A new buzz

There is the curriculum. There is the unwritten curriculum that children hold dear. There is also the null curriculum and the hidden curriculum.

There are all sorts of curriculae.

I think that there is only the relationship between the teacher and the child. And back the other way.

And in this relationship there is also the question of power; to create and to be created.

The closeness of the child to the unwritten hope of the not yet become, that is the place of wordless magic. By this I mean the spirit of the child that seeks other, and can not find the words.

In that moment, i te wairua o te tamariki, is the moment beyond words, in which hope lives, and in which human life becomes other.

Curriculum that encourages the not yet, and the not yet become.

Quinn, S., & Manning, J. (2013). Recognising the ethical implications of the use of photography in early childhood educational settings. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 14(3), 270-278.

This paper is a timely reminder that practices which teachers may find unproblematic (that is, normal practice), may in fact be problematic from an ethical standpoint. Given that photography is widespread in early childhood education, as well as the fact that photos and video are often used in research and reflective practices, the authors point out that there is a need to highlight the ethical component of these practices in order to encourage further consideration amongst teachers.

 

The authors are critical of the power relationships that exist between photographer and photographed, highlighting that there is exploitative potential in terms of who has more and who has less power within this relationship. This article positions photography as a potential source of knowledge and power. There is also potential for photographs to be used as a technology for constructing institutionally sanctioned identities.

 

The goal of most photography in early childhood settings is making learning visible, both for children and for teachers to reflect upon the practice. The use of photography as an invitation to see what is going on places power in the hands of the photographer in terms of how the photograph is constructed, and the elements that are included and excluded. According to the authors, this creates an ethical dilemma. The authors argue for a democratic approach in which motivations are critically engaged and where children’s agency is prioritised.

 

The authors highlight two specific standpoints in relation to photography in early childhood settings: The first is that photographs are a meaningful tool for assessment, and the second is that photographs might also be a tool for control and surveillance – as a mechanism for the normalisation of sanctioned outcomes. This is so because the photographer has power over the construction, but in assessment, they also have power over the interpretation of what is in the photograph.

 

The authors suggest that teachers need to actively consider issues of consent in the use of photography: consent in this regard means consent to be photographed, as well is consent over how the photographs are to be used. The authors point out that although parents give consent, and often blanket consent for photographs to be used, this practice may in fact reflect a loss of agency for children. Questions are posed throughout this article that aim to problematize the non-critical use of photography in early childhood settings, for example, “do all stakeholders (anyone who is photographed or takes photographs) have a voice in determining the meaning of respect, dignity, and inclusivity?” (p. 275).

 

The authors suggest that we need to consider ethics when using photography to articulate learning. They also suggest that there is a need for discussion around how photography serves the best interests of the child, as well as engagement with the wider question over who has the right to determine what those best interests are.

ERO. (2013). Priorities for Children’s Learning in Early Childhood Services. Wellington: Author.

Dr.Bradley's buzz:

This national report accompanies the report entitled Working with Te Whāriki (2013), and is a response in part to the 2011 ECE Taskforce report which recommended that an evaluation of Te Whāriki take place. This report makes use of the curriculum direction that the learning valued in a service should guide planning, implementation, assessment, and self review. The sample size for this report was 387: 17% services were found to be highly effective in identifying priorities for children, 34% had good articulation of priorities but alignment between articulation and assessment needed more work. 24% had minimal reflection of priorities planning and assessment and poor or no alignment between documentation and articulation. 5% had not set priorities. Of this number only 40% considered responsiveness to Māori children is a priority, and a 20% had considered priorities for Pasifika.

ERO’s key recommendations were:

·         learning valued by the service should be visible in assessment information

·         curriculum should be responsive to Māori and Pacific children

·         self review should focus on priorities are realised through the curriculum

The report is broken into several sections identifying effective practice and less effective practice. In terms of identifying priorities for children’s learning, effective practice included: teachers walking the talk, priorities included whānau aspirations, and planning and assessment were clearly linked to identify curriculum priorities. Teachers were up-to-date with research and supported by professional development programs, service priorities were identified through self review and there was a culture of improvement within services. Leaders in these settings promoted a coherent approach to curriculum provision. In settings where there was less effective practice there was often: a lack of purpose, shared understanding, and intent when it came to linking curriculum to practice. Curriculum was largely focused on the provision of resources and activities, children were often viewed from a deficit perspective, and the services were often associated with weak leaders or high staff turnover.

In terms of assessing children’s learning, effective practices included: the principles and strands of Te Whāriki were valued and visible within assessment documentation, assessment informed the curriculum, and assessment showed planned next steps leading to progress over time. In those settings where assessment was less effective, only tentative links were made to the curriculum, there was limited evidence of teacher role in children’s learning progress, and for some, learning priorities had not been identified.

In terms of sharing information about children’s learning, effective practices included: well developed links between the curriculum and priorities for learning, opportunities for parents to contribute were offered and followed up, and assessment documents reflected identify priorities for learning. In those settings where practices were less effective, priorities were often not visible, assessment was not well aligned to strands and goals, assessments were records of things that happened rather than records of learning progression, and in transition to school, the focus was on social competency rather than recognising learning priorities.

In terms of using information about children’s learning, effective practices included: using a highly collaborative structure in evaluation processes, self review was responsive to priorities and linked to the principles and strands of the curriculum, there was a strong alignment between identified priorities, assessment practices, curriculum decisions, self review, and teaching practices. Children’s interests, strengths, and dispositions were used to inform priorities alongside parent aspirations. Less effective practices created self review processes that reinforced poor practice, teachers were not good at reflecting priorities in the practice, or recognising quality.

In terms of responsiveness to Māori children only 14% were found to be responsive, these services included whānau, consulted iwi, and responded in a coherent way to Ka Hikitia and Tātaiako. 25% were found to be partially responsive, 28% were limited in the provision for these children and 26% were found to not be providing a responsive curriculum. In terms of responsiveness to Pacific children only 6% were found to have responsive practices including robust self review, recognising the importance of Pacific Island cultures in practice, developing partnerships, forming relationships, and using external research to inform practice. 15% were found to be partially responsive 21% were limited in the provision for these children, 13% had no awareness of what responsiveness might entail, and 45% had no Pasifika children or strategy.

Education Review Office. (2013). Working with Te Whāriki. Wellington: Author.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This is a key report from the Education Review Office which builds upon the ECE Taskforce’s recommendation that Te Whāriki be evaluated, and the OECD report which found that there is a need to improve the curriculum approach to parental engagement, children’s agency, and strengthening communication and leadership skills. The study included 627 early childhood settings. It was found that 80% of these were making some use of Te Whāriki in planning and assessment documentation, that 10% were working in depth with the document, and that in 10% there was very limited use.

It was also found that in many services aspects of Te Whāriki were highlighted in documentation but those aspects were not often translated into practice. ERO found that the broad interpretation of Te Whāriki sometimes lead to inappropriate practices. There was a general concern over how services were implementing Te Whāriki with many services found not to be using Te Whāriki as a reflective or evaluative tool. These issues were aligned to the fact that Te Whāriki does not provide clear standards of practice. ERO put out a call for services to evaluate the extent to which they are implementing Te Whāriki. They also raise three specific questions:

·         when the curriculum should be reviewed or revised next

·         whether there is clearer alignment between the framework and the regulated standard

·         the implications of having a non-prescriptive curriculum

ERO’s analysis found six particular themes for curriculum use:

·         philosophical curriculum – many services linked philosophical statements to aspects of Te Whāriki however it was also found that there was often a lack of alignment between the philosophical curriculum and practice.

·         Implicit curriculum – many saw Te Whāriki as a given, as ‘what we do’ and therefore implicit. ERO found that where Te Whāriki was treated as implicit there was not always shared understanding of meaning or how it is put into action.

·         Selective curriculum – this treated the framework is a menu to choose from. It was found that the most popular choices were family and community, relationships, well-being, and belonging. Least favourite choices were found to be empowerment, holistic development, exploration, communication, and contribution. There was diversity in the extent to which the principles and strands were integrated into programs. Learning outcomes were far less evident than principles and strands.

