Digital tablets and applications in preschool – Preschoolers’ creative transformation of didactic design

• Authors: Susanne Kjällander , Farzaneh Moinian
• Languages of publication: EN

Abstracts

EN

Little is known about preschoolers and their engagement with digital tablets. This article addresses this gap by drawing on findings from two research projects. The aim is to illustrate how children make meaning, transform and play while engaging with various applications comprised by the materiality of the digital tablets. Empirical video material has been multimodally transcribed and empirical examples are framed by a design theoretical perspective. Findings capture diverse experiences illustrating how preschoolers creatively manipulate and playfully transform didactic designs. The results illustrate how children´s self-initiated play with application’s design shifts the balance of authority that typically exists between adults and children, and the article concludes in a suggestion of how the notion of play can be understood with a design theoretical perspective.

• Publisher: Sciendo
• Journal: Designs for Learning
• Year: 2014
• Volume: 7
• Issue: 1
• Pages: 10-33

Dates

published

2014-12-01

online

2014-12-20

Contributors

author

Susanne Kjällander

• Stockholm University, Sweden

author

Farzaneh Moinian

• Uppsala University, Sweden

References

• Bauman, Z. (1991). Modernity and Ambivalence. Ithaca, NewYork: Cornell University Press Beschorner, B. & Hutchison, A. (2013). iPads as a literacy teaching tool in early childhood. International Journal of Education in Mathematics, Science and Technology, 1(1), 16-24.
• Bjork Gudmundsdottir, G. & Hardersen, B. (2012). The Digital Universe of Young Children. In: Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy. 03/2012. p 221-225
• Bolgan, N. (2012). From IT to Tablet: Current Use and Future Needs in Kindergartens. In: Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy 03/2012. p 154-170
• Burnett, C. (2012).Technology and literacy in early childhood educational settings: A review of research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy September 2010 vol. 10 no. 3 247-270
• Butler, J. (1999). Gender Trouble. Feminism and the Subversion of Identity. New York, London: Routledge Drotner, K. (2009). Children and Digital Media: Online, On site On the go. In: J. Qvortrup; W. Corsaro and M. Hong: The Palgrave handbook of childhood studies. Palgrave and Macmillan
• Evaldsson, A.C. (2009). Play and games. In: J. Qvortrup; W. Corsaro and M. Hong: The Palgrave handbook of childhood studies. Palgrave and Macmillan.
• Flanagan, J. C. (1954). The Critical Incident Technique. Psychological Bulletin. 51 (4), p. 327-359.
• Fleer, M. (2010). Early learning and development: cultural-historical concepts in play. Melbourne, Australia: Cambridge University Press.
• Flewitt, R., Hampel, R., Hauck, M. & Lancaster, L. (2009). What are multimodal data and transcription? In: Carey Jewitt, (Ed.) (2009). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. London, New York: Routledge.
• Flyvbjerg, B. (1991). Rationalitet og magt. Kobenhavn: Akademisk Forlag.
• Gee, J. P. (2003). What video games have to teach us about literacy and learning. NewYork: Palgrave and Macmillan Gee, J. P. (2008). Game-like learning. An Example of Situated Learning and Implications for Opportunity to Learn. In: Moss, P. A. Pullin, D. C. Gee, J. P. Haertel, E. H. & Young, L. J. (2008) Assessment, Equity, and opportunity to learn. New York: Cambridge University Press.
• Geertz, C. (1973). “Thick Description: Toward an Interpretive Theory of Culture”. In The Interpretation of Cultures: Selected Essays. New York: Basic Books, 1973. 3-30
• Green, J., Franquiz, M. & Dixon, C. (1997). The Myth of the Objective Transcript, TESOL Quarterly, 31 (1), Pp. 172-176. http://www.skeptron.ilu.uu.se/broady/sec/p-greendixon.htm[Crossref]
• Gibson, J.J. (1979). The Ecological Approach to Visual Perception. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
