The American Academy of Pediatrics (AAP) (儿科学) just released its updated guidelines for children's media use.

    The recommendations reflect what all parents know: children need less screen time, which indicates that they desperately need more free time to develop their imagination, a sense of wonder and discover their passion and purpose.

    Our children are over-stimulated, over-scheduled and under pressure to perform academically and beyond school. This weakens their ability to build creative thinking skills essential to self-discovery. Creativity occurs when kids have time for curiosity and exploration. With children spending up to eight hours a day on media devices and additional hours engaging in scheduled activities, opportunities for growth disappear.

    What we are not so sure about is how to get our kids to want the free, screenless time which we know will benefit them. It may sound counter-intuitive (违背直觉的) but today's kids need coaching to experience and discover the benefits of free time.

What came to parents easily a few decades ago has become a challenge for our generation. It's not that yesterday's parents knew more about child development; they simply had fewer choices. Boredom and relaxation were an inescapable part of daily life. Today, they mean, "I'm a bad parent and not doing enough to get my kid ahead."

    Recently, I had an eye-opening revelation while watching my 11-year-old daughter play in a softball game. I have six children and have attended dozens of such game. I know the drill—or thought I did. Families settled in for the day with lawn chairs, cold drinks and cousins. These brothers and sisters would gradually chat with each other. Games of catch and hide-and-seek began, and friendships were formed then. At crucial moments, the newfound friends turned their attention to the field to cheer on their teams.

    But that wasn't happening. Though there were at least 15 children by the sidelines (球场边线), I didn't hear any of them. They sat in silence using their individual tablets (平板电脑). Even with the score tied in the final inning (垒球比赛的一局), not a single child watched the game or spoke to each other. The situation was strange and revealing: Kids have more planned activities and passive entertainment at their fingertips than ever before, but less free time to dream, imagine and focus on what they truly love.

I understand that making time for "nothing" is difficult in a world where we are constantly worried our kids will fall behind if they aren't good at academics. But I refuse to sit back and watch this loss of childhood. We are taking back childhood. Imagination needs time and space to blossom.

If your kids are like mine, asking them to imagine will at the beginning be difficult. That's because they haven't developed the skills and muscle memory to make it second nature. I hope the AAP guidelines prompt all of us to set needed screen time limits for our children. Personally, I am practicing strategies to "develop imagination" in my children. Imagination, like a sport, requires practice, training, motivational speeches, rewards and extreme patience.

    A serious problem for today's society is who should be responsible for our elderly and how to improve their lives. It is not only a financial problem but also a question of the system we want for our society. I would like to suggest several possible solutions to this problem.

    First, employers should take the responsibility for their retired employees. To make this possible, a percentage of profits should be set aside for this purpose. But when a company must take life-long responsibility for its employees, it may suffer from a commercial disadvantage due to higher employee costs.

    Another way of solving the problem is to return the responsibility to the individual. This means each person must save during his working years to pay for his years of retirement. This does not seem a very fair model since some people have enough trouble paying for their daily life without trying to earn extra to cover their retirement years. This means the government might have to step in to care for the poor.

    In addition, the government could take responsibility for the care of the elderly. This could be financed through government taxes to increase the level of pensions. Furthermore, some institutions should be created for senior citizens, which can help provide a comfortable life for them. Unfortunately, as the present situation in our country shows, this is not a truly viable answer. The government can seldom afford to care for the elderly, particularly when it is busy trying to care for the young.

    One further solution is that the government or social organizations establish some working places especially for the elderly where they are independent.

    To sum up, all these options have advantages and disadvantages. Therefore, it is reasonable to expect that some combination of these options may be needed to provide the care we hope to give to our elderly generations.

    It is good to get in touch with your inner child from time to time, and obviously some people are willing to pay big money for the chance to do so in a proper environment. A Brooklyn-based adult preschool is charging customers between $333 and $999 for the chance to act like a kid again.

    At Preschool Mastermind in New York adults get to participate in show—and—tell, arts—and—crafts such as finger paint, games like musical chairs and even take naps. The month-long course also has class picture day where the adults are expected to have a field trip and a parent day.

    30-year-old Michelle Joni Lapidos, the brain behind the adult preschool, studied childhood education and has always wanted to be a preschool teacher. She's always on the lookout for new ways to get people in touch with the freedom of childhood. A friend encouraged her to start the mastermind course instead.

    According to Candice, her blogger friend, Preschool Mastermind gives adults a chance to relearn and master the things that they failed to understand as children. "I realized all the significances of what we learn in preschool," said founder Michelle Joni, "People come here and get in touch with their inner child. It's magical. We are bringing ourselves back to another place, another time with ourselves when we are more believing in ourselves, more confident and ready to take on the world."

    "One person's here because they want to learn not to be so serious." Michelle said. "Another's here to learn to be more confident." She explained that most of the classes were planned. However, Joni added that while the planned activities were fun, it was often the spontaneous(自发的)moments that attracted students. "It's the things you don't plan for, the sharing between friends and learning from each other."

