Links To Theory Through Observation.

Links: to Theories Through Observations. I will be reflecting upon two separate observations completed in a nursery setting. The first refers to child A aged three years and three months the second refers to child B aged Four years and five months. Both focusing on a mathematical activity and demonstrating how the child in each observation developed their mathematical learning through play in regards to the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) criteria. EYFS was established under the Childcare Act 2006 and is compulsory for all early years’ providers that have to register with Ofsted for children age three to the end of the academic year in which they turn five. During reflection I will also be considering some theorists and their theories on learning through play and the benefits or criticisms they imply in relation to each observation. Child A pushes a lorry around table, watching as the wheels go round. He plays alongside others without interaction. Picking up the lorry he carries it to another area of nursery and kneels on the floor, again watching as he pushes lorry around the carpet. Another child approaches so he picks up the lorry taking it to a table with other vehicles on. Holding on to the lorry he picks up a small car, looking at a child opposite he says “My lorry is big”. The child agrees with child A saying “Yes because lorries are bigger than cars”. Child A smiles and replies “My lorry is bigger”. He puts lorry on table and lines up two cars and a small bus alongside it and repeats “My lorry is bigger”. From the observation it was recognised that child A achieved several milestones for his age in conformity with the Development Matters in the EYFS criteria. These include Mathematics (Shape Space and Measure) he is beginning to use the language of size, Physical Development (Moving and Handling) he squats with steadiness to rest or play with object on the ground and rises to feet without using hands, Communication and Language (Speaking and Understanding) he uses language as a powerful means of widening contacts, sharing thoughts and developing understanding of simple concepts e.g. big/little (Early Education 2012). The EYFS categorise childrens development according to age which was influenced by Piagetian theory. Jean Piaget is credited with the cognitive-developmental theory that views the child “as actively constructing knowledge and cognitive development as taking place in stages” (Berk, 2000, p.21). He introduced the term schema and its use was popularized through his work based on his four development stages, Sensorimotor (0-2yrs), Pre-Operational (2-6 or 7), Concrete Operational (6 or 7-11 or 12) and Formal Operational (11 or 12). Chris Athey (2007) was influenced by Piagets’ schemas and developmental stages and building on Piagets’ work she applied this theory to the observation and analysis of young childrens learning. Focusing on young children 's spontaneous play and activity she suggested that there are several ways of defining schema, although not a single one on which everyone would agree. During the observation it was identified that child A was performing some schemas in accordance to Piaget and Atheys’ schema theory. Pushing the lorry around the table exhibits a rotation schema, taking the lorry to different areas exhibits a transporting schema and lining up the vehicles exhibits a positioning schema all of which Dowling (2013) suggests are mathematical schemas. Piaget viewed children as ‘lone scientists’ who had all the cognitive mechanisms to learn independently from personal experiences and environmental aspects. He believed in the importance of children learning through exploring and finding new knowledge in many different situations without any need for teachers or more mature peers input (Nutbrown, 2006). However in their response to schema-related play Bruce (1999) and Meade (1999), (in Lindon, 2001) both highlighted the role of more mature ‘others’ in influencing childrens development. This is also posited by Lev Vygotsky who criticised Piagets’ lone scientist beliefs, emphasising the need for support from families, communities and other children to extend a childs learning in his Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) theory (Pound, 2005). Vygotskys’ ZPD has been defined as "the distance between the actual developmental level as determined by independent problem solving and the level of potential development as determined through problem solving under adult guidance, or in collaboration with more capable peers" (Vygotsky, 1978, p. 86). These theories were recognised from the observation when Child A communicated his thoughts on the size of the lorry to another child who confirmed his original schema of size but extended his level of thought by explaining lorries are bigger than cars. As the other child was more knowledgeable on size and mathematical language he was able to provoke adaptation in child As’ original schema allowing him to assimilate and accommodate this new