What age for child to own a kindle/tablet device?

bitemebankers

Tropez wrote: »

You mean like where I said...

Define "responsible". For some people - not necessarily you - the TV is a surrogate babysitter. How do you think they'll handle the supervision of internet access? Bottom line is, I don't know anything about you, and the term "responsible" is incredibly vague.

hgotsparkle

Tropez wrote: »

Statistics show that those in my generation who had regular experience and interaction with technology growing up now have better employment opportunities. The truth is that it doesn't harm a kid to allow them to have access to something that, like it or not, is going to become a huge part of the future.

I'm sure you have seen kids scream when they have an iPhone taken off them and that's because their parents are bloody useless and thankfully it is a minority.

Allowing a child access to a computer or tablet isn't going to suddenly turn them into a social leper. The majority will still prefer to hang around with their friends. A lot of kids these days also socialise at times when I was a kid I would have been bored and alone because they can use VoIP to talk while playing a game of FIFA on a computer or console. This whole "kids should be outside" argument is sensationalist claptrap that ignores the benefits of allowing responsible access to and education about technology in favour of horror stories about them turning into socially inept zombies, conveniently ignoring the many threats that exist outside.

Regardless, it isn't at all difficult for a child with a decent upbringing to balance access to technology with an active social life in a healthy, controlled manner. A lot of kids already do.

Thats the thing though, in my job I see plenty of kids being bought tablets to play on and its not the sort of families that you can tell care about their childs education, its the sort who will do anything but look after their children. Chavs, basically.


Yes, we live in a society that is very technology focused but I didn't use the computer when I was young (and it was certainly an option), and was taught about using the pc to do homework but I never did because I had that choice. I know schools now may require homework to be submitted online but I see no need for a child to have internet access other than school work.

Tropez

bitemebankers wrote: »

Define "responsible". For some people - not necessarily you - the TV is a surrogate babysitter. How do you think they'll handle the supervision of internet access? Bottom line is, I don't know anything about you, and the term "responsible" is incredibly vague.

Several months back I interviewed approximately twenty-five candidates for a position in my department. All but five were around my age (within 2 years either side). Although the majority of the tasks outlined in the job description were to do with sociological matters, there was an expectation that the successful candidate could use Excel to a certain level, Access to a certain level, Word to a certain level and would be capable of troubleshooting basic computer problems themselves without resorting to phoning in our IT Department and so a simple test was devised.

Of the ~25 candidates, all of whom were more than qualified with regards to their sociological and criminological qualifications, only three had adequate abilities in using computers to the level we required.

We're not talking about extremely intensive or difficult tasks either. Even with my inadequacy at maths (I received a C for GCSE, which was my lowest scoring subject) I could handle the formulae required for the Excel portion of the test with ease. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these candidates lacked familiarity and experience with technology and it cost them an opportunity at the job as a result - a well paid job with several benefits including an actual cost of living raise, which is a nice job to get in this climate.

I am certainly not advocating handing a child a tablet or laptop and saying "Here you go son, knock yourself out" and then being shocked when the kid starts asking me about why that woman had a willy, but what I am advocating is a measured, rational and yes, responsible, approach to introducing children to technology so that they develop basic skills long before they enter the job market. The sooner children have these skills the easier they will develop more skills, the quicker they will grasp on to new technologies and the longer they will be considered as valuable workers.

In another work-related story, a while back we were all ordered to obtain an Android-powered tablet (charged to the company, of course). I'd not bothered with tablets before then as I couldn't see a use for them. Now, I can. They have made several tasks easier, quicker and increased productivity in several ways - as a result, I can see why these devious little devices are going to become a big part of the future. Once again, it doesn't hurt to familiarise a child with technology, especially as these technologies are liable to change and evolve rapidly and keeping up will be key to future successes.

Surely part of any good parent's job is priming them for the future? Not all children will have a love for tech, nor an affinity for it, but increasingly, in many, many industries there is a need to at least be able to do something with it.

We all know what responsible actually is - we all know it isn't responsible to give kids unfettered Internet access in the same way it isn't responsible to teach your kid to drive in a Ferrari F430 but letting your kids have responsible use of tech isn't a bad thing, it won't turn them into a social leper, it won't zombify their brain, it won't convert them into a drooling pervert providing the parents take an active part in their child's development. Those who stick their kids in front of the TV while they smoke pot and work on baby #6 are the minority and their lazy, negligent and arguably by extension abusive parenting will only be countered by rational people behaving like rational people.