·         Reference point – Te Whāriki could often be seen in artefacts around the setting, the document was often referenced in paperwork but far less observable in practice. For most services there was little evidence of principles and strands being used in assessment and planning documentation. ERO point out is that referencing curriculum does not necessarily equate to implementation.

·         Basis for bicultural curriculum – ERO found that across this sample teachers knew that Te Whāriki is a bicultural curriculum however there was little evidence that this was well understood particularly as a translated into action.

·         Basis for evaluation of curriculum – it was found that very few services used Te Whāriki to evaluate their curriculum or the learning program. There was also a need for ongoing review of how responsive service’s curriculum as to changing communities and changing needs within the community.

In the discussion, ERO point out is that the absence of a prescribed framework may have weakened the link between teaching programs and the principles and strands of Te Whāriki. They thought that perhaps Te Whāriki is too familiar and therefore possibly lacked the challenge for teaching teams. That said, ERO commented that although teachers knew the principles and strands they were not necessarily familiar with the whole document itself. ERO propose that more support and guidance may be needed to improve implementation, to work with goals and outcomes, and to enhance bicultural provision.

On the whole, this is a rather damning report which points to the fact that early childhood education in New Zealand has become complacent and has drifted away from the curriculum framework as a document to guide practice. I suggest that this report is the first step in the review and revision of our curriculum framework.

Brown, A., & Inglis, S. (2013). So what happens after the event? Exploring the realisation of professional development with early childhood educators. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(1), 11-15.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This paper reports on a case study carried out in Australia with four early childhood teachers. The article investigates supports and barriers to the effectiveness professional development (PD) in changing practice, based on the premise that PD can improve teacher skills and enhance outcomes for children. One of the key points that this article makes is that the quality of PD is not measured in simply attending a course or workshop, but rather is in the on-going change that occurs within early childhood settings afterward.

The key findings of this research were: that being able to directly relate the information given in the PD to the lived experience of teaching was highly important for generating change. This was enhanced by on-going teacher experimentation and subsequent reflection on the effects of the PD within particular early childhood settings. Another finding was that teachers often gauged the value of PD programme by the visible effect it had on children and their behaviour. Sharing the positive outcomes of the PD with others in the setting was found to reinforce the value of the changes that were made to practice, and encourage further reflection. Similarly sharing ideas with parents enhanced parent/child relationships as a result.

Having a supportive management added to the effect of the PD, and having other team members at the PD raised perceptions of support. Successful change as a result of the PD was highly linked to having local mentors who acted as enablers, and help to identify key priorities that arose from the PD rather than applying everything that had been learnt. Concentrating on one priority at a time was found to be important for on-going development.

One key barrier to the effectiveness of PD was in finding time to talk with the mentors and connect to others in the busy life of the centre. It was found in regular time to discuss ideas that arose from the PD, and as well as ideas that had subsequently risen from practice was vital. Reflective discussion on changes to teaching practice was found to be a key reinforcer for changes in practice. It was highlighted that change after PD is a slow process and that is important to recognise that understandings are grasped through practice over time.

The article ends by suggesting three phases of capacity building within early childhood services:

1.       PD is actively prioritised within the service

2.       Teachers and managers attend relevant PD

3.       On-going support is provided to explore ideas arising from the PD as they are put into practice

Blaiklock, K. (2013). What are children learning in early childhood education in New Zealand? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(2), 51-56.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

In this latest instalment of his critical approach, Blaiklock constructs an argument around the proposition that we do not know what children are learning in early childhood education in New Zealand. To achieve this argument he looks at curriculum, assessment, Education Review Office data, and Ministry funded education projects. His approach is to undermine certainty and validity of each of these sources to make the following comments:

·         For curriculum, this document is largely unevaluated and is limited in two particular ways – in the framing of learning goals and outcomes there is a lack of recognition of developmental change between zero and five, and there is a lack of guidance around learning and outcomes, which is in turn derived from a lack of benchmarking in a perspective that allows that “each early childhood setting will develop its own emphasis and priorities” (Min. Ed., 1996, p. 44).

·         For assessment, individual teachers and individual settings may decide what to assess and what not to assess – this means that there is no clear requirement to assess particular areas of children’s learning. Without gathering empirical data across multiple learning areas Blaiklock points out that it is not possible to know what children are learning in early children settings. He highlights the learning stories approach to assessment as one that is unclear on this links between behaviour and dispositions, as one that is devoid of discussion of developmental changes in relation to dispositions, and as one that is largely untested and therefore questionable both in terms of validity and empirical effectiveness.

·         For ERO, given the lack of empirical evidence on the effectiveness of learning stories Blaiklock points out that ERO, in its function as an independent watchdog, is failing to highlight learning outcomes for children. In the reports produced by ERO, learning stories are the main source of data on children’s learning, given that their effectiveness is questionable, he points out that it is difficult to ascertain whether learning that occurs is a result of the programme or of the home or other environments.

·         For Ministry funded research projects, Blaiklock looks at the Centre of Innovation (COI) projects and the Teaching and Learning Research Initiative (TLRI). In both cases he provides evidence that neither project focuses on what children are learning in early childhood settings. In the case of the former he points out that there is no evidence that changes in teaching practice have an effect on changes in learning outcomes in multiple settings.

This article makes the point that more evidence of what children are learning in early childhood is needed. Blaiklock suggests that we need to move beyond hope to certainty and identifies that the adoption of international assessment tools might help in the drive toward more validity of assessment within the early childhood sector in New Zealand.

Alcock, S. (2013). Toddlers’ complex communication: playfulness from a secure base. Contemporary issues in early childhood, 14(2), 179-190.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This article focuses on the interface between attachment theory and sociocultural activity theory. Attachment processes are seen as a complex of relationships and interactions between human beings and between human beings and their environment. Within this framework teachers have a key responsibility to create reciprocal learning environments that engage children in both action and word/thought. Opportunities to co-create are linked to improved well-being.

The article frames attachment as something that is embodied, intersubjective, and socially connected, highlighting the importance of physicality and inventiveness to attachment. This article is about the nature of attachment processes rather than the use of more traditional attachment categories. The author suggests that perhaps intersubjectivity and interconnectedness are good synonyms to convey the idea of attachment in early childhood settings. The notion of an independent self is challenged by the idea that through playing together children come to recognise a self that is essentially relational.

The author understands “attachment concepts as fluid states of being and feeling, located within interconnecting systems of activity.” The body of the article consists of observational data which is reinterpreted through the authors understanding of attachment as an embedded in embodied activity. Within this understanding, teachers act as mediators, facilitators, and agents who enable and strengthen interconnectedness. Objects within the environment are seen as affordances which merge bodies and contexts with the key insight being that the self is distributed rather than segregated. Teachers are encouraged to initiate relationships to enhance attachment, which the author sees as bodies and minds connected through play, to ask the question – how do we create good enough spaces to encourage attachment as a social activity?

Chu, M. (2012). Observe, reflect, and apply: ways to successfully mentor early childhood educators. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 40(3), 20-28.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This article looks at some of the strategies that make a mentoring relationship effective. The authors define the goal of mentoring as being “to connect effective strategies to teacher’s actual interactions with young children.” The focus of this article is on developing a research based practice for mentoring new or inexperienced teachers. They point out that effective professional development should be on-going, self-assessing, and associated with specific criteria. The authors point out that one off professional development is not useful for making lasting change to practice.

The authors take a humanistic approach to mentoring, identifying a process that begins with building trust. Having a supportive relationship with a focus on listening is seen as highly important. According to the authors, mentors “are most effective when they ask open-ended questions, listen, and employ a circle of enquiry.” The circle of enquiry is: observe (document), reflect (make meaning of), and apply (to teaching practice).

Key to this approach as a collaborative relationship which is built on empathy, shared problem-solving, and co-learning with a focus on identifying issues rather than giving lectures. The authors hold that a corrective approach is less likely to inspire meaningful change. Mentors are encouraged to engage teachers, and think about change and the reasons for change before taking action, this can be achieved through open-ended questions and active listening. By encouraging teachers to develop their own questions, mentors are able to ensure buy in for the process and direct those questions toward teaching practice. Mentors also need to encourage documentation.

