EMC305 Learning experience plan
docx
keyboard_arrow_up
School
Charles Sturt University *
*We aren’t endorsed by this school
Course
305
Subject
English
Date
Jan 9, 2024
Type
docx
Pages
10
Uploaded by SuperSandpiper2461
1.
Part 1: Context for the play- based observations
This observation is collected from a family day care setting where I work as an educator. The parents of the children at this family day care service have culturally diverse backgrounds and they are working parents. I have chosen Ella, Kelly, John, and Cony as my focus children because they are similar ages between two to three years. These children attend the service from Monday to Wednesday so there is more opportunity to observe and implement my planning for them. Ella is a two and a half-year-old girl and Kelly is three-year-old girl. They like to engage in dramatic play
most of the day, and they are very enthusiastic to learn whatever I offer them. Cony is a three-year-old and John is a two-year-old boy. They are always busy exploring various activities however focus on each activity for a short span of time. Their speech has not fully developed yet so they tend to play physically rather than communicating verbally. They usually play with cars, trucks, and blocks. These children often share toys together and the children follow each other around to different activities; therefore, it will be effective to teach them with a focused learning activity based off their common interests.
2.
Part 2 Summary of the children’s interest, the Bishop’s mathematical activities, the 5Es and the mathematic concepts evident in their play
From my observation, the children were interested in shapes, colours, and blocks. The children engaged in Bishop’s six mathematical activities
(
MacDonald & Rafferty, 2015, p. 21) whilst playing with blocks and shapes. Cony, John, and Aiden connected Duplo block pieces vertically and horizontally and they compared the height and the length of their block towers, then Cony added more block pieces one by one to make his tower the tallest. According to Macmillan (2009, p. 22), it is evident that the children were engaged in Bishop’s processes such as playing
, counting
, measuring
, designing
, and locating
. The
three children compared the size of their block towers then Cony identified that his tower was the tallest. The children measured
the three block buildings then they explained
that Cony’s tower was the tallest. 1
The children demonstrated emergent understanding of measurement by comparing each block building and identified the tallest one. Clements and Stephan (2004, cited in MacDonald & Rafferty, 2015 p. 102) argue that children begin to understand the concept of measurement from a young age even though they cannot measure objects by certain unit yet. Cony showed that he compared three different block buildings then he recognised the differences of the block towers by their heights. During this process, the children developed the concept of conversation, comparing, length and height (Montague-Smith & Price, 2012, p. 145-173). When the children stacked the block pieces one by one, they could learn one to one principle (Montague-Smith & Price, 2012, pp. 23-51), adding and subtracting (Montague-Smith
& Price, 2012, pp. 23-51). During this process they could learn science concepts which were gravity, balance, weight, and stability (Writer, 2014, July). The technology the children used for their learning was blocks. The blocks enabled the children to gain measuring, designing, locating, gravity, balance, and problem-solving skills.
When the children explored different two-dimensional shapes, they engaged in Bishop’s mathematical activities by playing
with shape magnetic stamps,
designing
different two-dimensional shapes on the board, and locating
three-dimensional shape pieces into a shape sorting ball. They also engaged in 5Es model (Primary connections, 2008) whilst playing with two dimensional shapes. Kelly, Ella, Cony and John engaged
in playing with shapes and colour. Kelly and Ella explored
magnetic shape stamps on a magnetic board. They explained that the shape they made was a ‘yellow star’ and a ‘red heart’. When the other boys joined in, the four children elaborated
their learning further to three-dimensional shapes. They evaluated
their learning about two-dimensional shapes whilst playing with a Tupperware shape ball as they put three-dimensional shapes into two-dimensional shape hole. Two- to three-year-old children can recognise and identify various shapes and related
concepts (Montague-Smith & Price, 2012, cited in MacDonald & Rafferty, 2015, p. 80). Kelly, Ella, John, and Cony are aged between two to three years old, and they practiced and displayed their spatial reasoning
(MacDonald & Rafferty, 2015, p. 81) while playing with the magnetic shape stamps and the Tupperware shape ball. The 2
children have learnt to identify two dimensional shapes using the magnetic shape stamps. With the Tupperware shape ball, the children practiced their spatial relationship
(Stelzer, 2005, pp. 161-177) during the process of finding the matching two-dimensional shape hole using three-dimensional shape pieces. While the children played with the magnetic board and stamps, they learnt about attributes of magnets (Harlan & Rivkin, 2012, pp. 53-74) as the magnetic pen and magnetic stamps left marks on the board. The children learnt a mechanism of Tupperware shape ball when they tried to open it by pulling two handles together forcefully. The technologies that the children used which were magnetic shape stamps and the Tupperware shape ball supported the children’s learning of shapes, spatial awareness, magnetism, and mechanism.
Learning experience plan
1.
Date of planned experience
22
nd
of May 2023
2.
Learning Focus
The children will learn to recognize and identify two-dimensional shapes.
3.
Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) Learning Outcome
The children will be learning about mathematical concepts such as geometric shapes
and spatial visualization. To achieve these learning concepts, the children will be manipulating various shaped objects and they will experiment and investigate two dimensional shapes from three dimensional shapes. An educator will encourage the children to learn mathematical vocabulary and they will use the vocabulary to describe two dimensional shapes. During this learning experience, the children will be able to achieve problem solving, inquiry, experimentation and investigating skills; therefore, learning outcome 4.2 (Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE], 2022, p. 53) is relevant to my mathematical learning focus.
3
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
4.
Set up and resources
Kearns (2016, p. 254) discusses that young children experience play environments through their senses and children’s mood and behaviours greatly affected by the physical environment. Therefore, play environments should be appealing from a child’s perspective and support children’s learning based on their interest and abilities as children learn best when experiences are interest-based (DEEWR, 2009, as cited in Kearns, 2016, p. 255). This learning experience will require the following resources: a two-dimensional shape poster, two shape sorting boxes, two shape puzzles, playdough with two-dimensional shape cutters and shape stamps, coloured paper shape cut outs (circle, oval, square, rectangle and triangle) and glue with brushes. Three activity tables and chairs will be needed, and these activities will be located indoors. For table one there will be a two-dimensional shape poster, two shape sorting boxes and two shape puzzles. For table two, there will be playdough with two-dimensional shape cutters and shape stamps. For table three, there will be coloured paper cut outs, glue pots with brushes and papers. The social constructivist
learning environment allows children to access resources freely and setting are designed to be as flexible as possible (Chaille &Britain, 2003, as cited in Elwick, 2023a). Therefore, table one and two will be placed close together for children to get easy access to similar learning resources. This setting also enables educators to pick up on teachable moments more easily. Table three will be located nearby a craft
material stand so that the children can get access to any craft material they need to add on their shape collage. 5.
Details of the planned experience – what is it and what will you do?
This learning experience is for the children to explore two dimensional shapes whilst
they are engaging with shape sorting toys, shape puzzles, playdough shape cutters and shape stamps. The children can extend their learning through a creative experience from the activity on table three. An educator can encourage the children to reflect on different shapes they see in their environment such as a house with a triangle roof, rectangle door and square windows. This process enables children to develop their spatial visualisation skills. 4
The children can then use shape cut outs to make the environmental shape they had
in mind. When the children engage with shape sorting balls and shape puzzles, an educator should find teachable moments to explain about different shapes. An educator can use a shape poster and teach the children how each shape looks different using mathematical vocabulary such as angle, side, and length.
Leoni et al. (2017, p. 338) states that when an educator plans a learning experience, they should consider balancing between child guided and adult guided experiences and that an adult’s role in adult guided experiences is taking an active role in children’s play as a participant and guiding them when they need support. An educator should sit with the children at the activity table, show how to explore shape sorting balls and puzzles and explain about different shapes. When the children have a difficulty with the given activities, an educator should support the children to find a solution at their own pace. Kearns (2016, pp. 245-249) suggests that an educator should be a role model, play partner, a supporter, and an information giver. For this focus learning experience play, an educator should not only demonstrate how to engage in the new play setting but also play with the children to support and help their new learning and discovery. When the children cannot figure out how to put a shape piece into a matching hole, an educator can encourage them by saying “this shape is a bit tricky, but you can turn it around and it
might fit in, can you try?” or “a rectangle has longer sides than a square. Do you want to try rectangle shape into longer side hole?” MacDonald and Rafferty (2015, p. 26) argue that an educator should ask questions to the children to find a solution to their challenge and must give time to the children to think further. If the children cannot recognise a pentagon puzzle from a hexagon, then the educator should ask questions whether they can identify any difference between the two shapes. The educator should wait for their reply and give another question to further their learning. Shape sorting balls, shape puzzles, playdough cutters and shape stamps are used for technologies for Bishop’s mathematical learning process (MacDonald & Rafferty, 2015, p. 21). Whilst the children are exploring these technologies, firstly the children
would engage in counting
by putting shape pieces into the shape ball one by one 5
and cutting shapes out of playdough then counting how many they are. Secondly, the children would engage in measuring
by comparing different lengths and sides of shapes. Thirdly, they would engage in designing by making shapes using paper cuts and playdough. The children would also engage in playing
with the activities they were given. Lastly, the children would engage in explaining
by naming what two dimensional shapes they cut out from playdough or shape stamps they made. These technologies enable the children to engage in scientific learning processes through 5Es (MacDonald & Rafferty, 2015, p. 24) as well. The children would show their interest and ask questions while they play with the technologies through the engaging
process. When they find difficulties, they would figure out ways to solve the problems by the exploring process. The children would understand the difference of each shape and they can identify each shape by the explaining
process.
