Science in early childhood classrooms: content and process (2023)

CasaBesides this problemSEED: Collected documents

SEED Papers: Released Fall 2010Science in early childhood classrooms: content and processKaren is worth it
Science Education Center
Center for Educational Development, Inc.
Newton, Massachusetts

There is a growing understanding and recognition of the power of children's early thinking and learning, as well as a belief that science can be a particularly important domain in early childhood, serving not only to build a foundation for understanding subsequent science, but also to develop important skills. and attitudes to learn. This article addresses the question of what should be the nature of science teaching and learning in the early childhood classroom. It proposes four basic ideas: (1) doing science is a natural and critical part of children's early learning; (2) children's curiosity about the natural world is a powerful catalyst for their work and play; (3) with proper guidance, this natural curiosity and need to make sense of the world becomes the foundation for beginning to use inquiry skills to explore basic, material phenomena in the world around children; and (4) this early scientific exploration can be a rich context in which children can use and develop other important skills, including working together, basic large and small motor control, language, and early mathematical understanding. The article describes a framework for learning through inquiry and criteria for selecting appropriate content for young children. It concludes with a discussion of the implications for the classroom, with a focus on child-centered curriculum, the role of materials, the use of time and space, the critical role of discussion and representation, and the role of the teacher

In a world replete with the products of scientific research, scientific literacy has become a necessity for everyone. Everyone needs to use scientific information to make decisions that come up every day. Everyone must be able to intelligently engage in public discourse and debate important issues related to science and technology. And everyone deserves to share in the excitement and personal fulfillment that can come from understanding and learning about the natural world.(National Research Council, 1996, p. 1)

The need to focus on science in the early childhood classroom is based on a number of factors currently affecting the early childhood community. The first is the growing understanding and recognition of the power of children's early learning and thinking. Research and practice suggest that children have much greater learning potential than previously thought, and therefore early childhood settings should provide richer and more challenging learning environments. In these environments, guided by trained teachers, children's experiences in the early years can have a significant impact on their later learning. Furthermore, science can be a particularly important domain in early childhood, serving not only to build a foundation for later scientific understanding, but also to develop important learning skills and attitudes. A recent publication from the National Research Council supports this argument:

Children who have a broad base of knowledge experience in a specific domain (eg, in mathematics or in an area of ​​science) make faster progress in acquiring more complex skills…. Since these [mathematics and sciences] are "privileged domains", that is, domains in which children have a natural propensity to learn, experiment and explore, they allow to encourage and extend the limits of learning in which children already actively participate. 🇧🇷 Developing and expanding children's interest is particularly important in the preschool years, when attention and self-regulation are fledgling skills. (Bowman, Donovan, & Burns, 2001, pp. 8-9)

This growing understanding of the value of science in early childhood education comes at a time when the number and diversity of children in child care and the number of hours each child spends in such settings is increasing. An increasing number of children live in poverty. More and more are growing up in single-parent homes and in homes where both parents work. The media have become commonplace in the lives of young people. Therefore, experiences that provide direct manipulation and experience with objects, materials, and phenomena, such as playing in the sink, raising a pet, or going to the playground, are less likely to occur in the home. Increasingly, it is in the early childhood classroom that this kind of experience with the natural world should take place, allowing all children to develop inquiry and problem-solving experiences and the foundation for understanding basic concepts of science. sciences.

Science is both a body of knowledge that represents the current understanding of natural systems and the process by which that body of knowledge was established and is continually extended, refined, and revised. Both elements are essential: you cannot progress in science without understanding both. Similarly, in learning science, one must understand both the body of knowledge and the process by which that knowledge is established, extended, refined, and revised.(Duschl, Schweingruber y Shouse, 2007, pág. 26)

Before moving on to a more in-depth discussion of science for young people, it is helpful to describe our vision of science. The goal of science is to understand the natural world through a process known as scientific inquiry. Scientific knowledge helps us explain the world around us, such as why water evaporates and plants grow in certain places, what causes disease, and how electricity works. Scientific knowledge can help us predict what might happen: a hurricane might hit the coast; the flu will be severe this winter. Scientific knowledge can also help solve problems such as impure water or the spread of diseases. Science can guide technological development to meet our needs and interests, such as traveling at high speeds and talking on the phone.

