So, continuing on from my last D&T blog, how do children play and use technology at the moment? Within this post I want to look into the current methods of play available to children over 5, at what point technology is introduced, when should it not be introduced and when are these methods implemented positively and negatively?

This topic is inherently difficult to research, primarily because almost every resource surrounding it is in some way someone’s personal opinion; no-one has figured out a ‘correct way’ to raise a child and no-one ever will; everyone has different needs and wants. So, I need to make sure that I’m not just formulating my own biased opinion from these and spouting this as the output for this project. The goal is instead to lay out the best explanation and suggestion possible as to how different modes of play might affect a child’s upbringing. Maybe this will dip into some of my personal opinions or suggestions on the general ways in which these may be improved upon, however it’s important to note that there will be no right answers, only suggestions on different ways of thinking around the topic.

As well as this, I’m acutely (and thankfully) aware that I don’t have a child myself. All the suggestions online and ‘theoretical benefits’ of certain types of play, everything out there encouraging patient parenting is easy for me to promote when I don’t have a temper tantrum 4 year old screaming in my ear. Like I said, I’m not going to find a ‘right answer’ and the way that children are raised is obviously hugely circumstantial.

So how does technology fall into this? Well first we have to look at the ways in which it is implemented. Is it a bit of tele before dinner, some time on a screen alone, with an adult? How is this going to change, how young will children start to have access to screens and how can this be done in a productive way?

The main way this screen consumption can be split is into passive and active consumption. Passive is sitting in front of the tele or youtube, watching or scrolling through something without any significant interaction. This isn’t an inherently bad thing, especially as adults we need time to switch off, however too much of it, especially at a young age can really stunt development. There are some really good articles out there on this; here’s an article from Catherine Andrews to make you think about your screen time and here’s a study from the National Institute of Medicine, both of which define passive consumption, albeit in very different styles. This website and article by ‘Heather B’ is centred around managing children's screen times and does a really good job at describing the different types of technological consumption; as she says “not all screen time is created equal”. Passive consumption is an incredibly useful tool for parents - what’s not attractive about sitting your kid in front of the TV for half an hour of peace? - however the best forms of passive consumption are able to create some active interaction at the same time.


Shows like ‘Peppa Pig’ and ‘Bluey’ are really great examples of how kids' shows are able to put active learning into passive entertainment. My driving instructor told me a story which I thought illustrated this really nicely the other day. He’s actually been really interesting to talk to about this project as someone who’s actually got a kid who’s not quite grown into her ‘technological phase’ yet. I mean, it also helps that we’re stuck in a car together for 2 hours once a week and he’s constantly being sent photos of his daughter by her mum.

Anyways, he has both a 2 year old daughter and a 7 month pregnant wife so they’ve had the looming question of how the two will get along. He said the other day his eldest watched an episode of Peppa Pig where her little brother George is born and instantly starts to annoy her. By the end of the episode though, Peppa’s realised her brother needs help to understand things and ends up reading him a bedtime story. My instructor said his 2 year old came to him afterwards, raving about how she’s going to read her brother bedtime stories when he's born and she can’t wait to teach him things. Who knows how much affect this will end up truly having, but at the very least it’s a great example of how well done forms of passive entertainment can encourage active thinking and learning.

When we talk about active consumption we’re looking at objects and media that is both consumed and interacted with, either physically or mentally. Within the lens of technology, the most common form of this afforded to children is through phone/tablet apps and as they grow older, video games. I was quite interested to try out a few of these games made for different age groups to see how they encourage interaction and what children stand to gain from them. There are a lot of options out there aimed at younger children such as ‘Endless ABC’ and ‘Moose Math’. These are mostly focused on drag and drop mechanics and are really aimed at intuitive puzzle solving, almost similar to the match the block to its shape holes toys. These are generally used as a positive introduction to phone mechanics, motor skills and some maths and spelling, however they do raise questions around whether children in this age range should even be using phones; what’s wrong with physical toys?


Next are more exploratory games like ‘Toca World’ or ‘Bluey’. These both place characters in rooms full of different objects and interactive items. You might tap the fridge to open it then drag together bread and tomato to make a sandwich which you can give to Bluey. There’s no real goal or purpose within these games, they seem more focused again on phone mechanics and motor skills but in a much more investigatory way. They almost feel like the equivalent of playing with action figures, making them different food and pretending to feed it to them, perhaps just with less imagination required as the app does all the heavy lifting. As well as this, there’s also a large subsection of games such as ‘How it’s made’ which seem to be incredibly focused on education. These involve a lot more text and facts, potentially for older, more inquisitive children. These feel slightly more like they’re made to be played with adults at the same time, however the facts they give are complex and long winded and seem quite random. This is also promoting the most passive interaction out of any of the games, as there are short activities between the facts that require minor amounts of input, however even I couldn’t figure out how a lot of these were meant to work!

There’s also a large sentiment online that video games shouldn’t be used to force learning at all. People believe they should be products inherently made for relaxation and enjoyment, so shoehorning learning into them can only be damaging. This would suggest that for games to be productive but still enjoyable the learning and development undergone within them should be more innate, and I think a game like Minecraft is the epitome of how this is done correctly. Within the game there are no specific goals or requirements, players are given full creative freedom to make and do whatever they want. Despite there being no direct teaching within the game, Minecraft is able to inherently develop patience, creativity, motor skills and forces players to build, frequently do arithmetic and manage a whole variety of processes and assets as they play! For me, this ingrained learning within a game is the gold standard as it can be used as proper down time, whilst avoiding the pitfalls of mind numbing, passive consumption.

I’m acutely aware that these DT project blog posts don’t have much of an overarching argument. There’s no beginning, middle and end, just me rambling and documenting the things that I’m reading and thinking. They’ve been an incredibly useful resource for me to condense my thoughts and feelings on the topic and will hopefully help to produce a final presentation on the subject that feels a little more guided and with some overarching point or idea. Before I make this presentation, I want to do one more post, looking into the alternative side of the argument: traditional play without technology. This is where I think design holds the most power for change and where I think it can encourage away from some of the more dangerous pitfalls of the technological play I’ve discussed here…

Example content of comment

5th Jan