for Culture, Media and Sport (DCMS). More importantly the shows are adored by their audience for some basic reasons.

Toddler TV means long close-ups on human presenters' faces with plenty of eye contact and lip synching. Tikkabilla (it means Hopscotch in Hindi), a song and dance-heavy magazine show not dissimilar to Play School, was described by one nursery school carer as the "the best one-to-one contact some children get all day". Repetition is key for the preschooler but perhaps the most important thing is the principle that every time producers introduce a character, an animal, a shape, a number or a colour, it may be the first time a child has seen it. Never assume is the golden rule of preschool telly.

There is something scary about endeavouring to create telly addicts out of two-year-olds. Elstow admits that CBeebies, and its fellow pre-school channels such as Nick Jr, rely on parents and carers not only to show judgment over how much television they allow children to watch, but to watch it with them so they get the most out of it. However, she is scathing about the quality of the vast majority of research. "It is almost entirely based on children exposed to a whole range of TV, most of it not age-appropriate, so it's hardly surprising if they don't get much out of it.

"Research that looks specifically at quality pre-school programming has often found a pretty positive correlation with later achievement". And whether it be in answer to the DCMS review or not, the newest CBeebies shows all have a clear public service remit. Razzle Dazzle is aimed at developing listening and communication skills among children whose carers spend less and less time talking to them one-to-one. Boogie Beebies is about getting children to dance around - aimed at the couch potatoes - and Something Special, a project which started in BBC Education, uses Makaton sign language developed for children with learning difficulties. It's an enormous relief for us repeat social offenders to discover that the BBC intends to look after our toddlers so carefully. As Elstow points out: CBeebies is the one place left in the BBC which is still pleased to be called Auntie.

(The Guardian, 02.08.04)

No TV for children under three

The following appeared alongside a feature article Is television destroying our children's minds? inThe Guardian, 21.07.04.

Martin Large, author of Set Free Childhood
Children under three should not watch TV at all and should watch as little as possible up until the age of seven. From seven to 12, they should be allowed to watch suitable programmes, but with close parental supervision. They should be shielded from electronic media as much as possible - computers as well as TV.

TV is neurologically damaging - it is too fast-paced and over-stimulating and isn't at all creative; free time should be spent on play activities and story time. A study of 1,000 children in Manchester in the 1990s found that a fifth of the children observed had listening and attention problems which impeded their language development. The constant background noise of the television dulled their sense of hearing and the lack of verbal interaction with their parents meant they were unable to recognise basic words.

Dr Jeffrey Johnson, Associate professor of clinical psychology, Columbia University
The American Academy of Paediatrics recommends that parents should limit children's TV viewing time to two hours a day. Ideally, young children should not watch at all. Television is highly addictive and it is often very difficult for children to turn the set off. Parents can help by encouraging their children to have a wide range of interests - including physical exercise, interacting with other children, reading, art and music. Moderate viewing of educational programmes can help the development of language skills but even high-quality TV programming can be problematic if viewing displaces other important activities.

A child's mind is highly impressionable and the habits we establish during childhood often stay with us throughout our lifetimes. Our research indicates that adolescents who spend too much time watching TV are more likely to experience frequent sleep problems by early adulthood. We found that the risk could be reduced if teenagers restricted their viewing to less than an hour a day.

Liz Attenborough, manager of the Talk to Your Baby campaign at the National Literacy Trust
A lot of the research as to how children are affected by TV comes from America and as such is slightly misleading, in that British TV is quite different from US TV. There are lots of high-quality, carefully prepared programmes for early-years in this country. Programmes with a single gentle voice are most suitable for very young children - multiple voices are extremely confusing in the pre-school years.

It is actually more useful to watch videos of children's programmes as this fosters a certain familiarity with particular programmes and encourages anticipation and so on. No child learns a word from hearing something once and repetition is important in developing in language skills. It is also important to remember that it is OK for children to enjoy watching television - everyone needs to have some time to relax and be entertained.

The context in which TV-watching occurs is key - if you talk about a programme after watching it, children are likely to gain more from the experience.Constantly having a TV on in the background actually distracts adults and discourages them from interacting with their child which is one of the main ways that parents can help to foster and improve their children's linguistic skills and educational development.

Louise Emanuel, consultant child and adolescent psychotherapist, and head of the under-fives service at the Tavistock clinic, London
I don't think there is any formula - it's not a case of simply saying that so many hours a day is bad or whatever. There are times when TV can be useful and comforting and watching a favourite video can help a child who is in a transitional stage such as starting school.

Very small children really need a good-quality carer who is able to monitor and manage TV or whichever input they are exposed to: all external influences should be mediated. If parents discuss programmes afterwards, it helps to make a link between what is watched and their view of the world.

If a child is left in front of the TV for a long time without any adult presence, they may end up feeling quite glazed and stop taking much in; sometimes they need to be "rescued" from such a passive situation. It is important for whoever is looking after them to be aware of how they are reacting and whether or not they feel emotionally secure.

Parents assume that children's TV is OK but they need to be observant of quality and content and recognise that the story of the Three Little Pigs can be as frightening to a young child as the Blair Witch Project is to us: stories can be scary, but there is something about visual stimuli which comes straight into the room that can be particularly powerful.

(The Guardian, 21.07.04)

TV makes children grow up as telly tubbies

Children who watch television for more than two hours a day are more likely to grow into fat, unhealthy adults, according to a 26-year survey.

Regardless of family background, class, or if they were overweight as teenagers, those who watched lots of television consistently turned out to be heavier, more likely to smoke, with higher cholesterol levels and poorer physical fitness than those who watched less.

Parents should limit television viewing to between one and two hours a day, the researchers say - a target exceeded by half of the children and two thirds of adolescents in the study conducted in New Zealand.

Robert Hancox and colleagues from the University of Otago monitored 1,000 people born in 1972 and 1973 until they were 26. They gathered information on television viewing at the ages of 5, 7, 9, 13, 15, 17, and assessed the health of participants at the age of 26.

Just why television should be so damaging is unclear. One possibility is that by watching television a lot a child develops unhealthy habits of indolence that damage health. Another is that exposure to advertising increases risky behaviour such as smoking or an unhealthy diet.