    Forests are always losers at the Olympics, and that's unlikely to change anytime soon.

    For the winter games in PyeongChang, South Korea, virgin forest was destroyed on Mount Gariwang to accommodate ski runs. For the 2022 Winter Olympics in Beijing, a ski run is set to wipe out part of the Songshan National Nature Reserve And let's not forget the 240 acres of Atlantic Forest that were leveled for the 2016 games in Rio de Janeiro to make way for a golf course.

    For the upcoming Tokyo games, environmental and human rights advocates have been raising alarms about the use of tropical wood to build the New National Stadium. Activists have fought against such environmental destruction. The damage is often permanent, threatens endangered plants and animals and, in some cases, causes conflicts with native people But frequently the country's organizing committee, and the International Olympic Committee (IOC) have found ways to make it reasonable—despite a paragraph in the Olympic Charter that states that the IOC's role is to "encourage and support a responsible concern for environmental issues."

    As it stands now. the IOC has little authority over a city's local organizing committee, which finally plans the event, Chappelet, professor of public management at the University of Lausanne, told Earther. "Even if the IOC is dissatisfied with the way host cities have prepared for the games, they have no built-in systems to supervise (监督) them so that they strictly follow the Olympic Charter. The only thing they can do if they're not happy is to withdraw the right to organize the game. But the IOC could include more enforcement (执行) systems into the contract (合同) they make with the host city, he added. That contract must be signed and obeyed by everyone. Those who break it could be fined.

    Boykoff, the author of several books on the Olympics, suggested a similar solution. "The IOC could insist that host cities prioritize their ecological promises, but instead they look the other way, time and time again," he said.

    Educators across the US are calling for major changes to the admissions process in higher education. The Harvard school of Greduate Education, along with 80 other schools and organizations, released a report called "Turning the Tide Making Caring Common” in January, 2016. The report argues that the process schools use to choose students causes major problems.

    David Hawkins is the Executive Director for Educational Content and Policy at the National Association for College Admissions Counseling. Hawkins told Voice of America that most colleges and universities require many things from students when they apply. Schools usually ask for an essay describing a student's interests or why they want to study at that school. The schools also ask for letters from teachers or other responsible adults describing why a student is a good candidate. But, Hawkins says, the area that schools are most concerned about is a student's high school grades and standardized test results.

    The report suggests that paying attention to academic success over other qualities works well for some students but hurts others. In addition, academic success is not the most important quality a student should have. More attention should be paid to showing whether or not a student wants to do well in the world, according to the report.

    The report goes on to state that the best way to change the admissions process is by changing college applications. It suggests that schools should ask for evidence that students care about other people. But the report does have its critics. Bob Schaeffer, Public Education Director for the National Center for Fair and Open Testing, said that every few years, someone makes the same argument for changes, but no real change has happed yet. Even many of the schools that agree with the report still make no changes.

    Lloyd Thacker, Executive Director of the Education Conservancy, said that until a majority of schools agree to make the changes, there will still be problems. However, he said, the admissions process was better in the past. If bad changes can affect the process, so can good ones.

    GOING TO UNIVERSITY is supposed to be a mind-broadening experience. That statement is probably made in comparison to training for work straight after school, which might not be so encouraging. But is it actually true? Jessika Golle of the University of Tübingen, in Germany, thought she would try to find out. Her result, however, is not quite what might be expected. As she reports in Psychological Science this week, she found that those who have been to university do indeed seem to leave with broader and more inquiring minds than those who have spent their immediate post-school years in vocational (职业的) training for work. However, it was not the case that university broadened minds. Rather, work seemed to narrow them.

    Dr. Golle came to this conclusion after she and a team of colleagues studied the early careers of 2,095 German youngsters. The team used two standardized tests to assess their volunteers. One was of personality traits, including openness, conscientiousness（认真）and so on. The other was of attitudes, such as realistic, investigative and enterprising. They administered both tests twice—once towards the end of each volunteer's time at school, and then again six years later. Of the original group, 382 were on the intermediate track, from which there was a choice between the academic and vocational routes, and it was on these that the researchers focused. University beckoned for 212 of them. The remaining 170 chose vocational training and a job.

    When it came to the second round of tests, Dr. Golle found that the personalities of those who had gone to university had not changed significantly. Those who had undergone vocational training and then got jobs were not that much changed in personality, either—except in one crucial respect. They had become more conscientious.

    That sounds like a good thing, certainly compared with the common public image of undergraduates as a bunch of lazybones. But changes in attitude that the researchers recorded were rather worrying. In the university group, again, none were detectable. But those who had chosen the vocational route showed marked drops in interest in tasks that are investigative and enterprising in nature. And that might restrict their choice of careers.

    Some investigative and enterprising jobs, such as scientific research, are, indeed beyond the degreeless. But many, particularly in Germany, with its tradition of vocational training, are not. The researchers mention, for example, computer programmers and finance-sector workers as careers requiring these traits. If Dr. Golle is correct, and changes in attitude brought about by the very training Germany prides itself on are narrowing people's choices, that is indeed a matter worthy of serious consideration.