MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404219824 · doi:10.1111/chso.12922

Children's perspectives of learning through play in the majority world: Findings from Bangladesh, Colombia and Uganda

2024· article· en· W4404219824 on OpenAlexaff
Nikhit D’Sa, Sue Robson, Angela Pyle, Jennifer M. Zosh, Kazi Ferdous Pavel, Carolina Maldonado‐Carreño, Eduardo Escallon Largacha, Martin Ariapa, Mauro Giacomazzi, Rachel Hatch, Carina Omoeva

Bibliographic record

VenueChildren & Society · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldSocial Sciences
TopicChild Development and Digital Technology
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
FundersLEGO Foundation
KeywordsDeveloping countryPsychologySocioeconomicsEconomic growthGeographySociologyDevelopmental psychologyEconomics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Abstract As efforts to use learning through play (LtP) expand globally, it is important to explore how children's perspectives impact the efficacy and experience of this pedagogical approach. LtP has been conceptualized as a spectrum from free play to guided play to teacher‐directed play. This spectrum describes different ways in which play happens—with varying levels of adult support—and acknowledges that children's agency is characterized by choice and the ability to direct, participate in, and/or initiate play. Previous research has primarily focused on adult perceptions of LtP for preschool children in high‐resource contexts. We present the perspectives on LtP of children (3–12 years) in Bangladesh, Colombia and Uganda. We photographed learning activities in community centres and schools that incorporated play‐based practices. In group discussions, we used these photographs to elicit children's perspectives on the difference between play and learning in the classroom, the factors that influence their construction of play and learning, and the role that teachers play in these activities. Conceptualizations across the three research sites and ages were similar: Children associated learning with play if the activity was fun and social; distinctions between play and learning were defined by content, modality, materials and location; and teachers were seen as involved in play under limited conditions. We discuss the implications of our findings for the implementation of LtP in majority‐world contexts. By moving teachers from a primarily teacher‐directed approach to more guided‐play approaches, we are not only asking teachers to give up some control but are also asking children to think about adults in fundamentally different ways. This research highlights that we may need to couple professional development for teachers with approaches that support children to change their perceptions of agency and choice in the classroom.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.286
Threshold uncertainty score0.484

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.010
GPT teacher head0.268
Teacher spread0.258 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChildren & SocietySame topicChild Development and Digital TechnologyFrench-language works237,207