The Inquiry Oasis: A UArizona College of Education Podcast
Ep 5 Dr. Sung eun Jung - Young Minds and Robots: Unraveling the World of Early Childhood Robotics
Oct 18, 2023Season 1Episode 5
UArizona College of Education
Embark on a fascinating journey into the realm of early childhood robotics with Dr. Sung eun Jung, an early childhood educator and researcher specializing in robotics education at the University of Arizona College of Education. In this episode, we explore the existential and ontological questions young children pose about robots, the cultural implications of programming, and the future of culturally responsive STEM teaching and learning. Dr. Sung’s insights into children's agency, empowerment, and the importance of hands-on interaction offer a profound look into how technology can shape children's understanding of the world. This episode provides an invaluable perspective for educators, parents, and anyone interested in the intersection of technology, education, and child development.
Topics Discussed:
The philosophical inquiries of children in relation to robots
The cultural norms and values embedded in robot programming
The future vision for early childhood robotics and STEM education
Culturally responsive pedagogy and community engagement
The importance of agency in children's interaction with technology
The connection between pedagogy and equity for marginalized children
The role of early childhood educators in shaping robotic education
Embark on a fascinating journey into the realm of early childhood robotics with Dr. Sung eun Jung, an early childhood educator and researcher specializing in robotics education at the University of Arizona College of Education. In this episode, we explore the existential and ontological questions young children pose about robots, the cultural implications of programming, and the future of culturally responsive STEM teaching and learning. Dr. Sung’s insights into children's agency, empowerment, and the importance of hands-on interaction offer a profound look into how technology can shape children's understanding of the world. This episode provides an invaluable perspective for educators, parents, and anyone interested in the intersection of technology, education, and child development.
Topics Discussed:
The philosophical inquiries of children in relation to robots
The cultural norms and values embedded in robot programming
The future vision for early childhood robotics and STEM education
Culturally responsive pedagogy and community engagement
The importance of agency in children's interaction with technology
The connection between pedagogy and equity for marginalized children
The role of early childhood educators in shaping robotic education
Welcome to the Inquiry Oasis, a University of Arizona College of Education and Podcast. Here in the heart of the Sonoran Desert, we bring you conversations with our esteemed faculty and staff whose research impacts lives from Southern Arizona to the far reaches of the globe. Recording From the College of Education's Digital Innovation and Learning Lab, we explore the transformative power of education in this border town where diverse cultures and ideas converge, weaving a tapestry of innovation with compassion and a sense of wonder. Join us as we journey through the sands of curiosity, unearthing insights that enrich and inspire. So sit back and relax as we invite you to dive into the Inquiry Oasis. Thank you for tuning into the Inquiry Oasis. I'm your host, Jeffrey Anthony, and today we're thrilled to be joined by Dr. Sung Un Chung. An assistant professor in teaching learning socio-cultural studies department at the University of Arizona College of Education. She received her PhD in early childhood Education from the Department of Educational Theory and Practice at the University of Georgia. As a former kindergarten teacher and a researcher, she has been interested in teaching practices, allowing young children to exercise their agency and to make their voices, and teaching and learning. Her expertise included designing and implementing early childhood education programs such as theme-based integrated curriculums, project-based learning activities, and a childcare program for toddlers, and the focus of today's talk will be her groundbreaking research in early childhood robotics education as a space for culturally responsive STEM teaching and learning. So without further ado, let's dive into this journey of exploration and discovery with Dr. Chung here in the Inquiry Oasis. It's an honor to be speaking with you. Sung un.
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Hi, Jeffrey. Nice to meet you.
