Hey Everybody!
Check out what I read yesterday. I think it makes tons of sense. Let me know what u think and how this will change the way u live your life...or not? Either way, I want to hear from u.
In Christ,
Omar
____________________________
Downloaded on 2/7/12 from http://teens.webmd.com/news/20120203/can-too-much-texting-make-youth-shallow
Too Much Texting Make Teens Shallow?
Study: Young People Who Text Frequently Focus on Wealth, Image; Less on Moral, Spiritual Goals
By Kathleen Doheny
WebMD Health News
Reviewed by Laura J. Martin, MD
Feb. 3, 2012 -- Teens and young adults who text frequently -- such as more than 300 text messages a day -- may be risking more than sore thumbs, according to a new study.
"Heavy texters do seem to be a little more materialistic and less concerned about inward growth," says Paul Trapnell, PhD, associate professor of psychology at the University of Winnipeg in Canada.
The frequent texting, he says, is ''weakly correlated with traits, goals, and attitudes that indicate low interest and engagement in reflective thought." Those who texted very frequently were also more concerned about wealth and image than those who did not text as often.
He conducted the study with Lisa Sinclair, PhD, associate professor of psychology at the University of Winnipeg. She presented the findings in San Diego at the 13th Annual Meeting of the Society for Personality and Social Psychology.
"One can't say it's cause and effect," Trapnell tells WebMD. "There could be a hundred different reasons why these associations exist."
"Although the overall size of the finding is small in absolute terms, the finding was very reliable across several years," he tells WebMD. So far, they have looked at five years of data.
Too Much Texting: Study Details
The researchers surveyed more than 2,200 college psychology class students about their texting frequency. They were ages 18 to 22. Data were collected from 2007 through 2011.
Cell phone texting has become the preferred communication method between teens and friends, according to a 2010 report by the Pew Research Center. It found that 72% of all teens surveyed use text messaging. That's up from 51% in 2006.
For the Canadian study, the students noted how many text messages they sent or received (whichever number was higher) on their highest-use day of the month. They reported only non-work-related texts.
About 30% of the students had a peak rate of more than 200 texts a day. Twelve percent had a peak rate of more than 300 a day.
The researchers then gave them a battery of tests. These included:
• A standard personality test to measure such traits as extroversion and openness to experiences.
• A questionnaire that measures tendencies to engage in reflection and self-reflection: The students agreed or disagreed with such statements as, "I often love to look at my life in philosophical ways."
• A survey that asked students to rate the importance of numerous life goals: Goals included wealth, fame, image, power, achievement, morality, community, family, health, spirituality, and others.
The researchers looked to see if texting frequency had an effect on the test results.
They wanted to test the so-called ''shallowing hypothesis," as described in the Nicholas Carr best seller, The Shallows, and by scientists. It suggests that very brief media social interaction such as texting encourages rapid, relatively shallow thought.
"Those who texted more than 100 a day were 30% less likely to feel strongly that leading an ethical, principled life was important to them," Trapnell tells WebMD. "This was in comparison to those who texted 50 or less a day."
Those who texted frequently also tended to be less reflective than those who texted less often.
The researchers cannot pinpoint a number at which the differences kick in. They found ''a general linear trend." The higher the number of texts, the greater the effect.
They looked to see if being from a higher-income home might explain the effects of placing more importance on wealth. It did not, Trapnell says.
The study has limitations, he says. For instance, naturally reflective youth may just not be into texting. They are continuing the research.
Meanwhile, Trapnell has a suggestion for those with high texting frequency: "It might be a great idea if they spent more quiet time."
The study was partially funded by the federal Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada.
Frequent Texting and Shallowness: Perspective
The new research ties in to similar research by Mary Helen Immordino-Yang, EdD, assistant professor of psychology, education, and neuroscience at the University of Southern California. She reviewed the new findings but was not involved in the study.
In recent years, she says, scientists have focused on the brain's ''default'' mode. That refers to what the brain does when it is quiet and rested. When the brain is in this mode, she and other experts believe, it provides valuable time to reflect on life and situations. They think that downtime is important.
Distractions such as frequent texting can hamper it, she says.
"If you are habitually pulled into the outside world by distracting media, you may be systematically undermining opportunities to reflect about the moral, social, emotional, and longer-term implications of a situation," she says.
It is possible, she says, that those who text frequently are so distracted from this reflection that ''they get in the habit of thinking about things in a shallow way."
