SUSS Advocating for Childrens Outdoor Play Paper Question 1 Discuss if Singaporeans need to have a paradigm shift if we were to promote more outdoor learn

SUSS Advocating for Childrens Outdoor Play Paper Question 1

Discuss if Singaporeans need to have a paradigm shift if we were to promote more outdoor learning for young children. Propose the kinds of policies and educational practices that would be required to support Singapore’s early childhood educators to promote outdoor learning. In your response, demonstrate your current understanding of local policies/practices, as well as knowledge of child development.

—–> yes, Singaporeans need to have a paradigm shift. Do elaborate on what kind of shift is required, and why?

Current Singapore’s policies:

1. currently, Singapore requires Gross motor activities to be carried out (For full day services) 1 hour daily, with at least 30 minutes outdoors or 45 minutes thrice weekly outdoors or equivalent, or (For half day services) 30 min thrice weekly, with at least one session outdoors or equivalent

(reference: page 29 https://www.ecda.gov.sg/Documents/Resources/Guide%20to%20Setting%20up%20an%20Early%20Childhood%20Development%20Centre.pdf)

2. Every child care centre shall have access to outdoor play space. The outdoor playground must be within walking distance from the child care centre, i.e. the children should not cross any vehicular roads to reach the playground. For playgrounds located on different levels, staircases must not be more than 2 flights of steps (maximum 10 steps each). (reference: https://www.childcarelink.gov.sg/ccls/uploads/CCC_Guide.pdf Appendix C, or page 5) (Singapore is too safe?)

3. “The GUSTO cohort is based in Singapore, a high-income country where screen use is among the highest globally. At 2 years of age, about 75% of our study children exceeded the recent AAP recommendations for 2 and 3 year old children. Similarly to previous reports in older children, we found that SVT tracks moderately between 2 and 3 years. An increase in SVT between 2 and 3 years was mostly due to an increase in hand-held device SVT, consistent with findings from a cross-sectional study among Singaporean children aged 2 years and below.” (Proof that Singaporean toddlers have too much screen time?)

(Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5584344/ )

4. “Several parental behavioral predictors were also observed. Maternal television viewing time???3 h/day was among the strongest predictors of children’s total SVT and television viewing time, but not of hand-held device viewing time. Paternal television viewing time???2 h/day was associated, although less strongly, with total and device-specific SVT. Previous studies have reported that the presence of frequent screen users in the household is associated with children’s screen behavior. Altogether, the evidence suggests that children’s screen use behavior is strongly influenced by parental behavior. Targeting parental behavior in early childhood may be a potentially effective avenue for interventions aimed at reducing children’s SVT.” (There need to be a shift in parent’s mindset? Root of the problem?”

(Reference: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5584344/ )

— I’m not sure if you can find any other articles on Singapore’s childcare policies.

— Also include knowledge of child development — ie, children need outdoor play. why?

— Also, include on other good policies you may know from other countries to implement in Singapore.

Question 2

Select and review TWO recently published (i.e., in the last 5 years) journal articles that provides evidence to advocate for young children’s outdoor learning.

—-> I have attached 4 journal articles which MAY or MAY NOT be useful. Do choose the best 2, otherwise do help me to outsource your own.

Discuss what you have learned from these two articles and think about THREE things that you would do to support either 3-year-olds’ OR 5-year-olds’ (select one age group) enjoyment of and learning in the outdoors.

