Advertisement

Cultural Studies of Science Education

, Volume 13, Issue 4, pp 865–888 | Cite as

The relations between ideal and real forms of small science: conscious collaboration among parents and infants–toddlers (Cultural Studies of Science Education)

  • Shukla Sikder
  • Marilyn Fleer
Original Paper
First Online:

Abstract

Vygotsky (in: Rieber, Carton (eds) The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky, vol 1, Pleneum Press, Newyork, pp 167–241, Retrieved from http://images.lib.monash.edu.au/edf5411/04118997.pdf, 1987) stated that academic or scientific concepts require a level of conscious awareness on the part of the child within everyday situations. Academic concepts can be any kind of concept, such as science concepts, mathematics concepts, language concepts and so on. Vygotsky theorised how these academic concepts could be developed by school aged children, but he said less about the prior to school period. Scientific concepts do not instantly develop in their final form but rather follow a process of conceptual development guided through adult–child interaction. It is understood that not any kind of social interactions can be considered developmental, but rather it is interaction which is purposeful and which is viewed as useful for a child’s development. Any kind of conceptual development requires the interaction with the ideal form as presented through adult interaction in social contexts. In any stage of development, ideal forms need to be present in the real context. Ideal in the sense that it acts as a model for that which should be achieved at the end of the developmental period; and in contrast, the real form represents the beginning point of child development (Vygotsky, in: Veer, Valsiner (eds) The Vygotsky reader, Blackwell Publishers, Oxford, pp 338–350, 1994). Many studies have documented the interactions between adults and children for developing scientific concepts in formal settings but little is understood about what happens in family homes for the prior to school age period. We do not know how scientific concepts develop during infants–toddlers everyday life at home. What kinds of social interactions in everyday family life support infants and toddlers to develop early forms of science concepts? This paper presents the findings of a study of infant and toddler learning of science at home. A total of around 30 h of video data were collected from three Bangladeshi families in Australia and Singapore. Three children aged from 10 to 36 months were filmed over 1 year in their everyday context. Informed by cultural-historical theory, the findings indicate that a form of conscious collaboration between parents and infants–toddlers is the key for developing small science concepts from rudimentary to final form. Small science has been defined as simple scientific narration of the everyday moments that infants and toddlers experience at home with their families. It was found that it was the families who filled the gap in understanding, through actively supporting the development of their infant–toddler’s higher mental function. Here the relations between infant–toddler real forms of development were carefully considered by the parents in relation to the ideal form that they created through collective dialogue of small science moments in the environment. If infants–toddlers learn these small concepts in their everyday settings, it is probable that they could link these early forms of understandings to learning abstract concepts later in school. This study contributes to understanding the nature of social interaction patterns for developing small science concepts in the everyday context of family life. This paper also provides pedagogical suggestions for early childhood science education.

Keywords

Ideal and real form Cultural-historical Infants–toddlers Small science Early childhood science education 
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The Australian Endeavour Postgraduate Awards provided funding for the research project reported in this paper. The authors would like to thank all parents and children who participated in the study. Special thanks to the Cultural-Historical Research Community at Monash University for their help in giving feedback on this manuscript.

