Wood et al. Flashcards
(31 cards)
what is the theory?
tutor intervention and scaffolding + children being natural problem solvers
what is the background?
that complete comprehension of the solution must precede production (need to know end goal/ aim)
what is the aim?
to examine relationship between child and tutor
what is the research method?
controlled observation in an artificial environment
how long did procedure last?
20 mins to 1 hour
what is the sample?
30 children
- x10 3,4, and 5 year olds (5 f and 5m)
- middle class families
- Cambridge USA
what is the sampling technique?
volunteer - parents responded to ad
what is the task?
to build a pyramid consisting of 21 blocks (9x9 square base, 6 layers, 4 pieces per layer with 2 interlocking)
- peg and hole (all pegs fit in all holes = easy to get wrong)
what is the tutoring procedure?
- close to standardised as possible
- female tutor
- child left alone with all 21 pieces jumbled for 5 mins
- tutor only helps if child stops and stuggles
- puts together 2 pieces and says “make some more like this one”
what is the system of scoring?
- correct or incorrect construction
- assisted or unassisted construction
- interventions e.g., direct assistance (modelling), verbal prompt, or straightforward verbal attempt (“make some more like this one”)
what was the inter-rater reliability?
94%
what were some observations from the tutorials?
- older children did better at producing the larger number of correct constructions
- older children also less likely to deconstruct
what were the tutorial relationships like?
3 year olds often ignored the tutor with (112 rejections and 4 / 5 year olds with virtually none) despite needing the most help
what was the median for all ages for total amount of help received?
3- 20.0
4- 19.0
5- 3.5
what type of tutoring was the most effective?
showing
3= 40% 4= 63% and 5=80%
what were the total interventions for the children?
3- 201
4- 198
5- 112
what is the key analysis of the tutoring?
in the 478 opportunities for standardisation it was followed 86% of time for 4 year olds and 92% for 3 year olds - suggests that 4 year olds have the most unstructured behaviour
how come some of the findings be applied to education?
- 3 year olds and discovery learning
- 4 year olds and individual responses from tutors
- 5 year olds benefit most from tutor
what are some conclusions?
- the older the child the more successful the problem solver
- older children were more prepared to accept (and act on) tutor advice
evaluate according to reliability?
strengths:
- standardised protocol / procedure e.g., same task (21 block pyramid) = internal reliability
- high inter-rater reliability (94%)
- replicable procedure
weaknesses:
- tutor protocol not always followed
- lacks external validity e.g., male tutor, different volunteers, different task
- observation makes subjective = less reliable (lacks internal reliability)
evaluate according to validity
strengths:
- high control = construct validity = causality
- mundane realism (pyramid building = IRL task children would do)
weaknesses:
- lacks population validity (small, culture bias sample)
- lacks ecological validity (artificial environment)
- tutor = stranger/ female may have impacted behaviour
evaluate according to data
BOTH types collected (so strengths and weaknesses of both apply)
e.g., the quan data collected is objective and not impacted by researcher bias BUT the qual data is nomothetic and there may be individual differences
evaluate according to samples and ethnocentrism
strengths:
- 3,4,5 year olds = cross sectional - can see changes with age
- no gender bias (male and female used)
- volunteer sample = easy to obtain
weaknesses:
- culture bias (USA) = ethnocentric - only provides western view on development with tutor
- volunteer samples = only certain type of parent (smart children etc.)
evaluate according to methodology
strengths:
- snapshot has no EVs impacting
-more scientific
- quicker and cheaper
weaknesses:
- participant variables / individual differences