The authors contend that introducing a process (the circle of enquiry) rather than providing information to answer the question allows teachers to develop their own problem-solving skills. Another role of the mentor, once the relationship has been established, is to find the gaps that prevent forward movement, as well as to link the teacher to other relevant professional development. Furthermore, mentors need to reflect on their own progress in order to move from a purely intuitive to an intentional practice. This approach to mentoring involves mentor self-knowledge with the upshot of that mentors are role modelling the circle of enquiry in their own practice.

Hedges, H., & Jones, S. (2012). Children’s working theories: the neglected sibling of Te Whāriki’s learning outcomes. Early Childhood Folio, 16(1), 34-39.

This article aims to provide a working definition of working theories so that teachers may use this definition to inform their practice. It is also an article which acts as an introduction to a larger research project on working theories. The authors begin by noting that there are two outcomes in Te Whāriki: dispositions and working theories. They note that the former has had plenty of attention but the latter has no operational definition.

The authors claim there is very little focus of working theories in initial teacher education, and that teacher understandings are generally intuitive and difficult to articulate. They point out that teachers often use children’s exploration as a means of describing what they mean by working theory. For this reason the authors believe it is necessary to construct a theory to support understanding and articulation.

The idea of learning theories borrows from Claxton’s neo Piagetian idea of minitheories, whereby children and adults seek to construct personal meaning. The authors claim that using a sociocultural lens can further complexify this notion of meaning making. To do this the authors identify six themes of working theory from a sociocultural perspective:

1.       Working theories developed through intentional observations and practice of the outcomes of those observations. For example, how friends look after each other.

2.       Working theories are developed through children being together and become the foundation of later learning. For example, children playing McDonalds links to understandings of commerce.

3.       Working theories are developed through social negotiation as children come to understand one another.

4.       Working theories are driven by the need to make sense of the world and are strongly linked to collaborations in learning.

5.       Working theories require active engagement with others.

6.       Working theories are treated by intellectual curiosity and as a curriculum event was clearly linked to thinking in the school curriculum.

This article puts a sociocultural lens on the notion of working theories providing the following definition “the evolving ideas and understanding is formulated by children as they participate in their family, community and cultural lives and engage with others.” My own suspicion is that this definition is not clear in itself, but rather a reworking of Vygotsky’s objections to Piaget. It will be interesting to see how this project develops.

Underwood, K., Valeo, A., & Wood. R. (2012). Understanding inclusive early childhood education: a capability approach. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 13 (4), 290-299).

This article explores how a capability approach to understanding inclusion can be applied to early childhood settings. Inclusion is defined as activity that promotes equitable outcomes. Equity is not cast as simply a matter of access, it also includes support and individual responsivity. The capability approach “emphasises that each person has capabilities that are individually defined by that which they value” (p. 291). This article sets out a theoretical framework for taking a capability approach to inclusion of children with diverse learning needs.

The capability approach entails three key concepts: capabilities – actions and states valued by the individual; functionings – capabilities that have been realised by the individual; and, differences – how an individual converts capabilities into functionings. “Acknowledgement of the range of experiences and individual characteristics of children with disabilities is an important starting point to understandings inclusive education” (p. 292). These definitions, and the pedagogical thrust, circulate an important question – how do we find out about the capabilities of diverse learners in our settings? The authors are clear that inclusion is as much about achieving the goals of individual children as it is about giving equal access to early childhood settings.

Some of the issues for early childhood teachers come in the form of young children not being able to articulate what they value. This is a problem for an early childhood education that is charged with “preparing children for later educational experiences or enhancing their developmental trajectory” (p. 293). So how then do teachers recognise the capabilities of all children? What do you do?

Dr Bradley's buzz:

The authors point to a central tension in inclusive education: how do teachers balance early intervention with the right to be different? Or put another way, how do ‘special’ differences differ from the ‘normal differences’ of a child’s culture? (My own interpretation of the problem posed). The answer put forward is simple – all children must be acknowledged for their own individual capabilities, whatever they may be. The authors state that this takes effort on the part of educators, specifically, it entails educators taking a non-deficit, pluralistic approach to capability. The challenge here is for teachers to reflect not only on their practice (behaviours) but also the motivation of that practice (assumptions on capability).

