backtop


Print 62 comment(s) - last by chripuck.. on Apr 21 at 12:59 PM

They say students lack the motor skills or can't pay attention in class because of tablet overexposure

A group of UK teachers are urging parents to limit their children's time on tablets and other technology, as they claim a rising number of young students lack the motor skills needed to play with building blocks while older students are unable to take written exams with pen and paper.

According to The Telegraph, the Association of Teachers and Lecturers wants parents to turn off the Wi-Fi at night before bed so students get a good night's sleep instead of playing on tablets all night. 

The association claims that younger students as young as three or four can swipe on an iPad screen, but have little or no dexterity in their fingers to use building blocks. 

As for the older students, the association said their attention spans are limited in the classroom due to overexposure to technology. They further claimed that these students can't implement the skills they read in their textbooks, but have exceptional technical skills when it comes to consumer electronics.  


“It is our job to make sure that the technology is being used wisely and productively and that pupils are not making backward steps and getting obsessed and exhibiting aggressive and anti-social behaviours,” said Mark Montgomery, a teacher from Northern Ireland.

“In the same way we can use a brick to either break a window or build a house, digital technology can be used for good or bad, and teachers can and should help their pupils make positive choices so they have positive experiences.”

The teachers say many children born with an iPad in their hands and overuse the devices are more likely to lack non-tech skills as simple as writing with pen and paper. 

This seems to be an issue in other parts of the world as well. Back in 2012, it was reported that children in South Korea are especially prone to internet addiction, and that the dangers of tech addiction would be taught in schools. 

In the U.S., however, tablets like the iPad are being deployed in many school districts to advance tech skills. 

Source: The Telegraph



Comments     Threshold


This article is over a month old, voting and posting comments is disabled

RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 5:49:18 PM , Rating: -1
Freedom of Speech is synonymous with the US Constitution when used in casual discussion. Nobody goes around equating the 'freedom of speech' with the UK.

UK citizens do not have a true freedom of speech, because their "freedom" is granted by the Government and thus can be taken away by the Government.

Also the freedom of speech in the UK is a negative right, with so many restrictions and addendums that it can hardly be called a "right" at all. We're not talking about yelling "Fire" in a theater here. Things like "causing someone anxiety" is not protected speech in the UK. I mean really, that's absurd.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Censorship_in_the_Uni...

Only in America is the freedom of speech an inalienable right to all humans, granted not by the Government, but by a higher state of being.


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 6:07:05 PM , Rating: 2
Oh and by the way, I was making a joke anyway. Hence the smiley face. Hello?


RE: Sod Off
By atechfan on 4/17/2014 7:08:17 PM , Rating: 2
reclaimer77 said

quote:
Only in America is the freedom of speech an inalienable right to all humans


Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms said

quote:
Fundamental Freedoms

FUNDAMENTAL FREEDOMS.
2. Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms:
(a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association.


Once again, you prove you have no idea what you are talking about. Sadly, you exercise your right to free speech by showing how uneducated you truly are.


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 7:19:47 PM , Rating: 1
Canada, where they had Government enforced SPEECH CODES! That were finally lifted in 2012. Not 1812, not 1912, but two thousand and freaking twelve.

http://www.roger-pearse.com/weblog/2012/06/08/an-i...

"For decades, Canadians had meekly submitted to a system of administrative law that potentially made de facto criminals out of anyone with politically incorrect views about women, gays, or racial and religious minority groups. All that was required was a complainant (often someone with professional ties to the CHRC itself) willing to sign his name to a piece of paper, claim he was offended, and then collect his cash winnings at the end of the process. The system was bogus and corrupt."

Yeah great freedom of speech there...


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/14, Rating: 0
RE: Sod Off
By atechfan on 4/17/2014 7:30:38 PM , Rating: 2
Says the guy from the country where the IRS is sent after people with viewpoints that Obama doesn't like.


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/14, Rating: 0
RE: Sod Off
By atechfan on 4/17/2014 7:36:44 PM , Rating: 2
quote:
In June 2010, the Supreme Court ruled against free speech in a case challenging the legitimacy of the material support statute. In Holder v. Humanitarian Law Project, the government accused HLP, a non-profit organization that advocates for human rights and peaceful resolution of armed conflicts by consulting with local groups around the world (and which has consultative status with the United Nations), of material support for terrorism. As the Center for Constitutional Rights explains,

The decision marks the first time that the Supreme Court has held that the First Amendment permits Congress to make pure speech advocating lawful, nonviolent activity-human rights advocacy and peacemaking-a crime. Doing so can land a citizen in prison for 15 years, all in the name of “fighting terrorism.”

