Maritta Hännikäinen

Promoting children’s participation: the role of teachers in preschool and primary school learning sessions

The aim of this study is to provide insights into the social construction of participation in joint activities in Finnish preschool and primary school classrooms. The article deals with two issues: How do teachers promote participation in a preschool classroom as compared with a primary school classroom? What similarities and differences are found? It also considers the question of how the similarities contribute to the continuity from preschool to primary school in terms of participation. Based on observation data insights are provided into the interactions between teachers and children by using extracts from teacher‐led learning sessions. The teachers used a diversity of strategies to promote participation in both contexts. In the preschool the focus was on participation and interaction as such, whereas in the primary school the emphasis was more clearly on academic learning. The findings suggest that teacher support of active participation and friendly relationships, together with creative and playful activities in the preschool, enrich children’s curiosity, and nourish children’s motivation for and interests in academic learning.

The role and practice of interpersonal relationships in European early education settings: sites for enhancing social inclusion, personal growth and learning?

This study sought to identify and compare the characteristics of the social pedagogic context of cognitive activities in a sample of early education settings in six European countries (England, Finland, Greece, Italy, Spain and Sweden). Previous research concerning the social context within which cognitive/learning activities take place has focused on practitioner–child relations; yet, children undertaking these activities spend the majority of their time with peers and away from the presence of practitioners. Data were collected in two early education settings in each of the countries, using as research tools: descriptive narrative contextual information (concerning structure, size, curriculum framework), mapping of interpersonal activity, reflective rating scales (concerning nature of cognitive tasks and support for children’s interactions) and practitioner interviews (concerning children’s interactions for learning and development). Results identified some variation in frameworks, activity and practice between the partner countries but noted more generally that children are found in distinct pedagogic ‘worlds’ when acting/interacting with practitioners and peers. These pedagogic worlds were separated by size and composition of grouping, activities and communication. The pedagogic worlds also related to task and interpersonal support for learning and development within settings. Interviews with practitioners showed a concern to promote children’s social development but a consistent focus on individual children’s development (rather than a social focus on all children). Conclusions identify that the distinctive pedagogic ‘worlds’ may be the source of social exclusion (especially among peers) and question how practitioners may more fully integrate/support a socio‐constructive basis of cognitive activities into peer‐based interactions. Cette étude cherche à identifier et comparer les caractéristiques du contexte socio‐pédagogique des activités cognitives dans un ensemble de services de la petite enfance de six pays européens (Angleterre, Finlande, Grèce, Italie, Espagne et Suède). Les recherches antérieures sur le contexte social dans lequel les activités cognitives/d’apprentissage prennent place sont centrées sur les relations praticien‐enfant; pourtant les enfants qui entreprennent ces activités passent la majorité de leur temps avec leurs pairs et hors de la présence des praticiens. Les données ont été recueillies dans deux services de la petite enfance dans chacun des pays, à l’aide des instruments de recherche suivants: description du contexte (structure, taille, cadre curriculaire), caractérisation de l’activité interpersonnelle, échelles d’évaluation réflectives (nature des tâches cognitives et soutien des interactions des enfants) et entretiens avec les praticiens (interactions des enfants pour se developper et apprendre). Les résultats indiquent quelques variations dans les cadres, les activités et les pratiques entre les pays partenaires, mais ils montrent plus généralement les ‘mondes’ pédagogiques distincts dans lesquels se trouvent les enfants lorqu’ils agissent et interagissent avec les praticiens et les autres enfants. Ces mondes pédagogiques se distinguent par la taille et la composition du groupe, par les activités et la communication, ainsi que par les tâches et le soutien interpersonnel du développement et des apprentissages au sein des services. Les entretiens avec les praticiens indiquent un intérêt pour la promotion du développement social des enfants, mais aussi une centration sur le développement individuel des enfants (plutôt qu’une centration sociale sur tous les enfants). Nous concluons sur le fait que ces mondes pédagogiques peuvent être source d’exclusion sociale (surtout entre enfants) et nous nous questionnons sur la façon dont les praticiens pourraient intégrer/soutenir davantage une base socio‐constructive des activités cognitives dans les interactions entre enfants. In dieser Studie sollten Merkmale des sozialen pädagogischen Kontexts von kognitiven Aktivitäten in einer Stichprobe von frühpädagogischen Settings in sechs europäischen Ländern (England, Finnland, Griechenland, Italien, Spanien und Schweden) identifiziert und verglichen werden. Frühere Forschung über den sozialen Kontext, innerhalb dessen kognitive Lernaktivitäten stattfinden, hat auf die Praktiker‐Kind‐Beziehung fokussiert; aber Kinder, die diese Aktivitäten ausführen, verbringen die meiste Zeit mit Gleichaltrigen und außerhalb der Präsenz des Praktikers. In jeweils zwei frühpädagogischen Settings der beteiligten Länder wurden Daten erhoben, wobei als Forschungsinstrumente eingesetzt wurden: deskriptive narrative kontextbezogene Information (zu Struktur, Größe, Curriculum und Rahmenbedingungen), Registrieren interpersoneller Aktivitäten, reflexive Einschätzskalen (zur Art der kognitiven Aufgaben und Unterstützung für die kindlichen Interaktionen) und Interviews mit den Praktikern (zu den kindlichen Interaktionen in Hinsicht auf Lernen und Entwicklung). Die Ergebnisse zeigten Unterschiede in den Rahmenbedingungen, der Aktivität und Praxis zwischen den Partnerländern und wiesen allgemeiner in die Richtung, dass die Kinder sich in unterschiedlichen pädagogischen ‘Welten’ befinden, wenn sie mit Praktikern und Gleichaltrigen agieren und interagieren. Diese pädagogischen Welten unterscheiden sich hinsichtlich Größe und Zusammensetzung der Gruppen, der Aktivitäten und der Kommunikation. Die pädagogischen Welten bezogen sich auch auf die Aufgaben und die interpersonelle Unterstützung für das Lernen und die Entwicklung innerhalb der Settings. Die Interviews mit den Praktikern zeigten das Bemühen um die Förderung der sozialen Entwicklung der Kinder, aber einen konsistenten Fokus auf die individuelle Entwicklung der Kinder, und nicht einen sozialen Fokus auf alle Kinder. In den Schlussfolgerungen wird gezeigt, dass die distinkten pädagogischen “Welten” die Quelle von sozialer Exklusion sein können (speziell unter den Gleichaltrigen) und es wird danach gefragt, wie die Praktiker in größerem Umfang eine sozio‐konstruktive Basis kognitiver Aktivitäten in die Gleichaltrigen‐Interaktionen integrieren bzw. diese unterstützen können. Este estudio pretendía identificar y comparar las características del contexto pedagógico social de actividades cognitivas en una muestra de ambientes de ecuación infantil en seis países Europeos (Inglaterra, Finlandia, Grecia, Italia, España y Suiza). La investigación previa relacionada con el contexto social dentro del cual se producen actividades de aprendizaje/cognitivo se ha centrado en las relaciones entre educador y alumno. Sin embargo, los niños que realizan estas actividades pasan la mayor parte de su tiempo con sus compañeros y lejos de la presencia del educador. Los datos fueron recogidos en dos aulas de educación infantil en cada uno de los países, usando las siguientes herramientas de investigación: La información contextual narrativa descriptiva (referida a la estructura, medida, y marco curricular), una configuración de la actividad interpersonal, escalas de de puntuación reflexiva (referidas a la naturaleza cognitiva de la tareas y al apoyo de las interacciones de los niños) y entrevistas con los educadores (referidas a las interacciones de los niños para el aprendizaje y el desarrollo). Los resultados indicaron alguna variación en los marcos de referencia, la actividad y la practica entre los países, pero se observó que los niños están en distintos ‘mundos’ pedagógicos cuando interactúan/actúan con los educadores y sus compañeros. Estos mundos pedagógicos están relacionados con la tarea y el apoyo interpersonal para el aprendizaje y el desarrollo dentro de sus contextos. Las entrevistas con los educadores mostraron una preocupación por promover el desarrollo social de los niños pero un interés consistente en el desarrollo individual de los niños (más que un interés social sobre todos los niños). Las conclusiones identifican que los mundos pedagógicos característicos pueden ser fuente de exclusión social (especialmente entre compañeros) y cuestiona como los educadores podrían plenamente apoyar/integrar actividades cognitivas con una base socio‐constructiva dentro de las relaciones entre iguales.

