AN EVEN BETTER START? PARENT CONCEPTIONS OF THE PREPARATORY YEAR IN A NON-GOVERNMENT SCHOOL IN QUEENSLAND
Lyndal O’Gorman Diploma of Teaching (Early Childhood) Bachelor of Educational Studies (QUT)
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 2007 Key words “Early childhood education and care” (ECEC), “Preparatory Year”, parents, views, Queensland, Australia, phenomenography, conceptions.
Abstract The introduction of a universal, full time Preparatory Year in all Queensland schools from 2007 is a significant reform in early childhood education and care (ECEC) in that state. Rapidly increasing enrolment of children in full time Preparatory Year programs in non government schools has been a feature of the Queensland context over the past decade. These trends, along with efforts towards consistency of services and universal school starting ages across Australian states and territories have prompted this important reform to early education in Queensland. Constructions of the role of parents as consumers of early childhood services and/or partners in their children’s early education suggest that consideration of parent views of this reform is both timely and strategic. This thesis reports the findings of a research project investigating parent conceptions of a Preparatory Year in a non government school in outer urban Queensland. The research used a phenomenographic approach to elicit and describe the qualitatively different ways in which a group of 26 parents viewed the Preparatory Year. Analysis revealed that the range of parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year demonstrated varying emphasis on parent needs, child needs and preparation for future success in school and beyond. The study led to the construction of five categories of description outlining five different ways of understanding the Preparatory Year. The Preparatory Year was viewed in relation to (1) the current needs of the parents, (2) the current needs of the child, (3) preparation for Year One, (4) providing an advantage in primary school, and (5) preparation for future success beyond school. These five categories were linked and differentiated from each other by two central themes, or dimensions of variation: (1) a beneficiary dimension in which either the parent or the child were seen to benefit from the program, and (2) a temporal dimension in which the
ii program was viewed in relation to meeting current needs or preparing for the future. The results of the study suggest that variation exists in the ways that parents may conceptualise the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. Analysis of the data further suggests that tensions exist around whether the Preparatory Year ought to emphasise preparation for the future and/or meet current needs of children; and whether those programs should meet the needs of the parent and/or the needs of the child. This thesis opens up the possibility of future tensions, with the potential for parent preferences for a formal interpretation of the Preparatory Year curriculum being at odds with the new play based Early Years Curriculum Guidelines. Results of the study suggest that more attention be given to engaging parents and eliciting their views of the early childhood programs experienced by their children. Moreover, it provides an approach for ways in which parent views might be generated, analysed and incorporated into future policy developments and reforms.
iii Table of contents Key words ...... ii Abstract ...... ii Table of contents...... iv List of tables...... vii Statement of original authorship ...... ix Acknowledgements...... x CHAPTER 1 ...... 1 INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS...... 1 1.1 Introduction...... 1 1.2 Background to the study...... 2 1.3 Research question and design ...... 7 1.4 Terminology...... 9 1.5 Researcher’s standpoint ...... 10 1.6 Significance and timeliness of the study...... 12 1.6.1 Significance...... 12 1.6.2 Timeliness...... 18 1.7 Structure of thesis...... 19 CHAPTER 2 ...... 21 LITERATURE REVIEW...... 21 2.1 Introduction...... 21 2.2 Non government schooling and the education market...... 22 2.2.1 An education marketplace in Australia...... 24 2.2.2 Early childhood education as a marketable commodity ...... 26 2.3 Constructions of the role of parents in ECEC...... 29 2.3.1 Parents as consumers...... 29 2.3.2 Parents as partners...... 34 2.4 The contested focus of the early childhood curriculum...... 39 2.4.1 Developmental psychology and children’s needs...... 44 2.4.2 Readiness for school ...... 49 2.5 Play as a focus for learning and teaching in the early years ...... 52 2.5.1 Context of play...... 52 2.5.2 Characteristics of play...... 54 2.5.3 Work and play...... 56 2.5.4 Pressures on play...... 58 2.5.5 What is good play?...... 62 2.6 Transition to school...... 63 2.7 Studying parent views...... 65 2.7.1 Parent views across cultures...... 66 2.7.2 Parent views across different services...... 69 2.7.3 Parent views across individuals ...... 73 2.8 Chapter summary...... 74 CHAPTER 3 ...... 75 METHODOLOGY...... 75 3.1 Introduction...... 75 3.2 A qualitative approach ...... 75 3.3 Phenomenography...... 77 3.3.1 History of phenomenography...... 77
iv 3.3.2 Phenomenography and other qualitative approaches...... 79 3.3.3 Phenomenography in early childhood research ...... 81 3.3.4 Advantages of phenomenography...... 82 3.3.5 Variations within phenomenography...... 83 3.3.6 Second order perspective...... 86 3.3.7 The phenomenographic interview...... 87 3.3.8 Conceptions and categories of description...... 90 3.3.9 Phenomenographic analysis...... 93 3.3.10 Dimensions of variation...... 98 3.3.11 Outcome space ...... 99 3.3.12 Research rigour ...... 101 3.3.13 Transferability...... 103 3.3.14 Objectivity...... 104 3.4 Research method and design...... 106 3.4.1 Pilot interviewing...... 108 3.4.2 Selection of interview sample...... 109 3.4.3 Conduct of interviews ...... 112 3.4.4 Conduct of analysis...... 114 3.4.5 Iterative process ...... 117 3.4.6 Dimensions of variation...... 122 3.5 Chapter summary...... 123 CHAPTER 4 ...... 125 FINDINGS ...... 125 4.1 Introduction...... 125 4.2 Overview of the findings...... 125 4.3 Categories of description...... 128 4.3.1 Category A: The Preparatory Year program is conceived in relation to the current needs of parents ...... 128 4.2.2 Category B: The Preparatory Year program is conceived in relation to the current needs of the child ...... 135 4.3.3 Category C: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as preparation for Year One ...... 161 4.3.4 Category D: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as providing an advantage in primary school...... 178 4.3.5 Category E: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as preparing for future success beyond school...... 182 4.4 Dimensions of variation...... 186 4.5 Chapter summary...... 187 CHAPTER 5 ...... 188 DISCUSSION ...... 188 5.1 Introduction...... 188 5.2 Discussion of categories...... 190 5.2.1 Current needs of parents...... 190 5.2.2 Current needs of children...... 193 5.2.3 Preparation for Year One ...... 201 5.2.4 Providing an advantage in primary school...... 205 5.2.5 Preparation for future success beyond school...... 207 5.3 Tensions within dimensions...... 209 5.3.1 The tension between current and future needs...... 210 5.3.2 The tension between needs of child and needs of parents ...... 214
v 5.3.3 The value of exploring tensions...... 216 5.3.4 Future tensions ...... 217 5.4 Contribution to the empirical research literature ...... 220 5.5 The usefulness of phenomenography...... 225 5.5.1 Finding variation...... 225 5.5.2 Methodological contribution...... 228 5.6 Caveats of the study...... 229 5.7 Opportunities for further research...... 233 5.8 Recommendations...... 235 CHAPTER 6 ...... 237 CONCLUSION...... 237 6.1 Introduction...... 237 6.2 A multilayered backdrop...... 238 6.3 Phenomenography as a tool for investigation...... 239 6.4 Study conclusions...... 240 REFERENCES...... 244 Appendix A Letter of approach to Junior School Principal...... 262 Appendix B Letter of approval to conduct research (research site to QUT ethics committee)...... 264 Appendix C Participant information...... 266 Appendix D Participant consent form...... 269 Appendix E QUT Human Research Ethics Committee confirmation of exemption from full ethical clearance email...... 271 Appendix F QUT Human Research Ethics Committee authorisation to commence project email ...... 273 Appendix G Interview questions ...... 275
vi
List of tables Table 1 Key Dates and Tasks for the Study…………………..……… 107 Table 2 Categories A E. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements.……………..………………………..……127 Table 3 Category A. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements …………………………………………....128 Table 4 Category B. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements…………………………..………………...136 Table 5 Category C. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements …………………..…………………..……162 Table 6 Category D. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements ……………………………………....……178 Table 7 Category E. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements ……………………..……………..……....182 Table 8 Comparison of Evans and Fuller (1998) with Current Study………….…………………………………………..……221 Table 9 Overview of Categories of Description and Dimensions of Variation.…………………..……...……….…..241
vii List of figures Figure 1 Print media headlines referring to the Preparatory Year in Queensland….………………..…...……15 Figure 2 Typical steps involved in discursive phenomenographic research………………………………….…107 Figure 3 First draft of categories of description, September 2005…………………………………………………119 Figure 4 Second draft of categories of description, November 2005………………...... …120 Figure 5 Third draft of categories of description, December 2005………………………….………………….…..121 Figure 6 Outcome space depicting parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year in a non government school in Queensland…………………………………………….……..126
viii Statement of original authorship
The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made. Signature ______ Date ______
ix Acknowledgements
There are many people to whom I owe heartfelt thanks for their wisdom, encouragement and companionship during this PhD journey. Four years have passed since I began as a Masters student and that period of my life has been one of the happiest and most rewarding I have experienced. Firstly, I am grateful to the Queensland Department of Education, Training and the Arts for granting me leave to undertake these studies. Also, I offer sincere thanks to QUT for financial assistance through the QUTPRA scholarship I was awarded for 2005 and 2006. Sincere thanks must go to my family for their ongoing acceptance of my need to again do something different with my life. Special thanks go to my Mum for never doubting that I had the ability to do anything I chose to do, and thanks to my late Dad who gave me a sense of humour as a necessary tool for use along the way. I am grateful also to my sisters Christine and Helen and to my nieces. Families have a way of keeping us grounded and I appreciate that. An acknowledgement of my family would not be complete without mention of my two cats Jonty and Wally who came into my life as this journey began, bringing affection, amusement and complete disregard for my studies. I would like to take this opportunity to express my love and thanks to the many friends who have accompanied me along the way. Thankyou to those with whom I have taught in schools and who have become so much more than work colleagues. Particular credit goes to Barb McKinlay for all the conversations about teaching we’ve had over the years. Thanks must also go to all of my friends who are not teachers but have made sure that I was leading a balanced life. Special thanks go to Professor Vi McLean who was the first to plant the seed of PhD research before I could believe that it was possible. Thankyou for welcoming me into the Faculty, for making me feel at home and for being my friend. It is also impossible for me to express my gratitude to Dr Lee Tennent
x who showed me the ropes of being a research assistant, filled my days with laughter and made sure I never took myself too seriously. In closing these acknowledgements, I must state that this PhD journey has only been made possible through the ongoing commitment and encouragement of my three supervisors, Professor Ann Farrell, Dr Kerryann Walsh and Dr Jo Brownlee. Without the expertise, professionalism, encouragement and friendship of these three wonderful supervisors, the journey would not have been the pleasure that it has been.
xi CHAPTER 1
INTRODUCTION TO THE THESIS
1.1 Introduction
It is time for us to consider how to give Queensland children an even better start to formal schooling, and better meet the needs of their parents and carers. (Education Queensland, 2002, p. 2) This statement issued by the Education Queensland in 2002 heralded a major reform to early childhood education in the state of Queensland, Australia. Five years later, in 2007, this reform had materialised in the form of full time Preparatory Year programs available to all four and a half to five and a half year old children in every school across the state. An even better start (Education Queensland, 2002, p. 2) to early childhood education in Queensland had begun. This thesis outlines a research project that investigated the views of a group of parents who had experience of a full time Preparatory Year program in Queensland. This study elicited and described conceptions of the Preparatory Year held by a group of 26 parents whose children attended a non government primary school in Queensland. The parents in the study had direct experience with the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year at a school that had offered such a program in the years prior to the above announcement. Their views or conceptions of the program are examined in detail in this thesis. This chapter provides an overview of the study, beginning with a background to the research, a description of the historical context and current enrolment trends in early education in Queensland. The research question is presented and important terminology is outlined. This is followed by an acknowledgement of the researcher’s standpoint in relation the research. The significance and timeliness of the research are highlighted, particularly in terms of the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. Finally, the structure of the thesis is outlined.
1 1.2 Background to the study Recent reforms to education in the state of Queensland have seen the introduction (in 2007) of a universally available Preparatory Year in all schools. This reform represents the latest phase in the complex history of early childhood provision in Queensland, specifically, and in Australia, more broadly. This section outlines key points that have shaped the historical context in which the provision of a Preparatory Year in Queensland has occurred. Australia is a nation constituting six states and two territories, each with individual responsibility for the provision of school education. At the time of Federation in 1901, it was assumed that national concerns, such as defence and immigration, would be promoted as issues of compelling national importance, while education was regarded as a state responsibility, as it had been under the previous arrangements with the colonies (Boyd & Ailwood, 2007; Haynes, 2002). As a result, the post Federation era has seen the development of separate school education systems in each Australian jurisdiction, although a complex arrangement of shared funding responsibilities has evolved since the middle of last century (Lingard & Porter, 1997). Early childhood services began in Queensland with the establishment of the Crèche and Kindergarten Association of Queensland (C & K) in 1907 to provide community early childhood services (C & K, 2002). By the 1930s state schools in Queensland had begun to provide one or two years of free Preparatory education before being abolished in 1953 to redirect funding for Year 8, the first year of secondary school (Department of Education, Training and the Arts, 2006). Significant government funding was required after the Second World War to enable the construction of school buildings that would accommodate the rapidly growing Queensland population (Holthouse, 1975). Preschool education became a focus of the Federal government during the post war period with the provision of funding to the tertiary education sector to increase the number of trained teachers to staff the rapidly growing number of private preschool settings in the states (Mellor, 1990). Moreover, greater
2 participation of Australian women in the workforce during the 1950s and 1960s resulted in increased pressure being applied to both state and federal governments in relation to the provision of preschool education (Brennan & O’Donnell, 1986). The introduction of the Child Care Act by the federal government in 1972 relieved some of that pressure, with substantial funding allocated by the government towards the provision of preschool services at a local level (Brennan, 1998). By 1974, 72% of federal government funds for children’s services were spent on preschool education, a scenario which endured for over twenty years. From 1997, however, the federal government began to redirect responsibility for preschool education to individual states and territories (Walker, 2004). In 1972 Queensland was the first Australian state to adopt a policy of free, voluntary preschool education to all four year olds (Brennan & O’Donnell, 1986; Holthouse, 1975). This new policy direction emerged as a result of extensive consultation within the early childhood community and provision was based on the model provided by C & K. The C & K model was that of a part time program structured around two and a half hours each day, five days per week – a model that was not introduced to meet the needs of working mothers (Ailwood, 2007; Boyd & Ailwood, 2007). Rather, the sessional model emerged as a result of the Queensland government’s tendencies, at that time, towards a traditional, valorised view of motherhood and family (Ailwood, 2004). During the first seven years of Queensland state preschool education beginning in 1972, 357 centres opened across the state (Education Queensland, 2003) and by 2002, 767 state schools provided part time preschool education to 37 542 children in Queensland (O’Gorman, Farrell & Walsh, 2004). The fragmentation and inconsistency of school and preschool provision across state boundaries continued throughout the late twentieth and early twenty first centuries, and have been addressed in the literature (see, for example, Boyd & Ailwood, 2007; Press, 2006; Press & Hayes, 2000; Thorpe et al., 2004; Walker, 2004). The importance of the early childhood years as a national focus was reinforced in 1996, with the Senate Inquiry Report (Senate Employment Education and Training Reference Committee, 1996) recommending reforms such
3 as “universal provision, across the range of early childhood settings, of preschool programs for the year before a child enters school” (p. 65). Little action, however, was taken to implement recommendations of this report, particularly around universal access to early childhood programs in the preschool year. Following on from the Senate Inquiry Report , the Queensland Government commissioned a comprehensive review of the benefits of pre Year One schooling (Tayler, Perry & Lennox, 1999) at a time when moves towards improving uniformity across state boundaries were being explored further, both within Queensland and the broader national context. Tayler et al.’s paper provided an important catalyst for the reform of early childhood education and care (ECEC) in Queensland, represented more broadly in the Queensland State Education 2010 document (QSE 2010 ) (Education Queensland, 2000). The QSE 2010 document focused on education in general, but also drew attention to the nature of transitions from preschool to formal education and to the objective of “improving outcomes in pre Year One education over the next ten years” (p.16). Initiatives known as “new foundations” (p.7) considered central to this reform agenda were proposed as follows: The preparation of Queensland children for formal schooling should be appropriate to the needs of children of that age, flexible in meeting the requirements of families (particularly families in which all care givers work) and available, where possible, in the local community. (Education Queensland, 2000, p.16) This reform statement is important because it signalled the onset of renewed scrutiny of what is considered appropriate education for young children in Queensland. Importantly and concurrently, international focus on the importance of the early years was also taking place. The concept of universal provision of free and high quality early childhood services was promoted across various countries with the publication of the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD), Starting Strong (2001) report which emphasised that a key element of successful ECEC policy for preschool children was universal access, particularly for children needing special support (OECD, 2001). The OECD’s
4 follow up report, Starting Strong 2 (OECD, 2006) continued to stress the importance of universal access to early childhood services, pointing out that most European OECD countries offered at least two years of government funded provision before children begin compulsory schooling (OECD, 2006). Against such benchmarks Australia lagged far behind. In Australia, efforts aimed at reducing inconsistencies between state education systems were further pursued at a national meeting in April, 2004 of the Ministerial Council on Education, Employment, Training and Youth Affairs (MCEETYA), a body with ministerial representatives for each state and territory. At this meeting, MCEETYA agreed to introduce a uniform school starting age by 2010 along with a common nomenclature for the two years prior to Year One. The Common School Starting Age Project was commissioned to examine the costs, benefits, risks and opportunities that might result from a common school starting age across Australia. Conclusions outlined in the report indicated that while the costs would be substantial in the short term, the economic benefits in the long term would be wide ranging. “Substantial and permanent” benefits (p. xix) also included a smoother transition for children who relocate across states, promotion of a national curriculum, and a fairer assessment regime given that all children compared across one year level would be the same age (Atelier Learning Solutions & Access Economics, 2006). In June 2004, the Australian government issued a draft framework, The National Agenda for Early Childhood (Department of Family and Community Services, 2004) which promoted coherence of early childhood provision across state boundaries and improved access for all children to services. While a common school starting age remains under consideration by national authorities such as MCEETYA, the issue remains unresolved. Meanwhile in Queensland in 2002, the document Education and Training Reforms for the Future (Education Queensland, 2002) was released, announcing “an even better start” (p. 2) in the form of the trial of a full time Preparatory Year of school. Concerns about the Queensland’s literacy results in relation to other states, the ongoing inconsistency of school starting age, the fact that Queensland was the only state without a full time year of education prior to Year One along with an acknowledgement of the needs of working parents had cemented the
5 importance of these reforms (Boyd & Ailwood, 2007). In this way, the introduction of a full time Preparatory Year in Queensland became a significant state wide policy objective. In 2003, 39 government and non government schools introduced a Preparatory Year under the banner of the Preparing for School Trials , (Education Queensland, 2002, p. 3). A further 121 government and non government schools were selected to join the phase in of the Preparatory Year by 2006, along with the implementation of the new Early Years Curriculum Guidelines (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006). In 2007, the full time Preparatory Year of school was offered in all schools throughout the state. A century after the kindergarten movement began in Queensland, parents may now choose between a number of options for the care and education of their four and five year old children in the year before compulsory schooling. Family day care, centre based child care, Crèche and Kindergarten Association and branch centres, state schools and non government schools are among the choices available. Prior to the introduction of the full time Preparatory Year in 2007, it was typical for parents to choose a combination of part time services in order to obtain full time care. C & K, a government funded community based early childhood association, claimed in 2002 to be “the leading non government organisation in the early childhood sector” (C & K, 2002). In the past decade, however, non government schools in Queensland have experienced significant enrolment growth, particularly in the provision of early childhood education (O’Gorman et al., 2004), making these providers a significant current and future participant in the early childhood sector. This is important because it marks a significant change to the Queensland educational context in which the new Preparatory Year has emerged. In the seven years leading up to the announcement of a full time Preparatory Year in Queensland, Preparatory Year programs in non government schools experienced significant enrolment growth, with full time programs becoming increasingly popular (O’Gorman et al., 2004). As full time Preparatory Year programs increased in popularity, non government schools worked quickly to satisfy the demand. The increasing popularity of the non government schooling
6 sector in Queensland is not limited to precompulsory programs and has been further noted in the work of English (2004) and also in relation the broader Australian context (Ailwood, 2007). Indeed, Ailwood suggests that the shift towards the non government sector formed the basis of the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. A number of questions are posed by the increased enrolments in non government schools. Did the full time nature of the non government school programs influence the choices made by these parents? Would the introduction of a full time Preparatory Year in all government schools influence the trends noted by O’Gorman et al. (2004)? Have the ways in which parents conceived of the Preparatory Year phenomenon influenced their choices? These are pressing questions with serious implications for parents, children, the Preparatory Year curriculum and the operations of government and non government ECEC provision. This research project emerges from these unanswered questions.
1.3 Research question and design
The research outlined in this thesis investigated the views of a sample of parents who had chosen a non government school for their children’s Preparatory Year. This enquiry aimed to shed light on parent views of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year at a time of significant change to the provision of early childhood services in Queensland. In so doing, the study provides an approach for ways in which parent views of early childhood programs might be generated, analysed and incorporated into future policy developments and reforms, not only in ECEC but also in subsequent years of schooling. The methodological approach of phenomenography was implemented in this study. Phenomenographic approaches seek to explore variation in the ways in which people conceive of a phenomenon in their world (Marton, 1986). In line with phenomenography, which will be discussed in detail in Chapter 3, the study explored the following major question:
7 How do parents in a non-government school in Queensland view the Preparatory Year?
The issues of increased enrolment in the non government school sector, provision of full time Preparatory Year programs in non government schools, the current introduction of a full time Preparatory Year in Queensland schools, and the paucity of research into parent views of Preparatory Year programs necessitated this research. In light of the reform context and the importance of parent views, the focus of this thesis is the ways in which a group of parents viewed the Preparatory Year. As outlined in greater depth in Chapter 3, a phenomenographic approach dictated that the group of parents chosen for this research needed to have experience with the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. Hence, a non government school with a history of offering a full time program was chosen as the research site. The choice of a non government school for the research was important for at least two reasons. First, the school was eager to provide a forum for parent views and access to these parents was provided through an introduction by a professional colleague. Second, the parents, in most cases, had clear views about the Preparatory Year and were willing to share them. Analysis of interview data revealed that parent views were by no means uniform. Significant variation in the views held about the program was found and will be reported in Chapter 4. Five categories of description emerged from the data, delineated from each other according to a number of structural features and two sets of dimensions of variation. Two categories featured a focus on current needs and three focused on future needs across the temporal dimension . One category was dominated by consideration of the parent , while four were framed around consideration of the child across the beneficiary dimension . Further analysis revealed tension within each of the two dimensions of variation. These tensions were around balancing present concerns and future concerns with the needs of both parents and children. Again, these tensions will be explored in greater depth in Chapter 4.
8 1.4 Terminology
The terms preschool, kindergarten, nursery school and Preparatory Year typically describe the types of early childhood education services provided for children in pre compulsory settings. The term kindergarten is used in the United States (US) (for example, Carlson & Stenmalm Sjöblom, 1989; Graue, 1993; Shepard & Smith, 1988) to describe the full time pre primary year and in various countries in Asia (for example, Dunn & Dasananda, 1995; Seng, 1994). Referring to programs for four year old children, studies based in the United Kingdom (UK) usually refer to nursery school (for example, Evans & Fuller, 1998) or preschool (programs for three to five year old children) (for example, Foot, Howe, Cheyne, Terras, & Rattray, 2000). Preschool is also a term commonly used in Europe to refer more broadly to kindergarten and childcare programs for four to six year old children (for example, Laloumi Vidali, 1998; Ojala, 2000). In the Australian context, a variety of terms are used to refer to the year before primary school, including kindergarten (Dockett & Perry, 2004a; Rodd & Milikan, 1994), Preparatory Year (Education Queensland, 2002; Page, Nienhuys, Kapsalakis, & Morda, 2001), pre-primary (Stamopoulos, 2003), reception , transition , and preschool (for example, Dockett & Perry, 2002; Lockwood & Fleet, 1999). Such inconsistencies occur despite the recommendations that the starting age and terminology for early education be consistent across Australian states (Senate Employment Education and Training Reference Committee, 1996). Varying starting ages and nomenclature for early childhood programs are indicative of complexity within Australia (Walker, 2004). Further, these inconsistencies make international comparisons of early childhood programs problematic, an issue that was noted in the Starting Strong 2 report (OECD, 2006). Until 2007, the term preschool was used to refer to the non compulsory year of education provided to children in Queensland beginning in January of the calendar year they turned five years of age, with compulsory schooling beginning in January of the year they turned six (Press, 2006). Within Queensland until the end of 2006, state government provided part time services were referred to as
9 preschool , with preschool programs also being offered in non government schools, private schools such as Steiner and Montessori schools, Crèche and Kindergarten Association affiliated centres and private child care centres. From 2007, the terms Preparatory Year or Prep are terms used to describe the full time provision that was phased in in various schools in Queensland from 2003 and is now available in all schools across the state, replacing preschool. The year prior to Year One in non government schools also is often referred to as the Preparatory Year , with many schools such as the one that is the focus of this study already using the term for at least ten years.
For the purposes of this thesis, the review of the literature focuses predominantly on studies that have investigated parent views of the year prior to compulsory schooling, including programs offered to four and five year old children. This cohort correlates with the children of the parents who are the focus of this investigation, as these children entered the full time Preparatory Year at the beginning of the year in which they turned five. In this thesis, when discussing the provision for children in Queensland in the non compulsory year before Year One, the term preschool is used to refer to the part time service provided by government schools up until the end of 2006. The term Preparatory Year is used to describe the full time service provided by government schools from 2007 and offered in many non government schools prior to 2007.
1.5 Researcher’s standpoint
The phase in of a full time Preparatory Year of school is a watershed for stakeholders in Queensland education. For the purposes of this thesis, the term stakeholders is used to refer to those with a potential interest in the Preparatory Year; parents, children, teachers, service providers and policy makers. This significant time of educational reform provides a unique opportunity to revisit, examine and identify the views of various stakeholders about curriculum
10 and pedagogy for young children. For the purposes of this study the broad view of curriculum taken by Genishi (1992) is adopted. Genishi suggested that the term refers to more than just events that are planned by the classroom teacher, and also includes environments and relationships within the classroom “community” (p. 4). The notion of curriculum is closely related to that of pedagogy, which is widely understood to relate to the art or science of teaching and learning (Petrie, 2003). During a time of significant change in the provision of early childhood services in all Queensland schools, it is important to pause to identify and explore stakeholder views, and to reflect upon the future directions that early childhood education might take in Queensland. The views of governments, parents and policy makers hold the potential to guide future service provision in this state. Parents, in particular, are the focus of the current study. My interest in parent views emerges, in part, from my work as an early childhood teacher in state primary schools since 1989. This interest is closely connected with my background, training in and personal commitment to early childhood education and child centred curricula for young children. My work in schools has naturally involved many opportunities for communication with the parents of the children whom I have taught. My involvement with parents has confirmed that they hold broad and varying opinions about appropriate curriculum and pedagogy for young children. I undertook this study, therefore, from the perspective of a practitioner researcher. Edwards (2001) described the challenge facing practitioner researchers in early childhood, as they attempt to balance their “engaged commitment to the field” (p. 123) with the need to provide a rigorous, research based interpretation of it. I have arrived at this point in my teaching and research journey with a firm conviction that early childhood educators need to promote their beliefs and, using an evidence base, justify their approaches to curriculum implementation. This is important at any time but, most critically, at times of change. So too, educators respond to the needs of parents as partners in the educational enterprise. My interest in the present reform agenda, of which the Preparing for School Trials
11 (Education Queensland, Office of Strategic Planning and Portfolio Services, 2002) was one component, emerges from concerns about the potential for the “push down” of a more formal curriculum in the future Preparatory Year. This push down phenomenon, which will be explored in greater detail in Chapter 2, maintains wider and enduring relevance in ECEC as documented by Graue (1992), Shepard and Smith (1988), and Walsh (1989) and contemporary Australian researchers such as Corrie (1999) and Grieshaber (2000).
1.6 Significance and timeliness of the study
1.6.1 Significance As introduced in earlier sections of this thesis, the focus of the research has been parent views of the Preparatory Year in a non government school. Research providing insight into parent views of the Preparatory Year is significant during the introduction of this major reform. The study’s significance is further demonstrated in its focus on a group of people with prior experience of the phenomenon, an essential element of the phenomenographic approach. It is arguable that the current changes in ECEC in Queensland are accompanied by a potentially volatile mix of interest, anticipation, excitement and uncertainty by stakeholders including government, school administrators, teachers and parents in Queensland (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007). The focus of this study has been restricted to a group of parents and their views of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. It was not within the scope of the study to examine the views of children with regard to the Preparatory Year, although such a study could well provide an opportunity for worthwhile investigation at a later stage. The non government school chosen for this research is relatively new, celebrating its 10 th anniversary during the year in which data for this study were collected. The school is not an exclusive school and its relatively short history means that it would not be described as being part of the tier of “elite” non government schools. This school is situated in an area of high growth in outer urban south
12 east Queensland. Median household income for this region is comparable with the Australian average (ABS, 2006). Children in the 5 – 14 years age group make up 16.9% of the population compared with 13.5% across Australia, and English is the only language spoken at home for 92.3% compared to 78.5% nationwide (ABS, 2006). For the parents involved in this study, the Preparatory Year was not necessarily a novel concept. Unlike most parents of young children in Queensland, this group of 26 parents were familiar with the concept of the Preparatory Year. Their experience had been shaped by a range of factors, some of which may be easily identified, while other factors that shaped their views may be more difficult to describe. For some of them, their direct experience with the program was limited to the ten months preceding the research interviews, having enrolled children in the program for the first time in 2003. For others, their experience spanned several years as they drew on their familiarity with the program associated with their elder children’s attendance. Many of them were aware of the current educational reforms involving the universal roll out of the Preparatory Year. They were, in a sense, at the centre of this policy change and its accompanying complexities. Interestingly, precisely half of the children whose parents were interviewed for this research would not have been eligible for the Preparatory Year under the 2007 policy, largely owing to their chronological age; that is, they would have been too young. From 2007 the universal Preparatory Year enrols children between the ages of four and a half and five and a half years. When the research was conducted, parents at the research site were able to enrol children who turned five at any time during the year. Thirteen of the 26 children of the participants turned five between July and December of their Preparatory Year and would not be eligible under the new policy arrangements to attend the program until the following year. Indeed, an interview with the Deputy Principal at the research site prior to data collection revealed that, from time to time, three year old children had been accepted into the Preparatory Year program at the school, although there were no
13 such children in the 2003 cohort when interviews with their parents took place. This apparent discrepancy in age of entry provides another perspective from which to view the context in which this study took place. These parents were privileged to the extent that they were able to enrol their children in a program that would not be available to them four years later in any government or non government school in their district, nor, indeed, anywhere in Queensland. Between 1993 and 2006 a window had opened for these parents enabling them to enrol their four year old children in a full time Preparatory Year program. This window was created partly from parent demand and partly by the changes to age of entry that are occurring in 2007. In sum, the views of the Preparatory Year provided by these parents as a result of this window of opportunity offer a rare insight into how parents conceived of the Preparatory Year phenomenon at a critical point in time in Queensland. During the lead up to universal provision of the Preparatory Year in Queensland, a growing number of parents whose children will be enrolled in programs from 2007 onwards had been particularly active in expressing their concerns and interest in the Preparatory Year (Prep Alert, personal communication, December 18, 2006). Figure 1 illustrates the profile of the Preparatory Year in the Queensland print media.
14 Figure 1. Print media headlines referring to the Preparatory Year in Queensland. Along with the universality and the full time nature of the program, one major point of discontent was the adjustment in age of entry into the program. Under the previous preschool arrangements until the end of 2006, children generally attended the program in the year in which they turned five. In a major policy shift, the Preparatory Year is available to children who turn five before June 30. Children whose birthday falls between July 1 and December 30 will attend the program during the year in which they turn six, bringing the school starting age of Queensland children in line with the policies of other Australian states The arrangements for 2007 are unique because only those children turning five before June 30 will be able to access the Preparatory Year, with those who are turning six at any time during the year attending Year One. Effectively, a half cohort of children are accessing the Preparatory Year during 2007. Parents have been, understandably, concerned about how their children will fit age entry criteria for programs beginning in 2007. Some parents would prefer their five year old children (turning six in 2007) to attend the Preparatory Year rather than enter Year One. During 2006 parents were invited to apply to the
15 Department of Education, Training and the Arts if they felt that their children (turning six in 2007) would benefit from Preparatory Year rather than Year One placement. A media release issued in August 2006 announced that more than 4000 parents were successful in applying for their children to enrol in the Preparatory Year rather than Year One in 2007. This represented 91% of applications that were received (Welford, 2006). Other parents have been reported in the media as stating their preference for their four year old children (turning five after June 30 2007) to attend the Preparatory Year rather than other settings such as part time kindergarten or long day care. Another point of contention for parents was the allocation of teacher aide time to Preparatory Year programs. In July 2006, a group of parents gathered in Brisbane to organise protest action against what they perceived to be the limited allocation of teacher aide hours to Preparatory Year programs in state schools and its potentially adverse effect on curriculum, pedagogy and child safety in Preparatory Year settings. During 2006, the DETA initiated a raft of information to parents, announcing the universal availability of the new Preparatory Year and seeking to answer questions about it. At the same time, parents were encouraged to inform their local school of their intention to enrol their children. Schools had responsibilities for preparing for the 2007 roll out and of keeping their parent communities abreast of developments. Communication and information sharing have been generally one way with limited opportunities provided for policy makers and government to consider the ways in which various parent communities might understand the Preparatory Year phenomenon. Given that a full time Preparatory Year has been in existence in many non government schools for at least a decade, it would seem appropriate and, indeed, opportunistic to seek the views of parents who have experienced such a program already. This is especially relevant when the various layers of government and policy makers at state, federal and international levels are increasingly eager to promote the benefits of parent involvement and consultation in ECEC (for example, Commonwealth Government, 2004; OECD 2001, 2006; Queensland
16 Studies Authority, 2006). Given the espoused benefits of parent involvement and consultation in ECEC (see for example, Arthur, Beecher, Dockett, Farmer, & Death, 1996; Berger, 2000; Bowes & Watson, 2004; Hargreaves, 2001; Henry, 1996; Howe, 1999; Siraj Blatchford, Sylva, Muttock, Gilden & Bell, 2002), it is important that governments and policy makers maintain consultation with parents during the roll out and beyond. And yet, commentators such as Woodrow and Brennan (1999) have questioned whether genuine consultation with parents has occurred in past instances of reform to ECEC in Queensland. The Education and Training Reforms for the Future (ETRF) document (Education Queensland, 2002) announced a package of reforms including the Preparing for School Trials and included details of community consultation, but the emphasis leaned towards the reforms affecting older students rather than those in the proposed Preparatory Year. Parent feedback around the proposal for a full time, universal Preparatory Year to replace preschool was hardly alluded to in the ETRF document, aside from the declaration that “parents will decide if their children take part” (p. 14). There was little consultation, if any, over what sort of Preparatory Year program would be valued by parents until the Preparing for School Trials began in 2003. Thorpe et al.’s (2004) evaluation of the trial provided an opportunity for the collection of survey data addressing reasons for choice, parent expectations and satisfaction during the first year of the trial. The current study, though, is unique insofar as it offers detailed examination, using in depth interview data and phenomenographic analysis techniques, of how parents might conceive of the Preparatory Year in a school in which such a program is well established. The prevailing international, national and state policy contexts suggest that parent consultation and participation are legitimate priorities. In light of this priority the current study sought to contribute in ways that might be useful to the various stakeholders involved in the implementation of Queensland’s Preparatory Year. Further, this study contributes to the work of international authors such as Ball, Bowe, and Gewirtz, (1995), Evans and Fuller (1998), Foot et al. (2000), Lockwood and Fleet (1999), Lythe (1997), Ojala, (2000), Vincent and Ball (2001), Wise (2002) and others outlined in Chapter 2 who have explored themes
17 related to the context of the current study. These themes include parent perspectives, preferences, expectations, understandings and experiences of ECEC services and parent involvement and consultation in ECEC. This study, with its focus on parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year program, contributes to the work that has preceded it in the international literature.
1.6.2 Timeliness This study is timely because Queensland is currently (in 2007) introducing a Preparatory Year in all government and non government schools. At this time of significant change in ECEC in Queensland, the Preparatory Year is naturally a topic of concentrated interest. The intense time of debate, introduction and evaluation leading up to this critical point has provided a unique context for research examining and identifying the views held by various stakeholders about early education. During a time of significant change, research into stakeholder views can provide the means by which we can reflect upon past provision and plan future directions for early childhood education. This research makes the most of an opportunity to gauge views about the Preparatory Year at a time when it is very much on the agenda of the stakeholders who are involved in the introduction of this important reform. As discussed earlier, in the lead up to the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland schools, the strong views held by many parents regarding reforms to early childhood service provision were broadcast to the wider community. These current concerns continue to persist and hold the potential for impacting on the introduction of the universal Preparatory Year. It is valuable to consider, therefore, a population of parents who already have experienced a Preparatory Year program as the result of their children’s attendance in one of the approximately 300 non government schools in Queensland offering preschool or Preparatory education. In 2004, more than 6000 children each year were attending full time Preparatory Year programs in these non government schools and from 2004, there were more children enrolled in full time Preparatory Year programs than part time Preparatory (or preschool) programs in non government schools in
18 Queensland (J. Tracey, personal communication, January 17, 2007). In the current context of the Preparatory Year roll out, seeking and examining the views of a group of parents who have experience of these full time programs is both critical and timely. The strength and value of the study lie in its relevance in this period of reform to ECEC in Queensland; a period when an even better start (Education Queensland, 2002, p. 2) to the education of young children is beginning to be espoused in all Queensland government and non government schools. This was an opportune time to ask the underpinning research question of this study: How do parents in a non-government school in Queensland view the Preparatory Year?
1.7 Structure of thesis
This thesis comprises six chapters. The first chapter has provided the background to the study, specifically in relation to the historical context and reform agenda. The central research question of the study has been put forward and terminology has been outlined. Finally, the significance and timeliness of the study have been demonstrated. Chapter 2 consists of an extensive review of several bodies of literature that have informed this study. Of particular relevance to this research was literature addressing non government schooling and the education market, constructions of parents as consumers and participants, the social context of early education, play, transition to school and parent views of early education. The chosen methodological approach, phenomenography, is presented in Chapter 3. The appropriateness of phenomenography for answering the research question is examined and the research methodology is described. Chapter 4 presents the findings of the research. Consistent with a phenomenographic approach, the findings are presented as an outcome space in which five categories of description and two dimensions of variation are identified and examined. In Chapter 5, the findings of the research are discussed in relation to the research literature and the current context of the introduction of the Preparatory Year. The value of a phenomenographic approach to studying parent views of the Preparatory Year is
19 reiterated. A number of caveats to the study are provided, along with opportunities for further research and recommendations for the future. Finally, Chapter 6 provides an overview of the study’s conclusions.
20 CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
2.1 Introduction
In the previous chapter, the contextual background of the current study was described. The significance and timeliness of research into parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year in Queensland were underscored. The primary research question for this study, How do parents in a non-government school in Queensland view the Preparatory Year? was presented as the central avenue of enquiry. This chapter consists of a comprehensive review of literature pertinent to this investigation. The various bodies of literature reviewed in this chapter are representative of a number of pertinent aspects of the overarching social world in which this research took place. Hughes (2001) pointed out that people continually make sense of their circumstances “within a cultural framework of socially constructed and shared meanings” (p. 35). The phenomenon of the Preparatory Year is just one part of this complex social world. Consideration of the broader context in which the study took place is relevant to this thesis. In Chapter 3, an extensive description of the methodological approach of phenomenography is provided. The methodological approach of phenomenography is flagged here in order to bring the reader’s attention to the need to explore the social contexts of the study. Phenomenography’s prime aim is to explore and describe the variation in ways that people experience phenomena in their world (Marton & Booth, 1997). Richardson (1999) went further to suggest that phenomenographic approaches might benefit from deeper consideration of the social and cultural contexts in which thinking about a phenomenon might occur. The literature explored in this chapter deals with a number of these social and cultural contexts in order to illustrate the milieu in which parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year in Queensland occur.
21
Due to the many complex issues that surround the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland and the characteristics of the research site, a number of bodies of literature have informed this study. These fields of research and commentary provide key insight into the social and cultural contexts mentioned previously. This chapter reviews literature that addresses the following topics: • Non government schooling and the education market • Constructions of the role of parents in ECEC • The contested focus of the early childhood curriculum • Play as a focus for learning and teaching in the early years • Transition to school • Studying parent views
2.2 Non-government schooling and the education market
For over a decade, the educational marketplace has been the focus of considerable educational critique. Critical theorists such as Apple (1996, 2001), Ball (2003a), Bowe, Ball and Gold (1992) and commentators Hargreaves and Fullan (1998) have argued that the growth in the educational marketplace has resulted in unfair distribution of school funding, favouring wealthy non government schools to the detriment of public, or government schools. While the work of such theorists relates largely to the phenomenon of the educational marketplace in the US and UK, there is a growing body of literature suggesting the emergence of an education marketplace in Australia as well. The emergence of a marketplace in education, encouraged by overarching free market economies in the US and the UK, has coincided with the growth of private sector schooling and subsequent negative impact on public education (Apple, 1996, 2001; Hargreaves & Fullan, 1998). And yet, there are those who believe that support for public education and for public sector teachers ought to be the major priorities of education reform in the 21 st century (Hargreaves, 2001, Walford, 2006). Apple (1996, 2001) has been highly critical of the strengthening
22 conservative movement in the US, with its continuing assumption that public education is a “key enemy” of those on the right of the political spectrum (Apple, 2001, p. 173) and the threat such a movement represents to the future of state education. The move towards “conservative modernisation” (Apple, 2001, p. 5) is propelled by a view of a weak state and is reflected in the widely held assumption that public education is failing: …What is private is necessarily good and what is public is necessarily bad. Public institutions such as schools are “black holes” into which money is poured – and then seemingly disappears – but which do not provide anywhere near adequate results. (Apple, 2001, p. 38) Emotive references to children being “trapped” (p. 1) in “failing” (p. 1) and “dangerous” (p. 3) schools have become a feature of policy documents such as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) legislation (The White House, 2001) in the US. Such terms have been vigorously critiqued by authors such as Hargreaves (2004) and Houston (2005). The promotion of voucher plans and tax credits in the US, was an idea first proposed in the 1960s (Marginson, 1997a). Such strategies have served to promote competition in schooling through the provision of incentives for attendance at private schools and strengthening the notion of a free market in education while at the same time impeding educational reforms that may have supported notions of social justice and democracy (Apple, 1996). In a further prediction of the effect of an expanding private education sector in the US, Hargreaves and Fullan (1998) issued the following warning: Teachers and parents observe democracy deteriorating every time the gap between a privileged and unprivileged learner widens, every time the public school system weakens and independent schools become the institutions of choice for those who can afford it. (p. 15) So too, the belief that the standard of public education will improve through the influence of market forces and self management has also infiltrated schooling
23 since the 1990s in the UK (Bowe, Ball & Gold, 1992). In the UK, the marketing and promotion of education have become big business, with many educational institutions setting up enterprise and marketing sections (Maguire, Ball & Macrae, 1999). There are those such as British researcher and theorist Geoffrey Walford who believe that government policy promoting increased choice in schooling is not neutral. Rather, such policies may be reflective of a wider programme on the part of the political right to “increase individualistic competitiveness and reduce the role of the state” (Walford, 2006, p. 13). Rather than being the ‘natural’ pair with diversity, government policy on choice is more appropriately paired with competition, selection and privatization. (Walford, 2006, p. 13) Walford’s critique of political rhetoric regarding meeting the needs of diverse populations by increasing choice in education is worth noting. Additionally, endeavours of Western government to promote the privatisation of education may have broader implications than increased competition between schools and shifts in funding arrangements. Ball (2003b) took this discussion of increased competition in education a step further in a critique of the education market in the UK. He suggested that educational reforms valorising marketing and competition are profoundly altering the nature of teaching itself, as teachers become increasingly concerned with their own performance at the expense of individual beliefs and commitments regarding what might be best for children.
2.2.1 An education marketplace in Australia
Australia has a history of frequent changes in education policy (Marginson, 1997a). As in the US and UK, the past two decades in Australia have seen a change in direction towards a “quasi market of a system of self managed schools” (Karmel, 2000, p. 7). In 1997, the Australian federal government abolished what was known as the New Schools Policy . This policy had, between 1985 and 1996, contained the growth of the private sector in education through restrictive funding criteria at the federal level (Kemp, 1996). A change of federal
24 government to the conservative parties in 1996 and the almost immediate retraction of the New Schools Policy enabled the unencumbered emergence of a large number of new non government schools (Marginson, 1997a). Concomitant with these changes to funding to government and non government schools has been an increase in the tendency to perceive the Australian education context as a marketplace (Karmel, 2000). The increased emphasis on private schooling in Australia has occurred at a time in which funding to the non government sector has increased steadily. Commentators such as Morrow, Blackburn and Gill (1998), have suggested that the notion of “greater choice” is a euphemistic term referring to an unregulated education market in Australia. The twin tenets of competition and choice, favoured by the current conservative federal government in Australia, have spawned a host of policies that have cleared the way for parents to choose non government schools for their children (Morgan, 2000). These increased choices come as a direct result of the ever growing number of well funded non government schools that are now available in the market and to which parents are increasingly turning. Australia is unique in its policy of redistributing taxpayer funds towards non government schools (Morrow et al., 1998), enabling those schools to source funds from the government as well as raising substantial funds through their fee structures. Critics of this funding regime, under which well resourced non government schools are seen to flourish while the government sector struggles, point to an education marketplace in which the private sector is seen to be presented with an unfair advantage. Those such as Marginson (1997a) who have questioned school funding arrangements in Australia, have called for a more egalitarian approach in their critique of the current federal government’s funding policies. …the model was that of a market of competing institutions, powered by the struggle for individual advantage, rather than a system based on common good. (Marginson, 1997a, p. 3)
25 Marginson was referring to the proliferation of new non government schools, supported by increased government grants, which emerged in Australia during the late 1990s. At the same time as this was occurring, many small government schools were forced to close due to costs associated with keeping them running. Shifts in the enrolment balance between the government and non government schooling sectors within the education marketplace were also scrutinized by Smith (1993) prior to the election of the current federal government. Emphasising the way in which the role of parents as consumers may dictate the education market, Smith flagged the potential for parents, as consumers, to influence education as a result of their choice. Indeed, Smith (1993) predicted that “schools which meet with parental approval will flourish, while those which do not will be forced to close” (p. 184), resulting in a climate of competition rather than co operation in the mutual enterprise of educating children. Education has become an increasingly marketable commodity both in Australia and overseas. While the literature reviewed in this section has addressed the education market in a broad sense, there is a growing body of work that has investigated the marketisation of the education of young children specifically. In the next section, literature addressing the notion of early childhood education as a marketable commodity will be examined.
2.2.2 Early childhood education as a marketable commodity
Until recently, discussions of the education marketplace have focussed predominantly on the choices made on behalf of children during their compulsory school years. A growing number of authors are now considering the notion of a market in early childhood education and care, although this remains largely an Anglo American concept rather than a feature of the European context (Vincent & Ball, 2001). In Australia, as in the US and UK, the emergence and increasing dominance of private childcare services has resulted in greater acknowledgement of a competitive market in ECEC (Goodfellow, 2005; Press, 2006; Sumsion, 2006).
26 Marginson (1997a, 1997b) described Australian education as a marketplace, with early childhood education viewed as offering children “superior pathways to the key institutions at later levels” (Marginson, 1997b, p. 43). While the notion of ensuring children are prepared for access to advantageous placements in the future may be a feature of the ECEC marketplace, other authors suggest that further considerations have also emerged in the context of the market. Grieshaber (2000) suggested that the early childhood context in Queensland, for example, is increasingly characterised by competition for clientele and that curriculum features and operating hours are key selling points. The introduction of the Queensland’s Preschool Curriculum Guidelines (Queensland School Curriculum Council, 1998) also prompted discussion of marketisation within the local early childhood sector. Woodrow and Brennan (1999) predicted that the state wide adoption of the Guidelines (QSCC, 1998) was likely to encourage increased competition within the early childhood sector as the implementation of the Guidelines and associated professional development program could be used as marketing tools. These authors suggested that curriculum, for the first time in Queensland ECEC, would be used as “an instrument of competition” (p. 87) between different sectors of the early childhood marketplace in their competition for clientele. Early childhood curriculum, itself, is unlikely to be the only tool used by service providers to improve their position in the so called early childhood marketplace. As an increasing number of non government schools in Australia have offered full time pre compulsory programmes for many years on the basis that the full time nature of these programs is a significant contributor to this increased market share (Tayler, Diezmann, Lennox, Perry & Watters, 1999). The educational marketplace is, therefore, a feature of the Australian early childhood education landscape and it exists as a key detail in the background of the current study. The location of the school in this study is important. Considerable increases in enrolment in non government schools in recent years have been a feature of Australian education. The Queensland education context, particularly in the south east corner of the state, is characterised by a proliferation of new non government schools, usually called “colleges.” Typically, these schools rely
27 heavily on marketing techniques aimed at attracting parents who are considered aspirational (English, 2004). This is illustrated particularly clearly within the Queensland context and pre Year One enrolments in Queensland shed further light on this trend. The enrolment statistics outlined in the previous chapter show that enrolment in non government preschool or Preparatory Year education in non government schools in Queensland has dramatically increased in recent years. This background of increasingly popular non government schooling options for parents validates a review of literature dealing with non government schooling and the notion of an education marketplace. It is clear that, in Queensland, there has been an increase in the number of non government schools that are able of offer parents a full time Preparatory Year (O’Gorman et al., 2004). An exploration of parent views of a Preparatory Year program in a non government school will shed light on the complex interplay of factors such as parent beliefs regarding programs for young children and the subsequent choices that are made. Such an exploration is particularly relevant at a time in Queensland when a full time Preparatory Year is being implemented in all government and non government schools for the first time in over 50 years. If Queensland parents consider themselves to be involved in an education marketplace, as the literature suggests, then the introduction of the Preparatory Year will add a new and desirable product, bringing with it the marketplace connotations of choice and competition. This important reform, therefore, represents a considerable expansion of the early childhood marketplace in Queensland. In this marketplace the consumer parent stands to be a major player and the views that parents hold regarding the Preparatory Year stand to be influential. The following section explores the literature addressing parents as consumers whose views of early education may affect their choice of school.
