Working through questions about technology and education

Tag: inquiry

A First Look at Digital Literacy in Kindergarten

How does one weave technology into Kindergarten learning? Certainly there are ways for the teacher to use technology in preparing lessons for students, sharing media with students, and reporting student learning to parents, but how do teachers put the technology into the hands of four and five year olds for the purpose of enhancing their learning? One way might be through inquiry-based learning. The authors of the paper, Information and Digital Literacies in a Kindergarten Classroom: An I-LEARN Case Study (Tecce DeCarlo, Grant, Lee, & Neuman, 2018), sought to validate the I-LEARN model for guiding young learners’ inquiry-based projects.

The authors of the paper appear to be connected through Drexel University in Pennsylvania, U.S.A. Mary Jean Tecce DeCarlo is an Associate Clinical Professor in the School of Education at Drexel University. Her research interests are listed as early literacy development, digital and information literacy, learning differences, knowledge construction, and urban education. Allen Grant, formerly an Associate Clinical Professor at Drexel University, is now Dean of the School of Education at State University of New York Potsdam, in New York. His research interests are listed as emerging technologies, urban school reform, leadership development, and virtual schooling. Vera J. Lee is also an Associate Clinical Professor at Drexel University. Her research interests are listed as family literacy in urban communities, sociocultural perspectives of literacies, language and literacy development of multilingual parents and children, and community partnerships. Finally, Delia Neuman is a Professor Emerita from the College of Computing and Informatics at Drexel University. Her research interests are listed as learning in information-rich environments, instructional systems design, the use of media for learning, and school library media.

T. Westwood (2019)

It is important to note that the authors declared no conflict of interest in the production of this research, even though the I-LEARN model was created by Dr. Neuman (2008). The I-LEARN model consists of six steps designed to guide students through the research process: Identify a question, Locate information, Evaluate information, Apply information, Reflection, and kNow.

The case study discussed in the paper is a report on the results of one kindergarten class out of four kindergarten classes that were part of a larger research project. The authors believed that this particular class of 24 students “yielded the richest findings” because the teacher, Ms. C, applied a “developmentally appropriate approach” (Tecce DeCarlo et al., 2018, p. 265). The paper outlined how each step was executed with the teacher identifying how to best model and structure each step based on her own expertise developed over five years of teaching kindergarten. The last step, kNow, was not discussed in the paper other than to list it as a step and explain it as “instantiating the knowledge gained so it can be used in the future” (p. 266). The four teachers involved in the larger study developed the assessment rubric and did not include kNow; they only proposed to assess the first five steps. The researchers concluded that young children, even in low-income public schools, can identify inquiry topics, locate sources, and participate actively in the digital world.

There are many models for designing inquiry projects for both adults and children. Most of them include the same steps as Neuman’s model in some form. Neuman’s model is a linear model. Others describe inquiry steps as a cycle or spiral where a student may continue into a new question or reflection may cause the student to go back a step or two. MacKenzie and Bathurst-Hunt list “Ten Phases of the Inquiry Cycle” (2018, p. 24). The model itself is not what drew me to this paper.

What drew me to this paper was the notion of exploring digital literacy with Kindergarten children. The authors repeatedly emphasized the role of the teacher, Ms. C, in making the project a success. “Ms. C’s developmentally appropriate approach to the I-LEARN project…was exemplary, and this paper focuses on the strategies and techniques she adopted as well as the results of her students’ work” (p. 265). “Analysis of the data indicated that Ms. C had developed her own highly effective approach to the assignment and adjusted her implementation of I-LEARN’s stages to meet her students’ particular needs” (p. 270). I would argue that in the end, it seemed to have little to do with the actual I-LEARN model and entirely to do with the scaffolding and support provided by the adults that were present in each of the steps.