The three common principles of international reviews on inclusive education are: that instruction must be individualised; that instruction must occur across settings; and, that practice requires systemic support (e.g., policy etc). Each of these principles are shown to be consistent with the capability approach to inclusion (the approach that focuses on individual definitions of capabilities that are valued).

For the teacher, this article amounts to a challenge. It is a challenge to drop the schematic tool of knowing where a child should be in favour of knowing where a child wants to be, on their terms. There is much detail that I have missed in defending these propositions, but the article itself is a very engaging read. It is well worth a look.

Moore, M., & Hall, S. (2012). Listening and comprehension at story time: how to build habits of the mind. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 40, 2, 24-31.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This article makes the point that understanding is an active process and that storytime is a key time for building strong habits of mind. Key habits of mind are noted as: being able to attend to what is important in the story, being able to anticipate what comes next, and being able to build meaning from a collection of details. These habits of mind combine the dispostion to engage with the story with the skill of being able to make sense.

These authors describe comprehension as an act of meaning making, and point out that learning to listen and build understanding leads naturally to formal reading. The authors offer several strategies to teachers:

1. Teaching children about the structure of stories (cover, page numbers, beginning, middle, end, author etc.) is an important facet of early literacy.

2. Breaking down pictures by asking questions about setting, characters, activities helps children to make sense of scenes.

3. It is useful for teachers to introduce new vocabulary before the story and lead discussion on meaning and what it means to children. Then ask questions about pictures that allows children to use practice using that vocabulary.

4. Most stories revolve around the main character encountering some sort of problem and then solving the problem. Working with children on identifying the problems and brainstorming or recognising solutions is a good way of engaging them in the story.

5. Begin with the cover of the book and get children to make predictions about what they think the book will be about and what will happen.

6. Asking meaningful questions about the picture (e.g., what is going on here? or, do you have one of these at home?) can help unpack the symbols in the picture as well as link to prior knowledge and working theories.

7. Graphic organisers like T-charts (http://www.enchantedlearning.com/graphicorganizers/tchart/) are useful to extend learning - it also provides a tool that links to numeracy. Venn diagrams and story timelines can also support understanding of characters and the way a story unfolds.

This is a very useful practitioner directed article that aims to give teachers practical skills for developing comprehension in group reading situations.

Shin, M. (2012). The role of joint attention in social communication and play among infants. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 10(3), 309-317.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This article identifies a gap in the literature when it comes to infant peer communication. The author's focus is on non-verbal social play, noting that there is a great deal of research on adult-infant interactions, but very little on infant-infant interactions.

The research took place in New York City over the course of a semester, and it involved 8 infants (4 boys, 4 girls) between the age of 6 weeks and 25 months.

The researcher found that infants began to engage in social interactions at around 9 months of age. She found that gazing, and being able to hold one another's gaze was the foundation of early social play. This gaze meeting then developed into gaze following as infants began to understand the intention behind the gaze of the other (e.g., looking over at a ball together).

Pointing was found to be object oriented but the researcher found that the children in her study were more interested in the other infant's interaction with the object rather than the object itself. Two types of pointing interactions were noted: pointing that is imperitative (e.g., requesting and object), and point that is declarative (e.g., drawing the other's attention to the object). In this study gesture was strongly linked to social play.

Conflict was also shown to take a positive role in social play. Although struggles were often over the ownership of objects and could lead to the end of the interaction, it was found that over time infant's strategies changed. This suggests that conflict can be a powerful tool for social learning leading to compromise and engagement.

These findings suggest that active observation is also a form of active participation in social relationships. The author points out that infants are highly capable of shared understanding long before they gain the ability to use verbal language. The upshot of this article is that infant caregivers need to be sensitive to the multiple meanings of behaviour, especially when it comes to the development of social communication.

Dunn, J., & Stinson, M. (2012). Learning through emotion: moving the affective in from the margins. International Journal of Early Childhood, 44, 203-218.

Dr Bradley's buzz:

This article looks at a drama programme introduced to children between the ages 6.5-7.6 in a small Australian school. It takes a case study approach gathering data from observations, child made artefacts and researcher reflections.

