The above cited literature suggests that creating definition-focused concepts begins by children slowly extending their labelling of canonical forms to increasingly atypical instances of shapes. To deepen their understanding of how shape terms are used, children need to move beyond canonical referents and their “standard” perceptual features to eventually encompass all members of the category based on the properties that define the shape. They do not initially apply shape names to unusual variants of the shapes, and seem not to understand the properties which define the shapes (e.g., that triangles have 3 sides and3 angles Clements & Battista, 1992 Clements et al., 1999 Fisher, Hirsh-Pasek, Newcombe, & Golinkoff, 2013 Satlow & Newcombe, 1998). However, research suggests that children's initial referents for shape names are the most common versions of those shapes (e.g., an equilateral triangle on its base Cross, Woods, & Schweingruber, 2009 Satlow & Newcombe, 1998) and it is clear that children are not using shape categories in a mature fashion at this early age. Thus, children may quickly learn to label shapes they have encountered. In the latter part of the second year, children begin to learn words by “fast-mapping” the meaning of a new term to a specific referent based on only one or two labeling events (e.g., Carey & Bartlett, 1978 Golinkoff, Hirsh-Pasek, Bailey, & Wenger, 1992). Thus, at least by 2 years of age, children appear to have the tools necessary to begin to learn shape names and accurately apply them.ĭuring their second year, children can learn to label shapes with relatively little exposure to them ( Heibeck & Markman, 1987), and they appear to know some basic shape names by age 3 ( Clements, Swaminathan, Hannibal, & Sarama, 1999).Although children are capable of creating categories of shapes prior to learning their names (e.g., Quinn, 1987), early shape concepts are not focused on the features that define the shape categories. They are even capable of creating prototypical representations based on variations in shapes seen in dot patterns ( Quinn, 1987). By 3- to 4-months, infants are capable of extracting shapes from simple patterns ( Quinn, Brown, & Streppa, 1997) and of creating classes for simple geometric forms (e.g., circle, triangle Quinn, Slater, Brown, & Hayes, 2001). Infants can categorize visual stimuli like dot patterns arranged as geometric shapes ( Quinn & Eimas, 1986) and even newborns can create perceptual categories for open and closed forms ( Turati, Simion, & Zanon, 2003). We are surrounded by geometric shapes-for example, rectangular pictures on the wall, circular tables, and square window panes. Possible mechanisms driving this initial development of shape knowledge and implications of that development for school readiness are explored. By 30 months, however, children have acquired more shape names, and are beginning to apply them to some of the less typical instances of the shapes. At 25 months, children know very few names, including those for canonical shapes. We tested 25- and 30-month-old children's ( N = 30 each) understanding of names for canonical shapes (commonly-encountered instances, e.g., equilateral triangles), non-canonical shapes (more irregular instances, e.g., scalene triangles), and embedded shapes (shapes within a larger picture, e.g., triangular slices of pizza). The current study investigates when children first begin to understand shape names and how they apply those labels to unusual instances. How do toddlers learn the names of geometric forms? Past work suggests that preschoolers have fragmentary knowledge and that defining properties are not understood until well into elementary school.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |