Gregory Hine (University of Notre Dame Australia) and Sandra Herbert (Deakin University)

A well-established claim is that teacher education programs are pivotal in the professional preparation and formation of pre-service secondary mathematics teachers (PSMTs). Despite this claim, there appears to be a lack of understanding of how best to prepare PSMTs for the profession.

The purpose of this study was to examine and monitor changes over time in PSMTs’ views about approaches to teaching mathematics in secondary schools, before and after undertaking mathematics teaching methods courses (including practicum teaching). These views included their perceived readiness to teach secondary mathematics, as well as an indication of their likelihood to use particular teaching approaches for mathematics.

For this study, PSMTs at two Australian universities were surveyed before and after they undertook their respective teaching methods courses, and interviewed upon course completion. Overall, survey data did not indicate a significant change in PSMTs’ views of readiness to teach mathematics from either university (N = 61 pre-survey, N = 34 post-survey).

An analysis of interview data revealed that PSMTs did not feel ready to teach secondary mathematics, with their emphases focused on two areas where improvement was needed. The areas requiring improvement were their mathematical content knowledge and mathematical pedagogical knowledge. Nevertheless, nearly half of the interviewees reported feeling confident to teach mathematics to lower secondary classes (Years 7-10). Despite these concessions, all interviewed PSMTs outlined at least one area where they had experienced professional growth since commencing a teacher education degree.

Issues in Educational Research, 32(2), 533-554. http://www.iier.org.au/iier32/hine.pdf

The post Shifting pre-service teachers’ views of teaching secondary mathematics appeared first on WAIER.

Over several decades, a preoccupation with reading has dominated the literacy debate in primary education. One-sided discussions around literacy not only neglect to consider the symbiotic relationship of reading and writing, but marginalise writing as a worthwhile subject for research. Increasingly, primary teachers are using commercial writing programs as a means of scaffolding the writing curriculum. However, using NAPLAN results as a benchmark, standards of writing have consistently deteriorated over the last decade. Starting from the premise that teachers need to be confident writers in order to teach writing, this study surveyed the writing practices of First Year Primary and Early Childhood Education (ECE) B.Ed. students on entry to university.

Findings show that although student teachers write regularly, they most frequently write short, informal digital texts, rather than the text types common to the primary English curriculum. Over fifty percent of students had not written a story or poem in over two years, and in some instances, it was more than a decade. It is suggested that insufficient recent experience of writing the text-types they will teach on graduation may be a factor contributing to falling standards of writing. International studies show this phenomenon is not restricted to Australia.

The study recommends that writing should be given a higher profile in Initial Teacher Education (ITE) through a ‘knowledge in praxis’ approach in which student-teachers are positioned as writers who learn about writer agency and compositional processes as ‘insiders’.

The study is followed by a second paper, yet to be published, in which students reflect on their experiences of learning about writing after being immersed in this ‘knowledge in praxis’ approach.      

An investigation of the writing experiences of pre-service teachers, Issues in Educational Research, 32(2), 513-532 http://www.iier.org.au/iier32/gardner.pdf

The post Ready to Write? An investigation of the writing experiences of pre-service teachers appeared first on WAIER.