The descriptions of what Ms. C did to model and guide the students are necessary in order for the students to be successful. It is possible that the three, less successful, teachers either did not realize this or did not want to alter the instructions provided by the researchers. Mrs. C broke each step into smaller, more manageable pieces, and provided opportunities for discussion, examples and modelling. For example, before having the children choose there own sources, she discussed possible sources such as computers and family members, and then provided concrete examples of sources in the form of read-alouds and guest speakers. Then, she modelled how to fill in their draft sheets. These necessary sub-steps for applying the I-LEARN steps were not provided by the I-LEARN model.

Overall, the paper provided few answers and raised many questions for me. What was the level of engagement by students in the class? How was the class managed? Did all the children work on their projects at the same time? The paper mentioned that the teacher and two of the researchers were helping the children use the computers. How often did these computer sessions take place? Can a project such as this be managed by one teacher alone?

T Westwood (2019)

These questions about the paper are contributing to my own emerging research interest. It is often the case that the kindergarten teacher is the only adult in the room. It is sometimes possible to schedule the Learning Commons Teacher once a week, but there are no guarantees. How can a lone teacher build digital literacy in a kindergarten class? Is it done through inquiry projects that follow a model such as I-LEARN or the Ten Phases of the Inquiry Cycle offered by MacKenzie and Bathurst-Hunt (MacKenzie & Bathurst-Hunt, 2018, p. 24)? Would structured inquiry projects be more feasible in small groups while the rest of the class is doing different activities that require less guidance? Would it be better to break up digital literacy into its smaller components and address each in turn while introducing students to different applications? Tablets such as iPads are amazing tools in that they are fairly easy to use and offer a tactile component that young children enjoy. They are engaging all by themselves. Is it important for young learners to know how to use a computer or laptop at this stage?

Kindergarten is a very busy place. Some of these children are as young as four years old when they walk through the door. They have come to school to play. They are at school to develop social skills and test new relationships. They are there to experiment and take risks. Many are just beginning to understand behavioural expectations and self-regulation. They are beginning to compare themselves to others and allow that to shape their behaviour. The children are active and noisy. In the classroom setting, they need to be guided and monitored in virtually everything they do. How does a kindergarten teacher fit digital literacy into this already full day? Those same children are also there to learn. They have great curiosity and have many interests of their own. Most are eager to learn to read, write, and do math. Project-based inquiry might be the answer.

References

MacKenzie, T., & Bathurst-Hunt, R. (2018). Inquiry Mindset (First). Elevate Books EDU.

Neuman, D. (2008). I-LEARN: A Model for Creating Knowledge in the Information Age. International Association of School Librarianship. Selected Papers from the … Annual Conference; Brantford, 1–10.

Tecce DeCarlo, M. J., Grant, A., Lee, V. J., & Neuman, D. (2018). Information and Digital Literacies in a Kindergarten Classroom: An I-LEARN Case Study. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(3), 265–275. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-017-0857-7

Two Worlds Meet

“Inquiry Learning Word Cloud” by Christopher Lister is licensed under CC BY-NC-SA 2.0

Back when I taught grade 4/5 in 2014, I collaborated with my colleagues to create an amazing inquiry experience we called, Two Worlds Meet. This project was centred around and assessed within the Social Studies curriculum with the initial goal of incorporating more local, authentic First Nations content. Most of the students really enjoyed it, but I believe we teachers enjoyed it even more. It consumed far more time than our administrators generously gave us, but we enjoyed the collaboration time and together; we designed a project that is still in use today. Since then, I moved away from intermediate students and into the world of Kindergarten.

When I dropped back into Kindergarten, an interesting thing happened. I stopped thinking about inquiry and focused more on play-based and outdoor learning experiences. Play-based learning really has a lot of the elements of Inquiry in it. I spend a lot of time noticing what the students are choosing to play and then, asking them if they want to explore more about it. For example, I noticed two children really enjoyed drawing monkeys so I sat with them as they drew and asked them what they knew about monkeys. Then, during my lunch hour, I found some videos and books about monkeys that they could check out during choice time.

