View in EDS HTML Full Text PDF Full Text

Building Collaborative Competencies through Play with Outdoor Loose Parts Materials in Primary School

Saved in:
Bibliographic Details
Title: Building Collaborative Competencies through Play with Outdoor Loose Parts Materials in Primary School
Language: English
Authors: Mackley, Honor (ORCID 0000-0001-5575-0958), Edwards, Susan (ORCID 0000-0002-5945-0597), Mclean, Karen (ORCID 0000-0003-0332-6914), Cinelli, Renata (ORCID 0000-0002-2090-6390)
Source: Cambridge Journal of Education. 2022 52(4):431-451.
Availability: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
Peer Reviewed: Y
Page Count: 21
Publication Date: 2022
Document Type: Journal Articles
Reports - Research
Education Level: Elementary Education
Descriptors: Teamwork, Outdoor Education, Elementary School Students, Foreign Countries, Manipulative Materials, Cooperative Learning, Play
Geographic Terms: Australia
DOI: 10.1080/0305764X.2022.2030300
ISSN: 0305-764X
1469-3577
Abstract: This paper reports on the findings from a study investigating the provision of outdoor loose parts materials for upper primary school aged children. Conducted in Queensland, Australia, the study focused on loose parts materials as cultural tools, following the sociocultural argument that tools mediate activity and outcomes. The findings suggest that loose parts materials are used by children in the formation of sociodramatic play, including episodes of trading, bartering and advertising that support their shared understandings. Shared understandings precede collaborative competencies, including engagements with others, working towards and achieving common goals. With collaboration recognised as an important learning disposition for children in twenty-first-century societies, the findings suggest loose parts materials may be pedagogically appropriate for supporting these competencies in primary school settings.
Abstractor: As Provided
Entry Date: 2022
Accession Number: EJ1356722
Database: ERIC
Full text is not displayed to guests.
FullText Links:
  – Type: pdflink
    Url: https://content.ebscohost.com/cds/retrieve?content=AQICAHj0k_4E0hTGH8RJwT4gCJyBsGNe_WN95AvKlDbXJGqwxwFpqPxs200bSGCfFpkZTCCyAAAA4jCB3wYJKoZIhvcNAQcGoIHRMIHOAgEAMIHIBgkqhkiG9w0BBwEwHgYJYIZIAWUDBAEuMBEEDMmu42O66XSUkMlqGAIBEICBmgCP6UWJtIbYJtIet6MKxgXOG-EJN7HrzW7MPvBRYCwMIbR21V-lPHg8WqsxYd69386IGdKRQGXKSyOB2lFYTW_r4_XXLjxHk5SU_TAan5_3SJocly1qtgisfbxF9948p26BcGCflFx3yRk2PTrPEChzt5ethKpYAajSRLeiaic8fz8-EM6VXSDC6P2_ODqrweQa3xafMIU1-7E=
Text:
  Availability: 1
  Value: <anid>AN0158249783;caj01aug.22;2022Aug01.07:30;v2.2.500</anid> <title id="AN0158249783-1">Building collaborative competencies through play with outdoor loose parts materials in primary school </title> <p>This paper reports on the findings from a study investigating the provision of outdoor loose parts materials for upper primary school aged children. Conducted in Queensland, Australia, the study focused on loose parts materials as cultural tools, following the sociocultural argument that tools mediate activity and outcomes. The findings suggest that loose parts materials are used by children in the formation of sociodramatic play, including episodes of trading, bartering and advertising that support their shared understandings. Shared understandings precede collaborative competencies, including engagements with others, working towards and achieving common goals. With collaboration recognised as an important learning disposition for children in twenty-first-century societies, the findings suggest loose parts materials may be pedagogically appropriate for supporting these competencies in primary school settings.</p> <p>Keywords: Loose parts materials; play; collaboration; primary school</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-2">Introduction</hd> <p>This paper considers the role of upper primary school aged children's play with loose parts materials in developing collaborative competencies. Loose parts materials are open-ended objects, such as stones, boxes, ropes or containers used for children's play. Research shows that loose parts play is beneficial for children, including increased creativity, physical activity and social interactions (Hyndman, Mahony, Te Ava, Smith, & Nutton, [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref1">23</reflink>]). However, what is not yet known is the extent to which loose parts materials themselves operate as culturally available tools for children in educational settings, with potential for promoting collaborative outcomes as an object of activity within children's play. This lack of knowledge represents a missed opportunity for schools to capitalise on loose parts materials as a readily available and affordable mechanism for achieving collaborative outcomes for children. This is particularly important given the significance placed on collaboration in curriculum documents and frameworks worldwide as governments and educational providers seek to prepare children for life and work in the twenty-first century (Voogt & Roblin, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref2">50</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-3">Loose parts materials</hd> <p>Loose parts materials can be physically and symbolically manipulated by children to invent and experiment through play. Loose parts materials are made up of natural and synthetic resources. Natural loose parts materials include leaves, sticks and pinecones which are typically found in outdoor environments. Synthetic loose parts materials include ropes, tyres, buckets and wood planks which are typically human-made. The pedagogical purpose behind loose parts materials is that the materials themselves have no single defined play function (Hyndman et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref3">23</reflink>]). In using materials with no defined function, opportunities for creative problem solving and social interactions amongst children are increased (Mahony, Hyndman, Nutton, Smith, & Te Ava, [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref4">27</reflink>]; Spencer et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref5">41</reflink>]). Several studies confirm that the availability of loose parts materials benefit children through increased participation in play, resulting in improved physical activity (Hyndman et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref6">23</reflink>]), improved pro-social behaviours, enhanced teamwork and the achievement of shared goals (Mahony et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref7">27</reflink>]). Loose parts play is also recognisable in educational and social initiatives, such as makerspaces (Marsh, Arnseth, & Kumpulainen, [<reflink idref="bib28" id="ref8">28</reflink>]) and Compound 13 Lab in Mumbai (https://<ulink href="http://www.compound13.org/">www.compound13.org/</ulink>). These initiatives are predicated on the collaborative reuse of materials by people as a basis for learning and development, especially for marginalised communities.</p> <p>Loose parts materials for play in the outdoors was first suggested by Nicholson ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref9">30</reflink>]), drawing on affordance theory (Gibson, [<reflink idref="bib19" id="ref10">19</reflink>]). Nicholson ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref11">30</reflink>]) argued that play spaces may afford increased opportunities for creativity and fantasy for children using loose parts materials instead of fixed-object play equipment. Nicholson ([<reflink idref="bib30" id="ref12">30</reflink>]) believed that loose parts materials in children's play spaces would result in multi-functionable play opportunities for children. Likewise, he argued that such materials can be readily provided outside of the classroom within school playgrounds, being both portable and readily affordable. In recent years, loose parts materials have gained increased traction in the redesign of play opportunities in risk adverse playgrounds 'where there is little for children to engage with, restrictive playground rules and few natural features' (Chancellor, [<reflink idref="bib5" id="ref13">5</reflink>], p. 64).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-4">Play</hd> <p>Play is known to foster many aspects of childhood development including cognition, language, physical, emotional and social development (Rubin, Fein, & Vandenberg, [<reflink idref="bib40" id="ref14">40</reflink>]). Within the Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) sector, play is pedagogically related to curriculum goals, including the achievement of academic content (e.g. literacy, science, numeracy) and dispositional learning (e.g. resilience, creativity, responsibility) (Danniels & Pyle, [<reflink idref="bib7" id="ref15">7</reflink>]; Pyle & Alaca, [<reflink idref="bib36" id="ref16">36</reflink>]). These achievements are realised through play-based learning. Play-based learning involves children participating in a combination of play types, including open-ended, supported, modelled play and/or purposeful play (Edwards, Cutter-Mackenzie, Moore, & Boyd, [<reflink idref="bib9" id="ref17">9</reflink>]). Open-ended play is typically freely chosen and directed by children; modelled play involves adults illustrating concepts in action with children; and purposeful play encompasses children and adults in jointly constructed experiences (e.g. Trawick-Smith, [<reflink idref="bib45" id="ref18">45</reflink>]). While well developed in ECEC, play is less evident in primary school settings, despite play being of continued developmental importance to children in upper primary school, with noted capacity for developing twenty-first-century learning skills indicated in international curriculum documents (e.g. European Commission, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref19">14</reflink>]), including collaboration, creativity and problem solving (Yogman, Garner, Hutchinson, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref20">55</reflink>]).