Engagement and complexity of thinking � 1
!!!!!
What is the effect of digital technologies on engagement and complexity of thinking
of the explorations of 5-‐6 year old children in a Reggio inspired setting?
!!!!
Action Research
!Clair Weston
!!!!!
Buffalo State, SUNY
Dr Hank Nicols
!!
December 2013
!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 2
Abstract
Twenty four Kindergarten students attending Jakarta International School participated
in an action research study exploring the question, “What is the effect of digital
technologies on engagement and complexity of thinking of the explorations of 5-‐6 year
old children in a Reggio inspired setting?” A two-‐group pre-‐test and post-‐test design
measured student engagement and student complexity of thinking after a seven week
intervention. The experimental group consisted of one class of Kindergarten students
who were exposed to opportunities for using iPads as a language of expression, as a
device for creation. The control group consisted of a second Kindergarten class who
were exposed to opportunities for using iPads in the traditional way, as a device for
consumption. Results indicated that after the intervention period, although the scores of
both groups increased, the level of engagement and the depth of thinking of the
experimental group was higher.
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 3
Introduction
In today’s context it is difMicult to ignore the role of digital technologies in the lives
of young children. However, I am often in a state of tension as to an effective way for
children to use digital technologies and still be true to my pedagogical beliefs about early
childhood education. I would like to think about how digital technologies could be
interwoven into our approach to learning and our beliefs about young children to
enhance what we do and so improve the experience for our children. This study
researched into ways to enhance relationships and understanding and consider
possibilities to evocatively interweave the digital, poetic and symbolic languages.
Although there are a variety of different digital technologies that could be considered the
study focussed on the application and use of one device, the iPad. Using an iPad appears
to be natural to the children. I have observed how skillful they are in commanding the
touch screen and navigating the controls. Somehow to these children it is intuitive. There
is much current discussion about the use of iPads with young children and we have
recently received two in each Kindergarten class and are anticipating a class set for next
year. This study explored some of the possibilities of using the iPads, which are open to
creativity, imagination and to deepen learning and relationships.
I am reminded by Vea Vecchi,
“We have to give closer attention to the process of learning through the digital
media. The digital experience is much too often exhausted simply in its
function and technical form. In addition to this technical aspect, if it is also
used in creative and imaginative ways, it reveals a high level of expressive,
cognitive and social potential as well as great possibilities for evolution. It is
necessary to reMlect on and better comprehend the changes that the digital
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 4
language introduces in the processes of understanding. We have to be aware
of what this adds, takes away, or modiMies in today’s learning. “
(Gandini et al, 2005, p. x )
Based on my observations of children using iPads they can be passive users, looking at a
screen, consuming, rather than using the device as a language of expression and
communication. This implies to me a low level of engagement, in that the activity level is
simple, repetitive and passive, there is an absence of cognitive demand. Lower order
thinking skills are utilized. No other ‘languages’ are used. By languages I am referring to
my understanding of the term ‘Hundred Languages’ used by the Reggio educators. The
Hundred languages of children is a metaphor for the many ways of making meaning and
connections and supporting concept development and understanding. The hundred
languages is a declaration that gives value to all the symbolic and poetic languages that
children possess (Malaguzzi, cited in Edwards et al, 2012, p.2). As a result of the
intervention, I hoped to see the children displaying sustained intense engagement. There
would be creativity, energy and persistence. Higher order thinking skills would be
displayed. Several languages of expression would be intertwined. By transferring
between languages there exists a deeper understanding in the child’s thinking and
explorations. The quality of the exploration would be higher if the child is highly
engaged and there is a richness of languages, that the exploration would be more
complex if multiple languages of expression are used. I proposed that in using the iPad
as an expressive language we move beyond the common use of iPads. Merely giving the
children somewhat narrowly focused Apps, which are not open to imaginative use or
Apps, which have little meaning or substance and take away from an actual experience
with clay or building with wooden blocks. I am suggesting that it is possible that digital
technologies can add to the level of engagement and the complexity of thinking of a
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 5
child’s explorations when the other languages of expression are not forgotten. My
thinking has been inMluenced by George Foreman, who proposes that,
“Children learn about the world by creating relationships between different languages.”