Togetherness--A Manifestation of Day Care Life.

This article discusses togetherness in the day care centre. In what way and in which situations is togetherness expressed among children? “What is the impact of adults on the rise and development of togetherness?” Answers to these questions were sought by making use of observations carried out in a cooperative Nordic study of the quality of childrens lives in Danish, Finnish and Swedish day care centres. The data were collected by observing five‐year‐old children during their daily activities in seven day care centres. Attention was paid to relations between the children and adults as well as to the objects — in the sense of contents and objectives of ongoing activities. What do individual children do and why do they do it? “What is the object of the educator and the whole group? In what ways do the children and the educators participate in joint activity?” In this article, only the objects of activities and the relations connected with the theme of togetherness are taken into consideration. The study de...

From Togetherness to Equal Partnership in Role Play.

In the day care centre, already at the transition stage to role play children show different kinds of participation. They observe each others play, share goal orientation and directly tutor each other. The play process is materially supported and often initiated by educators. However, children also need to acquire the power to act autonomously in role play. The different kinds of participation in young childrens play, as well as the appearance and development of basic features of joint role play were examined in three games of a two‐year‐old girl, Katju, in her day care group. The games are examples of ten play sessions she was involved in. These data were collected by means of reactive participant observation and analyzed by using interpretive methods. It turned out that Katju proceeded from a feeling of togetherness in a shared space, through parallel and successive play actions to reciprocity and equal exchange of play actions. Moreover, the three educators contributed to this process in different wa...

