An Examination of the Claims About Children and Caregivers in Kampala ECD Centers” to The

Digital Natives or Digital Immigrants? An Examination of the Claims about Children and

Caregivers in Kampala ECD Centers

Nakyeyune Yudaya

2017/HD04/1562U

A Research Dissertation Submitted to the Directorate of Research and Graduate Training in

Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Award of Master of Education in

Curriculum Studies of Makerere University

October, 2019

Declaration

I, Yudaya Nakyeyune, declare that this dissertation is my original work and that it has never been submitted in any academic institution for any academic award.

Approval

I hereby approve the submission of this dissertation titled: “Digital Natives or Digital Immigrants?

An Examination of the Claims about Children and Caregivers in Kampala ECD Centers” to the

Directorate of Research and Graduate Training in partial fulfilment of the requirements for the

Award of the Degree of Master of Education in Curriculum Studies of Makerere University to

Nakyeyune Yudaya.

Dedication

I dedicate this Book to my lovely children; Kizito Harrison and Kisa Helena.

iii

Acknowledgement

I would like to thank my supervisor, Dr. David Kabugo (PhD) Department of Language Education,

School of Education, for the patient guidance, encouragement and advice he has provided throughout my time as his student. I have been extremely lucky to have a supervisor who cared so much about my work, and who responded to my questions and queries so promptly. Completing this work would have been diﬃcult were it not for the valuable suggestions, comments and guidance support of my friend Ms. Gatrude Nambi.

My sincere gratitude is reserved for Mr. Kizito Henry Nicks for his willingness to support my education. I am indebted to all of them.

Above all I thank God for letting me through this journey of life. I feel your guidance day by day in every stages of my work. You are the one who has done a great and tremendous job for this book.

Thank you Lord, for your endless blessing that has showered upon me. I will always remain grateful to you God.

Nakyeyune Yudaya

Table of Content

Declaration ...... i

Approval ...... ii

Dedication ...... iii

Acknowledgement ...... iv

Table of Content ...... v

List of Tables ...... ix

List of Figures ...... x

Abstract ...... xi

Chapter One: Introduction ...... 1

1.0 Introduction ...... 1

1.1 Background to the Study ...... 2

1.1.1 Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants ...... 3

1.1.2 Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP) for Children (5-6 Years) ...... 4

1.1.3 Veletsianos’ Definition of Emerging Technologies (ETs) ...... 6

1.3 Contextual Perspective...... 10

1.4 Problem Statement ...... 12

1.5 Purpose of the Study ...... 14

1.6 Study Objectives ...... 14

1.7 Research Questions ...... 15

1.8 Significance of the Study ...... 15

Chapter Two: Literature Review ...... 17

2.0 Introduction ...... 17

2.1 Claims made about Today’s Children ...... 17

2.1.1 Tech-Savvy and Immersion into Technology ...... 17

2.1.2 Different Learning Styles and Preferences ...... 19

2.2 Claim(s) made about Today’s Preschool Teachers and Caregivers ...... 22

2.2.1 They Have Varied, but Feeble Digital Education Capabilities ...... 22

2.2.4 Strategies for Preparing Teachers to utilize ETs to Enhance Children’s Learning and

Development in ECD Centers ...... 24

Chapter Three: Methodology ...... 27

3.0 Introduction ...... 27

3.1 Nature of the study ...... 27

3.2 Research Approach ...... 28

3.3 Research Design ...... 28

3.4 Study Site and Participants ...... 28

3.5 Data Collection Methods and Tools ...... 29

3.6 Data Analysis ...... 29

3.7 Validity and Reliability of Findings ...... 29

3.7.1 Triangulation ...... 30

3.7.2 Debriefing ...... 30

3.8 Ethical Issues ...... 30

Chapter Four : Presentation, Analysis, and Discussion of Findings ...... 32

4.0 Introduction ...... 32

4.1 The extent to which the claims, which are being made about today’s children in

ECD Centers in Kampala true ...... 32

4.1.1 Tech-Savvy of Children in ECD Centers in Kampala ...... 32

4.1.2 Learning Styles and Preferences of Children in ECD Centers in Kampala ...... 38

4.1.3 To what extent are their ways of thinking and processing of information fundamentally

differently from their predecessors? ...... 39

4.2 Teachers’ Capabilities to Utilize ETs to enhance the Learning and Development of

today’s Children ...... 42

4.2.1 Capability of Teachers to Enhance Children’s Socio-Emotional Development ...... 42

4.2.2 Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Cognitive Development ...... 50

4.2.3 Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Linguistic Development ...... 58

4.3 Strategies which Tutors can utilize to Prepare Teachers/Caregivers to Appropriately

utilize ETs to Enhance Children’s Learning and Development ...... 64

Chapter Five: Conclusions and Recommendations ...... 70

5.0 Introduction ...... 70

5.2 Conclusions ...... 71

5.3 Recommendations ...... 72

References ...... 74

vii

Appendices ...... 80

Appendix A: Interview with Caregivers ...... 80

Appendix B: Interview Guide for Heads of ECD Centers ...... 82

Appendix C: Questionnaire on Children’s Access to Emerging Technologies ...... 83

Appendix D: Budget ...... 86

Appendix E: Timeline ...... 87

Appendix F: List of ECD Teacher/Caregivers’ Training Institutions in Kampala 97

Appendix G: Introductory Letter ...... 99

viii

List of Tables

Table 1.1: Examples of Emerging Technologies in Early Childhood Development (ECD) ...... 8

Table 1.2: Modules Offered and Examined in the ECD Teacher training colleges ...... 11

Table 4.1: Children’s access to and experiences of using Emerging Technologies ...... 34

Table 2: Children's Access to, and Experiences of Using Emerging Technologies (n=70) ...... 36

Table 4.2: Ways in which today's Children in Kampala ECD Centers think and process

information ...... 40

Table 4.3: Capability of Teachers to Enhance Children’s Socio-Emotional Development ...... 48

Table 4.4: Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Cognitive Development ...... 55

Table 4.5: Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Linguistic Development ...... 61

List of Figures

Figure 4.1: Learning Preferences and Interests of today's Children in Kampala ECD Centers ... 38

Abstract

This study investigated the anecdotal yet problematic claims, which were generally being made about todays’ children in urban Early Childhood Development Centers (ECD) centers. Also called “Digital Natives”, today’s children in urban ECD centers are said to be spending their entire lives while surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, cell phones, social media, and so many other Emerging Technologies (ETs) and tools of the digital age. This study contextualized and investigated such claims because they create a sense of crisis that caregivers and indeed the entire education system in urban ECD centers is underprepared to enhance the learning and development of today’s children. In light of these claims, the following questions were raised: i. To what extent are the claims, which are being made about today’s children in ECD centers in Kampala true? ii. To what extent are nursery teachers/ caregivers in ECD centers in Kampala capable of utilizing ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children? iii. How can tutors in ECD teacher-training institutions better cultivate caregivers’ capabilities to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children? In order to obtain answers to these questions, this study employed an amalgam of Case Study data collection methods including questionnaires, direct observations as well as interviews. Data was conveniently collected from fifty (50) nursery teachers, seventy (70) children, and 10 tutors spread in 12 ECD centers and 5 ECD training institutes in Kampala. Quantitative data was presented in tabular form using Ms. Excel and was analyzed using Descriptive Statistics. On the other hand, qualitative data was analyzed using Theory-Driven Thematic Analysis (TDTA). More specifically, the themes form qualitative evidences, were aligned to Copple and Bredekamp (2009)’s theoretical model and characterization of Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP) for Early Years. Contrary to the above anecdotal claims, findings of this study revealed that children in the 12 ECD centers in Kampala are by large, Digital Immigrants. While 33.4% of children in studied ECD centers had a fairly good access to technologies, their ability to use available technologies for learning and development purposes is limited and not identical. This result provides evidence that these children’s lives are not immersed into technology. On the other hand, a big number (77%) of children preferred technology-based to print-based methods of learning. For this reason, the claim that there is a distinctive new generation of children with different learning preferences was regarded. With regard to caregivers’ capabilities to use ETs, it was established that big percentages (53.2%, 59.9% and 61.8%) of teachers have little or no capabilities to utilize ETs to enhance children’s socio-emotional, cognitive, and linguistic development respectively. Conclusively, this study noted that not all children in urban ECD centers have access to technology, and while majority of children are Digital Immigrants, the there is need to cultivate teachers’ capabilities to utilize ETs in developmentally appropriate ways to enhance these children’s learning and development. Drawing from tutors’ views and literature on ETs and DAP, a Seven-Step Model of cultivating nursery teachers’ capabilities to appropriately use ETs to foster the learning and development of Digital Natives was generated.

Chapter One

Introduction

1.0 Introduction

Several grand claims have been made about a new generation of children that is entering Early

Child Development (ECD) centers across the globe. Some such claims are that today’s children are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach, today’s children have changed drastically from those of the past, they have changed not just incrementally nor simply changed their learning styles, but also represent a first generation of children to grow up with and use immersive technologies. Also called “Digital Natives” / “Net-Generation”, today’s children are said to be spending their entire lives surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, cell phones, social media, and so many other emerging technologies (ETs) and tools of the digital age. Many more claims about today’s children are being made. However such claims need to be contextualized and investigated, because then, they create a sense of crisis that caregivers and teachers in ECD centers and preschools especially in developing contexts seem to be underprepared to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of these

Digital Natives.

In light of the above view, this study sought to investigate the said claims in the context of ECD centers in Kampala. The rest of this chapter is organized as follows: Conceptual underpinnings, contextual perspective, problem statement, purpose, study objectives, research questions, and significance of this study.

1.1 Background to the Study

Different studies and reports (MoES&S, 2001, UWEZO 2015; NAPE, 2015; UNEB 2013) on education in Uganda do revel that in spite of the many changes and reforms there is a suspicion that children are not taught well and are not learning. There are few well trained personnel in early childhood pedagogy, care and management at all levels. The

Government of Uganda has made this area of study a national priority by calling for a dramatic increase in the number of qualified early childhood teachers, teacher educators, caregivers and managers of ECD Centres (MOES, 2012 and the National Integrated Early

Childhood Development, IECD Policy). Though ECD is an old discipline in Uganda its relatively new. It’s in recent years that people have begun taking ECD more seriously.

According to (MoGLSD, Central Uganda has the highest ECD child enrolment and school concentration of approximately 39%. The history of ECD in Uganda is linked to the Early Christian

Missionaries and the Madrasa (Ssekamawa 1997) Today and given the expansion of formal schooling in Uganda Early Childhood education is more refined and well structured unlike the early ECD by the missionaries which was mainly under trees and meant to introduce children to either catechetical or Koranic instructions.

This study was anchored on Prensky (2001)’s concept of “Digital Natives”, Velestianos(2011)’s definition of “Emerging Technologies”, and Copple and Bredekamp (2009)’s concept of

“Developmentally Appropriate Practices” (DAP) as its conceptual underpinnings. Each of these three concepts is illuminated in light of this study as below:

1.1.1 Digital Natives and Digital Immigrants

Prensky (2001a) used the term “Digital Natives” to refer to a new generation of children who are born with, and live their lives surrounded by digital technologies:

What should we call these new students of today? Some refer to them as the N-[for Net]-Gen, or

D-[for digital]-Gen. But the most useful designation I have found for them is, Digital Natives”

Our students today are all “native speakers” of the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet.” (Prensky, 2001a: 1)

On the other hand, Prensky (2001a) referred to all those adults who were not born into the digital age but have, at some later point in their lives, become fascinated by and adopted many or most aspects of emerging technologies into their work as Digital Immigrants.

Prensky’s distinction between digital natives and digital immigrant is important in the context of this study, because, it brings tries to contrasts today’s children (Digital Natives) with their teachers/caregivers (Digital Immigrants). It is inferred here that like all immigrants, several teachers/caregivers in ECD centers are not native speakers of the digital language i.e. not know how to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance children’s learning and development, while those who know the digital language still retain a certain degree of their "accent," that is, their traditional ways of teaching. Inferring from this, we can call all those caregivers/teachers in ECD centers with computers but who for example return to using counting-sticks or stones to teach certain mathematical concepts to children, as having an immigrant accent. There are so many characteristics of digital immigrant teachers/caregivers in ECD centers. Literature purporting the distinctiveness of today’s children and the characteristics of today’s teachers is reviewed later in

3 chapter two of this study. This study contends that teachers need engage in Developmentally

Appropriate Practices including gaining a certain level of digital proficiency and capabilities in order to effectively address the learning and developmental needs of the digital natives. In the next section, the concept of Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP) is illuminated.

1.1.2 Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP) for Children (5-6 Years)

According to the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC),

Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP) is the practice of an excellent caregiver or teacher who knows and changes his/her teaching practices to meet the socio-emotional, cognitive and linguistic development needs of his/her children. NAEYC argues that in order to adjust caregiving and teaching practices to meet children's development needs, caregivers and teachers must research and be educated on child development and a variety of extant and emerging approaches and tools for caring and teaching children. Every tool, approach and strategy used should be appropriate for children’s learning at a given developmental stage. This study was concerned about DAP for children of 5-6 years.