• Alvesson, M. & Deetz, S. (2021). Doing critical research. London: Sage.
• Anderson, G. (1989). Critical Ethnography in Education: Origins, Current Status and New Directions. Review of Educational Research, 59(3), pp. 249-270.
• Angus, L. (1986). Developments in ethnographic research in education: from interpretive to critical ethnography. Journal of Research and Development in Education, 20, pp. 59-67.
• Angus, L. (1986). Research traditions, ideology and critical ethnography. Discourse, 7(1), pp. 61-77.
• Anyon, J. with Dumas, M., Linville, D., Nolan, K., Perez, M., Tuck, E, & Weiss, J. (2009). Theory and educational research: Towards critical social explanation. New York: Routledge.
• Atkinson, P., & Delamont, S. (2006). In the roiling smoke: Qualitative inquiry and contested fields. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(6), pp. 747-755.
• Barley, R., & Russell, L. (2016). Ethnography: More than the written field note. The Oxford Ethnography and Education Conference Plenary Session, 19-21st September 2016, Oxford. (Unpublished)
• Ball, S. (2006). The necessity and violence of theory. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 27(1), pp. 3-10.
• Burawoy, M., & et. al. (2000). Global ethnography: Forces, connections, and imaginations in a Postmodern World. Berkeley: University of California Press.
• Burgess, R. (1988). Conversations with a purpose: The ethnographic interview in educational research. Studies in Qualitative Methodology 1(1), pp. 137-155.
• Cannella, G., Salazar, M., Pasque, P. (2015). (Eds.). Critical qualitative inquiry: Foundations and future. London: Routledge.
• Carmona, J., & Luschen, K. (2014). Crafting critical stories: Toward pedagogies and methodologies of collaboration, inclusion, and voice. New York: Peter Lang.
• Clair, R. P. (2003) The changing story of ethnography. In R. P. Clair (Ed.), Expressions of ethnography (pp. 3-26). Albany, US: SUNY Press.
• Cook-Sather, A. (2013). Translating learners, researchers, and qualitative approaches through investigations of students’ experiences in school. Qualitative Research, 13(3), pp. 352-367.
• Denzin, N., & Giardina, M. (2016) (Eds.). Qualitative inquiry through a critical lens. London: Routledge.
• Denzin, N., & Giardina, M. (2016) (Eds.). Qualitative inquiry – past, present and future: A critical reader. London: Routledge.
• Denzin, N., & Giardina, M. (2017). Qualitative inquiry in neoliberal times. London: Routledge.
• Denzin, N., Lincoln, Y., & Giardina, M. (2006). Disciplining qualitative research. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 19(6), pp. 769-782.
• Fielding, M. (2004). Transformative approaches to student voice: Theoretical underpinnings, recalcitrant realities. British Educational Research Journal 30(2), pp. 295–311.
• Fine, M. (2018). Just research in contentious times: Widening the methodological imagination. New York: Teachers College Press.
• Foley, D. (2002). Critical ethnography in the postcritical moment. In Y. Zou & H. Trueba (Eds.), Ethnography and schools: Qualitative approaches to the study of education (pp. 139-170). Lanham, MD.: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Foley, D. (2002). Critical ethnography: the reflexive turn. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 15(4), pp. 469-490.
• Garman, N. (1994). Qualitative inquiry: meaning and menace for educational researchers. In J. Smyth (Ed.), Qualitative approaches to educational research. Adelaide: Flinders Institute for the Study of Teaching.
• Goodall, H. L. (2000). Writing new ethnography. New York: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Goodson, I. F. & Gill, S. (2011). Narrative pedagogy: Life history and learning. New York: Peter Lang.
• Guajardo, M., & Guajardo, F. (2002). Critical ethnography and community change. In Y.
• Zou & H. Trueba (Eds.), Ethnography and schools: Qualitative approaches to the study of education (pp. 281-304). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Jeffrey, B., & Troman, G. (2004). Time for ethnography. British Educational Research Journal, 30(4), pp. 535-548.
• Jordan, S. (2003). Critical ethnography and the sociology of education. In C. Torres & A. Antikainen (Eds.), The international handbook on the sociology of education: An International Assessment of New Research and Theory (pp. 82-100). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield.
• Jordan, S., & Yeomans, D. (1995). Critical ethnography: problems in theory and practice. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 16(3), pp. 389-400.
• Kincheloe, J. (1993). Toward a critical politics of teacher thinking: Mapping the postmodern. Westport: Connecticut: Bergin & Garvey.
• Kincheloe, J. (2003). Teachers as researchers: Qualitative inquiry as a path to empowerment. New York: Routledge.
• Kress, T. (2011). Critical praxis research: breathing new life into research methods for teachers. Dordrecht: Springer.
• Lather, P. (1986). Research as praxis. Harvard Education Review, 56(3), pp. 257-277.
• Lather, P. (1993). Fertile obsession: validity after poststructuralism. Sociological Quarterley, 34(4), pp. 673-693.
• Lave, J. (2011). Apprenticeship in critical ethnographic practice. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.
• Lawrence-Lightfoot, S. (2005). Reflections on portraiture. A dialogue between art and science. Qualitative Inquiry, 11(1), pp. 3-15.
• Lawrence-Lightfoot, S., & Hoffmann Davis, J (1997). The art and science of portraiture. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
• Levinson, B., & Cade, S. (2002). Introduction: ethnography and education policy across the Americas. In B. Levinson, S. Cade, A. Padawer & A. Elvir (Eds.), Ethnography and education policy across the Americas (pp. ix-xx). Westport, CT: Praeger.
• Levinson, B., & Sutton, M. (2001). Introduction: policy as/in practice; a sociocultural approach to the study of educational policy. In M. Sutton & B. Levinson (Eds.), Policy as practice: Toward a comparative sociocultural analysis of educational policy (pp. 1-22). Westport, CT: Ablex.
• Lund, D., & Carr, P. (2008). Introduction: scanning democracy. In D. Lund & P. Carr (Eds.), Doing democracy: Striving for political literacy and social justice (pp. 1-29). New York: Peter Lang Publishing.
• Madison, D. S. (2005). Critical ethnography: Methods, ethics, and performance.
• Marcus, G. (1998). Ethnography through thick and thin. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.
• Mills, C.W. (1983 [1959]). The sociological imagination. New York: Penguin Books.
• Shacklock, G., & Smyth, J. (1998). Being reflexive in critical educational and social research. London: Falmer Press.
• Smith, B. J. (2000). Marginalized youth, delinquency, and education: The need for critical-interpretive research. The Urban Review, 32(3), pp. 293-312
• Smith, L. (1999). Decolonizing methodologies: Research and indigenous peoples. London: Zed Books.
• Smyth, J., Angus, L., Down, B., & McInerney, P. (2006). Critical ethnography for school and community renewal around social class differences affecting learning. Journal of learning Communities: International Journal of Learning in Social Contexts, 3, pp. 121-152.
• Smyth, J., Down, B., McInerney, R., & Hattam, R. (2014). Doing critical educational research: A conversation with the research of John Smyth. New York: Peter Lang.
• Smyth, J., & Hattam, R. (2001). ‘Voiced’ research as a sociology for understanding ‘dropping out’ of school. British Journal of Sociology of Education, 22(3), pp. 401-415.
• Smyth, J., & McInerney, P. (2012). From silent witnesses to active agents. New York: Peter Lang.
• Smyth, J., & McInerney, P. (2013). Whose side are you on? Advocacy ethnography: Some methodological aspects of narrative portraits of disadvantaged young people. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(1), pp. 1-20.
• Steinberg, S., & Cannella, G., (2012). Critical qualitative research: Reader. New York: Peter Lang.
• Sultana, R. (1992). Ethnography and the politics of absence. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 5(1), pp. 19-27.
• Swaminathan, R., & Mulvihill, T. (2017). Critical approaches to questions in qualitative research. London: Routledge.
• Uhrmacher, P., Moroye, C., & Flinders, D. (2017). Using educational criticism and connoisseurship for qualitative research. London: Routledge.
• Weis, L. & Fine, M. (2001). Extraordinary conversations in public schools. Qualitative Studies in Education 14(4), pp. 497- 523.
• Walcott, H. (1975). Criteria for an ethnographic approach to research in schools. Human organization, 34(2), 111-127.
• Walford, G. (2002). When policy moves fast, how long can ethnography take? In B. Levinson, S. Cade, A. Padawer & A. Elvir (Eds.), Ethnography and Education Policy Across the Americas (pp. 23-38). Westport, CT: Praeger.
• Willis, P. (1980). Notes on method. In S. Hall, D. Hobson, A. Lowe & P. Willis (Eds.), Culture, media and language (pp. 88-95). London: Hutchinson.
• Willis, P. (2000). The ethnographic imagination. Cambridge: Polity Press.
• Willis, P. (2004). Twenty-five years on: old books, new times. In N. Dolby, G. Dimitriadis & with P. Willis (Eds.), Learning to labor in new times (pp. 167-196). New York & London: RoutledgeFalmer.
• Willis, P., & Trondman, M. (2000). Manifesto for ethnography. Ethnography, 1(1), pp. 5-16.

