As a parent of young children, I had a love-hate relationship with television. Actually, “love” is too strong of a word. I tolerated “educational” shows that kept my kids occupied long enough that I could accomplish a task. I liked it when we could cuddle together for family time.

I was determined that my children would not turn out like Joey, a childhood friend who had no t.v. and became so obsessed with it at friends’ houses that he didn’t want to play. I had the lofty goal of helping my kids to develop healthy viewing habits, but mostly, I hated it when the t.v. was on.

As a mom who’s not a “t.v. in the background” person and who doesn’t watch much herself, I felt guilty if my kids were watching. The educator in me scolded, “You’re not doing your job as a mother!” The mother in me rebutted, “You can only turn house chores into a game for so long before the toilet needs to be scrubbed, for real, by an adult!”

What I hated most about television was the way the children would get sucked in and not want to turn it off, especially when the shrewd programmers began to “wrap” shows, making one roll seamlessly into the next, so that parents who wanted to stop the madness had less than a split second to divert, point and click “off.” Even though I pre-set limits, tears abounded for the loss of the next wonderful show. It was easier to just say, “No. You can’t even turn it on,” but then how was I going to get anything done?

I tried to extend grace: surely television had some redeeming qualities, and besides, all the children watched was PBS. Then the children discovered other channels, which they deemed “commercials,” and began composing their Christmas lists in September!

As a WeJoySing teacher, I am sometimes asked: “What about ‘Baby Einstein?’ If my infant watches it, will he be smarter?” to which I respond: The American Academy of Pediatrics recommends no television for children under two,* and immediately, the schizophrenic debate resurfaces: is t.v. an educational tool, or is it worthless past time?

I decided to turn to Dr. John Feierabend, PhD, Director of the Music Education Division at The Hartt School of the University of Hartford, Connecticut, for help. He is the driving force behind the PBS show “Lomax,” which is based upon his First Steps in Music Curriculum (for 3 to 6 year olds and beyond) and for which he served as Curriculum Consultant.

How does Dr. Feierabend feel about television? His response, point blank: “I hate t.v.” (no deliberation there!) Dr. Feierabend explains that Jane Healy’s book Endangered Minds made a huge impression on him. He chose not to have a television in his home, except for in his bedroom, when the family would occasionally “huddle together on the bed to watch Cinderella or The Wizard of Oz.”** His children, now grown, frequently thank him. They grew up reading and doing other creative activities.

So, why would someone with such strong convictions secure a 3.7 million dollar grant from the Bingham Trust (which funded season one) then hire Serius Thinking, Ltd. (only after they agreed to his specifications and philosophies) to produce a children’s show?

“Television can be damaging OR helpful,” Feierabend clarifies. “When a kid at home is participating, it’s a whole different story…Time spent watching television is time taken away from brain development. When someone watches t.v., his/her brain goes into an ‘alpha state,’ one step above sleep, with a very low level of brain function taking place…I had to do some convincing [to Serius] about the importance of interaction in the program, but I would never have done a show that was not interactive.”

In “Lomax,” for example, viewers see “Conductor Fred” saying something like, “Now you sing after me,” then there’s a cut-away of children singing (which is what kids at home are doing) then when it shows him again, he encourages the children by saying, “Thanks. That was great!”

When Feierabend conducted research for the pilot, nearly ten years ago, he wanted to know: could t.v. effectively motivate a response? Researchers videotaped children watching the show with a teacher in the room and also with no teacher in the room. The result was that there was no difference. Children participated and did what the leader on the t.v. asked them to do. This indicated that children would be actively involved in the program and would exhibit total participation. Though this was one of the most important requirements for the show, according to Feierabend, the Public Broadcasting System was not as concerned with that but more interested in the “social studies aspect of the show, which teaches songs of America to the children of America.”

The title character “Lomax” is a hound dog who “hears music from very far away” and whose hobby is “tracking down tunes.” The name was inspired by the work of famous musicologist Alan Lomax, “the pioneering ‘tune tracker’…one of the world’s great collectors of folklore and folk music from the United States [and other countries.] He and…his musicologist father John Lomax contributed over 10,000 field recordings to the Archive of Folk Song at the Library of Congress.”*** These men are considered to be responsible, more than any other researchers, for the preservations of America’s folk music heritage. Many of the songs used on the show “Lomax” were discovered by Alan Lomax as he traveled the countryside.***

One of the goals of the show is, as Dr. Feierabend puts it: “Out of the mouth of [music educator/theorist Zoltan] Kodaly himself, ‘to teach the music of the country to its people.’” Another is to help children develop their musical intelligence. A television show that provides activities to help children become tuneful, beatful, and artful?! “Lomax” truly stands alone in upholding and fulfilling these goals.

The challenge: not all PBS stations carry the show. “That means that only 50% of children in America [have access to] a show that is helping to develop their musical intelligence,” Feierabend laments. Because the Bingham Trust only funds start-ups (it does not provide continuous funding) and due to the economy, the program has not received funding for a second season. However, there’s hope for “Lomax,” (and for the children of America!) because PBS stations can continue to broadcast season one’s episodes, and a dvd featuring four episodes of “Lomax” is available to consumers this fall (see www.giamusic.com/feierabend for details.)

The October edition of Music Notes will respond to the question: “Can television make my child smarter?” and explore how parents might choose television programming wisely and use limited viewing time to their child’s advantage. We’ll also include more advice from Dr. Feierabend, including his take on products like “Baby Einstein,” and the music of the “Wiggles” and “Sesame Street.”

Until then, check out “Lomax” using the link below. Watch your children as they watch this and other shows. Let us know what you see.

Join the discussion on the WeJoySing Facebook page.

A Note from Mrs. Jo
“Lomax” meets several criteria that have earned WeJoySing’s stamp of approval as an excellent teaching tool for children. One of the most important is that the show, which is “visual” in nature, evokes a verbal or movement response from children. Little ones do something as a result of and in the midst of their watching. Educational research indicates that a child must respond to visual stimuli to assure that true learning is taking place. So, take a look at “Lomax…” you may find yourself responding with JOY!!!

* 1999 Recommendation of American Academy of Pediatrics.

** WeJoySing Interview with Dr. John Feierabend, May 27, 2009.

*** http://pbskids.org/lomax/pt_resources.html