Her advice to parents of younger children who have not yet begun to text? "For healthy development, I think it is essential that we encourage our kids to have free time in which there are no distractions from TV, media, texting, you name it,'' she says.
This downtime allows kids that crucial time to reflect, she says.
These findings were presented at a medical conference. They should be considered preliminary as they have not yet undergone the "peer review" process, in which outside experts scrutinize the data prior to publication in a medical journal.
Wednesday, February 8, 2012
Wednesday, January 25, 2012
Surprise Pregnancy?!
Hello All:
It's been awhile since I've written on my blog. I've been writing a lot on my column "Miranda Writes" at insightmagazine.org
Anyhow, I wanted to begin posting on my blog weekly.
I read this article last week and I wanted to hear from others about what they thought the real reason why so many of our teens are getting pregnant.
As a counselor, my contention is that ultimately the reason so many teens are getting pregnant is that they're looking for love in all the wrong places.
Read the article and let me know what you think.
Blessings,
Omar
Downloaded on 1/24/12 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-study-many-teen-moms-didnt-think-they-could-get-pregnant-didnt-use-birth-control/2012/01/19/gIQA9P6zAQ_story.html
CDC study: Many teen moms didn’t think they could get pregnant, didn’t use birth control
By Associated Press, Published: January 19
ATLANTA — A new government study suggests a lot of teenage girls are clueless about their chances of getting pregnant.
In a survey of thousands of teenage mothers who had unintended pregnancies, about a third who didn’t use birth control said the reason was they didn’t believe they could pregnant.
Why they thought that isn’t clear. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey didn’t ask teens to explain.
But other researchers have talked to teen moms who believed they couldn’t get pregnant the first time they had sex, didn’t think they could get pregnant at that time of the month or thought they were sterile.
“This report underscores how much misperception, ambivalence and magical thinking put teens at risk for unintended pregnancy,” said Bill Albert, a spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
Other studies have asked teens about their contraception use and beliefs about pregnancy. But the CDC report released Thursday is the first to focus on teens who didn’t want to get pregnant but did.
The researchers interviewed nearly 5,000 teenage girls in 19 states who gave birth after unplanned pregnancies in 2004 through 2008. The survey was done through mailed questionnaires with telephone follow-up.
About half of the girls in the survey said they were not using any birth control when they got pregnant. That’s higher than surveys of teens in general, which have found that fewer than 20 percent said they didn’t use contraception the last time they had sex.
“I think what surprised us was the extent to which they were not using contraception,” said Lorrie Gavin, a CDC senior scientist who co-authored the report.
Some of the teen moms were asked what kind of birth control they used: Nearly 20 percent said they used the pill or a birth control patch. Another 24 percent said they used condoms.
CDC officials said they do not believe that the pill, condoms and other forms of birth control were faulty. Instead, they think the teens failed to use it correctly or consistently.
Only 13 percent of those not using contraception said they didn’t because they had trouble getting it.
Another finding: Nearly a quarter of the teen moms who did not use contraception said they didn’t because their partner did not want them to. That suggests that sex education must include not only information about anatomy and birth control, but also about how to deal with situations in which a girl feels pressured to do something she doesn’t want to, Albert said.
The findings are sobering, he added. But it’s important to remember that the overall teen birth rate has been falling for some time, and recently hit its lowest mark in about 70 years.
Albert said it would be a mistake to come away from the report saying, “They can’t figure this out?” ‘’Most of them are figuring it out,” he said.
___
Online:
CDC report: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
It's been awhile since I've written on my blog. I've been writing a lot on my column "Miranda Writes" at insightmagazine.org
Anyhow, I wanted to begin posting on my blog weekly.
I read this article last week and I wanted to hear from others about what they thought the real reason why so many of our teens are getting pregnant.
As a counselor, my contention is that ultimately the reason so many teens are getting pregnant is that they're looking for love in all the wrong places.
Read the article and let me know what you think.
Blessings,
Omar
Downloaded on 1/24/12 from http://www.washingtonpost.com/national/health-science/cdc-study-many-teen-moms-didnt-think-they-could-get-pregnant-didnt-use-birth-control/2012/01/19/gIQA9P6zAQ_story.html
CDC study: Many teen moms didn’t think they could get pregnant, didn’t use birth control
By Associated Press, Published: January 19
ATLANTA — A new government study suggests a lot of teenage girls are clueless about their chances of getting pregnant.
In a survey of thousands of teenage mothers who had unintended pregnancies, about a third who didn’t use birth control said the reason was they didn’t believe they could pregnant.
