Child Routine activities – Project topics materials

Get Complete Project Material File(s) Now! »

CHAPTER 2 ACTIVITY SETTINGS

Introduction

Scope of the chapter

This chapter aims at providing a theoretical framework by means of discussing relevant theories that support the use of activity settings. The theoretical concepts discussed include the Bioecological theory, ecocultural theory and the developmental niche concept. Thereafter, the components of activity settings are expanded on, with specific reference to the African context.

Background

The field of early childhood intervention has evolved significantly over the past three decades with many conceptual changes highlighted in the literature. The most significant being the introduction of family-centered practice which recognises the centrality of family in the life of the child (Turnbull, Turbiville & Turnbull, 2000). The term familycentered refers to a particular set of beliefs, principles, values and practices that aim at supporting and strengthening family capacity to enhance and promote child development and learning (Dunst, 2002). Family-centered practice recognises that families are unique, with their own traditions, beliefs and value systems. The family context which has been identified as the context for learning and development (Carpenter, 2000), is embedded within a particular culture; and while families are not defined by culture alone, culture is viewed as having a significant impact on the developmental opportunities of children (Harry, 2002; Barnwell & Monimalika, 1996). To understand family strengths and in order to build capacity, it is imperative that one gains insight into the cultural contexts in which families live (DeFrain & Asay, 2007). This is important, as research has shown that caregivers desire approaches which are easy to incorporate into their daily lives, and assist the child in being part of the family and community (Sheldon & Rush, 2001).

Contextualising development

Culture is defined as a “socially interactive process of constructions” consisting of two main components: shared activity and shared meaning (Greenfield, Keller, Fuligni and Maynard, 2003, p. 462). One way of understanding shared activity and shared meaning is through investigating activity settings, which are the “perceptible instantiation of the ecological and cultural system that surrounds the family and individual” (Gallimore, Goldenberg and Weisner, 1993, p. 539). The study of activity settings therefore allows for human activity to be understood within context, because the impact of culture on belief systems is mediated through the everyday experiences and events that involve the child’s interactions with various people and the environment (Gallimore et al., 1993; Harry, 2000). Furthermore, it is through engagement in activity settings that individuals learn ‘cultural scripts’ or what is expected of them, which activities are considered appropriate or inappropriate, how they are expected to engage in these activities, the ways other people will deal with them, and the ways in which they are expected to deal with others (Tudge, Odero, Piccinini, Doucet, Sperb and Lopes, 2006). Culture therefore structures the settings within which children’s activities take place (Dawes & Donald, 2005). The theoretical concepts underlying activity settings are now explored, in order to develop a perspective on development in context.

Bioecological framework

Bronfenbrenner has motivated for research on children to focus on how children develop within settings that are “representative of their actual world” (Lerner, 2005, p. x). Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological perspective helps to achieve this objective, because it is inclusive of all the systems in which families are enmeshed and it reflects the dynamic nature of actual family relations (Swick & Williams, 2006). The ecological environment is conceptualised as a set of nested systems consisting of the Microsystem, the Mesosystem, the Exosystem and the Macrosystem (Bronfenbrenner, 2005; Sontag, 1996). This discussion focuses only on the Microsystem and Macrosystem in order to understand the proximal and distal influences on the child.Bronfenbrenner’s most proximal level of interaction in his hierarchy of systems, the Microsystem, allows for a closer look at the patterns of “activities, roles and interpersonal relations experienced by a developing person in a given face-to-face setting with particular physical and material features, and containing other persons with distinctive characteristics of temperament, personality and systems of belief” (Bronfenbrenner,1992, p. 227). The child’s family context is the Microsystem in which early learning takes place (Swick & Williams, 2006). The interaction that takes place in the immediate environment is referred to as ‘proximal processes’. The proximal processes affecting development vary systematically as a joint function of the characteristics of the developing person, the environment (both proximal and distal), and the processes taking place. Examples of such processes include feeding a baby, reading, caring for others and play. Participation in these interactive processes over time generates the ability, motivation, knowledge and skill to engage in such activities, with others and on one’s own (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). Children’s developmental contexts are therefore viewed as cultural in all senses (Dawes & Donald, 2005). Bronfenbrenner’s fourth level of his taxonomy, the Macrosystem, addresses the cultural influence within this system. The “cultural repertoire” of belief systems of significant others in the child’s world creates the context that determines and contributes to developmental outcomes (Bronfenbrenner, 1992). Helman’s (1994) definition of culture allows insight into the link between culture at the level of the Macrosystem and how it impacts on everyday life within the Microsystem. Culture is defined as:“A set of guidelines which individuals inherit as members of a particular society, and which tells them how to view the world, how to experience it emotionally, and how to behave in it in relation to other people, to supernatural forces or Gods, and to the natural environment. It also provides them with a way of transmitting these guidelines to the next generation – by use of symbols, language, art and ritual” (Helman, 1994, p. 2-3). The Macrosystem therefore influences what, how, when and where relationships are carried out (Bronfenbrenner, 2005). According to Sontag (1997) this affords credibility to the study of belief systems where more detailed descriptions of the child’s environment and unique cultural niches can be obtained. The study of belief systems and the activities, through which culture is adopted, will assist in understanding “the way things are ordinarily done in a particular community” (Dawes & Donald, 2005, p. 12). In order to understand how culture is adopted and how people adapt to it, ecocultural theory developed by Weisner is discussed in the following section.

