exploring conflict occurrences in a nature-based …
TRANSCRIPT
EXPLORING CONFLICT OCCURRENCES IN A NATURE-BASED
PRESCHOOL IN THE CONTEXT OF INDOOR AND OUTDOOR
CHILD-INITIATED PLAY
by
Annette Pic
A thesis submitted to the Faculty of the University of Delaware in partial
fulfillment of the requirements for the degree of Master of Science in Human
Development and Family Sciences
Spring 2020
© 2020 Annette Pic
All Rights Reserved
EXPLORING CONFLICT OCCURRENCES IN A NATURE-BASED
PRESCHOOL IN THE CONTEXT OF INDOOR AND OUTDOOR
CHILD-INITIATED PLAY
by
Annette Pic
Approved: __________________________________________________________
Myae Han, Ph.D.
Professor in charge of thesis on behalf of the Advisory Committee
Approved: __________________________________________________________
Bahira Trask, Ph.D.
Chair of the Department of Human Development and Family Sciences
Approved: __________________________________________________________
Gary Henry, Ph.D.
Dean of the College of Education and Human Development
Approved: __________________________________________________________
Douglas J. Doren, Ph.D.
Interim Vice Provost for Graduate and Professional Education and
Dean of the Graduate College
iii
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
First, I would like to thank Dr. Myae Han for her time, unwavering support,
feedback, and guidance. I would like to thank my committee members, Dr. Rena
Hallam and Dr. Jason Hustedt for their suggestions and discussions which provided
invaluable insight and direction. Thank you to my fellow graduate students, Cara for
assisting me with inter-rater reliability, and to Imani, Susan, and Nadisha for providing
encouragement. I would also like to thank Polly for encouraging me to pursue a
master’s degree. I owe a huge thank you to my husband, Chris and my four children,
Andrew, Ryan, Rebeca and David for believing in me, picking up the extra slack, and
for their unending patience. Lastly, I would like to thank my parents, Charlie and
Reita, my siblings, Chris, Carolyn and Dan, and my daughter-in-law, Kristin for their
support and encouragement throughout this process.
iv
TABLE OF CONTENTS
LIST OF TABLES .................................................................................................... vi LIST OF FIGURES .................................................................................................. vii
ABSTRACT............................................................................................................ viii
1 INTRODUCTION .......................................................................................... 1
Theoretical Framework ................................................................................... 2
2 LITERATURE REVIEW ............................................................................... 9
Nature-Based Outdoor Classrooms ................................................................. 9
The Benefits of Child-Initiated Play and Outdoor Nature-Based Play ...... 11
Benefits of Child-Initiated Play. ........................................................ 11 Benefits of Outdoor Nature-Based Play. ............................................ 12
Defining Conflict .................................................................................... 15
Conflict Categories, Constructs and Rates ......................................... 16
Categories of Conflict. ................................................................. 16 Conflict Constructs. ..................................................................... 18
Rates of Conflict. ......................................................................... 20
Gaps in Current Literature ....................................................................... 21
Current Study .......................................................................................... 22
Research Questions ........................................................................... 23
3 METHOD ..................................................................................................... 25
Present Study ................................................................................................ 25
Setting .................................................................................................... 25 Participants ............................................................................................. 30
Data Collection ............................................................................................. 32
v
Data Analysis/Coding ....................................................................... 37
Event Sampling ........................................................................... 37
Coding Development ................................................................... 39
Credibility ............................................................................................... 46
Ethics ...................................................................................................... 47
4 FINDINGS ................................................................................................... 48
Question 1. Frequency of Conflict Between Indoor and Outdoor Child-
initiated Play in a Nature-based Preschool .................................................... 48
Question 2. Catalyst Differences Among Preschool Children During Child-
Initiated Play Indoor and Outdoor in a Nature-Based Preschool .................... 51
Question 3: Conflict Resolution Among Children in the Context of Child-
Initiated Play in a Nature-Based Preschool .................................................... 55
5 DISCUSSION .............................................................................................. 63
Frequency of Indoor and Outdoor Conflict .................................................... 63
Catalysts Which Initiate Conflict .................................................................. 65 Interventionist Types and Resolutions ........................................................... 66
Limitations ................................................................................................... 67 Conclusion and Implications ......................................................................... 68
REFERENCES ........................................................................................................ 71
Appendix
A PARENTAL CONSENT LETTERS ............................................................. 82
B PARENTAL SCRIPT ................................................................................... 88 C CHILD SCRIPT ........................................................................................... 89
D FIELD NOTES FORM ................................................................................. 90 E CONFLICT LOG INDOOR/OUTDOOR ...................................................... 91
F CODE BOOK ............................................................................................... 93 G IRB FORMS ................................................................................................. 96
H INTERVENTIONIST TYPE DATA ............................................................. 99
vi
LIST OF TABLES
Table 1 Characteristics of Focal Children ......................................................... 31
Table 2 Catalyst Categories .............................................................................. 42
Table 3 Resolution Intervention Types .............................................................. 43
Table 4 Resolution Outcome ............................................................................. 45
Table 5 Focal Child Conflict Events Indoor and Outdoor .................................. 49
Table 6 Interventionist Type by Setting ............................................................ 56
Table 7 Frequency of Indoor and Outdoor Resolution by Interventionist Type .. 57
vii
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure 1 Indoor Setting Layout .......................................................................... 28
Figure 2 Outdoor Setting Layout ........................................................................ 29
Figure 3 Conflict Identification and Transcript Coding Map............................... 38
Figure 4 Conflict Event Coding.......................................................................... 40
Figure 5 Frequency of Catalyst that Initiates Conflict ......................................... 52
viii
ABSTRACT
The social nature of preschool play provides a rich context to study conflict.
Play in the outdoor environment affords children the opportunity to engage in deep
sustained play (Bohling et al., 2010) making outdoor nature-based preschools a rich
setting for children to engage in conflict in the context of play. This descriptive
qualitative study explored peer conflict and resolution in the context of free play in a
culturally diverse nature-based preschool both in the indoor and the outdoor setting. In
this nature-based preschool, children spend two-thirds of their school day outside
engaging in free play and forty-five minutes indoors engaging in free play and teacher
directed activities. For this study focal child (n=16) video observations were
conducted. Each focal child was video recorded for 30 minutes of their outdoor free
play and 30 minutes of their indoor free play. Event coding analysis was used to
examine peer conflict frequency, catalysts, interventionist types, and resolution or no
resolution. Data analysis showed that in this nature preschool the setting (indoor,
outdoor) played a role in conflict frequency rates, duration, catalyst, interventionist
type patterns, and children’s opportunity to negotiate and resolve peer conflict. Boys
engaged in more conflict indoors while girls engaged in conflict outdoors. The outdoor
conflict events were more likely to be initiated by a play idea, lasted longer and
involved more complex interventionist patterns.
1
Chapter 1
INTRODUCTION
The Federal Mandate No Child Left Behind stressed standardized testing of
students in grades 3-8, incentivized schools to focus on math, reading, and writing;
and created a teach-to-the-test climate extending down to preschool. Common Core
State Standards Initiative’s kindergarten guidelines led to increased “seat work” for
children and scripted curricula, also known as direct instruction, for teachers. In a
comparative study which examined teachers’ attitudes nationwide in 1998 and 2010,
Bassok, Latham and Rorem (2016) noted Kindergarten children spent more time with
workbooks and worksheets and less time with music and art. The authors concluded
kindergarten was the new first grade, shifting the expectations for kindergarten
readiness to preschool. Kindergarten skills taught in preschool limits children’s
opportunities to play freely, engage in child-initiated learning (Bassok, et al., 2016;
Gray, 2011), and play in the outdoor environment (Davies & Hamilton, 2018; Kuo,
Barnes & Jordan, 2019). This decrease in child-initiated play may decrease the
opportunity for children to gain necessary social skills such as sharing, turn taking,
conflict negotiation and resolution.
The teach-to-the-test climate generated pushback from early childhood
educators, especially supporters and researchers of play, child-initiated learning, and
the social-emotional well-being of children. The push back against formal
assessments, standardized testing, and structured curriculum began in Europe in the
early 1990’s and spread to the United States. The movement was fueled by Richard
2
Louv’s (2008) book, Last Child in the Woods, in which Louv coined the term ‘nature-
deficit disorder.’ His work generated renewed interest in outdoor free play, child-
initiated learning, and outdoor nature preschools.
Play is a natural activity pursued by children that encourages independent skill
acquisition, allows free expression of their ideas, enables them to change their minds
and disagree, and suggest what is both possible and impossible because they are
playing (Brown & Vaughan, 2010). Nature-based outdoor classrooms combine
education and encourage play in a naturalistic environment. The natural outdoor
environment provides children with the opportunity to engage in conflict occurrences
and resolutions (Bohling, Saarela, & Miller, 2010). Conflicts are naturally occurring
events (Chen, Fein, Killen & Tam, 2001) which provide children the opportunity to
acquire and practice social skills such as negotiation, resource sharing, cooperation,
emotional regulation, and conflict management (Aasen, Grindheim & Waters, 2009;
Wheeler, 2004). Nature-based preschools offer larger play spaces compared to
standard classrooms, tend to use curriculum rich in child-lead learning and free play,
and combine education and play in a naturalistic environment which provides an ideal
setting for investigating peer conflict during free play.
Theoretical Framework
This present study is informed by Lev Vygotsky’s (1966, 1978) sociocultural
theory and plays role in development, and Urie Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986)
bioecological systems theory, primarily Phase 2 (1980-1993) as defined by Rosa and
Tudge (2013). Vygotsky (1966, 1978) acknowledged the important role of play in
child development and proposed that play provides the context for learning
opportunities to develop cognitively. Vygotsky stated make-believe play is essential
3
for children to develop the ability to think abstractly. Children create learning
opportunities and experiences in the context of free play which provides them with
necessary tools (e.g., problem solving, self-regulation) to achieve higher cognitive
development (Bodrova, Germeroth & Leong; Tovey, 2007). Bronfenbrenner contends
the child’s whole environment must be considered in their developmental processes
suggesting a bidirectional interconnectedness between the child’s lived experiences,
their surroundings, peers, teachers, and their own biology. These constructs will
provide a foundation in which to investigate peer conflict and resolutions among
preschool children in a nature-based preschool during indoor and outdoor child-
initiated play.
Key concepts of Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory include social interaction as
the fundamental role in children’s construction of knowledge, language as a mediator
of development, and the role of play and culture in children’s development of higher
order processes. Vygotsky proposed human development and learning originate in
social, historical, and cultural interactions suggesting learning and development are
interrelated (Green, & Piel 2010; Vygotsky 1966, 1978). Vygotsky saw play as a
context for thought creation and a leading source of cognitive development during the
preschool years. Play provides children the opportunity to practice what they
previously learned and to construct new knowledge. For Vygotsky it is through play
children reach higher levels of thinking by using objects symbolically. The stick from
a tree becomes the horse that the child uses to gallop around. The act of symbolic
thinking involves abstract thinking. According to Vygotsky the stick is a ‘pivot’ that
allows children to explore the meaning of horse. Meaning exploration contributes to
children’s development of abstract thought (Tovey, 2007). Additionally, through the
4
act of play children learn to act in a cognitive realm relying on their internal
tendencies and motives within their cultural context.
According to Vygotsky social interactions are shaped by cultural and historical
settings. For Vygotsky the cultural setting of the classroom and the relationships
between peers and teachers must be taken into account (Bodrova, Germeroth &
Leong, 2013). Peer social interactions are dependent on the setting context. The
context in which play occurs is different dependent upon the setting such as an indoor
preschool classroom or an outdoor nature-based classroom. Vygotsky believes
language exchanged in the social interactions accelerates cognitive development thus
verbal interaction which occur during conflict affords children the opportunity for
cognitive growth (Green, & Pie, 2010). The natural outdoor environment allows
children to engage in deep imaginative play (Bohling, Saarela, & Miller, 2010).
Vygotsky proposed learning itself was not development but rather it is through
social interactions with peers and teachers that development and learning occurred. In
other words, there is a social nature to learning. Play among peers occurs in a social
context. Conflict that arises between preschoolers during play allows children the
opportunity to learn through shared problem solving experiences. Vygotsky viewed
these experiences as a dialectical process which occurs in cognitive development. The
current teach-to-the test climate which emphasizes outcomes and increases seatwork
for children leads to a decrease in children’s opportunity to play (Bassok, Latham, &
Rorem, 2016; Gray, 2011).
Bronfenbrenner originally proposed the ecological systems theory (Phase 1)
(Bronfenbrenner, 1977, 1979), which stated an individual’s environment influences
development, and development occurs within nested systems in which the individual
5
resides: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem (Bronfenbrenner,
1977). Phase 2 of Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological systems theory built on the
constructs of Phase 1 and encompasses Bronfenbrenner’s writings from 1980-1993
(Rosa & Tudge, 2013). Bronfenbrenner acknowledged short-comings in his original
work and later expounded upon his original theory: the role of the individual on
development, focus on the passage of time, and greater concern with developmental
processes (Rosa & Tudge, 2013). The microsystem is the first layer in the nested
system, and it refers to the direct relationships between the child, and the child’s
immediate surroundings including people, places, and objects; and the interpersonal
bidirectional interactions between the individuals, places and objects. Examples of the
microsystem are the child’s relationship with their parents, siblings, peers, and
teachers as well as, their neighborhood and school. The mesosystem is the second
layer of the nested system; it encompasses the direct interactions between two or more
aspects of the microsystem that influence the child’s development. An example of the
mesosystem is the relationships between the child’s parents and their teacher.
