My own two cents

[Rosewood]

That very true.

Well, sadly, PBS isn't a very popular channel anymore. Nickelodeon and Disney are. And because they have all those other shows, most people don't even think to tune into PBS.

I payed good money to get the Disney channel, thinking I would be getting good quality programs. But after I got it, I soon became very disapointed in what I was seeing. Once I found that Disney was promoting programs like "Yugio", "American Dragon; Jake long", "Dragon Ball - Z", and "W.I.T.C.H.", I was ready to throw in the towel! But to be truthfull, that is the one thing that did push me back to PBS. (Fortunately, my kids are still young enough that they have not yet become stuck on any of these violent shows, and I hope they never do.)

 

[Hays]

All this aside, if we're talking education, I do think there is something to be said for the idea of giving Elmo his own show.

Personally, I'm not a big fan. I do, however, see the educational value of Elmo for the under-three set; there were a lot of basic concepts that my son learned directly from Elmo's World - I remember "sky" being a difficult idea to explain that he got from there. I think a half-hour show just for babies and toddlers is a terrific idea - they really can't handle a full hour of TV, anyway.

That being said, now that my son is five, it doesn't hold his interest, or have as much to offer as it used to - and this is where the regular SS segments come in. I'd love to have a full hour of well designed educational TV just for preschoolers - that is, 3 to 5 year olds. I know that there are a lot of shows out there for this demographic, but very few have the actual educational value of Sesame Street.

So, basically, what I'd like to see is an hour and a half. Funding, anyone?

 

[BEAR]

All this aside, if we're talking education, I do think there is something to be said for the idea of giving Elmo his own show.

Personally, I'm not a big fan. I do, however, see the educational value of Elmo for the under-three set; there were a lot of basic concepts that my son learned directly from Elmo's World - I remember "sky" being a difficult idea to explain that he got from there. I think a half-hour show just for babies and toddlers is a terrific idea - they really can't handle a full hour of TV, anyway.

That being said, now that my son is five, it doesn't hold his interest, or have as much to offer as it used to - and this is where the regular SS segments come in. I'd love to have a full hour of well designed educational TV just for preschoolers - that is, 3 to 5 year olds. I know that there are a lot of shows out there for this demographic, but very few have the actual educational value of Sesame Street.

So, basically, what I'd like to see is an hour and a half. Funding, anyone?

You're right, there are so many terrific shows out there for kids that Sesame Street has paved the way for. However, Sesame Street still manages to be educational and highly entertaining at the same time...almost to the point where you forget you're learning.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

I don't know if anybody suggested this already or anything, but I propose they they turn Sesame Street back to the was it was, as in target theh 3-5 crowd, and then make Elmo World It's own show to target the 2-4 crowd. They could show 15 minutes of that, and 15 minutes of Play With Me Sesame.

 

[Rosewood]

I'm all for that!

I don't know if anybody suggested this already or anything, but I propose they they turn Sesame Street back to the was it was, as in target theh 3-5 crowd, and then make Elmo World It's own show to target the 2-4 crowd. They could show 15 minutes of that, and 15 minutes of Play With Me Sesame.

I think there are ALOT of people out here who would like to see this happen. Not necessarily to bring old episodes back, but simply to get rid of this repetative, boringly predictive, new format. Although it may go against the currant beliefs of SW, kids of all ages like nice surprises. And a format that is so predictable you could list it off in your sleep after watching it for a week, IMO, is not something that is going to keep kids attention. The problem is that SW is simply so bound and determined to prove their theory of "younger kids likeing it better this way" that they are not willing to admit how ultimately boring this format has caused the show to become. Plus the needs of the older age group (4-5), (which this show was originally created for), are suddenly not seaming so important anymore, which, to me, is disturbing.

When a new idea doesn't work as greatly as you wanted it to, there is no shame in admitting it and going on to something different; and just because something is old doesn't mean it's worn out. It's been shown many times that often an "old" way of doing something only got that way because it has been proven time and again to be the best!

 

[Katzi428]

Speaking as a Gen Xer (group that'watched SS from the beginning til they felt they were too old for it ) we watched 60 minutes of Sesame Street when we were little kids.There was no Elmo, Journey to Ernie (in fact Ernie just either appeared with Bert or every so often he was in street scenes) Why can't they just keep the show an hour long & have these little extra things after Sesame Street?
OK...granted I have no kids of my own & I don't think my 5 year old niece is into Sesame Street or Elmo for that matter anymore. But still,letters & numbers are the fundamentals of a child's learning. The only little extra on the show that would probably help kids is "Global Grover"It teaches kids geography.
I don't want to start any fights that'd cause this thread to be locked up.So if one of the mods wants me to delete this post,I will do it willingly.
Thank you.

 

[Rosewood]

Heres my two cents worth.......