Science means different things to different people. Some think it is a list of facts memorized at school. Others understand it as a body of knowledge, which includes facts, concepts, principles, laws, theories, and models that explain how the natural world works. But, as the quote above makes clear, science is more than knowledge and information; it is also a process of study and discovery, what we call scientific inquiry or scientific practice. According to the National Science Education standards, "Scientific inquiry refers to the various ways in which scientists study the natural world and propose evidence-based explanations of their work" (National Council for Scientific Research, 1996, p. 2. 3) . Many scientists also talk about the fun and creativity of doing science. A famous scientist, Richard Feynman, once said about his work: “Why did I enjoy doing this (physics)? I used to joke about it. I used to do what I wanted to do... [depending on] whether it was interesting and fun for me to play” (Feynman, 1997, p. 48).

Some people, when they think of people who do science, picture laboratories full of scientists in white coats mixing chemicals and looking through microscopes. These images are real, but there are other images of scientists charting the course of a hurricane, studying the behavior of wolves, looking for comets in the sky. But scientists are not the only people doing science. Many jobs involve science, such as an electrician, horticulturist, architect, and auto mechanic. And people of all ages learn about the world through actions that begin to approach scientific practice; For example, when a hobby gardener asks, "How much light does my geranium need to flower well?" he experiments with different locations and observes the results. . These activities, carried out by both scientists and non-scientists, whether in the laboratory, in the field or at home, have in common the active use of basic research tools in the service of understanding how the world works. Children and adults, experts and beginners all share the need to have these tools on hand as they develop their understanding of the world.

These notes provide a picture of science teaching and learning in the early childhood classroom, in which teachers and children engage in investigations of scientific phenomena: animal behaviors, and more specifically, the behavior of snails. They suggest the potential of children from 3 to 5 years of age to participate in scientific practices. These notes also provide a small window into science for young children, based on several beliefs that have guided my work: (1) doing science is a natural and critical part of children's early learning; (2) children's curiosity about the natural world is a powerful catalyst for their work and play; (3) with proper guidance, this natural curiosity and need to make sense of the world becomes the foundation for beginning to use inquiry skills to explore basic, material phenomena in the world around children; and (4) this early scientific exploration can be a rich context in which children can use and develop other important skills, including working together, basic large and small motor control, language, and early mathematical understanding.

Children entering school already possess substantial knowledge of the natural world, much of which is implicit… Contrary to older views, children are not concrete and simplistic thinkers…. Research shows that children's thinking is surprisingly sophisticated... Children can use a wide range of reasoning processes that form the basis of scientific thinking, even if their experience varies and they have much more to learn.(Duschl, Schweingruber y Shouse, 2007, págs. 2-3)

Science content for young children is a sophisticated interaction between concepts, scientific reasoning, the nature of science, and doing science. It is not primarily a data science. While facts are important, children need to begin to understand basic concepts and how they connect to and apply to the world in which they live. And thought processes and scientific skills are important too. In our curriculum development work for teachers, we equally focus on scientific inquiry and the nature of science and content: core concepts and the themes through which they are explored. In the teaching and learning process they are inseparable, but here I analyze them separately.

Scientific inquiry and the nature of science.

The phrase “children are scientists by nature” is one we often hear. Their curiosity and need to make the world a more predictable place certainly leads them to explore and draw conclusions and theories from their experiences. But left to themselves, they are not natural scientists. Children need guidance and structure to turn their natural curiosity and activity into something more scientific. They need to practice science, engage in rich scientific research.

In our work, we use a simple inquiry learning cycle (Worth & Grollman, 2003, p. 19) to provide a guiding framework for teachers as they facilitate children's investigations (Figure 1). The cycle begins with a long engagement period in which children explore the phenomenon and the selected materials, experiencing what they are and can do, questioning them, raising doubts and sharing ideas. This is followed by a more guided step as issues are identified that can be further investigated. Some of these may be questions from the children, others may be presented by the teacher, but their goal is to start the process of more focused and in-depth explorations involving forecasting, planning, data collection, and recording; organize experiences; and look for patterns and relationships that can eventually be shared and from which new questions can arise. This structure is neither rigid nor linear, hence the many arrows. And although it is used here to suggest a scaffolding for inquiry-based science teaching and learning, it is very similar to the way scientists work and, interestingly, how children learn.

