Beruflich Dokumente
Kultur Dokumente
CONCERNS HAVE BEEN RAISED about science education in early childhood settings. A revised
Introduction
Researchers have raised questions about the quality of
science education in early childhood (EC) settings (Fleer
& Pramling, 2015). There is consensus that EC educators
competence and confidence to teach science could be
enhanced by strengthening their pedagogical and content
knowledge (Fleer, 2010). It is surprising, therefore, that
although Shulmans (1986) conception of pedagogical
content knowledge (PCK) has been widely used in
educational research, it has rarely been used in studies
of EC science education. This paper seeks to open up
discussion about EC educators PCK in science education
by reporting on an investigation into the ways in which
20 New Zealand EC educators provided science learning
experiences in their centres.
The paper comprises three parts. It begins with an
explanation of PCK as an amalgam of content, pedagogical
and contextual knowledge, and its subsequent modification
by Cochran, DeRuiter and King (1993) that is referred to
as pedagogical content knowing (PCKg). Next, we review
several empirical studies about educators science
pedagogy in EC settings. We then report on our own
investigation.
50
51
Research design
The research was undertaken through a qualitative,
interpretive mode of inquiry with a case study approach
(Denzin & Lincoln, 2011). This interpretive mode of inquiry
placed importance on context-bound understandings.
Fieldwork visits and conducting an individual interview
with each educator on-site, alongside teacher verification
of interview transcripts, enhanced the dependability
of interpretations (Warren & Karner, 2010). It was not
expected that the research findings would be directly
applicable to other settings since this research was an
in-depth case study. Instead it aimed to enable readers to
determine whether or not the findings of the research were
useful or relevant to their own or other contexts (Merriam,
2009). An institutional ethics committee approved the
study and ethical principles of voluntary participation,
informed consent and confidentiality were followed at all
times. Accordingly, all names used are pseudonyms.
Research site
This study was conducted at two privately owned EC
education and care settings located in Auckland. Centre A
was located in a residential urban location. The centre was
licensed to provide full-day education and care for 78 children
at a time, including up to 24 children aged three months to
two years. Centre B was located in an urban location and
was licensed for 50 children at one time, including up to
eight children aged three months to two years. Both centres
were run by the same management and shared the same
philosophy. Educators from both centres gathered formally
as a team approximately once a month to discuss teaching,
learning and general centre-related issues. A description of
the participants is provided in Table 1.
Vo l u m e 4 1 N u m b e r 2 J u n e 2 0 1 6
53
Centre
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
B
Qualified
Educator
Degree/
role in the
Diploma
centre
Bachelor Degree Manager
Bachelor Degree
Over 2
Bachelor Degree
Over 2
Bachelor Degree
Over 2
Bachelor Degree Under 2
Bachelor Degree
Over 2
Bachelor Degree
Over 2
Diploma
Over 2
Diploma
Over 2
Diploma
Under 2
Diploma
Over 2
In training
Under 2
Bachelor Degree Manager
Bachelor Degree
Over 2
Diploma
Under 2
Diploma
Over 2
Diploma
Over 2
Diploma
Over 2
Diploma
Under 2
In training
Over 2
Data-gathering methods
The data was collected over six months through
semi-structured interviews, observational field notes and
centre documents such as the centre policy folder, learning
and teaching stories and portfolios of educators planning
and evaluations. Twenty individual educator interviews
were conducted, with each lasting between 40 minutes to
one hour. Twelve field visits of approximately four hours per
centre were made, and 380 photos of centre documentary
data were collected. Interviews were transcribed verbatim,
field notes were documented, photos collated and all data
was then thematically analysed.
Findings
As discussed above, Cochran et al.s (1993) PCKg
framework was used to analyse the data collected. The
educators beliefs and understandings are presented as four
themes reflecting the four components of Cochran et al.s
(1993) PCKg model. First, an analysis of these educators
understandings about the role of content knowledge is
presented. Second, educators understandings of the
pedagogy they employ are provided. Third, evidence of
ways in which educators accessed knowledge about their
learners is given. Finally, an analysis of their understandings
of the context in which learning takes place is discussed.
54
Content knowledge
When asked about the role of content knowledge in
childrens science learning, four Centre A educators and
two from Centre B thought that having science content
knowledge was important to childrens learning. For
example, Kathy (Centre B) recognised the importance of
science content knowledge and its place in developing
childrens thinking:
Learning is always about our content knowledge
The teachers with more content knowledge could be
more open to find out about childrens learning and
probe what the children are thinking.
Although six educators provided insights into the place of
science content knowledge in childrens science learning,
their voices seemed contrary to that of the majority of
educators in both centres. Seven educators in Centre A
and seven in Centre B agreed that science education in the
early years should focus on process rather than content.