Why they thought that isn’t clear. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention survey didn’t ask teens to explain.
But other researchers have talked to teen moms who believed they couldn’t get pregnant the first time they had sex, didn’t think they could get pregnant at that time of the month or thought they were sterile.
“This report underscores how much misperception, ambivalence and magical thinking put teens at risk for unintended pregnancy,” said Bill Albert, a spokesman for the Washington, D.C.-based National Campaign to Prevent Teen and Unplanned Pregnancy.
Other studies have asked teens about their contraception use and beliefs about pregnancy. But the CDC report released Thursday is the first to focus on teens who didn’t want to get pregnant but did.
The researchers interviewed nearly 5,000 teenage girls in 19 states who gave birth after unplanned pregnancies in 2004 through 2008. The survey was done through mailed questionnaires with telephone follow-up.
About half of the girls in the survey said they were not using any birth control when they got pregnant. That’s higher than surveys of teens in general, which have found that fewer than 20 percent said they didn’t use contraception the last time they had sex.
“I think what surprised us was the extent to which they were not using contraception,” said Lorrie Gavin, a CDC senior scientist who co-authored the report.
Some of the teen moms were asked what kind of birth control they used: Nearly 20 percent said they used the pill or a birth control patch. Another 24 percent said they used condoms.
CDC officials said they do not believe that the pill, condoms and other forms of birth control were faulty. Instead, they think the teens failed to use it correctly or consistently.
Only 13 percent of those not using contraception said they didn’t because they had trouble getting it.
Another finding: Nearly a quarter of the teen moms who did not use contraception said they didn’t because their partner did not want them to. That suggests that sex education must include not only information about anatomy and birth control, but also about how to deal with situations in which a girl feels pressured to do something she doesn’t want to, Albert said.
The findings are sobering, he added. But it’s important to remember that the overall teen birth rate has been falling for some time, and recently hit its lowest mark in about 70 years.
Albert said it would be a mistake to come away from the report saying, “They can’t figure this out?” ‘’Most of them are figuring it out,” he said.
___
Online:
CDC report: http://www.cdc.gov/mmwr
Copyright 2012 The Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Tuesday, December 7, 2010
New Low in Human Narcissism
Hey Everybody:
Check out the article that I just read a second ago. This is serious! Some guy actually did this!
Here's the article: http://my.earthlink.net/article/str?guid=20101206/06869a81-8dac-46b6-b3c7-c1241403cede
Write back and let me know what you think.
--Omar
Check out the article that I just read a second ago. This is serious! Some guy actually did this!
Here's the article: http://my.earthlink.net/article/str?guid=20101206/06869a81-8dac-46b6-b3c7-c1241403cede
Write back and let me know what you think.
--Omar
Monday, December 6, 2010
What Are They Thinking ?!
Hey Everybody:
I just read a great new article about new research on the teen brain. Take a look:
http://www.parade.com/news/2010/11/28-inside-the-teenage-brain.html
Blessings,
Omar
I just read a great new article about new research on the teen brain. Take a look:
http://www.parade.com/news/2010/11/28-inside-the-teenage-brain.html
Blessings,
Omar
Thursday, September 23, 2010
HA! I knew it!!!
Hello All:
Check out this article that I just read!
Downloaded on 09/23/10 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39038581/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/
Facebook use can lower grades by 20 percent, study says
Study finds university students distracted by social networking site
By Suzanne Choney
msnbc.com
updated 9/7/2010 6:26:19 PM ET
Does the "F" in Facebook stand for an "F" in school? A new study says that college students who are on Facebook while studying or doing homework wind up getting 20 percent lower grades than students who don't have the social networking site in visual range, or even running in the background on their computers or mobile phones.
The study, reported in the Daily Mail of Britain, was done by Netherlands psychologist Paul A. Kirschnera of the Centre for Learning Sciences and Technologies at the Open University of the Netherlands, and Aryn C. Karpinskib of Ohio State University. It will be published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior.
Kirschnera told the Daily Mail that his team studied 219 U.S. university students between ages 19 and 54, and found that Facebook users had a typical grade point average of 3.06, while "non-users" had an average GPA of 3.82.
The psychologist said the study wasn't about whether Facebook's good or bad, but goes more to the stereotype that younger people are fluid multi-taskers —sending text message, listening to music, reading a book, all at the same time, for example —without any problems. (Driving and texting at the same time is, of course, being the among the most dangerous multi-tasking activities anyone can do.)
"The problem is that most people have Facebook or other social networking sites, their e-mails and maybe instant messaging constantly running in the background while they are carrying out other tasks," Kirschnera told the newspaper.
