99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Early Childhood Education Teachers’ Perspectives on Adult-Child Interactions at Outdoor Spaces with Young Children in Portugal
Ana Sofia Lopes1, Gabriela Portugal1, Maria Figueiredo2
1Centro de Investigação em Didática e Tecnologia na Formação de Formadores, Departamento de Educação e Psicologia, Universidade de Aveiro, Portugal; 2Instituto Politécnico de Viseu, Escola Superior de Educação, Portugal
Presenting Author: Lopes, Ana Sofia
There has been growing interest in the use of outdoor spaces in school institutions and in outdoor learning (Dinkel et al., 2019; Kalpogianni, 2019). Also in Portugal, research has pointed to the growing relevance of being and playing outside at an early age (Bento & Portugal, 2019). Still, there isn’t a widespread use of the outdoor space in creches (0-3 years old). Several factors influence this situation. A study conducted in some European countries, including Portugal, states that weather conditions and aversion to risk are considered by parents and teachers as the main reasons to prevent outdoor time (Sandseter et al., 2020). McClintic and Petty (2015) claim that although positive thoughts about the use of outdoor spaces are associated with childhood memories (space to express creativity, imagination, and time to explore), that vision is not incorporated in daily practice, where the adult assumes a supervisor role, responsible for maintaining the security and conflict resolution.
The adult’s role is central to the educational experience of the children, not only outdoor but as an important indicator of quality. Research on quality in early childhood education highlights how quality contexts are essential for assuring long-term benefits for children (Cash, Ansari, Grimm & Pianta, 2019). In Portugal, studies conducted in early childhood institutions raised concerns about quality at the creche level (Barros et al., 2018) reinforcing the importance of the adult role as a quality indicator (adult-child interactions), also referring space organization, including the outdoor spaces of the institutions.
In Portugal, the creche is supervised by the Ministry of Labour, Solidarity and Social Security and not by the Ministry of Education, so there are no curriculum guidelines for early childhood education teachers who work with these ages (only for 3 to 6 years old which are included in the educational system as the first stage of basic education). Kalpogianni (2019) refers that in the absence of such a document, the early childhood education teachers’ opinions and personal experiences gain more value regarding decision-making concerning the use of outdoor spaces, reinforcing that the adult role is strongly affected by teachers’ conceptions.
Acknowledging the centrality of the adult-child relationships, this study looks into the outdoor space learning experience for children by focusing on the adult’s role or profile: what dimensions of the adult’s role/profile are considered important by early childhood teachers in their interactions with children from 3 months up to 3 years old in outdoor spaces aiming at a quality practice. For the adult’s role/profile we have combined dimensions from Laevers’ framework on Experiential Education (Portugal & Laevers, 2018) with dimensions from the CLASS Infant (Jamison et al., 2014) and CLASS Toddler (La Paro et al., 2014).
In this paper, we present part of our study by analysing the results of a survey that has been answered by early childhood education teachers in the centre region of Portugal. This survey aimed to: a) Describe spaces, practices, and routines at outdoor creche spaces; b) Identify problems associated with the use of outdoor space, and c) Design a profile of the use of the outdoor space at creche’s settings.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThis study assumes an interpretative paradigm (Cresswell, 2014) that seeks to understand the meaning that different experiences and/or interactions have for the participants. An online survey was developed based on an integrative literature review. This review aimed to understand how adult-child interactions were studied through the analysis of 21 papers focusing on quality assessment instruments and their application in early childhood education contexts. The collected data referred to instruments such as Classroom Assessment Scoring System, CLASS-Toddler (La Paro et al., 2014), CLASS-Infant (Jamison et al., 2014); Adult Involvement Scale (Portugal & Laevers, 2018); Infant/Toddler Environment Rating Scale-Revised (ITERS-R) (Bjørnestad & Os, 2018); Caregiver Interaction Scale (CIS) (Jamison et al, 2014); Sustained Shared Thinking and Emotional Wellbeing Scale (SSTEW) (Howard et al., 2020) and Caregiver Interaction Profiles (CIP) (Helmerhorst et al., 2014). From the corpus analyses, we identified adults' key actions at early childhood education centres revealing quality interactions and educational action. We also identified instruments assessing outdoor spaces and their use, such as the Preschool Outdoor Environment Measurement Scale (POEMS) (Larrea, et al, 2019); Go-Exterior (Bento, 2020) and the Outdoor Play Rating Scale (OPRS) (Hu et al, 2015) which reinforce the adult’s role as a curriculum co-constructor. Through these analyses, we defined the following three dimensions: characterization of the participants, characterization of creche institutions, and characterization of the adult’s role in the outdoors. The construction process was engaging and debated, ending in the validation process. First, the survey was revised by experts in three areas of early childhood education concerning outdoor space use, adult-child relations, and quality practices. In the second phase, a group of early childhood education teachers working at the creche piloted the survey. After both feedbacks, the survey was re-check. Both groups agreed with the main topics and approved the survey.