The obvious explanation was that those who watched television longest were from poorer families with a worse diet. While this was true, the research team reports in The Lancet, correcting for those factors did not eliminate the link between watching television and health.

(Times, 16.07.2004)

TV can help language development

Watching TV can benefit the language development of young children - but parents and carers need to know the best ways to make the most of it.

The conclusion, which flies in the face of much media coverage about the impact of TV on youngsters, was reached by a research review commissioned by the National Literacy Trust (NLT).

To make the most of TV parents and carers should consider the following:

• Although watching the same video over and over may eventually impinge on a parent's sanity, the repetition and familiarity of words and phrases makes it easier for children to learn from them.
• For a child to learn from a TV programme or video they need the opportunity to talk about what they have watched with an adult - this is easier to do when an adult and child watch together.
• It is especially important that younger children watch programming designed for their age group. This is difficult when watching with an older brother or sister who may dominate the remote control. Set aside TV time for all siblings.
• When the programme or video has finished, turn it off. There is no substitute for talking to children.

Liz Attenborough, Manager of the NLT's Talk to Your Baby campaign said: "We wanted to know if television really is to blame for the difficulties in communication that many young children seem to have when they arrive in school.

"What we found is that there are many social and cultural factors that have an impact, but that in the right circumstances television may be useful for young children's language development.

"Television has been part of our popular culture for over 50 years and continues to be so, and by itself is neither the cause nor the answer to language issues. What is important is that parents and carers are aware of the pros and cons of TV watching and maximise the opportunities whilst diminishing potential risks."

(National Grid for Learning, 5.14.04)

Baby boom with a view

The idea came to Yuda Talit as he paced the floor in the wee small hours, his wailing grandson, Jonathan, in his arms.

For the Israeli media executive, the solution to soothing a restless infant was an instinctive one. A focus group of eight-month-old experts clad in romper suits then gave his plan a gurgling thumbs-up, and within weeks, the Baby Channel was born.

If you spent last night trying, and failing, to persuade your baby to sleep, read on.

The Baby Channel offers 24 hours a day, seven days a week programming for children aged three and under. As you wind your little one at 2am, you could be calming him with the help of the origami characters of the Italian show Qua Qua, or the animated creations of the Australian programme Art Alive.

The Baby Channel's mission is simple: to entertain the tiniest members of society as and when they desire, including when they will not sleep. Launched with a free two-month pilot scheme in January, it has taken nurseries across Israel by storm, with several thousand households now said to have taken out a subscription.

The company is also understood to have received inquiries from a host of European countries, including the UK, about the possibility of rolling out its service on these shores.

Before your mind fast forwards to the prospect of a better night's sleep, maybe you should stop the tape and pause for thought. Babies across Israel may be revelling in their very own television channel, and their parents obviously think the service is worth paying for. But not everyone is so impressed.

The Baby Channel has been dismissed by some as little more than an electronic nanny, a device with which parents are abnegating their duty to interact one-to-one with their child.

Despite these growing concerns, the viewing options for babes in arms are expanding rapidly in the UK. This January, Telewest launched Play and Learn, an interactive channel aimed at pre-school children which costs £2.99 a month and is available 24 hours a day. By the age of two, infants should be able to interact unaided with their TV set.

With the help of the remote control, your little ones can play simple interactive games, involving familiar characters such as Miffy the rabbit or Mole, Ratty and Toad from The Wind in the Willows. So baby might find himself helping Miffy match pictures or guiding Dora the Explorer through a maze while being chased by Swiper the fox.

Andrew Whiteman, the managing director of Kidstime Entertainment, the company which produces the channel's content, accepts that parents are likely to dump their babies in front of the TV while they get on with household tasks.

But the father of two insists that Play and Learn is of greater benefit to youngsters than other broadcasts which are not targeted at their age group. "The point of all games is that they are educational," he says. "We did a lot of research into that to make sure what we were doing had benefits other than kids staring at a screen. Children, even at a very young age, are aware of television and the internet, but there wasn't much out there that was aimed at them."

Maybe not when Play and Learn was launched, but today the market in on-screen baby entertainment is booming, and opinion on the consequences of this growing trend is split.

The Baby Bright videos were first launched in 2000 but next month it relaunches with an expanded range which includes DVDs. Designed for babies as young as three months, Baby Bright offers videos filled with colour, movement, sound, objects and music, based on scientific research into what really stimulates babies, and the range comes with some serious credentials. It is designed by Professor Annette Karmiloff-Smith, the head of the Neurocognitive Development Unit at the Institute of Child Health in London.

"Baby Bright makes babies truly active participants," says the professor, emphasising that the product is not about passive viewing. "Not only is this video full of attractive colours, movements, sounds, objects and music, but the content has been devised to take account of the latest scientific research into what really stimulates babies and how they structure their own brain development."

Infants in the US are offered a similar alternative with the Baby Einstein videos, which were launched in 1996 with the slogan "Great Minds Start Little". These are designed to introduce babies to the world around them by featuring real objects, music, art and language. One DVD is Baby MacDonaldT A Day on the Farm, which features live-action images and visuals of puppets, children and toys with the sights and sounds of a farm. Apparently working on the basis that education can never start too early, it combines traditional nursery rhymes with the music of Schubert, Schumann and Strauss.

More than one million Baby Einstein videos are believed to be sold in the US every year. It doesn't and shouldn't take the place of books or outdoor activities. TV is in addition to, not instead of an active life Critics have suggested that the videos could encourage pushy parents to "hot-house" their children, and push them to achieve too much too young.

If you are in any doubt as to the industry feeling for the potential market for on-screen baby entertainment, the fact that the Walt Disney Company purchased Baby Einstein in 2001 gives some indication as to how this sector is expected to expand.

But experts across the globe are becoming increasingly concerned about the effects of television viewing on young children. A report published in the April issue of the US medical journal Pediatrics, found that each hour of television watched by one to three-year-olds after the acceptable level of two hours a day increased the risk of attention difficulties and concentration by almost 10 per cent in later life.

The research has been questioned by TV producers, but its findings echo growing concerns in the UK about the effects of the goggle box on babies.

Liz Attenborough is manager of the National Literary Trust's Talk To Your Baby Campaign, which was set up last year amid concerns that increasing numbers of children were starting school with poorly developed communication skills.