(Edwards et al, 2012, p.349)
The following study was designed to explore this hypothesis.
!Review of the Literature
After identifying the need to validate the effect that iPads can have in the
engagement and complexity of thinking of the explorations of 5-‐6 year old children, I
reviewed the literature to ensure an in depth knowledge about the use of digital
technologies with young children and to learn about results obtained from prior
research. This literature review presents ideas from various research studies that have
suggested that digital technologies can be used to enhance learning in young children. I
have found it difMicult to locate reliable evidence to offer support on pedagogical ways to
maximise the learning potential of digital technologies.
There is an ongoing debate about how and whether digital technologies can Mit in
the lives of young children, although the use of computers and other digital devices are
rapidly becoming a reality in early childhood settings and in many children’s homes.
Arguments are repeatedly concerned with the quality of children’s experiences with
digital technologies and the value of such experiences for their physical, cognitive and
socio-‐emotional development (Verenikina and Kervin, 2011). Banister (2010) points to a
lack of research into iPads for education, as they are still very new to the market. Parette,
Queensbury and Blum (2010) believe early childhood educators are missing the boat in
terms of digital technology use in their classrooms. Drawing on ideas associated with the
digital disconnect they describe the huge divide between children’s digital technology
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 6
use at home and at the early childhood setting. They value the appropriate use of digital
technology within early childhood settings and encourage educators to develop their
technology skills to adequately teach their students. However, in my conversations with
the Kindergarten children taking part in this study, the children described their favourite
home activities on an iPad as predominately playing closed apps generally for the
development of maths and literacy skills or low level thinking games. Although the
children in the study often use iPads at home they are still not being used in a manner to
promote complex thought or modes of expression.
Plowman and Stephen (2007) suggest that early childhood educators already have
pedagogical knowledge but can lack the ability to transfer it to ICT use. Plowman and
Stephen’s (2007) Mindings would suggest that an additional aspect associated with
pedagogical guidelines that assist educators to create and extend leaning outcomes
related to ICT in their classrooms include exploring what constitutes ICT; reMlecting on
the value of ICT in early childhood classrooms; and exploring ideas to transfer current
pedagogical approaches to the use of ICT and that educators play an important role in
extending children’s learning on digital devices. There appears to be agreement that the
emergence of mobile touch devices, such as the iPhone, iPod touch and iPad, provide rich
opportunities for young learners. Teachers in the early years are seeing these as valid
pedagogical devices as they allow young children to easily manipulate and interact with
screen objects and create digital content. Touch-‐screen devices in particular encourage
intuitive participation in open-‐ended games and apps (Verenikina and Kervin, 2011).
There are hard-‐wired affordances of the iPad that make these devices particularly
attractive for early years learning: their portability, their ‘touch’ interface, their simple
navigation system. It is suggested that iPads can support independent use by very young
learners, as has been demonstrated by researchers such as Verenikina and Kervin
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 7
(2011) and O’Mara and Laidlaw (2011). As with technology and learning more generally,
particularly with ICT that affords Mlexibility of use, the impact depends largely on how
they are used (Lynch, 2006).
Bird (2012) suggests that, educators need to consider and provide apps that
encourage imaginative play. Her studies identiMied the necessity for further research
around children’s need for time to explore digital devices to assist them in moving from
explorative to imaginative behaviours. This is supported by the research of Goodwin and
HighMiled (2012) who discovered that, despite the plethora of apps currently available
for young children in the iTunes Store, there has been limited systematic analysis of
educational apps and those designed speciMically for young children. Researchers have
failed to keep pace with the exponential growth in this technology. With over 15 billion
apps downloaded since the inception of Apple’s App Store, there is a preponderance of
apps marketed as ‘educational’ and designed for young children. Both teachers and
parents seek educational apps to use on touch devices like the iPhone, iPad and iPod
touch. Many of these apps offer self-‐contained already-‐formed content, such as gamiMied
literacy apps and are relatively closed. They direct the learner through the content,
positioning the learner as a consumer. The level of interactivity and the level of user-‐
choice varies from app to app, but the geography of the app is closed and the learner
practises particular skills and is rewarded with tokens of accomplishment and progress
(O’Mara and Laidlaw 2011).
