Abstract
This study investigates young children’s theorising about families and their differential access to food from a perspective of wealth and poverty. Fifty-two children, aged 6–7 years, attending a Western Australian school were invited to share their perspectives on this global issue. The single case study method utilised three children’s focus groups to gather a range of perspectives from the children. Photographs of full and empty refrigerators were used elaborate a story told to the children about two families with significantly different amounts of food in their refrigerator at home. The study demonstrates that researchers and educators may fruitfully consider social sustainability with young children whose insights into these issues provide evidence of their clearly formed perspectives on complex global issues. Conversations about global “wicked problems” enable children to express their point of view on economic and social as well as environmental issues. The findings indicate that the young children in this study hold clear and sophisticated opinions regarding fairness, poverty, the relationship between paid work and money, food security and social justice. They also had an optimistic outlook on how to address inequality. Significant insights into children’s theorising around social sustainability are presented in four themes.
Résumé
Cette étude examine la théorisation des jeunes enfants sur les familles et leur accès différentiel aux aliments du point de vue de la richesse et de la pauvreté. Cinquante-deux enfants, âgés de six à sept ans, qui fréquentent une école de l’Australie occidentale ont été invités à partager leurs points de vue sur ce problème mondial. La méthode d’étude de cas unique a utilisé trois groupes de discussion d’enfants afin de recueillir un éventail de points de vue d’enfants. Des photographies de réfrigérateurs pleins et vides ont été utilisées pour construire une histoire racontée aux enfants à propos de deux familles avec des quantités très différentes de nourriture dans leur réfrigérateur à la maison. L’étude démontre que les chercheurs et les éducateurs peuvent utilement aborder la durabilité sociale avec de jeunes enfants dont les idées sur ces questions démontrent qu’ils ont des points de vue clairement formés sur des questions mondiales complexes. Des conversations sur les problèmes mondiaux «pernicieux» permettent aux enfants d’exprimer leurs points de vue sur les questions économiques, sociales ainsi qu’environnementales. Les résultats indiquent que les jeunes enfants de cette étude ont des opinions claires et sophistiquées concernant l’équité, la pauvreté, la relation entre le travail rémunéré et l’argent, la sécurité alimentaire et la justice sociale. Ils ont également une vision optimiste sur la façon de lutter contre les inégalités. Les idées importantes dans la théorisation des enfants sur la durabilité sociale sont présentées en quatre thèmes.
Resumen
Este estudio investiga la teorización de los niños pequeños acerca de las familias y su acceso diferenciado a los alimentos desde una perspectiva de la riqueza y la pobreza. Cincuenta y dos niños, de edades comprendidas entre seis y siete años que asisten a una escuela de Australia Occidental fueron invitados a compartir sus puntos de vista sobre este problema mundial. El método de estudio de caso único utilizó tres focus group de niños para reunir una gama de perspectivas. Las fotografías de los refrigeradores llenos y vacíos fueron utilizadas elaborando una historia contada a los niños acerca de dos familias, con cantidades significativamente distinta de alimentos en su refrigerador en casa. El estudio demuestra que los investigadores y educadores pueden considerar provechosamente la sostenibilidad social con niños pequeños, cuyos conocimientos sobre estos temas presentan pruebas de sus puntos de vista con claridad formados en temas globales complejos. Conversaciones sobre “problemas perversos” globales permiten a los niños expresar sus puntos de vista sobre cuestiones económicas y sociales, así como del medio ambiente. Los hallazgos indican que los niños pequeños en este estudio tienen opiniones claras y sofisticadas, en cuanto a equidad, pobreza, la relación entre el trabajo remunerado y el dinero, la seguridad alimentaria y la justicia social. También tenían una visión optimista sobre la forma de abordar la desigualdad. Una mejor aproximación a la teorización de los niños en torno a la sostenibilidad social se presenta en cuatro temas.
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
It was assumed that each family had a refrigerator. In Australia, unless a family is homeless, it is assumed that they have access to a fridge to avoid food perishing.
In Western Australia, mines are located in very remote areas. It is most common for miners to live in large cities and work shifts that require them to fly to the site and work for several weeks then fly home, hence the name Fly In, Fly Out.
As part of this project, the researchers worked with the children’s ideas and offered support to teachers to develop a school garden. A breakfast program also operates within this school setting.
References
Anderson, L. W., Krathwohl, D. R., & Bloom, B. S. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.
Australian Early Development Census (2012). Community profile. Retrieved from http://www.aedc.gov.au/data/data-explorer?id=47319
Australian Government (2009). Belonging, being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia, Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. Retrieved from http://deewr.gov.au/early-years-learningframework.
Australian Institute of Health and Welfare. (2012). Australia’s food and nutrition 2012. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
Australian International Food Security Research Centre (2015). Food security and why it matters. Retrieved from http://aciar.gov.au/aifsc/food-security-and-why-it-matters
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.
Burns, C. (2004). A review of the literature describing the link between poverty, food insecurity and obesity with specific reference to Australia. Melbourne: Victorian Health Promotion Foundation.
Clark, A. (2004). The mosaic approach and research with young children. In V. Lewis, M. Kellett, C. Robinson, S. Fraser, & S. Ding (Eds.), The reality of research with children and young people (pp. 142–161). London: Sage.
Clark, A., & Moss, P. (2011). Listening to young children: The Mosaic Approach (2nd ed.). London: NCB.
Cook, T., & Hess, E. (2007). What the camera sees and from whose perspective: Fun methodologies for engaging children in enlightening adults. Childhood, 14, 29.
Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Damon, W. (1990). The moral child: Nurturing children’s natural moral growth. New York: The Free Press.
Davis, J. (2008). What might education for sustainability look like in early childhood? In I. P. Samuelsson & Y. Kaga (Eds.), The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society (pp. 18–24). Paris: UNESCO.