</p> <p>Loose parts materials provide for open-ended play because they are multi-functionable (Spencer et al., [<reflink idref="bib41" id="ref21">41</reflink>]). Children can direct their own activities using materials to support different aspects of activity, such as construction, pretend or sociodramatic play (Hyndman et al., [<reflink idref="bib23" id="ref22">23</reflink>]); play with rules (Engelen et al., [<reflink idref="bib10" id="ref23">10</reflink>]); and/or rough and tumble play (Armitage, [<reflink idref="bib1" id="ref24">1</reflink>]). Of these play forms, sociodramatic play is considered most significant in the formation of collaborative competencies between children. Sociodramatic play is an advanced form of imaginative play in which children imitate and re-enact the social situations occurring in their own settings (DeWolf, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref25">8</reflink>]). Sociodramatic play is characterised by the development of pretend activities and routines, related to organisational features of life, such as the family, school and workplace (Garte, [<reflink idref="bib17" id="ref26">17</reflink>]). In sociodramatic play, children experiment and explore with language, imitate others and incorporate objects into their activities following a set of pre-determined rules derived from the social situations in which they live (Vygotsky, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref27">52</reflink>]). During sociodramatic play, children collaborate to 'collectively transform objects, people and situations in order to create non-literal "as if" situations' (Whitebread & O'Sullivan, [<reflink idref="bib53" id="ref28">53</reflink>], p. 198).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-5">Collaboration</hd> <p>The available literature concerning collaboration typically draws upon sociocultural thinking to explain the establishment of shared or 'joint' understandings between two or more people (Garte, [<reflink idref="bib18" id="ref29">18</reflink>]; Whitington & Floyd, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref30">54</reflink>]). Roschelle ([<reflink idref="bib39" id="ref31">39</reflink>]) defines collaboration as the convergence of meaning through the construction, monitoring and repairing of shared understanding between people. Shared understanding is otherwise represented as <emph>intersubjectivity</emph>, which occurs when people align 'their own experiences with the experiences of others' (Tomasello, Carpenter, Call, Behne, & Moll, [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref32">44</reflink>], p. 714). Intersubjectivity is fundamental to collaboration because it implies a synthesis of different perspectives between people for the creation of new meanings to achieve common goals. Göncü ([<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref33">20</reflink>]) argues that there are three main components in the achievement of shared understanding between children. First, joint focus of attention referring to the adoption of a shared focus for interaction (e.g. on an external object, material or topic) between two or more children. Second, meta-communication implying agreement on the nature of a pretend activity (e.g. cooking a pretend meal) including implicit or explicit agreement to use objects for a specific purpose within the activity (e.g. using stones as food items). Third, communication involving the coordination of intentions between children of pretend play though verbal and non-verbal means, including instructions, requests and body language. Research consistently shows that all three components are evident in pretend play (Göncü, [<reflink idref="bib20" id="ref34">20</reflink>]; Whitington & Floyd, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref35">54</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-6">Collaborative competence</hd> <p>Collaboration, and by extension, collaborative competence, is a core dispositional learning outcome included in many curriculum documents (Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref36">2</reflink>]; Finnish National Board of Education [FNBE], [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref37">15</reflink>]) and frameworks internationally (European Commission, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref38">14</reflink>]; UNESCO, [<reflink idref="bib46" id="ref39">46</reflink>]). This inclusion derives from the recognition that increasing levels of digitalisation and globalisation in twenty-first-century society requires learners to participate in diverse cultural settings (Chalkiadaki, [<reflink idref="bib4" id="ref40">4</reflink>]; Organisation For Economic Co-Operation And Development [OECD]. ([<reflink idref="bib32" id="ref41">32</reflink>]). United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation. ([<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref42">47</reflink>]). Many societies now require their young people to seek, analyse, create and share knowledge in what are essentially multidisciplinary and interconnected contexts (Valtonen et al., [<reflink idref="bib48" id="ref43">48</reflink>]). Such knowledge generation is most effectively mediated through collaboration with others, characterised by the capacity to establish and work on shared goals.</p> <p>Internationally, educational reforms incorporating collaborative competencies (e.g. understanding and respecting the view of others, working on shared tasks) have been introduced to prepare young people for future workforce success (Eronen, Kokko, & Sormunen, [<reflink idref="bib13" id="ref44">13</reflink>]; Voogt, Pieters, & Roblin, [<reflink idref="bib49" id="ref45">49</reflink>]; Voogt & Roblin, [<reflink idref="bib50" id="ref46">50</reflink>]). Finland, for example, emphasises schools as collaborative communities providing opportunities for individual and shared knowledge development through project-based learning (FNBE, [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref47">15</reflink>]). Singapore identifies a broad range of learning outcomes centred on collaborative competencies to enable learners to capitalise on opportunities of the new digital age (Kennedy, [<reflink idref="bib25" id="ref48">25</reflink>]; Ministry of Education, [<reflink idref="bib29" id="ref49">29</reflink>], 21<sups>st</sups> Century Competencies section). Britain, as part of Personal, Social, Health and Economic Education (PSHE), identifies 'how to listen to other people and play and work cooperatively' (PSHE Association, [<reflink idref="bib35" id="ref50">35</reflink>], p. 16) as an important competency.</p> <p>In Australia, where the findings reported in this paper were derived, collaborative competence is also recognised. The ability to work collaboratively is identified in the Personal and Social Capability learning continuum of the Australian Curriculum (ACARA, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref51">2</reflink>]). Here, children are expected to share experiences of cooperation in play, and within group activities; identify cooperative behaviours in a range of group activities; describe characteristics of cooperative behaviour, and to identify evidence of these in group activities; and contribute to groups and teams (ACARA, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref52">2</reflink>]). Notably, at state level in Queensland Australia, where this project was specifically conducted, the Queensland Curriculum and Assessment Authority (QCAA) lists collaboration and teamwork as important twenty-first-century skills, defining these as 'working and interacting with others to maximize their understanding of concepts' and 'recognizing diverse perspectives to help achieve shared goals' (QCAA, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref53">38</reflink>], p. 2).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-7">Conceptual framework</hd> <p>This project was framed using the sociocultural notion of tool mediation (Vygotsky, [<reflink idref="bib51" id="ref54">51</reflink>]). Tool mediation argues that culturally available tools mediate activity resulting in an outcome. Cultural tools can be material artefacts, such as pencils or building blocks, or symbolic representations, including language or concepts (Karpov, [<reflink idref="bib24" id="ref55">24</reflink>]). Tool mediation explains how people achieve the object of their activity in culturally shaped ways because tools themselves are always derived from the cultural situation in which people participate. Tools are directed towards the object of activity, and in doing so shape the achievement of an outcome. In this study, loose parts materials were defined as physically available tools for resourcing children's sociodramatic play as a site for shared understandings (e.g. intersubjectivity), with such understanding representing the object of their activity. Given collaboration is a known function of shared understandings within sociodramatic play (Whitington & Floyd, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref56">54</reflink>]), it was theorised that collaborative competencies were likely to be generated amongst the children using loose parts materials for pretend play as an outcome of their activity. (Figure 1)</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 1. Conceptual framework.</p> <p>While previous research concerning loose parts materials has used sociocultural theory (e.g. Hyndman & Mahony, [<reflink idref="bib22" id="ref57">22</reflink>]), such work focuses on participating children as they engage in play activities with the materials, taking children's social interactions as the unit of analysis. In contrast, this study sought to examine loose parts materials as cultural tools making up the central unit of analysis to identify the extent to which the materials themselves mediate shared understandings during children's sociodramatic play, supporting collaboration as an outcome of their activity. This shift in focus contributes new insight into the extent to which loose parts materials themselves may operate to mediate the achievement of collaborative competencies through play with upper primary school aged children.