my choices were limited! At that early age, Sesame Street was in a way programming me to become both a social and visual learner, or so I thought. Through the association of puppets with real people they provided a "pseudo-learning environment" that encouraged kids to "sing-along" the alphabet and attempt to solve arithmetic problems by counting sheep or how many cookies the cookie monster ate. This not only promoted a group atmosphere, but also displayed the learning that was taking place on screen, or did it? Although the show did try to instill into children a set of everyday values, (such as do onto others as you would have them do onto you) I don ‘t believe that the show alone (or those like it ) could ever replace the classroom setting. Under closer discretion I realized that the classroom provides a place of social interaction which is essential to the healthy development of children. The viewing of television is more or less a private, secluded act. In class, children can ponder the essence of questions asked by their teachers either amongst themselves or with their teacher. This is very important in the development of linguistics, the Bibbs 4 basis of higher elementary education, whereas television merely demands attention to images. Looking more deeply into the subject, I started to wonder if my learning styles would account for my exceptional aptitude and intellectual level being poorly portrayed through my high school transcripts. High school is largely conducted on an independent and auditory scale resulting with instructors hoping to find in their students some aspect of creativity. In my eyes, that concept is totally paradoxical. If educators encourage the institution of such "educational programs" which supplement long listening activities with quick editing, up-beat tunes, and fun images, when do they expect the student to adapt to lectures and critical analyzing ? Although I found a side of truth in my questionin...
