Barrie Trower, a physicist reports during a presentation at the University of Toronto that cell phones and wireless internet both emit microwave radiation, which has been known in large doses  to be harmful to both adults and children since the 1930’s. Trower references research showing that damage to lung tissue, brain cells and the blood brain barrier are among a litany of ill-effects of prolonged exposure to low levels of microwave radiation. He goes on to report that children are the most susceptible to microwave radiation due to the high level of water content in their body acts as a conduit for microwave radiation. Trower states that because children’s cellular structure is the same size as microwaves, children can actually act as ‘antennae’ for this type of radiation. Tower reports in his presentation that “Children are not small adults, and their systems have not yet formed. The blood brain barrier is like a fish net that surrounds the brain and keeps toxins out (of the brain). Microwave radiation makes the holes (in the blood brain barrier) bigger so toxins leak into the brain. This can cause psychiatric problems. Auditory hallucinations that make people think they’re hearing sounds, fatigue, difficulty concentrating, sleeplessness and irritability are among the symptoms of blood brain barrier damage researchers have documented. Damage to the immune system, which takes 18 years to develop in children, is another effect of exposure to microwave radiation” Mr. Trower cites. He also said the human nervous system is composed of mile-long, inch-thick sheets of layers of proteins, which take 22 years to develop in children; and that microwave radiation affects the protein synthesis. Mr. Trower said there isn’t a school in the world that hasn’t seen an increase in aggression and other bad behavior when WiFi was introduced. He cites paranoia, suicidal tendencies and inability to make decisions, among the deleterious effects of exposure to low levels of microwave radiation. Mr. Trower reported that Russia is banning any children under 18 from microwave exposure, and Britain said children under 12 should have no microwave radiation exposure at all. This is in the wake of reports made to the British parliament detailing the cases of 11 children under 11 years old who have leukemia. As a result of research that documents the harmful effects of microwave radiation on fetuses, the British government said that pregnant women must not be exposed to microwave radiation.

Tony Muc, a University of Toronto physics professor, was consulted by the Ontario School Board and reportedly told them that wireless internet use in schools poses no harm. Health Canada issued a statement last week that said there is no health threat. “Based on scientific evidence, Health Canada has determined that exposure to low-level radio-frequency energy, such as that from Wi-Fi systems, is not dangerous to the public,” said a statement from the federal agency. Health Canada said Tuesday it based its conclusion on reviews of studies from around the world and is satisfied there is more than enough evidence to support their view that it is safe. “Using data from these studies, Health Canada set the general public exposure limits significantly lower than the threshold for any potentially adverse health effects,” department spokesman Stephanie Shank wrote in an e-mail. “Health Canada’s exposure guidelines for RF (radio frequency) energy are similar to, or more restrictive than, similar health-based international exposure standards. As long as exposures respect these guidelines, Health Canada has determined that there is no scientific reason to consider Wi-Fi dangerous to the public.” “The specified limits for public exposure apply to everyone — including the elderly, individuals with health concerns, children and pregnant women and allow for continuous, 24/7 exposure,” Shank wrote.

Trower disagrees and maintains parents should make the schools sign off legally in case there are any health problems in the future. “Parents should have a document from the school saying they take full legal responsibility for any damage caused by Wi-Fi. If they won’t give that, the first question should be “Why”. Trower reports that the World Health Organization stated that they will not comment on microwave radiation effects on people until 2015, when it will be able to establish effects on human beings. He added that the WHO only began studying microwave radiation effects on children in 2009 and it said it won’t be able to comment until 2020. Trower’s contention about health risks was echoed last week by Magda Havas, a professor in the Centre for Health Studies at Trent University in Peterborough, Ont. She said other forms of microwave exposure — particularly cell phone towers — have been linked to cancers, heart problems, sleeping problems, skin conditions and short-term memory loss. Children are also more likely to be vulnerable, due to weaker immune systems and because their bodies are still growing. “It is possible, and I think it is even probable, that this exposure will have an effect on children,” Havas said. Professor Havas issued an open letter last year saying she was “increasingly concerned” about Wi-Fi and cell phone use at schools. “It is irresponsible to introduce Wi-Fi microwave radiation into a school environment where young children and school employees spend hours each day,” Havas wrote. Statistics show young children absorb much more radiation than older children and adults because of their thinner skulls. It is a public health issue, insisted Palmer, and should at least be taken as seriously as the threat of West Nile virus.

Several scientists from around the world testified about the dangers of microwave transmissions during parliamentary hearings into cellular telephones last spring. Both cell phones and Wi-Fi utilize microwaves, but critics point out exposure to radiation from Wi-Fi is often for hours at a time, not minutes as it is with cell phones. “Symptoms referred to as microwave syndrome, like headaches, sleep disturbances, fatigue, etc., among people residing around base station antennas can possibly be explained by cellular stress induction on brain cells or even cell death,” testified Dimitris Panagopoulos, a biophysicist from the University of Athens. Prof. Olle Johansson of the Royal Institute of Technology in Sweden warned the committee that Canada and other countries need to update their guidelines for exposure to microwave radiation. “It’s obvious that your safety code is completely out of date and obsolete and that goes for any form of international or national standard body throughout the world,” testified Johansson.

Recommendations

So how much is too much? The American Academy of Pediatrics in 2004 issued a policy statement indicating that children 0 to 2 years of age should not be exposed to any form of technology, and school-aged children should be limited to 1 to 2 hours technology per day. This limit includes both entertainment and educational technologies in the form of cell phones, internet, television, video games, movies and iPods. Further research indicates that there is no research evidence to support the use of technology for the achievement of student literacy (with the exception of assistive technologies for children with significant disabilities), and mounting research which indicates causal links between technology and impairment to child physical, mental, social and academic performance. Therefore, the continued use of technology with elementary children in a school-based setting is not necessary, and may cause both short and long term harm. Responsible schools might be wise to consider discontinuing all technologies with students through grade six until such time as these technologies have proven to be effective and safe. Relying on the World Health Organization and Health Canada reports that wireless internet is safe is not recommended, as neither can produce long term studies to support their statements, and ultimately may result in harm to children. Redirecting funding currently allocated to technology toward playground and gym equipment to promote health, as well as redirecting valuable teacher expertise toward reading, printing and math skill, would not only ensure student literacy, but also ensure student and staff safety. Should schools continue to escalate the use of technology with elementary-aged children, actions should be taken by these schools to provide concerned parents with appropriate waivers that indicate full responsibility for any eventual harm to student mental and/or physical health.

