Sep 25, 1999 - Two research questions need to be answered to present a clearer pictiire of .... be seen as quality indicators of a pupil's school career which, .... ready and wants to stop with this task (to the left), the pupil wants to ..... 101-02-99.
Designing ICT in Early Childhood Education: a Prototype
Paper and software demonstration presented on the 'European Conference on Educational Research' (ECER) Lahti, Finland, 22-25 September 1999
Ton Mooij
ITS, University ofNijmegen Toemooiveld 5
NL 6525 ED Nijmegen The Netherlands
September 1999
Abstract
In early childhood education children differ in a lot of respects. These differences increase the management problems of a kindergarten teacher. It was therefore decided to develop software to try to help teachers and pupils. A first research question concerns the educational and management characteristics which should become part of software to support both teachers and pupils in early childhood education. A second question is whether first experiences with the ICT reveal the desired improvement in educational practice. To answer the first question, observation and research on educational innovation and improvement were used to identify relevant characteristics. The answer to the
second question is based on developmental research concerning the functioning of the software in two kindergarten classes. The software for pupils of four - six years old will be demonstrated and discussed during the conference session.
Introduction
Information and Communication Technology (ICT) can play an important role in optimising education (Mooij, 1999a). For example, ICT may support a pupil's learning processes by accounting for initial competence or learning style, help the teacher in planning each pupil's learning progress and results, present clear didactic pictures of individual progress to both pupil and teacher, assist teacher and school staff in administrating and organising teaching processes in didactic and economically responsible ways, and generate evaluation indicators for policy decisions within and outside school (see also Pedersen, 1998). However, compared to elementary and secondary education, ICT is hardly used in early childhood education. Yet the differences between children i'n early education, and the corresponding management problems of a kindergarten teacher with a class of 25 or more
children aged between four and seven, may be very large. It therefore seems worthwhile to try to develop software to help teachers and pupils in early education. Two research questions need to be answered to present a clearer pictiire of the
possibilities and effects of doing so. The first question concerns the relevance of specific courseware and didactic management characteristics in the improvement processes (cf. also
Kynigos, 1998). Which optimising courseware and didactic management aspects and qualities of the instructional system should become part of software designed to support both teachers and pupils in early education? Additionally, which specific planning and administrative characteristics should be used to improve developmental and learning processes in early educational practice for pupils, teachers, and the school alike? A second question concentrates on implementation experiences and developmental
effects of integrating a first software prototype into early educational practice. How is a first prototype implemented in early education and what are the first effects of introducing this potential ICT-support on both the teacher, the pupils, and the school? In this paper I will first present some theoretical aspects. Then I will answer both
research questions. The answers will be based upon the design and first empirical results ofprototypical software to optimise early education. The prototype has been developed in two classes in Dutch early childhood education, that is kindergarten and the first year of elementary school for pupils aged four to about seven.
Theoretical aspects
At the beginning of kindergarten, differences in development between children may be large and a huge problem for the teacher already. A mismatch between a child's actual or potential characteristics on one side, and educational or didactic and instmctional characteristics in kindergarten on the other side, may create behavioural, emotional, social, and cognitive problems for a pupil. At this early stage already, social and cognitive or other problems of marginal pupils in particular can become rather excessive. The social and pedagogical abilities of teachers to cope with such 'deviating' or 'difficult' pupils vary greatly. Some teachers or teams are managing quite nicely from social, pedagogical, and cognitive points of view (see also Kirschner, 1997), whereas other teachers and teams cannot get to grips with such pupils. Given the differences between the pupils, kindergarten teachers tend to have too less diverse kinds of play and learning materials. Moreover, the teachers usually cannot
manage specific kinds of activities for certain pupils because (a) these materials are either not present or not ordered by significance or degree of difficulty, and (b) teachers have too much to do for the whole group or other pupils, which also is a matter of management.
There appears to be a need to tackle the root of the didactic 'mismatch' problem between educational offering and pupil requirements, to prevent disruptive behaviour in class and more serious behavioural, social, cognitive, and motivational problems later on.