28 2.3 Constructions of the role of parents in ECEC
In an educational marketplace, the literature positions parents as “customer, manager or partner” (Munn, 1993, p. 9) or as “consumers, partners or citizens” (Vincent, 2000, p. 1). Considering two of these constructions – the parent as consumer and the parent as partner – is important in this study because of the increased influence of the educational marketplace in ECEC and the ongoing emphasis in the literature on authentic engagement of parents in the education of their young children.
2.3.1 Parents as consumers The literature discussed in the previous sections points to the emergence of an education marketplace in which government and non government schools and ECEC services are viewed in competition with one another for clientele. Within the context of the market, parents can be seen to be consumers of educational services (Moss, 2005; Munn, 1993; Vincent, 2000). In this construction, a parent is viewed as “an autonomous and calculating consumer who must take responsibility for making choices to meet his or her own needs and those of his or her family” (Moss, 2005, p. 410). Similarly, in relation to the Australian childcare market, Goodfellow (2005) proposed that “choice must take into account the interests and needs of the consumer” (p. 60). However, the interests and needs of the parent consumer may not always be easy to identify. In a recent report on ECEC policy directions in Australia, Press (2006) came to the conclusion that parents of young children must take into account a complex array of interrelated factors when choosing provision for their children. These factors include unpaid household responsibilities, income, work characteristics and the expectations and judgements of others (Press, 2006). Ball (2003a) proposed that when selecting schools for their children, parents make complex choices based on their values, practical concerns and deep seated beliefs about what might be best for their children. Indeed, Ball suggested that such choices occur in a complex milieu in which parents they may not always be cognisant of reasons for choice themselves. He warns us not to take parents’ professed reasons for choice of school at face
29 value. This is particularly relevant when we consider the full time nature of the Preparatory Year in many non government schools in Queensland. Authors such as Brannen and Moss (1991) in the UK and Pocock (2005) in Australia have explored the tensions and feelings of guilt felt by parents who require full time care for their children as a result of work commitments. The complexities around parent choice of school affirm the value of a phenomenographic study in which the views held by parents are explored in great depth. Such empirical research supports the work of Ball and others who have investigated the views and beliefs about schools and education that are held by parents. There is evidence in the literature that parent consumer views affect their choice of school. According to Kingwill and Fegan (2001), social, cultural and economic diversity play a major role in the manner in which parents view education and subsequently make choices for their children’s early schooling. Some commentators have suggested that the construct of the parent as consumer presents parents as having a degree of influence that has the potential to shape educational reform. Stambach (2001) suggested that, “the language of ‘choice’ in schooling puts parents at the centre of school reform” (p. 213). In an education marketplace, parent consumers will simply choose those schools or ECEC services that they feel will best suit themselves and their children. It is, imperative, therefore, that we consider the views and preferences of parents during this period of educational reform in Queensland, particularly now that many parents are making their schooling choice before their children reach the first year of compulsory school. Variation in parent views regarding the education of their young children is reflected, to some extent, in the literature that addresses choice of school. The complex interplay between parent views of children, early childhood education and schooling sets the scene for a multifaceted picture in which parental choice of programs and schools appears as an important detail. Australian commentator Pat Reeve (1993), expanding on the notion of “parents as consumers” (p. 6), linked the underlying view of parent participation to the debate around private (or independent) schooling in Australia. Reeve noted that what parents view as a
30 good education influences choice and this is further connected with the rise of private schooling in Australia. The most important activity for parents in this image is to choose the most appropriate school for their children; one which supports the values and religious or cultural beliefs of the home and provides an educational service that reflects the parents’ views of a good education. (Reeve, 1993, p. 7) Hence, parents’ role as consumers of educational services is closely connected with their views of what constitutes quality education. Typically, a quality education is defined in relation to providing individual advantage rather than in relation to the common good of all children (Ball, 2003a). In the UK, the parent as consumer discourse emerged at the same time as a shift away from a consideration of education for the common good and towards its construction as a private right. The role of the parent as consumer is congruent with the traditional parental concern for the schooling of his or her own child. It emphasises private rights and interests, not the collective welfare of children in schools. (Munn, 1993, p. 6) The individualistic aspirations of the consumer parent in Queensland are confirmed in the 2002 newsletter of the Association of Independent Schools of Queensland (AISQ) (“Keeping Up in a Competitive Environment,” 2002). This newsletter reported results of a survey undertaken in 2002 identifying factors that influence parent choice of non government schools in Queensland. These factors included the provision of an education that would prepare the child to fulfil his/her maximum potential, good discipline and the encouragement of a responsible attitude to schoolwork. Further, parents valued the partnerships between the school community and parents, ethics and values, and the high quality of teachers in non government schools. These factors are clearly attracting increasing numbers of parent consumers to select non government
31 schools in Queensland for the education of their children, and the findings suggest that greater value is placed on the aspirations for individual success rather than promoting a high quality education for all. Yet, the issues surrounding parental choice of school maybe more complex than is suggested by the Keeping Up in a Competitive Environment (2002) newsletter. In their study of parental choice of high school in the UK, Ball et al. (1995) suggested that “parents are oriented culturally and materially differently towards the education market” (p. 74). While some parents view it as a market, others do not; and parents expect different things from it. Ball et al. (1995) identified social class differences in the ways that parents chose high schools for their children. Working class parents, for example, considered the “practical and immediate,” while the middle class discourse is strongly characterised by the “ideal and advantageous” (p. 74). Additionally, Connell (1998, p. 92) suggested that within the Australian education market, parents who choose non government schooling for their children are “buying an educational and social advantage for their children” (original emphasis). Within the context of the present study, it is likely that the notion of an educational and social advantage raised by Connell might play a part in the ways that parents view a program such as the Preparatory Year, particularly as this study took place in a non government school. It is clear that the construction of parent as consumer is a feature of the educational landscape in Australia. It also appears as a feature of ECEC services, particularly in relation to the private childcare market (Goodfellow, 2005). It would not be unreasonable to surmise that the way in which parents view early childhood programs is likely to influence their choice of the most desirable ECEC service. The particular program or school characteristics that loom largest in the minds of parent consumers as they make their choice will vary, and this is reflected in the literature, as studies have revealed a range of school or program characteristics that might be most influential. Given that non compulsory early childhood programs variously cater for children in the 0 to 5 age group, it is not surprising that research conducted by Canadian authors Pence and Goelman (1987) and British authors Foot et al. (2000)
32 suggested that an important factor in choice of program was the age of children as they progress through the early childhood years. Desire for settings that were most likely to meet parent requirements in terms of preparation for school was more likely to be expressed, understandably, as children approached the age for compulsory school. However, some authors have suggested that parents may be casting their gaze further than the criterion of preparation for their child’s first year of compulsory schooling when they make their choice. For example, Vincent and Ball (2001) found that when parents were considering childcare placement, they were also mindful of giving their children the best chance in a congested labour market in the future. Other important factors in parent choice of ECEC service were described by Pence and Goelman (1987). When examining parental choice of preschool education in Canada, Pence and Goelman noted that the major factors that parents considered were aspects of the program and characteristics of the caregiver. Rodd and Milikan’s (1994) Australian study revealed that parents consider availability in the local area, affordability, operating hours and program quality as major factors in their choice of care. In contrast to Pence and Goelman (1987), Rodd and Milikan (1994) found that convenience and location were more prominent considerations than educational or learning criteria when parents chose a setting for their child. In her study of parent experiences of early childhood services in New Zealand, Lythe (1997) found that, among the main factors that parents considered when choosing a primary school for their children, were proximity, reputation and previous family attendance. These three factors also featured in the reasons for parent choice of a prior to school ECEC service, with the notable inclusion of whether the service suited the needs of parents. Lythe’s research suggested that the needs of parents were a particularly relevant consideration when parents were first time users of an ECEC service. In Australia, Whitton (2005) found that parents of gifted children were particularly focussed on choosing a school that satisfied their criterion for a program promoting the individual academic progress of the child.
33 In the Australian context, it has been shown that the provision of full-time pre compulsory programs for young children has been influential in parents’ choice of ECEC service. Non government sector provision of full time services has, in many cases, met the demands of working parents, and once parents have chosen non government schools for their child’s pre compulsory year, they tend to continue their attendance at that school (Tayler et al., 1999). This suggestion places the current study in an interesting position. While this research is clearly informed by previous work investigating how parents choose ECEC services for their children, the situation of the program in a primary school setting means that this study is also informed by and considers parent choice of venue for formal schooling. There has been extensive discussion in the literature of the role of parents as consumers of education services for their children, both in school and prior to school settings. The consequences of this construction of parents as consumers are that providers of ECEC need to be aware that parents base their choices on a number of factors including their own needs and perceptions of the type of program that will best meet the needs of their children. There is increasing recognition in Australia and elsewhere of a marketplace in ECEC with parents being constructed as key players in that market as consumers of services. Services such as Preparatory Year programs in Queensland may be of continuing interest to parent consumers in this state. A greater understanding of how these parents view such programs will be vital. A further body of literature explores the notion of partnerships between ECEC services and parents, and this construction of the role of parents is also worthy of consideration in this review.
2.3.2 Parents as partners
The role of parents in schools and in ECEC is typically constructed as that of a partner working in collaboration with educators for the benefit of the child. Recognition has been given to the crucial role that parents play in the education of
34 young children (OECD, 2001, 2006) and the importance of encouraging parent involvement in schools (for example, Berger, 2000; Henry, 1996; Munn, 1993; Vincent, 2000). Parents are widely recognised as the first and primary educators of their children. Their influence on young children’s early development including their education is paramount (OECD, 2001). The rhetoric of partnerships has long been a feature of commentary about early education, both internationally and in the Australian literature, and yet there may be a gap between rhetoric and practice. There is yet to be a body of evidence that examines the take up of the rhetoric of parent partnerships in practice. Policy and curriculum documents indicate that state education authorities in Queensland endorse partnerships between early childhood staff and families. The important contributions made by families and carers to children’s learning and development are acknowledged in the recently published Early Years Curriculum Guidelines (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006). This document and its predecessor, The Preschool Curriculum Guidelines (QSCC, 1998) acknowledge the value of parents’ contributions in preschool/ Preparatory Year settings and also to the learning that occurs outside of those formal settings. Social and cultural diversity of parents and children is recognised, information and perspectives are shared, and ideas are responded to, all with the aim of making the transition from home to program as successful as possible for the child. The child may not always be the sole beneficiary of teacher parent partnerships. For example, Tobin, Wu and Davidson (1989) found that many Japanese preschools actively seek to support and to provide socialisation for young parents. Active and open communication between early childhood staff and parents is believed to promote respect and to provide the means of responding to each participant’s expertise and knowledge. These partnerships, then, become important vehicles which enable collaborative contribution to the learning and development of the young child (QSCC, 1998; Queensland Studies Authority, 2006), although authors such as Woodrow and Brennan (1999) have questioned whether genuine consultative partnerships are possible with the introduction of state wide mandated curricula. They proposed that, as knowledge in the form of early childhood curriculum becomes “more centrally controlled and codified” (p.
35 88), achievement of authentic partnerships with parents becomes an unrealistic goal. It is broadly accepted within the early childhood field that one of the principal objectives of professionals is to actively seek a deeper understanding of the children and families with whom they work. While fruitful partnerships with parents are highly valued in education, the parent/teacher relationship may be vexed by unaligned expectations and approaches (Hargreaves, 2001; Tobin et al., 1989). Moreover, parents themselves often experience confusion and conflict with regard to their own role in raising and educating their children (Moqvist, 2003). Although parents and teachers may have differing and sometimes opposing perspectives on children, childhood or education (Tobin, 2005), their relationship may also be characterised by a necessary reliance of one upon the other. The literature dealing with parent/teacher relationships typically presents the view that the parties, ideally, may complement each other, with the enrichment of the young child’s experiences at school and in the home the ultimate result (see for example, Arthur et al., 1996; Berger, 2000; Bowes & Watson, 1999; Hargreaves, 2001; Henry, 1996; Howe, 1999). Significant recent research emerging from the UK strongly emphasises the benefits of partnerships with parents in early childhood settings. Siraj Blatchford et al. (2002) found that when teachers and parents were able to find common ground in terms of educational aims and children were supported at home, the children achieved positive developmental outcomes. Arthur et al. (1996) suggested that achieving an understanding of the needs and expectations of families is a crucial first step in establishing productive teacher parent partnerships. Page et al. (2001) however, pointed out the paucity of research into parents’ expectations of the “early childhood experience” (p. 43, 44) and professionals’ responses to those parent beliefs. In an extensive review of the large body of research addressing transition to school, Yeboah (2002) suggested that there has been wide support in the literature for the assumption that when parents, teachers and children work together as equal partners the transition to school is made easier for young children. Yeboah
36 noted, however, that authors such as Katz (1984) and Lareau (1989; cited in Yeboah, 2002) pointed out problematic aspects of parent teacher partnerships and the “need to separate the roles of parents and teachers” (p. 62). Partnerships with parents are necessarily grounded in consideration of the views they hold about young children. This becomes particularly challenging when parents hold views about quality early childhood programs that may differ radically from accepted beliefs amongst educators (Tobin, 2005). Further, in a critique of community involvement and parent partnerships in education, American post structural author Bloch (2003) challenged some of the prevalent and powerful governing discourses of the 20 th and early 21 st centuries. These discourses: …focus on localization, bringing in the community, empowerment of marginalized voices, and bringing partners and new voices to the table. They privilege discourses of privatization (parent involvement, private public partnerships) and the realm of private lives, while continuing to administer that privacy. (Bloch, 2003, p. 220) Bloch’s point here is that while the rhetoric of involving parents and the wider community in genuine decision making maintains its currency, there are limits to the degree to which schools are willing to authentically relinquish control. According to Petriwskyj, Thorpe and Tayler (2005), the unequal nature of family school power relationships has not been extensively addressed in the literature and needs to be explored in greater depth, particularly within the context of children’s transition to school. Given the diversity of opinion regarding what preschool should be like (See, for example, Carlson & Stenmalm Sjöblom, 1989; Evans & Fuller, 1998; Foot et al., 2000; Ojala, 2000; Wise, 2002), it is important that stakeholders in preschool education (i.e., parents, teachers, policy makers) have the ongoing opportunity to work collaboratively and listen to each other (Graue, 1993). This becomes a key issue during times of transition, such as that characterising the current context in Queensland. During a period of policy change, unrecognised differences in needs,
37 values and expectations between parents and policymakers could result in future consequences that impact negatively on young children (Laloumi Vidali, 1998). It is important, therefore, for each to understand the other and to be able to work together for the benefit of young children. Indeed, better outcomes for children are expected when parents and teachers collaborate. For example, Australian researchers Lockwood and Fleet (1999) found that parent expectations of programming and assessment procedures in the preschool program of a day care centre in Sydney were both aligned with those of the staff and were at variance with what the staff expected. In this case, the staff assumed that the parents desired a more formal interpretation of the preschool curriculum and a focus on early academic development, whereas the parents in fact supported a program that valued social and emotional skills and a positive attitude to learning. The authors of this study called for genuine involvement of parents in ECEC so that program expectations and goals might be shared across parent teacher partnerships. Engagement with parents, whether they are constructed as consumers, partners or in other ways, is a means by which the social context may influence the ECEC curriculum. Further, relationships between parents and other stakeholders in ECEC stand to influence the ways in which programs for young children are viewed. Hence, a study of how a group of parents within the marketplace view the program attended by their children makes an important contribution to the literature that has been examined in this section. Such a study has particular relevance given that the program in question, the Preparatory Year in Queensland represents a significant change to ECEC provision. However, this social environment extends far beyond relationships between schools, ECEC providers and parents to include constructions of childhood itself and the notion of what constitutes an appropriate focus of the early childhood curriculum. Literature dealing with the broader social context of early education will now be considered.
38 2.4 The contested focus of the early childhood curriculum
The early childhood curriculum and, indeed, constructs of childhood itself (Burman, 1994) exist within a broader sociocultural context, which includes the demographic, social political conditions that characterise the larger society, and includes its ideologies and traditions (Kessler, 1992). In turn, the decision to trial a full time Preparatory Year in Queensland schools is linked inextricably to current social and political conditions in which it occurred. Research into parent views of Preparatory Year programs requires preliminary investigation of the literature that deals with the current political and social landscape and its potential impact on the provision of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. Further, it can be argued that parent views regarding their young children’s education, in general, and the Preparatory Year, in particular, may be influenced by those same sociocultural contexts. A longstanding debate addressing what constitutes appropriate learning for children in non compulsory settings has taken place in recent decades and continues within the current context of Queensland’s introduction of the full time Preparatory Year (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007). According to New (1999), decisions regarding “when” and “if” to formally educate young children are connected to broader beliefs about children themselves and their relationship to the social milieu of which they are part. In Australia, this debate has led, in part, to a growing body of research dealing with children’s transition to compulsory schooling (for example, Dockett & Perry, 2002; Perry, Dockett & Howard, 2000; Raban & Ure, 2000; Sanagavarapu, & Perry, 2005; Whitton, 2005). In the period since the 1980s, commentators in the US, UK and Australia have described a reshaping of the expectations that are placed on children as they complete their non compulsory preschool education. Policy initiatives such as the No Child Left Behind (NCLB) (The White House, 2001) legislation in the US placed the educational expectations of young children firmly on the agenda. Specific emphasis in the NCLB proposal was placed on school accountability, parent and student choice – particularly for those children “trapped in a failing school” (p.1) – greater flexibility for spending government funds and a high
39 prioritisation of improved reading skills (The White House, 2001). The latter focus, that of improved reading skills, involved awarding competitive grants to Local Education Authorities “to support early language, literacy, and pre reading development of preschool age children, particularly those from low income families” (p. 3). This suggests that a focus on early academic skills, particularly literacy, remains a high priority for the preschool years. In Australia and the US the rhetoric of “readiness” has steadily shifted from the “ready to learn” agenda to the ubiquitous notion that children ought to be “ready for school” (Dockett & Perry, 2002; Graue, 1992). The consequences of this have been noted for nearly two decades and a vigorous critique of constructs of readiness is emerging (e.g. Graue, 2006; Snow, 2006). US authors, Shepard and Smith (1988), and Graue (1992) observed that parents had begun delaying their children’s entry into formal schooling, and the curriculum for kindergarten was subtly adjusted to meet the needs of the older children. The NCLB legislation (The White House, 2001) provided impetus for a continued emphasis on the acquisition of early literacy skills in early childhood settings across the US. Parent nostalgia for schools as they used to be, characterised by strong standards and simple teaching approaches (Hargreaves, 2001) may also shape curriculum in the early years. Further factors placing pressure on early childhood programs to implement formal approaches are outlined in a description of policy shifts around issues of parent employment and school standards in the UK by Moss (1999) who suggested the following: Viewed from the perspective of these imperative projects, young children are understood primarily as dependants of their parents, in need of ‘child care’ to enable their parents’ employment, and as ‘becoming’ school children and economically active adults. (Moss, 1999, p. 235) Moss’ point here suggests an increasing focus on preparing young children for school and adulthood in the early childhood years. Programs are valued according to the extent to which they meet the needs of working parents and prepare children for the short and longer term future.
40 Shepard and Smith (1988) also noted that universal kindergarten provision across the US has resulted in first grade teachers assuming that children beginning school have a common set of prerequisites. What was previously considered the first grade curriculum had filtered down into kindergarten. Similarly in the UK, it has been argued by educational researchers such as Aubrey (2004) that the implementation of the Foundation Stage curriculum in reception classes has resulted in a tension between play based approaches and the content driven outcomes aspired to in the early years of school. She explains: The tension within early years settings between planning a curriculum that is taught informally with a mix of child initiated and adult directed tasks, in keeping with children’s interests, experience and previous learning and the exigencies of a prescribed, heavily structured curriculum endures. This is a tension that resides in the policy documents … is reflected in teachers’ own uncertainty and, inevitably, is translated into practice. (Aubrey, 2004, p. 655) Mandated curricula in the early childhood years may encourage a move away from child responsive practices such that teachers may have little choice but to implement a curriculum that is out of alignment with their own philosophies and beliefs. The complexities around this issue are explored further by the work of authors such as Stipek & Byler (1997) who suggested that the enacted curriculum may in some cases be quite different to the planned curriculum in early childhood settings. Evidence from the literature suggests, however, that the push down of formal curriculum into preschool contexts may not be as widespread as we might assume. Tobin et al.’s (1989) major comparative study investigated attitudes towards preschool in China, Japan and the US. The study revealed that preparation for school was constructed differently in Japan compared to the US and China, where an early academic start was highly valued. According to Tobin et al.,
41 To prepare children for successful careers in first grade and beyond, Japanese preschools teach not reading, writing, and mathematics but more fundamental preacademic skills, including perseverance, concentration, and the ability to function as a member of a group. (Tobin et al., 1989, p. 192) Notions of an early academic start are evident, too, in Queensland. When, in 1998, the Preschool Curriculum Guidelines (QSCC, 1998) were introduced, Grieshaber (2000) raised concerns regarding the “push down” of formal curriculum into the preschool year. She cautioned that universal and mandatory implementation of the (then) new curriculum might lead to greater emphasis on outcomes based school like approaches rather than the more informal, and to some extent intangible effects of a child centred preschool curriculum (Grieshaber, 2000, Woodrow & Brennan, 1999). The distinctly different histories of, and research approaches within, early childhood education and school education may have served to prop up the divide between the two sectors in the past. According to Bloch (1992) the different histories of early childhood education and elementary school education in the US have had an important influence on the conduct of research in those two fields. While studies of early childhood education have traditionally been shaped by psychological and child development perspectives, more general schools of education have been informed by interpretivist, critical and post modern paradigms. As a result of this paradigmatic mismatch, child development theorists who have historically advocated for child responsive practices have found themselves to be at odds with those calling for more traditional methods of teaching. Burman (1994) further explored the distinctions between child centred and educational approaches that have distinguished between early childhood settings and schools: While there are clearly major differences of approach between the different theorists, broadly speaking all subscribed to a ‘child centred’
42 approach, in the sense of advocating that education should be oriented towards children’s interests, needs and developmental growth and informed by an understanding of child development. This approach contrasts with an educational approach emphasising performance in terms of the achievement of standard forms of accreditation, with a fixed curriculum divided into specific disciplines, and with formal teaching methods. (Burman, 1994, p. 164) The US experience over the past two decades has seen the increasing prevalence of early childhood programs in school settings. From the 1990s, authors such as Kessler (1992) have tracked this trend and its influence on the pedagogical practices and the experience of young children. Similarly, the scene may be set to change in Queensland, as the physical, administrative and perhaps philosophical boundaries that formerly separated preschool settings from the influence of the primary school weaken. Recently, Hard and O’Gorman (2007) revisited the potential for the “push down” of formal curriculum in Queensland, situating this phenomenon within the context of the introduction of the Preparatory Year. In light of the reform agenda, they call for leadership within the ECEC field in order to resist this so called push down of formal, teacher directed pedagogy in the Preparatory Year. The current study stands to make a valuable contribution to the discussion of the push down trend, as the current body of literature suggests that this phenomenon comes into clear focus in relation to the transition from precompulsory to compulsory education. The literature suggests that internationally, as well as in Australia, the push down influence of formal, academic curricula into early education programs has been a feature of many contexts. Many voices are contributing to the contested focus of the early childhood curriculum. Ailwood (2007) suggests that, as a result of the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland “the space for a shift in early childhood discourses has opened up” (p. 15). The current study of parent views of the Preparatory Year will provide valuable insight on the contested focus and shifting discourses that characterise the Queensland context.
43 At the same time that the push down trend has been noted, a number of authors have proposed that the powerful rhetoric of child developmentalism and children’s needs ought to be challenged and critiqued. If we assume that the views that parents hold about young children and early education are likely to be informed by factors such as the push down influence and discourses of child development and needs, then a review of the literature dealing with the latter notions is required.
2.4.1 Developmental psychology and children’s needs
Notions of exemplary early childhood programs point to underlying assumptions about the “normal” development of young children. Burman (1994) underscored the unspoken, yet powerful role of developmental psychology and its influence on the way we construct our understandings of children and families: Developmental psychology, more than any other variety of psychology, has a powerful impact on our everyday lives and ways of thinking about ourselves. Its effects are so great that they are often almost imperceptible, taken for granted features about our expectations of ourselves, others, parents, children and families. (Burman, 1994, p. 2) Burman (1994) suggested here that principles emanating from developmental psychology have become, in Western cultures, an intrinsic part of understandings of ourselves and others. These principles have become so prevalent that they are broadly accepted as truth and are not usually questioned. So powerful is the notion of child development that its influence extends to the ways that parents view their own children in relation to others and their children’s progress in school (and prior to school) settings: Developmental milestones structure mothers’ observations of their offspring, such that they worry about the rate of progress, and induce competition between parents by inviting comparisons between children, reflecting the structuring of ‘normal development’ as measurable through
44 the ranking of individuals. Development thus becomes an obstacle race, a set of hoops to jump through, with cultural kudos accorded to the most advanced, and the real or imagined penalties of professional intervention or stigmatisation if progress is delayed. (Burman, 1994, p. 58) Here, Burman’s describes the inflexible and powerful framework provided by developmental psychology and the effect such a framework has on the way we view young children’s progress. The idea of “normal development” has become a talisman for success in the lives of young children and their parents. All is well when the developmental milestones are achieved, but any departure from the framework is met with anxiety and calls for remedy. The early childhood teaching profession has joined with parents in holding up developmental theory as the basis for planning environments for young children and making judgements about them. Indeed, Ryan and Grieshaber (2005) suggest that “the developmental knowledge base has been the early childhood teacher’s regime of truth” (p. 38), or, as Fleer (2006) suggests, in ECEC child development has become “a taken for granted cultural practice” (p. 7). In recent times, authors such as Bloch (1992, 2003) and Silin (1995) (US), Burman (1994) (UK) and Ryan and Grieshaber (2005) have vigorously critiqued what had been widely accepted theories regarding child development and practices that are assumed to promote them. These critiques of developmentalism and broader positivist traditions were not necessarily welcomed by the early childhood field during their emergence in the early 1990s (Bloch, 1992). Despite this early marginalisation, the movement towards reconceptualising early childhood education has continued and grown since that time. That there may be more to the child development movement than meets the eye was summed up by Silin (1995): A theory of education is not only a theory of individual growth but also a theory of political and social power. (p. 87)
45 This suggestion by Silin implies that the developmental psychology movement has served to control our expectations of children and childhood and to ensure that the position held by children in Western society is maintained. Predominant assumptions about children and childhood have been challenged further by a number of authors operating largely within the UK context. These authors have contributed to discussions around the sociology of childhood. Boyden (1997) and James, Jenks and Prout (1998) have suggested that childhood itself is a social construct that has emerged historically and culturally and is dominated by Western industrialised ideologies. Aspects of the social construction of childhood include childhood as a period of scholarization and apprenticeship for adulthood (Mayall, 2002). Ailwood (2007) relates this notion of childhood as preparation for adulthood to the current Queensland context of the introduction of the Preparatory Year. For young children in Queensland, the Preparatory Year is aimed towards getting them ready for a lifetime of learning or earning as they grow into the 21 st century. (Ailwood, 2007, p.14) Perhaps curiously, childhood may also be viewed as a period in which individuals need protection (Mayall, 2002). Further, UK writers such as Burman (1994) and Woodhead (1997) have paid particular attention to the seemingly benign idea of children’s needs. That ECEC programs ought to cater for the needs of children is widely accepted. So too, the notion of need invites analysis of the historical influences that may shape the ways in which we construct children’s needs. As Burman (1994) pointed out, “the rhetoric of children’s needs, while attractive, has been invoked over the years in quite diverse and often conflicting terms” (p. 53). Woodhead (1997) also pointed out that powerful assumptions about what is good for children and how this can be achieved may lie behind the rhetoric of children’s needs: Children’s psychological ‘needs’ are at the heart of contemporary public concern, part of the everyday vocabulary of countless numbers of social welfare workers and teachers, policy makers and parents. Conceptualizing
46 childhood in terms of ‘needs’ reflects the distinctive status accorded to young humanity in twentieth century western societies. (p. 63) This conceptualising of childhood in relation to the needs of children reflects a construction of the child as vulnerable and helpless, reliant on the provision of adults to ensure successful passage through the early years. The idea of children’s needs is closely aligned to Western society’s historical interest in human development and the theoretical movements that have shaped the spread of “knowledge” about how people grow and learn. And yet, “even within a relatively homogeneous cultural group, different historical periods have represented the process of rearing children very differently” (Burman, 1994, p. 53). During the 18 th and 19 th centuries, increased travel by scientists, anthropologists and missionaries facilitated the spread of awareness of different cultures. As a result of this increased awareness and the subsequent growth of scientific knowledge, theories of child development began to spread throughout the developed world and to influence thoughts about how “normal” children and families were defined (Bloch, 2003). By the 19 th and 20 th centuries, “childhood became an imagined space where all children were in need of care, as dependent and primitive, as an immature form of the civilized adult” (Bloch, 2003, p. 203). By the late 19 th and early 20 th centuries, a range of child development experts had emerged and with assistance from philanthropists, inspired the provision of facilities such as buildings and playgrounds that were designed to promote normal development and behaviour (Bloch, 2003). Concomitant with these provisions, the views of child development theorists such as Freud (1905), Erikson (1963), Piaget (1929) and Vygotsky (1930, 1990) gained prominence and provided direction for those seeking to promote the well being and development of young children. According to Boyden (1997), the 20 th century assumption that childhood is a period of life distinct from adulthood prompted the emergence of an extensive body of knowledge incorporating theories of child development. The theoretical understandings of child development that emerged in the early 20 th century have dominated the study of childhood up until recently (Prout & James, 1997; Silin,
47 1995) and early childhood education specifically (Bloch, 1992). While calling for decisions about early childhood education to move beyond knowledge of children, Silin (1995) made the incisive point that “it is how and what we choose to know about them that is immediately in question” (p. 91). Hence, Silin suggested that those who make decisions about the education of children ought also to consider the ways in which psychology is connected with certain world views, particularly in relation to political and social power. The expansion of modern schooling, as a feature of Western democratic societies, serves to “homogenize” children and their families, particularly those from minority groups who were historically seen to be deficient in behaviour and cultural morality (Bloch, 2003). Gutiérrez and Rogoff (2003) note that this continues to be a feature of modern education, with assumptions of homogeneity within a particular cultural group resulting in variation in learning styles being overlooked. This idea of homogeneity continues to be echoed in the literature addressing the enhancement of children’s transition to school. The expectation that children should enter compulsory schooling as a relatively homogenous group is characteristic of a view of transition that emphasises “readiness for a type of school that is formal in construction” (Petriwskyj et al., 2005, p. 64). How realistic is it, though, to expect that children entering school ought to be in homogenous groups? Ryan and Grieshaber (2005) have suggested that as a result of recent social changes such as a growing recognition of diversity, the range of family structures and access to technology: … children enter the classroom with a wide variety of experiences, making a focus on patterns of growth and what is developmentally appropriate increasingly difficult to discern, let alone apply. (Ryan & Grieshaber, 2005, p. 35) The discussion about developmentalism and children’s needs sheds light on a key aspect of the social context of the current study. The weight and popularity of these prevailing ideas in the Western context, although they constitute aspects of
48 the contested focus of early childhood curricula, is likely to play a major part in the ways in which a group of parents conceive of an early childhood program such as the Preparatory Year. Specifically, these aspects of the broader context will shape the ways in which a program such as the Preparatory Year is viewed as ensuring that children are ready for school.
2.4.2 Readiness for school
A further aspect of the contested focus of the early childhood curriculum is the notion of readiness for school. The question of what constitutes best practice for the education and care of young children has been the subject of much postulation over a lengthy period of time, and yet the notion of school readiness is a relatively recent arrival as a research construct with interest growing rapidly since 2003 (Snow, 2006). Reference to arguments around “when” and “if” formal education of young children is beneficial have been made earlier in this chapter. These arguments, according to New (1999), are inextricably linked to broader views about children and their societal context, as well as to perceptions of early childhood professionals as objective observers and nurturing protectors of young children (Bloch, 1992; Silin, 1995) and even as “substitute mothers” (Moss, 2006, p. 34). The rhetoric of partnerships with parents, which has been explored previously in this review, has also, according to Woodrow and Brennan (1999), served to reinforce the view that early childhood professionalism is characterised by maternalistic values such as caring and sharing. As mentioned earlier, there has been a suggestion in the literature of an emerging emphasis on children being “ready for school” rather than “ready to learn” as they enter compulsory education (Dockett & Perry, 2002; Graue, 1992), although Silin (1995) suggested that the principle of preparation for school may have been an underlying current in early childhood education since the 1920s. The question of children’s readiness for school or, conversely, schools’ readiness for children, is ongoing and consensus about what readiness means has not yet been achieved (Graue, 2006; Snow, 2006). Reference will be made later in this
49 chapter to research indicating that cultural differences exist in the ways that parents view early childhood services (for example, Carlson & Stenmalm Sjöblom, 1989; Dunn & Dasananda, 1995; Ojala, 2000; Seng, 1994; Tobin et al., 1989; Wise, 2002). Graue (2006) suggests that the construct of readiness varies geographically according to the population to which it is applied. In Scandinavia and parts of Italy, where formal schooling begins later, childhood is set aside and valued as a specific period of life rather than viewed as a stage in which preparation for school is prioritised (Petriwskyj et al., 2005). In Japan, readiness for school is constructed as being a self reliant member of a group (Tobin et al., 1989). The point being emphasised here is that there are geographical and cultural differences in the way that readiness for school is constructed. Further, variation in the ways that parents and other stakeholders view the construct of school readiness has been reported widely in the literature (Snow, 2006) with specific differences noted between how parents and teachers understand the construct (Graue, 2006). Graue calls for a move away from “exclusionary readiness practices” (p. 51) that justify removing access to early childhood education on the grounds of readiness. Rather, Graue demands a move towards receptive schools that are characterised by developmental approaches, inclusivity and accountability for the benefit of all children. In the current context, therefore, a study which examines parent views of a program which, in turn, purports to enhance children’s preparation – or readiness – for school is particularly timely. Whether or not it is desirable, or indeed possible, to aim for homogeneity in children’s abilities as they enter compulsory schooling, it is clear that there remains great variation in the quality of programs for young children in the non compulsory years. An array of studies have sought in recent years to elucidate the characteristics of high quality early childhood programs in the UK, US and Australia (see, for example, Siraj Blatchford et al., 2002; Schweinhart & Weikart, 1997; Thorpe et al., 2004). The High/Scope Preschool Curriculum Comparison study (Schweinhart & Weikart, 1997) conducted in the US state of Michigan assessed the effects of three different models of preschool education on the academic and behaviour outcomes through to age 23 of children from disadvantaged backgrounds. The three
50 programs were differentiated from each other in relation to the levels of teacher and child initiative that were expected. Results of Schweinhart and Weikart’s (1997) major study indicated that while there were no significant long term differences in academic achievement by age 23, there were significant findings in other areas. Crucially, the study found that children who had attended programs based on child initiated activities rather than direct teacher instruction emphasising academic skills displayed significantly more positive long term social and emotional outcomes. Siraj Blatchford et al.’s (2002) more recent UK study found that, in the highest quality early childhood programs, there was an even share of staff and child initiated activities with an emphasis on “sustained shared thinking” (p. 10) where both parties were engaged and the content was to some extent instructive. In the US, recent commentary by Hyson (2003) has suggested that high quality early childhood programs seek a balance between academic achievement and social emotional development: Without a nurturing, playful, responsive environment, an academic focus may diminish children’s engagement and motivation. But a “child centred” environment that lacks intellectual challenges also falls short of what curious young learners deserve. By putting academics in their rightful place, early education programs can enhance children’s experiences now and build the foundation for their later success. (Hyson, 2003, p. 23) This commentary suggests that a polarised view of early childhood curricula, in which the benefits of either teacher or child centred programs are promoted, may not be particularly helpful. Rather, as Hyson suggests, the emphasis ought to be placed on the value of child responsive, negotiated environments which include opportunities for both teacher and child input. In other words, schools ought to consider their readiness for children rather than the converse. In Australia too, recent research supports an approach in which there is room for both teacher and child initiated activities; a focus on academic competence as
51 well as play, as most beneficial for young children. In their evaluation of Queensland’s Preparing for School Trials , Thorpe et al. (2004) found that successful Preparatory Year teachers: … were focussed on learning, reported clear goals related to positive attitudes and social skills and were proactive in leading children’s learning. They reported less teacher directed activity, more child initiated activity and more prevalence of computer usage in their programs than preschool or Year One teachers. (p. 18) Given the current study’s focus on parent views of the Preparatory Year, it has been important to consider large scale international research that has dealt with the outcomes of different types of early childhood programs. Their results have shed light on the importance of maintaining a balance between teacher and child initiated activities in early childhood settings. Without a doubt, a central component of child initiated learning is the notion of play. Understandings of play in the lives of young children are likely to influence parent views of a program such as the Preparatory Year. The following section reviews the key literature that deals with play in early childhood settings.
2.5 Play as a focus for learning and teaching in the early years
2.5.1 Context of play Arguments about curriculum and pedagogy for young children often crystallise around the role of play in children’s learning. The role of play in the Preparatory Year is a topic of some contention in the current Queensland context (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007), but there exists in the literature an acknowledgement that play is a relatively modern conception (Pramling Samuelsson & Johansson, 2006). Yet, questions addressing the nature and quality of play have been ongoing since early last century (Keating, Fabian, Jordan, Mavers & Roberts, 2000), suggesting that play is both a modern and historical concept. Indeed, the idea of play as a singular characteristic of childhood with value in the early years of education has
52 been proposed by numerous commentators since the philosopher Rousseau in the mid 18 th century (Tyler, 1991). It would appear that interest in the play phenomenon is not restricted to educationalists and that it has also held a certain fascination for researchers such as psychologists, sociologists, and anthropologists (Sandberg & Pramling Samuelsson, 2003). Acknowledgement of the crucial role of play in the lives of young children culminated in 1990 with reference to it in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNICEF, 1990) which affirmed the right of children to access periods of rest and leisure and to participate in age appropriate play and recreation activities. Within the local context, the support document developed for the implementation of the Preparatory Year in Queensland Schools, the Early Years Curriculum Guidelines (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006), nominates play as “a powerful context in which children learn as they actively engage socially, emotionally, physically and intellectually with people, objects and representations (p. 43). Information provided on the Education Queensland website devoted to the new Preparatory Year offers an unequivocal picture of a program featuring play as a significant component:
There are many different types of play and these change as children grow older. In Prep, children participate in fantasy, exploratory, directed, educational and free play, as well as physical play and games with rules. It also means that children will play in different ways at different times of the school day. Play can occur indoors and outdoors. What children learn during play will depend on the questions they pose and the way that they investigate. In this way, play develops social and personal learning, language and communication, early mathematical understanding, health and physical ability and active thinking processes. (DETA, 2005)
The idea of play as an important context for learning in the Preparatory Year is confirmed here. This quote alludes to a number of characteristics and types of play that could be expected to take place in Preparatory Year contexts, and the
53 benefits that may result. Characteristics of play have been further examined in the broader literature, and will be outlined in the following section.
2.5.2 Characteristics of play Despite the wealth of historical discussion of play and its relatively recently obtained status as a right of all children, there remains some contention in the literature about how play is defined and constructed. As noted by Ailwood (2003), “play is an elusive concept that has refused to be pinned down” (p. 288). Despite the interest in play that has been expressed over a long period of time and by a diverse range of researchers, there remains no agreement on a definition. Rather, much time has been spent arguing for and against specific definitions (Hall & Abbott, 1991). One of the few things that can be said with any certainty is that “children express play in many different ways and that adults interpret what play is in many different ways” (Sandberg & Pramling Samuelsson, 2003, p. 2). According to David (1990), adopting too broad a definition of play can be problematic as it can lead to a failure to differentiate between different activities that are deemed to be play. Moreover, David (1990) proposed that adopting a broad definition of play may put at risk opportunities to evaluate which types of play are actually beneficial to young children’s learning. Also, too rigid a definition of play may fail to account for the potential for play to change its characteristics as children grow older and enter formal schooling (Hall & Abbott, 1991), a point made clearly in the information provided earlier from the Education Queensland website (DETA, 2005). Despite the contention around defining play, there is abundant reference in the literature to the characteristics that are commonly felt to typify this activity although, again, this can be contentious terrain. The notion that play is to a large extent initiated and controlled by the child is widely accepted. The play world belongs to the child and it is important that teachers do not attempt to take over the activities of play or to restrain the child’s freedom to create the culture of their play (Pramling Samuelsson & Johansson, 2006). “Play in most cases is seen as something children do by themselves, without interference from teachers”
54 (Pramling Samuelsson & Johansson, 2006, p. 61). Progressive curriculum ideas that are an intrinsic feature of the modern construction of children’s play stress that “children should be enabled to learn what they wish to learn when they are ready to do so” (Soler & Miller, 2003, p. 59), forming the goal of the activity themselves (Pramling Samuelsson & Johansson, 2006) with unobtrusive guidance from the teacher as “onlooker” (Dockett, 1999, p. 43). One of the characteristics of play that differentiates it from other childhood experiences is that the child, in play, is able to maintain control of a situation (Dockett, 1999) which might be impossible in real life (Tyler, 1991). The degree of control experienced by children in the context of play is, it seems, variable. Keating et al. (2000) observed that, in some cases, teachers were organising play by allocating children to particular activities. Structuring play in this way would seem to be contrary to one of the basic tenets of play as described in the literature – that is, that play, by definition, must be voluntary. In the words of Atkin (1991): … the essence of play is that it is voluntary and the child or player must have the freedom to say ‘no’… for however play like an activity is, it cannot be called play if it is compulsory. (p. 30, 31) The common belief that play is both voluntary and fun (Tyler, 1991) is not, however, asserted universally in the literature. The voluntariness of play has been called into question by authors such as Ailwood (2003), Burman (1994) and Sutton Smith and Kelly Byrne (1984) who have suggested that the powerful influences of relationships with other children and with adults result, in many cases, in play being a far from voluntary activity. Rather, play may feature a loss of freedom on the part of the players. Ailwood (2003) proposed that play may serve to control relationships between groups of children and adults and a more accurate picture of play is of “a technology of governmentality” ( p. 292). The context in which play occurs may also have a powerful influence on the freedom experienced by the players (King, 1992). As Sutton Smith and Kelly Byrne (1984) put forward:
55 One can still play even if one has been required to play in the first place. There are a host of ways in which degrees of personal autonomy are or are not expressed in the phenomena called play, and it is an empirical matter to decide what these have to do with it. What has been assumed as the most fundamental characterization of play by modern specialists must therefore be brought into question. (p. 311) In the above quote, Sutton Smith and Kelly Byrne (1984) have suggested that there are times when play is not voluntary, therefore calling into question one of its assumed characteristics, a point backed up by the observations of Keating et al. (2000). Fleer (1999) joined the chorus of those cautioning against universal characterisation of the notion of play. Focussing on the early childhood context in Australia, which is often typified by the involvement of children from diverse cultural backgrounds, Fleer calls into question the dominant Western construct of play and its presumed relevance for all children. If play is socially constructed and therefore learned, as Fleer has suggested, attempts to define and characterise this phenomenon may become unstitched. The potential for this is heightened when dominant theories of play and its interaction with child development fail to match cultural expectations and realities. These expectations and realities are often prominent as children make the transition to formal schooling, at which time the conflicting notions of work and play may come into particular focus.
2.5.3 Work and play
The distinction between activities considered “work” and those identified as “play” in the lives of young children has been examined by a number of authors over the last three decades (for example, Apple & King, 1977; King, 1992; Tyler, 1991). Transition to compulsory school would seem to be a decisive period for the work play dichotomy and this is alluded to by a number of commentators who suggest that it is at this point that the balance between work and play is seen to shift.
56 It is no secret among educationists that we have been singularly unsuccessful in persuading politicians, journalists and parents that play is of tremendous significance in the intellectual, social and physical growth of children. So long as we are talking about very young children, the pre fives, no one worries too much. But once children start schooling most parents consider that ‘real’ learning has to start and the apparently inconsequential behaviours associated with play must, fairly quickly, be replaced by ‘work’. (Hall & Abbott, 1991, p. 2) In this quote, Hall and Abbott (1991) were suggesting that the importance of play no longer has the same clout once a child moves from pre compulsory to compulsory schooling. Within the school context, work activities are considered by teachers and children to be more important than play activities (Apple & King, 1977) although not necessarily less enjoyable (King, 1992). While the notions of play and work are seen by some to be “merely ends of a continuum,” differentiated only by semantics (Tyler, 1991, p. 15), others suggest a more polarised view in which children learn quickly upon entering school that play and work are utterly incompatible (Atkin, 1991). More recent authors (for example, Perry & Irwin, 2000) suggest that a confluence of the two might be possible and indeed beneficial for children beyond the transition to formal schooling, although as children move through the educational system they are likely to experience increased tension between the two constructs from parents, teachers and administrators (Tyler, 1991). Adding further to the previous discussion of the characteristics of play, it seems that the critical feature distinguishing play from work may be the matter of who instigates the activity. Apple and King’s (1977) research involved observation and interviews of children and their teacher in a kindergarten classroom during the first weeks of the school year. They found that, regardless of the nature of the activity itself, it was the context that determined to which of the two categories it belonged:
57 Information which the children said they learned in school were all things that the teacher had told them during activities they called “work.” “Play” activities were permitted only if time allowed and if the children had finished their assigned work activities. Observation data revealed that the category of work had several well defined parameters sharply separating it from the category of play. First, work includes any and all teacher directed activities; only free time activities were called “play” by the children. Activities such as colouring, drawing, waiting in line, listening to stories, watching movies, cleaning up, and singing were called work. To work, then, is to do what one is told to do, no matter the nature of the activity involved. (Apple & King, 1977, p. 351) These observations suggest that a key defining factor separating the notions of work and play lies in the origins of the activity. In the minds of the children, if it is teacher initiated, it is work. If it is child initiated, it is play. Further investigation of the work/play dichotomy has been undertaken by Swedish researchers Pramling Samuelsson and Johansson (2006). They suggest that the substance assigned to teacher initiated activities has lead in part to the assumption that ‘real’ learning may only occur when a particular activity has been organised and led by the teacher (Pramling Samuelsson & Johansson, 2006). Caution ought to be applied to any attempts to differentiate between notions of work and play in the lives of children, especially in light of the suggestions in the previous section by authors such as Ailwood (2003), King (1992) and Kelly Byrne (1984) who highlighted the challenging task of identifying levels of genuine personal autonomy and freedom within the play context.
2.5.4 Pressures on play
Putting aside the debate around the degree of genuine autonomy and freedom that play offers, it has been acknowledged by a number of authors that play is under pressure in early childhood settings. In an earlier section of this review, reference was made to the body of literature addressing the “push down” or “top down”
58 effect of formal curriculum into pre compulsory settings. That factors outside the pre compulsory classroom itself play a major part in determining the experiences of children within those settings has been well documented. As Ailwood (2003) noted, “influences beyond the hallowed play space of the pre school have been significant in shaping the activity that occurs in that space” (p. 294). There are many factors influencing the opportunities for and characteristics of play in early childhood settings. Silin (1995) offered a critical theorist’s perspective on the way that socio cultural expectations and structures might serve to reduce the value placed on an activity such as play: If play is considered an end in itself, it may represent an irreducible challenge to contemporary values. That is, because play is a non productive, pleasure oriented, aesthetic activity, it may be seen to threaten a society built on material production, repression and control. (Silin, 1995, p. 91) Similarly, David (1990) suggested that because play may be the “antithesis of reality” (p. 79) the idea of a play based curriculum may be vulnerable to attack in a society swayed by the dual influences of market forces and productivity. The view that play is deemed less valuable by society because it does not produce outcomes which can be evaluated for their educational worth was proposed by Hall and Abbott (1991) and explored further by Keating et al. (2000). These sentiments were echoed by Aitkin (1991) who proposed that the relentless requirement to justify the educational value of play is indicative of a general mistrust of it and denigration of its place in child development. According to Keating et al. (2000), the pressure of the curriculum and the lack of time for teachers to be involved in children’s play contributed to its devaluation in the UK reception classes they studied, with the result that teachers only felt comfortable to spend time with children in play when they were simultaneously assessing them and children were only rewarded with play when they had completed their “work”.