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-8">Research approach</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158249783-9">Method</hd> <p>This study was conducted using micro-ethnography (Erickson, [<reflink idref="bib12" id="ref58">12</reflink>]; Garcez, [<reflink idref="bib16" id="ref59">16</reflink>]). Micro-ethnography is concerned with an analysis of culture, specifically examining settings in a 'micro' or highly focused manner. In educational research, micro-ethnography seeks to examine the culture of smaller-sized class groups or schools, rather than larger cultural entities (e.g. school systems) as is common in other forms of ethnography (Streeck & Mehus, [<reflink idref="bib42" id="ref60">42</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-10">Participants</hd> <p>Convenience sampling is a form of nonprobability sampling where participants are selected because they are suitably available for participation and 'represent some characteristic the researcher seeks to study' (Creswell, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref61">6</reflink>], p. 144). The participants in this study were a convenience sample recruited from a government-funded primary school in Queensland, Australia. A classroom of Year 5 primary school children (10–11-year-olds) was available for participation for 30 minutes per week. Their availability was due to non-compulsory Religious Instruction being offered by the school during this 30-minute period. During this time, the school was not able to provide any other form of instruction as children attending Religious Instruction would otherwise miss out on curriculum content. Children not attending Religious Instruction usually completed optional learning tasks, such as worksheets or silent reading. The school viewed the opportunity for children to participate in loose parts play an appropriate alternative option.</p> <p>Participating children were mainly from a high socioeconomic background, with 64% of children from the highest quartile and 3% from the lowest quartile on the Index of Community Socio-Educational Advantage (ICSEA) (ACARA, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref62">3</reflink>]). Fifteen percent of students attending the school had a language background other than English, and 2% of the children were of Indigenous Australian background (ACARA, [<reflink idref="bib3" id="ref63">3</reflink>]). Thirty-nine children not attending the Religious Instruction class were invited to participate. A total of 31 children provided parental consent along with their own assent to participate in the project. Of these children, 13 were female and 18 were male. The eight children not providing parental consent continued their participation in the optional learning tasks.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-11">Ethical considerations</hd> <p>This study was conducted with ethical approval from the Australian Catholic University's Human Ethical Research Committee and Queensland Department of Education. Approval was also obtained from the school Principal and two Deputy Principals. Two ethical considerations were important: 1) Researching with children; and 2) Privacy using digital images.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-12">Researching with children</hd> <p>All child participants were invited to an information session hosted by the first author. During this session, the purpose of the study was explained, and children invited to ask any questions. Children were advised that they could choose to participate in the study and withdraw at any time without negative consequences. Each child received a plain language statement, parental information letters and parental consent forms. Upon return of parental consent forms, each child was asked to sign a child assent form signifying their own understanding and agreement to participate (Guillemin & Gillam, [<reflink idref="bib21" id="ref64">21</reflink>]).</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-13">Privacy using digital images</hd> <p>All digital data used in the study was de-identified and anonymised to protect children's privacy. De-identification was achieved by blurring or pixilating images involving children, along with inserting block-out bars on children's school uniform logos to prevent identification (Pauwels, [<reflink idref="bib33" id="ref65">33</reflink>]). Self-selected pseudonyms by the children were used during all stages of analysis, including reporting of findings in this paper. Children self-selected gendered pseudonyms.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-14">Procedure</hd> <p>Children participated in loose parts play for 25 minutes per week for six weeks. The play sessions were conducted in a designed outdoor play space on the school grounds (Figure 2).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 2. Loose parts play space.</p> <p>During the first session, the first author introduced the materials to the children. Children were invited to play with the materials in any way they liked. However, children were provided with some safety guidelines within this freedom of choice. For example, children were asked not to stack crates and tyres in tiers higher than two. Children were also asked not to swing objects, such as wood planks or ropes, and were encouraged to use the materials safely and respectfully. It was stipulated that the supervising teacher or the researcher would only intervene in the event of socially, emotionally or physically unsafe play practices.</p> <p>Materials were provided for children according to select criteria: a) materials not typically associated with play (e.g. balls or climbing equipment); b) materials freely available via recycling options, requiring no monetary expenditure on behalf of the project or school; c) materials that are multipurpose and moveable; and d) materials that are safe for use. These criteria are typical of those characterising loose parts materials in the literature (Mahony et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref66">27</reflink>]).</p> <p>Materials used in this study were sourced from recycling centres, kerbside collections, charity shops and as giveaway items from local businesses. All materials were waterproofed, cleaned and regularly inspected for sharp edges and breakages. Tyres were spray-painted on the insides using white paint (toxin and lead-free) to discourage insects, and to make insects easier to detect by the children. The materials were subjected to a Workplace Health and Safety (WHS) risk assessment by the school's designated officer.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-15">Data generation</hd> <p>Three primary methods were used to generate data: 1) video observations (Erickson, [<reflink idref="bib11" id="ref67">11</reflink>]); 2) still photographs (Pink, [<reflink idref="bib34" id="ref68">34</reflink>]); and 3) observational notes (Creswell, [<reflink idref="bib6" id="ref69">6</reflink>]). Video observations centred on how the loose parts materials were used by the children during sociodramatic play. For videorecording, sociodramatic play episodes were defined as any period of interactive activity using loose parts materials amongst two or more children (Luchs & Fikus, [<reflink idref="bib26" id="ref70">26</reflink>]). Play episodes were marked by beginnings and endings. Beginnings included calls for attention by children, and/or expressions of desire to play. Endings included terminations between children, e.g. walking away from an activity. Most videorecorded play episodes were 10 minutes or longer, many lasting for the full 25-minute session and not terminating until instructions to end play and return to class were given by the supervising teacher.</p> <p>Photographs focused on documenting the children's use of loose parts materials and were taken to capture images of artefacts developed by the children in various stages of completion. Observational notes were made up of detailed textual descriptions of how the materials were physically and symbolically manipulated and used by the children within identified play episodes. The notes included reference to verbal and non-verbal interactions between children, e.g. physical movements and facial expressions. Observational notes were taken from the video footage immediately following time in the field, generating rich descriptions of the loose parts materials as tools relative to the sociodramatic play occurring between children at a micro-level.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-16">Data analysis</hd> <p>Video data were textually transcribed using NVIVO version 11.4.3 (QSR International Pty Ltd., [<reflink idref="bib37" id="ref71">37</reflink>]). Transcribed video data, photographs and observational notes were collated into one data set. This was made up of 150 minutes of videorecording, 200 photographs and 24 detailed observational notes. Data were analysed in four stages using deductive and inductive analysis (Stucky, [<reflink idref="bib43" id="ref72">43</reflink>]). Stage 1 deductively coded for 'cases', following each loose part as unit of analysis (e.g. tyre, plank, milk crate). Stage 2 deductively coded all cases to episodes of sociodramatic play. These episodes were then inductively coded for play-types (e.g. trading, bartering, advertising). Stage 3 deductively coded play-types for evidence of shared understandings between children. These were defined according to the literature (e.g. joint focus of attention, meta-communication and communication). Stage 4 inductively coded evidence of shared understandings for collaborative competencies (e.g. engagements and accomplishments). Accordingly, analysis followed the conceptual framework with loose parts materials as a cultural tool making up the unit of analysis orientated towards sociodramatic play and shared understandings as the object of activity, with collaborative competencies as the outcome (Figure 3).