Reference Links

http://www.cbc.ca/health/story/2010/08/16/wifi-students.html?ref=rss#ixzz0y9IntXQS

http://www.vancouversun.com/health/Weapons+expert+warns+schools+could+cause+birth+defects/3437356/story.html#ixzz0y9CdFkm1

http://www.thecanadiancharger.com/page.php?id=5&a=554

http://www.cbc.ca/technology/story/2010/08/16/wifi-students.html

http://aappolicy.aappublications.org/cgi/content/full/pediatrics;107/2/

http://www.zoneinworkshops.com/fact-sheet/zonein-fact-sheet/

The Zone’in Child Development Series newsletter for education and health professionals profiled teleEducation in June 2010, and now turns to telehealth for July’s topic.  As a pediatric occupational therapist concerned about the overuse of technology by children, I have recently received a number of requests for information regarding the efficacy of telehealth, e.g. the use of telecommunication systems to facilitate the delivery of health-related information and services.  A school principal questioned the efficacy of telehealth for speech and language services; an occupational therapist was told by her school district that she was required to use telehealth to deliver OT services to reduce her travel expenditures, and questioned efficacy in a pediatric school-based population; a speech and language pathologist who has been providing telehealth conjointly with 1:1 therapy services stated her telehealth service “wasn’t working” and she wondered whether she was doing it “correctly”.  The intent of this article is to raise awareness regarding the increased use of telehealth services as they apply to treating the pediatric population, and raises concerns regarding the utilization of telehealth services with children.

What is telehealth?

The term “telehealth” is broadly used in research literature, and could reference any or the following: video conferencing between health care professionals and clients, client education or training, and may reference client assessment, treatment intervention and follow up consultation.  Related terminologies found in the literature are ehealth, telemedicine, telerehabilitation and teleoccupational therapy.  This generalization of the term “telehealth” in the literature creates obvious difficultly when considering the scope of therapeutic practice.  Variability in client parameters (age, diagnosis), choice of assessment and treatment type, competency level of therapist, frequency/duration/intensity of intervention, and treatment environment are but a few factors to consider regarding telehealth service delivery.  Trying to determine cost-effectiveness and efficacy of a telehealth service requires research that is specific to each variable parameter encountered.

Who is doing telehealth?

It appears that telehealth is present to some degree in almost all health care disciplines, yet exactly what type of telehealth is offered, and whether this telehealth is actually effective, is difficult to determine when reviewing existing telehealth research.  In the field of paediatrics, telehealth is present in ‘virtually’ all child care centres, hospitals, mental health clinics, private therapy clinics, and even many schools are now using telehealth.  As telehealth technology expands its role from video conferencing into areas of assessment and treatment, more and more health professionals are using telehealth with limited knowledge regarding above noted usage parameters.  Careful design of implementation protocols, and preliminary review of evidenced-based research is imperative prior to wide scale use of telehealth, particularly with the pediatric population.  A brief google search indicates that a number of private practice pediatric occupational and speech and language clinics are currently offering telehealth services, yet not one of these websites cited evidenced-based research outcomes, nor did they delineate telehealth service delivery protocols or procedures.  Telehealth is a relatively new treatment modality, and requires careful evaluation of existing relevant research and extensive planning prior to implementation.

Does telehealth work?

The National Initiative for Telehealth Guidelines, Environmental Scan of Organizational, Technology, Clinical and Human Resource Issues, prepared by the NIFTE Research Consortium published April 30, 2003 is a comprehensive document on telehealth and ultimately recommended that health care systems move forward to implement telehealth services, despite also citing research that profiles the lack of evidence-base for clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness.  This document may be helpful to readers who are seeking to design implementation protocols with outcome measures for the use of telehealth in their school or clinic settings.  The following statement is excerpted from the NIFTE Executive Summary located at http://www.cranhr.ca/pdf/NIFTEEnvironmentalScan-ExecutiveSummary-May72003.pdf.

The clinical efficacy and cost-effectiveness of telehealth has been demonstrated for some but not all applications (e.g., Hersh et al., 2001; Roine et al., 2001; Whitten et al.,2002). It has been asserted that technological improvements are overcoming many current limitations (e.g., Bashshur, 1998) such that there are or soon will be no important clinical difference between face-to-face and telehealth consultations.

The following conclusion statements are excerpted from abstracts of above cited research studies on telehealth.

• Hersh, W.R., Helfand, M., Wallace, J., Kraemer, D., Patterson, P., Shapiro, S., & Greenlick, M. (2001). Clinical outcomes resulting from telemedicine interventions: a systematic review. BMC Medical Informatics and Decision Making 1(5): http://biomedcentral.com/1472-6947/1/5, 2001. The strongest evidence for the efficacy of telemedicine in clinical outcomes comes from home-based telemedicine in the areas of chronic disease management, hypertension, and AIDS. Conclusion: Despite the widespread use of telemedicine in virtually all major areas of health care, evidence concerning the benefits of its use exists in only a small number of them. Further randomized controlled trials must be done to determine where its use is most effective.
• Roine, R., Ohinmaa, A. & Hailey, D. (2001). Assessing telemedicine: a systematic review of the literature. Canadian Medical Association Journal 165 (6), 765-771.  Interpretation: Evidence regarding the effectiveness or cost-effectiveness of telemedicine is still limited. Based on current scientific evidence, only a few telemedicine applications can be recommended for broader use.
• Whitten, P.S., Mair, F.S, Haycox, A., May, C.R., Williams, T.L., & Hellmich, S. (2002). Systematic review of cost effectiveness studies of telemedicine interventions. British Medical Journal 324, 1434-1437.  Conclusion: There is no good evidence that telemedicine is a cost effective means of delivering health care.

There are likely a number of research studies in progress that will show specific areas where telehealth utilization is an effective method of occupational service delivery.  An  occupational therapist is investigating the use of telehealth to service children with disabilities in remote locations http://www.otworks.ca/otworks_page.asp?pageid=751.  Delivering Developmental Occupational Therapy Consultation Services Through Telehealth is a study conducted by the University of New Mexico’s Center for Development and Disability http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_7520/is_200909/ai_n39229849/?tag=content;col1.  The University of Alberta’s Centre for Telerehabilitation http://www.uofaweb.ualberta.ca/telerehab/research.cfm profiles a number pediatric-related areas of telehealth research such as assistive technology, FASD, preschool mental health, school-based teams and wheelchair seating.  I would caution use of telehealth for assessment and treatment interventions in the pediatric population until such time as evidence-based research supports such.

Telehealth Clinical Issues

The following considerations for clinical practice are excerpted from the NIFTE Executive Summary, ‘Clinical Issues’ section located at http://www.cranhr.ca/pdf/NIFTEEnvironmentalScan-ExecutiveSummary-May72003.pdf.

Communication – As there is no consensus as to whether telehealth enhances or attenuates the therapeutic relationship or the traditional practice of medicine, further research is urgently needed on the nature and content of the communication process.

Standards/Quality of Clinical Care – There is diversity of opinion regarding whether there is a need for telehealth-specific practice guidelines, or if existing guidelines from the various professional licensing bodies and associations serve the purpose. The “appropriate” standard of care delivered via telehealth should be equivalent to the standard expected in traditional provision of care. If equivalent standard of care cannot be met, the telehealth practitioner needs to consider what the alternatives are and decide if it is acceptable to proceed.

Clinical Outcomes - Telehealth systems require assessment of relevant outcome data to promote and support the sustainability of telehealth programs. Telehealth networks need to have a systematic method of collecting, evaluating and reporting meaningful outcome data, which would include indicators of efficiency of service and clinical effectiveness between telehealth practitioners and patients.  Telehealth should be integrated into the normal provision of health care services to enhance, not replace existing health care services and to improve access, appropriate use, and efficiency of health care services.

Telehealth Considerations

“…there are or soon will be no important clinical difference between face-to-face and telehealth consultations”.

Creating a technological interface between therapist and child removes the ‘human element’, an energetic connection that requires face to face interaction.  Occupational therapists are trained in the ‘therapeutic use of self’ which is the true gold standard for achieving effective therapy.  In the absence of a therapeutic relationship, the role of the therapist is reduced to that of an observer which while useful, yields limited information and may significantly alter treatment.  If telehealth is used for the purpose of interactive communication between therapist and child, how might children interpret the concept of ‘self’ when viewing their therapist through the screen?  The therapist might be perceived by the child to have an appearance similar to a TV character.  Interacting with a real therapist vs. a virtual image could change the ways in which the child performs or verbalizes.  To consider the term ‘self’ (child or therapist) is the same concept whether using a technological interface, or face to face interaction, is denying the fact that we are all human beings whose survival and well being depends on our ability to form healthy attachments and connections with each other.  Can a child actually form an attachment with a character on a screen, and can communication be therapeutic when the therapist is not perceived as real?

In pediatric occupational therapy, the use of touch, movement and human connection are three critical modalities used to facilitate child development and ensure efficacy of treatment techniques.  These critical modalities are not achievable using telehealth, significantly limiting use of  specific types of assessment and treatment interventions.  Relying solely on the therapist’s ability to observe, and not interact, with a child will yield a poverty of information which may result in misguided treatment interventions.

Just as with teleEducation, the rapid advancement of technology into the health care system has caught professionals unaware and unprepared regarding the consequences of unrestricted and pervasive use of telehealth services.  Thinking that telehealth will prove effective (eventually) in every setting with every individual is short sighted and will likely result in client harm.  For example, proceeding forward with telerehabilitation services in school-based settings without adequate evidenced-based research to support such initiatives, may prove to increase the wait time until the client actually receives his/her research proven 1:1 therapeutic interventions.  There are inherent problems associated with the idea that technology is useful for every condition and situation, and even more inherent problems when society chooses to ignore the detrimental consequences of technology overuse on children.  30% of children enter school developmentally delayed and 15% have a diagnosed mental illness, both associated with sedentary technology use.  Yet – we are using technology to assess and provide interventions to address these very disorders that are a result of technology overuse.

Restrictive use of telehealth is imperative until such time as specific research provides evidence to support implementation.  Specific guidelines regarding utilization of telehealth must be developed to promote ‘best practice’ and result in improvements (not erosions) in occupational therapy service delivery.

Cris Rowan, OT (Reg), BScOT, BScBi, SIPT, Approved Provider for ACTBC, AOTA and CAOT
CEO Zone’in Programs Inc. and Sunshine Coast Occupational Therapy Inc.
6840 Seaview Rd. Sechelt BC V0N3A4
604-885-0986 O, 604-740-2264 C, 604-885-0389 F
crowan@zonein.ca
websites: www.zonein.ca, www.suncoastot.com

Technology Overuse or Management?  It’s time to face the facts!

Balanced Technology Management for Schools of the New Millennium

The 21st century has borne witness to nothing short of an explosion in use of electronic technologies, both at home and in school settings. Education systems have joined the race to stock their schools with the latest and greatest new technologies, striving to provide their students with up to date learning tools and techniques. Unfortunately, there is limited research regarding the actual effectiveness of these electronic devices to facilitate learning, empirical evidence the education systems once used as the gold standard to determine teaching methods. More worrisome is the existing research regarding the long term effects of technology overuse on the developing child shows detrimental effects on physical, mental, social and academic performance. Another parameter worth considering regarding the issue of technology overuse is the fact that education systems throughout North America are experiencing whole scale financial crises. While school districts lay off teachers, close schools, and cordon off playgrounds with yellow tape due to disrepair, one has to question educators choice to continue to spend escalating amounts of money on student technologies that are antiquated before they even comes out of the box! It’s time to face the facts regarding the impact of technology overuse, and work together to manage a balance between activities children need for growth and success with technology use.

So how much technology use is too much when considering the developing child, and what measures can the education system take to ensure children who overuse technology are still achieve optimal growth and academic performance?    A quick review of the research is imperative if educators are to understand the impact of technology overuse on child health and academic performance. Children now use an average 7.5 hours per day of entertainment technologies, largely unsupervised due to the fact that 75% of children have either a TV or computer in their bedroom (Kaiser Foundation 2010). The subsequent impact of this sedentary yet chaotic technology overuse on a child’s physical, mental, social and academic performance is astounding, to say the least.  Child obesity is a North American epidemic (Tremblay M 2007). One third of children entering school are developmentally delayed (Kershaw P 2009) and 1 in 6 children have been diagnosed with a mental illness (Waddell C 2007).  Child aggression and acts of violence in schools are at an all time high (Vancouver Sun 2010), while ability to communicate and socialize at an all time low (Christakis D 2007).  Academically, literacy is declining as attention and learning disabilities escalate, leaving educators wondering how they can possibly teach children who are also sleep deprived and hard wired for high speed.

While all these above noted statistics are causally related to child technology overuse (see Zone’in Fact Sheet), few brave souls are willing to walk the path toward promoting wide scale recognition and development of effective solutions. The virtual lure is so strong and technology use so pervasive, that everyone seems to have adopted the illusion that technology may actually be good for children, a widely circulated idea amongst educational technology producers. The wide spread and escalating use of computers in school settings, without any empirical evidence to show they do nothing more than simply entertain children, is literally bankrupting the education system. Universal denial by educators that technology overuse is putting children’s existence in peril, along with the blinded persistence to allow children unrestricted use, could actually be termed a form of abuse and/or neglect in a legal sense. Caution and adherence to research evidenced facts will help guide educators back on the track toward optimizing child health and literacy. So how do education systems get on the same page and begin the difficult task of managing balance between activities children need for growth and success, with technology use?

Activities Children Need to Grow and Succeed

Build Sensational Classrooms, Gyms and Playgrounds

With one third of a child’s day spent sedentary, schools can provide organized activity that incorporates the three critical factors to ensure optimal child development and academic performance.  These activities can be performed in the classroom, gym or on school playgrounds and should include sensory and motor components:

• Touch – deep pressure tactile input promotes praxis (planned movement patterns) essential for printing, and reduces anxiety to promote learning.
• Movement – vestibular and proprioceptive input determines core posture, motor coordination, and optimizes arousal states – essential for printing, reading and academic performance in all subjects.
• Connection – student relationships with educators can promote healthy attachment formation, integral for attention and learning.

