Identificar y categorizar las percepciones de los Hondanos frente a la actividad

The literature shows that although the technological pedagogic approaches have adopted well-established and effective pedagogical qualities from early childhood education models, the uses of these approaches are not necessarily individually appropriate, within the context of technology use in the classroom. In determining the qualities which have the potential to constitute an appropriate technological adapted pedagogy, a number of interesting commonalities were found between the successful ECE models (Pramline et

59

al., 2004). In investigating the three early childhood models of the High/Scope, Regio Emillia and EXE approach, the following distinct and common pedagogical qualities emerge and are outlined below:

1. A balanced mix of adult-initiated and chosen child-initiated activities, where although freely chosen, are yet potentially instructive (Regio Emillia);

2. Active learning where children learn through active experiences with people, material, events and ideas (High/Scope);

3. The quality of meaningful and shared dialogue and interactions between adults and children (Regio Emillia-High/Scope);

4. The quality of well being and involvement of the young children, in a safe and supportive learning environment, within challenging yet achievable experiences with young children (EXE).

Vyogtsky, in Mind and Society, wrote that “just as a mould gives shape to a substance, words can shape an activity into structure (1978, p. 28). There is new evidence from Supporting Playful Learning with Information and Communications Technology, SPLICT project, (Siraj-Blatchford, 2011) to suggest, that the early years Communication and Collaboration approach (Siraj-

Blatchford, I., 2007) has the potential to support learning through the pedagogical qualities highlighted above, when applied with technology within the early years.

“The study shows that when the preschools were provided with software for use in the home and in the preschool, along with the limited pedagogic support that adults (families) required to use it effectively, this had a significant positive effect upon some aspects of early learning in language and number of the children aged 3-5. We now know that: Supporting Playful Learning with Information and Communications Technology (SPLICT) in the Early Years Really Works…” (Siraj-Blatchford (SPLICT), 2011/2012, p.1).

The EPPE (2003 – 2007) and REPEY (2002) project evidence shows that the use of

Communication and Collaborative approach (Siraj-Blatchford, I., 2007) is likely to encourage a more balanced approach of learning settings, which combines the provision of free play with more active focused group work, involving practitioner direct instruction, within a more naturalistic environment. This is potentially reflective of the highlighted effective pedagogical approaches (shown above), that can be applied with technology, in an early years classroom setting. Used extensively in creative environments of the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), and included in the Key Elements of Effective Practice (KEEP), the Communication and Collaboration type of interaction stresses the importance of the affective bond that builds between a child and a

practitioner; a bond that does not evolve from interactions with a machine but through the nurturing nature of playrooms, where practitioners concerns go beyond the academic (Cuban 2001 and Elkind 1996).

By extending the Guided Interaction approach, the Communication and Collaboration approach points to the more effective interactions between practitioner and child. According to Iram and John Siraj Blatchford (Siraj-Blatchford, I., 2007), there is general agreement among developmental psychologist and educationalists that collaboration is especially important in the early years.

60

“When children share ‘joint attention’ and ‘engage jointly’ in activities, we know that this provides a significant cognitive challenge in itself” (cited in Siraj and Siraj Blatchford 2007, Light and Butterworth, 1992).

The role of collaboration is very influential in providing opportunities for the co-construction of possible solutions in the learning processes, where both the more experienced peer or practitioner and the child can learn alongside one another, and where they are actively and jointly (as suggested by Dewey above) constructing new knowledge (Doise and Mugny 1984). These more successful practitioner and child interactions can inclusively look to adopt the use of Sustained Shared Thinking which, when used correctly, can provide for effective dialogue, and can help move forward the attention and interest of the child. The uses of Sustained Shared Thinking are strongly associated with high-quality interactions and studies have shown that children who engage in these conversations are more likely to do well in school and life (Iram-Siraj Blatchford 2005).

“These were identified as sustained verbal interactions that move forward in keeping with the child’s interest and attention. Unfortunately, in both the EPPE and REPEY studies, the evidence of adult (practitioner) and child interactions suggest that too often there was no adult (practitioner) present at these times to provide the necessary scaffolding and support” (John-Siraj Blatchford (2007, p.6).

The EPPE project quantitative analysis revealed qualities of effective pedagogical interactions, utilising scaffolding with Sustained Shared Thinking, ‘where two or more individuals ‘work together’ in co-construction in an intellectual way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate activities or extend a narrative’; which was found to most commonly occur in a 1:1 practitioner and child ratio interactions (Siraj and Manni 2008). As Pramling et al., (2004) and Siraj Blatchford (1999) observed, there is a number of interesting commonalities that can be found between the instances of Sustained Shared Thinking and the highly promoted particular strategies applied within the Regio Emilia, High/Scope and EXE early learning models (Siraj-Blatchford, 2007, Appendix 6) where:

“Teacher’s (Practitioners) are there to not only initiate activity through effective pedagogic models using appropriate language, encouraging learning, asking questions and interacting verbally with children but...also there to extend the activities, in cases of child-initiated activity, where the teacher (practitioner) has a good knowledge and understanding of the curriculum, and of the child

development and wellfare” (p.11).