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 3. Stages of data analysis.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-17">Findings</hd> <p>Two main findings were established relative to the object and outcome of activity concerning loose parts materials as the unit of analysis. For the object of activity, the findings were made up of three main types of sociodramatic play, including trading, bartering and advertising, with consequent shared understandings (joint focus of attention, metacommunication and communication). For the outcome of activity, collaborative competencies included engagements and accomplishments.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-18">Sociodramatic play</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158249783-19">Trading</hd> <p>Trading occurred when the loose parts materials were used in exchange for other loose parts materials desirable to a group or individual child. Trading activities typically arose around purpose-built structures in the form of markets or shops, all of which were built by the children using loose parts materials (Figure 4).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 4. Trading market.</p> <p>Trading occurred when participants came to a market structure with loose parts to exchange. Children engaged in elaborate attempts to promote their own wares and attract attention to their offerings. For example, Border built a shop counter made of milk crates. He addressed Ella, who approached him pulling a sled-type structure made of a crate with rope attached. The sled had been designed by Ella to transport loose parts materials for trade. 'Welcome to the market!' proclaimed Border. Ella uncovered a black tarpaulin covering the contents of the sled and pointed to a plastic spool and a wood plank. 'I would like to trade this or that!' she responded.</p> <p>In trading episodes of play, a joint focus of attention was established by the children as a form of shared understanding. For example, in the interaction occurring between Border and Ella, both children looked directly at the plastic spool and wood plank. Once the joint focus of their attention was established on the materials, metacommunication was possible, in terms of mutual agreement to view the items as tradeable. Verbal and non-verbal communication followed, including shared eye contact, body stance and positioning, and Ella using specific terms 'I would like to trade this or that!' in response to Border's 'Welcome to the market!'</p> <p>In another episode also involving Border, the joint focus of attention was similarly established through trading. This time, Border approached a shop counter constructed with milk crates. Behind the counter stood Burton. Border asked, 'What are you selling? What are you selling?' Burton replied, 'What do you want?' In a moment of joint attention, Border claimed, 'I'll have the tarp', pointing to a tarpaulin for sale behind Burton's counter. Burton, evidencing the joint attention through a moment of meta-communication asked, 'This one?', holding up a small green tarpaulin. The communication was completed as Border said, 'Yeah', and with another act of both joint attention and metacommunication placed a black pipe on the counter in exchange for the tarp and walked away.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-20">Bartering</hd> <p>Bartering occurred when children endeavoured to add value to a material to maximise trade. Bartering frequently required negotiation which maintained and developed shared understandings about the value of materials. Like trading episodes, bartering involved shared understandings through the establishment of joint attention, metacommunication and communication. For example, Tom and Tra appeared in an episode with Border. Here the children first established joint attention on a red rope: Tom<emph>We want to trade something for that red rope</emph>. Pointing at the red rope. Tra also gesturing towards the rope.Border<emph>How much do you want to pay?</emph> Standing behind his shop counter with hands on a blue plastic container holding the red rope.</p> <p>With their attention directed towards the red rope, Tom assigns value to a box he and Tra wanted to exchange, implicitly confirming a trade agreement between themselves and Border: Tom<emph>This box ... it even has silver on it!</emph> Picking up the white box and showing it to Border, pointing out the silver on the handles. Using explicit hand gestures and leaning in towards Border, standing closer to the counter.</p> <p>Tra nodded his agreement, confirming the value of the silver handles. Border began the next set of communication underpinning the forthcoming moment of shared understanding, claiming, 'No, we've way too many boxes'. In another act of joint attention, Tom claimed 'But it has silver', pointing at the handles. Border looked at the box and then back to Tom. Tra, sensing a bartering moment near completion chimed in, 'Sliver!' Border, moving towards acknowledgement of the value associated with the silver handles said, 'Okay, here you go', and leaned forward to have a closer look at the box. Completing the trade, Border took the rope from his container, uncoiled it and handed it over to Tom. Tom smiled, said 'Thank you!', and turned away.</p> <p>In another bartering episode, Cate and Ella engaged with Tom and Net to exchange some buckets of wood for tarpaulin. Again, establishing joint attention was important, as Tom asked, 'Ah ... we can trade this container for the red one with the wood inside ... with the wood?' Cate, undecided, looked around and said, 'Um ... ', while Ella chipped in, 'We are looking for tarp'. Cate, feeling more confident, said, 'Yeah we are looking for tarp'. Their joint attention was confirmed as Net noted, 'We do have some tarp' (pointing to a pile of tarpaulins on the ground). With joint attention established, the metacommunication and communication leading to the final moment of shared understanding began: Cate<emph>Can we pick the blue one over there?</emph> Pointing to tarp.Net<emph>Agh ... No</emph>. Shaking head.Ella<emph>Why not?</emph>Net<emph>Well actually</emph> ....Cate<emph>You can have everything in here</emph>. Gesturing towards a bucket Ella is holding.Net<emph>I'll give you that tarp for everything</emph>. Gesturing towards both buckets of wood.</p> <p>Here, movement towards an implicit agreement to trade indicates the moment of metacommunication. Although the trade is not yet secured, the communication, made up of pointing, head shaking, gesturing and verbal exchange, moved Ella, Cate, Tom and Net towards a shared understanding. This included bartering in terms of the value attached to the tarpaulins according to their size: Cate<emph>No!</emph>Net<emph>I'll give you two tarps for everything!</emph>Cate<emph>You give us two tarps for the buckets!</emph> Holding up two fingers up to Net to reinforce her meaning.Ella<emph>We've got to check how big it (the tarpaulin) is!</emph></p> <p>Net, having engaged in the communication, commits to the deal as Tom attempted to retract the agreement: Tom<emph>One tarp!</emph> Starting to put one tarp into her container.Net<emph>No two tarps! I've already made the deal!</emph> Contradicting Tom's offer and taking the two buckets of wood from Ella's container.</p> <p>The shared understanding is confirmed: 'No, two tarps!' The deal is already made, and so the act of communication completed as Cate agreed, 'Okay let's go!', taking the second tarpaulin and pushing it into her container.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-21">Advertising</hd> <p>Advertising occurred as the trading and bartering episodes became more prevalent over the six-week period. Advertising featured in the form of verbal promotions and discount pricing on materials to promote the possibilities for exchange. As advertising developed, trading hubs formed amongst the children, with children differentiating their group from others by naming their shops. One of the first such named shops was The Black-Market – an identifiable and unique trading entity established by a group of boys. In response, a group of girls named themselves The Right-Market. Yet another group, The Boys'-Trading-Group was consequently established. In these advertising exchanges, shared understandings continued to be developed through joint attention, metacommunication and communication. Here, joint attention typically focused on the benefits of a given market, rather on the materials themselves. For example: The Black-Market<emph>Guys this is the best shop open and everything! This is the best market in all of Australia!</emph></p> <p>And responding to this claim by The Right-Market: The Right-Market<emph>The Right-Market is the best! Find something at the Black-Market and we'll beat it at the Right-Market!</emph></p> <p>Here, as the joint attention was established according to the relative merits of each market, the metacommunication centred on an implicit agreement to competitively position their wares. Likewise, communication in the form of announcements and shout-outs to the playing community featured. Within these announcements, materials were used specifically as tools for communication and not necessarily trade or bartering items. For example, hose pipes were often used as 'microphones' to facilitate a greater range of volume when shouting out advertisements (Figure 5). In this manner, while not necessarily physically increasing the volume, such microphones nonetheless represented a metacommunicative act in that they symbolised the promotion of each hub.</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 5. Hose pipe as 'microphone'.