According to Copple and Bredekamp (2009), DAP for children of 5-6 years entails caregivers and teachers using appropriate tool, approach and strategies that essentially engage children into learning through play, community, and social interaction with peers. The dual suggest that as a caregiver, it is developmentally appropriate to be modeling positive social interactions in the classroom, fostering positive relationships between students of different cultures and ethnicities, give children leadership roles in the classroom, and teach in whole and small group settings, with peer interaction during instruction. They added that it is important in this year that children spend the majority of the day moving, with little time sitting down and still. Children at this age should

4 be working and developing their fine and gross motor skills through this daily movement. At this stage of development, children are expected to spend time playing outside everyday, with a regular physical education schedule. Other social, emotional, cognitive and linguistic learning tasks that are recommended for children at this stage include:

i. Learning body and spatial awareness, as well as key movements like balancing, jumping

and catching objects of varied size. Children should have time daily to exercise their fine

motor skills, such as through writing with utensils of varied size, using scissors, play

dough, puzzles, etc. Along with physical development, kindergarten is a time when

students should be developing self-help skills, which should be promoted by teachers

through giving students daily activities that teach them to care for themselves. These

activities would look like washing their hands, putting on jackets and cleaning up after

their own classroom activity.

ii. Giving regular time in the classroom for students to be conversing with others, and working

in small groups on projects that teach communication, listening and understanding skills.

Teachers should provide opportunities for students to verbally respond to questions,

describe scenarios, retell stories, and give directions. It is important that English Second

Language students are integrated and involved in these discussions and peer work time, in

order to develop their listening, speaking and understanding skills.

iii. Introducing children to phonological and phonemic awareness by implementing songs,

poems, books, etc. Students should have books read to them on a daily basis. Books should

be available in a classroom library at all times and contain a variety of story types. It is

appropriate at this age that students are taught the sounds of letters, and writing should be

encouraged throughout. Math is taught through manipulatives, block play, games, etc., and

at this age it is natural for students to begin to try and make sense of the world through

mathematics. Science is based off students’ natural curiosity and experiences. Science

should be a hands-on activity.

iv. Technology should be integrated into the classroom through computers, and any other

available technology in the classroom in a way that fosters problem solving and thinking,

and by teachers to document children.

Although Emerging Technologies (ETs) can mediate children’s engagement in the above socio- emotional, cognitive and linguistic tasks thereby having potential to enhance their learning and development, several teachers are said to be digital immigrants with limited understanding and capabilities to integrate ETs into preschool activities. In the next section, the concept of emerging technologies (ETs) is explained.

1.1.3 Veletsianos’ Definition of Emerging Technologies (ETs)

Before Siemens and Tittenberger (2009), and Veletsianos (2010)’s works, the term Emerging

Technologies (ETs) had been generally talked about in education and technology fora as if it has a straight forward definition.

Siemens and Tittenberger (2009) gave Social Networking Software such as Second Life, Facebook and Google Reader among others as examples of ETs. The dual also had the view that ETs are not neutral but embody philosophies and ideologies in themselves, reflecting particular worldviews. They noted that ETs have multiple affordances (see Bower, 2008) such as the ability of SNS to provide emergent learning paths through interaction with peers.

Unlike Siemens and Tittenberger (2009), Veletsianos (2011) took on a different view of ETs, by focusing less on their specific affordances. In his works, Veletsianos defined ETs in education more broadly, as “tools, concepts, innovations, and advancements utilized in diverse educational settings to serve varied education-related purposes” (2010:3). He characterized ETs as follows:

i. ETs are context-specific and not necessarily new technologies. For example, online gaming

and Twitter have been around for some time but may still be considered emerging in HEIs

depending on how and where they are appropriated.

ii. ETs are evolving or, in other words, in a “dynamic state of change where technologies and

practices are in a continuous state of refinement and development”.

iii. ETs also go through established hype cycles of “euphoria, adoption, activity and use,

maturity, impact, enthusiasm, and even infatuation”.

iv. ETs are not yet fully understood and not yet fully researched, which might account for the

fact, that they are often being used in “old and familiar ways” without taking full advantage

of their potential.

v. ETs have the potential to disrupt current teaching and learning practices, but this potential

is mostly unfulfilled or has yet to be realized.

Although there has been a significant interest in the definition and integration of Emerging

Technologies (ETs) in Higher Education, there is still a big dichotomy about the actual meaning and relevance of ETs in Early Childhood Development (ECD) and preschool activities especially

7 in developing contexts. Often times, ETs are generally discussed with reference to their role in

Higher Education in especially developed contexts, and in ways that are taken for granted, without any profound discussion about their meaning, accessibility, relevance and usage in ECD in developing contexts. Examples of technologies that are generally considered to be emerging in the field of ECD include:

Table 1.1: Examples of Emerging Technologies in Early Childhood Development (ECD)

# Technologies Considered to be Emerging in ECD Literature Source

Handheld gaming devices e.g. Game Boy, Atari Lynx, (Hutsko, 2000; East, 2009)

1 Turbo Express, Wonderswan Color,PSP G

Digital Cameras eg, 360 degrees cameras, Action (Walter, 2006)

2 Cameras, Pocket Sized Cameras

Video Camcorders e.g. analog and digital, camera (Pongue , 2007)

3 phones, Built in Projector

Electronic toys e.g. digital pet, robot dog, (Levin, 2001)

4 entertainment robot

Multimedia players for music and videos e.g. Home (Immink, 1991)

5 theatre and a 3D Video player

6 Digital audio Recorders

7 Interactive whiteboards (Beeland Jr, 2002)

Programmable and radio-controlled toys eg. Bee-Bot, (Janka, 2008)

9 Alarm clock

Musical keyboards e.g., piano hammer, digital (Schellenberg, 2004)

10 keyboard

11 Talking toys (Justine &Kimiko, 2001)

12 Books that incorporate music (Green, 2008)

Children’s websites e.g. Time for Kids, star fall, make (Duncan, 2018)

13 me Genius, PBS Kids

14 Mobile devices e.g. smart phone (Sharples, 2005)

15 Video-conferencing (Lloyd & Walsh, 2011)

16 Computers (Pinar, Olgun, & Nicola, 2002)

17 Face book

18 Twitter

19 You-Tube

20 Emails

Table 1above lists some (n=20) of the technologies that have been considered to be emerging in

Early Childhood Development (ECD). Basing on Veletsianos (2010)’s five characterizations of

ETs, and Copple and Bredekamp (2009)’s definition of Developmentally Appropriate Practices

(DAP) in early years, this study was aimed at cultivating caregivers’ capabilities of using ETs to enhance the learning and development of Digital Natives in Kampala ECD centers. In the next section, the context of teachers’ use of ETs to enhance the learning and development of Digital

Natives in Kampala ECD centers is illuminated.

1.3 Contextual Perspective

This study was conducted in Early Childhood Development (ECD) centers and caregivers training institutions in the central regions of Uganda, particularly Kampala. Kampala has more than one hundred (100) ECD centers close to fifty caregivers training institutions (See Appendix F). Most of these caregivers training institutions and ECD centers are in the hands of private individuals.

The liberalization of education in Uganda opened doors for private institutions to participate in education provision at levels, including caregivers training and ECD provision (Ssegawa, 2007;

Muwagga, 2006). This development (liberalization) came with a number of concerns including the issue of quality. In order to regulate the quality of education provision by private proprietors in the country, Ministry of Education and Sports (MoES) through its Directorate of Education Standards

(DES) set minimum standards, which education proprietors at different levels must meet. For instance, at the ECD level, DES requires that every ECD Teacher-Training Institutions (TTIs) should be affiliated to a protuberant chartered university, which should offer pedagogical support to tutors, conduct summative assessments /examination, as well as certify ECD teachers and caregivers in collaborating ECD centers. On the other hand, the Department of Teacher Instructor

Education and Training (TIET) is the one in charge of ECD teacher/caregivers’ training. These two ministry organs (DES and TIET) play a vital role enhancing the standards and quality of ECD provision in the country, including giving guidance on training frameworks and curricular, children’s learning environments, and other ECD related pedagogical issues. The different ECD training institutions though in private hands do comply and follow a national ECD teacher training frame work in which the following disciplines are taught as listed in the table below:

Table 1.2: Modules Offered and Examined in the ECD Teacher training colleges

SN Module code and Name Module code and Name Module code and Name

Year One Year Two Year Child Care

( Finalists )

CES 111 CEC211 Administration CC111 Introduction to ECD

Introduction to ECD & Management of ECD

CEC 113 CEC 212 Child Health CC112

Educational Psychology and Nutrition Learning Framework for ECD

CEC 125 Language CEC 226 Language CC113 Child Health, Nutrition,

Teaching & Development Teaching & Development Safety and security

CEC 112 Child Growth & CEC 213 Foundations of CC114 Child Rearing and Care

Development Education Practices

CEC 124 Mathematics CEC 224 Home CC115 Introduction to

Education in ECD Management language

CEC 123 Child Study & CEC 223 Special Needs

Field Work Education in ECD

CEC 122 CEC 221 Cultural

Pre-primary Curricular Education

CEC 114 Educational CEC 222 Developmental

Technology in ECD Studies in ECD

CEC 214 ICT

Modules in table 2 show the various disciplines that ECD teachers and caregivers learn how to teach and care for the children. Different reports do indicate that in spite having a good learning frame work for ECD teacher training many of the tutors and student teachers seem not to be applying Emerging Technologies (ETs) in both in the teacher training and in the student teachers class practice and child care. The teaching framework is based on the Early Childhood

Development Policy in the Education Sector approved in 2007 which stresses the importance of

Early Childhood Education (ECD); the early stimulation of different parts of the brain to provide social and learning advancement throughout life and it is geared at enhancing The Learning

Framework for Early Childhood (3- 6 Years) and the Caregivers Guide To The

Learning Framework (3 – 6 Years). This study was conducted twelve (12) ECD centers and five 5 caregivers’ training institutions in Kampala with the view of establishing the extent to which the claims that are being made about children in these centers are true, as well as establishing the extent to which teachers and caregivers in these centers have capabilities of appropriately utilizing

ETs to enhance the learning and development. Conversely, the study was also purposed to generate strategies, which tutors in these teacher/caregivers training institutions can use to better cultivate caregivers’ capabilities to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of children in these ECD centers.

1.4 Problem Statement

Several anecdotal claims are being been made about today’s children in Early Childhood

Development (ECD) centers especially of urban areas. Today’s children in ECD centers of especially urban areas are said to be changing drastically from those of the past; they are said to have changed not just incrementally nor simply changed their learning styles, but also represent a

12 first generation of children to grow up with and use emerging technologies for their learning and development. Also called “Digital Natives” / “Net-Generation”, today’s children in ECD centers in urban areas are said to be spending their entire lives while surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, cell phones, social media, and so many other emerging technologies (ETs) and tools of the digital age.

This study argued that the above and other related claims are anecdotal and problematic needing to be contextualized and investigated. Otherwise, such claims create a sense of crisis that caregivers and indeed the current education system is underprepared to enhance the learning and development of today’s children that are entering ECD centers in especially urban areas.

In light of the above view, this study sought to contextualize and investigate the above claims obtain answers to the following questions:

a) To what extent are today’s children in ECD centers in Kampala “Digital Natives”?

b) To what extent do caregivers in ECD centers in Kampala have capabilities to appropriately

utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of “Digital Natives”?

c) What “best” strategies can tutors follow to cultivate caregivers’ capabilities to

appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of “Digital Natives”?

Although the practice of using emerging technologies (ETs) is increasingly common among childcare givers and teachers in preschools in Uganda, there is limited research on appropriate utilization of ETs to transform children’s learning and development. According to (Masoumi,

2015) in many pre-school activities, ICTs are utilized as a way to entertain and keep kids busy and

13 quiet, which may not have any defined relevance to the designated curriculum. In view of this discrepancy of the emerging technologies and their inappropriate use in childcare giving and teaching in preschool activities, there is need to model caregivers and teachers. While the NCDC’s

Caregivers’ Training Framework of 2013 presents some guidelines for integration of ICTs in preschool activities, (ECD Caregivers’ Training Framework, 43, 125), those guidelines are generally indistinct and fuzzy and thus do not sufficiently support teachers in the integration of

ICTs in preschool settings. In order to occupy this niche, a study was made to develop a robust pedagogical framework for developmentally appropriate integration of ICTs into childcare activities.

1.5 Purpose of the Study

The purpose of this study was to generate “best” principles for cultivating caregivers’ capabilities to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of Digital Natives.

1.6 Study Objectives

This study intended to achieve the following objectives:

a) To establish the extent to which the claims that are being made about today’s children in

ECD centers in Kampala are true.

b) To establish the extent to which teachers and caregivers have capabilities of appropriately

utilizing ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children in Kampala ECD

centers.

c) To generate strategies, which tutors in ECD teacher-training institutions can use to better

cultivate caregivers’ capabilities to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and

development of today’s children.