Bronfenbrenner (1986) proposed a child’s home life can impact the child’s progress in
school, and a child’s school experience can impact the child’s home life. This suggests
mesosystem interactions impact a child’s development. The third layer of the nested
system is the exosystem; the distal influences of the microsystem elements that do not
interact with the child directly. For example, parent’s employment status or job
security impacts both family income, and the parent’s physical and emotional
availability to the child. Bronfenbrenner (1986) proposed although children do not
interact with their parent’s place of employment or social systems directly their
development is affected by the distal influences. The fourth layer of the nested system
6
is the macrosystem. The macrosystem includes the cultural and societal beliefs,
ideologies, and programming which influence a child’s development. Societal gender
norms and religious influences are examples of the macrosystem. The fifth layer of the
nested system, chronosystem, was added in Phase 2 of Bronfenbrenner’s (1986)
writings. Bronfenbrenner proposed the chronosystem is the dimension of time as it
relates to the child’s internal (physiological and cognitive changes), and external
(specific event) environment, historical time, past and present. Examples of the
chronosystem are family morals and values handed down through the generations,
sudden death of a parent, and the child’s physiological and cognitive stage.
Bronfenbrenner (1986) proposed development is influenced by the child’s reaction to
the event or value system.
In Bronfenbrenner’s (1986) Phase 2 writings, he stressed the bi-directionality
of the nested system, the importance of time, and the role of the child in development.
A key construct of bioecological systems theory is the reciprocal interactions between
the child and other persons and places (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). A child’s development
is dependent on the child’s immediate environment, their biology, and the
bidirectional interactions within the layered system. According to bioecological
systems theory, the child’s personal interaction within their environment, the
relationships the child forms within the nested system, and the outside influences of
sociohistorical conditions should be taken into account to understand a child’s
development (Bronfenbrenner, 1986). The child’s environment includes interactions
and relationships between the child and other individuals (e.g. parents, siblings,
relatives, peers, teachers, religious leaders, etc.) who surround the child. The nature
and quality of the interactions throughout the system result in positive and/or negative
7
influences on the child’s cognitive development. An underlying assumption of
Bronfenbrenner’s Phase 2 writings, is that development is influenced by both the
child’s biology and the environment in which the child resides (Rosa & Tudge, 2013).
Examples of the child’s individual biology are hair color, weight, height, gender
identity, ethnicity, sex, and physical and mental health.
Phase 2 of the bioecological systems theory provides a framework in which to
identify multiple factors which may influence a child’s initiation of conflict or
response to conflict in a nature-based preschool. The model offers a broad, holistic
approach to researching, and analyzing the multiple interactive influences on peer
conflict and resolution occurrences among preschool children. On the microsystem
level the child’s surroundings such as forested area, meadow, or creek and natural
lighting would impact a child differently than a classroom with four walls, fluorescent
lighting, tables, and chairs. The outdoor natural environment has the potential to
provide unlimited resources to manipulate, explore, and discover. The materials
available for children to interact with are different in the indoor space compared to the
outdoor space. Legos, blocks, puzzles, and a fish in a tank provide a different
experience than logs, stones, dirt, leaves, plants, and insects. Static playgrounds with
fixed structures do not offer changing landscapes as do natural areas affected by
seasonal and weather changes.
On the mesosystem level the interactions with peers and the proximity of
teachers in the indoor space compared to the outdoor natural space may be different.
The larger more open space of the outdoor environment may allow children more
freedom to resolve peer conflict independently compared to the close proximity of
teachers and children in a classroom setting.
8
An example of the exosystem is parental employment and income which are
likely to determine if a child has access to a nature-based preschool. Policies and
belief systems which support outdoor nature-based play for all children are examples
of the macrosystem. National policies and belief in the value of play can impact the
availability of outdoor nature play for children. Providing children with the
opportunity to play freely in the outdoor environment may provide them with
opportunities to develop conflict resolution skills. The child’s past experience with
peer conflict and the passing of time which produce physiological and cognitive
changes, and the changing seasons are examples of the chronosystem. In nature-based
preschools children’s experiences are rooted in seasonal changes, landscape changes
and personal growth.
9
Chapter 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
This literature review acknowledges the importance of children’s participation
in peer conflict occurrences and resolutions in the context of child-initiated play in a
nature-based preschool.
Nature-Based Outdoor Classrooms
The terms “nature-based preschool” and “nature preschool” are used
interchangeably in the literature (Larimore, 2016). Nature-based outdoor classrooms
are designed for use in all types of weather and throughout the seasons. The materials
provided are natural, open-ended, renewable, evolving, and plentiful. A stick becomes
a wand, a cane, a broom, a pencil, or a spatula, the child’s imagination is the limit. The
natural environment provides a different setting in comparison to standard indoor
classrooms (controlled climates, four walls, predictable, designated spaces, and
fluorescent lighting) with natural borders, child-sized places, unique exploration
opportunities (Bohling, Saarela, & Miller, 2010), and changing landscape. In the
outdoor environment voices can be louder and movement can be bigger, engaging
whole body movement (Frost, Wortham, & Reifel, 2012).
Nature-based outdoor classrooms support full body learning, child-initiated
learning and afford children the opportunity to interact directly with nature promoting
environmental stewardship (Kuo, Barnes, & Jordan, 2019). In a qualitative post-
occupancy study, Dennis, Wells, and Bishop (2014) examined 11 nature-based
10
outdoor early childhood education sites in various regions in the U.S through
structured semi-structured telephone interviews of involved teachers and
administrators. Interview data was used to evaluated six existing theories linking
nature-based outdoor classrooms to positive learning and developmental outcomes
(p.38):
• The use of open-ended materials stimulates imaginative play;
• Using “loose parts” and sensory materials contributes to full-bodied
experiential learning and physical development;
• Incorporating as much open space as possible promotes physical
activity;
• Creating multiple places for activity increases learning opportunities;
• Providing “safe” risks allows children to learn to handle risk
successfully;
• The replication of rich, natural environment contributes to stewardship
Their findings support the above theories, noting nature-based outdoor
classrooms afforded children many opportunities for explorations of patterns of
change (life cycles of plants and animals), longer engagement with materials, more
cooperative play, and cozy nooks and child-sized spaces compared to indoor settings.
Their findings also noted nature-based outdoor classrooms provide a flexible changing
environment through seasonal variation, changes in weather and naturally occurring
environmental changes. Additionally, Dennis and colleagues’ results suggest that
children in the outdoor setting were more relaxed, happy and less impulsive compared
to children in the indoor setting.
11
A qualitative case study exploring preschool children’s (ages 3-5) skill
development in a Nature Explore Classroom in Minnesota was conducted by Bohling,
Saarela, and Miller (2010). Bohling and colleagues noted seasonal changes impact
play among children. The authors concluded winter contained the most complex and
creative play frames as well as the largest number of children playing together. The
authors observed on eleven occasions dramatic/creative play frames that involved five
or more children. Bohling and colleagues reported only 18% of the sixty Nature Notes
completed by teachers represented adult-directed activities in the nature-based outdoor
classroom, the remaining were child-initiated. These findings support literature
suggesting the larger degree of freedom afforded by the natural outdoor environment
lends itself to child-initiated learning and a smaller degree of adult control (Sutterby,
& Frost, 2006; Maynard, Waters, & Clement, 2013a); and in the outdoor environment
teachers tend to plan activities which have a greater emphasis on children’s
collaboration and social skills (Maynard et al., 2013a).
The Benefits of Child-Initiated Play and Outdoor Nature-Based Play
Benefits of Child-Initiated Play. Empirical research has established that
children develop and learn through play. According to Aras (2016), play provides a
context for children to develop social and emotional, physical, and cognitive skills that
cannot be acquired through teacher-directed instruction. Johnson, Christie and Wardle
(2005) state, “development is served by play and development is seen in play” (p.56).
Play provides children a non-threatening environment in which to explore, discover,
and test new skills through a process of trial and error. Child-initiated play provides
children an important context in which to acquire skills (Cordoni et al., 2016).
Qualitative research studies acknowledge the positive role child-initiated learning
12
plays in children’s overall development (Berkhout, Bakkers, Hoekman & Goorhuis-
Brouwer, 2013; Maynard, Waters, & Clement, 2013b), and acknowledge children’s
ability to self-select learning activities and manage their choices (Wood, 2014).
Through this process, development (defined as changes over time) evolves into
processes that become predictable, coordinated, and transferable to other contexts.
Owens (1996, p.229) states, “much of the child’s language develops with the context
of play with an adult or with other children.” Play is a natural context in which
children can explore new ways to merge language and thought (Pelletier, 2011).
Cordoni et al., (2016) suggests, “managing new playful interactions requires
sophisticated communicative, emotional and social skills” (p. 1076). Play affords
children the opportunity to practice necessary fundamental social skills such as
conflict management. Providing children the opportunity to engage in child-initiated
play where conflicts may arise affords children the opportunity to develop and practice
communication, and emotional and social skills (perspective taking, negotiation,
resolution).
Benefits of Outdoor Nature-Based Play. The limitations placed on children’s
free play by the formal assessment climate directly impact play opportunities afforded
to child-initiated play. The decrease is most notable in the reduced exposure to play in
the outdoor environment (Gray, 2011). Several qualitative studies note outdoor nature-
based play presents children with multiple opportunities and freedom to learn, explore
and develop skills loudly, wildly and without direct adult control (Maynard, Waters, &
Clement, 2013a; Stack, & Nikiforidou, 2019; Tovey, 2007). Nature provides children
with an abundance of materials for manipulation and investigation (Bohling, Saarela,
& Miller, 2010) and supports increased opportunity for independent exploration and
13
risk taking (Stephenson, 2003). Outdoor nature-based play provides children with an
endless supply of natural loose parts: stones, sand, dirt, water, logs, sticks, leaves, seed
pods, and living creatures (Craft, McConnon, & Paige-Smith, 2012; Maynard et al.,
2013a). In nature-based environments children have the freedom to use their
imagination and inventiveness to create their own play, engage in deep play with
sustained attention (Bohling et al., 2010), and investigate, construct and reorganize
their surroundings (Fjørtoft, 2004). A quantitative study done by Wells and Evans
(2003), noted the benefits of nature appear to be associated with children’s mental
health through the association of nature as a buffer against the impact of stressful life
events and global self-perception of psychological well-being. Taylor and Kuo (2006)
reviewed the literature around nature’s role in the healthy development of children and
suggest children’s interaction with green spaces has a positive influence on
concentration, impulse control, and delayed gratification as well as encouraging
children to be self-reliant in physically challenging environments. In a quantitative
study Ulset, Vitaro, Brendgen, Bekkhus, and Borge (2017) demonstrated interacting
with nature benefits cognitive development observed through achievement of higher
digit scores, and reduced inattention-hyperactivity symptoms. Nature has been shown
to boost academic learning, personal development and environmental stewardship
(Kuo, Barnes & Jordan, 2019). Play in nature engages the whole body, providing
increased opportunities to develop gross and fine motor skills, coordination, and
balance (Fjørtoft, 2004; Moore, 2014) and provides space and freedom for extended
peer negotiation (Aasen, Grindheim & Waters, 2009). The naturalistic outdoor
environment provides children with the opportunity to engage in problem solving
14
(Fjørtoft, 2004), and conflict negotiation and resolutions (Bohling, Saarela, and Miller,
2010).
Although the current research supports the benefits of nature and outdoor play
for children, few empirical studies provide analysis of conflict occurrences in the
context of an outdoor nature-based preschool. Without empirical evidence of the
importance of navigating peer conflicts in the outdoor space, teachers, although aware
of the benefits of nature and outdoor spaces, may not replace indoor instruction with
outdoor child-initiated play opportunities.
Given the growing interest in nature-based preschools and the increase in the
number of outdoor nature-based programs in the U.S. it is important to understand
conflict occurrence in the context of child-initiated play in both the outdoor and indoor
environment of a nature-based preschool. The types and frequency of conflict
occurrences during indoor and outdoor free play in a nature-based preschool should be
investigated to establish occurrence rates, catalyst patterns, interventionist types, and
to foster exploration and conversation regarding the importance of outdoor child-
initiated play and child lead conflict management in nature-based preschools. It is
important to understand the context surrounding peer conflict occurrences and whether
the outdoor nature-based environment influences conflict occurrence and resolution or
no resolution. The outdoor environment may provide more opportunities for children
to engage in and resolve peer conflict scenarios. Establishing frequency and types of
conflict occurrences will provide insight for practitioners, professional development,
and pre-service teacher education.
15
Defining Conflict
By definition a conflict arises when two individuals have incompatible goals or
behaviors (Hay, 1984). In research literature, conflicts are commonly defined as
events in which one child protests, retaliates, or resists the action or verbalization of
another child (Hay, 1984; Shantz, 1987). Conflicts can be verbal or social: Hay (1984)
defines social conflict as one individual’s actions causing a second individual to
object; Garvey (1984) defines verbal conflict, as an individual’s reaction to refuse,
deny, object, prohibit or disagree with the initial request by another individual.
Wheeler (2004, p.10) suggests, “Conflict is a disagreement between people, and it is
an opportunity for children to learn.” Conflict can be destructive (threats, coercion) or
constructive (mutual problem solving) both of which contribute to a child’s social,
emotional and cognitive development (Shantz, 1987; Wheeler, 2004).
Child-initiated play (free play) is one context in which preschool children
engage in peer conflict. Providing children with the opportunity to engage in, navigate,
and manage peer conflict is a key component for the formation and maintenance of
interpersonal relationships (Laursen, Hartup & Koples, 1996) and for children to
develop morally, socially and cognitively (Chen et al., 2001; Laursen, Finkelstein &
Betts, 2001; Shantz, 1987) through the development of negotiation skills, logical
thinking, perspective taking, relationship management, morality, and problem-solving
(Aasen, Gridheim & Waters, 2009; Laursen, et al., 2001; Malloy & McMurray, 1996;
Piaget, 1932; Wheeler, 2004).