Sign up for the Foundation Series Workshops (available in webinar or DVD format) and learn everything you need to know to optimize student learning to successfully bring your school into the 21^stcentury.  Purchase the Zone’in Program to improve attention and learning through self regulation of energy.

Teach Children to Print

Chalk boards have disappeared from the primary setting, with many teachers under the illusion that because of computers, children don’t need to learn to print. Educators in the primary sector spend an average of 13 minutes per day teaching children to print, and utilize inconsistent and non-standardized instruction and evaluation methods.  The result is that children don’t know how to make their letters and numbers, slowing down output and increasing student frustration.

Purchase the Move’in Program to teach children how to print at their own developmental level.

School learn to manage balance with…

Technology Use

Identify Indicators of Technology Overuse

The first step is to identify children who overuse technology, either through use of a technology screening tool and/or record of technology overuse indicators. The Technology Screen provides an average daily technology usage as reported either by parents or the student themselves. Recording the total number of technology overuse indicators as listed below on a student’s file would guide teachers toward technology management interventions, as opposed to use of psychotropic medication. The greater number of technology overuse indicators a student has could be indicative of a possible technology addiction, requiring school counseling for the student and family.

• Obesity
• Developmental delay
• Sleep deprivation
• Mental illness
• Behavior disorder
• Aggression
• Social isolation
• Speech or communication delay
• Poor academic performance
• Attention difficulty
• Learning disability

Purchase the Unplug’in Program to build alternate skills to technology, allowing students to develop technology reduction strategies.  Purchase the Live’in Resource Guide to assist your school in developing a yearly one week intervention to raise student and staff awareness regarding the detrimental effects of technology overuse.

Technology Overuse Impact Parent Education Sessions

Education and health systems may want to team together to plan education sessions and support for parents of children who overuse technology.  The Unplug’in Parent Brochure and the Ten Steps to Successfully Unplug Your Child from Technology are two documents that can be sent home with children as parent education initiatives.

Develop Technology Usage Policy Guidelines

1. Prohibit entertainment technology use AT ALL TIMES. Children are already using 8 hours per day at home, so don’t allow additional use at school.
2. Only use technology products that are evidenced based without conflict of interest e.g. research that was not conducted by the technology production company.
3. Establish risk/harm reduction policies regarding technology use.  These policies should take into account that children with photophobic conditions such as autism are at risk for seizures.

Working together as a team – parents, educators, health professionals, government, researchers and technology production corporations can ensure sustainable futures for all children by enacting Balanced Technology Management initiatives. We can move children away from the virtual toward a healthy new reality.

Cris Rowan OT (Reg), BScOT, BScBi, SIPT, Approved Provider for ACTBC, AOTA and CAOT
CEO Zone’in Programs Inc. and Sunshine Coast Occupational Therapy Inc.
6840 Seaview Rd.  Sechelt  BC  V0N3A4
604-885-0986 O, 604-740-2264 C, 604-885-0389 F
crowan@zonein.ca
websites: www.zonein.ca, www.suncoastot.com

Schools of the New Millennium – Declining Literacy – A learning disability or a teaching disability?

The escalating proliferation of untested technology in education systems to the detriment of child literacy.

I was consulting in Northern BC in a remote Native community, and was working with a bright and energetic grd. 4 student who had “learning difficulties”.  The resource teacher stated that she thought he was underperforming, and had this year exhibited significant defiance and difficult behaviour.  I was observing this child doing math, and when he looked at me and asked if the number he just produced was a “5” (it looked a bit more like a backward “7” to me), I realized he didn’t know how to print.  I asked the resource teacher to scribe for this child, and he literally jumped to the challenge and proceeded to fly through math sheets getting all correct answers.  Here was a delightful, smart and now extremely frustrated child trapped in a system that had not taught him how to print.

I would like for you to do a small task to help illustrate how children who are not taught to print feel on a minute by minute basis in our school systems.  Write or print your name.  Now do the same mirror image backward.  Now print this way for the next week.  How do you feel right now, having been given a task you neither know how to do, nor want to do?  Confused, frustrated and a bit defiant?  Might you eventually evolve into a child with “behaviour problems” if asked to continue with this ridiculous task?   Hopefully, you would eventually develop a “motor plan” for this new way of producing output, but that’s because you are an intelligent adult with average motor skills, and not a developmentally delayed child, as 30% of our primary children are today (Kershaw P 2009).

Declining interest by educators to teaching printing skills continues to astound me.  When children’s grades are based largely on output produced by printing, one would think that some effort to teach this essential skill would be warranted. Instead, far too often, lack of printing skill is perceived as a ‘learning disability’ when really it is a ‘teacher disability’, and the consolation prize is to hand children who can’t print a computer.  Steven Graham in a 2008 survey of primary teachers found that average time spent on a daily basis teaching children to print is 13 minutes per day. In the 1970’s it was 60 minutes per day. Also reported in Graham’s study was that teachers reported methods for teaching printing were highly diverse and inconsistent, and evaluation of printing non-standardized.  The illusion of the “quick fix” by handing children who struggle with printing a laptop is ignorant and short sighted, and is resulting in soaring rates of illiteracy.  Half of grd, 8 students do not have job entry literacy for math, reading and printing (National Centre for Education Statistics 2005), yet instead of going back to the ‘tried and true’ McLean’s method of teaching printing, the education system continues to invest scarce resources on unproven and untested educational technologies (Fast Company April 2010).  When I say “unproven” and “untested” I am referring to something more than a ‘conflict of interest’ document provided by the manufacturer.  These devices require rigorous research that is reliable and reproducible over the long term.  This becomes exceptionally difficult when technology is advancing at such a rapid pace (see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cL9Wu2kWwSY ).  With dwindling resources, it might be wise to ask the question “Is it the job of the education system to provide children with updated computer applications, at the expense of not teaching ‘the basics’?”  This line of thought is likely to bankrupt the Education Ministries in short order, and is presently contributing to declining literacy!  Children with developmental delays and subsequent poor motor coordination, largely due to technology OVERUSE in the home setting (average use of entertainment technology is now 8 hours per day for the elementary child – Kaiser Foundation 2010), can no more manipulate keyboards than a pencil.  We are raising a generation of children who are largely illiterate, and as a result, are being mislabelled with behaviour diagnoses.  How long would you keep going to a job where your skills were deficient and you didn’t know what you were doing?