When the children cut out shapes using playdough cutters, they might experiment to put two shapes together to form different shapes such as two triangles form a square or two squares form a rectangle. During this elaborating
process the children
will be able to extend their learning and review their understandings. Throughout learning experiences, an educator should collect information regarding children’s learning about shapes. Elwick (2023b) shares that the Early Years Learning Framework guides educators to use various strategies to interpret children’s learning
and should be able to explain their progress, strength, and skills. When an educator engages in the activities with the children, they will observe what the children will learn from the activities. An educator can make notes, take pictures, and watch how the children interact with other children during the experience then they will be able
to analyse how much learning focus the children achieves. If the focus children all achieve the learning outcomes, the educator can move on to extending children’s interests but if there are any challenges the children had, the educator can plan for further learning experiences to support these areas. 6.
Plan for review
6
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
An educator should expect the children to recognize and identify two dimensional shapes; therefore, the children should be able to name each shape, and find matching shape holes on the shape sorting ball and matching the shape puzzle. An educator should be aware of the level of each child’s understandings prior to the new learning experience then they are able to evaluate how much mathematical concepts the children have achieved after the learning experiences. These learning experiences have planned for the children to achieve mathematical concepts throughout the process of engaging with technologies and activities given. The children will be able to recognize any two-dimensional shapes they see from the environment, and they will be able to name them. During this process the children will develop skills of investigating, experimenting and problem solving at their own pace. Therefore, the learning outcome 4.2 (AGDE, 2022, p. 53) will be achieved. The main teaching strategy of an educator acting as a role model, play partner and a supporter to guide learning within their play will enable the children to gain knowledge of two-dimensional shape awareness by the end of the experience. Part 4: Reflections and future practice
Prior to this unit, I expected to learn how to teach maths, science, and technology in a child-friendly way; however, it turned out to be a whole new way of conceptualising children’s play. MacDonald and Rafferty (2015, p. 16) state that educators must understand that children learn concepts through powerful processes. Since I studied about the learning processes, I can view children’s play in detail, and I realized that observation is critically important to analyse children’s learning processes. According to Chaille and Britain (2003, p. 20), children are born as scientists, and they will have their own experimentation and problem-solving process through play. I can now identify that children do construct their own learning during their play, and I will need to develop different teaching strategies depending on the situation and individual children’s needs. It is considered that child initiated, and teacher-initiated experiences are at cross purposes. It is undeniable that children learn their best when engaged in self-directed play however, I have learnt that my role as a teacher is scaffolding and supporting 7
children to achieve new goals (Leonie et al., 2017, p. 343). I believe that intentional teaching should happen in between child initiated play through interaction between a child and a teacher. In the future when I plan for learning experiences, I will involve children by asking what they want to know, how children and educators find information together regarding their interests, what technologies we need and what we can bring from their home environment (Williams, 1997). I have now understood that it is critical for educators to understand that children learn mathematics and science concepts through their initiated play. Therefore, I’ll interact with them by asking questions to guide them to extend their learning. 8
Reference
Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE]. (2022). Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia
(V2.0). Australian Government Department of Education for the Ministerial Council. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-2022-V2.0.pdf
Chaille, C., & Britain, L. (2003). The young child as scientist: A constructivist approach to early
childhood science education
(3rd ed.). https://doms.csu.edu.au/csu/file/402149f8-
c4ca-41a5-9843-201be9f0138b/1/chaille-c1.pdf
Elwick, S. (2023a). Physical and social environments for mathematical, scientific and technological learning [Power Point slides]. Interact 2. https://interact2.csu.edu.au
Elwick, S. (2023b). Assessment and planning in mathematics, science and technology
[Power Point slides]. Interact 2. https://interact2.csu.edu.au
Harlan, J.D., & Rivkin, M.S. (2012). Science experiences for the early childhood years: An integrated affective approach
. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education, Inc.
Kearns, K. (2016). Birth to big school
. Cengage Australia.
Leonie, A., Beecher, B., & Death, E. (2017). Programming and planning in early childhood settings.
Cengage Learning AUS.
MacDonald, A., & Rafferty, J. (2015). Investigating mathematics, science and technology in early childhood
. Oxford University Press.
Macmillan, A. (2009). Numeracy in early childhood: Shared contexts for teaching and learning
. Oxford University Press.
9
Your preview ends here
Eager to read complete document? Join bartleby learn and gain access to the full version
- Access to all documents
- Unlimited textbook solutions
- 24/7 expert homework help
Montague-Smith, A., & Price, A.J. (2012). Mathematics in early years education
(3rd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Primary Connections. (2008). An elaboration of the Primary Connections 5Es teaching and learning model
. https://primaryconnections.org.au/sites/default/files/inline-files/An
%20elaboration%20of%20the%205E%20model.pdf
Seefeldt, C., Galper, A., & Stevenson-Garcia, J. (2012
). Active experiences for active children: mathematics
(Third edition). Pearson.
Stelzer, E. (2005). Experiencing science and math in early childhood
. Toronto, ON: Pearson Education Canada.
Williams, K.C. (1997). “What do you wonder?” Involving children in curriculum planning. Young Children, 52
(6), 78-81.
Writer, S. (2014, July 8). Using block play to promote STEM
. Kaplan early learning company. https://blog.kaplanco.com/ii/block-play-stem
10