An important distinction must be made between conflict and aggression;
aggressive behaviors may occur during conflict, but conflict in and of itself is not
aggression (Shantz, 1987, Wheeler, 2004). Conflict refers to incompatible behaviors
or goals while aggression suggests the intent to harm or injure another individual
16
(Parke & Slaby, 1983; Shantz, 1987). Research indicates most conflict episodes do not
involve aggression (Shantz, 1987). Cordoni, Demuru, Ceccarelli & Palagi (2016) used
continuous video recordings and event sampling method to investigate aggressive
conflicts among 3- to 5- year old preschool children in the indoor environment. The
authors noted two levels of aggressive conflicts: low intensity, defined as aggressive
conflicts void of physical contact, and high intensity, defined as aggressive conflicts
with the presence of physical contact. Cordoni and colleagues found a higher
frequency of aggressive conflicts during free play compared to guided activities.
Conflict Categories, Constructs and Rates
Categories of Conflict. Conflict categories have been established through
empirical research. Chen, Fein, Killen and Tam (2001) organize child conflicts into
five categories (p.532):
• Physical harm (hitting, biting, punching),
• Psychological harm (name-calling, teasing),
• Distribution of resources (fairness issues such as violation of sharing or
turn taking, grabbing, taking),
• Play ideas (who will do what, how, when and where),
• Social-conventional issues such as the violation of class or school rules
about running indoors
The largest percentage of conflicts among toddlers and preschoolers involve
possession disputes (Brenner & Mueller 1982; Chen et al., 2001) referred to by Chen
et al., as distribution of resources. Ramsey (1986) conducted a naturalistic observation
study of twenty 3- to -4-year olds examining possession conflicts during indoor free
play. Ramsey used event sampling method to identify and examine how situational
17
factors relate to possession-based conflicts. The study results suggest the types,
quality, and distribution of materials present in a setting significantly relate to the
occurrence of possession episodes. Additionally, the accessibility of space appeared to
significantly impact possession disputes; closed spaces or areas with single entrances
were more likely locations for possession-based conflicts. The natural outdoor
environment lends itself to endless resources (sticks, dirt, leaves, stones, flowers,
seeds) and wide open spaces which would indicate less possession conflicts in the
outdoor environment compared to the indoor.
The second largest conflict category identified is response regarding another
child’s actions or lack of actions such as refusal to adopt a suggested fantasy role
(Shantz, 1987). Chen et al., refer to this as conflict over play ideas. Given Bohling,
Saarela and Miller’s (2010) research which indicates children in nature-based
preschools play in relatively large groups of five or more, it would be expected
children within the group would disagree with a peer’s actions or suggestion more
often than a typical indoor classroom setting where children play in dyads and triads.
The majority of the studies examining conflict among preschoolers were
conducted in laboratory settings or typical indoor preschool classrooms. A few studies
included data collection in the indoor and outdoor environment. Malloy and
McMurray (1996) used a purposive sample of video data to investigate peer conflict
among typically developing children and children with disabilities in an integrated
preschool (mean age 4.42 years) in the indoor and outdoor setting, and determined
conflicts occurred most often during self-selection (free play) time.
A mixed methods study using an ethnographic approach by Stack and
Nikiforidou (2019) observed twelve children ages 3- to 4- years of age in the indoor
18
and outdoor play environment of a private nursery school in England. The majority of
the observations were conducted in the indoor environment. The study focused on
possession disputes in play type (child- or adult-initiated play) among preschoolers,
and the role of the teacher in the dispute. The researchers concluded in the indoor
space there were significantly more disputes among children within adult-initiated
play and, in the outdoor space there were more disputes during child-initiated play.
Additionally, their findings suggest regardless of the play type the closer proximity of
teachers and children in the indoor space allows teachers more opportunity to
intervene during disputes. These findings support previous research indicating
teachers play a less involved role in the outdoor environment (Maynard et al., 2013a).
Conflict Constructs. Conflict episodes are broken down into five constructs:
the catalyst (what the conflict is about), the initial influence attempt, tactics and
strategies, oppositions, and outcomes or resolutions (Shantz, 1987). An initial catalyst
which triggers a conflict, whether a positive or negative social overture (Garvey,
1984), must be met by opposition (protest, retaliation or resistance) from another
individual (Shantz, 1987) in order to constitute a conflict occurrence. A simple
conflict sequence suggests catalyst event-opposition-compliance to opposition is
sufficient to define the occurrence of a conflict episode (Shantz, 1987). Maynard
(1985) suggests the catalyst event-opposition-compliance model is too simplistic.
Maynard acknowledges opposition is necessary but not sufficient; rather opposition to
the initial opposition must be present.
According to Shantz (1987) conflict resolution patterns differ with age with
coercion being the most common tactic used by children. Malloy and McMurray
(1996) noted that children resolved thirty-one percent of the conflicts by themselves
19
most frequently when one child stopped insisting or protesting. A narrative
observation study conducted by Laursen and Hartup (1989) observed fifty-three
children between the ages of 3 years 4 months and 5 years 4 months during indoor free
play and concluded most conflicts were resolved by insistence resulting in a win-lose
outcome and child separation after the conflict episode. However, children who
interacted prior to the conflict catalyst were more likely to interact after the conflict
episode.
In a qualitative study, Killen and Turiel (1991) observed sixty-nine children
age 3- to 4- years during peer group sessions and school-time free play to examine
conflict resolution patterns (coding for child-generated, adult-generated, or no
resolution). Killen and Turiel determined more conflicts ended without defined
resolutions compared to child-generated resolutions. Adult intervention in the conflict
resolution resulted in ninety-one percent of conflict resolution outcomes ending as
adult-generated. The authors noted children used more negotiation skills in conflict
resolutions in the absence of the teacher. This is consistent with findings from Corsaro
and Rizzo (1990) comparing disputes in peer cultures of American and Italian nursery-
school children. Corsaro and Rizzo observed children were not always successful in
reaching mutual resolutions; however, the authors acknowledge disputes among
children as important elements in cognitive and communication development as well
as in the organization and construction of play frames. Additionally, resolved peer
conflict permits play to continue while unresolved conflict terminates or disrupts a
playful interaction (Garvey, 1984).
Conflict resolution tactics provide children the opportunity to practice and
acquire social skills such as negotiation, resource sharing, cooperation, emotional
20
regulation and conflict management (Aasen, Grindheim & Waters, 2009; Wheeler,
2004). Aasen et al. note negotiation requires one to acknowledge another’s view point
suggesting conflict participation is an important context that affords children the
opportunity to develop and practice negotiation skills. Additionally, these skills have
been identified as necessary for the formation and maintenance of friendships
(Denham, et al., 2003). By engaging in conflict resolution children learn which
techniques and strategies are effective in resolving conflict, these skills are used later
as an adult when engaging in rational argumentation (Garvey, 1984). When a teacher
steps in and resolves the conflict, the children involved are removed from the
opportunity to develop negotiation and resolution skills.
The importance of conflict negotiation and resolution as a means for children
to develop social and emotional skills has been established; however, the majority of
the studies were conducted in a typical indoor classroom setting or on static
playgrounds.
Rates of Conflict. Killen and Turiel (1991) investigated the types of social
issues that produce conflicts among children 3- to 4- years of age in two settings,
semi-structured peer group and school-time free play. The authors observed 201
conflicts during forty-eight 15 minute semi-structured peer group sessions (indoors);
and 61 conflicts in nineteen 30 minute school-time free-play sessions (indoor and
outdoor). Conflicts were coded for the source of the conflict, outcome and resolution.
Actions that did not produce a conflict were not coded as a conflict. They noted the
mean number of conflicts during the 15-minute semi-structured peer group session
was 4.9. The mean number of conflicts in the 30 minute free play setting was 10.5.
Shantz (1987) reported findings from a summary study completed by Hay (1984)
21
which pooled findings from 11 group observations (which used focal child sampling
in nursery school settings and laboratories) and concluded the median number of
conflicts per hour was approximately 8. In a pilot study, Han et al., (2019, March)
conducted 13 hours and 24 minutes of running narrative observations in a nature-
based preschool and noted the rate of conflict was 0.97 conflicts per hour. The
researchers also noted instances where initiated conflict behaviors were not met with
resistance. These exploratory findings are cause for further investigation into conflict
occurrences in the context of nature-based preschools.
It is important to investigate conflict occurrence in the natural setting in order
to include contextual factors and explore emergent themes. A research study needs to
explore conflict occurrences in the context of outdoor and indoor child-initiated play
in a nature-based preschool to add to the current literature regarding conflict among
preschool children.
Gaps in Current Literature
Although research studies have connected conflict episodes in the context of
child-initiated play to emergent social and emotional skills, fewer have done so in a
nature-based preschool environment. The majority of preschool child-initiated play
studies examining peer conflict are qualitative research conducted in indoor
classrooms with the goal to identify emergent themes. This qualitative study expands
this area by exploring the frequency and evolving nature of conflict occurrences
within child-initiated play that occur in the outdoor and indoor environment in a
nature-based preschool.
Without empirical research to support the importance of conflict occurrences
in the context of child-initiated play through social emotional and cognitive
22
development, teachers may continue to abandon outdoor child-initiated play for
teacher directed activities.
Current Study
Empirical research affirms the importance of children’s participation in
conflict as significant to child development noting its importance in the formation and
function of peer relationship (Laursen, Hartup, & Koplas, 1996), moral development,
negotiation skills (Keller, 1984; Wheeler, 2004), and logical thinking (Aasen,
Gridheim & Waters, 2009). Given the importance of children’s participation in
conflict events it is necessary to understand the components and context of the conflict
events. Examining conflict categories in a nature-based preschool during outdoor and
indoor child-initiated play using the framework from Chen et al. adds to the current
literature because this type of research has not been done before.
This study used the definition of conflict by Shantz (1987) as incompatible
behaviors or goals between preschool children during child-initiated free play in a
nature-based preschool, and did not explicitly focus on differentiating between verbal
and social conflicts. The aim of this study was to examine the nature, direction and
resolution or non-resolution of conflict among preschoolers in a nature-based
preschool. The initial conflict catalyst, frequency, duration, interventionist types, and
resolution or non-resolution during both indoor and outdoor child-initiated play were
examined. Conflict resolution without a defined conclusion for this study followed the
protocol used by Laursen and Hartup (1989, p.286) “A conflict was considered
discontinued if 10 s passed after an interruption without resumption of the conflict.”
This study considered a conflict episode occurring “when child A does or says
something that influences child B, child B resists, and child A persists” (Shantz, 1987,
23
p. 284); and drew from the definitions stated by Laursen and Hartup (1989, p.286)
which defined ‘influence’ as “any attempt by one child to change the behavior of
another” and defined ‘resistance’ as “opposition or refusal to comply.”
This exploratory study sought to understand conflict episodes in the indoor and
outdoor setting among children in a nature-based preschool in order to provide an
understanding of initial conflict catalyst, the evolving conflict scenario and resolution
or no resolution. The aim of this study is to add to the literature and understanding of
peer conflict in nature-based outdoor classrooms to provide insight into the benefits of
outdoor nature play and provide evidence of the importance of increasing children’s
outdoor play.
Research Questions
The outcome driven climate focused on academic goals and skill attainment
has diminished the amount of child-initiated play opportunities for preschool children.
Time spent outdoors has shifted to indoor teacher-instruction time. It can be argued
the outcome driven climate has lost sight of the whole child and the positive benefits
of child-initiated play in the outdoor environment; a context which allows children to
develop and refine their negotiation, communication, reasoning and perspective taking
skills through participation in conflict occurrence with their peers. According to
Shantz (1987), conflict among children should not be considered trivial, as it appears
to have a substantial affective meaning for those involved in the conflict. A study
investigating conflict in the context of child-initiated play in a nature-based preschool
would expand the current literature on the importance of conflict within the realm of
child-initiated play in nature.
This study seeks to answer the following three questions:
24
1. Does the frequency of conflict episodes differ in indoor and outdoor settings
during child-initiated play in a nature-based preschool?
2. Do catalyst of conflict differ in indoor and outdoor settings during child-
initiated play in a nature-based preschool?
3. Does conflict resolution differ in indoor and outdoor child-initiated play in a
nature-based preschool?
25
Chapter 3
METHOD
Present Study
This present qualitative descriptive study was informed by piloted research
conducted through running narrative and qualitative method of data collection (Han,
Pic, & Pollock, 2019 March). Naturalistic observation data via video recording were
collected from an outdoor classroom at a nature-based preschool affiliated with a
university laboratory school in the Mid-Atlantic Region.
The aim of this study was to investigate conflict occurrences in the context of
indoor and outdoor child-initiated play in a nature-based preschool, examining peer
conflict development among preschoolers noting the catalyst, frequency, duration,
interventionist type, and resolution or no resolution.
Setting
The Laboratory School operates an outdoor Nature Preschool classroom for
sixteen children ages older 3- to 4- years (fall enrollment ages). The Nature Preschool
operates Monday to Thursday from 9:15 AM to 1:00 PM and Friday 9:15 AM to Noon
(all weather types). The children are outdoors from 9:15 AM to 11:15 AM and again
from 12:00 PM to 1:00 PM. The outdoor setting includes a forested area, a meadow, a
creek, and a pond. The indoor setting is an Art room that doubles as a preschool
classroom in the morning and an elementary school Art room in the afternoon. Snack
26
time operates as a center and is held outside when the outdoor sink is not closed due to
freezing temperatures. Indoor snack is limited to three children at a time.