I recently completed a six week pilot project designed to enhance literacy and printing skills in two school kindergarten classrooms on the Sunshine Coast. This project consisted of the following components: 1) development of a K screening tool to determine sensory and motor components that limit acquiring literacy, 2) design a 3 hour teacher/SETA workshop on methods to promote literacy, 3) design and pilot test 12 twice weekly sessions to enhance attention, gross motor, oculomotor, fine motor, visual motor, praxis, and hand function skill components, 4) perform final evaluation using initial screening tool.  Approximately 30% of each classroom was identified as developmentally delayed and subsequently referred for the intervention by resource and classroom teachers, a statistic congruent with Paul Kershaw’s 2009 15 X 15 UBC HELP study findings.  Limitations were only 7 out of the total 12 session were conducted, screening and sessions required extensive revisions with consistent pattern established session 5, (largely due to unanticipated poor spatial concepts and inability to pay attention), use of printing “rules” and use of wall surface inconsistent with classroom experience (classrooms did not have chalk or white boards).  Results indicated 12% and 18% improvements in two schools, with 29% and 26% improvements in hand function, and 16% and 26% improvements in visual motor skills (the two most significant skill deficit areas).  While this pilot project was just a start toward a far more expansive printing program, it illustrated that a minimal intervention (two ½ hour weekly sessions) can go a long way toward improving children’s ability to print.

At this crucial point in time, when educators are actively making the decision to not teach printing skills, and instead turn the job of literacy over to computers, they would be wise to ask the question “Where is the evidence?” that supports this choice.  I have long and hard championed the return of printing as a curriculum-based subject with all our Canadian provincial Education Ministries.  If printing were curriculum, this would provide teachers with much needed consistency in teaching and evaluation methods.  The continued escalation of use of computers in school settings is further contributing to rising rates of ADHD and illiteracy (Christakis D 2007).  In his book “iBrain – The technological alteration of the human mind”, neurophysiologist Gary Small reports that children who use high speed technologies are rewiring their brains to not access frontal lobe (the longer neuronal tracks), and poses the question “How will educators teach children with poor executive functioning and limited impulse control?”  Whole school districts in the US are supplying every elementary aged child with TeacherMates (Fast Company April 2010), calling it the “$100 curriculum in a box” and referencing the teacher as a mere “moderator”. One has to wonder about the future longevity and rapidly changing role of the teacher.

On May 3, 2010 I will have the opportunity to speak with 20 representatives from the Ministries of Education, Health, and Children and Families in Victoria on the impact of technology on the developing child.  During this “technology craze” period, educators might want to revert to use of teaching tools that are evidence based and backed by reliable and replicable research studies, and not spend dwindling resources on technology that is antiquated before the box is even opened.

Research references can be located on www.zonein.ca under Fact Sheet.

Cris Rowan OT (Reg), BScOT, BScBi, SIPT, Approved Provider for ACTBC, AOTA and CAOT
CEO Zone’in Programs Inc. and Sunshine Coast Occupational Therapy Inc.
6840 Seaview Rd.  Sechelt  BC  V0N3A4
604-885-0986 O, 604-740-2264 C, 604-885-0389 F
crowan@zonein.ca
websites: www.zonein.ca, www.suncoastot.com

Download the article in pdf format here.

No Touch, No Connection – No Learning!

iTeach and ITV are two new ways to use technology in school and therapy based settings.  “iTeach” refers to the use of computer devices to teach children, also termed “Virtual Teaching”.  Increased use of TeachMate, ClassMate and XO computer devices as replacements for teachers is rapidly becoming the norm in both the US and Canada  http://www.fastcompany.com/magazine/144.  “ITV” is a term applied to the use of satellite TV linkage of occupational, physical and speech and language therapists to remote locations for the purpose of assessment and treatment of children.  I was recently speaking in Oklahoma to a group of therapists who informed me of this new and rapidly growing practice.  One therapist reported she was concerned regarding poor results yet continued use of this method, being told by the school system that “It’s better than nothing”!

While many of these technologies could eventually prove to be beneficial for some children, it appears as if many school systems are throwing the baby out with the bathwater, and charging ahead without adequate research to support their technological choices.  The illusion that technology will “fix” all the children with developmental problems and learning difficulties is not only short-sighted, but may result in more significant behavior management problems down the road.  Reflecting on what research and time has shown to be effective and useful techniques to facilitate attention and learning, might be wise.  Putting the “breaks” on the Technology Train to allow for research to catch up, would likely benefit all children.

Separating children from human touch and connection through increased use of technology has already had a profound effect on child behavior and mental health.  Children now watch an average 8 hours per day of technology (Kaiser Foundation 2010) resulting in 30% entering the schools developmentally delayed (P. Kershaw 2009).  Charlotte Waddell reported in 2007 that 14.3% of Canadian children have a diagnosed mental illness.  It has been theorized by many child psychiatrists and neurologists (P. Breggin 2009, F. Baughman 2009) that the underlying causal factor in all mental illness is dysfunctional attachment between the child and primary parent(s).  Autism and ADHD incidence (both consider disorders of attachment) are now at 2% and 10% respectively, and are escalating yearly (CDC/NIMH 2009).  These statistics are important to consider by educators, as any time children with attachment disorders spend connected to a device, is time spent disconnected from humanity, and could result in a worsening of their disorder.

Human touch and connection are biological needs, without which humans die. In the late 60’s, Ashley Montagu a physiology researcher from France discovered that infants in orphanages who received touch and human connection survived, whereas those who were deprived, died. Dr. Montagu began his life study of human touch and connection, and went on to author his famous book “Touching – The Human Significance of the Skin”.  Dr. Monagu’s research determined that children who were exposed to “adequate touch” were calm and relaxed, and children who were touch deprived demonstrated anxiety and depression.  Tactile input and human connection are both power tools when it comes to helping children feel safe and secure in school based settings, both salient predictors of attention and learning.

We live in world that seems to have forgotten the need for touch and human connection.  In fact, many educators have recently banned touch from schools settings, enacting “No Touch” polices.  While these policies are well meaning, and presumably put in place to protect children from what might be termed “inappropriate” or “sexual” forms of touch, removing all touch from children who have attachment disorders or difficulty learning could be disadvantageous (to say the least).  While one can certainly follow this line of reasoning, I wonder if indeed there is adequate evidence to back “No Touch” policy initiatives.  Are children actually safer from inappropriate or sexual touch in schools who prohibit all forms of touch?  Would it not be prudent to explore the idea that possibly prohibiting all touch with a “No Touch” policy might leave children more vulnerable, because they wouldn’t understand the difference between touch that is appropriate and touch that isn’t?

In my workshops I teach a form of appropriate touch termed “Deep Pressure Touch” (DPT) that I recommend combining with attachment techniques.  Protocol for this procedure requires the educator or therapist first make an “I see” or “I hear” observation of the child, which helps the child to feel seen or heard.  The educator or therapist then asks the child permission to give them a “shoulder squeeze”.  The educator positions themselves well off to the side of the child, and administers a sustained squeezing motion of both shoulders, while pressing their forearm across the child’s back.  The child can at any time move out of this position.  The shoulder squeeze has proven to be exceedingly relaxing for children, and works to ground hyper and charged energy states.

