Question-posing & question-responding at the heart of possibility thinking in the early years.

publication-status: Publishedtypes: ArticleDrawing on research that sought to explore the characteristics of ‘Possibility Thinking’ as central to creativity in young children’s learning, this paper considers question-posing and question-responding as the driving features of ‘Possibility Thinking’ (PT). This qualitative study employed micro-event analysis of peer and pupil–teacher interaction. Events were sampled from two early years settings in England, one a Reception classroom (4- to 5-year olds) and the other a Year 2 classroom (6- to 7-year olds). This article arises out of the second stage of an ongoing research programme (2004–2007) involving the children and practitioners in these settings. This phase considers the dimensions of question-posing and the categories of question-responding and their interrelationship within PT. Three dimensions of questioning were identified as characteristic of PT. These included: (i) question framing, reflecting the purpose inherent within questions for adults and children (including leading, service and follow-through questions); (ii) question degree: manifestation of the degree of possibility inherent in children’s questions (including possibility narrow, possibility moderate, possibility broad); (iii) question modality, manifestation of the modality inherent in children’s questions (including verbal and non-verbal forms). The fine-grained data analysis offers insight into how children engage in PT to meet specific needs in responding to creative tasks and activities and reveals the crucial role that question-posing and question-responding play in creative learning. It also provides more detail about the nature of young children’s thinking, made visible through question-posing and responding in engaging playful contexts

When Policy and Infrastructure Provisions are Exemplary but still Insufficient: Paradoxes Affecting Education for Sustainability (EfS) in a Custom-designed Sustainability School

Schools willing to implement education for sustainability (EfS) commonly find themselves confronted with curricula, school grounds and buildings and teaching practices that do not lend themselves easily to best practice EfS. In this article, we present what we learned about some of the challenges confronted daily by the staff of a purpose-built sustainability primary school situated in a ‘green’ suburb in Western Australia. Over the period of a year, we regularly engaged with the staff of the school through semi-structured, in-depth interviews and classroom observations as part of an interpretive ethnographic study. We identified three key themes—policy infrastructure, physical infrastructure and pedagogical infrastructure—that serve as both affordances and counter-affordances to best practice EfS. Given the paradoxical interplay of the affordances and counter-affordances shaping the school’s implementation of EfS, we suggest that overcoming these paradoxes requires no less than a transformation of school culture

Children’s participation in school grounds developments: creating a place for education that promotes children’s social inclusion

Abstract This paper advances the idea that ‘education for the social inclusion of children’ is similar but different to ‘inclusive education’ as it has come to be understood and used by some authors and UK government documents. ‘Inclusive education’ tends to carry an inward emphasis on the participation of children in the education system (with discussions on school culture, transitions, truancy, exclusion rates, underachievement, and school leaving age). In contrast, education for the promotion of children’s social inclusion requires an outward emphasis on children's participation in 'mainstream' society while they are still children. The latter emphasis is seen to be lacking in educational policy discourse in Scotland though a recent shift in policy towards education for active citizenship is noted. Examples are provided to show how many policy statements enact a limitation on the scope for education to promote children’s social inclusion by emphasising children’s deficits as social actors and focussing on the ‘condition’ of social exclusion. The paper draws on an empirical study of children’s participation in changing school grounds in Scotland. The analysis shows how the enclosure of learning in books, classrooms and normative curricula was challenged. Learning from school grounds developments was constructed relationally and spatially but the scope of what was to be learned was often delineated by adults. The paper closes with a discussion of how education that promotes the social inclusion of children will benefit from seeing both children and adults as current though partial citizens and utilising socio-spatial opportunities for the generation of uncertain curricula through their shared and/or differentiated participation

‘Does My Haltung Look Big In This?”: The Use of Social Pedagogical Theory for the Development of Ethical and Value Led Practice

The aim of this article is to set out how the use of social pedagogical Haltung can support the exploration of values and how this informs and shapes a practitioner’s direct work. Haltung is a German concept that has no direct English translation but means ‘mind set’, ‘ethos’ or ‘attitude’ (Eichsteller, 2010) and relates to an individual’s value base. Mührel’s (2008, cited in Eichsteller, 2010), sets out that a social pedagogical Haltung is based on the two concepts of empathic understanding and regard. This paper argues that the use of a social pedagogical Haltung gives practitioners a philosophical framework to support the reflection of core values and ethics held on a personal level. It also supports an understanding of how these influence practitioners and students when using ‘self’ in relationship based practice. The understanding of Haltung is important but for social pedagogical practice to be undertaken it also has to be demonstrated by actions. The reflective activity Values Alive in Practice, set out in this article, provides a tool for social workers, practitioners and students to critically explore their own values and practice and make more meaningful connections between their Haltung and their behaviours demonstrated in their everyday work. In the UK, values and standards for social work practice are set out by British Association of Social Work and Social Work England. Arguably, these have, at times, been reduced to a checklist for students and practitioners and can lack more in depth and explicit links to practice. The analysis of practice is more likely to focus on the skills and abilities of practitioners rather than the value base that underpins these. Whilst the understanding and key application of core knowledge and skills is essential for competent social work practice (Forrester et al., 2019), this article argues that it must also be supported and shaped by ethical principles. This article seeks to explore how social workers can be supported to adopt value led approaches to complex work within an outcome focussed culture

Schematic pedagogy: supporting one child’s learning at home and in a group

In this paper we identify ways in which the learning of very young children can be supported by practitioners developing a schematic pedagogy which focuses on structures of children’s thinking. First we provide a critical overview of relevant literature on schemas and schematic approaches to pedagogy. We then outline an original study undertaken to identify and support the learning of seven young children. Taking one child, whom we call Annie, we illustrate how her attention to the fine detail of elements of her home and group environments as she played, offered strong clues to her pedagogues about her persistent interests (schemas). We show how careful observation by practitioners can be used to understand and support future learning encounters through a schematic pedagogy, and we consider implications of such an approach for practice in toddlers’ early learning