Children are growing up in a world full of digital devices and an understanding is
needed of the potential of these devices in children’s play and learning. However the use
of digital technology within early childhood education continues to be an emerging area
of research. Marsh, like many other authors call for further research into the children’s
use of digital technology stating,
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 8
“Academics and educators need to examine their affordances more
closely in order to identify what children gain from their playful
engagements in these worlds and how their experiences can be built
upon in early years settings”
(Marsh, 2010, p36)
In conclusion there is research that delves into the need for digital
technologies in early childhood settings and supports the use of iPads. There are
also some indications of the disconnect between teachers conMidence in their
understanding of early childhood pedagogy and the integration of digital
devices in keeping with this pedagogy. Digital technologies are evident in the
everyday lives of children and researchers are beginning to explore and promote
their place in early childhood. There appears to be little current research,
although plenty of anecdotal accounts on personal blogs, connecting digital
technologies with engagement and complexity of thinking, to provide further
support for teachers in their facilitation of technology use with early childhood
settings.
!Method
Research Design
To answer my research question I designed and implemented an action research
and intervention study with a two group pre-‐test and post-‐test design. As the grade level
consists of four kindergarten classes, one class, KA was the control group and class KB
was the experimental group.
!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 9
!The dependent variables were level of engagement and complexity of thinking. The
independent variable was the opportunities provided to use the iPad in order to open up
possibilities for iPad exploration as an expressive language, for example, the apps
available, the placement of the iPads in the learning environment. The extraneous
variables were sensitive and timely teacher intervention, the learning environment and
conversations between the children themselves. My hypothesis was that in a supportive
learning environment with carefully chosen apps, iPads could be used to improve the
level of engagement and complexity of thought in the explorations of 5-‐6 year children
within a Reggio inspired setting.
Intervention
Before the treatment, the iPads were placed next to the desktop computer in the
classroom with all of the apps the IT department put on school iPads as standard.
Appendix C lists the apps which were initially installed on the devices. For the treatment,
I removed the apps that only allowed for simple, passive, repetitive explorations, which
lacked possibilities for ways of expression. I selected the apps for the iPads using criteria
Pretest Treatment Posttest Gain or change score
Traditional iPad group
Likert Scale for Engagement Rubric for Complexity of Thinking
No treatment Likert Scale for Engagement Rubric for Complexity of Thinking
Subtract pre from post
Intervention iPad group
Likert Scale for Engagement Rubric for Complexity of Thinking
Removal of most apps, careful consideration of placement of iPads within learning environment
Likert Scale for Engagement Rubric for Complexity of Thinking
Subtract pre from post
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 10
that I have developed to help me evaluate the qualities of any material that I might offer
the children. I asked myself,
!Will the app be used in many ways, or does it dictate a particular purpose?
Will it be used by many children?
Does it lend itself to a variety of explorations?
What affordances does it offer?
How might the app be best introduced to the children?
!The selection of apps also payed attention to the SAMR (Substitution Augmentation
ModiMication RedeMinition) model proposed by Puentedura (2013). Appendix E shows a
diagram of the SAMR model. This model offers a method of seeing how computer
technology might impact teaching and learning. Moving along the continuum, computer
technology becomes more important in the classroom but at the same time becomes
more invisibly woven into the demands of good teaching and learning. Appendix D lists
the apps used for the Experimental Group. The iPads were placed in different locations
within the setting to promote transferring between languages. The iPads were located in
the vicinity of other modes of expression, such as on the light table, in the Atelier or near
the wooden blocks. The children were supported in their explorations and encouraged
to share discoveries and ways of expression with each other. There were discussions
with the intervention group that the iPad could be taken to different places to work on.
