what is the effect of digital technologies on engagement and complexity of thinking of the...
Post on 21-Oct-2014
807 views
DESCRIPTION
In using the iPad as an expressive language we move beyond the common use of iPads. In a supportive learning environment with carefully chosen Apps , iPads can add to the level of engagement and the complexity of thinking of a child’s explorations when the other languages of expression are not forgotten.TRANSCRIPT
What is the effect of digital technologies on engagement and complexity of thinking of the explora4ons of 5-‐6 year old children in a Reggio inspired se:ng?
Ac#on Research by Clair Weston December 2013
Hypotheses
In using the iPad as an expressive language we move beyond the common use of iPads. In a suppor#ve learning environment with carefully chosen Apps , iPads can add to the level of engagement and the complexity of thinking of a child’s explora#ons when the other languages of expression are not forgoIen.
Research Ques#on !What is the effect of digital technologies on engagement and complexity of thinking of the explora4ons of 5-‐6 year old children in a Reggio inspired se:ng?
Children can be passive users Looking at a screen Consuming Low level of engagement Ac#vity level is simple Repe##ve Absence of cogni#ve demand Lower order thinking skills are u#lized
My Concern
Intension
Children displaying sustained intense engagement Crea#vity Energy Persistence Higher order thinking skills would be displayed Several languages of expression would be intertwined
This is the one I like the best on the iPad. I didn’t know how to do it before and then Amon showed me how to do it. I like making all of the sounds. It reminded me about when we did buIerfly dancing outside.That makes me feel happy because I like to hear the sounds. !
Variables Dependent: level of engagement and complexity of thinking Independent: opportuni#es to open up possibili#es for iPad explora#on as an expressive language Extraneous: sensi#ve and #mely teacher interven#on, the learning environment and conversa#ons between the children themselves
!!“We have to give closer aIen#on to the process of learning through the digital media. The digital experience is much too oTen exhausted simply in its func#on and technical form. In addi#on to this technical aspect, if it is also used in crea#ve and imagina#ve ways, it reveals a high level of expressive, cogni#ve and social poten#al as well as great possibili#es for evolu#on. It is necessary to reflect on and beIer comprehend the changes that the digital language introduces in the processes of understanding. We have to be aware of what this adds, takes away, or modifies in today’s learning.”
!
!
(Vea Vecchi in Gandini et al, 2005, p. x)
Review of the Literature
Review of the Literature
!!There appears to be agreement that the emergence of mobile touch devices, such as the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad, provide rich opportuni#es for young learners. Teachers in the early years are seeing these as valid pedagogical devices as they allow young children to easily manipulate and interact with screen objects and create digital content. Touch-‐screen devices in par#cular encourage intui#ve par#cipa#on in open-‐ended games and apps. !!!
(Verenikina and Kervin, 2011)
Review of the Literature
!Marsh, like many other authors call for further research into the children’s use of digital technology sta#ng, !!
“Academics and educators need to examine their affordances more closely in order to iden#fy what children gain from their playful engagements in these worlds and how their experiences can be built upon in early years se_ngs” !!!
(Marsh, 2010, p36)
Research Design
A two group pre-‐test and post-‐test design. !To measure student engagement and complexity of thinking before and aTer the interven#on. !To compare the gain in mean score for a_tude and complexity of thinking of the control group and the experimental group.
Interven#on
Removal of the apps that only allowed for simple, passive, repe##ve explora#ons, which lacked possibili#es for ways of expression. !iPads placed in different loca#ons within the se_ng to promote transferring between languages. !Children were supported in their explora#ons and encouraged to share discoveries and ways of expression with each other. !
The children were able to access the iPads just as they would the other materials and ways of expression within the se_ng. !iPads could be taken to different places to work on. !During class mee#ngs the interven#on group were invited to share with each other projects that they were proud of. !!!
Sample
Convenience sample of 26 Kindergarten students from two of four kindergarten classes at Jakarta Interna#onal School, Indonesia !One class, KA, formed the control group and the second class, KB, formed the experimental group !Age range is 5-‐6 years !The kindergarten classes are inspired by the principles of the Reggio Emilia Educa#onal Project
Instrumenta#on and Data Collec#on
Each child’s explora#on with the iPad was observed before and aTer the interven#on.
Level of engagement was measured with a Likert Scale Survey
ATer a lengthy observa#on of a random sample of five children from the control group and five children from the experimental group, a rubric grade was assigned to the explora#ons to ascertain the complexity of thinking of the explora#ons.