Promoting play for a better future

The proliferation of the number of studies on play in the past decade is remarkable and an interesting cultural phenomenon by itself. For anthropologists, developmental psychologists and educationalists ‘play’ has been one of the topics on their research agenda for a long time, and, in fact, educationalists are now increasingly interested in studying play for educational purposes. Why? What’s going on? Obviously, in addition to anthropology, psychology and pedagogy, today play is a subject of interest and concern for many disciplines, like sociology, philosophy, cultural studies and childhood studies. The importance of play for children’s learning, development and well-being is now broadly acknowledged, and this acknowledgement is clearly reflected in the outpouring of books and other publications on play and playful learning in the past decade. The various benefits of play for children are beyond doubt, which is supported by an increasing number of empirical studies. Seeing this tendency as a cultural phenomenon, especially in the industrialised world, immediately raises further questions about the reasons for this growth of attention. Is it a reaction to a dreading ‘disappearance of childhood’ (Postman 1994), or is it a consequence of the process of de-traditionalisation (Ziehe 2009) that gives children and youngsters more freedom to act to their own accord? Or is it a sign of taking seriously and respecting children’s right to play and express their views through play? Or is it an expression of the eternal urge of the human being for self-realisation and – hence – a counter-reaction to de-humanising effects of industrialised and overregulated societies on culture and human development (e.g. Huizinga 1935, see also Singer, this issue, pp. 172–184)? Despite these positive circumstances, there are as yet still good reasons for concern with regard to children’s opportunities to play in the modern industrialised society. Recent changes in society and cultural life, driven by the ambitions of an upcoming knowledge society, increasingly emphasise effective teaching for the acquisition of knowledge and skills, as well as stressing accountability in educational matters. And this trend seems to expand to younger (preschool) children as well. This tendency in society is interpreted by many educationalists and developmental psychologists as inconsistent with play, and it often results in a reduction or even marginalisation of play in (early years) educational settings (e.g. Nicolopoulou 2010). And actually nobody really knows the extent of the psychological, social and economic consequences of this marginalisation of playing in the pre-primary and primary school for the future of individuals, the evolution of scientific thinking and art, social life and society as a whole. Most likely, it is a combination of different factors, and varying individual reasons that rouses the concern about our collective and individual future, and especially about how to optimise conditions for positive developments in human beings as agents in a diversifying cultural environment. At a political level there is currently serious awareness of the essential importance of education, and especially the need for high quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) is emphasised by many politicians as a vital condition for the maintenance of culture and the improvement of the living conditions of all people. According to the UNESCO definition, there is no room for

Building children’s sense of community in a day care centre through small groups in play

Abstract This study examines the process through which children build a sense of community in small groups in a day care centre. The study asks the following: how does children’s sense of community develop, and what are its key features? Data were collected by applying ethnographic methods in a group of three- to five-year-old children over eleven months. The results show that children’s sense of community developed through three stages. In the first stage, it evolved gradually through experiences in joint play. In the second stage, stable friendships were formed and strengthened in play. In the third and final stage, sense of community was fully established and children’s emotional bonding was strong, manifesting itself in affective and physical closeness, sharing and caring and togetherness.

The teacher's lap a site of emotional well-being for the younger children in day-care groups

This study focuses on a particular relationship between teachers and one- to three-year-old children: the child in the teachers lap. When, in what situations, does this happen? Who are the children in the teachers lap? Why are they there? How do children express emotional well-being when in the teachers lap? Relational, sociocultural and revised attachment approaches to emotional well-being supplied the theoretical framework of the study. Data were collected by ethnographic methods and analysed qualitatively. Two day-care groups in Finland participated. For most of the day, at least one child was in a teachers lap. The teachers lap signified, for example, not only consolation and confidence but also delight. Furthermore, for the children, it was a contested site for gaining teacher attention and displaying power. The teachers also enjoyed this affective bond with the children, while having a child in their lap also had practical value, for example, sometimes it guaranteed undisturbed play for the other children.

Care, Upbringing and Teaching in ‘Horizontal’ Transitions in Toddler Day-Care Groups

This chapter focuses on the fundamental notion of early childhood education as an integrated whole, composed of care, upbringing and teaching, in the context of Finnish early childhood education. These three concepts – care, upbringing and teaching – are addressed firstly on the conceptual level, and then empirically by illustrative examples from day-care groups for one-to-three-year-old children.

Pedagogy in ECEC : Nordic Challenges and Solutions

Finland held the Presidency of the Nordic Council of Ministers in 2016. The Ministry of Education and Culture organised the seminar, Pedagogy in Early Childhood Education and Care – Nordic Challeng ...

Younger children in ECEC: focus on the national steering documents in the Nordic countries

The aim of this study was to review the national steering documents on early childhood education and care (ECEC) in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden, with the focus on children up to the age of three, posing the question: What do these documents tell us about ECEC for younger children in the Nordic early childhood settings? Methodologically, a qualitative document analysis was applied. The documents provide a picture of young children whose age, individual needs and a number of other factors, such as cultural background, should be taken into account in ECEC. These children learn holistically, in close interaction with their environment. Their safety and well-being are seen as paramount. The physical and social worlds of children expand with the help of experienced and sensitive educators. However, younger children are rarely addressed specifically in these documents. For instance, many important themes, such as the very beginning of the childs attendance in ECEC, are poorly explicated in them.