Bronfenbrenner´s Ecological Systems Theory

The experience in the activity plan above is supported by several contemporary theoretical perspectives. The first of which is that play occurs within a context. Child care sits inside Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Systems theory (1979) and gives contextual emphasis on children’s learning (Docket & Fleer, 1999). The first part of the system, the Microsystem, involves the child gaining socially and linguistically through interaction with immediate social networks, including home and family. The model encourages caregivers and family to take note of how a child’s surroundings impact them and vice versa. Also, to recognise that communication from parent to caregiver or teacher and back again promotes positive development of the care each stakeholder

provides to children (Nixon & Gould, 1996. Pg 14-16). This collaboration between family and caregivers can help to subtract from the feelings of tension that can result from changes in environment or moving to completely different environment like from home to starting school, for example (Docket & Fleer, 1999).

When one considers the interrelation of ideas from Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model (1979), between the Microsystem through to the exosystem, they will see that children may take what they have seen from shops or the bank or ATM in the way of machines and relate that to how to create a robot and for what purpose, like its job for example (Docket & Fleer, 1999). This subject matter could lead to extending the box construction activity to the topic of machines and then extend further again to work vehicles like building trucks and emergency services vehicles. Ideas can be gained from families by way of questionaries, parent input forms and suggestion boxes. This information could include support in the form of a helping hand in basic play situation, excursions or even a talk given from someone who works in an industry where they use robots. Materials from someone’s home or work are very supportive and go a long way to contributing to the children’s environment and play based learning experiences.

Each and every child who participates in the robot creating discussion will have a different inspiration, therefore, a different design in mind. This is because ‘the context of play is influenced by the individual players and the development and experience they bring with them to the play’, as stated by Docket & Fleer (1999). They go on to say that all the people in the diverse environments children are expose to can encourage different kinds of play and that the child influences their own play as well (Docket & Fleer, 1999). The direction of play in the robot construction will be determined by each individual but also, shaped by the whole as it is in small groups of 5-6 children in each group. The social resources that children derive from their social networks at home, school and around the world, determine the character and course of play as everyone’s input will bring about an end result (Docket & Fleer, 1999).

The Early Years Learning Framework, hereby known as EYLF, supports children’s development by recognising the need for children to develop a strong sense of identity and wellbeing, an understanding that they are part of a whole and can contribute to the world and the confidence to be proactive learner and effective communicator (EYLF, 2009).

The box construction activity looks at outcome 4.1, 4.2 and 4.3 by encouraging investigation and hypothesising through imagination and creativity to develop perseverance toward the satisfaction of completing a task. This is done through providing this preschool group with the opportunity to verbally contribute to the how’s, what’s and why’s of the robot construction activity. Each small group involved will bring his or her knowledge into the design and construction of their robot. Outcome 4.3 will be evident when considering the Letter Land book and CD. The letter ‘R r’ is part of the reason this activity has come about. Each child can gain the understanding of the correlation between the red robot story and the robot creation activity because they are able to say the words starting with the ‘Rrrr’ sound. They can apply generalisations from one situation to the other, from a story to construction. They will also use the knowledge gained during the activity in different contexts, in care, at home or at the shop because they may recognise the letter ‘R r” written somewhere and associate it with what was learnt at school or care (Eggan &

Kauchak, 2010).

Communication will play a key part in each group determining the design of their robot and the design will constitute some of each child’s knowledge about robots and their creative ideas. Therefore, each child needs to be encouraged to share their ideas during the group time so that other children can choose to agree or disagree during the planning and construction of their group’s robot. This is why the group time section of the activity is so important. It provides all the children with the opportunity to contribute as they are given the chance to confidently describe their ideas.

According to the socio-cultural theory of development, Vygotsky believed that thinking was the direct result of social interaction (Eggan & Kauchak, 2010). The children in each group will bounce ideas off of each other, giving meaning to this statement. From a basic idea of sticking boxes together, ideas will change and add more to the design while the children work. The robot may need eyes, buttons and antennas. These ideas will have been gained from past experiences in the home and in care and will promote the children’s thought processes. Social interaction will encourage a more diverse understanding of what could be done and how it could be done. The children in each group will feed off each other’s suggestions and the children in other groups will also benefit from other groups input, providing a cultural exchange of ideas (Eggan & Kauchak, 2010).

In the Western World, the culture of play these days is about making learning enjoyable through play (Nixon & Gould, 1996). Nixon and Gould also mention that before theorist like Locke, Rousseau and Piage, child development was based on the importance of childhood learning to later adult life (1996). This is not the case now. These times dictate that early childhood education is all about enjoyment. Enjoyment in learning opens up more possibilities to children as their interests are acknowledged.

The age of the children that this activity will be delivered is 4-5 years old, being the preschool age. Developmentally, this age group ought to be able to take part in both the discussion and design and construction of robots because children of this age are in the preoperational stage in Piage’s stages of cognitive development. Nixon and Gould reveal that “children use language and their highly developed imagination to extend their thinking abilities and understanding of the world around them (Nixon & Gould, 1996. Pg 7). Children in this stage have not left behind their skills from the sensorimotor stage. They still use their senses and adapt and develop them according to new schemas learnt when ensuring equilibrium as developmental milestones are achieved (Eggan & Kauchak, 2010). Not only will this activity be discussed, but, the children involved will attempt to choose collage and glue and tape parts together to make their robot come to life.

Managing play means to build a learning experience by providing tools, materials, a prepared environment, a plan of the activity and the staff support required and the organisation of these is necessary before providing an educational activity. Time and space allocation is part of managing play as the more comprehensive the play, the more adequate time and space is required (Docket & Fleer, 1999).

For this activity, an indoor environment can be provided with enough time and space allocated to ensure that exploration of this exercise is sufficient.

A 10-20 minute group time is all that would be required. Although, I have personally sat with children for this exact type of group time discussing things like cooking or making play dough. A group time mat with an easel, paper and colourful texters will help to guide the discussion that gains input from the children. Another 30-40 minutes would be sufficient time for children to take to play around to create their robot. When taking part in the construction, each group will have a table to play at with all the necessary materials to get creative at each table (Docket & Fleer, 1999). Paint, coloured pencils, glue, tape and collage pieces including things like bottle tops and corks that have been collected from carers and families over a few weeks as well as boxes from a parent that works in a packing firm will be provided. These materials can always be sourced from parents given enough time before the activity is to

commence.

The interaction of the carers in the room would be all about getting the children’s ideas and encouraging, through open ended questions, what it is they want to use and what they want to do to achieve the goal set for them. This is part of facilitating play which means to arbitrate play that occurs. This is referred to as taking an active role in play by Docket & Fleer (1999). This type of interaction is always available for but not necessarily used all the time. It is used when children are struggling physically or emotionally to accomplish something, when guidance is required. It is also used as a means of conflict resolution and when children are clearly in danger of hurting either themselves or someone else, however intentionally or unintentionally it is occurring (Docket & Fleer, 1999). When assisting in play, educators must take note of what is going on during play by acknowledging all aspects of any discrepancy whilst making certain that the focus is on the act and not on the personalities of the children involved (Docket & Fleer, 1999). It is also important for to understand that, particularly older children who have language to use, that carers try to use every opportunity to encourage involvement from the children concerned to be able to tell understand and explain what is it that is no ok and how this issue could be fixed or changed. Outcome 5 of the EYLF works toward encouraging children to be effective communicators and is used during interaction with children.

To observe the goings on during the activity, a combination of anecdotal and running record photo formats could be used. This would depict a great idea of where everyone’s involvement stands because the photo evidence will demonstrate each observed child’s expression, which will portray his or her emotions, telling how they felt when they were taking part in the activity, therefore, showing their interests. The running record will give evidence of the child’s language and its context. Anecdotal records help us to revisit how a child did something, while focussing on each individual aspect, like how a glue brush was help, for example. Notes would be required to be taken to ascertain whether or not the activity worked well or needs changing. No planned experience is without the need for any changes. There is always room for improvement, particularly when it is due to the developmental level of a child or children. The observations made on the children would be developed from the focus group for that week, plus any other observations taken on random children regardless of them not belonging to the focus group of that particular week.