1.7 Research Questions

This study sought to answer the following questions;

i. To what extent are the claims, which are being made about today’s children in ECD centers

in Kampala true?

ii. To what extent are caregivers in ECD centers in Kampala capable of utilizing ETs to

enhance the learning and development of today’s children? iii. How can tutors in ECD teacher-training institutions better cultivate caregivers’ capabilities

to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children?

1.8 Significance of the Study

It was hoped that findings of this study would benefit the following categories of people and institutions.

i. Teachers and Caregivers in ECD Centers: This study shares best practices, evidences and

compelling examples of how to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance children’s socio-

emotional, cognitive and linguistic development

ii. Tutors in ECD Teacher-Training Institutions: This study shares strategies, which tutors in

ECD teacher-training institutions can use to better cultivate caregivers’ capabilities to

appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children.

iii. Researchers especially in the Field of ECD and Educational Technologies: This study

extends the “Digital Natives vs Digital Immigrants” debate by examining the claims which

are being made about children and caregivers in Kampala ECD Centers. The study also

suggests researchers in this field, a testable model of cultivating caregivers’ capabilities to

appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children.

Chapter Two

Literature Review

2.0 Introduction

In this section, literature related to the three objectives of this study is reviewed, starting with the claims that are being made about today’s children.

2.1 Claims made about Today’s Children

2.1.1 Tech-Savvy and Immersion into Technology

One of the grand claims that are being made about today’s children is that today’s children are fluent speakers of the digital language implying that they are technology savvy, and that they live their entire lives surrounded by, and immersed into technology. According to Prensky (2005a), today’s children are “fluent in the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet”

(Prensky, 2005b:8). In their attempt to expand similar claims, McNeely (2005) and Windham

(2005) report about the difficulty today’s children can face when disconnected from Internet.

According to Windham (2005), today’s children live a connected life.

Research into how young people access and use technology offers a more diverse view of the role of technology in the lives of young people. For example, a survey of 4374 students across 13 institutions in the United States (Kvavik, Caruso & Morgan, 2004) found that the majority of respondents owned personal computers (93.4%) and mobile phones (82%) but a much smaller proportion owned handheld computers (11.9%). The most common technology uses were word processing (99.5%), e-mailing (99.5%) and surfing the Net for pleasure (99.5%). These results do demonstrate high levels of ownership of some technologies by the respondents and high levels of

17 some academic and recreational activities, and their associated skills. The researchers found, however, that only a minority of the students (around 21%) were engaged in creating their own content and multimedia for the Web, and that a significant proportion of students had lower level skills than might be expected of digital natives.

The general thrust of these findings is supported by two recent studies of Australian university students (Kennedy, Krause, Judd, Churchward & Gray, 2006; Oliver &Goerke, 2007) showing similar patterns in access to ICTs. These studies also found that emerging technologies were not commonly used, with only 21% of respondents maintaining a blog, 24% using social networking technologies (Kennedy et al., 2006), and 21.5% downloading podcasts (Oliver &Goerke, 2007).

As observed by Kennedy et al. (2006), although many of the students were using a wide range of technologies in their daily lives, “there are clearly areas where the use of and familiarity with technology-based tools is far from universal” (p. 8). Some of this research (Kennedy et al., 2006;

Kvavik et al. 2005) has identified potential differences related to socio-economic status, cultural/ethnic background, gender and discipline specialisation, but these are yet to be comprehensively investigated. Also not yet explored is the relationship between technology access, use and skill, and the attitudinal characteristics and dispositions commonly ascribed to the digital native generation.

Large scale surveys of teenagers’ and children’s use of the Internet (cf. Lenhart, Madden &Hitlin,

2005; Livingstone &Bober, 2004) reveal high levels of online activity by many school-aged children, particularly for helping with homework and for social communication. The results also suggest that the frequency and nature of children’s Internet use differs between age groups and

18 socio-economic background. For instance, Internet use by teenagers is far from uniform and depends on the contexts of use, with widely varying experiences according to children’s school and home backgrounds (Lee, 2005). This is further supported by recent research showing family dynamics and the level of domestic affluence to be significant factors influencing the nature of children’s home computer use (Downes, 2002). These findings suggest that technology skills and experience are far from universal amongst young people.

In summary, though limited in scope and focus, the research evidence to date indicates that a proportion of young people are highly adept with technology and rely on it for a range of information gathering and communication activities. However, there also appears to be a significant proportion of young people who do not have the levels of access or technology skills predicted by proponents of the digital native idea. Such generalisations about a whole generation of young people thereby focus attention on technically adept students. With this comes the danger that those less interested and less able will be neglected and that the potential impact of socio- economic and cultural factors will be overlooked. It may be that there is as much variation within the digital native generation as between the generations.

2.1.2 Different Learning Styles and Preferences

The second assumption underpinning the claim for a generation of digital natives is that because of their immersion in technology young people “think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors” (Prensky, 2001a, p. 1,emphasis in the original). Brown (2000), for example, contends “today’s kids are always “multiprocessing” – they do several things simultaneously – listen to music, talk on the cell phone, and use the computer, all at the same time”

(p. 13). It is also argued that digital natives are accustomed to learning at high speed, making random connections, processing visual and dynamic information and learning through game-based activities (Prensky, 2001a). It is suggested that because of these factors young people prefer discovery-based learning that allows them to explore and to actively test their ideas and create knowledge (Brown, 2000).

Although such claims may appeal to our common-sense perceptions of a rapidly changing world there is no evidence that multi-tasking is a new phenomenon exclusive to digital natives. The oft used example of a young person doing homework while engaged in other activities was also applied to earlier generations doing homework in front of the television. Such examples may resonate with our personal observations, but research in cognitive psychology reveals a more complex picture. For example, multi-tasking may not be as beneficial as it appears and can result in a loss of concentration and cognitive ‘overload’ as the brain shifts between competing stimuli

(Rubinstein, Meyer & Evans, 2001; Sweller, 1988).

Nor is there clear evidence that the interactivity prevalent in most recreational computer games is applicable to learning. The enthusiasm for educational games amongst some commentators rests on the possibility of harnessing the high levels of engagement and motivation reported by many game players to motivate students to learn. Although the idea has excited interest for many years and there is some evidence that highly modified game-based approaches can support effective learning (Dede, 2005), research into how to design games that foster deep learning is inadequate

(Moreno & Mayer, 2005). Furthermore, the substantially greater popularity of games amongst males compared to females (Kennedy et al., 2006; Kvavik et al. 2005) may limit the appeal of

20 games to all learners. This is not to say that educational games might not be effective, but simply questions the assumption that their apparent popularity in everyday life makes them directly and unproblematically applicable to education.

Generalisations about the ways in which digital natives learn also fail to recognise cognitive differences in young people of different ages, and variation within age groups. Cognitive psychologists have studied the level and range of skills exhibited at different ages (Berk, 2006;

Carlson &Sohn, 2000; Mityata & Norman, 1986). The notable differences identified throughout the key stages of infancy, early childhood, middle childhood and adolescence are significant for the digital native debate. For example, research findings have identified the developing capacity of short-term memory (Cowan, Nugent, Elliott, Ponomarev & Saults, 1999). As this capacity increases with age, so too do children’s abilities to scan information more quickly, apply strategies to transform it more rapidly, hold more information within memory and move between tasks more easily. Thus, differences across the developmental stages need to be considered when making claims about the level of skills ‘young people’ have and their ability to successfully utilise these when interacting with ICTs.

Furthermore, the claim that there might be a particular learning style or set of learning preferences characteristic of a generation of young people is highly problematic. Learning style theories (cf,

Kolb, 1984; Jonassen & Grabowski, 1993) do differentiate between different preferences learners might have and different approaches they might adopt, but these are not seen as static nor are they generalisable to whole populations. Such theories acknowledge significant variability between individuals. Research also shows that students change their approach to learning depending on

21 their perception of what a task requires and their previous success with a particular approach

(Biggs, 2003; Ramsden, 1992). To attribute a particular learning style or even general preferences to a whole generation is thus questionable.

In this section, we have examined the key assumptions underlying the claim that the generation of young people born between 1980 and 1994 are ‘digital natives’. It is apparent that there is scant evidence to support this idea, and that emerging research challenges notions of a homogenous generation with technical expertise and a distinctive learning style. Instead it suggests variations and differences within this population which may be more significant to educators than similarities.

Some commentators might still argue that regardless of whether the digital native phenomenon is a generational trait or whether it is more due to exposure to ICTs, the education of tech-savvy students is still a major issue for education. This second prominent claim in the debate, that education must fundamentally change to accommodate digital natives’ interests, talents and preferences, therefore requires exploration.

2.2 Claim(s) made about Today’s Preschool Teachers and Caregivers

2.2.1 They Have Varied, but Feeble Digital Education Capabilities

Like all immigrants, it is claimed, teachers who were not born in a digital age, have limited digital literacies and capabilities, although, some are better than others. Nevertheless, “all digital immigrants retain, to some degree, their accent that is, their foot in the past” (Prensky, 2001a:

1).According to Prensky, the “digital immigrant accent” in some teachers can be seen in such things as:

i. Turning to the Internet for information second rather than first

ii. Reading the manual for a program rather than assuming that the program itself will teach

them to use it. iii. Printing out their emails (or having their Secretary to print it out for them iv. Printing out a document written on the computer in order to edit it rather than just editing

on the screen.

v. Bringing people physically into their offices to see an interesting web site rather than just

sending them the URL.

There are many more of symptoms that digital immigrants show. However, what is crucial is not to compile all the symptoms here, but to emphasize the need to address the problem that comes with having digital immigrant teachers teaching digital native children. Prensky (2001) contends:

The single biggest problem facing education today is that our Digital Immigrant instructors, who speak an outdated language (that of the pre-digital age), are struggling to teach a population that speaks an entirely new language. This is obvious to the Digital Natives – school often feels pretty much as if we have brought in a population of heavily accented, unintelligible foreigners to lecture them. They often can’t understand what the Immigrants are saying (Prensky, 2001a: 1)

Teacher-Educators, including tutors in ECD caregivers’ and teacher-training institutions, need to adopt appropriate strategies to prepare caregivers and teachers to appropriately utilize ETs to

23 enhance children’s learning and development. Otherwise, a number of caregivers and teachers would continue to graduate from these institutions feeling ill-prepared to address the needs of today’s children. In the next section, a review of literate on strategies of preparing teachers for integration of ETs into teaching is presented.

2.2.4 Strategies for Preparing Teachers to utilize ETs to Enhance Children’s Learning and

Development in ECD Centers

Several researchers including Agyei and Voogt (2011), Sang, Valcke, van Braak, and Tondeur,

2010), Drent and Meelissen (2008), Dawson (2008) and Kirschner and Selinger (2003) who have researched about ICT and teacher preparation have highlighted the importance the quantity and quality of pre-service technology experiences that are included in teacher education programs as a crucial factor that influences new teachers’ technology utilization. Kohler and Mishra (2017) also emphasized that whenever the quantity and quality of pre-service technology experiences that is included in teacher education programs is low, teachers graduate from their training program with limited Technological Pedagogical and Content Knowledge (TPACK). According to Tondeur

(2010), there exist a gap between what pre-service teachers are taught in their courses and how teachers use technology in a real classroom. Consequently, several preservice teachers graduate from their training institutions when they are still ‘digital immigrants’. In this section, a range of strategies which have been proposed for tutors to prepare preservice teachers to integrate ETs into teaching are discussed.

Using teacher-educators as role models: Several studies urge teacher-educators to “walk the talk” when teaching preservice teachers how to utilize technology in teaching and learning. One of the ways of “walking the talk” in this respect is to model preservice teachers in technology use.

Modeling preservice teachers in technology use requires that teacher-educators themselves utilize and actually integrate technology in teacher-preparation programs rather than simply talk about technology in those programs. This strategy helps preservice teachers to learn what their trainers are doing (Angeli & Valanides, 2009) and would help accumulate examples and practices of technology integration in teacher-education curriculum.

Learning Technology by Design: In this strategy, “teachers work collaboratively in small groups to develop technological solutions to authentic pedagogical challenges” (Kohler and Mishra,

2005:1). This approach to learning technology integration into teaching is rooted in Dewey

(1934)’s Constructivist and Project-based Learning principles, which seek to promote learning by doing. By following this strategy, teacher-trainers avoid the temptation of simply making

PowerPoint presentations and lecturing to their trainees, as the latter is often the major limitation in conventional approaches to teacher-preparations and trainings.

Scaffolding Authentic Technology Experiences: Different researchers including Brush et al.,

(2003), Tearle and Golder (2008), and Angeli and Valanides (2009) tend to agree that it is crucial for teacher-trainers to provide the necessary scaffolds, such as additional support for trainees to learn how to effectively integrate technology into their pedagogical practices.

Technology Leadership and Policy Implementation: Related studies on teacher preparation and technology integration have established that in those institutions that lack technology leadership and do not have very clear technology in education policies, students’ understanding and readiness for technology integration is usually weak. For example, Clift et al. (2001) stated, “In some schools, not using technology was simply not an option” (Clift et al., 2001: 47). In this respect,

Tondeur (2011) urged that it is necessary for policy development at the institutional level to develop a shared vision on technology integration. It should also be observed that some teacher education programs require the use of technology, while others did not have this shared vision.

