Enabling creativity and inquiry in early years, Fani Stylianidou
•Als PPTX, PDF herunterladen•
1 gefällt mir•1,355 views
Presentation from the 2nd Scientix Conference, 24-26 Ocotober 2014, Brussels, Belgium
Empfohlen
Empfohlen
Weitere ähnliche Inhalte
Was ist angesagt?
Was ist angesagt? (20)
Andere mochten auch
Ähnlich wie Enabling creativity and inquiry in early years, Fani Stylianidou
Ähnlich wie Enabling creativity and inquiry in early years, Fani Stylianidou (20)
Mehr von Brussels, Belgium
Mehr von Brussels, Belgium (20)
Kürzlich hochgeladen
Kürzlich hochgeladen (20)
Enabling creativity and inquiry in early years, Fani Stylianidou
- 1. Enabling Creativity and Inquiry in Early Years Fani Stylianidou Ellinogermaniki Agogi, Greece.
- 2. Presentation outline • Background to the ‘Creative Little Scientists’ project (EU/FP7, 2011-2014) • What do we mean by creativity in early years science and mathematics? • Potential for creativity and inquiry in practice – Findings from fieldwork in schools • Implications – practices and teacher education. 2
- 3. Background to the project Context • Rationale for science education • Changing perspectives on young children • Aims for science education in the early years Importance of early years science • Perspectives on science development and learning • Role of the teacher – environment, scaffolding • Assessment – new roles and priorities New insights into learning and teaching • Challenges of inquiry-based approaches • Beyond the rhetoric of creativity – reviewing potential • Changing policy climate across Europe Issues in policy and practice 3
- 4. Background to the project Research Questions 1. How are the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years in the partner countries conceptualised by teachers and policy? What role if any does creativity play in these? 2. What approaches are used in the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years in the partner countries? What role if any does creativity play in these? 3. In what ways do these approaches seek to foster young children’s learning and motivation in science and mathematics? How do teachers perceive their role in doing so? 4. How can findings emerging from analysis in relation to questions 1-3 inform the development of practice in the classroom and in teacher education (Initial Teacher Education and Continuing Professional Development)?
- 5. Background to the project Project Partners 5
- 6. Background to the project Project Processes Conceptual framework Research Questions List of Mapping and Comparison Factors Policy and teacher surveys Comparative Report Report of practices: Fieldwork in schools Guidelines for teacher training Exemplary training materials Final Report & Recommend ations 6
- 7. Conceptual Framework Creativity in early science and mathematics
- 8. Conceptual Framework Synergies between Inquiry-Based and Creative Approaches • Play and exploration • Motivation and affect • Dialogue and collaboration • Problem solving and agency • Questioning and curiosity • Reflection and reasoning • Teacher scaffolding and involvement • Assessment for learning
- 9. Conceptual Framework Strands Strands and dimensions from the Conceptual Framework (1) Dimensions linked to Curriculum Components ‘The vulnerable spider web’ van den Akker (2010) Aims /Purpose/Priorities Rationale or vision: Why are children learning? Methodology Aims and Objectives: Toward which goals are children learning? Teaching, learning and assessment Learning activities: How are children learning? Pedagogy: How is the teacher facilitating learning? Assessment: How to measure how far children’s learning has progressed?