Tropez

hgotsparkle wrote: »

Thats the thing though, in my job I see plenty of kids being bought tablets to play on and its not the sort of families that you can tell care about their childs education, its the sort who will do anything but look after their children. Chavs, basically.


Yes, we live in a society that is very technology focused but I didn't use the computer when I was young (and it was certainly an option), and was taught about using the pc to do homework but I never did because I had that choice. I know schools now may require homework to be submitted online but I see no need for a child to have internet access other than school work.

In my job I see some of the worst humanity has to offer, and yes, a lot of them are chavs. Through my job I have learned that society cannot judge others and attempt to alter their behaviour based on what the aberrations do.

Simply because you don't see a need for it doesn't mean that there isn't one. It's unfortunate but obviously it is your choice.

bitemebankers

Tropez wrote: »

Several months back I interviewed approximately twenty-five candidates for a position in my department. All but five were around my age (within 2 years either side). Although the majority of the tasks outlined in the job description were to do with sociological matters, there was an expectation that the successful candidate could use Excel to a certain level, Access to a certain level, Word to a certain level and would be capable of troubleshooting basic computer problems themselves without resorting to phoning in our IT Department and so a simple test was devised.

Of the ~25 candidates, all of whom were more than qualified with regards to their sociological and criminological qualifications, only three had adequate abilities in using computers to the level we required.

We're not talking about extremely intensive or difficult tasks either. Even with my inadequacy at maths (I received a C for GCSE, which was my lowest scoring subject) I could handle the formulae required for the Excel portion of the test with ease. Unfortunately, the vast majority of these candidates lacked familiarity and experience with technology and it cost them an opportunity at the job as a result - a well paid job with several benefits including an actual cost of living raise, which is a nice job to get in this climate.

I am certainly not advocating handing a child a tablet or laptop and saying "Here you go son, knock yourself out" and then being shocked when the kid starts asking me about why that woman had a willy, but what I am advocating is a measured, rational and yes, responsible, approach to introducing children to technology so that they develop basic skills long before they enter the job market. The sooner children have these skills the easier they will develop more skills, the quicker they will grasp on to new technologies and the longer they will be considered as valuable workers.

In another work-related story, a while back we were all ordered to obtain an Android-powered tablet (charged to the company, of course). I'd not bothered with tablets before then as I couldn't see a use for them. Now, I can. They have made several tasks easier, quicker and increased productivity in several ways - as a result, I can see why these devious little devices are going to become a big part of the future. Once again, it doesn't hurt to familiarise a child with technology, especially as these technologies are liable to change and evolve rapidly and keeping up will be key to future successes.

Surely part of any good parent's job is priming them for the future? Not all children will have a love for tech, nor an affinity for it, but increasingly, in many, many industries there is a need to at least be able to do something with it.

We all know what responsible actually is - we all know it isn't responsible to give kids unfettered Internet access in the same way it isn't responsible to teach your kid to drive in a Ferrari F430 but letting your kids have responsible use of tech isn't a bad thing, it won't turn them into a social leper, it won't zombify their brain, it won't convert them into a drooling pervert providing the parents take an active part in their child's development. Those who stick their kids in front of the TV while they smoke pot and work on baby #6 are the minority and their lazy, negligent and arguably by extension abusive parenting will only be countered by rational people behaving like rational people.

tl;dr

.....

[Deleted User]

bitemebankers wrote: »

tl;dr

.....

Exactly.

Tablets are consumption devices, and are not really going to be teaching kids IT skills. Maybe other fields of education, but not IT.

I'd get your kids playing with a Raspberry Pi and Python if you want them to be IT gurus.

bitemebankers

ringo_24601 wrote: »

I'd get yourv kids playing with a Raspberry Pi and Python if you want them to be IT gurus

Now you're talking!

[Deleted User]

bitemebankers wrote: »

Now you're talking!

I was coding my BBC Micro B at 7 or 8 years old, so I don't think my kids stand much chance of not geeking out too

Tropez

bitemebankers wrote: »

tl;dr

.....

Probably 'cr' in your case.

Tropez

ringo_24601 wrote: »

Exactly.

Tablets are consumption devices, and are not really going to be teaching kids IT skills. Maybe other fields of education, but not IT

That's likely why "IT" was updated to "ICT" a decade ago. Communications technology is as integral a part of modern courses as information technologies.

Still, that said, tablets can still be utilised for more traditional information-related pursuits and given that they remain in relative infancy it is ill-advised to dismiss their uses in more traditional computer-related fields at this present time. They will likely evolve, just like laptops did after being viewed in a similar manner a couple of decades ago.