The post Critical qualitative research/ethnography: Selected reading list. appeared first on WAIER.

In this feature article, Jodi Dorney (EdD Candidate, CQ University) explores the impact of domestic and family violence and abuse on young children. If you or someone you know is experiencing abuse or violence contact the National Sexual Assault and Domestic Violence Counselling service on 1800 737 732.  Alternatively, you can call lifeline on 131114.

Some scholars argue that the family home is the most dangerous place for women and children ^[1]. Whilst it can at times be easy to identify a child who is a victim of physical abuse, it is more difficult to identify the child who does not present with the external signs and symptoms, but rather suffers due to witnessing their parent – usually the mother – being abused in the ‘safety’ of the family home.

But how is a child a victim if they are not touched, pushed, or hit?  

The rate of women experiencing abuse and violence in the family environment is estimated to be one in three globally^[2] and homicides perpetrated by a current or former male intimate partner account for approximately 38% of all global homicides against women^[3], a figure that continues to rise^{[4, 5]}.  We see or read these stories way too often, with an average of one woman dying every week at the hands of an intimate partner in Australia.

It is estimated that one in four children under five years of age live in a family environment where the mother is a victim of intimate partner violence^[5], and whilst many of these children do not suffer direct physical abuse  at the hands of the offender, they are witness to often horrific and violent physical attacks on their mother. They may also be witness to their mother being emotionally abused and/or psychologically abused. Emotional abuse is aimed at affecting the person’s feelings, while psychological abuse often involves frightening, isolating and/or controlling someone, consequently impacting their mental health.

Research identified indirect experiences of domestic and family violence can result in negative psychological, physical, and behavioural impacts ^{[6, 7, 8]} on the child, and negative effects on their cognitive development ^[5] , and social and emotional development and functioning ^{[5, 8, 10, 11].}

Also, much evidence suggests that because a child usually experiences recurrent exposure to domestic and family violence, often they develop cognitive and behavioural schemas over time related to their gender, such as devaluing their own worth, lack of confidence in adults as protectors, and they may believe that abuse and violence within in the family context is a normal experience for girls ^[5] and abusive behaviours are normal for boys, which explains the intergenerational transmission effect over generations.

Children learn about emotions primarily from parents and others within the family; however, children living in an abusive and violent family context may be deprived of positive emotional engagement with their parents^[11]. Research suggests mothers who are victims of domestic and family violence can suffer from symptoms of anxiety and depression, and may be inattentive, unresponsive, and demonstrate a lack of interest toward their child resulting in insecure attachment ^{[11, 12]}, impacting the child’s opportunity to learn skills to manage, identify, and express personal emotions ^{[9, 13]}.

The sometimes erratic, aggressive, and explosive externalising behaviour of a child (usually a boy, because girls usually adopt an internalised victim-mentality) who has been exposed to abuse and violence in the family environment can hinder opportunities for the child to engage in positive social interactions with friends and adults ^[14]. Furthermore, unstable, unpredictable, and fractured connections between the child and parents within a violent environment can promote a lack of trust, safety, and security within the child and a failure to acquire and learn fundamental social skills ^[15].

Early childhood is a crucial time for a child’s language development^[15] too, as language skills allow a child to communicate and connect with others, and these interactions promote the development of cognitive skills ^[15].