The final version of the survey focus on the three dimensions allowing for a profiling of the institutions and the use of outdoor spaces, including the adult’s role. It also includes open questions for teachers to express their perspectives. Accordingly, the analysis will combine statistics with content analysis.
The survey was launched in the second week of January and is still underway. It was sent to all 122 creches in the centre region of Portugal.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThis study is still underway, so at this moment, conclusions are yet to be obtained. By the time of the Emerging Researchers Conference, we will be able to present the results of the survey analysis.
We expect that the collected data will enable us to trace a profile of the use and practices developed at outdoor spaces in creche with particular attention to the adult’s role/profile. The discussion of these results together with the dimensions of quality, studied mainly indoors, will be relevant for supporting practices in the outdoor.
The survey was launched in the second week of January 2023, focus groups and interviews will follow. Focus group and “go-along” interviews will help us to go deeper in the subject connecting with the early childhood education teachers’ conceptions at real contexts.
This work is financially supported by National Funds through FCT – Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia, I.P., under the project UIDB/00194/2020.
ReferencesBarros, S., Cadima, J., Pinto, A.S., Bryant, D., Pessanha, M., Peixoto, C. & Coelho, V. (2018). The quality of caregiver-child interactions in infant classrooms in Portugal: The role of caregiver education. Research Papers in Education, 33(4), 427-451
Bento, G. & Portugal, G. (2019). Uma reflexão sobre o processo de transformação de práticas pedagógicas nos espaços exteriores em contextos de educação de infância. Revista Portuguesa de Educação, 32(2), 91-106
Bjørnestad, E., & Os, E. (2018). Quality in Norwegian childcare for toddlers using ITERS-R*. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(1), 111–127.
Cash, A.H., Ansari A., Grimm, J.K. & Pianta, R.C. (2019) Power of Two: The Impact of 2 Years oh High Quality Teacher Child Interactions, Early Education and Development, 30:1, 60-81
Helmerhorst, K. O. W., Riksen-Walraven, J. M., Vermeer, H. J., Fukkink, R. G., & Tavecchio, L. W. C. (2014). Measuring the Interactive Skills of Caregivers in Child Care Centers: Development and Validation of the Caregiver Interaction Profile Scales. Early Education and Development, 25(5), 770–790.
Howard, S. J., Siraj, I., Melhuish, E. C., Kingston, D., Neilsen-Hewett, C., de Rosnay, M., Duursma, E., & Luu, B. (2020). Measuring interactional quality in pre-school settings: introduction and validation of the Sustained Shared Thinking and Emotional Wellbeing (SSTEW) scale. Early Child Development and Care, 190(7), 1017–1030.
Hu, B. Y., Li, K., De Marco, A., & Chen, Y. (2015). Examining the Quality of Outdoor Play in Chinese Kindergartens. International Journal of Early Childhood, 47(1), 53–77.
Jamison, K., Cabell, S., LoCasale-Crouch, J., Hamre, B., Pianta, R. (2014). CLASS-Infant: An Observational Measure for assessing teacher-child interactions in centre-based child care. Early Education and Development, 25:553-572
Kalpogianni, D. (2019). Why are the children not outdoors? Factors supporting and hindering outdoor play in Greek Public day-care centres, International Journal of Play, 8:2, 155-173
La Paro, K. M., Williamson, A. C., & Hatfield, B. (2014). Assessing Quality in Toddler Classrooms Using the CLASS-Toddler and the ITERS-R. Early Education and Development, 25(6), 875–893.
McClintic, S., & Petty, K. (2015). Exploring early childhood teachers’ beliefs and practices about preschool outdoor play: A qualitative study. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 36(1), 24–43
Portugal, G. e Laevers, F. (2018). Avaliação em Educação Pré-escolar. Sistema de Acompanhamento das Crianças. Porto. Porto Editora
Sandseter, E., Cordovil, R., Løge Hagen, T., & Lopes, F. (2020). Child Care in Practice Barriers for Outdoor Play in Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) Institutions: Perception of Risk in Children’s Play among European Parents and ECEC Practitioners.
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
Observation as a Professional Tool: Exploring Early Childhood Teachers’ Experiences
Gamze Nur İnönü, Sema Çelebi, Meryem Gulhan, Selda Aras
Hacettepe University, Turkiye
Presenting Author: Gulhan, Meryem
Observation is a necessary professional tool that all early childhood teachers should have for understanding and assessing children’s development and learning and their professional acts (Wortham & Hardin, 2019). When the importance of teacher quality is considered, observation skills have a critical position among teachers’ capabilities (Halpin & Kiehler, 2015). Systematic observation for intentional teaching can be administered in various formats, including visual and written records, children’s narratives, and checklists (Bruce et al., 2014; Dunphy, 2010; MacDonald, 2007; Wortham & Hardin, 2019). Before starting the observation, the teacher should determine the objective and purpose, the time to be allocated, the place, and the form in which the observation will be made and recorded (Peterson & Elam, 2020; Wortham & Hardin, 2019). Based on their observations, teachers decide how the learning environment will be organized to support children’s development. The analysis during and after the observation informs the teacher about what children need, which materials and learning environments are preferred by children most or least, and the ways to support children’s learning and participation. Moreover, by analyzing children’s interactions during observation, they decide how to give them feedback and guide their learning experiences (Aras, 2019). Thus, teachers make educational decisions to improve their acts and children’s development by considering data-driven observation. With the increasing importance of evidence-informed practice, recent studies show the need for systematic observation and recording of children’s learning processes, which can provide information about the teachers’ acts regarding teaching quality. Concurrently, this need has brought an increasing responsibility to observe the children in the classroom in a qualified and systematic way (Damjanovic & Blank, 2018; Goldhaber & Smith, 1997; Peterson & Elam, 2020; Seitz & Bartholomew, 2008). Moreover, it can be understood how teachers use the data they obtained from observation (Gullo, 2005; Hatch et al., 2001). For this reason, early childhood teachers need to know what they do with which purpose, called intentional teaching, and make decisions based on the data they collect. However, there is less research on teachers’ perspectives on observation as a professional tool and their observation experiences with the purpose of their acts based on the data they collect (Birkeland et al., 2020).
Considering all these, the current study aims to contribute to the literature by examining teachers’ perspectives and self-reported practices regarding observation as a professional tool. As it is claimed, a clear understanding and interpretation of the issue of observation are crucial to achieving assessment goals (Alvestad & Sheridan, 2015; Aras, 2019; Goldhaber & Smith, 1997; Knauf, 2020; Lindh & Mansikka, 2022; Yılmaz et al., 2021) as at the center of assessment in early childhood education (Wortham & Hardin, 2019), there is a lack of knowledge about the early childhood teachers’ experience as a professional tool. Therefore, the current study seeks to answer the following research questions:
1. How do early childhood teachers define observation as a professional tool?
2. What are early childhood teachers’ experiences with observation as a professional tool?
3. How do early childhood teachers use the data obtained from observations as a professional tool?
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedThe current study was designed as a qualitative research methodology via Interpretative Phenomenological Approach (IPA) to get how and what participants experience a particular issue (Smith & Osborne, 2007). Hence, IPA was used to get information for interpreting participants’ experiences deeply from their point of view (Smith & Osborne, 2007). Due to trying to achieve participants’ detailed experience and view regarding observation as a professional tool, IPA was selected as an appropriate method in the current study.
Interpretative Phenomenological Analysis (IPA) studies require a long and detailed process to analyze the participants’ transcripts. Besides, the study should include an in-depth examination of the perceptions and understandings of the group rather than making general judgments. The participants of the current study consist of a total of five early childhood educators. IPA studies try to create a homogeneous sample. Random sample selection does not contribute much to the study. Instead, selecting a purposive sample is recommended (Smith & Osborne, 2007).
For the current study, three-interview series was used to investigate and understand the experiences of teachers. The semi-structured interview forms created by the researchers consists of three steps with open-ended questions designed to explore the experiences of early childhood teachers. Dolbeare and Schuman (1982) designed the three-interview series to enrich and contextualize the participant’s experience with this approach. The current study was based on some evaluation criteria to ensure trustworthiness. For a qualitative study to be valid and reliable, Lincoln and Guba (1985) emphasize that the confidence in the truth of the findings (credibility), their applicability in different contexts (transferability), their consistency and repeatability (dependability), and their independence from the researcher’s bias, motivation, and interest (confirmability) should be ensured. In this sense, to establish trustworthiness and credibility, researchers spent enough time with them to understand their phenomenon related to observation as a professional tool. So much so that they conducted interviews with them over one month. Lincoln and Guba (1985) called this technique prolonged engagement. Moreover, analyst triangulation (Patton, 1999) is used; thus, three researchers reviewed the findings. These researchers also reflect their understanding of study situations during the analysis (reflexivity).
