An enhanced understanding of Early Years Educators.
How do they sustain and redefine their professionalism and knowledge through the changing demands of education today?
Avril Brock; Department of Teacher Education; Bradford College
Paper presented at the Annual Conference of the British Educational Research Association, University of Leeds, England, September 13-15, 2001
Contemporary issues which have prompted this research include:
• Early years is now perceived to be a high priority in education.
The Foundation Stage was established in September 2000 and QCA produced guidance for implementing a relevant curriculum for achieving the Early Learning Goals.
The House of Commons Committee of Enquiry [2000/2001] resulted in ‘First Report’ containing fifty-five recommendations for early years education.
• Continual change in primary education during the last decade has impacted on early
years education.
• ‘Eliciting teacher thinking’ has become an important methodological approach in educational research.
Recent studies in professional knowledge are now being undertaken, which examine educational practice in the United Kingdom and internationally.
• The General Teaching Council aim to enhance the status of the profession and have composed a draft ‘Professional Code for Teachers’ that defines essential values, attitudes and beliefs, setting out ethical standards and making continual professional development a priority.
Whilst this research is concerned primarily with the professional development of early years educators, it is important to set this focus of early years within the context of the continuing professional development of all members of the teaching profession. Although early years professionalism has come to involve specific expertise, including a knowledge of child development, early years principles, professional collaboration and practical knowledge, early years education is not and should not be seen as separate from education as a whole. However, the phrase ‘early years educators’ is increasingly used to encompass a range of people who educate young children - teachers in schools, in nursery classes and nursery schools, playgroup leaders, private day-care managers and nursery nurses – and this does not mark out ‘teacher’ professionalism in an early years context as distinct.
Educators of young children have roles which require them to develop expertise in a wide range of capabilities, which include management issues, forming appropriate working relationships with their client group of adults and children, negotiating with a range of different agencies, demonstrating an understanding of pedagogy and the processes of learning. Their job descriptions cannot be limited to just the delivery of subject based knowledge. An early years professional also needs expertise in child development that often develops through practice and experience.
How do these early years educators define their professional knowledge?
There is evidence that the educators of young children – teachers, nursery nurses and lecturers in early years education - are concerned with providing a developmentally appropriate curriculum, which ensures quality of provision and equality of access for all children to preschool education. Contemporary research regarding early years educators’ expertise includes studies by Blenkin and Yue [1994]; Pascal and Bertram [1997]; Bennett, Woods and Rogers [1997]; Anning and Edwards [1999]; Siraj-Blatchford et al [1997 – 2004]; Munn [1994]; Lucas [2000]; Wood [2001]; Moyles [2001]. The scope and understanding of educators of early years issues, their beliefs in the implementation of a developmentally appropriate curriculum and knowledge of how young children learn were demonstrated in the testimonies given to the Select Committee [House of Commons Minutes of Evidence 2000/2001]. However, until recently, many of those most directly responsible for the education of young children have felt disenfranchised. Campbell and Neill [1994] held the view that early years teachers were too conscientious for their own good, that they were a malleable predominantly female workforce exploited by predominantly male policy makers. Keyes [1999] and Meade [1999] asserted that ‘what’s missing from the knowledge base for teaching ... are the voices of teachers themselves.’ Pascal and Bertram [House of Commons Evidence 2000/2001] stated that ‘the knowledge base which supports our understanding of early learning is developing fast’ and that ‘they are attempting to encourage those who work with young children to apply this knowledge to their practice and ensure their work is at the forefront of professional knowledge’ and ‘to communicate this newly acquired professional knowledge to those who create policy so that they may also act from an informed base’ [[House of Commons Minutes of Evidence 2000/2001: EY 82:3].
What do they perceive to be the critical issues that affect their practice as early years educators?
At the present time, early years is at the forefront of educational change in the United Kingdom and in September 2000, the introduction of a foundation stage was described as a ‘significant landmark in funded education in England’ by Nick Tate, Chief Executive, QCA [QCA/00/587 05/2000]. Even though the emphasis on a play-based curriculum is being promoted, many early years practitioners are gaining diverse messages and still have concerns about early years provision [indications signalled by early years educators on in-service courses at Bradford College]. Anning [1991, 1996, 1999] gathered evidence that the main worries of early years practitioners were the projected effects of the implementation of a National Curriculum and the shift towards subject teaching for young children. The effectiveness and appropriateness of various forms of early childhood provision from policy makers, politicians and practitioners have been strong on assertion but weak on empirical evidence [Anning 1996]. As the stresses to meet the demands impacting from primary education filter down from schools into nurseries and early years provision, many early years educators have believed that they are losing opportunities to be creative autonomous professionals.
How do they meet the demands of imposed policy change?
David [1993]; Pascal [1996]; Engel [1990]; Bennett [1992] commented that the changes in primary education have created pressure and affected the confidence, self-esteem and status of early years educators.Blenkin and Kelly [1994: 40] attributed these professional tensions to be a direct consequence of difficulties faced by teacherstrying to meet ‘the requirements of the law, whilst also trying to protect young children from the effects of summative assessment.’ Recent studies on how teachers manage change during implementation of multiple innovations include Wallace and McMahon A [1994]; Woods [1988; 1995]; Dadds [1995]; MacGilchrist et al 1995]; Fullan and Hargreaves [1992] Blenkin and Hutchin’s [1998] survey included many statements from head-teachers that 'early years staff feel threatened, frightened for the future and under-valued’ [1998:74]. Change is a complex process which is unsettling [Page 2000:33] and which impacts on different individuals in different ways [McClelland and Varma 1996:52]. Change is endemic and timing is crucial. Teachers have to deal with the issues that are forced upon them from policy driven agendas [Desforges 2001]. Coping with change and adapting professional practice has been a key concern since the introduction of SCAA’s desirable learning outcomes Edwards [2000:188].
What are these early years educators’ perceptions of their continuing professional development?
Munn [1994], Bennett et al [1996] and David [2000] indicate that teachers and other early childhood educators need continuing professional development. Blenkin and Yue’s research [1994] aimed to build criteria for improving professional practice in early years education, claiming that continuing professional development is a strategic tool through which practitioners gain confidence in their own professionalism and in the making of educational decisions.
The government is ‘committed to giving teachers the training and support’ - Green Paper DfEE 1998. Teachers have a contractual obligation to update their skills and knowledge on a regular basis, but they need support and the opportunities to extend and develop their expertise. Not until recently has early years been targeted as a key area and the Teacher Training Agency is now exploring ‘ways of supporting the professional development of teachers working in the early years’ [TTA 21.3.00 website]. The new General Teaching Council has made the continuing professional development of all teachers a key priority, arguing that ‘an entitlement to professional development should enable all teachers to enhance their professional knowledge and pedagogic practice in order to raise the standards for all pupils, manage change and pursue their own personal and professional development’ [DfEE website December 2000].
Relatively little is known about the differential impact of continuing professional development activities that are needed to achieve changes in teaching practices [Lee:2000 National Foundation for Educational Research website]. The most effective provision that will impact on the profession is when individuals usetheir own relevant knowledge and ideas, which will enhance self-confidence and encourage reflection on their own teaching [Lee:2000 National Foundation for Educational Research website].
This research has been prompted through delivering in-service during which students raised such issues and concerns.
Key Questions
·How do these early years educators define their ‘professional’ knowledge?
·What do they perceive to be the critical issues that affect their practice as early years educators?
·How do they meet the demands of imposed policy change?
·What are this group’s perceptions of their continuing professional development?
The Pilot
October 1999 - Recruitment of six early years educators from early years
in-service modules in the Department of Teacher Education at Bradford College.
November 1999 - Provision of the paper informing them - ‘What’s in it for you?’
- Completion of a short questionnaire investigating their continuing
personal and professionaldevelopment.
January 2000 - Visit to their nursery / school setting to gain a background
to April 2000 perspective, embedding each interviewee in their teaching context.
-Personal / professional time line completed.
-Interviews transcribed and analysed.
September 2000 - Follow up interviews.
- Transcription and analysis
- Themes generated.
The recurring themes that arose included:
change
commitment
creativity
family
gender issues
identity
expertise
formality
knowledge of young children
pressure
professionalism
qualifications
support
‘too much too soon’
Considerations for the Research emerging from the Pilot Study
Ethical issues
In undertaking research, it is important to examine ethical issues and identify one’s position as a researcher in relation to those to be researched. For the pilot research I interviewed six early years educators enrolled on my in-service programmes and was keen to continue to involve them in a longitudinal study of their professional development. However it soon became clear that I had to acknowledge Seller’s [1994] ‘power’ relationship between the researcher and interviewees that could affect the validity of the research I wanted to undertake. I decided to widen the cohort for the research to a sample of early years educationalists with whom I have had contact professionally. However, I had to defer to Strachen’s [1993:79] observation that ‘researching friends and colleagues adds an extra responsibility' on a personal and professional level [Methodology paper 2001:3].
An additional problem that arose during the pilot study was that asking busy educationalists produces pressures on them and I often felt uncomfortable in making the requests. My sample will therefore not be drawn from a small group of early years professionals whom I have encountered personally or professionally. A new sample will be established through my contacts in Bradford and Leeds. I will approach the ten / twelve participants who will be a combination of early years educators of different ages, lengths of experience, genders, ethnicities and occupational roles. I will negotiate from the outset their proposed involvement, the timescale and the nature of the research.
