Beyond the Binary of Adult Versus Child Centered Learning: Pedagogies of Joint Activity in the Context of Making

Vossoughi, Shirin; Davis, Natalie; Jackson, Ava; Echevarria, Ruben; Munoz, Arturo; Escudé, Meg

doi:10.1080/07370008.2020.1860052

Cited by 47 publications

(37 citation statements)

References 64 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…We recognise that we are offering these recommendations in a context where educational technologies are big business and where binaries (child needs vs. adult needs) are preferable due to their perceived simplicity and thus, enhanced consumer appeal (Vossoghi et al, 2021). The market for technologies for educational purposes has been steadily growing and is expected to grow from 85.5 billion (USD) in 2020 to 181.3 billion in 2025 (Markets Insider, 2020).…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…As part of self‐determination, learners may be encouraged to set goals, make plans, maintain meta‐cognitive awareness and evaluate progress (Zimmerman & Risemberg, 1997). Personalisation and these related concepts have been associated with student‐centred movements, which actively work to set up a false binary between child and adult needs, thus removing the intergenerational component from teaching and minimising the role of joint literacy activities (Vossoghi et al, 2021). Instead, the developmental needs of children and the resources of adults who are providing the experiences should be acknowledged when considering when and in what circumstances children are positioned to benefit from choices of pace, place and path; moreover, “choices” for children are a matter of social negotiation because children live in families with caregivers who have rules and preferences for them and children often share devices, bandwidth and living space with others.…”

Section: From Biological Personalising Processes To Modern Conceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Personalising digital learning for young children: Leveraging psychosocial identities and Techne for literacy development

Rice

Cun

2021

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Children learn literacies as social practices in context. Increasingly, these contexts include technological tools. Moreover, children engage with psychosocial identity tasks that involve more than cognitive growth. With the rapid rise in digital personalisation, there is a need to consider ways to ensure that digital technologies attend to literacies using understandings about psychosocial development. In this paper, we share ideas from Erik Erikson about the psychosocial tasks children must achieve in their communities from infancy and we relate these to literacy. The psychosocial tasks are trust, autonomy, initiative and industry. We explain how digital personalisation efforts might contribute to holistic psychosocial development that are also supportive of expansive literacies. Then, we make three recommendations for enhancing the digital personalisation efforts. These include attending to identity tasks, considering multiple types of growth simultaneously and involving multiple systems (eg, parents, caregivers and community) in planning, implementing and evaluating personalised instructional materials for young children. What is already known Personalisation is a concept centred on meeting learners' individual needs. Digital personalisation tools and practices for young children have not fully leveraged unique aspects of childhood versus other phases of life. What this paper adds Digital personalisation processes for young children can be enhanced through psychosocial considerations within social contexts, particularly for literacy learning. Psychosocial developmental theories offer new ways to think about how to involve parents and other caregivers in digital personalisation processes. Implications for practice Planners, implementers and evaluators of digital personalised instructional materials should tether their efforts to psychosocial identity tasks. Planners, implementers and evaluators should also consider ways to layer multiple types of learning (cognitive, social and psychological) within identity tasks. Planners, implementers and evaluators should work to include multiple support systems (parents, educators and communities) in their efforts to personalise digital activities and materials.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Section: From Biological Personalising Processes To Modern Conceptionsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Personalising digital learning for young children: Leveraging psychosocial identities and Techne for literacy development

Rice

Cun

2021

Brit J Educational Tech

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The establishment of these two perceptual channels-visual imagery of embodied interactions and multivocal observer comments-began to train our collective eyes and ears on the specific qualities of generative and constraining interactions, and surfaced problems of practice in new ways. For example, the subtle differences between pedagogical stances that supported joint activity and those that reverted to more didactic models were an ongoing point of dialogue (Vossoughi et al 2021). As seen in the following excerpt, collective attention to embodied actions offered new insight into how this tension manifests and the ways pedagogical moves involving the body may support or contradict the intent of verbal assistance.…”

Section: Beginnings: Experiments In Ethnographic Representationmentioning

confidence: 96%

“…For each image, we discussed the pedagogical affordances of the configuration, asked the educator who was present to contextualize the interaction, and considered what this type of assistance might feel like for the kids. This helped us move away from narrow binaries (adult vs. child-centered learning) or maxims ("students should have their hands on the project at all times"; Vossoughi et al 2021). Instead, the photographs and conversations helped us identify a more nuanced range of assistance practices and to elevate the generative forms of embodied action already present within the setting (Engeström 2011).…”