Moreover, from pedagogical and educational points of view, environmental circumstances should be designed as optimally as possible for every child. On a child's entrance of early education, both the content and structure of education, and its interactions with and effects on characteristics of the pupil, should support the pupil's development. At the beginning of early education, parents and teachers should therefore inform each other as accurately and simply as possible about relevant entry behaviours of a child. Relevant behaviours and differences in developmental functioning of the pupils can then be used as basics to part of the play and didactic learning characteristics in the class. The variation
between developmental levels of the play and didactic characteristics should correspond to the diversity in entrance behaviours or characteristics between the pupils, which is a
main principle in the pedagogy and psychology of 'pupil-based education' (cf. Mooij, 1999a). In pupil-based education, situations of free play and so-called 'instmctional lines can support the stimulation and integration of a child in kindergarten. An instmctional line denotes a hierarchical arrangement of educational concepts and subconcepts corresponding with specific play or curricular and instructional materials. For example, sensory motor
development for 4 - 6 year-olds generally starts with global movement with the whole body, followed by movement with arms and hands, and then by paying attention to writing
conditions e.g., direction in moving, training of regularity in movement with hands and fingers, and motor exercises evolving into preliminary writing. Furthermore, quality indicators need to be integrated within the instructional lines to evaluate educational processes and their outcomes on every pupil, from the beginning in kindergarten onwards. Therefore, adequate screening and registration of beginning characteristics is required also. Continuous monitoring, quality control and improvement seem very important, in particular for pupils at risk from a very young age onwards. The role of ICT in optimising early education then becomes essential with respect to the educational system on the one hand, and concerning the support of each pupil's development on the other.
Answer to question 1: Optimising courseware and didactic management Educational system functions
As indicated above, free play remains a pedagogical necessity in early childhood education. Additionally, ICT can support institutionalised curricular and didactic processes in the following ways (see also Mooij, 1999a; Schofield, 1997): * curriculum structuring in instructional lines of the most important play and development or learning activities and materials, and their functional or instructional and didactic characteristics or activities;
* integration of diagnostic and progress indicators by specific play and development or learning activities or materials in the instmctional lines. The goal is to screen or check each pupil's initial competence level, to measure and evaluate progress in both individual and group or age normed ways, and to relate progress scores or outcomes as indicators to specific support activities or lines for one or more conspicuous pupils or pupils at risk, if appropriate; * regular planning and registration of development or learning activities and materials to be carried out by a pupil, a small group of pupils, or a class of pupils or more pupils;
* specific planning and registration of development or learning activities and materials, if necessary supplied by specialists, to support one or more conspicuous pupils or pupils at risk, in any respect, since the beginning in early education; * continuous monitoring and evaluation of each pupil's development and achievement in the different instmctional lines, which can be aggregated also to the level of a class, comparable classes, or the school. Pupil development functions
Since the beginning in early education each pupil could be helped by software in the
following aspects:
* competence-based playing and working, alone or in small groups, can be carried out on more individual levels of competence within a social group context, with
didactically more fitting learning styles, more independently and more continuously, in didactically more controlled ways;
* positive development and learning processes and effects can be stimulated by motivation and next development or learning processes and effects on e.g., social, motor, and cognitive behaviour; .
* more self-responsibility becomes possible for an individual pupil or for a small group of pupils helping each other. Choosing and planning of own activities is better realisable, within the limits planned and set by the teacher;
* better distribution of teacher time: a pupil who can function more in accordance with the software saves teacher time. This means that the teacher can spend
relatively more time to the pupil or pupils who most need her or his pedagogical or didactic attention. In other terms, more different learning possibilities and learning styles become possible and are being supported more. Didactic curriculum design with the software prototype
A software program was designed according to the above system and pupil development characteristics (Mooij, 1998). Different versions of the computer program were developed in cooperation with teachers of two kindergarten classes (cf. Kensing, Simonsen, & B0dker, 1998). The usual planning system consisted of a differently coloured board on the wall. Each colour referred to a day of the week. Small groups of pupils, corresponding with certain table groups, were indicated by different logos and colours. Activities to be done by a small group were assigned by placing the tags of these pupils on a symbol or logo representing a certain kind of activity, on a certain day of the week. The computer program
was designed to improve this didactic management system on the wall: see Figure 1. Figure 1 about here
The present version 1.4 of the software can be described according to the educational system and pupil development features given above.