• Goncu, A., Mistery, J and Mosier, C.(2000).Cultural variations in the play of toddlers, International journal of Behavior development, 24(3), 321-29.
• Holm Sorensen, B., Danielsen, O. & Nielsen, J. (2006). Children’s informal learning in the context of schools of the knowledge society. Springer Science +Business Media, LLC 2006
• Hylland Eriksen, T. & Fuglerud, O (2007). Grenser for kultur? Perspektiver fra norsk minoritetsforskning. Oslo: Pax forlag.
• Insulander, E. (2010). Tinget, rummet, besökaren:: om meningsskapande på museum. Stockholm: Institutionen for didaktik och pedagogiskt arbete, Stockholms universitet.
• Jefferson, G. (1984). On stepwise transition from talk about a trouble to inappropriately next-positioned matters. In J.M. Atkinson and J.C. Heritage (Eds.) Structures of social action: Studies of conversation analysis (pp. 191-222). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.
• Jewitt, C. (2006). Technology, literacy and learning. A multimodal approach. London: Routledge.
• Jewitt, C. (Ed.) (2009). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. London, New York: Routledge.
• Kamp, K.A. (2001). Where have all the children gone? The archeology of childhood. Journal of Archeological method and theory, 8(1), 1-34.
• Kjallander, S. (2011). Designs for Learning in an Extended Digital Environment: Case Studies of Social Interaction in the Social Science Classroom. Stockholm: Department of Education. Stockholm University.
• Kress, G. & Jewitt, C. & Ogborn, J. & Tsatsarelis, C. (2001). Multimodal teaching and learning The rhetorics of the science classroom. London, New York. Continuum.
• Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (1996). Reading Images: The Grammar of Graphic Design. London: Routledge.
• Kress, G. & van Leeuwen, T. (2001). Multimodal discourse: the modes and media of contemporary communication. London: Arnold Kress, G. (2003). Literacy in the New Media Age. London, New York: Routledge Kress, G. (2009). What is mode? I: Jewitt, C. (Ed.) (2009). The Routledge Handbook of Multimodal Analysis. London/New York: Routledge.
• Kress, G. (2010). Multimodality. A social semiotic approach to contemporary communication. London: Routledge.
• Kress, G. (2011). Didaktikens Verktyg. Utbildningsradion - UR. www.ur.se Lave, J. & Wenger, E. (1994). Situated learning. Legitimate peripheral participation. 2. (Eds.) Cambridge: Cambridge University Press Linderoth, J. (2004). Datorspelandes mening. Bortom idén om den interaktiva illusionen. Goteborg: Acta Universitatis Gothoburgensis.
• Lindstrand, F. (2006). Att göra skillnad. Representation, identitet och lärande i ungdomars arbete och berättande med film. Stockholm: HLS Forlag.
• Lyotard, J. (1984). The Postmodern Condition: a Report on Knowledge. Manchester: Manchester University Press.
• Mariett Olsson, L. (2013). Taking Children’s Questions Seriously: the need for creative thought. In: Global Studies of Childhood ISSN 2043-6106 Volume 3 Number 3 2013
• Marfo, K & Biersteker, L. (2011). Exploring culture, play, and early childhood education practice in African contexts, in S. Rogers, (ed.) Rethinking Play and Pedagogy: contexts, concepts and cultures. London: Routledge Marsh, J. (ed) (2005). Popular Culture, New Media and Digital Technology in Early Childhood. London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• Matusov, E. (2007). In Search of the Appropriate´ Unit of Analysis for Sociacultural research. Los Angeles, London, New Delhi, Singapore: SAGE Publications.
• Moinian, F. (2007). Negotiating identities: Exploring children’s perspectives on themselves and their lives.
• Stockholm: HLS Moinian, F. (2011). Growing up in a digital world. An explorative study of toddler´s access to and use of digital technologies at home. Norsk senter for barnforskning. Barn, nr. 3-4, 55-73
• Nordin-Hultman, E. (2004). Pedagogiska miljöer och barns subjektskapande. Stockholm: Liber.
• Norris, S. (2002). The implication of visual research for discourse analysis: transcription beyond language. Visual communication, vol 1, nr 1, 97-121. London: SAGE Publications.
• Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants. On the Horizon, 9(5), 1-5.
• Prensky, M. (2005). Digital Natives: How they think differently. Retrieved from http://coe.sdsu.edu/eet/articles/digitalnatives//start.htm.
• Plowman,L.&Stephen, C. (2005). Children, play and computers in pre-school education. British Journalof educational technology. 36(2):145-58
• Potter, J. (1996). Discourse analysis and constructionist approaches: theoretical background. In J. Richardson (Ed.) Handbook of Qualitative Research Methods for Psychology and the Social Sciences, Leicester: BPS Books: 125-140.
• Rogers, S. (ed.) (2011). Rethinking Play and Pedagogy: contexts, concepts and cultures. London: Routledge.
• Rogoff, B., Paradise,R., Arauz R.M., Correa-Chavez,M. and Angelillo, C (2003). Firsthand learning through intent participation. Annual review of psychology, 54, 175-203.[PubMed]
• Ronneberg, M. (ed.) (2008). Toddler´s TV. How do children under tre experience tv and play with remote control. Uppsala: Filmforlaget.
• Ricoeur, P. (1994). The Rule of Metaphor: Multi-disciplinary studies of the creation of meaning in language. London: Routledge.
• Rosenstein, R. (2002). Video use in social science research and program evaluation. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 1 (3). Article 2. Retrieved November 20, 2006 from: http://www.ulberta.ca~ijqm
• Rostvall, A-L. & West, T. (2005). Theoretical and methodological perspectives on designing studies of interaction. International Journal of Qualitative Methods 4 (4) December 2005.
• Sandvik, M., Smordal, O. & Osterud, S. (2012). Exploring iPads in Practitioners’ Repertoires for Language Learning and Literacy Practices in Kindergarten. In: Nordic Journal of Digital Literacy. p 204-221
• Selander, S. & Aamotsbakken, B. (2009). Nordic Identities. Oslo: Novus Forlag.
• Scollon, R. (2001). Mediated discourse. The nexus of practice. London/New York: Routledge.
• Selander, S. & Kress, G. (2010). Design för lärande - ett multimodalt perspektiv. Stockholm: Norstedts Akademiska Forlag.
• Selander, S. & Rostvall, A-L. (2008). (Eds.) Design för lärande. Stockholm: Norstedts Akademiska Forlag.
• Selander, S. & Svardemo-Aberg, E. (2009). Didaktisk design i digital miljö - nya möjligheter för lärande.
• Stockholm: Liber. Selander, S. (2008a). Tecken for larande - tecken pa larande. Ett designteoretiskt perspektiv. In Selander, S. & Rostvall, A-L. (Eds.) Design för lärande (28-43) Stockholm: Norstedts Akademiska Forlag.
• Selander, S. (2008b). Designs for learning - A theoretical perspective. In: Designs for Learning, Vol 1(1), 10-22.
• Shaffer, D. W. (2006). How computer Games Help Children Learn. New York: Palgrave Macmillan.
• Souza, M.D. & Cabello, P. (Eds)(2010) The emerging media toddlers. Nordicum. Unversity of Gothenburg.
• Statens Medierad. (2013). Smaungar och medier. Stockholm: Statens Medierad.
• Sutton-Smith, B. (1997). The Ambiguity of Play. Cambridge, Massachusetts, London: London: Harvard University Press.
• Tripp, D. (1993). Critical incidents in teaching: developing professional judgement. London: Routledge. van Leeuwen, T. (2005). Introducing social semiotics. London: Routledge.
• Vetenskapsradet. (2004). Forskningsetiska principer inom humanistisk-samhällsvetenskaplig forskning, (2004). Stockholm: Vetenskapsradet. See http://www.codex.vr.se Vetenskapsradet. (2005). Vad är god forskningssed? Synpunkter, riktlinjer och exempel. Gustafsson, B.
• Hermeren, B. Petersson. Stockholm: Vetenskapsradet Waller, T. (ed) (2009). An Introduction to Early Childhood: a multi-disciplinary approach London: Sage.
• Waller, T. (2011). Digital play in the classroom: A twenty-first century pedagogy in S. Rogers, (ed.) Rethinking Play and Pedagogy: contexts, concepts and cultures. London: Routledge.
• Wartofsky, M. W. (1993). Kameror kan inte se: Representation, fotografi och det manskliga seendet. In: Jan-Erik Lundstrom (Ed.) Tankar om fotografi. Stockholm: Alfabeta.

Identifiers

DOI

10.2478/dfl-2014-0009