When Trevor Mackenzie came into our EdTech MEd class this week, I thought to myself, “Oh yeah, inquiry. Where does that fit in Kindergarten?” I reflected back on those monkey boys, and thought that if I had been thinking with my inquiry-based brain, I might have taken it further. Why didn’t I ask them about their wonderings? Why didn’t I have them share their learning with the class? Why didn’t I get the iPads out and have them share their learning through a simple app? My answer is, because I am the lone adult in such a busy room. Where can I get that kind of time? How do I focus on teaching a small group an app when there are so many other activities and behaviours to monitor during choice time? Then I look at the book, Inquiry Mindset, and find the profile of Mackenzie’s co-author, Rebecca Bathurst-Hunt, at the back. She is a Kindergarten Teacher! Now I need to read the book and Rebecca’s blog, and follow her on Twitter.

Next, we met Jeff Hopkins from Pacific School of Innovation and Inquiry (PSII). The school’s website claims, “Through a formal inquiry process, learners at PSII (we pronounce it “sigh”) develop interdisciplinary pathways leading to learning activities that take them through a curriculum all their own, while also meeting or exceeding BC graduation requirements.” Listening to Jeff, I was excited for the possibilities for those learners and then, I started thinking about what could I use in Kindergarten. What if I could talk my two Kindergarten teacher colleagues at my school into adapting the PSII model for our learners? I thought about PSII’s layout. What if we had one of our classroom’s as “the noisy room”, one as the room with the “working hum”, and one with “quiet space”? What if our learners could move from one space to the other, with one teacher in each room? I do not think our learners can schedule their own time like PSII learners can, but what if we could schedule the children taking into account their needs and interests. Could we schedule small levelled groups for short, focussed lessons on the basics? Could we schedule large group times for gym, music, and French? Could we schedule small inquiry group sessions that incorporate literacy, numeracy, social studies, science, art, and technology? Would a model such as this meet the social-emotional needs of our students? Would the children be able to establish good social connections? Can my colleagues and I agree on how to implement, assess, and report on progress? How would parents and administrators respond? It is an exciting idea, but it would require an enormous investment of time and energy to get off the ground. But still, it’s there: Kindergarten meets PSII.

A Settler’s Work Has Just Begun

This has been an eye-opening week. Before this week, I believed that Indigenous Education was about weaving the previously absent indigenous content into my curriculum. Each year, I teach my students a few SENĆOƩEN words, I read the occasional Indigenous story book, we participate in Orange Shirt Day, our class goes to the “Multicultural Room” to see authentic first nations artifacts and listen to our school’s Indigenous Education Teacher share some stories and some properly pronounced SENĆOƩEN language. This past year, our school enjoyed some bonuses. Our classes participated in building a canoe replica with an indigenous canoe builder. We had Canadian Geographic bring their giant Indigenous Peoples Map for classes to see and discuss. We participated Aboriginal Day activities such as The Bone Game, Storytelling, and Lacrosse. Several years ago, we had local artists design and/or carve our school logo, school sign, and a welcome figure for the front foyer. We, my colleagues and I, are really trying.

We want our aboriginal students and their families to feel welcome and included. We want our non-aboriginal students and their families to share our belief that including these cultural activities and art pieces is an important step toward reconciliation and respect for the unceded territory our building stands upon. Even with all that, we know there’s something awry. Many of our Indigenous students are still struggling academically and confining themselves to Indigenous friends. Their families rarely come into the school and seem to keep us “at arm’s length”. There are signs of growing trust with some of our Indigenous families but only, I think, because our previous Indigenous Education Teacher is an elder from the local W̱SÁNEĆ community and was leveraging her status there to build bridges. What is next for our school? What is next for me in my own practice?

After reading Meschachakanis, a Coyote Narrative: Decolonising Higher Education, I have come to see “that colonisation is not simply a historical event, but an ongoing system of oppression and advantage. A system designed to privilege the settler state at the expense of the Indigenous peoples” (Pete, 2018, p. 179). No wonder our Indigenous families do not trust us. It’s not just the horrors of residential schools prompting mistrust but also, the ongoing subjugation of the people and communities they are forced to live in. I did not put it together at the time, but I remember our Indigenous Education Teacher mentioning that she needed to know how many of my students were on the “nominal role” because she had to fill out paperwork for the federal government to fund them for a field trip we went on. I remember thinking how dumb the federal government was, wanting paperwork for a $3.50 skate rental, but now I think, how terrible and humiliating for her and those indigenous families that this is how tightly controlled they are! It makes me angry to think about it.

