Opportunities for learning and social interaction in infant sitting: Effects of sitting support,sitting skill,and gross motor delay

The development of independent sitting changes everyday opportunities for learning and has cascading effects on cognitive and language development. Prior to independent sitting, infants experience the sitting position with physical support from caregivers. Why does supported sitting not provide the same input for learning that is experienced in independent sitting? This question is especially relevant for infants with gross motor delay, who require support in sitting for many months after typically developing infants sit independently. We observed infants with typical development (n = 34, ages 4–7 months) and infants with gross motor delay (n = 128, ages 7–16 months) in early stages of sitting development, and their caregivers, in a dyadic play observation. We predicted that infants who required caregiver support for sitting would spend more time facing away from the caregiver and less time contacting objects than infants who could sit independently. We also predicted that caregivers of supported sitters would spend less time contacting objects because their hands would be full supporting their infants. Our first two hypotheses were confirmed; however, caregivers spent surprisingly little time using both hands to provide support, and caregivers of supported sitters spent more time contacting objects than caregivers of independent sitters. Similar patterns were seen in the group of typically developing infants and the infants with motor delay. Our findings suggest that independent sitting and supported sitting provide qualitatively distinct experiences with different implications for social interaction and learning opportunities.

Highlights

• During seated free play, supported sitters spent more time facing away from their caregivers and less time handling objects than independent sitters.
• Caregivers who spent more time supporting infants with both hands spent less time handling objects; however, caregivers mostly supported infants with one or no hands.
• A continuous measure of sitting skill did not uniquely contribute to these behaviors beyond the effect of binary sitting support (supported vs. independent sitter).
• The pattern of results was similar for typically developing infants and infants with gross motor delay, despite differences in age.

     

Learning in Community for STEM Undergraduates: Connecting a Learning Sciences and a Learning Humanities Approach in Higher Education

Abstract

Previous research demonstrates that social and interpersonal factors, more than academic preparation, affect decisions by under-represented students to stay in or to leave STEM fields. Yet, much of the theorizing about STEM learning in higher education begins with conceptual and epistemological dimensions. We make the case for a new theoretical framework, a learning humanities, that begins with relationships. From this relational starting point, we locate STEM knowers as actors in relationships who become answerable for their STEM knowledge and take wise actions from this place. We then use this framework to analyze learning for STEM undergraduates involved in the STUDIO: Build Our World program, an afterschool mentoring program for low-income, immigrant, and refugee youth of color. Drawing on narrative and ethnographic analyses of data from 12 focal mentors, we found that mentors developed 3 focal practices identified by Edwards, relational expertise, common knowledge, and relational agency through their efforts to create the best possible program for youth. This built mentors’ sense of answerability and a capacity for wise action within and outside of STUDIO. We argue that this theoretical stance provides new ways to conceptualize the nature, purpose, and outcomes of STEM learning for historically non-dominant STEM undergraduates’ learning.