The campaign has reviewed all available research on the subject of babies and television, and is in no doubt that excessive viewing can hinder the development of a child's verbal skills, which has a knock-on detrimental effect on their literary abilities. A survey of head teachers by the trust in 2002 found that more children were arriving at nursery education aged three without the language skills appropriate for their age. Vocabulary was considered to be less well developed than five years ago, with a reduced capacity to listen.

Attenborough accepts that such research reflects the views of adults, rather than the children studied, but says infants should only be allowed to watch television in moderation, preferably in the company of an adult who is also viewing.

The Literary Trust's concern lies with the question of what children are missing out on while they are watching television. "Children would probably prefer a good half hour quality play with a parent," she says simply.

However, a spokeswoman for the National Family & Parenting Trust believes many parents are aware of the dangers posed by TV targeted at babies in the time-poor, double-income household. "Most parents we speak to don't want to put very young children in front of television or computer screens for long times," she says.

Ayr-based psychologist Agnes Steven, argues that this is the best policy to adopt. "Children will become slow developers verbally because they don't need to talk," she says of infants left to spend long periods in front of the screen. "If people live in fantasy from childhood, once they have to start interacting with people they have real problems in terms of communication skills."

However, Dr Robin Campbell, a specialist in the intellectual development of pre-school children who lectures at the University of Stirling's Psychology Department, is less damning of the industry that is out to attract your baby's attention.

"Should we worry about children spending excessive amounts of time watching screens or reading?" he says. "Probably not. It is good training for school and work." He points out that in later childhood and adulthood, most people now have to spend many hours a day in front of a screen.

Campbell adds that a very low percentage of children in the UK are diagnosed with attention deficit problems, and suggests that contrary to the US Pediatrics report, TV-viewing may have unmeasured benefits.

This seems to be the school of thought adhered to by those behind the Baby Channel. Interviewed by the Jerusalem Post, Ron Isaak, its creative director, was quoted as saying: "It doesn't and shouldn't take the place of books or of outdoor activities. TV is in addition to, not instead of an active life.

"Although there are some negatives associated with television, with its recognised junk and bad programming, TV has changed the world, and it can be a wonderful way to educate."

If you don't agree, hide the remote control. Television for babies is on its way to a living room near you soon.

(Scotsman, 30.04004)

Television escapes blame

Television has escaped blame by parents for their children's bad behaviour in a survey contradicting the conclusions drawn by many professionals. The survey of 1,000 parents, conducted as part of the campaign for the Barney Best Behaviours range of toys and videos, found only one percent blamed televison for behaviour, while 70 percent of parents said they believed children's manners are not what they used to be and 94 percent admitted that children learned most of their behaviour from their parents.

(Nursery World, 22 April 2004)

TV 'rewires' developing brains, researches fear

Young children who watch television face an increased risk of attention-deficit problems by school age, a study has found, suggesting that television might overstimulate and permanently 'rewire' the developing brain. For every hour of television watched daily, two groups of children - ages 1 and 3 - faced a 10 percent increased risk of having attention problems at age 7.

The findings bolster previous research showing that television can shorten attention spans and support American Academy of Pediatrics recommendations that children younger than 2 not watch television.

"The truth is there are lots of reasons for children not to watch television. Other studies have shown it to be associated with obesity and aggressiveness, too" said lead author Dr Dimitri Christakis, a researcher at Children's Hospital and Regional Medical Center in Seattle.

The study, appearing in the April issue of Pediatrics, involved 1,345 children who participated in government-sponsored national health surveys. Their parents were questioned about their children's TV viewing habits and rated their behaviour at age 7 on a scale similar to measures used in diagnosing attention-deficit disorders.

In a Pediatrics editorial, educational psychologist Jane Healy said the study "is important and long overdue but needs to be followed up to confirm and better explain the mechanisms that might be involved."

(The Washington Times, 5 April 2004)

Visit http://www.aap.org/advocacy/releases/tvapril.pdf

"Next, two bits of more worrying news: no one is yet sure about the effects of too much TV on the under-twos; and for all young children there's considerable difference between the effects of 'appropriate' and 'inappropriate' viewing.

"This review [commissioned by the National Literacy Trust] provides many helpful pointers for parents and teachers, but if we are to learn more about how the huge social phenomenon of television affects our children's future capacity for learning, we really need a lot more focused research."

(Times Educational Supplement, 2 April 2004)

Family meals are fast becoming a thing of the past, a study has found. Karen Pasquali Jones, editor of Mother and Baby magazine, which carried out the survey, said: The trend for toddlers to eat alone in front of the TV is a recipe for disaster. Toddlers need the experience of sitting up at the table. It not only encourages them to eat properly, it improves their speech and social skills."

(Daily Mail, 31 March 2004)

Children's progress 'hit by TV'

Some argue the very young should not watch TV Young children who watch too much television have impaired language development, research suggests. A review of studies on the subject for the National Literacy Trust says children aged two to five may benefit from good-quality educational TV.

The effect is enhanced when programmes are watched and discussed with an adult, said researcher Dr Robin Close. But a lot of viewing, especially of programmes intended for adults, is associated with slower development. She advises "strictly limiting the exposure of under-twos to television".

The chief inspector of England's schools, David Bell, has complained that some five year olds cannot speak properly when they start school.

Less expressive
The research review was published on Monday to coincide with a conference the trust has organised in London, called TV is Here to Stay. Dr Close examined the findings of studies on English language development from a number of countries. She found that, in the early years, there was evidence that attention and comprehension, language, knowledge of letter sounds and storytelling all benefited from high-quality educational programming.

Children who were heavy television viewers were less able to express themselves, though she says "specific cause and effect relationships have not been identified". For those aged under two, the literature was far less certain about the benefits of "the current crop of educational television".

"Some evidence suggests that children under 22 months are simply incapable of acquiring information from television, or learning first words, and can only do so via interactions with adults," Dr Close reported.

Too much stimulation
Watching programmes aimed at a general or adult audience was associated with poor language development in pre-school children. Researchers had found that the best TV involved content appropriate to children's ages, and which let them watch, interact and learn with adults.

Conversely, a negative experience went with excessive stimuli for the under-twos, complex narratives, watching with older siblings and watching adult programmes with adults. "Where televisions are located in a child's bedroom, this is associated with reduced opportunities for co-viewing with parents and also with increased viewing of general or adult programming.

