Spatial Learning and Play with Technology: How Parental Spatial Talk Differs Across Contexts

Abstract

Early acquisition of foundational spatial concepts can occur in play contexts within and beyond the home. Early exposure to spatial language supports spatial development (e.g., Pruden et al. in Dev Sci 14:1417–1430, 2011), which has been found to be a good predictor of subsequent mathematics achievement in school (e.g., Duncan et al. in Dev Psychol 43:1428–1446, 2007; Magnuson et al. in Am Educ Res J 53:1198–1228, 2016). With decreasing costs, increasing mobility, and an abundant array of software applications (apps), spatial play has evolved from traditional physical blocks and puzzles to include interactive games and technology-enhanced toys that “talk” available on mobile devices. Digital technologies provide the potential for unique learning opportunities by exposing young children to developmentally appropriate cognitive skills through play, and by offering appropriate pedagogical supports to help adults to scaffold children’s learning (e.g., Kabali et al. in Pediatrics 135:1044–1050, 2015; NAEYC and the Fred Rogers Centre for Early Learning and Children’s Media in Technology and interactive media as tools in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8. NAEYC, Washington, DC, 2012; Rideout in Learning at home: Families’ educational media use in America. The Joan Ganz Cooney Center at Sesame Workshop, New York, NY, 2014). However, emerging research suggests that not all parent–child engagement contexts elicit production of spatial words equally (e.g., Zosh et al. in Mind Brain Educ 9:136–144, 2015). In this chapter, we introduce important differences in spatial talk and activities elicited during different play contexts, in particular, spatial versus non-spatial, guided versus free, and technology-based versus traditional manipulatives. We discuss ways to capitalize on the affordances offered by both digital applications and traditional manipulatives to harness children’s spatial learning. In addition, we examine the educational content and instructional affordances (i.e., quality of instruction and scaffolding) of apps on spatial-visual and geometry to better understand when technology provides appropriate learning experiences for preschoolers.