Final Report Summary - CREATIVELITTLESCIENT (Creative Little Scientists: Enabling Creativity through Science and Mathematics in Preschool and First Years of Primary Education)
Executive Summary:
Creative Little Scientists is a 30-month EU funded comparative study working across nine participating countries: Belgium, Finland, France, Greece, Germany, Malta, Portugal, Romania and the UK. The project focused on the relationships and synergies between science and mathematics education and creativity in preschool (children aged 3+) and early primary school (up to the age of 8). Creative Little Scientists documented current reality in the nine partner countries of the study, through survey and classroom focused research. The definition of creativity in early science and mathematics developed from the Conceptual Framework and subsequently refined through discussion with stakeholders is: Generating ideas and strategies as an individual or community, reasoning critically between these and producing plausible explanations and strategies consistent with the available evidence. This needs to be understood alongside the ‘Little c creativity’ definition (Craft, 2001).
The project identified synergies between inquiry based science education and creative approaches: Questioning and Curiosity; Motivation and Affect; Problem Solving and Agency; Dialogue and Collaboration; Play and Exploration; Reflection and Reasoning. The definition of creativity as above, and the synergies between inquiry based and creative approaches, have been empirically tested in diverse classroom contexts across Europe throughout the project and have been found to be both appropriate and valid across geographic and age contexts (3-8). However, there were often differences between policy and practice, between pre-school and early primary approaches, and whether the approaches were conceptualized as developing creativity. Learning approaches that addressed Motivation and Affect were common in both practice and policy but were not seen as creativity enabling. In contrast, Play and Exploration were seen as creativity enabling but were more prominent in pre-school classes.
Findings indicated considerable potential for inquiry and creativity in the opportunities teachers provided for the generation and evaluation of ideas and strategies in both preschool and primary settings. Opportunities for the generation of ideas, for example, were fostered by rich motivating contexts for play and exploration, whilst purposes for inquiry were linked to children’s everyday experiences and there was considerable scope for children’s decision making.
Across the episodes from the fieldwork there were many examples of children observing and making connections, for example drawing on prior learning or between experiences. Opportunities for children’s questioning were also present but not always recognised or built upon. There was greater evidence of children’s engagement in the social dimensions of inquiry, explaining evidence and communicating explanations than might have been expected from the findings of policy and teacher surveys; this was often prompted by dialogue with peers and adults. Explicit examples of children’s developing understanding of the nature of science were limited however starting points for the development of understanding of the nature of science was indicated in a number of episodes, in children’s reflections on learning in classroom discussion or in interviews with researchers.
A major outcome of the project is a set of curriculum design principles that was devised for teacher education. These are supported by a set of specific teacher outcomes and an extensive series of materials based on the fieldwork episodes, which illustrate the various teacher outcomes and design principles.
The key policy recommendations from the project related to:
• the aims of the curriculum, especially the processes associated with evaluation, as well as the generation of ideas in science and mathematics and fostering the social and affective dimensions of learning;
• teaching, learning and assessment, especially the roles of play-based approaches extending into primary school, space and time to develop inquiry approaches, focus on the nature of science and the role of creativity in science and mathematics, varied forms of representation, authentic contexts and issues around formative assessment;
• contextual factors, especially ensuring sufficient resources and facilities, on-going professional development and dialogue with parents and the wider community concerning the aims of science and mathematics in the early years.
Reference
Craft, A. (2001). Little c Creativity. In Craft, A., Jeffrey, B. and Leibling, M. Creativity in Education. London: Continuum. pp 45 – 61.
Project Context and Objectives:
CORE DRIVERS FOR CREATIVE LITTLE SCIENTISTS
The project Creative Little Scientists was informed by at least four key drivers that set the context for an increased research focus on science and mathematics education and creativity in the early years classroom:
• The role of an economic imperative within education
Research and policy literatures reveal that there are economic factors driving the focus on science and mathematics education as well as the inclusion of creativity in the classroom. Today’s knowledge economy dictates an imperative for countries to train scientists capable of competing globally (European Commission, 2006) and the European Commission emphasises the role of educators in this, with the European Commission documents (2007a, 2007b) identifying basic competence in science as a part of the spectrum of key attributes contributing to individuals’ personal fulfilment and development, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment. Moreover, the European Commission (2011) report emphasised the need for educators not only to foster science learning with confidence but to be able to reflect on their teaching and students’ learning – reflecting a strong European perspective that educators have a vital role to play in developing creativity in science education.
• The role played by science, mathematics and creativity in the development of children and of citizens.
As well as succeeding as scientists in the 21st century knowledge based society, it is perceived as important to develop socially aware and responsible citizens. Education must therefore strive to achieve this aim in the development of the child. There is growing recognition that scientific literacy plays an increasingly critical role not just for 21st century society, but for individuals (Harlen, 2008). Developing scientific and mathematical literate individuals then becomes an important part of the development of the child and the citizen. Looking at the world from a scientific perspective enriches the understanding and interaction with phenomena in nature and technology, empowers students (and therefore future adults) to take part in societal discussions and decision-making processes, and gives them an additional element from which to form interests and attitudes (Gago et al., 2004). As the need for more innovative thinkers increases, so the need to improve attitudes and the importance of scientific reasoning skills become more important. Indeed, in order to compete globally as future scientists, it is further important that individuals develop the skills and confidence to apply their knowledge in innovative ways. In Europe then, scientific literacy is viewed as a dimension of ‘democratic citizenship’, as an informed citizen can better contribute to the decisions of the community to which she/he belongs (European Commission, 2004).
Creativity is also framed as a valuable dimension in the lives of all. Craft (2002) and Gibson (2005) see creativity as an inherent capability in all people and an important part of childhood. As a dimension of fostering creative citizens, the latter part of the 20th century saw increased focus on the role of dialogue and collaboration in creativity. The field was influenced by Gruber’s (1989) and John-Steiner’s (2000) work and has been developed by many in education, most recently by Chappell (2008) who highlights the interplay between individual, collaborative and communal creativity.
• The role of early years education in building on children’s early experiences and in promoting positive skills and dispositions.
There is also increasing recognition that young children’s early educational experiences impact on later outcomes, not only in terms of educational attainment but also their attitudes towards learning (Sylva, 2009). In relation to science, this is reflected in six assertions by Eschach and Fried (2005:315) about why children benefit from early exposure to science: 1) Children naturally enjoy observing and thinking about nature; 2) Exposing students to science develops positive attitudes to science; 3) Early exposure to scientific phenomena leads to better understanding later in a more formal way; 4) The use of scientifically informed language at an early age influences the eventual development of scientific concepts; 5) Children can understand scientific concepts and reason scientifically; 6) Science is an efficient means for developing scientific thinking.
There are equivalent arguments made about young children’s creative capacities and the benefits of fostering their creative potential (e.g. Craft, 2002; Laevers, 2005). These tend to highlight that children are naturally curious and actively seek to problem find and problem solve, making connections and imagining what might be as they explore ideas and ask questions of themselves and others. In the process, it is posited, they develop their capacity to take risks and to engage creatively.
• The role of a digital or technological imperative within education.
Science, mathematics and creativity have evolved through rapid advances in digital technologies, which are shaping new literacies. Shaffer and Kaput (1998) argue that as mathematics is inseparable from the tools we use, such as calculators and computers, it is evolving with ‘virtual’ culture. Other digital technologies are not only altering the demands involved in recording and calculating, but are also gradually removing the demands of collecting, organising and presenting data. Various authors (e.g. Capobianco and Lehman, 2006; Wang et al., 2010) have claimed that technology is able to support inquiry in a variety of ways, including data collection, stimulating questioning and supporting thinking. There have also been examples of technology promoting creative behaviours in mathematics, such as generating more ideas and incorporating more elements in their patterns (Moyer-Packenham et al., 2008) or gaming, with children using hand held as well as fixed console digital technology to collaborate with others in generating content and understandings (Craft, 2011, 2012). Thus capabilities in science, mathematics and creativity are enabled through the rapid evolution of digital technologies but also to a degree demanded by these.