</p> <p>From this point, communication centred on deliberate advertising ploys, including discounts and the establishment of rival trading amongst three prominent hubs – The Right-Market, The Black-Market and The Boys'-Trading-Group: The Right-Market<emph>We have wood, we have rope ... we'll beat it by 10%. If you find something anywhere else on sale, we'll beat it by 10%!</emph>The Black-Market<emph>For sale, this is the only tyre on sale, get it now for ... I'd say ... a few buckets of wood or something!</emph></p> <p>Here, The Black-Market indicated that a tyre is better than rope, while in response The Boys'-Trading-Group went on to claim at their hub, four tyres rather than only one could be obtained:</p> <p>The Boys'-Trading-Group: <emph>Give two crates and you get four tyres in exchange!</emph></p> <p>Not to be outdone, The Black-Market effectively communicated their position:</p> <p>The Black-Market: <emph>Buy one, get one free! Buy one, get one free!</emph></p> <p>In these episodes, advertising was made up of the development of shared understandings, in this case about which trading hub was mostly likely to meet the needs of playing children. Here, joint attention was indicated in terms of the benefits of each market, metacommunication in the use of materials to signal announcements, and communication in the value or otherwise of the trading possibilities held by each hub.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-22">Collaborative competencies</hd> <p></p> <hd id="AN0158249783-23">Engagements</hd> <p>Engagements were established when two or more participants worked together on the same task following the achievement of shared understandings. This occurred when children demonstrated implicit or explicit agreement of their intentions through trading, bartering and/or advertising. For example, Cate and Ella embarked on a trading episode in which joint attention, metacommunication and communication supported their shared understanding of their next strategic move as they stood outside their market structure: Cate<emph>What should we do now?</emph> Standing, looking at Ella with her hands on her hips.Ella<emph>Will we both go trading?</emph> Holding the white container containing the buckets.Cate<emph>Ok! What's something we don't need?</emph> Lifting a piece of plastic and signifying it might be available for trade.Ella<emph>We don't need that, let's trade it!</emph></p> <p>Such engagements were often characterised by 'We' statements, suggesting shared responsibility for a task. For example, Cate signified the plastic was tradable, while Ella confirmed, 'We don't need that'. In another example of engagement, Cody and Walt were committed to securing a trade with Tom. This engagement occurred within a trading episode: Cody<emph>Can we have a hose for this wood?</emph> Holding a container filled with wood planks.Tom<emph>A hose?</emph> Looking at the container.</p> <p>Cody, who sensed that Tom was unconvinced by their joint request, added, 'and a rope' to increase the value of the exchange. Seeking to build the engagement, Cody offered Tom an opportunity: Cody<emph>Here have a feel!</emph> Lifting the box up towards Tom, to feel how heavy and full of wood it is.</p> <p>Walt pulled back on the engagement between himself and Cody, thinking that Cody was over-offering on the trade: Walt<emph>Wait no! Don't trade that! Don't trade that! That's only one hose for all that wood.</emph></p> <p>Tom attempted to benefit from the trading offer by getting a hose and offering it to Cody. However, Cody recognised the shift in his shared understanding with Walt, and said to Tom, 'Yeah, not enough for us!' Both Cody and Walt turned away from Tom and walked towards another trading group. The engagement between Cody and Walt remained; however, this was not achieved between Cody, Walt and Tom, with Tom calling out, 'Come back! Come back!', while Cody and Walt ignored his pleas.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-24">Accomplishments</hd> <p>Accomplishments occurred when two or more children successfully completed an activity or goal which they could not have done alone. This was evident within The Black-Market when the children luxuriated in their trading riches: Tom<emph>We're rich ... we've got heaps of stuff</emph>. Placing more loose parts materials on The Black-Market shop counter.Tom<emph>We're too rich!</emph> Walking around the counter.Border<emph>We're too rich?</emph> Sitting on a tyre behind the counter.Tom<emph>We're dirty rich guys!</emph> Clarifying to Border that together they have accumulated a large quantity of loose parts materials.</p> <p>Accomplishments, as a collaborative competency, were only feasible when shared understandings through joint attention, metacommunication and communication had been deployed in trading, bartering and advertising episodes. For Tom and Border's accomplishment, such riches were not otherwise possible. Net and Form, also members of The Black-Market, likewise celebrated their shared accomplishment: Form<emph>We're really successful!</emph> Sitting on a tyre behind the counter keeping an eye on the stock, smiling at Net.Net<emph>Yeah, we are!</emph> Nodding and sorting milk crates on the shop counter.Net<emph>If we were selling for real money, we'd be millionaires!</emph>Form<emph>Yeah, I know!</emph> Nodding and smiling at Net.</p> <p>Accomplishments did not always follow shared understandings, even when joint attention, metacommunication and communication was evident in sociodramatic play episodes. While accomplishments were more frequent than not, they were not always assured. Two or more children with a confirmed engagement did not always achieve their joint goal. For example, in one episode, two children, Migu and Burton, were prepared to trade. They were approached by JD: JD<emph>Can I just trade these two for a tyre?</emph> Offering two milk crates in his hands.Migu<emph>No, that's not enough!</emph> Shaking his head as he looks at the crates.</p> <p>Migu and Burton wanted to achieve a trade but were not prepared to undervalue their own stock. Burton insisted the tyre was more expensive: Burton<emph>Three milk crates for a tyre!</emph> Walking towards and looking directly at JD, making a hand gesture holding up three fingers.</p> <p>JD's decision ended the shared engagement that Migu and Burton set out to accomplish: JD<emph>No! That's way too much!</emph> Shaking his head and walking away with his crates.</p> <p>Here there is evidence of shared understanding amongst the boys through joint focus of attention on the crates and tyre, meta-communication in the implicit approach to trade, and verbal and non-verbal communication. Yet, this was not enough to progress the engagement between Migu and Burton to an accomplishment, as ultimately the third player required for this achievement was not willing to accede that three of his crates were worth one tyre.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-25">Discussion</hd> <p>The findings from this study suggest that loose parts materials may operate as cultural tools facilitating children's sociodramatic play in which shared understandings are developed as an object of activity. Shared understandings, or intersubjectivity as per the literature (DeWolf, [<reflink idref="bib8" id="ref73">8</reflink>]), are made up of joint attention, metacommunication and communication, and is known to exist within children's sociodramatic play (Whitington & Floyd, [<reflink idref="bib54" id="ref74">54</reflink>]). In this project, shared understanding appeared to lead to two main competencies as an outcome: engagements and accomplishments (Figure 6).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 6. Object leading to outcome.</p> <p>While previous research has investigated children's play with loose parts materials from a social perspective, this is the first known investigation to follow loose parts materials as cultural tools in the mediation of children's sociodramatic play for shared understandings, with collaborative competencies as an outcome. The findings suggest value in the open-ended and flexible nature of such materials, including their moveable nature, resulting in the construction of shop-like structures. From within these structures, trading, bartering and advertising play episodes were enabled, with these in turn promoting opportunities for shared understandings and consequent engagements and achievements amongst children. For example, the bartering episode between Cate, Ella, Tom and Net illustrates the tarpaulin as a tool, leading to sociodramatic play with shared understandings as the object of activity. This then results in collaborative competencies when the tarpaulin was successfully traded between the participating children (Figure 7).</p> <p>PHOTO (COLOR): Figure 7. Tarpaulin as tool.</p> <p>During such episodes of play, groups of children developed and agreed upon new meanings and understandings of the materials. Subsequent agreement between groups of competing children resulted in the tarpaulin being traded, demonstrating their capacity to work towards achievement of a shared goal, with achievement central to collaboration (Tomasello et al., [<reflink idref="bib44" id="ref75">44</reflink>]). Confirming the value of pretend play for children (Yogman, [<reflink idref="bib55" id="ref76">55</reflink>]), these findings suggest the provision of loose parts materials in upper primary school settings may provide an appropriate pedagogical approach for fostering collaboration, particularly where this is indicated in educational policy (e.g. Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority, [<reflink idref="bib2" id="ref77">2</reflink>]; Finnish National Board of Education [FNBE], [<reflink idref="bib15" id="ref78">15</reflink>]; QCAA, [<reflink idref="bib38" id="ref79">38</reflink>]).