Protection, Paranoia & Parenting

Some articles I read years ago, and this one from Common Sense Media more recently have a habit of continually popping back into my head, every time the inevitable web scare rears its ugly head.

There is a paranoia associated with the web which can easily be exaggerated, for example parents who are profoundly uncomfortable at the thought of a photo of their child being viewable online, even if the image is buried in a website with an extremely obscure URL, a proverbial needle in a digital haystack. Yet this same parent will almost certainly allow their child to walk down Orchard Rd, Fifth Avenue, Oxford Street, knowing that they can be seen (perhaps even photographed unawares) by the general public? Not to mention the ever increasing presence of CCTV cameras watching our every move. Could this same parent be in the habit (as I am) of regularly posting images of their children on social media? ... The fact is that without an associated name and detailed localising data, such as an address, it is almost impossible to track down one child based on the image of their face alone (in the extremely unlikely event that someone wanted to).

So, like the concrete jungles of our cities and towns, the Wild Wonderful Web is an amazing place, but it is a metaphorical jungle, and, as it happens, the wild wild web has a great deal in common with a jungle—not too many leaves—but many wonderful opportunities and yes, many dangers; dangers that, with a few basic precautions, can be avoided.

The first Article makes a few controversial but critical points, which could be broadly summarised as:

Less monitoring more mentoring

The expectation of constantly monitoring children and teenagers on the Internet is an impossible ideal. Who has time to stand over the shoulder of your kids for the entire time they are online? Children’s freedom to roam in the physical world has been radically curtailed. While previous generations could ride bikes or walk to school or play outside unsupervised till dinner time, this generation is watched all the time. They have lost that thrill of being on their own until they are much older, and, for them, the Internet can provide that open space, to test and explore and try out the outside world—while being a lot less painful than ... say ... falling out of a tree, a risk that was commonplace in my childhood. In fact a shiver runs down my spine when I consider some of the risks I routinely took as child, with n'ere a parent, or even an adult in sight or sound. There is educational value in this kind of risk, this exploration even if it is online, perhaps even because it is: a lot of the work kids do is apprehending the social world, and for them, much of this work is done online.

Less restrictions more responsibility 

The important thing is to give kids the ability to handle choices, assess risks, and take strategic, or calculated risks. You want, in other words, to create the kid who can handle the Internet without you. And how can they become that kid if you are watching them all the time, if you are always hovering right there next to them? You don't just throw a 5-year-old out on the streets and tell them to figure it all out. The same is true online. But, accordingly, you can't expect to put them under surveillance and control every action they make until they're 18 and then magically assume they'll be fine at university, and the world 'beyond school' (I dislike the use of 'real world' to describe life outside school—school life is real life too!) when they haven't had any experience managing their own decisions.

Pain is a powerful teacher

Pain is a powerful teacher, sure, it's not kind, but it certainly is effective. Parents need to face up to the idea that they cannot protect their children from every potential negative experience, online, or offline, this is an impossible fantasy; there is no way to seal your children off from awful or painful or frightening things. This is nothing new, think back to your own childhood, bad things happened, you got over it, hopefully you learned something from it.

A caveat...

With great power comes great responsibility, not anonymity

A huge part of responsibility means ceasing the dubious practice by many, well meaning, but poorly informed parents, of allowing their kids to create social networking accounts in anonymity, based on the notion that this somehow protects their child. STOP! All this does is remove all responsibility, and in far too many cases actively encourages irresponsibility, as far too many children wreak havoc online from behind the veneer of a name like Puff the magic Dragon, with an Avatar of an aardvark or ... a pineapple ... or, you get the idea... Like no paedophile has ever thought of doing that? It is important to note here that online predators are far less likely to be paedophiles, and far more likely to be your child's own 'friends' and acquaintances. All you've done is encourage a situation where your anonymous child is forced to socialise with other anonymous people online, strangers, because they are similarly anonymous, oh, but they SAY they are your child's best friend ... . If you're going to let your kid 'play outside'; make sure they are playing as themselves, no disguises, no anonymity, their name, their face, and they should make sure to only socialise with people who do likewise.

The point, is not to create a safe world, but a safer world. 

