|
TALLER
|
|
Technological Tools: Enhancing All Young Children’s Cognitive and Social-Emotional Learning Dr Belinda G. Gimbert and Dr Dean S. Cristol CENDI, May, 2003
Concurrently, neo-Vygotskian theorists, contemporary constructivists, and developmentally appropriate instructors debate whether and how technology can or should influence pedagogical practices in early childhood education. In their view of cultural-historical-activity theory (CHAT), Rivera, Galarza, Entz and Tharp (2002) advocate technology as a support for implementing a pedagogy that is based on sociocultural theory, as well as developmentally appropriate instruction practice (DAP). Rivera, Galarza, Entz and Tharp’s question, “With the advent of technological innovation, ‘how should’ pedagogy be modified now that children must learn how to use digitized information processors?” (p. 181). Contemporary constructivist discuss a child’s construction of knowledge through interaction with materials and activities, and ask, In what ways does learning with technology enhance a child’s development? While principles of developmentally appropriate practice are embedded in neo-Yvgotskian and Piagetian conceptual frameworks, advocates of DAP question, When and how does a particular technological tool best support a child’s learning needs? Our workshop’s design supports technological, hands-on experiences for early childhood educators that situate instruction in the socio-cultural nexus of diverse learners, curriculum and context, and facilitate effective pedagogy. In a guided sequence at each learning center, participants construct technological knowledge through interactions with materials and activities within a social context of relationships. These experiences model the problem-solving activity of child and adult as the primary framework for cognitive development (Tharp & Gallimore, 1988). Further, such experiences integrate social tools with the tools of physical action, including technology, and propel early childhood educators’ learning to a higher platform. Consequently, at the conclusion of the workshop, participants can offer empirical, informed and reflective responses to all three questions previously posed in our introductory statement. Participants encounter five learning centers with a particular technological focus:
Each center offers explorations of a particular technological tool, considered developmentally and culturally appropriate for early childhood classrooms, birth to six years. Participants are required to explore each technological tool through free play, participate in a group activity, assess the experience of the technological task and its associated tool/s, including a discussion of the curriculum possibilities, and reflect on the individual and group experiences of implementing a particular technology or set of technological tools. Learning Center 1: Assistive Technology for Children with Special Needs Definitively, The Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997 (IDEA 97) stated that an educational system must include technology and make dramatic and timely changes so all children can keep pace with technological advances. Recently, Judith Heumann, Assistant Secretary of the U.S. Department of Education, Office of Special Education and Rehabilitative Services, made it clear that the term "all" includes children in early intervention programs from infancy through preschool (Heumann, 2000). Hutinger and Johanson (2000) studied in-depth forty-four 3-, 4-, and 5-year-olds with moderate to severe disabilities. In the analysis of the study’s data, patterns of behavior across data sources show positive outcomes for young children with a wide range of disabilities when teachers integrated appropriate computer software and adaptations into the early childhood curriculum and set up accessible computer centers in the classroom. When technology was used to support learning, children achieved success (that is, they were able to accomplish an activity). Evidence that children's social--emotional growth rate more than doubled in comparison to their pre-Early Childhood Comprehensive Technology System years helped allay the fears of those who caution that computer use automatically leads to isolated, solitary behavior. Teacher and parent interviews, observational data, and scores on the Behavior Interaction Tool stressed the growth of social skills associated with computer use in all 44 of the study children. Children with behavior problems, those diagnosed as having autistic-like tendencies, and those who did not talk to adults exhibited fewer disruptive behaviors during computer time, interacted socially more often, and communicated more (Hutinger, Johanson, & Clark, 1999). From this study, Hutinger and Johanson (2000) claimed, “appropriate computer applications and adaptive devices can provide a set of components to ensure this opportunity when equipment and software take their places in early childhood classrooms alongside traditional materials and equipment--blocks, paints, books, rhythm band instruments, housekeeping corners, and manipulative toys” (p. 159). Further, they asserted, “computer hardware, interactive software, switches, adaptive devices, alternative input devices, and related off-computer activities incorporated into the early childhood curriculum give young children with mild to severe disabilities a set of tools to equalize learning opportunities across developmental domains and curricular content” (p. 159). Last, Hutinger and Johanson (2000) corroborated scholarly evidence (Behrmann & Lahm, 1994; Brett, 1997; Erickson & Koppenhaver, 1995; Godt, Hutinger, Robinson, & Schneider, 1999) that clearly points to the “effectiveness of computers as access technology for young children with disabilities, helping them to interact socially, work cooperatively, control their environment, gain confidence, develop language and communication, and move from concrete to representational thought” (p. 