"Our study, and other previous work, suggests that while people may think constant task-switching allows them to get more done in less time, the reality is it extends the amount of time needed to carry out tasks and leads to more mistakes.
"We should resist the fashionable views of educational gurus that children can multi-task, and that we should adapt our education systems accordingly to keep up with the times."
Among the comments to the story was this one, from "I'moverhere" in Britain: "Believe me, if it isn't Facebook, it's something else. There's always something ready to distract a bored mind. While you're at it why not do a similar survey relating to consoles, television, texting, radio, football practice and staring into space?
"Having said that, Facebook does take up a lot of time due to society's increasing dependence on computers for education. Even in 2004 when I was doing A levels, I would get information from a book rather than Wikipedia. This instant-satisfaction-minimum-effort society has a lot to answer for."
Check out this article that I just read!
Downloaded on 09/23/10 from http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/39038581/ns/technology_and_science-tech_and_gadgets/
Facebook use can lower grades by 20 percent, study says
Study finds university students distracted by social networking site
By Suzanne Choney
msnbc.com
updated 9/7/2010 6:26:19 PM ET
Does the "F" in Facebook stand for an "F" in school? A new study says that college students who are on Facebook while studying or doing homework wind up getting 20 percent lower grades than students who don't have the social networking site in visual range, or even running in the background on their computers or mobile phones.
The study, reported in the Daily Mail of Britain, was done by Netherlands psychologist Paul A. Kirschnera of the Centre for Learning Sciences and Technologies at the Open University of the Netherlands, and Aryn C. Karpinskib of Ohio State University. It will be published in the journal Computers in Human Behavior.
Kirschnera told the Daily Mail that his team studied 219 U.S. university students between ages 19 and 54, and found that Facebook users had a typical grade point average of 3.06, while "non-users" had an average GPA of 3.82.
The psychologist said the study wasn't about whether Facebook's good or bad, but goes more to the stereotype that younger people are fluid multi-taskers —sending text message, listening to music, reading a book, all at the same time, for example —without any problems. (Driving and texting at the same time is, of course, being the among the most dangerous multi-tasking activities anyone can do.)
"The problem is that most people have Facebook or other social networking sites, their e-mails and maybe instant messaging constantly running in the background while they are carrying out other tasks," Kirschnera told the newspaper.
"Our study, and other previous work, suggests that while people may think constant task-switching allows them to get more done in less time, the reality is it extends the amount of time needed to carry out tasks and leads to more mistakes.
"We should resist the fashionable views of educational gurus that children can multi-task, and that we should adapt our education systems accordingly to keep up with the times."
Among the comments to the story was this one, from "I'moverhere" in Britain: "Believe me, if it isn't Facebook, it's something else. There's always something ready to distract a bored mind. While you're at it why not do a similar survey relating to consoles, television, texting, radio, football practice and staring into space?
"Having said that, Facebook does take up a lot of time due to society's increasing dependence on computers for education. Even in 2004 when I was doing A levels, I would get information from a book rather than Wikipedia. This instant-satisfaction-minimum-effort society has a lot to answer for."
Friday, September 10, 2010
Tween & Teen Reading Material Negatively Affecting Development of Teens
Once again, this is a "DUH" moment! Anybody with any type of electrical impulse in their brains could have predicted that reading this type of material is bad for tweens & teens. There are two things that I want to say:
1. Adolescent's brains are still developing and parents, guardians, teachers, youth pastors, youthworkers and anybody else that works with teens should be aware of this very important fact.
2. This point is compliments of my parents--I'm sure you've heard it as well. Here it is: "Garbage in, garbage out!"
There is NOTHING POSITIVE OR REDEEMING ABOUT READING The Twilight or Harry Potter books. They are not good literature. They are Occultism (Satanic Worship), Wicca and Witchcraft all wrapped up in a pretty, but deceptive package.
If you are a parent or know a teen-or adult who's reading these types of books and that teen insists on reading these types of DANGEROUS MATERIALS that could open the door to Satanic and demonic influences and practices in their lives, then you should not only remove all of those materials, but then sit them down and talk with them about the dangers of what they're getting into.
I'm a firm believer in letting teens make as many decisions about their lives as possible, but you wouldn't let them dive off a diving board into a pool with no water would you?! This stuff is just plain dangerous to their spiritual lives...and now, we have proof that this stuff is just as dangerous and damaging to their emotional lives and well-being!
I hope you'll make the right decision.
Downloaded on 9/10/10 from http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/literature/experts-probe-how-twilight-and.html
How 'Twilight,' other dark fiction affect teen brains
Scientists, authors and education experts are meeting this weekend at Cambridge University to investigate how the teenage brain is affected or altered by reading the "Twilight" saga, the "Harry Potter" series and other books that invite fear and anxious emotional responses.
Edward Cullen altering the teen brain? This is one education conference that I would have enjoyed attending. (I have two teenage daughters.)
It turns out, according to the organizer of the interdisciplinary conference, called "The Emergent Adult -- Adolescent Literature and Culture,” that fiction with dark themes does indeed alter teen brains in sometimes important ways.
The conference is bringing together scientists, authors and education experts to make connections between recent neuroscience research and the representation of the adolescent in literature, film, computer games and social networking sites.
Participants are looking at the physiological, psychological, chemical and sociological effects of reading teenage fiction, said organizer Maria Nikolajeva, who is the first director of the Cambridge/Homerton Research and Training Center for Children’s Literature, which is dedicated to studying children’s media.
The trend for darkness and dystopia in children’s literature reflects concerns in the wider, adult world, Nikolajeva said. A hundred years ago, books for kids were dominated with stories about boys having adventures and girls finding husbands; then, from the 1950s to the 1970s, the themes were emerging sexuality and parental conflict.
Inside the teenage brain, synapses are breaking and reforming, and the chemistry keeps changing. Teenagers can’t make decisions in the same way adults can, Nikolajeva said, and she noted that authors, filmmakers and game developers have a moral obligation to make sure that their works contain some positive ethic.
To find out more, including about what parents should do, I e-mailed Nikolajeva. Here’s the discussion, and if you have further questions you’d like me to ask, please send them to me at theanswersheet@washpost.com.
Q. Let me start by asking you this: Are kids’ brains really changed after they read the "Twilight" saga or "Harry Potter"? What does change mean, anyway, in this context?
A. We have always known that encounters with art and literature affect our senses. We feel joy, sorrow, fear, anxiety, grief. We empathize with the characters. We learn from them about ourselves and about other people. What we know today from neuroscience is that there are spots in the brain that are responsible for these feelings, that it is possible to identify parts of the brain affected by reading or watching a film. Adolescent brain goes through a significant and rapid change; everything that affects it leaves deep imprints. Very dark fiction creates and amplifies a sense of insecurity, which is typical of adolescence; but it can also be a liberation, when readers "share" their personal experience with that of fictional characters. So yes, all readers’ brains are changed after they have read a book, but teenage brains are especially perceptive and therefore vulnerable.
What kind of "deep imprints"? Does deep mean lasting?
Yes, both lasting and delving deeply into the mind.
About the notion of vulnerability: Is there a possibility that an exclusive diet of such material could negatively affect some teens?
Definitely. Here comes the question of responsibility. Writers who address young audience should, in an ideal world, be very careful about what they say. Exactly because teenage brains lack the ability to make judgments. In plain words, they may get wrong ideas. Not because they are stupid, but because their brains are wired like that. Because they are socially and emotionally unstable. The so-called social brain is under development during adolescence. Small children presumably do and believe what they are told to. Adolescents start to think for themselves, they interrogate, they doubt.
What does modern brain research tell us about the differences between adult and kids brains when it comes to reading?
So far it is all basic emotions: joy, sorrow, fear. But teenage readers can get extremely engaged with what they read, for instance, "fall in love" with fictional characters. Once again, not because they are stupid, but because there is so much going on in the brain (synapses that get pruned, other connections made, etc.) that it gets confusing, as if you were watching 10 movies at the same time. By the way, teenagers do -- perhaps not watch 10 movies, but listen to music, chat, blog, watch, read, all at the same time. With adults, it gets much more quiet. As adults we can take distance from what we read or see. For teenagers, it’s all real and close.
What is the best research telling us about how kids read on screens vs. paper?
There are several papers at the conference addressing this question, and different opinions. Some say it does not matter whether we read linear texts (traditional, printed texts) or non-linear, printed or visual or multimedia. Some are worried that traditional reading skills disappear. The best research is just about starting [to investigate] these issues. They are sensitive because they deal with traditional educational values.
Serious research should be free from moral panic. There is a lot to be studied, not least through neuroscience. What we do know is that young people whose mother tongue is not English get considerably better skills in English because of social media. They simply need to be able to read and write. This may be true of English-language kids, too.
How is the conference being organized? Tell me a little about the focus of different sessions.
