Vol. 16 No. 1 (2025): MEDIA EDUCATION – Studi, ricerche e buone pratiche
Articles

Digital competence in early childhood: the dialogue between pedagogy and neuroscience for screen education in the Di.Co.Each project

PDF
  • Cosimo Di Bari,
  • Irene Balboni,
  • Claudio D'Antonio,
  • Ester Giamberini
Cosimo Di Bari
Università degli Studi di Firenze, Italy
Bio
Irene Balboni
Università di Ginevra, Switzerland
Bio
Claudio D'Antonio
Università degli Studi di Firenze, Italy
Bio
Ester Giamberini
Università degli Studi di Firenze, Italy
Bio
DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/me-17115

Published 2025-06-26

Keywords

  • digital competence,
  • early childhood,
  • media literacy education,
  • systematized literature review

Copyright (c) 2025 Cosimo Di Bari, Irene Balboni, Claudio D'Antonio, Ester Giamberini

Creative Commons License

This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Abstract

In recent decades, the spread of digital technologies in daily life has introduced the presence of screens into childhood life as well. Despite the recommendations of the American Academy of Paediatricians and other studies on the subject, the use of technological devices frequently occurs at an early age, with high exposure times and without adequate adult accompaniment. Based on these considerations, the Di.Co.Each Project has been carried out since October 2023 and it aims to foster interdisciplinary research (combining medical, pedagogical, psychological, and sociological perspectives) to enrich the literature and promote among parents, educators, and teachers a greater awareness of the risks and opportunities of the presence of electronic devices in the lives of children, promoting approaches that are conducive to the early acquisition of digital skills. The article offers a summary of the results of the first year of the project and relates the investigation developed from a neuroscientific point of view (with a literature review) with the research in the pedagogical field, carried out on a qualitative level (through focus groups with parents, educators/teachers, and pediatricians), on a quantitative level (with a questionnaire for educational staff and a questionnaire for parents).