Family environments lacking in stimulation also have the potential of inhibiting the brain to develop to its full potential ^[15] . Suffering stress within an abusive and violent family environment has been identified as a potential precursor to diminished cognitive development as it can impair the young child’s brain ^[15]. Children living with domestic and family violence often experience fear and subsequently suffer chronic stress ^[15], and it has been identified that children who experience stress and constant anxiety may have cognitive difficulties such as thinking clearly enough to problem solve and reason, and may have difficulty sustaining attention, resulting in the inability to acquire new skills or new information ^[16], which can result in educational deficits.

As many people may not be aware that witnessing domestic and family violence as a young child can have such detrimental effects on a child’s development and wellbeing, and with 2020 being a year where rates of domestic and family violence  have reportedly increased ^[16], it is crucial that as educators we engage in the sometimes uncomfortable and confronting conversations about the visible and invisible effects of domestic and family violence with others, including peers and parents.  

The focus of my current research is on the impact of intrafamilial violence on children in early childhood, and through exploring early childhood educators’ knowledge regarding the impact of exposure to intrafamilial violence on a developing child, I aim to develop a professional teaching resource prototype that supports early childhood educators to effectively identify, respond to, and support children impacted by intrafamilial violence.

It is essential that we advocate for and be aware of all children impacted by domestic and family violence, directly and/or indirectly and keep their safety and wellbeing at the forefront of our endeavours.

Jodi Dorney is an early childhood educator from Victoria, currently completing her Doctor of Education at CQUniversity. Her interest and advocacy for children impacted by intrafamilial violence results from many years working in various early childhood education settings.

[1] United Nations Office on Drugs and Crime (2018). Gender-related killing of women and girls. https://www.unodc.org/documents/data-and-analysis/GSH2018/GSH18_Gender-related_killing_of_women_and_girls.pdf

[2] World Health Organisation (WHO). (2019). Respect women: Preventing violence against women. Geneva. Retrieved from https://apps.who.int/iris/bitstream/handle/10665/312261/WHO-RHR-18.19-eng.pdf?ua=1

[3] Lutwak, N. (2018). The psychology of health and illness: The mental health and physiological effects of intimate partner violence on women. The Journal of Psychology, 152(6), 373-387. doi:10.1080/00223980.2018.1447435

[4]  Guggisberg, M. (2018). Chapter 2: Conceptualising intimate partner sexual violence: danger and harm to victim survivors and the role of persistent myths. In Guggisberg, M., & Henricksen, J. (Eds.)., Violence against women in the 21st century: Challenges and future direction (pp. 29-56). Nova Science Publishers, Incorporated.

[5] United Nations Children’s Fund. (UNICEF). (2017). A familiar face: violence in the lives of children and adolescents. Unicef: New York, NY.  Retrieved from https://www.unicef.org/publications/files/Violence_in_the_lives_of_children_and_adolescents.pdf

[6] Carpenter, G., & Stacks, A. M. (2009). Developmental effects of exposure to intimate partner violence in early childhood: A review of the literature. Children and Youth Services Review, 31(8), 831-839. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/10.1016/j.childyouth.2009.03.005

[7] Howell, K. (2011). Resilience and psychopathology in children exposed to family violence. Aggression and Violent Behavior, 16(6), 562-569. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/10.1016/j.avb.2011.09.001

[8] Briggs-Gowan, M. J., Carter, A. S., & Ford, J. D. (2012). Parsing the effects violence exposure in early childhood: Modeling developmental pathways. Journal of Pediatric Psychology, 37(1), 11-22. doi:10.1093/jpepsy/jsro63

[9] Fusco, R. A. (2017). Socioemotional problems in children exposed to intimate partner violence: Mediating effects of attachment and family supports. Journal of Interpersonal Violence, 32(16), 2515–2532. Retrieved from https://doi-org.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/10.1177%2F0886260515593545

[10] Osofsky, J. (1995). The Effects of Exposure to Violence on Young Children. The American Psychologist, 50(9), 782-788.

[11] Gelfand, D. M., & Teti, D. M. (1990). The effects of maternal depression on children. Clinical Psychology Review, 10(3), 329-353. https://doi-org.ezproxy.cqu.edu.au/10.1016/0272-7358(90)90065-I

[12] Zahn-Waxler, C., Iannotti, R., Cummings, E., & Denham, S. (1990). Antecedents of problem behaviors in children of depressed mothers. Development and Psychopathology, 2, 271-291.  https://doi.org/10.1017/S0954579400000778

[13] Cummings, E., Cicchetti, D., & Greenberg, M. (1990). Attachment in the preschool years: Theory, research, and intervention. 

[14] The National Child Traumatic Stress Network (NCTSN). (2019). Complex trauma: effects. Retrieved from https://www.nctsn.org/what-is-child-trauma/trauma-types/complex-trauma/effects

[15] Zauche, L., Thul, T., Mahoney, A., & Stapel-Wax, J. (2016). Influence of language nutrition on children’s language and cognitive development: An integrated review. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 318-333.

[16] Morgan, A. & Boxall, H. (2020). Social isolation, time spent at home, financial stress and domestic violence during the COVID-19 pandemic. Trends and Issues in Crime and Criminal Justice, 609, 1-18.

Would you like to write a feature article for WAIER? Contact us!

The post Looking at the child: The invisible scars of domestic and family violence appeared first on WAIER.

In this feature article Dr. Saul Karnovsky from Curtin University explores teachers’ emotions.

