It was crucial that I considered the ethics of working with children before I collected any data in accordance with the British Educational Research Association (BERA, 2018).  I gained permission from the school to undertake the work in line with this assignment (see Appendix 1) as well as sending a letter of consent to the participants parents to give permission for their child to be involved (see Appendix 2). I gained verbal assent to make sure that they felt comfortable and agreed to participate in the assignment, making clear of their right to withdraw at any time. To ensure anonymity of the participant and the school, pseudonyms was used – Child X and School Y. This ensured that the participants or school could not be identified which complies with the ethical requirements set out by BERA. I acknowledged the participants entitlement to privacy, therefore accorded them their rights to confidentiality by not disclosing any identifiable information about the data gathered. 

Data collection
The method that was used to collect data was the Mosaic Approach, first outline by Clark and Moss in 2001. According to Clark (2007), the term Mosaic refers to:/; 
‘drawing together pieces from different sources to create a complete picture of children’s perspectives.’
(Clark, 2007, p. 77).  
The Mosaic Approach, encourages researchers to view children as;’ experts In their own lives, skilful communicators, rights holders and meaning makers’. 
		(Clark and Moss, 2005, p. 5)

Furthermore, they view children as constructivists in making meaning and constructing their own understanding (Tassoni and Hucker, 2005). Throughout the research, Child X played an active role in the process by taking the lead in explaining the significance of the learning environment and the impact it has on her learning. 
The importance of listening to learners is outlined in Article 12 of the UNCRC 1989 which expresses a child’s right to say what they think should happen and be listened to (UNCRC, 1989). Likewise, Estyn (2016) highlight the correlation between pupil participation and school improvements. The Mosaic Approach has reflected this view, with a particular interest in the voice of the child (Clark, Kjorholt and Moss, 2005; Walker and Logan, 2008). Furthermore, there are similarities between the Mosaic Approach and Malaguzzi’s (1996) philosophy of how children communicate. Malaguzzi developed a concept of ‘The Hundred Languages of Children’ which recognised the multiple ways in which children can communicate their thinking and emphasises the importance of listening to children. 
The Mosaic Approach combines multiple methods which Clark and Moss (2005) consider as individual tiles. This includes traditional methods such as observations of the learner, with participatory tools for the child participants to use. 
There are four tiles of the mosaic that were used, each forming one piece of the mosaic in order to gather a holistic view of the child, these are:

















Figure 1: Four tiles of Mosaic Approach

The four methods used to collect the data enables both researcher and child to be co-documenters as they emphasise the child’s role of capturing their experiences (Rinaldi, 2006). Having said this, Clark and Moss (2001) acknowledge that a multi-method approach can be time-consuming and complex.  
The first data collection method used was observations. The use of observations in research with children is common practice for educators. Furthermore, the Welsh Government highlights the importance of observations within the Foundation Phase curriculum for noting children’s progress and involvement in their learning as well as a tool to inform planning (Welsh Government, 2008). Observations are considered a popular method to use when carrying out research with children as it enables researchers to explore participants perceptions of the important spaces considered by the participant (Greenfield, 2011, Leondard, 2007; Palaiologou, 2016). In line with the Mosaic Approach, Neaum (2019) believes that observations enable researchers to understand how children make meaning of their learning and how best we can support their learning. For the purpose of this research, the use of non-participant observations enabled me to capture the attitudes, skills and knowledge of Child X across the specific areas of learning. 
 Map making is a valuable piece that contributes to the Mosaic Approach, providing a visual perspective of their learning environment by using photographs they have taken and drawings to represent places that are important to them (Clark, 2001). Prior to Child X completing her map, she took me on a tour of the learning environment to indicate the important places to them. Child X used the iPad to take photographs of the tour to bring together the materials to create a visual map of the tour (see Appendix 3). Worth and Hardill (2015) identifies how map making can capture a child’s relationship with their environment and leads to opportunities to engage in meaningful dialogue. Furthermore, it ensures that the researcher takes time to listen to the child, allowing their voices to be heard (Dudek, 2005). Gray and Winter (2011) highlights an advantage of using such participatory methods with children, stating that it offers creativeness of data collection.   
Photographs were used as part of the participatory methods in order for children’s perspectives on themselves as learners to be portrayed. Clark and Moss (2001) believe that the use of photographs contribute to a ‘powerful new language’ for children to express themselves. Furthermore, the use of digital technology allows the process of documentation to be visible whilst enabling the child participant to make meaning of their learning, whilst enjoying the process (Clark, 2005, Cowie, Huser and Myers, 2014). However, Clark, Kjørholt and Moss (2005) consider the complexity of using digital technology within research due to the high cost of equipment which may not be available within the setting your conducting research. 
Child X and I had opportunities to discuss what she believed supported her learning. This makes reference to the ‘child conferencing’ tile of the Mosaic Approach (Clark and Moss, 2005). This gave me the chance to listen to the participant and gather her perspectives towards the learning environment and how areas within the classroom support her. I discussed with her the reasons why she took photographs of specific areas which supported my analysis of her learning. 