As many children are currently already falling off the Technology Train, I suggest trying a few appropriate touch and human connection techniques prior to engaging children in increasing amounts of disconnection from humanity.  Empathy requires human connection.  With increasing problems with child aggression in school-based settings (Vancouver Sun March 27, 2010), causing harm to teachers and students alike, trying a little appropriate touch and human connection are certainly more humane than locking children in seclusion rooms or restraining them with medication.

Cris Rowan, OT (Reg), BScOT, BScBi, SIPT, Approved Provider for ACTBC, AOTA and CAOT

CEO Zone’in Programs Inc. and Sunshine Coast Occupational Therapy Inc.

6840 Seaview Rd.  Sechelt  BC  V0N3A4

604-885-0986 O, 604-740-2264 C, 604-885-0389 F

crowan@zonein.ca

websites: www.zonein.ca, www.suncoastot.com

Schools of the New Millennium – Drugs and Seclusion, or Movement and Green Space?

Managing child behavior in school settings poses potential injury risk, to both staff and students, resulting in increased use of questionable practices.  In the past decade, schools have witnessed an unprecedented rise in the use of various forms of restraint to control child behavior: medication of children, use of seclusion rooms, and physical restraint.  To protect children with behavior problems and their staff, it is imperative that schools take proactive measures by establishing effective child behavior interventions and policies in an effort to avoid use of restraints.  This article profiles the increasing incidence of schools to diagnose and medicate child behavior, and use seclusion rooms and/or restraints, and contrasts the high risk and cost of this behavior management method to the low risk and cost of improved access to green space and movement.  A less discussed, but increasingly used type of restraint in school settings, is that of technology.  While many educators are under the assumption that children need unlimited access to computers to perform their school work, many of these children are actually spending the majority of their time involved in entertainment or social networking tasks – not academic-type work.  Technology used for the purpose of giving either teachers or students a “break”, is really a form of restraint, and should be prohibited.  When we know that adequate access to movement and green space is attention restorative and enhances learning, (as well as healthy!), there really is no reason for the use of any type of restraint.

15% of elementary aged children have been diagnosed with a mental illness (C. Waddell 2007) at a time when medical experts are actively debating whether these children really just have “bad behavior” (F. Baughman 2006).  15% of these children are on some form of psychotropic medication, prescribed for toddlers as young as age two (J. Zito 2002), and prescribed for foster children and children of low income families at significantly higher rates.  Almost half of the referrals for ADHD diagnosis are from teachers (L. Sax 2003) who now consider themselves as “disease spotters” (C. Phillips 2006).

While the incidence of seclusion rooms and use of physical restraints to manage child behaviour in school-based settings are increasing(M. Irwin 2009), evidence shows they are not only detrimental to child mental and physical health, but also result in an INCREASE in the behavior (S. Magee 2001).  Numerous studies point to the associated problems between seclusion and restraints, with lack of education; poor development of policy, guidelines, and regulations; and staff inconsistency, www.pent.ca.gov/beh/rst/restraintresources.pdf and www.pent.ca.gov/beh/rst/alternativestorestraint.pps.  Endemic problems with seclusion and restraints have prompted pediatric researcher and medical school professor Dr. Martin Irwin to actively advocate for the widespread elimination of their use in both child psychiatric and school-based settings.

Two of the ten healthy alternatives to use of seclusion and restraints listed in the Schools Operating Safely – Child Behavior Management Policy are daily access to “green space” and movement.  Schools planning student daily access to “green space” would effectively counteract the “overload” effects of technology use, promoting focused attention and learning.  Green space is defined as nature-based and alive, including plants, shrub, trees, grass, and flowers, and can be created either indoors, or accessed outdoors, and is further discussed in excerpted section from Zone’in February 2010 newsletter below.  Movement is defined as either cardiovascular or resistive/isometric, and should comprise approximately 3-4 hours of a child’s day, and is further discussed in excerpted section from Zone’in January 2010 newsletter below.

Excerpt from Schools of the New Millennium – Part 2 (February 2010 Zone’in Newsletter)

Indoor green space is already accessible to classrooms with a view of nature, which a number of studies have now shown to procure students with lower behavior problems and higher academic performance.  Fresh air breaks, either through opening the window or door to the outside, can prove to be essential techniques for afternoon sleepy and zoned out students.  Indoor green space can also be designed and achieved through use of greenhouse-type environments such as arboretums, conservatories and biospheres that contain aspects of nature e.g. plants, small trees, ponds with waterfall, patch of grass.  Funds might be accessed for creation of indoor green space through local community groups and organizations, or alternatively, through application to technology production corporations. One of the goals of the future Children of the New Millennium Foundation will be to promote the channeling of donations from technology production corporations to schools to reverse the negative effects of technology overuse on development and learning, through increasing access to green space.

Outdoor green space can be accessed during recess and lunch breaks, with strict adherence given to the policy of no technology use during these designated time periods.  Accessing outdoor space for a short time prior to tests or more difficult subjects such as math, can prove to be an effective strategy to ensure optimal learning. Starting a school gardening project with daily access to shoveling a bit of dirt would not only provide green space access, but also provide necessary proprioceptive input for calming an aggressive or anxious child.  Weekly field trips to a local park, woods, farm or beach, and/or yearly classroom or school camping trips would provide children with a more significant experience of the soothing aspects of nature.  Accessing Mother Nature feeds not only the body and mind, but also the soul, and is truly the best remedy for problems associated with technology overuse.

Excerpt from Schools of the New Millennium – Part 1 (January 2010 Zone’in Newsletter)

Dr. John Ratey, child psychiatrist and author of Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain discovered that 45 min. of sustained aerobic activity at heart rate 65-75% of maximum sufficient to gain one grade level in only 4 months!  Dr. Ratey goes on to report the following correlations between exercise and learning, impulsivity and mental health.

Exercise and Learning

• Improved cognition: exercise enhances memory and learning through improved neurogenesis in hippocampus and frontal cortex.
• Decreases ADHD: increases dopamine transmitter, which improves focus and attention.
• Increases attention:  releases nerve growth factor to inhibit impulsivity, promoting focus.

Exercise and Impulsivity

• Impulsivity control is located in the frontal lobes.
• Overuse of technology “short circuits” access to frontal lobes.
• Exercise increases blood flow to frontal lobes, thereby decreasing damage caused by technology overuse.
• Exercise decreases impulsivity and increases attention.

Exercise and Mental Health

• Reduces anxiety: rewires response pathways.
• Decreases stress: improves blood flow to brain to enhance neural connections.
• Decreases depression: elevates endorphins and dopamine, regulates serotonin.
• Decreases addiction tendency: increases dopamine, enhances the brain’s own ability to satiate.