The Court's ruling leaves it unclear whether publishing an op-ed or submitting an amicus brief in court arguing that a group does not belong on the list is a criminal act is prohibited. What is clear is that the Court's decision is likely to cast a broad chill over political speech and the activities of humanitarian groups and journalists.


I could go on, but I'll let you further embarrass yourself.


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 7:42:55 PM , Rating: 1
LOL I love how you still think you have the high road here. Dude, your Canada example blew up in your face!

I've known for years Canada had speech codes. You're obviously just using Bing and desperately trying to find anything to hurl at me without understanding any underlying context.

And yes Eric Holder is a scumbag, and Obama put two Liberal cunts on the Supreme Court. But comparing ONE ruling to years of Canadian thought-police policies?

Desperate!


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 7:57:42 PM , Rating: 1
And where in the hell exactly did I say in America that Government couldn't infringe on our freedom of speech?

Read what I said again. Yes in other countries there is a defined freedom of speech. Yet that freedom is always derived from the Government, thus can be taken away from the Government.

The Founders believed we had inalienable rights, that were imbued to us not by Government authority, but were "natural" rights. Thus NO Government body could strip them from us.


RE: Sod Off
By atechfan on 4/17/2014 8:14:59 PM , Rating: 2
The usual reclaimer77 moving goalpost. First you claim that no other country has free speech as a right. Then when I gave an example, you come back with a case where this right was abusively supressed, so I show that the same thing happens in your so-called free country. Now you are changing the requirements, so that my examples are not valid but yours somehow still are?

OK, we'll play by your rules. You state that only the US believes that these rights come from a higher power.

The Canadian Charter starts out like this:

quote:
Whereas Canada is founded upon principles that recognize the supremacy of God and the rule of law:


Sounds an awful lot to me that the rights therein were considered to be granted by a power higher than government, just like in your constitution.

Sure, there have been abuses, but that doesn't make your statement that only the USA has the right of free speech to be any more true, regardless of your backpedalling and rule changing.

While we are on the subject of free speech violations in the USA:

quote:
In the eeriest parallel to my experiences in martial law Poland, on two consecutive evenings the police inexplicably deemed assemblies of people peacefully gathered in a large, grassy University of Pittsburgh plaza to be “unlawful” and ordered everyone to disperse immediately. Police used an “LRAD” (first-ever civilian use of a military sonic weapon that can cause permanent hearing loss), shot pepper spray into dormitory stairwells, and fired rubber bullets and beanbags at fleeing students and curiosity seekers.


When the Chretien government used pepper spray on G20 protesters here in Canada, the nation was outraged and that was one of the events that helped bring down his government and force him to resign. Yet much more dangerous weapons were used against protesters in your country and you probably didn't even know about it.

America is turning into a police state, and you have the gall to declare it more free than the rest of the world?


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 8:33:22 PM , Rating: 1
quote:
First you claim that no other country has free speech as a right.


I never said that.

quote:
America is turning into a police state, and you have the gall to declare it more free than the rest of the world?


I never said that.

I'm getting some creepy Nationalistic vibe from you over this, when it was never my intention to declare my country was the 'bestest evar' or whatever you have in your head. If I've somehow offended you over my quite innocent statement, I guess I'm sorry.

I'm as concerned as anyone over the direction my country has gone in lately. However I still believe in the ideals it's founding was based on. And I am NOT going to apologize for that!


RE: Sod Off
By atechfan on 4/17/2014 8:59:26 PM , Rating: 5
quote:
quote:
First you claim that no other country has free speech as a right.

I never said that.


quote:
Only in America is the freedom of speech an inalienable right to all humans


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/14, Rating: 0
RE: Sod Off
By atechfan on 4/17/2014 8:22:38 PM , Rating: 5
You are making this too easy.

quote:
And where in the hell exactly did I say in America that Government couldn't infringe on our freedom of speech?


quote:
Thus NO Government body could strip them from us.


You contradicted yourself. Which is it? Can the government take away your free speech, or can it not?


RE: Sod Off
By Reclaimer77 on 4/17/2014 8:28:01 PM , Rating: 2
It can't take away our freedom of speech, but of course it can place certain limits on it.

We've all heard the "fire in theater" bit, I'm not going to repeat it.

And why are we going on and on about something that wasn't even my main point?


"I modded down, down, down, and the flames went higher." -- Sven Olsen














botimage
Copyright 2014 DailyTech LLC. - RSS Feed | Advertise | About Us | Ethics | FAQ | Terms, Conditions & Privacy Information | Kristopher Kubicki