Analysis of learner
Language, Literacy and Communication
Child X took photographs of areas around the classroom that she felt supported her in LLC in order to discuss them with me. Child X chose to take a photograph of the reading corner within the classroom. When asked why, she explained that she enjoyed using the reading corner during COOL tasks (choose our own learning) to look at books with her friends. It is recognised by the Welsh Government that children should be given opportunities to ‘choose and use reading materials’ (Welsh Government, 2015, p.14). Likewise, this is also echoed in the new curriculum for Wales, in the ‘What Matters’ statements for the six Areas of Learning and Experiences. Furthermore, The Welsh Government believe that literature has ‘the power to expand the mind and give people dreams and aspirations’, (Welsh Government, 2017, p. 7). In relation to Child X’s reading, she is developing her skills in this area in order to become a competent reader and able to apply her skills to different elements of LLC. With guidance, she is able to apply her knowledge of reading strategies to support her whilst also acknowledging speech within the text and developing pace and fluency.  
Child X referred to the Literacy display board as an area which supports her learning, stating that is helps her to remember important things during lessons. This is something that she chose to photograph during our tour. School Y uses feedback as a way of assessing children’s understanding of their learning. Child X was able to explain to me how she responds to her marking, making reference to the use of purple pens and demonstrated her understanding of the school’s policy of using a ‘way forward’ to extend thinking. 
From observing Child X, she demonstrated her strengths in her ability to contribute to class discussions which was evident when working collaboratively on a shared task with her group to communicate  ideas and listen to others to create a circle map for the bake sale (see Appendix 4). According to the Education Endowment Foundation (EEF), collaborative learning (CL) is proven effective in classrooms with an average of five months gained from using the strategy with children. However, Freeman and Greenacre (2010) argue that CL may present challenges to learners such as the lack of participation and communication skills. I took the opportunity to discuss this with Child X to gain her perspective on CL within the classroom and she explained that her group works well within the activities set, each having enough time to discuss the activity. 
Child X displayed a range of skills in writing such as following and building upon a form modelled by the teacher during a write up of data collection for the Year 2 bake sale (see Appendix 5). Furthermore, it is evident that Child X takes pride in her handwriting, and can form upper- and lower-case letters accurately which is recognised as an outcome 5 skill for the Foundation Phase (WG, 2015). When given the opportunity to discuss her work, she acknowledged her targets to use ordering words and connectives in her work which she presented a can-do attitude towards, making reference to the VCOP display that reminds her of how she can achieve these targets. 
Next steps 
Generally, Child X is doing well in reading, however in order to progress Child X will need to improve her comprehension skills. Save the Children (2015) identify reading comprehension as the focus of children understanding different texts that they are reading. This is something that Child X finds difficult but it is an equally important skill that she will need to develop. My role as a teacher is to implement strategies which I believe would support a child’s development in a specific area of learning. The EEF recognises reading comprehension strategies can contribute to an additional six months progress in this area whilst remaining low in cost. By putting an emphasis on this strategy within the classroom, Child X will be able to develop their skills and knowledge of a range of techniques which would support them in making meaning of what they read (Brooks, 2007). As a teacher, a strategy that could be used alongside this would be questioning which Coe et al (2014) identifies as good practice.