Researcher Validity
To show rigour in qualitative research it is important to ensure that the philosophic position of the researcher is made clear [Meade 1999]. Researcher validity is necessary and that I am very aware that Ihave to subject any of my own assumptions to scrutiny, in order for my interpretations of others to be regarded as reliable. I realise that I have to do more than just acknowledge Foucault’s – ‘regimes of truth’ in [1977 in Abbott & Moylett 1999:41]and Alexander’s [1995:10] ‘shibboleths.’ In this research into ‘early years educationalists voices’ it will be extremely important to examine the ‘folklore’ of early childhood knowledge base critically, to avoid over-simplification and polarised debates [Aubrey et al [2000:xii]. In order for validity and reliability to occur when undertaking the research, I must ensure that the interviews are not driven or contaminated by my personal views, expectations or assumptions. This will not be an easy task and I will need to acknowledge how my values may influence and mould the research. However, Graham [1989 in Bullough and Pinnegar 2001] proposes that without ‘the admission of prejudice … the story would not be worth reading.’ It is particularly difficult in the field of early years education to remain ‘detached’ as the majority of research, theories and educational texts promoted over the last twenty years portray and uphold similar observations related to the importance of a ‘developmentally appropriate’ practices and curriculum for young children. I recognize that I need to interact with theoretical frameworks and literature review critically and reflexively. In the empirical work I understand that I must not ‘lead’ research participants in any way. This is firstly to be achieved through selection of the sample more or less randomly and secondly through revisiting the proposed research methodology in order to ensure that the sample have proper opportunity to say what they believe and know rather than what they think I want to hear. The interactions undertaken in the research will reflect on ethical guidelines for ethical research practice recommended by the School of education; University of Leeds.
When undertaking the pilot study, I had concerns about the interviewing process – was I effecting semi-structured or unstructured interviews and was I eliciting appropriate data relevant to the research focus and questions. However, when I listened to, transcribed and analysed the interviews I realised that these early years educators were actually thinking through critical issues that were important to them as individuals - at that moment in time - and that these reflected the changes, influences and demands which affected their teaching. The key questions were arrived at through analysis of data collected during the pilot study. The methodology of the proposed research is derived from reflection on and analysis of the pilot study methods.
Methodology
This study is qualitative educational research, which draws the field of eliciting teacher thinking. The main research method employed will be semi-structured interviewing eliciting teacher professional knowledge through dialogue, enabling early years educators to affirm what they know.
‘Purposeful sampling’ of a group of early years educators in Local Authorities in West Yorkshire will be undertaken in order to gain ‘information-rich cases from which one can learn a great deal about the issues of central importance to the purpose of the research’ [Prosser:2001]. In order to establish each participant’s professional context they will be asked to complete a short questionnaire to establish age, gender, ethnic group, years of service, educator role, training routes and any professional development. The participants will be provided with guidance notes about the research and asked if they would complete their own personal / professional time line. This will provide contextual data about these early years educators, which will be followed up in the interviews through open questions exploring their origins and routes – ‘Who are these early years educators?’ A visit to each interviewee’s educational setting will allow the researcher to build a background perspective, embedding the beliefs in their teaching context. The interviews will be of one / one and a half hour duration, recorded on audio tape with the transcription of the whole of each interview completed as soon as possible by the researcher. The interviewees will be encouraged to participate actively in the research/analysis process. Each interviewee will receive a full transcription of their interview with a request for comments regarding accurate representation, in order to establish the reliability of the recording of the interview. As analysis and data gathering should be a cyclical process with the results utilised to feed the ensuing data collection, each interview will be analysed from the transcription as the research progresses. Constructs will be formed from each interview through grounded theory - coding, memoing, sampling and sorting as multiple layers of meaning and themes emerge. This will be sent to each participant for perusal and comments.
Silverman [2000: 10] criticisms of qualitative research are regarding ‘how sound are the explanations it offers,’ posing problems with anecdotalism, interpretations of interviews, transcripts that have omissions of ‘crucial, pauses and overlaps.’ In order to ensure validity and reliability, I plan to use a range of strategies to elicit the ‘teacher thinking.’ Holland and Ramazanoglu [1994:135 in Blaxter et al 1996:18] demonstrated that data can be gathered through the process of interviewing using prompts such as photographs, key questions, time-lines. Whilst still proposing to undertake some face to face methods of eliciting their beliefs through semi-structured interviews, requesting that participants complete autobiographical time-lines and observing them in their context, I plan also to extract their knowledge and thinking through the use of more ‘private’ processes of responding to photographs and email correspondence.
Contemporary research is documenting the use of digital cameras in early years settings to record observations of children’s learning [Surestart Conference 2001; Pen Green Centre]. Digital camera images were also used by children in the ‘Mosaic approach’ to get them to portray what they know and think. I propose to invite the research participants to photograph examples of effective practice in action from their workplaces, with explanations of their reasons for choosing those images, which should enable them to rethink what is significant in ‘effective practice’ for them. The use of the photograph is still an innovative methodological approach. Lucas [1999] research with early years teachers in England and Sweden used photographs to elicit early years teachers views on good practice. SÁ-Chaves, I., and AlarcÃo I [2000:1] research project focus ‘was to stimulate and deepen reflection on the multi and interdimensional structure of teachers’ professional knowledge in an epistemological framework approach.’ Their study focused on the ‘analysis and the reading of a vast collection of genuine photographs’ obtained by their teacher training students. SÁ-Chaves, I., and AlarcÃo I [2000:1] were convinced that ‘the photograph can offer a learning opportunity in the development of visual literacy in the trainees, in awareness of the concepts which underlie their practice and in the deepening of their professional knowledge.’ They determined that they achieved the intended outcomes of their study and that it was possible to ‘identify multiple dimensions of the teachers’ professional knowledge from the images’ [2000:5]