延边新闻网,tokyo hot n0624,3d地图查询
|
Discussion
Mary’s act of breaking the boundaries applied in the current provision could let us think deeply about the type of tools or mediums provided for the children’s meaning-making a play. The ability to make improvements to these areas could cultivate creativity in the children while developing other areas of development such as the three-dimensional visualization and problem-solving skills. Adding on, Mary’s capability of creativity and three-dimensional thinking was also illustrated during the meaning-making process. The ability to use other tools for better representation demonstrates her creativity through thinking out of the box. Furthermore, this action of using other materials could illustrate her courage to express herself to others. The three-dimensional thinking capability Mary possesses is also shown through thinking humans are not flat. However, this leads us to think further that is the current provision sufficient in helping the children to develop creative thinking capabilities, through providing wide choices of tools are the fundamental passive step in an attempt not to restrict a child’s thinking. However, none was done in cultivating their creative ability. Thus, further policies or system could take on an active role through applying methods such as mind mapping at the simplest form in helping children in idea generations.
Main metacognitive regulation impact on student learning on the ability of learning, the monitoring refers to the students to engage in learning activities actively and consciously plan, inspection, evaluation, feedback, control and adjustment. In recent years, study psychology and education psychological research show that students' self-monitoring of their learning is the main aspect of students' learning ability, which is the key factor affecting their academic performance.
Reference list
Bruner, J. (1983). Play, thought, and language. Peabody Journal of Education, 60.
Coates, E. and Coates, A. (2015) Recognising ‘the sacred spark of wonder’: scribbling and related talk as evidence of how young children’s thinking may be identified in Robson, S. and Flannery Quinn, S. (eds) The Routledge International handbook of Young Children’s Thinking and Understanding, Abingdon: Routledge.
Edwards, C. P., Gandini, L. & Forman, G. E. [Eds.] (1998). The hundred languages of children: the Reggio Emilia Approach - Advanced reflections [2nd Ed.] Greenwich, CT: Ablex.
Fillippini, T. And Vecchi, V. (Eds.) (1996). L. Morrow (trans.) The hundred languages of children: narrative of the possible. Reggio Emilia: Reggio Children.
Forman, G. (1994). Different media, different languages. In L. G. Katz & B. Cesarone (Eds.) Reflective essays on the Reggio Emilia approach, (pp. 43-49). Urbana, IL: ERIC Clearinghouse on Elementary and Early Childhood Education.
Kolbe, U. (2000). Seeing beyond marks and forms: Appreciating children’s visual thinking. Thinking through the arts, 48-60.
Matthews, J. (1999). The art of childhood and adolescence. London: Falmer Press.
Vygotsky L (1978) Mind in Society. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard University Press.
Whitebread, D. (2011). Developmental psychology and early childhood education: a guide for students and practitioners. Sage.
Wright, S (2007) Young Children’s meaning making through drawing and ‘telling’ Australian Journal of Early Childhood vol 32 no 4 pp37-49
Appendix
Bruner’s three stages of representation discussed during the presentation was further supported by my teacher and classmates. The identification of Mary’s drawing at the iconic stage was agreed upon. Although her representation of her iconic meaning-making through images such as sword and flags, no languages or clear symbols was used. Nonetheless, I performed further research in clearly identifying and partition between the symbolic and iconic stage in Mary’s context. I found that the symbolic representation often refers to children between the age 7 and above while often associated with the use of words or symbols as representation. Mary’s use of visual images such as flags and sword could still fall into the iconic stage, however, the use of these iconic images to represent personal attribute illustrate the very early stages of meaning-making in symbolic representation (Bruner, 1966:12).
Key questions raised during the presentation was regarding the identification of metacognition during Mary’s art-making process. I believe that metacognition was observed in different components of the process. Firstly, the children’s creative processes and representational practices are actualized through the open-ended resources offered through drawing. When children interact with the drawing medium, there is reciprocity between the child and the materials (Kolbe, 2000:51). The use of straws as representations demonstrated the explicit expression of one’s knowledge in relation to strategies used or performing a cognitive task where a strategy is a cognitive or behavioral activity that is employed so as to enhance performance or achieve a goal. Such as using bendable straws to represent joints. More importantly, Mary said during her process of creation “Using straws are more interesting, more realistic because people are not flat”. This verbalization also demonstrated the explicit expression of one’s knowledge in relation to cognition or people as cognitive processors (Whitebread, 2011:13). It might include knowledge about cognition in relation to self, others or universals.
I have also reflected on this issue raised and identified that the confusion of this concept during the representation was mainly due to the lacking emphasis placed on the main point (the verbalization above). If I were to do it again, I would have placed the action of using Demark flag without thinking to the end after self-planning discussing it as an interesting observation rather than placing it completely into metacognition section. The additional slide could be placed in to discuss the relations between the straws and its human representations in illustration of Mary’s metacognition abilities.
After further reading on the Bruner’s ideas and self-regulation, the concept clarifies and the last question raised in the presentation were not adequate. The question which links the act of self-regulation to critical thinking and creative thinking were not appropriate. Furthermore, Vygotsky (1987:34) also identified that children’s self-directed or private speech as the main medium for the transfer of behavior regulation from others to self as well as the primary tool for self-direction and self-guidance. Hence, his theory stated that self-regulation begins when the child integrates adult prompts, explanations, strategies and demands into their play, actions or speeches thus controlling cognitive processes such as memory, planning, self-reflection and attention in redirecting their own behavior. This leads me to think of the two types of regulation in a place where one could initiate internally or with the environment by the child and the other initiated by the teacher or other adults. The functions of each type of regulation onto the child’s cognitive and social development are also further questioned.
|
