Advertisement

A COMPARISON OF THE PEDAGOGICAL PRACTICES OF MATHEMATICS EDUCATION FOR YOUNG CHILDREN IN ENGLAND AND SOUTH KOREA

  • Iram Siraj-Blatchford
  • Kwi-Ok NahEmail author
Article

ABSTRACT

The pedagogical practices of mathematics education for young children in English and Korean pre-schools were compared through analyses of interviews with practitioners, observations of classroom activities and an examination of documents related to the planning and implementation of mathematics education. Practitioners in both countries used integrated activities to teach mathematics, although they used such activities more frequently in nurseries than in reception classes in England and more frequently in state settings than in independent settings in Korea. Furthermore, mathematics education was more structured, more likely to be led by an adult and less holistic in reception classes than in nurseries in England, whereas it was more structured and didactic in independent than in state settings in Korea. However, mathematics education in England was more systematic, used a more individualised approach and incorporated a variety of hands-on materials and rigorous outdoor activities, whereas it was more group-oriented and utilised limited materials and fewer outdoor activities in Korea.

KEY WORDS

England Korea mathematics education pedagogical approach pre-school 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. Alexander, R. (Ed.). (2010). Children, their world, their education: Final report and recommendations of the Cambridge primary review. Oxon, UK: Routledge.Google Scholar
  2. Aunio, P., Aubrey, C., Godfrey, R., Pan, Y. & Liu, Y. (2008). Children’s early numeracy in England, Finland and People’s Republic of China. International Journal of Early Years Education, 16(3), 203–221.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Anning, A. (1998). Appropriateness or effectiveness in the early childhood curriculum in the UK: Some research evidence. International Journal of Early Years Education, 6(3), 299–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Apple, M. W. (2006). Educating the “right” way. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  5. Bennett, J. (2005). Curriculum issues in national policy-making. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 13(2), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Biggs, J. B. (1996). Western misconceptions of the Confucian- Heritage learning culture. In D. A. Watkins & J. B. Biggs (Eds.), The Chinese learner: Cultural, psychological, and contextual influences (pp. 45–68). Hong Kong: Comparative Education Research Centre.Google Scholar
  7. Bilton, H. (2002). Outdoor play in the early years: Management and innovation. London: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  8. Brimer, A. & Griffin, P. (1985). Mathematics achievement in Hong Kong secondary schools. Hong Kong: Centre of Asian Studies, University of Hong Kong.Google Scholar
  9. Claxton, G. (2008). Too formal too soon. Speech at an Early Years conference in Northern Ireland 2008. Retrieved May 25, 2012, from http://www.early-years.org/news/newsletters/issue_07.pdf.
  10. Creswell, J. W. (2008). Educational research: Planning, conducting, and evaluating quantitative and qualitative research. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson/Merrill Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  11. Curtis, A. (2002). A curriculum for the pre-school child: Learning to learn (2nd ed.). Taylor & Francis e-Library. Retrieved May 25, 2012, from http://web.ebscohost.com/ehost/ebookviewer/ebook/nlebk_68716_AN?sid=77ff6c48-53f6-4c23-ac31-2b1879223fda@sessionmgr15&vid=2.
  12. Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) (2008). Practice guidance for the early years foundation stage. London: DCSF.Google Scholar
  13. Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF) (2009). Learning, playing and interacting: Good practice in the early years foundation stage. Nottingham, UK: DCSF.Google Scholar
  14. Drury, R., Miller, L. & Campbell, R. (Eds.). (2000). Looking at early years education and care. London: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  15. Duncan, J. & Lockwood, M. (2008). Learning through play: A work based approach for the early years professional. New York: Continuum International Publishing Group Ltd.Google Scholar
  16. Geary, D. C., Bow-Thomas, C. C., Fan, L. & Siegler, R. S. (1993). Even before formal instruction, Chinese children outperform American children in mental addition. Child Development, 8, 517–529.Google Scholar
  17. Howard, S. (2010). Pedagogy in context. In I. Palaiologou (Ed.), The early years foundation stage: Theory and practice (pp. 38–52). London: SAGE.Google Scholar
  18. Hurst, V. (1997). Planning for early learning: Educating young children. London: Paul Chapman.Google Scholar