59 In a further examination of the attitude towards play in UK reception classes, Soler and Miller (2003) found that the implementation of the Foundation Stage Curriculum had resulted in a more fragmented experience for children, with a focus on preparation for the future: At the centre of the English Foundation Stage Curriculum Guidance is a view of the child as a future pupil. This has led to curriculum content which emphasises ‘subject’ related learning goals and has resulted in practitioners feeling the need to prepare children for entry to school through more formal teaching approaches. Play is seen to be marginalised. (p. 66) This observation by Soler and Miller (2003) is redolent of earlier discussions in this review around the scholarization of childhood as noted by Mayall (2002). The notion of childhood as preparation for adulthood, and the emphasis in early childhood on preparation for school has had implications for the value of play in the early years. It would seem that the greater the emphasis on preparation for school and for life beyond school, the less value is placed on the experience of play in the lives of young children. Factors closer to home may also have an effect on the incidence of play in early childhood settings. Corrie (1999) found that there was an increase in teacher directed activity and a decrease in child initiated play activities at the same time as Western Australia’s pre primary classroom space was effectively reduced. In a further examination of the Western Australian pre primary experience, Stamopoulous (2003) found that the necessity to combine pre primary and Year One classes had influenced the opportunities for young children to engage in play activities. Ailwood (2003) proposed that regulation of children’s play is already a feature of early childhood settings due to limitations of physical space, resources, the presence of adults and complex power relations between children and adults. The promotion of play as a valid context for learning in the early years is further challenged by inconsistencies in teacher beliefs and practices. A number of researchers such as Keating et al. (2000) (UK), Sandberg and Pramling
60 Samuelsson (2003) (Sweden) and Stipek and Byler (1997) (US) have suggested that, while teachers in the early years may cling to ideals around child centred learning and the importance of play, this may not be reflected consistently in their practice. Further, Sandberg and Pramling Samuelsson (2003) found that teachers rarely reflected on the importance of play. Keating et al. (2000), on the other hand, found that teachers did reflect on the importance of play and that this reflection typically resulted in feelings of guilt on the part of the teachers that their practice was inconsistent with their philosophy: It is clear that in discussion, on the role of play in the reception class, there appears to be a dichotomy between beliefs, philosophies, ideals and the pressures of everyday reality. It became evident that curriculum pressure was seen to inhibit both the amount of time available for play and the adult involvement with it. Yet this was contradicted by staff, both teachers and classroom assistants, who asserted that play was a vehicle for valuable curriculum learning opportunities. We recognise that this gap between rhetoric and reality caused a great deal of anguish for some staff. Indeed, there was a very distinct feeling of guilt when listening to staff, and further this guilt was double edged in that they felt guilty if they allowed children to play and also felt guilty if they did not. They knew what they should be providing, but they felt unable to justify it with all of the other pressures placed upon them. (Keating et al., 2000, p. 450, 451) Keating et al.’s (2000) work suggests that, while teachers of young children may readily acknowledge the importance of play in early childhood classrooms, they are often caught in a dilemma. On the one hand, there is pressure to remain accountable to systemic requirements for syllabus implementation. On the other hand, there is pressure to remain true to a philosophy in which the role of play is paramount. The role of mandated curricula such as the Early Years Curriculum Guidelines (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006) in promoting the retention of play as a vehicle for learning in the Preparatory Year is crucial. It is equally important to consider whether there might be situations in which some types of play may be deemed better than others.
61 2.5.5 What is good play?
Authors such as Ailwood, (2003), Burman (1994), and Fleer (1999) have called into question the glorification and idealisation of the Western idea of play. Fleer (1999) particularly urged caution with the notion that the Western view of children’s play is applicable to all cultures and that children follow a particular developmental path in their play. Burman (1994) suggested that we need to reconsider the ways in which children’s play may demonstrate negative and sometimes dangerous qualities. Further, Sutton Smith and Kelly Byrne (1984) stressed the inextricable link between children’s play and the complex social and psychological contexts in which it occurs. Although these authors call for rethinking the place of play in early childhood settings and taking a step back from the many widely held assumptions that are attached to the notion of play, there is still general acceptance that play is a valuable vehicle for learning. David (1990) offered a word of caution, pointing out that different types of play may be more beneficial than others. For example, programmes offering free play with little adult involvement are not likely to improve children’s cognitive development. Sandberg and Pramling Samuelsson (2003) describe the Swedish context in which there are moves to bring together play and learning in an integrated fashion. Rather than shying away from teacher intervention in children’s play, there is a move towards identifying the types of adult involvement that might enhance the learning that occurs in play situations (Hall & Abbott, 1991). The ways that parents understand the idea of play may influence their perceptions of a program such as the Preparatory Year. This section of the literature review has focused on the idea of play as a vehicle for learning and teaching in the early years. This literature has, in part, explored the role of play as children move from the precompulsory to compulsory years of early education. An examination of other issues relating to children’s transition to school follows.
62 2.6 Transition to school The notion of transition to school is worthy of consideration in a discussion of the literature relevant to a study on parent views of the Preparatory Year, given that the Preparatory Year represents the year before the child enters compulsory education. Yeboah (2002) defined transition to school in this way: “When a child moves from early childhood education to the primary school, transition to school is said to occur” (p. 52). Such a narrow definition of transition has been recently challenged. Petriwskyj et al. (2005) map a number of constructions of the notion of transition in the literature. While transition may be constructed as prior to school practices initiated by schools and parents, a “time limited change event” (p. 57), which is aligned with Yeboah’s (2002) definition, Petriwskyj and colleagues’ (2005) extensive review of the literature suggested that transition is also constructed as (i) a continuity of experience; (ii) a multi layer, multi year process; and (iii) constructed horizontally and vertically (Petriwskyj et al., 2005, pp. 59 61) In the local context, it is clear that an underpinning objective of a Preparatory Year program is to aid the transition process through preparation of the child for the first year of compulsory school, that is, Year One in Queensland. It would appear, then, that the construct of transition as “a time limited change event” (Petriwskyj et al., 2005, p.57) and the Preparatory Year as the means by which that process may be enhanced, maintains its currency in the local context. In an earlier discussion in this chapter, it was noted that a number of authors have mapped some of the assumptions around transition to school that might be held by various stakeholders (for example, Graue, 1992; 2006). Transition to school continues to be the focus of a number of research projects within Australia, with emphasis on optimum conditions for children to make a successful transition and continued investigations into views about transition that might be held by various stakeholders (for example, Dockett & Perry, 2002; 2004a; 2004b; Sanagavarapu, & Perry, 2005; Whitton, 2005). Petriwskyj et al. (2005) suggest that
63 Education programs aimed at enhancing the success of transitions could be grouped according to an emphasis on improving homogeneity of school entrants or accommodating heterogeneity and according to the time frame for transition. (p. 63) A common thread running through much of the research into transition to compulsory schooling is the suggestion that children are likely to experience a shift from child centred approaches in pre compulsory programs to teacher directed approaches in the compulsory school years. While early childhood teachers are often viewed as advocates for child responsive practices (Woodrow & Brennan, 1999), these approaches may not be so strongly articulated by those from the primary school sector, where formal, teacher directed pedagogical practices are more likely to feature (Petriwskyj et al., 2005; Yeboah, 2002). Broström (2005) describes the rapid adjustment required of children as they move into primary school in Denmark as a kind of “culture shock” (p. 17) and suggests the incorporation of advanced types of play to enhance transition to formal schooling. Teacher and parent attitudes towards children at the point of transition to primary school have been examined by Australian researchers such as Raban and Ure (2000). They suggested that there was a tendency for both parents and teachers to draw attention to what children could not do as they began formal schooling, rather than what they could do. However, while philosophical differences between the approaches of preschool and primary school teachers in the Queensland context have been described in the literature (Sawyer, 2000), it is unwise to make generalisations in this regard. While a number of teachers in primary schools may well be adopting child responsive practices, recent research has highlighted frequent use of teacher directed, whole group approaches in some preschools compared to Preparatory Year classes (Thorpe et al., 2004). Researchers such as Stipek and Byler (1997) in the US found variation in the goals of early childhood teachers; and assuming homogeneity of teacher beliefs and practices in any context would be ill advised (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007).
64 Teachers are likely to hold diverse views regarding early childhood programs, particularly during times of transition. There is also evidence in the research literature of variation in the views of parents, and this literature will be reviewed in the following section.
2.7 Studying parent views This study asks and answers the question, “How do parents in a non government school in Queensland conceive of the Preparatory Year?” As such, it contributes directly to the body of local and international research that has specifically investigated parent views of early childhood services. This final section of the literature review examines key research that has informed this study (through a similar focus on parent views of early childhood programs). In the period since Pence and Goelman’s (1987) suggestion that parents were the “silent partners” (p. 103) in studies of early childhood services, a number of projects investigating parental perceptions of early childhood services have been undertaken within Australia and beyond. These studies are identified here according to their focus: • studies of parental views across different cultures • studies of parental views across different services • studies of parental views across individuals.
The term views is used in the framework of this review. It must be acknowledged that throughout the literature, assorted terminology such as views , perceptions , expectations , attitudes and conceptions have been used by various authors. It is felt that the term views broadly encapsulates the essential features of each of these terms and is appropriate for a research overview such as this. However, it also must be noted that the term conceptions rather than views is used in the current study because of its specific relevance to a phenomenographic approach. A more detailed explanation of the term conception is provided in Chapter 3.
65 An overview of each group of studies will now be provided.
2.7.1 Parent views across cultures It is not within the scope of the current study to explore the influence of culture on parent views of an early childhood program. Although not the focus of this study, it is recognised that a large number of studies of parent views of early childhood programs have investigated the ways in which cultural background may influence the ways in which parents consider early childhood programs. This section provides an overview of such research. Australian researchers Lockwood and Fleet (1999) called on educators to be mindful of the ways, in a culturally diverse society such as Australia, culture may influence families’ opinions and needs in relation to ECEC. Researchers in a range of international contexts have also explored cultural differences in parent views of early childhood programs. An extensive body of research suggests that cultural background and ideology have a strong influence on what parents expect from early childhood programs (for example, Carlson & Stenmalm Sjöblom, 1989; Dunn & Dasananda, 1995; Ojala, 2000; Seng, 1994; Tobin et al., 1989; Wise, 2002). An examination of some key studies follows. Tobin et al.’s (1989) comparative study of preschool in Japan, China and the US raised some important issues addressing cultural differences in views of early childhood programs. While parents from all three countries were keen for preschool programs to give their children an early start to academic learning, Tobin et al. observed that preschools in Japan offered programs in which play was emphasised, although teachers there were finding themselves to be under increasing pressure to emphasise academic skills. In their investigation of parent perceptions of early childhood programs in Sweden and the United States, Carlson and Stenmalm Sjöblom (1989) found evidence that early childhood program implementation is directly affected by the characteristics of the broader society in which the program exists. In turn, they
66 discussed the ways that these broader societal characteristics undergirded parental perceptions and expectations of the programs. The more uniform and clearly delineated child centred philosophy in Sweden directly impacts parents’ views related to the goals, environments, and curricula in early childhood programs in that country. In contrast, diversity and societal pressures appear to influence parents in the United States. (Carlson & Stenmalm Sjöblom, 1989, p. 517) Not surprisingly, Carlson and Stenmalm Sjöblom (1989) found both differences and similarities in parents’ perceptions across the two cultural contexts. One of the most significant differences was the Swedish parents’ emphasis on child centred, inner directed interactions, distinct from the United States parents’ preference for a conformist, outer directed approach in early childhood programs. Similarities in parental perceptions across the two countries included concern with some community issues, the value of children’s choice within the early childhood program, the importance of peaceful conflict resolution, and the desire of parents to be involved in the programs. In a study undertaken by Dunn and Dasananda (1995), the attitude of US parents toward early childhood curriculum was compared to that of parents of preschoolers in Thailand. Dunn and Dasananda (1995) identified the ongoing struggle to promote developmentally appropriate practices in early childhood against a background of higher demand for academic programs in both countries. Their study showed that common parental expectations may emerge from contrasting cultural contexts. In both countries, success in later life was seen to depend on early academic progress, and both parents and teachers in the USA and Thailand promoted preschool as “preparing children for the next level of education” (p. 3) rather than as an environment in which children’s current needs were met (Dunn & Dasananda, 1995). This view of preschool as “preparation for school” is echoed in other contexts. Seng (1994), for example, noted that parents of kindergarten children in Singapore were strongly united in their view that the kindergarten year is valued for its capacity to prepare children for school.
67 Vincent and Ball (2001) found similar agreement regarding preparation for the future amongst parents of children in childcare in the UK. In that study, the future extended to school and beyond, as a number of parents expressed awareness of the need for childcare to prepare their young children not only for school, but for an uncertain employment future beyond school. Vincent and Ball (2001) also noted a degree of tension expressed by the parents in their study. While many were mindful of their need to ensure the program prepared their child for school – and preparation meant different things to different parents they were cautious about placing too much pressure on their children to obtain early academic skills. The relevance of this discussion to the current Queensland context is highlighted by the nomenclature of the Preparing for School Trials (Thorpe et al., 2004) in this state. A cross cultural study comparing expectations of young children’s development in Irish and Finnish early childhood programs was undertaken by Ojala (2000). This study added a further dimension to the exploration of perceptions by including data from teachers as well as parents. Whilst no significant differences emerged between the views of Irish and Finnish teachers, there was some diversity within the range of parent views between the two countries. Both parent communities ranked social skills with peers as the most important area of development, but the similarities in parent perceptions ended at that point. Irish parents promoted self assessment skills and social skills with adults as important, while Finnish parents favoured self sufficiency and language skills. Differences in the importance given to preacademic skills were also evident, with Finnish parents and teachers convinced that these were the least important skills. Ojala’s study also illuminated the existence of a “teacher parent” (p. 58) dilemma in Ireland, but not in Finland. That is, there was strong agreement between parents and teachers in Finland, but jointly held priorities generally were not to be found in the Irish responses. Culturally determined differences in parents’ expectations of early childhood programs emerge in other studies. Wise (2002) collected data from Somali, Vietnamese and Anglo Australian parents of children attending family day care and centre care in Victoria. The study revealed differences in expectations
68 according to the cultural background of the parents. Cognitive and social skills were promoted by the Vietnamese parents, while Somali parents valued social and emotional development as a priority. Wise (2002) found that Anglo Australian parents expressed high expectations for all areas of child care and development. These studies suggest that cultural factors are influential in shaping parent views of early childhood services. Views about young children that are held by the broader society are reflected in the views that parents hold regarding what is important for the preschool year. When the views of parents from different cultural backgrounds are compared, some views have been found to be at variance, while others are common to more than one culture. The next section examines the literature addressing parental expectations across different early childhood services within the same cultural context.
2.7.2 Parent views across different services
Parental expectations of early childhood curriculum may vary according to type of service provision (for example, Foot et al., 2000; Laloumi Vidali, 1998; Pence & Goelman, 1987; Rodd & Milikan, 1994). Key research findings highlight differences and similarities among parents who choose different services for their children in the preschool years. Pence and Goelman’s (1987) Canadian study of parents of young children in day care provides insight into the ways that conceptions vary across service type within the same cultural context. Parents of children in three types of day care – centre day care, licensed family day care, and unlicensed family day care – were interviewed and, again, distinct similarities and differences emerged. Pence and Goelman (1987) imply that their data “indicate that parents’ actions in selecting and using various day care arrangements may speak for them” (p. 117, original emphasis). They also suggested that philosophies and values are more prominent distinguishing factors than socio economic considerations when differences emerged between parent groups in the study. For example, the age of the child emerged as a major factor influencing the type of care desired. However, within a
69 particular age group, program issues and the “characteristics of the caregiver” (p. 117) were the two main considerations that influenced parents’ choices. This link between the attitudes and expectations of parents and their actions in choosing preschool provision for their children was examined further by Foot and associates (2000) in their study of Scottish parents. Their study emerged conceptually from the perceived changing view of parents as consumers of preschool services to a view of parents as partners in the provision of education to young children; views that have been explicated in an earlier section of this chapter. The study was framed by the theory of “planned behaviour” (Foot et al., 2000, p. 192), which was used to explain links between the attitudes and actions of preschool parents in terms of their choice of preschool setting for their child. Foot et al. (2000) examined the views of parents who chose among three types of early childhood provision; government provided nursery school, playgroup and private nursery. They found that, broadly speaking, most parents were able to find a service that matched their preferences and expectations for the preschool years. In this study, the authors raised the “education vs. play” (p. 198) dichotomy and suggested that the two concepts are distinctly separated in the minds of the parents; a distinction at variance with government policy. Like Pence and Goelman (1987), Foot et al. (2000) noted the shift in parents’ priorities in relation to the age of their children. As the children moved closer to school age, there was a tendency for parents to place greater emphasis on education rather than play, and this was reflected in their choice of service. Wise’s (2002) Australian study also indicated that differences in expectations may also be linked to parental choice of early childhood service. For example, she found that parents who used family day care placed less importance on cognitive development that those who chose centre care. Laloumi Vidali’s (1998) study of parental expectations of preschool services in Greece revealed that parents were relatively united in their desire for both care and education, regardless of the type of service provision they had chosen. This is particularly interesting given that the ages of the children referred to in this study ranged between 3 and 6 ½ years of age. Unlike Foot et al. (2000), Laloumi Vidali
70 (1998) did not note a shift in parents’ priorities in relation to the age of their children. Across the age groups, there was a strong emphasis on the educational aspect of the program, regardless of the type of service. A similar level of agreement across parent groups was suggested by Rodd and Milikan’s (1994) research into parental perceptions of services for pre primary children in an Australian context. Through the use of structured interviews, parents of children in a range of formal and informal settings in Victoria were asked about their level of satisfaction with services and whether they felt that their children would be prepared for formal schooling in the following year. There was general agreement across the parents that their children would be well prepared for school, regardless of the type of preschool provision they had experienced. Rodd and Milikan’s (1994) study revealed that when parents chose between services, “pragmatic considerations such a convenience and location appear to override educational or learning criteria” (p. 100). The above studies illustrate considerable variance and commonality of parent views across different early childhood services. Further literature suggests that parent views of early childhood programs may vary from setting to setting, even when the age of the children and the type of provision are the same.
In 1998, Evans and Fuller produced a detailed study of parent and child perspectives in three nursery schools in the UK. Each setting emerged with significant distinguishing characteristics in terms of their dealings with parents, physical settings and teaching styles. The data obtained from the parent interviews revealed significant differences according to the nursery school setting, with one set of parents, in particular, focusing on the importance of academic skills at the nursery level. A critical conclusion is made by Evans and Fuller (1998): Parents … who had had little experience of their children’s nursery education, emphasised the acquisition of numeracy and literacy skills as
71 being the purpose of nursery education … Parents who have no knowledge or experience of nursery education, may choose those institutions which concentrate on numeracy and literacy skills, rather than those which emphasise a wide variety of experiences. (p. 50) Here, Evans and Fuller made a link between parent knowledge about and experience of programs and their expectations of those programs. In their study, they found that parents who did not have regular contact with nursery schools and teachers were more likely to have expectations for a curriculum that valued academic learning. The authors raised the spectre of pedagogical change in the UK as parents move away from nursery schools that promote developmentally appropriate practices, to choose instead programs in which academic skills are made paramount. The importance of ensuring that parents are familiar with early childhood curriculum and policy, particularly in times of transition, has been highlighted by Aubrey (2004). Discussing the move towards the Foundation Stage curriculum in the UK, Aubrey (2004), underscoring the importance of awareness of parent expectations, found that teachers believed most parents had only a moderate knowledge of the new curriculum. We need to exercise caution, however, because previously mentioned research by Lockwood and Fleet (1999) illustrated that teachers making assumptions about parent beliefs can be fraught with danger. Evans and Fuller’s (1998) study highlighted the ways that parent views of early childhood programs might be influenced by characteristics of particular schools, classrooms and teacher qualities. In particular, the studies undertaken by Evans and Fuller (1998) and Lockwood and Fleet (1999) call for open communication between parents and teachers in early childhood settings. This is emphasised in further studies that have explored variation in parent views of early childhood programs within one school or class. The following section provides further examination of the diversity of parent views by focussing on the mix of priorities that may be discovered within the parent population of one school or class setting.
72 2.7.3 Parent views across individuals
A dilemma facing early childhood teachers as they seek to establish parent views of early childhood programs is that they may encounter a complex and contrasting range of views among individual parents. Noble’s (2007) phenomenographic study of parent conceptions of early childhood services in Queensland is differentiated from the current study by its focus on parents of children attending both long day care and preschool centres. Noble’s study found that parents conceived of the services in relation to three dimensions – physical, personnel and personal. While the conception of preparation for further learning featured in Noble’s research, so too, parents valued the programs for their location, high quality and focus on socialisation. In depth studies such as Noble’s phenomenographic investigation based on interview data allow the exploration of diverse views of participants from one location or ECEC setting. Similarly, Graue’s (1993) ethnographic study, based in a school in the mid western US, provided a detailed examination of the views of parents in one school. Graue’s study aimed to explore the social construction of the expectations of parents of children enrolled in kindergarten and first grade. Graue (1993) explored the complex and entwined social contexts that lead to higher academic expectations of the kindergarten curriculum. In so doing, she unearthed a degree of conflict among individual parents from the same kindergarten class. While many parents were concerned with promoting the social and emotional benefits of the kindergarten program, others were disappointed with the lack of academic challenge. Tobin et al.’s (1989) study of preschool in three cultures also found that parents of children in one school in Japan varied greatly in their views about the curriculum experienced by their children. Some parents felt that the curriculum was overly focussed on academic skills, while others felt it was not academic enough. Studies from the Australian context (for example, Lockwood & Fleet, 1999, Page et al., 2001) have revealed that disparate parental expectations or are also a feature of the preschool environment. Teachers are required to negotiate a spectrum of individual parent views, some of which call for a more formal interpretation of the
73 curriculum, while other stakeholders maintain the philosophy of learning through play. Earlier sections of this review suggested that within the education marketplace, parent views have the potential to influence curriculum. This reinforces the importance of research that enables parent views to be heard and explores their implications for ECEC programs. Such endeavours are particularly significant during a time of transition such as that currently being experienced in Queensland.
2.8 Chapter summary
This chapter has reviewed previous research addressing parent views of early childhood programs to demonstrate variation in parent views and that many factors may influence those views. While a number of studies of parent views have been undertaken both overseas and in Australia, this review indicates that a qualitative study specifically examining parent views of the Preparatory Year in Queensland is unique and timely. This review has included an exploration of literature that has discussed the complexities of the current context in which the introduction of the Preparatory Year took place. Literature dealing with the increasing popularity of non government schooling in Australia and elsewhere has been explored. Differing constructs of the role of parents in early education; namely those of consumer and participant have also been described. The contested focus of early education and a review of the literature dealing with play have also been included. Findings from a number of studies dealing with children’s transition to formal schooling have also been examined, and finally, previous research investigating parent views of early childhood programs was outlined. Each of the sections of this review stands to shed light on the broader context of the Preparatory Year and the influences that may shape parent views of such a program. The following chapter will provide an overview of the methodological approach that was adopted to address parent views in this particular study.
74 CHAPTER 3
METHODOLOGY
3.1 Introduction The aim of this study was to discover and describe the various ways in which a group of 26 parents viewed the Preparatory Year in a non government school in Queensland. This chapter outlines the methodology used in the research. This methodology was seen to be the most efficacious means by which these goals of discovery and description might be met. A rationale for the use of a qualitative approach generally, and phenomenography specifically, is provided here, along with a detailed description of the phenomenographic approach and its application to the present study. The method and design of the study are outlined, including data collection, analysis and trustworthiness. This chapter provides methodological details of a phenomenographic study that investigated parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year in a non government school in Queensland. Data were collected from 26 parents of children attending a Preparatory Year program in a south east Queensland non government school during 2003. In this chapter, details will be provided of the steps taken to gather, analyse and present the data as five categories of description representing the conceptions held by the parents.
3.2 A qualitative approach This study engages a qualitative research approach in that it strives to make an aspect of the world visible; that aspect being the ways in which parents conceptualise the phenomenon of a Preparatory Year program. In the words of Denzin and Lincoln (2005a):
75 Qualitative research is a situated activity that locates the observer in the world. It consists of a set of interpretive, material practices that make the world visible. (p. 3) Qualitative approaches to research “aim to capture and understand individual definitions, descriptions and meanings of events” (Burns, 2000, p. 388). Unlike quantitative methods, which characteristically seek to measure observable data in order to answer specific or narrow questions (Cresswell, 2002) or to test hypotheses, qualitative methods seek to listen to the participants' stories, interpret their views, retell their accounts of their experiences (Glesne, 1999), and explain how a particular group of people make sense of the social world (Hughes, 2001). Polarised views regarding the value of qualitative versus quantitative research approaches may still exist in research community. However, authors such as Denzin and Lincoln (2005b) suggest that a “blurring of disciplinary boundaries” (p. ix) is presently occurring to the extent that researchers from the fields of social and policy sciences and the humanities are finding common ground in valuing qualitative approaches for what they offer in terms of making the world visible. That said, recent US experience suggests that “contemporary methodological conservatism” (Lincoln & Cannella, 2004, p. 7) is still alive and well, particularly in relation to research in public education, where quantitative, experimental design studies are favoured for their so called scientific rigour. Despite this, as Silverman (2000) pointed out, a choice between qualitative and quantitative methods ought not to be a decision about which approach is superior, but rather a decision based on the purposes of the research. Returning to the purpose of the research and core research question that underpins the current study How do parents in a non-government school in Queensland view the Preparatory Year?- it is clear that an approach that is able to capture individual “definitions, descriptions and meanings” (Burns, 2000, p. 388) is an appropriate match for the research question being investigated here. Hence, a qualitative approach was chosen.
76 The aspect of the social world in focus for this study was the Preparatory Year program in a non government school. The constructionist assumption that different people build understandings of the same phenomena in a variety of ways guided the research (Crotty, 1998). A further underlying premise of this research is that a group of people (such as parents) are likely to understand a phenomenon such as the Preparatory Year program in a variety of ways. Critical assumptions such as these drove the selection of a methodology able to describe variation in the ways that people experience a phenomenon.
3.3 Phenomenography The methodological approach of this study drew on the research tradition known as phenomenography, which is a qualitative approach geared towards capturing variation in the ways that people conceive of phenomena in their social world. As mentioned in Chapter 2, a review of previous research into parent views of early childhood services suggests that evidence is emerging of variation in parent views of programs, both in Australia and overseas. In light of this variation, phenomenography was chosen as the tool for eliciting and describing the views of the parents in this study.
3.3.1 History of phenomenography This study aimed to examine the qualitatively different ways in which a group of parents viewed the Preparatory Year in a non government school. This search for qualitative difference in understandings of phenomena is consistent with a group of studies situated within the field of phenomenography. The following statement by Marton (1986) argues that the search for qualitative difference is a key feature of phenomenographic research and constitutes a defining feature of this methodology: Phenomenography is a research method adapted for mapping the qualitatively different ways in which people experience, conceptualise,
77 perceive, and understand various aspects of, and phenomena in, the world around them. (p. 31) Although Hasselgren and Beach (1997) reported that the term “phenomenography” was first used in research texts in 1954, it is widely acknowledged that the methodology had its origins in Europe in the 1970s and is evident in the early work of Marton, Dahlgren, Svensson and Säljö (1977), Marton and Svensson (1979) and Säljö (1979). Since that time, phenomenographic techniques have been used to study a range of issues such as approaches to learning, approaches to teaching, understanding of scientific phenomena learned in school, as well as understanding of general issues in society (Bowden, 2000). Clearly, studies investigating approaches and conceptions of learning are the most well known within the field of phenomenography (Burns, 1994). There is also evidence of the broadening use of phenomenographic techniques in the international literature, which includes a diverse range of studies beyond conceptions of learning examining, for instance, experiences of people with late effects of polio (Willén & Scherman, 2002), differences in Japanese and Swedish mothers’ understanding of a story (Samuelsson, Mauritzson, Carlsson & Ueda, 1998), parents’ experiences of having a child with a cleft lip and palate (Johansson & Ringsberg, 2004), young peoples’ conceptions of environment (Loughland, Reid & Petocz, 2002) and experiences of surviving the Ebola virus (Locsin, Barnard, Matua & Bongomin, 2003). As a relatively new research discipline, the field of phenomenography has continued over the past three decades to expand its application and to develop its theoretical base (Pramling, 1995). Authors such as Hasselgren and Beach (1997) have focused on these developments within phenomenography and provide a detailed account of the variations in approach that they identified in their analysis. These variations in approach will be outlined later in the chapter. Changes in methodological approaches and application of phenomenography have taken place at the same time as increased popularity in phenomenographic research emerging from countries other than Sweden. A growing number of researchers from Australia, the UK, and Asia as well as North America, South
78 Africa and New Zealand have engaged phenomenographic techniques (Åkerlind, 2005b; Bruce & Gerber, 1997), with Australian researchers becoming increasingly recognised as major contributors to the application and development of this methodology. The phenomenographic researcher approaches research with a view to discovering rather than testing hypotheses; therefore seeking to describe rather than to explain (Laurillard, 1993). In these ways, phenomenography shares features of many other qualitative approaches. However, some critics such as Francis (1996) have implied that only studies that focus on investigating conceptions of learning ought to be considered truly phenomenographic as was the case in the early stages of the phenomenographic research movement. Francis warned against overuse of the term “phenomenography,” suggesting that it is often used to “describe work that does little more than report interview data in a non quantitative, descriptive manner” (p. 35). While it may be the case that phenomenography has been used in increasingly broad research endeavours, researchers must be mindful of the essential qualities that justify the legitimate location of a study within the phenomenographic field. The defining features of the current study that ensure its place within the field will be described in subsequent sections.
3.3.2 Phenomenography and other qualitative approaches With reference to this project, the objective was to identify the various ways in which parents understood the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year program in the school that they had chosen for their child. In phenomenography, an understanding of something is dependent upon a combination of an individual’s collective conceptions of the world (Pramling, 1995) that is, the sum total of their experiences to date. Pramling also suggested that the ways that an individual may experience a new or immediate phenomenon are dependent on prior experiences. As proposed in the previous chapter, the complex interplay of factors such as choice of school, constructs of childhood and sociocultural factors may well have influenced both prior life experiences and the current experience of being a parent of a child attending a Preparatory Year program. An underlying premise of
79 phenomenography is that individuals will have a variety of understandings and experiences of this aspect of their world, even though they all share the common experience of being a parent of a child in the Preparatory Year at a particular school. The current study adopted what Marton (2000) labelled a “non dualistic ontological perspective” (p. 105), that is, that one world exists and it is experienced and understood by people in a variety of ways. In this non dualistic sense, phenomenography finds common ground with a plethora of qualitative approaches such as case study, grounded theory, phenomenology and content analysis (Trigwell, 2000b). While it is clear that phenomenography has much in common with other qualitative approaches, there are critical differences that set this methodology apart from those that have been mentioned. While phenomenology shares a similar perspective with phenomenography, the primary objective of the latter is the focus on variation, whereas this is not the case when a phenomenological approach is taken. Where phenomenology seeks to elicit and describe the essence of a phenomenon as experienced by people (Richardson, 1999), phenomenography aims to describe variation . Where phenomenography investigates internal relations between different ways of experiencing a phenomenon (Francis, 1996), content analysis (even though it also seeks variation) does not (Trigwell, 2000b). A fundamental goal of phenomenography is to “capture conceptualisations which are faithful to the individual’s experience of a selected learning phenomenon” (Francis, 1996, p. 36). Rather than coming to the research with a predetermined set of categories, phenomenographers align themselves with those qualitative researchers who approach the task of analysis with a desire to facilitate the emergence of the categories from the data. The phenomenographic approach allows for the possibility that surprising and unforeseen views might emerge, or that some expected conceptions might not be present as anticipated (Marton, 1986). Within the field of phenomenography this aspect of data analysis is somewhat vexed by discussion around whether the process is best described as a “construction” or “discovery” of categories (Walsh, 2000). Walsh suggested that this discussion has divided the field of phenomenography into two camps. On the
80 one hand, there are those who believe that the researcher’s perspective is influential in determining the categories (categories are constructed). On the other hand, there are those who hold the view that the categories are part of the data and independent of the influence of the researcher (categories are emergent). This debate notwithstanding, it is widely acknowledged within the field that phenomenographic researchers should actively seek to put aside any predetermined predictions about how the categories might eventually appear.
3.3.3 Phenomenography in early childhood research A search through the extensive body of early childhood research with the aim of locating studies undertaken from a phenomenographic perspective meets with some success. That said, there is much scope for further convergence of the two fields of phenomenography and early childhood research. The use of phenomenography is becoming more widespread within early childhood research but is still limited, as the application of this methodology is gradually expanding further from its traditional base of investigating conceptions of learning per se . During the 1980s and 1990s the work of Swedish researcher Ingrid Pramling achieved much in terms of the application of phenomenographic techniques to research with young children; specifically their conceptions of learning (Pramling, 1990). Pramling and her associates have continued to use phenomenographic approaches with more recent early childhood research (Sandberg & Pramling Samuelsson, 2003). While this work departs from the earlier, more traditional investigations into conceptions of learning, it retains a focus on early childhood education and related phenomena such as play. Evans and Fuller’s (1998) study exploring parent and child views of the purposes of nursery education in the UK was the first to use a phenomenographic approach to investigate parent views of an early childhood service, combining phenomenography and Bronfenbrenner’s ecological systems theory (1979, 1992). More recent work by Irvine (2005) and colleagues (Irvine et al., 2004) provided insight into parents’ conceptions of their role in public policy and service development within the Queensland context. Similarly, Noble’s (2007)
81 investigation of parent conceptions of early childhood services and choice of service contributed to the space in the field in which phenomenography and early childhood research overlap.
3.3.4 Advantages of phenomenography Chapter 2 provided a review of research into parent views of early childhood services in the international, and to some extent Australian literature. However, this literature sustains a focus on curricular expectations prior to compulsory schooling and the purposes of those programs. While it could be expected that many parents might refer to curriculum and purpose when relating their views of a Preparatory Year program, the study presented here provides broader insight into parent views. By eliciting parent views about the Preparatory Year in general, this study will inevitably contribute to discussions around curriculum and purpose, and provides additional scope for exploring views of the program within the broader sociocultural context of this particular non government school. Phenomenography, with its explicit emphasis on open ended enquiry, has enabled the emergence of complex views about the Preparatory Year, whereas other methodologies which can include predetermined ways of arranging data may not have offered these opportunities. As Dean (1994) suggested, phenomenographic methods enable the clarification of complex ideas without the need to simplify those ideas, as well as the explication of new levels of understanding of a phenomenon (such as the Preparatory Year). These new levels of understanding about the Preparatory Year may not have emerged if an alternative methodology had been chosen for this study. Additionally, research in the area of parent views of early childhood services has been dominated by large scale studies involving surveys and other quantitative approaches. Further, many of these researchers have sought to compare parent and teacher views of programs or to compare parent views cross culturally. A phenomenographic study within this field offers an important contribution to the body of existing research into parent views of early childhood services because it
82 offers an in depth and open ended exploration, the results of which are described in Chapter 4. Phenomenography provides the opportunity to openly explore parent views of a Preparatory Year program through recognising and temporarily setting aside preconceived ideas on the part of the researcher as to what those views may be. This methodology also provides scope for more expansive dialogue around the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland schools. As Laurillard (1993) suggested, phenomenographic research is necessarily democratic, giving full representation to the participants’ conceptions and providing a basis for further dialogue. Phenomenography is a valid tool for an investigation of parent views of the Preparatory Year. Within the field of phenomenography, however, there have developed several different approaches, and these will be explored in the next section of this chapter.
3.3.5 Variations within phenomenography Variations in approaches to phenomenography have been identified by Hasselgren and Beach (1997) who proposed five types or modes: ● Experimental phenomenography in which participants were assigned a learning task and conceptions of learning were mapped out. ● Discursive phenomenography in which conceptions of a phenomenon were explored, but the research was not part of a formal course of learning. ● Naturalistic phenomenography which uses data collected from a natural situation rather than from a formal interview. ● Hermeneutic phenomenography in which analysis involves interpreting texts that were not originally created for phenomenographic purposes. ● Phenomenological phenomenography in which participants are asked to explore what is occurring in their minds during interviews.
83 It is to the idea of “discursive phenomenography” (Hasselgren & Beach, 1997, p. 196) that I turn now. In their discussion of the variation of approaches within phenomenography, Hasselgren and Beach coined this term to describe an approach in which investigations “did not go beyond the knowledge interest of phenomenographic investigation itself” (p. 197). In other words, this type of investigation is not directly concerned with improving learning outcomes. Rather the focus in discursive phenomenography is contained within an interest in how the phenomenon is conceived by a particular group of individuals. The current study is more clearly aligned with a discursive approach because the interest was in the variation in views of the Preparatory Year program and did not extend to an intention to improve participants’ understanding of the phenomenon. While primarily interested in conceptions of learning, Marton (1988) described varying approaches to phenomenography, including an approach in which the focus is a “description of how people conceive of various aspects of their reality” (p. 191). This approach, aligning with Hasselgren and Beach’s (1997) discursive phenomenography, explores aspects of the everyday world that hitherto have not been formally studied. On the other hand, other studies located within the field explore concepts that have been studied formally. In many cases, this research ultimately aims to improve students’ understanding of the phenomenon in question (Bowden, 2000) or to improve practice (Green, 2005). In Bowden’s discussion of the nature of phenomenographic research, he differentiated between two types of phenomenography – “pure” and “developmental” approaches (Bowden, 2000, p. 3). Studies that have as their objective the improvement of student understanding of a particular concept in a teaching and learning situation were referred to as developmental phenomenography. Those which do not seek to improve conceptions of phenomena and in which exploration of variation is the primary aim are referred to as pure phenomenography. The current study adopted a pure phenomenographic approach because parents’ knowledge of Preparatory Year programs is constructed informally rather than as
84 part of an educational program such as might be provided by a school or university. The current exploration of parent views of the Preparatory Year did not have as its aim the improvement of parents’ understanding of the Preparatory Year phenomenon. In the current study qualitative differences were ultimately evident in the resulting categories, with these categories arranged horizontally rather than in a hierarchy that would indicate that one way of viewing the Preparatory Year was more advanced or better than any other. Indeed, the field of phenomenography is not without its critics who question whether it is plausible to maintain that any conception is more correct than another. Webb (1996) noted: Whether a conception is ‘correct’ or not therefore lies not in the conception itself, but in the values and interpretation of the historically and socially located researcher. (p.3) A primary research aim was a description of “all possible ways of experiencing something” (Pramling, 1995, p. 136), in this case the Preparatory Year program in a non government school. The assumption in this case is not that one way of viewing the Preparatory Year is superior, or more desirable than any other. Rather, the varying views are simply qualitatively different, or perhaps increasingly expansive. As Pramling (1995) puts forward in her discussion of the work of Uljens (1989): The different ways of thinking are considered as qualitatively different, partly dependent on the difference in the conceptualised acts and partly dependent on types of content. Thus in some cases, one way of thinking is judged as more advanced than an other, while in other cases the conceptions are regarded as horizontal and equal but still qualitatively different. (Pramling, 1995, p. 136) The current project did not seek to improve parent views of the Preparatory Year by encouraging more sophisticated conceptions framed around a hierarchy of categories. If it had, it may have been described as developmental phenomenography. Rather, it can be described as adopting a pure phenomenographic approach (Marton, 1986). While phenomenography’s original
85 aim was the improvement of learning, (Walsh, 2000), the application of this methodology in broader contexts has been recognised, and both pure (or discursive) and developmental approaches are now accepted within the field.
3.3.6 Second-order perspective The central aim of this study was to focus on the Preparatory Year in a non government school in Queensland as it was experienced by a group of people who were associated with the phenomenon through their role as parents of children in the school. As a result of an underlying interest in how people view an aspect of their experience, it follows that the study must investigate their points of view. An examination of the Preparatory Year curriculum itself, for instance, would have constituted what Marton (1981) termed taking a “first order perspective” (p. 178). This is distinct from what phenomenographic researchers such as Marton and Trigwell (2000b) referred to as a “second order perspective” which is an investigation and description of an individual’s experience of the world from their point of view. This study sought a second order perspective because it explored people’s experience of reality in terms of how they, as parents, viewed the Preparatory Year. In the words of Hasselgren and Beach (1997): It implies living the experience of a phenomenon vicariously, by stepping back from one’s own experience and using it only to illuminate the ways in which others state an understanding for something. (p. 192) Like phenomenology, phenomenography “allow(s) the researcher to see the world through the eyes of people in the world” (Burns, 1994, p. 71). In this sense, this study enabled the researcher to see a particular Preparatory Year program through the eyes of the parents who chose this program for their child. In her discussion of the connections between phenomenography and phenomenology, Bruce (1997) noted that researchers within the related fields of phenomenography and phenomenology both have as their goal: …to better understand phenomena through studying afresh the ways in which aspects of the world appear to people, without encumbering their
86 insights with previous understandings of the phenomenon being studied”. (p. 39) This second order perspective allowed the researcher to focus on the experience of being a parent of a child in a Preparatory Year program through the eyes of the parents themselves, thus giving valuable insight into how this group of people experienced this particular phenomenon, and opening up the possibility that new ways of conceptualising the Preparatory Year phenomenon might be explored. The point of departure from the goal that phenomenology and phenomenography share is related to the final outcomes of the research. While phenomenologists seek to discover the essence of an experience (Hasselgren & Beach, 1997), phenomenographers seek to describe variation (Marton, 1981). The variation that is sought relates to variation in the meaning that is applied to a phenomenon.
3.3.7 The phenomenographic interview To gain this second order perspective, the primary tool for data collection in the study was an in depth interview (Minichiello, Aroni, Timewell, & Alexander, 2000). Although interviews provide a rich source of data for the phenomenographic researcher, other data gathering techniques such as open ended questionnaire responses are also acceptable (Åkerlind, 2005a) and may lend themselves to variations in the methodology such as “hermeneutic phenomenography” (Hasselgren & Beach, 1997, p. 198). Phenomenographic interviews involve questions that are as open ended as possible. Booth (1997) stated: That the interview is open means that while a structure might be planned in advance, to approach the phenomenon in question from various interesting perspectives, the interviewer is prepared to follow unexpected lines of reasoning that can lead to fruitful new reflections. (p. 138)
87 A flexible approach is often taken in that, while the interview may begin with a set of pre established questions, each individual interview may follow a slightly different course as participants’ responses are explored (Marton, 1986) and new questions emerge. This is typical of qualitative studies broadly (Glesne, 1999) and phenomenographic studies specifically (Burns, 1994). Indeed, Åkerlind (2004) suggests that follow up questions in interviews can prove to be more valuable than pre set questions in drawing out underlying meanings. However, it is important that the aims of the study are kept in focus, so “some pre determined leading experiences and leading prompts are required to focus the interview appropriately for the aims of the study in question” (Francis, 1996, p.39). In the current study, pre established open ended questions covered the following topics: views about the Preparatory Year, reasons for choosing the school, expectations for the program and thoughts about the universal provision of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. A common thread throughout the 26 interviews involved asking the participants to relate their concrete experiences of the Preparatory Year and then to move on to more abstract questions aimed at eliciting their opinions and what they thought the program should be about. This questioning technique is in line with Entwistle’s (1997) suggestion that “it is better to move in the questioning, from actions to experience, and from concrete to abstract (p. 132).” In the case of the present study, in depth interviews were considered the most fruitful source of rich and varied views of a Preparatory Year program, given that this method allowed for probing and clarification of expressed ideas and specific reflection on the phenomenon which was the Preparatory Year. As suggested by Ekeblad and Bond (1994), phenomenographic interviews enable the establishment of a “common focus” (p.158) between the researcher and the participant, providing an opportunity for reflection on the phenomenon in question. Phenomenographic interviews constituted a source of rich data from which parent views of the Preparatory Year could be identified and described.
88 A set of questions was established prior to data collection (see Appendix G) and these questions were refined prior to the interviews taking place. A “recursive model of interviewing” (Minichiello et al., 2000, p. 80), which relied heavily on the natural flow of conversation, was used. This process of reflection turned out to be very worthwhile for one participant who reflected, not only on the phenomenon itself, but also on the nature of her views of it. Her statement towards the conclusion of the interview, that “I’ve got some quite old fashioned views, now that I think about it,” (interview 7) indicated that the interview process had become a reflective tool for this participant. Interview techniques such as the use of “transitions” (Minichiello et al., 2000, p. 81) whereby a participant’s comment is linked to the main topic of discussion in order to refocus the interview were called upon, as necessary. In this way, the interviews were semi structured, having a clear purpose (i.e., to elicit views about the Preparatory Year) and seeking to achieve those purposes using flexible wording and questioning format (Robson, 1993) including probing (Burns, 1994). The advantages of obtaining data through in depth interview include allowing opportunities to gain access to people’s words and interpretations (Minichiello et al., 2000), to follow up interesting responses, investigate motives and observe non verbal behaviours (Robson, 1993), and find unexpected common ground with people who may hold contrary values to those held by the researcher (Glesne, 1999). One benefit of small scale qualitative research is that it is usually possible for one interviewer to gather all of the data, thus promoting consistency and rigour (Johansson & Ringsberg, 2004). Disadvantages of this technique include concerns about reliability and bias, the time consuming nature of the interview and data analysis (Robson, 1993) and the potential for misgivings about whether interviewees are, in fact, telling the truth (Minichiello et al., 2000). Further, the level of skill of the interviewer and the manner of posing questions could potentially be factors limiting the gathering of quality data. In phenomenography, the interview data provide the source for eliciting conceptions of the phenomenon, the ultimate aim being to organise those conceptions into categories of description . An exploration of these terms follows.
89 3.3.8 Conceptions and categories of description At its core, phenomenography deals with the relationship between an individual and an aspect of their world. Within the phenomenographic literature, the meaning that an individual applies to a particular phenomenon is often called a conception : … The term ‘conception’ and other terms used more or less synonymously, have been used in phenomenographic research to refer to the meaning aspect of dynamic human engagement with phenomena in the world. (Ekeblad & Bond, 1994, p. 150) This emphasis on meaning is important in establishing a working definition for the term conception, but Ekeblad and Bond’s (1994) allusion to the synonymous use of the term with others can be problematic. Bowden (2000) expressed this specific concern, warning against the use of the terms conception and category of description interchangeably. Indeed, Marton’s early work in 1981 suggested that the terms were used synonymously during the early years of the evolution of the methodology: Conceptions and ways of understanding are not seen as individual qualities. Conceptions of reality are considered rather as categories of description to be used in facilitating the grasp of concrete cases of human functioning. (Marton, 1981, p. 177, original emphasis) Bowden’s (2000) point clarifies what are, in his view, the differences between conceptions and categories of description. He acknowledged that, due to the complex and dynamic relationship existing been the participant and the phenomenon, it is difficult, if not impossible, for the researcher to truly understand that relationship, or individual conception of reality. Rather, the researcher’s role is to seek to describe the different conceptions that may be evident through analysis of the transcripts and to group conceptions together into categories for the practical purposes of description.
90 While a conception consists of the internal relationship between an individual and an aspect of their world, a category of description consists of a number of conceptions grouped together. Through this grouping process, the researcher seeks to describe the different conceptions that may be evident by situating together those that are similar for the practical purposes of description. The category is a description of what is the common meaning of the meanings of a phenomena grouped together. The categories are based on comparison and grouping of data representing expressions of conceptions. The categories are not general characterisations of the conceptions but forms of expressing the conceptions. (Svensson, 1997, p. 168) As mentioned previously, the primary distinguishing characteristics of phenomenography involve a focus on variation, the formation of a set of categories of description and an exploration of the internal relationships that exist between those categories. Nevertheless, authors such as Hasselgren and Beach (1997) suggested that there exists an “ongoing debate about what categories of description really are and actually represent” (p. 193). That said, for the purposes of this study categories of description are defined in line with Svensson’s (1997) proposal. Common meanings have been grouped together in categories which represent the various forms of expressing the conceptions. In applying Bowden’s (2000) caution about any presumption of knowledge of individuals’ conception of, in the current case, the Preparatory Year, it would be appropriate to suggest that we cannot expect to “know” an individual’s conception, but rather our aim was to “differentiate between a number of different ways of seeing” (Bowden, 2000, p. 16) the Preparatory Year that appeared to be evident in the interview transcripts. The debate around whether it is possible to know an individual’s conception is also explored by Entwistle (1997) who put forward for discussion the apparently opposing views held by Säljö (1997) and Marton (1981) in this regard. Does phenomenography “produce descriptions of accounts” as Säljö (1997) suggested or does it provide a true “description, analysis and understanding of experiences” as proposed by Marton (1981, p. 177)? The debate about this matter could engage phenomenographic researchers
91 for some time. Suffice to say, we should heed Säljö’s warning to use caution when asserting that phenomenographic analysis reveals participants’ ways of experiencing the phenomenon. After all, the phenomenographer relies heavily on the participant’s communication about the phenomenon and there could be multiple agendas being played out through their talk (Säljö, 1997). A conception is nested within the relationship between an individual and an aspect of their world. The relational nature of a conception means that conceptions are likely to change as contexts change and as people’s experience of the world causes them to adapt their views and understandings about certain phenomena. The person’s conception of the phenomenon is unlikely to be stable; it may vary with time and context. Also, it is not possible for the researcher to ‘be’ that person; the researcher interprets the communication with the person. (Bowden, 2000, p.16) In investigating parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year, I did not assume to “be” the parents as they described this phenomenon. Rather, I interpreted and described the conceptions as faithfully as I was able on the basis of the interviews that constituted my communication with them. Additionally, I did not intend to attach the conceptions to the participants without due acknowledgement of the dynamic nature of the relationship. As Ekeblad and Bond (1994) noted: Phenomenography does not assign a ‘conception’ to the person as his or her property. The person does not ‘have’ a conception of learning regardless of any kind of involvement with learning. We would say that the relation between a person and a phenomenon is always of a dynamic nature, which also involves the dynamics of the situation.” (Ekeblad & Bond, 1994, p. 156) In sum, it is through the carefully planned and conducted phenomenographic interview and subsequent analysis that the dynamic relationship between people and a certain phenomenon such as the Preparatory Year was be explored. In the words of Laurillard (1993):
92 A conception is not a property of an individual in the way a nose is; it is an aspect of their behaviour in the world and their experience of it… Without careful interviewing and observation it is impossible to interpret students’ [parents’] actions correctly. The power of the phenomenographic methodology is that it sets out to discover precisely what teachers [researchers] need to know – the conceptions of reality that students [parents] have already acquired. (p. 36, parentheses added) The interviews for this research occurred at an important time in relation to the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. As Chapter 1 noted, at the end of 2003 the plan to introduce a full time Preparatory Year in all schools in the state was in the public forum. Further, this group of parents were coming to the end of a year long experience of the program and were looking forward, in most cases, to their children’s entry into Year One. One could expect that the conceptions of the Preparatory Year that were held by this group of people could be in a state of some flux as their understandings and thoughts about the program may have been influenced by the overarching context of the time. These points are made in order to emphasise the relevance of the above statements by phenomenographers Bowden (2000), Ekeblad and Bond (1994) and Laurillard (1993). This research is a point in time snapshot of parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year. An underlying tenet of phenomenography is that conceptions occur in a context and that an individual may experience a phenomenon in different ways in different contexts (Åkerlind, 2005c). Thus, it is inappropriate to suggest that any of the participants in this study are attached in a permanent way to the conceptions that they expressed during the interviews. Rather, the objective has been to map a complete set of conceptions of the Preparatory Year that were experienced by this group of people at that time.