The following is a CBC film on the work of Dr. John Ratey.

http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/story/2009/10/06/national-braingains.html

In moving our children toward sustainable futures, and creating healthy environments that support attention and learning, it is imperative that schools embrace increased access to nature and movement based strategies. Children who act out are simply craving love and attention, and the only way they know how to get it is to be extreme in their behavior. Reaching out with a kind word and deep pressure touch techniques can not only calm an anxious child, but enable that child to pay attention and learn. Employing attention restorative strategies of access to nature and movement, will successfully take schools into the new millennium, creating sustainable futures for all children.

Schools of the New Millennium – Sitting Still or Moving to Learn?

Exercise and the Learning Zone

During in-classroom prototype testing of the Zone’in and Move’in Programs, we found that specific types of sensation and movement optimized children’s attention and learning, whereas other types either made no difference or were detrimental to children’s overall academic performance.  We also discovered through trials of numerous sensory and motor tools and techniques, that each child’s arousal system is unique, precluding use of whole-classroom type activities.  Some children whose energy was In the Zone prior to trialing a Zone’in tool or technique, actually were quite upset when they found their energy either too charged or too hyper, disabling their learning!  Each child should therefore have adequate information and opportunity to develop their own specific activities to regulate their sensory system (body energy).  Achieving optimal arousal state for attention and learning is best achieved through use of the widely popular Zone’in Program which comes with Zone-O-Meters to measure energy, as well as Zone’in DVD, Know Your Zone and Tone Your Zone posters and a variety of Zone’in sensory and motor tools and techniques to get your whole classroom Zone’in to Learn!

So what types of sensation and movement proved most effective in attaining an optimal arousal state for paying attention and learning?  Two types of movement – vestibular and proprioceptive, deep pressure touch, and connection with other human beings (not computers!).  Examples of activities that stimulate the vestibular system are anything that moves the child off their centre of gravity, thus requiring anti-gravity muscles to bring them back to stabilize their core e.g. suspended swings, slides, merry-go-rounds.  Core stability is essential for eventual coordination of both sides of the body, as well as coordination of eyes to hands.  Proprioceptive stimulation is necessary for fine and gross motor development, and is achieved with heavy work type activities involving push/pull/lift/carry such as tug of war, climbing on jungle gyms and using an exercise bike.  Tactile stimulation plays an integral role in the development of “praxis” or planned muscle movements required for sports or printing.  “Dyspraxia” is when a child has a poor sense of where their body is in space, and often bumps into things or overshoots when picking up objects.  Use of deep pressure touch to the tactile system can reduce anxiety, as well as help a child feel more comfortable in their own skin, thus leading to improved ability to plan  movements.  Supporting a child’s attachment to significant others can result in lowered anxiety and increased confidence, greatly enhancing learning, and can be achieved through “I see you….” and “I hear you…” statements followed by active listening e.g. “I see you are looking upset; can I help you with your math” or “I hear you don’t like to print; what are the hardest letters for you so we can practice together”.

Dr. John Ratey, child psychiatrist and author of Spark: The Revolutionary New Science of Exercise and the Brain discovered that 45 min. of sustained aerobic activity at heart rate 65-75% of maximum sufficient to gain one grade level in only 4 months!  Dr. Ratey goes on to report the following correlations between exercise and learning, impulsivity and mental health. 

Exercise and Learning

• Improved cognition: exercise enhances memory and learning through improved neurogenesis in hippocampus and frontal cortex.
• Decreases ADHD: increases dopamine transmitter, which improves focus and attention.
• Increases attention:  releases nerve growth factor to inhibit impulsivity, promoting focus.

Exercise and Impulsivity

• Impulsivity control is located in the frontal lobes.
• Overuse of technology “short circuits” access to frontal lobes.
• Exercise increases blood flow to frontal lobes, thereby decreasing damage caused by technology overuse.
• Exercise decreases impulsivity and increases attention.

Exercise and Mental Health

• Reduces anxiety: rewires response pathways.
• Decreases stress: improves blood flow to brain to enhance neural connections.
• Decreases depression: elevates endorphins and dopamine, regulates serotonin.
• Decreases addiction tendency: increases dopamine, enhances the brain’s own ability to satiate.

The following is a CBC film on the work of Dr. John Ratey.

http://www.cbc.ca/thenational/indepthanalysis/story/2009/10/06/national-braingains.html

While everyone agrees that recess is an essential part of a child’s day for physical activity, many children are allowed technology use during recess, gravely limiting opportunity for movement.  Another limitation to movement on t he playground is one in three children are obese, and don’t readily join in playground socializing and movement.  Dr. RM Barros found out the following information in his study.

Exercise and Recess

• Study looked at 11,000 third-graders ages 8-9 years.
• Those who had greater than 15 minutes per day of recess had teacher reports of better classroom behavior.
• 30% had little or no recess (< 15 minutes per day).
• 40% of schools surveyed had cut back at least one daily recess period.
• Since the 1970’s, children have lost 12 hours per week in free time.

If you would like to hear more about these great tools and techniques to promote attention and learning – attend our up and coming Foundation Series Workshop Webinar Sitting Still – The Science of Attention and Learning. this coming Wednesday February 3, 2010 at 8 AM Pacific Standard Time.

See you there!

Cris Rowan

This article is the first of a six part series on successful school-based strategies to optimize attention and enhance learning ability, and follows the Zone’in Child Development Series December 2009 newsletter advocating for school implementation of the School Operating Safely (SOS) – Child Behavior Management Policy and Procedures. This policy has recently been forwarded to all provincial Education Ministers, as well as members of the Council of Ministers of Education.

1) Schools of the New Millennium – Go Virtual or Go Green? will contrast the outcome on academic performance of two strategies: 1) allocating funds to technology vs. 2) ensuring children access “green space” on a daily basis.  Go Virtual or Go Green? will profile a variety of cost effective strategies for improving green space in school-based settings.

2) Schools of the New Millennium – Sitting Still or Moving to Learn? will review current research on how specific types of organized movement improve attention and learning ability, while sitting still stops children from learning.  Sitting Still or Moving to Learn? will emphasize classroom, gym and playground strategies for incorporating these types of movement into daily routines.

3) Schools of the New Millennium – Drugs and Seclusion or Green Space and Movement? profiles the increasing incidence of schools to diagnose and medicate child behavior, and use seclusion rooms and/or restraints, and contrasts the high risk and cost of this behavior management method to the low risk and cost of improved access to green space and movement.

4) Schools of the New Millennium – “No Touch” – No Learning! will review the neurological benefits of touch and human connection on formation of praxis (planned movement patterns), and reduction of anxiety, and profiles the devastating consequences of “No Touch” policies on learning ability in school environments.  “No Touch” – No Learning! discusses how teachers can use Deep Pressure Touch techniques and strategies in school based settings to enhance attention and learning.

5) Schools of the New Millennium – Computers or Printing? will cover current research on why children need to learn to print to achieve literacy, and how defaulting to computers is creating a generation of illiterate children.  Computers or Printing? profiles “whole school” based printing strategies to improve not only academic performance in every subject, but also improve student behavior of children who have not achieved printing fluency.