information also showing evidence of Piagets developmental theory (McLeod, 2009). Although further observations or adult led activities would be required to ascertain child As’ equilibration. Upon reflection, had a teacher or LSP been present during this activity an opportunity to develop child As’ mathematical knowledge further on shape, space and language could be met by comparing vehicle sizes and modelling language for size, big, bigger, biggest. Child B points to her tights saying “Look red, blue, red, blue” to LSP who replies “Oh yes, well done you spotted a pattern” child B smiles. “Do you think you can make a pattern?” asks LSP, child B nods following LSP to table with coloured cubes and pattern cards. LSP hands child B a two coloured pattern card modelling how to copy it. Child B follows card repeating pattern. LSP praises child B giving her a sticker, child B smiles examining sticker. Child B picks another two coloured pattern card and copies it independently saying “I can do this one”. After praising child B LSP leaves table. Child B makes a two coloured pattern without card calling to LSP “Look I made my own pattern”, LSP praises and rewards child B with another sticker. Child B turns to a friend saying “I got two Stickers”. As in first observation, regarding the EYFS, child B is achieving several milestones within the seven areas of learning and development relevant to her age range of 40-60months. She is also demonstrating characteristics of effective learning, also specified in EYFS these being, Playing and Exploring (engagement), finding out and exploring and being willing to ‘have a go’, Active Learning (motivation), being involved and concentrating, keeping trying, enjoying achieving what they set out to do and Creating and Thinking Critically (thinking), having their own ideas, making links, choosing ways to do things. However mathematically it was notable that child B aged 53 months is above her milestone development in shape space and measure aspect of EYFS as she was able to recognise, create and describe patterns, which are Early Learning Goals (ELG). ELGs’ are the next developmental milestones of EYFS and usually occur around age 60+ months (Education, 2012). This contrasts Piagets’ theory that children learn in stages, achieving one stage before moving onto the next. Maria Montessori also criticised this theory as she believed in focusing on the individualized nature of learning and recognised “all children were capable of learning but they need to work at their own pace” (Groark et al, 2011, p. 41). This was highlighted in observation as child B is developing at her own pace and achieving a higher development milestone without completing all aspects of the 40-60 mth shape space and measure category of EYFS. Although Montessori criticised Piagets’ development stage theory she believed, like Piaget that children learn by exploring alone and felt that children were teaching themselves by absorbing information from their environment (Daley et al, 2006). Without intervention from the LSP child B would not have extended her knowledge or language of pattern and an opportunity would have been missed, sometimes it is therefore necessary to have the support of an adult or more knowledgeable peer. This is supported by Bruner whose scaffolding theory stated the importance of the role of a practitioner to extend childrens learning (Doherty, 2009). Scaffolding refers to assistance which ‘‘enables a child or novice to solve a problem, carry out a task or a goal which would be beyond his unassisted efforts’’ (Bruner, 2006 p.199). Child B had spotted the pattern but until the LSP assisted her and pointed out she had spotted a ‘pattern’ child B did not have the language to describe it. On doing so child B was then able to remember this language and repeat it when informing the LSP she had ‘made her own pattern’. Good evidence of two out of Gardeners seven intelligences were noted, Logical Mathematical Intelligence showing child Bs ability to detect patterns and Linguistic Intelligence, remembering written and spoken information (Smith, 2013). When LSP praised child B and gave her a sticker it illustrated Thorndike’s Law and Effect theory which suggests “any behaviour leading to a positive consequence will be repeated” (Pound, 2005 P.42). This was more apparent when child B was motivated to complete another pattern independently to gain another sticker. Upon reflection as child B was motivated and enjoying making patterns the LSP could have extended learning further by introducing a three coloured pattern or introduced shapes. In conclusion I feel the opportunity was there to extend mathematical knowledge for both children. However it was observed that children can learn through play both independently from their own senses and exploration and with the help of adults or more mature peers. Each child is unique in their needs and abilities so require different approaches therefore it is important to integrate different aspects of different theories to get a good all rounded child.