Curriculum structuring. Instructional lines in the prototype are made up of different structured learning contents e.g., motor behaviour, social-emotional development, projects, language, (preliminary) arithmetic, (preliminary) reading, and (preliminary) writing. Each instructional line is characterised by a specific logo, a specific colour, and the corresponding text. A screen shot of an overview with these attributes referring to instructional lines is given in Figure 2. Figure 2 about here
Activities or tasks within each line are visually represented by a photograph of the object as present in class because four-year-olds must also be able to work with the program. The photographs or tasks can be ordered by difficulty level. To stimulate pupils adequately, variations of the same lines refer to different developmental levels e.g., of pupils developing in a more or less normal way, of pupils who need remedial activities, or of pupils who are advanced on the topic of the line. Depending on their rate of development or progress, pupils can change a line. A screen shot of the activities or tasks within a
remedial variant, a regular of normal variant, and a fast variant within a first motor line at level 1, is given in Figure 3. Figure 3 about here
Integration of diagnostic and progress indicators. Within a line, specific activities can be assigned depending on whether or not they belong to a remedial variant, a normal variant, or a fast variant. Moreover, an activity can be tagged with an indicator meaning that the pupil has to go to the teacher in order to go on. For example, in Figure 4 one of the activities within the three identical variants of the language line is an indicator activity, to be done by both teacher and pupil. With this indicator a pupil's initial level of language is screened, as a basis to further placement into a next variant. Also, a standardised diagnostic or achievement test could be included, in particular for measurement with a conspicuous pupil or a pupil at risk. Figure 4 about here
A pupil's progress can be checked regularly by integrating diagnostic tests and normalised or standardised achievement tests, or parts of tests, in the instructional lines. To check the construction of the courseware, the teacher can compare the structuring of the instmctional lines within a certain developmental area. In Figure 3 three variants differing within the motor area were given. In Figure 5 the three identical variants corresponding with the first language line of Figure 4 are presented. Figure 5 about here The scores on the normalised or achievement tests included within an instructional line can
be seen as quality indicators of a pupil's school career which, controlling for his or her beginning or entrance levels, express the rate of a pupil's progress over the course of time. In these quality indicators the school's degree of support of the pupil's development may become visible. Construction of such progress measurements must of course occur on a sound methodological basis of reliability and validity (cf. Wegerif, Mercer, & Dawes, 1998). Regular planning and registration. The teacher can change or extend the play or structured activities within a line, to improve the educational processes or to check their desired effects for one or more pupils. As presented in the above Figures, the teacher can
also get detailed overviews or summaries of the lines included. Furthermore, the teacher can registrate the pupils involved, as in Figure 6 which shows photographs of the pupils and the teacher involved in one of the developmental classes. Figure 6 about here
Another registration facility is the automatic administration of activities done by each of the pupils working according to the software, as is presented in the screen shot in Figure 7. Figure 7 about here
Furthermore, the registration of each pupil's beginning characteristics is carried out conform a statistically controlled procedure based on quantitative research with 966 fouryear-olds (Mooij & Smeets, 1997). A screen shot of part of this procedure with parents' information at the intake of the pupil is given in Figure 8. Figure 8 about here.
An overview of the beginning characteristics of every pupil can be produced. Specific planning and registration. Specific developmental or learning activities
and materials, if necessary supplied by specialists, can be included within a certain instructional line to support only one conspicuous pupil or pupil at risk. This is relevant for a pupil who, compared to classmates, is developing relatively slow, or fast, on developmental areas of one or more of the instructional lines. A screen shot is given in Figure 9. Figure 9 about here
Continuous monitoring and evaluation. EachpupiVs development and achievement in all relevant instructional lines can be monitored and printed. This means that the
software assists the teacher in administrating and systemising the more general and specific didactic information for the whole group of pupils. This information could be aggregated to the level of a class, comparable classes, or the school.
The program thus functions as a planning, registration, monitoring, and evaluation system to support the didactic and educational management for the teacher and the school as such. On the other hand, each pupil is helped by the software in the following ways. Didactic support of each pupil's development via the software
Competence-based playing and working. Kindergarten or elementary school activities can be carried out on different and more adequate levels of competence, with
more fitting learning styles. This happens because the teacher can assign an instructional line, or specific line contents or tasks, to every pupil separately, or to a small group of two or more pupils. As seen above, different kinds of colours and icons are used to make the
prototype understandable for, and usable by, four-year-olds and older children. Positive development and learning processes. Given the more adequate play and learning situtations, it can be expected that motivation and next development or learning processes and effects are stimulated by using the software. More self-responsibility. A pupil chooses, within the limits given before by the teacher, the lines or activities to work with. This is possible for an individual pupil or a small group of pupils helping each other. Such choosing and planning of own activities is expected to lead towards better learning processes and outcomes.