Shauneen Pete’s chapter is aimed at decolonizing universities but the lessons resonate at all levels of education. How do we decolonize elementary school? Our knowledge system is “rooted in Eurocentrism…a system of knowledges that reinforce colonial dominance” and “Indigenous peoples intimately understand the nature of colonialism and its effect; members of the dominant group tend to know very little” (Pete, 2018, p.181). This tells me I need to know more but I have to admit, I struggle to ask questions of our Indigenous Education Teacher because I am afraid to offend, or perhaps, afraid to give up the “luxury of ignorance” (Howard as cited by Pete, 2017). I believe it is more the former as I recall, several years ago, when our Indigenous Education Teacher was a white woman, I did ask many questions and learned a lot about our local Indigenous communities. She mentioned that some people in the community were offended when she tried and failed in her pronunciation of SENĆOĆŠEN words. She warned us against asking about sacred ceremonies since they once had to be conducted in secret and have since become privileged knowledge. It was also at this time, when one of my grade 4 students was engaged in inquiry about residential schools, that an elder told her mom (and she, in turn told me) that he was tired of telling his story because it was a painful one. With these things in mind, I believed my trepidation was justified and I just stopped asking. After reading and listening to the frustrated words of Shauneen Pete, I understand it is time to get to work on decolonising my practice and overcome my fears. I need to do some of my own research. I need to know more about culturally responsive pedagogy, critical multiculturalism, Tribal Critical Theory, and Red Pedagogy. Then, I can take better questions to my Indigenous Education Teacher.

What does decolonising my practise look like in Kindergarten? I have work to do in figuring out this question, I started looking at my district’s Hub for Indigenous Education Resources. I can understand why few people would make use of this resource as it is enormous, with very long lists of links. It is hard to know where to start. I turn instead to student-led inquiry. Inquiry-based learning is a natural leap for Kindergarten. The children are eager to learn. We might not get the deep questioning of older learners but we can certainly lay the foundation simply by asking, “What do you want to know about?” or “What do you want to teach us about? They almost always have an answer. They have not yet been trained to wait for information to be delivered to them in tidy little themes. They are already experimenting with inquiry at playtime. How high can I make this tower before it falls over? How can we make this fort big enough for all our friends? How can I take her idea and make it better? How can I turn this kitchen into a veterinarian’s office? How can I arrange this furniture to make a home for Barbie? Mentioning Barbie makes me cringe; I wonder what toys and materials I have that meet the needs of decolonised play. Indeed, what is available in the settler marketplace? Clearly I have much more to do.

When it comes to decolonising my kindergarten, I am now clearly in the role of researcher. I have a lot of resources to evaluate and sort; which are materials that I can use to teach and which address the manner in which I teach? The latter will require that I adopt self-study as a research method. How will I change my practice to reflect my growth toward becoming a culturally responsive, socially just educator? How will I assess and document that growth? Perhaps, I will invite Coyote (Pete, 2018). My self-study will take time and I don’t want my students to have to wait so changes in my practice will need to be thought out one at a time, assessed in practice, and then move on from there. I will be renovating my practice, rather than tearing down to rebuild. In that way, the students will become the researched alongside myself. If I am thoughtful in my application, all the changes should be positive ones. As for the reader of the research, that would be me, but also I would be compelled to share what I learn with my colleagues. I wish to encourage them to begin their own self-study, passing along Shauneen Pete’s notion that it is time for the settlers to do the work.

 

Other possible starting points:

SETBC

In Our Own Words: Bringing Authentic First Peoples Content to the K-3 Classroom

School District 61 Learning Team – Indigenous Education

© 2024 What the Tech?

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