This type of thinking is also seen to resonate with the Vygotskian early years philosophical

perspective which suggests that learning occurs on a social plane before it is internalised and made sense by the individual learner. It expands on the theory of constructivism put forward by Piaget (1973) where young children have the potential to construct meaning from prior understandings and meaning with the added emphasis of learning in a more social, cultural and history context, which is the by product of interactions with the practitioners and peers (even though there are not deliberate attempts to provide for interactions). Whereas Piaget’s (1973) work is mainly interested in exploring a universal process of development, the Communication and Collaborative approach uses Vygotsky’s work (1978), which is more interested in using language for interactions as the driving force behind cognitive development. For learning to take place, the child must be found to

61

be actively involved in the process, within a safe and healthy environment, and there is to be mutuality between learner and practitioner, where collaboration and negotiation is possible, despite the asymmetrical nature of the relationship (Bruner 1996).

In research by Downes et al., (2001), where he explored the educational use of the Internet with children aged eight years in primary school, he found that both teachers and peers could provide varying levels of modelling, scaffolding and challenge when participating in the activity together as co-constructing learners. The findings showed that the co-construction of information and

collaboration on its own does not successfully occur when we simply bring children together to share the computer. Instead the teachers often need to orchestrate collaborative interactions if there are to be learning gains (Crook 1994).

There is evidence to suggest that the many programmable toys and technical screen based applications, found in early childhood settings, have the potential to offer the possibility of collaboration, when combined with the provision of free play opportunities in a more focused group work; involving practitioner direct instruction and where there is an increased structure of activities and games (Siraj-Blatchford in project SPLICT, 2012). However, where the

Communication and Collaboration approach has the potential to combine a balanced mix of adult and child intiated activity (Regio Emillia), within active learning experiences (High/Scope), and can initiate a meaningful and shared dialogue and interactions between the adult and child, it falls short for measuring the quality of well-being and involvement of the young children, in a nurtured and supportive learning environment (EXE). Laever’s (1997) suggests that learning is a two way interactive process that is effectively driven through appropriate pedagogical instructions. This can bring about the quality of well-being within a planned learning environment, and involvement for the children through engaging pedagogical practices of the educator. Therefore, to disregard the measures of well-being and involvement of the children is to disregard measures of learning in context.

“Not only does the adults’ style of engagement directly affects the children’s level of involvement, but the children’s involvement effects the adult’s style of engagement” (Pascal and Bertram 1997, p.135).

To date, no research has been conducted in integrating the Communication and Collaboration approach with new forms of technology in learning and development, within the early years classroom. This research will look to adopt the existing framework of the Communication and Collaboration approach, and extend its validity by using Laever’s Scales of Well-Being and Involvement, so as to determine if it can support a technological adapted pedagogy, with young children in their early years.

3.5.

To Summarise

The literature demonstrated that the social cultural theory, proposed by Vygotsky (1978), has become an important element in re-thinking education for the young children. It showed that children’s cognitive skills begins through social interactions between the child and the practitioner, where the practitioner functions as a tool in delivering knowledge and guidance to the children. However, this does not just happen on its own accord. The nature of pedagogy, defined as the art of instructions in the early years, incorporates all the necessary process that is required to drive learning forward, with young children. These include the many ways that the practitioners work

62

with the children, ranging from modelling, probing, exploration, questioning, scaffolding and nurturing a child’s disposition to learn.

In considering the delivery of these instructions, there is widespread belief that early years learning should be playful learning, as part of a holistic pedagogic educational process. There is evidence to suggest that learning and development can be implemented through planned, purposeful play and through a mix of adult-led and child-initiated activity, which when demonstrated correctly, can stimulate learning (DfE 2008 – 2012). However, there is also evidence to suggest, that in the context of free play, where children choose from a range of activities in the classroom, there seems to be very little planning and practitioner interventions. This is particularly problematic, in areas of technology as the use of the computer by young children, was often conducted during times of free play, and often resulted in missed learning opportunities. The literature demonstrated that

practitioners need to consider planning learning experiences of the highest quality, for the young children, if they wish to maximise learning opportunities, whilst using the technology, with young children during times of free play.

