Insights from watching an old TV Show

Over the holidays, I stumbled on Everwood, a show that felt good to watch. It wasn’t too silly, or too teenagey, it’s just a really nice drama. It also not been some mind-numbing binge; it’s quiet, character-driven, and surprisingly… engaging. The storylines are relatable. I was a teenager once (lol), and I parent teenagers now.  And, oddly enough, it’s full of rich language. Vocabulary like eloquent and ruminate are sprinkled through everyday dialogue and used naturally by kids. The other day, I heard the word asinine for the first time, and I had to look it up! The other interesting thing is that there are no phones and no laptops on the dining table. No constant buzzing or scrolling. Just people talking, thinking, and interacting together.

Then I realised something else: the first series aired in 2002. That’s more than 20 years ago! And the world we see on screen in Everwood, especially the way people communicate, feels like a different era.

Here are some things that I spent a long time thinking about as I’ve got through some of the episodes.

1. Technology Has Completely Changed Family Interaction

In Everwood, home life feels tactile: books, homework, dinners, discussions. No one is sneaking glances at a device every few minutes. Nowadays, even adults default to their phones during downtime. I’ll admit it, If I don’t put my phone in the kitchen, I find I will absent-mindedly scroll my feed because it’s second nature. But with Everwood? I didn’t. The storyline was rewarding enough to hold my attention. That got me thinking: is it just good writing, or is there something about language and engagement that holds attention differently than quick, constant distraction?

2. Children’s Language and Our Expectations Have Shifted

The kids' characters on Everwood are also given the opportunity to think and speak with real verbal depth. They are able to articulate ideas with precision and don’t filter their thoughts through screens. That contrast with much of today’s youth media is striking, and it got me thinking about why has language changed so much? And what implications does this have for literacy and learning?

3. Screen Time is Not Neutral for Language Development

A growing body of research suggests that extensive screen use, especially passive exposure,  comes with costs for language and communication. Studies show that high screen time in early childhood is correlated with poorer vocabulary and language outcomes, as well as reduced interactive communication with caregivers and peers, factors that are foundational for literacy later on.

Not only this, but parents' interactions with their children can also be limited due to screen time, whereby they would rather be on their device than chatting whilst out on a walk. Some developmental research indicates that passive screen use can reduce the quantity and quality of caregiver–child talk, which is critical for rich vocabulary growth. (See links to further reading at the bottom of this blog)

One review found that prolonged screen exposure in the first two years of life was associated with delays in language acquisition and social interaction, likely because screens displace real verbal practice and responsive, back-and-forth conversation.

4. Oral Language Still Matters, Maybe More Than Ever

Decades of literacy research underpin one core truth: oral language is foundational to reading and writing success. Knowledgeable scholars such as Timothy Shanahan and Christopher Lonigan point out that complex oral language skills like vocabulary, grammar, and narrative comprehension strongly predict later reading comprehension.

When children hear and use a wider, richer range of words in meaningful contexts, through conversations, stories, and shared experiences, they build the mental network of language that supports fluent literacy. In contrast, environments dominated by brief phrases, fragmented texting language, or scrolling feeds often lack that depth.

Then Came TikTok…. and Gen Z Language Filters in Canva

Not long after my Everwood binge, I found myself on TikTok (yes, another confession) watching a teacher talk about a new Canva feature that embraces Generation Z slang. It turns out Canva recently introduced an “English (chronically online)” mode, which is a language setting that reframes its interface with Gen Z slang, emojis, and TikTok-native expressions.

On the surface, this is playful and engaging and perhaps a nod to how younger creators actually communicate online. But it also made me think: if the way we frame language tools for students leans toward novelty slang (“inky stuff” for printing, for example), what message does that send about the value of precise and rich language?

I then watched this same teacher pose another question, asking for recommendations to connect with her new Year 5/6 class, and the answers were predominantly about using their lingo when communicating, and asking them for their favourite slang words.

As an aside, my advice would be to simply connect with these kids as if they are intelligent, and expect them to see themselves this way, too. I’ve taught so many kids now who think they are ‘dumb’. I treat them and speak to them as though they are not, and they soon start to believe in themselves.

So What Do We Make of All This?

Here are my thoughts on things:

• Language Richness Matters
The way people in Everwood talked, which I find to be thoughtful, deliberate, and wide-ranging vocabulary,  wasn’t just nostalgic; it was engaging. It drew me in and kept me present without distraction. This aligns with what literacy research has long highlighted: deep oral language supports comprehension, critical thinking, and long-term literacy success.

• Screen Time Changes Contexts, But Isn’t All Bad
Research doesn’t say screens are inherently evil,  rather, it shows that how and how much they are used matter. Excessive passive screen exposure, particularly at young ages, may limit opportunities for rich conversation, shared story time, and interactive language building. However, if you are watching TV together and can talk about what you are watching, then this can buffer some of the negative effects.

