It's official - Teens are getting dumber
Categories: Kids 8-11, Teens & tweens, Development, In The News, Education
We all know that teenagers are stupid. Rather, they act stupid. Having been teens ourselves and now being adult enough to be able to reflect back, most of us agree that at one time or another, most teens are, well, dumb. Pregnancy pacts, virginity rings and Marilyn Manson obsessions aside, now it turns out that sentiment might actually be true! According to a new study, kids are getting less smart, mainly due to watching too much television and playing too many video games. Hmm. This sounds familiar. I feel like I heard the same thing in the early 80's when I was a kid with a pocketful of quarters and a Pac Man machine (OK, fine, it was Ms. Pac Man) in front of me. But, I digress.
The study reviewed test scores of 800 thirteen- and fourteen-year-olds and compared them with similar tests of teens from 1976, a generation ago. The results? In one test, only one in ten of the current teens tested with top scores, down from one in four twenty years ago. In another, only one in twenty reached the top score compared to one in five from the 1976 batch. Professor Michael Shayer, who lead the study, believes the educational focus on testing (rather than learning) is at least partially to blame. Focusing on testing leaves little time for teaching development skills such as those required in the tests that were part of the study.
Primarily, however, Shayer believes that television and video games are responsible for the decline. Participating in these "non" activities leads to a lack of being involved in other things such as playing with gadgets and tools which develop higher level thinking. The UK education system has responded that measures were being taken to "ease the burden" of testing. According to the article in the Mail Online, the UK government had also scrapped the SATs for fourteen-year-olds.
Recent Posts
- G.I. Joe, My Little Pony Invading TV With New Children's Network (2/09/2010)
- Movies May Influence Children's Food Choices, Study Shows (2/09/2010)
- Report Cites 220 Cases of D.C. Teachers Abusing Students (2/09/2010)
- Chicago Candidate Drops Out of Race With Tearful Child On Display (2/09/2010)
- Juicy, But Not Juice (2/09/2010)
Reader Comments (Page 1 of 1)
Serena 10-28-2008 @ 10:29AM
Buy those kids Nintendo!
*Snip*
Think you know the video gamer type? Think again
Vito Pilieci, Ottawa Citizen
Published: Monday, October 27, 2008
Ottawa . People who play video games have better family lives, are more social and make more money than people who do not, according to two new studies.
The Canadian and American studies dispel stereotypes surrounding gamers - largely that they are solitary, overweight teens who are wasting their time.
According to the Canadian study, one in two Canadians can be considered a gamer, having actively played video games within the past month
*Snip*
In addition, gamers are 11 per cent more likely to play sports than non-gamers and spend the same amount of time per week reading books as those who don't play video games.
*Snip*
According to the IGN study, the average income of a gaming household in the U.S. is $79,000 U.S., compared to $55,000 for those households that do not play.
*Snip*
"If you are good at games, you probably have some aptitude for computer science," he said. "One of the things games teach you to do is experiment. That is exactly the skill you need to learn. In effect, games are ways of teaching computer skills."
*Snip*
Anil Somayagi, associate professor in the department of computer sciences at Carleton University, wasn't surprised by the discrepancy in income. He said many gamers are highly educated and technology savvy, traits coveted by employers offering higher salaries.
Reply
Jamie 10-28-2008 @ 11:25AM
Interesting find. I don't believe everything I read though. I do believe children need time by themselves to think for themselves. Everything is ok in moderation. I limit my 4 year old to 2 hours of TV a day. I am a stay at home mom and this is not always an easy task. When the weather gets bad outside things get complicated inside. When he starts playing video games (around age 5 or 6), then I will also limit that activity. This amazing thing happens when you turn the TV off. They find something else to do. My son has great deductive reasoning skills (tests out at age 5 or 6) and I know I had a hand in that. I also believe it would take me 10 seconds to find an article to debunk Ms. Pilieci. It is easy to use the internet to support just about any cause you want to fight for. Know your children and do right by them.
Honestly, I believe that kids do need time to themselves just to think and explore the world. Turn the TV off and see what happens.
LS 10-28-2008 @ 3:22PM
I think laying blanket blame on TV and Video Games is a problem.
Yes, kids watch more tv, yes they play more video games. But... they also spend more time in organized activities (soccer, scouts, whatever), and more time being supervised. The "helicopter parenting" out here is amazing. I've seen it myself... give a kid a toy, and watch what happens - with the parent. More times than not, that parent will jump in and say, "this is what it is, this is how you play with it, now pose so I can take sixty two pictures. Wait, don't put it down until I get you a blanket to put it on!...NO!! NO!! Don't move!! Get the antibacterial wipes!"
The kid never gets a chance to actually PLAY with the toy, either in the way that it's meant or in the way that his imagination dictates.
My point here is that we don't LET our kids become smart, because we're so focused on them "achieving".
My son, who is 5, can tell you all about the water cycle, not only because I've read about it with him, but because I've plopped him in a pool of water with an ice cube in the hot sun. He's watched the cube melt. He's watched the splashes evaporate. And then the next day, we've gone out and danced in the rain, and he learns why the water falls.