Australian universities enrol thousands of people to become teachers. Some who choose to study education are motivated by a desire to make a difference to the lives of young people, while others are looking for job security and intellectual fulfilment.

A course in education encompasses a broad range of cognitive and technical skills aligned to professional teacher standards. Yet, what is largely missing from a teaching degree is what to do with emotions as a teacher.

Despite all the theory, training and practical experience, research shows teachers’ professional lives can be highly demanding, pressured, stressful and at times, emotionally exhausting.

In doctoral research, I followed pre-service teachers throughout their course. I found there exists an invisible rule book that defines what teachers can and cannot do with their emotions.

Emotional labour is hard work

Our teachers recently started the school year. Many are likely facing a range of emotional challenges including working with difficult students and communities, managing increasing administrative control over their work and standardisation reforms. All these can result in substantial mental health issues.

One Australian study found increasing numbers of teachers suffer from persistent anxiety and depression. Up to 50% burn out or simply leave in the first five years of their career.

Early studies are showing the COVID-19 lockdowns of 2020 are further exacerbating the stresses facing Australian teachers.

Because teaching is emotionally demanding, teachers experience what is known as “emotional labour”. This is when teachers have to manage, suppress or feign their emotions as part of the work. Like other forms of labour, doing so can become exhausting.

Understanding these facts is a fundamental part of learning to become a teacher. I’ve come to know this through years of researching teacher emotions, specifically focused on those learning to teach.

Putting on a mask

I spoke with and collected questionnaires from almost one hundred education students in a large Western Australian university. I wanted to find out how someone who wants to become a teacher learnt what they should or should not be doing with their emotions in secondary schools.

I found pre-service teachers learnt about the rules for emotional behaviour from expectations and assumptions about teacher’s work, which was confirmed when they began training in school placements.

From interviews, focus groups, diary entries and questionnaires, I have summarised some of the unwritten rules these teaching students spoke of:

Don’t ever cry in front of students, because if you do, they will see you as weak and eat you alive.
Don’t lose your temper, shout or get angry, because if you do, students will lose respect for you.
Don’t show your emotional vulnerability, especially not to other teachers, because if you do, they might think you are not right for the job.

Many pre-service teachers explained they worked at “hiding” or “suppressing” their vulnerable emotions from students and other teachers.

Some said they put on a “mask”, “a brave face” or “façade” to show they were “professional” and could “control” their emotions.

One participant experienced “intense frustration” during school placement in trying to manage and engage a group of behaviourally difficult students, which led to her feeling “emotionally overwhelmed”.

She hid these emotions from her supervising teacher, telling me she did not want to “appear weak”. So she held back her tears because she would “hate” being the “little woman that cries at work, who gets upset”.

This shows there exists a demand for teachers to behave in ways they believe to be acceptable. All these pre-service teachers have learnt to keep a hold of their “inappropriate” emotions in front of other teachers or risk being perceived as incompetent and unprofessional.

Let’s talk about it

Navigating the emotional rules of learning to teach is a significant aspect of becoming a teacher, yet it goes largely unrecognised in an initial teacher education course.

Such labour in teaching can have personal costs and lead to emotional exhaustion, depression and anxiety.

If we are to ensure thousands of newly enrolled teachers are to thrive in their courses and careers, we must make the invisible emotional rules of the profession seen and heard.

I believe if pre-service teachers can come together with teacher educators to explore these emotional rules, they could build resilience to confront the many emotional challenges of modern teaching.

This article is republished from The Conversation under a Creative Commons license. Read the original article.

Dr. Saul Karnovsky is a member of the WAIER Committee for 2021.

The post Teachers are expected to put on a brave face and ignore their emotions. We need to talk about it. appeared first on WAIER.

The significance of play deserves recognition and respect by all stakeholders in children’s lives. Play is recognised as a right of all children in the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. Research that speaks to the benefits of play is long-existing, extensive, and decisive. Play is integral to children’s development across domains (e.g. Gordon, 2014) and influences key areas such as children’s psychological wellbeing (e.g. Chang, Qian & Yarnal, 2013), resilience and social competence (e.g. Casey, Stagnitti, Taket & Nolan, 2012), imaginative and creative thinking (e.g. Sansanwal, 2014), and problem-solving (e.g. Solis, Curtis & Hayes-Messinger, 2017). 

And yet, there are persistent and pernicious barriers for educators, children, families and communities to confront. An erosion of play is noted across media, curriculum, and ideology (Lewis, 2017). In some schools, play has become taboo and educators are pressured to favour more ‘academic’ types of learning and teaching – this, of course, ignores the reality that play and learning are closely linked and often indistinguishable (Pendlebury, 2016). Outdoor play has become extremely limited (Bento & Dias, 2017), and further to that, not all families and communities have access to the kind of spaces where play is welcomed and encouraged. Play is often misconceptualised as belonging solely to the early years, when in fact, older children are just as deserving of opportunities to engage in play and playful ways of learning. 

In my role as Lecturer and Course Coordinator of Early Childhood at Curtin University’s School of Education, I am fortunate to have the opportunity to work closely with pre-service teachers and new graduates who are well-versed in the importance of play and who are ambitious and innovative in their implementation of play-based learning methods. Last year, I led Curtin University’s School of Education creation and dissemination of a position statement on play. This statement acknowledges the centrality and multidimensionality of play in children’s lives, and calls for adults to advocate for and contribute to children’s play. There are many ways in which this can be accomplished. 

