On 5/30/06, Bill Ricker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Please go see "reader Rabbit" or "Math Blaster" in action with kids
> who are in Kindergarten through fourth grade. Then it will be clear to
> you.
Right on Jeff. My daughter loved Reader Rabbit. I credit Reader
Rabbit and Harry Potter between them for my daughter being literate.
Of course, this is the daughter that likes Windows XP Home and fills
the harddrive with WMA soundfiles to my shame, so there is a downside
to Reader Rabbit. Which would be solved by the $100 laptop, no MS
Windows ...
I guess my point is that computers aren't a magic pill. Kids will
learn if their parents spend the time with them to teach them. It
seems increasingly more common that parents (in this country at least)
take to some sort of electronic substitute for what have been their
traditional jobs when it comes to teaching their children. We don't
have time to sit and read with our kids anymore, but have no problem
plopping them in front of the computer so we don't have to miss
American Idol.
I'm not arguing that there's no place for such programs (Reader
Rabbit, etc.). But a computer will never be as effective a teaching
tool for young readers as their parents. It just seems to me to be a
confusion in priority.
-Mike-
--
"The biggest big business in America is not steel, automobiles, or
television. It is the manufacture, refinement and distribution of
anxiety."
-Eric Sevareid, American News Commentator (1912 - 1992)
_______________________________________________
gnhlug-discuss mailing list
gnhlug-discuss@mail.gnhlug.org
http://mail.gnhlug.org/mailman/listinfo/gnhlug-discuss