1500 words in total Article
Actualizing children’s
participation in the
development of outdoor
play areas at an early
childhood institution
Action Research
0(0) 1–17
! The Author(s) 2015
Reprints and permissions:
sagepub.co.uk/journalsPermissions.nav
DOI: 10.1177/1476750315621610
arj.sagepub.com
Kwi-Ok Nah
Department of Early Childhood Education, Soonchunhyang University, South Korea
Sun-Mi Lee
School of Social Welfare, College of Social Science, Chung-Ang University, South Korea
Abstract
This study examined how children’s participation can be actualized, and their perspectives
respected, through an action research project that engaged them in the development of an
outdoor play area in a child care center in South Korea. An educator devised a broad plan
and invited children to participate and take the initiative in leading the project. Young
children were capable of expressing their points of view and could contribute directly to
issues that mattered to them if they worked in accordance with ‘‘child-centered’’ methods
and were appropriately supported by adults. Communication with children was also identified as an important means of clarifying their true perspectives, also allowed for the
formation of shared meanings. The children perceived themselves as confident learners,
developed the ability to communicate and negotiate with other children and adults, showed
initiative and enthusiasm, and acquired democratic attitudes and skills. The educator also
changed her perspectives and attitudes toward children’s rights and capacities as well as
toward outdoor play and learning and maintained these changes in her pedagogy and
management of the classroom. An inclusive context and sustainable implementation of
child participation are recommended for the purpose of realizing children’s rights and
transforming education and child care practices.
Keywords
Child participation, action research, children’s perspectives, outdoor play, South
Korea
Corresponding author:
Sun-Mi Lee, School of Social Welfare, College of Social Science, Chung-Ang University, 84 Heukseok-Ro,
Dongjak-Gu, 156-756 Seoul, Korea.
Email: smlee@cau.ac.kr
Downloaded from arj.sagepub.com at EMORY UNIV on February 29, 2016
2
Action Research 0(0)
Introduction
During the past 20 years, interest in the rights of children to be involved in decision
making about educational policies and practices has increased. According to the
1989 United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC), children have the right to express their views and to have those views, given due
weight in all matters a?ecting them. Children’s voices should be heard and
respected to ensure that their perceptions, concerns, desires, and dreams are considered in decisions about their education and everyday lives. Children younger
than eight years of age are also endowed with these rights related to many areas of
their lives (Lundy, 2007).
Experience with participation in decision-making processes during the early
years of childhood can help develop democratic citizens. That is, children who
learn to participate during their early years are more likely to become capable
and involved citizens with respect for the principles and practices of a democratic society (Miller, 1997), resulting in the development of the skills involved
in citizenship in such a society (Bae, 2009; Lansdown, 2001; Sinclair & Flanklin,
2000). To enable young children to mature into democratically oriented individuals, children must have the opportunity to express their opinions, be
involved in decision making, and experience real in?uence over their everyday
environment (Lindahl, 2005). Furthermore, children’s initial experiences of these
kinds of participation in educational institutions can also play an important role
in helping them subsequently contribute to their communities and the broader
society as citizens, behaving according to the rules of a democratic society. Such
participation also leads to better choices about and services for children, enhancing their quality of life and well-being by incorporating their needs and interests into decision-making processes (Thomas, 2007). Thus, the right to
participate contributes not only to their survival and quality of life but also
to their community.
This international trend toward child participation has led educators in the ?eld
of early childhood to seek ways to solicit children’s opinions and perspectives
about their experiences in educational and care settings. As a result, young children
have become increasingly involved in projects that clarify their perspectives about
themselves and their lives (e.g., priorities, interests, concerns, and views).
Speci?cally, Bae (2009) analyzed how children’s right to participation was realized
when they expressed themselves in everyday interactions, such as mealtimes, circle
times, and free-play periods in preschools. Pascal and Bertram (2009) also worked
with children to explore and document their experiences in early childhood through
a series of research and development projects. Other researchers have involved
young children in the redevelopment of an outdoor play area (Clark & Moss,
2005) and in the actual design and review projects for a new institution for children
(Clark, 2007, 2010a). Adopting a more inclusive and participatory approach, some
researchers (Harcourt, 2011; Lundy, McEvoy, & Byrne, 2011) in the ?eld of early
childhood education and care have also attempted to involve young children in all
Downloaded from arj.sagepub.com at EMORY UNIV on February 29, 2016
Nah and Lee
3
stages of the research process, including research design, data collection and interpretation, and dissemination of results.
Traditionally, children’s voices have been muted and marginalized in research
(Cannella, 1997) because children have generally been believed to be incompetent
and in the process of ‘‘becoming adults.’’ New sociological studies of childhood
have reconceptualized children as competent social actors in their own right rather
than as preadult ‘‘becomings’’ (Holloway & Valentine, 2000; James & Prout, 1997).
Studies undertaken from this perspective (e.g., Clark, 2007, 2010b; Clark & Moss,
2005; Harcourt, 2011; Lundy et al., 2011) view young children as contributing to
the accumulation of knowledge in their own lives and as meaning makers. This
approach is consistent with a social constructivist view of learning (Rogo?, 2003),
according to which children play an active role in the construction of knowledge in
a social context.
One common issue in this domain involves the development of approaches that