PDF

References

  1. Abdel-Aziz, K., & Ciccarelli, O. (2014). Rationale for Quantitative MRI of the Human Spinal Cord and Clinical Applications. In Cohen-Adad J. & Wheeler-Kingshott C. A. M. (Eds.), Quantitative MRI of the Spinal Cord (pp. 3-21). Academic Press. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-396973-6.00001-0
  2. Arabiat, D., Al Jabery, M., Robinson, S., Whitehead, L., & Mörelius, E. (2023). Interactive technology use and child development: A systematic review. Child: Care, Health and Development, 49(4), 679-715. https://doi.org/10.1111/cch.13082
  3. Arnott, L., Palaiologou, I., & Gray, C. (2019). Internet of toys across home and early childhood education: understanding the ecology of the child’s social world. Technology, Pedagogy and Education, 28(4), 401-412. https://doi.org/10.1080/1475939X.2019.1656667
  4. Baltzaki, M., & Chlapana, E. (2023). Fostering receptive vocabulary development of kindergarten children with the use of Information and Communication Technologies (ICT). Education and Information Technologies, 28(11), 14019-14049. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10639-023-11707-7
  5. Buckingham, D. (2019). The media education manifesto. Polity Press.
  6. Burnett, C., Merchant, G., & Neumann, M. M. (2020). The appearance of literacy in new communicative practices: Interrogating the politics of noticing. Cambridge Journal of Education, 50(2), 167-183. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2019.1654978
  7. Charmaz, K. (2006). Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Sage.
  8. Clarke, V., & Braun, V. (2017). Thematic analysis. The Journal of Positive Psychology, 12(3), 297-298. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439760.2016.1262613
  9. Corbin, J., & Strauss, A. (1990). Grounded theory research: Procedures, canons, and evaluative criteria. Qualitative Sociology, 13(1), 3-21. https://doi.org/10.1007/BF00988593
  10. Demetriou, K., & Nikiforidou, Z. (2019). The relational space of educational technology: Early childhood students’ views. Global Studies of Childhood, 9(4), 290-305. https://doi.org/10.1177/2043610619881458
  11. Di Bari, C. (2023). I nativi digitali non esistono. Uppa.
  12. Dolgova, V., Batenova, Y., Emelyanova, I., Ivanova, I., Pikuleva, L., & Filippova, O. (2019). Factors of the readiness for information exchange in pre-school education establishments. Education Sciences, 9(3), 1-10. https://doi.org/10.3390/educsci9030166
  13. Eco, U. (1964). Apocalittici e integrati. Bompiani.Gibbs, G. R. (2012). Analysing qualitative data (2nd ed.). Sage.
  14. Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: An analysis of 14 review types and associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1471-1842.2009.00848.x
  15. Haas, B., Lavicza, Z., Houghton, T., & Kreis, Y. (2022). Evaluating technology-enhanced, STEAM-based remote teaching with parental support in luxembourgish early childhood education. Frontiers in Education, 7, 1-12. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2022.872479
  16. Haddon, L., Cino, D., Doyle, M.A., Livingstone, S., Mascheroni, G. & Stoilova, M. (2020). Children and young people’s digital skills: A systematic evidence review. KU, Leuven: ySKILLS. https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4160176
  17. Hatzigianni, M., Gregoriadis, A., Karagiorgou, I., & Chatzigeorgiadou, S. (2018). Using tablets in free play: The implementation of the digital play framework in Greece. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(5), 928-942. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12620
  18. Herodotou, C. (2018). Mobile games and science learning: A comparative study of 4 and 5 years old playing the game Angry Birds. British Journal of Educational Technology, 49(1), 6-16. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjet.12546
  19. Hutton, J. S., Dudley, J., DeWitt, T., & Horowitz-Kraus, T. (2022). Associations between digital media use and brain surface structural measures in preschool-aged children. Scientific Reports, 12(1), 19095. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-022-20922-0
  20. Hutton, J. S., Dudley, J., Horowitz-Kraus, T., DeWitt, T., & Holland, S. K. (2020). Associations Between Screen-Based Media Use and Brain White Matter Integrity in Preschool-Aged Children, PubMed. 174(5):509. https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/31682712/
  21. Klakk, H. et al. (2020). The development of a questionnaire to assess leisure time screen-based media use and its proximal correlates in children (SCREENS-Q). BMC Public Health, 20(1), 664. https://doi.org/10.1186/s12889-020-08810-6
  22. Li, H., Hsueh, Y., Yu, H., & Kitzmann, K. M. (2020). Viewing Fantastical Events in Animated Television Shows: Immediate Effects on Chinese Preschoolers’ Executive Function. Frontiers in Psychology, 11. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2020.583174
  23. Li, H., Subrahmanyam, K., Bai, X., Xie, X., & Liu, T. (2018). Viewing Fantastical Events Versus Touching Fantastical Events: Short-Term Effects on Children’s Inhibitory Control. Child Development, 89(1), 48-57. https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.12820
  24. Marangi, M. (2023). Addomesticare gli schermi. Scholé.
  25. Mascheroni, G., & Siibak, A. (2021). Datafied Childhoods: Data practices and imaginaries in children’s lives. Peter Lang.
  26. Masterman, L. (1985). Teaching the media. Routledge.
  27. Mertala, P. (2019). Teachers’ beliefs about technology integration in early childhood education: A meta-ethnographical synthesis of qualitative research. Computers in Human Behavior, 101, 334-349. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chb.2019.08.003
  28. Moher, D., Liberati, A., Tetzlaff, J., Altman, D. G., & Prisma Group. (2009). Preferred reporting items for systematic reviews and meta-analyses: the PRISMA statement. PLoS med, 62, 1006-1012. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jclinepi.2009.06.005
  29. Negroponte, N. (1994). Being digital. Knopf.
  30. Page, M. J. et al. (2021). The PRISMA 2020 statement: An updated guideline for reporting systematic reviews. BMJ, 372(71). https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n71
  31. Papadakis, S. (2021). The impact of coding apps to support young children in computational thinking and computational fluency. A literature review. Frontiers in Education, 6, 657895. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2021.657895
  32. Pinti, P. et al. (2020). The present and future use of functional near‐infrared spectroscopy (fNIRS) for cognitive neuroscience. Annals of the New York Academy of Sciences, 1464(1), 5-29. https://doi.org/10.1111/nyas.13948
  33. Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1108/10748120110424816
  34. Prensky, M. (2012). Brain gain. Macmilian.
  35. Sakr, M. (2018). Multimodal participation frameworks during young children’s collaborative drawing on paper and on the iPad. Thinking Skills and Creativity, 29, 1-11. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2018.05.004
  36. Shimada, S., & Hiraki, K. (2006). Infant’s brain responses to live and televised action. NeuroImage, 32(2), 930-939. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.neuroimage.2006.03.044
  37. Sur, S., & Sinha, V. K. (2009). Event-related potential: An overview. Industrial Psychiatry Journal, 18(1), 70-73. https://doi.org/10.4103/0972-6748.57865
  38. Tomopoulos, S. et al. (2007). Is Exposure to Media Intended for Preschool Children Associated With Less Parent-Child Shared Reading Aloud and Teaching Activities? Ambulatory Pediatrics, 7(1), 18-24. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ambp.2006.10.005
  39. Twait, E., Farah, R., Shamir, N., & Horowitz-Kraus, T. (2019). Dialogic reading vs screen exposure intervention is related to increased cognitive control in preschool‐age children, Acta Paediatrica, Wiley Online Library, 108(11), 1993-2000. https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/apa.14841
  40. Undheim, M. (2022). Children and teachers engaging together with digital technology in early childhood education and care institutions: A literature review. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 30(3), 472-489. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2021.1971730