The authors highlight an increasing focus on testing that is leading to the further disappearance of emotional competence in the early years. The strong link between emotional engagement and brain development (particularly memory) is identified, and the idea of process drama as a means of developing emotional inteligence is put forward.

Process drama involves children and teachers pretending together in teacher led pretexts (such as a particular story or set of events). Children draw on their own lived experience to empathise with the situations that characters find themselves in (e.g., Goldilocks doing something she shouldn't and being caught). Through process drama children are able to engage their imagination to construct emotional empathy with others, as well as work through their own emotions and model different forms of expression. According to the authors, emotions allow children to explore the space between fiction and reality. Process drama offers a way for children to do so in a safe and supported manner.

The authors argue that when children begin to identify with characters they are developing the ability to identify with others and how they are feeling - this in turn is a powerful tool for the development of social competence. The article goes on to report on a particular event where children act out parts in a researcher constructed story. Much of the data in the article is derived from researcher reflections but there were also some good ideas about linking domains such as art, literacy, and technology to the dramatic experience. This reminded me a little of a project approach.

Children's interactions in the story, their engagement with themes and their developing empathy with the characters were well reported. I thought that the article looked a little like an entry in a reflective journal, but it provided a good articulation of the impact of emotional state on subsequent thinking, speaking and writing/drawing. I would have liked to see a gender break down as the project and its framing on relationship, verbal articulation and empathy may have engaged girls more than boys. It may not have, but it would have been nice to know.

Carter, D., & Pool, J. (2012). Appropriate social behaviour: teaching expectations to young children. Early Childhood Journal, 40, 315-321.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This article does not muck around when it comes to behaviour guidance. The approach taken is teacher led and not really inclusive, but it could be modified to include children as agents in the development of positive behavioural expectations.

The programme reported on is Positive Behaviour Interventions and Supports. The programme is designed as a method of systematically teaching appropriate behaviour, but it also creates a shared language that teachers and parents can use to discuss challenging behaviour. The key to the programme is consistency and predictability - which is similar to most behaviour modification programmes.

There are three phases of the programme: creating support links with parents and caregivers, explicit instruction of social skills, and individualised intervention when needed.

Once a reciprocal relationship has been built with parents/caregivers the programme begins with the definition of expections. This is split into two steps: step one involves creating broad expections in a language children can understand e.g., 'we take care of each other.' There should be no more than 5 expectations. The second step involves providing examples of what the expectation looks like in different settings or routine times, as well as examples of what not meeting the expectation looks like. Teachers can then draw up a behaviour expectation matrix which lists what expectations look like in practice.

Teachers then devise specific lessons for each part of the matrix. When teaching, it is best to move into the setting to give instruction. The article then introduces a four step approach to teaching behaviour expectations: "1. Tell children what the expectation is, what it looks like and why it is important. 2. Show children what it looks like to display the expectation in the target setting or routine and what it looks like to not meet the expectation. 3. Create opportunities for children to practice implementing the expectation in the target setting or routine. 4. Provide feedback to children for both meeting the expectation and not meeting the expectation in natural contexts" (Carter & Pool, 2012, p. 318.

This article was an easy read aimed at providing a structure for the intentional teaching of behavioural expectations. It challenges early childhood teachers to formulate lesson plans around behaviour modification but also reiterates throughout that consistency is the key.

Gross, C. (2012). Science concepts young children learn through water play. Dimensions of Early Childhood, 40 (2), 3-11.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This is a fantastic practice focused resource that offers language and concept for learning through water play. It builds on children's natural curiousity and interest in water and goes beyond the initial pouring schema that occupies many children from the outset. The overall theme of this article is that - play IS investigation.

This article highlights the links between water play and physics (flow, motion), chemistry (solutions), biology (plant, animal life) and mathematics (measurement, volume). Science is defined as an activity where children can build their ideas of the world through a process of experimentation and revisitation. Examples of scientific enquiries with water include: how and where puddles form; how to make whirlpools; how a drop of water behaves on different surfaces.