In schools, educators can pursue play-based and inquiry learning methods where children are engaged with agency – Journeys of Inquiry offers comprehensive guidance and insightful case-studies about how the realisation of this method across Western Australian independent schools. Green school grounds are also a valuable pursuit – naturalising school environments through gardens, nature-based play spaces, and connections to nearby bushland or woodland can support children’s wellbeing and create opportunities for discovery, creativity, and collaboration (Chawla, Keena, Pevec & Stanley, 2014). 

Parents and carers can create and seek out opportunities for play at home and in local community contexts – their investment in playful interactions are thoroughly advantageous for their children and their child-parent/carer relationship (Ginsburg, 2007). At a broader community level, we should be investing in child-friendly cities  and play spaces that embrace the ‘Seven Cs’: character, context, connectivity, change, chance, clarity, and challenge. For researchers, there is work yet to be done – as children’s ways of living, learning, and playing continue to evolve, further research is not only possible but imperative. 

Lastly, ongoing advocacy in this space is critical. Not only is play a right of all children, it is a meaningful and formative part of their lives. As we continue pushing for greater recognition and respect for the benefits of play and its place in our educational contexts and communities, it is vital that our advocacy involve children. The perspectives and experiences of children are of great value in this space and can take us beyond adult understandings (Nicholson, Shimpi, Kurnik, Carducci & Jevgjovikj, 2014). Play is worth fighting for – as we keep fighting for it, we ought to do so in partnership with children, who are the very people most involved and affected. 

References

Bento, G. & Dias, G. (2017). The importance of outdoor play for young children’s healthy development. Porto Biomedical Journal, 2(5), 157-160. doi:10.1016/j.pbj.2017.03.003

Casey, S.A., Stagnitti, K., Taket, A. & Nolan, A. (2012). Early peer play interactions of resilient children living in disadvantaged communities. International Journal of Play, 1(3), 311-323. doi:10.1080/21594937.2012.741432

Chang, P., Qian, X. & Yarnal, C. (2013). Using playfulness to cope with psychological stress: taking into account both positive and negative emotions. International Journal of Play, 2(3), 273-296. doi:10.1080/21594937.2013.855414

Chawla, L., Keena, K., Pevec, I. & Stanley, E. (2014). Green schoolyards as havens from stress and resources for resilience in childhood and adolescence. Health & Place, 28, 1-13. doi: 10.1016/j.healthplace.2014.03.001

Duncan, R. (2018). Journeys of inquiry. Osborne Park, WA: AISWA. 

Ginsburg, K.R. (2007). The importance of play in promoting healthy child development and maintaining strong parent–child bonds. Pediatrics, 119(1), doi: 10.1542/peds.2006-2697

Gordon, G. (2014). Well played: The origins and future of playfulness. American Journal of Play, 6(2), 234-266.

Herrington, S., Lesmeister, C., Nicholls, J. & Stefiuk, K. (2007). 7Cs: An informational guide to young children’s outdoor play spaces. Retrieved from https://sala.ubc.ca/sites/sala.ubc.ca/files/documents/7Cs.pdf

Laker, L. (2018). What would the ultimate child-friendly city look like? The Guardian. Retrieved from https://www.theguardian.com/cities/2018/feb/28/child-friendly-city-indoors-playing-healthy-sociable-outdoors 

Lewis, P.J. (2017). The erosion of play. International Journal of Play, 1, 10-23. doi:10.1080/21594937.2017.1288391

Nicholson, J., Shimpi, P.M., Kurnik, J., Carducci, C. & Jevgjovikj, M. (2014). Listening to children’s perspectives on play across the lifespan: children’s right to inform adults’ discussions of contemporary play. International Journal of Play, 3(2), 136-156. doi:10.1080/21594937.2014.937963 

Pendlebury, K. (2016). Mental recreation in Wonderland. American Journal of Play, 9(1), 41-55.

Sansanwal, S. (2014). Pretend play enhances creativity and imagination. Journal of Arts and Humanities, 3(1), 70-83.

Solis, S.L., Curtis, K.N. & Hayes-Messinger, A. (2017). Children’s exploration of physical phenomena during object play. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 31(1), 122-140. doi: 10.1080/02568543.2016.1244583

UN General Assembly. (1989). Convention on the rights of the child. https://www.unicef.org/crc/

Would you like to submit a feature article to WAIER? Contact us – we would love to hear from you!

The post Recognising and respecting the right of all children to play appeared first on WAIER.

Western Australia has one of the highest numbers of endemic plants and flowers on the planet and is listed as one of only 35 global biological hotspots (Fitzpatrick, Gove, Sanders, & Dunn, 2008). Through my work as a designer of nature playspaces for early years services and schools, I have found that young children appreciate the beauty of plants in their spaces, but they do not know many of the names of the plants or have much botanical knowledge of plants in general. In most cultures, plant knowledge, also known as botanical literacy is traditionally passed down from family members including grandparents and parents.

Botanical literacy is described by Uno (2009) as a type of biological literacy or ecological literacy and it is defined as the knowledge of plants and botany. The information below has been adapted (Uno, 2009) to explain the levels of botanical literacies and the knowledge included in each level.