Vinnys comment exemplified this viewpoint:
At this age we have to concentrate only on the process
... instead of abstract concepts or content.
Fran agreed. She was concerned that too much content
knowledge would destroy childrens urge to explore and
the holistic nature of their learning, a view echoed in the
centre's philosophy statement:
We dont need to focus on the heavy science content,
such a focus on content will damage childrens natural
urge to explore the environment and interrupt their
holistic development.
Despite these references to the place of content knowledge
in EC science education, many of the educators in the
study commented on their own lack of content knowledge.
Shinnys remarks were representative of this stance:
I dont have much knowledge in science as I said I was
not keen on science.
Knowledge of pedagogy
In line with the dominant pedagogy of current EC practice
(Wood, 2009), all educators in Centre A and B identified
that they used a play-based approach for teaching science
in their centres. Gayes response was representative
and she stated that minimum intervention by the
educators provided children with opportunities to explore
independently:
Free play could offer children infinite freedom and
opportunities to explore.
It was evident from educators responses that the
centre philosophy strongly influenced their pedagogy.
For example, the centre philosophy stated that:
We value that children play to learn and therefore need
long periods of uninterrupted time to do this.
Vo l u m e 4 1 N u m b e r 2 J u n e 2 0 1 6
55
Discussion
This research has investigated how a PCKg model can
illustrate the ways in which a group of New Zealand
EC educators offered affordances for childrens science
learning. The findings revealed that the use of the PCKg
model enabled the researchers to unpick these educators
pedagogy and examine how the educators used each of
the four PCKg components.
When considering these educators knowledge of the
context for learning, the use of the PCKg model showed
that they provided a resource-rich play environment for their
children, a finding similar to Tu (2006), with an emphasis
on natural resources. In addition, these educators took
advantage of the plentiful funds of knowledge available in
their community. However, centre documentation revealed
that these educators did not capitalise on the resource-rich
environment or community funds of knowledge with which
to build childrens scientific understandings. Their espoused
belief in a hands-off play pedagogy resulted in them having
little scientifically meaningful interaction with the children
as they explored the resources and environment, and
participated in the community partnership projects.
Another component is an educators content knowledge.
The majority of these educators expressed the belief that
using too much content knowledge would interfere with
childrens natural exploration of the environment. The
centres philosophy articulated by management confirmed
this belief that content knowledge was not an important
56
Acknowledgements
Special thanks go to the educators who participated in this
study. Sincere appreciation is noted to Professor Jennifer
Sumsion and Dr Brent Mawson for their attentive critique
and advice.
References
Barnett, J., & Hodson, D. (2001). Pedagogical context knowledge:
Toward a fuller understanding of what good science teachers
know. Science Education, 85(4), 426453.
Bulunuz, M. (2012). Developing Turkish preservice preschool
teachers attitudes and understanding about teaching science
through play. International Journal of Environmental and Science
Education, 7(2), 141166.
Cheng, P. W. D., & Stimpson, P. (2004). Articulating contrasts in
preschool teachers implicit knolwedge on play-based learning.
International Journal of Educational Research, 41(45), 339352.
Cochran, K., DeRuiter, J., & King, R. (1993). Pedagogical content
knowing: An integrative model for teacher preparation. Journal of
Teacher Education, 44(4), 263272.
Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (Eds.). (2011). The SAGE handbook
of qualitative research (4th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage
Publications.
Epstein, A. S. (2007). The intentional teacher: Choosing the best
strategies for young childrens learning. Washington, DC: National
Association for the Education of Young Children.
Fleer, M. (2010). Early learning and development: Culturalhistorical
concepts in play. Melbourne: Cambridge University Press.
Fleer, M. (2013). Play in the early years. Port Melbourne: Cambridge
University Press.
Fleer, M., & Pramling, N. (2015). A culturalhistorical study of
children learning science: Foregrounding affective imagination in
play-based settings. Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Springer.
Garbett, D. (2003). Science education in early childhood teacher
education: Putting forward a case to enhance student teachers
confidence and competence. Research in Science Education,
33(4), 467481.
Gess-Newsome, J. (1999). Pedagogical content knowledge:
An introduction and orientation. In J. Gess-Newsome & N. G.
Lederman (Eds.), Examining pedagogical content knowledge: PCK
and science education (pp. 317). Dordrecht, The Netherlands:
Kluwer.
Hedges, H. (2003). Avoiding magical thinking in children: The
case for teachers science subject knowledge. Early Childhood
Folio, 7, 27.
Hedges, H. (2005). I will see more because I am bigger. Primary
Science Review, 88, 1315.
Vo l u m e 4 1 N u m b e r 2 J u n e 2 0 1 6
57
58