The indoor space is 700 square feet and is set up as centers where children are
free to move about as long as the number of designated children for that center is not
exceeded. For example, the science center has two stations for two children at a time.
The centers change along with the lesson plan. Three separate tables with chairs allow
for various activities, such as writing, playdough, painting, table games, and
manipulatives. There is also a light table with magnetic colored tiles for building and
creating, an area rug designated for playing with trains, and blocks; an area rug for
reading books among pillows; and a dramatic play/science center. Children have
access to books, stuffed toys, blocks, puzzles, small manipulatives, dramatic play
props, and art supplies. Indoor layout is displayed in Figure 1.
The outdoor classroom space is approximately 5,000 square feet and provides
children with access to natural materials such as sticks, logs, stones, leaves, seeds,
sand, dirt, mud, tree stumps, water, and living creatures. In addition to nature
materials, child have access to a bird blind, stage, mud kitchen, wooden planks,
wooden pallet, rope swing, opaque double-sided painting board, and large wooden
spools to climb. There are indoor items in the outdoor space such as miniature fairies
with accessories, crayons, markers and colored pencils, plastic small animals, kitchen
utensils, hammer, microplanes, nails, creature collections containers, binoculars, and
butterfly wings costumes. Children are free to move about the outdoor classroom.
Rules govern the use of the rope swing and workbench tools and the number of
children allowed at the picnic table used for the daily art activity. Four children are
27
allowed to work at the picnic table at a time, two at the workbench and one on the rope
swing. Outdoor layout is displayed in Figure 2.
Children are free to move about the indoor and outdoor space while abiding by
the rules for the number of children permitted at the center/location. There are more
rules governing the number of participants at centers in the indoor space compared to
the outdoor space.
28
Figure 1 Indoor Setting Layout
29
Figure 2 Outdoor Setting Layout
30
Participants
All children enrolled in the outdoor nature-based classroom had consent to
participate in the study. There were sixteen children, average age of 49 months as of
10/04/2019, enrolled in the outdoor-nature based class. The age range was 36 months
to 60 months. Nine of the children were female. Three of the children included in this
study attended the outdoor nature-based preschool program the previous year. Seven
of the children were Dual Language Learners (DLL). None of the focal children had a
documented disability although during a member checking meeting it was discussed
that three of the children were being evaluated for the possibility. Fifteen of the
sixteen children were included in the final analysis for this study (female n=8). See
Table 1 for focal child characteristics.
31
Table 1 Characteristics of Focal Children
The class was instructed by a lead teacher and an ECE pre-service teacher
completing her practicum. Additional class support was provided by university field
placement students from undergraduate ECE courses and a Laboratory School staff
member. The lead teacher has a BS in ECE and a MS in Literacy, and is a state
licensed teacher who has seventeen years of teaching experience teaching full day
Kindergarten, Pre-K, and Play & Grow. The lead teacher has her Naturalist
Certification. She is also an instructor for pre-service teachers at the University level
and has attended two Natural Start Conferences.
Pre-service teachers completing their practicum are placed in the nature-based
classroom for one semester. The student teacher assigned for the fall semester was
completing her first practicum. Prior to the start of the school year support staff was
32
assigned to the classroom due to an injury sustained by the lead teacher. The injury
limited the physical abilities of the lead teacher thus necessitating the need for an
additional teacher. The support staff member completed a BS in ECE and a MS in
Human Development and Family Studies with an ECE concentration, and has eight
years of ECE classroom experience and two years of ECE administrative experience.
The Nature Preschool uses an emergent curriculum combining children’s
interests and needs, what is occurring in the nature environment, Teaching Strategies
GOLD indicators, and past experiences. The scope and sequence of the curriculum
themes change year to year dependent upon the children enrolled. The children are
indoors from 11:00 AM to12:30 PM (Noon on Fridays); the remaining time is spent
outdoors. The Laboratory School’s Nature Preschool is the only one in the
surrounding area making it the ideal context to study conflict events and resolution
among preschoolers during child-initiated play in a nature-based environment.
Data Collection
In accordance with IRB requirements, informed parental consent was obtained
for collection of observation data (field notes, photographs, and video-record) and
demographic data for participants. Consent letters explaining the study and requesting
child participation were given to parents of enrolled children, by the researcher, at
morning drop off (Appendix A). The letters requested a parental response of either yes
or no to their child’s participation in the study. The researcher explained the study to
each parent/relative using the parental recruitment script (see Appendix B). The
researcher answered any questions the parents/relative had regarding the study. Two
relatives took the consent letters home to the child’s parent and relayed the
information. Parents either signed the consent letter after speaking to the researcher or
33
returned the signed consent letter within one week. Parental consent for all enrolled
children (n=16) to participate in the study was received.
Each focal child was assigned a number, 001-016, to ensure confidentiality.
Observation order was determined by the focal child’s assigned number. All focal
children were present on their assigned observation day; thus, the observations were
conducted in numeric order. Demographic class data (child age, gender, ethnicity,
home language, cognitive and/or physical limitations) was obtained from the
Laboratory Preschool Director and Office Manager. The lead teacher provided weekly
lesson plans and informed the researchers about field trips, flipped day (indoors time
followed by outdoor time) due to extreme temperature, absent children, accreditation
visit, etc.
Researchers used naturalistic observation of focal children through video-
record in order to document children in their naturalistic environment engaging in
natural peer interactions. Each focal child was video-recorded for a 30-minute
observation periods during indoor and outdoor child-initiated play (free play) or until
free play session ceased. The focal child observation period began at the start of the
designated outdoor free play (approximately 9:45 AM) and again at the start of indoor
free play (approximately 11:15 AM). The focal child was followed at a reasonable
distance in order to record child-child, and teacher-child interactions but did not
interfere with the child’s free play. One focal child’s observation data were omitted
per the recommendation of the lead teacher after member checking process because it
was considered an unusual day for the child.
Prior to data collection the researcher collecting video data was introduced to
the children. The researcher briefly explained the study, showed the children the video
34
camera, and answered the children’s questions (Appendix C). After the initial meeting
the researcher spent time with the class first without and then with the video camera in
order to increase the children’s comfort level with the researcher, and to test the
equipment selected for use indoor and outdoor. Video data were collected the first
week of November to the second week of December.
Video-record provides a detailed record of the conflict occurrences capturing
preceding interactions, conflict intervention development and resolution (Garvey,
1984; Shantz, 1987) and allows the researchers to view and review data in order to
provide an accurate assessment (Wheeler, 2004) of conflict events. Researchers did
not interact with focal child or other children unless someone initiated interaction
with the researcher accepting the ‘least adult’ role suggested by Mandell (1988).
Field Notes. The Field Notes Form modified from a pilot study (Han, Pic, &
Pollock, 2019 March) was used at the beginning of each observation session to note
the date, focal child identification number, class attendance, staffing numbers,
weather, and location (outdoor, indoor) (Appendix D). Field notes are used to “assist
in the maintenance of the research instrument” (Marshall, & Rossman, 2016, p.117).
During the collection of the video-record the researcher collected additional field notes
regarding environment information deemed important in order to obtain a complete
picture of the conflict occurrences, such as phrases or words spoken by the focal child
if concern was noted for poor audio quality. There is a train that runs near the outdoor
classroom which occasionally inhibited the microphone from recording verbal
exchanges.
Video Taping. The researcher used a video camera to record focal child
observations in order to record the entire conflict sequence from the catalyst to the
35
resolution or no resolution. Additionally, videotaping captured both the preceding
interactions, which provided details regarding emotions and prior play interactions,
and the evolving conflict which aided in the determination of conflict interventionist
types and resolution. The researcher followed the focal child at a reasonable distance
as to avoid interfering with the focal child’s activities and peer interactions. The
researcher did not plan to interact with the children. Children’s body language,
expressions and verbal cues were observed to determine if the focal child was
comfortable being recorded. None of the focal children displayed signs of discomfort
with video recording nor inquired about the videotaping. Video-taping allowed
examination of the conflict event in detail noting the catalyst, conflict development
and resolution.
A total of 461 minutes and 52 seconds of indoor video data and 474 minutes
and 31 seconds of outdoor video data was collected. The indoor and outdoor video
data ranged from 20 minutes and 9 seconds to 29 minutes and 59 seconds per focal
child, and 24 minutes and 45 seconds to 29 minutes and 59 seconds per focal child
respectively. The average indoor video data were 28 minutes and 47 seconds per focal
child, and the average outdoor video data were 29 minutes and 38 seconds per focal
child.
Transcripts. Observation data collected through video-record were transcribed
verbatim by one researcher. Field notes provided verification of details when
applicable. Focal children were identified in the transcriptions according to their
identification number. Classmates interacting with the focal child were identified as
classmate 1, classmate 2, etc. according to the order of interaction with the focal child
in the setting (indoor/outdoor). University field placement students were identified as
36
Student 1, Student 2, etc. in the order they interacted with the focal child. Lead
Teacher, Support Staff and Student Teacher were identified according to their title.
Sixteen indoor and sixteen outdoor transcripts were constructed. Focal child indoor
transcript length ranged from eight pages to twenty-eight pages with an average
transcript length of nineteen pages. The outdoor transcript length ranged from thirteen
pages to thirty-two pages with an average transcript length of twenty-two pages per
focal child. The transcripts were proofread, edited, and printed for analysis and
coding. Prior to coding the transcripts were reviewed to provide an overall picture of
the data.
Conflict Log. The Conflict Log (Appendix E). The Conflict Log was created
from information gathered by the researchers in a pilot study conducted at the Lab
School (Han, Pic, & Pollock, 2019) and informed by Chen et al., (2001) and Killen
and Turiel (1991). Two Conflict Observation Logs were completed, one for conflict
events in the indoor child-initiated play and one for outdoor. The Conflict Log was
used in the coding process to compile data on the frequency of conflict events per
focal child, location of conflict (e.g. light table), duration (determined by start and end
time of conflict event), catalyst, interventionist type, and resolution or no resolution .
Completed indoor and outdoor Conflict Logs were analyzed separately for emergent
themes and patterns, and were used to construct the evolution of the conflict
occurrence noting the exchange pattern, and resolution.
Conflict occurrences were counted per child (outdoor and indoor), and then
combined for a total class count (outdoor and indoor). Conflict events per child were
counted and compared to determine if one child drove the data to determine if specific
37
child(ren) were driving the data results. It was determined no outliers needed to be
removed from the data.
Data Analysis/Coding
Event Sampling
Event sampling method was used with the transcription data to identify conflict
situations. The event sampling method is used to identify specific behaviors to serve
as the unit of analysis (Miller, 2018), and it is commonly used to discover its causes
and results (Wortham, 1995). Therefore, it is an appropriate method to discover the
conflict situation and its catalyst and resolution. For the purpose of this study, a
conflict was selected as the event and was defined as a social interaction in which an
emotional exchange occurs between two or more individuals that is characterized by
events in which one individual protests, resists, retaliates, or opposes the actions of
another individual, and the second individuals’ action is met with resistance or
acceptance (Chen, Fein, Killen, & Tam, 2001; Garvey, 1984; Hay, 1984; Shantz,
1987).
The indoor and outdoor transcripts were analyzed separately. The conflict
events were marked and tabulated. The identified conflict events were coded with the
focal child’s ID number and event number followed by ID for indoor and OD for
outdoor (e.g. 004_3ID indicates focal child four, third conflict event, indoor setting).
Focal child transcripts which contained identified conflict events were
separated from focal child transcripts that did not contain conflict events. Only the
transcripts which contained conflict events were used in further coding development
(See Figure 3).
38
Figure 3 Conflict Identification and Transcript Coding Map
39
Coding Development
After the conflict events were identified and transcripts were developed, an
initial coding process began with the pre-established categories identified by Chen et
al. (2001) and Killen and Turiel (1991). These included the initiating action (physical
harm, psychological harm, distribution of resources, play ideas, social-conventional
issues) and resolution or no resolution. While reading the transcripts, new codes
emerged. After rereading the transcripts and codes, and peer debriefing, three major
categories emerged related to the research questions: catalyst, interventionist type,
resolution outcome and then sub codes were identified and developed under these
three main categories (see Figure 4). The identified codes for catalyst, interventionist
type, and resolution or no resolution were used to construct the Code Book (Appendix
F). Conflict events identified in the transcripts were reviewed in detail to code each
event with the defined codes for catalyst, interventionist type, and resolution or no
resolution.
40
Figure 4 Conflict Event Coding
Catalyst. Two new catalyst categories emerged from the data and were added
to the previously identified categories (Chen et. al, 2001; Killen & Turiel, 1991):
tickling/touching (non-receptive tickling or touching); and accusation (accusing
someone of a specific action). One new category description emerged and was added
41
under social conventional-issues: number of center participants. The final codes for
the catalyst are identified and defined in Table 2. Transcripts were reviewed to
extrapolate details of the conflict catalyst in the outdoor and indoor environment. The
researcher coded the catalyst for the onset of noted conflict event: physical harm,
psychological harm, distribution of resources, play ideas, social conventional issues,
tickling/touching or accusation. The catalyst was determined by behaviors from child
A that met the criteria for initiating a conflict which was met with resistance, protest
or retaliation by child B, to which child A responded with insistence or acceptance.
Example of a tickling/touching identified as the catalyst:
002: (reaches over and touches the sparkles on the front of Classmate 4’s shirt)
Classmate 4: Don’t touch it. Stop it you’re tickling me.
002: (touches the sparkles on Classmate 4’s shirt again)
Classmate 4: Stop it. You’re tickling me.