• Digital Slang and Literacy Can Coexist, But We Should Be Intentional
Tools like Canva’s playful language modes reflect real linguistic shifts, over centuries, language has evolved, and Gen Z has definitely shaped communication patterns. But we need to consider that if we lean too far into slang at the expense of rich vocabulary and expressive language, we risk undermining the very skills that support deep thinking and literacy. Definitely something to consider when connecting with other learners.

• Teachers and Caregivers Still Shape Language Development
Screen features, apps, and slang filters may be cultural phenomena, but the heart of language development still thrives in real conversation, shared reading, and intentional talk. These are the contexts that expand vocabulary, build syntax understanding, and support lifelong literacy. The other day, my frist piece of advice to parents of children just starting school was keep reading to your children for exactly this reason. Poems, fiction, non-fiction and newspaper articles. Build that vocabulary.

Further Reading:

1. The Impact on Interactive Communication ("Technoference")

A landmark 2024 study published in JAMA Pediatrics specifically measured the "cost" of screen time in terms of lost human interaction.

• Study: Screen Time and Parent-Child Talk When Children Are Aged 12 to 36 Months (Brushe et al., 2024).

• Key Finding: Researchers used "Fitbit-like" audio devices to track home environments and found that for every additional minute of screen time, children heard fewer adult words and engaged in fewer back-and-forth "conversations" (conversational turns). By age 3, children with average screen use were missing out on approximately 1,100 adult words and 190 conversational turns per day.

2. Poorer Vocabulary and Language Outcomes

Several large-scale reviews have established a correlation between high screen use and delayed language milestones.

• Study: Association Between Screen Time and Children’s Performance on a Developmental Screening Test (Madigan et al., 2019).

• Key Finding: This longitudinal study of 2,441 children found that higher levels of screen time at ages 2 and 3 were significantly associated with poorer performance on developmental screening tests (including communication and problem-solving) at ages 3 and 5.

• Systematic Review: The Relationship between Language and Technology: How Screen Time Affects Language Development in Early Life (Massaroni et al., 2024).

  • This 2024 review of 18 separate studies concluded that prolonged screen exposure in the first two years of life negatively affects vocabulary range and comprehension.

3. Long-term Literacy and School Readiness

Studies have also tracked how early screen habits manifest as "costs" once children reach school age.

• Study: Longitudinal Associations Between Screen Use and Reading in Preschool-Aged Children (McArthur et al., 2021).

• Key Finding: Published in Pediatrics, this study found a "reciprocal" relationship: more screen time at age 2 predicted lower reading frequency at age 3, which in turn led to even higher screen use by age 5. This suggests that screens can displace the very activities (like shared book reading) that build literacy.

• Study: Associations Between Screen Exposure and Language, Educational Skills, and Peer Functioning (Gath et al., 2025/2026).

  • Data from the Growing Up in New Zealand study showed that children with more than 1.5 hours of daily screen time at age 2 had below-average vocabulary and "letter fluency" by age 4.5.

    
    1. The National Early Literacy Panel (NELP) Report

    Both Shanahan and Lonigan were primary contributors to this massive meta-analysis. It is the most-cited document for the link between oral language and later literacy.

    • Study: Developing Early Literacy: Report of the National Early Literacy Panel (2008)

    • Key Evidence: The report identified oral language (specifically vocabulary and "listening comprehension") as a "conventional" predictor of later reading comprehension. It proved that children who can’t navigate complex grammar or narratives orally will eventually hit a "wall" in 3rd or 4th grade, even if they are good at sounding out words.

    2. Lonigan’s Research on the "Precursors" of Reading

    Christopher Lonigan has spent decades mapping how preschool language skills transition into elementary school reading.

    • Study: The Development of Early Literacy Skills: Evidence from Forecasting Studies (Lonigan et al., 2000/updated 2008).

    • Key Finding: Lonigan’s work demonstrates that narrative discourse (the ability to tell a story) and syntactic awareness (understanding grammar) are distinct from simple letter-naming. He argues that while phonics gets kids started, oral language is what allows them to understand what they read.

    3. Shanahan on the "Language-Reading" Connection

    Timothy Shanahan frequently synthesizes the research for practitioners. He often cites the "Simple View of Reading," which states that Reading Comprehension = Decoding × Language Comprehension.

    • Key Resource: Common Core State Standards and the Science of Reading (Shanahan, 2020).

    • Key Argument: Shanahan argues that vocabulary is not just about knowing "words," but about the background knowledge and complex sentence structures that children learn through talk before they ever pick up a book.