Some other strategies, which have been suggested for teacher-trainers to prepare teacher-trainers to effectively integrate technology into their pedagogical practices include: reflecting on attitudes about the role of technology in education(Goktas, Yildirim, &Yildirim, 2009), collaborating with peers (Brush et al., 2003; Angeli & Valanides, 2009), changing assessment strategies (Lavonen et al., 2006; O’Reilly, 2003; Sahin, 2003), staff development (Clift et al., 2001), and access to resources (Goktas et al., 2008; Seels et al., 2003) among others. Although these strategies are potentially transformative, their presentation in literature is often in a loose form that does not indicate how each of these strategies is related to each other. This study asserts that overarching framework indicating the relationship among different strategies of preparing teacher-trainees for technology integration in teaching is potentially transformative and important for enhancement of the learning and development of today’s children.

Chapter Three

Methodology

3.0 Introduction

This chapter presents in a greater detail how the research was conducted. It described the research design, research approach, sampling procedures, data collection methods and analysis, constraints and ethical considerations.

3.1 Nature of the study

The study was largely a basic research study in the way that, it increased my understanding of the problem in detail thus increased my scientific knowledge base and purely anchored on the social cultural activity theory which informed my research questions that was used in analysis of data.

Therefore the overarching basic research questions that SCAT helped me answer were; How childcare givers and Pre-teachers utilized ICTs to enhance children’s cognitive skills, How

Childcare givers and Pre-teachers utilized ICTs to enhance children’s social skills and How childcare givers and Pre-teachers utilized ICTs to enhance children’s linguistic skills? After gaining of the deeper understanding of the problem, the study was partially an applied study which was practically carried out in the course of the activity of childcare giving and pre-teaching and came up with guidelines to guide the appropriate integration of ICTs in ECD activities. Therefore the overarching question was; what principles would childcare givers and pre-teachers follow to appropriately integrate ICTs in order to enhance children’s learning development?

3.2 Research Approach

The study followed an interpretive approach with an aim of understanding the subjective world of human experience, and sought to describe, explain and interpret the subjective reasons and meaning that lie behind social action. The human experience and social action of interest in this study was that of the caregivers and teachers in Kampala ECD centers had to integrate different

ICTs in preschool activities. After identifying the different ICTs that caregivers had access to and utilized, the researcher sought to describe, explain and interpret how such ICTs were utilized to enhance children’s learning and development. From that analysis and insights gained, robust pedagogical principles would be generated.

3.3 Research Design

Qualitative data was gathered from 50 pre-school teachers (subjects) in order to better understand their own evolving understanding of appropriate use of different technologies. These pre-school teachers were asked to write about their own understanding of appropriate use of ICTs and how they utilized the various ICTs to enhance the different learning areas.

3.4 Study Site and Participants

This study engaged fifty (50) nursery teachers, seventy (70) children, and 10 tutors spread in 12

ECD centers and 5 ECD training institutes in Kampala. The 12 ECD centers and 5 ECD training institutes in Kampala were conveniently selected because of the researcher’s proximity and prior experiences working with them. It should be reported that the researcher coordinates the pedagogical capacity building, assessment and certification activities of all those ECD in the

Central Region of Uganda working under the Early Childhood Development (ECD) Project at

Makerere University.

3.5 Data Collection Methods and Tools

In order to obtain answers to these questions, this study employed an amalgam of Case Study data collection methods including questionnaires, direct observations as well as interviews. As indicated in section 3.4, data was conveniently collected from fifty (50) nursery teachers, seventy

(70) children, and 10 tutors spread in 12 ECD centers and 5 ECD training institutes in Kampala.

3.6 Data Analysis

The quantitative data collected in this study was presented in a tabular form in Ms. Excel and analyzed using Descriptive Statistics. On the other hand, qualitative data was analyzed using

Theory-Driven Thematic Analysis (TDTA). More specifically, the themes, which were generated from qualitative evidences collected, were aligned to Copple and Bredekamp (2009)’s theoretical model and characterization of Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP). The DAP themes were used to augment the meaning that were obtained from the descriptive statistics.

3.7 Validity and Reliability of Findings

According Creswell and Clark (2007, 2011), Shenton (2004) and Miles, Huberman, and

Saldana(2014), the strength of a research study is informed by its validity and reliability. To ensure the validity and reliability of findings in the proposed study, the following were the strategies were adopted:

3.7.1 Triangulation

This is a method involved in collecting and analyzing data from both qualitative and quantitative strategies (Amin, 2005). The weaknesses or shortcomings in one method or tool would be compensated for and by another method or tool (Creswell & Clark, 2007). In the study researcher would therefore use observation tool and interviews to collect data. The observation was conducted first and then interviews done last with the view of linking the latter to the former.

3.7.2 Debriefing

Findings of this study were be subjected to several debriefs by peers and researcher’s supervisors.

Similarly, findings of this study were conducted in different seminar series that are held in the

Department of Foundations and Curriculum studies in the College of Education and External

Studies. This enabled the researcher to obtain constructive criticisms from the peers and supervisors.

3.8 Ethical Issues

While conducting the study with human subjects it involved ethical issues especially those relating to informed consent and confidentiality (Herrington, 2016). The following guidelines by the

Directorate of Research and Graduate Training (DRGT) of Makerere University, the researcher acted ethically in the following ways follows:

1. Ensured that caregivers’ and Pre school teachers’ participation in the study was entirely

on a free will and voluntary basis by allowing participants to sign a consent form to

participate in the study.

2. Prior to their participation, all participants were given full information about the study

including how it would be conducted and what it would involve.

3. Pseudo names were used during data transcription, analysis and reporting. This was done

with the view of securing their anonymity.

4. Participants were availed with feedback after the research was done.

All the identified ethical considerations were used and applied for issues of protecting all the participants in the study as well as observing their rights.

Chapter Four

Presentation, Analysis, and Discussion of Findings

4.0 Introduction

This study sought to find answers to the following questions: a) To what extent are the claims, which are being made about today’s children in ECD centers in Kampala true? B) To what extent are caregivers in ECD centers in Kampala capable of utilizing ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children? c) How can tutors in ECD teacher-training institutions better cultivate caregivers’ capabilities to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children? In order to obtain answers to these questions, this study employed an amalgam of Case Study data collection methods including questionnaires, direct observations as well as interviews. The findings to these questions are presented and discussed as below:

4.1 The extent to which the claims, which are being made about today’s children in ECD

Centers in Kampala true

4.1.1 Tech-Savvy of Children in ECD Centers in Kampala

Some of the grand claims that are being made about today’s children are that today’s children surrounded with technology, they are immersed into technology, and that they are fluent speakers of the digital language implying that they are technology savvy. According to Prensky (2005a), today’s children are “fluent in the digital language of computers, video games and the Internet”

(Prensky, 2005b:8). In their attempt to expand similar claims, McNeely (2005) and Windham

(2005) report about the difficulty today’s children can face when from Internet. In order to

32 investigate this claim, children who participated in this study (n=70) were asked about their access to, and experiences of using a number of Emerging Technologies. A list of twenty (20) often-used

ETs was generated based on existing literature, in particular, the Encyclopedia of Early Childhood

Education (2019). Table 1 below shows the descriptive statistics relating to children’s access to, and ability to utilize ETs for their learning and development.

Table 4.1: Children’s access to and experiences of using Emerging Technologies

Don’t At least On a know Children’s access to, and experiences of using once in regular % % Never % what you % Emerging Technologies the past basis mean by year # this

Handheld gaming devices eg Game Boy, Atari

Lynx, Turbo Express, Wonderswan Color, 9 12.9 8 11.4 19 27.1 34 48.6

1 PSP G(Hutsko, 2000; East, 2009)

Digital Cameras eg, 360 degrees cameras, Action 12 17.1 10 14.3 26 37.1 22 31.4 2 Cameras, Pocket Sized Cameras (Walter , 2006)

Video Camcorders e.g. analog and digital, camera 13 18.6 14 20.0 21 30.0 22 31.4 3 phones, Built in Projector (Pongue , 2007)

Electronic toys e.g. digital pet, robot dog, 17 24.3 14 20.0 20 28.6 19 27.1 4 entertainment robot (Levin, 2001)

Multimedia players for music and videos e.g. 10 14.3 14 20.0 21 30.0 25 35.7 5 Home theatre and a 3D Video player

6 Digital audio Recorders (Immink, 1991) 23 32.9 20 28.6 12 17.1 15 21.4

7 Interactive whiteboards (Beeland Jr, 2002) 5 7.1 2 2.9 25 35.7 38 54.3

Programmable and radio-controlled toys eg. Bee- 24 34.3 18 25.7 17 24.3 11 15.7 9 Bot, Alarm clock (Janka, 2008)

Musical keyboards e.g., piano hammer, digital 13 18.6 15 21.4 19 27.1 25 35.7 10 keyboard (Schellenberg, 2004)

11 Talking toys(Justine &Kimiko, 2001) 9 12.9 8 11.4 28 40.0 25 35.7

12 Books that incorporate music (Green, 2008) 13 18.6 14 20.0 27 38.6 16 22.9

Children’s websites e.g. Time for Kids, star

fall, make me Genius, PBS Kids (Duncan, 12 17.1 19 27.1 28 40.0 11 15.7

13 2018)

Mobile devices e.g. smart phone (Sharples, 23 32.9 27 38.6 10 14.3 10 14.3 14 2005)

15 Video-conferencing (Lloyd & Walsh, 2011) 5 7.1 2 2.9 25 35.7 38 54.3

16 Computers (Pinar, Olgun, & Nicola, 2002) 25 35.7 28 40.0 12 17.1 5 7.1

17 Face book 7 10.0 5 7.1 25 35.7 33 47.1

18 Twitter 2 2.9 1 1.4 29 41.4 38 54.3

19 You-Tube 3 4.3 1 1.4 30 42.9 36 51.4

20 Emails 1 1.4 0 0.0 29 41.4 40 57.1

Average 17% 16% 31.8% 34.8%

Table 1:Children's Access to, and Experiences of Using Emerging Technologies (n=70)

Findings in table above refer. Contrary to common anecdotal claims, findings of this study revealed that children in the 12 ECD centers in Kampala are by large, Digital Immigrants. While

33.4% of children in the 12 studied ECD centers had a fairly good access to technologies, 66.6% did not have access to, and have no understanding of several ETs. In fact, even with 33.4% who had access to, and hand an understanding of the above ETs had divergent views about the potential of these technologies in enhancing their learning and development. This result provides evidence that today’s children are not completely immersed into ETs as perpetuated in some intuitive debates. Related research on young people’s access to and use ETs for learning and development offers more diverse views of the expertise that young people have about using technology in their lives. For example, a study of 4374 students across 13 institutions in the United States (Kvavik,

Caruso & Morgan, 2004) established found that the majority of young people owned personal computers (93.4%) and mobile phones (82%) but a much smaller proportion owned handheld computers (11.9%). According to Kvavik, et.al (2004), the most common technologies which young people accessed in the US were word processing (99.5%), e-mailing (99.5%) and surfing the Internet for pleasure (99.5%). Whereas these results demonstrated high levels of ownership of some technologies by young people in developed context, understandably, the opposite is to be true in Kampala ECD centers, being in a developing context. On the other hand however, it was established that though limited the number of children who have access to ETs in Kampala ECD centers is small, those who have access are indeed highly adept with such technologies and rely on those technologies to enhance their socio-emotional, cognitive and linguistic development.

To this end, this study concludes that today’s children in Kampala ECD centers are to a very limited extent technology-savvy. A big percentage (66.6%)does not have access to, and have no

37 understanding of several ETs. It was noted that even within the33.4% that had a fairly good access to, and understanding of ETs(the digital natives), there are as many variations of the their levels of adeptness.

4.1.2 Learning Styles and Preferences of Children in ECD Centers in Kampala

It is asserted that today’s children learn differently from those of past: “Our students have changed radically. Today’s students are no longer the people our educational system was designed to teach

(Prensky, 2001a: 1). Figure below presents summary response to a question of whether the learning preferences and interests of Children in ECD Centers in Kampala significantly different from those of the past. One dichotomy of technology vs. print-based methods was explored:

Learning preferences and interests of Children in ECD Centers in Kampala

Series1, Print Methods, 16, 23% Technology Methods

Series1, Technology Print Methods Methods, 54, 77%

Figure 4.1: Learning Preferences and Interests of today's Children in Kampala ECD Centers

Although a big percentage (66.6%)children in Kampala ECD centers does not have access to, and have no understanding of several ETs, the other results of this study indicated that majority of these children (77%) would prefer to learn using technology-based rather than print-based methods.

4.1.3 To what extent are their ways of thinking and processing of information fundamentally differently from their predecessors?

