|
Asia-Pacific
Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 7, Issue 1, Article
5 (June, 2006) Beverley JANE Online reflections about tinkering in early childhood: A socio-cultural analysis
|
|
|
Asia-Pacific
Forum on Science Learning and Teaching, Volume 7, Issue 1, Article
5 (June, 2006) Beverley JANE Online reflections about tinkering in early childhood: A socio-cultural analysis
|
Context for the study
The study reported in this article was carried out in a metropolitan campus of a university in Melbourne, in the state of Victoria, Australia. All primary teacher trainees are required to participate in a core unit in technology education. This unit is not organised as a series of formal lectures, but instead, consists of two-hour tutorials, weekly for one semester. In these face-to-face tutorials, the trainees participate in hands-on science and technology activities in small groups.
One assessment task was a 'Community project' that the trainees carried out in their own time. The task was to 'design and make a technological product' to meet a real need, or solve a problem of a client in the community. Once the product was completed, the client evaluated how well the product worked. Another requirement was that each week the trainees were expected to read specific research articles on science and technology education and chapters of the text (Fleer & Jane, 1999). After reflecting on the readings and their involvement in the science and technology activities in tutorials, they wrote responses as online journal entries that were accessible to others studying the unit. The lecturer intended that this process of reflection would encourage the trainees to make links between what they learnt in tutorials and their prior experiences in science and technology.
One tutorial focussed on tinkering, and the lecturer began the session by brainstorming ideas about how to dismantle a 'Dustbuster' (a hand held electrical dust collector). This simple machine is used in many Australian homes (Jane, 2000). The lecturer then introduced the 'Tinkering with toys' activity (Figure 1) and encouraged pairs of trainees to dismantle a range of toys to see how they worked. After examining all the constituent parts, the trainees were required to put the dismantled toys back together again. This structured task involved the 'Predict, Explore, Record, Evaluate' strategy.
Predict: First, using only one coloured pencil, draw a sketch of the toy from the outside, and then what you think it might look like inside. Name all the parts and materials that you know. Explore: Next, pick up the toy and try to pull it apart, making sure that you lay the parts out in order, because you have to put it back together again. This ‘layout activity' will help you succeed. Look at all the different parts and find out their names and functions. Observe all the materials that have been used to make the toy. Record: Now, using a different coloured pencil, draw what you have found out about the toy. Name all the parts, including the materials they are made of, and describe the function of each part. Evaluate: Lastly, compare the different colours to check what you have found out. Write down what you have learnt by doing this activity.
Figure 1. 'Tinkering with toys' activity (Fleer & Jane, 2004, p. 96)The 'tinkering with toys' activity became the catalyst for many trainees to reflect on their early childhood experiences of tinkering and consequently write about these in their online journal entries.
Copyright (C) 2006 HKIEd APFSLT. Volume 7, Issue 1, Article 5 (June, 2006). All Rights Reserved.