Yeah, our schools focus on testing, but we, as parents and society in general, focus WAY too much on the results, and not the trip. I know at least one engineering student who is a big-time "gamer", but you know what? Half those video games he plays are ones that make him think and solve problems.
Reply
Heather 10-28-2008 @ 5:27PM
I really don't belive that video games and TV are the problem. Has anyone stopped to look at HOW kids are doing work? Calculators, computers, books that read for you, ect. People do not need to know how to figure what 160x342 on their own anymore, they turn to a computer or whatever to get the answer. People in general are lazy, not stupid.
Reply
Serena 10-28-2008 @ 10:12PM
Heather wrote: "People in general are lazy, not stupid."
Well put Heather.
Reply
Arlene 10-28-2008 @ 10:41PM
It's a given that children aren't as smart, but then ignorant people make the best citizens. While TV and video games may be a the problem, the reason they aren't to blame. The blame would fall on parents who allow this and government schools that do not educate. But the "stupid" people feel good about themselves and it's all about feelings. And not to worry, the bottom are hoping the top will share the paycheck (wealth) so they can stay stupid.
Reply
Baron 10-29-2008 @ 7:48AM
You hit the nail on the head. Smart people ask too many questions (though I find that it is only the truly intelligent among us that ask the good questions and are truly looking for the answers. Those that merely think they are smart - there are way too many of them - are the ones that think they have the answer and are trying to tell everyone they know best), but you can keep an ignorant person "fat and happy" (I don't really mean fat, hence the quotes) pretty easily.
Lia 10-29-2008 @ 1:47AM
Of course they are. Schools now frown on rewarding kids who excel because it "lowers the self-esteem" of the kids who don't apply themselves, or those who simply don't get it. They no longer have Valedictorians. The smart kids have to sit and wait all day while the teachers spend time trying to catch Stupid Johnny up, because it is no longer politically correct to have "slow classes" for those kids who can't keep up with the regular kids. The school administrators are to blame for this. The teachers are just stuck trying to follow these "stupid" rules.
Reply
stylin2599 10-29-2008 @ 1:46AM
Kids are super lazy! Why use you brain when we have calculators to do it for us!
The problem is that they have become "button pushers," children use the technology we have provided them to their advantage so they don't have to think. Then they never learn the processes which would allow them to come to the same conclusion on their own.
Just think about the spell check we have on our computers. Do you remember having to look up words in a dictionary before writing words down using a pen for reports? Just the act of looking it up increases memory because you actively search for the answer with your hands(thumbing through pages), eyes (scanning the words) and cognitive reasoning (looking for the correct word).
We live in a world that provides them easy answers and instant gratification of "I can just look it up on the internet" instead of how the older generations had to go to libraries and search through series of books for hours. Our technology has made the majority of people lazy.
Kids have so much available at their fingertips but they don't retain much of the information they recieve because they don't go through any information gathering processes and they don't invest the time to absorb the information.
That aside, I think most of them are more self absorbed and focused on what's going on in hollywood and what movies are coming out and whats on TV than we used to be. Whoever their heroes are, that is who they will strive to be like. So be a parent and role model, do your best to make sure the hero or heroine your child looks up to is a good one, and if not introduce him or her to one of your own.
Reply
KTK 10-29-2008 @ 7:43PM
It does not surprise me in the least that today's teenagers are ignorant. Afterall, it is this same group that is voting overwhelmingly for Obama, a politician whose resume is almost as thin as theirs.
Reply
JJ 10-29-2008 @ 10:31AM
Wow KTK... I wasn't aware 13 and 14 year olds could vote...
Please keep your political leanings out of a article that has nothing to do with Either McCain or Obama. (There's in experienced politicians on all sides of the fence)
Reply
KtK 10-29-2008 @ 7:50PM
No JJ, but the current 18 and 19 year olds can and they are just as ignorant. And speaking of inexperienced there is only one serious candidate for President running that is ridiculously inexperienced. FYI I spoke about the topic at hand and connected to politics. There is nothing untoward about this.
Reply
Little Miss 10-29-2008 @ 10:15PM
How about taking a look at the tests? Studying for the SATs, my math teacher (an extremely intelligent woman) couldn't solve some of the probles they gave you in the book. As for the English portions, they're fairly easy, but completely utterly useless. (Honestly, when is anyone ever going to need to know that water is to swimming as ball is to soccer?) By the time you're an hour into the test, your so bored and fried from answering the same bloddy question that you're hardly reading anymore. (Mind you, I got a 1928 on the demmed thing.)
Also, according to my parents, who would've been among the 1976 testers, the material we learn is far more complicated. I was below "regence" level in Math in high school and my dad still mentioned remembering doing the same things in college. my mom says she certainly never studied Beowulf or Homer. As for history, both parents were shocked to learn that not only did we learn about Middle Eastern, African and Asian civilizations, but also had to take entire courses on government and economics.
If teens are being taught more material at higher levels than the 1976 students, then maybe your comparison is less than fair.
Reply