The children were able to access the iPads just as they would the other materials and
ways of expression within the setting. During class meetings the intervention group
were invited to share with each other projects that they were proud of. In the control
group, the full list of apps remained on the iPads and the iPads remained next to the desk
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 11
top computer for the duration of the study. The control group continued to use the iPads
in the traditional way, mainly for skills practice, rather than as a language of expression.
The teachers observed how the iPads were used and shared observations with each
other. This discussion and shared interpretation of what has been observed offered
different points of view. Observing carefully and listening to the children helped us to
understand the ways of learning with materials that the children develop so that we, in
turn, can support them.
Sample
The sample used in this study was a convenience sample of twenty four
Kindergarten students from two of four kindergarten classes. The Kindergarten classes
are inspired by the principles of the Reggio Emilia Educational Project. These
pedagogical principles include:
!• The pedagogy of relationships;
• The pedagogy of listening;
• Communication and collaboration;
• Pedagogical documentation;
• The image of the children as being strong, curious, competent and capable;
• Social constructivism;
• The ‘Hundred Languages of Children’, a metaphor that refers to the many
ways of making meaning and connections, and supporting concept
development and understanding;
• The environment as the third teacher;
• The teacher as researcher.
!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 12
These pedagogical beliefs inMluence the everyday experience of the children and teachers
and thus inMluence the sample and the context of the study. One class, KA, formed the
control group and the second class, KB, formed the experimental group. All of the 24
students were tested with the attitude Likert Scale to Measure the Level of Engagement.
Five students from each class were part of a randomly generated sample to be tested
with the Complexity of Thinking Rubric. The random sample was generated by assigning
consecutive numbers to all the members of KA and then KB and a random number
generator (www.mathsgoodies.com) was used to identify students. A random sample
was used so that all members of the classes would have an equal and independent
chance of being selected and providing a representative sample.The Kindergarten
classes are of equal size and consist of students of mixed gender, ability, mother tongue
language and nationality. All students were between 5 and 6 years old. All students in
this study attend Jakarta International School in Jakarta, Indonesia. Jakarta International
School serves the educational needs of the international community in Jakarta. The
school is non-‐sectarian and admits students of all races, cultures and religions.
!Instrumentation and Data Collection
Each child’s exploration with the iPad was observed before the intervention. The
level of engagement was measured with a Likert Scale Survey developed for the
purposes of this study, entitled, The Weston Scale of Engagement. The Weston Scale of
Engagement is listed in Appendix A. A Likert scale is designed to measure the attitude
about something. All the items together constitute an attitude, not any one. Thus each
student needs to get a total score across items. The items for the Weston Scale of
Engagement were chosen to cover all the signals for engagement except for complexity
and creativity, which would be measured through a rubric to grade the exploration for
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 13
it’s depth of thinking. I believe that the items are an important part of high level of
engagement. This would be when the child is showing the most competence they can,
that they are at their ‘best’, they are at the edge of their capabilities, at the Zone of
Proximal Development. This instrument has no center or neutral point so the
respondent has to declare whether he/she is in agreement or disagreement with the
item. The items help the observer to consider the level of engagement of a child’s
explorations, which involve an iPad. The items are channels for observer awareness, a
means of making an overall judgment of the child’s engagement.
!1. The child is not easily distracted from his/ her deep concentration.
