Constructing Ideas and Theories About Quality: the Accounts of Young Children in Two Early Childhood Classrooms in Singapore
Total Page：16
File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb
CONSTRUCTING IDEAS AND THEORIES ABOUT QUALITY: THE ACCOUNTS OF YOUNG CHILDREN IN TWO EARLY CHILDHOOD CLASSROOMS IN SINGAPORE Deborah Sue Harcourt DipT (SACAE), BEd (UniSA), MEd (UniSA) A thesis submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of Doctor of Philosophy Centre for Learning Innovation Faculty of Education Queensland University of Technology Australia March 2008 Key words Quality, socio-cultural theory, children’s accounts, new sociology of childhood, United Nations Convention on the Rights Of the Child (UNCROC), early childhood education, Singapore. i Abstract Early childhood research and policy are focusing increasingly on issues of ‘quality’ in early childhood education. Much of the focus, however, has been on adult-generated notions of quality, with little attention being devoted to children’s own views of their experience in early childhood settings. Conducted in the context of early childhood education in Singapore, this research breaks new ground by contributing children’s own insights into their experience in two early childhood classrooms in Singapore. Informed by the sociology of childhood conceptualisation of child competence (James & James, 2004), the research methodology drew on the mosaic approach to researching with children used by Clark and Moss (2001), whereby children’s photography, mapping and conversations were used by them to consider their early childhood settings. The findings of this study were generated, beginning with the understanding that young children have the competence to articulate their ideas using a range of symbolic literacies. They formed views and constructed theories about their preschool experiences, in particular about the teachers, the curriculum, the physical environment and friends, and gave a clear indication of what constitutes good quality in those domains. When offered a platform to discuss the issue of quality in early childhood settings, the children articulated ideas about their own best interests. This study calls for those engaged with children, to act upon the contributions offered by this group of children to our understanding of quality. ii Contents Key words i Abstract ii Table of contents iii List of tables vi List of figures vi List of plates vi Certificate of authorship and originality viii Acknowledgements ix Chapter One: Introduction to the thesis 2 1.1 Introduction 2 1.2 Purpose of the study 6 1.3 Background to the study 8 1.3.1 The educational context of Singapore 1.3.2 Quality in early childhood education 1.3.3 A mandate for change 1.4 Research question 14 1.5 Research design and methodology 1.5.1 Participants and their accounts 1.5.3 Data analysis 1.6 Structure of the thesis 21 Chapter Two: Literature review 23 2.1 Introduction 23 2.2 The policy landscape of early childhood education in Singapore 24 2.2.1 The historical background 2.2.2 Teacher education 2.2.3 Licensing instruments: Ministry of Community Development and Sport 2.2.4 Kindergarten curriculum framework: Ministry of Education 2.3 The measurement of quality 32 2.3.1 Aspects of quality 2.3.2 The early childhood environment 2.3.3 Parent perceptions 2.3.4 Teacher qualifications 2.4 Situating Singapore in the global context 38 2.4.1 Developmental psychology paradigms 2.4.2 Didactic learning environments and direct instruction 2.5 Acknowledging children 45 2.5.1 Children’s right to be heard 2.5.2 The new sociology of childhood 2.5.3 Starting from children’s prior knowledge 2.5.4 Early childhood education as a social context for dialogue, debate and co-construction iii 2.6 Including children in the research conversation 58 2.6.1 The child standpoint on quality 2.6.2 Children as research participants Chapter Three: Conceptual framework and methodology 65 3.1 Introduction 65 3.2 Research design 67 3.4 Research methodology 69 3.5 Sample 77 3.5.1 Research sites 3.5.2 Participants 3.6 Data collection 82 3.7 Data analysis 83 3.8 Phases of the study 87 3.6.1 Phase One 3.6.2 Phase Two 3.6.3 Phase Three 3.6.4 Phase Four Chapter Four: The data and its analysis 100 4.1 Introduction 100 4.2 The questions 101 4.3 The teacher 111 4.3.1 Teachers and children 4.3.2 The teacher’s teaching 4.3.3 Summary 4.4 The school 127 4.4.1 Centre B 4.4.2 Centre A 4.4.3 Summary 4.5 Learning 145 4.5.1 Summary 4.6 Friends 169 4.6.1 Summary 4.7 The children’s summaries: A good school and a bad school 177 Chapter Five: The findings and conclusions 188 5.1 Introduction 188 5.2 The teacher 191 5.3 The school 197 5.4 Learning 210 5.5 Friends 207 5.6 Implications 209 5.6.1 The teacher 5.6.2 The school 5.6.3 Learning 5.6.4 Friends 5.6.5 Children in research iv 5.6.6 In summary 5.7 Limitations 217 5.8 Conclusion 218 References 222 Appendices Appendix 1 Letter of approval from UHREC Appendix 2 Research information sheet Appendix 3 Consent to participate v List of tables Table 1 Parental views on preschool education Table 2 Four phases of data collection and analysis, 2002 Table 3 Preliminary themes drawn from children’s questions (Centre A) Table 4 Preliminary themes drawn from children’s questions (Centre B) Table 5 Kindergarten 2 timetable (Centre B) List of figures Figure 4.1 K2 classroom at Centre B Figure 4.2 K2 classroom at Centre A List of plates Plate 3.1 Daily sharing at school Centre A Centre B Plate 3.2 Questions and response: Celine and Jei Le Plate 4.1 Beatrix’s list of 20 questions Plate 4.2 Children and teacher at Centre A editing a story line Plate 4.3 Renee’s drawing and narrative of a school that is not very good Plate 4.4 The grasshopper project: Alan, You Joh, Jesalin, and Jia Yue working together Plate 4.5 Teacher BE (and her notebook) discussing work plans with Riggs and Xue Wei Plate 4.6 Examples of children’s planning and recording in two languages on the Insect project Plate 4.7 Jie Le’s design for a preschool Plate 4.8 Hui Min’s design for a preschool Plate 4.9 Julia’s design for a preschool Plate 4.10 Renee’s photographs of the “new look” classroom Plate 4.11 Renee’s photograph of the dress-up corner Plate 4.12 Renee’s photograph of one of the computer desks Plate 4.13 Renee’s photographs of one of the book areas Plate 4.14 Renee’s design for a preschool classroom Plate 4.15 Example of solitary play in Centre B Plate 4.16 Example of solitary play in Centre A Plate 4.17 Example of group play in Centre B Plate 4.18 Example of group play in Centre A Plate 4.19 Benjamin: The most important things to do at preschool Plate 4.20 Riggs: The most important things to do at preschool Plate 4.21 Hui Min: The most important things to do at preschool vi Plate 4.22 Alan: Pictorial narrative about play and work Plate 4.23 Hui Min: Pictorial narrative about play and work Plate 4.24 Jesalin: Pictorial narrative about play and work Plate 4.25 Julia: Pictorial narrative about play and work Plate 4.26 Riggs’ daily timetable Plate 4.27 Jie Le’s daily timetable Plate 4.28 Alan’s drawing and narrative of a good school Plate 4.29 Amanda’s drawing and narrative of a good school Plate 4.30 Li Bing’s drawing and narrative about a bad school Plate 4.31 Beatrix’s drawing and narrative about a bad school Plate 4.32 Alan’s drawing and narrative about a bad school Plate 4.25 Renee’s photographs of her school vii Certificate of authorship and originality I certify that this thesis has been written by me. Any help that I have received in undertaking this research, and all sources used, have been acknowledged in the thesis. I also certify that this research has not previously been submitted for a degree at any other higher education institution. Signed: Date: viii Acknowledgements I would like to acknowledge and sincerely thank the following people for the support, inspiration, and guidance offered to me throughout the journey that is this thesis. To Dr Barbara Piscitelli for the encouragement and faith in me to undertake this project in the first place, and for her guidance (and friendship) in the first four years of its development. To Professor Ann Farrell and Dr Felcity McArdle for their rigorous critiques, and long distance telephone discussions throughout the last two years of writing. To Professor Lilian Katz for her guidance and feedback, and her persistent nagging to get this project completed. To the children, staff, and parents who welcomed me into their lives, without whom this project would not have been realised. To my colleagues and friends who have not seen much of me in the last six years, I have now returned! And finally, to my partner John, and children Samuel, Hunter, Hugh, and Maya, thank you, from the bottom of my heart for always being there for me. Deborah Harcourt ix If you want to know if you are going to a good kindergarten, this is what you should do. If your parent has been to that school, ask them if it is good. If they don’t know, ask them to ask the teachers weather (sic) it is good.