002: (reaches over again and touches Classmate 4’s shirt).
Classmate 4: You’re tickling me. Stop it!
42
Table 2 Catalyst Categories
Interventionist Types. The data revealed three distinct interventionist types
within the conflict event. The final codes for interventionist type are identified and
defined in Table 3. Interventionist type coding was used to form any combination of
the three distinct interventionist types involved in the resolution process (e.g. CI/PIN
indicates child(ren) interventionist and an uninvolved peer interventionist); ten
combination patterns emerged.
43
Table 3 Resolution Intervention Types
Participant Coding Description
Child CI child(ren) involved in conflict event
Peer PIN peer not involved in conflict
Teacher TI lead teacher, student teacher, support staff, university students
Emerged Patterns
Coding Description
CI child interventionsist
TI teacher interventionsist
PIN peer interventionsist
CI/TI child interventionsist /teacher interventionsist
CI/PIN child interventionsist /peer interventionsist
TI/CI teacher interventionsist /child interventionsist
CI/PIN/TI child interventionsist /peer interventionsist /teacher interventionsist
CI/TI/CI child interventionsist /teacher interventionsist /child interventionsist
CI/PIN/TI child interventionsist /peer interventionsist /teacher interventionsist
CI/TI/CI/TI child interventionsist /teacher interventionsist /child interventionsist
/teacher interventionsist
Resolution Outcome. Analysis of the conflict conclusion revealed three types
of resolution outcomes. The final codes for resolution or no resolution are identified
and defined in Table 4. Indoor and outdoor transcripts were analyzed to determine the
outcome of the conflict event. Each conflict event was coded as resolution (R), no
resolution (NR) (Chen et al., 2001; Killen & Turiel), or undetermined resolution
(UDR). For the purpose of this study a conflict was coded as R if agreement was
44
reached through acceptance of the initial request or protest, compromise or
negotiation, or a return to play with deescalated emotion or the emotional state pre-
conflict event. Conflicts that ended due to distraction or interruption, or with high
emotion indicating nonacceptance, were coded as NR. Additionally, a conflict was
coded NR if no conflict resolution was defined, the conflict was considered ended if
10 seconds passed without resuming the conflict (Laursen & Hartup, 1989). Conflict
events without clear resolution or no resolution were coded as UDR.
Conflicts with the same focus that were divided into two intervals (e.g.
interruption or distraction) were coded as individual conflicts with defined ends if
more than 10 seconds elapsed between episodes.
Conflicts ending without a clearly defined resolution or no resolution were
reviewed again alongside the video record to note the details of the child(ren)’s body
language, emotional state, gestures, and facial expressions (e.g. crossed arms, pouty
lip, turning away).
45
Table 4 Resolution Outcome
Resolution Coding Description Example
Resolution R agreement is
reached, there is
acceptance of the
initial request or
protest, or there
is a return to play
with deescalated
emotion
Classmate 2: You’re still making it blue! (pause) Now
may I have to that? (reaching for blue paint brush)
008: When I am finished.
Classmate 2: mmm… 008 is not letting me have a turn.
Student 1: Did you ask her for a turn?
Classmate 2: Yea (pause) mmmm-mmmm (whinny tone
bottom lip in a pout)
Student 1: Maybe when she’s done with the blue you can
finish using the blue.
Classmate 2: mmmm-mmmm, nnnnn (reaching for blue
paint container)
(008 is holds the blue paintbrush out)
008: Here. I’m giving you the blue paintbrush.
Classmate 2: Oh
No
Resolution
NR ends due to
distraction,
interruption, or
with high
emotion
indicating
nonacceptance
Classmate 2: Can you give me the dinosaur?
009: No. When I’m done.
Classmate 2: Okay (pause) I am waiting for my
tetradactyl. (pause) Are you done now? (classmate 2
attempts to take the dinosaur, 009 moves his arm with the
dinosaur away from classmate 2)
009: No
Classmate 2: May I borrow it now? May I have it?
009: See it’s flying
(009 and classmate 2 are distracted by classmates playing
Zingo)
Undetermined
Resolution
UDR
resolution cannot
be determined
Concluding exchange not in English. Facial expressions,
body gestures do not indicate resolution or no resolution.
46
Credibility
The researcher used multiple processes to reduce subjectivity and establish
credibility and validity of data analysis. First, peer debriefing addressed potential bias
of the researcher and ensured the analyses were grounded in the data. Throughout the
research process the researcher conferred weekly with the study advisor regarding data
collection, coding and analysis. Member checking with the lead teacher during the
data collection and twice after the collection of data clarified questions, verified
information, and ensured the researcher captured accurate focal child data. Lastly, the
involvement of a non-involved peer coder maintained inter-rater reliability. A non-
involved peer researcher was trained on the definitions developed for coding, the
identification of a conflict event and the coding process. Miles and Huberman (1994)
suggest 80% agreement between coders on 95% of the codes is adequate agreement
among multiple coders to maintain inter-rater reliability. The non-involved peer
reviewed, analyzed and coded 20% of the transcribed data in order to identify conflict
events and apply the coding process to the identified conflict events. Coding
agreement between the two researchers in regard to identifying conflict events was
100%. The coding agreement between the two researchers in regard to coding each
conflict event for the five identified codes (location, catalyst, interventionist type,
participants, and resolution, no resolution outcome) was 93.8%. There were no
differences in agreement with regard to conflict location, involved participants, and
resolution, no resolution or undetermined resolution categories. The conflict events
coded differently were related to categorical agreement of the initial catalyst and
interventionist type. Differences in coding can be resolved through discussion in order
to reach consensus on categorical agreement (Bartholomew, Henderson, & Marcia,
47
2002) therefore, the two researchers collectively reviewed and discussed the coding
disagreements. The discussion resulted in 100% agreement between coders.
Ethics
This study was approved by the Institutional Review Board (IRB) at the
University of Delaware (Appendix G). This research was conducted in compliance
according to the standards set forth by the IRB. Parental consent and child assent were
obtained prior to the collection of data. Video data, identifying data and child
demographic information were kept confidential and maintained in a secure server
according to IRB requirements.
48
Chapter 4
FINDINGS
The findings chapter is divided into three sections. In the first section analysis
was conducted to determine frequency of conflict events in the indoor and outdoor
setting for children as a collective group and per focal child. The second section noted
the observed catalysts which initiated conflict events and explored potential
differences between settings and focal children. The final section investigated emerged
patterns of intervention and the resolutions which followed the interventionist types.
Question 1. Frequency of Conflict Between Indoor and Outdoor Child-initiated
Play in a Nature-based Preschool
The first research question seeks to identify the frequency of conflict events in
both the indoor and outdoor setting in a nature-based preschool, and to investigate
whether conflicts emerged more in the indoor or the outdoor setting. Analyses were
conducted to compare the two settings, looking at overall conflict frequency, and
conflicts by adult presence, child gender and language status, and specific location in
the two settings. The analysis seeks to answer the question: To what extent does the
frequency of conflict differ among children during indoor and outdoor child-initiated
play in a nature-based preschool?
Table 5 presents the findings of research question 1.
49
Table 5 Focal Child Conflict Events Indoor and Outdoor
Focal
Child
Gender
Dual Language
Learner (DLL)
Conflict Events More Conflict Events
Indoor Outdoor Indoor Outdoor
001 M N 3 1 +
002 F N 5 3 +
004 M Y 12 6 +
005 F Y 0 0
006 M N 2 0 +
007 M N 1 1
008 F Y 0 2 +
009 M N 2 0 +
010 F Y 4 2 +
011 M N 2 1 +
012 F Y 0 0
013 F N 0 3 +
014 F N 1 2 +
015 F Y 1 1
016 M Y 0 0
Total 33 22
Note. DLL Y=Yes; N=No.
A total of 33 indoor and 22 outdoor conflict events were identified. On average
there were 4.58 conflict events per hour in the indoor setting and 2.96 per hour in the
outdoor setting. This finding differs from the findings of Stack and Nikiforidou (2019)
which noted indoor and outdoor conflict were nearly equal. A teacher was present
during 39.39% of indoor and 63.64% of outdoor conflicts. The average indoor conflict
duration was 38 seconds with a duration range of 7 seconds to 1 minute and 57
50
seconds. Outdoor conflict events lasted longer with an average duration of 50 seconds,
and a duration range of 18 seconds to 2 minutes and 31 seconds.
Three focal children did not engage in indoor or outdoor conflict events during
their observation period; twelve focal children participated in conflict events. Ten
focal children were involved in conflict events indoors, and ten were involved in
outdoor conflict events. Seven children were involved in more indoor conflict events
compared to outdoor; three children engaged in more outdoor conflicts; and five
children had equal indoor/outdoor rates. Of the focal children involved in conflict
event(s) four DLL children were involved in a total of 28 conflict events and eight
monolingual children were involved in a total of 27 conflict events. The rate of
conflict per child for DLL children is more than double the rate of conflicts per child
for monolingual children at a rate of 7 conflicts per child and 3.375 conflicts per child
respectively.
The frequency of indoor and outdoor conflicts varied by gender; males had
more conflicts in the indoor setting (n=22) while females had more conflicts in the
outdoor setting (n=13). Six of seven male focal children engaged in indoor conflicts
events while only four participated in outdoor conflicts. Four of eight female focal
children were involved in indoor conflict events and six of eight participated in
outdoor conflict events. Twenty-two of thirty-one total conflicts for males occurred
indoor (70.97%) and thirteen of twenty-four total conflicts for girls occurred outdoor
(54.17%).
Conflict events in the indoor space were concentrated at the light table (n=18)
followed by the middle activity table (n=6). Conflict events in the outdoor setting were
51
spread out by location, the jumping stump (n=5) had the highest incidents of conflict
followed by the open play space (n=4), the stage (n=3) and the mud kitchen (n=3).
Question 2. Catalyst Differences Among Preschool Children During Child-
Initiated Play Indoor and Outdoor in a Nature-Based Preschool
The second question explored whether the frequency and types of catalysts that
initiated the conflict differ in the indoor and outdoor setting. Analyses were conducted
to compare the catalyst in the two settings. The second research question sought to
answer the question: How are the catalysts by which conflict emerges different among
preschool children during child-initiated play indoor and outdoor in a nature-based
preschool?
The findings demonstrated distribution of resources conflicts (75.75%) were
more prevalent in the indoor space as supported by previous research (Brenner &
Mueller 1982; Chen, et al., 2001) however, play idea conflicts (54.54%) were more
prevalent in the outdoor space (Table 6).
Indoor distribution of resources conflicts were generated by a limited supply of
magnetic light tiles, a red train engine, a one of a kind pillow, and an icing bag used
for decorating cookies. Four of nine outdoor distribution of resources catalysts were
generated by non-nature-based items (green rake, plastic turtle, and blue paint). Four
play idea conflicts in the indoor space revolved around building ideas and a request to
join a playframe. Play idea conflicts in the outdoor space focused on roles in play,
types of play in which to engage, and the intended use of an item during play.
Limitations placed on how many children could be present in a center generated three
instances of social-conventional issues in the indoor setting.
52
Figure 5 Frequency of Catalyst that Initiates Conflict
There was a slight difference in distribution of resources conflicts by gender in
the indoor and outdoor setting. Five males and three females were involved in indoor
distribution of resource conflicts while one male and five females were involved in
outdoor distribution of resource conflicts. Play idea conflicts were almost the same for
males and females in the indoor and outdoor setting. One male and two females were
involved in indoor play idea conflicts, and four males and three females were involved
in outdoor play idea conflicts.
53
Example 1. Play Idea (Outdoor). Play idea conflict occurs during play when
one child’s new idea or wish for the play scenario changes and conflicts with a peer’s
idea (Shantz, 1987). The catalyst is a conflict over a play idea between two classmates
and focal child 011. Classmates 7 and 8 are sitting on a plank in the obstacle area
playing with a leaf. Focal child 011 approaches the play frame and wants to play a
game of chase where he plays the role of a dinosaur. This conflict event lasted 46
seconds.
011: RAWH! RAAAWH! (011 makes dinosaur roars to classmate 8
and 7)
Classmate 8: I don’t like that. (looks at researcher)
(classmate 7 reaches to get a leaf from classmate 8’s right hand.
Classmate 8 gives classmate 7 the leaf)
(011 stands very close to classmate 8 and 7 and looks around while
classmates 8 and 7 sit on the plank of the obstacle course)
Classmate 7: We’re taken a break here. (classmate 7 looks up at the
researcher after speaking. 011 completely ignores classmate 7 and
looks up and around standing about 2 inches from classmate 7 who is
seated on a plank)
Classmate 8: Go (classmate 8 swings her leg in a kicking motion
towards 011)
(classmate 8 raises arm and points towards 011)
Classmate 8: Not going!
(011 responds by leaning over to where classmate 8 and looking her in
the eyes at a close range)
Classmate 8: Ahh (classmate 8 leans backwards to move away) Ahhh.
Hey. Stop it!
(support staff is helping another classmate walk on the obstacle course
and is standing about 3 feet from 011)
Support Staff: What are you doing 011?
Classmate 8: Stop it.
(011 pulls on his pocket)
Classmate 7: Stop it. Can’t you see classmate 8 doesn’t like it.
(011 is standing close to classmate 8 while looking up and around
ignoring the support staff and classmate 7)
Classmate 8: Leave the space here.
(011 walks away)
54
Example 2. Distribution of Resources (Indoors). Conflicts over distribution of
resources occurs during child’s play when one child desires an object in another
child’s possession (Shantz 1987). The catalyst for this conflict is over a pretend icing
bag used to decorate gingerbread cookies. The conflict occurs in the dramatic play
kitchen. The focal child, classmates 4 and 6, and the lead teacher are present along
with the focal child. The conflict duration is 27 seconds.