3.3.9 Phenomenographic analysis Phenomenographic studies typically reveal a relatively small or limited number of categories of description (Marton, 1981). The process used to arrive at the goal of
93 a group of qualitatively different categories of description varies between accounts of phenomenographic research procedures in the literature, but some common procedural threads are evident. Booth (1997) shed light on processes that are likely to be common to the experience of most researchers taking on the task of phenomenographic analysis. These processes include the researcher becoming immersed in the data to the extent that individual and group meanings become visible. As this process of immersion continues, different features emerge and the researcher begins to ascertain links between features. As the categories are drafted, internal relationships between them become established. This process is typically repeated many times until a stable, logically related set of categories of description results. The process of arriving at a set of logically related, qualitatively different categories of description necessarily involves the grouping together and summarising of conceptions. The challenge for the researcher is to condense the data into a manageable form for descriptive purposes and yet at the same time to remain faithful to the participants’ related experience: The categories of description aimed at are of a certain kind. At the same time as they mean a reduction of data to a limited and pregnant form, the aim is to reach a summary expression of the content or meaning of data as close to the data as possible. (Svensson, 1997, p. 167) So, how does the researcher arrive at a stable, logical set of categories? As mentioned previously, there has been discussion within the field as to the nature of this important stage in the analysis process. Are the categories “constructed” or “discovered” (Walsh, 2000)? It is likely that the phenomenographic analysis process involves both construction and discovery and that it would be improbable for the process to involve one action entirely exclusive of the influence of the other. The analysis process involves a relationship between the researcher and the data and the researcher’s perspective must have some influence in the determination of the categories. However, the challenge for the
94 phenomenographer is to allow the categories to emerge in such a way that the categories remain faithful to the data as far as possible. As the researcher sets aside, to the extent that it is humanly possible, their preconceived ideas about how the phenomenon in question might be experienced by the participants, he or she allows the differing views to be discovered from the pooled transcripts. A limited number of categories of description might then be constructed by the researcher in order to make sense of the pooled meanings. Walsh (2000) added: A process of discovery means emphasising the similarities and differences in the data, rather than the hierarchy of categories. Focusing on the similarities in the data classified against a particular category develops the detail in that category. Focusing on the differences between sets of data where each set is classified against a different category elaborates the differences between those categories. (p. 25) When a draft set of categories has been established, the task of the researcher is to begin to explore, as Walsh (2000) suggests above, the similarities in each category. In this way the features that distinguish one category from the others can be investigated and a detailed description of the qualitatively differing characteristics of each category described. Further detail of this, in relation to dimensions of variation, will be addressed in the next section. It is important to note, however, that it is possible to map not only the differences between categories, but also in some cases the differences within categories. While it is assumed that there should be general similarities between the conceptions within each category, the researcher may notice subtle differences extant within those conceptions that belong to the same category (Dean, 1994). It is important that to consider the nature of a category of description or, in effect, what a category of description is not. A category of description is not to be considered a means by which the researcher places the participants in boxes. Rather, Marton (1981) stressed this in his seminal paper:
95 We would argue that these forms of thought should not be considered as categories for classifying individuals, but as categories for describing ways of perceiving the world around us. (p. 195) In phenomenography, the researcher’s aim is to explore the varying ways a group of people experience a phenomenon in their world. The aim is not to use conceptions as a means of labelling individuals, but rather to map the range of different ways that a group of people might experience an aspect of their world. This process of mapping differences and similarities between categories of description results in the realisation of the ultimate aim of the phenomenographic researcher, that is to illustrate the variation in the collective experience of the participants in an outcome space. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, phenomenographic research differs from other types of qualitative inquiry, such as traditional content analysis, in that the categories into which data are sorted are not determined in advance. One of the advantages of this approach is that it allows for the possibility that some surprising views might emerge, or that some expected conceptions might not be present as anticipated (Marton, 1986). While it may be the case that only a small number of categories of description emerge during the data analysis phase, this is not unusual. Trigwell (2000a) suggested that this is typical of studies that involve eliciting the views of a relatively homogeneous group of individuals. Richardson (1999) noted that early phenomenographic studies from the 1970s generally followed a pattern in which the emergent categories of description formed a hierarchy, indicative of the level at which the phenomenon in question is understood. Often, the phenomenon under investigation involved students’ understanding of high school or university scientific concepts (Bowden, 2000). However, while phenomenographic studies may typically arrange the categories of description in hierarchical terms, phenomenography does not exclude a non hierarchical approach to the organisation of categories (Hazel, Conrad, & Martin, 1997). Laurillard (1993) described three ways in which categories of description may be ordered in phenomenographic studies. First, inclusive ordering whereby a more sophisticated conception includes the ones below it; second, in which
96 conceptions are not necessarily related to each other but rather to the individual’s history with the phenomenon; and third, a developmental progression of conceptions in which, for example, each conception explains more about the phenomenon than those that precede it. Had the categories of description that emerged during the analysis phase of this study reflected the second or third of the ordering frameworks outlined by Laurillard (1993), it could be suggested that the parents’ views of the Preparatory Year curriculum might have been influenced by their prior experiences of it. These experiences may have included having older children who attended the Preparatory Year, or parents’ use of their own experience of preschool as a basis for their expectations. A relationship or order of the categories may also emerge in terms of the depth of explanation provided by the parents, thus reflecting the third of Laurillard’s (1993) frameworks. However, Richardson (1999) pointed out that phenomenographic enquiry is characterised by a constant attempt by the researcher to approach the task with a minimum of assumptions and preconceived ideas. Boulton Lewis, Wilss and Lewis (2003) found it problematic that, in many phenomenographic studies, participants have been described according to their highest conception. They differentiate between the “highest” conception and the “core” conception. The approach they have taken seems to involve making judgements about the participants according to their core conceptions, tending to avoid allocating them to the highest conception if there have been inconsistencies or contradictions. It may be better to include evidence of these contradictions because it better illustrates the tensions that exist within these views of the Preparatory Year. It is worth reiterating an underlying assumption of this project, which is that there are various ways of experiencing or viewing the Preparatory Year without necessarily one way of viewing being more sophisticated than any other. It is often the case that surprising categories emerge during the phenomenographic process; categories that may not have been predicted by the researcher prior to the analysis process beginning. My experience of this is that I was surprised by some of the categories that have emerged. Allowing the data to “speak for themselves”
97 rather than projecting my own predictions onto the data has allowed, I believe, a greater complexity of parent views about the Preparatory Year to emerge.
3.3.10 Dimensions of variation As mentioned in the previous section, a critical step in phenomenographic analysis is for the researcher to discern the features that distinguish one category from the others and to describe the qualitatively differing characteristics of each category. Describing variation is a key goal of the phenomenographic research approach. In order to obtain that goal, the researcher seeks to tease out the important ways in which one category differs from the others. In reflecting on this point, Marton and Booth (1997) proposed that the phenomenographic researcher’s understanding of what differences are critically significant is reflected in the way in which variation is described. Marton and Booth (1997) coined the phrase “dimensions of variation” (p. 108) and explained the term thus: A certain way of experiencing something can thus be understood in terms of the dimensions of variation that are discerned and are simultaneously focal in awareness, and in terms of the relationships between the different dimensions of variation. As the different ways of experiencing something are different ways of experiencing the same thing, the variation in ways of experiencing it can be described in terms of a set of dimensions of variation. (p. 108, emphasis added) Dimensions of variation, therefore, reveal the relationships that exist between and within the categories of description. In his discussion of the development of phenomenographic research, Pang (2003) suggested that in recent years, the approach has adopted a greater emphasis on a “second face of variation”. The variation that corresponds to the critical aspects of the phenomenon, i.e. the dimensions of variation as experienced by the ‘experiencer’, is the
98 ‘second face of variation’ to which we allude. This implies a shift in the primary emphasis of phenomenography from methodological to theoretical concerns, i.e. from questions about how to describe different ways of experiencing something to questions concerning what is the nature of the different ways of experiencing something described. (Pang, 2003, p. 146) Australian phenomenographer Gerlese Åkerlind uses the notion of dimensions of variation consistently throughout her research in higher education. Åkerlind’s recent studies (for example, Åkerlind & Kayrooz, 2003; Åkerlind, 2004, 2005a, 2005c, 2005d) have involved an examination of the structural relationships that exist between categories of description. These structural relationships are explored in relation to key themes, or dimensions of variation, that run through the participant interviews and constitute the ways in which the categories are both linked and differentiated. For the purposes of the current study, the categories of description will be presented in Chapter 4, along with an exploration of the key dimensions of variation that set each category apart from the others. Finally, the categories of description and the dimensions of variation will be presented in an outcome space.
3.3.11 Outcome space According to Marton (2000), “the logically structured complex of the different ways of experiencing an object is what has been called the outcome space of the object” ( p. 105, emphasis added). The phenomenographic researcher’s primary aim is to represent the conceptions or experiences of the participants in the form of categories of description and then to arrange these internally related categories in an outcome space. An outcome space may take the form of a diagram or list which outlines the different categories and the relationships that exist between them. An outcome space is complete in the sense that it provides an overview of the range of different ways in which a phenomenon can be experienced by a particular group of individuals:
99 The outcome space of categories of description for some phenomenon outlines to the best of our knowledge the span of generative possibilities for relating with this phenomenon. (Ekeblad & Bond, 1994, p. 155) As mentioned previously, early phenomenographic research tended towards investigations into conceptions of learning the ultimate outcome beyond the research being the improvement of that learning. As a result, it is often assumed that the outcome space in phenomenographic research will demonstrate a hierarchically ordered set of categories in which each new category is more complex or sophisticated than those that precede it (Walsh, 2000). While it may be imperative to explore the hierarchical relationship or logical structure of the categories, such a result should not be obtained at the cost of meaning: …It is important during the analysis to undertake certain safeguards to ensure that the search for structural relationships does not unduly influence the constitution of the categories, as this may lead to a less complete outcome space. In my case, a key safeguard that I employed was to prioritise the search for meaning over the search for structure during the early stages of the analysis. (Åkerlind, 2005a, p. 119) During the analysis phase of the current research, care was taken to ensure that a desire to produce ordered categories of description did not overshadow the need for empathetic examination of the data (Ashworth & Lucas, 2000). Various draft versions of the outcome space including categories of description and dimensions of variation were presented, initially to the supervisory team, then to a university based group of phenomenographic researchers, then to an international symposium of phenomenographers and finally to an international audience of early childhood researchers including phenomenographers. More details of this iterative process are provided in a later section of this chapter.
100 3.3.12 Research rigour It is important to consider issues of reliability, validity, transferability and objectivity in all research and although these terms are more frequently used in quantitative research, aspects of these principles remain relevant to promoting rigour in qualitative approaches. Attempts to address the demands of research rigour in qualitative studies have been a major source of criticism by proponents of quantitative methods (Burns, 2000). Burns suggests that, as a result of the subjective nature of qualitative data and its typical focus on a single context, it is often problematic to approach validity and reliability in the same way that quantitative researchers might. However in the following section, some of the issues surrounding research rigour, or trustworthiness, will be addressed in terms of their implications for the current project. The issue of addressing validity and reliability in phenomenographic studies is somewhat vexed and, according to Cope (2003), is yet to be resolved. In phenomenographic studies such as the current project, the focus is on the qualitatively different ways that a group of individuals view a particular phenomenon such as, in this case, the Preparatory Year in a non government school. However, Burns, (1994) makes the point that there exist not only qualitatively different ways of experiencing phenomena but also qualitatively different ways of viewing peoples’ experience of those phenomena. Different researchers, according to Burns are likely to interpret the data in different ways and she argues for close involvement of the research participants in the final stages of the analysis process. While this may not be feasible in many cases, Burns’ point serves to remind us of the importance of promoting validity and reliability in phenomenographic research endeavours which are, essentially, interpretive in nature. The aim of phenomenographic research is to construct a set of categories of description that represent the various ways in which a group of people conceive of, or experience an aspect of their reality. The challenging task for the
101 phenomenographer is to produce a set of categories that are a logically related summary of the participants’ views while at the same time representing the views as faithfully as possible. The critical questions about the phenomenographic methods of data collection, and the ‘validity’ of phenomenographic results may conceivably be seen as an admonition to be true to the people we study, which is, of course, a moral responsibility as well as a prerequisite for the objectivity demanded of all research in the human and social sciences. (Ekeblad & Bond, 1994, p. 158) As mentioned previously, Burns (1994) took the view that validity, reliability and objectivity in phenomenographic enquiry can be promoted through the involvement of research participants themselves in the analysis process. Silverman (2000), however, questioned the extent to which such participant involvement promotes validity, defined by him as “what constitutes a credible claim to truth” (p. 91). Bowden (2005) cautioned against the approach suggested by Burns because phenomenographic research aims to map conceptions from a range of participants, rather than from individuals. In any case, practical constraints including the time lapse between data collection and analysis prevented such an approach in the current study, but alternative strategies were put in place in order to promote notions of research rigour. For example, credibility was achieved in this research via supervisory team debriefing sessions and workshop presentations of draft categories. This process will be outlined in a later section. The iterative nature of phenomenographic data analysis, in which draft categories are repeatedly and rigorously presented against the interview transcripts, is easily aligned with Silverman’s (2000) “constant comparative method” (p. 179) of promoting validity; as is his “comprehensive data treatment” (p. 180) which insists on the consideration of every piece of relevant data in the analysis process. The idea of reliability is also dealt with differently in qualitative research and phenomenography specifically. According to Sandberg (1997), the extent to which research results are replicable is the most frequently cited indicator of
102 reliability in the field of social science. A point to be noted is that, in order to promote reliability in phenomenographic research, it is not critical for more than one researcher to arrive at the same set of categories from the data. In phenomenographic studies, argued Marton (1986), the most reasonable question that may be asked of the phenomenographer is: Would different researchers allocate conceptions to the categories of description in the same way as the original researcher? As Walsh (2000) proposed, what is reasonable is that once the categories are established, other researchers should be able to allocate the transcripts to the categories in a consistently reliable manner. As mentioned previously, the data analysis phase of this study involved rigorous examination of the transcripts and collaborative allocation of the conceptions into emergent categories of description. While a group process might be the ideal in phenomenographic analysis, the extent to which collaboration occurs is inconsistent in the literature. Åkerlind (2005b), for example, takes the more realistic view that group analysis is not strictly necessary. That said, a group process was undertaken in order to promote research rigour in the current study. While I undertook the initial phases of the analysis in isolation, the group process took place at the point where a draft set of categories was presented and salient quotes from the transcripts were put forward for discussion and allocation to draft categories.
3.3.13 Transferability In qualitative enquiries the transferability, or generalisability, of results can be promoted by the provision of rich contextual information (Guba & Lincoln, 1994) that enables the reader to enter the context of the study (Glesne, 1999). The sample chosen for this study is small (26), as is typical of phenomenographic enquiries and the population was chosen from just one context; the parents of one non government school who had children enrolled in the Preparatory Year program in 2003. Therefore, it was necessary to provide detailed descriptions in Chapter 1 of the context of the study to enable future readers to draw accurate
103 comparisons with similar schools and parent populations elsewhere. Owens (1982) outlines the approach this way: Thick description conveys very much the sense of the web of interrelated contextual factors that is associated with the situation under study. Thick description is more than mere information or descriptive data: it conveys a literal description that figuratively transports the readers into the situation with a sense of insight, understanding, and illumination not only of the facts or the events in the case, but also of the texture, the quality, and the power of the context as the participants in the situation experienced it. (p.8, original emphasis) The descriptions of the context of the study provided in Chapter 1 seek to provide the reader with a deeper understanding of the complex backdrop of the current study. The conceptions of the Preparatory Year that are outlined in Chapter 4 are compelling in themselves, but the thick descriptions of the social and political context of this study add richly to our understanding of the parents’ conceptions of this phenomenon.
3.3.14 Objectivity As outlined in Chapter 1, I acknowledge that I came to this research with professional experience and beliefs about early childhood education. It was necessary throughout the course of the study to acknowledge those beliefs and their potential to influence the research outcomes. Every effort was made to remain as objective as possible at all times in order to minimise researcher bias. Ashworth and Lucas (2000) suggested that phenomenography in general benefits from a greater emphasis on the “bracketing” (p. 296) or putting aside of presuppositions on the part of the researcher. The aim is to reveal the participants’ experiences rather than the researcher’s expectations (Ashworth & Lucas, 2000).
104 A number of strategies were employed to promote objectivity. Interview questions were open ended, giving the participants opportunity to reflect on their views (Ashworth & Lucas, 2000) of the Preparatory Year. Probing questions were used only as necessary, but resulted in rich and fruitful data reflecting on the participants’ experiences of the Preparatory Year program at the school. Cope (2003) suggested that objectivity can be promoted in phenomenographic studies by framing follow up interview questions that incorporate terms that are introduced by the interviewees. This was done throughout the interview process and proved valuable in assisting the parents to explain their views at a deeper level. For example, when participants used terms such as “structure”, “preparation”, “schoolwork”, “play based”, probing questions incorporating these terms were used in order to garner a deeper understanding of the meaning being expressed. In this way, the interviewer’s bias that could have been reflected in the use of particular terminology in the questions was minimised and more extensive opportunities for rich data gathering arose. In a discussion of the critical importance of researcher bracketing during the data analysis phase of phenomenographic research, Bowden (2005) suggested the following method for minimising distortion caused by the researcher’s own association with the phenomenon: The primary way of minimising such distortion is to base all analysis on the transcripts: if it is not in the transcript, then it is not evidence … Just because the researcher can ‘imagine’ a different way of looking at the phenomenon or a better way of constituting it, it is not an acceptable category if such descriptions cannot be derived from the transcript evidence. (p. 15) As described in a later section, this bracketing strategy was incorporated in the current study. Evidence obtained directly from the interview transcripts was examined during group analysis sessions which involved input from a mix of people including one who did not have a background in early childhood education. In this way, the allocation of conceptions to transcripts was justified
105 and, where necessary, agreement was reached over issues of contentious allocation of conceptions to interview transcripts. Presentation of the draft findings, including categories of description and interview excerpts, at national and international symposia and conferences for critical feedback also contributed to ensuring the objectivity of the research. Greater detail of this cycle of drafting and presentation of emerging results is presented in a later section of this chapter.
3.4 Research method and design The research study described in this thesis took place between 2003 and 2006. A gant chart is supplied on the following page to provide an overview of procedures and dates:
106 Table 1 Key Dates and Tasks for the Study Dates Research tasks January 2003 August 2003 Design of study 26 June 2003 Ethical clearance confirmed 11 September 2003 Confirmation of Candidature Seminar 29 October 28 November 2003 Data collection 23 February 2004 24 January 2005 Leave of absence from study in order to return to full time employment 25 January 2005 June 2006 Data analysis 29 September 2005 Presentation of first draft of categories to Early Childhood Australia conference 7 November 2005 Analysis discussion with experienced phenomenographers 6 and 7 December, 2005 Presentation of second draft of categories to international panel at phenomenography symposium, Sydney 15 May 2006 Analysis discussions with experienced phenomenographers 31 August 2006 Presentation of final draft of categories to European Early Childhood Research Association conference, Reykjavik, Iceland 18 September 2006 February 2007 Final write up of thesis February March 2007 Final oral seminar and preparation for submission for examination As mentioned in earlier sections, a degree of variation exists in the approaches that have been adopted by phenomenographic researchers in the literature. In their description of what they term “discursive phenomenography” (p. 197) Hasselgren and Beach proposed the following set of steps that typify the method usually adopted in studies that might be described as “discursive phenomenography”:
(Hasselgren & Beach, 1997, p. 197) Figure 2. Typical steps involved in discursive phenomenographic research.
107 Åkerlind (2005d) provided a more detailed account of phenomenographic method in her description of a research project investigating “ways of experiencing being a university researcher” (p.103). Åkerlind’s key steps can be broadly summarised as follows: • Selection of interview sample • Conduct of interviews • Conduct of the analysis • Iterative process • Dimensions of variation In this section, the details of the research method and design of this study are provided. I will begin by describing the pilot study process. This will be followed by a description of the data collection, analysis and presentation steps, in line with the above framework based on the work of Åkerlind (2005d).
3.4.1 Pilot interviewing Aside from ethical factors, the researcher must consider further feasibility issues such as limitations of time, resources and researcher skills (Creswell, 2002). The design of this study was influenced by these factors, not the least of those being the articulation of the study from a Master of Education (Research) to the Doctor of Philosophy program at the end of 2003. It could be considered beneficial in phenomenographic research to undertake a pilot study involving the trial of interview questions and perhaps drafting some tentative categories of description. As a result of the articulation, a formal pilot study was not considered necessary and it was essential that data collection occur during that year. Informal piloting of the interview questions occurred prior to the first interview, with feedback from the supervisory team taken into account during the official data collection phase. The importance of piloting interview questions is addressed by Bowden (2005):
108 Pilot interviews are important to enable the interviewers to perfect their phenomenographic interviewing skills. More than that, it is also crucial to test whether the planned inputs, such as the opening scene setting, actually do elicit comment on the intended topic… Pilot interviews are always essential to ensure that the topic that interviewees are encouraged by the planned inputs to discuss is the topic that is the subject of the research. (p. 19) In the case of the current study, pilot interviewing occurred with the assistance of a parent of young children who had experience of a preschool setting. This was audio taped and presented to the supervisory team prior to official data collection to ensure that the proposed interview questions elicited views in an appropriate manner and that the interview questions were not unnecessarily leading. In the following sections, steps from Åkerlind’s (2005d) framework for phenomenographic research are used to outline the research process.
3.4.2 Selection of interview sample Context for the study This study examined the views of a group of parents who had children enrolled in the Preparatory Year classes of an independent, coeducational college known for the purposes of this study as Eagle Plains College. The research site is a Preparatory to Year 12 school which had a total enrolment of approximately 1600 children at the time of data collection. It is situated in a semi rural suburb west of Brisbane. Having celebrated its tenth anniversary in 2003, the school was relatively new and had been offering a Preparatory Year program since its inception, proudly claiming that it provided the region’s first school based Preparatory Year. There were four Preparatory Year classes at the school in 2003, each situated within the campus of the Junior School, which had an enrolment of approximately 650 children. Children attending the Preparatory Year at the school at the time of
109 the research were the same age as those attending the current state preschool year in Queensland; that is they began the Preparatory Year in January of the year in which they turned five. The school also provided space on its campus for integrated service provision with the placement of other early childhood services on site catering for 3 4 year old children. Ethical clearance Verbal approval to conduct the research was sought (see Appendix A) and obtained from Eagle Plains College during Semester 1 2003 and formal written acceptance was received from the school on 19th July, 2003 (see Appendix B). The sample was drawn from parents of children attending the Preparatory Year in this particular non government school during the year of data collection (2003). A letter was sent to all 95 parents of children enrolled in the Preparatory Year (see Appendix C), inviting them to participate in the study by responding to the request for interview. The invitation informed volunteers of the aims of the project, their right to withdraw at any time and relevant confidentiality issues. A signed consent form (Appendix D) was obtained from each participant prior to data collection. Ethical clearance for the study was formally sought and the University Human Research Ethics Committee granted exemption from full ethical clearance (See Appendix E) and authorisation to commence the project was received on 8 th July, 2003 (Appendix F). In all stages of the research, general ethical principles of integrity, respect and consent were adhered to. The primary ethical issue that needed to be considered was the potential disclosure of personal information by the participants. Pseudonyms were used throughout the research to ensure participant confidentiality. Participants were reminded during the interview process that their comments about the school and the program would remain confidential, and confirmation of this was requested by a number of participants who believed that their views might be controversial. Further, my aim during both the data collection and data analysis phases of the research was to maintain respect for the views of the participants. This was particularly challenging during interviews when participants expressed contentious views about government
110 schools as they articulated their views about the Preparatory Year at the school they had chosen. Participants A sample size of 10 15 participants from a total population of 100 Preparatory Year families was initially considered for this study. Trigwell (2000a) contended that a sample size of 10 15 is feasible in phenomenographic studies as variation in the range of conceptions might be expected with this number of participants. Other phenomenographic researchers such as Bruce and Gerber (1994) (12 participants) and Ballantyne, Thompson, and Taylor (1994) (16 participants) have used a sample of similar size. When discussing sample size in phenomenographic research, Bowden (2005) proposed the following: … You need to interview enough people to ensure sufficient variation in ways of seeing, but not so many that make it difficult to manage the data. Two people would be too few and two hundred would be too many. In practice, most phenomenographers find that between 20 and 30 subjects meet the two criteria. You have sufficient variation and you can manage the data. (p. 17) When it became clear that a larger participant group was going to be feasible in the current study, and that the project would articulate into the doctoral program, an additional sweep for volunteers occurred and the group size increased as all 95 parents of children attending the Preparatory Year were included. Despite the time constraints at the end of the school year, by the end of data collection 26 interviews had taken place over a period of four weeks. Of these 26 participants, 24 were mothers and 2 were fathers, although this study did not seek to explore gendered conceptions of the phenomenon as such. In line with phenomenographic approaches, the emphasis was on a pool of meanings rather than an effort to explore boundaries between individual participants (Åkerlind 2005b). In phenomenographic studies, the researcher may choose to include in the sample people who potentially might describe an interesting or extreme conception. This
111 sampling technique ensures that a range of conceptions emerge from the data when only a small group of participants are interviewed (Trigwell, 2000a). Further, “purposive sampling” (Burns, 2000) or “maximal variation sampling”, (Cresswell, 2002, p. 194) can be chosen in order to investigate differences in the ways parents view the Preparatory Year according to diverse characteristics such as their employment status, their cultural background and their prior experience with older children. With the aim of obtaining greater variation through purposeful sampling, participants who might represent a broad range of views about the Preparatory Year, based on varied demographic characteristics such as cultural and socioeconomic backgrounds were enlisted. This initial list represented the first mail out of invitations to be part of the project. When interviews with this initial group were established, the invitation was then issued to all Preparatory Year parents in order to maximise the research cohort, and the positive total response of 26 was achieved. In the words of Bowden (2005) “phenomenography is a creature of the particular people from whom the data are drawn (p. 16).” This study sought to elicit and describe the qualitatively different ways that parents viewed a full time Preparatory Year program. Therefore, it followed that the sample chosen for the research comprise a group of parents who had experience of the Preparatory Year in a Queensland school. At the time of writing, full time Preparatory Year programs were offered in many non government schools across the state, as well as in the 121 schools (2006 figure) involved in the phased in introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. Given the significance of the non government sector in Queensland and the opening for research in a specific school in which a full time Preparatory Year was offered, this research site was considered most appropriate for the study.
3.4.3 Conduct of interviews When the interview sample has been selected, the next step outlined by Åkerlind (2005d) is the conduct of the interviews. As broad as phenomenographic research topics may be, the features that characterise phenomenographic approaches are
112 usually consistent. That is, data are typically gathered through one on one interviews (Marton, 1986; Green, 2005; Walsh, 2000). The interviews in this study ranged between 25 and 60 minutes, the majority lasting between 30 and 40 minutes. This length of time is typical of research in the social sciences (Robson, 1993) and phenomenography specifically (Cook & Stir, 1994; Trigwell, 2000a). Most interviews occurred on the school site, but it was more convenient for two parents to be interviewed in their workplaces and for three parents to be interviewed in their homes. At all times it was the aim to find a location conducive to relaxed, uninterrupted discussion and in most cases this was achieved. Consideration was given to establishing rapport with the interviewees and ensuring that they felt comfortable, as this promoted free flowing conversation. As Bowden (2005) noted, the aim is to ensure that the participant reveals all of their views about the phenomenon in question. All attempts were made to put aside the researcher’s preconceptions and viewpoints so that the participants felt that their viewpoints were valued and understood (Best & Khan, 2003; Fontana & Frey, 2000). At times this was challenging, given the controversial nature of some of the comments that were made. Also, some participants wanted to know my views about the implementation of the Preparatory Year and while this indicated that good rapport had been established, it was felt that it would be inappropriate to discuss my views during the interviews. The interviews were audio taped and subsequently transcribed verbatim. A common set of interview questions was used for each participant to promote comparability and authenticity as well as to ensure the discussions were kept on track. Given that this study’s key aim was to explore parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year, the opening interview question, “In a nutshell, how would you sum up your views of the Prep Year at Eagle Plains?” was an appropriate launching pad for eliciting conceptions about the program. In most cases, responses obtained from this opening question provided a rich source of follow up questions that enabled a deeper exploration of conceptions. Additional prompts, which were directly related to the research question “How do parents in non-
113 government schools view the Preparatory Year?” , led participants to consider their own views about the purposes and benefits of the Preparatory Year and their current experiences with the Preparatory Year. As predicted, probing questions (Minichiello et al., 1995; Burns, 1994) such as “Tell me more about …” and “What do you mean by …” were used when additional clarification was required. This proved to be particularly important in the current study when different parents allocated different meanings to the same term. When all interview data were collected, the task of phenomenographic data analysis began. The steps taken in the analysis process are outlined in the following section.
3.4.4 Conduct of analysis A further phase in Åkerlind’s (2005d) approach to phenomenography is the constituting of structural relationships. The conceptualisation of data analysis can be viewed as the most challenging task facing phenomenographic researchers (Thompson & Ballantyne, 1994). The analysis of phenomenographic data involves several complex steps including the selection of utterances that are relevant to the research question, the clustering of quotes according to their similarities, and the emergence of differing categories of description (Marton, 1986). This is often undertaken as a collaborative, iterative process by a research team, but an individual researcher may be able to take on the task with certain safeguards in place. The primary task of phenomenographic analysis involves “identifying and grouping expressed ways of experiencing the phenomenon (Marton, 1992, in Bowden, 2000, p. 12) in order to formulate an ordered set of categories of description; which in this study constituted the qualitatively different ways that parents described the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains College. Bowden (2005) suggested that data analysis should not begin until the complete set of
114 interview transcripts has been obtained. This process then involves repeated reading of transcripts and sorting relevant utterances according to their similarities and differences. In the current study, initial reading of transcripts after the completion of data collection and subsequent grouping of similarities was useful. However, in some cases the participants used the same term, but when the context of the quote was considered it was clear that they were expressing different conceptions. For example, the term “head start” was a common phrase expressed by these participants. When the analysis began, I assumed incorrectly that the participants who used this term shared the same meaning, but the context eventually illuminated two different deeper meanings attached to this term. One parent viewed the “head start” in terms of her child gaining a competitive advantage over children from other settings because of an early start to literacy and numeracy learning. Another participant used the same term, “head start,” referring to the earlier start to formal learning providing an easier transition to Year One with formal skills already in place. Transcription and proofreading Verbatim transcription of the interviews was undertaken with assistance from a professional transcription service. A portion of this task was outsourced to enable the researcher to begin data analysis in a timely manner. As noted by Åkerlind (2005d) “research always involves a compromise between ideals and practicalities” (p. 116). This approach was sufficient considering the attention given to thorough proofreading of those interviews that had been professionally transcribed. This task proved time consuming, but ultimately extremely valuable. While proofreading the transcripts, a focus on the research question was maintained by this overarching question: “What does this interview tell me about the way this person understands the Preparatory Year?” and to obtain an overall sense of the meanings expressed by the group as a whole. Coding After completing the proofreading, the next phase of data analysis involved coding the transcripts as they were reread to identify utterances that appeared to be primarily related to the research question, a process described by Marton (1986). At the same time, statements that appeared to have similar meanings were
115 grouped together accordingly. During this initial coding phase, over 70 meaning groups emerged. Bowden (2005) refers to this early stage of analysis as “cataloguing” (p. 26). The aim was then to sort these meaning groups into sets of related themes that were to form the first rudimentary draft of the categories. According to Booth (1997), this early phase of analysis involves examining the transcripts both individually and in relation to others, and focusing on extracts both in and out of context. This early stage of the process aims towards finding similarities and differences in the ways in which the phenomenon is viewed. Using NVivo to code data The qualitative analysis software NVivo was used for the initial coding of data. The challenge of using software such as NVivo with phenomenographic data is that the quotes may become decontextualised. Marton (1986) emphasised the importance of interpreting all quotes in relation to their context within the interview. In this study, the context was always foregrounded, and indeed, this coding process helped to characterise the different meanings allocated to terms used by the participants. As mentioned previously, the term “head start” constituted an example of this. Going through the transcripts methodically, looking for similar terms, actually helped to attain a deeper level of analysis by teasing out the differences; the subtle variation in what the participants were saying when they might have used the same language for different meanings. Similarly, Dean (1994) found that after dense coding of data a number of conceptions may seem similar, but the process of deeper reflection subsequent to coding enables further differences to emerge. Interview summaries It was helpful at this stage to summarise each interview to enable efficient reference back to the data when necessary, a technique described by Boulton Lewis et al. (2003) as the creation of “a series of brief case studies” (p. 82). The use of interview summaries is also reported by Trigwell (2000a) as a means by which the researcher is able to gain an overall picture of the range of comments represented in the transcripts although, unlike the approach taken by Trigwell, the summaries were not arranged hierarchically at this early stage.
116 3.4.5 Iterative process The next critical step in the analytic process outlined by Åkerlind (2005d) is the process of iteration, in which the drafting of categories is revisited several times. The process of drafting a set of categories of description proved to be time consuming and complex. Frequent meetings with the supervisory team over a period of several months assisted in the clarification of ideas and suggestions were taken on board. Entwistle (1997, p. 132 133) asserted that, during this phase, “great care must be taken in establishing the categories in ways which most fairly reflect the responses made, and discussions with others in the process of formulating the reported categories will be an important safeguard.” Following the example of Åkerlind (2005d) the process of achieving a set of stable categories of description involved iterating between a focus on parts and on wholes. Utterances that were seen to relate directly in response to the overarching research question “How do you view the Preparatory Year at your school?” were examined in light of their context within the interview transcripts. It was important throughout the analysis process to examine each statement in relation to the overall context of the interview. For example, three participants might have referred to the full time nature of the program, but the context of the interviews indicated three differing conceptions – full time hours met the current needs of parents , full time hours met the current needs of the child or full time hours prepared the child for Year One . The context of each utterance proved to be critically important during this process of mapping structural relationships and identifying emergent themes throughout the interviews. Similarly, transcripts were considered in relation to other transcripts that seemed to contain similar conceptions. Finally, the emerging categories of description were considered in relation to the complete set of categories, the draft outcome space. At various phases in this process, logical relationships between the categories began to appear and the features of each category that delineated it from the others became clearer. During this iterative process, several drafts of categories and outcome spaces were constituted and put forward for discussion. Immersion in the transcripts meant
117 that the total meaning of what the participants said in relation to the Preparatory Year became clearer and underlying themes began to emerge. These themes would later crystallise into the dimensions of variation, although the dimensions of variation were not explicitly incorporated into the early drafts of the categories. As each draft set of categories was refined, the transcripts were revisited to gain a sense of whether the categories were authentic representations of the way the group of participants were expressing their conceptions of the phenomenon. In the initial stages of the analysis process, early drafts of the categories suggested that they might be ordered hierarchically such that each new category described a more comprehensive view of the Preparatory Year than those preceding it, as described by Walsh (2000). Figure 3 on the following page describes an early outcome space. This early draft of categories was presented for critique at the national Early Childhood Australia 2005 conference, and was well received by colleagues within the national ECEC field. It appears on the following page.
118 • Category A Child has developed, quality environment, preparation for Year One, limited knowledge of program .
• Category B Child has developed, quality environment, preparation for Year One , program features : – Positive features – Negative features
• Category C Child has developed, quality environment, program features, preparation for Year One, and comparison with other centres: – Program inferiority – Program superiority • Category D Child has developed, quality environment, program features, preparation for Year One, and comparison with other centres, providing competitive edge for primary school success . • Category E Child has developed, quality environment, program features, preparation for Year One, and comparison with other centres, and ensuring long-term future success.
Figure 3. First draft of categories of description, September 2005. Continuing the analysis after the conference, though, the transcripts were revisited for a second time to check the authenticity of these draft categories. At this time during the iterative process, Åkerlind’s (2005a) warning that a search for structure in the early stages of analysis should not overrule a search for meaning, was considered. It became clear that the initial attempts to constitute a logical and hierarchically organised outcome space, key meanings that were becoming increasingly evident in the transcripts were being overshadowed. Repeated re reading of the interview transcripts resulted in a reconfigured outcome space and draft categories that began to reflect the key themes of current needs and future needs in a more authentic way.
119 At the first group analysis session on 7th November, 2005, a subsequent draft of the categories was presented to the group of experienced phenomenographers. This second draft is presented here, as Figure 4:
Changing child
Current needs Better program for of child child
Preparatory Bit rough for child Year Program Preparation for Year Preparation for One future
Better preparation for Year One
Advantage
More options Figure 4. Second draft of categories of description, November 2005. It became clear during this discussion and in subsequent weeks of analysis that a strong temporal theme was running through the categories and, in Figure 4, this was represented in the sorting of the categories according to whether they related to “current needs of the child” or “preparation for the future” This temporal dimension will be examined in greater depth in the following chapter. When the redrafted categories were presented to a panel of international phenomenography experts in December 2005, they were rearranged horizontally as a timeline to illustrate the nature of this dimension and several early categories merged as the delineating features of the emerging categories became clearer:
120 The Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains
Current needs Concern with of child future Program promotes Program prepares Program provides Program paves child child advantage the way for development for Year One future success Figure 5. Third draft of categories of description, December 2005. This process of refining replicated, in some respects, the process portrayed by Booth (1997) and described earlier in this chapter. Features of the draft categories were shifted around, new features appeared, and the boundaries of each category became more firmly delineated, until a final version of the outcome space (provided in the following chapter) was constructed in June 2006. The rigour of this iterative process described in this section relied heavily on a number of occasions on which draft categories and transcript excerpts were presented to and critiqued by colleagues with experience in phenomenographic approaches. Walsh (2000) raised the question of whether it is possible for an individual researcher to conduct a valid phenomenographic study: Could a valid study be conducted by an individual researcher? Some researchers may have the necessary range of skills and expertise. But the lone researcher may find it difficult to bracket his or her own perceptions when reading the data and developing a description of the categories. However, where a lone researcher makes explicit his or her input into the analysis and allows other researchers to check, text and probe the results, such bias can be overcome. (p. 30) While for this study the drafting of the categories of description was often undertaken by a researcher working alone, critical safeguards were put in place
121 throughout the process to ensure the results were trustworthy. Regular meetings of the supervisory team provided a forum in which the emerging categories were described, scrutinized, questioned and adjusted where necessary. To ensure even greater rigour, a gathering of experienced phenomenographers from the broader university community was arranged so that the draft categories might be presented and refined further. Utterances that were acknowledged as representing conceptions of the phenomenon and yet difficult to allocate were put forward, discussed and categorised. At a critical time in the analysis process, a draft set of categories of description was presented to a panel of international experts at the Phenomenography Interest Group Symposium at the University of Sydney in December 2005. Finally, the complete outcome space was presented at an international conference attended by early childhood researchers and phenomenographers. This scrutiny by scholars of world renown enabled the emerging results to be publicly questioned and defended and the choice of phenomenography as an appropriate methodology for this study to be confirmed by international experts. The result is a rigorously tested set of categories that are faithfully representative of the data and logically presented in an outcome space.
3.4.6 Dimensions of variation A further step in Åkerlind’s (2005d) process is the identification of dimensions of variation that distinguish between categories of description. During the iterative process outlined in the previous section, the structural relationships between the categories emerged and were clarified during the continuous redrafting process. At the same time as the categories emerged, the relationships between the categories became clearer. At the phenomenography symposium in December 2005, positive feedback about the draft outcome space was received and the ordering of the categories in relation to the temporal dimension was validated. The dimensions that were emerging in the analysis process were made explicit and the existence of further dimensions was determined.
122 Returning to the transcripts after the symposium, it was confirmed that there was a strong temporal dimension running through the interviews as the parents expressed their views about the Preparatory Year program. This revisiting of the transcripts proved to be crucial, not only for confirming the existence of the temporal dimension, but also to enable the beneficiary theme to emerge. Although not quite as obvious as the temporal dimension in the early readings of the transcripts, it was nonetheless evident as the transcripts were revisited over time. It then became clear that the five categories that had emerged during the 18 month analysis period were linked and separated by these two dimensions. The two dimensions of variation were then incorporated into subsequent drafts of the outcome space. By the time the completed outcome space was presented at the European Early Childhood Education Research Association conference in August 2006, these two dimensions of variation had been established and confirmed. The incorporation of the categories of description as well as the dimensions of variation that explicate the links and differences between the categories has enabled the simultaneous portrayal of the whole as well as the parts (Åkerlind & Kayrooz, 2003). The result of this process is an outcome space which ultimately represents a collective view of ways of experiencing the Preparatory Year. A detailed explication of individual conceptions of the Preparatory Year, while not provided in the outcome space itself, is outlined in the initial sections of the following chapter.
3.5 Chapter summary This chapter has outlined the conceptual framework and methodology that were the chosen means of eliciting and describing parents’ views of the Preparatory Year in a non government school in Queensland. This chapter has argued the appropriateness of applying phenomenography in this project and specific details of the steps taken throughout data collection and analysis have been provided. A rationale for the use of phenomenography was outlined, along with a detailed description of the phenomenographic approach and its application to the present study. A primary goal of the phenomenographer is to remain as faithful as
123 possible to the experience of the participants (Francis, 1996). This chapter has provided assurance that processes put in place during the course of the study have promoted the rigour of the research and the trustworthiness of the findings which will be explored in the next chapter.
124 CHAPTER 4
FINDINGS
4.1 Introduction This chapter presents the findings of the study. The findings of this study are presented as an outcome space in Figure 6. An overview of the findings is presented with the outcome space to orient the reader. The relationships between the five categories of description and the dimensions of variation are also introduced in this overview. In the main body of this chapter, each of the five categories of description is explored in detail and illustrated with excerpts from the interview transcripts. Two dimensions of variation that link and differentiate the categories of description are then discussed in the later sections of this chapter.
4.2 Overview of the findings Typically, phenomenographic researchers present the findings of research in the form of an outcome space. As outlined in the previous chapter, the outcome space consists of a set of internally related categories of description which, in turn, represent the varying conceptions or experiences expressed by the participants. The outcome space for this study, shown in Figure 6, takes the form of a diagram capturing the different categories that emerged and the relationships between those categories. The key relationships or themes, that both link and differentiate the five categories are represented as dimensions of variation . As each category is described in the following section, the dimensions of variation that underpin the category will also be discussed. During the analytic process, five categories of description relating to parent views of the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains College emerged. These are illustrated on the following page.
125
Figure 6. Outcome space depicting parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year in a non government school in Queensland Figure 6 presents the five categories of description that emerged in this study. Each of the five categories or ways of viewing the Preparatory Year program, varies according to the emphasis on the parent or the child (i.e., beneficiary dimension) and according to the emphasis on the present or the future (i.e., temporal dimension). The categories presented here are not differentiated in terms of their sophistication or “correctness” or ordered in terms of their merit. In this case, the five categories are ordered across the temporal dimension , featuring increasingly expanding horizons that describe the influence the Preparatory program might have on the child. The focus in Categories A and B is a “here and now” view of the Preparatory Year, while the focus of Categories C, D and E extends into the future. The categories are also delineated from each other in relation to the beneficiary dimension . Category A features a focus on the parent, while Categories B, C, D and E involve a focus on the child. In moving beyond the current needs of parents and children, the influence of the program expands to preparation for Year One, the provision of an advantage in later schooling, and finally to Category E where the program is described as preparation for longer
126 term success. The results demonstrate a complex interplay of factors around the key temporal and beneficiary dimensions. Table 2 outlines the five categories of description that emerged in this study. The table highlights the dimensions that apply to each category and the key structural features on which the participants focussed as they expressed the various conceptions. The following sections of this chapter are organised around the key structural features of each category. Table 2 Categories A - E. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements
(A) Current (B) Current needs (C) Preparation (D) Providing (E) Preparation needs of parents of child for Year One advantage in for future success conception conception conception primary school beyond school conception conception Beneficiary Parent Child Child Child Child dimension Temporal Current Current Future (to Year Future (to Future (beyond dimension One) primary school) school) Structural Contextual School like School like Focus on social Academic focus elements features of features of features of and emotional of program program meet program meet program prepare skills provides an prepares child current needs of current needs of child for Year advantage in for future parents child One primary school success beyond school Program features Informal Academic focus Academic focus meet current features of of program provides an Focus on needs of parents program meet prepares child for advantage in positive current needs of Year One primary school disposition to Program climate child learning prepares meets current Social and Non compulsory child for future needs of parents Focus on social emotional skills status of the success beyond and emotional prepares child for program provides school development Year One an advantage in meets current primary school High quality of needs of the child High quality of program program prepares prepares child Program climate child for Year for future meets current One success beyond needs of child school Program staffing meets current needs of child Current needs of child are better met than they would be in other settings Each category is now described highlighting the distinguishing structural features of each category. Each section begins with a diagrammatical representation of
127 each category incorporating key structural features and the relevant dimensions of variation. Each category includes illustrative quotes from the interview data. Quotes in italics denote interviewer questions or probes. Each interview was allocated a number and these are provided at the end of each quote for reference purposes.
4.3 Categories of description
4.3.1 Category A: The Preparatory Year program is conceived in relation to the current needs of parents In this section, Category A will be discussed and illustrated with relevant quotes from the interview transcripts. Table 3 provides an overview of this category, including the dimensions of variation and the key structural elements on which the participants focused. Table 3 Category A. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements (A) Current needs of parents conception Beneficiary dimension Parent Temporal dimension Current Structural elements • Contextual features of program meet current needs of parents • Program features meet current needs of parents • Program climate meets current needs of parents In this category, the focus is on the program meeting the current needs (temporal dimension) of the parents (beneficiary dimension). The focus is not future oriented or directly related to the needs of the child. Comparisons with other centres, therefore, are also based on a consideration of parent needs.
128 4.3.1.1 Contextual features of program meet current needs of parents The first structural element described in Table 3 is the contextual features of the Preparatory Year program. Contextual features of the Preparatory Year program at the school were frequently highlighted when parents described the program as meeting their current needs. These contextual features included the full time program, affordability, and the convenient location. One of these contextual features, the full time nature of the program, is also a feature of Categories B and C. However, the distinguishing features of this conception are that when the participants described the full time nature of the program, the focus was directed towards their own needs rather than those of their child (beneficiary dimension) and the present rather than the future (temporal dimension). Full-time program meets parent needs
Parents in the study used two different foci to express the view that the full time program met their needs. Some parents focused on their situation as working parents, while others focussed on the fact that they lived out of town. In both cases, it was the full time nature of the program that met their needs as parents. These two ways of expressing the view that the full time nature of the program met the needs of parents are illustrated in this section. The importance of the full time Preparatory Year program for parents who work was highlighted by a number of participants. The program met the needs of these parents who work full time because it was a full time program. I don’t think there were any other Preps close by that we knew about. And double edged sword… and with me working, it had to be something that would fit in with the work cycle. And the Prep program did that quite easily. Preschool programs with five day fortnights just don’t fit into a working cycle. So that also was an influencing factor (22). As goes the other front, well it would help with the childcare situation! Sure, yes! So, you see benefits beyond just for the child? Oh, well, that’s the big picture, isn’t it? Yes.
129 Umm, it would help parents if they wanted to return … to work. Or if they needed to return to work should be the phrase. Umm … it’s easier cause preschool three and two, you have to find child care (4). And the other programmes that I was aware of were mainly part time. A couple of days a week or a few half days or something, and I couldn’t do that physically anyway, because I work (7). The full time program was reportedly convenient for parents who had to travel long distances to the school. In explaining their views about the full time program, parents often explained why the full time program offered at Eagle Plains was more convenient than a half day program that may have been offered at a state preschool. I like the full time. I do. Like, it’s, it’s tough at first. They do get a bit tired and that, but umm for the likes of us because we live out of town, half days would just be pointless (1). And because we live out of town, two hours three times a week just would not suit. Because by the time we got home you’re heading around and coming back. So, the five days is what really got me. And with the school hours as well, it fitted in with having another child at school (9). Affordability of program meets parent needs
Some parents made the point that the Preparatory Year program at the school met their financial needs. They suggested that the program was affordable when compared to child care centres. And from a finance point of view, people said that it’s really expensive, but I would’ve had to pay for him to go to day care those other days. So for us there was no choice. Like, why would I pay for him to go to day care for five days a fortnight, and for him to go to a public school, when I can spend the same amount of money and send him to a private school? (10)
And also, here with the Prep being five days a week, for the working people it’s a lot better. We’re not looking for day care, our children are going to school full time a year earlier. That’s 12 months less day care bills for a lot of people. Because your day care or your child care takes a lot of your wage and I think a lot of people feel like they’d rather their kids being in a structured environment rather than just a play or someone supervising, a baby sitter really. That’s what it comes down to (8).
130 Convenient location meets parent needs
The convenient location of the Preparatory Year program was raised as an illustration of the way the program met the current needs of the parents. The program was conveniently located, close to parents’ workplaces or homes. We did go around to all the schools. I had a look and I couldn’t get past here though. Particularly because of the Prep program? Because it was full time. I mean, we were already leaning towards private school anyway, but because this offered the full time there was no question. Because I don’t think there are any other in the area. And it’s convenient, too. I have to say that it’s very convenient for us, because we work just over there. It works. It suits what we wanted to do (10). I’ve got to admit that I’d seen the brochures, but in my mind, Eagle Plains was way out in the sticks. I seriously did not know it was only 10 minutes drive from where I live (17). And at the time I was working at the RAAF base, so it was particularly convenient and close by and we’re not that far away so… they were all factors in us making the choice (22). 4.3.1.2 Program features meet current needs of parents The next structural element described in Table 3 is that the program features meet the current needs of parents. Program features of the Preparatory Year were frequently referred to when parents described the program as meeting their current needs. Aspects of the program such as assessment and reporting procedures, homework, a reportedly better environment for learning, and a structured, formal program were used to exemplify the program features. Some of these features, such as homework and a structured, formal approach, were also a feature of Categories B and C. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described these program features, the focus was directed towards their own needs rather than their child’s (beneficiary dimension) and the present rather than the future (temporal dimension).
