Crucial brain development in the first few years of life depends on the ‘serve and return’ interaction with parents and carers; baby talk, storytime and games. Sitting in front of a screen is one-way traffic: a child is only in receive mode. Maybe that’s why we are seeing the terrible impact of excessive screen time on pre-school children at the start of Reception. According to Kindred’s latest school readiness report, a third of children starting Reception can’t dress themselves or communicate their needs to an adult; 45 per cent are reported to be unable to sit still for a short time. Up to a quarter of children who begin Reception are not properly toilet trained.
Why aren’t we also discussing what could be far more effective: a ban on under fives having excessive screentime?
Both teachers and parents told us that a significant factor is the increased amount of time children spend on phones and tablets, with 54 per cent of teachers and 49 per cent of parents agreeing that parents spending more time on devices than with their children contributes to children not being ready for school. Additionally, 54 per cent of teachers and 43 per cent of parents believe that children spending more than the recommended two hours a day on screens is a contributing factor.
Around half of secondary schools in England ban pupils from using smartphones. Yet new research suggests such bans do not by themselves improve academic grades and children’s wellbeing. However, the researchers from the University of Birmingham did find that spending longer on phones and social media in general was linked to lower grades, poor sleep, disruptive behaviour and a lack of exercise.
So we know screentime is having a detrimental effect on children; hence increasing numbers of school bans. Given we know how important the early years of development are to mental and physical health and educational attainment in adulthood, why aren’t we also discussing what could be far more effective: a ban on under fives having excessive screentime? The World Health Organisation guidance is unequivocal: infants and children under two should have no screentime at all, yet it’s hard to find evidence of this in information provided to parents. That’s perhaps why mums and dads told us that 57 minutes per day is appropriate for one-two year olds ,and 13 per cent think over 100 minutes a day is fine. In addition, a false distinction is made by many parents believing that screentime for babies is acceptable as long as it’s ‘educational’. As one parent put it, ‘As long as it’s for educational purposes, it’s great – it can teach them a lot. We just need to keep the balance.’
We’re probably all guilty of a bit of mindless scrolling, but let’s start with how much time we let our children stare at screens, as well as how much time we spend as adults on phones and tablets in front of children. If we understand how detrimental screentime really is to our children, this is something we can all control, no matter how rich or poor.
There has always been government squeamishness about talking about parenting for fear of being branded a ‘nanny state’. It will take a brave minister to tell parents how much screen time they should be allowing their children to have or even to be straight with adults about the need for us all to ‘put the phones down’ around their children.
So, by all means be shocked at the sheer number of children currently starting school behind before they begin. You can be concerned about the impact on other children of teachers losing a third of their teaching day by providing catch-up support to these children. Alongside that shock, perhaps we should be looking at the effect of screentime not just on teenagers, but on the very youngest before they even start school; after all it’s only then, perhaps for the very first time in their lives, they will have their screens taken away.
Comments