"The newness of the trend means that research has yet to fully explore the effects of children's viewing and behaviour patterns while watching television in their bedrooms."

A recent survey suggested that nearly a third of all children under the age of four have a television in their bedroom.

Limits
Dr Close said children watched more TV in poorer families where parents had little education. Boys were more likely to watch than girls. Children who spent less time at home, or watched with older children, especially in poorer homes, were less likely to see educational television.

"Carers should limit exposure for the under-twos in favour of other one-to-one language enhancing activities," she advised. "Given the uncertainty within the literature, the cautious guidance of the American Academy of Pediatrics, which advises strictly limiting the exposure of under-twos to television, seems prudent."

The academy says it "does not recommend television for children age two or younger" and for older children, no more than one to two hours per day of educational, non-violent programmes.

(BBC News, 17 March 2004)

Under-twos who watch TV 'risk stunted speech'

Toddlers should be banned from watching television because it can stunt their development, literacy experts warn. Young children become 'mesmerised' by the screen but cannot understand what they are watching and even 'educational' shows such as Teletubbies may cripple their language skills.

Speech experts believe many children get little opportunity to develop their verbal skills by interacting with adults and siblings. Now a report for the National Literacy Trust has laid bare the apparent damage that watching television can inflict. It points to evidence that preschool children who watch shows aimed at a general audience have weaker language skills.

The independent charity runs the Talk To Your Baby campaign, which has received Government funding. Its latest report, compiled by literacy expert Dr Robin Close, supports the advice of the American Academy of Paediatrics that viewing should be restricted among children under two.

There is growing concern that children's speaking skills are at an all-time low. David Bell, head of education watchdog Ofsted, has blamed lazy parents for using television as a 'babysitter.' Surveys suggest that two in five children under four have a set in their bedrooms. And Alan Wells, director of the Basic Skills Agency, sparked a furore when he said young children talk in 'grunts'.

Dr Close says in her report that if children watch television, an adult should supervise them, explain key words and discuss the programme afterwards.

"Some evidence suggests that children under 22 months are simply incapable of acquiring information from television, or learning first words, and can only do so via interactions with adults."

Her report, which draws on research by academics in Britain and abroad, will be unveiled at the National Literacy Trust's conference on Monday. James Law, professor of language and communication sciences at City University, will tell delegates that interaction between parent and child must come first.

"The idea that shoving a child in front of a television is going to teach them anything beyond movement of sound and light is silly," he said. "They get mesmerised by it and it is too chaotic for them. Parents think that because they may use the medium to learn about things, children can take from it in the same way. But it takes a level of sophistication that little children don't have."

He added: "Very young children need social interaction."

(Daily Mail, 13 March 2004)

Telly has ways of making kids talk

Young children are not couch potatoes: watching television is more likely to make them dance, sing and chatter to the on-screen characters, a conference will be told next week.

TV is often cited as one of the reasons why children have poor communications skills. But speakers at the event, organsied by the early language campaign, Talk To Your Baby, will argue that the medium can be a powerful way of helping children become literate.

Anne Wood, co-creator of Teletubbies, said children will immediately engage if a programme catches their interest. "Four-year-olds will start jumping about, especially with the Boohbahs," she said. The Boohbahs, colourful magical atoms whose movement is stopped and started by children saying the word "Boohbah", are a new favourite on ITV.

Guidelines on teaching speaking and listening were issued to all schools last term, and the Government has recently commissioned a training programme for preschool practitioners. David Bell, chief inspector, has said he is concerned that the speaking skills of children are at an all-time low. At the conference, researchers and programme-makers are to discuss how TV can contribute to language development.

Dr Jackie Marsh of the University of Sheffield will relate how she gave nursery children media boxes to take home, which included a video of a TV programme, such as Teletubbies, and a range of language games and reading material. She said: "Children would talk about the TV programme and develop play around the characters."

One box had dressing-up clothes so children could pretend to be Tinky Winky, one of the Teletubbies. Children were asked to write instructions to mend Noo Noo, the vacuum cleaner, who had broken down. "Children at nursery were highly motivated, particularly boys. It is about using TV effectively."

She also challenges the idea that watching TV is passive. "We did a study in Sheffield and only one child out of 44 families sat passively in front of the TV. All the other parents said children would be dancing, singing, talking to the characters or playing with dolls. Children are not couch potatoes."

Anne Wood said that TV is not comparable to a classroom, and should not be treated as such. "Once you allow the debate to become TV versus learning then you increase anxiety to the point where support for the proper development of TV dries up."

(Times Educational Supplement, 12 March 2004)

Should the tots be tuning in?

How much TV should your toddler watch? Is it OK to park your two-year-old in front of the set for a few hours? Does it matter if they prefer Tinky Winky to Peter Rabbit? A recent raft of polls and surveys suggests that very young children may be being harmed by too much goggling at the box, especially if they are watching on their own.

Eighty-nine per cent of nursery staff, in a survey by the charity I CAN, which helps children with speech and language difficulties, were worried that those difficulties were on the increase among pre-school children. The survey covered only 120 workers, but was said by those in the profession to reflect a growing concern. Lack of time spent talking to children, the use of TV to pacify a child and the trend for parents to talk on behalf of their child instead of letting the child have a say were all blamed for the downward trend.

The education world was alerted to the problem when David Bell, the Chief Inspector of Schools, said that many children led "disrupted and dishevelled" early lives and were too often left in front of the television. Alan Wells, the director of the Basic Skills Agency, stoked the fire. Attacking a culture in which parents let children sit in front of the TV or computer for hours, rather than talk to them, he complained that children's conversational skills had declined to the level of a "daily grunt".

Now, a digest of all recent research, compiled by the National Literacy Trust, suggests that until we know more about how much television is enough - and the effects of background TV in particular - viewing should be kept to a minimum, especially among the under-twos. Heavy viewers are more likely to be linguistically under-developed, according to some of the evidence, although a direct causal link hasn't been established.

"People have reported going into homes where the TV has been on loudly all day - and talking opportunities are being missed if that's the case," says the Trust's director, Neil McLelland. "We're not as good as we should be at giving parents simple, empowering skills. We should be getting across the pleasure of, say, watching with your child, as well as the benefits".