Tim Elmore wrote an article more recently on this subject,  Three Huge Mistakes We Make Leading Kids…and How to Correct Them - a great article, and again, if you will permit me, it can be summed up similarly and thus:

Over-protection is damaging our children—

We Risk Too Little

“If you’re over 30, you probably walked to school, played on the monkey bars, and learned to high-dive at the public pool. If you’re younger, it’s unlikely you did any of these things. Yet, has the world become that much more dangerous? Statistically, no. But our society has created pervasive fears about letting kids be independent—and the consequences for our kids are serious.” (Gever Tully)

The truth is, kids need to fall a few times to learn it is normal; teens likely need to break up with a boyfriend or girlfriend to appreciate the emotional maturity that lasting relationships require. Pain is actually a necessary teacher. Over-protecting our young people has had an adverse effect on them, we are failing miserably at preparing them for a world that will not be risk-free.

We Rescue Too Quickly

This generation of young people has not developed some of the life skills kids did thirty years ago because adults swoop in and take care of problems for them. We remove the need for them to navigate hardships. This may sound harsh, but rescuing and over-indulging our children is one of the most insidious forms of child abuse. It’s “parenting for the short-term” and it sorely misses the point of leadership [parenting]—to equip our young people to do it without help. Just like muscles atrophy inside of a cast due to disuse, their social, emotional, spiritual and intellectual muscles can shrink because they’re not exercised.

We Rave too Easily

Praise effort and persistence, not ability. Carol Dweck (Mindset) tells us that our affirmation of kids must target factors in their control. When we say “you must have worked hard,” we are praising effort, which they have full control over. It tends to elicit more effort. When we praise ability 'you're smart/clever/awesome!', it may provide a little confidence at first but ultimately causes a child to work less. They say to themselves, “If it doesn’t come easy, I don’t want to do it.”

A helpful metaphor when considering this challenge is inoculation. Inoculation injects a vaccine, which actually exposes you to a dose of the very disease your body must learn to overcome. It’s a good thing. Only then do we develop an immunity to it. Similarly, our kids must be inoculated with doses of hardship, delay, challenges and inconvenience to build the strength to stand in them.

So let them fail, let them fall, and let them fight for what they really value. If we treat our kids as fragile, they will surely grow up to be fragile adults. We must prepare them for the world that awaits them. Our world needs resilient adults not fragile ones.

Video Games & Playgrounds

One of the most profound shifts in terms of childhood in a digital age, is the rise of online gaming. Once the preserve of teenage and tween geeks and nerds in darkened LAN rooms, now it is a common pastime for younger children, certainly many of our Junior School children regularly engage in these pursuits as a regular pastime. This is not a post about whether or not this kind of activity is one we should encourage, (I think we should) that is a subject I have written about elsewhere, and present a parent workshop about gaming every year. No, this is about providing some advice for the many parents who, for whatever reason, have kids who like to play online.

There is a growing collection of video games that fall into the category of multiplayer online game, from Clash of Clans to Club Penguin, to Minecraft, Roblox and Overwatch, and many more.

21st Century Playgrounds

As is often the case these days/this century, parents and teachers often find themselves faced with trying to relate to a child, whose normative childhood experience bears little resemblance to their own, but let me reassure you—while the medium has changed—the message and the meaning, and the opportunities and obstacles that surround group play have not.

The main place and space you are likely to encounter this is at home, as playing video games in class is generally not something kids will have time to do. There may be exceptions, eg possibly as a one off iTime project, but even then, the objective of creating something that they are accountable for in terms of achievement would need to be paramount. This is the stance we take with these kinds of gaming experiences, like Minecraft and Roblox. That said of course, there may be teachers who find this to be a useful strategy as a reward for hard work for example. If so they will take the necessary precautions, just as they would if sending kids to play on the playground.

Safe Play

When it comes to games for kids, Roblox is a great game, just like its progenitor Minecraft, however—as with all making, creating, playing, social experiences there is always the potential for inappropriate use, and experiences, whether the playground is virtual or actual. The solution, much as we would advocate for any 'multi-player' 'off screen' play—from playing tag or handball, to playing football, to swimming or having a sleepover, is to make sure there a​re​ clear parameters, and appropriate supervision, to ensure that we are minimising the likelihood of potentially harmful or unpleasant encounters.

Online maker spaces like Roblox and Minecraft are unique in terms of the sheer potential they offer in terms of unbridled creativity, and are also very familiar in terms of their potentials and pitfalls.

With all of these kinds of games the same safeguards we would have applied to playgrounds as children apply, ie be aware of the other people who are playing in this online arena or space, and the extent to which this space is effectively supervised, or moderated. If, as kids, we had been permitted to play unsupervised at nearby playground (I was, in London in the 70s, that seemed to be quite normal). We would have taken appropriate action if, for example, there were bullies in the playground, making life miserable for everyone. The same is true of these online spaces, which are very much similar to playgrounds, only on a screen, instead of in a park.