(classmate 4 holds a pretend icing tube in her right hand and pretends
she is applying icing to her cookie. 011 leans back and watches
classmate 4)
Lead Teacher: I love the way you’re putting icing on him.
(classmate 6 leans forward and reaches with her left hand)
Classmate 6: Can I try icing?
(011 reaches with his right hand towards the icing bag)
011: I I I
(011 grabs a hold of the icing with both hands and tries to pull it from
classmate 4’s hands)
Lead Teacher: It’s just for pretend. I think classmate 4’s (lead teacher
places her hands on the icing bag and on 011’s right hand) using it
right now.
(011 continues to try and take the icing bag from classmate 4)
011: Can I use it? Can I have it?
Classmate 4: No
Classmate 6: Please may I have a turn?
(classmate 4 is holding the icing bag in her right hand and 011 has
both his hands on the icing bag. The lead teacher places her pinkie
finger between the icing bag and 011’s right hand)
Lead Teacher: Hear her? Make make your cookie then (011 releases
his grasp on the icing bag with his right hand but continues to hold it
with his left hand) come over to do it.
(011 lets go of the icing bag and classmate 4 takes a step away from
the table)
Classmate 6: Please may I have a turn with the cream?
Classmate 4: Okay. (classmate 4 hands the icing bag across the table to
classmate 6)
55
011: I I I I want (011reaches for the icing bag) I want to have a turn
with the…(interrupted)
Lead Teacher: You don’t have cookie. (classmate 6 pulls the icing bag
down to her right side. 011 let’s go) What are you going to decorate
(pause) use as a cookie to decorate?
(011 reaches in to the bowl of dough and takes out two handfuls. 011
places the dough on the table and begins trying to flatten the dough.)
Question 3: Conflict Resolution Among Children in the Context of Child-
Initiated Play in a Nature-Based Preschool
The final research question evaluated the emerged interventionist types, child,
peer, or teacher, present during the conflict process and the resulting outcome:
resolution, no resolution or undetermined. Analysis of the three types of resolutions
were conducted looking for patterns in the indoor and outdoor setting. Examining
interventionist types may help predict if one interventionist type is more successful in
achieving conflict resolution. The analysis sought to answer the question: How are
indoor and outdoor conflict events resolved among children in the context of child-
initiated play in a nature-based preschool?
Eight resolution interventionist types emerged; five interventionist types were
documented in the indoor setting and all eight were present in the outdoor setting. This
finding suggests the outdoor setting may provide richer and more complex conflict
negotiation and resolution participation and may provide insight into the duration
differences between indoor and outdoor conflict events. Figure 2 displays the emerged
interventionist type by setting.
56
Table 6 Interventionist Type by Setting
Indoor Interventionist Types Outdoor Interventionist Types
CI child interventionist CI child interventionist
TI teacher interventionist TI teacher interventionist
CI/TI child interventionist/teacher
interventionist
CI/TI child interventionist/teacher
interventionist
CI/PIN child interventionist/peer
interventionist
CI/PIN child interventionist/peer
interventionist
CI/TI/CI child interventionist/teacher
interventionist/child
interventionist
CI/TI/CI child interventionist/teacher
interventionist/child
interventionist
TI/CI teacher interventionist/child
interventionist
CI/PIN/TI child interventionist/peer
interventionist/teacher
interventionist
CI/TI/CI/TI child interventionist/teacher
interventionist/child
interventionist/teacher
interventionist
Focal child patterns of child interventionist types were consistent between the
indoor and the outdoor settings indicating one child did not generate the pattern
results. Of the three child interventionist types employed in the indoor setting, the
prominent interventionist type was child interventionists. Eight focal children were
57
involved in the child interventionist type, two children were involved in child
interventionist/teacher interventionist/child interventionist type, and one child was
involved in child interventionist/peer interventionist type. In the outdoor setting of the
four child interventionist types, six focal children were involved in child
interventionist type, four children were involved in child interventionist/teacher
interventionist/child interventionist type, one in child interventionist/peer
interventionist and one is teacher interventionist/child interventionist.
The frequency of indoor and outdoor resolution by interventionist type is
displayed in Table 7. Due to the low number of peer interventionist type the child and
peer interventionists types were combined into one group for analysis.
Table 7 Frequency of Indoor and Outdoor Resolution by Interventionist Type
Interventionist
Type
Indoor Interventionist Resolution Outdoor Interventionist Resolution
Child/Peer N (%) Teacher N (%) Child/Peer N (%) Teacher N (%)
TI 4 (18.2)
CI 13 (59.1) 5(38.5)
CI/PIN 1 (4.5) 1(7.7)
CI/TI 1 (4.5) 3 (23.1)
TI/CI 1 (7.7)
CI/TI/CI 3 (13.6) 2 (15.4)
CI/PIN/TI 1 (7.7)
Total (%) 17 (77.2) 5 (22.7) 9 (69.3) 4 (30.8)
58
A collective analysis of resolved conflicts revealed indoor conflicts (n=33)
were resolved 66.66% of the time. Outdoor conflicts (n=22) resulted in a lower
resolution percentage (59.09%). The most successful interventionist type for reaching
a resolution for both the indoor and the outdoor setting were child interventionist (CI).
Example 3. Child Interventionist (Outdoor). The conflict between focal child
013 and classmate 6 is an example of an unresolved outdoor conflict. The conflict
occurred at the fairy garden in the outdoor play space and began when classmate 6
expressed desire for the plastic turtle the focal child was using. The conflict did not
have a defined conclusion due to a distraction. The conflict duration was 50 seconds.
013: Quick. I know you who you are. Come on hop on my turtle.
(013 extends her arms out for classmate 6 to hold her fairy on the
turtle’s back)
Classmate 6: I’ll take the turtle. (classmate 6 tries to take the turtle
from 013)
013: No. (013 pulls her arms back away from classmate 6)
Classmate 6: Let’s switch. (classmate 6 holds out her piece to offer for
the switch)
013: No. (013 backs away from classmate 6)
Classmate 6: Heyyyy that’s not nice (spoken in a whinny voice)
(classmate 6 turns away from 013)
Classmate 6: That’s not nice.
(classmate 6 turns slightly back towards 013. Classmate 6 stands with
her arms crossed)
Classmate 6: I want the turtle.
013: But can this be both our turtle our pet?
(classmate 6 takes the turtle from 013 and the turtle falls to the ground,
classmate 6 bends down to pick up the turtle)
013: Can this be both our pets? Classmate 6?
Classmate 6: No because I want it.
(classmate 6 stands holding the turtle, 013 starts to walk towards
classmate 6 and sees something on the ground)
(013 bends down to look more closely at the object which is a small
Styrofoam pumpkin ornament)
013: Huh? Ah look! What’s that? (013 looks up at classmate 6)
59
Classmate 6: I don’t know. (classmate 6 walks over to see what 013
found on the ground)
013: Ooooo hmm (013 picks up the object) A pumpkin? What?
(both 013 and classmate 6 smile and giggle)
(the conflict over the turtle is interrupted and a discussion begins about
the little pumpkin being eaten by a squirrel)
013: Maybe this get eat by a squirrel! (the word squirrel is said loudly
and in a dramatic tone)
Of the total indoor conflicts resolved by child/peer interventionist types, 14
(82.4%) were resolved without the involvement of a teacher, and 3 (17.6%)
resolutions involved a teacher. Six (66.7%) outdoor conflicts were resolved by
child/peer interventionists types without the involvement of a teacher and 3 (33.3%)
involved teacher presence. During indoor conflict resolutions, child interventionist
type occurred as the last interventionist type 2.3 times more than teacher
interventionist type. In the outdoor setting child interventionist type occurred last 2.6
times more than teacher intervention type.
Example 4. Child Interventionist-Peer Interventionist Type (Indoor). The
conflict event began when the focal child 002 entered the play frame of classmates 1
and 4, and requested to help classmate 1 build her tower. The focal child was standing
at the light table across from classmate 1 across and with classmate 4 to her left.
Classmates 1 and 4 are building with magnetic light tiles. Focal child 002 tried to
negotiate her way into the play frame. The conflict concluded with classmate 4
offering focal child 002 a solution which she accepted. The event lasted 33 seconds.
002: Hey, can I help you build?
Classmate 1: I don’t need help.
(002 does not accept classmate 1 doesn’t want help and places a
magnetic tile on classmate 1’s structure and then glances up to see if
classmate 1 is watching her. 002 watches classmate 1’s face for a
moment, then attempts to place a second light tile on the structure. 002
60
glances up a second time at classmate 1 and tries to place another tile
on classmate 1’s structure)
002: That’s ok.
(002 continues to try and place tiles while watching classmate 1’s eyes
in between placing tiles. When 002 notices classmate 1 watching her
place a tile she attempts to hand classmate 2 the magnetic tile)
002: Here.
Classmate 1: Mine doesn’t need those. (002 pulls her arm back from
trying to place the small
triangle light tile on classmate 1’s structure) It just needs these.
Classmate 4: You can help me build my little houses. I mean my little
blocks.
002: Okay.
Classmate 4: It’s easy (classmate 4 holds up his cube to show 001)
Seventy percent (n=14) of indoor conflict events that involved only child/peer
interventionist types [CI (n=18), CI/PIN (n=2)] were resolved by children. One indoor
conflict resolution could not be determined and therefore was not included in the
resolution analysis. Outdoor conflicts that involved only child/peer interventionist
types [CI (n=10) CI/PIN (n=1)] were resolved by children 54.5% (n=6) of the time.
These findings are higher than child resolution percentages found by Chen et al.
(2001) for children 3- to 4-years old.
Example 5. Child Interventionist (Indoor). Focal child 006 was playing Zingo
at the center activity table with classmates 2 and 7. Focal child 006 was seated at the
end of the table with classmate 2 on his right. Classmate 7 was seated to the right of
classmate 2. The conflict began when the focal child took the game tile away from
classmate 2. The conflict was resolved by the involved children. The conflict duration
was 19 seconds.
Classmate 2: Ouh. I have a bug. (classmate 2 holds the bug tile and
looks for the bug picture on her Zingo card)
61
006: I have a bug! (006 reaches over and takes the bug tile out of
classmate 2’s hands)
Classmate 2: Oh. (classmate 2 sounds surprised)
(classmate 7 takes the dispenser to begin his turn)
Classmate 2: Hey! (pause) (classmate 2 looks at her card) Hey! I had
that. I have a bug!
006: Where? (006 continues to hold the bug tiles and looks towards
classmate 2’s card)
Classmate 2: Right there. (classmate 2 points to the picture of a bug on
her game card) That’s it!
(006 looks at classmate 2’s card)
006: Oh. (006 takes the bug piece off his card and places it on
classmate 2’s card)
Indoor conflicts resolved with teacher interventionist (n=5) as the last
interventionist type ended in resolution 50% of the time. Indoor conflicts with
child/peer interventionist as the last interventionist type ended in resolution 73.9% of
the time. Outdoor conflicts resolved with teacher interventionist type were resolved
66.8% of the time. Child/peer interventionist as the last interventionist type were
resolved 56.3% of the time in the outdoor setting.
Example 6. Child Interventionist-Teacher Interventionist Type (Outdoor). The
conflict began when classmate 4 noticed focal child 014 dragging a wooden plank
across the open play space. Focal child 014 verbally attempted to get classmate 4 off
of the end of the plank. When the strategy was unsuccessful the focal child solicited
the help of the student teacher. The conflict was resolved when classmate 4 accepted
the student teacher’s explanation and gets off the plank. The conflict lasted 2 minutes
and 32 seconds.
Classmate 4: Bouncy!
(classmate 4 straddles the plank and sits on the end of the plank that is
dragging along the ground)
62
014: No ba. No Classmate 4! No! (pause) (014 looks around scanning
the open play space)
(classmate 4 continues to sit on the end of the plank and bounce)
014: No Classmate 4. Get off! Raa-Ehhh (014 tries to hold up her end
of the plank while classmate 4 sits on the other end more towards the
middle and bounces. 014 looks up and sees the student teacher walking
towards her)
014: Ah Miss Student Teacher he keeps going on here when I do this.
He keeps bumping on…(interrupted by the student teacher addressing
classmate 4)
Student Teacher: Classmate 4 what’s going on? (student teacher goes
over and takes classmate 4’s hand) Classmate 4 what’s going on?
014: Just get him off.
Classmate 4: Rrrrrrr (classmate 4 leans back to be dead weight for the
student teacher)
Student Teacher: Classmate 4 I need you to get off (student teacher
let’s go of classmate 4’s hand and steps back) because…
Classmate 4: I’m
Student Teacher: ….you could hurt
Classmate 4: Don’t wanna get off.
Student Teacher: I understand but if 014 is trying to move that you
could hurt her.
(classmate 4 gets off the plank)
Student Teacher: Thank you
Analysis of conflict resolution in which the only interventionist type was
teacher interventionist revealed 50% (n=4) of indoor and 0% (n=0) of outdoor
conflicts were resolved. Interventionist type data are found in Appendix H.
63
Chapter 5
DISCUSSION
Previous research has examined preschoolers’ peer conflict events, how they
present in a nature-based preschool has not been examined. The findings of this study
begin to fill this gap. This study examined and described conflict events among
preschool children in an outdoor nature-based preschool. In this study an exploration
of conflict catalysts, interventionist types and resolutions was undertaken. The results
provide a deeper understanding of indoor and outdoor conflict event frequencies,
catalysts which propel the conflict, participant involvement as interventionist, and
patterns of resolution or no resolution in the context of a nature-based preschool.