Television viewing for the very young is best done with mum - or dad - the digest suggests, but that isn't always happening. This means that little ones are almost certainly tuning in to bedroom scenes in 6pm soaps, or just watching pictures and words that are too fast-paced or plainly unsuitable for them. It isn't a good idea to have television sets in bedrooms, either, says the digest. Yet an NOP survey in 2003 found that one in three children under four has a TV in the bedroom. Who is responsible for this state of affairs? Making instant judgements about what or who is to blame is unhelpful, says James Law, a professor in the language and communication science at City University. "TV is not the villain of the piece," he says. "Very young children need social interaction, but later on they can watch TV and learn from it."

But if there are homes where there is severe or complete cultural impoverishment - not a book in sight - and outrageously low expectations, there are also homes with impossibly high ambitions for their offspring. Middle-class parents with very high expectations may, by working long hours, lose touch with the language development of their child. The ideal, says Professor Law, is to find out where your child is on the language stepladder and provide some "scaffolding" - giving them help to build on what they know. That can be difficult if you're always out and the nanny is Czech. As a result, a lot of worried parents are buying books on how to teach children to read.

The TV executives taking part in a big conference next week are used to the flak but are often bemused by it, arguing that they can't take the postition of a parent or carer themselves, whatever some people would like. "No programme-maker wants anyone to watch their shows 24 hours a day," says Clare Elstow, head of pre-school TV at CBBC. "People wouldn't leave toddlers alone with other toys - why is TV any different? The viewing experience is enhanced so much if it is accompanied." The BBC's children's digital channel repeats its programmes in four-hour blocks, so that parents can get out and about and still catch favourite shows.

At this public-service end of the TV spectrum the programme-makers take enormous trouble to ensure that their output does not offend and that they are doing what they can to aid children's development. Some are so committed that one wouldn't be surprised if they read the whole of the foundation years curriculum before breakfast. Anne Wood, co-creator of Teletubbies and the founder of Rag Doll Productions, has three employees devoted to visiting schools, working with parents, videoing children watching the programmes and keeping in touch with 25 families to monitor feedback.

Iain Lauchlan, the head of Tell Tale (Tweenies and Boo), routinely consults a child education expert and a psychologist before he sending off a script. Every programme has a "reason for being", he says. Tweenies came about because he had noticed children aged three to five watching soaps that were not aimed at them. They wanted to have their own soaps. "Vicarious" television watching is condemned in the digest compiled by the National Literacy Trust. Now, says Lauchlan, this age group can be entertained by the Tweenies - their peers - and lock into the characters. "We can raise any issue - telling lies, keeping up socially, dying," he says. "But it's not overt."

When Wood created Teletubbies she wanted to tailor-make a programme for the very young. The storm over whether Teletubbies stunted children's educational development by having its characters talk in baby language was partly about the fact that it replaced another favourite - Playdays - and had the audacity to do away with an adult explaining what was going on. That naturally made it less appealing to some adults. Educationalists and psychologists condemned the monosyllabic utterances of Tinky Winky, Dipsy, Laa Laa and Po.

Wood has always defended the language in the programme. As well as the teletubby voices, it had a narrator, nursery rhymes and voice trumpets, with a variety of accents and languages.

In a re-run of these old battles, though, the Trust digest questions the extent to which the under-twos understand the content of Teletubbies, as opposed to being entertained by it. Other research on this age group says that it is difficult for toddlers to separate emotion (pleasure) from cognition (knowing) so the digest's conclusion might be over-harsh.

Teletubbies has won some academic support. Jackie Marsh of the University of Sheffield, who is speaking at next week's conference, says the programme dovetails well with children's need to build on what they already know. In other words, it makes good use of repetition. Marsh ran a study on children aged three and four in two inner-city nurseries in the north of England, which showed up differences between parents' and teachers' perceptions of the programme. The parents were positive and the teachers more negative. But the teachers' views changed when it was decided to organise Teletubbies activities in the classroom. The teachers found that children they had categorised as having problems with writing were enthusiastic when asked to write about Teletubbies. One of the boys couldn't wait to get to the writing table and once there wrote a number of recipes for Tubby toast, Tubby burgers and Tubby pizza. Almost every child talked about how the programme related to their home lives, which was their favourite character, and which videos they had.

This weaving of threads between children's home lives and school is one way in which TV can be used to develop language - and also literacy. For the National Literacy Trust, accentuating the positive will be important in the battle to tame the monster in the corner, because it wants parents to think about how they use TV rather than to feel beleaguered and defensive. All the same, it might be best not to buy that extra set for the bedroom.

(The Independent, 11 March 2004)

You send them to school to learn to read, write and do sums. But is that enough? No, say the experts. Today's children also need to be taught another art - conversation.

In the past we thought that being a chatterbox was a vice. Now it may be considered a virtue. Children as young as five are to be given lessons in telling stories, disagreeing politely and adapting conversations to suit the situation. Silence is not necessarily golden - it can be burden.

"Talking is a pretty important life skill to have," says Sue Horner, Head of English for the Qualifications and Curriculum Authority. No one would argue with that - but surely talking, like walking, is something that comes naturally? In fact studies have shown that babies learn to speak in the same way the birds learn to sing - by interacting with their mothers, not by just imitating them.

But today's parents use television as a babysitter rather than talking to their children.

New evidence from the Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation in the US says that one in four American children under two has a TV in their bedroom. And a study by nappy manufacturers Pampers suggests we're heading down the same path. Four out of 10 British children aged three and under now have TV sets in their bedrooms.

But to help children speak the telly has to be turned off.

Liz Attenborough, of the Talk To Your Baby campaign, says: "Young children need silence to hear language, time to process it and the opportunity to speak it. These days there is a lot of background noise from TVs and less talking. But you can't interact with a TV or a computer game the way you can with a person."

"There is growing evidence from teachers that children are coming into schools with far fewer language skills than previously. They don't have the vocabulary to make decisions. If they're offered orange or apple juice, they won't know which to pick - all they know is "drink".

"They're not used to conversation. They interrupt and talk when they're not supposed to. Kids need language skills to do well at school. If they don't have them, they fall behind very quickly."

