Geometric Toys in the Attic? A Corpus Analysis of Early Exposure to Geometric Shapes.

Abstract Preschoolers' experiences with shapes are important because geometry is foundational to aspects of mathematics and it is now part of the Common Core for school-readiness. Exposure to shapes also provides experiences that are key to developing spatial thinking more broadly. Yet achieving a strong conceptual understanding of geometric categories can extend well into elementary school ( Satlow and Newcombe, 1998 ) despite a general sense that many kindergarten children “know their shapes.” The extended time period may be partially a product of the nature of the spatial input to which children are exposed. This study characterizes the geometric input preschoolers receive from three sources: shape books, sorters, and interactive digital content. These shape materials were examined for the types of shapes they include. Shapes were further classified as canonical (e.g., equilateral triangles) vs. non-canonical (e.g., isosceles or scalene), and whether the shape was presented as a geometric form vs. everyday object and in isolation vs. embedded in a scene. The quantity of shape terms was documented for each shape material. The level of sophistication of associated shape language was assessed by tracking the presence of geometric adjectives and explicit definitions. Findings suggest that children are exposed to a limited number of shape categories and very few non-typical variants within those categories. Shapes were typically labeled with only a single generic identifier (e.g., triangle ) and few of the materials provided explicit definitions, geometric adjectives (e.g., scalene ), or identified similarities and differences across shapes. Findings suggest a need for more thoughtful design of shape learning materials to provide variety and evoke discussion of their defining properties.

[1]  N. Lavie Attention, Distraction, and Cognitive Control Under Load , 2010 .

[2]  Erika Hoff,et al.  Input and the Acquisition of Language: Three Questions , 2008 .

[3]  J. Watson,et al.  Preschool Embedded Figures Test Performance of Young Children: Age and Gender Differences , 1993, Perceptual and motor skills.

[4]  C. Snow,et al.  Lexical input as related to children's vocabulary acquisition: effects of sophisticated exposure and support for meaning. , 2001, Developmental psychology.

[5]  Roberta Michnick Golinkoff,et al.  Playing around in school: Implications for learning and educational policy. , 2010 .

[6]  R. Golinkoff,et al.  One cow does not an animal make: young children can extend novel words at the superordinate level. , 2001, Child development.

[7]  Letitia R. Naigles,et al.  How children use input to acquire a lexicon. , 2002, Child development.

[8]  Amani Zaier,et al.  Mathematical Language in Early Childhood Settings: What Really Counts? , 2008 .

[9]  N. Newcombe,et al.  Block Talk: Spatial Language During Block Play , 2011 .

[10]  Sandra R. Waxman,et al.  How Two‐ and Four‐Year‐Old Children Interpret Adjectives and Count Nouns , 1993 .

[11]  A. Bryk,et al.  Early vocabulary growth: Relation to language input and gender. , 1991 .

[12]  D. Gentner,et al.  Comparison in the Development of Categories , 1999 .

[13]  K. Hirsh-Pasek,et al.  Young children associate novel words with complex objects rather than salient parts. , 2007, Developmental psychology.

[14]  Kelly S. Mix,et al.  The relation between space and math: developmental and educational implications. , 2012, Advances in child development and behavior.

[15]  H. Schweingruber,et al.  Mathematics learning in early childhood : paths toward excellence and equity , 2009 .

[16]  Julie Sarama,et al.  Building Blocks for early childhood mathematics , 2003 .

[17]  E. Markman,et al.  Children's use of mutual exclusivity to constrain the meanings of words , 1988, Cognitive Psychology.

[18]  C. Eagle,et al.  A MODIFICATION OF THE EMBEDDED-FIGURES TEST FOR USE WITH YOUNG CHILDREN. , 1963, The Journal of genetic psychology.

[19]  Sandra R. Waxman,et al.  Linguistic biases and the establishment of conceptual hierarchies: Evidence from preschool children , 1990 .