</p> <p>The emergence of sociodramatic play as an object of activity within which shared understandings developed is of pedagogical interest. Whilst play is not typically provided in upper primary school as a pedagogical approach, this study shows that older children can benefit from opportunities to use loose parts materials in their play in the development of collaborative competencies. Primary school-aged children appear able to achieve intersubjectivity more readily than young children when using loose parts materials to sustain sociodramatic play. Sociodramatic play is understood to provide younger and older children with opportunities to participate in adult social roles in which they generally do not have opportunities to engage (Vygotsky, [<reflink idref="bib52" id="ref80">52</reflink>]). In this study, the proliferation of market structures built by the children resulted in their interpretative response to trading, bartering and advertising, reflecting a depth of knowledge about these processes, e.g. The Right-Market claiming they could beat anything on offer at The Black-Market.</p> <p>Likewise, the children had in-depth understanding of the wealth they held inside the play, and the 'real' worth of this wealth. As Net explained to Form, 'If we were selling for real money, we'd be millionaires!' This suggests potential for greater attention to be directed towards the value of sociodramatic play for upper primary school aged children relative to their own social and cultural contexts. Given this study suggests collaborative competencies are an outcome of such play, there is potential value in using loose parts materials in the achievement of curriculum goals. Collaboration, particularly as form of dispositional learning, is now of significant concern in education policy and curriculum internationally (OECD, [<reflink idref="bib31" id="ref81">31</reflink>]; UNESCO, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref82">47</reflink>]). Supporting this learning may be mediated through loose parts materials enabling sociodramatic play opportunities for older children. Such materials are relatively inexpensive (or free) and, being portable, can be deployed in outdoor areas of various size and playground availability. A set time does not need to be allocated for such play, with schools possibly capitalising on recess and lunchtimes as opportunities for children to engage with loose parts materials. Where schools pay attention to the relevant Workplace Health and Safety requirements of any materials used, such a play with loose parts materials as pedagogical approach is feasible with upper primary school aged children</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-26">Limitations</hd> <p>This was a small-scale study, conducted within one primary school in Queensland, Australia. Given the sample size, no generalisations can be drawn from the findings. In addition, as a micro-ethnographic piece of work, the focus of attention was on how participating children used loose parts materials as tools for the realisation of collaboration competencies during play; the study has not empirically tested the efficacy of loose parts materials on collaboration per se.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-27">Conclusion</hd> <p>Loose parts materials are established in the literature as beneficial for children's problem-solving capacities, physical activity and social interactions (Mahony et al., [<reflink idref="bib27" id="ref83">27</reflink>]). However, little research has investigated loose parts materials as cultural tools mediating children's sociodramatic play for collaborative competencies as an outcome of activity. This study suggests that loose parts materials are deployed by children for cultural meaning-making, with consequent sociodramatic play resulting in episodes of trading, bartering and advertising. Within these episodes, shared understandings, made up of joint attention, meta-communication and communication are evident, with these in turn facilitating children's collaborative competencies, in the form of engagements and accomplishments. Notably, international policy (e.g. UNESCO, [<reflink idref="bib47" id="ref84">47</reflink>]) and curriculum (e.g. European Commission, [<reflink idref="bib14" id="ref85">14</reflink>]) highlights that central to collaboration is the capacity to engage with the worldview of others, and work towards the achievement of shared goals. Given loose parts materials are affordable and moveable, they may be under-estimated in upper primary school education for achieving curriculum outcomes concerned with collaboration. With collaboration positioned as a key learning disposition for children in the twenty-first century, making greater use of loose parts materials in upper primary school education represents a significant learning opportunity that children themselves are likely to find culturally relevant and meaningful to their lives.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-28">Acknowledgment</hd> <p>The authors would like to acknowledge the contribution of child participants to this study.</p> <hd id="AN0158249783-29">Disclosure statement</hd> <p>No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).</p> <ref id="AN0158249783-30"> <title> References </title> <blist> <bibl id="bib1" idref="ref24" type="bt">1</bibl> <bibtext> Armitage, M. (2010). Play pods in schools: An independent evaluation (Vol. Project 43). Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.childrensscrapstore.co.uk/PlayPodsinschools-anindependentevaluation2009.pdf">http://www.childrensscrapstore.co.uk/PlayPodsinschools-anindependentevaluation2009.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib2" idref="ref36" type="bt">2</bibl> <bibtext> Australian Curriculum Assessment and Reporting Authority. (2013). General capabilities in the Australian Curriculum: Personal and social capability. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.acara.edu.au">www.acara.edu.au</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib3" idref="ref62" type="bt">3</bibl> <bibtext> Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority (ACARA). (2017). My school. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.myschool.edu.au">http://www.myschool.edu.au</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib4" idref="ref40" type="bt">4</bibl> <bibtext> Chalkiadaki, A. (2018). A systematic literature review of 21st century skills and competencies in primary education. International Journal of Instruction, 11 (3), 1 – 16.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib5" idref="ref13" type="bt">5</bibl> <bibtext> Chancellor, B. (2013). Primary school playgrounds: Features and management in Victoria, Australia. International Journal of Play, 2 (July 2014), 63 – 75.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib6" idref="ref61" type="bt">6</bibl> <bibtext> Creswell, J. W. (2015). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib7" idref="ref15" type="bt">7</bibl> <bibtext> Danniels, E., & Pyle, A. (2018). Defining play-based learning. In: Tremblay RE, Boivin M, Peters RDeV, eds. Pyle A, topic ed. Encyclopedia of early childhood development (pp. 1–5). https://<ulink href="http://www.child-encyclopedia.com/sites/default/files/dossiers-complets/en/play-based-learning.pdf">www.child-encyclopedia.com/sites/default/files/dossiers-complets/en/play-based-learning.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib8" idref="ref25" type="bt">8</bibl> <bibtext> DeWolf, D. M. (1999). Preschool children's negotiation of intersubjectivity during rough-and-tumble play. LSU Historical Dissertations and Theses. 7040. Baton Rouge, LA : Louisiana State University. https://digitalcommons.lsu.edu/gradschool_disstheses/7040/</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibl id="bib9" idref="ref17" type="bt">9</bibl> <bibtext> Edwards, S., Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Moore, D., & Boyd, W. (2017). Finding the balance: A play-framework for play-based learning and intentional teaching in early childhood education. Every Child, 23 (11), 14 – 15.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Engelen, L., Wyver, S., Perry, G., Bundy, A., Chan, T. K. Y., Ragen, J., ... Naughton, G. (2018). Spying on children during a school playground intervention using a novel method for direct observation of activities during outdoor play. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 18 (1), 86 – 95.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erickson, F. (2011). Uses of video in social research: A brief history. International Journal of Social Research Methodology, 14 (3), 179 – 189.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Erickson, F. (1992). Ethnographic microanalysis of interaction. In M. D. LeCompte, W. L. Milroy, & J. Preissle (Eds.), The handbook of qualitative research in education (pp. 201 – 225). New York, NY : Academic Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Eronen, L., Kokko, S., & Sormunen, K. (2019). Escaping the subject-based class: A Finnish case study of developing transversal competencies in a transdisciplinary course. Curriculum Journal, 30 (3), 264 – 278.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> European Commission. (2019). Key competences for lifelong learning. Official Journal of the European Union, 61 (2018/C189/01), 20.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Finnish National Board of Education (FNBE). (2016). National core curriculum for basic education 2014. Helsinki : National Board of Education.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garcez, P. M. (2008). Microethnography in the classroom. In K. A. King & N. H. Hornberger (Eds.), Encyclopedia of language and education (2nd, 257 – 271). New York : Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-0-387-30424-3_259</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garte, R. R. (2010). Inter-subjectivity and collaborative complexity: Effects of peer interaction and context in head start classrooms (Doctoral thesis). The City University of New York. https://search.proquest.com/openview/476f6f2b1002d391e963c9943db1b0a2/1?pq-origsite=gscholar&cbl=18750&diss=y</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Garte, R. R. (2015). Intersubjectivity as a measure of social competence among children attending head start: Assessing the measure's validity and relation to context. International Journal of Early Childhood, 47 (1), 189 – 207.