2. The child’s facial expression reveals ‘hard’ thinking.
3. The child shows prolonged motivation.
4. The child shows special care for their work and are attentive to detail.
5. The child displays a feeling of satisfaction with their achievements.
!After a lengthy observation, notably 30mins-‐45mins, of a random sample of Mive children
from the control group and Mive children from the experimental group, a rubric grade
was assigned to the explorations to ascertain the complexity of thinking of the
explorations. The rubric was created for the purposes of this study, entitled, The Weston
Rubric to Assess Depth of Thinking. The Weston Rubric to Assess Depth of Thinking is listed
in Appendix B. In order for an exploration to have great depth multiple languages would
be used, moving between digital and analogue languages. This is important in our
setting, because we believe that children learn about the world by creating relationships
between different languages. In order for an exploration to be of a high quality the child
would display a high level of engagement and the child would be utilizing higher order
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 14
thinking skills. Over seven weeks, the intervention was carried out. After seven weeks,
each child’s explorations were again observed, measuring the level of engagement with
The Weston Scale of Engagement and the complexity thinking of exploration with The
Weston Rubric to Assess Depth of Thinking. The children were interviewed to discover
their point of view about iPads and how they use them in their explorations. This did not
provide quantitative data but provided information to enhance my understanding of
how children view their learning. I value the children’s perspective and wanted to
provide an opportunity for their voices to be heard as this study concerns them.
!Threats to Validity
The greatest threat to validity in this study was researcher bias. I was responsible
for writing, administering and scoring the tools of instrumentation and data collection. I
may have been looking for particular traits in my observations of the control group and
the experimental group in order to prove my hypothesis correct. There was the
possibility of a history threat as the children have other experiences outside of the
school context that could affect the study. It was the case that all of the children had
access to iPads at home. Maybe this could have been taken into consideration by asking
the parents whether their children had access to iPads at home, if any restrictions are
placed on their use, any particular activity that is encouraged more than others, what the
parents notice their children most commonly doing on the iPad. There was also the
threat of maturation as the study involved young children. The length of the study could
have inMluenced this. I wanted to spend enough time on the intervention for it to be
possible to make a difference, but not so long that the children’s natural maturation
would be a massive threat.
!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 15
Results
To answer my research question I conducted a number of t-‐test analyses to
examine group differences. The one-‐tailed P value was calculated to determine whether
the results had statistical signiMicance by conventional criteria.
Student Attitude
The gain in pre and post test scores was compared between the control group and the
experimental group. An unpaired t-‐test, showed a signiMicant change in student
engagement after the iPad intervention was implemented. A one-‐tailed P value showed
that the results were statistically signiMicant by conventional means. (t= 3.1161, df= 22 ,
p=0.0025). Table 1 shows the means and standard deviations for each group.
!Table 1
Means and Standard Deviations of Group Mean Pre and Post Test Gains in Student
Engagement
Figure 1 below provides a visual representation of the mean gain in score for student
engagement for the control group and the experimental group.
!
Group Control Group gain between pretest score
and post test scores
Experimental Group gain between pretest score
and post test scores
Mean 2.83 5.5
Standard Deviation 2.52 1.57
N 12 12
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 16
Figure 1
Visual representation of the control group and experimental group gain in engagement
scores
!Student Complexity of Thinking
The results of the analysis of complexity of thinking between the control group and the
experimental group showed that the experimental group signiMicantly increased the
complexity of their thinking during explorations involving an iPad. A one-‐tailed P value
showed that that the results were statistically signiMicant by conventional means
(t=4.9058, df= 8, p=0.0006). Table 2 shows the means and standard deviations for each
group.
!Table 2
Means and Standard Deviations of Group Gains between pre and post tests for complexity
of thought
0
1.5
3
4.5
6
Mean gain in engagement score
Control Group Experimental Group
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 17
!Figure 2 below illustrates student’s mean scores after receiving the iPad intervention
compared to the control group.
Figure 2
Control group vs. experimental group mean gain in scores for complexity of thinking of
explorations
Generalisations
A t-‐test result showed a signiHicant difference when comparing student attitude and
complexity of though between the control group and the experimental group. The
results suggested that children can demonstrate a higher level of engagement and
Group Control Group gain between pretest score
and post test scores
Experimental Group gain between pretest score
and post test scores
Mean 4.6 12.2
Standard Deviation 3.21 1.3
N 5 5
0
3.25
6.5
9.75
13
Mean gain in score of complexity of thinking
Control Group Experimental Group
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 18
complexity of thinking when using the iPads as a language of expression rather than as a
means of consuming.
