Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

What’s in Your Refrigerator? Children’s Views on Equality, Work, Money and Access to Food

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Early Childhood Aims and scope Submit manuscript

An Erratum to this article was published on 30 October 2015

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.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. 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.

  2. 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.

  3. 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clark, A., & Moss, P. (2011). Listening to young children: The Mosaic Approach (2nd ed.). London: NCB.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cook, T., & Hess, E. (2007). What the camera sees and from whose perspective: Fun methodologies for engaging children in enlightening adults. Childhood, 14, 29.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. W. (1998). Qualitative inquiry and research design: Choosing among five designs. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Creswell, J. (2013). Qualitative inquiry & research design: Choosing among five approaches. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Damon, W. (1990). The moral child: Nurturing children’s natural moral growth. New York: The Free Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Erickson, F. (1986). Qualitative methods in research on teaching. In C. Wittrock (Ed.), Handbook for research on teaching (pp. 119–161). New York: Macmillan.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Flick, U. (2007). Managing quality in qualitative research. London: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Gonzalez, N., Moll, L., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge: Theorising practices in households, communities and classrooms. New Jersey: Taylor and Francis.

    Google Scholar 

  • Grieshaber, S. (2008). Interrupting stereotypes: Teaching and the education of young children. Early Education and Development, 19(3), 505–518.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hsieh, H. F., & Shannon, S. E. (2005). Three approaches to qualitative content analysis. Qualitative Health Research, 15(9), 1277–1288.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorising childhood. Cambridge: Polity Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • James, A., & Prout, A. (1997). Constructing and reconstructing childhood (2nd ed.). London: Falmer Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Jenks, C. (2005). Childhood (2nd ed.). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • McDonald, C. (2009). Children and poverty: Why their experience of their lives matter for policy. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 44(1), 5–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mertens, D. M. (2015). Mixed methods and wicked problems. Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 9(1), 3–6.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pramling Samuelson, I., & Kaga, Y. (Eds.). (2008). The contribution of early childhood education to a sustainable society. Paris: UNESCO.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Rinaldi, C. (2006). In dialogue with Reggio Emilia. New York: Routledge.

    Book  Google Scholar 

  • Rogoff, B. (1990). Apprenticeship in thinking: Cognitive development in social context. New York: Oxford University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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).

    Google Scholar 

  • Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2009). Editorial: Education for sustainable development in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 9–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • 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.

    Google Scholar 

  • 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).

    Google Scholar 

  • Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Harvard: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Weinger, S. (2000). Economic status: Middle class and poor children’s views. Children and Society, 14, 135–146.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (1989). Case study research: Design and methods. Newbury Park, California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

  • Yin, R. K. (2012). Applications of case study research. Thousand Oaks, California: Sage.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Libby-Lee Hammond.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

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

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-015-0150-0

Keywords

Navigation