Department of Education of Western Australia (2014). Schools online: School overview. Retrieved from http://www.det.wa.edu.au/schoolsonline/main_page.do
Elliott, S., & Davis, J. (2009). Exploring the resistance: An Australian perspective on educating for sustainability in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 65–79.
Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook for research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.
European Panel on Sustainable Development (2010). European Panel on Sustainable Development. Taking children seriously: How the EU can invest in early childhood education for a sustainable future, (Report number 4) Retrieved from http://gmv.gu.se/english/collaborations-and-projects/collaboration-with-industry-and-society/european-panel-on-sustainable-development–epsd
FAO, Ifad, & WFP. (2015). The State of Food Insecurity in the World 2015. Meeting the 2015 international hunger targets: taking stock of uneven progress. Rome: FAO.
Flick, U. (2007). Managing quality in qualitative research. London: Sage.
Gonzalez, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorising practices in households, communities and classrooms. New Jersey: Taylor and Francis.
Grieshaber, S. (2008). Interrupting stereotypes: Teaching and the education of young children. Early Education and Development, 19(3), 505–518.
Hagglund, S., & Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2009). Early childhood education and learning for sustainable development and citizenship. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 49–63.
Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.
James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorising childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press.
James, A., & Prout, A. (1997). Constructing and reconstructing childhood (2nd ed.). London: Falmer Press.
Jenks, C. (2005). Childhood (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.
Kellett, M. (2005). Children as active researchers: A new paradigm for the 21 st century? Economic and Social Research Council [ESRC] National Centre for Research Methods. Methods Review Papers NCRM/003. Retrieved from http://eprints.ncrm.ac.uk/87/1/MethodsReviewPaperNCRM-003.pdf
Lather, P. (1991). Feminist research in education: with/against. Geelong: Deakin University Press.
Lipponen, L., Rajala, A., Hilppö, J., & Paananen, M. (2015). Exploring the foundations of visual methods used in research with children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal,. doi:10.1080/1350293x.2015.1062663.
Lister, R. (2008). Povertyism and ‘othering’: Why they matter. A talk by Professor Ruth Lister at the TUC conference, ‘Challenging Poverty—the Media and Politicians’. Brighton. Retrieved from http://www.tuc.org.uk/social/tuc15539-f0.pdf.
Mac Naughton, G. (2003). Shaping early childhood: Learners, curriculum and contexts. Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill International.
McDonald, C. (2009). Children and poverty: Why their experience of their lives matter for policy. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 44(1), 5–21.
Mertens, D. M. (2015). Mixed methods and wicked problems. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(1), 3–6.
Moll, L. C., Amanti, C., Neff, D., & González, N. (1992). Funds of knowledge for teaching: Using a qualitative approach to connect homes and classrooms. Theory into Practice, 31(2), 132–141.
Moore, T., McArthur, M., & Noble-Carr, D. (2008). Little voices and big ideas: Lessons learned from children about research. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 7(2), 77–91.
OMEP (2014). OMEP’s World Project 2013–2014: Equality for Sustainability. Retrieved from http://www.worldomep.org/en/equality-for-sustainability/
Patton, M. Q. (2002). Qualitative research and evaluation methods (3rd ed.). London: Sage.
Pramling Samuelson, I., & Kaga, Y. (Eds.). (2008). The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society. Paris: UNESCO.
Redmond, G. (2008). Children’s perspectives on economic adversity: A review of the literature. SPRC Discussion Paper No. 149. Sydney: The Social Policy Research Centre, University of New South Wales.
Richland, L. E., Morrison, R. G., & Holyoak, K. J. (2006). Children’s development of analogical reasoning: Insights from scene analogy problems. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 94, 249–273.
Rinaldi, C. (2006). In dialogue with Reggio Emilia. New York: Routledge.
Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.
Rosier, K. (2011). Food insecurity in Australia: What is it, who experiences it and how can child and family services support families experiencing it? Communities and Families Clearinghouse Australia: Australian Institute of Family Studies. Retrieved from: https://aifs.gov.au/cfca/sites/default/files/publication-documents/ps9.pdf
Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2008). The implications of early understandings of inequality, science and technology for the development of sustainable societies. In I. P. Samuelson & Y. Kaga (Eds.), The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society (pp. 67–72). Paris: UNESCO (2008).
Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2009). Editorial: Education for sustainable development in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 9–21.
Skouteris, H., Edwards, S., Rutherford, L., Cutter-MacKenzie, A., Huang, T., & O’Connor, A. (2014). Promoting healthy eating, active play and sustainability consciousness in early childhood curricula, addressing the Ben 10 problem: A randomised control trial. BMC Public Health, 14, 548. doi:10.1186/1471-2458-14-548.
Stake, R. E. (2004). Qualitative case studies. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), The Sage handbook of qualitative research (pp. 236–247). Thousand Oak, California: Sage.
UNESCO (2008). Early childhood and its contribution to a sustainable society. Paris: UNESCO.
UNESCO (2014). Education for sustainable development (ESD). Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/education-for-sustainable-development/
United Nations. (1990). United nations convention on the rights of the child. Geneva: Office of the United Nations High Commissioner for Human Rights (OHCHR).
Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard: Harvard University Press.
Weinger, S. (2000). Economic status: Middle class and poor children’s views. Children and Society, 14, 135–146.
Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, California: Sage.
Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Corresponding author
Rights and permissions
About this article
Cite this article
Hammond, LL., Hesterman, S. & Knaus, M. What’s in Your Refrigerator? Children’s Views on Equality, Work, Money and Access to Food. IJEC 47, 367–384 (2015). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-015-0150-0
Published:
Issue Date:
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-015-0150-0