enable young children to participate e?ectively. Young children can be viewed as
presenting communication di?culties in research settings owing to the possibility of
nonliterate status. Clark and Moss (2001) argued that researchers should attempt to
engage preschool children with the myriad of symbolic languages through which
children represent and communicate their experiences. They emphasized the use of
participatory methods, including photographs taken by children, child-led tours, and
map making in addition to the traditional methods such as observations and interviews. The most signi?cant characteristics of these participatory methods are their
visual, kinesthetic, and manipulative features, which provide e?ective ways for
young, nonliterate children to document their experiences and priorities. These participatory methods could elicit children’s perspectives about their everyday lives and
produce more ‘‘authentic’’ knowledge about children’s subjective realities (Grover,
2004). Thereby, child-friendly participatory methods identify children as competent
and autonomous beings, skillful communicators, meaning makers, and active participants who are ‘‘experts’’ and ‘‘agents’’ in their own lives (Clark, 2005, 2010b;
Langsted, 1994; Pascal & Bertram, 2009).
An important function of this process involves enabling young children to play a
signi?cant role in image building by exploring meanings with their peers, educators,
researchers, and parents. Visual or kinesthetic documentation using photo albums,
maps, slideshows, drawings, and child-led tours make children’s perspectives visible
in a way that can initiate conversation and provide a platform for communication
with relevant personnel (Clark, 2010b; Clark & Moss, 2005). Participatory research
considers review and discussion based on the data as important and does not
privilege the data per se. For example, Green?eld (2004) used child-directed
photography to identify the activities valued by the preschool children in their
outdoor play area. However, the data used in her paper were not derived from
the photographs alone but from the discussions that she had with the children while
collaboratively creating scrapbooks.
In East Asian countries, such as China, Japan, and South Korea, Confucianism
and paternalism have formed the foundation of traditional hierarchical and
Downloaded from arj.sagepub.com at EMORY UNIV on February 29, 2016
4
Action Research 0(0)
authoritarian relationships between parents and children and between educators
and students. Children’s participation has been restricted by this cultural context
and by traditional adult attitudes that view children as subordinate to adults.
However, this has also been a period of social change, including Westernization,
economic globalization, and the emergence of a job market that requires creativity
(Theis, 2007). In this context, children have had to become more autonomous and
show more initiative and creativity to succeed. Indeed, the recent national curricula
for young children in these societies have re?ected these values and emphasized the
need to develop democratic citizens who recognize their own rights, enjoy these
rights, and consider the rights of others. This change has led to e?orts to encourage
children to express their views and to participate in decision making.
The participatory rights of young children have not been of interest in Korea
until recently (Ahn, 2008; Lee, 2004). Child participation in education and care
institutions, such as kindergartens (for 3- to 6-year-olds) and child care centers
(for 0- to 6-year-olds) has been at a low level, although these institutions advocate
for children’s choice and the encouragement of children’s initiative (Lee, 2004).
For example, it is the educator and not the children who make decisions about
the classroom roles and responsibilities, sequences of presentations or other activities, menus for school dinners or snacks, and ?eld trips (Kim & Suh, 2011).
Although educators generally agree with the child-centered or child-initiated
approach, the actual child participation is not fully realized in the institutions
for young children.
Meanwhile, outdoor play and activities o?er more opportunities for children to
exercise their rights than do indoor ones because educators have less authority over
the former (Bilton, 2010; Stephensen, 2002; Tovey, 2007). In outdoor settings,
children have more options about what and how to play and can try various
activities, exert more control, and manipulate their environment in the absence
of the strict adult-imposed constraints that govern indoor settings. When children
have the freedom to make choices and determine their own activities, they are more
active, take more initiative, and develop a sense of agency (Tovey, 2007). Children
are capable of making their own decisions in an environment in which they can
in?uence their own and others’ actions and in which their opinions are listened to
and regarded as important (Lindahl, 2005).
Furthermore, democratic values and skills are best learned by children in
unstructured informal learning situations, such as those that occur in outdoor
play, which often involves immediate reactions and unplanned events that result
in interactions between adults and children. The consequent negotiation of roles,
symbols, and play narratives (Trawick-Smith, 1998) provide an arena in which
children can be immersed in democratic decision making and negotiation. When
playing outdoors, children can exert real in?uence over their situations and experience the possibility of self-determination. Therefore, informal outdoor play provides a good opportunity for children to learn democratic values and skills in real
situations (Aasen, Grindheim, & Waters, 2009). In summary, children have many
possibilities to exercise their rights with opportunities to make choices and exert an
Downloaded from arj.sagepub.com at EMORY UNIV on February 29, 2016
Nah and Lee
5
impact on their own environment, and their voices can be listened to and heeded by
adults while outdoors.
Accordingly, this study aimed to examine how children’s rights could be
respected, and their perspectives could be re?ected in play, learning, and lives in
early childhood institutions through an outdoor play development project.
Additionally, this project was aimed at improving the quality of outdoor play
and learning within institutions located in a city by incorporating children’s perspectives into future learning opportunities, and using the procedure and methods