Scientific inquiry offers children the opportunity to develop a variety of skills, either explicitly or implicitly. The following is one such list:

• Explore objects, materials and events.
• Ask questions.
• Make careful observations.
• Participate in simple investigations.
• Describe (including shape, size, number), compare, classify, classify, and classify.
• Record observations using words, pictures, tables, and graphs.
• Use a variety of simple tools to extend the observations.
• Identify patterns and relationships.
• Develop explanations and experimental ideas.
• Work collaboratively with others.
• Share and discuss ideas and hear new perspectives.

This description of the practice of doing science is quite different from some of the scientific work that is evident in many classrooms, where there may be a science table on which interesting objects and materials lie, along with observation and measurement tools, such as magnifying glasses. and scales. . . The work often stops there, and little is given to the observations children make and the questions they raise. Another form of science is activity-based science, in which children engage in a variety of activities that generate excitement and interest but rarely lead to deeper thought. There are a plethora of science activity books that support this form of science in the classroom. Thematic units and projects are one more vehicle for scientific work in the classroom. These can be rich and challenging; however, they may not have a scientific approach. Transportation or a neighborhood study are typical examples that have the potential to engage children in interesting science, but often focus more on social studies concepts. If these projects or topics really engage students in science, care must be taken to ensure that science is cutting edge and that integration with other subjects is appropriate and related to science.

scientific content

With one of the science practices guiding how we approach scientific inquiry in the early childhood classroom, we turn to the question of science content for this age group. There are many phenomena to explore, many questions to explore, many basic concepts to present, and many topics to choose from, so rather than making a list of possible topics and themes, the following are key criteria to guide decisions about the selection of topics.

At the heart of inquiry-based science is the direct exploration of phenomena and materials. Thus, the first criterion is that the phenomena selected for young children should be available for direct exploration and drawn from the environment in which they live. The study of snails is an example of exploration that meets these criteria. Others include light and shadow, moving objects, structures, and the life cycles of plants and animals. Examples of some that don't meet these criteria include popular themes like dinosaurs or space travel. While these are often created by children because they are part of the media environment around them, they are not appropriate content for inquiry-based science in the classroom because they do not present the opportunity for children's direct exploration and even ideas. simpler explanations. They are problematic for development. Other themes that are often chosen in early childhood classrooms, such as the rainforest or arctic animals (polar bears and penguins), can be based on appropriate concepts (habitat, physical characteristics, and adaptation of animals), but also they lack the possibility of a direct discussion. commitment. No need to delete topics like these. They can be the subject of major drama, elaborate discussion, and exploration using books and other secondary sources. The problem arises when they take time away from or replace scientific, inquiry-based experiences.

The second criterion is that the concepts underlying the children's work are concepts relevant to science. For example, in snail farming, the underlying concept is animal behavior and how behaviors relate to the physical structure and the way an animal meets its needs. Such experience provides a foundation from which children will gradually develop an understanding of adaptation and evolution. The study of shadows is another example, where children's experiences build a foundation for understanding a key concept about light: that it travels in a straight line. Working with balls on ramps is another example where expert-led experiments build a foundation for further understanding of forces and motion.

A third criterion is that the focus of science is on concepts that are developmentally appropriate and can be explored from multiple perspectives, in depth, and over time. When children have many and varied opportunities to explore a phenomenon, they reach the final stages of inquiry with a rich set of experiences on which to base their reflections, their search for patterns and relationships, and their developing theories. In our example of the snails, the teacher focuses the children's attention first on the description. But the next step could be to compare the movement of the snails with that of an earthworm and an insect. This can be continued by observing their own movements and those of other familiar animals and an ongoing discussion of similarities and differences and how movement relates to where an animal lives and how it gets its food. In contrast to this depth and breadth, there are experiences with phenomena such as magnets that are very engaging, but once children have seen what they are doing, there is little else to explore. With a variety of experiences, children are more likely to think about the connections between themselves, challenge their naive ideas, and develop new ones.

Equally important, the third criterion is that the phenomena, concepts, and themes must be attractive and interesting to children AND their teachers.

