Becoming clowns: How do digital technologies contribute to young children’s play?

Abstract

Research concerning play and technology is largely aimed at expanding the knowledge of what technological play may be and, to a lesser extent, examines what happens to children’s play when it encounters digital tools. In order to explore some of the complexity in play, this article elaborates on how Latour’s concepts of ‘translation’ and ‘inscription’ can make sense of a narrative from an early childhood setting. The article explores how to challenge ‘taken-for-granted knowledge’ and create different understandings of children’s play in technology-rich environments. Through a flattened ontology, the article considers how humans, non-humans and transcendental ideas relate to one another as equal forces; this allows for an understanding of play as located within and emerging from various networks. The discussion sheds light on how activation of material agents can lead us to look for differences and new spaces regarding play. Play and learning are no longer orchestrated by what is already known; rather, they become co-constructed when both the children and the material world have a say in constructing the ambiguity of play. Lastly, the discussion points to how early years practitioners need tools to challenge their assumptions of what play might become in the digital age.

Children and teachers engaging together with digital technology in early childhood education and care institutions: a literature review

“…Young children's contemporary play practices are characterised as a mixture of overlapping 'real' and digital play practices, in which non-digital and digital toys and tools are combined in various ways in their play (e.g. Edwards et al 2020;Fleer 2019Fleer , 2020Lafton 2019). Hence, it has become almost impossible to make a distinction between 'real' play and digital play (Edwards et al 2020).…”

“…Most of the reviewed studies are descriptive studies, and the researchers mostly describe the use of technology in a positive way. Six of the studies provide some critical perspectives (Alvestad et al 2017;Hoel and Jernes 2020;Jernes and Engelsen 2012;McGlynn-Stewart et al 2018; Pramling 2014; Undheim and Jernes 2020), but only one study can be described as being critical (Lafton 2019). Further, most of the studies draw on socio-cultural perspectives, which leaves room for further studies drawing on other theoretical perspectives, for example, multimodality or actor-network theory.…”

“…Most of the studies use several data collection methods, such as interviews and observations of teachers and children. Only four studies include children under the age of three (Fleer 2020;Jernes and Engelsen 2012;Lafton 2019;Ljunggren 2016) (Appendix 2).…”

“…As highlighted by several researchers (e.g. Edwards et al 2020;Fleer 2019Fleer , 2020Lafton 2019), it has become almost impossible to distinguish between 'real' play and digital play today because children's various play practices are so interrelated with each other and continuously moving towards each other. According to Lafton (2019), the spheres where technology and traditional toys are present overlap with each other in children's play.…”

“…Edwards et al 2020;Fleer 2019Fleer , 2020Lafton 2019), it has become almost impossible to distinguish between 'real' play and digital play today because children's various play practices are so interrelated with each other and continuously moving towards each other. According to Lafton (2019), the spheres where technology and traditional toys are present overlap with each other in children's play. Fleer (2019, 214) describes these practices as a 'coalition of practices' that create new transformative conditions for children in a play-based learning environment.…”