References

  1. Appl, D. J., Brown, S., & Stone, M. (2008). A father’s interactions with his toddler: Personal and professional lessons for early childhood educators. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 127–134.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-008-0263-2.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bayraktar, S. (2011). Turkish preservice primary school teachers’ science teaching efficacy beliefs and attitudes toward science: The effect of a primary teacher education program. School Science and Mathematics, 111(3), 83–92. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/857517780?accountid=12528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bell, B. (2005). Pedagogies developed in the learning in science projects and related theses. International Journal of Science Education, 27(2), 159–182.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0950069042000276703.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Bozhovich, L. I. (2009). The social situation of child development. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 47(4), 59–86.  https://doi.org/10.2753/rpo1061-0405470403.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chang, N. (2012). The role of drawing in young children’s construction of science concepts. Early Childhood Education Journal, 40, 187–193.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-012-0511-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Cohen, N. L., & Tomlinson-Keasey, C. (1980). The effects of peers and mothers on toddlers’ play. Child Development, 51(3), 921–924.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1129488.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Crockenberg, S. B., & Smith, P. (2002). Antecedents of mother–infant interaction and infant irritability in the first 3 months of life. Infant Behavior and Development, 25(1), 2–15.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(02)00088-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Damast, A. M., Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Bornstein, M. H. (1996). Mother-child play: Sequential interactions and the relation between maternal beliefs and behaviors. Child Development, 67(4), 1752–1766.  https://doi.org/10.2307/1131729.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Elkonin, D. B. (1978). Psikhologiya igry (Psychology of play). Moscow: Pedagogika.Google Scholar
  10. Elkonin, D. B. (2005). The subject of our research: The developed form of play. Journal of Russian & East European Psychology, 43(1), 22–48. Retrieved from http://web.a.ebscohost.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/ehost/pdfviewer/pdfviewer?sid=87398146-a92f-410c-8c42-1c127edbb1d0%40sessionmgr4005&vid=3&hid=4109.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Farver, J. A. M., & Wimbarti, S. (1995). Paternal participation in toddlers’ pretend play. Social Development, 4(1), 17–31.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-9507.1995.tb00048.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fleer, M. (1991). Socially constructed learning in early childhood science education. Research in Science Education, 21, 96–103.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02360462.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Fleer, M. (1992). Identifying teacher–child interaction which scaffolds scientific thinking in young children. Science Education, 76(4), 373–397.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.3730760404.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Fleer, M. (1996). Fusing the boundaries between home and child care to support children’s scientific learning. Research in Science Education, 26(2), 143–154.  https://doi.org/10.1007/BF02356428.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Fleer, M. (1997). A Cross-cultural study of rural Australian aboriginal children’s understandings of night and day. Research in Science Education, 27(1), 101–116.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02463035.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Fleer, M. (2008). The relations between cultural-historical theory, methodology and digital video methods. In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Studying children: A cultural-historical approach (pp. 104–117). London: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  17. Fleer, M. (2009). Understanding the dialectical relations between everyday concepts and scientific concepts within play based programs. Research in Science Education, 39(2), 281–306.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-008-9085-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Fleer, M. (2011). The develoment of motives in children’s play. In M. Hedegaard, A. Edwards, & M. Fleer (Eds.), Motives in children’s development cultural-historical approaches. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Fleer, M., & Beasley, W. (1991). A study of conceptual development in early childhood. Research in Science Education, 21, 104–112.  https://doi.org/10.1007/bf02360463.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Fleer, M., & Pramling, N. (2015). A cultural-historical study of children learning science: Foregrounding affective imagination in play-based settings. Dordrecht: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Flick, U. (2006). An introduction to qualitative research (3rd ed.). London: Sage Publications Ltd.Google Scholar
  22. Forman, G. E. (2010). When 2-year-olds and 3-year-olds think like scientists. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 12(2). Retrieved from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v12n2/forman.html.
  23. Gamble, R. (1989). Force. Physics Education, 24, 79–82.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/24/2/303.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Garcia-Barros, S., Martínez-Losada, C., & Garrido, M. (2011). What do children aged four to seven know about the digestive system and the respiratory system of the human being and of other animals? International Journal of Science Education, 33(15), 2095–2122.  https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.541528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Gilbert, J. K., Watts, D. M., & Osborne, R. J. (1982). Students’ conceptions of ideas in mechanics. Physics Education, 17, 62–66.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0031-9120/17/2/309.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Gloeckler, L., & Cassell, J. (2012). Teacher practices with toddlers during social problem solving opportunities. Early Childhood Education Journal, 40, 251–257.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-011-0495-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Gopnik, A. (2012). Scientific thinking in young children: Theoretical advances, empirical research, and policy implications. Science, 337, 1623–1627.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1223416.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Goulart, M. I. M., & Roth, W.-M. (2010). Engaging young children in collective curriculum design. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 5(3), 533–562.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-009-9196-3.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Hedegaard, M. (2008a). The role of the researcher. In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Studying children: A cultural-historical approach (pp. 202–207). London: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  30. Hedegaard, M. (2008b). Principles for interpreting research protocols. In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Studying children: A cultural-historical approach (pp. 46–64). London: Open University Press.Google Scholar