While not a criterion for selecting content for an individual unit, the year-round science program should reflect a balance between life and physical sciences. For many reasons, teachers are becoming more comfortable with the life sciences and moving away from the physical sciences. This bypasses explorations of deep interest to children and robs them of the challenge and excitement of experimentation. Life science research is different from physical science research in that the former is more observational and develops slowly over time. Research in the physical sciences is more experimental with immediate results. Both are important, so it is the balance that is important in an early childhood science program.

There are many implications for the classroom given this view of science. Here I will briefly address science in the child-centered curriculum, the role of materials, the use of time and space, the critical role of discussion and representation, and the role of the teacher.

Science in the child-centered curriculum

There are many definitions of “child-centered” curriculum that fall on a continuum. On the one hand, there is the belief that much of the curriculum focuses on children's ideas and questions. It is co-constructed by the child and the teacher. At the other extreme is a structured program that involves young children, except during "free time." The reality of a good science curriculum is that it falls between these extremes. The basic phenomena and concepts are determined by the teacher, perhaps because of an interest that he has observed in the classroom, but it does not have to be that way. Once a phenomenon is introduced and children begin their explorations, their questions can guide much of what follows.

From that perspective, the question to ask is not "Whose question is it?" but rather, "Are the children engaged?" Children need to own the content, but it doesn't necessarily have to be started by them. In the example above, water was the teacher's scientific focus. But the idea of ​​the pipes and the City of Waters was clearly for children.

science materials

Selection and access to materials are fundamental to science. It is through the materials that children confront and manipulate the phenomenon in question. As far as possible, materials should be open, transparent, and selected because they allow children to focus on important aspects of the phenomenon. This is in contrast to materials that, by their appearance and the ways in which they can be manipulated, guide what children do and think. An example of the difference is the pre-made marble run. Instead of creating its own marble run and fighting to make it work, the marble run thought of children. All they have to do is drop the marble and watch it roll. This is very different than using blocks and some sort of gutter material, where they have to deal with slope, corners, intersection parts, and solving the problem of getting the marble to its goal. Another example is the use of clear tubes, droppers, and funnels in water exploration, as described in the teacher's journal above. The materials themselves are open and the movement of the water is visible. A third example is the use of various types of building blocks and materials when investigating structures. In such an investigation, Legos can be temporarily removed because the fact that they fit reduces the challenge of building towers and walls and thus reduces the focus on the forces at play.

Time and space for science

Good scientific investigations take place over a long period of time, both short term and long term. Engaged children may stay with something for significant periods of time, and some children may need time to engage. Typical programming in children's classrooms often militates against inquiry-based learning in science. Short activity times or a choice of 20 or 30 minutes allow children to start but not continue their work. Furthermore, if the scientific work is episodic and not regularly available throughout the week, continuity is lost and the opportunity to draw conclusions is reduced. Science also needs to be discussed and documented. This also takes time. Science needs space. If the children are going to engage with the phenomena in many different ways, the activity may need to spread throughout the classroom and outdoors. Building structures can occur in the block area, on tables, on the sand table. Sprouts need to be placed somewhere, as do plants that grow in other ways and interesting outdoor collections. A shadow investigation might include a shadow puppet theater, a dark corner to play with flashlights and a lamp, and a screen to explore shapes. The implication of this need for space and time is that the focus in a scientific study may require other things to be set aside or changed. The morning circle routine can turn into a science lecture a few times a week. The dramatic play corner can be a shadow puppet theater, and the water table can be closed for washing dishes and bathing dolls.

Discussion and Representation in Science

Discussion and representation are critical to science learning and an important part of the inquiry process and the development of scientific reasoning. In both small and large groups, the discussion encourages children to think about what they have experienced, listen to the experiences of others, and reflect on their ideas. Similarly, role-playing using a variety of media, including drawing, writing and collage, encourages children to carefully observe and reflect on their experiences over time, as well as to develop vocabulary structures and language. George Forman, professor emeritus at the University of Massachusetts, in an unpublished commentary put it this way: “Experience is not the best teacher. It sounds like heresy, but thinking about it, it is the reflection on the experience that makes it educational” (Presentation of the Conference).