- 10. Methodology Strands and dimensions from the Conceptual Framework (2) Conceptual Framework Strands Dimensions Contextual factors Content: What are children learning? Location: Where are children learning? Materials and resources: With what are children learning? Time: When are children learning? Grouping: With whom are children learning? Contextual factors TEACHERS Teacher Personal Characteristics Teacher General Education and Training Teacher Science and Mathematics Knowledge, Skills and Confidence Initial teacher training Continuing Professional Development
- 11. Methodology Fieldwork Data collection and analysis Wider site context Case pedagogical context • Policy, planning, assessment documents, resources, map of the space. Case observation of pedagogical interaction and outcomes • Core Instruments: Sequential digital images, fieldnotes, audio recording, timeline Case oral evidence (interviews children and teachers) • Core Instruments: individual interviews (teachers), group interviews (children) using digital images from observations, ‘learning walk’ led by child, looking at children’s work. Siraj-Blatchford et al, (2002)
- 12. Water play - nursery ‘heavier when higher’ Trying out the syringe Pedagogical framing Time and Space - to explore Materials - Variety of resources accessible Pedagogical interactions Play - Role of play valued Scaffolding – sensitivity to stand back
- 13. Trying to fill the pipette with the jug Filling the jug to the brim Trying to fill the pipette with a syringe Opportunities for creativity Creative dispositions: curiosity, motivation, sense of initiative Generating ideas and strategies: problem solving, making connections
- 14. Interview with Anna reviewing photographs of her activity “I was putting the water in to see which one was the heaviest” (balancing activity) “ I was squirting – yeh something happened and it squirted in my face” (syringe). “ I was it put through the little tuber and it didn’t work’ … ‘it kept slipping off, slip, slip, slip” (trying to fix the pipette on to the syringe). When asked what she found most interesting she quickly referred to “the tuber”. When asked what she thought was new or special she commented on her observations of water flow “Well the special thing was the water goes woo, woo, woo’…. ‘the water glows a wee bit’’. Anna’s recorded her activity with annotations dictated to the researcher. The drawing highlights the balance scales, the holes in the board, the incident with the syringe and the pipette “I was trying to squirt it down the tube” and her observations of moving water “water sparkled and sparkled and sparkled”.
- 15. Cars and ramps – nursery (Chioma is the teacher) Rosalie: That one really fast. Chioma: Look how fast it went – what about other cars? Rosalie: (Tried a truck on the steeper slope.) Went faster on this one. Chioma: Went faster on the first ramp than on the second ramp? Rosalie: Faster on second. Chioma: Why do you think? Rosalie: Because really high? Zared: Look (he puts a new car on the ramp) – fast really fast. Chioma: Why do you think that one went fast and Rosalie’s slow? Zared: (Gesturing with his hands) – Sideways does not go. Chioma: What happens if you change it? Zared: It goes fast. Pedagogical framing: Time to explore, range of materials, use of outdoor space. Pedagogical interactions: questioning to encourage observation & reasoning, fostering dialogue and collaboration, scaffolding to support independence
- 16. Inanna tries different slopes Which one is going to come down first? Inanna: I want mine to come first. Deanna: What will you need to do? Inanna: Push it. Inanna: This is very, very slow. Deanna: How do you make it go fast? Inanna: I tipped it up [demonstrating]. Deanna: That was fast! Inanna: And when I push it [with a gesture to illustrate]. Opportunities for creativity Creative dispositions: curiosity, perseverance Generating ideas & strategies: problem solving, making connections, offering explanations
- 17. Forest School - nursery Reflecting on the visit Ian: When I went to Forest School it was brilliant. I liked the most taking pictures (of fungi) and that was the best thing I did there. R: So the best thing was taking pictures? Ian: And lots of smashing ice on the pond. (...) R: What were you doing in smashing the ice? Ian: So the animals could breathe under the ice? R: Have you been there another time? Have you seen any animals? Ian: I think I been there a long time ago. R: What did you see? Ian: I think I saw frogs in the summer – and before I saw frogspawn. R: That sounds exciting what was it like? Ian: It was sort of jelly – and tadpoles inside the ball of jelly. R: Wow! Ian: Not the kind of jelly from what you eat and got tadpoles inside it. Opportunities for creativity Creative dispositions: curiosity, motivation, sense of initiative Generating ideas and strategies: making connections – life processes & cycles, variety of life
- 18. Findings from fieldwork in schools Approaches used Aims • Most often implicit • Rarely an explicit focus on creativity, though promotion of creative dispositions was evident in majority of episodes • Strong focus on social and affective factors of learning as well as on development of concepts and process skills • Limited explicit focus on nature of science 23
- 19. Implications Teacher Education Aims Focus on • Perspectives on the nature of science and mathematics and the purposes of science and mathematics education in the early years. 24
- 20. Findings from fieldwork in schools Approaches used Teaching, Learning and Assessment • Potential for inquiry and creativity in the generation and evaluation of ideas & strategies – Rich, motivating contexts important – Purposes for inquiry linked to children’s everyday experiences and scope for children’s decision making. – Dialogue and collaboration, promoted by group work and teacher questioning – Sensitive and responsive teacher scaffolding 25