131 Assessment and reporting procedures meet parent needs Parents placed value on keeping track of their child’s progress in the Preparatory Year through regular reporting. Some parents expressed appreciation of the assessment and reporting procedures and felt that their needs in understanding their child’s progress were being met. One thing that they do on a fairly ongoing basis, and they just integrate it in really comfortably, is actually assess the kids. So they’ll assess their reading ability, their ability to count, just your general kinds of tests, and things like that. You get a report card once a term, which tells you quite specifically how the kids are going (7). It does give you a pretty good idea of where they’re standard is in terms of ... They’ll break it down into reading and writing and it gets broken down into the different areas of English so it’s not just English as a standard because they’re still learning to read and they’re still learning write. So they do break it down into those things and talk about, you know, your child is able to put a structured sentence together and is able to use punctuation, or that they’re not able to use punctuation. That they can get to this level and that they just need to... Sort of, you know, in order for them to get to the next level they just need to sort of do the punctuation. And it gives you that indication, really, of where they’re exactly up to. So that if you want to do a bit of work, you say okay, we've got to this point, I just need to maybe work on this and we’ll get them up to the next level (11). Not all parents, however, felt that the assessment and reporting system met their needs. The following quote illustrates the view that the reporting system utilised in the Preparatory Year was inappropriate: And I don’t think they should get a report card. So they get a report card in Prep here? Yeah. What’s that like? Very detailed. Like, just say for the English, it would be they’d give a grade, they’d give the grade, they’d give the level of participation, the behaviour and something else that I can’t recall, and then an in depth … Then they’d go into big spiel about how they got to that grade and what they could achieve in each subject. And that part of it was good, like they could say that she can identify all the letters of the alphabet, that she can write all the letters of the alphabet, but she does her zs back to front, or her gs back to front or whatever. And I felt that was inappropriate as well. And then to hear some of the mothers saying, well, if you get a good
132 report card, you know I’ll take you to Macca’s, to a Preppie, and I just … I was a bit dumbfounded. And I thought it was a bit like in the hospital setting where you say, if you’re not good the nurse will give you a needle. It’s just that stupid. That made me a bit angry actually. But when I got a report card I was quite mortified. They did a parent teacher interview mid year which was totally appropriate, I felt. But as [teacher] said to me, I see you every morning and every afternoon so I’ve really nothing to say to you, it’s more for the parents that they catch the bus, or they go to after school care. And that was fine. I thought that was appropriate, but just the report card I didn’t like that at all (23). Homework meets parent needs The following excerpt illustrates the view that the setting of reading homework in the Preparatory Year meets the current needs of parents by helping them to know what their children are doing at school and how they are progressing: I think the main thing parents want is them to … because that’s something that you can see. You can see that they can read, you know. That’s something that you can test and use every day. I’m sure he’s learnt millions of other things, but the things that we see, that he brings home to us because it’s part of his homework because that’s the only way we get to see it (10). Provision of a better environment for learning meets parent needs Parents expressed the view that the Preparatory Year provided a better learning environment than they could have provided for the child at home. In this sense, the program, through the teachers, provided them with expertise in managing their child’s learning. So for me to have laid that ground work for my kids as toddlers was not too bad, but if I had have been expected to do that for [child] through last year instead of her doing Prep, if she had have gone to a pre school and done pre school part time, I would’ve had to have put in a lot more effort to get her to where she is now. And I don’t know that I would’ve done that. I would’ve liked to have achieved that, but I seriously in reality, I don’t know that I would’ve achieved nearly to the level that she is now (11). Yeah, I think they get very, very bored at home. [Child] was driving me completely insane the last six months she was at home. She was bored. I can’t … I didn’t have the time to provide for her an entertainment (12).
133 Structured, formal program meets parent needs One parent felt that the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains offered structure and a degree of formality that met her needs. Although the idea of “structure” was a feature of Categories B and C, the following quote illustrates how one parent felt that the perceived structure of the program actually met her own needs as parent, as well as those of the child. It’s provided the structure, the daily structure that I think is really important. For me it’s been very important because I’ve had a few years of a lot of changes, a lot of stress on my family, and that structure for them to come to school and have such a structured day has been really important (11). 4.3.1.3 Program climate meets current needs of parents The final structural element of Category A is that the program climate meets current needs of parents. The program climate, or environmental features of the Preparatory Year program were referred to when parents described the program as meeting their current needs. Examples of the program climate provided by the parents were the open, caring, safe and clean environment that was provided in the Preparatory Year. That the program was characterised by an open, caring environment is also a feature of Category B. However, the critical feature of this conception is that when the participants described the climate, the focus was directed towards their own needs rather than their child’s (beneficiary dimension). Open, caring environment meets parent needs An open, caring environment was important to parents of Preparatory Year children and such an environment was seen to meet parent needs as well as child needs. I like the Prep Year here at Eagle Plains. I think it’s very much a family atmosphere. I think that helps the Preppies settle in. They have the open door policy for the parents, which is good (12).
134 Parents felt that their needs were met because the teachers were approachable. The teachers have always been completely approachable, before school, after school or making a formal appointment, always been happy to talk to me (5). Safe, clean environment meets parent needs Some parents articulated the view that the Preparatory program met their need for assurance that their children were in a safe and clean environment. So the standard of teaching is very good, the cleanliness, the safetiness for the kids, is a high standard. Which was one of the main things too, was the safetiness (sic) of knowing that the kids are here, they are supervised. They aren’t just left to their own devices (16). In sum, Category A focussed on how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains College met the current needs of parents. In expressing the view that the program met their needs, parents focussed on how the program met their contextual needs, the features of the program itself, and the climactic features of the Preparatory Year environment.
4.2.2 Category B: The Preparatory Year program is conceived in relation to the current needs of the child In this section, Category B will be explored. Relevant quotes from the interview transcripts are included to illustrate each of the structural elements. Table 4 is included to provide an overview of Category B. Dimensions of variation and key structural elements are outlined.
135 Table 4 Category B. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements (B) Current needs of child conception Beneficiary dimension Child Temporal dimension Current Structural elements • School like features of program meet current needs of child • Informal features of program meet current needs of child • Focus on social and emotional development meets current needs of the child • Program climate meets current needs of child • Program staffing meets current needs of child • Current needs of child are better met than they would be in other settings In this category, the focus is on the child rather than the parent (beneficiary dimension) and the present rather than the future (temporal dimension). The program is evaluated according to whether it has met the current needs of the child or not. Comparisons with other centres are based on whether the program has or would meet the current needs of the child. 4.3.2.1 School-like features of program meet current needs of child When describing the ways in which the program met the needs of their children, parents often focused on the school like nature of the Preparatory Year. Reference to the perceived school like features of the program is also a feature of Category C. However, the distinguishing features of this conception are that when the participants described the school like nature of the program, they focused on their children’s needs (beneficiary dimension) and the present rather than the future (temporal dimension). As the parents described the school like characteristics of the Preparatory Year, they referred to features such as the full time hours, literacy and numeracy progress, discipline and rules, and the perception that the program
136 was structured and formal. Parents also referred to their children being at school and engaging in school like activities such as homework, specialist lessons and extra curricular activities. In addition, parents expressed the view that a school like Preparatory Year program was the next logical step after kindergarten. Each of these perceived school like aspects of the program will now be discussed in turn. Full-time program meets current needs of the child As in Category A, this category includes reference to the full time nature of the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains. Like Category A, this category incorporates a focus on the present rather than the future (temporal dimension). A critical characteristic of Category B is that when the participants described the full time nature of the program, the focus was directed towards the needs of the child rather than their own needs as parents (beneficiary dimension). Parents felt that the full time nature of the program enhanced their child’s development better than a part time program would. These parents compared their own child’s progress to that of children who had attended part time programs. The notion of the child being ready for a full time program was also explored by these parents. And just having that full time as well… we’ve got a niece that does three days, three half days and they’re just … in a state preschool, and they’re just sort of colouring in. And you know I’m just like, oh my goodness, just the big differences between the two (18). Developmentally we thought she was ready [for a full time program] and yes, it suited our lifestyle for her to do that (22). And I think I do believe, well of [child] anyway, that at her age, this year, that she has been ready for a five day program. Physically and emotionally she’s been ready to go five days a week. She goes the same days as daddy goes to work (23). The following parent, however, questioned whether the full time program met the needs of children:
137 I just think that sometimes it’s a long day, and it gets a lot for them. I think sometimes it is quite demanding on them, that five day a week sort of thing. Once again, it’s a maturity thing, and a readiness thing, like are they ready to handle a five day a week program? But I do think that is a big thing, actually, and I think that some of the little kids actually really do suffer in that way. Especially if they’re going to after school care. It’s a big ask for a little kid that age. And I just wonder what they miss out on at the other end. You know? With nurturing … and yeah, I just wonder if the things they miss out on sort of outweigh in some ways the benefits that can be gained. But who knows (21). Progress in literacy and numeracy indicates that the program meets current needs of child In this conception, parents focussed on their children’s progress in literacy and numeracy throughout the Preparatory Year. The quotes that follow illustrate a focus on literacy. These parents felt that the program had met the current needs of the child through promoting literacy development. Academically, she’s just gone in leaps and bounds, perhaps that’s normal, but I just find it’s taken us back a bit because she’s attempting to write sentences and she highlights the newspaper for her sight words (17). Well, he’s writing and he’s reading. Like, he’s very advanced in his reading. He’s blown me away like I cannot believe, you know. And he’s even starting to spell words out. Like he sits there and can look at a word and start to spell it out and you know, he’s only four still, so he’s very, very young. You see your four year old doing all this stuff and you’re just floored (18). Developmentally it has kept her going and she’s still … she’s always been good with reading, writing and that sort of thing and it’s just kept her, I suppose, constant. Hasn’t held her back in any way (22). One parent, however, expressed the view that the focus on literacy was not appropriate for meeting the needs of her child. The following quote suggests that this parent would have been happier if there had been no expectation in the Preparatory Year for her child to read and write:
138 So he was literally just four when he started, which was too young … and I did feel a bit uncomfortable. I’d discussed it in the parent interview beforehand, that I didn’t want him, you know, learning to read or write and the person in charge told me “Oh no, they go at their own pace.” That person’s no longer at the school and I didn’t feel that that was quite truthful, because by the time [younger sibling] got in, to the Prep program, halfway through the year I felt they were doing Grade One curriculum, and I actually do still think that (5). In this conception, parents also focussed on their children’s progress in numeracy throughout the Preparatory Year. The quotes that follow illustrate a focus on numeracy. These parents felt that the program had met the current needs of the child through promoting numeracy development. I mean, [child], you know, when we’re in the car, I say to her, I think counting in ones to a hundred is enough. Stop counting in twos to a hundred. And like, you know, she does 10, 20… she does 20, 40, 60… 50, 100, she says 105, she doesn’t quite get 150, but that all has to come from here (17). He surprised me this morning; he counted to a hundred, would you believe! I just think it’s really good for the kids, you know (9). Discipline and rules meet current needs of the child
Parents felt that the Preparatory Year program met the current needs of the child by providing an environment in which children experienced discipline and learn rules. I’ve actually spoken to [child]’s teacher this year because we had some behaviour problems with [child]. And we, I mean, I’ve actually been to a psychologist and spoken to a psychologist about his behaviour and how to deal with it. Because I find that he would just go off the rails at home and just go into these wild, mad things and I’d go ok my child’s possessed and all that, you know! Take it outside, honey! And yet he wasn’t like that at school, but he’d be doing different things at school. So I sort of got together with the teacher and said, okay, this is happening. And she said to me, I noticed that he’s doing this and this, I think perhaps I need to work on giving him a bit more positive reinforcement instead of saying no, don’t do that, right, go into the kitchen and sit on the lino. Once the kids misbehaved, they remove them from the class, which I think is a good idea. Because I’ve done some hours at the school and I’ve seen boys sitting on the lino, it’s usually boys not girls, and I’ve seen them sitting on the lino and they really sit there and some of them get reduced to tears. And it’s not because anyone said anything, they’ve just removed them.
139 They’ve said, right, you’ve done this, you need to go and sit and think…(11). Not all parents, however, felt that the Preparatory Year program should teach children discipline. I don’t think that it’s a teacher’s role, or a school’s role to, to teach your children discipline. You should teach them that at home and that should be carried through and I don’t think teachers should have to teach your children manners, where some people think their teachers should teach their children everything (2). Structured, formal program meets current needs of the child Parents felt that the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains offered structure and a degree of formality that met the current needs of their child. They have a set program. It’s not just wishy washy. They have Maths, they have English, they have Science, they have Social Science, they have Christian Living. They have all that sort of stuff and it’s all have a timetable, a program. So that’s what I like about it. So they know where they stand. They know what’s coming up. Like he knows every Wednesday he has Music, he knows every Tuesday they have PMP. And he’s a real structure, he’s a real routine person as well. It comes from us, because we’re like that as well (10). She was over it. She needed something more formal (7). He particularly likes structure and formal environment and that’s what he tends to get in this Prep class (5). One parent, on the other hand, felt that the structured environment had not met the needs of her child. I think [child] has gained a lot from doing the Prep Year. However, I don’t agree with the rigid structure of the Prep Year and I don’t believe that they have enough play based activities out there (23). Some parents, while describing the perceived formal nature of the program as meeting the current needs of their child, also suggested that the program may not meet the needs of all children. Many of these parents suggested that some
140 children may not be ready for a Preparatory Year program such as the one offered at Eagle Plains. Yeah, I think it depends on the child, actually. I think it’s very much dependent on the child. I think [older sibling], definitely not, it wouldn’t have suited him. I think [younger children], absolutely. It’s interesting, yeah, but it’s different … different levels of readiness I think. And different types of children, I really believe that. I really think that some children are suited to this type of education system, some children aren’t (21). And for her it has been great, because she’s that bit older. So, a lot of it is to do with the age of the child, and you see children that are perhaps four for most of the year… it would be a whole different ball game for them, as opposed to [child] because he was five for the whole year. A lot depends on the child (6). Current needs are met because child is at school Some parents expressed the view that the Preparatory Program at Eagle Plains met the current needs of their child by being a year of school , rather than a year of preparation for school. Well, I think it’s great. He was ready for school. And because we lived in New South Wales he actually would have gone to school this year regardless, and full time. So that’s what he expected and that’s what we expected. So when we were moving up here that’s what we looked for specifically. And he’s just thrived. And he picks up everything that’s going on. When you say he was ready for school, tell me more about that Ready for school. Well he went to preschool in NSW which is equivalent to I think, technically, kindergarten up here, but from what I’ve heard it’s really like the preschool that they do at the state schools up here. And he already adds and minuses. He was doing that last year. So, to me, the child can add and minus; they’re ready to start school (10). It’s not just here are the little four year olds and five year olds. They are part of the school community and I think that that’s probably the most important thing that they are made to feel part of the whole school community. From day one (13). Oh, I think it’s been wonderful. [Child], I figured they’re going to have 13 years at school, and we come from a farm. So [child] wouldn’t watch TV and he never sat still. He was always outdoors. So [child] couldn’t count, couldn’t write his name or his colours or anything. When he came he was
141 a completely blank canvas. So what they’ve done with him is wonderful. So it’s been brilliant. So when you say 13 years of school, you consider the Prep Year a year of school for him? That’s what it’s been for him this year? Oh yeah. He’s had homework and it’s a full year of school and he has to come every day, and they have a full curriculum and they have the rules and they have set 40 lessons a week and so ... Yeah, it’s a full year. It’s a full year of school. They have excursions and they do projects (26). I think it’s just fantastic. Whether it’s the sch… Because it’s so much like school, too, you know, and he’s just grown up so much in the last eight months (9). It was evident in the data that there were parents who felt that the school like characteristics of the program did not meet the current needs of the child. One parent, whose child had repeated the Preparatory Year, expressed a strong view that the program at Eagle Plains did not meet the needs of children because the children were too young to be attending. Some parents shared the view that their child had been too young to thrive in the program. I think it’s an important year to have before Grade One though. I think they should start it at the same age as they start Grade One now because having put him through last year, he was just far too young; it was awful (25).
Homework meets current needs of the child One parent focussed on the setting of homework in the Preparatory Year as an illustration of how she felt that the program met the current needs of her child. She loved going to school and it’s that thing of when they first go, too, and they come home at the beginning of the year and they’re so keen to do their homework. Mum I’ve got homework, I’ve got homework. And they jump up and they want to do it straight away. And because it’s just small amounts of homework you can sit there with them and do it and it’s over in the blink of an eye, sort of thing. I felt that she coped with it really well (11). Another parent, while focussing on the current needs of the child, felt that homework tasks were not necessary:
142 And like one of the mums said to me, oh yeah, I’ve asked for extra homework and extra reading for her little boy, for [other child], and I was like, Oh, why? And she said, oh because he’s so clever, and I’m paying all this money and I want to get my money’s worth out of the school. And that made me a little bit angry actually, because I just thought, why would you want to do that to your child? And it’s not a matter of … with [child]’s homework and things, I’d spend that time gladly with her … but I just don’t feel it’s fair to her. I’d rather be spending the time with her in the pool, or playing totem tennis or jumping on a trampoline. Like, to me that would be better quality time with her. Or reading a book with her …reading her a story. I’d rather do that than sitting down and doing homework (23). Specialist lessons meet current needs of the child Some parents focussed on the provision of specialist lessons in the Preparatory Year program as a further example of how the program met the current needs of their child. But at the same time, all of the other pluses that they get some writing, some computing, another language, is all a nice, a different challenge for the kids. And for those that can … are ready, it’s good that they get the opportunity (22). He does like doing different things all the day, all the time. If there’s a day when umm they don’t go to music or to Chinese, or something, he’ll “Ohhh, it was boring today” (5). Extra-curricular opportunities meet current needs of the child Parents felt that the Preparatory Year program offered children exposure to extra curricular activities that met their current needs. And so there’s that, and then they’ve got all the facilities within Eagle Plains, like the pool and then they can do computer club… So they’ve got all those other things that they can do as well which, you know, especially for little kids, like, I think if kids are sort of busy doing things then they stay out of trouble a lot of the time. So I think, you know, with all those little things, he can learn so many things and so, yeah, he’s always got that sort of prospect of being able to do sort of the different things and extra curricular activities that they have (18). They should be given the ability to do a wide variety of things. I think that’s the most important thing. Maybe not even the standard of anything
143 is that important. That they get an overall view of what’s around, what’s available, what there is to learn about. That there is a Chinese language that, oh, we can learn to play drums and recorders. Not all children know about these things, and don’t have the opportunity to … oh, girls can play soccer. [Child] played rugby and soccer, does swimming lessons. All these things are available. That’s all learning as well (12). Current needs of child are met because program builds on kindergarten Some parents suggested that their child was ready to experience a more challenging program at the end of their kindergarten year, and that the Preparatory Year program offered such challenge through its school like characteristics. A number of children had attended the Crèche and Kindergarten Association affiliated centre within the campus of the school. I knew he needed something more from when he left kindy, so yeah, I was um expecting him to learn a lot, and he did. He has (1). 4.3.2.2 Informal features of program meet current needs of child Informal aspects of the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains were referred to when parents described the program as meeting the current needs of the child. In this category, informal features include the notion of an individualised program, a program planned around children’s interests, and a balanced and flexible program. A number of parents described informal features of the program such as children having choice, the program encouraging curiosity and creativity and small group activities. The notion of play is also referred to as an example of an informal feature of the program. Each of these reported features of the program will be dealt with in this section. Again, the key features of this category are that when the participants described the informal aspects of the program, the focus was directed towards their children’s needs (beneficiary dimension) and the present rather than the future (temporal dimension).
144 Individualised program meets current needs of the child This conception includes the view that the Preparatory Year program is tailored to meet the current individual needs of the child. In this sense, the parents focussed on the ways in which the program was child responsive: If the children… They’re always given … They’re at their level. So, that’s what I like too. They’re treated as individuals, they’re not treated as a group of kids. They’re treated as individuals. So if they’re advanced in maths or whatever, they will actually allow for that and give them that little bit more so that they don’t get bored. Or their English. So they’re treated as an individual, not as a group, as well. And I think that’s a really good start (9). I find that she’s, you know, recognised his abilities and will challenge him and you know, give him those extra tasks, or, so there’s room for growth, you know, it’s not just flat out “This is what you do da da da, because they split them into their sort of their ability levels, and, yeah, because he would he would probably be a behavioural problem if he wasn’t given those extra little tasks and stuff like that, so that’s what I’ve liked the most. Each child as an individual and, yeah, that’s been a big thing for me and because he … he just loves to learn and I think, why take that off them(1). On the contrary, other parents felt that the program was not tailored to meet the needs of individual children. … I think that it’s not as versatile and as individualised as what I’d hoped it would be. Like I think when a child’s having difficulty with something, I don’t know that it’s addressed as well as it could be addressed. I think, their motto is in pursuit of individual excellence, but I’ve seen lots of times with [child] and with [older child] when that hasn’t been the case. It hasn’t really been … Like, I think it’s just a case of there’s so many kids in the class, there’s one teacher or two in Prep with the assistant, and I think basically the numbers outweigh the ability… And the time factor, you’ve only got so much time (21). Some parents observed that children found the Preparatory Year curriculum challenging and were enrolled to repeat the program the following year. Some I know have struggled this year and they’re staying back another year because they have struggled (18).
145 The notion of the individualised program was explored by some parents who suggested that, in the Preparatory Year program, children were able to develop at their own rate without experiencing pressure to achieve certain goals. Whilst they do all of these things there doesn’t seem to be a pressure on them, there’s no pressure. For example, [child] wasn’t doing well with her maths and I said, you know, is there a problem? She goes, no, it’s not a problem. She’s just a bit slower than some of the other kids at the moment. She’ll catch up and so on (12). Because they are still perceived as toddlers growing, so they’re not school age children as such. So I guess it’s more play based and not necessarily directed towards achievement of certain levels and goals. It’s more they just go along at their level (24). One parent suggested that a limitation on children being able to develop at their own rate in the Preparatory Year was the number of children in the class. Ideally, I’d like to see smaller classes than that. I’d like to see smaller classes across the board at every age, but particularly in Prep Years, I think, I would like to see smaller, you know; no more than 18 per class (11). Program meets current needs of the child because it is planned around children’s interests A further illustration of how the program was conceived as meeting the current needs of the child was provided by parents who suggested that children’s interests were taken into account in the planning. I think that they brought the dinosaurs in because the boys were all playing dinosaurs and getting a bit rough and they thought, “Well maybe we should teach them … about dinosaurs and then they would learn.” So, it seems to be umm … the learning experiences are very much about what they’re doing at the time and maybe what is the trend at the time, rather than trying to take their focus off whatever they’re interested in and trying to make them sit there and learn (2).
146 Balanced program meets current needs of the child The notion of a balanced program was an example of the ways that parents viewed the program as meeting the current needs of the child. A number of parents described the program as being an in between step between preschool or kindergarten and Year One, which they felt was appropriate for meeting the current needs of the child. I mean, I like the fact that Prep is preschool, but it’s school together … so, and you don’t want it to go back to being preschool, but you don’t want it to become school (2). I think it really has been a good in between step from kindy to Grade One (11). Further exploration of the idea of the program being balanced was provided by another parent, who described it as a “rounded” program that promoted a holistic approach to learning: I think it should be a very rounded program and I think this one does achieve that pretty much. Like, I think it should achieve … I don’t think it should focus just on academic, but I think it should be rounded. It should be social, emotional, spiritual, the whole kit and caboodle. Very holistic approach, which I think they try to do, but like I say, I think it works better for some kids than others (21). Flexible program meets current needs of the child Parents reflected on the flexible nature of the Preparatory Year program as a further example of how it met the current needs of the child. You know, there’s bells and things. I mean they don’t necessarily stick to that but it’s a fairly loose program in some ways. In what ways that you’ve observed this year do you find that the prep program is fairly loose? Well, when the class is maybe … I’ve been there when they’re all really high or really not so … You know they’re a bit low and [teacher] will just change it around. She’ll change tact, do something completely different. You know, there’ll be bums on carpets and hands on heads and she’ll be just … She grabs them and ... or what else has she done? Oh, like change things around for the children that maybe don’t have their … what am I
147 thinking of? … their show and tell and things like that. You know, she’ll restructure the whole show and tell time around other activities that are happening. You know, like I brought the puppy in one day, so the puppy was the big focus. So she just changed things around so that we could do that, have that experience with the kids (24). You know, they have four activities set up for the children that you move through all four activities. Well, [child] can’t do all four activities. Like, he’ll … he’ll start one and then he’ll drift over to book corner and flip through a book, and then … [teacher’s aide] or [teacher]’ll encourage him to go on to activity two … umm … and then he’ll go back and read another book, so he’s not forced through all the activities like the rest of the children … well, they just automatically do it … but he’s diff … he can’t, he can’t do it. Umm, so I probably appreciate their efforts more than most of the others, because they’re very nurturing towards him and help him (4). Current needs of child are met because children have choice Some parents identified choice as a program feature which met the current needs of the child. And the thing is, they haven’t got like a set activity, like they have to do this one. They have about four activities, I think, that they go through that they have to do throughout the morning, which is really good. Instead of being told that you have to do this… So they have some sort of choice? Yeah, they’ve got a choice of four different activities I think, that they do. Like, might be cutting out, and the other one would be counting, and patterns, and stuff like that. Which, you know, I think is really good. Sort of gives them the choice. Even though they have to do the four activities, but it’s up to them to choose which ones they want to do first (9). And yet another parent identified lack of choice as an indication of the way the program did not meet the current needs of her child. I think children should be more, at that age should be allowed to do what they want to do. They shouldn’t have to sit there and learn about the letter ‘r’, spend a week they do the letter ‘r’. They sing the song for the letter ‘r’; they write the letter ‘r’, they do everything associated with the letter ‘r’. I think if a child starts showing an interest and say, I want to learn to write my name, then they should be provided with that. But I think it should be more of a choice on the children’s part of what they want to do (23).
148 The program meets the current needs of the child by encouraging curiosity The following quote illustrates the view that the Preparatory program met the current needs of the child by encouraging curiosity: [Child] has just taken this by the … both hands and everything is learning, now. Looking at street signs, and he has got this inquiring mind. We were coming home on the barge last night from Russell and there was the most spectacular storm in the distance. And it was like questions, questions, questions. Why is it doing that? Or, look at that cloud Mummy, it looks like a big whale going into the sea and look, look… like never stops, constantly inquiring. Now, he’s that sort of kid anyway, so that would have happened, but he’s able to use the information he’s already gained from his Prep experience and build on it. … and [child] just, oh, never shuts up of course, questions, questions, questions the whole time. But I think the Prep has ignited that fire in him (20). In what other ways do you think the program gives them that start that you mentioned? I think their overall look … everywhere they go, everything they do, they look at things differently. And they ask questions all the time. And I know kids are inquisitive by nature, but it’s not silly questions, it’s like how does that work? And why? And it’s not just why or, he’ll tell you why he thinks it works. And I think they put the process in their mind of not just why does it do it, but how does it do it. And they seem to just ask, all the time. Everything. Everything! And mum and dad don’t often have the answers which is really hard. But, yeah, it just seems to be a whole different approach to how the kids think about things (8). Environment allowing creativity meets current needs of the child One parent expressed the view that the Preparatory Year program met the current needs of the child by providing an environment free of criticism in which artistic expression and creativity were encouraged. I think there’s a lot of free expression in the Prep program. You know, they’re given ideas and they’re sat down with pens and paper and they’re told … or colour pencils and they’re asked to draw certain things or to express certain things. And they’re just umm … they’re encouraged. You know, even if you can’t tell what the picture looks like, if they’re telling you that’s what it is, then they just accept it. And there’s no correction, or … you know, they just wouldn’t tell a child no, no, that doesn’t look like a house, a house has doors and windows (26).
149 On the other hand, some parents questioned whether the Preparatory Year program fostered creativity: What could be the disadvantages from your point of view, or offering it full-time if any? Could there be any? The disadvantages. Maybe we might lose something along the way. Perhaps we might lose creativity or something like that. I’m just not sure, but maybe that free thinking step, maybe we might lose some of that. Because I mean, you can’t help that when you’re in a program, a formalised program, there’s going to be some loss of that, or I don’t think that creativity is perhaps encouraged as much. So maybe we lose some of that, I don’t know. And maybe we … perhaps we … we create little soldiers, little robots almost. I don’t know. But that is one of my fears with this sort of system, that you do create that sort of child, in a way (21). I just think they should be more play based, they just should have more play time. And non structured activity time. Like, you don’t have to make a dinosaur egg, or you don’t have to make rabbit ears, or you don’t have to make a kite, you can make what you want to make. Whereas when you see 24 preppies walk out of the classroom with exactly the same thing once a week, you just think, oh, like where’s their imagination? They’re not allowed to really have much of an imagination (23).
Small group rotations meet the current needs of the child Some parents noted that the program included small group rotations. They suggested that this organisational feature of the Preparatory Year program met the current needs of the child. They do rotations. So within, say, a 40 minute period, the kids will go from doing one exercise with a piece of paper and perhaps they have to colour in a picture, and then they go onto the next one and they have to cut something out and paste it. They keep them in short time frames, so they’re going from one exercise to the next. So that they aren’t sitting there becoming bored and perhaps getting restless. Like my child can tend to do, will start becoming a bit disruptive. Because he’s like, okay, I’ve had that, let’s move on to annoying someone. Yeah, but within … So I like the way that they have it set out (11).
Play activities meet the current needs of the child Parents often expressed the view that the Preparatory Year program met the current needs of the child by incorporating play based activities. A learning
150 environment involving play was seen as an appropriate means by which the current needs of children were met. Like, it is very play based from what I’ve seen. And you say that it’s play-based, tell me about that. Yeah, just that, you know, like I mean they do a lot of things like on the computer and stuff as well. So, I mean it is actually playing, but they’re learning at the same time without actually realising. And the same with the Annie Apple. Like, they sort of like make up little stories about them to help them learn the A. So it’s a lot more interesting for them (14). A play based Preparatory Year program was seen by some parents as a means by which their child could be exposed to academic activities involving literacy and numeracy in a child friendly manner. They do a lot of learning without knowing they’re learning. Like, a lot of games and a lot of, like, board games, and I think the kids see it as all a game. And they do things like they’ll lay them out and measure them and that kind of thing. And the kids don’t even realise they’re learning, but they are. So it’s that kind of … sort of play based learning. Play based Maths. I wish I’d learnt that way too (19). Yeah, because when I was going and helping with both classes a couple of times a week, ummm so they have ability groups with the maths and the English but again, the kids don’t even know they’re doing maths and English because it’s all play activities, which is good. I wouldn’t like it if they sat down and they were doing textbooks at that age (5). Like, with mathematics they learnt about the number five and they did things with the number five and that’s sort of like, to me, [child] learnt a lot from that. Even though it was all through play, but it was learning. Even though they didn’t know (9). The following quote exemplifies the current needs of the child conception. This parent identifies the play based nature of the Preparatory Year program as meeting the current needs of the child (Category B) rather than preparing the child for Year One (Category C). This is a clear example of Category B in that the parent is clearly articulating the view that the program provides for the current needs of the child through play. The view here is that preparation for Year One through the attainment of levels of achievement is not a priority in the Preparatory Year.
151 So I guess it’s more play based and not necessarily directed towards achievement of certain levels and goals. It’s more they just go along at their level. What’s your experience of the play-based nature of the program? From what you can gather, tell me more about that. The learning sort of structured amongst play so they’re playing games and interacting like for instance, sandpit and doing measuring. So they’re learning about measuring things but it’s done within the play environment. So they’re filling up cups and saucers… or cups and saucepans and things. But they’re learning about sizes at the same time but it’s play. So they don’t .. it’s different to sitting and being told that this is large and this is small. It’s a different learning (24). And yet, one parent felt that the “controlled” nature of play in the Preparatory Year did not meet the needs of her child. I thought she’d be a lot happier with the structured program than what she was. I mean I suppose I didn’t realise that there was so much free play or that she would associate the free play time and the lesson time as completely enclosured. Like, because they only do activities, it’s not sitting down lined up in desks as when we went to school. It’s sitting in groups and doing an activity. But she still saw that as controlled play whereby in kindy they had the option of choosing which activity they did (22). Other parents went further to suggest that the Preparatory Year program was not play based at all. I honestly believed that the Prep program would be the five days of preschool and that it would be more play based learning. And I was quite shocked to find that it wasn’t that at all. To go from kindy where you just play all day, for two days a week, to this program I thought was pretty rough (23).
4.3.2.3 Focus on social and emotional development meets current needs of the child Parents frequently pointed out ways in which their child had made progress as a result of attending the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains. This focus on child development included social and emotional progress as well as examples of academic progress referred to in a previous section of this chapter. A focus on social and emotional development in the Preparatory Year was referred to when
152 parents suggested that the program met the current needs of the child. They illustrated this aspect of the program by discussing features such as a focus on a positive disposition to learning, growth in confidence, independence, maturity, responsibility and social development. Each of these will be examined in this section. Category C also includes reference to children’s social and emotional progress in relation to preparation for Year One. A distinctive feature of this category is that when the participants described social and emotional development, the focus was directed towards the progress made during the Preparatory Year as an end in itself rather than in terms of preparation for the future (temporal dimension). As in Category C, this category includes reference to the child (beneficiary dimension) in relation to the ways in which the Preparatory Year program promoted social and emotional development. Focus on positive disposition to learning meets current needs of child In this conception, parents reflected on the happiness of their child as evidence that the Preparatory Year program met the child’s current needs. As with other aspects of Category B, the emphasis is on the current needs rather than any notion of preparation for the future (temporal dimension). This is particularly clearly articulated by the first participant: I sort of think, that if, if I see my children are happy to learn that and they’re not … umm … worried about it in any way. If they’re happy, well then I tend to go with the flow, and tend to think that … look at it that way (2). Umm, so as long as they grasp their fundamentals, be it at what level they grasp them, as long as they grasp them, umm, it doesn’t matter, as long as they enjoy themselves and want to come to school. Umm, so, no, I’ve always thought that and I still think that now, the mixture of the subjects …I don’t think it really matters as long as the enjoyment’s there (4). In counterpoint, one parent suggested that her child’s unhappy response to the Preparatory Year curriculum was indicative of how the program did not meet her current needs.
153 All year she just really wanted to go back to kindy and play. I didn’t have a single tear each time she … like all last year when she went to kindy and I had tears for 20 weeks morning and afternoon with Prep. And her constant thing was just that she wanted to go back to kindy and play (23). Another parent suggested that if children are too young for a Preparatory Year program, then a positive disposition to learning is not going to be achieved. I feel that in general that five is a good age to start school and I think that if they’re going to bring in a Prep Year then five is a good age to start Prep because I think they’re too young otherwise. They just don’t cope. They get too tired and revolting … and they hate it and there’s nothing worse than a kid that hates school (25). Growth in confidence indicates that the program meets current needs of child The capacity of the Preparatory Year program to encourage the development of the child’s confidence or sense of achievement was seen as important by many parents. A lot of the shyness has disappeared. You know, he was never a performer, never liked to get up in front of a class or anything like that and that doesn’t bother him at all now, so it’s just been a really encouraging environment. Yeah, it’s been really special for him (1). I think last year he was really standbackish and he didn’t sort of take part in much and he was very much the follower, did what everybody told him to do. And this year, I just would never have thought the change in him this year would have come about. Even repeating it, I’ve just been astounded by the change. He’s a real leader now and he’s really forward, and he’s always happy to go and ask for help with things if he needs it and help out with things if other people need it and he’d never have done that last year. So, yeah, it’s just been a huge change (25).
Increased independence and maturity indicates that the program meets current needs of the child Parents noted that their children had become more independent or mature during their attendance in the Preparatory Year program. The scope for the program to
154 foster this increased independence was seen as an example of how the program met the needs of the child. So, starting off very broadly Mary, how would you sum up your views of the Prep Year here? Exceptional. One word to describe it. What’s exceptional about it for you? What really stands out? The way they start introducing a whole range of life skills. And life skills is also academic as well as just general behaviour, self sufficient, taking care of their own property, I suppose that’s self sufficient, and bringing it right through that I now see a structured form of education coming through in [child] (17). He’s a little bit more mature than he was, obviously at the beginning of the year (19). Increased sense of responsibility indicates that the program meets current needs of the child In describing the program as meeting the current needs of the child, parents also reflected on their child’s growing sense of responsibility. They’re given responsibility. I mean he goes, he’s been given little desk monitor, to keep the desk tidy, or, or tuckshop monitor. Little pieces of responsibility like that that kids really respond to. And, and certainly [child] has. I mean, he’ll come home and tell us he’s, you know, tuckshop monitor this week and “Oh, that’s good,” and “Who gets to be tuckshop monitor. The bad kids?” “No.” So, you sort of, you, you’re getting all that positive reinforcement, and he’s sort of really picking up and thriving on it (3).
Social development indicates that the program meets current needs of the child Parents described the progress their children had made socially during the Preparatory Year. They felt that the program had met the current needs of the child by fostering the development of social skills. And he has learnt, through the year, how to deal with his peers, not always well, but he has learnt that, you know, you can’t just give them a clip in the ear, or something like that, you know, he’s learning how to relate to
155 people better, so learning how to problem solve, I suppose … And that kind of thing. And I have noticed that this year as well. I don’t know whether that’s just a growing up thing, and age thing, but I think, I think that you know, the class environment has a lot to do with it (1). I think Prep’s also good for their interacting and their first lot of friends that they make. Tell me more about that. In terms of interacting with each other. How has the Prep program helped with that? I think just sharing, communicating, how to ask for things even, play together. Kindy they play together but they don’t. By the time they’re Prep they’re sort of looking that little bit more, and I know [child]’s made one or two friends that she’ll say, oh, yeah, she’s a friend. And the next day, we’re not friends. All the usual. So, just with sharing things within the classroom, working together as a group or, you know, they pair up as they help each or whatever. [Child]’s very helpful (laughs). I think that helps (16). For some parents, the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains was seen to encourage social learning more effectively than other settings might have. It’s the strangest thing. And he [child who has not attended Prep] doesn’t seem to be able to interact as well. I’ve seen them playing with other kids together, and they haven’t got as many social skills. Still very clingy to their mothers usually. They just seem more babyish (12). 4.3.2.4 Program climate meets current needs of child The climactic features of the Preparatory Year program were referred to when parents described the program as meeting the current needs of the child. The term program climate is used here to describe such characteristics as physical features and the perceived open and caring environment. These ideas will be unpacked in this section. A focus on the program climate was also characteristic of Category A. In Category B, though, when the participants described the program climate their focus was directed towards their children’s needs rather than their own (beneficiary dimension). Physical features of the classroom meet current needs of child Parents described various physical features of the Preparatory Year classrooms to illustrate their view that the program met the current needs of their child. For
156 example, the location of toileting facilities in the classroom was seen to be important in meeting the needs of young children. The supervision was top. The fact that they’ve got toilets in the same room. The little ones aren’t wandering around the place, I thought was a very big plus (16). The classrooms were of a reasonable size and reasonably airy considering the climate (4). Not all parents shared this view that the physical features of the classroom were sufficient in meeting the needs of children in the Preparatory Year. From a sleep perspective it was very hard for them to have a rest and they’re actually resting on… and some of them couldn’t all fit on the mat. And coming from where [child] was used to having a rest in the middle of the day and was still … at the start of the year was having probably having a considerable sleep, getting used to it all. So your feeling about the size of the room is that it would be better if it was a bigger room for the program? I think so. I think so. Given they’ve got so much crammed in to such a small space and they don’t have the ability to have a few things set up where the kids can actually play, probably, with more than one or two. It’s very cosy and very cramped. Now, I haven’t been in the classroom during the day to see how it all works, maybe it does work well. But it just seems that by the time you’ve got 21 kids in there, there’s not going to be much room for movement and to actually play with different activities. It’s sort of, the kids, once they’re playing in one thing, they’re going to be almost on top of the kids playing with something else. So the room itself I don’t think tends to a play environment (22). Open and caring environment meets current needs of the child As in Category A, Category B also includes reference to the open and caring environment of the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains. The distinguishing feature of this category, however, is that when parents referred to the open and caring environment, they refer to the child’s needs rather than their own (beneficiary dimension). So I didn’t have any worries or particular concerns with her. And I knew [teacher] personally, so I know she’s a great lady, and [assistant] is one of
157 the best assistants you could get. So I just knew she was going into a good environment with those two. So I really didn’t have any expectations or concerns or anything. I just thought, whatever happens, it’ll be good for her. So what is it about the environment that you knew the teacher and the aide provided that was going to be a good environment? I knew what type of people they were, like I knew they were really patient, very dedicated sort of people that really did care about the kids. So I knew that for a start. And [child]’s quite creative and arty and drama y, and that’s her flair, and music. And she was going with a teacher that’s very much orientated that way, two teachers that were orientated that way. So I knew that they would nurture that in her or whatever they did would help to nurture that. So I guess it was just the whole environment. I guess, because [older child] had been through the Prep system, I knew that it was a good year, it was a positive year for them (21). You mentioned that you felt that it was a very nurturing environment. Can you tell me more about that, Barbara? They’re just so friendly and helpful, you know, if a child’s sitting there, looking a little bit sad, it’s an automatic thing, be it a mothering instinct, I don’t know, umm the arm slides round the child, gives them a little pat, and they’re made to feel loved. Umm, yeah. That’s … that’s the best way I can describe it (4). 4.3.2.5 Program staffing meets current needs of child The perceived high quality of the Preparatory Year staff at the school was referred to when parents described the program as meeting the current needs of the child. The perception that the program was of high quality is a feature of Categories C and E, where a similar focus on the quality of the teaching staff is included as a structural feature. However, in this category there is a more specific focus on the high quality of the staff themselves; both in relation to their demeanour and their qualifications. A distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the program staffing, the focus was directed towards their children’s current needs rather than a focus on preparation for Year One or longer term success (temporal dimension). High quality teachers meet current needs of the child Some parents felt that the current needs of the child were met through the high quality of the teaching staff.
158 So, what do you think is special about the Prep Year at Eagle Plains? Focussing, back again, on the Prep Year itself. Yep. Look, I think the staff … I mean, I can only talk, I guess from what the class [child]’s in … But they’re, I think they’re very professional. They’re very good. They’re very caring. And they’re very supportive of the kids and you can … and, you can … and the other side of it, I, you feel comfortable walking in there ahh, and the kids are obviously very, very comfortable with it. Umm, there’s no, umm, there’s no fear of the teachers, or they don’t hold back, I mean they tell the teachers what they think (3). And I think that’s why he probably has done so well as well. Because, like, [teacher and teacher’s aide] are really good at that so that's helped a lot (18). I think that the teachers and the aides are lovely. I think [teacher] is just gorgeous. Keep her! And [teacher’s aide], both of them. You know, they just … they make the room. As in any teaching situation, the teacher makes the room and the kids just love them and what can I say, it’s really warm (25). One parent expressed her view that the teaching staff were high quality because they ensured that the Preparatory Year program was not too school like. I think that their programme … obviously there’s planning and, and thought goes into it and that sort of thing, and I do … the kids do have, like, a timetable to work by … Maybe I’m basing my opinion more … I mean, like, if they had … If you had [teacher and teacher aide], who are [child]’s and were [older sibling]’s teachers, all … in every Prep Year, you wouldn’t have a problem! Sounds like their great teachers! Oh, well, [teacher] and … [teacher’s aide]’s a teacher aide, and [teacher]’s the teacher, but … yeah … my concern would be that if, if it turned out to be … too school like, that’s probably what I’m trying to get at. I mean, I like the fact that Prep is preschool, but it’s school together … so, and you don’t want it to go back to being preschool, but you don’t want it to be … come school (2). This parent went further to stress the need for qualified early childhood teachers to meet the needs of young children. The emphasis on child needs is particularly clear in this quote:
159 How do you think they manage that balance, you talk about, between the structure and the, the, the play or the preschool type programme here. How, how do they, how do they manage to make that work? I’m not sure, but I would hazard a guess that they, if they’d have to make sure that the teachers they use for Prep would abs … be trained in early childhood. Rather than using standard primary school teachers. Because at least they’ve got a better insight into what younger children need (2). 4.3.2.6 Current needs of child are better met than they would be in other settings In describing how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains might be different from what was offered elsewhere, parents typically observed that the program at Eagle Plains was better for meeting the current needs of their child. Examples of the perceived superiority of the Eagle Plains program also featured in Category C, but in this conception, the focus is on the current needs of the child rather than preparation for Year One (temporal dimension). I think they do more … more pre reading, writing and maths than say a state preschool seems to do. I sort of equate a state preschool to kindy. It seems to be a similar program to that and I think he’s been there, done that, he was ready to move onto something a little more challenging (19). I think, umm, kids tend to learn a lot better the younger they start. Umm, because they’re, they’re so hungry for it. Umm, so I think, yeah, that I would not have liked to have to wait another year, for him to … I mean another year wasting time, I guess, in, in virtually a kindergarten arrangement. I mean, he did that in kindy. He did the gluing, he did the games. Umm and, you know, why would you want to go through another year of doing that and I, I think he would have got bored (3). In describing the program as different to what is offered elsewhere, some parents suggested that the children were exposed to content that they might not have encountered until Year One in other settings. But you know, you can tell him, okay, write a ‘H’ which is a ‘Hairy Hat Man’ which is the letter land, and off he’ll go. He can sort of do them all and even his numbers, he can write his numbers really, really well like, doesn’t seem to have a problem with that. So, you know, it sort of floors you a bit, because they are so young, and to be able to achieve… And I’m sure like that in state schools and stuff that they probably do that in Grade One, but they’re Prep, you don’t expect that (18).
160 [Child] can recognise every letter of the alphabet, he can write most of them. Some of them backwards, but, yeah, he can write most of them. He can write his name, and his name’s not exactly small. He can recognise … He can count to twenty or he can count to thirty, recognise all his … What else can he do? Recognise all his numbers, write all his numbers, adding them together. He’s learnt lots of things outside of that. They’ve got the farm, well he knows all about planting and stuff, but they learn about planting, and growing trees. Scarecrows was a project how to keep the magpies away from the gardens and stuff. They’ve just planted all the babies. They did a dinosaur term where they learnt all about dinosaurs, all the videos, they did an excursion to the museum. They’ve learned lots of things like that. They learned time and distance and weights. They play with water and see how fast things travel. So I think that this Prep is pretty much equivalent to, you know, three quarters of Grade One in the state system (26). In sum, Category B focussed on how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains College met the current needs (temporal dimension) of the children (beneficiary dimension). In expressing the view that the program met the child’s current needs, parents focussed on the school like features of the program as well as the informal features of the program; the ways in which the program fostered social and emotional development, the climactic features, the staffing of the Preparatory Year program and the ways in which they conceived of the program being superior to what was offered elsewhere.
4.3.3 Category C: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as preparation for Year One A discussion of Category C follows in this section. Table 5 presents an summary of this category, including the dimensions of variation and the key structural elements that were invoked by participants as they described how the Preparatory Year prepared their children for Year One.
161 Table 5 Category C. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements (C) Preparation for Year One conception Beneficiary dimension Child Temporal dimension Future (to Year One) Structural elements • School like features of program prepare child for Year One: • Academic focus of program prepares child for Year One • Social and emotional skills prepares child for Year One • High quality of program prepares child for Year One In this category, the focus is on the program preparing the child for Year One. As in Category B, this category features a focus on the child (beneficiary dimension). A focus on the future rather than a focus on the present (temporal dimension) represents a point of departure from Category B. The future focus is limited to the following year, that is, Year One which differentiates this category from Categories D and E. In this category, parents evaluated the program according to whether it had prepared the child for Year One. Comparisons with other centres were typically framed around the belief that this program better prepared children for Year One than would alternative programs. Each structural element of this category will now be discussed in turn. 4.3.3.1 School-like features of program prepare child for Year One The school like nature of the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains was referred to when parents described the program as preparing the child for Year One. Perceived school like characteristics of the program were also evident in Category B as parents described the ways in which the program met the current needs of their children. However, the distinguishing feature of this category is that when the participants described the school like nature of the program, the focus was directed towards preparation for Year One rather than a focus on their children’s current needs (temporal dimension). Aspects of the program such as the full time hours, integration with the school, being a year of school, discipline
162 and rules were mentioned by the parents as ways in which the program prepared children for Year One. They also cited the perceived structured and formal nature of the program, uniforms, homework and specialist lessons as further examples of the program preparing children for Year One. Each of these features will now be explored alongside representative quotes from the interviews. The full-time program prepares children for Year One While the full time nature of the program was also a feature of Categories A and B, in this category parents focussed on the child rather than the parent (beneficiary dimension) and the future rather than the present (temporal dimension). Parents expressed the view that the full time nature of the program prepared children for Year One because it enabled the children to become familiar with a full school day, fives days per week. … a lot of kids in kindy have got, you know, a couple of half days and then, or preschool sorry, and then bang! They’re into these big full days the following year and they just would find it tough, I think (1). But I do think that, in my opinion, if you were going to a pre school you’d want full days even if it’s not every day. You’d want to get them used to doing a full day. Not the half day which was all that was available to me being out in the country, and I just thought no, that’s not getting them used to a school day (11). Well I thought with the five day fortnight half day, they really wouldn’t have much time to get into any activities and it was more … it’s more play based outside, as where this is …. I suppose it’s more …It’s play based here as well, but not as much. And also I wanted the children to be able to, when they went into Year One; I wanted them to be able to settle in properly. And being away half a day, five day fortnight, was not really what they would expect going into Year One (15). The program prepares children for Year One because it is part of the school The notion that the Preparatory Year program prepared children for Year One because it was seen as part of the school community was also expressed by parents.