6) Schools of the New Millennium – Technology Overuse or Management? will review current research findings on the impact of technology overuse on academic performance, and profile how schools can begin to manage balance between activities children need to grow and succeed with technology use.

Schools of the New Millennium – Go Virtual or Go Green?

Upgrading technology is time consuming and costly, whether in a home, business or school –based setting.  Decisions to upgrade rapidly evolving technology in schools may not serve the best interests of students, nor advance their ability to learn.  Schools are quickly moving into the “age of technology” with limited empirical research to support technology initiatives, and subsequently limited long term planning.  Current research now indicates that the use of computers in school settings actually reduces a student’s ability to focus on task and pay attention, impacting on comprehension and memory, and also impairs student ability to think critically (Mangen 2008).  Long periods immersed in a sedentary, virtual world “overloads” the brain, resulting in energy that is way out of the Zone to Learn, and behaviors that are difficult to manage in classroom settings (Small 2008).  When substantial research now shows that as little as 20 minutes per day access to “green space” restores attention, significantly improving learning ability, why are schools continuing to invest resources and funds into computers and virtual classrooms (Kuo & Faber-Taylor 2004)?

Go Virtual?

Technology consultants, hardware, software, and internet security are just a few of the costs of technology upgrading, which often exceed school budgets, requiring transfer of funds from other areas.  Teachers attending the Foundation Series Workshops report that these technology upgrades frequently come at a cost to the once revered field trips, library services, art and music supplies, and gym and playground equipment.  Workshop participants report that they experience pressure from both school administrations and parents to provide students with the latest technology, or the student will “fall behind”.  Possibly schools might benefit from forming a Balanced Technology Management Committee consisting of not only the school technology consultant, but also teachers and administration who have current knowledge regarding the detrimental effects of technology overuse on academic performance http://www.zoneinworkshops.com/fact-sheet/zonein-fact-sheet/. This committee should also have an understanding of what type of activities children need to engage in to ensure adequate sensory and motor development to achieve eventual literacy skills.  The Balanced Technology Management Committee would subsequently develop a cost effective, long term technology plan that is reflective and consistent with recommendations from current research, and ensures that funds are still available to support healthy activities that optimize student growth and success.

Why Not Go Green?

Schools planning student daily access to “green space” would effectively counteract the “overload” effects of technology use, promoting focused attention and learning.  Green space is defined as nature-based and alive, including plants, shrub, trees, grass, and flowers, and can be created either indoors, or accessed outdoors.

Indoor green space is already accessible to classrooms with a view of nature, which a number of studies have now shown to procure students with lower behavior problems and higher academic performance.  Fresh air breaks either through opening the window or door to the outside, can prove to be essential techniques for afternoon sleepy and zoned out students.  Indoor green space can also be designed and achieved through use of greenhouse-type environments such as arboretums, conservatories and biospheres that contain aspects of nature e.g. plants, small trees, ponds with waterfall, patch of grass.  Funds might be accessed for creation of indoor green space through local community groups and organizations, or alternatively, through application to technology production corporations. One of the goals of the future Children of the New Millennium Foundation will be to promote the channeling of donations from technology production corporations to schools to reverse the negative effects of technology overuse on development and learning, through increasing access to green space.

Outdoor green space can be accessed during recess and lunch breaks, with strict adherence given to the policy of no technology use during these designated time periods.  Accessing outdoor space for a short time prior to tests or more difficult subjects such as math, can prove to be an effective strategy to ensure optimal learning. Starting a school gardening project with daily access to shoveling a bit of dirt would not only provide green space access, but also provide necessary proprioceptive input for calming an aggressive or anxious child.  Weekly field trips to a local park, woods, farm or beach, and/or yearly classroom or school camping trips would provide children with a more significant experience of the soothing aspects of nature.  Accessing Mother Nature feeds not only the body and mind, but also the soul, and is truly the best remedy for problems associated with technology overuse.

Support Weblinks

• Last Child in the Woods – www.richardlouv.com
• First Nations – www.articwintergames.com
• Children and Nature Network -www.childrenandnature.org
• Nature’s Classroom – www.naturesclassroom.net
• Forest Schools – www.forestschools.com
• Learning With Nature Idea Book – www.arborday.org

References

1. Mangen, A. Hypertext fiction reading: haptics and immersion. Journal of Research. 2008; 31(4):404-419.
2. Small G, Vorgan V. iBrain: Surviving the technological alteration of the modern mind.  2008: HarperCollins, New York, NY.
3. Kuo FE, Faber Taylor A.  A Potential Natural Treatment for Attention-Deficit/Hyperactivity Disorder: Evidence from a National Study.  American Journal of Public Health. 2004; 94(9):1580-1586.

Problem

Managing child behavior in school settings poses potential injury risk, to both staff and students, resulting in increased use of questionable practices.  In the past decade, schools have witnessed an unprecedented rise in the medication of children, use of seclusion rooms, and the need of physical restraint.  To protect children with behavior problems and their staff, it is imperative that schools take proactive measures by establishing effective child behavior interventions and policies.

Rationale

20 years ago children played outside, walked or rode their bikes to school, and watched 1-2 hours television per day.  Today elementary-aged children are exposed to an average of 8 hours per day of combined technologies, resulting in an epidemic of physical, mental, social and academic disorders, often described as “behaviors” (Zone’in Fact Sheet).  As children connect more and more to technology, they are disconnecting from humanity at an alarming rate.  In Canada, 30% of children enter school developmentally delayed (Kershaw P. 2009), and 14.3% have a diagnosed mental illness (Waddell C. 2007).  With the majority of media content now containing violent images (Anderson, C. 2008), managing child aggression in schools, has put both students and staff at risk for significant injuries.

Policy

The following ten evidenced based interventions should be implemented by schools for a six month period, prior to any behavioral diagnosis, medication, or use of seclusion rooms or restraints.

Procedure

The attached “Schools Operating Safely (SOS) – Policy and Procedures” form can be used by school administrations as a guideline to determine proactive interventions to manage escalating child behaviors, thereby reducing risk of injury to students and staff.  Potential funding for SOS equipment can be obtained through applications to pharmaceutical and/or technology production corporations.

Evaluation

Implementation of the “Schools Operating Safely” policy should not only reduce risk of injury to students and staff, but also will serve to improve student’s physical, mental, social and academic performance.  Therefore, school measurement of the following outcomes are suggested, following an initial baseline data gathering period:  attention and learning ability, printing output speed, obesity, developmental delay, behavior, office referrals, school fights, suspensions and grades.

Research

Alphabetical – http://www.zoneinworkshops.com/research/foundation-series-workshops-2/

Topic Fact Sheet – http://www.zoneinworkshops.com/fact-sheet/zonein-fact-sheet/

© Zone’in Programs Inc. 2009