One morning, one of the girls was a little clingy as she was
missing her mum. I asked her if she would like to use the digital camera to
record her day at kindergarten. I suggested to her that we could print off the
photos and she could take them home to mum.
I showed her how to turn the camera on, and what button to
push to take a picture. Then she was off. On her return we viewed the images
together. There were lots of photos of feet and sky and the majority of them
were out of focus, as she didn’t realise she had to stand still when taking a photo
and to point the camera in the direction of what she wanted a picture of. Now
equipped with more knowledge of how to use this digital technological device,
and without a sense of urgency, she was off again.
This time she was focused in her approach, as she gathered
her friends and told them where to stand for the photo, she asked children to
stop swinging so that she could take a photo of the swing, she took photos of
nature, and invited me into her world so that I could take photos of her up the
tree and playing with the play dough.
Once she had all the photos that captured her day at
kindergarten, I printed them off for her. I then suggested she might like to choose
six of her favourite photos and glue them to a cardboard cube. She eagerly did
this and then carried that cube around for the rest of the day. It was obvious
to all who saw her, that this child now had a sense of belonging and a spirit
of connectedness between the centre and her home (Ministry of Education, 1996).
She was so happy with herself, and in what she had created.
I consider this learning experience to be a technological
activity as according to Smorti “technology is also a creative and purposeful
activity aimed at meeting needs and opportunities through the development of
products, systems or environments” (p. 5). I believe that this experience was a
creative product (e.g. taking the photos and putting them onto a cube), and I
purposefully suggested this activity to meet the needs of the child (e.g. as
she was missing her mum) (Smorti, 1999). It also aligns with ‘the New Zealand
Curriculum’ definition that “technology is intervention by design” (p. 32).
Through engaging in collaborative creativity the child experienced a quality
outcome from her sense of connectedness between the centre and home (Ministry
of Education, 2007).
I believe that through the use of digital technology the
child was able to revisit her learning as she told her mother about her day.
“Being able to reconnect with past experience is thought to help memory
development and encourage metacognitive processes such as interpretation
(Hatherly, 2009, p.9).
From this child’s learning experience I learnt that it is
important that I teach ICT skills to children, otherwise if I just allow the
children to focus on the tool, e.g. the digital camera, it is then no more than
a jazzy and expensive alternative to existing resources (Carter, 2010). Te Whāriki places significant value on
the ‘funds of knowledge’ (e.g. ICT technology) that children bring with them
into our early childhood centres (Ministry of Education, 1996). Therefore, I must
broaden my understanding of technology, so that I extend my knowledge and skill
base to support children’s learning in this area (Smorti, 1999).
References:
Carter, M. (2010). Helping teachers thank about technology. Exchange, 191, 30-32.
Google Image. (n.d.). Stock
photo – Child taking a photo. [photo].Retrieved from
Hatherly, A.
(2009). ICT and the greatest technology: A teacher’s mind. Early Childhood Folio, 13, 7-11.
Ministry of
Education. (1996). Te Whāriki: He whāriki
mātauranga mō ngā mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early childhood curriculum. Wellington,
New Zealand: Leaning Media.
Ministry
of Education. (2007).The New Zealand
curriculum. For English-medium teaching and learning in years 1-13.
Retrieved from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/Curriculum-documents
Smorti, S. (1999). Technology in early childhood. Early Education, 19, 5-10.