Through the form of playful learning, the role of the practitioner also plays a major role in the delivery of the pedagogic instructions. Corrine Hut (Hutt et al., 1989) shows that when

practitioners are able to focus on what is in the child’s interest and is paying full attention to the child, they are able to enhance learning through their social interactions and drive learning forward through meaningful dialogue. However, a balance needs to be reached between the child-initiated and practitioner-initiated learning activities. In reaching this balance, the DfE (2012) suggested that practitioners are required to provide sufficient support in guiding the playful activity; where too much support can hinder any playful learning and too little support can limit learning. The literature demonstrates that if early years educators are to extend the children’s learning opportunities, then they ought to receive guidance on appropriate pedagogical insight of what qualities to embed, when looking to achieve a balanced instructional approach.

The literature showed that the qualities of Vygotsky’s social constructive learning theory and the nature of the early years pedagogy have formed the basis for most early years education models. While there are many varied education models globally, three effective models of the Regio Emillia, High/Scope and the Experiential Model (EXE) play a great emphasis on the UK EYFS framework. The literature showed that many childhood settings recognise the need to integrate technologies across their childhood settings. There is also evidence to suggest that many approaches have been tried and evaluated; of which these approaches have developed from

established early years education models and their pedagogical qualities. There is evidence that the developmentalist Drill and Practice approach is highly unsuitable, whilst using technology, with young children in their early years. The Exploratory approach, adopting the High/Scope early years quality, allows for free play to liberate the young children, but does little to take account of social interpersonal interactions to facilitate learning, and there is evidence to suggest that learning opportunities are going missed. The Adult Interaction approach adopts the quality from the Regio Emillia early years models and seeks to recognise the social nature of learning and the important role of the adult within the setting. Unfortunately, there are studies that show that even though adults are present in the classroom with the children, their passive interactions with the technology have done little to improve or develop learning in any meaningful way (Siraj-Blatchford 2005, 2007).

63

While the Guided Interaction Approach facilitated learning through social cultural interactions, adopting the qualities from the Regio Emillia early years model, and encourages for children to learn through active experiences of play, there was evidence to suggest that the role of the practitioner, in providing for meaningful dialectical interactions were minimal. More focus was dedicated to scaffolding outcomes, to pre-conceived educational goals, rather than extending or consolidating the children’s interests, to an even greater extent. However, through the Guided Interaction Approach, there is claim that the proximal features of physical touch and gestures have the ability to move forward learning and attention of the children which is in sync with The Experiential Education (EXE) early years model. Although some of these tried and tested approaches have been counterproductive to the children, the other approaches have offered evidence to explore and improvise areas of concern.

The study of various effective early years models in early childhood education, such as the Regio Emillia, High/Scope, and the Experiential Education (EXE), illustrate shared pedagogical qualities that can drive forward the totality and holistic approach, for the child’s learning and development. Although there are many varied and significant early years models, within early childhood

education, the three listed above have influenced much of the UK Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS). Effective pedagogical qualities have emerged that can serve as a foundation in structuring an activity, when applied with technology in early years settings.

These shared pedagogical qualities include the following:

1. A balanced mix of adult-initiated and chosen child-initiated activities, where although freely chosen, are yet potentially instructive;

2. Active learning where children learn through active experiences with people, material, events and ideas;

3. The quality of meaningful and shared dialogue and interactions between adults and children;

4. The quality of well being and involvement of the young children, in a safe and supportive learning environment, within challenging yet achievable experiences with young children. The literature demonstrated that the Communication and Collaboration approach is found to be able to combine the social constructive theory, within the provision of active learning through play, in more focused group work, and involves both hands on and active practitioner instruction, within a naturalistic environment. This takes into account the majority of effective pedagogical qualities highlighted above and points to the more effective interactions between practitioner and child. This approach, driven by the use of Sustained Shared Thinking, has the potential to provide for appropriate pedagogical instructions and can help move forward the attention and interest of the child (Iram-Siraj Blatchford 2005). However, the Communication and Collaboration approach lacks the potential to measure for well-being and involvement, which within the EXE early years model, has the potential to provide for a conducive planned learning environment, and through which both parties are contributing holistically to the learning experience. This research, therefore, looks to extend the Communication and Collaboration approach to include the measures of care and involvement for the young children, in a technological adapted pedagogic environment.

64

The overall conclusion reached from the analysis of the available literature suggests that although there are possibilities and opportunities for the use of technology within early years settings, that can possibly be armed with a clear set of pedagogical approach and qualities, there is still no guarantee as to how can it work in a particular context or subject matter.

“This is a mantra I find very disheartening. I believe that, when used

appropriately and meaningfully, technology truly can enhance a young child’s educational experience....Yet, I am troubled by the fact that the value and meaning of these technologies may never be seen, if opportunities are not presented for early childhood educators to learn about them. How can early childhood educators begin to see, and classrooms grow to include, technology as a pedagogically valuable enhancement if the response is always “no” and there are no opportunities for teachers to learn more “(Powers 2012 p.1).

65