Jeffrey Anthony:
Well, it's great that you're here with us. And so before we get into your research with early childhood robotics engagement, I was hoping you could share with our audience a bit of your background and the motivation that has put you on the path that you're on today?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes. It's my pleasure as well to be here and in this episode. I enjoyed introducing myself as a person in early childhood education. I am in, I'm early childhood educator still, and I'm a early childhood teacher educator in the College of Education, and I'm a researcher in the early childhood education, and I earn all of my degree from bachelor, master's, to doctorate in early childhood education that usually target four to eight years old young children. And, I'm a former kindergarten teacher who taught four to five years old children. So I can say that my teaching experience is still very guided my current teaching and current research, You know, both. So, I tried to, briefly introduce my teaching experience. The kindergarten that I worked was a research one university, like laboratory school in South Korea. It is distinguished from its strong emphasis on the emergent curriculum and the project based approach. As a kindergarten teacher, I had never adopted others, made scripted, you know, curricular. Instead, I always had to, you know, design my own classroom immersion curriculum based on my students' own interests and question. Of course it was not easy for the busy kindergarten teacher to make a new curricula, based on my students' interest. But however, I realized that, it was my privilege, to train myself well, how to listen to young children's voices, ideas, perspectives, and how to practically use those voices in the curriculum. So that's my teaching background. And I, I was really enjoyed teaching young children, working with the young children, but I am, a kind of lifelong learner type of person. So I always was eager to broaden and deepening my perspective and education. that's why, I decided to, pursue my PhD in the United States, and it was my actually turning point in my career. So I earned my PhD in, the University of Georgia. In my doctoral work, I met robotics, first. I participated in a series of research project for, robotic education, and that was actually my advisors, a project. I participated in this, project as a researcher, and a teacher and curriculum developer for the program. So we provided free afterschool program and Saturday program and summer program in several different, public elementary school in Georgia and in a local community center that the majority of, the students were African-American and Latinx children from the, in particular, from the low economic status. So the interesting thing was that the research team, the members, nobody, was the STEM people, but everybody was the, early childhood educator like me. So we basically wanna provide this program for giving them just, you know, today's a toy, the robot as a today's toy. Mm-hmm. Not just only for the STEM itself. Mm-hmm. So, those projects led me to turn my attention, to the social-cultural context where young children learning with the technologies in their context. I told you we visit their local center and their Saturday program. So it led me discover the value of the practice oriented and community engaged research. As you will hear from me that, this gave me the background of what I'm doing here and who I am here today.
Jeffrey Anthony:
Well, that is fascinating to hear. And someone who has a, a young kid who just finished kindergarten, the idea that of a teacher that would build a pedagogy mm-hmm. Around the interest of a child. That's really special. Yes, yes. Well, So we're really eager to hear about the focus of your research. What drives your investigations in early childhood robotics education?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes. Thank you for asking this question. I personally like this question because, whenever I introduce my research as in the robotics or education robot, I feel like robot, the, robotic technology itself, to do, not too much. So that's why I always wanted to explain further why I'm using robot in my work. So comparing to the laptop or iPad, I know that robot sounds like a fancy new technologist, but again, I'm an early childhood person. I'm an early childhood educator and researcher, not the technology seller. I appreciate for giving me this question. Mm-hmm. I began to have an interest in robotics education because it's alignment with the traditional pedagogical approach and traditional philosophy in early childhood education. So in other words, I investigate robotics education as a developmentary appropriate and academically rigorous pedagogical approach. As we typically know that young children learn through hands-on, right? So young children's engagement with the toys and the materials in their environment are hands-on sensory-based exploration of those material, right? It is very foundational way of learning for young children. Just to think about the young children's play with the block. While you're playing with the block, while you're building them, young children can learn math, science, language, engineering, technology, even art, everything, right? So like this, I basically position education robot as an interactive. And tangible material for young children, just like a toy to learn something and to make their own meaning, mm-hmm, through the a hands-on interaction with the technology. That's my basic position and that's why I choose this medium. But, different from blocks of course, education robot has its distinct technologies, but I can say that the robot's distinct technological feature can represent today's social-culture context that our young childrens are situated in nowadays. So by playing with the robot, by building robot, by exploring robot, young children can learn how to do engineering design process or how to program or how to control the, nowadays the technologies. So STEM knowledge, STEM skills can be embedded in children's interaction, with the robot. So I want to investigate how and what young children learn, why they're engaged in educational robots. Also, I approach education robot and the contents of STEM, as a young children's, meaning making tool. So, just like young children can express who they are, how they are doing by, writing story about their life, or sometimes by drawing or by making something. So just like that, I believe that young children can construct, context specific meaning of their life and express who they are by designing, building programming, robot. I know that there is the lingering concern over the use of a technology in particular in early childhood classroom because as you ex, expect many early childhood educator and parents are concerned and afraid of the screen-based technologies that can make young children very passive, right? However, I have a strong interest in young children's agency in the use of the technology. So through my qualitative work, I try to depict how young children use the education robot and STEM contents as a agent shaper of the technologies, not just a passive consumer who have to master the given technologies. Mm-hmm.