So what's the best way to get your child chatting?

Speech therapist Clare Geldard is services manager of children's communication charity I CAN's Early Years programme. She says: "Start showing your baby things as soon as it's born - point out Mummy, Daddy, Grandad and the dog. Talk while feeding, while changing nappies and when you go for a walk.

"Watch their eyes - see where they're looking and tell them what they're seeing."

Attenborough adds that babies need to see parents' expressions while they're talking.

"With old-fashioned prams you could walk along and talk to your baby. They could see you and you could see them. With modern buggies, babies can see a lot of the world but they can't see you helping them to understand it."

As children get older and find their voices, says Geldard, you can start helping them practise their new skills. Nursery rhymes in particular are a good way to get kids involved.

"Rhyme, rhythm and repetition help children learn," she says. "Read the rhymes to your child and get them to join in. A good way is to read the first line but leave off the last word. Humpty Dumpty sat on the -what? They should shout "wall".

"Even very young children who can't talk yet will enjoy looking at books if you explain the pictures. Then you could relate those pictures to real objects. "Look, there's a dog. Is he like our dog? How is he different?"

"Or you could add actions. If you're reading The Very Hungry Caterpillar eat and move the way he moves."

Geldard believes TV can be educational if it's used sparingly.

"Don't have it on all the time. Switch it on for a specific programme, watch it with your child and turn it off once it's finished."

"While you're watching, talk to your child about what's going on. Ask questions and give him or her time to respond. Refer to the programme afterwards. Perhaps something happened to a character that has also happened to you or your child. Get them talking about that."

Geldard and Attenborough agree that while limited teleivison won't hurt, children learn far more from real people.

"There's nothing wrotong with TV, interactive toys or computers," says Geldard. "All these things have their place.

"But nothing can replace the parent, grandparent or carer sitting down with a child. And there's nothing like the wonderful feeling you get when your child starts to respond."

(Take-a-Break, 22 January 2004)

Does too much TV harm your child?

Disturbing new research claims we're raising a generation of toddler telly addicts with some kids hooked on the box by the age of two. This, the researchers say, could be stunting both their speech and learning skills.

Many youngsters are left to watch TV or videos alone which often teaches them very little because kids need interaction with other people to fully develop their social skills. Researchers in America discovered that while eight in 10 children read or are read to for 50 minutes a day, the same proportion spend almost two-and-a-half hours glued to the screen. There are also concerns over obesity levels as toddlers become junior couch potatoes.

But many beleive that if used responsibly, TV can be a useful educational tool. Here, two sides of the toddler TV debate put their views...

Yes - too much TV can harm you child
Liz Attenborough, Manager of the Talk To Your Baby campaign

Young children need someone to talk to them as they develop. And they need someone to listen to them as they learn to speak themselves. This doesn't happen sitting in front of the television. Watching the box requires only a very small part of children's brains - and it develops an equally small part.

Just the same as with your arms and legs, if you don't use parts of your brain they won't develop properly. Research suggests that children learn more in the first three years of their life than at any other time. That's why it is vital to use as much of the brain as possible at this time.

The fact is that watching TV is passive. A two-way exchange between an adult and a child will use much more of their brain - looking, thinking, reacting and responding, not just sitting back and staring at a flickering screen. Unbelievably, some children starting nursery appear never to have had a one-to-one conversation with anyone at all.

British children's TV may be the best in the world but too much is bad. TV and videos don't involve children actively and too much slows development. The single most important thing for a child's development is playing with parents.

There are many ways to keep young children happy - and one of the simplest is taking the time to talk to them. Just like walking, talking is something they must learn. And part of talking means someone listening and talking back. They simply can't get that with TV.

It's easy to entertain young children when the television is off, even if only for a short time each day. Talk about theirfavourite toys while you're playing. Talk about things you're doing together, such as preparing a meal or unpacking the shopping - and give them time to talk to you.

If given the time, even newborn babies make noises in response to their parents speaking to them. It's never too soon to talk to your baby. Start as soon as they're born and look at them while you're talking. They learn to smile from imitating you. And that's how they'll learn to talk.

Learning to communicate is one of the most important skills a young child has to learn in their preschool years. Talking and listening go a long way towards that and are fun for both parent and child. Parents are their child's first and most important teachers. So turn off the TV and give it a go.

No - TV isn't harmful
Paul Smith, Head of CBBC on air

Television is a window on the world for young children. For many, it's their first glimpse of life outside the home and as such is very valuable. And as far as preschool children are concerned, almost all our programmes are about learning through play. So even something like the Teletubbies - which is aimed at very, very young children - is actually about language development. The words the Teletubbies speak and the noises they make are about persuading young children to take their first steps with language.

It evolves to other areas of development with programmes like the Tweenies, which is aimed at the next age group up. This is about interaction with other human beings. It explores a wide range of issues such as sharing and looking at different cultures - things children might come across at nursery schools and play groups. These programmes are very carefully thought through to introduce children to new concepts and situations that they may come across as they venture out of the home.

Clearly at this young age the concepts are simple and straightforward but they are there to build on the experiences children have had so far and hopefully extend their development much more quickly. But it's important this is not the whole thing and only part of their development.

Everything is new to young children and when they watch TV they're often seeing something for the first time. But as they get older there's a point where it's not so easy to engage them, so you have to combine entertainment with education and information in order to get those children to choose to watch those shows.

There's absolutely no point in making an educational show if nobody will watch it. When kids reach seven or eight they're choosing what they want to watch. If they don't feel it's interesting they won't stay with it- and they might go to something else that isn't good for them.

These days telelvision is part of the real life of a child and it's not necessarily a negative thing. In fact, we hope it's a positive thing.

But reading, going to the theatre and cinema, interacting with friends, parents and other people should all be part of childhood, too. So integrating TV into childrens' experiences is not a bad thing as long as it doesn't dominate them.

(Daily Mirror, 1 November 2003)

Hi-tech presents 'stifle imagination'

Parents who splash out on expensive hi-tech Christmas gifts such as DVD players for pre-school children are stifling their imagination and creativity, a children's charity warned in December 2003. NCH Cymru said that the average child under four spent nearly five hours a day watching television and videos or playing computer games.