READ THE AFRICAN RURAL SURVIVALIST CONSUMER CULTURE

Ecocultural theory

In essence, ecocultural theory is based on the idea of ‘locally rational action’, where people use connected, schematised and shared knowledge of their everyday cultural world to adapt and respond to complex decisions in their local communities (Weisner, 2002b). Development occurs along pathways determined by culture and society, and actively chosen and engaged in by parents and children, within a particular cultural ecology (Weisner, Matheson, Coots and Bernheimer, 2005). This cultural ecology is conceptualised as “the practices and activities embedded in everyday routines and the shared cultural models and interpretative meanings those activities have in a community” (Weisner et al., 2005, p. 46). Research on cultural values and parental beliefs illustrates that cultural context and socio-economic status does impact on the way parents think about children, their parenting goals and values, as well as the type of experiences and opportunities children will have access to (Rosenthal & Dorit, 2001). Within this context,families actively respond to circumstances in which they live, and construct and organise environments that provide meaning and direction to their lives (Bernheimer & Keogh,1995).The ecocultural framework therefore considers human diversity, both psychological and cultural, to be a set of collective and individual adaptations to context (Georgas, Van De Vijver & Berry, 2004). It is within the ecocultural context that every cultural community provides developmental pathways for children, which are made up of the everyday routines of life that children engage in (Weisner, 2002b). Ecocultural theory zones into these pathways, which consist of activities and practices that are viewed as being the most important influences in the child and family’s life (Bernheimer & Weisner, 2007). These activities (e.g. watching TV, visiting, playing), which are dependent to a large extent on cultural and family goals (Bernheimer & Weisner, 2007; Cooper & Denner, 1998), are useful units of cultural analysis because they are meaningful for parents and children (Weisner, 2002b).
The values and beliefs upheld by parents are reflected through their child rearing practices (Rosenthal & Roer-Strier, 2001). This is stressed further by Norton (1990, p. 3) who states that “child rearing practices reflect what parents know about life in their community, what they believe to be useful, and what they recognise as realistic aspirations for their children”. Beliefs about children and the experiences afforded to them are therefore inextricably linked to and derived from culture. Every cultural community provides developmental pathways for children within an ecocultural context (Weisner, 2002b); children’s well-being is therefore dependent on engaged participation in this context (Weisner et al., 2005; Weisner, 2002a). Two developmental pathways have been emphasised in the literature; one pathway emphasising individuation and independence, and the other membership and interdependence (Greenfield et al., 2003).
Oheneba-Sakyi and Takyi (2006) note that although variations exist among African societies as they adapt to different ecosystems and cultural realities, African indigenous cultures have historically believed in the supremacy of the group as opposed to EuroAmerican culture which focuses on the individual.
The value of looking at parents’ goals and beliefs is highlighted in a study conducted by Rao, McHale and Pearson (2003). They found that socialisation goals and child-rearing practices in India and China were linked to the specific beliefs about children and childhood in each culture. Other studies which have also highlighted the link between parenting approaches and culture, include Bornstein and Cote’s (2004) study which focused on parenting cognitions of Japanese, South American, and Euro- American mothers; Beckert, Strom and Strom (2004) who looked at parent expectations of young 11 children in Taiwan; and Javo, Ronning and Heyerdahl’s (2004) study of child rearing among the indigenous Sami population in Norway. Evans (1994) provides a comprehensive report of child-rearing practices in Sub-Saharan Africa, in particular in Namibia, Zambia, Malawi, Nigeria and Mali. Finally a more recent study by Geiger and Alant (2005), reports on child-rearing practices in Botswana. These studies, summarised in Table 2.1, indicate that the beliefs or expectations that parents have about the nature of development, reflect cultural values and regulate the opportunities that parents provide for children (Gauvain, 2003).

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS
LIST OF FIGURES
LIST OF APPENDICES
ABSTRACT
OPSOMMING
CHAPTER 1
PROBLEM STATEMENT
1.1 Introduction
1.2 Problem statement and rationale
1.3. Terminology
1.3.1. Activity settings
1.3.2. Family-centered
1.3.3. Natural environments
1.4 Chapters
1.5 Summary
CHAPTER 2
ACTIVITY SETTINGS
2.1 Introduction
2.1.1. Scope of the chapter
2.1.2. Background
2.2. Contextualising development
2.2.1. Bioecological framework
2.2.2. Ecocultural theory
2.2.3. Developmental niche
2.3. Activity settings
2.5. Summary
CHAPTER 3
RESEARCH METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction
3.2 Aims
3.3 Research design
3.4 Preparatory Phase
3.5 Main Study
3.5.1 Description of setting
3.5.2 Participants
3.6 Equipment and Materials
3.6.1 Equipment
3.6.2 Materials
3.7 Data Collection
3.7.1 General procedures
3.7.2 The interviews
3.7.3 Description of procedure followed
3.8. Data analysis and statistical procedures
3.8.1 Analysis of transcriptions
3.8.2 Reliability
3.9 Summary
CHAPTER 4
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
4.1. Introduction
4.2 Description of context
4.3 Activity settings
4.3.1. Child Routine activities
4.3.2. Play activities
4.3.3 Early Literacy activities
4.3.4 Entertainment activities
4.3.5 Chore activities
4.3.6 Spiritual activities
4.3.7 Family activities
4.3.8 Community-based activities
4.4 Caregiver Perceptions
4.4.2 Important lessons learned at home
4.4.3 Activities that the child enjoys
4.4.4. Perceptions on how children learn
4.5. Conclusion
4.6 Summary
CHAPTER 5
CONCLUSION
5.1 Introduction
5.2 Conclusions
5.3 Evaluation of research
5.4 Recommendations for further research.
5.5 Summary
REFERENCES
APPENDICES