Results from this current study are explored and discussed using Vygotsky’s belief in
the importance of play as a context for child development (Vygotsky,1966, 1978) and
Bronfenbrenner’s (1977, 1979, 1986) bioecological systems theory which states a
child’s environment must be considered in the child’s developmental processes
through a bidirectional interconnection between the child and their surroundings.
Frequency of Indoor and Outdoor Conflict
The first research question focused on the frequency of indoor and outdoor
conflict occurrence. The findings in this study demonstrate preschoolers peer conflict
is present during free play in both the indoor and outdoor environment. The presence
of conflict in the outdoor space during free play suggests learning and development
are occurring in this context. This finding supports both outdoor play as a viable
64
context for social and cognitive development drawing on Vygotsky’s belief in the
importance of play in child development and previous research that identified conflicts
as naturally occurring, positive opportunities for children to develop social and
cognitive skills (Chen et al., 2001, Shantz, 1987). The results of this study demonstrate
the healthy conflict present in the outdoor setting provides children with the
opportunity to develop problem solving, turn taking, perspective taking, negotiation,
conflict resolution skills, and friendship building.
Based on piloted research (Han, Pic, & Pollock, 2019), the overall rate of
conflict in the indoor setting was expected to be higher than the outdoor setting. This
study supports the initial findings of the piloted research noting the rate of indoor
conflict was higher than the outdoor rate. The lower outdoor conflict rate may provide
children with additional time to engage in outdoor free play and allow more
opportunities for deep play, learning, and development due to a reduction in the
amount of time spent on conflict management.
For the focal children in this classroom, this study revealed a higher number of
children were involved in more conflict events in the indoor setting (n=7) compared to
the outdoor setting (n=3). This difference may be due to a variety of indoor factors
such as limited resources (e.g. magnetic light tiles), available space, non-natural
lighting, noise level, and restrictions governing the number of center participants.
Initial results from this study suggests gender may play a role in conflict
frequency by setting. Males were found to engaged in more conflict events in the
indoor setting while females engaged in more conflict events in the outdoor setting.
The gender findings for the indoor space are consistent with previous studies in which
boys were found to have more conflicts than girls (Malloy & McMcurray, 1996). This
65
was not the case for the outdoor setting; girls engaged in more conflict events
compared to indoor. Due to the small sample size the indoor and outdoor gender
difference may be due to chance and needs further exploration.
It was expected that indoor conflicts would reveal more teacher presence than
outdoor conflicts given the differences in square footage between the indoor and
outdoor setting, the openness of the outdoor environment, and the expected proximity
of teachers to children. The opposite results emerged in this study. This finding may
be due to the difference in field placement student’s presence. Field placement
students were present for the duration of the outdoor sampling time but were present
for less than half of the indoor sampling time, increasing the ratio of teacher-to-child
indoors. On average the teacher-child ratio in the indoor setting was 1:4 while the
outdoor setting ratio was 1:3. These ratios are lower than the recommended ratios
from NAEYC (1:10) (2018), and the Washington State Department of Children,
Youth, and Families (1:6) (n.d.) for a group size of sixteen children ages 30 months-6
years. Washington State is the only state which issues licenses for the operation of an
outdoor nature-based preschool; the previously mentioned ratio applies to outdoor
preschools. Although the square footage of the outdoor setting is larger than the
indoor, the increase in the number of teachers allowed for teacher presence in the
majority of the outdoor area where children engaged in activities. The teacher-to-child
ratio may have impacted the frequency of teacher presence in outdoor conflicts.
Catalysts Which Initiate Conflict
The second research question explored the catalysts by which conflict is
initiated. Previous research has identified conflicts over possession and use of objects
(distribution of resources) as the primary catalyst for conflict among preschool
66
children (Shantz, 1987). The findings from this study found distribution of resources
conflicts were most prominent in the indoor setting but not in the outdoor setting. This
finding does not support previous research on disputes over possessions during indoor
and outdoor play which concluded possession-based disputes were nearly equal (Stack
& Nikiforidou, 2019) in both settings. Play idea disputes emerged as the most
prevalent catalyst in the outdoor space. The outdoor setting catalyst findings of this
study may be due to the nature of the outdoor setting which provides more
opportunities for deep engaged play, more play choices, materials, and the
construction and reorganization of the play space (Bohling et al., 2010; Fjørtoft,
2004).
Interventionist Types and Resolutions
According to Shantz (1987) children generally resolve peer conflicts on their
own without teacher intervention while other studies found teacher intervention as the
most prevalent resolution type (Malloy & McMurray, 1996). The final research
question investigated interventionist types and successful resolution interventionist
patterns to explore whether children were the primary interventionists in peer conflict
events. In this study the simple child interventionist (CI) resolution pattern was
demonstrated as the most frequently employed pattern in both settings. The findings
demonstrate children were able to engage in conflict resolution and resolve conflict
without adult intervention in both the indoor and outdoor setting.
Overall, the findings of this study demonstrated child-initiated play in the
indoor and outdoor setting provided children with the opportunity to engage in peer
conflict, intervention, and resolutions, providing children social and cognitive
development opportunities. This is consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s belief that the
67
child’s environment and those with whom a child interacts influence the child’s
development. Allowing children to be a part of the negotiation process affords them
the ability to learn to take the perspectives of peers, merge the peers’ perspective with
an understanding of their own needs and desires in order to achieve higher levels of
thinking, and to build and maintain relationships (Church, Mashford-Scott &
Cohrssen, 2018; Wheeler, 2004) . Additionally, conflict negotiation supports problem-
solving and enables children to discover and practice workable compromises (Church,
et al., 2018). All of which have been identified as skills necessary for the formation
and maintenance of friendships (Denham, et al., 2003). Rizzo (1992) suggests
conflicts do not have to reach resolution to produce benefits, the act of engaging in
conflicts with peers allows children the opportunity to develop their relationship with
one another. It must be acknowledged that teachers play a key role in conflict
management to prevent conflicts from escalating to a critical level.
Limitations
The small sample size and the collection of data at one location are major
limitations to this study. The sample size and one study site may not provide a
complete representation of children’s peer interactions as each play session has a new
agenda where peers, age, context, and physical and emotional states change (Cordoni
et al., 2016). Findings from this study may be different than other nature-based
preschools due to factors such as children enrolled, teacher-student ratio, the space
utilized by this program, and this program’s lead teacher’s qualifications, certification
and experience; therefore finding are limited to this study and are not generalizable.
This sample focused on typically developing children and did not include
children with documented disabilities. Malloy and McMurray (1996) noted children
68
with disabilities were more likely to ignore another child’s strategy, and tend to use
conflict strategies not used by typically developing children.
The number of University field placement students present was not expected.
In addition to their presence, they were learning how to support children in the
management of conflict. They were practicing providing guidance and scaffolding for
children to learn conflict resolution strategies. This field placement assignment may
explain the high percentage of teacher involved conflicts in the outdoor space, and the
interventionist patterns in which a teacher was involved but was not the final
interventionist in the conflict event.
Another possible limitation is focal child changes in behavior due to the
presence of a researcher. To address the potential of researcher presence affecting
participant behaviors the researcher spent time with the class prior to data collection,
however there exists the possibility that a child’s behavior changed due to the presence
of the researcher.
Conclusion and Implications
This study adds to the literature and understanding of peer conflict in outdoor
nature-based programs and provides an example for investigating conflict in nature-
based preschools. Analysis of the data emerged two conflict catalyst categories not
previously identified. The exploration of the children and teachers’ role within the
resolution process emerged interventionist patterns consistent in both the indoor and
the outdoor.
In 2014 Dennis and colleagues noted a lack of research demonstrating the
effectiveness of outdoor nature-based programs to produce behavior, learning and
developmental outcomes. Despite the limitations value can be gained from this
69
research though the findings demonstrating the outdoor setting provides opportunity
for children to participate in and resolve conflict participation thus providing children
the opportunity to practice perspective taking, communication, negotiation, and self-
regulation skills.
Additionally, this study provides insight into the benefits of outdoor nature
play and provides evidence supporting the importance of increasing children’s outdoor
free play time as a means for developing social-emotional and cognitive skills.
A broader study across multiple nature-based site locations that gathers data at
multiple time points would provide a richer understanding of conflict within nature-
based preschools. This study provides a foundation for assessing children’s roles as
participants in the conflict resolution process which could be expounded upon and
used to inform teacher practices. The identified intervention types should be further
explored to add a deeper understanding of conflict management. A larger study should
map out the verbal strategies used by children, peers, and teachers during the
interventionist role to help explain how and when children use resolution tactics to
resolve peer conflict. A deeper exploration of possible connections between employed
strategies and outcomes as well as further analysis to identify strategies used by
teacher in the TI/CI and CI/TI/CI patterns may provide insight into how children use
modeled information to manage in future peer conflict events.
Lastly, dual language learners in this classroom were involved in conflicts
at higher rates than monolingual children. DLL children were more likely to be
involved in a conflict in the outdoor environment. This may be due to DLL children’s
lack of nature vocabulary to express their needs or desires in the outdoor environment.
To provide insight to the results of this study, a larger in-depth study should explore
70
conflict differences among DLL and monolingual children in a nature-based preschool
assessing language and communication skills.
71
REFERENCES
Aasen, W., Grindheim, L., & Waters, J. (2009). The outdoor environment as a site for
children's participation, meaning-making and democratic learning: Examples
from Norwegian kindergartens. Education 3-13, 37(1), 5-13. doi: 10.1080/
Aras, S. (2016). Free play in early childhood education: A phenomenological study.
Early Childhood Development and Care, 186(7), 1173-1184. doi:
10.1080/03004430.2015.1083558
Bassok, D., Latham, S., & Rorem, A. (2016). Is kindergarten the new first grade?
AERA Open, 2(1), 233285841561635. doi:10.1177/2332858415616358
Berkhout, L., Bakkers, H., Hoekman, J., & Goorhuis-Brouwer, S. M. (2013).
Observing free play in classrooms with an instrument based on video
analysis. Early Child Development and Care, 183(1), 125-136.
doi:10.1080/03004430.2012.658385
Bodrova, E., Germeroth, C., & Leong, D. J. (2013). Play and self-regulation lessons
from Vygotsky. American Journal of Play 6(1), 111-123.
72
Bohling, V., Saarela, C., & Miller, D.L. (2010). This never would have happened
indoors: Supporting preschool-age children’s learning in a Nature Explore
classroom in Minnesota. White Paper. Retrieved from
https://dimensionsfoundation.org/wpcontent/uploads/2016/07/skillsforestlkmn
_10.pdf
Brenner, J., & Mueller, E. (1982). Shared meaning in boy toddlers' peer
relations. Child Development, 53(2), 380-391. doi:10.1111/j.1467-
8624.1982.tb01327.x
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development.
American Psychologist, 32, 513-531.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by
nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1986). Ecology of the family as a context for human
development: Research perspectives. Developmental Psychology, 22(6), 723-
742. doi:10.1037/0012-1649.22.6.723
Brown, S., & Vaughan, C. (2009). Play : How it shapes the brain, opens the
imagination, and invigorates the soul. New York: Avery.
73
Chen, D., Fein, G., Killen, M., & Tam, H. (2001). Peer conflicts of preschool children:
Issues, resolution, incidence, and age-related patterns. Early Education &
Development, 12(4), 523-544. doi:10.1207/s15566935eed1204_3
Church, A., Mashford-Scott, A., & Cohrssen. (2018). Supporting children to resolve
disputes. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 16(1) 92-103.
Cordoni, G., Demuru, E., Ceccarelli, E., & Palagi, E. (2016). Play, aggressive conflict
and reconciliation in pre-school children: What matters? Behaviour, 153(9-11),
1075-1102. doi:10.1163/1568539X-00003397
Corsaro, W. A. & Rizzo, T. A. (1990). Disputes in the peer culture of American and
Italian nursery school children. In A. D. Grimshaw (Ed.), Conflict Talk (pp.
22-66). Great Britain: Cambridge University Press.
Craft, A., McConnon, L., & Paige-Smith, A. (2012). Child-initiated play and
professional creativity: Enabling four-year-olds’ possibility thinking. Thinking
Skills and Creativity, 7(1), 48-61. doi:10.1016/j.tsc.2011.11.005
Davies, R., & Hamilton, P., (2018) Assessing learning in the early years’ outdoor
classroom: Examining challenges in practice, Education 3-13, 46(1), 117-129.
doi: 10.1080/03004279.2016.1194448
74
Denham, S., Blair, K., DeMulder, E., Levitas, J., Sawyer, K., Auerbach-Major, S., &
Queenan, P. (2003) Preschool emotional competence: Pathway to social
competence? Child Development 74(1), 238-256. doi: 10.1111/1467-
8624.00533
Dennis, S., Wells, A., & Bishop, C. (2014). A post-occupancy study of nature-based
outdoor classrooms in early childhood education. Children Youth and
Environments, 24(2), 35-52. doi:10.7721/chilyoutenvi.24.2.0035
Fjørtoft, I. (2004). Landscape as playscape: The effects of natural environments on
children's play and motor development. Children Youth and
Environments, 14(2), 21-44. Retrieved
from https://www.jstor.org/stable/10.7721/chilyoutenvi.14.2.0021
Frost, J. L., Worthman, S., & Reifel, S. (2012). Play and Child Development 4th
Edition. Boston, MA: Pearson.
Garvey, C. (1984). Children’s talk. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Gray, P. (2011). The decline of play and the rise of psychopathology in children and
adolescents. American Journal of Play, 3(4) 443-463.
Green, M. & Piel, J. (2010). Theories of human development: A comparative approach
(2nd ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon.