Spokesman Patrick Legge said parents might think they were being generous, but in fact they were losing sight of what young children needed and enjoyed, such as painting sets, play costumes and traditional games and toys. He argued that while technology was sometimes a useful educational tool, it was no replacement for two-way interaction with adults and other children, and that time, attention, encouragement and "the freedom to play imaginatively" were the most valuable gifts parents could give.

(Nursery World, 18 December 2003)

TV advertising helps pre-schoolers understand cultural differences

The Media Initiative for Children has developed an early years initiative which aims to combine television advertisements with interaction in pre-schools to help children aged three to five to have a greater understanding of their physical, racial and cultural differences. A pilot programme involving children in ten pre-schools in Northern Ireland is running alongside three 60-second television advertisements broadcast in Northern Ireland and in the Republic of Ireland. Four animated characters are seen playing in a park and the programme provides opportunities for discussion around the basic feelings - happy, sad, frightened and angry. The initiative has evolved from research carried out in 2002 by Dr Paul Connolly of the University of Ulster into the cultural and political awareness of children aged three to six in Northern Ireland.

(Nursery World, 19 February 2004)

More than half of American children are hooked on television by the age of two and master the use of a computer not long after learning to walk, according to research.

68% of two-year-old children spend an average of 125 minutes a day using a screen of one type or another, a nationwide study by the Henry J Kaiser Family Foundation, a private group devoted to promoting health, has found. "It's not just teenagers who are wired up and tuned in, it's babies as well," Vicky Rideout of the foundation, said.

The report also proved what most parents know instinctively - television watching is linked to reading skills. "These findings definitely raise a red flag about the impact of television on children's reading," Ms Rideout said.

59% of children under two watch television every day and 42% watch videos or DVDs. "These are astonishing data. Today's pre-schoolers are starting to use media much younger than we thought," Ellen Wartella, Dean of the College of Communications at the University of Texas, said.

The report's authors offered parents a powerful tool to reduce the effect of television on their children. Imposing rules on how much they watch and what they watch, reduces consumption, they found. Children whose parents set rules spent an average of an hour a day watching compared with 90 minutes for those whose parents did not. 10% of parents impose no restrictions on what their children watch, and 21% have no rules on how much time is spent watching television.

The study may also have underestimated the amount of television watched as it was based on self-reporting by 1,065 parents of children aged 6 months to six years who were interviewed randomly by phone.

Some comfort could be found in the percentage of children still reading or being read to - but these traditional activities are less popular than their screen competitors. About eight out of 10 children read or are read to for an average of 49 minutes a day, while 83% devote 142 minutes of the day to screen media. The study exposed the connection between television consumption and reading habits, showing that only 59% of children who live in homes where the television is on constantly or most of the time read every day.

Only about a quarter of children aged more than two in homes where the television stays on are able to read, compared with 36% in the other category. However, the study found no causal link between television watching and reading. More of the children who could not read had parents without a college education, indicating that the television may not be the cause.

American parents are overwhelmingly convinced of the benefits of screen media for their children. 72% think that computers are, on balance, helpful, and 43% regard the television as mostly helpful.

Nearly two-thirds of the parents of four to six-year-olds admitted that their sons had imitated aggressive behaviour on television and 35% of daughters had shown the same tendency.

The authors urged parents who want their children to watch less television to remove televisions from their bedrooms, noting that more than a third of children under six have a television by their bed and 27% have a video or DVD player.

Key statistics about TVs in America

• Only 1% of American children live in households without a television
• Half of American households with children under 6 have a videogame player, 73% have a home computer and twice as many have internet access as have a newspaper subscription
• 66% of those under six live in homes where the television is on at least half the time. In 36% of homes a set is on almost constantly
• Children aged 4 to 6 are already proficient computer users and spend slightly more than an hour a day at the terminal; 40% can load a CD-Rom
• Among children under three, 27% have used a computer without a parent's help

(Times, 30 October 2003)

One in three children under four "has a television"

A third of children under four now have a television in their bedrooms, a survey has found, and pre-school children typically watch more than two hours of television a day. In the survey, 750 parents with children aged up to six were interviewed by NOP for the Early Learning Centre, a toy retailer.

It found 86% of those children watched up to six hours of television every day. 7% of youngsters watched more than six hours a day, and an equal proportion never watched it. Parents agreed that the children spent significant amounts of time in front of the television, with 69% believing the youngsters watched more programmes than they did at the same age.
The survey also found that 81% of under-sixes owned computer games and more than a third of children aged five or six played video games regularly.
But almost 60% of parents said their children spent more time playing outside than they had as children. The survey found they averaged 3.6 hours a day during the summer months.

(Independent, 3 September, 2003)

More than 75% of five to 16-year-olds have their own TV and half have a video in their room, according to a survey by research group Childwise.

Three out of four also own a mobile phone - the figure rising to 82% of 11 to 16-year-olds - and most have a CD player. Almost nine in ten children have access to a computer at home, while a third have their own terminal. A decade ago, just 18% had a home PC.

Despite the growing number of distractions, children are more aware of the world around them. The poll of 1,200 found many sacrificed light-hearted TV programmes for current affairs, with the September 11 attacks thought to be the catalyst. The number tuning in to breakfast programmes has risen by 8% since 1994.

However, Children's BBC and Nickelodeon are the favourites for after-school viewing. The researchers said multi-channel TV was changing children's viewing habits. A spokesman said: "Years ago, there were only four basic channels and children's TV was restricted to a couple of hours in the afternoon. Now it is 24 hours a day."

One pastime has survived the technology boom. A fifth of children read for pleasure each day - the same proportion as a decade ago.

(Metro, 28 May 2003)

Children losing out on sleep as computers replace bedtime stories

Up to two thirds of children are not getting enough sleep and have missed out on as much as 4,500 hours by their seventh birthday according to research published on 1 May 2003.

The findings reveal a dramatic shift in nightly routines, with one in 10 of the 500 parents surveyed admitting they had never read their children a bedtime story. Instead, children are now falling asleep to television shows, computer games and videos.

Sleep deprivation expert Professor Jim Horne, of Loughborough University, said: Bedrooms are changing from places of rest and tranquillity to places where there are lots of things to keep children awake.

"I would not allow a child to have a TV or a computer in their room - or at least put firm limits on their use. Evidence suggests that adequate night-time sleep is just as important as healthy eating and regular exercise for children to develop."