The third main claim that is being made is that because of their assumed immersion in technology, today’s children “think and process information fundamentally differently from their predecessors”

(Prensky, 2001a: 1).Brown (2000), for example, contended “today’s kids are always

“multiprocessing” – they do several things simultaneously – listen to music, talk on the cell phone, and use the computer, all at the same time” (Brown, 2000: 13). Extending Brown’s thinking,

Prensky (2001) added today’s children are familiarized to learning at high speed, making random connections, processing visual and dynamic information and learning through game-based activities. It is suggested that because of these factors, today’s children prefer discovery-based learning that allows them to explore and to actively test their ideas and create knowledge. Using a

Likert scale instrument, this study established the extent to which these claims are true to children in Kampala ECD centers. Table below presents a summary of the findings to the above question:

Table 4.2: Ways in which today's Children in Kampala ECD Centers think and process information

Strongly Strongly # Ability to: % Agree % Disagree % % Agree Disagree

Effectively multi-

task i.e. do several

things

simultaneously –

1 listen to music, talk 9 12.9 8 11.4 19 27.1 34 48.6

on the cell phone,

and use the

computer, all at the

same time

2 Learn at high speed 12 17.1 10 14.3 26 37.1 22 31.4

Make random 3 13 18.6 14 20 21 30 22 31.4 connections

Process visual and

4 dynamic 17 24.3 14 20 20 28.6 19 27.1

information

Learn through

5 game-based 10 14.3 14 20 21 30 25 35.7

activities

Learn independently

6 through discovery 23 32.9 20 28.6 12 17.1 15 21.4

and exploration

Actively test

personal ideas and 13 18.6 14 20 21 30 22 31.4

7 create knowledge

Whereas the above seven attributes of thinking and information processing are somewhat appealing to our common-sense perceptions of what a typical digital native would be like, results of this study showed that most of the above thinking and information processing attributes/capabilities are missing in today’s children. For instance, with regard to multi-tasking, it was established that 75.7% disagree or strongly disagreed i.e. are unable to effectively multi- task i.e. do several things simultaneously – listen to music, talk on the cell phone, and use the computer, all at the same time when learning. Some caregivers argued that whereas some of their children attempt to multi-task, their actual performance of given task is usually below average:

Some of my children who attempt to multi-task end up being disrupted and losing concentration thereby performing poorly. (Caregiver #48)

To this end, this study disregarded the generalization that are being made about how today’s children learn. Such generalization fail to recognize the cognitive differences in young people lives. This study revealed that today’s children do not have a solitary learning style. Whereas a few can multi-task successfully, the majority need complete one task at time, and in guided rather than independent or self-regulated way. In the next section, findings regarding teachers’ capabilities to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children in Kampala ECD centers are presented.

4.2 Teachers’ Capabilities to Utilize ETs to enhance the Learning and Development of today’s Children

This study sought to establish the extent to which teachers and caregivers have capabilities of appropriately utilizing ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children in

Kampala ECD centers. As illuminated in section 1.1.2, this study argues that children’s learning and development is mediated by Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP).According to the

National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC), Developmentally

Appropriate Practice (DAP) is the practice of an excellent caregiver or teacher who knows and changes his/her teaching practices to meet the socio-emotional, cognitive and linguistic development needs of his/her children. NAEYC argues that in order to adjust caregiving and teaching practices to meet children's development needs, caregivers and teachers must research and be educated on child development and a variety of extant and emerging approaches and tools for caring and teaching children. Every tool, approach and strategy used should be appropriate for children’s learning at a given developmental stage. This study was concerned about DAP for children of 5-6 years.

4.2.1 Capability of Teachers to Enhance Children’s Socio-Emotional Development

Children's

Learning Qualitative Evidence from Capability Strongly Strongly and % Agree % Disagree % % Interview / Observations in Dimension Agree Disagree Development Classroom Environment

Domain

Teacher uses the Bubblr App to

3 6.0 9 18.0 15 30.0 23 46.0 engage children in creating comic

strips using photos from flickr.

Self-identity 6 12.0 11 22.0 16 32.0 17 34 Children take a sequence of pictures

and self where they add bubbles and create a

Esteem story in which they describe

Emotional Development themselves, their family, and

culture (Observation of Teacher

12 24.0 17 34.0 16 32.0 5.0 10.0 #1)

13 26.0 16 32.0 16 32.0 5 10.0 I was able to make children work Positive 13 26.0 22 44.0 10 20.0 5 10.0 together on a computer game with attitude the view of improving their way of toward self 15 30.0 18 36.0 12 24.0 5 10.0 socializing with the other and and others therefore created positive attitude 17 34.0 19 38.0 12 24.0 2 4.0

Utilizing ETs to Enhance Children's Social and 43

toward self and others. (Interview

18 36.0 20 40.0 11 22.0 1 2.0 with Caregiver #9)

At first, I ask my children to choose

and sing any cradlesong of their 4 8.0 8 16.0 19 38.0 19 38.0 choice clearly emphasizing the

words in each song. Then, I go to 3 6.0 8 16.0 19 38.0 20 40.0 YouTube to access copyright-free

or open version of that particular 5 10.0 9 18.0 17 34.0 19 38.0 song which I then project on the Confidence in screen in the classroom. After self projecting that lullaby, the child

sings it again and usually, on the

second or third attempt, s/he has

perfected and gained a lot of

confidence in singing that particular

song (Interview with Caregiver

15 30.0 18 36.0 13 26.0 4 8.0 #10)

Independence 7 14.0 12 24.0 22 44.0 9 18.0

Children are able to search their

own cradlesongs on 9 18.0 10 20.0 16 32.0 15 30.0 http://youtube.com with little or no

assistance from the teacher. The 15 30.0 12 24.0 13 26.0 20 40.0 teacher set child protection and

content-filter settings right before

children searched the websites.

Children almost knew the all the

rules and procedures for using the

website YouTube in their class. Use

of this website made the class

engaging and lively (Observation

10 20.0 16 32.0 15 30.0 9 18.0 of Teacher #10)

As we go along, my children learn

to use these technologies Rights of self 16 32.0 14 28.0 10 20.0 10 20.0 responsibly. At first, they had this and others kind of ego. You know children can 9 18.0 16 32.0 18 36.0 7 14.0

be possessive and selfish. They had

this sense of entitlement. When you

are like, these programmable toys

such as the Beebot, are few in the

class, it only child who wants to

play with it all through denying

others a chance. However, they now

appreciate that others also have the

right to use the same tools and they

have learnt to share with others. I

have taught them to do activities in

turns (Interview with Caregiver

10 20.0 12 24.0 18 36.0 10 20.0 #13)

Self-control Teacher uses Jolly Phonics Videos and on YouTube at http://bit.ly/2lK49gl 15 30.0 12 24.0 15 30.0 8 16.0 Interactions to provide children with in terms of opportunities to interact with others adhering to and they participate actively in the 8 16.0 13 26.0 16 32.0 13 26.0 rules and class. Children are able to follow routines 10 20.0 9 18.0 18 36.0 13 26.0 guidelines as they mimic and

illustrate sounds of different objects

(Observation of Teacher #14)

I give these cameras to my children

and I ask them to go take pictures of

9 18.0 8 16.0 20 40.0 13 26.0 things say of thematic color. So

before they actually go out in the

Play and environment, they have to decide in interactions their different groups what objects with peers they are going to capture. They

enjoy this type of collaborative

project in which they utilize

technology(Interview with

11 22.0 15 30.0 17 34.0 7 14.0 Caregiver #16)

Teacher engages her pupils in

completing an online word puzzle Empathy at http://lovattspuzzles.com in

10 20.0 11 22.0 16 32.0 13 26.0 groups. Everyone child appears

happy to complete a word after

Shares which s/he gives the other a chance.

9 18.0 12 24.0 18 36.0 11 22.0 Through these puzzles, children

learn to share and solve the

problems together. You can see it

on their faces as they feel sorry

when the other fails on a puzzle so

they are willing to help peers out

(Observation of Teacher #19)

Average 20.9 26.7 31.4 21.8

Table 2.3: Capability of Teachers to Enhance Children’s Socio-Emotional Development

According to Infante, et al. (2010) a variety of technologies enhance children’s collaboration and interaction with peers, For instance it was found that a video game designed for multiple players using one computer screen and several input devices encouraged kindergarteners to collaborate and communicate in order to complete the game tasks. Besides, technology is widely used as communication tools, such as email, mobile phone and web cameras.

Studies have applied Bandura’s social learning theory to a number of techniques to teach pro social behaviors such as video modeling which involves a child viewing a videotape of another child successfully performing a chained task in an effort to change existing behavior or learn a new one

(Singer-Califano, 2008)

Additionally, the same study demonstrates the powerful role of collaborative dialogue between learners and teachers to help scaffold knowledge of how to function in a technology-rich learning environment. Hyun (2005) also claims that active encouragement of collaboration when using ICT has benefits for the helper as well as the helped. Research also states that computer learning activities can elicit high levels of interest on the learning task and that young children report high levels of enjoyment and engagement.

Recently (Fridin, 2014) asserts that the storytelling robot successfully promotes children’s emotional involvement in the learning process emphasizing that kindergartners show benefits from playing educational games with the robot.

4.2.2 Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Cognitive Development

Children's I am able to

Learning use different Strongly Strongly Qualitative Evidence observed from and technologies % Agree % Disagree % % Agree Disagree the Learning Environment Developmen to enhance

t Domain children’s

16. Teacher uses computer games on the IXL

8 10 20.0 16 32.0 16 32.0 0 website to enhance children’s learning of

12. mathematical concepts such as counting, 6 11 22.0 16 32.0 17 34.0 0 shapes, classification, and money.

Problem Children are strongly motivated as they

Solving skills try to learn through competition

26. mediated by a countdown/timer of this 13 14 28.0 16 32.0 7 14.0 0 website

https://www.ixl.com/math/pre-k

(Observation of Caregiver #25)

20. I utilize Capzles to enable my pupils to 10 17 34.0 15 30.0 8 16.0 0 think and construct and create stories

Utilizing ETs to Enhance Children's Cognitive Development

26. about the people they admire or want to 13 22 44.0 10 20.0 5 10.0 0 become in future. You see,

30. Capzles is a media-rich tool with 15 18 36.0 12 24.0 5 10.0 Constructive 0 different videos and photos which thinking 32. children can play with to construct 16 19 38.0 12 24.0 3 6.0 skills 0 different things (Interview with Teacher #27) 32. 16 20 40.0 11 22.0 3 6.0 0

4 8.0 8 16.0 19 38.0 19 38.0

Prediction 3 6.0 8 16.0 19 38.0 20 40.0 and planning 10. skills 5 9 18.0 17 34.0 19 38.0 0

30. 15 18 36.0 13 26.0 4 8.0 0

Logical and 16. Teacher uses the 8 7 14.0 16 32.0 19 38.0 Mathematic 0 https://www.ixl.com/math/pre-k

51 al Thinking Website to enhance children’s logical 12. skills 6 11 22.0 21 42.0 14 28.0 and Mathematical thinking. By using 0 this website, children are able to sort

and classify objects by color, by 14. 7 8 16.0 16 32.0 18 36.0 shape, size, and labels (Observation 0 of Caregiver #37)

2 4.0 7 14.0 20 40.0 21 42.0

Teacher uses Ms. Excel to teach her 18. 9 7 14.0 14 28.0 20 40.0 children the concept of sequence in 0 Mathematics. She gives a number and

asks children to tell another number

Recalling addition of which makes 10 (X+Y=10, skills where y are the different number that the 14. 7 10 20.0 20 40.0 13 26.0 teacher has set randomly in Excel. 0 Teacher has set automatic feedback in

Excel such that when a child enters a

particular number, an appropriate

feedback is given. This excites students

as they learn the concept of numbers and

sequence. (Observation of Teacher #

50)

24. 12 8 16.0 16 32.0 18 36.0 0

Analysis of 18. 9 7 14.0 14 28.0 20 40.0 Relationship 0 s 14. 7 10 20.0 20 40.0 13 26.0 0

20. Teacher uses Ms. Word to enhance 10 6 12.0 16 32.0 18 36.0 0 children’s understanding of colors and

names of different objects. She teaches Information children how to different insert images Processing 18. and objects in Ms. Word by using the Skills 9 7 14.0 14 28.0 20 40.0 0 insert tab on the menu bar. Children

select and name different objects in their

environment. They construct / type out

sentences about these different objects

such as house, school, grocery store,

church, and other locations in the

community (Observation of Caregiver

#41)

Teacher uses the SmartArt tool in Ms.

Word to enhance children’s

understanding of basic spatial 16. 8 8 16.0 20 40.0 14 28.0 relationships. Children are able to 0 Analysis of explore as they play with different

Basic Spatial SmartArt Graphics in Ms. Word

Relationship (Observation of Caregiver #50)

20. Teacher uses the SmartArt tool in Ms. Awareness 10 11 22.0 11 22.0 18 36.0 0 Word to enhance children’s awareness of of Geometric 20. Geometric shapes (Observation of Shapes 10 7 14.0 13 26.0 20 40.0 0 Teacher #38)

Teacher uses a digital clock and count Awareness 20. down timer downloaded form Google of time 10 10 20.0 17 34.0 13 26.0 0 Play Store onto a mobile phone to teach concepts time concepts to her children. Children

demonstrate an understanding the usage

of day/ night, morning/ evening words

and relate them to their daily schedule.

