Programmable Toys and Free Play in Early Childhood Classrooms
AbstractThis paper reports on a study that investigated the ways that young children interact with familiar discrete programmable digital toys (e.g. robots) in a free play setting. This was designed to meet some of the requirements of the Digital Technologies subject in the Australian Curriculum. The study was implemented in two phases in consecutive years involving teachers and students in two early childhood classes. Researchers worked with the teachers to provide the children with opportunities to use two types of digital toys. The children were observed as they interacted with these toys and their interactions analysed using a checklist of behaviours. It was found that without some intentional teaching the children did not demonstrate ‘programming skills’. However, they did then demonstrate motivation, engagement, and increased proficiency with the devices.
Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2014). Digital Technologies. Retrieved February 18, 2016, from http://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/technologies/digital-technologies/Curriculum/F-10
Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2009). Belonging, Being and Becoming: the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Canberra. Retrieved 6 July, 2016, from http://k10outline.scsa.wa.edu.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0003/4629/EYLF_complete_doc.pdf
Bers, M. U., Flannery, L. P., Kazakoff, E. R., & Sullivan, A. (2014). Computational thinking and tinkering: Exploration of an early childhood robotics curriculum. Computers & Education, 72, 145-157. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.10.020
Bird, J., & Edwards, S. (2014). Observing and assessing children's digital play in early childhood settings. In S. Urban (Ed.), conference proceedings, Australian Computers in Education Conference (pp. 32- 42). Adelaide, Australia: Australian Council for Educational Computing.
Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., & Wartella, E. (2014). Factors influencing digital technology use in early childhood education. Computers & Education, 77, 82-90. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2014.04.013
Blackwell, C. K., Lauricella, A. R., Wartella, E., Robb, M., & Schomburg, R. (2013). Adoption and use of technology in early education: The interplay of extrinsic barriers and teacher attitudes. Computers & Education, 69, 310-319. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2013.07.024
Cresswell, J. W., & Miller, D. L. (2000). Determining validity in qualitative inquiry. Theory Into Practice, 39(3), 124-130. doi: 10.1207/s15430421tip3903_2
de Vries, P. (2013). The use of technology to facilitate music learning experiences in preschools. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(4), 5-12.
Deloitte Access Economics. (2015). Australia’s digital pulse. Sydney: Deloitte Access Economics. Retrieved 18 December, 2015, from http://www.acs.org.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0006/69720/02062015-Australias-Digital-Pulse-FINAL.PDF
Edwards, S. (2014). Digital play in the early years: a contextual response to the problem of integrating technologies and play-based pedagogies in the early childhood curriculum. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(2), 199-212. doi: 10.1080/1350293X.2013.789190
Farr, W., Yuill, N., & Raffle, H. (2010). Social beneﬁts of a tangible user interface for children with Autistic Spectrum Conditions. Autism, 14(3), 237–252.
Flannery, L. P., & Bers, M. U. (2013). Let’s dance the “Robot Hokey-Pokey!”: children’s programming approaches and achievement throughout early cognitive development. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 46(1), 81–101.
Grover, S., & Pea, R. (2013). Computational thinking in K-12: A review of the state of the field. Educational Researcher, 42(1), 59-69.
Hsin, C.-T., Li, M.-C., & Tsai, C.-C. (2014). The influence of young children’s use of technology on their learning: a review. Educational Technology & Society, 17(4), 85–99.
Kafai, Y. B., & Burke, Q. (2013). Computer programming goes back to school. Phi Delta Kappan, 95(1), 61-65.
Kalaš, I. (2010). Recognizing the potential of ICT in early childhood education. Russian Federaon.
Kazakoff, E. R., Sullivan, A., & Bers, M. U. (2012). The Effect of a Classroom-Based Intensive Robotics and Programming Workshop on Sequencing Ability in Early Childhood. Early Childhood Education Journal. doi: 10.1007/s10643-012-0554-5
McDonald, S., & Howell, J. (2012). Watching, creating and achieving: Creative technologies as a conduit for learning in the early years. . British Journal of Educational Technology, 43(4), 641-651. doi: 10.1111/j.1467-8535.2011.01231.x
Resnick, M. (1998). Technologies for lifelong kindergarten. Educational Technology Research & Development, 46(4), 1-18.
Ritz, J. M., & Fan, S. (2015). STEM and technology education: international state-of-the-art. International Journal of Technology and Design Education, 25, 429–451. doi: 10.1007/s10798-014-9290-z
Sylla, C., Coutinho, C., Branco, P., & Muller, W. (2015). Investigating the use of digital manipulatives for storytelling in pre-school. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 6, 39-48. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2015.10.001
The Australian Industry Group. (2015). Progressing STEM Skills in Australia. Sydney: The Australian Industry Group. Retrieved 18 December, 2015, from http://www.aigroup.com.au/portal/binary/com.epicentric.contentmanagement.servlet.ContentDeliveryServlet/LIVE_CONTENT/Publications/Reports/2015/14571_STEM Skills Report Final -.pdf
Wing, J. (2011). Research notebook: Computational thinking—What and why? The Link Magazine, Spring(6.0), 20-23. Retrieved 9 January, 2014, from http://link.cs.cmu.edu/article.php?a=600
Yurt, O., & Cevher-Kalburan, N. (2011). Early childhood teachers’ thoughts and practices about the use of computers in early childhood education. Procedia Computer Science, 3, 1562-1570. doi: http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.procs.2011.01.050
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
1. Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
2. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
3. Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).