Jeffrey Anthony:
So that's really important looking at the agency aspect of all this. Because, as a parent of a young child, we are very cognizant of screen time and, but I think a big part of that framing is the child is not so much an active agent mm-hmm. In co-creating whatever they're learning. Yes. Whereas a robot gives agency and STEM identity mm-hmm. To a child where they're actually creating and learning at the same time with their environment.
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
That's right. So I appreciate you, you know, highlighting the word of the children's agency in the use of the technology.
Jeffrey Anthony:
Yeah. So understanding our personal connection to our work is often key to realizing its full impact. Mm-hmm. So could you explain why this research is important to you?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes. This is a very reflective question for the researcher. Again, I like it. So, I can say that my research on robotics education is important to me because it's my oriented work in particular for young children from socially, culturally, economically marginalized backgrounds. Unlike what I experienced as a kindergarten teacher, and what early childhood educator scholars strongly believed. Unfortunately, young children in the United States are currently supposed to just sit still and stay quiet, contour your body, and comply with the teacher's direction rather than, talking rather than suggesting so to complete the given task. So many early childhood educator, of course, including me, have been concerned about these disappearance of the play and the disappearance of the child centered pedagogy. I'm very concerned about the disembodiment and the rigid form of curriculum in schools that limit the young children's agency. So most importantly, I personally point out that the children of color from the low income families are experienced both technological gap, and pedagogical marginalization in their classroom. So, the children of color tended to have lack of support for a wide ranges of instructional approach, like a play-based project base and diverse, resource in school. And with the notion of quiet and compliant bodies, the young children of color are penalized for their lack of control over their body and their language other than you know English at school. So, here I like to quote what you know, Dr. Adair and Dr. Colegrove, says, keeping young children of color from enacting their agency at school is an act of segregation, but, despite the positive potential of the education robot as a pedagogical approach and as a resource for those, children, I believe that the robot technology itself does not have a direct, straightforward impact on their learning. I mean, education robot itself cannot be a panacea. It cannot be a lead in length for dramatically ensuring the, children of colors early access or success access to STEM. But I'm very, cautious about using robotics technology, especially for the children from the, marginalized background. I mean, although I'm using these technologies for those children, I'm trying not to position children from socially, culturally, economically marginalized backgrounds as less informed person who should be enlightened with this advanced technology. You know, I believe that the simple adoption of education or technology itself cannot make, meaningful outcome for children without respecting, their, culture, social context, and their culture set. So under this context, my research on robotic education is important again to me because it is my scholarly attempt to counter the notion of compliant or quiet and control the body. Over the marginalized of children and bring early childhood pedagogy, that value in cultural responsiveness, children's agency back to the early childhood classroom in particular for the children of color.
Jeffrey Anthony:
This sounds similar to, uh, Paulo Freire's banking model, whereas Yes. Yeah, the Pedagogy of the Oppressed is I'm thinking of that book, it seems that you're bringing that lens to this research.
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes, I can find that connection too.