They construct sentences using different

time concepts including yesterday,

tomorrow, last month, before, after, first,

later. They also learn sequence of days of

the week, seasons and months using the

digital clock and count down timer.

(Observation of Teacher #46)

18. Average 22.1 31.4 28.5 4

Table 4.4: Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Cognitive Development

A study presented the effects of the Roamer Robot in children’s cognitive development.

Researchers indicate that the interaction with the robot, which is an autonomous, programmable toy, allow the child to study his ideas, construct a strategy and take decisions as well as improve problem solving answers.

Researchers have examined children’s cognitive skill development with digital media and have found that well-designed mobile -based learning activities and games can improve skills of abstract thinking, reflective thinking, and analyzing and evaluating information planning and scientific reasoning.

Eye-hand coordination improves with the use of computers at home and at school. Also, young children improve in problem-solving skills, spatial cognition, spatial representation, iconic skills, and visual attention skills when using computers, mobile and video games in school and for entertainment during leisure time at home. Use of digital media compared to traditional methods for teaching cognitive skills, and research has found that digital media are more effective in specific cases. Besides, there is a general belief that kindergarten children develop stronger memory when they use computers for learning compared to learning without new technology and multimedia

An exploratory study that was conducted showed the advantages of a Logo-based environment on an Interactive White Board in children’s cognitive skills and especially in the development of problem solving strategies and simple programs. The children followed for problem solving, either a planning strategy or a trial and error model, with teacher’s guidance and developed a variety of cognitive strategies including attention and perception (Drigas & Ioannidou, 2011).

Additionally, digital manipulative often use context sensitive sensors embedded within learning materials, in order to enhance children’s problem solving, reasoning, and deeper understanding.

Taking into account the findings of their research, it is obvious that digital media help young children to put forward thoughtful and justifiable theories about the events supporting at the same time their metacognitive skills. (Cantwell & Andrews, 2002).

4.2.3 Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Linguistic Development

Caregivers' (n=50) Perceived Capabilities in Utilizing ETs to Enhance Children's Linguistic Development

Children's I am able to use Strongl Learning different Qualitative Evidence from the Strongl Agre Disagr y and technologies to % % % % Classroom/learning y Agree e ee Disagre Developmen enhance environment e t Domain Children’s

I have downloaded a number of 8 16.0 7 14.0 15 30.0 20 40.0 mobile Apps from the internet

especially on Google Play to teach 7 14.0 11 22.0 16 32.0 16 32.0 my children different language Receptive skills including nonverbal Language language. Several of the mobile Skills reading applications such as those 10 20.0 17 34.0 16 32.0 7 14.0 on http://readbrightly.com can

make children responds to

instructions given, listen to a story

Utilizing ETs to Enhance Development Children's Linguistic

and follow pictures or words

(Interview with Caregiver #19)

Teacher uses interactive eBooks 13 26.0 15 30.0 16 32.0 6 12.0 and videos, such as Pocket

Phonics on a mobile phone teach

9 18.0 8 16.0 20 40.0 13 26.0 children how to correctly

articulate sounds. Through use of

7 14.0 18 36.0 12 24.0 13 26.0 Pocket Phonics on a mobile Expressive phone, children are able to Language produce sounds correctly, play Skills words with funny sounds,

nonsense and actual rhyming

words, imitate and repeat letter

12 24.0 19 38.0 12 24.0 7 14.0 sounds among other language

learning activities (Observation

18 36.0 19 38.0 11 22.0 2 4.0 of Caregiver #21)

15 30.0 10 20.0 19 38.0 6 12.0 Uses the

3 6.0 8 16.0 19 38.0 20 40.0 https://uk.ixl.com/ela/website to enhance children’s pre- 5 10.0 9 18.0 17 34.0 19 38.0 reading and literacy skills. On

this website, words come alive

with fun visuals and interactive Pre-Reading questions. Children are able to and Literacy construct different sentences Skills 15 30.0 18 36.0 13 26.0 4 8.0 following the SVO (Subject,

Verb, and Object) structure

through play and curiosity

(Observation of Caregiver

#22)

3 6.0 8 16.0 19 38.0 20 40.0 Teacher uses the Doodlecast App

4 8.0 11 22.0 21 42.0 14 28.0 on a mobile Phone to make Communicativ children tell stories about their e Skills 3 6.0 8 16.0 18 36.0 21 42.0 family life, preferences etc.

2 4.0 7 14.0 20 40.0 21 42.0 (Observation of Teacher #4)

6 12.0 9 18.0 21 42.0 14 28.0

Perceptual 8 16.0 8 16.0 13 26.0 21 42.0 Skills

2 4.0 7 14.0 20 40.0 21 42.0 Prewriting

Language and 7 14.0 11 22.0 18 36.0 14 28.0 Literacy Skills 9 18.0 7 14.0 17 34.0 17 34.0

Average 15.8% 22.4% 33.6% 28.2%

Table 4.5: Capability of teachers to Enhance Children’s Linguistic Development

As articulated by some teachers for example the computer that is frequently used for the development of language skills, such as reading and writing. For example, in preschool 1, this is done via different activities, like “newspaper publication”. In this preschool the computers are mainly used during the “hour of free activities” (one hour every noon, after lunch). Children demonstrate increased levels of spoken communication and cooperation during computer use

(Clements, 1994; Haugland & Wright, 1997). In general, under their teacher’s guidance, each child uses the computer two to three times a week, according to the tasks. Children work in pairs they choose by themselves: whoever chooses the computer corner must write his/her name and the date in a small diary kept beside each computer (Nikolopoulou, 2014).

Language and literacy development are major strengths of technology use with young children.

Studies show that computers encourage longer, more complex speech and the development of fluency by use techniques such as turn taking and collaboration. Computer play encourages longer, more complex speech and the development of fluency (Davidson & Wright, 1994).Young children interacting at computers engage in high levels of spoken communication and cooperation such as turn taking and collaboration (Young, 2001).

Besides computers, there are numerous other technologies that can be used effectively to support learning. For example: tape recorders support early literacy experience. They allow children to listen to recorded stories and to follow along in a book as they hear it being read on tape. When a teacher records children’s dictated words or from the tape recorder, children see how the spoken word can turn into the written works. These activities integrate all aspects of literacy, speaking,

62 listening, reading and writing. Cameras, and video recorders can be used to share artifacts of students’ learning (Young, 2001)

Van Scoter & Boss (2002) contend that one class where teachers often send home digital photos of children’s activities and field trips. Working with children to put captions on these photos offers an opportunity to develop children’s written language skills, while photos with captions deliberately left off can promote children’s oral language skills, as children use their own words to describe what the photos show.

In a Head Start kindergarten in Oregon, the latter strategy is considered particularly useful in homes where English is a second language, to support children’s oral language development in their native language. There are many ways in which ICT can support children’s storytelling. Even children who are not yet writing could dictate words to go with their pictures, or they could record their voices telling the story, or be videotaped as they tell the story and show the picture (Van

Scoter & Boss, 2002)

Also, in a similar study conducted by (Drigas, 2015) he points out the fact that, providing children with the written text together with synchronized narration, animated pictures and sound effects, enhances children’s literacy development(vocabulary, story comprehension and word reading) is supported significantly using the e-books.

4.3 Strategies which Tutors can utilize to Prepare Teachers/Caregivers to Appropriately utilize ETs to Enhance Children’s Learning and Development

Several researchers including Agyei and Voogt (2011), Sang, Valcke, van Braak, and Tondeur,

2010), Drent and Meelissen (2008), Dawson (2008) and Kirschner and Selinger (2003) who have researched about ICT and teacher preparation have highlighted the quantity and quality of pre- service technology experiences included in teacher education programs as a crucial factor that influences new teachers’ technology utilization. These same studies have however decried the quantity and quality of pre-service technology experiences included in teacher education programs is significantly low. According to the above studies, a gap exists between what pre-service teachers are taught in their courses and how teachers use technology in a real classroom. Consequently, several teachers graduate from their training institutions when they are still ‘digital immigrants’.

In this section, several strategies, which have been proposed for tutors to prepare teachers to integrate ETs into teaching, are discussed.

Aligning theory and practice: Studies suggest that to cultivate caregivers knowledge of integrating technology in teaching and learning, theory should be embedded in practice rather than being presented as isolated content i.e. how to use specific software, conceptual or theoretical information should be linked to practice so that pre-service teachers can understand the reasons behind using ICT (Brush et al., 2003; Jang, 2008a). There needs to be a combination of theory and its application in authentic learning experiences that makes learning interesting. Content of the course of technology in ECD should bear practical hours. In other words, pre-service teachers should be introduced to ways to use technology for educational purposes. Lavonen, Lattu, Juuti, and Meisalo (2006) suggest a mixture of short lectures or demonstrations and practical work. They

64 found that “studying in one’s own time and the combination of short demonstrations was a good solution”.

“The combination of theory during lectures and practice during lab time was effective for me.

From the one hand, I needed the theory, but from the other hand I also needed to see the application of this knowledge in real-world classroom examples”. Because of the vast amount of the course curriculum being theoretical, pre-school teachers were not motivated by or interested in a technology course that was heavily focused on theoretical concepts. (.) I think that a mixture of short lectures or demonstrations and practical work and studying in one’s own time was good solution” Tutor # 2

Use of teacher educators as role models: Finding technology-using teacher educators who are able to model technology use for pre-service teachers proved to be an important motivator

(Thompson, Schmidt, & Davis, 2003). Finding technology-using teacher educators who are able to model technology use for pre-service teachers through the tutor’s lectures and practice during labs and also during placements in schools

To illustrate, one pre-service teacher noted his lack of knowledge regarding how to use technology for educational purposes. I felt immensely uncomfortable but gradually, through the instructor’s lectures and practice during labs, things started to become clearer.it was difficulty finding technology-using teacher educators who are able to model technology use for pre-service teachers; I could hardly give examples of these role models in the teacher education curriculum.”

Because ICT isn’t modeled and resources are limited, pre-service teachers are unlikely to think about using it”.

Changing Attitude: Working on the change of attitude regarding the role of technology and its impact on teaching and learning. This can be done through discussion groups, observation and writing that may lead to pre service teachers’ reflection on the various experiences encountered in technological integration in classroom activities (Goktas, Yildirim, &Yildirim, 2009).

“We need to change the attitude of students in order to benefit from ICT related courses. They have negative attitudes and complain a lot about technology integration. We should change these attitudes. This is the most important problem for me” “If it technology is to be integrated in teaching and learning, our biggest task is to encourage caregivers to change their attitude towards

ICTs.” “I don’t really know what technology does to help students, and, I still don’t know how to do anything” “Without thinking and discussing with other peers, the teaching method seen from the observation is just a common teaching method. However, through writing the analyses and critiquing the teaching process, I finally realized that the theories of the teaching could be so effectively integrated into practice” “(……) I used my skills. I used my computer, video, etc. I enjoyed being active. We have to be active as the teachers of future” and “Being active is useful for positive attitudes “Tutor # 5:

Learning technology by design, Design learning experiences using technology is important in cultivating preschool teachers knowledge of technology integration. Pre-service teachers in their interventions to integrate technology in teaching and learning need to do additional planning and preparation in order to implement lessons that incorporate technology in different learning activities. They should design learning activities that are ICT- enhanced (Angeli & Valanides,

2009). Preschool teachers should learn to plan the preparation of different materials with different technologies.

“At the beginning, I felt I needed to listen to my course instructor and learn about instructional design. My initial knowledge about the design of ICT-enhanced learning activities was zero, and

I wanted to just hear about it and read about it” “I made my material. I was an active learner.

After I made my material, I presented it to my friends as an example elementary course. I learned the preparation of different materials with different technologies. Also, I observed my friends and evaluated their materials with my class and my lecture. We could not make such a good lesson design and teaching practice if we worked separately” Caregiver # 6

Peer Collaboration: Collaborating with peers was suggested to be an important fact in cultivating preschool teachers’ knowledge of technology integration. Working in groups when learning about the educational integration of ICT is vital as it leads to sharing expertise as caregivers help each other (Brush et al., 2003). According to Angeli and Valanides (2009), collaboration with peers provides a time effective, high-challenge, low threat learning environment for pre-service teachers.

It helps preschool teachers to reflect on their own performance and then evaluate their peers.

Online environment can be used as useful forums for preschool teachers to discuss and exchange points of view with others

“It was just an easy and relaxing, non-threatening way of picking things up, sharing expertise”

“The most successful part of the lesson was students helping each other’….. “I think the quality of experiences with the use of technology we get is better because you are continually getting people’s input on it”“One of the problems was that the group I was in had someone who was really good at ICT, but they went too quickly, you just got lost” Tutor # 9:

Scaffolding authentic technology experiences: According to the study, pre-service teachers suggested the importance of applying preschool teachers knowledge about educational technology in authentic technology experiences Goktas et al. (2008)

“Actually letting us experience using more ICT, more hands-on experience could not substitute for “doing. “I remember a physics lesson, I had a sound generator, and I was showing a video as well, and there was the data projector and a laptop with the oscilloscope on it, and I did all that and it worked really well. (.) I never expected to be doing this…this impacted caregivers progress”

Caregiver # 8:

Continuous Feedback: There is need to continuously assess preschool teachers’ ICT competencies in relation to what is needed in order to make progress in using technology in the classroom (Lavonen et al., 2006; O’Reilly, 2003; Sahin, 2003). This can be done through demonstration, discussions, questionnaires, interviews, and observations in order to follow how these teachers have adopted to using ICT in classrooms and what kind of problems and visions they have had in ICT use. Sahin (2003) suggested assessment based on the process.