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Gibson, J. J. (1979). The theory of affordances. In: J. J. Gibson (Ed.), The ecological approach to visual perception (pp. 127 – 141). Boston, MA : Houghton Mifflin.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Göncü, A. (1993). Development of intersubjectivity in social pretend play. Human Development, 36 (4), 185 – 198.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Guillemin, M., & Gillam, L. (2004). Ethics, reflexivity, and 'ethically important moments' in research. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (2), 261 – 280.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hyndman, B., & Mahony, L. (2018). Developing creativity through outdoor physical activities: A qualitative exploration of contrasting school equipment provisions. Journal of Adventure Education and Outdoor Learning, 18 (3), 242 – 256.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Hyndman, B., Mahony, L., Te Ava, A., Smith, S., & Nutton, G. (2016). Complementing the Australian primary school Health and Physical Education (HPE) curriculum: Exploring children's HPE learning experiences within varying school ground equipment contexts. Education. doi: 10.1080/03004279.2016.1152282</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Karpov, Y. V. (2015). Neo-Vygotskian developmental theory, and J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., Vol. 16, pp. 511 – 517). Oxford : Elsevier.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Kennedy, K. J. (2013). Singapore's school curriculum for the future beyond: National development? In Z. Deng, S. Gopinathan, & C. Lee (Eds.), Globalization and the Singapore curriculum, from policy to classroom (pp. 205 – 224). Singapore : Springer. doi: 10.1007/978-981-4451-57-4_12</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Luchs, A., & Fikus, M. (2013). A comparative study of active play on differently designed playgrounds. Journal of Adventure Education & Outdoor Learning, 13 (3), 206 – 222.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Mahony, L., Hyndman, B., Nutton, G., Smith, S., & Te Ava, A. (2017). Monkey bars, noodles and hay bales: A comparative analysis of social interaction in two school ground contexts. International Journal of Play, 4937, 1 – 11.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Marsh, J., Arnseth, H. C., & Kumpulainen, K. (2018). Maker literacies and maker citizenship in the MakEY (makerspaces in the early years) project. Multimodal Technologies and Interaction, 2 (3), 50.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Ministry of Education. (2020). Framework for 21st century competencies and student outcomes. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.moe.gov.sg/education/education-system/21st-century-competencies">www.moe.gov.sg/education/education-system/21st-century-competencies</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Nicholson, S. (1971). How not to cheat children: The theory of loose parts. Landscape Architecture, 62, 30 – 34.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> OECD. (2017). PISA 2015 results (Volume V): Collaborative problem solving. Paris: OECD Publishing. doi: 10.1787/9789264285521-7-en.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Organisation For Economic Co-Operation And Development [OECD]. (2005). The definition and selection of key competencies [Executive Summary]. Retrieved from <ulink href="http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf">http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pauwels, L. (2008). Taking and using: Ethical issues of photographs for research purposes. Visual Communication Quarterly, 15 (4), 243 – 257.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pink, S. (2007). Doing visual ethnography. London : Sage. 1 0.4135/9780857025029</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> PSHE Assocation (2020). Programme of study for the PSHE: Key stages 1-5. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.pshe-association.org.uk/system/files/PSHEAssociationProgrammeofStudyforPSHEEducation(Keystages1–5),Jan2020%5f0pdf">www.pshe-association.org.uk/system/files/PSHEAssociationProgrammeofStudyforPSHEEducation(Keystages1–5),Jan2020%5f0pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Pyle, A., & Alaca, B. (2018). Kindergarten children's perspectives on play and learning. Early Child Development and Care, 188 (8), 1063 – 1075.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> QSR International Pty Ltd. (2015). NVivo. Retrieved September 10, 2019, from https://<ulink href="http://www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo/what-is-nvivo">www.qsrinternational.com/nvivo/what-is-nvivo</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Queensland Curriculum & Assessment Authority. (2017). 21st century skills: Explanations of associated skills. Retrieved from https://<ulink href="http://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/senior/snr%5fsyll%5fredev%5f21st%5fcentury%5fskills%5fassociate%5fskills.pdf">www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/senior/snr%5fsyll%5fredev%5f21st%5fcentury%5fskills%5fassociate%5fskills.pdf</ulink></bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Roschelle, J. (1992). Convergent conceptual change. Journal of the Learning Sciences, 2 (3), 235 – 276.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Rubin, K. H., Fein, G. G., & Vandenberg, B. (1983). Play, and E. M. Hetherington (Ed.), Handbook of child psychology, Vol. 4, Socialization, personality, and social development (4th ed., pp. 694 – 774). New York, NY : Wiley.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Spencer, R. A., Joshi, N., Branje, K., McIsaac, J. D., Cawley, J., Rehman, L., ... Stone, M. (2019). Educator perceptions on the benefits and challenges of loose parts play in the outdoor environments of childcare centres. AIMS Public Health, 6 (4), 461 – 476.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Streeck, J., & Mehus, S. (2005). Microethnography: The study of practices. In K. Fitch & R. Sanders (Eds.), Handbook of language and social interaction (pp. 381 – 404). Mahwah, NJ : Erlbaum.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Stuckey, H. (2015). The second step in data analysis: Coding qualitative research data. Journal of Social Health and Diabetes, 3 (1), 7.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Tomasello, M., Carpenter, M., Call, J., Behne, T., & Moll, H. (2005). Understanding and sharing intentions: The origins of cultural cognition. Behavioral and Brain Sciences, 28 (5), 675 – 735.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Trawick-Smith, J. (2012). Teacher-child play interactions to achieve learning outcomes: Risks and opportunities. In: R. C. Pianta, W. S. Barnett, L. M. Justice, & S. M. Sheridan (Eds.), Handbook of early childhood education (pp. 259–277). New York, NY : Guilford Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> UNESCO. (2020). Sustainable development goal 4 (SDG 4) education within the 2030 agenda for sustainable development. Retrieved from https://sdg4education2030.org/the-goal</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> United Nations Educational Scientific and Cultural Organisation. (2015). Education 2030 - Incheon Declaration and Framework for action for the implementation of Sustainable Development Goal 4. (Vol. 94 (Paris : UNESCO)). doi: 10.2307/25094797</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Valtonen, T., Sointu, E. T., Kukkonen, J., Häkkinen, P., Järvelä, S., Ahonen, A., and Mäkitalo-Siegl, K. (2017). Insights into Finnish first-year pre-service teachers' twenty-first century skills. Education and Information Technologies, 22 (5), 2055 – 2069.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Voogt, J., Pieters, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2019). Collaborative curriculum design in teacher teams: Foundations. Collaborative Curriculum Design for Sustainable Innovation and Teacher Learning, 5 – 18. doi: 10.1007/978-3-030-20062-6_1</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Voogt, J., & Roblin, N. P. (2012). A comparative analysis of international frameworks for 21st century competences: Implications for national curriculum policies. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 44 (3), 299 – 321.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vygotsky, L. S. (1967). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet Psychology, 5 (3), 6 – 18.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA : Harvard University Press.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Whitebread, D., & O'Sullivan, L. (2012). Preschool children's social pretend play: Supporting the development of metacommunication, metacognition and self-regulation. International Journal of Play, 1 (2), 197 – 213.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Whitington, V., & Floyd, I. (2009). Creating intersubjectivity during socio‐dramatic play at an Australian kindergarten. Early Child Development and Care, 179 (2), 143 – 156.