The idea of the conference is to have an active scholarly discussion, so papers have been circulated in advance, and the sessions will be working sessions with discussants, and with panelists commenting on each other’s papers. The main point is to mix disciplines, so a literary scholar, a psychologist and a sociologist may meet within the same session (rather than putting all psychology papers in the same session). There are papers about real adolescents and fictional adolescents and virtual adolescents (e.g. blogs). And a variety of topical issues, such as identity, sexuality, social engagement, gender. And also art, music, media and popular culture.
It is also a mix of established and beginning scholars, and good international mix -- 20 countries. The main goal, for me, is to make connections. It all started when a sociology colleague at the faculty said to me: "And what do you know about adolescents?" So I decided we needed to talk to each other across disciplines and share what we know.
The idea that kids fall in love with fictional characters is so true. I’ve seen it happen. But what is the danger there? Can this affect their view of reality in a negative way?
Yes, because fictitious characters are not like real people; usually -- not always -- they are less complex, more predictable, their behavior may be driven by the plot rather than by psychological motivation, and it can be very confusing for young people. Especially in popular culture where all girls are beautiful and all men strong and handsome. Literature and art are not direct images of reality, and you need to be a mature reader/viewer to understand the fictional reality. A young girl who falls in love with a literary character may get problems with social relationships in real life.
Please talk a little bit about the trend in young people’s literature.
Well, this would take a couple of hours. YA fiction is about the marginal situation between childhood and adulthood. Childhood is over, but it was secure and somewhat straightforward. Adulthood is enticing, but uncertain and strange. The body changes unpredictably. The mind is out of control. Nothing is stable. There are rules to break and boundaries to test.
Relationship with parents or parental figures is crucial. But the thing is that, with few exceptions, YA novels are written by adults. So they are in fact not about what is it to be an adolescent, but what it should be, since, perhaps unconsciously, adults want to instruct young people and guide them into adulthood. So images of adolescence in YA fiction are images of what adults want teenagers to believe. It’s a very powerful ideological tool.
YA novels have successively explored various issues of adolescence, starting with sexuality in the 1960s and then death, suicide, sexual identity, anorexia, etc. Today the most prominent trend is dystopia, possibly because the world is what it is today, but also because placing an adolescent in an extreme situation is a good pedagogical and narrative device. "Hunger Games" is a very good example. But YA fiction has always been more dark and bleak than literature for younger children.
What can/should parents do in regard to letting kids read dark material?
Nothing. Kids will always find ways of accessing materials that the adults want to hide from them, and with Internet there is no control over what they can get hold of. So it is important to let young people be exposed to all kinds of literature and culture, dark and light, serious and entertaining; and it is always a good idea to talk to kids about what they read, watch or listen to. Many grown-ups today read the same books that teenagers read: "Harry Potter," "His Dark Materials," "Twilight" and much more -- the so-called crossover literature. Then parents/teachers and kids can talk to each other, share their reading experience. This is the best one can do.
The worst one can do is to forbid or restrict.
1. Adolescent's brains are still developing and parents, guardians, teachers, youth pastors, youthworkers and anybody else that works with teens should be aware of this very important fact.
2. This point is compliments of my parents--I'm sure you've heard it as well. Here it is: "Garbage in, garbage out!"
There is NOTHING POSITIVE OR REDEEMING ABOUT READING The Twilight or Harry Potter books. They are not good literature. They are Occultism (Satanic Worship), Wicca and Witchcraft all wrapped up in a pretty, but deceptive package.
If you are a parent or know a teen-or adult who's reading these types of books and that teen insists on reading these types of DANGEROUS MATERIALS that could open the door to Satanic and demonic influences and practices in their lives, then you should not only remove all of those materials, but then sit them down and talk with them about the dangers of what they're getting into.
I'm a firm believer in letting teens make as many decisions about their lives as possible, but you wouldn't let them dive off a diving board into a pool with no water would you?! This stuff is just plain dangerous to their spiritual lives...and now, we have proof that this stuff is just as dangerous and damaging to their emotional lives and well-being!
I hope you'll make the right decision.
Downloaded on 9/10/10 from http://voices.washingtonpost.com/answer-sheet/literature/experts-probe-how-twilight-and.html
How 'Twilight,' other dark fiction affect teen brains
Scientists, authors and education experts are meeting this weekend at Cambridge University to investigate how the teenage brain is affected or altered by reading the "Twilight" saga, the "Harry Potter" series and other books that invite fear and anxious emotional responses.