“I think evaluation of data should be continually collected by discussions, questionnaires, interviews, and observations in order to follow how staff members have adopted ICT, how they use ICT and how their ICT competence has developed, and what kind of problems and visions they have had in ICT use. Tutor # 11:

Technology planning and leadership: Development of a technology plan at the teacher education programme level was also suggested to be an important element. There should be technology planning which is developed together with all stakeholders, supported by a task force for both

68 technical and instructional purposes in order to empower preschool teachers. (Lavonen et al.,

2006).

“In some schools, not using technology was simply not an option that was good” Tutor #12:

Co-operation within and between Institutions: According to Thompson et al. (2003) he suggested that to cultivate preschool teachers knowledge of use of ICTs, there is need for cooperation at institutional level i.e. stake holders helping each others with technology at all time and all levels in order to make technology integration successful.

Staff Development: Many studies suggested that teacher educators lacked the knowledge, skills, and self-efficacy to teach or model technology integration to pre-service teachers. They should be provided with training on use of technology through workshops, easily accessible consultants, and sharing of information. Goktas et al. (2009) study also suggested more competent staff to lead the less competent ones and transfer their experiences.

“ in my experience,……more competent staff should lead the less competent ones and transfer their experiences” Tutor # 13:

Access to Resources: Access to resources such as hardware, software, learning material, documentation, is an important condition for technology integration. Integration of technology by preschool teachers should be regularly integrated in learning experiences not to be use on special occasions.

Chapter Five

Conclusions and Recommendations

5.0 Introduction

This study investigated the anecdotal yet problematic claims, which were generally being made about todays’ children in urban Early Childhood Development Centers (ECD) centers. Also called

“Digital Natives”, today’s children in urban ECD centers are said to be spending their entire lives while surrounded by and using computers, videogames, digital music players, cell phones, social media, and so many other Emerging Technologies (ETs) and tools of the digital age. This study contextualized and investigated such claims because they create a sense of crisis that caregivers and indeed the entire education system in urban ECD centers is underprepared to enhance the learning and development of today’s children. In light of these claims, the following questions were raised:

i. To what extent are the claims, which are being made about today’s children in ECD centers

in Kampala true?

ii. To what extent are nursery teachers/ caregivers in ECD centers in Kampala capable of

utilizing ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children? iii. How can tutors in ECD teacher-training institutions better cultivate caregivers’ capabilities

to appropriately utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children?

In order to obtain answers to these questions, this study employed an amalgam of Case Study data collection methods including questionnaires, direct observations as well as interviews. Data was conveniently collected from fifty (50) nursery teachers, seventy (70) children, and 10 tutors spread in 12 ECD centers and 5 ECD training institutes in Kampala. Quantitative data was presented in

70 tabular form using Ms. Excel and was analyzed using Descriptive Statistics. On the other hand, qualitative data was analyzed using Theory-Driven Thematic Analysis (TDTA). More specifically, the themes form qualitative evidences, were aligned to Copple and Bredekamp (2009)’s theoretical model and characterization of Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP) for Early Years.

5.2 Conclusions

Contrary to the above anecdotal claims, findings of this study revealed that children in the 12 ECD centers in Kampala are by large, Digital Immigrants. While 33.4% of children in studied ECD centers had a fairly good access to technologies, their ability to use available technologies for learning and development purposes is limited and not identical. This result provides evidence that these children’s lives are not immersed into technology.

On the other hand, a big number (77%) of children preferred technology-based to print-based methods of learning. For this reason, the claim that there is a distinctive new generation of children with different learning preferences was regarded. With regard to caregivers’ capabilities to use

ETs, it was established that big percentages (53.2%, 59.9% and 61.8%) of teachers have little or no capabilities to utilize ETs to enhance children’s socio-emotional, cognitive, and linguistic development respectively. Conclusively, this study noted that not all children in urban ECD centers have access to technology, and while majority of children are Digital Immigrants, the there is need to cultivate teachers’ capabilities to utilize ETs in developmentally appropriate ways to enhance these children’s learning and development. Drawing from tutors’ and caregivers’ views six (6) key strategies for cultivating nursery teachers’ capabilities to appropriately use ETs to foster the learning and development of Digital Natives were generated:

i. Using teacher educators as role models,

ii. Learning technology by design, iii. Scaffolding authentic technology experiences iv. Technology planning and leadership,

v. Co-operation within and between institutions, vi. Training teacher educators

5.3 Recommendations

Drawing on empirical data and artifacts, this study has revealed that there is such a big mismatch between the confidence with which claims about today’s children and ECD teachers/caregivers are made and the evidence for such claims. Whereas the said claims have had such a huge attention and caused panic, this study has provided evidence to settle such panic, especially amongst ECD stakeholders. The rise of a new generation of children should not be seen by ECD stakeholders as a threat to caregiving and teaching practices in ECD centers in Kampala and beyond. Rather, its should be seen as an opportunity for especially tutors in ECD caregivers’ training institutions to grow professionally by enrolling into Continuous Professional Development Programs (CPDs) that seek to particularly cultivate their capabilities to support caregivers to utilize ETs to enhance the learning and development of today’s children.

To future studies on the same or related matter, this study recommends yet another considered and disinterested examination of the assumptions underpinning claims about digital natives such that researchable issues can be identified and dispassionately investigated. More particularly, studies on the effectiveness of multiple strategies such as using teacher educators as role models, learning

72 technology by design, scaffolding authentic technology experiences, technology planning and leadership, co-operation within and between institutions, and training of teacher educators in preparing caregivers and preschool teachers to use ETs to enhance the learning and development of digital natives need to be extensively conducted.

References

Agyei, D., &Voogt, J. (2011, March). Determining Teachers’ TPACK through observations and

self-report data. In Society for Information Technology & Teacher Education International

Conference (pp. 2314-2319).Association for the Advancement of Computing in Education

(AACE).

Amin, M. E. (2005). Social science research: Conception, methodology and analysis. Makerere

University.

Angeli, C., &Valanides, N. (2009). Epistemological and methodological issues for the

conceptualization, development, and assessment of ICT–TPCK: Advances in technological

pedagogical content knowledge (TPCK). Computers & education, 52(1), 154-168.

Beeland Jr, W. D. (2002). Student engagement, visual learning and technology: can interactive

whiteboards help?.

Berk, L. E., & Harris, S. (2006). Child Development in Action: Observation Video Guide for Berk.

Pearson Education.

Biggs, J. (2003). Aligning teaching and assessment to curriculum objectives. Imaginative

Curriculum Project, LTSN Generic Centre, 12.

Bower, M. (2008).Affordance analysis–matching learning tasks with learning

technologies. Educational Media International, 45(1), 3-15.

Brown, J. S. (2000). Growing up: Digital: How the web changes work, education, and the ways

people learn. Change: The Magazine of Higher Learning, 32(2), 11-20.

Carlson, B. E. (2000). Children exposed to intimate partner violence: Research findings and

implications for intervention. Trauma, Violence, & Abuse, 1(4), 321-342.

Caruso, J. B., &Kvavik, R. B. (2004). ECAR study of students and information technology, 2004:

Convenience, connection, and control. Boulder, CO: EDUCAUSE Center for Applied

Research. Retrieved November, 23, 2005.

Clift, R. T., Mullen, L., Levin, J., & Larson, A. (2001). Technologies in contexts:: implications for

teacher education. Teaching and teacher education, 17(1), 33-50.

Copple, C., &Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood

programs serving children from birth through age 8. National Association for the

Education of Young Children. 1313 L Street NW Suite 500, Washington, DC 22205-4101.

Cowan, N., Nugent, L. D., Elliott, E. M., Ponomarev, I., & Saults, J. S. (1999). The role of attention

in the development of short‐term memory: Age differences in the verbal span of

apprehension. Child Development, 70(5), 1082-1097.

Creswell, J. W., Klassen, A. C., Plano Clark, V. L., & Smith, K. C. (2011). Best practices for

mixed methods research in the health sciences. Bethesda (Maryland): National Institutes

of Health, 2013, 541-545.

Cuban, L., Kirkpatrick, H., & Peck, C. (2001). High access and low use of technologies in high

school classrooms: Explaining an apparent paradox. American educational research

journal, 38(4), 813-834.

Dawson, S. P., McWilliam, E., & Tan, J. P. L. (2008). Teaching smarter: How mining ICT data

can inform and improve learning and teaching practice.

Dede, C. (2005). Why design-based research is both important and difficult. Educational

Technology, 45(1), 5-8.

Diana Oblinger, E. D. U. C. A. U. S. E., Oblinger, J., Roberts, G., McNeely, B., Windham, C.,

Hartman, J., ... &Kvavik, R. (2005). Educating the Net Generation.

Drent, M., &Meelissen, M. (2008). Which factors obstruct or stimulate teacher educators to use

ICT innovatively?. Computers & Education, 51(1), 187-199.

Drigas, A., Kokkalia, G., &Lytras, M. D. (2015). ICT and collaborative co-learning in preschool

children who face memory difficulties. Computers in Human Behavior, 51, 645-651.

Games, A. 10.2 The Evolution of Electronic Games Learning Objectives.

Goktas, Y., Yildirim, S., &Yildirim, Z. (2009). Main barriers and possible enablers of ICTs

integration into pre-service teacher education programs. Journal of Educational

Technology & Society, 12(1).

Goktas, Y., Yildirim, Z., &Yildirim, S. (2009). Investigation of K-12 teachers’ ICT competencies

and the contributing factors in acquiring these competencies. The New Educational

Review, 17(1), 276-294.

Green, L. (2017). Music education as critical theory and practice: Selected essays. Routledge.

Infante, C., Weitz, J., Reyes, T., Nussbaum, M., Gómez, F., &Radovic, D. (2010).Co-located

collaborative learning video game with single display groupware. Interactive Learning

Environments, 18(2), 177-195.

Janka, P. (2008). Using a programmable toy at preschool age: why and how. Proc. SIMPAR, 112-

121.

Kennedy, G. E., Judd, T. S., Churchward, A., Gray, K., & Krause, K. L. (2008). First year students'

experiences with technology: Are they really digital natives?. Australasian journal of

educational technology, 24(1).

Kennedy, G., Krause, K. L., Gray, K., Judd, T., Bennett, S. J., Maton, K. A., ... & Bishop, A.

(2006). Questioning the net generation: A collaborative project in Australian higher

education.

Kirschner, P., &Selinger, M. (2003). The state of affairs of teacher education with respect to

information and communications technology. Technology, Pedagogy and

Education, 12(1), 5-17.

Koehler, M. J., & Mishra, P. (2017). What is technological pedagogical content

knowledge?. Foundations of Learning and Instructional Design Technology.

Lavonen, J., Juuti, K., Aksela, M., &Meisalo, V. (2006).A professional development project for

improving the use of information and communication technologies in science

teaching. Technology, pedagogy and education, 15(2), 159-174.

Levin, D. E., &Rosenquest, B. (2001). The increasing role of electronic toys in the lives of infants

and toddlers: should we be concerned?. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2(2),

242-247.

Livingstone, S., &Bober, M. (2004). Taking up online opportunities? Children's uses of the

Internet for education, communication and participation. E-Learning and Digital

Media, 1(3), 395-419.

Masoumi, D. (2015). Preschool teachers’ use of ICTs: Towards a typology of

practice. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 16(1), 5-17.

Mayer, R. E. (2005). Introduction to multimedia learning. The Cambridge handbook of multimedia

learning, 1-16.

Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods

sourcebook.

Miyata, Y., & Norman, D. A. (1986).The control of multiple activities. User Centered System

Design: New Perspectives on Human-Computer Interaction, Lawrence Erlbaum

Associates, Hillsdale, NJ.

Oliver, B., &Goerke, V. (2007). Australian undergraduates' use and ownership of emerging

technologies: Implications and opportunities for creating engaging learning experiences

for the Net Generation. Australasian Journal of Educational Technology, 23(2).

O'Reilly-Knapp, M., & Erskine, R. G. (2003). Core concepts of an integrative transactional

analysis. Transactional Analysis Journal, 33(2), 168-177.

Pickering, L. E., & Joseph Walsh, E. (2011). Using videoconferencing technology to enhance

classroom observation methodology for the instruction of preservice early childhood

professionals. Journal of Digital Learning in Teacher Education, 27(3), 99-108.

Prensky, M. (2001). Digital natives, digital immigrants part 1. On the horizon, 9(5), 1-6.

Ramsden, P. (1993). Theories of learning and teaching and the practice of excellence in higher

education. Higher Education Research and Development, 12(1), 87-97.