160). Another study conducted by Hitchcock and Noonan (2000) compared pre-school students with disabilities performances using computer-assisted instruction (CAI) with interactive software and teacher-assisted instruction (TAI) with manipulatives. The results indicated that “CAI, using constant time delay, was an effective means of promoting attainment and maintenance of pre-academic skills in young children with disabilities” (p. 145). And, Howard, Greyrose, Kehr, Espinosa and Beckwith (1996) examined social play and pretend behaviors, communication, and affect exhibited by pre-school children with disabilities in both computer and non-computer play contexts. The 37 participants ranged in age from 18 months to 60 with developmental disabilities (speech/language delays, physical impairments, and/or mental retardation, including Down Syndrome), and represented diverse ethnic groups. Data analysis indicated “computer-based activities represented a context in which toddlers and preschool-aged children with disabilities exhibited more sophisticated levels of play behaviors and more positive, interactive social behaviors” (p. 36). About IntelliTools IntelliTools is a pioneer in learning solutions for the diverse classroom, has been producing award-winning classroom tools for early childhood education for over 20 years, beginning with its IntelliKeys programmable adaptive keyboard. The IntelliTools Classroom Pac is comprised of four integrated software programs - IntelliPics Studio, IntelliMathics, IntelliTalk II, and ReadyMade Curriculum Activities - providing a complete set of resources for both general education and special education needs students. IntelliTools Reading: Balance Literacy, winner of the Technology & Learning Award in two categories, is a none-unit program providing a full year of literacy instruction at a first-grade skill level. These IntelliTools software products are fully accessible for standard keyboard and mouse users as well as IntelliKeys adaptive keyboard and switch users. Learning Center 2: Interactive Multimedia materials for literacy and mathematic learning A comparatively recent development in the world of information technology, interactive multimedia technology is a combination of speech, text, graphics, sound, video, animation, and special effects that may be incorporated into classroom activities for both normally developing and learning-disabled children. Liu (1996), asked, “Is it appropriate to include interactive multimedia technology in the same context as other objects such as sand, books, water, toys, and television for pre-kindergarten children?” This researcher analyzed three-, four- and five-year-olds’ verbal and facial expressions, use of a mouse, body movements, and attitudes toward multimedia, as well as feedback from classroom teachers. Lui concluded interactive multimedia technology (with video, audio, and graphics) engaged young children for a longer period of time. Although researchers (Clements & Nastasi, 1993; Escobedo & Bhargava, 1991; Nelson, 1994; Wright., Shade, Thouvenell & Davidson, 1989) offer differing perspectives about the impact of interactive multimedia technology on the development of language, motor skills, social-emotional, and cognitive growth of young children, early childhood educators, Shade, Nida, Lipinski, & Watson (1986) have advocated that developmentally appropriate multimedia technology can enrich learning by providing another dimension of play that taps into young children’s five senses. Specifically, studies have explored three examples of multimedia CD-ROM products aconisdered appropriate for young children, ages four to six years: virtual adventures, electronic books, and desktop tools. Hallett (1999) has suggested desktop tools stimulate new learning opportunities that support the creation of learning environments saturated in language use. Desktop tools permit young children “to create messages (in the form of poems, stories, signs, posters, news, slide shows, and reflective statements) that are both personally meaningful and socially appropriate” (p. 151). At this particular learning center, participants experience desktop tools (Kid Pix, Wiggle Works, and The Graph Club) that integrate text, paint, graphics, animation, speech, and special effects into a wide variety of creativity tools for literacy and mathematical development. ˇ KidPix Studio TM (Broderbund Software) Early childhood researchers, Wetzel and McLean (1997), and Strickland and Morrow (1989) have argued that as young children move toward “more sophisticated use of symbols in their communication with others, they gradually shift from predominantly visual images as in drawings and paintings, to greater use of letters, numerals, or other more highly abstract symbols of their culture, as in formal written language” (p. 41). Recent advances in computer software and hardware are now providing powerful tools to help children represent their ideas and concepts during this time of transition, as they allow for both graphic and linguistic forms of symbolization. Wetzel and McLean have advocated Cochran-Smith, Paris and Kahn’s 1991 premise that “developments in computer software are providing a new level of compatibility between the use of technology and holistic, child-responsive approaches to early language learning” (p. 41). New early literacy software such as KidPix Studio TM support children's curiosity, exploration, and creativity, and are developmentally appropriate. A useful desktop tool is the text-to-speech function available in KidPix Studio TM. Students can listen to pre-recorded multimedia messages via built-in character voices in Spanish or English, as well as record their own narration. KidPix TM supports the development of mathematical concepts and skills for young children. Functions of this multimedia desktop tool allow young children to express, illustrate, and describe their mathematical understandings (as shown in the photographs).