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsThe proposed research aimed to make sense of teachers’ experiences of using observation as a professional tool. Overall, the study can broaden the current understanding of using observation as a professional tool. In this context, the preliminary findings of the data obtained using IPA demonstrated that teachers experience observation as a decision mechanism for their acts and practices. They use observation for evidence-based practice. On the other hand, teachers stated that they develop their observational understanding according to the dynamics in the classroom. Other preliminary and descriptive analyzes remain to be analyzed. In this way, the research contributes to the assessment literature, especially in early childhood education, by making sense of experiences related to observation as a professional tool.
ReferencesAras, S. (2019). Improving early childhood teachers’ formative assessment practices: Transformative role of collaborative action research. Uluslararası Eğitim Programları ve Öğretim Çalışmaları Dergisi, 9(2), 221–240. https://doi.org/10.31704/ijocis.2019.010
Birkeland, J., Baste, V., & Eriksen Ødegaard, E. (2020). Observation as a professional tool in Norwegian kindergartens and kindergarten teacher education. Cogent Education, 7(1), 1789381. https://doi.org/10.1080/2331186X.2020.1789381
Bruce, T., Louis, S., & McCall, G. (2014). Observing young children. Sage.
Damjanovic, V., & Blank, J. (2018). Building a Professional Learning Community: Teachers’ Documentation of and Reflections on Preschoolers’ Work. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(5), 567–575. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=eric&AN=EJ1185745&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,uid
Dunphy, E. (2010). Assessing early learning through formative assessment: key issues and considerations. Irish Educational Studies, 29(1), 41–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/03323310903522685
Goldhaber, J., & Smith, D. (1997). “You look at things differently:” the role of documentation in the professional development of a campus child care center staff. Early Childhood Education Journal, 25, 3–10. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=eue&AN=507598492&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,uid
Gullo, D. F. (2005). Understanding assessment and evaluation in early childhood education. (2nd ed.). Teachers College Press. https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&AuthType=ip&db=cat06966a&AN=metu.b2016290&site=eds-live&authtype=ip,uid
Hatch, J. A., Grieshaber, S., Halliwell, G., & Walsh, K. (2001). Child Observation in Australia and the USA: A Cross‐National Analysis. Early Child Development and Care, 169(1), 39–56. https://doi.org/10.1080/0300443011690103
MacDonald, M. (2007). Toward formative assessment: The use of pedagogical documentation in early elementary classrooms. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 22(2), 232–242. https://doi.org/https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2006.12.001
Peterson, G., & Elam, E. (2020). Observation and assessment in early childhood education. Zero Textbook Cost.
Seitz, H., & Bartholomew, C. (2008). Powerful Portfolios for Young Children. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(1), 63–68. http://10.0.3.239/s10643-008-0242-7
Wortham, S. C., & Hardin, B. (2019). Assessment in Early Childhood Education (8th ed.). Pearson Education.
99. Emerging Researchers' Group (for presentation at Emerging Researchers' Conference)
Paper
STEM Education In Early Childhood : Investıgatıng Teachers’ Conceptions And Practices
Sebnem Soylu1, Volkan Şahin2
1Abdullah Gul University, Turkiye; 2Middle East Technical University, Turkiye
Presenting Author: Soylu, Sebnem
Purpose of the study and the research questions
In this study, it is aimed to investigate inservice early childhood teachers’ conceptions of STEM education in early childhood and to understand how do they implement STEM activities in their classrooms.
This study aims to investigate and describe the conceptions regarding STEM education and classroom practices of a small group of preschool teachers in Turkey. For this purpose inservice early childhood teachers’ conceptions of STEM education will be investigated through interviews and their implementations will be observed, recorded, and documented.
In addition, it is aimed to reveal the similarities and differences between STEM conceptions and clasroom practices of early childhood teachers working in public and private schools.
Correspondingly with these purposes, the study aimed to respond to the following research questions:
1. What are STEM education conceptions of early childhood teachers working in public schools?
2. What are STEM education practices of early childhood teachers working in public schools?
3. What are STEM education conceptions of early childhood teachers working in private schools?
4. What are STEM education practices of early childhood teachers working in private schools?
5. What are the similarities and/or differences between the STEM education conceptions and practices of teachers working in public and private pre-schools?