The role of the teacher

The teacher's role is central to children's science learning and is complex, informed by their knowledge of children, teaching and learning, and pedagogical knowledge of science. I want to highlight only one of them: pedagogical scientific knowledge. Children's scientific inquiry is guided by the teacher's explicit understanding of the important scientific concepts underlying the approach he has chosen. For example, the children's work with water in the teacher's journal shown above is about pipes and “Water City”, but also about how water flows, a basic property of liquids. Although explicit teaching of the concept is not appropriate, the structure of the experiences and the teacher's facilitation are guided by their understanding of the concepts and how children learn them. His questions, comments, and surveys draw children's attention to the concept, in this case, that water flows and flows down. In the snail study described above, the children were interested in many things: whether snails liked each other, how they had children, how they got into their shells. In the notes, we see the teacher capture one of these interests and a basic characteristic of the behavior and adaptation of animals: how they move. This type of teacher guidance and facilitation builds on each teacher's understanding of the concepts behind the children's work and enables them to encourage children to notice and reflect on key aspects of the phenomenon they are exploring.

For many years, the role of early childhood education has focused on children's social, emotional, and physical development, as well as basic language and numeracy skills. While working with materials is essential to early childhood, it is rare to focus children's thinking on the science of these experiences. Science activities are often seen as vehicles for building vocabulary and skills such as fine motor skills, counting, and color and shape recognition. These activities are not part of long-term explorations or sequenced projects focused on scientific concepts and emphasizing scientific inquiry processes. This is exacerbated when teachers are uncomfortable with science, have little scientific knowledge, and are not confident in their abilities to teach science to children.

In many settings, new insights into children's cognitive potential are not used to broaden and deepen the science curriculum to include deeper and more challenging experiences. Instead, the growing preoccupation with reading reinforced the almost singular focus on learning basic literacy, numeracy, and socialization skills. It is also putting more pressure on responsibility in the early childhood scene, leaving little room for children's rich play and exploration of the world around them.

Exploration of the natural world is a thing of childhood. Science, when viewed as a process of building understanding and developing ideas, is a natural focus in the early childhood program. As described here, children's inquiry into appropriate phenomena is not only the site for building foundational experiences for later scientific learning, but also fertile ground for the development of many cognitive skills. It is also a context in which children can develop and practice many basic literacy and numeracy skills. Ultimately, science is a collaborative enterprise in which working together and discussing ideas is central to practice.

This article is based on collaborative work with Ingrid Chalufour, Cindy Hoisington, and Jeff Winokur that resulted in the publication of the Young Scientist series (Chalufour & Worth, 2003, 2004, 2005) andWorms, Shadows and Swirls(Value and Grollman, 2003).

Bowman, Bárbara T.; Donovan, M.Suzanne; y Burns, M. Susan (eds.). (2001).Eager to Learn: Educating Our Preschoolers. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Chalufour, Ingrid y Worth, Karen; con Moriarty, Robin; Winokur, Jeff; y Grollman, Sharon (2003)🇧🇷 Discovering nature with young children(Young Scientist Series). S t. Paul, MN: Red Leaf Press.

Chalufour, Ingrid y Worth, Karen; con Moriarty, Robin; Winokur, Jeff; y Grollman, Sharon. (2004).Construction of structures with young children.(Young Scientist Series). S t. Paul, MN: Red Leaf Press.

Chalufour, Ingrid y Worth, Karen; con Moriarty, Robin; Winokur, Jeff; y Grollman, Sharon (2005)🇧🇷 Exploring the water with young children(Young Scientist Series). S t. Paul, MN: Red Leaf Press.

Duschl, Richard A.; Schweingruber, Heidi A.; y Shouse, Andrew W. (eds.). (2007).Bringing science to school: learning and teaching science in grades K-8.Washington, DC: National Academies Press.

Feynman , Richard P. (1997).Surely you are kidding, Mr. Feynman!: Adventures of a curious character.New York: WW Norton.

Michaels, Sara; Shouse, Andrew W.; y Schweingruber, Heidi A. (2007).Ready set science. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

National Research Council. (nineteen ninety six).National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Worth, Karen y Grollman, Sharon. (2003).Worms, Shadows, and Swirls: Science in the Early Childhood Classroom. Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann.

Karen is worth it
Science Education Center
Center for Educational Development, Inc.
Calle Capela 55
Newton, MA 02458-1060
Email:KWorth@edc.org