ˇ Wiggle Works TM (Scholastic) WiggleWorks (2000), the Scholastic Beginning Literacy System, is a multimedia interactive CD-ROM based reading and writing program for Pre K – Grade 2 that is presented in English and Spanish. The WiggleWorks literacy program was developed by Scholastic Publishing Company and the Center for Applied Special Technology (CAST). Schultz (1997) researched: “Does WiggleWorks enhance first-graders growth in literacy over and above the learning produced by their usual language arts program?” (p.1). Participants in this study were 651 first graders from schools in three sites in Massachusetts and California). Results demonstrated a positive impact on six-year-olds’ reading and writing skills. Schultz stated, “First graders using this program made significantly greater gains on standardized reading tests and writing samples than comparison students using a more traditional language arts curriculum” (p. 8). Schultz concluded, “Teachers and students alike in the WiggleWorks classrooms were enthusiastic about WiggleWorks” (p. 8). ˇ The Graph Club TM (Tom Snyder Productions) The National Council of Teachers of Mathematics (2000) continues to emphasize statistical literacy, students’ ability to interpret and evaluate data, as a critical skill for functioning in our information-driven daily lives. Introducing and nurturing basic statistical thinking in young children, for example, plotting, counting, and reading values from a graph may support students’ later success with higher-level data analysis skills, for example, drawing inferences or making predictions. The Graph Club TM, appropriate for children aged four to eight years, engages students in mathematical reasoning and problem solving, and links mathematics to their daily lives. Young children can formulate questions that can be addressed with data, collect, organize, and display data to answer questions, represent data using tables and different graph types, and use manipulatives in conjunction with this software to compare different representations of the same data (see photograph). The Graph Club is easy to use in English or Spanish, and allows students to write, save, print statements about their graphs, as well as record their voices Learning Center 3: Robotics and Digital Manipulatives The use of robotics supports a constructionist approach (Papert, 1980) for integrating technology in early childhood classrooms. Constructionist methodologies help young children “learn by doing, by manipulating materials, by engaging in active inquiry, and by creating playful experiences” (Bers, Ponte, Juelich, Viera, & Schenker, 2002, p.123). Both young children and teachers experience an active process of design and construction. Experiences in a computational environment support the long-standing tradition of engaging young children in the creation of personally meaningful projects. Current philosophies in early education posit four premises that support constructionist practices in computational environments: learning by designing meaningful projects to share in the community; using concrete manipulatives to enhance abstract thinking; stimulating powerful ideas that afford new ways of thinking; and encouraging self-reflective practices by both children and teachers (Reggio Emilia in Rinaldi, Gardner, & Seidel, 2001). Potentially, a constructionist-oriented curriculum integrates developmentally appropriate and technologically rich instructional tools, tasks and activities, and supports new ways of promoting and assessing children’s learning. For example, robotic construction kits LEGO Mindstorms “offer a new kind of manipulative for young children to explore and play with new concepts and ways of thinking” (p. 123). Recently, the creation of digital manipulatives (such as programmable building blocks and communicating beads) has expanded the range of concepts for children’s exploration. Now, technologically-enhanced traditional toys enable young children to explore dynamic processes and “systems concepts” (such as feedback and emergence) that were previously considered too developmentally sophisticated for them (Bers, Ponte, Juelich, Viera, & Schenker, 2002; Resnick, Berg & Eisenberg, 2000). In their work with pre-service teachers and three and four-year olds, Bers, Ponte, Juelich, Viera, and Schenker (2002) used robotic construction kits to expose some of the possibilities that technology offered by taking an active role in the design process. Participants constructed physical artifacts that fostered the development of motor skills, as well as technological fluency (Papert & Resnick, 1995). Technological fluency refers to “the ability to use and apply technology in a fluent way, effortlessly and smoothly as one does with language” (Bers, Ponte, Juelich, Viera, and Schenker, 2002, p. 123). Papert and Resnick (1995) described a technologically fluent teacher as one who can use technology to write a story, make a drawing, model a complex instructional task, or program a robotic prototype. In the first case described by Bers, Ponte, Juelich, Viera, & Schenker (2002) a group of 12 three-year olds developed an understanding of metamorphosis, the concept of change that was introduced in a computational environment using a constructionist