Teachers are encouraged to facilitate science through providing materials, encouraging observation, prediction, description and theorising. Teachers can also encourage thinking by posing problems or asking questions. Other things teachers can do are creating time and space for exploration, using the environment as the third teacher, engaging children in meaningful conversation, and documenting and assessing children's progress.

The article then links science concepts with common play themes:

For sinking and floating
Concept = buoyancy   Method = choosing different items   Question = why do you think that happened?

Concept = displacement   Method = make a small boat and predict how many items it will take to fill and capsize it    Question = What happened to the water when the boat sank?

For bubbles
Concept = sphere    Method = make bubbles with different objects     Question = what kind of shaped bubble do you think the object will make?

Concept = dissolve    Method = provide a variety of ingredients for children to mix with water    Question = Where did the mixed item go?

For solutions
Concept = suspension   Method = fill containers with oil, vinegar, water and mix in different ingredients   Question = Why do you think that some mix and some don't mix?

Concept = absorption    Method = use mops, sponges, paper towels to mop up water   Question = Which one do you think will hold the most water?

Children are also cited as learning valuable social skills from water play - concentration, turn-taking, self-regualtion, collaboration, as well as key physical skills - precision in puring, hand-eye coordination, balance and building muscle strength.

This article has many other ideas to bring science alive, as well as many other scientific concepts, and is an excellent resource for teachers who wish to extend and build upon science and scientific understandings.

Duhn. I. (2012). Places for pedagogies, pedagogies for places. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 13 (2), 99-107.

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This is a bit more of a theoretical paper. In it Duhn argues for a post-humanist perspective on early childhood studies. What this means is the development of a perspective on place that includes the non-human world of animals, insects and inanimate objects.

Duhn begins with the idea that space is a socially constructed concept before moving on to say that 'place' is often taken to mean 'human space' as opposed to 'wilderness' which is the space we share with the non-human. Duhn advances the idea of 'assemblage' as a way of talking about early childhood spaces as an intersection between human and non-human worlds.

She gives the example of an interaction between children where a table, the child and the water trough feature as key participants in the learning experience. She makes two key points in relation to these assemblages - place enables the formation of identity. This is important as children grow to be custodians of no only the human but also non-human worlds. There is therefore an ethical advantage of viewing space from the post-humanist perspecive.

The other point that Duhn encourages is viewing children not simply as individuals, or as individuals within the complex web of social settings, but to view them as entangled in relationships with the human and the non-human world.

This article is a good example of theory-making in the hope that people might begin to critically reflect on how they think of place and the social and historical reasons for that perspective, whilst opening the door to ideas of place that supercede the mere social.

For teachers this article is a challenge that asks 'just what does it mean to belong to a place? What does contribution to that place look like, and who is able to contribute? And, how is the non-human world percieved and how does that perception favour a social, rather than an integrated human/non-human perspective on place?

Danby, Thompson, Theobald, Thorpe (2012). Children's strategies for making friends when starting school

Dr. Bradley's buzz:

This article offers a sociological perspective on transitioning to school, making the point that children are agents, that there is little research on children's perspectives of the transition, and that making friends is key to a successful transition.

Children who transition with or into friendships have more success in longterm outcomes, and enjoy school more than children who do not. This study takes place in Queensland Australia and uses data collected from 162 participants using video recording, children drawings, and recordings of small group conversations. Researchers aimed to identify children's interpretations of how they made friends.

This study found that children made friends in three key ways: through making requests of others, through engaging in shared activities (sometimes instigating those activities), and intervening to include those that appeared to be alone. Overall the children in the study highlighted that making friend is complex and time consuming.

The implications of this study for educators is that children tended to make friends on their own terms, outside the influence of the teacher; schools need to provide time and space for friendships to emerge, particularly early on in the transition; schools need to provide unstructured time and recognise that having a friend to play with is key to a good transition from a child's perspective.

This article challenges the New Zealand culture of sending children to school on their five birthday. It suggests that children transitioning with a group of peers is more beneficial to educational success than children transitioning alone.

What its all about

Kia ora, hi there.

This blog is about education, well, it is about educational research. It is my take on some of recent articles that have found their way into publication.