Section: Excerpt 6: Field Note 03/31/14mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…We argue that how this group of educators learned to see (methodology) was closely tied to what we learned to see (axiology) and how we learned to move based on that perception (pedagogy). Attending to the meanings associated with various configurations of hands, eyes, and voices emerged as a way to wrestle with recurring pedagogical tensions (such as the "pendulum swing" between adult and child centered models of learning [Paradise et al 2014]) and the ways these tensions intersect with broader social inequities (Vossoughi et al 2021).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Pedagogical “Hands and Eyes”: Embodied Learning and the Genesis of Ethical Perception

Vossoughi¹,

Escudé

Kitundu

et al. 2021

Anthropology & Edu Quarterly

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Drawing from a range of ethnographic information gathered within a participatory design project on after-school learning and educational justice, this paper describes the new ways of seeing and relating that emerged when researchers and educators "examined the obvious" (Erickson 1973/84) and closely analyzed the embodied-physical, gestural, artifact-mediated-dimensions of learning interactions. As participants co-analyzed field notes, photographs and video recordings of educatorstudent interactions during making and tinkering activities, they began to notice the forms of embodied assistance that cultivated or stifled rich forms of joint activity and consider the subjective meanings this layer of experience held for participants. This emergent lens was shared through various forms of professional development and gave life to a sustained practice of intentionality and reflective intuition among educators. Our analyses contribute to prior research on embodiment by tracing the emergence of "hands and eyes" (as it was referred to by participants) as a form of ethical perception and considering how educators learned to revise their embodied actions to organize more generative learning experiences with children. [Embodiment, Learning, Pedagogy, Educational Justice] When I first started…I had my hands on it, I would do it for them…[now] I'll like come in and like give them some advice or I'll kinda like explain it to them like: oh I had this same problem and then this is how I fixed it. And they'll go off of that, but they'll make this awesome new idea of it. And it'll be like, I would never have thought of that… And now, the way I actually think is like their creativity is more than mine. Seriously, like their minds just like come up with so many awesome things. Why would you want to stop that creativity that they have?…I feel like at the beginning when I was brand new to this, I wouldn't allow them to do any more than what I knew how to do. (Interview, Oct 2014)-James 1 , Young adult educator, Tinkering Afterschool Program

show abstract

Characterizing engineering outreach educators' talk moves: An exploratory framework

Miel

Swanson

Portsmore

et al. 2023

J of Engineering Edu

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Background: Despite the prevalence and potential of K-12 engineering outreach programs, the moment-to-moment dynamics of outreach educators' facilitation of engineering learning experiences are understudied. There is a need to identify outreach educators' teaching moves and to explore the implications of these moves. Purpose/Hypothesis: We offer a preliminary framework for characterizing engineering outreach educators' teaching moves in relation to principles of ambitious instruction. This study describes outreach educators' teaching moves and identifies learning opportunities afforded by these moves.Design/Method: Through discourse analysis of video recordings of a university-led engineering outreach program, we identified teaching moves of novice engineering outreach educators in interaction with elementary student design teams. We considered 18 outreach educators' teaching moves through a lens of ambitious instruction.Results: In small group interactions, outreach educators used ambitious, conservative, and inclusive teaching moves. These novice educators utilized talk moves that centered students' ideas and agency. Ambitious moves included two novel teaching moves: design check-ins and revoicing tangible manifestations of students' ideas. Ambitious moves offered students opportunities to engage in engineering design. Conservative moves provided opportunities for students to make technical and affective progress, and to experience engineering norms.Conclusions: Our work is formative in describing engineering outreach educators' teaching moves and points to outreach educators' capability in using ambitious moves. Ambitious engineering instruction may be a useful framework for designing engineering outreach to support students' participation and progress in engineering design. Additionally, conservative teaching moves, typically considered constraining, may support productive student affect and engagement in engineering design.

show abstract

Beyond the Binary of Adult Versus Child Centered Learning: Pedagogies of Joint Activity in the Context of Making

Cited by 47 publications

References 64 publications

Personalising digital learning for young children: Leveraging psychosocial identities and Techne for literacy development

Personalising digital learning for young children: Leveraging psychosocial identities and Techne for literacy development

Pedagogical “Hands and Eyes”: Embodied Learning and the Genesis of Ethical Perception

Characterizing engineering outreach educators' talk moves: An exploratory framework

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About