!Discussion and Action Plan
The results of this study implied that iPads can deepen engagement and complexity
of explorations in young children when informed choices are made in selecting apps
which provide possibilities for the interweaving of languages or combining apps and
thought is given to the placement of the iPads within the learning environment. Although
this resonates with my beliefs about early childhood pedagogy and the complexity of
thinking utilised by children when they use multiple languages of expression, I was
surprised by the signiHicance of the results and the size of the impact on engagement and
complexity of thought that more open apps can have. This leads me to believe that only
constructive apps should be installed on the iPads along with the standard productivity
suite (camera, video, Photo Booth).
My data and observations of the children in the control group showed them to be
overall, more passive consumers and less engaged. The dialogues amongst the children
as they were exploring the iPads were less rich than the experimental group and often
resulted in more arguments over turn taking and sharing. The iPads were generally used
by one child at a time. The story app, ‘Go Away Big Green Monster’ proved to be very
popular and led to the book version of this story being loaned from the library. At the
beginning of the study the simplistic apps were the most popular, but toward the end the
more creative apps were beginning to be used more frequently. The instructive apps had
elements of a ‘drill-‐and-‐practice’ design and required minimal cognitive investment on
behalf of the child. The children are positioned as consumers of the content, just listening
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 19
and looking, rather than producers of their own knowledge who actually produce
something. I wonder if these simple apps advertised as educational games, did not
capture the young children's attention and they quickly worked out the process and the
solutions and lost the interest in them. Maybe after the initial enthusiasm for the closed
apps, the children changed and began to show a preference for the games which allowed
them to engage their imagination and develop their own play that extended beyond the
screen as digital play blended in the variety of children's other play contexts.
My data and observations of the children in the experimental group showed them
to be overall more creative and more collaborative. They often worked together, helped
each other and shared ideas. Often other children would stand behind and watch and
offer words of encouragement. They shared their knowledge and taught their peers how
to use the devices or how to use a particular app. The children were able to use these
more constructive apps to create their own content or digital artifact and led to the
interweaving of multiple languages or transference from one language of expression to
another.
As a result of the study I had hoped to understand more about the transferability of
digital and analogue languages to enhance learning in young children and this would
improve my work with the children. Bird suggests that educators need to consider and
provide apps that encourage imaginative play (Bird, p.90, 2012.). I think that this is not
enough, the apps need to allow for creativity and interweaving of languages, not just
imaginative play. I found that there were times that the children needed help to learn the
functions of the devices despite every child having had experience using an iPad or their
parents iPhone. At times children sought help to explain how to use a particular app,
from an adult or another child or discovered things for themselves through trial and
error. The touch screen affordance of the device allowed the children to easily manipulate
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 20
and interact with screen objects and create digital content. It seemed that the children's
level of engagement in digital play depended on the characteristics of the digital game at
hand. The study showed that young children are interested in, and are capable of,
engaging in such a sophisticated digital play as creating their own puppet show or
movie, with their own characters and their own story. However, this is not all that
surprising, if we think of the level of sophistication of children's traditional, spontaneous
make believe play, which is largely created by the children themselves. Puppet Pals and
Puppet Pals 2 proved to be an extremely popular app where the children can create a
puppet show as they select backgrounds and characters and manipulate these on the
stage as they record oral annotations which can be saved to a library that can be viewed
again. This app allowed the participants to engage in a complex make-‐believe play which
was supported by the technical features such as voice recording facilities, choice of the
characters and recording an individually created story and using the camera function of
the iPad to import images to create characters and scenery. The ability to be able to
retrieve previous creations appeared to be a strong affordance of the device.