As long as people take these comments the way they are meant and not personally, Katzi, I don't think you need to fear for your post being deleated. What you said is a proven fact. Back in the days when it first came out, Sesame Street used to focus not on just one, but two (sometimes more) letters and numbers in each episode. They also used to focus more on showing kids how to say and use them by showing clips and skits that were based on these things. Find an early episode and watch it and you will find it jam-packed full of educational stuff that simply couldn't be packed into a time frame of less than 60 minutes. It was a bold experiment back in 1968, that turned out to be an unbelievable success! It's goal was to get kids ready to start school by teaching them the basics of ABC's and 123's, and, in the process, encourage tollerance and discourage bigatry by showing how the different races of people in the cast were all able to live on one street and still get along in perfect harmony. Kids (like me) would sit, mezmerized, in front of the T.V. for a full hour of good, clean, educational entertainment every day. And it was a great help to school systems, as well. In fact, the things that SS taught were carried right up to the level of first grade in the education system! I remember well the hour of class time when the teacher would bring in the T.V., give us all a carton of milk to drink, and turn on Sesame Street for us to watch while he/she used the hour to correct tests and assignments and such. Today, though, I don't think teachers would be caught dead showing SS to kids at school, not just because of all the "dumbing down" the show has experienced, but also due to the extreem increase in what kids need to know before starting kindergarden. Thats why I try so hard to emphasize the fact that the way SS used to be is needed today more than ever!

The people who have now taken over SW try to rationalize and back up their actions of "dumbing down" the show by claiming that the kids watching it today are of a younger, more vulnerable age group, usually around 2-3 yrs. old, who, by "proven research", are much more suceptable to being overwhelmed by to much data being pushed on them at one sitting, and whose attention span is "proven" to last not much longer than 30 minutes, which is why "Elmo's World" was inserted. (They say it basically "fools" kids into watching the remainder of the show because they think it is a completly different show altogether, which re-charges their attention span.)The reason I have a hard time believing all that "proven research", that they now go by as if it were gosple doctrine, is the fact that I, myself, was only 3 when they aired the pilot episode, and I never had any trouble sitting through it. So unless they are claiming that an entire generation of kids today is stricken with an extreem case of A.D.D., I don't see how they could come up with such a hypothosis and call it "proven".

The way I see it, the actual reason for pushing Elmo and all of his other "younger" based character friends (i.e. - Zoe, Baby Bear, and the like) into the spotlight so much and "dumbing down" the show has a far more subtle explanation behind it, and that would be money. The real fact is this: when "Elmo" came on the show back in 85, they saw what a smash hit he was with the younger crowd. And they also saw a possible future source of income, through retail sales, when the "Tickle-me-Elmo" craze happened. By now Jim Henson was gone, along with a good chunk of the other people who had ran the show up to this point. And the people who had replaced them were eager to give the show a new make-over. When they saw all the money that "Tickle-me-Elmo" brought in, I think they knew they had struck pay dirt. Here they had finally found a way to keep their programs running without always having to rely on donations and sponsors alone for income. The only drawback was the fact that, to keep the money comming in with other types of Elmo toys, they would need to find a way to keep his popularity from dying. And in order to do so they would need to forgo concentrating so much on the concept of teaching "The Basics" and start catering to the younger kids. Making Elmo their biggest little character was how they would keep the cash flowing. Thats why Elmo is now basically the "representative" character of SS. It also gave "newbies" in the pruduction field the chance they wanted to turn over a new leaf and start producing programs and characters that they could get credit for. As a result you now have the key characters and format that SS has today.

 

[Ilikemuppets]

I think there are ALOT of people out here who would like to see this happen. Not necessarily to bring old episodes back, but simply to get rid of this repetative, boringly predictive, new format. Although it may go against the currant beliefs of SW, kids of all ages like nice surprises. And a format that is so predictable you could list it off in your sleep after watching it for a week, IMO, is not something that is going to keep kids attention. The problem is that SW is simply so bound and determined to prove their theory of "younger kids likeing it better this way" that they are not willing to admit how ultimately boring this format has caused the show to become. Plus the needs of the older age group (4-5), (which this show was originally created for), are suddenly not seaming so important anymore, which, to me, is disturbing.

When a new idea doesn't work as greatly as you wanted it to, there is no shame in admitting it and going on to something different; and just because something is old doesn't mean it's worn out. It's been shown many times that often an "old" way of doing something only got that way because it has been proven time and again to be the best!

Well, maby a little more like 4-6. I'm sure younger kids would like the older format, but the reason why I think Elmo's World shoud be it's own show is so SW Would have a better reason to justify their theory.

 

[rowlf84]

Rosewood-
What research article are you quoting?

 

[Rosewood]

I know I've used that phrase alot, but.......

Rosewood-
What research article are you quoting?

I know I've used the phrase "proven research" quite a bit in my posts, enough that I may need you to be a bit more specific as to which post you are asking about. If you could give me that info., it may help me answer your question.