Conceptual Framework
In this research it is known that there is no one way of conceptualizing STEM education for early childhood teachers. Although the description of STEM education are varied (Brown et al., 2011; Bybee, 2013; English, 2016; Herschbach, 2011; Johnson, 2012), the definition of STEM conceptualization is defined for this study as, “the ability to identify, apply, and integrate concepts from science, technology, engineering, and mathematics to understand complex problems and to innovate to solve them” (Balka, 2011, p. 7). This definition highlights STEM education as different from traditional learning in two key areas: content integration related to the disciplines of STEM and an approach to innovative problem-solving that we understand as including the use of the 21st Century skills of creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration (Bellanca & Brandt, 2010).
Also STEM education should promote the 21st Century skills which are creativity, critical thinking, communication, and collaboration (Bellanca & Brandt, 2010) and lead to innovative problem-solving in authentic contexts. These skills, along with adaptability, literacy, systems thinking, self-management, and self-development have been identified as supportive of STEM education (National Research Council, 2010). STEM education is then, upholds the idea that teachers who embrace these 21st Century skills as important for student-learning and who use pedagogies that teach them can support the comprehensive thinking required of students in STEM education.
Methodology, Methods, Research Instruments or Sources UsedResearch design:
This study is designed as a qualitative study and multiple case study method is used. The qualitative approach is choosen for the study because it is necessary investigate the STEM education perceptions and the clasroom practices of the teachers in its own nature to uncover its nature. Depending on this need, qualitative methodology would be appropriate for the study. Qualitative research focus on the phenomena in order to collect profound information and detailed description (Merriam, 2009).
Participants and setting of the study :
Merriam (2009) claims that a qualitative inquiry should provide an in-depth description of the setting and the participants of the study. Therefore, the schools that the study will be conducted in and the participants should be well described in order to acknowledge the boundaries and details of the study. The study will be conducted in two public preschool in Kayseri. Both of the public preschools are chosen as the pilot schools for STEM education in Kayseri. The participants of this study will be two teachers from each preschool, preferably teaching 60-72 month-old preschool children. There will be approximately 20 children in each class. All of the teachers have been working in the current schools at least for three years and all of them received in-service training about STEM education and had carried out various activities, projects and collaborations about STEM education.
Conclusions, Expected Outcomes or FindingsSince the study is not yet conducted, we do not have any findings. Proposing expected outcomes will not be appropriate for the qualitative structure of the study.
ReferencesAugustine, N. R. (2005). Rising above the gathering storm: Energizing and employing America for a brighter economic future.
Brown, R., Brown, J., Reardon, K., & Merrill, C. (2011). Understanding STEM: Current perceptions. Technology and Engineering Teacher, 20(6), 5-9.
Bybee, R. W., & Fuchs, B. (2006). Preparing the 21st century workforce: A new
reform in science and technology education. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 43(4), 349-352.
Bybee, R. W. (2010). What is STEM education? Science, 329(5995), 996‐996.
Bybee, R.W. (2013). A case for STEM education. Arlington, VA: NSTA Press.
Creswell, J. W. (2007). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
Fraenkel, J. R., Wallen, N. E., & Hyun, H. H. (2011). How to design and evaluate research in science education. New York: McGraw-Hill
Gelman, R., & Brenneman, K. (2004). Science learning pathways for young children. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(1), 150‐158.
Johnson, C.C. (2012). Four key premises of STEM. School Science and Mathematics,
112(1), 1-2.
Katz, L. G. (2010). STEM in the early years. SEED (STEM in Early Education and Development) Papers. Retrieved from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/beyond/seed/katz.html.
Kelley, T.R., Knowles, J.G. (2016). A conceptual framework for integrated STEM
education. International Journal of STEM Education, 3(11).
Kumtepe, A. T. , Kumtepe, E. G., (2013). STEM in early childhood education: We talk the talk, but do we walk the walk?. In Z. Yang, H. H. Yang, D. Wu, S. Liu (Eds.). Transforming K-12 classrooms with digital technology (pp. 140‐163). Hershey, PA: IGI Global.
Merriam, S.B. (2009). Qualitative research: A guide to design and implementation. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.
Moomaw, S. (2013).Teaching STEM in the early years: Activities for integrating science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. St Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
Nadelson, L. S., Callahan, J., Pyke, P., Hay, A., Dance, M., & Pfiester, J. (2013). Teacher STEM perception and preparation: Inquiry-based STEM professional development for elementary teachers. The Journal of Educational Research, 106(2), 157-168.
|