163 They go to chapel and they go to assembly and they do their little performances in front of school and, so they’re made to feel part of the school even though they’re not … well, the kindy, too, that’s the same … they are involved in everything, even though it’s not the formal years (4). The program prepares children for Year One because it is school The idea that the Preparatory Year was a year of “school” was expressed by some parents who used this notion to relate how the program prepared children for Year One. While conceiving of the program as a year of school was also a feature of Category B, in this category parents focussed on preparation for the future rather than meeting the needs of the present (temporal dimension). Because the kids just gets so wrapped in what they’re doing and the routine. So I don’t think there’s really a disadvantage on the fact they start a year early. It’s just adjusting for the parent I think (laughs). That’s right. So am I right in saying that your feeling is that a full-time Prep Year really is like starting school? Yes, but gently. It’s first you’re setting them up for school, I think. It sets them up for their homework, this is what they’ll expect once you start Grade One, setting up for the sounds and the letters, and just the routine (16). And yet some parents resisted the idea that the Preparatory Year should be considered a year of school: I think that it would provide them with a good basis for starting school as opposed to … I truly believe that [child] has started school this year, and what I think a Prep Year should achieve is that readiness to begin school and to begin a formal learning process. So you don’t feel that it should be considered a year of school? No, not as such. Do you think at Eagle Plains it’s considered to be a year of school? Yes, definitely (23). It’s not, you know, it’s not school, it’s not Grade One, it’s not as structured, but there is that structure there, so they’re learning, there’s a time to play and there’s a time that I have to focus on doing things (19). One parent felt that the nature of play in the Preparatory Year classroom was an illustration of the school like characteristics of the program at Eagle Plains. This parent had experience of an alternative program with an older child and felt that
164 play in the Preparatory Year classroom was different from what children might experience elsewhere, and focused on preparation for Year One. I think it’s too formal not to be considered the year at school. When I compare it with the preschool year at [local childcare centre], that was very play orientated and even though it is play here, I think it’s a more formalised form of play. It’s not as free. It’s not a free sort of system so much. You know, [older child] was … he had so much time playing really that it was just … I mean, there wasn’t a lot of challenges academically and that year at [local childcare centre] for him, whereas there has been for the girls in the Prep Year here. Tell me more about your thoughts on the way they play but it’s more a formal type of play from your perspective. I think … I just think the whole … I think they are more restricted in their play perhaps in a lot of ways. I think … I don’t know how to describe it really …I just think that when I look at the [childcare centre] preschool year, I think perhaps … Perhaps it’s just the play is less directed. That’s the word I’m looking for, probably. The play is less directed whereas here it is, it’s more directed, their play, into specific areas and aiming for specific outcomes even though it is play. You know what I mean? Whereas I think the [childcare centre] was a more informal type of play (21). Discipline and rules prepare child for Year One Parents felt that the Preparatory Year program provided preparation for Year One by providing an environment in which children experience discipline and learn rules. Discipline and rules were also a feature of Category B, but in this category parents focussed on discipline and rules assisting preparation for the future rather than meeting the needs of the present (temporal dimension). And it’s really a very low tolerance for things like hitting and bullying. If you’re seen to touch another child, there’s no… that’s it you go. You go and sit in there and think about what you’ve done. And I think that’s really important at their age. So that they don’t go into Grade One and get in with the bigger kids and start thinking that they can push other kids around. Because a bigger kid’s going to come along and just flatten them. And they’re going to find out in a really, really hard way, physically, that you just can’t do that! So the discipline’s been good in that sense (11). I’m surprised that I keep harping on these things, given that I am a very unstructured person myself, but school is structured, there are rules, it is a system, it is a microcosm of society in itself, so all those intangible things
165 that they would learn in Prep mean that they don’t have to do it in Grade One (7). And because the rules here go from Prep right through … the school rules. The children know the school rules right from Prep. So when they go to Grade One it’s not a big shock to the system that they’re not allowed to run on concrete, they have to wear their hats, they know manners and things like that. They know the basics (8). Structured, formal program prepares children for Year One Parents often described the Preparatory Year program as offering a degree of structure, or a formal learning environment. Description of the program as structured and formal is also a feature of Category B, but in this category parents focussed on preparation of the child for the future rather than meeting the current needs of the child (temporal dimension). The following excerpts illustrate the view that the structured and formal aspects of the program prepared children for Year One. I suppose they’re getting used to being in a formal classroom situation, without it being too full on, you know. They do have to sit down at their desks and do their work, but they still have their time for playing and that kind of thing … and yeah, with the different subjects, you know. They all have their maths in the morning, or their work with their numbers in the morning, then their English, and that kind of thing, so it is sort of a big stepping stone, I think, to going into primary school (1). And I think that just the structure, the familiarity of the environment; it’s not so overwhelming when they come in to a new place in Grade One. All of that just contributes to preparing them. They have to go off and have their Chinese and go off and have their computer. You know, that’s what school is about (20). Exposure to routines was seen as a further example of the ways in which the program was structured and formal. The establishment of routines in the Preparatory Year was used as an example when they described the ways that the program prepared children for Year One. Okay, you mentioned that you felt that the Prep Year was a preparation, that that was one of the main focus, the preparation for Year One. How do you think that happens? What do they do to prepare the kids for Year One? Well, all these activities that, like the homework folders, visits to the
166 library, and music and the P.E., all breaking the school day up into all these different subjects. I know they have set times during the day, for all the set subjects, and I guess it’s the routine that is setting them up (6).
Wearing uniforms prepares children for Year One
Parents were supportive of the uniform policy of the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains and felt that by wearing a school uniform, the children in the Preparatory Year were being prepared for Year One. … they’re not moving from, like, going straight from preschool where they’re very insulated, straight into school. I don’t think it’s that so much of a culture shock. They’re already wearing a uniform (2). I like the fact that she would be in a uniform and start getting a level of structure around her, because that’s what you need for school, so it was a good discipline and preparation for her (7).
Homework prepares children for Year One
Parents felt that the children’s preparation for Year One was enhanced by the setting of homework tasks for Preparatory Year children. The focus on homework is also a feature of Categories A and B, but in this category emphasis is placed on homework benefiting the child rather than the parent (beneficiary dimension) and homework preparing the child for Year One rather than a means of meeting current needs (temporal dimension). It’s first you’re setting them up for school, I think. It sets them up for their homework, this is what they’ll expect once you start Grade One, setting up for the sounds and the letters, and just the routine (16). So it [homework]’s just there to give them the routine for the beginning of the real school life (26). On the contrary, one parent felt that the setting of homework tasks was inappropriate and was not suitable preparation for Year One: I actually don’t like the whole homework thing. Tell me all about the homework and your feelings about it. They get homework every Monday that they have to complete by Friday, and hand in on a Friday. Which I think in Grade One, or Grade Two, or Grade Three would be very appropriate. I mean, I like the fact that it
167 doesn’t have to be done that night, and it didn’t necessarily take a long time to do, though it does for [child] because she’s a perfectionist in every way, so everything takes a long tome for [child] to do. I actually didn’t do her homework a few weeks, because I refused to call her in from outside where she was playing with her little brother to say, you have to come in and do your homework (23). Specialist lessons prepare children for Year One
Many parents focussed on lessons provided by specialist teachers as an example of how the Preparatory Year program prepared children for Year One. A focus on specialist lessons was also a feature of Category B, but in this category parents mentioned specialist lessons as an example of the ways in which the program prepared the child for Year One rather than met current needs (temporal dimension). The following quotes illustrate the view that the “routine” of attending specialist lessons prepares children for Year One: Like, they run on the same times as the rest of the school, and they’re pretty much teaching the same things as the rest of the school, like the Christian Living, the Maths, the English, the Music, Chinese, swimming, computers, library, that sort of thing. So they’re pretty much doing the same things they would be doing in Grade One (14). Oh, I think the whole program sets … they have Chapel, they go to the library, they go off to the computer rooms, they have a Chinese teacher. So all these things are things that they’re going to encounter next year in Grade One. Music teacher, separate P.E. teacher. They’re not just sitting in a classroom, you know, painting and playing, they really are integrated into the Junior School completely (26). They have to go off and have their Chinese and go off and have their computer. You know, that’s what school is about (20). 4.3.3.2 Academic focus of program prepares child for Year One Many parents believed that there was a strong academic focus in the Eagle Plains Preparatory Year program and that this prepared their children for Year One. That the program was characterised by an academic focus is also a feature of Categories B, D and E. In this category, a distinguishing feature is that when the participants described the academic focus of the program, the emphasis was
168 directed towards preparation for Year One. This differentiates Category C from Categories B, D and E in which the program was seen to meet their children’s current needs, to provide an advantage in primary school or to prepare the child for future success beyond school (temporal dimension). In this section, the academic focus of the program is illustrated with reference to academic skills broadly, literacy and numeracy specifically and early intervention. These three aspects are discussed here. Academic skills prepare child for Year One Many parents observed that the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains focussed on children’s academic development and learning. This academic focus was portrayed as effective preparation for Year One. The emphasis in this category is on the way the program prepared the child for Year One rather than a focus on the current needs of the child (temporal dimension) or a description of the child’s development. I think the academics are really good. The academic side. I’d say [child] hasn’t even done really well, but the fact that it’s if she hadn’t come here she may have struggled in Grade One (12). Well just through speaking to other friends who have children that just go to preschool and stuff like that, it seems to be a lot like the kindy program. Just playing with play dough and doing their painting and stuff. Where this is just more learning. More of the Year One getting ready for Year One. And I know I keep going back to that, because that’s what I think is fantastic about it (9). Literacy and numeracy focus has prepared child for Year One Some parents were more specific about the progress their child had made. As in Category B, this category includes reference to the ways in which parents felt that their child had made progress (academic and social/emotional) as a result of attending the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the progress that their child made, the focus was directed towards preparation for Year One rather than how the program met the current needs of the child (temporal dimension).
169 Okay, so in what ways, you mentioned a few times that you felt that the Prep program really sets kids up well for Year One. In what ways in particular do you see it setting them up for Year One? The confidence. More relaxed to actually move into a school environment. Makes it easier to start because they’ve got so much to learn in Year One, they’re virtually starting, bang. This way they’re ahead. They don’t have to worry about learning their sounds or their letters. They’re actually there to start. Because a year isn’t that long any more, it seems very short. And to jam all that in in 12 months, it just seems mind blowing to me, as a mother. And watching the kids and just seeing how short the terms are and what the kids have to do, that sets her up. She’s ready to start on day one. Where it’ll take six months of jamming to get her up to the level she needs to start, from scratch. Which puts them ahead, from what I can see. It helps them (16). Because our children are already reading, they already know the alphabet inside and out, they know all their numbers, they’re ready to start developing on from there. But the ones that haven’t done that, how are they going to cope in Year One? They don’t have that grounding (10). Here, the kids are learning their alphabet and their counting and numbers and things, whereas at the public system they seem to be just playing and painting and singing and dancing. Didn’t seem to be as much of the writing and that sort of skills that the children are using, ready for Grade One (8). I think, again, all it is is the ground work, the basics, ready for Grade One. I don’t think that you need to say that at Grade One they will learn to read and at Grade One they will learn to be able to add. If they can do that in Preppy, why not let them? And that seems to be the thing. Some of these children down in Prep now, they can read, they don’t stop them. They go and they get books from the upper grades and bring down for these children to learn to read in. It’s just a starting block. And we’re starting them a year earlier than if they were just going to Grade One (8). For some parents, the academic focus of the Preparatory Year was seen to be an appropriate step between kindergarten and Year One. A number of children in this study had attended the on site Crèche and Kindergarten associated service that was available within the school grounds at Eagle Plains. And also setting her up to start Grade One. Making it easier to flow in. Instead of coming from kindy, which is just painting and looking at books, to actually understanding how to handle the books, the letters. They aren’t just thrown in the deep end and say well, this is what you’ve got to learn (16).
170 For some parents, the idea of children achieving a particular standard of academic development before entering Year One seemed important. They’re aiming the children to have reached a certain level academically prior to that level one entry because I know there are children that don’t go in to level one necessarily from Prep. They’re held back for another year on the recommendation of the teacher, whether it be a social reason or an academic reason or whatever. So I think they’re aiming for a standard, basically (21). On the other hand, one parent felt that there was no suggestion of achieving a set standard in the Preparatory Year but, rather, children were able to develop at their own rate. Yes, I think as much as they have been able to, they have certainly allowed for kids to develop at their own rate. There isn’t a pressure on that they must be up at this standard. I’ve actually found a big change from Prep to Grade One (11).
Early intervention prepares child for Year One
The notion that early intervention with regard to learning difficulties assisted preparation for Year One was expressed by some parents. It also has the two teachers, that if there’s any problems that the kids are going to come up with, that they’re going to see it then. They’re not going to wait two or three years’ time, sometimes five years before the teacher says, oh, this kid can’t read. Or this kid’s dyslexic or this kid’s having problems with this area. You can virtually start to see it there if the teachers are really good, like they’re supposed to be, and can pick up. Because that’s the time to do it, it’s too late further on. So the Prep Year I think is a good one for picking up any problems that may come in the future. Whether it’s speech, or handling certain subjects, it’ll show then (16). But, see, the school brought that [child’s learning difficulty] to my attention. I wonder if in a state system in Grade One, even, if they would’ve noticed. And it they did, would they have bothered to go to all the extremes to catch him up, or does he just get lost in the cracks and fall through the system. So it was brought to my attention with lots of time to catch him up to send him into Grade One (26).
171 4.3.3.3 Social and emotional skills prepare child for Year One The focus on social and emotional skills in the Preparatory Year program was referred to when parents described the program as preparing the child for Year One. This focus on social and emotional development is also a feature of Categories B and D. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the social and emotional development focus of the program, the emphasis was directed towards preparation for Year One rather than towards their children’s current needs or towards providing an advantage in primary school (temporal dimension). Parents referred to a focus on social skills, growth in their child’s confidence, responsibility, respect and emotional preparation. Each of these perceived attributes of the program is explored in this section. Social skills focus has prepared child for Year One As in the previous category, there is reference to the ways in which the Preparatory Year program encouraged the children’s social development. The focus in this category, however, is on how the children’s social development has prepared them for Year One, rather than meeting the current needs of the child (temporal dimension). The following quote illustrates that this parent believed that a standard of social development is required at the end of the Preparatory Year so that the child can move successfully into Year One: Well, I definitely think they are aiming for social integration and a certain level prior to that level one entry… And do you think that standard that they’re aiming for is equally important in the social areas as the academic areas? Absolutely. So that’s your point of view? Yeah, I do. Like there’s no point them being academic if they can’t socialise with their peers. Where’s that going to get them? Okay, they’re going to be a bright child with no friends. You know, so yeah I do think that’s just as important. How do you think the Prep program here promotes that social development in the children? Through a variety of ways really. I think it does it through the play and I think it does it through interacting just in specific outings and all the areas.
172 You know. Just them going to Chapel. Just them going to swimming or whatever. But I think there is a real emphasis on the socialisation, you know, and acceptable socialisation too (21). The following quote illustrates the view that social learning is more important than academic learning in the Preparatory Year. … I don’t think specific knowledge is required for entering Grade One. It’s more about separating, socialising, wanting to do it, focus stuff, yep, as opposed to knowing the alphabet, knowing the numbers, the colours … Yep, as opposed to that stuff (24). Growth in confidence has prepared child for Year One As in the previous category, there is reference to the way that the program was seen to build confidence and a sense of achievement for the child. The focus in Category C is on how the development of confidence has prepared the child for Year One, rather than the belief that a growth in confidence has indicated that the current needs of the child were met (temporal dimension). So why do you feel that that’s good for kids to have that early start? (long pause) Making the transition to Year One will be much more comfortable for them. It would give them confidence to know that they’re able to handle things that come up in Year One (15). She was doing okay, yes, but in a single situation she didn’t have the confidence, wasn’t as sure of what she was reading and didn’t know what she was reading as well. She could’ve gone through to Grade One, but we felt she would’ve struggled. And I didn’t want to stop her from going forward, because in the last 12 months she’s got so confident and outgoing with just the whole program, I didn’t want to knock that before it started. So another year to get everything down basic that by the time she gets to Grade One she’ll be flying. She’ll be confident, she’ll know her letters. She’ll be ready to start Grade One without any of those problems. And hopefully it will make it easier to learn later on. Instead of putting that brick wall up now saying it’s too hard, it’ll say, oh, it’s easy and just keep going. Hopefully. She’ll probably come to her problems, but at least it will start … give her a good, basic start, that she hasn’t have that problem first up of struggling and the embarrassment of not knowing and being unsure and scared. She’ll just go through and whatever’s given to her she’ll give it a go and go, yes, I can do it. The confidence (16).
173 The program has prepared child for Year One by encouraging responsibility Parents described the Preparatory Year as a program that enabled children to learn to take responsibility. In this way, the program was seen to prepare children for Year One. The growth of a sense of responsibility was also a feature of Category B, but in this category the focus is on preparation of the child for Year One rather than increased responsibility meeting the current needs of the child (temporal dimension). And during this year, Mandy, do you think the program’s changed? When the year started off, was Prep any different from what it is now do you think? It is to the extent where they’re trying to get them a bit more responsibility now. Like, they’re trying to make them responsible for their own like their hats and whatever. That they put them in their bags. And they get their own diary every afternoon, whereas the teacher’s not going to put it in their bag for them. Because in Grade One they’ve got no one to do that. So just teaching them to learn to do things on their own (14). Program prepares children for Year One teaching respect
Parents felt that the Preparatory Year assisted children’s social learning in relation to respect for adults, thus assisting preparation for Year One. I like the fact the teachers are on a Mrs or Mr, that they’re addressed by their title, because I think that’s an introduction to Grade One, and life (23). Program prepares children for Year One by preparing them emotionally
Some parents felt that the Preparatory Year had fostered emotional development and assisted their child to separate from them. In this way, the child was prepared for Year One. … you get children, never been to school, get thrown in school in Year One. That must be … horrific, like my children suffered with separation anxiety terribly, and to think … it was bad enough throwing them in school when they were four, to think … an extra two years attached to my legs … you know … I … it would have just been horrific for them, umm … yeah, just, just to help kids (4).
174 4.2.3.4 High quality of program prepares child for Year One
The perceived high quality of the Preparatory Year program at the school was referred to when parents described the program as preparing the child for Year One. This notion of high quality is also a feature of Categories A, B and E. What distinguishes this category from the others is that when the participants described the high quality of the program, the focus was directed towards the child’s preparation for Year One rather than a focus on their own needs (beneficiary dimension) their children’s current needs or preparation for future success beyond school (temporal dimension). Examples are provided here to illustrate parents’ suggestions that the program provided better preparation that other settings and that preparation for Year One was enhanced through the high quality of the teachers. The program provides better preparation for Year One than other settings
In describing how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains prepared the child for Year One, some parents drew comparisons with other settings such as state preschools or child care centres. They held the view that the type of program offered at Eagle Plains was different to what was offered elsewhere and was superior in terms of the preparation of children for Year One. Well, I don’t know how a child that hasn’t gone here will cope in Year One. That makes me wonder. Because they’ve done and they’ve learnt so much. A child that’s gone to another state preschool and then comes that would be an interesting thing to do as part of your follow up would be to come in next year, speak to the parents whose kids had been here this year and then speak to the ones that didn’t come here and see how they cope. Because I think it would be huge. Because our children are already reading, they already know the alphabet inside and out, they know all their numbers, they’re ready to start developing on from there. But the ones that haven’t done that, how are they going to cope in Year One? They don’t have that grounding. But I guess if it works in this program, if he went to a state school they wouldn’t expect him to know all that in Year One (10). So, because it’s just that little bit more advanced, it’s just got a better chance of preparing them for school, I guess. So tell me more about that level of work that you think might prepare children for school a bit better. In what particular areas of work? Just like in the reading and stuff. Like, I mean a lot of people have told me
175 that for kids that have had interviews to go to a grammar school or something, apparently all those schools have said that Eagle Plains are far ahead of what other students are coming from other schools (14). One parent elaborated on her view that the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains prepared children for Year One better than other settings by suggesting that the program was well matched with the Year One program. If I think that if they’re in a state preschool and then they’re going into Year One there’s not going to be big dramas because they’re not going to expect them to know anything. But if you go from there to here, I think that’s where there’s a problem. And if he went from here to there, he’d be bored. Because he’d be learning all the things in Grade One that he’s learnt in Prep (10). A number of parents measured their child’s progress against that of children who had attended preschool in other settings and felt that their child had made better progress. So I think that this Prep is pretty much equivalent to, you know, three quarters of Grade One in the state system. My girlfriend’s got a little girl that did two years of preschool in the state system. The first year she did one, and the second year she did two schools, so she did the equivalent to three years of preschool. And she’s in Grade One and she’s only a term ahead of [child] (26). The term “head start” was used by several parents when they suggested that the program was superior to what might be offered elsewhere in terms of preparing children for Year One. Yeah, I think it just gives them all that head start. I mean, I know, kids that have come here, umm I honestly feel they’ve got a better head start going into Grade One than kids in a state preschool (1). I think it’s a good head start for the kids. Comparing it to the alternatives of the preschool [where] I think it’s a five day fortnight (13). The term “head start” was used in ways other than to describe the program in relation to other early childhood programs. The following quote includes the term, with the emphasis being on the program easing the child into the school routine.
176 But I think that for [child] it’s sort of been a gentle introduction to Grade One, and it will give him a head start for Grade One, and that can only be good for him (6). The conception that the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains prepares children for Year One and is different from what is offered elsewhere was expressed very clearly by one participant who was not actually in favour of the approach she felt was adopted by the school: In hindsight I would never, ever start her out there in Grade One having not done the Prep Year because I think she would be behind the eight ball. Which I think is wrong as well. In what ways do you think she would be behind the eight-ball? Because her little cousin goes up to the preschool up the road, and she hasn’t done any of the reading, writing things that [child] has done, which I think is great but if [cousin] started in Grade One with [child] next year, if the majority of the class had done the Prep Year, those kids that hadn’t would be no reflection of their intelligence it would just be what they’d been exposed to. And I feel that they would be behind (23).
High quality teachers prepare children for Year One The notion of “high quality teachers” is also a feature of Categories A and B, but in this conception, the focus is on the quality of the teachers enabling the child to be better prepared for Year One. The focus here is on the high quality program meeting the needs of the child rather than the parent (beneficiary dimension) and preparing the child for Year One rather than meeting current needs (temporal dimension). In the following quote, it is clear that this parent identifies high quality teaching in the Preparatory Year, not just in terms of meeting the current needs of the child (Category B), but extending to preparation for Year One. [Older sibling] is in Year Two this year, and he attended Prep two years ago. He had [teacher and teacher’s aide] and they were just fabulous. And with him having a disability, like he’s got verbal dyspraxia, they were just so helpful. They worked in with the speech therapist and I just can’t talk highly enough of it. And I think that prepared him a lot for Year One. I’m just really, really happy with it (9). In sum, Category C focussed on how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains College prepared the child for Year One. In expressing the view that the program prepared the child for Year One, parents focussed on the school like
177 features of the program, the perceived academic focus, the focus on social and emotional development and the high quality of the program.
4.3.4 Category D: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as providing an advantage in primary school Category D is presented in this section. Table 6 provides an overview of the category and incorporates the dimensions of variation and structural elements of the category. Each structural element will be addressed in turn. Table 6 Category D. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements (D) Providing advantage in primary school conception Beneficiary dimension Child Temporal dimension Future (to primary school) Structural elements • Academic focus provides an advantage in primary school • Confidence provides an advantage in primary school • Non compulsory status of the program provides an advantage in primary school The distinguishing feature of this category is that parents described the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains in terms of it providing an advantage or competitive edge for their child, increasing the likelihood of success in subsequent primary school years. The focus is on the program providing an advantage for later schooling. The future focus extends beyond Year One into subsequent primary school years (temporal dimension). The program was evaluated according to whether it had provided the child with an advantage over peers in other centres or schools. Comparisons with other centres were framed around the belief that this program better prepared children for primary school and provides an academic advantage.
178 4.3.4.1 Academic focus provides an advantage in primary school The perceived academic focus of the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains was referred to when parents described the program as providing an advantage in primary school. That the program included an academic focus was also a feature of Categories B, C and E. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the program’s emphasis on academic development, the focus was directed towards the provision of an advantage in primary school rather than the current needs of the child, preparation for Year One or preparation for future success beyond school (temporal dimension). Some parents expressed the view that the Preparatory Year program provided their child with an advantage in later primary school due to the earlier start to academic learning. In discussing this view, these parents illustrated the notion of “advantage” by arguing that their child would be advanced in relation to year level peers if he or she were removed from Eagle Plains and enrolled at another primary school. But [child]’s here because it’s an advantage to start school here. Even if he didn’t continue to school here, which he is, put him into a state Grade One class and he’s going to be leaps and … and it’s going to give him that three years of that learning, that advantage. He's not going to struggle. He’ll be able to just build on that where a lot of the kids will struggle. He wouldn’t struggle because he would have like up to Grade Three before it balanced out. And all the other kids will catch up, but it gives him that nice, easy, casual start. And that’s why he’s here. He’s only here because it’s an advantage to put them in (26). One parent, however, expressed uncertainty as to whether the program at Eagle Plains provided children with a genuine and permanent academic advantage. What would be the benefits of providing it [the Preparatory Year]for everyone do you think? I think it would give every child an equal opportunity, quite frankly. I think that children are disadvantaged if they can’t get into this sort of program when they’re more than ready for it. But, you know, because I’ve never seen the end results I don’t know. You know what I mean? Like, do the kids just catch up anyway? Is it just like a variance in age and eventually they all sort of just…? You know what I mean? Like, even
179 out. Or does the Prep Year actually give them that head … I mean, I think it gives them the head start, but is it carried through? Is it something that’s worth while doing because it actually does affect the outcome in the end? You know what I mean, but who knows? Do you know? (21). Another parent seemed quite sure that there would be no advantage later in primary school. Just to me it seems a bit like they, I could be very wrong in saying this, that they it feels to me like they want to be different and that they’re going to create some kind of super genius kids by implementing this earlier. And I just believe in a couple of years time they’re all going to maybe, probably even next year, the middle of next year, they’re all going to be at the same level. I mean I don’t know. I’m sure they would’ve done studies on it, but you’re not going to make someone more intelligent by teaching them earlier. They’re just going to know things a bit earlier and then they’re just going to all meddle in together and all be the same (23). 4.3.4.3 Confidence provides an advantage in primary school A focus on confidence was referred to when one parent described the program as providing an advantage in primary school. That the program included a focus on children’s confidence is also a feature of Categories B and C. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the program’s emphasis on social and emotional development, the focus was directed towards the provision of an advantage in primary school rather than the current needs of the child or preparation for Year One (temporal dimension). Child will have an advantage due to increased confidence In the following excerpt, the parent focussed on the way that she felt the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains gave her child an advantage in primary school by instilling in him increased confidence: But certainly here it’s been worthwhile to have paid the money. Because they’ve got a leg in the door, they’ve got the confidence. You know, and I’ve put [child] into Grade One next year at another school, and supposedly he might be a little bit ahead of his peers. I’m not thinking that he’s going to be way ahead and leaving everyone else behind, but he’s
180 going to have a very good leg up which I think will give him a lot more confidence (11). 4.3.4.3 Non-compulsory status of the program provides an advantage in primary school One parent suggested that the Preparatory Year’s non compulsory status enabled her child to have an advantage over other children who might not attend a Preparatory Year program. She [younger sibling]’s already advanced now, going in, so I know that she’s not going to have any problems. But if she was just four starting, and she had social problems, I’d hate to think that that was compulsory for her. So the non-compulsory nature of it is important for you? Well that gives him the advantage, yeah. Because so many parents don’t bother, they just don’t. So that’s what gives him the advantage. And that’s what we do as parents, we look for every advantage they can get (26). Here, the parent is suggesting that the non compulsory nature of the program gives her child an advantage. She is pointing out that, were the program made compulsory, her child would no longer have an advantage because all children would be attending a Preparatory Year program. The current arrangements enabled her to provide her child with a program that not all children in the state would be accessing because their parents would not be legally obliged to enrol them. In sum, Category D focussed on how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains College provided the child with an advantage over other children in primary school. In expressing the view that the program provided an advantage, parents focussed on the program’s academic focus, the capacity to promote children’s confidence and the non compulsory status of the program.
181 4.3.5 Category E: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as preparing for future success beyond school The final category, Category E, will be outlined in this section. The dimensions of variation and structural elements of this category are represented in Table 7. This is followed by a discussion of each element, with representative excerpts from the interviews included. Table 7 Category E. Dimensions of Variation and Key Structural Elements (E) Preparation for future success beyond school conception Beneficiary dimension Child Temporal dimension Future (beyond school) Structural elements • Academic focus of program prepares child for future success beyond school • Focus on positive disposition to learning prepares child for future success beyond school • High quality of program prepares child for future success beyond school This category is differentiated from Category D according to the temporal dimension. Critically, these parents, rather than expressing the view that the Preparatory Year provided a competitive edge for primary school success, took an even longer view, describing the program in terms of it ensuring long term future success for their child. The focus is on the program providing more options and greater likelihood of success for the long term future. The future focus extended beyond Year One and subsequent primary school years to the years post school (temporal dimension). The program was evaluated according to whether it had prepared the child for Year One, primary school and life. Comparisons with other centres were framed around the belief that this program better prepared children for the rest of their lives after the Preparatory Year.
182 4.3.5.1 Academic focus of program prepares child for future success beyond school The perceived academic focus of the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains was referred to when parents described the program as preparing the child for future success beyond school. In this category, the parents focused on an early start to academic learning and the opportunities for early intervention for children having difficulty. The perception of an academic focus was also a feature of Categories B, C and D. In a point of departure from those categories, when the participants described the program’s emphasis on academic development in Category E, the focus was directed towards preparation for future success beyond school. In Categories B, C and D the focus was the current needs of the child, preparation for Year One or the provision of an advantage in primary school (temporal dimension). The program prepares for future success by giving children an early start to academic learning An early start to academic learning was identified by some parents as a means by which the Preparatory Year program prepared children for future success in the workforce. What do you think about that, that idea of the government providing a Prep Year for all children? I … I think it would be fantastic. Umm … these part time preschools, where they basically just go to play, I … yes they are making friends and they probably are achieving something … but I’ve always said that you’re going to need a degree to be a checkout chick in years to come, and if … you’re the biggest sponge around when you’re, you’re four and five and if you don’t utilise that … I think it’s crazy (4). Well for our children I think it’s just given them a better start. They are going to have more options if they know … if they’ve got the ground work done, they have more options when they get older. Tell me more about those options that they have. Well our family, not a lot of people have gone past Grade 10 or 12. I’m thinking now that our children will definitely … probably that won’t even be an option, they will go to 12 and our kids will have a chance to go to uni or whatever after that. Giving them the opportunity to do other things.
183 My husband’s a meat worker and I was a cleaner. I’ve done a little bit of computer work. Yeah, I want our kids to have the choices. To be whatever they want to be. Although that changes from week to week (laughs). But no, I think it’s just going to give them the opportunity to choose what they want to do (8).
The program prepares for future success by giving children confidence and offering early intervention The following excerpt illustrates the view that the Preparatory Year prepared children for success in later life by giving them a better opportunity to find work. This parent focused on how the program gave children confidence and provided opportunities for early detection of learning difficulties: Every child needs the opportunity. And the work force is getting that hard, I feel it starts now. It doesn’t start in Grade Eight where it used to. If you could just read, or if you were an average child, it was good enough. With the work force the way it is, you’ve got to be above average, and you’ve got to be an achiever. I’m not saying all kids can be or will be, but at least if the opportunity is there, they have a chance to give it a go. If they don’t, they’ll find their right spot, in time. But at least the opportunities are there to start with. And how do you think a full-time Prep Year gives kids a better opportunity? With the confidence again. It starts that year straight off. You’re not wasting time. It also has the two teachers, that if there’s any problems that the kids are going to come up with, that they’re going to see it then (16). 4.3.5.2 Focus on positive disposition to learning prepares child for future success beyond school The program’s capacity to foster a positive disposition to learning was referred to when parents described the program as preparing the child for future success beyond school. That the program encouraged a positive disposition towards learning was also a feature of Category B. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the program’s capacity to foster a positive disposition to learning, the focus was directed towards the child’s preparation for future success beyond school rather than towards current needs (temporal dimension).
184 Some parents focussed on the way that the Preparatory Year program had given their children a love of learning that would assist them in the long term future. And I hope they’ve achieved to give her a love of learning. That this is a … that learning is a fun thing regardless whether she’s done good, bad or indifferent, that learning isn’t a bad thing, that this is a good place to be. So that love of learning, that encouragement of that is important to you as well in Prep? Yeah definitely. Definitely. We spend so many years in school, TAFE, Uni, whatever, that it’s a way of life. There’s no… You have to do it. So they better start learning to like it because too bad otherwise! And they’re more likely to do well if they like it (12). This love of learning prepares children not just for Year One, but for the rest of their lives, as articulated by the following parent: Umm, so, yeah, and if that, if that umm, if that’s what the school has taught them, that, that learning is an exciting, fun thing, uhh, not a “This is really serious now. We’re in Year One” … the heart starts going … umm, it can be daunting for kids. So, yeah, I mean, if they develop a programme along those lines, that, that truly prepares them for the … not just for Year One, I guess. I mean, it sets the ground, I guess, for the whole basis of your learning experiences, doesn’t it? (3) An alternative view, which suggested that preparation for long term future success beyond school was not the primary role of the Preparatory Year, was expressed in the following quote: They’re happy. That .. that is the most important thing to me. To me, it’s not them being a brain surgeon or getting to university or any of that. To me, it’s that they are achieving their best and they’re happy about doing it (2). 4.3.5.3 High quality of program prepares child for future success beyond school The perceived high quality of the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains was referred to when parents described the program as preparing the child for future success beyond school. That the program was high quality was also a feature of Categories A, B and C. However, the distinguishing feature of this conception is that when the participants described the high quality of the program, the focus was
185 directed towards the child’s future success beyond school rather than a focus on their own needs (beneficiary dimension), meeting the current needs of the child, or preparation of their children for Year One only (temporal dimension). The notion that Eagle Plains offered a high quality Preparatory Year program and that this would prepare for future success is illustrated in the following quote: And I think these days you’ve got to give your kids the best education because you know, otherwise what are they going to do for the rest of their lives? It’s so hard now to get a job, never alone when he gets out of school … Because I just … the big difference between even my niece and [child], I just wouldn’t have [younger sibling] have that sort of setback in life (18). In sum, Category E focussed on how the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains College prepared the child for future success beyond school. In expressing the view that the program prepared the child for future success, parents focussed on the perceived academic focus of the program, the focus on positive disposition to learning and the perceived high quality of the program.
4.4 Dimensions of variation This chapter has provided an in depth outline of the five categories of description that have emerged in this study. These five ways of understanding the Preparatory Year were constituted around two primary dimensions of variation in views. The analysis of the interview data involved a detailed examination of the structural features that distinguished each of the categories, as outlined in previous sections of this chapter. A further step in the analysis process identified critical dimensions of variation or themes that run through the interviews. These dimensions of variation, which show how the five categories relate to each other, were the beneficiary dimension and the temporal dimension . These underlying themes, or dimensions of variation, have been explicated in this chapter at the beginning of each description of the categories and throughout the exploration of the structural features of the categories. The dimensions of variation have set each category apart from the others while simultaneously linking each category to the others.
186 4.5 Chapter summary The research used a phenomenographic approach to examine the qualitatively different ways in which a group of 26 parents viewed the Preparatory Year program at the non government school in which their children were enrolled. This chapter has presented the key findings of the study. These findings were arranged as five categories of description and an outcome space. Exploration of the dimensions of variation that both link and separate the five conceptions demonstrated varying emphasis on parent needs, child needs and preparation for future success in school and beyond. In the following chapter, these findings will be discussed in relation to previous research. The implications of these findings within the current context of the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland will also be explored.
187 CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION
5.1 Introduction
In Chapter 1 the background to the study was presented and the research question posed. Chapter 2 consisted of a review of the relevant literature, while in Chapter 3 the chosen research approach of phenomenography was outlined and justified and an overview of the method was provided. The results of the study in the form of five categories of description and two dimensions of variation were presented in Chapter 4 and illustrated in the form of an outcome space. This study examined the ways in which a group of 26 parents conceived of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year in a non government school. Five categories of description emerged: • Current needs of the parent • Current needs of the child • Preparation for Year One • Providing an advantage in primary school • Preparation for future success beyond school Consistent with phenomenographic research, a further analytical step revealed structural differences between these five categories along with two sets of dimensions of variation further differentiating the categories. As outlined in Chapter 4, the categories varied in their focus on whose needs were met by the Preparatory Year program: Category A focused on parents’ needs, while Categories B, C, D and E focused on the child’s needs. Categories also varied along temporal lines: Categories A and B focused on the present, while Categories C, D and E focused on the future. These categories of description revealed variation in the ways this group of parents conceived of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. This was not a
188 study of the Preparatory Year itself. For example, had the focus been the Preparatory Year curriculum as it was implemented at the school, the research may have taken a “first order perspective” (Marton, 1981, p. 178). Rather, the focus here was the relationship between the participants and the phenomenon as it was experienced by them. As such it took a “second order perspective” (Marton, 1981, p. 178) as outlined in Chapter 3. In this case, a second order perspective is valued for its emphasis on eliciting and describing the views held by a group of parents who are seen to be key stakeholders with an important and unique relationship with the phenomenon under investigation, that is, the Preparatory Year. This study is significant because of its timeliness and relevance to educational reform in Queensland. The introduction of a full time Preparatory Year in all Queensland schools from 2007 represents a major change to early childhood service provision in the state and brings provision in the year prior to compulsory schooling into line with programs in other Australian states. As outlined in Chapter 1, it has been more than half a century since a Preparatory Year was universally available to Queensland children in the year or years prior to Year One, having been abandoned in 1953 as a result of funding being reallocated to secondary schooling (Department of Education, Training and the Arts, 2006). Thus, the provision, from 2007, of a full time Preparatory Year in all schools throughout Queensland represents a significant shift towards both a nationally consistent provision for the year prior to compulsory school as well as uniformity in school starting age across jurisdictions. The importance of partnerships with the parents of young children in times of reform and change makes this study both critical and timely. In the following section, each of the five emergent parent conceptions will be discussed in light of their contribution to the wider body of international and Australian research. This chapter includes seven further sections. First, each of the five categories of description will be examined and discussed with respect to previous literature. Second, the dimensions of variation that emerged in this study will be teased out and attention drawn to the tensions inherent in them. In this latter section, a
189 number of interview extracts will be revisited to highlight these tensions. Additional participant quotes are included in this chapter to further illustrate the tensions emergent in parent reflections on the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. Third, the results of this study will be compared to a UK study which investigated parent perceptions of nursery school using a phenomenographic approach. Fourth, the application of a phenomenographic approach will be examined for its effectiveness in answering the research question. Fifth, a number of caveats, or limitations of the study will be described. Sixth, the chapter includes a discussion of further opportunities for research and and, finally, recommendations for the future are put forward. The clear variation in parent responses to the overarching question, “How do you view the Preparatory Year?” will be examined and posed as a future challenge to those who are involved in the implementation of the broader Preparatory Year in Queensland.
5.2 Discussion of categories This study identified five categories of description relating to parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year in a non government school. In this section, each of the five categories is discussed in relation to its contribution to the literature and in light of the current Queensland education context.
5.2.1 Current needs of parents
The current study found that parents viewed the Preparatory Year program in relation to its capacity to meet their own needs. In this conception, the child was not the main focus. Rather, the perceived needs of the parents were in the foreground and the needs of the child retreated to the background. The program was seen as meeting parent needs through practical features such as hours, affordability and convenience. Parents also identified features of the program itself that met their needs. These features included assessment and reporting procedures, homework and the provision of a better environment for learning. The idea that the setting of homework in the Preparatory Year may be a means of meeting the needs of parents through keeping them in touch with the curriculum
190 and their child’s progress has significant links with the work of Dockett and Perry (2004a). While these authors stressed that their study only enabled speculation about the link between homework and parent communication, the current study suggests that this is indeed a reality for parents who may not be able to spend a great deal of time in the classroom. Environmental features of the program were also nominated as the means by which parent needs were met; through the open, caring environment and safe, clean facilities. A number of these features were also found in the recent work of Noble (2007) around parent conceptions of ECEC services and choice of service in regional Queensland. Noble’s (2007) categories of “demographic convenience”, “safe, secure and hygienic”, and “valuing parents and keeping them informed” (pp. 25, 26), while different from the categories in this study, hold obvious connections with the current needs of the parent conception. The full time nature of the Preparatory Year program featured prominently when parents described the program as meeting their needs. Indeed, many parents suggested that this feature of the program was one of the most powerful influences on their choice of program and, therefore, their choice of school, in the first place. Those parents who worked full time sought a program that would “fit in with the working cycle” and, given that state preschools at the time were almost exclusively offering part time programs, many parents suggested they had “no choice” but to find a full time program. Several parents noted the high cost of childcare and proposed that it made little sense to pay for childcare when their children could be “learning something” or “attending school.” Within the current needs of parents conception we find some parallels to the work of Australian researchers Rodd and Milikan (1994) who found that convenience and location were more prominent than educational or learning criteria for parents choosing early childhood programs in the year prior to school. So too, Lythe’s (1997) study examining parent choice of primary school in New Zealand found that proximity, reputation and previous family attendance featured strongly as parent considerations. Again, there are commonalities in the results of the current study – particularly in relation to the citing of ‘convenient location’ as meeting the
191 current needs of parents. Unlike Rodd and Milikan’s and Lythe’s studies, however, the conceptions that dominated across this sample were the current needs of the child and the preparation for Year One conceptions rather than the current needs of the parent conception. And yet, the strong statements indicating that a full time program was an essential consideration for some parents, remind us of the significance of a conception that was less dominant than others in the interviews, but perhaps just as powerful in terms of how it influenced the choice of program. Ball (2003a) cautioned against necessarily accepting parent reasons for choice of school at face value. His point is that decisions around parent choice of school are made within a milieu of values and practical concerns and that parents themselves might not always be clear as to the motives that lie behind their choices. In relation to the Australian context, this point was also made by Press (2006) who pointed out “the decisions that families make in relation to children are the result of a complex interplay of factors” (p. 3). Clearly, practical considerations are important to parents and have implications for parents. While all schools in Queensland offer the Preparatory Year from 2007, it may not be the case that all schools provide before and after school services that working parents might find convenient. Certainly, the availability of programs in all schools will ensure that parents are able to access a program in their local area. This was not always the case before the introduction of the Preparatory Year, given that many government schools did not provide preschool programs and in many cases parents were required to register on waiting lists in order to enrol their children in such programs. The practical needs of parents are important. Tayler et al. (1999) found that full time pre compulsory programs were influential in parents’ choice of school and that non government schools had ensured their enrolments beyond the non compulsory year by providing programs that suit the practical needs of parents. This suggestion has obvious reverberations in this study. Combined factors such as the full time hours, the reasonable cost (compared to childcare) and the desire for private schooling at a local school have placed Eagle Plains in an advantageous position for attracting clientele. Whether the introduction of a full
192 time Preparatory Year in all schools in Queensland will compromise the advantageous position currently held by the school, remains to be seen.
5.2.2 Current needs of children This section begins with a discussion of the notion of children’s needs and the contribution made by this research to the literature addressing this topic. Each of the features of this conception; the school like features of the program, informal features, focus on social and emotional development, program climate and staffing will then be discussed in relation to the literature. The current needs of the child conception was frequently expressed across the parent group in this study. Many parents, while observing that the program at Eagle Plains was different to programs in state preschools and childcare centres, preferred this program for meeting their child’s needs. The strong affirmation by parents in this study that the program catered for their children’s needs is worth considering in light of the work of UK commentators Burman (1994) and Woodhead (1997). These authors suggested that the rhetoric of children’s needs is a powerful player in Western discussions about childhood, even though the notion of children’s needs may have been used at times to promote contradicting social and political agendas (Burman, 1994). In unpacking the features of the program that contributed to meeting their child’s needs, parents identified school like features, informal features, the focus on social and emotional development, the environmental features and the perceived high quality of the program. While parents invoked different features at different times during their interviews, they stressed that this was the sort of program their child was ready for. Their children’s progress throughout the year was evidence of that. Parents used phrases such as, “she was ready,” “gone ahead in leaps and bounds,” “blown me away,” “really good for the kids,” “he’s a real routine person,” “she needed something more formal,” “he’s just grown up so much,” “he just loves to learn” as they expressed this conception. These findings warrant comparison with the work of Australian researcher Whitton (2005) who found
193 that parents of gifted children were particularly inclined towards choosing schools that promoted the individual needs of the child in relation to academic development. In the UK, Ball (2003a) also found that parents made choices based on many complex, interrelated factors including the characteristics or needs of the child. Typically, parents identified formal, school like features of the program when they described the program as meeting the needs of their child. For many of them, the Preparatory Year was already a “year of school,” and they emphasised that a year of school was precisely what their child needed. The idea of “readiness” emerged strongly in the data, indicating that this construct still holds much currency with the parents in this context. Petriwskyj et al.’s (2005) research review of transition indicates that Australia and the US remain strongholds in the discourse of readiness, while in other international contexts the transition to school may be constructed more broadly, for example in ways that emphasise continuity of experience for children. The view expressed by many of the parents in the study was that the Preparatory Year program was significantly different to what was already offered in state preschools and childcare centres. We are reminded of the suggestion in the opening lines of this thesis that the Preparatory Year claimed to offer the children of Queensland an even better start (Education Queensland, 2002, p. 2) to their early education. As the parents in this study reflected on the ways in which their chosen program was superior to the alternatives, there was a strong sense that they believed their children were, indeed, receiving a better start. In considering the current needs of their children, these parents had chosen a program they felt would best meet those needs and, additionally, conceptualised the program according to whether it met those needs. The parents in this study viewed their children as ready to experience a more formal type of program than may have been offered in other settings. They identified, among other things, the full time nature of the program, the focus on literacy and numeracy, discipline, rules, homework and structure. For these parents, such program features were what their children needed. It seemed that a school like program was the
194 appropriate next step after kindergarten for these parents, as they framed their observations and expectations around a linear developmental framework. For these parents, evidence that the school like program had met the needs of their children was readily available and tangible in the form of progress their children had made since the beginning of the year. They expressed surprise, in many cases, at the extent of this progress, as evidenced by the comment highlighted on a previous page that the parent had been “blown away” by the progress her child had made. It was common for parents to compare their own children to those of relatives and friends who had attended programs in other centres, and the other children were frequently found wanting. Many of the parents were keenly aware of the progress of other children, including those who attended other schools or centres and those within the same class as their own child. Having come to the conclusion that their own children had progressed further than children in other settings, these parents expressed satisfaction that their choice of program was vindicated. This tendency towards comparison of children in relation to others is an enduring and powerful feature of child developmentalism, according to Burman (1994). Its potency in the context of this study cannot be underestimated. Importantly, however, in most cases those parents whose children were perceived as struggling with the content of the Preparatory Year program in comparison to their classmates were also content with their choice. They also expressed the view that their children’s needs could be met because the program facilitated early identification of learning difficulties and/or provided the option of repeating the following year. When discussing the Preparatory Year in light of its suitability in meeting the needs of the child, parents did not focus, exclusively, on the school like features of the program. In their reflections on the program’s appropriateness for their child, they also identified informal features including play, small groups, individual needs, choice, a balanced program, and flexibility. Parents used phrases such as “treated as individuals,” “no pressure,” “play based,” “in between step,” and “learning without knowing they’re learning” as they expressed this conception. Despite the focus on informal rather than school like features of the
195 program, parents’ attention remained on the ways that the program met the current needs of the child, which is at the heart of this conception. Parents believed that the current needs of the child were best met by a program that was appropriately matched not only to the needs of their child, but to the needs of four and five year old children generally. They acknowledged that their children were, after all, still quite young. In these utterances, there seemed to be a desire for the protection for some of the traditional aspects of early childhood curriculum and a degree of resistance to any approaches that many force children into academic activities before they were ready. Many parents referred to the idea of the “play based” curriculum as they reflected on how the program met the current needs of their children. Their responses, when they were asked to explain further what they meant by the term, were varied and interesting; providing an enlightening comparison to some of the discussions about play in the early childhood education literature. The diversity of opinion within this group mirrored the ongoing commentary about how the term “play” ought to be defined (Ailwood, 2003; Hall & Abbott, 1991; Sandberg & Pramling Samuelsson, 2003). Moreover, while defining the term “play” might be problematic, the suggestion by Sandberg and Pramling Samuelsson (2003) that adults may interpret play in different ways is worth noting, and seems also reflected in this study, as outlined here. The findings of this study reveal that participants had a broad definition of play. They described activities that involved children in practical, small group activities that seemed to be essentially teacher directed rather than generated from the children themselves, but because the children were not “sitting at their desks” these activities were defined as play. This construct of play would seem to be at odds with the views of researchers such as Atkin (1991) who claimed that an essential feature of play is that it is voluntary. Yet, Hall and Abbott (1991) warned against taking too narrow a definition of play. Their suggestion that play ought to be able to evolve as children enter formal schooling may well be represented in the views of the parents here. For many of these parents, their children had already entered formal schooling. Their definition of a play based curriculum, therefore, may have taken into account a more formal, teacher
196 directed construct of play; a version of play that was more appropriate for the current needs of their children than a predominantly child initiated version might have been. At other times in the interviews, parents described periods of free choice, when children were able to explore materials without the direct intervention of teachers. Descriptions of these sessions seem to reflect a contemporary characteristic of play in that it is controlled by the child (Dockett, 1999). These episodes of free play described by the parents seemed to be confined to after lunch sessions or when the children were “hot” or “tired” – but as is consistent with this conception, the parents emphasised that this type of play was best suited to meeting the needs of the children in this age group. Similarly, the notion of “choice” was provided as an example of the informal nature of the program by some parents when they described the program as meeting the current needs of young children. When a further probing question generated an explanation of how choice was incorporated in the program, the following response emerged from one parent: Even though they have to do the four activities … it’s up to them to choose which ones they want to do first (9). For this parent, choice was an important feature of a program that met the current needs of young children. In this case, however, it seems that it was valid to limit it to the extent that children were able to choose in which order to complete a set of preplanned teacher allocated activities. A small number of parents questioned the appropriateness of the Preparatory Year program for meeting the current needs of the child. For these parents, the key issues of play and choice featured prominently in their hesitancy or indeed criticism of the program as they had experienced it at the school. The tension within the temporal (current needs/future needs) dimension was highlighted by Sandy in the following example, exemplifying the dilemma faced by some of these parents:
197 I think it should be more a combination, as I was saying, maybe slow the transition down so that it is more play to start with. But at the same time in the back of my mind I can also hear alarm bells ringing as far as from a teacher’s point of view. Making it difficult as far as once a child has this expectation that they can do this in the classroom, how do you then control it or change it by the end of the year? But at the same time I think it would be easier from the littlies' perspective that they weren’t expected to have such a controlled environment until the end of the year. Or whether or not there is bigger place for play based activity in the year. So that way they can set the same scenario, they can set their controls at the start of the year with bigger play base and then slowly wind that back. Instead of having free for all and then trying to rein it in! I can imagine that would be difficult from a classroom perspective (22).