Jeffrey Anthony:
That's really fascinating, thank you for sharing your why with us. And so bringing this back to the space where we're sitting in, why do you believe this research is important to the community here at the University of Arizona?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Oh, definitely, I believe that my research project directly, aligned with the mission and goal, the community here at the University of Arizona. So I can say that again. Practice oriented and community engagement aspect are the key characteristic of my research. So my previous, and current research project are based on the ongoing partnership with the public elementary school and the local learning center, where majority of the students are Latinx from the low-ses. So the partnership is not one thi one time thing. It is still ongoing. For example, I designed it and provided free afterschool robotics education program to the school and to the, center. and also, that, program is still ongoing for every fall semester. And also for this coming youth semester, I plan to visit a kindergarten classroom to provide a play-based robotics activity on a weekly basis as a volunteer. And I will bring the material and I will bring the curriculum. Of course, I can revise the curriculum with, the classroom teachers. Of course, those are basically for my research for collecting data. But at the same time, I try to provided direct benefit to the participant children, the teachers and the school. And I also wanna build ongoing rapport, with the student and teachers in the community. So my project responsibly met the educational need of those student teachers and the community by providing developmentary appropriate tool and high quality STEM, contents. And I try to value their local contexts. I try to empower the teachers with this much, by providing, in particularly this expensive technology. And also, I involved my senior undergraduate student in our early childhood education program in that afterschool program as a STEM tutor. So, it gave that, it gave the undergraduate student opportunity to enhance, their, teaching efficacy in STEM and also in connection to the science method course I teach every fall semester. I encourage my student to capture children's social cultural context, in particular out of school context. I know that my students are, doing field practicum in the school, but these opportunity gave them look at their student out of school context and I encourage them, apply the funds of knowledge lens to look at their STEM teaching and learning. So like this, my research project contributes to nurturing the pre-service early try the teachers of the University of Arizona as an agent of equity in education. So I can say that my research is important to our community in the University of Arizona because my work directly fit into our collective mission for servingness and excellence as Hispanic, Serving Institution.
Jeffrey Anthony:
That was really interesting to hear all that. Did you say, you mentioned that during the fall semester as a robotic?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes. So every first semester I provided a free afterschool uh program for young children. Age five to eight years old. Yes.
Jeffrey Anthony:
That's fantastic. So now during the course of your research, had there been any discoveries or outcomes that took you by surprise? And could you share one with us and tell us why it stood out?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes, always. You know, participant children shows something that I didn't expect. Yeah. I would like to share two mm-hmm. Uh, noticeable findings and interesting things. So the first interesting finding was that, young children had existential and ontological question about the relationship human and the robot. Why are they building programming robot? So I originally designed to explore just how young children learn programming, concept and skills, by using child friendly and screen free robot cord. But that is very typical early childhood education robot. The participant children raise existential and ontological question regarding robot's, autonomy, and the extent to which human can control robot instead of just learning the given learning objectives. Mm-hmm. I mean, programming, so for example, when one of the participant children had to complete the programming task by using BeeBot, the kids repeat to move the robot by pushing it with his hands, instead of giving the programming commands and then to move it by giving the programming comments so the boy repeat this behavior. So it showed that It was the child serious encouraged to investigate whether the programming robot was fully autonomous or completely regulated by the voice control. So the child explored the locus of control over the robot machine. And the meaning of the programming practice. I was surprised by this finding because this kind of ontological inquiry was very sophisticated level of question and very philosophical, you know, about the meaning of the machine technology and the relationship with the human. And as you know, it is a very important ethical, question and ethical issue about the technological influence over the humans agency and humans control. So that was interesting.
Jeffrey Anthony:
That is. just to pause there, so you're saying the ontological relationship, so the child and how he's learning how a robot actually exists in his world. Yes. Right. Or their world, I should say. And so by pushing the robot mm-hmm. There's that I have the agency of pushing it. Yes. But then there's the actual code where if I run the program, you are right. Yeah. So this has a different conception of how, you relate to this robot in the world.
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yes. but they, the childrens are very, You know, we're very serious about that question and that's very meaningful for me to look at. And I wanna look at that part further, you know, following up, research.
Jeffrey Anthony:
Yeah, I mean, they're little philosophers, I think. Oh yes. But that's very important, meaningful question for us nowadays. Very exciting. Uhhuh.
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
And the second meaningful finding was the children design build and operate their robot by adopting value norms, routines of their peer culture. So for example, one participant child program his robot per for footing, you know, pushing others' robot like a battle. So it was very playful, just like a better play with the robot programming. And it was the child on purpose to make, his robot more powerful and more autonomous, which was the core value of his peer culture. Because I was doing, the ethnographic study so I can trace their peer culture. That's, how I can see that it's core value of their peer culture. So he tried to show his strengths, to the peers through his robot engineering design. And also another example of this case is that another girl in another study designed her robot to have many actuator having rolling wheels that actuator and in her robot design to add more wheels to her robot. And she, of course, she used the technological and engineering knowledge to build that part of her robot. But at the same time, she cited the notion of the physical mobility and the discourse of the autonomy and power from her local peer culture. So as a ethnographic observer, I found that her robot design can be understood as her tactic and her strategy for affirming her as a empower in a robot builder. And for these, robot design, she can successfully less might her entry into the, her, peer group. Because before making this robot, she was, denied by, her, peer you know group. But with this, robot design, she's successfully entering into the her peer group.
