requirements and / or met other federal criteria that placed them at risk for school failure. Children’ s races were identified as Black( two children), Asian( one), Latino / a( one), East Indian( one), and White( nine).
To collect data, I placed pattern blocks and pattern block puzzles on a table as one choice during a one-hour activity three days a week for seven weeks. Children were free to join or leave the activity as their interest dictated. I sat at the table, observing them work and intervening as necessary. To further measure their knowledge of angles, shapes, and spaces, children completed an assessment before using the pattern block puzzles( pretest) and after using them for a period of time( post-test). I found that children’ s scores significantly increased from pre- to post-test and concluded that their experiences with pattern block puzzles positively affected their spatial reasoning and geometric knowledge.
The information I gathered suggests that, in general, most young children approach their first pattern block puzzle with little knowledge of angles and area. They have not yet made spatial relationships among the five graduating angles of the pattern block shapes( 30, 60, 90, 120, and 150 degrees); the sizes / areas of the pattern blocks; or the angles, shapes, and sizes / areas of the spaces inside the puzzles. Consequently, they begin by randomly inserting blocks into the puzzles. To evaluate children’ s progress, I looked for signs of children’ s actions that implied contradictions to expectations, considerations of alternative block placements, and constructions of new mental relationships.
Isaiah’ s Experimentation
Figures 1, 2, and 3 capture Isaiah’ s attempts to fill in the pattern block puzzles. A complete set of detailed drawings represents each action( or block placement) that he made. The zigzag line was an action I coded that represents Isaiah bumping blocks out of place. The wings represent Isaiah picking up a block, bringing it close, and rejecting it without inserting it.
Isaiah’ s first attempt demonstrated his struggle before he emptied the puzzle and reached for another. As he experimented to figure out how to make his idea work, Isaiah spontaneously engaged in spatial and geometric reasoning. Although he had not yet constructed the spatial relationships needed to successfully fill the puzzle, he learned what did not work( see Figure 1 on page 81).
After three weeks of experimentation, Isaiah appeared to have consolidated his developing understanding of angles and area. On day seven( the first day of this experiment’ s third week), Isaiah chose the cone-shaped puzzle again( see Figure 2 on page 82). The drawings of Isaiah’ s actions document progress in his spatial reasoning development. He demonstrated that he could think simultaneously about the graduating sizes of the angles and the differences in area. His actions indicated that he had constructed spatial relationships among the angles from smallest to largest and between the area required for each pattern block shape. He also
As an example of children’ s progress, let’ s look at Isaiah’ s experience. Isaiah was the youngest child in the class and, like other 4-year-old children, was still emerging in his spatial reasoning and geometric knowledge. When the pattern block activity was introduced, he stood at the table every day for many weeks, watching and waiting for others to leave so that he could have a turn. His engagement and progression during this activity, which occurred with little adult mediation, illustrate his mental processing in the moment and over time. It offers a starting place for early childhood educators as they plan for and support spatial reasoning based on knowledge about trends in child development and about individual children and their strengths, interests, past experiences, and needs.
80 Young Children
Summer 2025