Better distribution of teacher time. The more pupils learn to use the software by themselves, or can be assisted in doing this by e.g., the help of parents or other pupils, the more the teacher can spend her or his time to the pupil or pupils who really need this pedagogical or didactic attention.
Research question 2: Implementation and first effects Implementation
The implementation of the software was carried out in close co-operation with the teachers and school leadership. First, attention was focussed on the potential and factual improvement of early educational practice in the particular kindergarten class and school. Second, teachers developed first versions of instructional lines for specific pupils deviating from the other pupils (cf. Mooij,1999b,1 999c). This preliminary period took a period of about two years. Third, instructional lines were developed according to the infonnation in the Figures above. This took another year of work, as the teachers did not get support from others. In particular the organisation of materials, their ordering, and their supply with symbols (logo, colour, points) to make them understandable for young children, took a lot of time. However, this activity was very illuminating for the teachers from a didactic point of view. Fourth, different versions of the software were developed and used in two classrooms to check the functioning in educational practice. The innovative work on didactic management required active commitment and professional co-operation between the teachers in the school: see Figure 10. Figure 10 about here
Furthermore, the teachers had to get used to software supporting the regular planning as carried out by the handicraft infonnation on the wall: see Figure 11. Figure 11 about here
In the same vein, the children were introduced to the possibilities of planning and working with the two systems: see Figure 12. Figure 12 about here
After touching the own photograph with the cursor, a pupil is shown a screen as in Figure 13. The screen shows the photograph and the name of the pupil (to the right, above). To
the left, above, the object or material the pupil is actually working with is being presented. The three pictures at the bottom of Figure 13 each illustrate one possibility: the pupil is ready and wants to stop with this task (to the left), the pupil wants to select a new activity (in the middle), and the pupil has made a wrong choice and goes one decision backwards (to the right). Figure 13 about here In Figure 14 a pupil is working on a task that is represented in a photograph within an instructional software line.
Figure 14 about here First effects
First experiences with the software can be used to clarify the assumed effects of the ICTsupported developmental processes in early education. First, stimulated by the screening of pupils' beginning characteristics and the subsequent need to integrate the levels of initial competency into adequate instructional lines, the teachers discovered that their play and learning activities and materials needed acute extension. In other terms: the variation between pupils in the beginning was much higher than was accounted for in the available activities and materials. A consequence was that a great deal of the school budget in 1999 was spent on new play and learning materials.
Second, teachers discovered didactically relevant relationships between the play and learning activities of the pupils and the materials in school. According to the teachers, this enabled them to use the materials much beHer than before in promoting the functioning of the pupils. Third, another consequence was that a teacher took much more time than before to instruct pupils who needed this instmction. This problem was reduced partly by including parents to assist in instructing pupils. More teacher assistance is needed, however. So this software accentuation of the usually assumed functions in kindergarten soon clarifies that there is much too much work for only one teacher in a class with 25 to 30 or more pupils. This is the most serious problem at the time. Fourth, some of the pupils of four, five, or six years old learned how to get along with the program very soon. They can assist other pupils too, if necessary. Fifth, the pupils' self-management in these classroom activities was clearly stimulated, which enlarged the teacher's possibility to devote more time to the pupils who need this assistance most.
Sixth, according to the teachers, in particular the pupils at risk could be helped by introducing this ICT-support. However, the teachers really need more assistance, or much less pupils, to get along with the time problem caused by this attention to pupils at risk.
Discussion
A pedagogical approach to improve early education with the aid ofICT was presented and tried out in educational practice. With respect to the usual play activities the pupil remains relatively free, but concerning structured activities instructional lines are used to represent content and didactic support for each pupil. This can be expressed in, for example, integrating infonnation about beginning level, progress over the course of time, and kind of evaluation. This information is regulated by the teacher. Using this software prototype, important indicators can for example be integrated in instructional lines concerning a pupil's learning processes, in diagnostic or achievement testing within these lines, with respect to assignment or registration facilities, in the teacher's administration and monitoring, and in the school's overall administration and monitoring.
Contrary to usual approaches, in the present implementation early education is being optimised before 'freezing' it with ICT, as seems to be the case usually (Smeets, Mooij, Bamps, Bartolome, Lowyck, Redmond, & Steffens, 1998). The software prototype therefore contributes to some essential didactic and curricular changes in optimising education for all pupils, in particular pupils at risk. The main points of this software can be summarised as follows.
