Perceptions of Children on Learning to Write - Research Proposal Example

Research Report: In their own words: Children’s perceptions of learning to write Author: Julie Martello Year of Publication: 1999 In early childhood education, children learn how to write and this learning takes place in different ways. People write to communicate their ideas to their readers. These ideas are developed in their individual, literate and social identities (Richardson, 2000). I hold the idea that when writers learn to write in the early stages of their schooling, they learn to write about themselves. As they continue to write, they continue to learn. In order to know how children learn how to write, it is important to find out if they understand the process of writing. Martello (1999) carried out a research that sought to investigate how pre-school children understood the process of learning how to write. The results of the study revealed that there exists a variation between metacognitive and metalinguistic awareness among the children on how learning how to write takes displace. The study also showed that there is a high degree of correlation between the children’s responses and what is recommended in the syllabus on strategies to be used when teaching/learning how to write. What makes this research study valuable in early childhood practice is the research population from which the sample was taken. Martello moves away from the usual research into children’s writing that concentrates more on the development of competence to children’s conscious understanding of the whole process of learning how to write. This report gives the results of a study based on interviews conducted on school beginners and some of their responses reported in the actual words they used. These responses show the experiences the children go through both at home and at school show how they continue to understand how writing takes place, how they learn and the strategies used in learning. This research report is also very valuable because it adds value to the strategies used to teach pre-school children entering school and learning how to write. Children aged between four year ten months and five years eleven months understand the strategies used to teach them. The most common strategies that the children understand are copying, practicing, being guided and use of a computer. These strategies are also recognized by adult educators and recommended in the Australian state and national teaching syllabuses. The national board of studies recommends shared/guided learning and independent practice as the three main strategies to be employed in teaching children how to write. It also assists those people involved in the practice of early childhood education to plan their experiences for children just beginning to learn how to write. The kind of information revealed in this study report was gained directly asking the children about how and what they learnt. Martello focused the interview questions on one particular area of learning, in this case writing, one is bale to able to know how children understand learning in way not easy to comprehend by only observing their ability to learn. Once a teacher understands how the children consciously understand the process of writing, even if they observe them as they write, teaching is made easy and enjoyable to both the teacher and the children. The method employed by Martello in carrying out this research was very critical to understand the view children have on the process of learning how to write. Many researchers would adopt the observation technique that seeks to establish the ability of the children to write. Gray (1987) focused on the observation of teachers and children as they constructed words and wrote them. Without the support of the knowledge of the children being able to consciously understand the process of learning how to write, too much responsibility of learning might be placed on the child. In addition, he used sample taken from early year’s education which may be marred with generalization with almost no concentration on a particular age group. Roberts (1965) asserted that children in their early years of learning should not be left to learn on their own at the peril of their resources. They usually benefit from demonstrations done by others, examples and guidance on deciphering text that is written. The only difference is that Roberts used interviews done on parents and children. Similarly, Landis (2003) argued that children left to do writings of their choice do not lead to an informative investigation what has been written and whether they understand or not. The process learning should involve teachers and family members. The children also understand this as a strategy of learning as revealed by the research study done by Martello. The interviews with 26 school beginners show the views of the children who are less than six years of age on the process of learning how to write. They understand that their parents, siblings and teachers are involved. In concurrence with this two other researchers have focused pre-school children seeing early writing ability as an indicator precociousness. The finding that learning shared closely with parents as an essential learning strategy is supported by Pirozzo (1986). He argues that the ability of a child to write at such an early age is not permanent. He therefore asserts that the learning process can be limited if the child does not consciously understand the process of learning. He used the predictive method to test the ability of the child to continue writing in future. This proves that Martello’s method of interviewing the children as employed in his research repot is very reliable in finding out if they will know how to write in future. Why does someone say with confidence that children learning to write in their early years will be doing the same or better in future from Martello’s research report? The responses to the question “How did you learn to write/write this?” give the answer to this question. The sample of 26 children had three most developed writers who were able to construct and write simple sentences as “I am at a school.” Two of these developed writers identified independent practice and their own repeated efforts as learning strategy. They gave responses that showed that they practice to write. Some of the responses were “Every day I went home after pre-school, I practiced,” and “First I couldn’t write. Then I stated to learn how to do big letters. Then I started to learn how to do little letters and then at last I learnt how to do a little ‘a’.” These responses show that there