Jeffrey Anthony:
That's fascinating. So I'm gonna try to break this down a little bit from what you just told me. So what you're saying is that the way you code your rope mm-hmm. Your robot is instilling normativity, right? Mm-hmm. It's also a way of, of, young children are realizing that a program is not ethically or normatively mm-hmm. neutral. Mm-hmm. And that when you program a robot, you're also programming a culture into the code. Yes. Right. That's right. And it's fascinating. So five, six year olds are realizing this. Yes. And.
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
That's why I always mention that children's agency in the use of technology, they can build their own meaning about that technology in their context.
Jeffrey Anthony:
So if you could jump into a time machine and observe the state of early childhood robotics and the state of culturally responsive STEM teaching and learning, what would you love to see?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
That is very, interesting question. Okay, so, I would like to see every child, including child again, from the marginalized background, would be fully supported pedagogically, and financially using a variety material, including natural object, general toys, and new technology at school and the children would influence what and how they want to learn with the material technology in their learning situation. That's what I'd love to see in the future. Also I'd like to see every early childhood the teacher believe, developmentary appropriate and effective teaching practice cannot be separated from cultural responsive practice and take a cultural responsive approach for granted in their daily interaction with the young children and their instruction. Lastly, I would like to see educational policy would increase implementing STEM class in early childhood classroom as a mandatory requirement. It's not the mandatory, like literacy, math, and the policy can support early childhood teachers professional development for it. That's what I would love to see.
Jeffrey Anthony:
I would love to see that future. Mm-hmm. Wow. So as we near the end of our conversation, we like to ask our guests to recommend the book. Mm-hmm. Or a paper that has been meaningful to them. Could you share one with our audience and explain how it has impacted you?
Dr. Sung eun Jung:
Yeah, of course. I'd like to recommend a book titled Good Guys Don't Wear Hats. So, wrote by Dr. Joseph Tobin, who was one of the doctorate, committee member and still, mentor for me. First this is not the book about technology or not about STEM, but this book is about Dr. Tobin's research on young children's media watching such as TV and movie watching, and how, this book is about how young children can make a sense of those media medium, and how children make a sense of the media representation of a sex, race, violence, and social class. So I, I'm sure that you can see some kind of alignment, with my research. this book modeled me how to contextualize young children's engagement, with the new medium and how to interpret, young children's behavior and un choices, with, post structured theory. So this will provide me image of the young children's drawing and vignettes of video transcription. So those image and vignettes from the video show was, very vivid and solid evidence of data in a qualitative study because sometimes I feel like as a researcher in STEM education, I'm rarely used this post structural, theories and qualitative data. But this book gave me nice model. And my work, as a qualitative researcher in the field of early childhood STEM education, my work is dis distinguished from my application of post-structual and poster human directed framework and video ethnography. If someone wants to learn more about respect for research method and tools to privilege the boys of young children and to capture young children's social culture, context, and local context, I would like to highly recommend this. Thank you for that recommendation and well Sung eun, it's been a profound pleasure delving into the groundbreaking world of early childhood robotics education and learning about what drives you and your research. Your commitment to fostering culturally responsive STEM teaching and learning and drive to empower young children's voices in their learning journeys are inspiring and incredibly important. We eagerly await witnessing the continued impact of Dr. Jung's transformative work within the field. And thank you listeners for joining us today in the Inquiry Oasis. We hope our conversation with Dr. Sung eun Jung has inspired you as much as it has us. Remember, we're back on the first and third Wednesdays of every month with fresh insights and conversations, so be sure to tune in. Until next time, keep your curiosity alive and remember, knowledge is our oasis.