1. Schema
The Action and
the Theory.

2. Focus Points
 Introduction to Upsy Daisy
 The theory of schema
 What are Upsy Daisy’s prevailing schemas
 What is being observed at home
 Next Steps – planning through schema
 Conclusion…….

3. The Context – Meet Upsy Daisy!

4. The theory of schema.
 Piaget (1896-1980) was interested in cognitive development. He
believed children go through 4 developmental stages - ‘stage level
theory’.
 Piaget ‘defined schemas as cognitive structures or mental maps’ He
believed these function at the four levels of the stage level theory.
 Stage 1. The sensori-motor stage.
 Level 2. Symbolic development and Language
development.
 Level 3. Function dependency.
 Level 4. The development of thought.
(Featherstone 2008:16)

5. The theory of schema
 Athey carried out research in 1972 about schema based
on Piaget’s stage level theory.
‘A schema, therefore, is a pattern of repeatable behaviour
which experiences are assimilated and that are gradually
co-coordinated. Co-ordinations lead to higher-level and
more powerful schemas’ (Athey 2008:50)
 Bruce who also carried out research on schemas in the
1970s says schemas are ‘biological’ and ‘socio-cultural’.
‘They are always adjusting and changing in the light of
experience’. (Bruce 2005:73)
Bruce also based her work on Piaget’s stage level theory.

6. Name that schema?

7. How do we know its containing
and enveloping?
 Athey (2008: 139-148) refers to, Putting objects
inside and outside, wrapping up, covering
up/over, containers/enclosures.
 Nutbrown (2006:44-50) refers to covering up,
climbing inside, objects inside containers, filling
containers.
 Bruce (2005:87 & 49) refers to ‘inside/outside’,
‘under’, ‘enclosing’, wrapping up.

8. Are the Schema’s observed in other contexts.

9. Schema Clusters.
 The observations have shown a cluster of containing and enveloping.
The containing was the dominant schema, the more this was
repeated in different contexts, so the enveloping evolved.
 Davies and Howe (2007:245) state schemas are often in clusters ‘part
of whole networks of senses, actions and thinking’.
 Bruce (2002) supports Davies and Howe statement and says that the
networking develops the child’s learning ‘into more complex forms’.
This links to Athey’s ideas of more powerful schema’s.
 Schema clusters follow Piaget’s concepts of
Assimilation
Accommodation
Equilibration (Anning & Edwards 2004:11-12).

10. Are the schema’s evident at
home?
 Time set aside to discuss the concepts of schema with
photographs.
 The parent is the child’s first educator – the expert.
‘The parents were genuinely respected and
recognised as experts on their own children…’
(Athey 2008:202)

11. Observations from home.

12. Next Steps – Planning through Schema.

13. Planning Considerations
 Assessment for learning. Nutbrown (2006:127)
says the process of assessment ‘illuminates children’s
thinking and their capabilities’.
 Developing language through schema.
Linking language to the schema. Nutbrown (2006:72 & 73)
says ‘action, thinking and language’ are all linked together
and support schematic play patterns.

15. Evaluation and reflections of the
activity.
 ‘Upsy Daisy came back to the activity
on 2 more occasions that day.
 Dressing up items now permanently
available in a basket, she frequently
visits the basket.
 Next steps – develop the dressing up to
dressing dolls.

16. Evaluation and reflections of the
activity – The theory
 ‘Child involvement scale’ (Bertram & Pascal 1997).
Dressing up – Level 5 (Sustained intense activity).
Engaged for approximately 25 minutes.
 ‘Used in conjunction with trying to identify
schemas it allows adults to observe when a child
may be most deeply involved in their play…’
(Whittaker 2007)
 What level is Upsy Daisy functioning at in her
schematic play patterns? Piaget and Bruce’s stage
level theory.

17. To Conclude…..
‘Schema theory can be identified as the journey from
perception to integrating experience and thinking’.
(Martin 2008).
 Schemas provide insight to children’s learning, for the
schematic interests to develop there needs to be a rich
learning environment, experiential play and learning,
responsive, observant adults to support, guide and gently
challenge the schematic interests.
 Can we conclude Upsy Daisy’s journey? Bruce and Athey
would argue no, the observations reflect this.

18. References
 Anning,A & Edwards, A. (2004) ‘Young Children as Learners.’In Miller, L &
Devereux, J. Eds. Supporting Children’s Learning in the Early Years.London:
David Fulton
 Athey, C (2008) Extending Thought in Young Children: A Parent – Teacher
Partnership. 2nd Edition. London: PCP Publishing.
 Bertram,T. & Pascal, C. (1997) Effective Early Learning Project: Child
Involvement Scale [online] Available from: http://www.decs.sa.gov.au/
farnorthandaboriginallands/files/links/link_104984.pdf [accessed 23.12.2009]
 Bruce, T (2002). ‘Brain Power’. Nursery World Magazine. 6 June. [online]
Available from:
http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/news/725619/Brain-Power/
[accessed 23.12.2009]
 Bruce, T (2005) Early Childhood Education. 3rd Edition. London: Hodder
Education.

19. References continued.
 Davies, D & Howe, A ( 2007) ‘What does it mean to be creative’. In:
Moyles, J. Eds. Early Years Foundations:Meeting the Challenge.
Maidenhead: Open University. pp 239-252.
 Featherstone, S. ed. (2008) Again Again!: Understanding schemas in
young children. London: A&C Black.
 Martin, M. (2008) ‘Chris Athey; John Dewey.’ Early Years Educator.
Volume 10 No 3 July 2008.pp24-26.
 Nutbrown, C (2006) Threads of Thinking: Young Children Learning and
the Role of Early Education. 3rd Edition.London: SAGE.
 Whittaker,W.(2007) ‘Schemas are a tool through which practitioners
and parents can interact more effectively with children and enhance
their learning by using a child’s natural motivation to learn.’ Early
Years Educator. Volume 9 No 4 August 2007.pp39-44.