Most recent public comments by Alana Bre https://nowcomment.com/users/96550 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214172 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214172 There really is a need for more digital platforms for elementary aged kids to connect to other kids. The problems I ran into were platforms are either too restrictive, causing them to become abandoned or not restrictive enough allowing them to become toxic. Minecraft is extremely popular for elementary aged kids. Pokemon go has "bosses" where you invite friends into a "raid" to collect an elite pokemon. There are many subscription options like Nightzoo; but mostly the platforms safe for kids don't connect people because that invites danger. I let my kids play games anonymously or connect to friends, but never strangers. While kids are not often finding their niches as kids, they are building skills in typing and gameplay which often translates to executive function, critical thinking, empathy, and even eye coordination. Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:07:56 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214171 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214171 I agree. I think the authors missed a more logical conclusion by trying not to focus on negative aspects of online platforms. Teachers and mentors can easily find their niche by doing what they do best; teaching kids how to be safe in the world. Students will resonate to lessons on how and why to keep their identities safe online; how to spot secure websites and credible forums; how not to engage in toxic online behavior; and even how to gain respect or notoriety when a student feels serious about their group. These things are different from learning digital skills like video, coding. and typing which could translate to many futures. Thu, 26 Nov 2020 21:00:19 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214166 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214166 I believe there is value to teachers guiding kids, in real life social environments, to use the more educational aspects of some games. Kids are taught "geeking out" can be fun, cool, social, interesting, and rewarding. The book often cites affinity users as searching for someone who "gets it," but this dynamic is teaching the youth generation to "get it." The competitive and social nature of such a camp could even translate to a continued use of coding skills outside of camp. Thu, 26 Nov 2020 20:44:50 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214165 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214165 I wonder if the writer of this piece spent a lot of time actually playing these games or engaging in the communities. As a long time gamer and a member of many affinity networks, I believe they are mostly a waste of time, highly addictive, the communities are toxic, and they have a high potential to take away from more important things a kid should be learning. If an occasional experience is a diamond in the rust, it is a rarity and would be great if a mentor managed to recognize the less common situation. The high learning potential is always optional and usually skipped. Coding with Minecraft is optional and only a tiny fraction of Starcraft players meaningfully make the ladder. It seems very risky being a trusted mentor and pointing a kid in the direction of something that ends up compromising their future. I know plenty of gamers who barely graduated or didn't graduate because of a video game addiction. Mon, 30 Nov 2020 06:22:58 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214132 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214132 I like to finish reading any research driven piece with the question, 'how was data collected,' and 'how does that impact the findings?' Children are not being exposed to different amounts of screen time and then donating their brains to science. Surveys are the only way to collect screen time data. Survey data is extremely undependable and there are never any controls. Kids who have two working parents might be more likely to watch more TV. Kids without extracurricular activities might spend more time with screens. Income equity plays a huge role in this and therefore so quality of screen time is important. This book states repeatedly that kids using educational online platforms are higher in income while kids spending more time in front of screens are of lower incomes. Lower income kids also have less access to nutrition, quality healthcare, safe living environments, and quality schools. It isn't that the author here is wrong, it's just that neural research, especially concerning kids, is almost never conclusive. Fri, 26 Nov 2021 16:12:51 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214122 https://nowcomment.com/documents/132976?scroll_to=2214122 Digital learning is something often used by home schools. Equity impacts the ability for a parent to facilitate access as well. These programs are statistically proven curriculums with asynchronous learning opportunities. In person peers, the personal attention of a teacher, utilizing high quality curriculum should be better. Why jump to Kahn Academy in school? Thu, 26 Nov 2020 18:00:41 -0500 https://nowcomment.com/documents/105218?scroll_to=2201482 https://nowcomment.com/documents/105218?scroll_to=2201482 By having water as the theme to this poem and ending in "Let this water make us do right." I am reminded how water is a finite resource, especially in California. The cyclists along asphalt was almost assaulting within a poem otherwise about nature. Wed, 03 Mar 2021 15:50:41 -0500