  19. Kwon, Y. I. (2002). Changing curriculum for early childhood education in England. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 4(2). Retrieved April 18, 2010, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n2/kown.html.
  20. Kwon, Y. I. (2003). A comparative analysis of preschool education in Korea and England. Comparative Education, 39(4), 479–491.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Leung, F. K. S. (1995). The mathematics classroom in Beijing, Hong Kong and London. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 29, 197–325.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Leung, F. K. S. (2006). Mathematics education in East Asia and the West: Does culture matter? In F. K. S. Leung, K.-D. Graf & F. J. Lopez-Real (Eds.), Mathematics education in different cultural traditions: A comparative study of East Asia and the West (pp. 21–46). New York: Springer Science + Business Media, Inc.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. McLean, M. (1995). Educational traditions compared. London: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  24. Miles, M. B. & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.Google Scholar
  25. Millard, E. (1997). Differently literate: Boys, girls, and the schooling of literacy. London: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  26. Ministry of Education (MOE) (2001). 6th kindergarten curriculum. Seoul, South Korea: MOE. in Korean.Google Scholar
  27. Ministry of Education and Human Resources Development (MOE) (2007). 2007 revised kindergarten curriculum. Seoul, South Korea: MOE. in Korean.Google Scholar
  28. Moy, R. & Peverly, S. T. (2005). Perceptions of mathematics curricula and teaching in China. Psychology in the Schools, 42(3), 251–258.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. New, R. (1992). The integrated early childhood curriculum: New interpretations based on research and practice. In C. Seefeldt (Ed.), The early childhood curriculum: A review of current research (2nd ed., pp. 286–322). New York: Teachers College Press.Google Scholar
  30. Noble, C., Brown, J. & Murphy, J. (2001). How to raise boys’ achievement. London: David Fulton.Google Scholar
  31. Sakakibara, T. (2006). The role of Japanese preschool teachers’ support in young children’s mathematical development. The Japanese Journal of Developmental Psychology, 17(1), 50–61. in Japanese.Google Scholar
  32. Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2008). Understanding the relationship between curriculum, pedagogy and progression in learning in early childhood. Hong Kong Journal of Early Childhood, 7(2), 6–13.Google Scholar
  33. Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2010). Learning in the home and in school: How working class children succeed against the odds. British Educational Research Journal, 36(3), 463–482.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Manni, L. (2008). ‘Would you like to tidy up now?’ an analysis of adult questioning in the English Foundation Stage. Early Years: An International Journal of Research and Development, 28(1), 5–22.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Siraj-Blatchford, I., Sylva, K., Muttock, R., Gilden, R. & Bell, D. (2002). Researching effective pedagogy in the early years. Research report 356. London: DfES.Google Scholar
  36. Siraj-Blatchford, I. & Sylva, K. (2004). Researching pedagogy in English pre-schools. British Educational Research Journal, 30(5), 713–730.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Smidt, S. (2002). Early years practice. London: Routledge Falmer.Google Scholar
  38. Tobin, J., Hsueh, Y. & Karasawa, M. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan and the United States. Chicago: The University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Tobin, J., Wu, D. & Davidson, D. (1989). Preschool in three cultures: Japan, China and United States. London: Yale University Press.Google Scholar
  40. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.Google Scholar
  41. Wang, J. & Paine, L. W. (2001). Mentoring as assisted performance: A pair of Chinese teachers working together. The Elementary School Journal, 102, 157–181.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Whitburn, J. (1995). The teaching of mathematics in Japan: An English perspective. Oxford Review of Education, 21(3), 347–360.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Wong, K. M. & Cheung, W. W. (1997). A survey of the current status of primary mathematics teaching in Hong Kong. EduMath, 4, 3–15.Google Scholar
  44. Wood, E. (2004). A new paradigm war? the impact of national curriculum policies on early childhood teachers’ thinking and classroom practice. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20(4), 361–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© National Science Council, Taiwan 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute of EducationUniversity of LondonLondonUK
  2. 2.Department of Early Childhood EducationSoonchunhyang UniversityAsanSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations