1
Young Children’s Knowledge-Building and Literacy Development
through Knowledge Forum®
Janette Pelletier, Richard Reeve & Cindy Halewood
Ontario Institute for Studies in Education of the University of Toronto
Address correspondence to: Janette Pelletier, PhD, Institute of Child Study, OISE/UT, 45 Walmer Road, Toronto, Ontario, Canada, M5R 2X2
Email:
Phone: 416-934-4506
Abstract
This study examined how the use of Knowledge Forum (KF)®, a networked, internet-based learning environment, was related to the literacy development of children in a 4-year old classroom in a laboratory school affiliated with OISE/University of Toronto. Junior K is not a common term in US. If you use “Kindergarten” only, it would cause confusion. I would suggest that you get rid of any reference to “kindergarten.”//. Over the course of the year, the children participated in a longitudinal photo journal project. With adult support, children posted their photo journals and ideas to Knowledge Forum in the form of electronic “notes,” which allowed children to view each other’s work and to build on ideas by posting their responses and comments. Results showed that children were motivated to read and to respond to the notes of their peers using invented spelling. Gender differences were found in the number and type of notes posted. Implications of the study were discussed regarding the motivation for literacy among boys and girls and the benefits for teachers and children in having electronic archives of literacy development in a comparison to a non-KF® class.
Knowledge Forum: Computer Technology for Kindergarten Knowledge-Building and Literacy Development //please consider my suggested title on the cover page//
Introduction
Given that Kindergarten children are increasingly exposed to computers in school, it is time for us to understand how technology in early childhood classrooms can serve the purpose of catapulting children’s learning to new heights. Rather than simply “use” their knowledge to write stories or fashion products, children now “build” knowledge in collaborative on-line environments that allow them access into each others’ and experts’ theory-building and problem-solving (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2003a). Yet, some contend that computer technology does not have a place in an early childhood class or may cause children to be bored or experience decline in literacy learning (Lankshear & Knobel, 2003). Others caution that starting children on computer technology at a very young age may cause a decline in children’s imaginative play (Miller, 2005). Nevertheless, many believe that young children can indeed profit from specific competencies that are developed through familiarity with computer technology (Calvert, Rideout, Woolard, Barr & Strousse, 2005; Haugland, 1992). However, in referring to computer technology, we must go beyond the simple realities of “having computers in the classroom” (Cohen, 2005) or using computers as a “benign addition” to the curriculum (Plowman & Stephen, 2003) to using technology in innovative ways such as telecommunication exchanges among young children (Cohen, 2005) and the development of new literacies for the knowledge generation (Wood, 2004). These new literacies range from multimedia, interactive websites, ICT or digital literacy (Plowman & Stephen, 2003) to recording theories and connecting children’s ideas so that the product becomes new knowledge (Hewitt & Scardamalia, 1998). Furthermore, research has shown other benefits of computer use in early childhood settings; as an example, the ERIC Resource Center cites a number of studies that show improvements in thinking, problem-solving, manual dexterity, creativity and verbal skills (ERIC, 2000).
In her reviews of Facer et al.’s (2003) book, ScreenPlay: Children and Computing in the Home and Holloway and Valentine’s (2003) book, Cyberkids: Children in the Information Age, Willett (2005) cautions us about oversimplifying both of these positions, that is, children’s facility (or lack thereof) with computers. Authors Facer et al. claim that there is no evidence that children are natural born experts vis-à-vis computer technology and claim that adults and children have different strengths when it concerns computers. Children may more readily access information and fashion artifacts, but adults have better judgment about the validity and usefulness of information that is obtained through this medium. This difference is important to the teacher’s role in facilitating “what” computer experiences children will have in school. It has been shown that children who have experience with computer software that facilitates and reinforces learning make notable gains in conceptual, language and dexterity skills (Calvert et al., 2005; Haugland, 1992). Yang & Liu (2005) showed that learning information literacy through the Learning Together approach helped Grade 3 students to design projects collaboratively. Although these points are well-taken, this article is less concerned with children’s use of programs and information accessed on computers and is more concerned with children’s use of computers as a shared “headspace”, a forum for depositing and reworking ideas in a sustained and creative way.
What is “Knowledge-Building”?//APA 5th uses Italic for Level 2 &3 headings//
Scardamalia & Bereiter (2003b) contrast the “soft skills” that are taught in schools to meet curriculum expectations – skills such as communication, thinking, and human relations – with ability for “innovation”, a requirement for success in the Knowledge Age. That is, we must meet the demands of society to have citizens who, in addition to having competent basic skills, will be prepared to share and extend ideas in order to solve complex problems and to fashion new products. Knowledge-building is concerned with the production of ideas that are sustained through continued improvement. Ideas become the focus of reflection, iteration and modification. Another contrast is made between “learning” – an unobservable change in belief, attitude or skill – and knowledge “building” – the creation of observable, public knowledge (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2003b). It is more than collaborative learning, which can mean learning together material that is already known; rather, it is about knowledge advancement.
All this may seem rather esoteric in its application to early childhood classrooms and yet, when considered in the simple context of responding to photographs in an electronic journal format, we can begin to see the roots of how young children can advance their own and others’ knowledge via a community platform. By making their views public, children open their ideas to reflection, feedback and modification by others. Knowledge, written down, becomes “objective” and revisable (Olson & Bruner, 1996).
Knowledge-Building and Social Constructivism in Early Childhood
The principle of knowledge-building in early childhood does not differ from knowledge-building in later childhood; that is, more sophisticated understandings about what is learned and how it is learned are “built” as children ask and answer authentic questions on a shared computer database. The classroom community is created by a belief system and support structures that encourage shared learning environments. Rogoff et al’s notion of a community of learners (Rogoff, Matusov & White, 1996) or Vygotsky’s notion of social constructivism (Vygotsky, 1978) are examples of the social importance in learning. Case’s (1996) description of social constructivism provides an appropriate foundation for the consideration of technology and knowledge-building. With reference to Vygotsky’s contribution to this perspective, children’s thought is seen in light of its biological and its cultural evolution (Case, 1996, p. 80); that is, humans have language, they fashion tools for thought and work and they have institutions to perpetuate their cultural innovations and beliefs. In this view the importance of the social context is realized through language and social interaction. Language helps direct children’s attention and organizes their thinking. As children mature, they internalize the language and thinking of their culture. The role of the teacher is critical in supporting, “scaffolding” or helping children “build” thinking through language (Vygotsky, 1962). Teachers create a learning environment that allows for discussion and shared understanding. Curriculum implications relate to use of time, space and materials to allow for this (XXXX, 1996) //unmask these citations// including the use of the computer as a “tool” that “mediates the human experience” (Wood, 1994, p. 24). Teachers and peers operate within what Vygotsky termed the “zone of proximal development”, allowing the learner to be supported to understand more than she would on her own. To extend this line of thinking to technology, scaffolds are “built in” to assist children, or to reach children within their ZPD (Hyun & Davis, 2005). When children are working together with the assistance of supportive technology, they are in essence building knowledge collectively. This type of classroom environment, facilitated by linked network technology is known as a knowledge-based learning community (Hewitt, 2004). Its purpose is to improve ideas and as a result, to build new knowledge (Scardamalia & Bereiter, 2003a). Knowledge-building assumes that the learner brings theories to bear on her surroundings, including for example, what she sees and hears. A knowledge-building community, including a virtual one, can provide prompts, or “scaffolds” to help children articulate and refine their ideas. The power of technology, in the form of the shared database, is in its capacity to store and organize these ideas. For example, children’s ideas about why some things float or sink or why leaves change color, can be clustered into groups which become an organizational framework for investigation and further theory-building. Children’s ideas are archived for later use, such as comparing what one knows now to what one thought earlier. Children come to understand what knowledge they create and how knowledge is constructed – an authentic example of constructivist learning. Teachers have records of children’s knowledge construction, records that provide rich fodder for reflective practice and research.
Knowledge Forum®: Technology for Knowledge-Building
Knowledge Forum® is a networked, internet-based environment in which students create notes that are then available to all participants in the community (Scardamalia, 2002). //can you provide an URL and an example?// Other students can “build on” if they have something to add or wish to request clarification. The build-on notes appear as linked rectangles with visible note titles. Only the author/s of each note can modify their own notes. Authors can highlight important “keywords” and create pictures and diagrams with their notes to further explain their ideas. Each note is titled and automatically displayed in the “view” along with other notes. The classroom database may include many separate views to help organize notes. Teachers have observed that motivation is heightened when the creation of each view comes from student suggestions during class meetings. Views are titled and may contain a background illustration. Links from one view to others’ views aid navigation within the database; that is, a visible line connects the notes to show that new information has been added on. All of these features are designed so that teachers can turn over control to their students, thereby facilitating the transference of creating knowledge from teacher to student.
Knowledge Forum® and Photo Journals in Kindergarten
In the Laboratory School at the Institute of Child Study, OISE/University of Toronto, Knowledge Forum® has been in use for 9 years at the Grades 1 – 6 levels (see Caswell & Lamon, 1998; Messina, Reeve & Scardamalia, 2003; Moreau, 2001; Reeve & Lamon, 1998, for teachers’ examples of Knowledge Forum® classroom teaching and research). For example, the Grade 4 teacher carried out an in-class research project on the study of light over a 3-year period. In Year 1, students used KF® to record their own investigations but did not build on to others’ notes. In Year 2 students formed interest groups and built on to each others’ notes within their groups. In Year 3, students did not form groups but rather participated in knowledge building with everyone else. Assessments of the three cohorts’ knowledge of light showed increases in understanding over the three years, suggesting to the teacher that the larger knowledge-building community led to greater gains by the children. This approach was then successfully implemented in Grade 1 (MacDonald, 2001), and the question arose as to whether Knowledge Forum® could be successfully employed in classrooms of even younger children. Would the children catch on to the idea of entering their theories on a shared database? Would they have the conceptual and fine motor skills to carry out tasks that required a keyboard and writing? The Kindergarten teacher decided to take this question on as an action research project, one that grew into the school-university partnership study reported here.
The impetus for this study was a photo journal project taking place in the Kindergarten class at the Institute of Child Study Laboratory School in Toronto. A similar project was taking place in a partner Kindergarten class at a similar university laboratory school in the United States (USLS). The children in both classes were engaged in writing about digital photos that were taken throughout the school day. The intent was to promote children’s writing in the context of reflecting about their own experiences, since children are more inclined to write about what is familiar to them (Haneda & Wells, 2000). The photographs also provided a way to include parents in the kindergarten experience, because young children do not always share what happens in a day with their parents. To that end, photo journals provide both documentation of writing and a record of what happens in a day. Photo journal projects are characteristic of what has become known as the “Reggio” approach; that is, long-term projects that employ digital cameras, videotapes and electronic documentation (Trepanier-Street, Hong & Bauer, 2001). In the project described here, children chose from dozens of photos and included them in their photo journals. They either wrote about them using their emerging knowledge of phonics or they had their ideas scribed for them by an adult. The adult assisted children, if asked, to read the entries of other children. Initial pictures were about school life-on the playground, eating lunch, free play, etc. As the children ventured deeper into discovery, pictures were taken of science experiments, field trips, or answers to questions the children were asking (such as what happens when icy snow and icy mud come inside). However, the goal for the project remained the same: to promote early literacy in a way that was both meaningful and developmentally appropriate for young children. It is noteworthy that “literacy” is naturally associated with reading and writing skills that are taught in school; yet as Plowman and Stephen (2003) note, traditional literacy skills may not be directly transferable to or from computer technology. Thus the question arose as to whether these traditional literacy skills would transfer in this context. Children at the ICS Laboratory School employed Knowledge Forum®, that is, they entered their ideas about the photographs onto the Knowledge Forum® database and “built on” to each others’ ideas (see Figure 1). //Consider: use one tree from Fig 1 as an example to briefly talk about how they build each other ideas. Where did Figure 1 come from? From the project reported here or a different project. Can you provide URL for more information//
//please move all figures/tables to pages after references. One figure/table a page. In the text, indicate where you want to place them. For example://
< Insert Figure 1 Here>
Figure 1. Children’s knowledge building notes on Knowledge Forum®
Research Question
We were interested to know whether and how //do you look at “how?// the Knowledge Forum® technology might contribute to children’s literacy learning. Since a longitudinal study of reading was taking place in the ICS Laboratory School at the time (see XXX, 2005), we decided to employ some of the same pre/post methodology to examine change in the Kindergarten children’s literacy development. //consider proposing some specific hypothesis or questions here//
A gender related question was based on the ICS teacher/s’ observations of boys and girls in the class. Boys, who in general were less likely to voluntarily take part in literacy activities in their play and free time activity, appeared to be interested in looking at what other children had written and in writing on the KF® database. Given the boys’ preference for non-literacy activity in class, the question of gender difference was explored in the research study. Certainly there has been research to suggest that by later grades, boys have greater computer literacy than girls (Christensen, Knezek & Overall, 2005; Hackbarth, 2002). In the early grades, girls typically engage in more computer “work” whereas boys engage in more video-gaming (Clayton, 2003). We were interested to know whether knowledge building using photographs and classmates’ ideas might appeal to boys and whether they might make as many entries as girls on the database.