teaching and learning approach. The curriculum unit was developed by a pre-service teacher, and implemented over a three-month period. Children experienced a culminating project that used robotics with the LEGO Mindstorms kit. The following excerpt from Teachers as designers: Integrating robotics in early childhood education by Marina Bers, Iris Ponte, Catherine Juelich, Alison Viera, and Joanthan Schenker (2002) describes and assesses the instructional tasks and learning process: To start exploring the concept of metamorphosis, the student-teacher read to the three-years old Eric Carle's The Hungry Caterpillar and engaged them in playing with a colorful clothesline depicting the caterpillar's journey through various food items, becoming first a cocoon and finally a butterfly. After introducing them to the concept of metamorphosis and allowing them time to play with the clothesline, the student-teacher showed to the children three puppets: a caterpillar, a cocoon, and a butterfly. Then she introduced the caterpillars' heart, which she built and programmed with the LEGO Mindstorms programmable brick. Children were asked to design the three environments that the caterpillar would move through its life cycle: the leaf environment, the branch environment, and the cloud environment. The environments were laid in order on the floor and children took turns placing the corresponding puppets on the Lego heart as it moved through the environments. The children had a great time watching the heart move across their created environment and helping the metamorphosis happen right before their eyes. To assess children's learning about metamorphosis, the student-teacher had them participate in a posttest. She also used extensive documentation, note taking, digital photography, and video recording on the children's reactions, discussions, and conversations, as well as the children's interaction with the technology. Overall this project was successful. Not only did the children have a wonderful time participating, they also learned about a very complicated topic that traditionally was only approached with older children. This happened for many reasons. First and foremost the basis of this project was a powerful idea formed by the children themselves. For this reason there was an authentic interest in the project. Secondly, this project used a new technology that "enhanced the creative, aesthetic, and personal dimension of students' scientific inquiries" (Martin, Mikhak, Resnick, Silverman, & Berg, 2000; Resnick et al., 2000). The children felt a strong personal motivation in the project because they created the environments that the "heart" would be traveling through. In the end, not only did the majority of the children understand the concept of metamorphosis but also they were able to go into detail about the process. (p. 129) In the second case, four year olds used the same technology to explore the concepts of balance. The following excerpt from Teachers as designers: Integrating robotics in early childhood education by Marina Bers, Iris Ponte, Catherine Juelich, Alison Viera, and Joanthan Schenker(2002) describes and assesses the instructional tasks and learning process: The activity took place during choice periods in a four-year-old classroom. First, the student-teacher read a book to the children, which tells the story of a crane. She then invited the children to experiment with the crane in a collaborative way. The challenge was for each child to pick up metal pieces with the magnet on the crane and transport it to the other side of the wall by controlling the crane with a touch sensor. To complete the task the child had to add and take away tokens from either side of the lever. First the child needed to figure out a way to make the magnet side of the crane more weighted so it could pick up magnets off the table. Next the child had to balance the crane for it to rotate over a short wall without hitting it. Once on the other side, the child needed again to redistribute weight for the magnet to touch the table or floor surface. The child was encouraged to go back and forth delivering magnets for as long as he or she wanted to. As a result of their experimentation with the crane and the magnets, the discussion that occurred among the children during this activity was very rich. For example, children were talking about making the baskets equal for it to balance. "Three in this side and three in that side." They began by simply adding pieces and then progressed to taking away pieces, as well. When the student-teacher asked the children what it meant to balance the crane, one child answered, "You have to make it equal." In building the crane the student-teacher was also personally challenged to re-visit the concept of balance. During the design process she had a hard time getting the lever to balance. It was very frustrating for her but with some trial and error she figured it out. At one point she stated, "I learned so much about balance just by making the crane!" The children who experienced this activity thoroughly enjoyed it. In particular, they liked being in control of the crane and its movement. For many children the activity was not appropriate. The scale of the LEGOs was too small, and thus required a great