|
On first presentation this collection of articles is diverse in areas of investigation, research, methodology and viewpoint. However, on closer inspection these different papers portray a common desire of the contributors to further our knowledge and stimulate our thinking of how we can improve the care, education or safety of young children. These articles investigate, discuss or research issues and ideas about change, improvement and quality, and ruminating about these terms brings challenges both to our thinking and practice. Therefore I invite you to reflect on these papers, individually or as a whole, on how they may alter your thinking or challenge your practice in the areas of change, improvement and quality in early childhood.
Rockel tests our thinking of these concepts by presenting a series of system initiatives that have led to the push for the professionalisation of the care sector in New Zealand. This article makes a case for reviewing pedagogy in the infant and toddler areas of care, and Rockel argues for moving beyond rigid care pedagogy and 'managing work and minding babies', stating that further research, professional development, qualifications and even a name change are needed to promote the best for babies and toddlers in our care.
Another challenge outlined by De Gioia centres on the expectations that parents and staff in day care settings have on the continuity of home practices for parents with diverse cultural backgrounds. De Gioia's study reminds us that feeding and sleeping contribute to 'the cultural blueprint that forms a child's identity'. In this study these practices and different expectations between the two settings were studied through an ecological systems theory orientation.
In matters of quality, the study undertaken by Ishimine and Wilson examines aspects of quality across 35 child care centres identified by Centre Location Demographics. This article challenges us to rethink our notions of quality, and the authors argue that more sophisticated instruments are required by quality assurance systems. Further, they advocate for the professional development of staff 'that promotes the care and pedagogical perspectives aligning with this broader conception of quality.'
In this edition mathematics learning is investigated and recommendations are made that assist either in practitioner knowledge or wider school curriculum planning. Van den Heuvel-Panhuizen, Van den Boogaard and Doig present their investigations of using picture books to stimulate the learning of mathematics in young children. This study was undertaken in the Netherlands in a K2 class (usually for five/six year-olds) and as part of the PICO-ma project. The authors give clear examples of how the picture books were used to develop mathematical understandings in three areas, and make a strong case for the inclusion of picture books in our practice.
Starting school is always a major transition and often such transitions are investigated from an adult perspective. MacDonald reminds us that children themselves are not to be overlooked in telling their own stories, and uses a 'mosiac' approach to collecting data about children's experiences on the first day of school. This study highlights the understanding that children have different opinions about issues that adults consider important, and that we perhaps cannot fully understand the transition experience unless the child's perspective is gained.
Finally, Depczynski, Fragar, Hawkins and Stiller draw our attention to the area of child safety and the prevention of children drowning in farm dams. This study investigates the impact of a promotional campaign and assessment of the progress of the uptake of safe play areas on farms.
It is a wonderful statement of the breadth and depth of our early childhood knowledge base when we can draw together different papers from care, education and health. I hope that, from reading these different papers, you can argue, debate and discuss with your colleagues perspectives around change, improvement and quality. Our work can only be strengthened by robust discussions around these concepts and I thank the contributors to this edition, whose continued work assist us with these necessary discussions.
Lennie Barblett
Edith Cowan University
Australasian Journal of Early Childhood – Volume 34 No 3 September 2009, pp. ii
Don't forget, Australasian Journal of Early Childhood is tax deductible for early childhood professionals
You can purchase this issue of the Australasian Journal of Early Childhood now.
|
