Abstract
In this chapter, I consider the aesthetics of digital playscapes for young children. I make an effort to move beyond the concept of ‘screen time,’ from two perspectives. First, I position the current concept of ‘screen time’ in relationship to historical media panics. These include those of the late twentieth century that focused on the sickening powers of television programming for children. Here, the American Academy of Pediatrics’ first reversal in August 2015 (American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Communications and Media. (2016). Media and young minds. Pediatrics, 138(5), e20162591. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-2591.) of its earlier recommendation on screen time is of note. Second, I consider digital playscapes for young children from the perspective of new media art. As new media, young children’s use of digital technologies has both potentials and constraints. In this way, I share documentation from research with children using new media to illustrate that young children play with new media as they play with the traditional media forms with which childhood is typically associated (e.g., blocks, the sandbox, crayons, paint, clay, and ‘loose parts’). Beyond this, young children’s use of new media offers novel possibilities that are not always accessible through traditional art media. Such capacities form the cornerstone of a consideration of the aesthetic potentials of digital playscapes.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
References
American Academy of Pediatrics. (2015). Media and children communication toolkit. Retrieved from, https://www.aap.org/en-us/advocacy-and-policy/aap-health-initiatives/Pages/Media-and-Children.aspx
American Academy of Pediatrics Council on Communications and Media. (2016). Media and young minds. Pediatrics, 138(5), e20162591. https://doi.org/10.1542/peds.2016-2591.
Axe Cop. (2009). Retrieved from, http://axecop.com/
Bell, V. (2010). Don’t touch that dial! A history of media technology scares, from the printing press to Facebook. Slate. Retrieved from, http://www.slate.com/articles/health_and_science/science/2010/02/dont_touch_that_dial.html
Bond, E. (2014). Childhood, mobile technologies, and everyday experiences. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Caine’s Arcade. (2011). Short film. Retrieved from, http://cainesarcade.com/
Carly’s Café. (2012). Retrieved from, http://carlyscafe.com/
CNN World News Story Page. (1997, December 17). Cartoon-based illness mystifies Japan. Retrieved from, http://www.cnn.com/WORLD/9712/17/japan.cartoon/
Dahlberg, G., & Moss, P. (2006). Introduction: Our Reggio Emilia. In C. Rinaldi (Ed.), In dialogue with Reggio Emilia: Listening, researching, and learning (pp. 1–22). London: Routledge.
Hanes, J. & Weisman, E. (2011). LEGO brick as pixel: Self, community, and digital communication. Journal of Social Theory in Art Education, 31. Retrieved from, http://scholarscompass.vcu.edu/jstae/vol31/iss1/4/
Hendricks, M. (2016). Retrieved from, https://busymockingbird.com/about/
Ivashkevich, O. (2009). Children’s drawings as a sociocultural practice: Remaking gender and popular culture. Studies in Art Education, 51(1), 50–63.
James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge, UK: Blackwell Publishers.
Jenkins, H. (2010, January 20). “Going Bonkers” (Revisited): A father-son conversation about Pee Wee (Part Two). (Web blog post). Retrieved from, http://henryjenkins.org/2010/01/going_bonkers_revisited_a_fath.html
Malaguzzi, L. (1994). Your image of the child: Where teaching begins. Retrieved from, https://reggioalliance.org/downloads/malaguzzi:ccie:1994.pdf
McClure, M. (2010). Site-specific kinderculture and digital media. Arts & Learning Research Journal, 26(1), 20–34.
McClure, M. (2011). Child as totem: Redressing the myth of inherent creativity in early childhood art education. Studies in Art Education, 52(20), 127–141.
McClure, M., & Sweeny, R. (2015). Children’s digital lives. In K. Heider & M. Jalongo (Eds.), Young children and families in the information age: Applications of technology in early childhood (pp. 245–254). New York, NY: Springer.
Molloy, M. (2016, January 16). The real story behind a viral Rembrandt ‘kids on phones’ photo. The Telegraph. Retrieved from, http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/newstopics/howaboutthat/12103150/Rembrandt-The-Night-Watch-The-real-story-behind-the-kids-on-phones-photo.html
Qvortrup, J., Corsaro, W., & Honig, S. (Eds.). (2009). The Palgrave handbook of childhood studies. London: Palgrave Macmillan.
Schulte, C. M. (2011). Verbalization in children’s drawing performances: Toward a metaphorical continuum of inscription, extension, and re-inscription. Studies in Art Education, 55(1), 20–34.
The Scared is scared. (2011). Retrieved from, https://vimeo.com/58659769
Thompson, C. (1995). What should I draw today? Sketchbooks in early childhood. Art Education, 48, 6–11.
Thompson, C. (2002). Celebrating complexity: Children’s talk about the media. International Journal of Education and the Arts, 3(2). Retrieved from, www.ijea.org/v3n2/
Thompson, C. (2003). Kinderculture in the art classroom: Early childhood art and the mediation of culture. Studies in Art Education, 44(2), 135–146.
Thompson, C. (2004, March). The Ket aesthetic: Visual culture in childhood. Paper presented at the Objects in/and Visual Culture Conference, State College, PA.
Thompson, C. (2006). The “Ket” aesthetic: Visual culture in childhood. In J. Fineberg (Ed.), When we were young: New perspectives on the art of the child (pp. 31–43). Berkeley, CA: University of California Press.
Thompson, C. (2009). Mira! looking, listening, and lingering in research with children. Visual Arts Research, 35(1), 24–34.
Thompson, C., & Bales, S. (1991). “Michael doesn’t like my dinosaurs”: Conversations in a preschool art class. Studies in Art Education, 33, 43–55.
UN General Assembly (1989, November 20). Convention on the rights of the child. Retrieved from, http://www.ohchr.org/EN/ProfessionalInterest/Pages/CRC.aspx
Wilson, B. (1966). An experimental study designed to alter fifth and sixth grade students’ perceptions of painting. Studies in Art Education, 8(1), 33–42.
Wilson, B. (1974). The superheroes of JC Holz: Plus an outline of a theory of child art. Art Education, 27(8), 2–9.
Wilson, B. (1976). Little Julian’s impure drawings: Why children make art. Art Education, 17(2), 45–61.
Wilson, B. (2004). Child art after modernism: Visual culture and new narratives. In E. Eisner & M. Day (Eds.), Handbook of research and policy in art education (pp. 299–328). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
Wilson, B. (2005). More lessons from the superheroes of J. C. Holz: The visual culture of childhood and the third pedagogical site. Art Education, 58(6), 18–34.
Wilson, B. (2007). Art, visual culture, and child/adult collaborative images: Recognizing the other-than. Visual Arts Research, 33(2), 6–20.
Wilson, M., & Wilson, B. (2010). Teaching children to draw (2nd ed.). Worchester, MA: Davis Publications.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
McClure, M. (2018). Beyond Screen Time: Aesthetics of Digital Playscapes for Young Children. In: Schulte, C., Thompson, C. (eds) Communities of Practice: Art, Play, and Aesthetics in Early Childhood. Landscapes: the Arts, Aesthetics, and Education, vol 21. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70644-3_10
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-70644-3_10
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Cham
Print ISBN: 978-3-319-70643-6
Online ISBN: 978-3-319-70644-3
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)