Safeguards

The developers behind games like Roblox and Minecraft are very aware of this, and design in safeguards for children, but this only works if the child has been honest about their age when creating the account, whether it's a Roblox account, or an Instagram account. Whenever a child creates an online account, like any other internet account, it's important that they set these up with the parent, or with the parents permission, otherwise they can 'accidentally' end up effectively creating an account for adults which could result in their being exposed to content that is inappropriate. Ideally a teacher or parent should be involved in the account setup and in ensuring that the child plays/uses the account responsibly—this is a skill that will serve them w​e​ll for the rest of their lives, in all sorts of online environments.

Roblox, for example, have a very clear commitment to safeguarding children; but it can be all too easy for children to create adult accounts, thereby effectively bypass any and all safeguards that would automatically be applied in the case of younger children. This usually happens if a child 'accidentally' enters the 'wrong' year of birth when registering their account, then the system assumes that are older than 13. In the event that this happens, my advice is for the parent to have a close look at the child's account settings, if Roblox or Minecraft knows that a user is under 13 there are a slew of safeguards that will be applied to the account to ensure the child's welfare, eg:

"For users age 12 and under, however, we take extra precaution to ensure their safety and privacy by automatically enforcing more restricted settings so they can only directly message other users that are accepted as friends on Roblox." 

"Players age 12 and younger have locked privacy settings to prevent contact from people they don't know. These players must first become friends with another user before certain activities are allowed, such as messaging, following into game, and playing in private servers."

Have Fun!

There are advocates in some quarters who encourage parents to join their child and play with them, to be honest, I think you'll find that most kids are less than enthusiastic about this idea.... Would you play tag, or have a sleepover with your kids and their friends? Probably not, so why would online play be any different?

Last but not least, the best thing you can do as a parent is be consistent; online and offline play are rich experiences that are enjoyable and highly beneficial provided some basic precautions are followed; for more on the potential benefits of gaming, see the following on video games as 'sandboxes'.

Video Games & Violence...

A few years ago, the Parliamentary Office of Science and Technology (POST) in the UK, published a document, reviewing official government recommendations to improve children’s digital and video game safety. POST is an office of both Houses of Parliament, charged with providing independent and balanced analysis of policy issues that have a basis in science and technology.

The original document, in its entirety can be located here.

I have taken the liberty of highlighting the points that I as gamer and a father find particularly interesting.

First I should come clean; am I biased? Yes - absolutely, as a gamer of many years, and one who not only permits his children to play games, but actively encourages it, and have done since they were very young. Here's my son playing Dora and the Purple Planet when he was 4.

The back pack actually waits for my answer? No way! 

Well, I say 'they', despite my continued enticement my daughter remains less than enthusiastic about the whole gaming thing. A little Wii Fit is all she can tolerate before returning to her dolls, or making faces at herself on an iPad.

Truth be told given the choice between coming home from work and seeing my kids slouched on the couch passively gazing at a television screen or excitedly interacting and participating in a video game, I'll always choose the latter.

My concern is media bias, for some reason it's considered OK to blame games for the ills of the earth, but not TV, or film? If someone is a little hot under the collar after playing a video game, it can only be because of the violence, right? Wrong. Speaking personally, yes, games can sometimes leave me a little hot under the collar, but then very often so does sport, for the same reason, frustration, good old simple—this is really challenging—and I can't believe I find it so hard—frustration.

No, it's not mine. Really. 

If anything, I am more likely to get wound up by a level in a Mario game than a level in Call of Duty.

So—to the article, all are direct quotes I have selected from the original report, with my contributions in [brackets] or italics, all emphasis is mine:

"There is debate surrounding the impact of violent video games on behaviour. This document summarises the key aspects of the discussion, and other potential impacts of gaming such as addiction. It also examines the educational use of games, and reviews mechanisms to ensure children’s game safety.

As gaming increases, particularly among children and adolescents, so have concerns over the games’ content, influence and excessive use. While the main focus of research and policy has been on violent games, other impacts of games on addiction, brain development, social interaction and education are also considered

• Some, but not all, research suggests links between violent video games & aggression. However, causation cannot be proved. 
• A small minority may play video games excessively, but there are no firm criteria for diagnosing video game addiction. 
• Video games can be social, educational, and allow for personalised learning 

Research suggests that social, cultural and genetic factors have a stronger influence on aggressive behaviour than video games. For instance, gender, personality and violence in the immediate family environment are important influences on aggressive behaviour.