[20]  Roberta Michnick Golinkoff,et al.  Finding the missing piece: Blocks, puzzles, and shapes fuel school readiness , 2014, Trends in Neuroscience and Education.

[21]  Linda B. Smith,et al.  The importance of shape in early lexical learning , 1988 .

[22]  S. Levine,et al.  The effects of word-learning biases on children's concept of angle. , 2015, Child development.

[23]  J. Deloache Dual representation and young children's use of scale models. , 2000, Child development.

[24]  N. Newcombe,et al.  Taking shape: supporting preschoolers' acquisition of geometric knowledge through guided play. , 2013, Child development.

[25]  N. Newcombe,et al.  When is a triangle not a triangle? Young children's developing concepts of geometric shape , 1998 .

[26]  A. Tversky Features of Similarity , 1977 .

[27]  Sian L. Beilock,et al.  The relation between spatial skill and early number knowledge: the role of the linear number line. , 2012, Developmental psychology.

[28]  J. Lehto,et al.  Some factors underlying mathematical performance: The role of visuospatial working memory and non-verbal intelligence , 2008 .

[29]  Kathy Hirsh-Pasek,et al.  The Contribution of Early Communication Quality to Low-Income Children’s Language Success , 2015, Psychological science.

[30]  Shannon M. Pruden,et al.  Children's spatial thinking: does talk about the spatial world matter? , 2011, Developmental science.

[31]  Nora S Newcombe,et al.  Thinking about quantity: the intertwined development of spatial and numerical cognition. , 2017, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[32]  Elizabeth F. Shipley,et al.  Mothers' use of superordinate category terms , 1983, Journal of Child Language.

[33]  M. Casey,et al.  The Influence of Spatial Ability on Gender Differences in Mathematics College Entrance Test Scores across Diverse Samples. , 1995 .

[34]  Dennis W. Moore,et al.  Vocabulary acquisition from teacher explanation and repeated listening to stories: Do they overcome the Matthew effect? , 2002 .

[35]  Brian N. Verdine,et al.  Talking Shape: Parental Language with Electronic versus Traditional Shape Sorters. , 2015 .

[36]  C. Sandhofer,et al.  Same, varied, or both? Contextual support aids young children in generalizing category labels. , 2013, Journal of experimental child psychology.

[37]  Kathy Hirsh-Pasek,et al.  Putting Education in “Educational” Apps , 2015, Psychological science in the public interest : a journal of the American Psychological Society.

[38]  R H Day,et al.  Visual shape perception in early infancy. , 1979, Monographs of the Society for Research in Child Development.

[39]  E. Hoff The specificity of environmental influence: socioeconomic status affects early vocabulary development via maternal speech. , 2003, Child development.

[40]  James F. Christie,et al.  Standards, science, and the role of play in early literacy education , 2006 .

[41]  Brian N. Verdine,et al.  The Shape of Things: The Origin of Young Children’s Knowledge of the Names and Properties of Geometric Forms , 2016, Journal of cognition and development : official journal of the Cognitive Development Society.

[42]  J. Sarama,et al.  Young Children's Concepts of Shape. , 1999 .

[43]  Kathy Hirsh-Pasek,et al.  Guided Play: Where Curricular Goals Meet a Playful Pedagogy , 2013 .

[44]  Kelly S. Mix,et al.  Thinking about quantity: the intertwined development of spatial and numerical cognition. , 2015, Wiley interdisciplinary reviews. Cognitive science.

[45]  M. Wiener,et al.  DISCRIMINATION OF FORM ORIENTATION IN YOUNG CHILDREN. , 1964, Child development.

[46]  N. Mahajan,et al.  Once upon a Time: Parent-Child Dialogue and Storybook Reading in the Electronic Era. , 2013 .

[47]  D. Lubinski,et al.  Spatial ability for STEM domains: Aligning over 50 years of cumulative psychological knowledge solidifies its importance. , 2009 .