Sahin-Hodoglugil, N. N. (2003).Theorist as an authentic person.

Sang, G., Valcke, M., Van Braak, J., &Tondeur, J. (2010). Student teachers’ thinking processes

and ICT integration: Predictors of prospective teaching behaviors with educational

technology. Computers & Education, 54(1), 103-112.

Schellenberg, E. G. (2004). Music lessons enhance IQ. Psychological science, 15(8), 511-514.

Seals, D., & Young, J. (2003). Bullying and victimization: Prevalence and relationship to gender,

grade level, ethnicity, self-esteem, and depression. Adolescence, 38(152).

Sharples, M., Taylor, J., &Vavoula, G. (2005, October).Towards a theory of mobile

learning.In Proceedings of mLearn (Vol. 1, No. 1, pp. 1-9).

Shenton, A. K. (2004). Strategies for ensuring trustworthiness in qualitative research

projects. Education for information, 22(2), 63-75.

Siemens, G., & Tittenberger, P. (2009). Handbook of emerging technologies for learning.

Manitoba: University of Manitoba.

Singer-Califano, A. (2008).The Use of Technology in Enhancing Social Skills. Journal on

Educational Psychology, 1(4), 1-8.

Thompson, A. D., Schmidt, D. A., & Davis, N. E. (2003). Technology collaboratives for

simultaneous renewal in teacher education. Educational Technology Research and

Development, 51(1), 73-89.

Tondeur, J., Cooper, M., & Newhouse, C. P. (2010). From ICT coordination to ICT integration: A

longitudinal case study. Journal of Computer Assisted Learning, 26(4), 296-306.

Van Scoter, J., & Boss, S. (2002). Learners, language, and technology: Making connections that

support literacy: Northwest Regional Educational Laboratory. Retrieved 30 June, 2004.

Veletsianos, G. (2011). Designing opportunities for transformation with emerging

technologies. Educational Technology, 41-46.

Veletsianos, G. (Ed.). (2010). Emerging technologies in distance education. Athabasca University

Press.

Walters, C. R., Blackledge, S. M., Carlough, S. R., Lee, N. J., Purdy, A. S., & Robinson, A. O.

(2005). U.S. Patent No. 6,914,695. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent and Trademark Office.

Ying, B. Y. P., &Silsby, C. D. (2011). U.S. Patent No. 7,960,767. Washington, DC: U.S. Patent

and Trademark Office.

Appendices

Appendix A: Interview with Caregivers

Dear Caregivers,

My name is Nakyeyune Yudaya. I am a student undertaking research for my masters program in the College of Education and External Studies (CEES) at Makerere University. My research interest is in generating guidelines for teachers and caregivers to integrate ICTs into care giving in developmentally appropriate ways. I have purposively selected you to participate in this study given your training as a caregiver in this institution. The responses that you will provide to me here shall be used solely for academic purposes. So, I will be asking you a few questions regarding your experiences in using any ICTs in care giving.

1: Could you mention any technologies that are available in your institution /school which you can use when teaching / giving care to young children?

2: How would you use any of the available technologies in your institution to enhance the following skills among children?

Emotional skills

Linguistic skills

Cognitive skills

Social skills

3. Can you briefly describe these technologies? What features do these technologies have?

4. How would you utilize these technologies when teaching/giving care to children?

5. How does your institution influence (guide/control/regulate) the way you access and use the available technologies in teaching and giving care children?

6. What limitations/challenges/ barriers do you encounter when utilizing the available to care for / teach children in your institution?

7.What specific care giving / teaching tasks do you particularly perform when using the above technologies?

8.What principles would you follow when using technologies in teaching the above skills to children?

9.What other technologies would you recommend that your institution buy to enhance giving for children?

10.What impact/ outcome has use of available technologies had on giving care/ teaching children in your institution?

Appendix B: Interview Guide for Heads of ECD Centers

Dear Principal,

My name is Nakyeyune Yudaya. I am a student undertaking research for my masters program in

the College of Education and External Studies (CEES) at Makerere University. My research

interest is in generating guidelines for teachers and caregivers to integrate ICTs into care giving in

developmentally appropriate ways. I have purposively selected you to participate in this study

given your position as a principal / administrator in this institution. The responses that you will

provide to me here shall be used solely for academic purposes.

i. Could you mention any technologies that are available in your institution /school which your

caregivers can use when teaching / giving care to young children?

ii. How does your institution’s strategic plan / priorities address the matter of training caregivers in

the integrate technology when teaching/giving care to children? iii. How often do caregivers access the available technologies in teaching and giving care to children? iv. What experiences do your teaching staff (tutors) have in designing and delivering on technology

enhanced ECD courses?

v. What influences your institution’s decision to procure a particular technology? vi. What areas of capacity building do your teaching staff need in the areas of integrating ICTs into

ECD curriculum?

Appendix C: Questionnaire on Children’s Access to Emerging Technologies

Developmentally appropriate On a regular At least once Never Don’t knowwhat technologies basis inthe past year you meanby this

Handheld gaming devices eg

Game Boy, Atari Lynx, Turbo

Express, Wonderswan Color,

PSP G (Hutsko, 2000; East,

2009)

Digital cameras eg360-degree cameras, Action cameras, pocket-sized compact camera(Walter, 2006)

Video camcorders eg Analog and digital, camera phones,

Built-in projector(Pongue, 2007)

Electronic toys eg digital pet, robot dog, entertainment robot(Levin, 2001)

Multimedia players for music and videos eg. Home theatre, 3D

Video player

Digital audio

Recorders(Immink, 1991)

Interactive whiteboards(Beeland

Jr, 2002)

Streaming Video(Zanetis, 2012)

Programmable and radio- controlled toys eg. Bee-Bot,

Alarm clock(Janka, 2008)

Musical keyboards eg piano hammer, digital keyboard(Schellenberg, 2004)

Talking toys(Justine & Kimiko,

2001)

Books that incorporate music(Green, 2008)

Children’s websites eg. Time for

Kids, star fall, make me Genius,

PBS Kids(Duncan, 2018)

Mobile devices e.g. smart phone(Sharples, 2005)

Videoconferencing(Lloyd &

Walsh, 2011)

Multi-touch tables(George,

2011)

Ebooks (Korat, 2014)

Computers(PINAR, OLGUN, &

NICOLA, 2002)

Appendix D: Budget

No Item Quantity Total

1 Travel cost (Transport) to conduct - 200,000

interviews

2 Audio Recorder 1 250,000

3 Internet Bundles - 150,000

4 Airtime to communicate with 100,000

respondents

6 Transcribing - 1,500,000

7 Peer Reviews and Publication - 2,000,000

8 Photocopying & Binding - 150,000

9 Stationery (Note books, pens, papers) - 100,000

TOTAL 4,450,000

Appendix E: Timeline

Item May June July August September

Chapter One

Introduction

Conceptual Underpinning

Historical background

Study context

Problem statement

Study purpose

Study objectives

Research questions

Significance of the study

Chapter Two

Introduction

Literature on the study problem

Related literature the objective

Chapter Three

Complete first three chapters of dissertation

Submit draft of dissertation for feedback

Continue data collection

Work on plan for data analysis

Continue reading and documenting literature relevant to dissertation

Organize data analysis for narrative description— findings/results

Work on outline for findings/results

Finalize proposal chapters 4

& 5

Submit revised draft for additional comments

Observing and Cultivating Caregivers Capabilities to Utilize Emerging Technologies for

Enhancing Children’s Socio-Emotional, Linguistic and Cognitive Development

Caregiver’s Name ______ECD Center Name ______

Number of Children ______Date: ______

Caregiver uses

one or more of the To enhance By Engaging Children Comments

following Children’s in Activities which

Emerging Socio-emotional improve their:

Technologies/(IC Development

Ts); observed

Not Observed  Handheld gaming Self-identity and self

devices e.g. Game Esteem. For example.

Boy,Atari Lynx, Children use

TurboExpress, technologies to perform

WonderswanColor the following tasks:

, PSPG  Describe self, family

 Digital Cameras and cultural group

eg, 360 degrees  Draw, play, tell stories

cameras, Action  Explain family culture

Cameras, Pocket and traditions (food,

emotional Developmentemotional

- Sized Cameras holidays, music

Socio

 Video Camcorders Attitude toward self

e.g. analog and and others. For

digital, camera example through use

phones, Built in technologies children:

Projector  Separate from parents

 Electronic toys without difficulty

e.g. digital pet,  Asks for help when it’s

robot dog, really needed

entertainment Confidence in self. For

robot example through use

 Multimedia technologies children:

players for music  Enjoy practicing new

and videos e.g. skills

Home theatre and  Share accomplishments

a 3D Video player with others

 Digital audio  Show persistence in

Recorders perfecting a skill

 Interactive Demonstrate

whiteboards Independence. For

 Programmable and example through use

radio-controlled technologies children:

toys eg. Bee-Bot,  Do not cling to the

Alarm clock caregiver

 Musical keyboards  Do things for self

e.g., piano  Makeblocks in the

hammer, digital classroom

keyboard  Use materials to

 Talking toys implement original

 Books that ideas

incorporate music  Function independently

 Children’s as well as receive

websites e.g. Time support form caregiver

for Kids, star fall, and peers

make me Genius, Respect the rights of

PBS Kids Self and others. For

 Mobile devices example through use

e.g. smart phone technologies children:

 Video-  Demand fairness from

conferencing others.

 Computers  Project their work

 Face book  Protect self physically

 Twitter or emotionally

 You-Tube  Appear to be aware that

 Emails peers are people and not

things.

 Other technology Self-Control self and

(specify) Interactions. For

example through use

technologies children:

 Follow most rules and

routines

 Know and follow daily

plans

 Explain classroom rules

 Manage transitions

without dispute

Emotion

Development: For

example through use

technologies children:

 Move form one

emotional state to

another (angry ways)

 Express anger (or other

feelings) with words

 Redirect behaviour

(with support)

 Recognize and name

various emotions

 Explain the reason for

their emotions

Abilities to Learn

through Play. For

example through use

technologies children:

 Play alone

 Play alongside another

children with little or no

interaction (parallel

play)

 Use care giver’s

suggestions to play

more elaborately with

peers

 Participate in

cooperative activities

Cooperation and

interactions with

peers. For example

through use

technologies children:

 Initiate conversations

 Make effective bids for

play non-verbally

 Join play when asked

by others or ask “Can

I/we play?”

 Take turns

 Encourage other

children to play

 Contribute and accept

ideas from peers.

Social Behaviour. For

example through use

technologies children:

 Show empathy

 Demonstrate awareness

of others’ feelings

(distress, fun)

 Help others in need

Understanding and

Respect Differences

 Plays with a child of a

different background

 Shows interest in

differences of others

 Uses appropriate names

when discussing

diversities

Accepts alternatives

Gives toys to others

Allows others to finish

Takes toys form others

after asking

Takes responsibility

Uses materials in

appropriate ways

Helps clean up

Completes tasks

Uses compromise and

discussion to resolve

problems

Uses appropriate words

to discuss conflict with

one other child

Resolves conflict

appropriately without

adult support

Trades one toy for

another

Understanding and

Respect for

differences. For

example through use

technologies children:

 Play with peers of a

different backgrounds

 Show interest in

differences of peers

 Use appropriate names

when discussing

diversities.

Table 3: Observing and Cultivating Caregivers Capabilities to Utilize Emerging Technologies for Enhancing Children’s Socio-Emotional, Linguistic and Cognitive Development

Appendix F: List of ECD Teacher/Caregivers’ Training Institutions in Kampala

1. Buloba PTC

2. Gayaza Technical And Skills Development

3. Kiteezi ECD Training Center

4. Majoline Vocational Institute

5. Namasuba College of Commerce

6. Nangabo ECD Centre

7. Ndiwulira Memorial

8. Norfolk Voctaional Institute

9. Penta B Vocational

10. Pere Cadet ECD College

11. Prime Institute Of Applied Technology And Mass Communication-Kireka

12. Pope Paul Vocational Institute

13. Fastline ECD

14. St Cecillia Kisubi ECD

15. Sure Prospects

16. Tutor Times

17. Buganda Royal Institute Of Business

18. Early Years

19. Focagifo Hope Institute

20. Madrasa ECD Institute

21. Mengo Technical Institute

22. Water Side ECD

23. Royal Institute Of Business Bwaise

24. St Barnabas

25. Ucc Vacational Institute

26. Marina

27. East African Institute Of Learning

28. Modern Busunju

29. Mipa Technical Business Institute

30. St Andrews ECD Tc

31. Lugazi ECD

32. Kampala Institute Of Vocational Training

33. Luigi Guisin

34. Ebenezer ECD

35. Mtbi ECD

36. Mukono Integrated

37. Standard ECD

38. Alhidaaya ECD

39. Central Teachers Intitute-Kibimbiri

40. Kampala ECD Education Teacher Training Institute(Ketti)

41. Mitiyana NTC

42. Biira NTC

43. Kayunga Community

44. St Anthony NTC -Nkokonjeru

45. Light of Hope

Appendix G: Introductory Letter