- 21. Findings from fieldwork in schools Approaches used Teaching, Learning and Assessment • Opportunities for play limited in primary settings • The roles of varied forms of representation (incl. ICT) and the processes of representation in developing children’s thinking needed greater recognition • Few examples of use of outdoor resources/areas, or non-formal settings for learning in museums or the wider community - more in preschool • Assessment approach informal and formative, but limited involvement of children in assessment 26
- 22. Implications Teacher Education Teaching, Learning and Assessment Focus on • The characteristics and roles of creativity in learning and teaching in early mathematics and science. • Use of the outdoor and wider school environment for learning in science and mathematics. • Ways in which everyday learning activities can be opened up to allow space for children’s agency and creativity. • The roles of questioning in supporting inquiry and creativity, different forms of teacher questioning, ways of supporting children’s questioning, recognising questions implicit in children’s explorations. 27
- 23. Findings from fieldwork in schools Approaches used Contextual Factors • Influence of teachers’ perspectives on learning and teaching, and their views of the nature of science and understanding of creativity • Lack of resources presenting a challenge. Need for further funding to support the use of ICT and of the outdoor environment. • Limited reliance on textbooks or published schemes • Pressures of time and curriculum limit opportunities for children’s creativity and inquiry in primary. 28
- 24. Findings from fieldwork in schools Children’s learning • Observing and making connections most common • Children’s questioning also present but not always recognised 29 or built upon • Explaining evidence and communicating explanations more limited attention, but still evident in more than half the episodes and more strongly in primary • Explicit examples of children’s developing understanding of the nature of science were limited, but indication of starting points • Evidence of creative attributes in children’s inquiry skills and understandings
- 25. Implications Teacher Education Materials • Curriculum Design principles and teacher outcomes for teacher education based on Creative Little Scientists findings • Exemplar materials for use in teacher education related to each design principle – Selected episodes from fieldwork – with context and commentary illustrated by extracts from data – Classroom extracts, photographs, interviews • Suggested approaches to using exemplar material • Teacher training summerschool using this material (in the framework of Erasmus+ KA1 activities) All materials are available on Creative Little Scientists website: www.creative-little-scientists.eu Contact: fani@ea.gr 30
- 26. Acknowledgements Presentation based on Work Packages for Creative Little Scientists: http://www.creative-little-scientists.eu Coordinator Ellinogermaniki Agogi, Greece: Dr. Fani Stylianidou This publication/presentation reflects the views only of the author, and the Commission cannot be held responsible for any use which may be made of the information contained therein.
- 27. Alsop, S., & Watts, M. (2003). Science education and affect. International Journal of Science Education, 25(9), 1043-1047. Asay, L. D., & Orgill, M. K. (2010). Analysis of essential features of inquiry found in articles published in The Science Teacher, 1998-2007. Journal of Science Teacher Education, 21(1), 57-79. Banaji, S. and Burn, A. (2010) 2nd edition. The Rhetorics of Creativity: A review of the literature. London, Arts Council England. Barrow, L. H. (2010). Encouraging creativity with scientific inquiry. Creative Education, 1(1). Chappell K., Craft, A., Burnard, P. and Cremin, T. (2008) Question posing and Question responding: The heart of possibility thinking in the Early Years. Early Years, 28(3), 267-286. Eshach, H., & Fried, M. N. (2005). Should science be taught in early childhood? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(3), 315-336. Fleer, M. (2009). Supporting Scientific Conceptual Consciousness or Learning in ‚'Roundabout Way" in Play-based Contexts. International Journal of Science Education, 31(8), 1069-1089. Fleer, M., & Robbins, J. (2003). “Hit and Run Research” with “Hit and Miss” Results in Early Childhood Science Education. Research in science education, 33(4), 405-431. French, L. (2004). Science as the center of a coherent, integrated early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(1), 138- 149. Gallas, K. (1995). Talking their way into science: hearing children's questions and theories, responding with curricula. London, Teachers College Press. Kind, P. M., & Kind, V. (2007). Creativity in science education: Perspectives and challenges for developing school science. Milne, I. (2010). A Sense of Wonder, Arising from Aesthetic Experiences, Should Be the Starting Point for Inquiry in Primary Science. Science Education International, 21(2), 102-115. Minner, D. D., Levy, A. J., & Century, J. (2010). Inquiry-based science instruction: what is it and does it matter? Results from a research synthesis years 1984 to 2002. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 47(4), 474-496. Ryder, J. (2011). Scientific inquiry: learning about it and learning through it. Perspectives in Education: Inquiry-based learning. E. Yeomans. London, Wellcome Trust: 4-7. Siraj-Blatchford, I. and K. Sylva (2004). Researching pedagogy in English pre-schools. British Educational Research Journal 30(5): 713-730. 32
Hinweis der Redaktion
- So this is the outline for my presentation: I will first say something about the background to the project – its purposes and design. Clearly a major issue for the project to explore was what might be meant by creativity in early years mathematics and science – so I will give some indication of our conceptual framework. I will then refer to the methodology used, that is to the approaches employed for data collection and analysis. Then I will give a flavour of our key findings from our fieldwork in schools, as I thought you would be most interested in this. Finally, I will finish by exploring implications for schools, teachers and teacher education.
- BACKGROUND TO THE PROJECT - AIMS AND RESEARCH CONTEXT The project was seeking to build a picture of science and mathematics in the Early Years and in particular of the potential for inquiry and creativity in learning and teaching, by documenting and comparing current policies and practices and looking to identify potential and possibilities. By EY we mean children of 3-8 years of age, covering both preschool and early primary phases of education. The project reflected the high focus on science, mathematics and creativity in European education policy and the growing recognition of the importance of science and mathematics teaching in the early years, both for a child’s development and for science and mathematics learning. This builds on new insights into learning and teaching gained from close study of the learning of very young children and of classroom interactions made possible with new technologies. The emphasis being on children’s capabilities and perspectives, very important focus of our project. Having said this, there have been EU reports of Science and Mathematics that cover primary education and separately reports on aspects of Early Years policy and practice. However, limited attention has been paid by EU policy to science and mathematics in the Early Years. The project was also set in the context of debate about inquiry based approaches, and of much rhetoric on the importance of developing children’s creativity through education. What is new in this project is the exploration of what might be meant by creativity in learning and teaching in science and mathematics. The project aimed to provide insights into whether and how children’s creativity is fostered and appropriate learning outcomes, including children’s interest, emerge in early years science and mathematics classrooms. While we were studying current policy and practice we were also seeking to identify potential and possibilities – ways forward – which is very relevant in the context of policy change across Europe. Based on the findings the project aimed to mainstream good practices by proposing changes in policy and teacher education encompassing curriculum, pedagogy and assessment.
- These were our research questions These reflect common distinctions between Intended curriculum – policy as well as teachers’ conceptualisations Curriculum as implemented Curriculum as experienced by children The purpose was to inform policy and guidelines for teacher education One of the strengths and contributions of the project was the exploration of the interconnections between these questions.
- These were the project partners 1 (Coordinator) Ellinogermaniki Agogi (EA) Greece 2 Institute of Education, University of London (IOE) UK 3 Open University (OU) UK 4 Bishop Grosseteste University College Lincoln (BG) UK 5 University of Eastern Finland (UEF) Finland 6 Artevelde University College (AUC) Belgium 7 Goethe University Frankfurt (GUF) – University of Bonn (UBO), Germany 8 University of Minho (Uminho) Portugal 9 National Institute for Laser, Plasma and Radiation Physics (NILPRP) Romania 10 Université de Picardie Jules Verne, France (UPJV) France 11 University of Malta (UoM) Malta The consortium provided rich opportunities for dialogue as it represents countries with very different histories and traditions in education and raised the challenges of developing joint understandings, as well as common language for sharing these.
- Project was achieved through a series of stages as follows Conceptual framework (completed in March 2012) provided a framework for subsequent empirical work on the project. It was operationalised as a List of Factors to describe characteristics of opportunities for creativity in early years science and mathematics, in all subsequent research phases. First Research Phase: comprised Desk study of policy and survey of teachers’ views and practices, by which we gained insights into conceptualisations about and approaches to EY science and mathematics and potential for creativity Second Research Phase: consisted of In depth fieldwork in small number of schools in each country, gaining insights into classroom and school processes and leading to case studies of practice. Finally, a set of guidelines for teacher education and a number of exemplary training materials, based on the findings of the theoretical, comparative and in-depth field research, as well as through a process of continuous involvement of real-life communities of stakeholders in curriculum design research.
- Work on the project draws on a review of policy-related and research-related literature covering fields including science and mathematics education in the early years, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as cognitive psychology and comparative education 2.2 Science and Mathematics Education 2.3 Creativity in Education 2.4 Teacher education 2.5 Comparative Education Conceptual framework has in particular sought to draw together the material from the reviews of S&M and Creativity in early years Education, exploring synergies and differences between Inquiry-based Science Education and Creative Approaches – expanding literature in relation to both these dimensions .
- An examination of features of IBSE and CA – both subject of considerable debate in the literature, told us In terms of IBSE While widespread evidence of promotion in policy, review of research reveals varied definitions Common features evidenced in a wide range of types of activity Its use reflects purposes/aims for science education that emphasise scientific literacy In relation to CA The literature identifies similar processes, attitudes, such as problem finding and solving, exploration, notions of ownership and control, risk taking, motivation/curiosity, which are key also in inquiry. More limited emphasis on explanation and reasoning in relation to specific subject content Reflects notions of creativity as something of which we are all capable and an association in the early years with play (Banaji and Burn 2010) Also there are links with cognition, creative affordances of technology and the creative classroom. IBSE and CA are both interpreted and employed as tools for knowledge construction seen not only as ways of learning content but also of fostering development of positive attitudes profile a number of common pedagogical practices, skills and learning dispositions Examining connections between these and the wider literature suggested the following definition of creativity used across the project, and provided the basis for examination of synergies between inquiry-based and creative approaches.
- So the project developed this definition of creativity in science and mathematics that needs to be understood alongside the definition of Little c creativity, which is: Purposive and imaginative activity generating outcomes that are original and valuable in relation to the learner = something of which we are all capable. Creativity in mathematics and science Generating alternative ideas and strategies as an individual or community and reasoning critically between these and producing plausible explanations and strategies consistent with the available evidence. As you can see, there is greater focus on notions of evaluation within a community in this definition of creativity in science and mathematics – although the notion of what is of value is included also in definitions of creativity more widely.
- The literature review also provided the basis for identification of synergies between Inquiry Based and Creative approaches - familiar in policy, fields of science, mathematics and early years education: Role of play and exploration – varied kinds both indoors out, use of digital technologies, importance of context, time and space to deepen and extend inquiry over time Role of motivation and affect – power of drama, narrative (stories), history, informal learning settings, cross-disciplinary contexts , incorporating children's prior experiences, links to everyday lives, role of aesthetic experience Role of dialogue and collaboration – small groups, classroom discussions – developing metacognitive awareness, considering alternative strategies and explanations, sensitivity of adult in listening (fieldwork – time) Role of problem solving and agency – guided, open, structured inquiry – varied over time – nature of this orchestration area of great interest in our current fieldwork Fostering questioning and curiosity – recognising questions inherent in children’s actions, need for modelling of teacher curiosity and self reflection, varied forms of questioning for different purposes Fostering reflection and reasoning - evaluation of alternative ideas Teacher scaffolding and involvement – varied roles over time, complexities of issues involved – when to intervene and when to stand back – challenges in climate of accountability Assessment for learning – to inform sensitive and responsive approach – importance of holistic, multimodal approaches, involvement of children, reflecting on learning within a community Both the definitions of creativity and the synergies have provided very productive frameworks across the project – in providing common reference points and shared language and in fostering coherence across the phases of work – but also need for continued revisiting! We have found them very useful also in our work more widely for example in teacher education.
- We also drew on literature related to creative dispositions in examining creativity in learning in the context of early mathematics and science as indicated here.
- Further features of the CF were also critical in decisions concerning research methodology including the range of data collected during fieldwork. The CF identified 3 broad strands of significance in the opportunities provided for creativity in science and mathematics to be addressed across the different phases of the project – aims – teaching and learning and assessment and contextual factors. They highlight a focus not just on learning and teaching processes but also on how these are influenced by aims for science and mathematics education, the wider context and teacher characteristics. Finally – these broad strands were broken down in more detail for the empirical work undertaken across the project using the framework associated with ‘the vulnerable spider web’ from van den Akker - vulnerable because a change in relation to any one dimension affects another. These dimensions and associated list of creativity enabling factors identified from CF played an important role in providing a common analytical framework for partners across the different phases of our research. These were used in capturing an in depth picture of conceptualisations and practices and outcomes related to opportunities for creativity in early science and mathematics.
- These contextual factors recognise the importance of teachers’ pedagogical framing through the environment and the influence of teachers’ backgrounds and attitudes.
- A mixed method approach was adopted combining both qualitative and quantitative approaches – including the use of surveys of policies and teachers views based on a list of factors but also case studies of classrooms – the focus of this presentation. Important features of the project were the wide scope of data collection the use of a common analytical framework of spider dimensions and factors associated with inquiry and creativity interconnections between phases. Findings from policy and teacher surveys informed the foci for fieldwork. Materials from across the phases of empirical work were used in development of the teacher training materials. This provides a brief summary. National Reports (for each country) were produced from each phase – based on common specifications Findings were then analysed as a whole – looking at patterns across the partnership -examining differences between EY and Primary.
- The fieldwork (in both early years and primary settings) presented the most challenging but also very rewarding phase of work in undertaking case studies in diverse contexts within very tight time frame. This just gives you an indication of the range of data collected – reflects principles from CF and RQ It addressed our concern to gain contextual information, insights into learning, teaching and assessment as well as the lived experiences of participants Also informed by the pedagogical model from Siraj Blatchford et al that highlights the importance not just of pedagogical interactions but also the key influence of pedagogical framing. We Needed common approaches that would be practical in all circumstances. Core instruments. Common approaches to analysis so that results could be combined across the partnership.
- The following episodes will I hope give a flavour of the potential of the data collected and approach to analysis In terms of CONTEXT – access to teacher planning for free flow play – resources planned and indications of possibilities for learning they might offer In each instance we drew the classroom LAYOUT and variety of RESOURCES – in this case the child had selected resources from tray at the back and requisitioned also resources the teacher had set out to support investigations of ice (balance scales, syringe and pipette). TIMED SEQUENCE of photographs and observation – changing focus of activity over time AUDIO RECORDING – but limited speech in this instance although Anna was singing much of the time! In terms of analysis of PEDAGOGICAL FRAMING and INTERACTIONS – see annotation – italics refer to the spider factors from Van den Akker shown earlier.
- Next Anna tried to get the pipette to work. Then she repeatedly explored filling the jug to the brim and feeling the water surface. Overall this episode suggested the following opportunities for creativity (see above).
- Finally this shows part of the transcript of an interview with Anna about her experiences supported by the photographs and an invitation to make a a drawing of her experiences – the talk transcribed above accompanied the drawing process.
- CONTEXT Second example Adults set up a couple of ramps and vehicles outside We saw Detailed planning of learning opportunities and resources informed by notion of Sustained Shared thinking (developed by Iram Siraj) included questioning to elicit children’s ideas and extend learning. As before series of photographs accompanied by examples of transcripts of dialogue. FRAMING - As in the previous example TIME and SPACE were critical Collaboration promoted by practical arrangement INTERACTIONS – use of questioning to foster dialogue and to elicit ideas At the start there was some teacher modelling of possible ways to use the resources – later taken over independently by children as shown in next slide.
- Approaches developed by the adult and children together taken on independently by the children in growing groups - making comparisons Within this one child’s independent investigation – direction again indicated by photographs Adult encouraging her to articulate ideas Potential for creativity above.
- Finally episode concerns visit to Forest School - again it highlights what can be gained from interviews with children CONTEXT – regular occurrence, well prepared – clothing, shelter, food, equipment for investigation Observations recorded, photographs, audio recording during the visit indicated Ian’s interest on ice on the pond, bubbles under the surface, fungi – extending his repertoire. Challenges of wet, snow and multiple viewpoints – adds to complexity. FRAMING – materials, repertoire of planned outdoor activities, use of children’s profiles to record interests and learning with the child Context for interview: child’s work on profile- sticking photos of fungi Opportunities for creativity suggested…. Interview underlined the ways children make connections over time. See other examples of episodes in project deliverables on website but also in the executive summary of findings - some available to give out.