as examples for other early childhood institutions. The following speci?c research
questions were postulated: how can child participation be actualized during the
development of outdoor play areas in early childhood institutions, and what are the
bene?ts and tangible changes that arise from children’s participation?
Methods
This study is a type of action research, concerned with developing practical knowledge to e?ect change in educational practices (Reason & Bradbury, 2006). An
educator, who attended weekly seminars with academics, re?ected on her practices,
with the purpose to improve in terms of respecting the children’s rights and facilitating their participation, in conjunction with assistance from us (two researchers).
We and the educator planned a project collaboratively and invited children drawn
from the educator’s class to participate. Subsequently, the project was implemented
and re?ected upon. The development of an outdoor play area was chosen as an
action project, because both the educator and the children were dissatis?ed with the
limited resources of the existing play area compared with one in a former center.
The outdoor play development project was implemented through a collaborative
e?ort among the educator, children, and researchers (Park, 2006). The project’s
design and implementation were facilitated by the employment of a more-?exible,
open-ended process, rather than applying prede?ned techniques, as recommended
by Gallacher and Gallagher (2008). This fostered meaningful participation from
the children, by allowing them to contribute to the project’s management. The
project was therefore open-ended, essentially representing the product of continuous collaboration among the educator, the children, and the researchers, with a
particular focus on the re?ections of the children’s perspectives.
Participants
An educator and 25 children, between ?ve and six years of age, participated in this
study, performed at a workplace child care center in a metropolitan area of South
Korea. The educator, who had seven years of work experience, was eager to
improve her teaching and sought advice from us accordingly, was actively involved
in researcher–educator meetings, and conceived this project for her class. While she
was working with the child participants of this project, the other educator responsible for her class worked with the remaining children.
Downloaded from arj.sagepub.com at EMORY UNIV on February 29, 2016
6
Action Research 0(0)
The center serves 258 children (between one and six years old) and is sta?ed by
38 educators. The center is open between 07:00 and 19:00 hours; however, the
regularly-scheduled educational activities occur between 09:00 and 17:00 hours.
The educator was able to apportion the time and resources required for this project, because children attended the center for the entire day and engaged in morning
and afternoon outdoor play sessions.
The child care center is located on the ground ?oor (the location of the classrooms) and the basement (the location of other facilities) of a large building. The
outdoor play area was not originally designed when the child care center was
relocated within this workplace, having been previously situated in an independent
unit (until February, 2013) because the importance of outdoor play had earlier
been overlooked by the workplace administrators. At request of the principal, the
small yard attached to the building was rearranged to create an outdoor children’s
play area, which was 450 m2 and equipped with a composite structure featuring
two slides, a three-level sandpit with water and an awning, two rocking horses, and
a small garden for plants near a fence. One hundred and seventy-?ve children,
aged > three years, used the area; each class took turns according to a predetermined schedule.
We acted as ‘‘committed facilitators, participants, and learners’’ rather than as
neutral observers (Arieli, Friedman, & Agbaria, 2009). We not only observed but
also participated in the activities involved in the development of the outdoor play
area; accordingly, child participation was actualized. Speci?cally, we participated
in the project by helping and o?ering assistance with the activities, such as visiting
nearby playgrounds, building and decorating, as well as managing and repairing
the waterways, playhouses, and golf practice ranges. We encouraged the parties
involved in the project by providing ideas, searching for relevant resources when
they approached us with problems, and cooperating in e?orts to maintain a fundamentally democratic relationship, in which all parties could exercise power and
share control of the decision-making process.
Ethical considerations
Informed consent was provided by the principal of the center, parents, and children. We and the educator sought informed consent from the center’s principal at
the outset of the project. The educator obtained informed consent from parents
after explaining the project to them when they collected their children from the
center. When obtaining consent from the children, the educator informed them that
taking part was not mandatory and that they could withdraw at any time without
any consequences. The children created and posted their own consent forms such
as ‘‘attending,’’ ‘‘absent’’ memos on the board (see Figure 1) when they began the
project, and they verbally rea?rmed or withdrew consent at each session. To
ensure that they were fully informed about what they were doing, at the start of
each session, the educator reviewed the project to date, reminded the children of the
decisions reached during the previous session, and sought informed consent for
Downloaded from arj.sagepub.com at EMORY UNIV on February 29, 2016
Nah and Lee
7
Figure 1. Children’s consent forms.
that session according to the recommendations for updating participants’ involvement in studies employing emergent research designs (Heath, Charles, Crow, &
Wiles, 2007).
Procedures
The outdoor play area development project began in March 2013 (i.e., at the
beginning of the school year) and lasted until December 2013; the project
became the once-a-week focus of the educator’s regular classroom activities.
The procedure comprised ?ve phases: capacity building, theme development, investigation, application, re?ection and sharing. The three groups of participants took
the initiative at di?erent stages in the various phases of the project (Clark, 2010b).
The children took the initiative in the phases of theme development, investigation
and application, and the educator and the …
Purchase answer to see full
attachment