After talking with the children about their previous experiences I discovered that
the children were all familiar with iPads and had access to devices at home. When asked
about what they preferred, or were encouraged by parents, to use the iPad for at home,
most responses were literacy or numeracy based gamiHied Apps, a few reported that
they loved to play Mine Craft. The observational and interview data suggested that the
children demonstrated a high level of motivation towards using iPads and were
consistently enthusiastic. The children showed themselves to be highly competent and
conHident users of these technologies in terms of locating, launching and operating the
apps and caring for the devices. After the intervention, when interviewed many of the
children from the control group explained that they would like to have the same games
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 21
at school, that they have at home, such as ‘Plants vs. Zombies’ and ‘Angry Birds’. In
comparison the children from the experimental group stated that they liked using the
iPad with their friends now and that they would like to be able to put the content that
they made onto the class blog so that their families could see what they were doing.
Their favourite app was Puppet Pals and Puppet Pals 2 because: they liked to record
their own stories with their friends; see each others stories; could make characters from
their friends photographs and liked the way the characters moved.
The results were shared with my colleagues within the Kindergarten grade level
and in other sections of the school. I had an ongoing dialogue with my colleagues about
the study and presented the Hindings at a grade level meeting. As a result of our
dialogues I am hopeful that teachers in Kindergarten and other grade levels will become
more thoughtful in selecting the apps installed on the class iPads to allow more
expression, rather than passive consumption.
From an early childhood educator’s perspective there is a notable absence of
constructive apps, which offer open-‐ended, learning and representation, in the
‘Education’ classiHication on iTunes. I would suggest that the suite of productivity apps
and tools that are automatically loaded onto the device, such as Photo Booth and the
camera and video functions allow for far more engagement and complexity of thinking
than many of the apps sold as educational. This research highlights the need for further
research examining children’s use of apps and the impact of pedagogical design on
learning. IPads can potentially be used by young children as tools for representing their
own understandings, producing their own knowledge, communicating their school
learning to the broader community, and making connections between home literacies
and those developed at school. New technologies as an opportunity for innovation,
which can empower students by putting the technology into their hands in support of
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 22
more self-‐directed learning, and by positioning students as active stakeholders in their
learning and producers of their own culturally signiHicant artifacts. As suggested by
Lynch, with technology and learning more generally, the impact depends largely on how
they are used (Lynch, 2006).
!!!
!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 23
References
!Banister, S. (2010). Integrating the iPod Touch in K-12 education: Visions and vices.
Computers in the Schools, 27(2), 121-131.
!Bird, J. (2012) The rabbit ate the grass! Exploring children’s activities on digital technologies
in an early childhood classroom. http://dlibrary.acu.edu.au/digitaltheses/public/adt-
acuvp391.25062013/02whole.pdf
!Edwards, C., Gandini, L. and Foreman, G. (Ed.) (2012) The Hundred Languages of
Children:The Reggio Experience in Transformation Praeger: California
!Gandini, L., Hill, L., Cadwell, L. and Schall, C. (Ed.)(2005) In the Spirit of the Studio,
Learning from the Atelier of Reggio Emilia Teachers College Press: New York
!Goodwin, K. & Highfield, K. (2012) iTouch and iLearn: An examination of ‘educational’
Apps. Paper presented at the Early Education and Technology for Children conference,
March 14-16, 2012, Salt Lake City, Utah. accessed on academa.edu
!Lynch J. (2006) Assessing Effects of Technology Usage on Mathematics Learning.
Mathematics Education Research Journal 18(3): 29–43.
!Marsh, J. (2010) Young children’s play in online virtual worlds. Journal of early childhood
research, 8 (1), 23-39.
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 24
!O’Mara J. and Laidlaw L. (2011) Living in the iWorld: Two Literacy Researchers
Reflect on the Changing Texts and Literacy Practices of Childhood. English Teaching:
Practice and Critique 10(4): 149–159.
!Parette, H.P, Quesenbury A.C. and Blum C. (2010) Missing the boat with technology usage in
early childhood settings: A 21st century of developmentally appropriate practise. Early
childhood Education Journal, 37, 335-343
!Plowman, L and Stephen, C. (2007) Guided interaction in pre-school settings. Journal of
computer assisted learning, 23(1) 14-26
!Verenikina, I. and Kervin, L. (2011) iPads digital play and preschoolers. (volume 2, number 5,
october 2011) He Kupu accessed through hekupu.ac.nz
!!!!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 25
APPENDIX A
The Weston Scale of Engagement
Observer:
Date:
Name of child/ children:
Time and duration of observation:
When observing the child’s / children’s explorations of the iPad, please consider to what
level you agree with the statements below.
!Strongly Agree 4
Agree !3
Disagree !2
Strongly Disagree
1The child is not easily distracted from his/ her deep concentration.
The child’s facial expression reveals ‘hard’ thinking.
The child shows prolonged motivation.
The child shows special care for their work and are attentive to detail.
The child displays a feeling of satisfaction with their achievements.
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 26
APPENDIX B
The Weston Rubric to Assess Complexity of Thinking
Name:
Date:
Time:
Brief description of child’s exploration:
Complexity of thinking for understanding demonstrated
4 3 2 1
Observing closely and describing what’s there
Analysed features of App
Described features of App
Noticed features of App
Located desired App with support
Wondering and asking questions
Asked questions and tried to independently Hind solutions to own questions in investigations of what App can be used for
Explored App independently and asked questions about what can be done with App
Explored App independently
Asked adult how to use App, did not initiate own explorations
Making connections Drew on past explorations in application of new ways to use App
Compared and contrasted previous explorations with Apps
Independently remembered how to use an App
Responded to suggestions on how to use App
Interweaving of languages
Intentional transfer of idea from i-‐pad App to another language to further reHinement and transferring/ combining another language of expression. (e.g. using AuraHlux to create backdrop to a mermaid story setting diorama, video retelling of story)
Self directed transferring of idea from i-‐pad App to another language of expression
As a result of discussions with an adult (or another child) transferred idea from App to another language. (e.g. creating an image on Drawing Pad and then recreating with materials on the light table)
Used one App
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 27
Building explanations
Independently predicted what might happen when used an App to create a way of expression and explained what they did and what they wanted to achieve.
Independently explained what they did and what they wanted to achieve when created a way of expression with App
With prompting explained what they intended to do with the App when they created a way of expression
Not yet able to suggest what their intention was when they used the App
Capturing the essence of the exploration
Made decisions independently about which Apps to use for desired form of expression, reHined ideas as needed.
With support made decisions about how to combine Apps or expressive languages
Independently and with intent chose an App to explore
With support chose an App to use
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 28
Appendix C
Apps on iPads before the intervention and left on the iPads for the Control Group:
1. Camera/ video
1. Photo Booth
2. Aura Flux
3. Epic Drum Kit
4. Art of Glow
5. Puppet Pals
6. Puppet Pals 2
7. Drawing Pad
8. Hooked on Phonics
9. Leapfrog Maths
10.Princess School
11.Play Home
12.Type Drawing
13.Handwriting
14.Rhymes
15.Spelling
16.Tic-‐Tac-‐Toe
17. Kindergarten Maths
18.IXL maths
19.123 tracing
20.Lets Create Pottery
21.Jack and the Beanstalk
22.Big Green Monster
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 29
23.Space Numbers
!!!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 30
Appendix D
Apps on iPads during intervention for the Experimental Group:
1. Camera/ video
2. Photo Booth
3. Aura Flux
4. Epic Drum Kit
5. Art of Glow
6. Puppet Pals
7. Puppet Pals 2
8. Drawing Pad
9. Book Creator
!
Engagement and complexity of thinking � 31
Appendix E
!http://www.hippasus.com/rrpweblog/archives/2013/10/02/
UnderstandingSAMR.pdf
!Ruben R. Puentedura, Ph.D.
!
�
Top Related