  31. Jaakkola, R. O., & Slaughter, V. (2002). Children’s body knowledge: Understanding life as a biological goal. The British Journal of Developmental Psychology, 20, 325–338. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/docview/218739990?accountid=12528.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Keengwe, J., & Onchwari, G. (2009). Technology and early childhood education: A technology integration professional development model for practicing teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37, 209–218.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0341-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Kravtsova, E. E., & Kravtsov, G. G. (2011). The connections between the motives and will in the development of personality. In M. Hedegaard, A. Edwards, & M. Fleer (Eds.), Motives in children’s development cultural-historical Approaches. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  34. Lee, S. (2012). Toddlers as mathematicians? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 37(1), 30–37. Retrieved from http://go.galegroup.com/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA289721571&v=2.1&u=monash&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w&asid=f6f842d036c908fb96ace05543da370c.
  35. Maas, A. J. B. M., Vreeswijka, C. M. J. M., & Bakela, H. J. A. (2013). Effect of situation on mother–infant interaction. Infant Behavior and Development, 36(1), 42–49.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2012.10.006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Main, M. (1983). Exploration, play, and cognitive functioning related to infant–mother attachment. Infant Behavior and Development, 6(2), 167–174.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0163-6383(83)80024-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Martin, D. J., Jean-Sigur, R., & Schmidt, E. (2005). Process-oriented inquiry-a constructivist approach to early childhood science education: Teaching teacheres to do science. Journal of Elementary Science Education, 17(2), 13–26.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Mayer, S., & Musatti, T. (1992). Towards the use of symbol: Play with objects and communication with adults and peers in the second year. Infant Behavior and Development, 15(1), 1–13.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0163-6383(92)90002-N.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nadelson, L., Culp, R., Bunn, S., Burkhart, R., Shetlar, R., Nixon, K., et al. (2009). Teaching evolution concepts to early elementary school students. Evolution Education Outreach, 2, 458–473.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s12052-009-0148-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Page, M., Wilhelm, M. S., Gamble, W. C., & Card, N. A. (2010). A comparison of maternal sensitivity and verbal stimulation as unique predictors of infant social–emotional and cognitive development. Infant Behavior and Development, 33(1), 101–110.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.infbeh.2009.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Panagiotak, G., Nobes, G., & Potton, A. (2009). Mental models and other misconceptions in children’s understanding of the earth. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 104, 52–67.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jecp.2008.10.003.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Pierce, D. (1999). Maternal management of the home as a developmental play space for infants and toddlers. The American Journal of Occupational Therapy, 54(3), 290–299. Retrieved from http://ovidsp.tx.ovid.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/sp-3.13.0b/ovidweb.cgi?&S=NCLFFPPHMBDDBPOPNCLKKDJCJAMAAA00&Link+Set=jb.search.44%7c1%7csl_10.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Robbins, J. (2005). ‘Brown paper packages’? A sociocultural perspective on young children’s ideas in science. Research in Science Education, 35, 151–172.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-005-0092-x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Robbins, J., & Jane, B. (2006). Intergenerational learning: Grandparents supporting young children’s learning science. Paper presented at the Australasian Science Education Research Association, Canberra.Google Scholar
  45. Rogoff, B., Mosier, C., Mistry, J., & Goncu, A. (1989). Toddlers’ guided participation in cultural activity. Cultural Dynamics, 2(2), 209–237.  https://doi.org/10.1177/092137408900200205.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Sackes, M., Trundle, K. C., & Flevares, L. M. (2009). Using children’s literature to teach standard-based science concepts in early years. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36, 415–422.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-009-0304-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Shin, J. Y., Elicker, J. G., & Nope, I. C. (2004). Mothers’ influence on toddlers’ curiosity and exploration: Infant–mother attachment and supportive behaviors. International Journal of Early Childhood Education, 10(2), 157–173. Retrieved from http://kiss.kstudy.com.ezproxy.lib.monash.edu.au/journal/thesis_name.asp.
  48. Sikder, S., & Fleer, M. (2015). Small science: Infants and toddlers experiencing science in everyday family life. Submitted: Resaerch in Science Education.Google Scholar
  49. Siry, C., Ziegler, G., & Max, C. (2012). “Doing science” through discourse-in-interaction: Young children’s science investigations at the early childhood level. Science Education, 96(2), 311–336.  https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.20481.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Smolleck, L., & Hersberger, V. (2011). Playing with science: An investogation of young children’s science conceptions and misconceptions. Current Issues in Education, 14(1). Retrieved from http://cie.asu.edu/ojs/index.php/cieatasu/article/view/324.
  51. Solomon, J. (1983). Learning about energy: How pupils think in two domains. European Journal of Science Education, 5, 49–59.  https://doi.org/10.1080/0140528830050105.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Tamis-LeMonda, C. S., & Bornstein, M. H. (1991). Individual variation, correspondence, stability, and change in mother and toddler play. Infant Behavior and Development, 14(2), 143–162.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0163-6383(91)90002-A.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vosniadou, S., & Brewer, W. F. (1992). Mental models of the earth: A study of conceptual change in childhood. Cognitive Psychology, 24, 535–585.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Vygotsky, L. S. (1966). Play and its role in the mental development of the child. Soviet psychology, 3, 6–18.Google Scholar
  55. Vygotsky, L. S. (1987). The development of scientific concepts in childhood (N. minick, Trans.). In R. W. Rieber & A. S. Carton (Eds.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 1, pp. 167–241). Newyork: Pleneum Press. Retrieved from http://images.lib.monash.edu.au/edf5411/04118997.pdf.
  56. Vygotsky, L. S. (1994). The problem of the environment. In R. V. D. Veer & J. Valsiner (Eds.), The Vygotsky reader (pp. 338–350). Oxford: Blackwell Publishers.Google Scholar
  57. Vygotsky, L. S. (1997). Genesis of higher mental functions. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L. S. Vygotsky (Vol. 4, pp. 97–119). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  58. Vygotsky, L. S. (1998). The problem of age. In R. W. Rieber (Ed.), The collected works of L.S. Vygotsky (Vol. 5, pp. 187–205). New York: Plenum Press.Google Scholar
  59. Wells, G. (2008). Learning to use scientific concepts. Cultural Studies of Science Education, 3(2), 329–350.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11422-008-9100-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Zembylas, M. (2004). Emotional Issues in teaching science: A case study of a teacher’s views. Research in Science Education, 34, 343–364.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-004-0287-6.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Teacher Education, Faculty of Arts and EducationCharles Sturt UniversityBathurstAustralia

Personalised recommendations

Cite article

Buy options