More than half the 559 parents of under-15s in the Silentnight Beds poll said their children had TVs. Those youngsters were two and a half times more likely to spend less than eight hours in bed. Children without TVs were twice as likely to be read a bedtime story every night and far more likely to get enough sleep.

One in eight children sleep less than the amount recommended for adults, rising to a quarter for those whose parents are out at work. Most parents agreed that lack of sleep impaired their children's performance and behaviour - but two thirds were not even aware how much sleep they should get.

Experts say two-year-olds should get 13 hours, falling to 11 hours for six-year olds. But the actual time they slept was between one hour and two and a half hours less.

(Guardian, 1 May 2003)

The TV habits of pre-school children

First there were teenagers, then tweenagers, now there are tinys - pre-school children aged three to five who are being treated like mini-adults. Their parents let them make more and more of their own decisions. They watch television for two hours or more a day but play outside for less than an hour. They also exert power over family purchases.

Research conducted by BMRB International for Pepper's Ghost, a children's television company, has found that 76% of pre-school children watched two hours or more of television every day. Some 14% are glued to the television for more than three hours.

With a typical 10 hours spent sleeping, and two to three hours at nursery school, less than an hour a day is given over to the activities the parents say their children enjoy the most: playing outside, being read to, playing on their own and drawing or painting.

More than 30% of parents also said they spend £25 or more each week on clothes and toys.

Pester power acquired significance in the late 1970s when baby boomers were indulged by parents enjoying the strong economy and easy credit. Now that generation is passing the culture on to its own small children, according to psychologist Sue Keane. "People now worry what their pre-school children wear and give them brands. What children want is influenced partly by peer pressure and TV adverts," she says. About 64% of parents said they played with their children for less than two hours a day.

The research also highlighted the decline in toys such as dolls and cars, which are being replaced by time spent playing on a computer.

(Guardian, 28 March 2003)

Parents who think their babies are blissfully unaware of what's happening on TV should think again. A new study has revealed that infants as young as one may be affected by high drama, or swayed by commercials. Researchers at Tufts and Stanford universities in the US gave babies a toy, then showed them a film of an adult playing with the same toy. When the adult feigned fear of the toy, the baby would avoid it, and was more likely to scowl or appear worried. But when the adult expressed enthusiasm for the toy, so did the child.

(The Week, 15 February 2003)

TV programme makers target new-born babies

New-born babies will be the next target for makers of television programmes. 

Peter Orton, the multi-millionaire owner of the company which produces Bob the Builder, believes there is a gap in the market for educational television aimed at zero to 18-month-old viewers.

The chairman of the television company Hit Entertainment plans to set up a conference later this year so programme-makers and education experts can discuss the matter. He said: "Everybody realises there is a huge learning period for children from zero to 18 months, but nobody is making anything for them. Those kids are like sponges at that age, and there's a great opportunity there. That might scare people, but it is a very interesting area."

Mr Orton said it was too early to know exactly what form the programmes would take, but they would be simpler than current shows such as Teletubbies, which is aimed at three-year-olds.

He hopes to explore the potential of TV for babies with the help of the research centre Futurelab, which was set up last year by the National Endowment for Science, Technology and the Arts with support from the Department for Education and Skills. Mr Orton is a board member of the laboratory.

The idea has horrified some teachers and education experts. Eric Spear, president of the National Association of Head Teachers, said that children were already arriving in school with weak social skills because of television.

Research by early years expert Dr Sally Ward has demonstrated a link between television viewing and the delayed acquisition of speech in young children, while a US study published this week found that toddlers with televisions in their rooms were more likely to be obese.

However, Neil McClelland, director of the National Literacy Trust, said that programmes made specifically for under 18-month-olds could be a valuable aid to babies' linguistic development, providing they were not left alone to watch them.

(TES, 7 June 2002)

Baby Bright 2, an educational video for babies as young as three months, is being launched with the promise that it will "develop the cognitive processes of the brain" and "maximise and lengthen a baby's attention span".

The video's producers, Just Entertainment, say that it "heralds a new concept in baby development" and helps "babies to build and develop their powers of logic, reasoning and observation". They have pledged to donate royalties to the Great Ormond Street Hospital Children's Charity.

Critics believe that educational videos for babies are, at best, a waste of money and, at worst, a source of worry for over-anxious parents desperate to help their children to get ahead of their peers.

Similar videos are hugely popular in the United States where more than a million Baby Einstein videos are selling a year. In Britain Baby Bright, a less ambitious version of Baby Bright 2, has sold 30,000 copies.

Professor Annette Karmiloff Smith, head of neurocognitive development at the Institute of Child Health in London, who has advised on the video, said that it was based on scientific evidence showing that babies could demonstrate an interest in images on a screen from birth onwards. She said that babies and parents could learn much from the video.

She said that the video was meant for parents to watch with their child and that no  baby should be left in front of the television on its own. This temptation to use the video as an alternative to playing with a child worries critics.

Asha Phillips, a child psychotherapist and a member of the association for Infant Mental Health, said: "Babies of this age are interested in their own impact on the world and in their parents' reaction to them. They are not interested in looking at things far away. They will learn more by looking at their own hands and feet or seeing whether they can touch their nose."

(Times, 31 October 2001)

More than a million a year Baby Einstein videos are being bought by American parents in the hope that they will stimulate their babies' minds. They include music by Mozart and Bach, poetry by Yeats and Wordsworth and seven languages.

The package,, aimed at children from one to eighteen months, will be available in Britain shortly along with Baby Bright which is associated with Great Ormond Street Hospital.  Professor Annette Karmiloff-Smith, who advised on its development, emphasises that there is no evidence of long-term educational benefits from any baby products.

There is concern about the impending baby video boom because of the association with television watching which is a passive activity. Professor Annette Karmiloff-Smith commented: "By far the most important things for mothers are to bond and talk and play with their babies. But if we are going to be bombarded with videos for babies, I thought it was better to have something intelligent on the market."

Research has shown that the first years of life are the most active and perhaps the most important period of learning. But there are plenty of academics who believe that the current range of early-learning products will do more for the bank balances of their developers than the minds of their consumers.

(Times, 10 August 2000)