Edward Cullen altering the teen brain? This is one education conference that I would have enjoyed attending. (I have two teenage daughters.)
It turns out, according to the organizer of the interdisciplinary conference, called "The Emergent Adult -- Adolescent Literature and Culture,” that fiction with dark themes does indeed alter teen brains in sometimes important ways.
The conference is bringing together scientists, authors and education experts to make connections between recent neuroscience research and the representation of the adolescent in literature, film, computer games and social networking sites.
Participants are looking at the physiological, psychological, chemical and sociological effects of reading teenage fiction, said organizer Maria Nikolajeva, who is the first director of the Cambridge/Homerton Research and Training Center for Children’s Literature, which is dedicated to studying children’s media.
The trend for darkness and dystopia in children’s literature reflects concerns in the wider, adult world, Nikolajeva said. A hundred years ago, books for kids were dominated with stories about boys having adventures and girls finding husbands; then, from the 1950s to the 1970s, the themes were emerging sexuality and parental conflict.
Inside the teenage brain, synapses are breaking and reforming, and the chemistry keeps changing. Teenagers can’t make decisions in the same way adults can, Nikolajeva said, and she noted that authors, filmmakers and game developers have a moral obligation to make sure that their works contain some positive ethic.
To find out more, including about what parents should do, I e-mailed Nikolajeva. Here’s the discussion, and if you have further questions you’d like me to ask, please send them to me at theanswersheet@washpost.com.
Q. Let me start by asking you this: Are kids’ brains really changed after they read the "Twilight" saga or "Harry Potter"? What does change mean, anyway, in this context?
A. We have always known that encounters with art and literature affect our senses. We feel joy, sorrow, fear, anxiety, grief. We empathize with the characters. We learn from them about ourselves and about other people. What we know today from neuroscience is that there are spots in the brain that are responsible for these feelings, that it is possible to identify parts of the brain affected by reading or watching a film. Adolescent brain goes through a significant and rapid change; everything that affects it leaves deep imprints. Very dark fiction creates and amplifies a sense of insecurity, which is typical of adolescence; but it can also be a liberation, when readers "share" their personal experience with that of fictional characters. So yes, all readers’ brains are changed after they have read a book, but teenage brains are especially perceptive and therefore vulnerable.
What kind of "deep imprints"? Does deep mean lasting?
Yes, both lasting and delving deeply into the mind.
About the notion of vulnerability: Is there a possibility that an exclusive diet of such material could negatively affect some teens?
Definitely. Here comes the question of responsibility. Writers who address young audience should, in an ideal world, be very careful about what they say. Exactly because teenage brains lack the ability to make judgments. In plain words, they may get wrong ideas. Not because they are stupid, but because their brains are wired like that. Because they are socially and emotionally unstable. The so-called social brain is under development during adolescence. Small children presumably do and believe what they are told to. Adolescents start to think for themselves, they interrogate, they doubt.
What does modern brain research tell us about the differences between adult and kids brains when it comes to reading?
So far it is all basic emotions: joy, sorrow, fear. But teenage readers can get extremely engaged with what they read, for instance, "fall in love" with fictional characters. Once again, not because they are stupid, but because there is so much going on in the brain (synapses that get pruned, other connections made, etc.) that it gets confusing, as if you were watching 10 movies at the same time. By the way, teenagers do -- perhaps not watch 10 movies, but listen to music, chat, blog, watch, read, all at the same time. With adults, it gets much more quiet. As adults we can take distance from what we read or see. For teenagers, it’s all real and close.
What is the best research telling us about how kids read on screens vs. paper?
There are several papers at the conference addressing this question, and different opinions. Some say it does not matter whether we read linear texts (traditional, printed texts) or non-linear, printed or visual or multimedia. Some are worried that traditional reading skills disappear. The best research is just about starting [to investigate] these issues. They are sensitive because they deal with traditional educational values.
Serious research should be free from moral panic. There is a lot to be studied, not least through neuroscience. What we do know is that young people whose mother tongue is not English get considerably better skills in English because of social media. They simply need to be able to read and write. This may be true of English-language kids, too.
How is the conference being organized? Tell me a little about the focus of different sessions.
The idea of the conference is to have an active scholarly discussion, so papers have been circulated in advance, and the sessions will be working sessions with discussants, and with panelists commenting on each other’s papers. The main point is to mix disciplines, so a literary scholar, a psychologist and a sociologist may meet within the same session (rather than putting all psychology papers in the same session). There are papers about real adolescents and fictional adolescents and virtual adolescents (e.g. blogs). And a variety of topical issues, such as identity, sexuality, social engagement, gender. And also art, music, media and popular culture.