– Nominal level: Students can identify terms that relate to botany however cannot define or describe the words and may have misconceptions of the terms.

– Functional level: Students can use botanical vocabulary and define terms correctly, but responses may be memorized and not deeply understood.

– Structural level: Students can understand botanical concepts, possess procedural knowledge and skills and can explain concepts well in their own words.

– Multi-dimensional level: Students understand the place of botany and biology as a science, know the nature and history of plants and can explain the interactions between the botanical world and society.

Uno explains that most children internationally sit within the nominal levels of knowledge and understanding and he suggests that it is critical for educators to build literacies in the biological sciences (Uno, 2009).

Other international research has found low botanical literacies or ‘plant-blindness’ is due to social changes on families and the community and this has resulted in less traditional plant knowledge being passed on. Several studies have explained ‘plant blindness’ as becoming more prevalent in both adults and children (Patrick & Tunnicliffe, 2011; Uno, 2009; Villarroel, J. D., Ant n, A., Zuazagoitia, D., & Nu o, T., 2018). ‘Plant blindness’ is the inability to recognise not only plants and their names, but also their importance in the environment and a belief that plants are inferior to humans and animals (Wandersee & Schussler, 2001). The ramifications of a decrease in levels of botanical literacies, and an increase in cases of ‘plant blindness’ is likely to have detrimental effects for efforts in sustainability and the care of our planet.

Many of the early childhood and school environments in Western Australia have an abundance of plants and trees and many are adjacent to bushland and parks. Across Australia, there has also been a dramatic increase in the last 10 years of schools and early learning centres adding nature play spaces to their play and learning environments (Elliott & Young, 2016). The research to date has found overwhelmingly that the benefits of children being and playing in nature are significant (Bruni, Winter, Schultz, Omoto, & Tabanico, 2017; Chawla, 2018; Ritchie, 2017). These benefits include, but are not limited to; healthier children who engage in more physical play, boosted brain development, stronger emotional development and social bonds and more creative play (Wilson, 2018).

However, researchers interested in sustainability in early childhood education are beginning to question if changes to the physical environment are enough to make a difference in increasing children’s connection with nature and deepening childrens understandings of biological literacies, including botanical literacies (Elliott & Young, 2016; Huggins & Evans, 2018). The development of botanical literacy is essential for children to form caring and sustainable beliefs and behaviours about plants and the Earth (Ritchie, 2017).

With an awareness of the importance of endemic plants in Western Australia and developing sustainable practices and plant knowledge in young children, what is the role of the early childhood educator in improving botanical literacies in young children in Western Australia? It has been suggested that connecting children deeply to nature through regular contact with nature and having a knowledgeable and passionate adult role model to demonstrate the connection and share knowledge of plants and the natural world can make a difference to what? (Chawla, 2018).

My present doctoral research project will address this topic through participative action research with 4 early childhood classes in Western Australian Primary Schools. The research will explore the existing levels of botanical literacies in educators and children through a term long project with the classes. The children will explore and learn about the trees and plants on their school grounds and source plant knowledge from community experts and local Indigenous elders to build botanical literacies in young children.

References

Bruni, C. M., Winter, P. L., Schultz, P. W., Omoto, A. M., & Tabanico, J. J. (2017). Getting to know nature: evaluating the effects of the Get to Know Program on children’s connectedness with nature. Environmental Education Research, 23 (1), 43-62. doi:10.1080/13504622.2015.1074659

Chawla, L. (2018). Nature-based learning for student achievement and ecological citizenship. Curriculum and Teaching Dialogue, 20½, R25-176.

Elliott, S., & Young, T. (2016). Nature by Default in Early Childhood Education for Sustainability. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 57-64.

Fitzpatrick, M. C., Gove, A. D., Sanders, N. J., & Dunn, R. R. (2008). Climate change, plant migration, and range collapse in a global biodiversity hotspot: the Banksia (Proteaceae) of Western Australia. Global Change Biology, 14(6), 1337-1352. doi:10.1111/j.1365-2486.2008.01559.x

Huggins, V., & Evans, D. (2018). Early Childhood Education and Care for Sustainabilty; International Perspectives. New York: Routledge.

Patrick, P., & Tunnicliffe, S. D. (2011). What plants and animals do early childhood and primary students’ name? Where do they see them? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 20 (5), 630-642. doi:10.1007/s10956-011-9290-7

Ritchie, J. (2017). Fostering Eco-Cultural Literacies for Social, Cultural and Ecological Justice: A Perspective From Aotearoa (New Zealand). International Journal of Early Childhood, 49 (3), 287-302. doi:10.1007/s13158-017-0198-0

Uno, G. E. (2009). Botanical literacy: What and how should students learn about plants? American Journal of Botany, 96 (10), 1753-1759. doi:10.3732/ajb.0900025

Villarroel, J. D., Ant n, A., Zuazagoitia, D., & Nu o, T. (2018). Young children’s understanding of plant life: a study exploring rural-urban differences in their drawings. Journal of Biological Education, 52 (3), 331-341. doi:10.1080/00219266.2017.1385505

Wilson, R. A. (2018). Nature and Young Children. New York: Routledge.

Would you like to submit a feature article to WAIER? Contact us – we would love to hear from you!

The post Botanical Literacies in Early Childhood appeared first on WAIER.