is a sense of personal agency in learning. It shows what these children do as compared t what the helpers do. These statements show that the children know that they have a central role in learning. Therefore, it is evident that one can make a prediction that these children are able to write in future. They can also be able to write even better without because of continued practice. We all know that practice makes perfect. If children understand that they learn how to write by practice, then with continued practice, they will be better writers in future. In the early childhood education practice, teachers usually experience learners asking a lot of questions. Precocious writers ask questions continuously and are normally exposed to a wide range of printed materials that they can be able to copy for themselves in the process of learning. Moreover, the fast learners and the not so developed writers of the preschool age lack fluency when invited to write. That is what drives teachers to adopt one of the strategies of teaching that was evident in the children responses. Some of the students interviewed gave such responses as “I just copied from my mum” when asked to explain how they learned or who taught them how to write. Because of the undeveloped metacognition, they show difficulty in reflecting their own learning and cannot differentiate between how they learnt and who taught them how to write. They responded in a manner to show that ‘copying’ was one way that they learnt how to write. This is a common strategy that is used in early childhood education and since Martello was able to show that the children themselves recognize this strategy, then it is a good strategy that is the same as demonstration that is accepted by the State and National English Syllabus. This research brings a reconceptualization of the early childhood education practice. Researchers like Alloway (2000) showed that there are flaws in using continual development and individual performance in assessing the knowledge children have on the process of learning how to write. This leads to consistent failure in the education system as recorded by the National Schools Survey (1997). This is because, children from non-English speaking backgrounds, Aboriginal students and students from poverty stricken families might not perform well in these continuous development assessments. However, that does not mean that they don’t understand the process of learning. It is only when the way children view the process of learning how to read and write is known as investigated by Martello that it becomes easy to come up with the necessary strategies to help them learn with ease. Martello’s research is limited by small sample interviewed. It would also be beneficial in the research is conducted on a wider scale with children of different age groups who are still in their early years of education. This will help gain a wider perspective of hat children in the early years of learning recognize as the strategies of learning in writing. The findings of this research report are also very important because they hold very significant education solutions to improving literacy results for pre-school children because such findings will change the setting of debate surrounding the teaching standards in early childhood education. It is strongly argued (Hill & Langford, 1997) that people in the early childhood education practice should build on the children’s conscious understanding of the learning process. The same was what Martello investigated to show that children do understand this process when they are learning to write. Therefore, teachers have to me very sensitive on issues of understanding and how children in diverse communities understand different processes. This also contributes to the perspective of developing a pedagogy chat that will lead childhood practices from adult-run to child-run practices. This research paper shows one of the many tensions existing in the current early childhood practice. This refers to the efforts to safeguard the children’s early childhood experiences against interferences by the processes of learning. The children should not learn under pressure and parents pushing and compelling their children to learn faster is not encouraged. Knowing that the children consciously understand the process of learning is in itself a cause to continue with the required strategies of teaching. These views given by the children are closely tied to the strategies of teaching and learning, syllabus and curriculum as well as factors formerly interpreted as natural balance of the child’s environment. With theories explain the development of the process of learning and the strategies used in writing, reconceptualization of the powers of teachers and parents in the children’s learning process. The balance should be done such that the power and the influence of teachers are not dominant. Literacy is not only in relation to reading but writing is also included. It is also about the rights of the learners and the about the access they have to the resources of understanding the process of learning. In this respect, Martello has shown that the children understand how they learn and that should not be taken for granted. The children have put learning how to write in their own words and their voice should be respected and taken by anyone in the early childhood education practice as a cause to offer better learning environments to them. This is a must read for all early childhood educators in the present age. Reference: Alloway, N. (2000), Reconceptualising early liceracy achievement: Moving beyond critique-paralysis, Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 24 (4), 1-5. Gray, B. (1987) How 'na(ural' is natural language teaching-employing wholistic merhodology in the classroom. Australian Journal of Early Childhood.12 (4),3-19 Hill, K. & Langford, P. (1997) Writing in the prep grade. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 9 (2), 38-43. Landis, D. (2003). Reading and writing as social, cultural practices: Implications for literacy education. Reading and Writing Quarterly, 19, 281-307. Masters, G. (1997) Literacy Standards in Australia. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia. Piro2zo, R.. (1986) The young gifted read.er. Australian, Journal of Early Childhood, 11 (1), 38-41. Richardson, L. (2000). Writing: A method of inquiry. In N. Denzin, & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research (pp. 923-948). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Roberts, M. ]. (1965) Some thoughts on it. Australian Pr~~School Quarterly, 5 (4), 4-6. Read More