1. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
1
!
!
!
!
!
What
is
the
effect
of
digital
technologies
on
engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
of
the
explorations
of
5-­‐6
year
old
children
in
a
Reggio
inspired
setting?
!
!
!
!
Action
Research
!
Clair
Weston
!
!
!
!
!
Buffalo
State,
SUNY
Dr
Hank
Nicols
!
!
December
2013
!

2. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
2
Abstract
Twenty
four
Kindergarten
students
attending
Jakarta
International
School
participated
in
an
action
research
study
exploring
the
question,
“What
is
the
effect
of
digital
technologies
on
engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
of
the
explorations
of
5-­‐6
year
old
children
in
a
Reggio
inspired
setting?”
A
two-­‐group
pre-­‐test
and
post-­‐test
design
measured
student
engagement
and
student
complexity
of
thinking
after
a
seven
week
intervention.
The
experimental
group
consisted
of
one
class
of
Kindergarten
students
who
were
exposed
to
opportunities
for
using
iPads
as
a
language
of
expression,
as
a
device
for
creation.
The
control
group
consisted
of
a
second
Kindergarten
class
who
were
exposed
to
opportunities
for
using
iPads
in
the
traditional
way,
as
a
device
for
consumption.
Results
indicated
that
after
the
intervention
period,
although
the
scores
of
both
groups
increased,
the
level
of
engagement
and
the
depth
of
thinking
of
the
experimental
group
was
higher.

3. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
3
Introduction
In
today’s
context
it
is
difMicult
to
ignore
the
role
of
digital
technologies
in
the
lives
of
young
children.
However,
I
am
often
in
a
state
of
tension
as
to
an
effective
way
for
children
to
use
digital
technologies
and
still
be
true
to
my
pedagogical
beliefs
about
early
childhood
education.
I
would
like
to
think
about
how
digital
technologies
could
be
interwoven
into
our
approach
to
learning
and
our
beliefs
about
young
children
to
enhance
what
we
do
and
so
improve
the
experience
for
our
children.
This
study
researched
into
ways
to
enhance
relationships
and
understanding
and
consider
possibilities
to
evocatively
interweave
the
digital,
poetic
and
symbolic
languages.
Although
there
are
a
variety
of
different
digital
technologies
that
could
be
considered
the
study
focussed
on
the
application
and
use
of
one
device,
the
iPad.
Using
an
iPad
appears
to
be
natural
to
the
children.
I
have
observed
how
skillful
they
are
in
commanding
the
touch
screen
and
navigating
the
controls.
Somehow
to
these
children
it
is
intuitive.
There
is
much
current
discussion
about
the
use
of
iPads
with
young
children
and
we
have
recently
received
two
in
each
Kindergarten
class
and
are
anticipating
a
class
set
for
next
year.
This
study
explored
some
of
the
possibilities
of
using
the
iPads,
which
are
open
to
creativity,
imagination
and
to
deepen
learning
and
relationships.
I
am
reminded
by
Vea
Vecchi,
“We
have
to
give
closer
attention
to
the
process
of
learning
through
the
digital
media.
The
digital
experience
is
much
too
often
exhausted
simply
in
its
function
and
technical
form.
In
addition
to
this
technical
aspect,
if
it
is
also
used
in
creative
and
imaginative
ways,
it
reveals
a
high
level
of
expressive,
cognitive
and
social
potential
as
well
as
great
possibilities
for
evolution.
It
is
necessary
to
reMlect
on
and
better
comprehend
the
changes
that
the
digital

4. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
4
language
introduces
in
the
processes
of
understanding.
We
have
to
be
aware
of
what
this
adds,
takes
away,
or
modiMies
in
today’s
learning.
“
(Gandini
et
al,
2005,
p.
x
)
Based
on
my
observations
of
children
using
iPads
they
can
be
passive
users,
looking
at
a
screen,
consuming,
rather
than
using
the
device
as
a
language
of
expression
and
communication.
This
implies
to
me
a
low
level
of
engagement,
in
that
the
activity
level
is
simple,
repetitive
and
passive,
there
is
an
absence
of
cognitive
demand.
Lower
order
thinking
skills
are
utilized.
No
other
‘languages’
are
used.
By
languages
I
am
referring
to
my
understanding
of
the
term
‘Hundred
Languages’
used
by
the
Reggio
educators.
The
Hundred
languages
of
children
is
a
metaphor
for
the
many
ways
of
making
meaning
and
connections
and
supporting
concept
development
and
understanding.
The
hundred
languages
is
a
declaration
that
gives
value
to
all
the
symbolic
and
poetic
languages
that
children
possess
(Malaguzzi,
cited
in
Edwards
et
al,
2012,
p.2).
As
a
result
of
the
intervention,
I
hoped
to
see
the
children
displaying
sustained
intense
engagement.
There
would
be
creativity,
energy
and
persistence.
Higher
order
thinking
skills
would
be
displayed.
Several
languages
of
expression
would
be
intertwined.
By
transferring
between
languages
there
exists
a
deeper
understanding
in
the
child’s
thinking
and
explorations.
The
quality
of
the
exploration
would
be
higher
if
the
child
is
highly
engaged
and
there
is
a
richness
of
languages,
that
the
exploration
would
be
more
complex
if
multiple
languages
of
expression
are
used.
I
proposed
that
in
using
the
iPad
as
an
expressive
language
we
move
beyond
the
common
use
of
iPads.
Merely
giving
the
children
somewhat
narrowly
focused
Apps,
which
are
not
open
to
imaginative
use
or
Apps,
which
have
little
meaning
or
substance
and
take
away
from
an
actual
experience
with
clay
or
building
with
wooden
blocks.
I
am
suggesting
that
it
is
possible
that
digital
technologies
can
add
to
the
level
of
engagement
and
the
complexity
of
thinking
of
a

5. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
5
child’s
explorations
when
the
other
languages
of
expression
are
not
forgotten.
My
thinking
has
been
inMluenced
by
George
Foreman,
who
proposes
that,
“Children
learn
about
the
world
by
creating
relationships
between
different
languages.”
(Edwards
et
al,
2012,
p.349)
The
following
study
was
designed
to
explore
this
hypothesis.
!
Review
of
the
Literature
After
identifying
the
need
to
validate
the
effect
that
iPads
can
have
in
the
engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
of
the
explorations
of
5-­‐6
year
old
children,
I
reviewed
the
literature
to
ensure
an
in
depth
knowledge
about
the
use
of
digital
technologies
with
young
children
and
to
learn
about
results
obtained
from
prior
research.
This
literature
review
presents
ideas
from
various
research
studies
that
have
suggested
that
digital
technologies
can
be
used
to
enhance
learning
in
young
children.
I
have
found
it
difMicult
to
locate
reliable
evidence
to
offer
support
on
pedagogical
ways
to
maximise
the
learning
potential
of
digital
technologies.
There
is
an
ongoing
debate
about
how
and
whether
digital
technologies
can
Mit
in
the
lives
of
young
children,
although
the
use
of
computers
and
other
digital
devices
are
rapidly
becoming
a
reality
in
early
childhood
settings
and
in
many
children’s
homes.
Arguments
are
repeatedly
concerned
with
the
quality
of
children’s
experiences
with
digital
technologies
and
the
value
of
such
experiences
for
their
physical,
cognitive
and
socio-­‐emotional
development
(Verenikina
and
Kervin,
2011).
Banister
(2010)
points
to
a
lack
of
research
into
iPads
for
education,
as
they
are
still
very
new
to
the
market.
Parette,
Queensbury
and
Blum
(2010)
believe
early
childhood
educators
are
missing
the
boat
in
terms
of
digital
technology
use
in
their
classrooms.
Drawing
on
ideas
associated
with
the
digital
disconnect
they
describe
the
huge
divide
between
children’s
digital
technology

6. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
6
use
at
home
and
at
the
early
childhood
setting.
They
value
the
appropriate
use
of
digital
technology
within
early
childhood
settings
and
encourage
educators
to
develop
their
technology
skills
to
adequately
teach
their
students.
However,
in
my
conversations
with
the
Kindergarten
children
taking
part
in
this
study,
the
children
described
their
favourite
home
activities
on
an
iPad
as
predominately
playing
closed
apps
generally
for
the
development
of
maths
and
literacy
skills
or
low
level
thinking
games.
Although
the
children
in
the
study
often
use
iPads
at
home
they
are
still
not
being
used
in
a
manner
to
promote
complex
thought
or
modes
of
expression.
Plowman
and
Stephen
(2007)
suggest
that
early
childhood
educators
already
have
pedagogical
knowledge
but
can
lack
the
ability
to
transfer
it
to
ICT
use.
Plowman
and
Stephen’s
(2007)
Mindings
would
suggest
that
an
additional
aspect
associated
with
pedagogical
guidelines
that
assist
educators
to
create
and
extend
leaning
outcomes
related
to
ICT
in
their
classrooms
include
exploring
what
constitutes
ICT;
reMlecting
on
the
value
of
ICT
in
early
childhood
classrooms;
and
exploring
ideas
to
transfer
current
pedagogical
approaches
to
the
use
of
ICT
and
that
educators
play
an
important
role
in
extending
children’s
learning
on
digital
devices.
There
appears
to
be
agreement
that
the
emergence
of
mobile
touch
devices,
such
as
the
iPhone,
iPod
touch
and
iPad,
provide
rich
opportunities
for
young
learners.
Teachers
in
the
early
years
are
seeing
these
as
valid
pedagogical
devices
as
they
allow
young
children
to
easily
manipulate
and
interact
with
screen
objects
and
create
digital
content.
Touch-­‐screen
devices
in
particular
encourage
intuitive
participation
in
open-­‐ended
games
and
apps
(Verenikina
and
Kervin,
2011).
There
are
hard-­‐wired
affordances
of
the
iPad
that
make
these
devices
particularly
attractive
for
early
years
learning:
their
portability,
their
‘touch’
interface,
their
simple
navigation
system.
It
is
suggested
that
iPads
can
support
independent
use
by
very
young
learners,
as
has
been
demonstrated
by
researchers
such
as
Verenikina
and
Kervin

7. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
7
(2011)
and
O’Mara
and
Laidlaw
(2011).
As
with
technology
and
learning
more
generally,
particularly
with
ICT
that
affords
Mlexibility
of
use,
the
impact
depends
largely
on
how
they
are
used
(Lynch,
2006).
Bird
(2012)
suggests
that,
educators
need
to
consider
and
provide
apps
that
encourage
imaginative
play.
Her
studies
identiMied
the
necessity
for
further
research
around
children’s
need
for
time
to
explore
digital
devices
to
assist
them
in
moving
from
explorative
to
imaginative
behaviours.
This
is
supported
by
the
research
of
Goodwin
and
HighMiled
(2012)
who
discovered
that,
despite
the
plethora
of
apps
currently
available
for
young
children
in
the
iTunes
Store,
there
has
been
limited
systematic
analysis
of
educational
apps
and
those
designed
speciMically
for
young
children.
Researchers
have
failed
to
keep
pace
with
the
exponential
growth
in
this
technology.
With
over
15
billion
apps
downloaded
since
the
inception
of
Apple’s
App
Store,
there
is
a
preponderance
of
apps
marketed
as
‘educational’
and
designed
for
young
children.
Both
teachers
and
parents
seek
educational
apps
to
use
on
touch
devices
like
the
iPhone,
iPad
and
iPod
touch.
Many
of
these
apps
offer
self-­‐contained
already-­‐formed
content,
such
as
gamiMied
literacy
apps
and
are
relatively
closed.
They
direct
the
learner
through
the
content,
positioning
the
learner
as
a
consumer.
The
level
of
interactivity
and
the
level
of
user-­‐
choice
varies
from
app
to
app,
but
the
geography
of
the
app
is
closed
and
the
learner
practises
particular
skills
and
is
rewarded
with
tokens
of
accomplishment
and
progress
(O’Mara
and
Laidlaw
2011).
Children
are
growing
up
in
a
world
full
of
digital
devices
and
an
understanding
is
needed
of
the
potential
of
these
devices
in
children’s
play
and
learning.
However
the
use
of
digital
technology
within
early
childhood
education
continues
to
be
an
emerging
area
of
research.
Marsh,
like
many
other
authors
call
for
further
research
into
the
children’s
use
of
digital
technology
stating,

8. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
8
“Academics
and
educators
need
to
examine
their
affordances
more
closely
in
order
to
identify
what
children
gain
from
their
playful
engagements
in
these
worlds
and
how
their
experiences
can
be
built
upon
in
early
years
settings”
(Marsh,
2010,
p36)
In
conclusion
there
is
research
that
delves
into
the
need
for
digital
technologies
in
early
childhood
settings
and
supports
the
use
of
iPads.
There
are
also
some
indications
of
the
disconnect
between
teachers
conMidence
in
their
understanding
of
early
childhood
pedagogy
and
the
integration
of
digital
devices
in
keeping
with
this
pedagogy.
Digital
technologies
are
evident
in
the
everyday
lives
of
children
and
researchers
are
beginning
to
explore
and
promote
their
place
in
early
childhood.
There
appears
to
be
little
current
research,
although
plenty
of
anecdotal
accounts
on
personal
blogs,
connecting
digital
technologies
with
engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking,
to
provide
further
support
for
teachers
in
their
facilitation
of
technology
use
with
early
childhood
settings.
!
Method
Research
Design
To
answer
my
research
question
I
designed
and
implemented
an
action
research
and
intervention
study
with
a
two
group
pre-­‐test
and
post-­‐test
design.
As
the
grade
level
consists
of
four
kindergarten
classes,
one
class,
KA
was
the
control
group
and
class
KB
was
the
experimental
group.
!

9. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
9
Pretest
Traditional
Likert
Scale
for
iPad
group
Engagement
Rubric
for
Complexity
of
Thinking
Intervention
Likert
Scale
for
iPad
group Engagement
Rubric
for
Complexity
of
Thinking
Treatment
No
treatment
Posttest
Likert
Scale
for
Engagement
Rubric
for
Complexity
of
Thinking
Removal
of
most
Likert
Scale
for
apps,
careful
Engagement
consideration
of
Rubric
for
placement
of
iPads
Complexity
of
within
learning
Thinking
environment
Gain
or
change
score
Subtract
pre
from
post
Subtract
pre
from
post
!
The
dependent
variables
were
level
of
engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking.
The
independent
variable
was
the
opportunities
provided
to
use
the
iPad
in
order
to
open
up
possibilities
for
iPad
exploration
as
an
expressive
language,
for
example,
the
apps
available,
the
placement
of
the
iPads
in
the
learning
environment.
The
extraneous
variables
were
sensitive
and
timely
teacher
intervention,
the
learning
environment
and
conversations
between
the
children
themselves.
My
hypothesis
was
that
in
a
supportive
learning
environment
with
carefully
chosen
apps,
iPads
could
be
used
to
improve
the
level
of
engagement
and
complexity
of
thought
in
the
explorations
of
5-­‐6
year
children
within
a
Reggio
inspired
setting.
Intervention
Before
the
treatment,
the
iPads
were
placed
next
to
the
desktop
computer
in
the
classroom
with
all
of
the
apps
the
IT
department
put
on
school
iPads
as
standard.
Appendix
C
lists
the
apps
which
were
initially
installed
on
the
devices.
For
the
treatment,
I
removed
the
apps
that
only
allowed
for
simple,
passive,
repetitive
explorations,
which
lacked
possibilities
for
ways
of
expression.
I
selected
the
apps
for
the
iPads
using
criteria

10. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
10
that
I
have
developed
to
help
me
evaluate
the
qualities
of
any
material
that
I
might
offer
the
children.
I
asked
myself,
!
Will
the
app
be
used
in
many
ways,
or
does
it
dictate
a
particular
purpose?
Will
it
be
used
by
many
children?
Does
it
lend
itself
to
a
variety
of
explorations?
What
affordances
does
it
offer?
How
might
the
app
be
best
introduced
to
the
children?
!
The
selection
of
apps
also
payed
attention
to
the
SAMR
(Substitution
Augmentation
ModiMication
RedeMinition)
model
proposed
by
Puentedura
(2013).
Appendix
E
shows
a
diagram
of
the
SAMR
model.
This
model
offers
a
method
of
seeing
how
computer
technology
might
impact
teaching
and
learning.
Moving
along
the
continuum,
computer
technology
becomes
more
important
in
the
classroom
but
at
the
same
time
becomes
more
invisibly
woven
into
the
demands
of
good
teaching
and
learning.
Appendix
D
lists
the
apps
used
for
the
Experimental
Group.
The
iPads
were
placed
in
different
locations
within
the
setting
to
promote
transferring
between
languages.
The
iPads
were
located
in
the
vicinity
of
other
modes
of
expression,
such
as
on
the
light
table,
in
the
Atelier
or
near
the
wooden
blocks.
The
children
were
supported
in
their
explorations
and
encouraged
to
share
discoveries
and
ways
of
expression
with
each
other.
There
were
discussions
with
the
intervention
group
that
the
iPad
could
be
taken
to
different
places
to
work
on.
The
children
were
able
to
access
the
iPads
just
as
they
would
the
other
materials
and
ways
of
expression
within
the
setting.
During
class
meetings
the
intervention
group
were
invited
to
share
with
each
other
projects
that
they
were
proud
of.
In
the
control
group,
the
full
list
of
apps
remained
on
the
iPads
and
the
iPads
remained
next
to
the
desk

11. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
11
top
computer
for
the
duration
of
the
study.
The
control
group
continued
to
use
the
iPads
in
the
traditional
way,
mainly
for
skills
practice,
rather
than
as
a
language
of
expression.
The
teachers
observed
how
the
iPads
were
used
and
shared
observations
with
each
other.
This
discussion
and
shared
interpretation
of
what
has
been
observed
offered
different
points
of
view.
Observing
carefully
and
listening
to
the
children
helped
us
to
understand
the
ways
of
learning
with
materials
that
the
children
develop
so
that
we,
in
turn,
can
support
them.
Sample
The
sample
used
in
this
study
was
a
convenience
sample
of
twenty
four
Kindergarten
students
from
two
of
four
kindergarten
classes.
The
Kindergarten
classes
are
inspired
by
the
principles
of
the
Reggio
Emilia
Educational
Project.
These
pedagogical
principles
include:
!
•
The
pedagogy
of
relationships;
•
The
pedagogy
of
listening;
•
Communication
and
collaboration;
•
Pedagogical
documentation;
•
The
image
of
the
children
as
being
strong,
curious,
competent
and
capable;
•
Social
constructivism;
•
The
‘Hundred
Languages
of
Children’,
a
metaphor
that
refers
to
the
many
ways
of
making
meaning
and
connections,
and
supporting
concept
development
and
understanding;
•
•
!
The
environment
as
the
third
teacher;
The
teacher
as
researcher.

12. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
12
These
pedagogical
beliefs
inMluence
the
everyday
experience
of
the
children
and
teachers
and
thus
inMluence
the
sample
and
the
context
of
the
study.
One
class,
KA,
formed
the
control
group
and
the
second
class,
KB,
formed
the
experimental
group.
All
of
the
24
students
were
tested
with
the
attitude
Likert
Scale
to
Measure
the
Level
of
Engagement.
Five
students
from
each
class
were
part
of
a
randomly
generated
sample
to
be
tested
with
the
Complexity
of
Thinking
Rubric.
The
random
sample
was
generated
by
assigning
consecutive
numbers
to
all
the
members
of
KA
and
then
KB
and
a
random
number
generator
(www.mathsgoodies.com)
was
used
to
identify
students.
A
random
sample
was
used
so
that
all
members
of
the
classes
would
have
an
equal
and
independent
chance
of
being
selected
and
providing
a
representative
sample.The
Kindergarten
classes
are
of
equal
size
and
consist
of
students
of
mixed
gender,
ability,
mother
tongue
language
and
nationality.
All
students
were
between
5
and
6
years
old.
All
students
in
this
study
attend
Jakarta
International
School
in
Jakarta,
Indonesia.
Jakarta
International
School
serves
the
educational
needs
of
the
international
community
in
Jakarta.
The
school
is
non-­‐sectarian
and
admits
students
of
all
races,
cultures
and
religions.
!
Instrumentation
and
Data
Collection
Each
child’s
exploration
with
the
iPad
was
observed
before
the
intervention.
The
level
of
engagement
was
measured
with
a
Likert
Scale
Survey
developed
for
the
purposes
of
this
study,
entitled,
The
Weston
Scale
of
Engagement.
The
Weston
Scale
of
Engagement
is
listed
in
Appendix
A.
A
Likert
scale
is
designed
to
measure
the
attitude
about
something.
All
the
items
together
constitute
an
attitude,
not
any
one.
Thus
each
student
needs
to
get
a
total
score
across
items.
The
items
for
the
Weston
Scale
of
Engagement
were
chosen
to
cover
all
the
signals
for
engagement
except
for
complexity
and
creativity,
which
would
be
measured
through
a
rubric
to
grade
the
exploration
for

13. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
13
it’s
depth
of
thinking.
I
believe
that
the
items
are
an
important
part
of
high
level
of
engagement.
This
would
be
when
the
child
is
showing
the
most
competence
they
can,
that
they
are
at
their
‘best’,
they
are
at
the
edge
of
their
capabilities,
at
the
Zone
of
Proximal
Development.
This
instrument
has
no
center
or
neutral
point
so
the
respondent
has
to
declare
whether
he/she
is
in
agreement
or
disagreement
with
the
item.
The
items
help
the
observer
to
consider
the
level
of
engagement
of
a
child’s
explorations,
which
involve
an
iPad.
The
items
are
channels
for
observer
awareness,
a
means
of
making
an
overall
judgment
of
the
child’s
engagement.
!
1.
The
child
is
not
easily
distracted
from
his/
her
deep
concentration.
2.
The
child’s
facial
expression
reveals
‘hard’
thinking.
3.
The
child
shows
prolonged
motivation.
4.
The
child
shows
special
care
for
their
work
and
are
attentive
to
detail.
5. The
child
displays
a
feeling
of
satisfaction
with
their
achievements.
!
After
a
lengthy
observation,
notably
30mins-­‐45mins,
of
a
random
sample
of
Mive
children
from
the
control
group
and
Mive
children
from
the
experimental
group,
a
rubric
grade
was
assigned
to
the
explorations
to
ascertain
the
complexity
of
thinking
of
the
explorations.
The
rubric
was
created
for
the
purposes
of
this
study,
entitled,
The
Weston
Rubric
to
Assess
Depth
of
Thinking.
The
Weston
Rubric
to
Assess
Depth
of
Thinking
is
listed
in
Appendix
B.
In
order
for
an
exploration
to
have
great
depth
multiple
languages
would
be
used,
moving
between
digital
and
analogue
languages.
This
is
important
in
our
setting,
because
we
believe
that
children
learn
about
the
world
by
creating
relationships
between
different
languages.
In
order
for
an
exploration
to
be
of
a
high
quality
the
child
would
display
a
high
level
of
engagement
and
the
child
would
be
utilizing
higher
order

14. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
14
thinking
skills.
Over
seven
weeks,
the
intervention
was
carried
out.
After
seven
weeks,
each
child’s
explorations
were
again
observed,
measuring
the
level
of
engagement
with
The
Weston
Scale
of
Engagement
and
the
complexity
thinking
of
exploration
with
The
Weston
Rubric
to
Assess
Depth
of
Thinking.
The
children
were
interviewed
to
discover
their
point
of
view
about
iPads
and
how
they
use
them
in
their
explorations.
This
did
not
provide
quantitative
data
but
provided
information
to
enhance
my
understanding
of
how
children
view
their
learning.
I
value
the
children’s
perspective
and
wanted
to
provide
an
opportunity
for
their
voices
to
be
heard
as
this
study
concerns
them.
!
Threats
to
Validity
The
greatest
threat
to
validity
in
this
study
was
researcher
bias.
I
was
responsible
for
writing,
administering
and
scoring
the
tools
of
instrumentation
and
data
collection.
I
may
have
been
looking
for
particular
traits
in
my
observations
of
the
control
group
and
the
experimental
group
in
order
to
prove
my
hypothesis
correct.
There
was
the
possibility
of
a
history
threat
as
the
children
have
other
experiences
outside
of
the
school
context
that
could
affect
the
study.
It
was
the
case
that
all
of
the
children
had
access
to
iPads
at
home.
Maybe
this
could
have
been
taken
into
consideration
by
asking
the
parents
whether
their
children
had
access
to
iPads
at
home,
if
any
restrictions
are
placed
on
their
use,
any
particular
activity
that
is
encouraged
more
than
others,
what
the
parents
notice
their
children
most
commonly
doing
on
the
iPad.
There
was
also
the
threat
of
maturation
as
the
study
involved
young
children.
The
length
of
the
study
could
have
inMluenced
this.
I
wanted
to
spend
enough
time
on
the
intervention
for
it
to
be
possible
to
make
a
difference,
but
not
so
long
that
the
children’s
natural
maturation
would
be
a
massive
threat.
!

15. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
15
Results
To
answer
my
research
question
I
conducted
a
number
of
t-­‐test
analyses
to
examine
group
differences.
The
one-­‐tailed
P
value
was
calculated
to
determine
whether
the
results
had
statistical
signiMicance
by
conventional
criteria.
Student
Attitude
The
gain
in
pre
and
post
test
scores
was
compared
between
the
control
group
and
the
experimental
group.
An
unpaired
t-­‐test,
showed
a
signiMicant
change
in
student
engagement
after
the
iPad
intervention
was
implemented.
A
one-­‐tailed
P
value
showed
that
the
results
were
statistically
signiMicant
by
conventional
means.
(t=
3.1161,
df=
22
,
p=0.0025).
Table
1
shows
the
means
and
standard
deviations
for
each
group.
!
Table
1
Means
and
Standard
Deviations
of
Group
Mean
Pre
and
Post
Test
Gains
in
Student
Engagement
Group
Control
Group
Experimental
Group
gain
between
pretest
score
gain
between
pretest
score
and
post
test
scores
and
post
test
scores
Mean
2.83
5.5
Standard
Deviation
2.52
1.57
N
12
12
Figure
1
below
provides
a
visual
representation
of
the
mean
gain
in
score
for
student
engagement
for
the
control
group
and
the
experimental
group.
!

16. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
16
Control Group
Experimental Group
6
4.5
3
1.5
0
Mean
gain
in
engagement
score
Figure
1
Visual
representation
of
the
control
group
and
experimental
group
gain
in
engagement
scores
!
Student
Complexity
of
Thinking
The
results
of
the
analysis
of
complexity
of
thinking
between
the
control
group
and
the
experimental
group
showed
that
the
experimental
group
signiMicantly
increased
the
complexity
of
their
thinking
during
explorations
involving
an
iPad.
A
one-­‐tailed
P
value
showed
that
that
the
results
were
statistically
signiMicant
by
conventional
means
(t=4.9058,
df=
8,
p=0.0006).
Table
2
shows
the
means
and
standard
deviations
for
each
group.
!
Table
2
Means
and
Standard
Deviations
of
Group
Gains
between
pre
and
post
tests
for
complexity
of
thought

17. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
17
Group
Control
Group
Experimental
Group
gain
between
pretest
score
gain
between
pretest
score
and
post
test
scores
and
post
test
scores
Mean
4.6
12.2
Standard
Deviation
3.21
1.3
N
5
5
!
Figure
2
below
illustrates
student’s
mean
scores
after
receiving
the
iPad
intervention
compared
to
the
control
group.
Control
Group
Experimental
Group
13
9.75
6.5
3.25
0
Mean
gain
in
score
of
complexity
of
thinking
Figure
2
Control
group
vs.
experimental
group
mean
gain
in
scores
for
complexity
of
thinking
of
explorations
Generalisations
A
t-­‐test
result
showed
a
signiHicant
difference
when
comparing
student
attitude
and
complexity
of
though
between
the
control
group
and
the
experimental
group.
The
results
suggested
that
children
can
demonstrate
a
higher
level
of
engagement
and

18. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
18
complexity
of
thinking
when
using
the
iPads
as
a
language
of
expression
rather
than
as
a
means
of
consuming.
!
Discussion
and
Action
Plan
The
results
of
this
study
implied
that
iPads
can
deepen
engagement
and
complexity
of
explorations
in
young
children
when
informed
choices
are
made
in
selecting
apps
which
provide
possibilities
for
the
interweaving
of
languages
or
combining
apps
and
thought
is
given
to
the
placement
of
the
iPads
within
the
learning
environment.
Although
this
resonates
with
my
beliefs
about
early
childhood
pedagogy
and
the
complexity
of
thinking
utilised
by
children
when
they
use
multiple
languages
of
expression,
I
was
surprised
by
the
signiHicance
of
the
results
and
the
size
of
the
impact
on
engagement
and
complexity
of
thought
that
more
open
apps
can
have.
This
leads
me
to
believe
that
only
constructive
apps
should
be
installed
on
the
iPads
along
with
the
standard
productivity
suite
(camera,
video,
Photo
Booth).
My
data
and
observations
of
the
children
in
the
control
group
showed
them
to
be
overall,
more
passive
consumers
and
less
engaged.
The
dialogues
amongst
the
children
as
they
were
exploring
the
iPads
were
less
rich
than
the
experimental
group
and
often
resulted
in
more
arguments
over
turn
taking
and
sharing.
The
iPads
were
generally
used
by
one
child
at
a
time.
The
story
app,
‘Go
Away
Big
Green
Monster’
proved
to
be
very
popular
and
led
to
the
book
version
of
this
story
being
loaned
from
the
library.
At
the
beginning
of
the
study
the
simplistic
apps
were
the
most
popular,
but
toward
the
end
the
more
creative
apps
were
beginning
to
be
used
more
frequently.
The
instructive
apps
had
elements
of
a
‘drill-­‐and-­‐practice’
design
and
required
minimal
cognitive
investment
on
behalf
of
the
child.
The
children
are positioned as consumers
of
the
content,
just listening

19. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
19
and
looking,
rather
than
producers
of
their
own
knowledge
who
actually
produce
something.
I
wonder
if
these
simple
apps
advertised
as
educational
games,
did
not
capture
the
young
children's
attention
and
they
quickly
worked
out
the
process
and
the
solutions
and
lost
the
interest
in
them.
Maybe
after
the
initial
enthusiasm
for
the
closed
apps,
the
children
changed
and
began
to
show
a
preference
for
the
games
which
allowed
them
to
engage
their
imagination
and
develop
their
own
play
that
extended
beyond
the
screen
as
digital
play
blended
in
the
variety
of
children's
other
play
contexts.
My
data
and
observations
of
the
children
in
the
experimental
group
showed
them
to
be
overall
more
creative
and
more
collaborative.
They
often
worked
together,
helped
each
other
and
shared
ideas.
Often
other
children
would
stand
behind
and
watch
and
offer
words
of
encouragement.
They
shared
their
knowledge
and
taught
their
peers
how
to
use
the
devices
or
how
to
use
a
particular
app.
The
children
were
able
to
use
these
more
constructive
apps
to
create
their
own
content
or
digital
artifact
and
led
to
the
interweaving
of
multiple
languages
or
transference
from
one
language
of
expression
to
another.
As
a
result
of
the
study
I
had
hoped
to
understand
more
about
the
transferability
of
digital
and
analogue
languages
to
enhance
learning
in
young
children
and
this
would
improve
my
work
with
the
children.
Bird
suggests
that
educators
need
to
consider
and
provide
apps
that
encourage
imaginative
play
(Bird,
p.90,
2012.).
I
think
that
this
is
not
enough,
the
apps
need
to
allow
for
creativity
and
interweaving
of
languages,
not
just
imaginative
play.
I
found
that
there
were
times
that
the
children
needed
help
to
learn
the
functions
of
the
devices
despite
every
child
having
had
experience
using
an
iPad
or
their
parents
iPhone.
At
times
children
sought
help
to
explain
how
to
use
a
particular
app,
from
an
adult
or
another
child
or
discovered
things
for
themselves
through
trial
and
error.
The
touch
screen
affordance
of
the
device
allowed
the
children
to
easily
manipulate

20. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
20
and
interact
with
screen
objects
and
create
digital
content.
It
seemed
that
the
children's
level
of
engagement
in
digital
play
depended
on
the
characteristics
of
the
digital
game
at
hand.
The
study
showed
that
young
children
are
interested
in,
and
are
capable
of,
engaging
in
such
a
sophisticated
digital
play
as
creating
their
own
puppet
show
or
movie,
with
their
own
characters
and
their
own
story.
However,
this
is
not
all
that
surprising,
if
we
think
of
the
level
of
sophistication
of
children's
traditional,
spontaneous
make
believe
play,
which
is
largely
created
by
the
children
themselves.
Puppet
Pals
and
Puppet
Pals
2
proved
to
be
an
extremely
popular
app
where
the
children
can
create
a
puppet
show
as
they
select
backgrounds
and
characters
and
manipulate
these
on
the
stage
as
they
record
oral
annotations
which
can
be
saved
to
a
library
that
can
be
viewed
again.
This
app
allowed
the
participants
to
engage
in
a
complex
make-­‐believe
play
which
was
supported
by
the
technical
features
such
as
voice
recording
facilities,
choice
of
the
characters
and
recording
an
individually
created
story
and
using
the
camera
function
of
the
iPad
to
import
images
to
create
characters
and
scenery.
The
ability
to
be
able
to
retrieve
previous
creations
appeared
to
be
a
strong
affordance
of
the
device.
After
talking
with
the
children
about
their
previous
experiences
I
discovered
that
the
children
were
all
familiar
with
iPads
and
had
access
to
devices
at
home.
When
asked
about
what
they
preferred,
or
were
encouraged
by
parents,
to
use
the
iPad
for
at
home,
most
responses
were
literacy
or
numeracy
based
gamiHied
Apps,
a
few
reported
that
they
loved
to
play
Mine
Craft.
The
observational
and
interview
data
suggested
that
the
children
demonstrated
a
high
level
of
motivation
towards
using
iPads
and
were
consistently
enthusiastic.
The
children
showed
themselves
to
be
highly
competent
and
conHident
users
of
these
technologies
in
terms
of
locating,
launching
and
operating
the
apps
and
caring
for
the
devices.
After
the
intervention,
when
interviewed
many
of
the
children
from
the
control
group
explained
that
they
would
like
to
have
the
same
games

21. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
21
at
school,
that
they
have
at
home,
such
as
‘Plants
vs.
Zombies’
and
‘Angry
Birds’.
In
comparison
the
children
from
the
experimental
group
stated
that
they
liked
using
the
iPad
with
their
friends
now
and
that
they
would
like
to
be
able
to
put
the
content
that
they
made
onto
the
class
blog
so
that
their
families
could
see
what
they
were
doing.
Their
favourite
app
was
Puppet
Pals
and
Puppet
Pals
2
because:
they
liked
to
record
their
own
stories
with
their
friends;
see
each
others
stories;
could
make
characters
from
their
friends
photographs
and
liked
the
way
the
characters
moved.
The
results
were
shared
with
my
colleagues
within
the
Kindergarten
grade
level
and
in
other
sections
of
the
school.
I
had
an
ongoing
dialogue
with
my
colleagues
about
the
study
and
presented
the
Hindings
at
a
grade
level
meeting.
As
a
result
of
our
dialogues
I
am
hopeful
that
teachers
in
Kindergarten
and
other
grade
levels
will
become
more
thoughtful
in
selecting
the
apps
installed
on
the
class
iPads
to
allow
more
expression,
rather
than
passive
consumption.
From
an
early
childhood
educator’s
perspective
there
is
a
notable
absence
of
constructive
apps,
which
offer
open-­‐ended,
learning
and
representation,
in
the
‘Education’
classiHication
on
iTunes.
I
would
suggest
that
the
suite
of
productivity
apps
and
tools
that
are
automatically
loaded
onto
the
device,
such
as
Photo
Booth
and
the
camera
and
video
functions
allow
for
far
more
engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
than
many
of
the
apps
sold
as
educational.
This
research
highlights
the
need
for
further
research
examining
children’s
use
of
apps
and
the
impact
of
pedagogical
design
on
learning.
IPads
can
potentially
be
used
by
young
children
as
tools
for
representing
their
own
understandings,
producing
their
own
knowledge,
communicating
their
school
learning
to
the
broader
community,
and
making
connections
between
home
literacies
and
those
developed
at
school.
New
technologies
as
an
opportunity
for
innovation,
which
can
empower
students
by
putting
the
technology
into
their
hands
in
support
of

22. Engagement
and
complexity
of
thinking
22
more
self-­‐directed
learning,
and
by
positioning
students
as
active
stakeholders
in
their
learning
and
producers
of
their
own
culturally
signiHicant
artifacts.
As
suggested
by
Lynch,
with
technology
and
learning
more
generally,
the
impact
depends
largely
on
how
they
are
used
(Lynch,
2006).
!
!
!
!