It’s a year old, but the Kaiser Foundation have written an interesting report called A Teacher in the Living Room? Educational Media for Babies, Toddlers, and Preschoolers [via Foe]. With the burgeoning number of videos, DVDs, and software for children from (gulp) one month old up, the Kaiser Foundation had a look at the way companies were marketing these to parents, and how valid some of the educational claims these companies made actually were.
It’s a 56-page report, so here are some snippets.
How companies market educational media
“At Amazon.com in June 2005, three-quarters (76%) of the 100 top-selling DVDs listed for babies from birth to two years old made educational claims. This market is dominated by Baby Einstein, with 26% of the videos, followed by Nick Jr. (18%), Brainy Baby (12%), and PBS (5%). ”
And when you venutre into software and games, the proportion of educational claims goes higher.
What the parents say
“Nearly two-thirds (62%) of parents say educational toys like talking books are very important to childrens intellectual development, with half (49%) deeming educational videos very important, and 43% saying the same about educational computer games”
What the scientists say
“…there are no published studies on cognitive outcomes from any of the educational videos, computer software programs, or video game systems currently on the market for children ages 0-6 years.”
The report then had a look at the benefit of TV (since many of the shows on video were off-shoots of TV shows) and found more heartening news. Sesame Street could help boost literacy, numeracy and the like (for kids over two years old). But then they quoted a study by American Behavioral Scientist concluded that
Although the experimental studies are still few, they are remarkably consistent in indicating a video deficit for children 24 months and younger. Although there is some learning indicated by some of the studies [of the educational benefits of videos for children], the learning is dramatically less than that found for equivalent live displays.
Video deficit?! Blimey. Anyway, there’s precious little public research out there for the products.
What the corporate researchers say
After basically drawing a blank in the public research archives, the Kaiser Foundation spoke to representatives from nine different companies with best-selling videos, DVDs, computer software, or video game products for infants, toddlers, or preschoolers. These companies were: Baby Einstein; Fisher-Price; Knowledge Adventure; LeapFrog; Nick, Jr.; Sesame Workshop; Small Fry Productions; Topics Entertainment and Vtech.
Of course, these companies all have educational or developmental experts working for them either on staff or as consultants. And, in general, it seems these companies would like to be able to do more work with published outcomes. But
“despite the lack of published outcomes research, there has been considerable formative research on learning-focused, in-home media for young children. These studies concentrate primarily on production needs as opposed to educational outcomes. Production needs include whether the childs attention remained on the screen, or if the child understood the action that was occurring in a particular scene.”
Why’s that? Well there are research benefits to production needs research, but there’s a fairly strong economic reason for sticking to it as well.
“Some companies said one reason they don’t conduct outcomes research is that it wouldn’t influence sales, and hence doesnt make economic sense …
Fisher-Price found in its marketing studies that parents were more heavily influenced by the experiences of other parents than they were by any expert opinions. As a result, the vast majority of internal research at most companies focuses on making sure that the product is one that will satisfy parents and children, rather than meeting any scientific standards of proof regarding the educational impact of the product.”
Wrapping it all up
It seems the reason for all this is effectively Parental Performance Anxiety, critics say companies are cynically developing marketing strategies that play on “parents’ competitive anxieties”. And companies respond by saying that,
“as academic expectations at preschool and kindergarten levels increase, parent anxiety levels are rising, and they [the companies] are trying to address those concerns with products that contain explicit learning content previously reserved for older children.”
I have to admit there’s a sneaking part of me that thinks all of these educational products are mutton dressed as lamb. As Diane said of Baby Einstein
who cares if researchers dispute the notion that such exposure enhances a baby’s mind? It could keep him quiet long enough for me to take a much-needed shower.
That said, I’d love to see one suggestion from the Kaiser Foundation come to bear. The idea was this:
“create an independent, non-profit review service that would make professional assessments of educational media products available to parents free of charge.