It is also a mix of established and beginning scholars, and good international mix -- 20 countries. The main goal, for me, is to make connections. It all started when a sociology colleague at the faculty said to me: "And what do you know about adolescents?" So I decided we needed to talk to each other across disciplines and share what we know.
The idea that kids fall in love with fictional characters is so true. I’ve seen it happen. But what is the danger there? Can this affect their view of reality in a negative way?
Yes, because fictitious characters are not like real people; usually -- not always -- they are less complex, more predictable, their behavior may be driven by the plot rather than by psychological motivation, and it can be very confusing for young people. Especially in popular culture where all girls are beautiful and all men strong and handsome. Literature and art are not direct images of reality, and you need to be a mature reader/viewer to understand the fictional reality. A young girl who falls in love with a literary character may get problems with social relationships in real life.
Please talk a little bit about the trend in young people’s literature.
Well, this would take a couple of hours. YA fiction is about the marginal situation between childhood and adulthood. Childhood is over, but it was secure and somewhat straightforward. Adulthood is enticing, but uncertain and strange. The body changes unpredictably. The mind is out of control. Nothing is stable. There are rules to break and boundaries to test.
Relationship with parents or parental figures is crucial. But the thing is that, with few exceptions, YA novels are written by adults. So they are in fact not about what is it to be an adolescent, but what it should be, since, perhaps unconsciously, adults want to instruct young people and guide them into adulthood. So images of adolescence in YA fiction are images of what adults want teenagers to believe. It’s a very powerful ideological tool.
YA novels have successively explored various issues of adolescence, starting with sexuality in the 1960s and then death, suicide, sexual identity, anorexia, etc. Today the most prominent trend is dystopia, possibly because the world is what it is today, but also because placing an adolescent in an extreme situation is a good pedagogical and narrative device. "Hunger Games" is a very good example. But YA fiction has always been more dark and bleak than literature for younger children.
What can/should parents do in regard to letting kids read dark material?
Nothing. Kids will always find ways of accessing materials that the adults want to hide from them, and with Internet there is no control over what they can get hold of. So it is important to let young people be exposed to all kinds of literature and culture, dark and light, serious and entertaining; and it is always a good idea to talk to kids about what they read, watch or listen to. Many grown-ups today read the same books that teenagers read: "Harry Potter," "His Dark Materials," "Twilight" and much more -- the so-called crossover literature. Then parents/teachers and kids can talk to each other, share their reading experience. This is the best one can do.
The worst one can do is to forbid or restrict.
Wednesday, August 25, 2010
Why Don't You Just Grow Up Already?
I remember hearing that from my mom and dad all the time when I was growing up...it was usually said to me when I was acting selfish and immature. But I just viewed this very interesting piece from the Today show and I wanted to share it with you because I think that this whole idea of an extended "adolescence" really has a lot to do with the way individuals are as spouses, parents and generally society. We've been sold the lie from the hedonistic worldview that says that "it's all about me" and "I deserve to be happy--at any cost!" But what's happening is that people are searching to have all the fun and self-fulfulling experiences in the world that they are putting off growing up, getting into serious relationships, getting married, having children...and even when they do those things, they still repeat their mantra, like spoiled brat Peter Pans "I'm never growing up! I want to stay a boy in Never Land..." but little do they know, like it or not, that time is always chasing them and will always catch up.
Well, enough of my pontificating. Take a look at this link and tell me what you think:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/38829873#38829873
Blessings,
Omar
I remember hearing that from my mom and dad all the time when I was growing up...it was usually said to me when I was acting selfish and immature. But I just viewed this very interesting piece from the Today show and I wanted to share it with you because I think that this whole idea of an extended "adolescence" really has a lot to do with the way individuals are as spouses, parents and generally society. We've been sold the lie from the hedonistic worldview that says that "it's all about me" and "I deserve to be happy--at any cost!" But what's happening is that people are searching to have all the fun and self-fulfulling experiences in the world that they are putting off growing up, getting into serious relationships, getting married, having children...and even when they do those things, they still repeat their mantra, like spoiled brat Peter Pans "I'm never growing up! I want to stay a boy in Never Land..." but little do they know, like it or not, that time is always chasing them and will always catch up.
Well, enough of my pontificating. Take a look at this link and tell me what you think:
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/21134540/vp/38829873#38829873
Blessings,
Omar
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