deal of fine motor ability, which many four-year-olds have not yet mastered. Due to their young age, it wasn't developmentally-appropriate to engage or expect children to participate in the whole design process of the crane, as their student-teacher did. However, the crane was a fun and different way for children to explore the concept of balance by being in control of what looked like a sophisticated new type of technology and by engaging in the scientific process of making predictions. (pp. 130-131). Wyeth and Wyeth (2001) analyzed 28 preschoolers’ (four and five-year-olds) reactions to, and interactions with, Electronic Blocks using direct observation methods of data collection. Two research questions guided their study’s design: “Are Electronic Blocks a developmentally appropriate resource for early childhood education? And, Are children able to access the dynamic programmable properties of the Electronic Blocks?” (2001, p. 4). The Electronic Blocks were tangible programming elements that could be stacked and arranged to form computer programs that interact with the physical world (Wyeth, 2002). The Electronic Blocks were designed so children can connect them just as they would any other blocks. The blocks were made by placing electronics inside Lego Duplo PrimoTM blocks. This ensured that the blocks were easy to stack and connect. There were three kinds of Electronic Blocks: sensor blocks, action blocks and logic blocks (see photograph from http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Ambience/ElecBlocks.htm). There were three sensor Electronic Blocks: a seeing block, a hearing block and a touch block. These blocks were capable of detecting light, sound and touch, respectively. Action blocks produced some kind of physical output. The light block lit a bright incandescent bulb, the sound block played a simple children's melody, and the movement block was a four-wheel car that drives in a straight line. Logic blocks had an intermediary role. Placed between a sensor block and an action block they had the ability to alter the expected action. [Note: Photograph from http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Ambience/ElecBlocks.htm] A fascinating aspect of Electronic Blocks was their ability to interact not only with the environment, but also with each other. An example of two Electronic Block structures interacting was the creation of a remote control car. By creating one block stack that contained a touch block and a light block and another stack that had a seeing block on top of a movement block, a child had effectively created a remote control car. By pressing the touch block, the child triggered the light. This light in turn was detected as an input by the seeing block which actives the movement block (see the picture from http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Ambience/ElecBlocks.htm). [Note: Photograph from http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Ambience/ElecBlocks.htm] Wyeth and Wyeth (2001) concluded that the Electronic Blocks afforded young children, aged between three and eight years of age, unstructured exploratory learning with concrete materials, thus empowering sensory-dependent children with experiences to actively manipulate technology in a purposeful and appropriate way. Further, the electronic blocks were programmable, real objects, developmentally appropriate resources for early childhood technology education (Bredekamp & Cople, 1997).Learning Center 4: Spatial Awareness using 2D/3D Software Although we perceive our surroundings in three-dimension, “the world portrayed on our information displays is caught up in the two-dimensionality of the endless flatland of paper and video screen” (Tufte, 1990, p. 12). Concepts of spatial awareness are linked to understanding and representing real world physical objects and conditions, as well as the development of creative expression. Some researchers suggest the use of digital technology affords early childhood educators opportunities to develop and enhance teaching and learning processes that illustrate spatial concepts (Everett, 2000; Hermer-Vazques, Moffet & Munkholm, 2001). Other researchers purport young children construct mental understanding of spatial relationships by experiencing and making sense of the interplay of the real world, the mental representation, the 2D representation, and the cyberspace representation of a 3D world (Matthews & Geist, 2002). Matthews and Geist (2002) defined interactions between a child, his or her surrounding world as well as perceptions of these lived experiences, and a computer context as essential inputs for the child’s development of spatial awareness. In drawing this conclusion, these researchers used a framework built on Jean Piaget’s understanding of spatial awareness in children to explore how digital technology might enhance young children’s three-dimensional spatial awareness and three-dimensional creative expression. Specifically, Matthew and Geist explored graphic intensive 3D modeling applications that allowed children to build 3D shapes on the computer and then manipulate them in a simulated 3D space. Graphic software permitted a child to view digital creations from four perspectives that required the child to change visual