In our centre we do not have a computer set up for children to use freely. Tsantis, Bewick & Thouvenelle (2003) say that some teachers do not value computers in their classrooms because many lack the confidence or knowledge to provide the opportunities. Be rest assured, the teachers in my room are more than computer savvy and proficient on computers. We have discussed how we feel about the importance of computers in our setting. Although we value computers and believe they are a fantastic tool for children to visualise difficult concepts and represent their discoveries through expressive media, we feel if computers are made readily available in our room some children may use it as a substitute for social interaction with others (Ministry of Education, 1996; Ministry of Education, 2007). The reason we believe this is because we have a few 4.5yr old children with additional learning needs, who, although computers can reveal hidden talents they possess, building their social competency in preparation for school is far more important at this point of their development, than sitting behind a computer discovering something that will be part of their future for many years to come (Katz & McCellan, 1997). Of course this is just the opinion of a few teachers, not a collective as a whole. In saying this, we want to provide an environment where all children have the opportunity to explore Information Technology but will not take precedence over the importance of social interactions within the environment (Ministry of Education, 1996). Therefore, we have developed a plan to introduce technology but still require sourcing the appropriate programs before we can implement it fully (Netsafe, 2008). We would like to run a computer lab similar to primary school. Two times a week we will divide the children into 3 groups, one with each teacher armed with a laptop preparing to explore the interests of the children in the group. We believe it is important that learning experiences that we provide throughout the curriculum are child lead not teacher directed (Arthur, Beecher, Death, Dockett & Farmer, 2008). This is not to say that we do not make suggestions or facilitate, because we do. I am merely suggesting that whatever experience we provide for the children have come from their interests and not plucked out of thin air. This IT exploration will run for an hour and a half, although there is flexibility within this allocated time as it depends on where the children lead the play. Our fourth teacher will provide supervision for those children that do not wish to participate as it is not a compulsory experience. We look forward to implementing the change in our centre and hopefully it is a beneficial one for all involved. We will be doing a self-review on our plan of action once implemented and evaluate and refine our practice if needed (O’Connor & Diggins, 2007).
References
Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Death, E., Dockett, S., & Farmer, S. (2008). Programming and planning in early childhood settings (4th ed.). Victoria, Australia: Thompson.
MacNaughton, G., & Williams, G. (2009). Techniques for teaching young children: Choices in theory and practice. New South Wales, Australia: Pearson Prentice Hall.
Ministry of Education. (1996). Te Whāriki, he whāriki mātauranga mo nga mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early childhood curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand Curriculum Retrieved from
http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/the new zealand curriculum.
Netsafe. (2008). Netsafekit for ECE. Wellington, New Zealand: Ministry of Education.
O’Connor, A., & Diggins, K. (2002). On reflection: Reflective practice for early childhood educators. Lower Hutt, New Zealand: Open Mind Publishing.
Tsantis, L.A., Bewick, C.J., & Thouvenelle, S. (2003). Examining some common myths about computer use in the early years. Young Children, 58(1), 1-9.