</bibtext> </blist> <blist> <bibtext> Yogman, M., Garner, A., Hutchinson, J., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2018). The power of play: A pediatric role in enhancing development in young children. Pediatrics, 142 (3). doi: 10.1542/peds.2018-2058</bibtext> </blist> </ref> <aug> <p>By Honor Mackley; Susan Edwards; Karen Mclean and Renata Cinelli</p> <p>Reported by Author; Author; Author; Author</p> </aug> <nolink nlid="nl1" bibid="bib23" firstref="ref1"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl2" bibid="bib50" firstref="ref2"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl3" bibid="bib27" firstref="ref4"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl4" bibid="bib41" firstref="ref5"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl5" bibid="bib28" firstref="ref8"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl6" bibid="bib30" firstref="ref9"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl7" bibid="bib19" firstref="ref10"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl8" bibid="bib40" firstref="ref14"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl9" bibid="bib36" firstref="ref16"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl10" bibid="bib45" firstref="ref18"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl11" bibid="bib14" firstref="ref19"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl12" bibid="bib55" firstref="ref20"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl13" bibid="bib10" firstref="ref23"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl14" bibid="bib17" firstref="ref26"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl15" bibid="bib52" firstref="ref27"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl16" bibid="bib53" firstref="ref28"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl17" bibid="bib18" firstref="ref29"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl18" bibid="bib54" firstref="ref30"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl19" bibid="bib39" firstref="ref31"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl20" bibid="bib44" firstref="ref32"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl21" bibid="bib20" firstref="ref33"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl22" bibid="bib15" firstref="ref37"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl23" bibid="bib46" firstref="ref39"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl24" bibid="bib32" firstref="ref41"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl25" bibid="bib47" firstref="ref42"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl26" bibid="bib48" firstref="ref43"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl27" bibid="bib13" firstref="ref44"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl28" bibid="bib49" firstref="ref45"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl29" bibid="bib25" firstref="ref48"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl30" bibid="bib29" firstref="ref49"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl31" bibid="bib35" firstref="ref50"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl32" bibid="bib38" firstref="ref53"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl33" bibid="bib51" firstref="ref54"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl34" bibid="bib24" firstref="ref55"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl35" bibid="bib22" firstref="ref57"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl36" bibid="bib12" firstref="ref58"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl37" bibid="bib16" firstref="ref59"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl38" bibid="bib42" firstref="ref60"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl39" bibid="bib21" firstref="ref64"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl40" bibid="bib33" firstref="ref65"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl41" bibid="bib11" firstref="ref67"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl42" bibid="bib34" firstref="ref68"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl43" bibid="bib26" firstref="ref70"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl44" bibid="bib37" firstref="ref71"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl45" bibid="bib43" firstref="ref72"></nolink> <nolink nlid="nl46" bibid="bib31" firstref="ref81"></nolink>
Header DbId: eric
DbLabel: ERIC
An: EJ1356722
AccessLevel: 3
PubType: Academic Journal
PubTypeId: academicJournal
PreciseRelevancyScore: 0
IllustrationInfo
Items – Name: Title
  Label: Title
  Group: Ti
  Data: Building Collaborative Competencies through Play with Outdoor Loose Parts Materials in Primary School
– Name: Language
  Label: Language
  Group: Lang
  Data: English
– Name: Author
  Label: Authors
  Group: Au
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mackley%2C+Honor%22">Mackley, Honor</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0001-5575-0958">0000-0001-5575-0958</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Edwards%2C+Susan%22">Edwards, Susan</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-5945-0597">0000-0002-5945-0597</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Mclean%2C+Karen%22">Mclean, Karen</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0332-6914">0000-0003-0332-6914</externalLink>)<br /><searchLink fieldCode="AR" term="%22Cinelli%2C+Renata%22">Cinelli, Renata</searchLink> (ORCID <externalLink term="http://orcid.org/0000-0002-2090-6390">0000-0002-2090-6390</externalLink>)
– Name: TitleSource
  Label: Source
  Group: Src
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="SO" term="%22Cambridge+Journal+of+Education%22"><i>Cambridge Journal of Education</i></searchLink>. 2022 52(4):431-451.
– Name: Avail
  Label: Availability
  Group: Avail
  Data: Routledge. Available from: Taylor & Francis, Ltd. 530 Walnut Street Suite 850, Philadelphia, PA 19106. Tel: 800-354-1420; Tel: 215-625-8900; Fax: 215-207-0050; Web site: http://www.tandf.co.uk/journals
– Name: PeerReviewed
  Label: Peer Reviewed
  Group: SrcInfo
  Data: Y
– Name: Pages
  Label: Page Count
  Group: Src
  Data: 21
– Name: DatePubCY
  Label: Publication Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: TypeDocument
  Label: Document Type
  Group: TypDoc
  Data: Journal Articles<br />Reports - Research
– Name: Audience
  Label: Education Level
  Group: Audnce
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="EL" term="%22Elementary+Education%22">Elementary Education</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Descriptors
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Teamwork%22">Teamwork</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Outdoor+Education%22">Outdoor Education</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Elementary+School+Students%22">Elementary School Students</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Foreign+Countries%22">Foreign Countries</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Manipulative+Materials%22">Manipulative Materials</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Cooperative+Learning%22">Cooperative Learning</searchLink><br /><searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Play%22">Play</searchLink>
– Name: Subject
  Label: Geographic Terms
  Group: Su
  Data: <searchLink fieldCode="DE" term="%22Australia%22">Australia</searchLink>
– Name: DOI
  Label: DOI
  Group: ID
  Data: 10.1080/0305764X.2022.2030300
– Name: ISSN
  Label: ISSN
  Group: ISSN
  Data: 0305-764X<br />1469-3577
– Name: Abstract
  Label: Abstract
  Group: Ab
  Data: This paper reports on the findings from a study investigating the provision of outdoor loose parts materials for upper primary school aged children. Conducted in Queensland, Australia, the study focused on loose parts materials as cultural tools, following the sociocultural argument that tools mediate activity and outcomes. The findings suggest that loose parts materials are used by children in the formation of sociodramatic play, including episodes of trading, bartering and advertising that support their shared understandings. Shared understandings precede collaborative competencies, including engagements with others, working towards and achieving common goals. With collaboration recognised as an important learning disposition for children in twenty-first-century societies, the findings suggest loose parts materials may be pedagogically appropriate for supporting these competencies in primary school settings.
– Name: AbstractInfo
  Label: Abstractor
  Group: Ab
  Data: As Provided
– Name: DateEntry
  Label: Entry Date
  Group: Date
  Data: 2022
– Name: AN
  Label: Accession Number
  Group: ID
  Data: EJ1356722
PLink https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&site=eds-live&db=eric&AN=EJ1356722
RecordInfo BibRecord:
  BibEntity:
    Identifiers:
      – Type: doi
        Value: 10.1080/0305764X.2022.2030300
    Languages:
      – Text: English
    PhysicalDescription:
      Pagination:
        PageCount: 21
        StartPage: 431
    Subjects:
      – SubjectFull: Teamwork
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Outdoor Education
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Elementary School Students
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Foreign Countries
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Manipulative Materials
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Cooperative Learning
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Play
        Type: general
      – SubjectFull: Australia
        Type: general
    Titles:
      – TitleFull: Building Collaborative Competencies through Play with Outdoor Loose Parts Materials in Primary School
        Type: main
  BibRelationships:
    HasContributorRelationships:
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mackley, Honor
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Edwards, Susan
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Mclean, Karen
      – PersonEntity:
          Name:
            NameFull: Cinelli, Renata
    IsPartOfRelationships:
      – BibEntity:
          Dates:
            – D: 01
              M: 01
              Type: published
              Y: 2022
          Identifiers:
            – Type: issn-print
              Value: 0305-764X
            – Type: issn-electronic
              Value: 1469-3577
          Numbering:
            – Type: volume
              Value: 52
            – Type: issue
              Value: 4
          Titles:
            – TitleFull: Cambridge Journal of Education
              Type: main
ResultId 1