The representation of children matters. When children are represented – whether, for example, in film and television, or on social media – this is not without consequence. These representations hold significance, are steeped in context, and contribute to how we perceive children and childhood. Perceptions of children and childhood inform and influence our relationships with children, across important contexts including parenting, education and care, and research. 

In Early Childhood Education and Care, educators and leaders hold and advocate for a strong ‘image of the child’ where children are recognised as unique individuals with capability, agency, and a right to choice and voice. There are many other ways of conceptualising children – we feel this is worthy of exploration, and are curious as to how different conceptualisations may intersect or conflict. 

Our current research focuses on the representation of children on Instagram and what image of children and childhood exist in this context. Through a multi-phase approach that includes analysing representations of children by influencer parents and high-profile children’s brands, we are seeking a rich understanding of how the image of the child might be evolving and what this might mean. We are curious about the influences and impacts upon children, families, educators, and communities.

This project stems from curiosities about Instagram as a platform where children are highly visible in a visual and narrative sense. As photos and videos of children are shared, along with stories and commentary, certain ideas emerge regarding who children are and what childhood means. Social communities shape conceptions of children and childhood – we view Instagram as one such social community which has the potential to influence its audience and shape/re-shape ideas about children and childhood.

We also approached this research with mindfulness towards the importance and impact of visual representations. Contemporary culture is described as ‘occularcentric’ where visual imagery is pervasive. Visual representations are imbued with complexities and are situated within histories and hierarchies. 

Our research seeks to explore these complexities and ideas around power, choice, and voice in the context of how children are visually represented on Instagram in photos and videos. We have taken a holistic approach which involves examining posts in their entirety – the image/video, tags, caption, and comments – with mindfulness towards the child depicted, the narrative presented, and what conversation stems from this. Key questions we have asked include:

• How is the child presented? Are they clothed and styled in a childlike way or an adultified way?
• Is the child engaged in an activity or are they still?
• Do we see the child’s face? If so, what emotion is conveyed?
• Where is focus placed in the caption and comments – on the child’s point of view and experience, or somewhere else?

As we have explored Instagram and the many images of children and childhood shared there, we have identified certain tropes that demand examination. These tropes rarely exist in isolation from each other – they are often entangled in the image and its connected components. The tropes include:

• Children as emotionless: This was most apparent across the brands we examined. Children are frequently represented as emotionless and disengaged. For example, they are often depicted with a blank expression, and also may be staring out of frame. Were we to observe this behaviour from a child in our care, it would be cause for concern. In the context of brand posts, it seems to be glamourised, and we feel this type of representation lends itself to the adultification of children.
• Children as malleable: The malleability of children emerged as a key theme after analysing many posts from parents and brands. Children are often depicted and/or described in ways that imply they are not their own person, and that who they are is subject to the choices of another. For example, children are sometimes depicted alongside their siblings or other family members, styled and posed in precisely the same way. While this makes for an aesthetically engaging image, to see this type of image shared repeatedly raises questions for us around child identity and agency.  
• Children as objects and ornaments: Objectifying practices have been prevalent in the posts we have examined. Children’s faces may be cropped out with only sections of their body shown – when this is the case, it is often done in the interest of focusing on a product being promoted. In addition to these objectifying practices, children are often depicted as though they are ornamental – they appear like dolls or figurines in their idyllic stillness. 

We wonder – what does it mean to be a child represented by others on social media? To what extent do children understand the context of social media and the nature of their own representation? How do children relate to their representation by others, be they family members or brands? What place do these representations hold in their minds and hearts, and what does it mean for their emerging sense of identity and self-image? If children were afforded greater agency to represent themselves from an early age, what shape might this take? And beyond the lived experience for and impact on the children themselves, how does this influence the wider community’s view of and attitude towards children? These questions hold significance for future research, and guide our continuing exploration of the image of the child and its place in social media contexts.

Educators are in a position to make a difference here as they have the opportunity to engage in productive dialogue with children and families. By sharing in dialogue with children and families about our use of social media and how we engage in the representation of self and others, we can arrive at a deeper understanding of these contexts, our engagement with them, and the rights and needs of those we represent. 

References

Dobson, M. & Jay, J. (2019). The image of the child re-imagined on Instagram: Provocations and recommendations for educators and families. The Spoke: http://thespoke.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/image-child-re-imagined-instagram/

Feighery, W.G. (2012). Editorial. Visual Methodologies, 1(1), 1-2. https://doi.org/10.7331/vm.v1i1.32

Fredrickson, B.L. & Roberts, T.A. (1997). Objectification theory: Toward understanding women’s lived experiences and mental health risks. Psychology of Women Quarterly, 21(2), 173-206. doi: 10.1111/j.1471-6402.1997.tb00108.x

Mannay, D. (2015). Making the visual invisible: exploring creative forms of dissemination that respect anonymity but retain impact. Visual Methodologies, 3(2). https://doi.org/10.7331/vm.v3i2.47

Pauwels, L. (2015). Reframing visual social science: Towards a more visual sociology and anthropology. Cambridge, U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

Vänskä, A. (2017). Fashionable childhood: Children in advertising. Bloomsbury Publishing. 

Would you like to submit a feature article to WAIER? Contact us – we would love to hear from you!

The post Emotionless, malleable little ornaments: Is this our image of children? appeared first on WAIER.