Desensitisation is the result of reduced emotional reaction due to repeated exposure to violence. It is thought to increase aggressive responses in individuals and to fuel a demand for more extreme games as gamers search for new excitement levels. However, this is not specific to games and applies to all media.

Many young gamers (aged 15) are upset by violence in games that are rated 18. Just as exposure to violence in films, television and the internet can be upsetting so can violence in games, and this is why content in games is age restricted (my emphasis).

(Young children are) more susceptible to negative, especially scary, content in video games and media. (Again, all forms of media, not just video games).

Despite the media focus on violent video games, the impacts of gaming are diverse and can be positive.

On average, 5-16 year olds play 1.5 hours of video games a day, but many gamers acknowledge that it is possible to devote too much time to games and many parents also worry about this. [Of course, it is possible, if not more likely, to devote 'too much time' to other media… Especially television]

A recent review of the literature reports that (only) 8-12% of young people (mean age 21) engaged in “excessive gaming”, whereas “problematic gaming” was present in (only) 2-5%."

Addiction?

"There remains debate over whether gaming addiction is a valid concept, with some researchers claiming that dependency and withdrawal are not observed in video game addiction. The American Psychiatric Association has stated there was not enough evidence to include video game addiction in the latest edition of the widely used Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Mental Disorders."

[In my experience the symptoms often attributed hastily to 'addiction' would be better attributed to 'flow'. Something game developers work very hard to facilitate, and something that only the very best games are capable of inducing.]

"A sense of that one’s skills are adequate to cope with the challenges at hand in a goal directed, rule bound action system that provides clear clues as to how one is performing. Concentration is so intense that there is no attention left over to think about anything irrelevant or to worry about problems. Self-consciousness disappears, and the sense of time becomes distorted. An activity that produces such experiences is so gratifying that people are willing to do it for its own sake, with little concern for what they will get out of it, even when it is difficult or dangerous." (Csikszentmihalyi, 1991)

"Educational" Games

Some of the most popular games are 'educational' (eg brain training games). Generally, educational games are developed to increase pupils’ motivation, communicate information, improve specific skills and test competencies. They can allow for personalised learning by being able to target specific learning difficulties and can also be used with groups of children, allowing players an active role that demands a wide range of skills.

Importantly, there is a difference between learning skills such as problem solving, and learning behaviours from video games. Playing video games can improve reaction times and visual skills related to attention and problem solving regardless of their genre. However, it is more difficult to show that behaviours, both positive and negative, transfer from video games into the real world.

Ratings...

Video games that contain film footage or include violence, criminal or sexual activity are accounted by for by only approximately 6-7% of all games. (BBFC)

There is an on-going need to educate parents about their responsibility to monitor game play."

Here in Singapore, most games originate in the USA, and as such their ratings will be governed by the ESRB. The problem is the ESRB ratings have been over politicized, to the extent that they are not that useful; this is because the 'adults only' rating is rarely used, instead they prefer to use the 'M'(Mature) rating. This rating is often misleading, as many games that get the M rating are definitely adult games. For this reason I advise parents to refer to the European ratings instead.

Ratings from the USA—not so helpful

Games from the EU are governed by the PEGI classification system . Both classification systems have indicators that are obvious, but the advantage with PEGI is that they are more practical, as they are not afraid to use the adult rating (18).

European ratings, not afraid to use the 18 rating

The problem is, even when a game is rated adult, as they err on the side of caution, this can also be a little overzealous... eg the Batman games by Rocksteady, and the Grand Theft Auto (GTA) games get rated 18; but there is no way they can describe both of those games as being 'adult',  the former is not, and the latter most certainly is, and when they describe both of these games as being adult, it makes a mockery of the whole ratings system.

Fortunately, there are sites out there like Everybody Plays, that include reviews for parents.  Common Sense Media have also got a great review section which is very helpful, although I do find they also err a little too far on the side of caution to be useful, just aping the rating on the box. The Parent posts are a better way to gauge whether or not a certain game would be appropriate for your child.

Put simply, if in any doubt, go by the rating on the cover—ignore this at your peril!

Last, but certainly not least, the best approach is communication. If there is a game your child is desperate to play, there will almost certainly be plenty of game play footage on YouTube that you can use to get a sense of the level of appropriateness of the gameplay. Below I've included an example from the 'adult' rated Batman games, which I allowed my son to play when he was 12. Having watched the gameplay footage (search with the keyword 'combat') I felt the level of violence was no worse than a typical action film—far be it from me to be guilty of media bias!