- Now move on to a summary of findings FS
- RQ: Approaches used in the teaching, learning and assessment of science in EY: opportunities present for inquiry and creativity. About the aims teachers set for activities: these were often implicit. Where aims were made explicit, they rarely included an explicit focus on creativity although the promotion of creative dispositions was evident in the majority of episodes observed. In both preschool and primary settings there was a strong focus on social and affective factors of learning and the development of scientific and mathematical concepts and process skills was a common feature of episodes observed. Explicit focus on the nature of science was limited.
- These findings suggested a number of areas for attention in teacher education to support inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics education. They included:
- Now, Findings about Teaching, Learning and Assessment: These findings indicated considerable potential for inquiry and creativity in the opportunities teachers provided for the generation and evaluation of ideas and strategies in both preschool and primary settings. In generating ideas, questions and interests, rich, motivating contexts for play and exploration were important, whilst purposes for inquiry were linked to children’s everyday experiences and there was considerable scope for children’s decision making. Dialogue and collaboration, promoted by widespread use of group work and teacher questioning, played important roles in encouraging the processes of reflection and explanation associated with the evaluation of ideas and strategies. The potential of sensitive and responsive teacher scaffolding both to support independence and extend inquiry was underlined, particularly in relation to when to intervene and when to stand back in order to listen to and build upon children’s creative engagement and the development of their ideas and questions.
- Opportunities for play were limited in primary settings. The value of play and exploration in the primary age phase could be more widely appreciated, for example in fostering a feel for phenomena. Findings also suggested that the roles of varied forms of representation and the processes of representation (not just the product) in developing children’s thinking needed greater recognition, this included the role of ICT, particularly in preschool settings. There were few examples of episodes involving the use of outdoor resources or non-formal settings for learning in museums or the wider community. Here differences were noted between preschool and primary settings. In a number of preschool settings, children had free access to outdoor areas, and the overall provision of space and staffing levels were more generous, providing greater scope for practical exploration. Assessment approaches observed were generally informal and formative, and were based on observation and teacher questioning. There was limited evidence of the involvement of children in assessment, although interviews with children during fieldwork did indicate their capabilities to reflect on their learning.
- The implications for teacher education are that the areas to focus on, should be:
- Findings underlined the important influence of teachers’ wider perspectives on learning and teaching, and their views of the nature of science and mathematics and understanding of creativity on the aims and approaches explicit or implicit in the activities observed. Lack of resources was identified as presenting a challenge in implementing inquiry and problem-based approaches. Partners identified the need in particular for further funding to support the use of ICT to support and extend children’s problem solving and inquiry processes, and the development of the whole school environment, in particular the outdoor environment to support learning. Teachers in most preschool settings designed their own learning experiences with only a small proportion of episodes relying on textbooks or published schemes. Partners commented on the greater scope for child-initiated activity and creative engagement in preschool settings, although this was not always recognised by teachers, and on the tendency for pressures of time and curriculum requirements to limit opportunities for children’s creativity and inquiry in primary settings.
- Ways in which these approaches (described) sought to foster young children’s learning, interest and motivation in science: - Observing and making connections featured in most episodes, for example drawing on prior learning or between experiences. - Opportunities for children’s questioning were also present but not always recognised or built upon. - Explaining evidence and communicating explanations received more limited attention, but they were still evident in more than half the episodes and were more strongly represented in primary settings; this was often prompted by dialogue with peers and adults. - Explicit examples of children’s developing understanding of the nature of science were limited; however starting points for the development of understanding of the nature of science were indicated in a number of episodes, in children’s reflections on learning in classroom discussion or in interviews with researchers. - Finally, children’s inquiry skills and understandings noted in episodes were interconnected with evidence of a number of creative attributes. For example children’s motivation, curiosity and abilities to come up with something new were evidenced in raising questions and in their active pursuit of explorations and investigations. The episodes offered many examples of children’s sense of initiative and growing abilities to collaborate in deciding what to do in carrying out investigations. Also, children showed imagination, ability to make connections and thinking skills in offering explanations.
- As indicated some aspects here difficult to study within the short time frame and constraints associated with access Be valuable to look more closely at these areas – where we have fewer examples to illustrate potential.