75
Han, M., Pic, A., & Pollock, K. (2019, March) The effects of Nature-Preschool on
children’s language, conflict resolution, and child-initiated learning. Paper
presented at The Association for the Study of Play & International Play
Association U.S.A. Harrisonburg, VA
Hay, D. F. (1984). Social conflict in early childhood. In G. Whitehurst (Ed.) Annals of
child development (Vol. 1, pp. 1-44). Greenwich, CT: JAI Press Inc.
Johnson, J. E., Christie, J. F., & Wardle, F. (2005). Play, development, and early
education. Boston: Pearson.
Keller, M. (1984). Resolving conflicts in friendship: The development of moral
understanding in everyday life. In W. Kurtines & J. Gewirtz (Eds.). Morality,
Moral Behavior, and Moral Development (pp. 140-158).New York: A Wiley-
Interscience Publication.
Killen, M., & Turiel, E. (1991). Conflict resolution in preschool social
interactions. Early Education and Development,2(3), 240-255.
Kuo, M., Barnes, M., & Jordan, C. (2019). Do experiences with nature promote
learning? Converging evidence of a cause-and-effect relationship. Frontiers in
Psychology, 10. Retrieved from
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fpsyg.2019.00305/full#h12
76
Laursen, B., Finkelstein, B., & Betts, N. (2001). A developmental meta-analysis of
peer conflict resolution. Developmental Review, 21(4), 423-49.
Laursen, B., & Hartup, W. (1989). The dynamics of preschool children's
conflicts. Merrill-Palmer Quarterly, 35(3), 281-297.
Laursen, B., Hartup, W., & Koplas. (1996). Understanding peer conflict. Merrill-
Palmer Quarterly, 42(2), Invitational Issue: Conflicts in families and between
children: Advances in theory and research, 76-102.
Louv, R. (2008). Last child in the woods: Saving our children from nature-deficit
disorder. Chapel Hill, N.C: Algonquin Books of Chapel Hill.
Malloy, H., & McMurray, P. (1996). Conflict strategies and resolutions: Peer conflict
in an integrated early childhood classroom. Early Childhood Research
Quarterly, 11(2), 185- 206.
Mandall, N. (1988). The least-adult role in studying children. Journal of
Contemporary Ethnography, 16(4), 433-467.
Marshall, C., & Rossman, G. B. (2016). Designing Qualitative Research. Los
Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Maynard, D. (1985). How children start arguments. Language in Society, 14(1), 1-29.
77
Maynard, T., Waters, J., & Clement, J., (2013a). Moving outdoors: Further
explorations of ‘child-initiated’ learning in the outdoor environment.
Education 3-13, 41(3), 282-299. doi:10.1080/03004279.2011.578750
Maynard, T., Waters, J., & Clement, J. (2013b). Child-initiated learning, the outdoor
environment and the ‘underachieving’ child. Early Years, 33(3), 212-225.
doi:10.1080/09575146.2013.771152
Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded
sourcebook (Second Edi). London: Sage Publications.
Miller, S., (2018). Developmental Research Methods. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
Moore, R. (2014). Nature Play & Learning Places. Creating and managing places
where children engage with nature. Raleigh, NC: Natural Learning Initiative
and Reston VA: National Wildlife Federation. Retrieved from
https://conservationtools.org/library_items/1320-Nature-Play-Learning-Places-
Creating-and-Managing-Places-Where-Children-Engage-with-Nature
National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC). (2018). Staff-
to-child ratio and class size. Retrieved from
https://www.naeyc.org/sites/default/files/globally-
shared/downloads/PDFs/accreditation/early-learning/staff_child_ratio.pdf
78
Owens, R.E. (1996) Language Development: An Introduction. Needham Heights,
MA: Allyn & Bacon
Parke, R. D. & Slaby, R. G. (1983). The development of aggression. In E. M.
Hetherington (Ed.), P. H. Mussen (Series Ed.), Handbook of child psychology:
Vol. 4, Socialization, personality, and social development, 4th ed. (pp. 547-
641). New York: Wiley.
Pelletier, J. (2011). Supporting early language and literacy. What works? Research in
Practice 37. Retrieved from
http://www.edu.gov.on.ca/eng/literacynumeracy/inspire/research/WW_Early_
Language.pdf
Piaget, J. (1932). Moral judgement of the child. New York: Free Press. Retrieved from
https://archive.org/details/moraljudgmentoft005613mbp/page/n19
Ramsey, P. (1986) Possession disputes in preschool classrooms. Child Study Journal,
16(3), 173-181.
Rizzo, T. (1992) The role of conflict in children’s friendship development. New
Directions for Child Development, 58, 93-111.
Rosa, E. M. & Tudge, J. (2013). Urie Bronfenbrenner’s theory of human development:
Its evolution from ecology to bioecology. Journal of Family Theory & Review,
5, 243-258.
79
Shantz, C. U. (1987). Conflict between children. Children Development, 58, 283-305.
Stack, J., & Nikiforidou, Z. (2019). Preschoolers’ possession-based disputes indoor
and outdoor play, Early Child Development and Care, 1-14. doi:
10.1080/03004430.2019.1649667
Stephenson, A. (2003). Physical risk-taking: Dangerous or endangered? Early Years,
23(1), 35-43. doi:10.1080/0957514032000045573
Sutterby, J. A., & Frost, J. (2006). Creating play environments for early childhood:
Indoors and out. In B. Spodek & O. N. Saracho (Eds.), Handbook of research
on the education of young children (2nd ed.). 305-321. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence
Erlbaum Associates.
Taylor, A. F., & Kuo, F. E. (2006). Is contact with nature important for healthy child
development? State of the evidence. In C. Spencer & M. Blades (Eds.),
Children and their environment: Learning using and designing spaces, 124-
140. New York: Cambridge University Press.
Tovey, H. (2007). Playing outdoors: Spaces and places, risk and challenge. Berkshire,
England: Open University Press.
80
Ulset, V., Vitaro, F., Brendgen, M., Bekkhus, M., & Borge, A. I. H. (2017). Time
spent outdoors during preschool: links with children’s cognitive and behavioral
development. Journal of Environmental Psychology, 52, 69–80. doi:
0.1016/j.jenvp.2017.05.007
Vygotsky, L. S. (1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child.
Translated by N. Versov and M.Barrs. International Research in Early
Childhood Education, 7(2) 3-25. Retrieved from
https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/EJ1138861.pdf
Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Interactions between learning and development. In L. S.
Vygotsky & M.Cole. Mind in Society. (pp. 79-91). Retrieved from
doi:10.12691/education-5-1-4
Washington State Department of Children, Youth, and Families. (ND) Outdoor
Preschool Pilot Standards-“The Touchstone Standard’, p. 74. Retrieved from
https://www.dcyf.wa.gov/sites/default/files/pdf/Outdoor_Preschool_Pilot_Stan
dards.pdf
Wells, N. M., & Evans, G. W. (2003). Nearby nature: A buffer of life stress among
rural children. Environment and Behavior, 35(3), 311-330.
doi:10.1177/0013916503035003001
Wheeler, E. J. (2004). Conflict resolution in early childhood: Helping children
understand and resolve conflicts. Upper Saddle River, N.J: Pearson Education.
81
Wood, E. A. (2014). Free choice and free play in early childhood education: Troubling
the discourse. International Journal of Early Years Education, 22, 4-18.
doi:10.1080/09669760.2013.830562
Wortham, S. C. (1995). Measurement and evaluation in early childhood education.
Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
82
Appendix A
PARENTAL CONSENT LETTERS
83
84
85
86
87
88
Appendix B
PARENTAL SCRIPT
Verbal Recruitment Script-Parental
“Good morning/Good afternoon, my name is Annette Pic and I am a master’s student
at the University of Delaware in Human Development and Family Sciences. I am
interested in understanding peer interactions in outdoor nature-based education.
Nature-based education appears to create unique experiences for children, however
there is little research on peer interactions in nature-based preschools. To help fill this
gap I will be conducting a research study in the Lab School’s Outdoor Nature-based
classroom for the next three months. I would like to request the participation of your
child. This parental consent form details the information regarding the study and
requests your permission to observe and video-record your child during their outdoor
and their indoor free play time. Your child will not be identified by name at any point
in the study or in the concluding thesis or conference presentation. Thank you for your
consideration in allowing your child to participate.”
89
Appendix C
CHILD SCRIPT
Script used for speaking to the children in group setting:
“Hi. My name is (researcher’s name) and I am here to learn about how children play.
Today I am here to watch you play. In a few days I will be using my camera (hold up
camera) to record the playing you do with your friends.”
On the day of the focal child’s observation:
If a child asks what we are doing, we will reply, “We are videoing to learn about how
you play with your friends.”
90
Appendix D
FIELD NOTES FORM
Conflict Observation Field Notes Outdoor/Indoor
Focal Child: __________________________
Date: ________________________________
Class Attendance: ______________________
Weather: _____________________________
Conflict
Observed
Time Location Notes
91
Appendix E
CONFLICT LOG INDOOR/OUTDOOR
92
93
Appendix F
CODE BOOK
Peer conflict occurrences and resolutions in a nature-based preschool
Definitions:
Conflict- a social interaction in which an emotional exchange occurs between two or
more individuals that is characterized by events in which one individual protests,
resists, retaliates, or opposes the actions of another individual, and the second
individuals’ action is met with resistance or acceptance (Chen, Fein, Killen, & Tam,
2001; Garvey, 1984; Hay, 1984; Shantz, 1987)
Interventionist Type- participants who employ strategies during the conflict event that
either continue the conflict or attempt to resolve the conflict
Resolution- agreement is reached, there is acceptance of the initial request or protest,
or there is a return to play with deescalated emotion
No Resolution- conflict that ends due to distraction, interruption, or with high emotion
indicating nonacceptance will be considered unresolved after 10 seconds elapses
without the continuation of the conflict
Undetermined Resolution- conflict ending cannot be determined by verbal exchange,
gestures or body language, and does not fit the either the definition for resolution or no
resolution
General Information
ID=Indoor
OD=Outdoor
001-016 focal child identification number
Classmate 1-15- refers to children in the class with the focal child
Lead Teacher- full time teacher
Support Staff- staff member assigned to the classroom
Student Teacher- university student in the practicum placement
Student 1, 2, 3, etc.- university student in fieldwork placement
Student Worker- university student providing classroom support
94
Locations: coded in orange
Indoor Conflict Locations
SC science center
MAT middle activity table
LT light table
CWT carpet area with trains
DPK dramatic play kitchen
CBS carpet near bookshelf
ST snack table
Outdoor Conflict Locations
OPS open play space
WB workbench
S stage
JS jumping stump
RS rope swing
PT picnic table
OC obstacle course
MK mud kitchen
ST snack table
Conflict Catalyst: coded in green (Chen et al., 2001; Killen & Turiel, 1991)
PH Physical harm (hitting, biting, punching, kicking)
PSH Psychological harm (name-calling, teasing)
DR Distribution of resources (fairness issues such as violation of sharing, turn
taking, grabbing, taking)
PI Play ideas (who will do what, how, when and where, use of space)
SCI Social-conventional issues (violation of class or school rule about running
indoors, how to take turns, or cleaning up time and procedure, number of
center participants)
T Tickling/touching (non-receptive tickling or touching)
A Accusation (accusing someone of a specific action)
Interventionist Type: coded in purple
CI child interventionist (child(ren) involved in conflict event)
TI teacher interventionist (lead teacher, student teacher, support staff,
university students)
PIN peer interventionist (peer not involved in conflict)
CI/TI child interventionist-teacher interventionist
CI/PIN child interventionist-peer interventionist
TI/CI teacher interventionist- child interventionist
CI/PIN /TI child interventionist-peer interventionist-teacher interventionist
95
CI/TI/CI child interventionist-teacher interventionist-child interventionist
CI/TI/CI/TI child involvement-teacher interventionist
Resolution Outcome: coded in blue
R resolution (agreement reached, acceptance of request or protest, return to play
with deescalated emotions)
NR no resolution (distraction, interruption, high emotion indicating nonacceptance)
UDR undetermined resolution (not possible to determine if a resolution was reached)
Participants: coded in pink
f1c1 focal child and 1 classmate
f1c2 focal child and 2 classmates
f1c1a1 focal child, 1 classmate, adult
f1c2a1 focal child, 2 classmates, adult
96
Appendix G
IRB FORMS
97
98
99
Appendix H
INTERVENTIONIST TYPE DATA
Indoor Intervention Outcome Result.2 Count
CI or
PIN R
TI R
CI or
PIN NR
TI NR
CI UDR
Outdoor Intervention Outcome Result.2 Count
CI or
PIN R
TI R
CI or
PIN NR
TI NR
TI-R 4 0 4 0 0 0 TI-NR 1 0 0 0 1
TI-NR 4 0 0 0 4 0 CI-R 5 5 0 0 0
CI-R 13 13 0 0 0 0 CI-NR 5 0 0 5 0
CI-NR 5 0 0 5 0 0 CI/PIN-R 1 1 0 0 0
CI-UNR 1 0 0 0 0 1 CI/TI-R 3 0 3 0 0
CI/PIN-R 1 1 0 0 0 0 TI/CI-R 1 1 0 0 0
CI/TI-R 1 0 1 0 0 0 CI/TI/CI-R 2 2 0 0 0
CI/TI-NR 1 0 0 0 1 0 CI/TI/CI-NR 2 0 0 2 0
CI/TI/CI-R 3 3 0 0 0 0 CI/PIN/TI-R 1 0 1 0 0
33 17 5 5 5 1
CI/TI/CI/TI-NR 1 0 0 0 1
22 9 4 7 2