Sandy viewed the program as involving play and choice, but within a limited framework that had been resented by her child throughout the year. The “alarm bells” she referred to are illustrative of the tension that she felt between meeting the current needs of children in terms of providing opportunities for play and choice, and the necessity of preparing for a program in Year One in which there were perhaps fewer opportunities for those activities.
Further variation in the way that this group of parents perceived opportunities for play and choice in the Preparatory Year program was indicated by the view of one parent that the program was not play based at all. This parent, Marcia, stridently rejected the idea that the program was appropriate to meet the current needs of her child because of limited opportunities for play and choice. Using phrases such as “rigid structure”, “pretty rough”, “kids should initiate”, “missed out on play time” Marcia described her disappointment in discovering that the Preparatory Year program was very different from her expectations of how it should be. When she reflected on what might have been offered in other settings, she nominated play, choice and her perception that there would be less of an academic focus in other settings as features that would attract her to them. Her view is interesting because such features propelled other parents away from programs such as preschools and child care centres.
Interestingly, though, despite Marcia’s reservations about the program she was glad that she had not removed her child from the school, though she had considered doing so early in the year:
198 … I did consider pulling [child] out at the time, but then I realised I’d just be one of those people that runs away from things in life, so we just dealt with it (23).
Like many of the parents who were interviewed, Marcia had one eye firmly set on the bigger picture. Unlike the clear majority of the interviewed parents, however, Marcia was unambiguously critical of the program. While openly disappointed about the ways in which the program did not meet the current needs of her child, she tolerated the perceived shortcomings of the program for the sake of the longer term benefits offered by private sector education. Marcia’s dilemma is reminiscent of Ball’s (2003a) description of the “deferred gratification” (p. 115) experienced by parents who choose private schooling for their children and justify their choice through complex layers of reasoning.
Many parents in the study identified social and emotional development as an important aspect of the program that met the needs of their children. They emphasised that the development of confidence, independence, responsibility, social skills and a positive disposition to learning were all ways in which the program addressed their child’s needs during the Preparatory Year. In line with the current needs of the child conception, the focus was on the here and now rather than any sense of preparation for the future. Parents used phrases such as “happy to learn”, “want to come to school”, “more mature than he was”, “making real friendships” as they described the ways in which the program had met the current needs of their children. The significance of social and emotional development of the children was emphasised consistently throughout the interviews. These parents placed a high value on the progress their children had made throughout the year in terms of learning to relate to others, separating from their parents and feeling confident at school. These findings are consistent with those of Australian researchers Dockett and Perry (2004a), Lockwood and Fleet (1999), and Wise (2002) who also found that parents in early childhood settings placed high value on their children’s social and emotional development in prior to school settings, and in the case of Dockett and Perry (2004a) during the transition to the first year of school.
Children’s social development was also used by several parents as a yardstick by which their own children’s progress was measured against the progress of
199 children who attended other settings. The following parent described her experiences when she took her child to an open day at another school in the district:
He’s definitely ahead socially. I can tell you that right now. Because we went to an orientation day at his new school and yeah, and his … there were all these other kids there that were crying because they took all the kids off to their classroom and left the parents behind… and [child], you could just tell from the social skills, he was sitting there and chatting away to this boy when they discovered they were in the same class (11).
It is noteworthy that the physical characteristics of the Preparatory Year classrooms also featured as parents described the program as meeting the current needs of children. The close proximity of toilets and the size of the rooms were flagged as important concerns that had influenced the choice of program in the first place by some parents. However, differing views were held by parents in this regard. Not everyone agreed that the room size was appropriate for supporting high quality early childhood programs, especially in relation to the space required to implement a play based curriculum. Concerns about the impact of reduced physical amenities in early childhood spaces were also voiced when the Preparatory (pre primary) Year was implemented in Western Australia more than a decade ago (Corrie, 1999). Corrie’s tracking of Pre primary classroom size from 1974 to 1997 suggested that as space allocated per child decreased, a concomitant loss of play based curricula was evident.
A number of the parents reflected on the Preparatory Year staff as they described the current needs of the child conception and the ways in which the perceived high quality of the program met those needs. Expressions such as “brilliant”, “hand picked”, “encouraging”, “approachable” and “dedicated” were used by the parents to describe the skills of the Preparatory Year teachers, but the descriptions went beyond reference to skills and professionalism. In many cases, parents also described the maternalistic characteristics of the staff, using terms such as “patient”, “treat the children as if they were their own”, “not just a job for a lot of them”, “always a hug for the kids”, “lovely”, “caring”, “mothering instinct” and “nurturing” as they described the qualities of the teaching staff in the Preparatory Year. These unambiguously maternalistic descriptions of the characteristics of high quality Preparatory Year staff reflect the historically prevailing views of the
200 early childhood profession described by post structural authors such as Bloch (1992), Moss (2006) and Silin (1995). These authors have explored the continuing dominant Western construction of the early childhood professional in relation to highly gendered characteristics such as nurturing and mothering – a construct labelled by Moss (2006) as “the worker as substitute mother” (p. 34). The phrases provided as examples above illustrate that powerful maternalistic and gendered language remains a feature of conversations about the suitability of Preparatory Year teachers for their roles. It would seem that the parents’ conceptions of the Preparatory Year in relation to the current needs of the child are connected to the much broader historical Western contexts that continue to shape our society’s views of children, childhood and early childhood education and care.
5.2.3 Preparation for Year One
Along with the current needs of the child conception, the preparation for Year One conception was a frequently expressed conception across the parent group in this study. Many parents, while observing that the program at Eagle Plains was different to what may have been offered elsewhere in state preschools and childcare centres, expressed the view that this program was the best one for preparing their child for the first year of primary school, that is, Year One. Again, parent views seem to reinforce the notion of an even better start (Education Queensland, 2002, p. 2), as parents in this study intimated their children had received a better start to their early education as a result of the program preparing them for Year One. In describing the features of the program that contributed towards preparation for Year One, parents identified the school like features of the program, the perceived academic focus, the focus on social and emotional development and the high quality of the program. Given that the interviews were conducted just a few weeks before the completion of the school year, it is perhaps not surprising that the idea of preparation for Year
201 One loomed large in the minds of the participants. Scottish researchers Foot et al. (2000) and Canadian researchers Pence and Goelman (1987) found in their research into parent views and choice of school, that as children approached the age for compulsory schooling, parents placed greater emphasis on the notion of preparation for school as they considered their priorities for early childhood programs. There was a strong thread running through the interviews that the Preparatory Year program was able to prepare children for Year One because many of its features were identified by the parents as school like. Indeed, many parents suggested that the Preparatory Year was more than a year of preparation and transition. In the words of one participant, Kristy, “It’s not just Prep.” For Kristy, and other parents, it was a year of school. They invoked features such as the full time hours, exposure to discipline and rules, uniforms, homework, program structure and emphasis on academic skills as examples of the ways in which the program prepared their children for Year One. Some parents went so far as suggesting that, by the end of the year, the program was “nine months” ahead of state preschools, or as one parent suggested, “halfway through the year I felt they were doing Year One curriculum.” There seems little doubt that the “push down” phenomenon noted by international authors (for example, Aubrey, 2004; David, 1990; Graue, 1992, Shepard & Smith, 1988; Snow, 2006; Soler & Miller, 2003; Tobin et al., 1989) as well as Australian authors (for example, Corrie, 1999; Grieshaber, 2000 and Stamopoulos, 2003) over the last two decades was not only recognised, but welcomed by the parents in this study. They acknowledged that the program was different from what was being offered in other settings (such as government preschools and childcare centres) and that the essential difference was that the program offered these school like features. For these parents, preparation for Year One constituted exposure to a curriculum that children in other settings would not experience until they reached Year One. There was a sense that the transition to formal schooling was enhanced by ensuring that the children experienced many of the traditional components of formal schooling during the Preparatory Year.
202 Even homework in the Preparatory Year, in the form of worksheets and sight word lists, were considered an important tool for preparing children for school. There was a strong sense in some of the interviews that, as children could expect to receive homework once they started Year One, it would aid their transition to school if they could first become familiar with a regular homework routine in the Preparatory Year. Similarly, the full time hours of the program were considered beneficial because this would replicate the daily structure of Year One. In reality, it seemed as if these parents were advocating for an earlier transition as the means of making the transition. And yet, just one parent in this group, Marcia, consistently railed against these features and rejected the notion that an early transition to formal education was beneficial for children. This is important because Marcia’s views indicate an awareness of the notion of the push down of formal curricula into precompulsory settings and she positioned herself against this influence in the Preparatory Year. The perceived academic focus of the Preparatory Year program at this school and the emphasis on literacy and numeracy were key structural features of the preparation for Year One conception. The findings suggest that the parents in this study constructed this aspect of preparation in several different ways, a phenomenon noted by Vincent and Ball (2001) who also found variation in the ways in which parents understood the notion of preparation. On the one hand, the parents in this study expressed the view that the first year of compulsory school, Year One, would be easier to manage for the children if many of the basic academic skills were in place prior to the start of that year. Further, one parent suggested that the Year One curriculum was rather crowded and that it would ease the pressure on children if some of the curriculum was covered during the Preparatory Year. Interestingly, there was an acknowledgement by some parents that the Year One curriculum at this school may have been more academically demanding than was experienced by children in other schools. As a result of this, attendance at the Preparatory Year at the same school would be necessary preparation, given that aspects of what could be considered a school curriculum had already been introduced in the Preparatory Year. This aspect of the preparation phenomenon was even acknowledged by the parent who felt that the formal approach of the program was inappropriate. Even though she so
203 rigorously criticised the Preparatory Year program at this school, she admitted that her child’s attendance at any other local centre would not have prepared her for the academic standard required for the beginning of Year One at this school. A further aspect of preparation for Year One was that the Preparatory Year might serve as a means by which all children would start Year One with similar skills in place. One parent in this study, Cassy, suggested that this would be a major advantage if the Preparatory Year was ever to become compulsory – that is, all children would, in her view, enter Year One at the same level if they had all attended a Preparatory Year program. This facet of preparation for school has strong links with Bloch’s (2003) commentary on the expansion of Western schooling systems and the subsequent push to homogenize children and their families. So too, this idea of preparation through homogeneity results from a schooling context dominated by the rhetoric of readiness; specifically readiness for a type of schooling that is formal in its construction (Petriwskyj et al., 2005). The link between the physical placement of ECEC classrooms within a primary school campus and the resulting push down of formal curricula has been noted in Australia (Corrie, 1999) as well as the United Kingdom (David, 1990). Similarly, many parents in this study reflected on the location of the Preparatory Year classrooms within the Junior School campus as an example of their children’s integration into the school setting and preparation for the onset of primary school. These parents believed that simply being in close proximity to the primary classes would assist preparation for Year One through familiarity with the layout of the school and the potential for mixing with older children. Further, features such as exposure to rules and uniforms were raised by the parents in this study as features of the Preparatory Year program that assisted their children’s preparation for school. This aspect of transition to school has also been explored by researchers such as Dockett and Perry (2004b) and Whitton (2005) in the Australian context. It is worth noting that, for the parents in the current study, these features of the program were raised as evidence that the transition to school had already occurred, as distinct from anticipation of the transition process.
204 Burman’s (1994) exploration of the contrasts between “child centred” and “educational” (p. 164) approaches to the education of young children is relevant to the findings of this study, particularly when we examine differences between the current needs of the child conception and the preparation for Year One conception. The views expressed by the parents in this study were echoes of the longstanding dispute around the merits of approaches grounded in developmental theory versus those in which the driving force is a structured curriculum framed around subjects and standards. Interestingly, though, the findings of this study describe a group of parents who felt, in the main, that the program experienced by their children reflected the best of both worlds. This was not a polarised group of people who were positioned in either one camp or the other, but rather they were people who conceived of the Preparatory Year as providing a child responsive program while simultaneously preparing their children for Year One. While there were clear differences in these two conceptions, as outlined in the preceding chapter, most parents were able to switch comfortably between the two as they articulated their views of the program.
5.2.4 Providing an advantage in primary school
Research investigating how parents make decisions around choice of school indicates that, in some cases, parents may be looking much further ahead than preparation for the first year of compulsory school (for example, Vincent & Ball, 2001). Reeve’s (1993) Australian research addressing the construction of parent as consumer within the context of the non government school context is also worth considering in light of the providing advantage in primary school conception. The current study, however, suggests that parents may be seeking more than simply fulfilling their view of a “good education” as suggested by Reeve (1993, p. 7). Clearly, the parents in this study almost exclusively felt that the Preparatory Year program offered a good education for their young children and they
205 supported their views with examples of the perceived high quality of the program presented against the deficiencies of the alternatives. The element of this conception that delineated it from others in the study was the notion of advantage in primary school. The parents who expressed this conception focussed on the ways in which they felt that the program could give their children an academic or confidence based advantage over children in other schools, should they ever find the need to enrol them elsewhere. This notion of being “ahead of the pack” to the extent that it would take other children a number of years to catch up implies a concern with competition. Here we find some parallels with the work of Ball et al. (1995). These authors suggested that, within an education market, the discourse of parents from the middle classes is characterised by the “ideal and advantageous”, rather than the “practical and immediate” (Ball, et al., 1995, p. 74) concerns that feature prominently in the discourses of the working class, according to Ball et al. The current study has added to the work of Ball et al. The aspirations of the parents in this study played a part in their conceptions of the Preparatory Year program and it is clear that their choice of school was based on concerns with the practical and immediate as well as the ideal and advantageous. The search for individual advantage over the common good was described as a critical feature of the education marketplace; a marketplace in which issues around non government schooling are key (Ball, 2003a; Marginson, 1997; Munn, 1993). These authors have described a growing situation in both Australia and the UK in which a quality education is increasingly viewed as one which promotes individual advantage over the collective benefit of all children. This is brought into clear focus in the current study in the interview with Lindy, as she gave reasons why she preferred the Preparatory Year in Queensland to remain non compulsory. Lindy initially suggested that her reasons for preferring a non compulsory Preparatory Year were grounded in fears that not all children would be ready for such a program at four years of age. When asked to clarify, Lindy then suggested that the non compulsory nature of the program was important for her because it gave her child an advantage. According to this parent, “so many parents don’t bother.” The assumption here is that many parents would not enrol
206 their children in Preparatory Year programs unless it was compulsory to do so. Lindy used the perceived negligence of other parents as a lever for her own aspirations, providing her child with an advantage over others. She did not recognise that universal access to a quality Preparatory Year program might be a worthy goal for all children. The struggle for individual advantage is clearly evident in this parent’s comments, and she used the non compulsory Preparatory Year as a tool for obtaining that advantage for her child. This view may seem alarming to ECEC educators who value the universality of programs such as the Preparatory Year for the benefits they provide for all children, regardless of socioeconomic status or other factors.
5.2.5 Preparation for future success beyond school The final conception, in which the Preparatory Year was conceived as preparation for future success beyond school, was the most expansive and future oriented of the five conceptions in the study. As with the previous conception, in which the program was conceived as providing an advantage in primary school, this conception involves a focus on preparation for a future that extends beyond the first year of compulsory schooling, that is, Year One. Further, what delineates this conception from the previous one is that the focus is extended beyond primary school. Parents who expressed this conception articulated a belief that, through attendance at the Preparatory Year program at this school, their children were being given the best chance of success in their lives after school, through improved access to employment or tertiary education. As in our discussion of the previous conception, we can see some links with the work of UK researchers Vincent and Ball (2001) who interviewed mothers of children in childcare. Concerned with a future which may feature high competition for employment, the parents in Vincent and Ball’s study had begun considering ways in which choice of pre compulsory care setting might give their children an advantage in the future. So, too, the suggestion by Barbara in the current study that “you’re going to need a degree to be a checkout chick in years
207 to come” is similarly suggestive of parents’ deep concerns with their children’s future. In the context of the current phase in of the Preparatory Year in Queensland, it is worth noting the context of Barbara’s comment. In her interview, Barbara used this statement to illustrate her opposition to the planned adjustment of the Preparatory Year starting age. This parent was a strong believer that an early start to academic learning constituted a better start. She proposed that four and five year old children were “the biggest sponges around” and that education policymakers ought to be making the most of it. This sentiment was echoed by other parents in the sample who used the same term, “sponge” to describe their young children and to justify an early academic start. The suggestion by another parent in this study, Tracey, that the Preparatory Year would give her child “more options” when she left school is also worth considering here. There was a strong sense that this parent wanted her child to have better opportunities than she and her husband had, and she cited her work as a cleaner and her husband’s as a meat worker. This use of the Preparatory Year, with its perceived early academic focus, as an aspirational tool by this parent, has some interesting similarities with the work of Tobin et al. (1989), who discussed the “compensation mentality” (p. 193) which they noted as characteristic of Chinese parents. Tobin’s description below can be applied to Tracey’s thoughts about the value of the Preparatory Year: Many of these parents look to preschools to provide their children with the educational opportunities they missed. Frustrated in their own careers, they tend to be very serious about those of their children. (Tobin et al., 1989, p. 193) The suggestion that the Preparatory Year, through its academic focus, its promotion of a positive disposition to learning and its high quality might provide children with more likelihood of success in their adulthood is symptomatic of broader understandings of childhood itself. According to Mayall (2002), the “scholarization” (p. 20) of childhood is such a ubiquitous notion in the UK that it
208 is easily overlooked. The construction of childhood as apprenticeship for adulthood, with preparation for future roles being a powerful shaper of how we think about children has been critiqued by authors such as Mayall (2002) and Moss (1999). The findings of the current study suggest that this particular construction of childhood – as preparation for successful adulthood – played a strong part in the ways that these parents conceived of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year.
5.3 Tensions within dimensions
The key findings of this research consist of five categories of description relating to how a group of parents conceive of the Preparatory Year phenomenon. A key point for discussion in this chapter lies in the tensions that occasionally emerged in the parents’ views of the Preparatory Year program. In this study, the tensions that emerged in the interviews were represented by uncertainties, contradictions and an awareness of the existence of opposing views with regard to the Preparatory Year program. I use the word tension here as it is indicative of broader debates around early education and the changing needs of parents. The shifts within the dimensions of variation represent pressure points in the ways that these parents considered the Preparatory Year and described their relationship within it. Previous phenomenographic research has found that participants may express multiple conceptions of one phenomenon (for example, Marton & Pong, 2005). The current study takes this a step further by providing an example of participants who expressed seemingly antithetical conceptions within the space of a single interview. On the one hand parents believed that the Preparatory Year ought to meet the current needs of their child and on the other hand this was offset by notions that the program should also prepare their children for the short or long term future. Further, although parents recognised and appreciated the ways in which the program met their own needs, in some cases they also accepted that their child’s needs were their first priority. The following section addresses the tensions that became apparent through analysis of the data. Illustrative quotes appearing in this section are provided as
209 specific examples of the aforementioned tensions. While some may also have been presented in Chapter 4 as examples of the various categories of description, they are provided again and with additional material here to highlight the tensions and complexities inherent in the ways that some of the participants described their conceptions of the Preparatory Year program.
5.3.1 The tension between current and future needs The tension between meeting current needs and preparing for the future which characterises this study has resonance in the work of Vincent and Ball (2001). They noted similar tensions in their interviews with parents of children in childcare in the UK: All the mothers except one … felt that one of the functions of childcare was as an important preparation for school, although this was no means straightforward. ‘Preparation’ meant different things. Some drew the link between pre school and schooling in specifically academic terms and talked of giving their children a ‘head start’, others in terms of giving the child opportunities to interact positively with others, disciplining them and encouraging them to conform: a kind of modelling of behaviour, encouraging readiness for school. However, there was a shared, overarching discourse of protecting early childhood, not ‘pushing’ the child too much, giving them the space and opportunities for play, and a dislike of an academic focus too early on in the child’s life. (pp. 638, 639) Here, Vincent and Ball (2001) reported that the parents in their study constructed the notion of preparation in various ways; preparation through an early start to academic learning and preparation through shaping school ready behaviours. Although the parents in their study differed in relation to the ways they understood the notion of preparation for school, Vincent and Ball found that the group as a whole were united in their concern that children not be pushed into an academic curriculum too early.
210 Similar caution against burdening children with premature academic expectations was expressed by parents in the current study, specifically those expressing the current needs of the child conception. In this conception, the focus is on the program meeting the child at his or her point of developmental need (as described by the parent) and the idea of preparation for the future retreats to the background. Yet, switching between the conceptions in rapid succession was a feature of a number of interviews, illustrating the potency of the tension in the minds of the parents. This can be seen when Tracey explained: That was probably my highest expectation that it’ll just settle her to start Grade One. Because I feel, these days, the standards are that high, from now to the time they hit high school, that you’ve got to take every opportunity you can. And give them any opportunity. I think the days are gone that Grade One you started and that was it, you didn’t worry. You worry now. I’m setting up on how to do homework, how they settle in, how they socialise. It starts now. It doesn’t start in three or four years’ time, where it used to. You didn’t worry. If you didn’t do good in Junior School you didn’t worry. When you did high school it did, but the competition out there is that strong that I feel that starting then, will just help her set up and relax into it. Without the pressure. Because there’s pressures … From what I can see there’s pressures now. They don’t need it now. They have enough by the time they’re teenagers that they can’t cope with. I’m hoping that will help her cope with the pressure as she gets older. … Prep Year gives them an idea that they can grow, it keeps them occupied and moving on. They just don't stop with nothing after kindy. You can do kindy again, but they aren’t growing any more. Where Prep gives them that little more to grow, slowly not fast, at that age. Because I find with that mind, it takes … some kids are slower than others. It gives that time for the ones who are a little bit slower, to catch up. I just think they need to keep the mind active and interested and moving on with the Prep year (16). Tracey’s view of the Preparatory Year explicates the tension of current needs versus future needs. She articulated her concern for her child’s future in an increasingly competitive employment market. At first, she suggested that a result of this competitive market is that parents begin worrying about their children’s future at a younger age than they may have in the past. Childhood, according to Tracey, is characterised by increasing pressures to succeed at school in order to maximise employability in the future. Comparable tensions and concerns with preparing children for an uncertain employment future emerged in the work of
211 Vincent and Ball (2001). The tension is clearly illustrated in Tracey’s rejection that “pressure” to perform in the present should be linked to pressure to perform in the future. Rather, she desired to protect her child from too much pressure at too young an age. Tracey is engaging in a construction of childhood as a period which requires protection from influences that might interfere with a unique period of life. The widely accepted notion of childhood as a period in which people need protection has been critiqued by authors such as Mayall (2002) who suggested that ubiquitous understandings of childhood have served to curtail the activities of children in Western culture over recent years. In the second part of this quote, Tracey’s view that the program should meet current needs moved into the foreground as preparation for the future receded. Here we see Tracey’s desire for a program that allows children to make individual progress in a logical progression from the experiences of kindergarten, somewhat removed from external pressures of formal schooling and free of the constraints of overly high parent or teacher expectations. Tracey’s daughter would repeat the Preparatory Year the following year because she was not learning to read as quickly as others, difficulties Tracey believed arose from her own learning difficulties in childhood. Her understanding of her own child’s progress and her own experiences of school were intimately connected to her understanding of the Preparatory Year. As a consequence of this family history of learning difficulty, Tracey viewed the Preparatory Year as a program which ought to address individual needs of children across a range of abilities. Another parent, Marcia, was aware of an overarching school culture dominated by preparation for the future and academic performance. Marcia, however, while acknowledging the existence of a tension between current and future needs, rejected it wholeheartedly. She explained … I mean, I think you could teach a three year old to read and write if you wanted to, but we just don’t do it because it’s not appropriate. They’re supposed to be little kids and they’re supposed to play and have fun. That’s just my opinion (23). Just to me it seems a bit like they, I could be very wrong in saying this, that they it feels to me like they want to be different and that they’re going
212 to create some kind of super genius kids by implementing this earlier. And I just believe in a couple of years time they’re all going to maybe, probably even next year, the middle of next year, they’re all going to be at the same level. I mean I don’t know, I’m sure they would’ve done studies on it, but you’re not going to make someone more intelligent by teaching them earlier. They’re just going to know things a bit earlier and then they’re just going to all meddle in together and all be the same (23). I really though it’d be an extension of kindy and I hoped it would be an extension of kindy. Basically just that going and having fun and playing with the kids and learning a bit and reading stories. And you would’ve been satisfied with that? Yeah, I would have. And I know a lot of parents out there aren’t, because I often say, what’s this crap that they’re doing here? Like, why are they doing all this kind of shit? And they’re like, oh, it’s wonderful. It’s so wonderful. They need to be disciplined and this is a great disciplining process. And it’s obviously just different people’s opinions (23). Marcia’s articulation of the current needs/ future needs tension is quite different from Tracey’s, and yet it is just as powerful. Where Tracey moved along the temporal dimension and struggled to come to terms with her perception of “pressures” on young children, Marcia was able to identify the existence of the tension and position her view in relation to it. Such was the extent of her awareness of the tension between current needs and future preparation that she raised the issue of the program’s early academic focus with other parents. Marcia’s description of this incident was powerful in its capacity to bring the tension to the surface, as she reflected:
I haven’t actually come across another parent that feels the same way, so I don’t say much any more (23).
Despite the isolation this caused her, Marcia readily understood the existence of the tension between meeting current needs of children and the notion of preparation for the future. However, the context in which Marcia found herself may have been quite different from Tracey’s. Unlike Tracey’s daughter, Marcia’s child did not (reportedly) have any difficulties with the academic expectations of the program and was, in her mother’s view, “a very, very clever little girl.” Perhaps Marcia’s rejection of the need for future preparation reflected composure arising from the apparently high academic ability of her child, whereas Tracey’s concern for the future may have been understandably grounded in her own and her child’s difficulties with academic tasks.
213 In their responses to the underpinning research question, “How do you view the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains?” these two parents, Tracey and Marcia, explicated the tension that exists between concern with current needs and desire for future preparation. For some parents, this was a real tension and their interviews suggested that it was, to a large extent, unresolved. On the other hand, Marcia expressed an awareness of what she perceived to be a broader culture of the parent community; a culture in which preparation for the future held such gravitas.
5.3.2 The tension between needs of child and needs of parents
The five categories of description in this study were further delineated from each other according to whether the focus was the needs of the parent or the needs of the child. A deeper look at the parents’ responses revealed that a degree of tension also exists along this dimension, as the parents considered the Preparatory Year program in light of their own needs and their child’s. For the majority of the parents in this group, no tension was evident in the interviews. These parents expressed their view that one of the positive features of the Preparatory Year program at the school was that it was beneficial for both the parent and the child. However, this was not always clear cut and it is at this point that the analysis process again revealed the existence of a degree of tension as some of the parents reflected on who the program ought to benefit. There was some hesitancy when a number of the parents acknowledged the importance of finding a program that accommodated their working lives. Barbara, for example, differentiated between “want” and “need” when describing how a full time Preparatory Year facilitates the arrangements of working parents: [A universal Preparatory Year] would help parents if they wanted to return … to work. Or if they needed to return to work should be the phrase. Umm …it’s easier ‘cause preschool three and two [days], you have to find child care (4).
214 Marcia went so far as suggesting that they were “selfish” to have sought a program that allowed them to return to work: I mean this probably sounds a bit selfish too, but I think, like, I just work at night time and I do a few hours work at night time on the weekend, but there’s only one mother in all of [child]’s class that doesn’t work (23). Perhaps it was more comfortable for parents, when they were discussing the full time hours of the program, to reflect on the ways that those hours met their children’s needs rather than their own. Tobin et al. (1989) made a similar suggestion in their analysis of parent attitudes to preschool in Japan and the US: Perhaps parents in the United States and Japan who feel guilty about having to place their children in child care longer or from an earlier age than they would ideally like may defend themselves from this guilt by rationalizing that the most important reason for placing the child in preschool has to do with the child’s developmental interests rather than with their own financial need or professional ambitions and desires. (Tobin et al., 1989, p. 205, 206) Again, it is worth considering the point made by Ball (2003a) that parents may not always be cognisant of the reasons for their choices when they emerge through a complex interplay of values and practical concerns. This possibility resonates with the work of Brannen and Moss (1991). They suggested that working parents in the UK negotiate tension between the guilt that they feel as a result of leaving their young children in the hands of carers and the perception that the program is beneficial for both parent and child. Similarly, the notion of “maternal guilt” (Pocock, 2005, p. 47) is also a feature of the Australian political and cultural landscape. According to Pocock (2005), Australian women typically feel guilty about the choices they make in relation to work and children, resulting in a lack of progress towards redressing gender inequities in work/ care regimes. Marcia’s admission that she felt “selfish” about preferring a full time Preparatory Year program strengthens Pocock’s (2005) suggestion that such feelings of guilt or selfishness on the part of working mothers continue to characterise Australian women.
215 5.3.3 The value of exploring tensions
In their responses to the underpinning research question, “How do you view the Preparatory Year?” the parents in this study have not only shown that parents hold varying views of this program. This in itself is very valuable and worthy of the discussion that has taken place earlier in this chapter. The further analytical step of examining the dimensions of this variation has helped to advance understanding of the real tensions that exist between some parents’ concerns with their own needs and those of their children. Some parents seemed unwilling to admit that they required a full time program for their children in order to fit their work schedule. Moreover, concern with current needs set against the desire for preparation for school and beyond was also a source of tension. For some parents, this was a real tension and their interviews suggested that it was to a large extent unresolved. Some of these parents questioned whether the program might focus too much on preparation for the future. One parent was singularly defiant in the face of what she perceived was overarching culture promoting an early academic start. For other parents the tension was not so evident, as they felt that the program accommodated all aspects of the dimensions – that is, it met their own needs and their children’s, and it met the current needs of the child while preparing for the future. As the Preparatory Year is now a reality in all schools in Queensland it will be interesting to see if these tensions will again bubble to the surface, along with others that have not yet been considered. It will be important for teachers, school leaders and policy makers to remain alert for evidence that tensions are emerging in the ways that parents consider early education, both in the Preparatory Year and in the early years of school. Awareness that there is variation in the ways in which parents conceptualise early childhood programs should prompt those who are committed to the education of young children to step forward and advocate for practices that are beneficial to young children. As proposed by Hard and O’Gorman (2007), this will require strong leadership, particularly from the early childhood field, as advocates actively seek to promote good practice.
216 5.3.4 Future tensions
As mentioned previously, this study took place at a critical time in the history of ECEC in Queensland. As the universal roll out of the Preparatory Year in 2007 takes place in Queensland, the energetic dialogue amongst key stakeholders that has been gaining momentum (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007) since the reforms were announced could be expected to continue. It is likely that through this dialogue, some of the tensions that have emerged in this study between the needs of parents and children, along with concern for the present and the future will continue to surface. The tensions described here appeared when one group of 26 parents were asked to share their views about the Preparatory Year program. From 2007, more than 1400 schools are offering a full time Preparatory Year in Queensland, and the vast majority of parents who will experience the Preparatory Year in 2007 will be experiencing it for the first time. Will we see the emergence of new tensions? There is every chance. While we cannot predict the nature of all tensions that may come to the surface during the initial years of the roll out, we should expect them nonetheless. One possible source of tension may be focussed around the implementation of the new Early Years Curriculum Guidelines (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006), which is the central curriculum document for use in Preparatory Year classrooms. As discussed earlier in this chapter, many of the parents interviewed for the current study placed a high value, understandably, on the perceived benefits of the Preparatory Year for preparing their children for Year One. Of particular note was the predominant belief that effective preparation for the first year of compulsory school was achieved by implementing school like features such as discipline and rules, routines, structure, homework and a strong emphasis on literacy and numeracy in the Preparatory Year. Many of these parents readily accepted the inclusion of take home readers, sight word lists, worksheets and report cards as evidence that their children were being well prepared for school. And yet, these artefacts of a formal, school like Preparatory Year curriculum are absent from the one being described and promoted in the Early Years Curriculum Guidelines . Rather, the Early Years Curriculum Guidelines promote child initiated and negotiated activities, active learning, play and real life experiences in
217 flexible indoor and outdoor environments. The writers, the Queensland Studies Authority, warn against passive activities with the following statement: In the Preparatory Year, it is inappropriate for children to assume passive roles as happens with decontextualised drill and practice activities and worksheets. (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006, p. 48) Many of the parents in the current study valued the Preparatory Year program at Eagle Plains for its lesser emphasis on play, and a number of them suggested that alternative programs were inferior as a result of their play based characteristics. Here again, we see an apparent mismatch between how many of these parents viewed the Preparatory Year and the intent of the Early Years Curriculum, in which play is nominated as one of the essential contexts for learning. It seems that the writers of the Early Years Curriculum Guidelines have sought to prepare teachers for some of these tensions by stating: Not all parents and educators share early childhood teachers’ views about play as a valuable context for learning. Teachers often need to advocate for the various types of play by providing opportunities for families and colleagues to make connections between their priorities, understandings and values and the learning that occurs when play is skilfully and deliberately scaffolded. Some partners may find it reassuring to know that research indicates that play is often more effective than direct formal instruction in promoting children’s learning. (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006, p. 44) There may well be many opportunities for new tensions to materialise as the Preparatory Year is introduced across Queensland. Caution must be taken to avoid making generalisations about all Queensland parents based on a study of 26 in one school. However it is reasonable to predict with some confidence that as the Preparatory Year is introduced across 1400 schools in Queensland, there will be parents, and perhaps school staff, in various communities who may seek a more formal interpretation of the curriculum. There is no reason why the views expressed by the parents in this study may not be echoed in other contexts,
218 particularly in the wider population of parents who have chosen non government schools. Marton and Booth (1997) proposed that “to the extent that the group represents the variation in individuals in a wider population …the categories of description can also be said to apply to that wider population (p.124). Chapter 3 described the efforts that were made to maximise the potential for variation in the sample population for this study. These efforts towards obtaining diversity within the group of 26 parents have ensured that the results of this study may be transferred to other contexts. As to the extent to which the results of this study may apply to government schooling contexts, there may be some common conceptions held by parents in those contexts, along with different ways of viewing the program. In a discussion of the potential for diverse cultural groups to hold different conceptions of phenomena, Marton and Booth (1997) proposed that one may find outcome spaces that both overlap and complement each other, as the two groups emphasise different aspects of the phenomenon. There is little doubt that no two Preparatory Year programs will be identical. All schools in the district of the school in this study are offering a full time Preparatory Year in 2007. Will the new parents conceive of the Preparatory Year phenomenon differently to the parents in this study? Many parents in this study reported that “word of mouth” had been a powerful source of information for them when they were choosing a school for their children. Will the views of the parents described in this study influence the views of the parents of children in other government and non government schools in the area? Will the school adopt the Early Years Curriculum Guidelines, as many schools in the non government sector in Queensland will do from 2007? If so, will the implementation of those guidelines transform the way in which the Preparatory Year is interpreted at that school? Indeed, are the views that were elicited and described in this study a true reflection of the way in which the Preparatory Year is actually delivered at Eagle Plains? These questions are yet to be answered. They do, however, set the stage for future tensions around the introduction of the Preparatory Year to emerge.
219 5.4 Contribution to the empirical research literature
This study makes an important contribution to the empirical research literature. Here, results of the current study are considered in light of a significant study conducted by Evans and Fuller (1998) which involved phenomenographic research of parent perceptions of nursery school in the UK. This demonstrates the significance of the current study and its contribution to the corpus of research into parent views or conceptions of early childhood programs. Table 8 provides a summary of the key links between Evans and Fuller’s research and the current study. Evans and Fuller’s 1998 study is singled out for detailed comparison for three reasons. First, it shares an important aim with the current study; that is, it aims to explore parent conceptions of a pre compulsory early childhood program and it is one of the few published and peer reviewed studies to do so. Second, Evans and Fullers’ study adopted a rigorous phenomenographic approach and as such it is one of the few to link the phenomenographic research approach to studies within the field of early childhood. Evans and Fullers’ paper highlights the value of phenomenography in exploring parent views of an early childhood program and it enables clear links with the current project, both in terms of the underpinning research question and the chosen methodological approach. Third, the study involved parents of children in the four to five year old age group.
220 Table 8 Comparison of Evans and Fuller (1998) with Current Study Evans and Fuller (1998) Current Study
Context United Kingdom Queensland Setting Nursery Schools Preparatory Year Theoretical frame Ecological Systems Phenomenography Theory and Phenomenography Data collection methods Parent focus groups Parent interviews Child interviews Results 7 categories: 5 categories: • Domestic • Current needs of • Child parent characteristics • Current needs of • School preparation child • Academic • Preparation for • Social Year One • Discipline • Providing • Experiences advantage in primary school • Preparation for future success beyond school
The changing political landscape of the UK at the time provided conceptual background to Evans and Fuller’s (1998) study of parent perceptions of nursery school. Further, the authors predicted that parent choices may impact on the provision of preschool (nursery school) education to young children. Evans and Fuller explored child and parent perceptions rather than the more typically used phenomenographic term of conceptions of the purposes of nursery education. The difference in terms here constitutes one point of departure from the current study. While perception as a term assumes a level of sensory awareness of a phenomenon or a thing, conception implies a deeper level of understanding and is felt to be more appropriate in relation to eliciting understandings of a complex phenomenon such as a Preparatory Year program. Moreover, the term conception is typical of the broader field of phenomenographic research.
221 Further, it is important to note the emphasis on purpose in Evans and Fuller’s overarching research question. It could be suggested that the use of this term may have influenced the ways in which the participants’ responses were shaped, effectively narrowing the context in which the phenomenon of the nursery school program was placed. The current study is distinguished from the work of Evans and Fuller by the broader nature of the research question. Rather than a focus on purpose, the current study was centred on exploring participants’ broader views of the program itself, therefore eliciting views about the Preparatory Year that ranged further than the purpose, although purpose was naturally a significant feature of the responses. In a further departure from Evans and Fuller’s (1998) study, the current study investigated parent conceptions of the program but not conceptions held by children. As mentioned previously in Chapter 1, it was not within the scope of this study to investigate child conceptions of the Preparatory Year, although the value of such research is acknowledged. In the context of the UK nursery school, Evans and Fuller found that within one local education authority, distinctly different patterns of perceptions emerged – not just between parent and child perceptions, but also between three nursery school settings. While all were situated in the same school district, the three settings differed according to teaching style and degree of openness to parents. The authors discussed the impact of different contexts and layers of context on the development of adult and child perceptions of the purposes of nursery education. The comparative nature of Evans and Fuller’s study, along with its application of Bronfenbrenner’s (1979; 1992) ecological systems theory enabled exploration of the connections between parent and child understandings of the purposes of nursery education and the characteristics of the three program settings. Those data no doubt contributed to the discussion of why parents’ and children’s perceptions of the purposes of nursery school may have varied across the three settings. However, there was not scope within the current study to undertake detailed research into facilities, teaching styles, degree of openness to parents and teacher qualifications, as had been the case in Evans and Fuller’s research. Rather, it provides an in depth, comprehensive analysis of the conceptions of 26
222 parents in one setting, and the non comparative nature of the research (in terms of settings) is typical of phenomenographic studies. Two research paradigms were synthesised in Evans and Fuller’s (1998) research; ecological systems theory and phenomenography. These paradigms informed the authors’ qualitative exploration of the different contexts or systems that shape parental and child expectations of nursery school. Their incorporation of phenomenographic approaches is a critical feature enabling clear comparison with the method and results of the current study in which phenomenography played a central role. Naturally, the use of phenomenography in both studies did not assume that the same categories would apply to both studies, as a critical feature of this approach is that the categories are allowed to emerge from rather than be applied to the data, as outlined in Chapter 3 of this thesis. The phenomenographic approach adopted by Evans and Fuller (1998) produced rich data to suggest that, within one culture, expectations can vary greatly according to nursery school setting. In addition, the examination of contextual influences on parent perceptions of prior to school provision resonates with the current project in which the broader social and reform contexts explored in Chapters 1 and 2 held such an important position. The importance of effective communication as an influence on perceptions is underscored by the results of Evans and Fuller’s study. The authors took the view that communication and knowledge were vital for informing parent choice of program. Also, the authors concluded by calling on early childhood professionals to ensure that lack of program knowledge on the part of parents does not lead to increased expectations of an academic and formal nursery school curriculum. The importance of parent school communication is underscored by a number of parents in the current study. Many parents emphasised that their needs were met through effective face to face communication with teachers informing them of their children’s progress in the Preparatory Year. Others drew attention to the setting of homework tasks as a means by which they could monitor the curriculum as well as their child’s progress in the program.
223 In the current context, the implementation of the new Early Years Curriculum (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006) provides an important opportunity for early childhood curriculum to be discussed by schools and parents. It is important for parents not only to have knowledge of the activities being undertaken by their children at school, but also to gain an understanding of the theoretical tenets that underpin the Preparatory Year curriculum. Authentic communication with parents, reinforced by experience of classroom practices, both creates and sustains views about early childhood programs. The current study has demonstrated that parent views of a Preparatory Year program may be shaped by numerous factors such as communication with school personnel and direct experience in the classrooms. However, this study has also indicated that the influence of other factors such as word of mouth, children’s experiences of the program and the broader social context may also be powerful in shaping parent views. A further point of departure from the current study was Evans and Fuller’s use of focus groups as the means of eliciting parent conceptions of the programs. While interviewing multiple participants is atypical of phenomenographic research, it is not unacceptable as phenomenographic data may be obtained in various ways (Walsh, 2000). In depth, one to one interviews are, however, more often associated with phenomenographic research and the more conventional data collection mode was chosen for the present study for its potential in providing a comprehensive exploration of parent views. As is typical of phenomenographic research, Evans and Fuller (1998) used only categories that emerged from the data. The emergence of categories rather than allocation of responses to preset categories is a critical feature of the phenomenographic approach, as outlined in Chapter 3. Once these categories had emerged – and they were distinctly different for the parent and child populations – the authors were able to calculate the percentage of either parents or children using each category of description and to compare results quantitatively and graphically. Evans and Fuller (1998) called for more research into children’s concepts and definitions of play and school. The current research indicates that research
224 exploring parents’ conceptions of play and school would also be worthwhile, given the diverse views attributed to these two terms as they emerged in the parent data. At a time in Queensland when the transition between preschool and formal education is under scrutiny more than ever before, these authors’ requests for deep examination of what is actually occurring in our classrooms and the different ways in which parents and children conceptualise these events and constructs, are echoed again in our own backyard. The introduction of the Preparatory Year in all Queensland schools will result in transparency of practice to a greater extent than may have occurred in the past. The physical relocation of many preschool classrooms to the campuses of primary schools may provide such an opportunity, as parents, school leaders and other teaching staff are given greater opportunities to observe what is happening in Preparatory Year classrooms.
5.5 The usefulness of phenomenography The aim of this study was to elicit and describe the ways in which a group of parents in a non government school conceived of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. This study has demonstrated that the methodology of phenomenography has been an appropriate tool for gathering and analysing data. These data have provided a rich insight into the conceptions held by the parents in this study. In this section, the contribution of phenomenography is further explored. There are two sub sections included here, discussing the importance of finding variation along with the methodological contribution of the study.
5.5.1 Finding variation As outlined in Chapter 3, the key aim of phenomenography is to elicit and describe variation in the ways that a group of people conceive of a particular phenomenon in their social world. Through in depth interviews, the relationship between the participants and the phenomenon in question was explored and a discrete number of qualitatively different conceptions or ways of viewing the phenomenon were revealed. Exploration of the structural features of the five categories has shed light on the varied attributes that the participants focussed on
225 as they described their views of the Preparatory Year. Taking the analysis process a step further, the explication of the dimensions of variation has enabled a deeper reflection and discussion around the tensions that emerged when these parents considered the Preparatory Year in light of their own positions as parents and the nature of childhood itself. This study revealed that five different ways of viewing the Preparatory Year were held by the group of 26 parents at Eagle Plains College. Analysis of the data revealed that the range of parent views, or conceptions, of the Preparatory Year demonstrated varying emphasis on parent needs, child needs and preparation for future success in school and beyond. In each of the five conceptions, there was a different focus: in one conception, the focus is on the parent (Category A), while in four conceptions the focus is on the child (Categories B, C, D and E). In two conceptions, the focus is on the present (Categories A and B) while for three conceptions, the focus is on the future (Categories C, D and E). The shape of this variation could not have been predicted prior to the data collection and analysis phases. The research did not fit the data to a set of preordained categories. In line with approaches taken by phenomenographic researchers, this research successfully met its primary aim of discovering the ways in which these parents conceived of the Preparatory Year phenomenon. The aim was not to test a hypothesis about parent attitudes towards the program, rather, to allow the varied conceptions to emerge from the interview data. Moreover, the research also successfully described the participants’ views of the Preparatory Year. The aim was not to explain in detail what may have shaped those views. As a result of the efforts made to discover and describe conceptions of the Preparatory Year, a set of distinctly different and varying ways of viewing the program at Eagle Plains College emerged during the research process. At the heart of the variation between the categories lie the two key dimensions; the temporal dimension (current/future) and the beneficiary dimension (parent/child). A critical feature of this research has been the powerful way in which these two dimensions influenced the ways in which the parents described the program. Concern with the present and the future and, in turn, with the parent and the child went further than providing a structure for sorting and delineating
226 one conception from another in this research. Indeed, the data strongly suggested that it was these two dimensions that caused a degree of tension and perhaps contradiction in the way many parents viewed the program. As outlined in Chapter 3, authors such as Hasselgren and Beech (1997) and Bowden (2000) have explored the variation in approaches that have been taken within the field of phenomenography. These authors propose the existence of different fields within the field of phenomenography. Phenomenographic approaches have evolved during the past 30 years and researchers have broadened their application of the methodology. It was proposed in Chapter 3 that the current study belongs within the field of “discursive phenomenography” as described by Hasselgren and Beech (1997) or “pure phenomenography” as described by Bowden (2000). To recap, discursive or pure phenomenography aims to elicit and describe variation in the ways that a group of people view an aspect of their world, but it does not extend to the ultimate aim of using research results to improve participants’ understanding of the phenomenon. The variation described in this study confirms its position within the field of phenomenography. The variation that has been described in this study is noteworthy and has implications that will be discussed later in this chapter. Full descriptions of the five different ways of experiencing the Preparatory Year that emerged in this study have been developed, but the outcome space depicted in Chapter 3 does not in itself provide us with a framework for changing parent views of the Preparatory Year, and this was never the intention. The strength of this study lies in highlighting the varying views of the Preparatory Year that were held by this group of parents and exploring the tensions that exist between the desire for a program that (a) addresses the needs of both parents and children, and (b) meets the current needs of the child while preparing for the future. The categories that have emerged in this study are not ordered in terms of their sophistication. They are, however, increasingly expansive in the sense that the focus moves from the parent to the child and then becomes increasingly broad in terms of the effect that the program is felt to have on the future success of the child beyond the year of attendance in the program. It would not be reasonable to
227 suggest that these categories could form the basis of a model in which we would encourage parents to adopt a more expansive view of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. Rather, there are no right or wrong ways of viewing the Preparatory Year, even though tensions, uncertainties and contradictions were evident in a number of participant responses in this study. The strength of this study lies in the way that the views of these parents are reflective of some of the powerful discourses of childhood, private education and the situation of this research in the present context in Queensland.
5.5.2 Methodological contribution
As outlined in Chapter 3, the field of phenomenography has expanded both geographically and in its application since the origins of the approach in Sweden during the 1970s. In recent years, phenomenographic approaches have been used to study conceptions of a range of phenomena. Only a few researchers have, however, applied phenomenographic techniques within the field of early childhood education, and the current study is one of them. The timeliness of the current study in the context of the introduction of Queensland’s Preparatory Year has been discussed in earlier sections. The appropriateness of a phenomenographic approach will be briefly discussed here. While the major Preparing for School Trials evaluation undertaken by Thorpe et al. (2004) provided quantitative data on parent satisfaction with the Preparatory Year, this study represents the first to engage a qualitative approach to parents’ views of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. Specifically, the use of a phenomenographic approach has enabled the following: • gathering of in depth parent views through interview • elicitation and description of variation • categorisation of views that were not pre defined • a rigorous and empirical approach
228 While it is not often within the scope of large scale studies such as that undertaken by Thorpe et al., the value of in depth interview and qualitative analysis cannot be underestimated. Rather than being an alternative to large scale survey based research, a study such as this one can be seen as complementary. Indeed, such a study opens up opportunities for further research which shall be outlined in a later section. Although time consuming and potentially expensive, this type of research provides insight which cannot be obtained through approaches characterised by pre set categories or scales. Finally, this study contributes to the field of phenomenography by providing a new context in which the approach may be applied. Diverging from the traditional role of phenomenography, in which conceptions of learning were typically investigated, this study has made an authentic application of the approach to the study of an ECEC program. In this way, it adds to the work of Evans and Fuller (1998) who used the approach in a similar way in their study based in UK nursery schools. This study’s specific location within the field of pure (Marton, 1986) or discursive phenomenography (Hasselgren & Beach, 1997) adds credibility to approaches that, rather than seeking to provide a framework for improving participants’ ways of conceiving of phenomena, simply explore the various ways in which a group of individuals view an aspect of their world. There is no intention to use the categories that have emerged in this study as the basis for “changing the way [the participants’] world operates” (Bowden, 2000, p. 3). A study such as this is worthy in itself, providing important insights into the complex ways in which people view a particular phenomenon. It was never the aim of this study to provide a framework for improving parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year and the research has proved to be a source of rich and thought provoking data that have clear implications for the introduction of the program in Queensland.