and mental orientation to the object/s. Thus, children experienced disequilibrium as they moved objects in 3D while looking at a 2D representation (a computer screen). Matthew and Geist (2002) premised: The emergence of digital technology as a tool, media, and environment has allowed for new opportunities to understand and develop spatial awareness in children. Digital technology can be implemented in the curricula to enhance the understandings of the spatial relationships in the physical world and in the creation of creative content to express original ideas using digital technology. (p. 322) And, These simple activities that integrate digital and physical spatial activities can help children develop a strong sense of spatial awareness. This awareness…helps the child develop cognitively, and creatively. (p. 331) Learning Center 5: Digital Photography with Instructional TasksThrough their research on uses of digitized information in early childhood education, Rivera, Galarza, Entz and Tharp (2002) illustrate how technology influences pedagogy for young children. They argue that technological innovations can “serve as powerful tools for increasing the potency of pedagogy based on fundamentals principles of human development (p. 181). Within a conceptual framework of cultural-historical-activity (CHAT), these researchers deem technology to be a “tool-to-be-taught and as a tool-for teaching” (p. 182). From this perspective, a community focus is particularly important for understanding how technological instructional activity is organized. Since communities are continually built through shared activities involving the use of tools and language, the introduction of tools of a technological nature disrupts traditional community practices, which alters social interactions, and impacts psychological phenomena such as cognition and values (p. 195). Given CHAT’s emphasis on classroom organization of an activity, the development of classroom values, and lived experiences of classroom community within the surrounding cultural context, nowhere is the integration of information technology more crucial than early childhood learning environments (Rivera, Galarza, Entz & Tharp, 2002). Rivera, Galaza, Entz and Tharp (2002) describe an instructional task in which two pre-school teachers used technology to increase three and four-year-olds social and academic language use. Technological tools - the digital still camera, the computer, and the color printer - stimulated an “occasion-rich dialogue between children and their teacher” (p. 191). This classroom illustration was based on a systematic approach towards implementing technology-enriched instruction. Specifically, this lesson was designed to develop the mathematical concept of sequencing (of events over time). In preparation, task cards were made for each phase of the learning activity (planting gourd seeds). Each task card featured simple printed instructions and a digital photograph of the teachers’ hands performing a task. Digital photographs of the children engaged in the activity centers recorded the children’s learning as the lesson unfolded. These digitized images of “familiar people and events” (p. 202) stimulated conversation, thus providing opportunities for the teacher to assist language development. Selections from the day’s digital images were posted in the front door for families’ perusal at home-time. In this instance, all children experienced rich and diverse technological explorations, and immediate communications was provided to families. Further, these digital images document and validate an individual child’s development, thus serving as invaluable assessment data for parents, teachers, and the children themselves. Although some readers may consider this approach to technology and early education as conventional and somewhat conservative (Rivera, Galarza, Entz & Tharp, 2002), this practice actively engages children in constructing their own understanding of sensory motor experiences. Developmentally appropriate and digitally-produced stimulus materials that are integrated with active, teacher-facilitated instructional activities elude what some researchers claim to be hazards of computer-reliant early childhood classrooms – ill effects on the development of young brains from close electronic exposure, and temptations to implement computers as “electronic babysitters or surrogate television sets” (p. 203). References Behrmann, M., & Lahm, E. (1994). Computer applications in early childhood special education. In J. L. Wright & D. D. Shade (Eds.), Young children: Active learners in a technological age (pp. 105-120). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Bers, M. U., Ponte, I., Juelich, C., Viera, A., & Schenker, J. (2002). Teachers as designers: Integrating robotics in early childhood education. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual 16, 123-145. Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (Eds.). (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood education. (Revised ed.). Washington DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children. Brett, A. (1997). Assistive and adaptive technology supporting competence and independence in young children with disabilities. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 25(3), 14-15, 18-20. Clements, D.H., & Nastasi, B.K. (1993). Electronic media and early childhood education. In B. Spodek (Ed.), In the Handbook of Research on the Education of Young Children. New York: Macmillan Publishing. Electronic Blocks. Retrieved from the Wide World Web March 8, 2003, from: http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Ambience/ElecBlocks.htm Erickson, K., & Koppenhaver, D. (1995). Developing a literacy program for children with severe disabilities. The Reading Teacher, 48, 676-684. Escobedo, T.H., & Bhargava, A. (1991). A study of children's computergenerated graphics. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 2(4), 3-25. Everett, S. (2000). Spatial thinking strategies. Science and Children, 37(7), 36-39. Godt, P., Hutinger, P., Robinson, L., & Schneider, C. (1999). A simple strategy to encourage emergent literacy in young children with disabilities. Teaching Exceptional Children, 32(2), 38-44. Hallett, T. L. (1999). Multimedia materials for language and literacy learning. Reading Horizons, 40(2), 147-158. Hermer-Vazques, L., Moffet., A. & Munkholm, P. (2001). Language, space, and the development of cognitive flexibility in humans: The case of two spatial memory tasks. Cognition, 79(3), 263-299. Heumann, J. (2000, February). Remarks at plenary session given at IDEAs for the 21st century, OSEP and NEC*TAS National Meeting, Washington, DC. Hitchcock, C. H. & Noonan, M. J. (Fall, 2000). Computer-Assisted Instruction of Early Academic Skills. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20(3), 145-158. Howard, J., Greyrose, E., Kehr, K., Espinosa, M. & Beckwith, L. (1996). Teacher-facilitated microcomputer activities: Enhancing social play and affect in young children with disabilities. Journal of Special Education Technology, 13, 36-47. Hutinger, P. L. & Johanson, J. (Fall, 2000). Implementing and maintaining an effective early childhood comprehensive technology system. Topics in Early Childhood Special Education, 20(3), 159-173. Hutinger, P., Johanson, J., & Clark, L. (1999). Promising practices: Benefits of a comprehensive technology system. In NASDSE/OSEP Seventh Annual CSPD Conference on Leadership and Change Monograph, 4-6. Individuals with Disabilities Education Act Amendments of 1997. 11 Stat. 37 (20 U.S.C. 1401 [26]). Jones, M. & Liu, M. (1997). Introducing interactive multimedia to young children: A case study of how two-year olds interact with technology. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education 8(4), 313-343. Liu, M. (1996). An exploratory study of how pre-kindergarten children use the interactive multimedia technology: Implications for multimedia software design. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education 7(1-2), 71-92. Matthews, D & Geist, E. A. (2002). Technological applications to support children’s development of spatial awareness. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual 16, 321-336. National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. (2000). Principles and standards for school Mathematics. Reston, VA: National Council of Teachers of Mathematics. Nelson, W.A. (1994). Efforts to improve computer-based instruction: The role of knowledge representation and knowledge construction in hypermedia systems. Computers in the Schools, 10(3/4), 371-399. Rivera, H., Galarza, S. L., Entz, S., & Tharp, R. G. (2002). Technology and pedagogy in early childhood education: Guidance from cultural-historical-activity theory and developmentally appropriate instruction. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual 16, 181-204. Schultz, L. H. (1995). A validation study of WiggleWorks, the Scholastic Beginning Literacy System. Unpublished report. Shade, D.D., Nilda, R.E., Lipinski, J.M., & Watson, J.A. (1986). Microcomputers and preschoolers: Working together in a classroom setting. Computers in the Schools, 3(2), 53-61. Stearns, P. H. (1993-2003). The Graph Club software. Tom Snyder Production. Tharp, R.G. & Gallimore, R. (1988). Rousing minds to life: Teaching, learning, schooling in social context. New York: Cambridge University Press. Tom Snyder Production. (2003). Graph Master: The research basis for data analysis software tool to support instruction Grades 4 – 8. Retrieved from the Wide World Web. March 8, 2003, from: http://www.tomsnyder.com/reports/Graphing%20Booklet.pdf Tufte, E. (1990). Envisioning information. Cheshire, CT: Graphic Press. Wetzel, K. & and McLean, S.V. (1997). Early childhood teacher preparation: A tale of authors and multimedia, a model of technology integration described. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education 8(1), 39-58. Wright, J., Shade, D.D., Thouvenelle, S., & Davidson, J. (1989). New directions in software development for young children. Journal of Computing in Childhood Education, 1(1). 45-57. Wyeth, P. (2002). Designing technology for children: Moving from the computer into the physical world with electronic blocks. Information Technology in Childhood Education Annual 16, 219-244. Wyeth, P & Wyeth, G. (2001). Electronic Blocks: Tangible programming elements for preschoolers. Retrieved from the Wide World Web March 8, 2003, from: http://www.dstc.edu.au/Research/Projects/Ambience/WyethInteract.pdf |