Threats to Validity
Researcher bias
History
Maturity
Results: Engagement
Control group mean gain in score vs experimental mean gain in score.
!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!An unpaired t-‐test, showed a significant change in student engagement aTer the iPad interven#on was implemented. A one-‐tailed P value showed that the results were sta#s#cally significant by conven#onal means. !t= 3.1161 df= 22 P=0.0025)
Group Control Group
gain between pretest score and post test scores
Experimental Group
gain between pretest score and post test scores
Mean 2.83 5.5
Standard Devia4on
2.52 1.57
N 12 12
Visual representa#on of the control group and experimental group gain in engagement scores
0
1.5
3
4.5
6
Mean gain in engagement score
Control Group Experimental Group
Results: Complexity of Thinking
Control group mean gain in score vs experimental mean gain in score. !!!!!!!!!!!!!!
!!!!The results of the analysis of complexity of thinking between the control group and the experimental group showed that the experimental group significantly increased the complexity of their thinking during explora#ons involving an iPad. A one-‐tailed P value showed that that the results were sta#s#cally significant by conven#onal means. t=4.9058 df= 8 P=0.0006.
Group Control Group
gain between pretest score and post test scores
Experimental Group
gain between pretest score and post test scores
Mean 4.6 12.2
Standard Devia4on
3.21 1.3
N 5 5
Visual representa#on of the control group and experimental group gain in complexity of thinking scores
0
3.25
6.5
9.75
13
Mean gain in score of complexity of thinking
Control Group Experimental Group
Discussion
Data and observa#ons of the children in the control group showed them to be overall, more passive consumers and less engaged. !Data and observa#ons of the children in the experimental group showed them to be overall more crea#ve and more collabora#ve with a higher level of engagement and a higher level of complexity of thought. !
Ac#on
Share results with colleagues within the Kindergarten grade level and in other sec#ons of the school. !More thoughjul selec#on of apps installed on the class iPads to allow more expression, rather than passive consump#on. !More thoughjul considera#on of placement of iPads within learning development. !Further reflec#on on possible uses of iPads as another of the children’s hundred languages.
Examples of the iPad used as a language of expression with a high level of engagement and complexity of thinking
References
Banister, S. (2010). Integra)ng the iPod Touch in K-‐12 educa)on: Visions and vices. Computers in the Schools, 27(2), 121-‐131. !Bird, J. (2012) The rabbit ate the grass! Exploring children’s ac)vi)es on digital technologies in an early childhood classroom. hIp://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/digitaltheses/public/adt-‐acuvp391.25062013/02whole.pdf !Edwards, C., Gandini, L. and Foreman, G. (Ed.) (2012) The Hundred Languages of Children:The Reggio Experience in Transforma)on Praeger: California !Gandini, L., Hill, L., Cadwell, L. and Schall, C. (Ed.)(2005) In the Spirit of the Studio, Learning from the Atelier of Reggio Emilia Teachers College Press: New York !Goodwin, K. & Highfield, K. (2012) iTouch and iLearn: An examina#on of ‘educa#onal’ Apps. Paper presented at the Early Educa)on and Technology for Children conference, March 14-‐16, 2012, Salt Lake City, Utah. accessed on academa.edu !Lynch J. (2006) Assessing Effects of Technology Usage on Mathema#cs Learning. Mathema)cs Educa)on Research Journal 18(3): 29–43. !Marsh, J. (2010) Young children’s play in online virtual worlds. Journal of early childhood research, 8 (1), 23-‐39. !O’Mara J. and Laidlaw L. (2011) Living in the iWorld: Two Literacy Researchers Reflect on the Changing Texts and Literacy Prac#ces of Childhood. English Teaching: Prac)ce and Cri)que 10(4): 149–159. !PareIe, H.P, Quesenbury A.C. and Blum C. (2010) Missing the boat with technology usage in early childhood se_ngs: A 21st century of developmentally appropriate prac#se. Early childhood Educa)on Journal, 37, 335-‐343 !Plowman, L and Stephen, C. (2007) Guided interac#on in pre-‐school se_ngs. Journal of computer assisted learning, 23(1) 14-‐26 !Verenikina, I. and Kervin, L. (2011) iPads digital play and preschoolers. (volume 2, number 5, october 2011) He Kupu accessed through hekupu.ac.nz