5.6 Caveats of the study
At a time in Queensland when the trial and eventual introduction of a universal, full time Preparatory Year has evoked unprecedented interest and speculation
229 (Ailwood, 2004, 2007; Hard & O’Gorman, 2007, Prep Alert, personal communication, December 18, 2006), this study addresses a specific deficit in knowledge. The study sought to investigate the ways in which a group of parents in a non government school conceived of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year, and was successful in achieving this aim. An outcome space in which five distinctly different ways of experiencing the Preparatory Year program are described has provided insight into the relationship between these parents and the phenomenon, within the broader contexts of non government schooling and the introduction of the Preparatory Year. While the study has made considerable headway in addressing the aforementioned deficit in knowledge of parent views in Queensland, there are a number of caveats to the research which ought to be acknowledged. These relate to • sample size • representativeness of sample • interpretive nature of research • transferability • second order rather than first order perspective • researcher subjectivity Each will be discussed in turn.
Sample size The sample size for this study was chosen “to ensure sufficient variation in ways of seeing” (Bowden, 2005 p.17) and manageability of the data. It was felt that the sample of 26 parents would yield sufficient variation while at the same time comprising a manageable body of data. So it proved to be, as within the group of 26 participants, distinctly different ways of conceptualising the Preparatory Year program emerged.
230 Representativeness of sample Studies of this size may also be open to challenge in relation to their representativeness. Within qualitative research it can be appropriate to include sampling techniques that increase the likelihood of variation (Burns, 2000; Cresswell, 2002) and in the early stages of the research, efforts were made to ensure that parents from a range of backgrounds would be included in the sample so that a representative cross section of views might be heard. While these efforts were to some extent successful, it must be acknowledged that ultimately all parents who had children enrolled in the Preparatory Year at Eagle Plains were invited to be interviewed. Further, participants were also approached at the research site and introduced to the researcher by a staff member. This proved to be a useful strategy for including parents who had assumed that they were not suitable for interview because they had younger children at home, when in fact home interviews were able to be arranged. It is felt that these strategies for engaging participants enabled a representative sample to be obtained, even though the research involved a small number of participants. Interpretive nature of research Qualitative approaches such as phenomenography are necessarily interpretive in nature and questions about research rigour ought to be addressed in research such as this. While it may not be reasonable to expect the same categories of description to emerge from the data when different researchers interpret those data, we are reminded of Marton’s (1986) and Walsh’s (2000) suggestion that a more valid question is whether different researchers would allocate conceptions to the categories in the same way. In response to this, the current study featured a series of group analysis sessions in which participant utterances were put forward for discussion and allocation to the emergent categories. Further, presentation of preliminary findings to a panel of international experts in the phenomenographic and early childhood fields and exposure to the critique in those settings, as outlined in detail in Chapter 3, has confirmed that the research was undertaken in a rigorous manner.
231 Transferability A question to pose in the context of this research is whether the findings are able to be transferred to other contexts. To what extent would the conceptions described in this study apply to a different group of parents who were involved in a different school? Indeed, it is reasonable to propose that the views of this group of parents may even have changed since the interviews. This research is a “point in time” snapshot of the conceptions expressed by a group of people in late 2003 within a specific school context. While these points clearly indicate that there are limits to the transferability of these findings, the findings are relevant nonetheless. The conceptions of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year that were elicited and described in this study may not be replicated if all parents in all schools were subjected to phenomenographic interview. Despite this obvious fact, these conceptions have shed valuable light on how many parents might conceive of the Preparatory Year and the tensions that may feature in their considerations of the phenomenon. Further, it is reasonable to conclude that parents from similar socioeconomic backgrounds who have chosen a non government school for their child’s Preparatory Year may share many of the conceptions outlined in this study. Second-order rather than first-order perspective As outlined in Chapter 3, this study is typical of phenomenographic research in its adoption of a second order perspective. To recap, if this study had been an examination of the Preparatory Year curriculum itself it would have constituted what Marton (1981) termed taking a “first order perspective” (p. 178). Rather, it took what phenomenographic researchers such as Marton (1981) and Trigwell (2000b) referred to as a “second order perspective” which is an investigation and description of an individual’s experience of the world from their point of view . In this sense, the study is limited by its reliance on the views expressed by the participants. Observations of classroom practice were not part of the research approach, and while such insights – which would constitute taking a first order perspective – may have proven fruitful and added to the study, they are not a critical feature of phenomenographic research.
232 Researcher subjectivity The final limitation of this research deals with the issue of researcher subjectivity. It has been necessary throughout the course of the study to acknowledge my own beliefs and their potential to influence the outcomes of the project. Every effort has been made to remain as objective as possible at all times in order to minimise researcher bias. A number of strategies were employed to promote objectivity, particularly during the interviews, and these were outlined in Chapter 3. Moreover, during the analysis phase of the research, particular care was taken to ensure that a desire to produce ordered categories of description did not overshadow the need for empathetic examination of the data (Ashworth & Lucas, 2000). As mentioned in Chapter 3, a number of group analysis sessions were held in an effort to ensure that the emergent findings of the study were obtained as objectively as possible. Further, findings were presented to experts within the phenomenographic field who had no connection to research in early childhood education and the results were received positively.
5.7 Opportunities for further research
It is clear that this study has met its primary aim of eliciting and describing parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year. Through in depth phenomenographic interview and rigorous analysis of the transcripts, the research question, How do parents in a non-government school view the Preparatory Year? has been thoroughly investigated. And yet, despite the successful investigation of the research question and the valuable insights that have been gained as a result of this research, many questions have emerged during the course of the project. Perhaps the nature of research is that a greater number of questions are raised than are answered, and this project may be a prime example of that irony. By presenting opportunities for further research, it is possible that some of those new questions may be addressed in the future, particularly during the early years of the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. The following suggestions
233 are proposed as opportunities for further research; using a phenomenographic approach in different contexts, using findings from this study to develop quantitative measures and exploring how the phenomenon may be understood by stakeholders other than parents. These will now be explored. The application of a phenomenographic approach has proven to be a successful means of exploring the various ways in which parents view, or conceive of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year in Queensland. The limitations or caveats of this project were outlined in a previous section, one of those caveats being an acknowledgement of the small sample size and singular context of the research. This moment of major educational reform in Queensland provides a unique opportunity for further phenomenographic research into parent conceptions of the phenomenon. Our understandings of how parents view the Preparatory Year would be would be extended and developed by similar studies within the context of a government school, for example. Given the diversity of the Queensland population, the approach taken in the current study could also be used as a framework for exploring the views of parents from diverse backgrounds, for example those from rural and regional contexts. Such a study would shed valuable light on how parents construct the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year and would add significant strength to the study described in this thesis. The interview data obtained in this study and the rigorous analysis process applied to those data have unearthed a number of complexities and tensions inherent in the views of this group of 26 parents. These complexities and tensions, examined earlier in this chapter, are worthy of further exploration with a larger participant sample. Further research might include the design of surveys and other quantitative measures that would enable a significantly larger and more diverse population of parents to share their views, expectations, concerns and considerations of the Preparatory Year. Again, the introduction of the program in all Queensland schools provides a timely opportunity for consultation with parents across the state. The views of the Preparatory Year held by a group of parents have been central to this study. The value of parent consultation and involvement in ECEC has been
234 explored in earlier chapters of this thesis and is recognised broadly. Further research into the views held by different stakeholders would be most valuable during this period of reform. For example, explorations of the views held by school administrators, teaching staff and children would provide a rich source of information which might encourage dialogue between stakeholders and a forum for advocating on behalf of practices that are most beneficial to young children. In relation to the views of children, Sumsion’s (2006) call for an increasingly activist early childhood profession suggests the importance of recognising children’s rights as participants and citizens whose views ought to be heard and acted upon. Further, this research has taken place during the lead up to the introduction of the Preparatory Year in 2007. Longitudinal research tracking changes in how the Preparatory Year is understood and implemented in Queensland schools over time by the various stakeholders would also be beneficial.
5.8 Recommendations This study has shown that parents hold diverse views about the Preparatory Year phenomenon. This small group of participants has shown that parents might conceive of the Preparatory Year in ways that may challenge our beliefs about the best approaches to educating our young children. This challenge is unlikely to abate as a universal full time Preparatory Year of school becomes a feature of every school in the state. This study has also confirmed what other studies have found in other contexts; that is that variation exists in the ways that parents conceive of early childhood programs and that one can never assume uniformity in the views of even a relatively small group of individuals. As the full roll out of the Preparatory Year begins in Queensland in 2007, stakeholders are presented with many major challenges. Included amongst these challenges is the clear requirement for continued consultation with parents in order that the reform initiative continues moving along through open and frank dialogue and advocacy. The experience of introducing the new Foundation Stage
235 curriculum in the UK, as described by Aubrey (2004), suggests that ongoing discussions with parents about early childhood curriculum and policy during times of transition is crucially important. Also, just as this study has been presented as a “point in time” snapshot of parent views, it is acknowledged that the beliefs that people hold about young children and their education are in a constant state of flux. It will be vitally important for all stakeholders to keep abreast of the divergent and changing views of parents at a time when early education in Queensland will be undergoing an enormous and redefining transformation. It will be crucial for early childhood professionals to step forward at this time to demonstrate both leadership (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007) and activism (Sumsion, 2006) as they demonstrate their commitment to the provision of an equitable and high quality Preparatory Year – an even better start – for all children in Queensland, not just those who attend non government schools. We are reminded, as we look towards a future of great uncertainty and yet great opportunity, of the challenging words of Jo Tobin: Those of us who believe that … progressive practices represent the highest quality early childhood education have an obligation to offer our best practices to children and parents. But, at the same time, we also have an obligation to listen to parents, to not impose our notions of best practice on them or their children, and to consider the possibility that where we disagree they might be right and we wrong. (Tobin, 2005, p. 432)
236 CHAPTER 6
CONCLUSION
6.1 Introduction This study was undertaken to shed light on the ways in which a group of parents in a non government school in Queensland conceived of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. At the time of the research, the Preparatory Year was a topic of great interest in Queensland as preparations were being made for the roll out of the program in every school across the state. The lead up to the universal introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland was characterised by national efforts towards consistency of provision for young children in the year before school. The growing push towards uniform school starting ages and nomenclature, along with increasing enrolment in non government schooling in the year prior to compulsory school, were factors that contributed to the policy shift in Queensland towards a full time Preparatory Year of school. Given that efforts to work alongside parents and to understand their views are valued in the field of ECEC, research involving the views of parents was seen to be both critical and timely during this period of educational reform. A phenomenographic research approach was chosen as the means by which the different ways of experiencing, conceptualising, perceiving and understanding (Marton, 1986) the Preparatory Year were elicited and described in this study. The key research question answered by this study was: How do parents in a non-government school in Queensland view the Preparatory Year? This chapter brings the thesis to a close with an overview of the study and its conclusions.
237 6.2 A multilayered backdrop This study took place against a complex, multilayered backdrop of contextual features that set the scene for an investigation of parent views or conceptions of the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year. As a result, the study was informed by a number of bodies of literature that addressed aspects of the context of the research. The growth of the non government schooling sector in Australia, particularly during the past two decades, and the subsequent emergence of educational marketplaces in school (and before school) settings formed part of the backdrop to this research. The notion that parents were key players in this marketplace was also explored. Literature addressing the various constructions of the parent, with specific focus on parents as consumers or partners was seen as particularly relevant to this study, given that the research took place in a non government school and focused on parent views of the Preparatory Year phenomenon. Findings of this research suggest that the participants in this study accepted their roles as consumers within an educational marketplace, having made an informed decision about their choice of school. In a number of cases, the conceptions of the Preparatory Year program that were held by these parents influenced their decision and they reflected on their satisfaction with their choice as they described the features of the program. A further layer to the backdrop to this research was seen to be the powerful discourses emanating from historical understandings of childhood, particularly in relation to developmental psychology, children’s needs and the notion of readiness for school; discourses that still hold much currency in the Australian early childhood context. Much discussion around the introduction of the Preparatory Year in Queensland has focussed on speculation regarding the potential for maintaining a play based curriculum. And yet, the literature revealed that there are competing notions of what constitutes play in the lives of young children, what play in the early years of school might look like, and whether the notion of play may be constructed out of dominant Western discourses.
238 Discourses of childhood such as developmentalism, children’s needs and preparation for the future featured strongly in the findings of this study. Parent conceptions of the Preparatory Year program reflected these varying, and at times, conflicting discourses are illustrative of Ailwood’s (2007) suggestion that the Preparatory Year in Queensland is shaped by an “eclectic mix” (p. 15) of influences and discourses. The final layer of the literature backdrop involved an investigation of previous research into parent views of early childhood services; a body of literature providing obvious links with the research question. Previous research had explored variation in parent views of ECEC services through cross cultural comparison, exploring the relationships between parent views and choice of ECEC service, and investigating individual variation in parent views. These studies suggest that differences in parent understandings and expectations of ECEC programs are typically linked to varying beliefs about when and how academic learning ought to occur. The timing of academic learning emerged as a strong theme in the current study and appeared as a structural feature of all categories in which the child was seen as beneficiary of the program (Categories B – E). A number of studies investigating similar topics to this study have taken place both internationally and within the Australian context, many being large scale survey based investigations. The timeliness and value of an interview based project investigating parent conceptions of the new phenomenon of the Preparatory Year in Queensland are evident, given the richness of the data and the depth of analysis that was possible using a phenomenographic approach.
6.3 Phenomenography as a tool for investigation In Chapter 3, the conceptual framework and methodology of the study were presented and a detailed outline of the application of a phenomenographic approach was described. This study has confirmed the appropriateness of phenomenography as a tool for investigating parent conceptions of the
239 Preparatory Year. The value of a qualitative approach, in general, and phenomenography, in particular, for in depth, open ended exploration of the relationship between the participants and the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year has been underscored. This study moved away from the territory occupied by phenomenography’s traditional applications involving studies of conceptions of learning. It is, however, comfortably established with more recent trends that have confirmed the increasingly broad application of phenomenographic approaches to research in wider social contexts. The application of phenomenography to the current study enabled in depth exploration of the relationship between the participants and the phenomenon to take place; an exploration that would not have been possible if the study had been designed around preset categories or quantitative measures. The two step process of identifying categories of description along with dimensions of variation that both linked and differentiated the categories enabled the complexities of the conceptions to become extant. Overarching issues dealing with the needs of working parents and discussions regarding the necessity to prepare children for the future surfaced during the exploration of the dimensions that ran through the interviews. In this sense, the layers of contextual complexity that featured in the backdrop to this research were brought to the foreground.
6.4 Study conclusions In line with the phenomenographic approach, the results of the study consisted of an outcome space representing the range of ways of conceptualising the phenomenon of the Preparatory Year by this group of parents at the time of data collection. Phenomenographic analysis of the interview data revealed five different ways of conceptualising the Preparatory Year: • Category A: The Preparatory Year program is conceived in relation to the current needs of parents • Category B: The Preparatory Year program is conceived in relation to the current needs of the child
240 • Category C: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as preparation for Year One • Category D: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as providing an advantage in primary school • Category E: The Preparatory Year program is conceived as preparing for future success beyond school. These five categories were both linked to and differentiated from each other through two underlying themes, or dimensions of variation that ran through the interviews: • Beneficiary dimension • Temporal dimension The five categories of description and two dimensions of variation are arranged together in tabular form to explicate the relationships that exist between them: Table 9 Overview of Categories of Description and Dimensions of Variation (A) (B) (C) (D) (E) Current Current Preparation Providing Preparation needs of needs of for Year advantage for future parents child One in primary success conception conception conception school beyond conception school conception Beneficiary Parent Child Child Child Child dimension Temporal Current Current Future (to Future (to Future dimension Year One) primary (beyond school) school) Table 9 summarises the major findings of this study; that is, the range of parent views or conceptions of the Preparatory Year demonstrated varying emphasis on parent needs, child needs and preparation for future success in school and beyond. The five categories are sorted according to their focus on the beneficiary of the
241 program and are ordered according to the extent to which the program was seen as impacting on the future. The further analytical step of identifying and exploring tensions that were apparent along the dimensions of variation provided deeper insight into the complexities inherent in the conceptions of the Preparatory Year that were held by this group of parents. Uncertainties about whether the program ought to prepare children for the future or meet the child’s current needs emerged in some of the interviews, reflecting the broader debate about the push down of formal curriculum into pre compulsory ECEC. Further tensions around the acknowledgement that ECEC programs are, in part, chosen for the characteristics that meet the needs of parents also emerged in the analysis. Finally, this study highlights the importance of maintaining open and frank communication with parents of young children, particularly within a context of significant change in ECEC provision. The greatest challenge may lie, however, in listening to and respecting the views of parents who may hold very different views to those we hold ourselves. This study suggests that it is likely that, while some parents who experience the Preparatory Year for the first time in 2007 may welcome a push down of formal, academic focussed curriculum, others may not welcome such a move, or may even resist it. Those who are responsible for implementing the new Early Years Curriculum (Queensland Studies Authority, 2006) may need to adopt the role of advocate even more so than they have in the past. Indeed, the broader Australian political and policy context suggests that now is the time for early childhood professionals to extend their advocacy role to that of the activist who is able to “negotiate complex and challenging political and policy terrains” (Sumsion, 2006, p. 8). As the implementation of Queensland’s Preparatory Year continues from 2007, some new questions may be posed and new challenges will arise. The challenge of providing a Preparatory Year that is responsive to the needs of both parents and children in a state of enormous diversity such as Queensland is significant. In rising to the challenge, those who continue to invest their energy and vision into advocating on behalf of young children and their families, in all their diversity,
242 will need to continue to question whether Queensland’s new Preparatory Year does, in fact, represent, for the education of our youngest citizens, an even better start .
243 REFERENCES
Ailwood, J. (2003). Governing early childhood education through play. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4 (3), 286 299. Ailwood, J. (2004). Geneologies of governmentality: Producing and managing young children and their education. The Australian Educational Researcher, 31 (3), 19 33. Ailwood, J. (2007 in press). Learning or earning in the ‘Smart State’: Changing tactics for governing early childhood. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research. Åkerlind, G. (2004). A new dimension to understanding university teaching. Teaching in Higher Education, 9 (3), 363 375. Åkerlind, G. (2005a). Learning about phenomenography. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing Developmental Phenomenography (pp. 63 73). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Åkerlind, G. (2005b). Variation and commonality in phenomenographic research methods. Higher Education Research and Development, 24 (4), 321 334. Åkerlind, G. (2005c). Academic growth and development – How do university academics experience it? Higher Education, 50 (1), 1 32. Åkerlind, G. (2005d). Phenomenographic methods: A case illustration. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing Developmental Phenomenography (pp.103 127). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Åkerlind, G., & Kayrooz, C. (2003). Understanding academic freedom: The views of social scientists. Higher Education Research and Development, 22 (3), 327 344. Apple, M. (1996). Cultural politics and education . Buckingham, U.K: Open University Press. Apple, M. (2001). Educating the "right" way: Markets, standards, God, and inequality. New York: Routledge Falmer. Apple, M., & King, N. (1977). What do schools teach? Curriculum Inquiry, 6 (4), 341 358. Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Dockett, S., Farmer, S., & Death, E. (1996). Programming and planning in early childhood settings (2 nd ed.). Marrickville, NSW: Harcourt Brace & Company.
244 Ashworth, P., & Lucas, U. (2000). Achieving empathy and engagement: A practical approach to the design, conduct and reporting of phenomenographic research. Studies in Higher Education, 25 (3), 295 308. Atelier Learning Solutions Pty Ltd & Access Economics (2006). Cost/Benefit analysis relating to the implementation of a common school starting age and associated nomenclature by 1 January 2010. Carlton South, VIC: MCEETYA. Atkin, J. (1991). Thinking about play. In N. Hall & L. Abbott (Eds.), Play in the primary curriculum (pp. 29 37). London: Hodder & Stoughton. Aubrey, C. (2004). Implementing the foundation stage in reception classes. British Educational Research Journal, 33 (5), 633 656. Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2006). Census QuickStats. Person Characteristics . Retrieved August, 2007, from http://www.censusdata.abs.gov.au/ Ball, S. (2003a). Class strategies and the education market: The middle class and social advantage. London: Routledge/Falmer. Ball, S. (2003b). The teacher's soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18 (2), 215 228. Ball, S. J., Bowe, R., & Gewirtz, S. (1995). Circuits of schooling: A sociological exploration of parental choice of school in social class contexts. The Sociological Review, 43 (1), 52 78. Ballantyne, R., Thompson, R., & Taylor, P. (1994). Principals' conceptions of competent beginning teachers. In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 23 45). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology. Berger, E.H. (2000). Parents as partners in education: Families and schools working together (5 th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Merrill. Best, J.W., & Khan, J.V. (2003). Research in education (9 th ed.). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon. Bloch, M. (1992). Critical perspectives on the historical relationship between child development and early childhood education research. In S.Kessler & B.B. Swadener (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the early childhood curriculum: Beginning the dialogue (pp. 3 20). New York: Teachers College Press.
245 Bloch, M. (2003). Global/local analyses of the construction of “Family Child Welfare.” In M.Bloch, K. Holmlund, I.Moqvist & T. Popkewitz (Eds.), Governing children, families and education: Restructuring the welfare state (pp. 195 230). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Booth, S. (1997). On phenomenography, learning and teaching. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 135 158. Boulton Lewis, G.M., Wilss, L., & Lewis, D. (2003). Dissonance between conceptions of learning and ways of learning for Indigenous Australian university students. Studies in Higher Education, 28 (1), 79 89. Bowden, J. (2000). The nature of phenomenographic research. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 1 18). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Bowden, J. (2005). Reflections on the phenomenographic team research process. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing Developmental Phenomenography (pp. 11 31). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Bowe, R., Ball, S., J., & Gold, A. (1992). Reforming education and changing schools: Case studies in policy sociology. London: Routledge. Bowes, J., & Watson, J. (2004). Families as a context for children. In J. Bowes (Ed.), Children, families and communities: Contexts and consequences (2 nd ed.) (pp. 91 115). Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Boyd, W., & Ailwood, J. (2007). Comparing early childhood education and care across Australia. In J. Ailwood (Ed.), Early childhood in Australia: Historical and comparative contexts (pp. 77 92) . Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson. Boyden, J. (1997). Childhood and the policy makers: A comparative perspective on the globalization of childhood. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood (2 nd ed.) (pp. 190 229). London: Routledge/Falmer. Brannen, J., & Moss, P. (1991). Managing mothers: Dual earner households after maternity leave. London: Unwin Hyman. Brennan, D. (1998). The politics of Australian child care: Philanthropy to feminism and beyond. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Brennan, D. & O'Donnell, C. (1986). Caring for Australia's children: Political and industrial issues in child care. Sydney: Allen & Unwin. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bronfenrenner, U. (1992). Ecological systems theory. In R. Vasta (Ed.), Six theories of child development (pp. 187 249). London: Jessica Kingsley.
246 Broström, S. (2005). Transition problems and play as transitory activity. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 30 (3), 17 25. Bruce, C. (1997). The seven faces of information literacy. Adelaide: Auslib Press. Bruce, C., & Gerber, R. (1994). Towards university lecturers' conceptions of student learning. In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 57 70). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology. Bruce, C., & Gerber, R. (1997). Editorial: Special Issue: Phenomenography in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 125 126. Burman, E. (1994). Deconstructing developmental psychology. London: Routledge. Burns, J. (1994). Extending critique within phenomenography . In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 71 85). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology. Burns, R. B. (2000). Introduction to research methods in education. Melbourne: Longman Cheshire. Carlson, H. L., & Stenmalm Sjöblom, L. (1989). A cross cultural study of parents' perceptions of early childhood programs. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4 (4), 505 522. Commonwealth Government (2004). The National Agenda for Early Childhood: A Draft Framework. Retrieved October 24, 2006, from http://www.facs.gov.au/internet/facsinternet.nsf/via/early_childhood/$File/ naec_aug04.pdf Connell, B. (1998). Schools, markets, justice: Education in a fractured world. In A. Reid (Ed.), Going public: Education policy and public education in Australia (pp. 88 96). Canberra, ACT: Australian Curriculum Studies Association. Cook, A., & Stir, J. (1994). Conceptions of maintenance. In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 77 85). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology.
247 Cope, C. (2003). Using the analytical framework of a structure of awareness to establish validity and reliability in phenomenographic research. Retrieved July 25, 2003, from http://www.anu.edu.au/cedam/ilearn/symposium/Cope.pdf Corrie, L. (1999). Politics, the provision of physical amenities, and the 'push down' curriculum. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 24 (3), 5 10. Crèche and Kindergarten Association of Queensland. (2002). About us. Retrieved July 23, 2003 from: http://www.candk.asn.au/about.htm. Creswell, J. (2002). Educational research: Planning, conducting and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. New Jersey: Merrill Prentice Hall. Crotty, M. (1998). The foundations of social research: Meaning and perspective in the research process. Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin. David, T. (1990). Under five – under-educated? Buckingham: Open University Press. Dean, G. (1994). A phenomenographical investigation of policing by consent. In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 111 129). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2005a). Introduction: The discipline and practice of qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3 rd ed.) (pp. 1 32). Thousand Oaks,CA: Sage Publications. Denzin, N., & Lincoln, Y. (2005b). Preface. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (3 rd ed.) (pp. ix xix). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. Department of Education, Training and the Arts, (2005). Preparatory Year Frequently Asked Questions. Retrieved November, 2006, from http://education.qld.gov.au/etrf/faq prep3.html Department of Education, Training and the Arts, (2006). Education History: Kindergartens and Preschools. Retrieved March, 2007, from http://education.qld.gov.au/information/service/libraries/edhistory/state/bri ef/early kindergarten.html Department of Family and Community Services (FaCS), (2004). The national agenda for early childhood: A draft framework. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.
248 Dockett, S. (1999). Thinking about play, playing about thinking. In E. Dau (Ed.), Child's play: Revisiting play in early childhood settings (pp. 28 45). Baltimore: Paul Brookes. Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2002). Who's ready for what? Young children starting school. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 3 (1), 67 89. Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2004a). What makes a successful transition to school? Views of Australian parents and teachers. International Journal of Early Years Education, 12 (3), 217 230. Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2004b). Starting school: Perspectives of Australian children, parents and educators. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(2), 171 189. Dunn, L., & Dasananda, S. (1995). Parental resistance to developmentally appropriate practice in Thailand [electronic version] pages 1 17. Retrieved 7 April, 2003 (ERIC Document Reproduction Service No. ED390527) Education Queensland (2000). Queensland state education 2010 . Brisbane: Office of Strategic Planning and Portfolio Services. Education Queensland, Office of Strategic Planning and Portfolio Services (2002). Queensland the Smart State: Education and Training Reforms for the Future. Brisbane: Office of Strategic Planning and Portfolio Services. Education Queensland (2003). Professional exchange: Education history . Retrieved June 26, 2003, from http://www.education.qld.gov.au/corporate/professional_exchange/edhisto ry/eq/briefhistory/early infant.htm Edwards, A. (2001). Qualitative designs and analysis. In G. MacNaughton, S. Rolfe, & I. Siraj Blatchford (Eds.), Doing early childhood research (pp. 117 135). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin. Ekeblad, E., & Bond, C. (1994). The nature of a conception: Questions of context. In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 147 161). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology. English, R. (2004). School choice in a new market context: A case study of the Shelbyville College . Unpublished Master of Education (Research) dissertation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Entwistle, N. (1997). Introduction: phenomenography in higher education. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 127 134. Erikson, E. (1963). Childhood and society (2 nd ed.). New York: Norton.
249 Evans, P., & Fuller, M. (1998). The purposes of nursery education in the UK: Parent and child perspectives. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 6 (2), 35 53. Fleer, M. (1999). Universal fantasy: The domination of Western theories of play. In E. Dau (Ed.), Child's Play: Revisiting Play in Early Childhood Settings . (pp. 67 79). Baltimore: Paul Brookes. Fleer, M. (2006). A sociocultural perspective on early childhood education: Rethinking, reconceptualising and reinventing. In M. Fleer, S. Edwards, M. Hammer, A. Kennedy, A. Ridgway, J. Robbins & L. Surman, Early childhood learning communities: Sociocultural research in practice (pp. 3 14). Frenchs Forest, NSW: Pearson Prentice Hall. Fontana, A., & Frey, J. (2000). The interview: From structured questions to negotiated text. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (2 nd ed.) (pp. 645 672). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Foot, H., Howe, C., Cheyne, B., Terras, M., & Rattray, C. (2000). Pre school education: Parents' preferences, knowledge and expectations. International Journal of Early Years Education, 8 (3), 189 204. Francis, H. (1996). Advancing phenomenography Questions of method. In G. Dall'Alba & B. Hasselgren (Eds.), Reflections on phenomenography: Toward a methodology? (pp. 35 47). Göthoburgensis, Göteborg, Sweden: ACTA Universitatis. Freud, S. (1905). Three essays on the theory of sexuality. Standard Edition, Volume 7, London: Hogarth Press. Genishi, C. (1992). Framing the ways. In C. Genishi (Ed.), Ways of assessing children and curriculum: Stories of early childhood practice (pp.1 24). New York: Teachers College Press. Glesne, C. (1999). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction. New York: Longman. Goodfellow, J. (2005). Market childcare: Preliminary considerations of a 'property view' of the child. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 6 (1), 54 65. Graue, M.E. (1992). Meanings of readiness and the kindergarten experience. In S. Kessler & B.B. Swadener (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the early childhood curriculum: Beginning the dialogue (pp. 62 90). New York: Teachers College Press. Graue, M.E. (1993). Expectations and ideas coming to school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 8 (1), 53 75.
250 Graue, M.E. (2006). The answer is readiness Now what is the question? Early Education and Development, 17(1), 43 56. Green, P. (2005). A rigorous journey into phenomenography: From a naturalistic inquirer standpoint. In J. Bowden & P. Green (Eds.), Doing developmental phenomenography (pp. 32 46). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Grieshaber, S. (2000). The State reinventing the preschool child. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 21 (3), 269 281. Guba, E., & Lincoln, Y. (1994). Competing paradigms in qualitative research. In N. Denzin & Y. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 105 117). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Gutiérrez, K., & Rogoff, B. (2003). Cultural ways of learning: Individual traits or repertoires of practice. Educational Researcher, 32 (5), 19 25. Hall, N., & Abbott, L. (1991). Introduction. In N. Hall & L. Abbott (Eds.), Play in the primary curriculum (pp. 1 9). London: Hodder & Stoughton. Hard, L., & O’Gorman, L. (2007). Push Me or Pull You? An opportunity for early childhood leadership in the implementation of Queensland’s Early Years Curriculum . Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8 (1), 50 60.
Hargreaves, A. (2001). Beyond anxiety and nostalgia: Building a social movement for educational change. Phi Delta Kappan, 82 (5), 373 377. Hargreaves, A. (2004). Distinction and disgust: The emotional politics of school failure. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 7(1), 27 41. Hargreaves, A., & Fullan, M. (1998). What's worth fighting for out there ? New York: Teachers College Press. Hasselgren, B., & Beach, D. (1997). Phenomenography a "good for nothing brother" of phenomenology? Outline of an analysis. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 191 202. Haynes, B. (2002). Australian education policy (3 rd ed.). Katoomba, NSW: Social Science Press. Hazel, E., Conrad, L., & Martin, E. (1997). Exploring gender and phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 213 226. Henry, M. (1996). Young children, parents and professionals: Enhancing the links in early childhood . London: Routledge. Holthouse, H. (1975). Looking back: The first 150 years of Queensland schools. Brisbane: Queensland Department of Education.
251 Houston, P. (2005). NCLB: Dreams and nightmares. Phi Delta Kappan, February, 2005, 469 470. Howe, J. (1999). Early childhood, family and society in Australia: A reassessment. Katoomba, NSW: Social Science Press. Hughes, P. (2001). Paradigms, methods and knowledge. In G. MacNaughton, S. Rolfe, & I. Siraj Blatchford (Eds.), Doing early childhood research: International perspectives on theory and practice (pp. 31 55). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin. Hyson, M. (2003). Putting early academics in their place. Educational Leadership, 60 (7), 20 23. Irvine, S. (2005). Parent conceptions of their role in early childhood education and care. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Irvine, S., Tayler, C., & Farrell, A. (2004). Lenses and lessons in phenomenographic research for public policy in early childhood education and care. In E. McWilliam, S. Danby & J. Knight (Eds.), Performing research: Theories, methods and practices (pp. 287 302) . Flaxton, QLD: Post Pressed. James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge: Blackwell. Johansson, B., & Ringsberg, K. (2004). Parents' experiences of having a child with cleft lip and palate. Issues and Innovations in Nursing Practice, 47 (2), 165 173. Karmel, P. (2000). Resources and their organisation: An overview. In. P. Karmel (Ed.), School resourcing: Models and practices in changing times (pp. 2 9) . Canberra, ACT: Australian College of Education.
Keating, I., Fabian, H., Jordan, P., Mavers, D., & Roberts, J. (2000). ‘Well, I’ve not done any work today. I don’t know why I came to school’: Perceptions of play in the reception class. Educational Studies, 26 (4), 437 454. Keeping up in a competitive environment: Promoting your school to the community. (2002, October). AISQ Briefings, 6 (9), 1. Kemp, D. (1996, August 20). Labor's restrictive "New Schools Policy" abolished [media release]. Canberra, ACT: Department of Education, Science and Training. Retrieved June 5, 2006, from http://www.dest.gov.au/archive/ministers/kemp/k30_20_8.htm Kessler, S. (1992). The social context of the early childhood curriculum. In S. Kessler & B.B. Swadener (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the early childhood
252 curriculum: Beginning the dialogue (pp. 21 42) . New York: Teachers College Press. King, N. (1992). The impact of context on the play of young children. In S. Kessler & B.B. Swadener (Eds.), Reconceptualizing the early childhood curriculum: Beginning the dialogue (pp. 43 61) . New York: Teachers College Press. Kingwill, S., & Fegan, M. (2001). Flexibility and responsiveness. In S. Dockett & B.Perry (Eds.), Beginning school together: Sharing strengths (pp. 48 55). Canberra, ACT: AECA. Laloumi Vidali, E. (1998). Parental expectations of early childhood services for preschool children: The case of policy change in Greece. International Journal of Early Years Education, 6 (1), 19 30. Laurillard, D. (1993). Rethinking university teaching: A framework for the effective use of educational technology. London: Routledge Lincoln, Y., & Cannella, G. (2004). Dangerous discourses: Methodological conservatism and governmental regimes of truth. Qualitative Inquiry, 10 (1), 5 14. Lingard, B. & Porter, P. (1997). Australian schooling: The state of national developments. In B. Lingard & P. Porter (Eds.), A national approach to schooling in Australia? Essays on the development of national policies in schools education (pp. 1 25). Deakin, ACT: Australian College of Education. Lockwood, V., & Fleet, A. (1999). Attitudes towards the notion of preparing children for school. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 24 (3), 18 24. Locsin, R., Barnard, A., Matua, A., & Bongomin, B. (2003). Surviving Ebola: Understanding experience through artistic expression. International Nursing Review, 50, 156 166. Loughland, T., Reid, A., & Petocz, P. (2002). Young people's conceptions of environment: A phenomenographic analysis. Environmental Education Research, 8 (2), 187 197. Lythe, C. (1997). Spreading their wings: Seven hundred and sixty-seven parents talk about their children’s home and early childhood education experiences. A report for the Ministry of Education. Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Council for Educational Research. Maguire, M., Ball, S.J., & Macrae, S. (1999). Promotion, persuasion and class taste: Marketing (in) the UK post compulsory sector. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 20 (3), 291 307.
253 Marginson, S. (1997a). Educating Australia: Government, economy and citizen since 1960. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Marginson, S. (1997b). Markets in education. St Leonards, NSW: Allen and Unwin. Marton, F. (1981). Phenomenography: Describing conceptions of the world around us. Instructional Science, 10, 177 200. Marton, F. (1986). Phenomenography A research approach to investigating different understandings of reality. Journal of Thought, 21 (3), 28 49. Marton, F. (1988). Phenomenography: Exploring different conceptions of reality. In P. Fetterman (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to evaluating education: A silent scientific revolution (pp. 176 205) . New York: Praeger. Marton, F. (2000). The structure of awareness. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 102 116). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Marton, F., & Booth, S. (1997). Learning and awareness. Mahwah, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum Associates. Marton, F., Dahlgren, L.O., Svensson, L., & Säljö, R. (1977). Inlarning och omvarldsuppfattning (Learning and conception of the world around) . Stockholm: Almquist and Wiksell. Marton, F., & Pong, W.Y. (2005). On the unit of description in phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development 24 (4), 335 348. Marton, F., & Svensson, L. (1979). Conceptions of research in student learning. Higher Education, 8 (4) , 471 486. Mayall, B. (2002). Towards a sociology for childhood: Thinking from children's lives. Buckingham: Open University Press. Mellor, E. (1990). Stepping stones: The development of early childhood services in Australia. Sydney: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich. Minichiello, V., Aroni, R., Timewell, E., & Alexander, L. (2000). In-depth interviewing (2 nd ed.). Sydney: Longman. Moqvist, I. (2003). Constructing a parent. In M.Bloch, K. Holmlund, I. Moqvist & T. Popkewitz (Eds.), Governing children, families and education: Restructuring the welfare state (pp. 117 132). New York: Palgrave Macmillan. Morgan, I. (2000). Funding for equity is the major need. Unicorn, 26 (2), 61 67.
254 Morrow, A., Blackburn, J., & Gill, J. (1998). Public education: From public domain to private enterprise? In A. Reid (Ed.), Going public: Education policy and public education in Australia (pp. 9 17). Canberra, ACT: Australian Curriculum Studies Association. Moss, P. (1999). Renewed hopes and lost opportunities: Early childhood in the early years of the Labour government. Cambridge Journal of Education, 29 (2), 229 238. Moss, P. (2005). Making the narrative of quality stutter. Early Education and Development, 16 (4), 405 420. Moss, P. (2006). Structures, understandings and discourses: Possibilities for re envsioning the early childhood worker. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7 (1), 30 41. Munn, P. (1993). Introduction. In P. Munn (Ed.), Parents and schools: Customers, managers or partners (pp. 1 10). London: Routledge. New, R. S. (1999). What should children learn? Making choices and taking chances. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 1 (2), 1 15. Noble, K (2007). Complexities and compromises: Understanding parents' experiences and choice of early childhood education and care services. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 32 (1), 24 29 . OECD. (2001). Starting strong: Early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publications. OECD. (2006). Starting strong 2: Early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publications. O'Gorman, L., Farrell, A., & Walsh, K. (2004). An even better start? Generating parent views of the preparatory year using a phenomenographic approach. In E. McWilliam, S. Danby & J. Knight (Eds.), Performing research: Theories, methods and practices (pp. 409 423) . Flaxton, QLD: Post Pressed. Ojala, M. (2000). Parent and teacher expectations for developing young children: A cross cultural comparison between Ireland and Finland. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 8 (2), 39 61. Owens, R. G. (1982). Methodological rigor in naturalistic inquiry: Some issues and answers. Educational Administration Quarterly, 18 (2), 1 21. Page, J., Nienhuys, T., Kapsalakis, A., & Morda, R. (2001). Parents' perceptions of kindergarten programs in Victoria. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 26 (3), 43 50.
255 Pang, M.P. (2003). Two faces of variation: On continuity in the phenomenographic movement. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 47 (2), 145 156 Pence, A. R., & Goelman, H. (1987). Silent partners: Parents of children in three types of day care. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 2 , 103 118. Perry, B., Dockett, S., & Howard, P. (2000). Starting school: Issues for children, parents and teachers. Journal of Australian Research in Early Childhood Education, 7 (1), 41 53. Perry, R., & Irwin, L. (2000). Playing with curriculum: Strategies and benefits. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology. Petrie, P. (2003). Social pedagogy: An historical account of care and education as social control. In J. Brannen & P. Moss (Eds.), Rethinking children's care (pp. 61 79). Buckingham: Open University Press. Petriwskyj, A., Thorpe, K., & Tayler, C. (2005). Trends in construction of transition to school in three western regions, 1990 2004. International Journal of Early Years Education, 13 (1), 55 69. Piaget, J. (1929). The child's conception of the world. London: Routledge & Kegan. Pocock, B. (2005). Work/care regimes: Institutions, culture and behaviour and the Australian case. Gender, Work and Organization, 12 (1), 32 49. Pramling, I. (1990). Learning to learn: A study of Swedish preschool children. New York: Springer Verlag. Pramling, I. (1995). Phenomenography and practice. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 30 (2), 135 148. Pramling Samuelsson, I., & Johansson, E. (2006). Play and learning – inseparable dimensions in preschool practice. Early Child Development and Care, 176 (1), 47 65. Press, F. (2006). What about the kids? Policy directions for improving the experiences of infants and young children in a changing world. NSW Commission for Children and Young People, Qld Commission for Children and Young People and Child Guardian, the National Investment for the Early Years (NIFTeY). Retrieved 28 October, 2006, from http://www.childcomm.qld.gov.au/pdf/publications/reports/What_About_t he_Kids/Policy WhatAboutTheKids.pdf Press, F. & Hayes, A. (2000). OECD thematic review of early childhood education and care policy, Australian background report. Canberra: Ausinfo.
256 Prout, A., & James, A. (1997). A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and problems. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood (2 nd ed.) (pp. 7 33). London: Routledge/Falmer. Queensland School Curriculum Council (1998). Preschool curriculum guidelines. Brisbane: Open Access Unit. Queensland Studies Authority (2006). Early Years Curriculum Guidelines. Brisbane: The State of Queensland (Queensland Studies Authority). Raban, B., & Ure, C. (2000). Continuity for socially disadvantaged school entrants: Perspectives of parents and teachers. Journal of Australian Research in Early Childhood Education, 7 (1), 54 65. Reeve, P. (1993). Issues in parent participation. The Australian Administrator, 14 (4 5), 1 11. Richardson, J. T. E. (1999). The concepts and methods of phenomenographic research. Review of Educational Research, 69 (1), 53 82. Robson, C. (1993). Real world research: A resource for social scientists and practitioner-researchers. Oxford: Blackwell. Rodd, J., & Milikan, J. (1994). Parental perceptions of early childhood services for pre primary children in Australia. Early Child Development and Care, 101 , 89 100. Ryan, S., & Grieshaber, S. (2005). Shifting from developmental to postmodern practices in early childhood teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 56 (1), 34 45. Säljö, R. (1979). Learning in the learner's perspective (no. 76). Göteborg: University of Goteborg, Department of Education. Säljö, R. (1988). Learning in educational settings: Methods of inquiry. In P. Ramsden (Ed.), Improving learning: New perspectives (pp. 32 48). London: Kogan Page Ltd. Säljö, R. (1997). Talk as data and practice: A critical look at phenomenographic inquiry and the appeal to experience. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 173 190. Samuelsson, I., Mauritzson, U., Carlsson, M., & Ueda, M. (1998) A mother and a friend: Differences in Japanese and Swedish mothers' understanding of a tale. Childhood: A Global Journal of Child Research, 5 (4), 493 506. Sanagavarapu, P., & Perry, B. (2005) Concerns and expectations of Bangladeshi parents as their children start school. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 30 (3), 45 51.
257 Sandberg, A., & Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2003). Preschool teachers' play experiences then and now. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 5 (1). Retrieved April 25, 2007, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v5n1/sandberg.html Sandberg, J. (1997). Are phenomenographic results reliable? Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 203 212. Sawyer, A. (2000). Pre school teachers in primary schools: Stories from the field. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1 (3), 339 344.
Schweinhart, L., & Weikart, D. (1997). The High/Scope preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12 (2), 117 143.
Senate Employment Education and Training Reference Committee. (1996). Childhood matters: The report on the inquiry into early childhood education. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia. Seng, S. K. (1994). Quality of kindergarten education in Singapore: Parents' views and expectations. Paper presented at the Biennial Meetings of ISSBD, Amsterdam, Netherlands, June 29 July 2. Shepard, L. A., & Smith, M. L. (1988). Escalating academic demand in kindergarten: Counterproductive policies. The Elementary School Journal, 89 (2), 135 145. Silin, J. (1995). Sex, death and the education of children: our passion for ignorance in the age of AIDS. New York: Teachers College Press. Silverman, D. (2000). Doing qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: Sage. Siraj Blatchford, I., Sylva, K., Muttock, S., Gilden, R., & Bell, D. (2002). Researching effective pedagogy in the early years. London: Department for Education and Skills. Smith, B. (1993). Educational consumerism: Family values or the meanest of motives? In D. Meredyth & D. Tyler (Eds.), Child and citizen: Genealogies of schooling and subjectivity (pp. 181 206). Brisbane: Institute for Cultural Policy Studies, Griffith University. Snow, K. (2006). Measuring school readiness: Conceptual and practical considerations. Early Education and Development, 17 (1), 7 41. Soler, J., & Miller, L. (2003). The struggle for early childhood curricula: A comparison of the English Foundation Stage curriculum, Te Whäriki and Reggio Emilia. International Journal of Early Years Education, 11 (1), 57 67.
258 Stambach, A. (2001). Consumerism and gender in an era of school choice: A look at US charter schools. Gender and Education, 13 (2), 199 216 Stamopoulos, E. (2003). Elucidating the dilemma of P1 in Western Australian schools: Towards a solution. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4(2), 188 217. Sumsion, J. (2006). From Whitlam to economic rationalism and beyond: A conceptural framework for political activism in children's services. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 31 (1), 1 8. Stipek, D., & Byler, P. (1997). Early childhood education teachers: Do they practice what they preach? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 305 325.
Sutton Smith, B., & Kelly Byrne, D. (1984). The idealization of play. In P. Smith (Ed.), Play in animals and humans . (pp. 305 321). Oxford: Basil Blackwell. Svensson, L. (1997). Theoretical foundations of phenomenography. Higher Education Research and Development, 16 (2), 159 171. Tayler, C., Diezmann, C., Lennox, S., Perry, R., & Watters, J. (1999). Educational consequences of early entry to Year One. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.
Tayler, C. Perry, R., & Lennox, S. (1999). Benefits of the full-time pre-Year 1 year of schooling. Brisbane: Queensland University of Technology.
The White House (2001). The No Child Left Behind Act of 2001, Executive Summary. Washington, D.C. Retrieved November 2, 2006 from http://www.ed.gov/nclb/overview/intro/execsumm.pdf
Thompson, R., & Ballantyne, R. (1994). Taking the drudgery out of analysing phenomenographic research data using electronic cut and paste. In R. Ballantyne & C. Bruce (Eds.), Phenomenography: Philosophy and practice. Proceedings of the 1994 Phenomenography Conference (pp. 395 400). Brisbane: Centre for Applied Environmental and Social Education Research, Queensland University of Technology. Thorpe, K., Tayler, C., Bridgstock, R., Grieshaber, S., Skoien, P., & Danby, S. et al. (2004). Preparing for school: Report of the Queensland Preparing for School Trials 2003/4. Brisbane, Queensland: Queensland University of Technology, School of Early Childhood.
Tobin, J. (2005). Quality in early childhood education: An anthropologist's perspective. Early Education and Development, 16 (4), 421 434. Tobin, J., Wu, D., & Davidson, D. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China, and the United States. New Haven, CT: Yale University Press.
259 Trigwell, K. (2000a). A phenomenographic interview on phenomenography. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 62 82). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Trigwell, K. (2000b). Phenomenography: Variation and discernment. In C. Rust (Ed.), Improving Student Learning. Proceedings of the 1999 7 th International Symposium (pp. 75 85). Oxford: Oxford Centre for Staff Leaning Development. Tyler, S. (1991). Play in relation to the National Curriculum. In N. Hall & L. Abbott (Eds.), Play in the primary curriculum (pp. 10 28). London: Hodder & Stoughton. UNICEF (1990). First call for children. World declaration and plan of action from the World Summit for Children. New York: UNICEF. Vincent, C. (2000). Including parents? Education, citizenship and parental agency. Buckingham: Open University Press. Vincent, C., & Ball, S. (2001). A market in love? Choosing pre school childcare. British Educational Research Journal, 27 (5), 633 651.
Vygotsky, L. (1930) (1990). Imagination and creativity in childhood. Soviet Psychology, 28, 84 96.
Walford, G. (2006). Markets and equity in education. London: Continuum.
Walker, K. (2004). For all our children: Report of the independent inquiry into the provision of universal access to high quality preschool education. Melbourne: Australian Education Union.
Walsh, D. J. (1989). Changes in kindergarten: Why here? Why now? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 4(3), 377 391. Walsh, E. (2000). Phenomenographic analysis of interview transcripts. In J. Bowden & E. Walsh (Eds.), Phenomenography (pp. 19 33). Melbourne: RMIT University Press. Webb, G. (1996). Deconstructing deep and surface: Towards a critique of phenomenography for staff developers. Proceedings of the Different Approaches: Theory and Practice in Higher Education HERDSA Conference, July 8-12, 1996, Perth, Western Australia. Retrieved August 5, 2007, from http://www.herdsa.org.au/confs/1996/webb.html
Welford, R. (2006, August 29). Parents views considered in Prep applications , [Press release]. Brisbane, QLD: Queensland Government.
Whitton, D. (2005). Transition to school for gifted children. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 30 (3), 27 31.
260 Willén, C., & Scherman, M. (2002). Group training in a pool causes ripples on the water: Experiences by persons with late effects of polio. Journal of Rehabilitation Medicine , 34(4), 191 197.
Wise, S. (2002). Parents' expectations, values and choice of child care: Connections to culture. Family Matters (61), 48 55. Woodhead, M. (1997). Psychology and the cultural construction of children's needs. In A. James & A. Prout (Eds.), Constructing and reconstructing childhood (2 nd ed.) (pp. 63 84). London: Falmer Press. Woodrow, C., & Brennan, M. (1999) Marketised positioning of early childhood: New contexts for curriculum and professional development in Queensland, Australia. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 1 (1), 78 94.
Yeboah, D.A. (2002). Enhancing transition from early childhood phase to primary education: Evidence from the research literature. Early Years, 22 (1), 51 68.
261 Appendix A Letter of approach to Junior School Principal
262 263 Appendix B Letter of approval to conduct research (research site to QUT ethics committee)
264 265 Appendix C Participant information
266 267 268 Appendix D Participant consent form
269 270 Appendix E QUT Human Research Ethics Committee confirmation of exemption from full ethical clearance email
271 272 Appendix F QUT Human Research Ethics Committee authorisation to commence project email
273 274 Appendix G Interview questions
275
276