Comparison of the Types of Cooperative Problem Solving Behaviors in Four Learning Centers: Computer, Dramatic Play, Block, and Manipulative

This study examined the variation in children's choice of learning centers in a naturalistic, free-play setting. The study was designed to develop a realistic picture of how 4and 5-year-olds interact in each of 4 settings (computer, dramatic play, block, and manipulative) to allow for comparison of their behaviors between genders and across settings. Children from two classrooms at a university preschool program made up the sample. Children were videotaped without their knowledge, and their social interactions were defined as disruptive, unoccupied, teacher interaction-child initiated, teacher interaction-teacher initiated, onlooker, solitary, parallel, or cooperative. Findings showed almost no disruptive behavior in any of the centers; the highest amount of conflict was coded in the block area, which also contained the highest amount of cooperative behavior. While the ratio of time spent in a center by gender was 3:4 minutes for the dramatic play, block, and manipulative centers (3 for boys and 4 for girls), the ratio in the computer center was 5.3:2.2 (5.3 for boys and 2.2 for girls) . Although the software was screened for gender bias and the computer to child ratio was 2:21, boys spent 2 to 3 times more time than girls at the computer center. Girls engaged in a higher percentage of cooperative play than boys in the computer, dramatic, and manipulative centers. Findings suggested that modifications to computer centers may need to include opportunities for cooperation among children as well as software that includes female characters and themes. (Contains 20 references.) (EV) ******************************************************************************** Reproductions supplied by EDRS are the best that can be made from the original document. ******************************************************************************** Comparison of the Types of Cooperative Problem Solving Behaviors m Four Learning Centers: Computer, Dramatic Play, Block, and Manipulative by Genan T. Anderson Cs1 s1 Csi C1 ABSTRACT: This investigation utilized the naturally occurring behaviors and choice of centers by fourand five-year-old children video taped without their knowledge. It examined the social interaction (defmed as disruptive, unoccupied, teacher interactionchild initiated, teacher interactionteacher initiated, onlooker, solitary, parallel, and cooperative) of children in four centersblock, dramatic play, manipulative, and computer. Two classrooms of children from a university preschool program made up the sample. There were 42, predominantly white, middle-class, children (20 boys and 22 girls) mean age of 56 months. Each center was taped for 30 minutes once a week for four weeks. Social behaviors of each child were coded in 10-second intervals for every 10-seconds the child was in the video taped centers (Kappa = 0.9). The range of variation in parallel behavior was 17 percent with computers the high and blocks the low. When the computer center (high percentage in parallel play; low value in cooperative play) was compared to blocks (low value in parallel play; high value in cooperative play), there was a 19 percent difference in the amount of time spent in cooperative interaction. After the three hierarchy social behaviorsonlooker, parallel, and cooperativewere combined, there remained almost no difference between the centers although variations remained between gender. We saw the area of greatest variation in magnitude in the interaction between gender and center; most markedly in the computer center. While the ratio of time spent in each center is 3:4 for dramatic play, block, and manipulative centers (3 being boys and 4 being girls), the ratio in the computer center is 5.3:2.2 (5.3 being boys and 2.2 being girls). Introduction and Review of Literature The "widely held expectations" for the interactional style of four-year-olds is that they play and share with others but also begin true give-and-take, cooperative play (Bredekamp & Copple, 1997 and Rubin, et al., in press). This overarching statement is derived from the quantitative and qualitative observations of those who study and work with young children. In their review of research on children's peer interactions Rubin, et al. (in press) reported that 5-year-olds ". spend less of their free play time in classroom settings interacting with others than being alone or near others" (p. 19). They contend that watching and playing near but not with others may be the sequences the young child uses to gain entry into an ongoing play activity. Examining the variations in play and interactional styles of the fourto five-year-old by gender broadens our perspective and understanding of their behaviors. Macoby (1990) characterizes the play of girls by their use of enabling styles; i.e., acknowledge other's comment, express agreement, support U.S. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION Ottad Encaoonto 1:10.1. 1 Inpoweneal EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) O This document MS been reproduced as received horn the person or oigandation originating 0 Minor changes have been made to reftroMmfion OcefirY. Points of view or opinions WINO in this document do not necessarily represent official OERI position or policy. 2 1 1 PERMISSION TO REPRODUCE AND DISSEMINATE THIS MATERIAL HAS BEEN GRANTED BY GRANCIA.NN 7K-ATARTSM TO THE EDUCATIONAL RESOURCES INFORMATION CENTER (ERIC) what partner is doing. Their conversation is a socially binding process, and theyare generally averse to rough-and-tumble play style characteristic of boys. On the other hand, boys are orientated toward issues of competition and dominance and are not easily influenced by girls. She observed that boys get more than their share of access to scarce resources. They use speech to protect turf and employ more constricting styles; i.e., behaviors that cause the partner to withdraw. In sharp contrast, Thouvenelle, et al. (1994) contends the preferences of materials and activities by boys or girls appear to be shaped by social conventions and expectations, which are transmitted by peers, parents, older siblings, teachers, television, and the mass media rather than by innate, genetic determinants. Petrakos & Howe (1996) found that solitary-designed centers facilitated more solitary play while group-designed centers facilitated more group play. When observing social interaction across settings they found that the children's behavior varied more across settings than within settings. In comparing housekeeping, sand, manipulative, vehicle, and reading settings, they found the highest proportion of complex social interactions occurred in the housekeeping setting. They also noted that time to interact was necessary to provide opportunity for the cooperative group play. Their results confirmed that the physical arrangement of setting directly influence type of play. When preschools add computers as a center choice, the children's preference for this center parallels that of other more traditional centers (Haugland & Wright, 1997, and Shade & Watson, 1990). Computers can be a very social activity (Davidson, 1990). Young children engage in high levels of spoken communication, social interaction, and cooperation at computer. They generally prefer working with a partner, share leadership roles, negotiate turns, resolve differences of opinion regarding the direction the game should take, seek help frompeers, initiate interaction, and take turns (Clements,