First, the beginning characteristics of each pupil are included and discussed systematically by parents and teacher. If present or assumed to be present, problems or risk characteristics can get systematic pedagogical attention, if necessary by integrating specialists from outside school. This means that the prevention of problems in early
education can increase considerably in comparison with present daily practice, at least in the Netherlands.
Second, next to the usual free play and whole-group sessions, with respect to the most important developmental and learning areas each pupil can be given preventive, systematic, and continuous support on his or her own levels of competency. This is not the case in present early education. Third, the software allows a growth in independence and self-responsibility of the pupils, which is also possible because the pupils themselves can assist each other in communicating with the computer. This advantage will increase when pupils get older. Fourth, immediate and controlled specific support is available for pupils who need this.
Fifth, a more or less automatic, efficient, and general monitoring of pupil and class or school results becomes available, which is not dependent on one teacher or on a small group of teachers. Sixth, more flexible organisation of developmental and learning processes becomes easy to realise, including more individual support and screening or testing. This, however, requires systematic innovation support in developing kindergartens and schools.
Seventh, extending the software to higher classes in elementary or secondary education can be done without any problem.
Eighth, realisation of this software approach means factual operationalisation of
e.g., giving equal opportunities to pupils from ethnic minorities, quality standards in education, or increasing safety at school. Ninth, in the long run, the frontiers between kindergarten and elementary education can disappear and be changed into continuous progressive developmental paths. Tenth, because of its flexibility, the software seems to be basic to further development of optimal education including ICT. Moreover, the software prototype acts like a supportive planning and management system for teacher, pupils, the school, and the parents alike. It therefore is necessary to continue the developmental work using this kind of software in early education.
References
Kensing, F., Simonsen, J, & Bodker, K. (1998). MUST: A method forparticipatory design. Human-Computer Interaction, 13, 167-198. Kirschner, G. (1997). Die Kinder stark machen. Aggressionsabbau durch Personlichkeitsaufbau [Empowering children. Reduction of aggression by promotion of personality]. Lichtenau, Germany: AOL-Verlag. Kynigos, C. (1998). Perspectives in analysing classroom interaction data on collaborative computer-based mathematical projects. Paper presented on the 'European Conference on Educational Research' (ECER), Ljubljana, Slovenia, 17-20 September 1998. Athens, Greece: University of Athens, Computer Technology Institute. Mooij, T. (1998). Digitaal plan- en registratiesysteem (versie 1.4) [Digital planning and registration system (version 1.4)]. Nijmegen, the Netherlands: University of Nijmegen, ITS.
Mooij, T. (1999a). Guidelines to Pedagogical Use of ICT in Education. Paper presented on the eighth conference of the 'European Association for Research on Learning and Instruction' (EARLI). Goteborg, Sweden, 25-29 August 1999. Nijmegen, the Netherlands: University ofNijmegen, ITS. Mooij, T. (1999b). Integrating gifted children into kindergarten by improving educational processes. Gifted Child Quarterly, 43(2), 63-74. Mooij, T. (1999c). Preventing antisocial behaviour of young children at risk. Risk Management: An International Journal, 7(2), 49-61.
Mooij, T., & Smeets, E. (1997). Beginkenmerken van leerlingen in de basisschool [Entry characteristics of pupils in kindergarten]. Nijmegen, the Netherlands: University ofNijmegen, ITS. Pedersen, J. (1998). Information Technology in the schools. A research survey. Linkoping, Sweden: Linkoping University, Department of Education and Psychology, 1998. (http://www.skolver ket.se/cgi-bin/inframe.pl?c/it/cbcl.html). Schofield, J. (1997). Computers and classroom culture. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Smeets, E., Mooij, T., Bamps, H., Bartolome, A., Lowyck, J., Redmond, D., & Steffens, K. (1998). The impact of Information and Communication Technology on the 10
Teacher. Nijmegen/Brussel: University of Nijmegen, Institute for Applied Social sciences / European Community, DG XXII. Wegerif, R., Mercer, N., & Dawes, L. (1998). Software design to support discussion in the primary curriculum. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 14, 199211.
11
^-
Figure 1: Computer support for handicraft on the wall
13
^ Muteren Speel/Ieeistoflijne
n
Kleur van deze lii
0
"jgltBspteis
I Naam
jl^
jVooibeieidend rekenen
i^ "."".'-" ^ ^ jMotoriek
f| w| .t.j
3 I
3 i
!*; 3 COWB WNIK9TO
Op6t)BBS^BA i W«bwttN