Alongside these wider societal issues, the project was informed by changing perspectives on children and increased awareness of the child as an active and competent meaning-maker. There is increasing recognition of children’s capacities to take ownership of their own learning and take part in decision making in matters that affect their lives in the present.
All three areas, science, mathematics and creativity are powerfully framed within a 21st century neo-liberal narrative around economic imperatives for flexible innovative thinkers who are also knowledgeable, competent and enthusiastic about science and mathematics, and who are also literate citizens in these areas. Economic factors therefore are significant, as are comparisons between countries’ achievements although it is important to question assumptions about how learning in the Early Years will ultimately translate to later economic gains and how comparative evaluations can be framed. Indeed, in the Early Years it is important to consider other reasons for greater attention to the relationships between science, mathematics and creativity. Looking at the world from a scientific perspective enriches the understanding and interaction with phenomena in nature and technology, empowers students (and therefore future adults) to take part in societal discussions and decision-making processes, and gives them an additional element from which to form interests and attitudes (Gago et al., 2004).
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
In the light of the above, the Creative Little Scientists project was a very timely intervention which set an overall twofold aim:
a) to provide Europe with a clear picture of existing and possible practices, as well as their implications and the related opportunities and challenges, in the intersection of science and mathematics learning, and creativity in pre-school and the first years of primary education (up to the pupil age of eight); and
b) to transform the knowledge generated through this into concrete contributions towards both relevant policy development and the training of preschool staff and primary school teachers so that they are empowered to exploit the potential of creativity-based approaches to Early Years science and mathematics learning.
Through this, in the long term the project aimed to enhance science and mathematics education in Europe in at least two ways. First, by supporting the emergence of appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics, helping to avoid the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images about science and mathematics in children, and attracting children’s interest to science and mathematics. Second, by connecting science education with Europe’s wider educational goals of improving the basic skills and promoting creativity in all children today and in the near future which subsequently can lead to the development of entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate in tomorrow’s adult citizens.
To achieve this aim, the Creative Little Scientists project brought together a consortium comprising expertise of the highest level and quality in the areas of science and mathematics education in Early Years, creativity in education, cognitive psychology, and comparative educational studies. This consortium designed and carried out a research programme which comprehensively integrated elements of comparative research, in-depth field research and curriculum design. The research was carried out in a sample of nine European countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Malta, Portugal, Romania, and the UK), which were carefully selected to represent a wide spectrum of educational, economic, social and cultural contexts, as well as a wide spectrum of practices regarding science and mathematics education in general, science and mathematics education in Early Years, and creativity in education.
In this context, the research was operationally defined in terms of the following specific objectives:
• To define a clear and detailed Conceptual Framework comprising the issues at stake and the parameters which needed to be addressed in all stages of the research. This was achieved through extensive reviews of policy-related and research-based literature at the beginning of the project. The literature reviews comprehensively and consistently covered areas as diverse as science and mathematics education with a focus on pre-school and first years of primary school, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, related teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as relevant issues from the wider areas of cognitive psychology and comparative education.
• To map and comparatively assess existing approaches to science and mathematics education in pre-school and first years of primary school (up to the pupil age of eight) in the nine sample countries, highlighting instances of, or recording the absence of, practices marrying science and mathematics learning, teaching and assessment with creativity. Such practices were mapped and compared consistently on the basis of a List of Factors which was developed in the light of the Conceptual Framework to define the scope, aspects to be addressed, and the dimensions for the comparison. To achieve this, the consortium conducted: (a) desk research looking at records of policies, curricula, reports and assessments of school practice in the nine sample countries; and (b) a questionnaire survey aiming to gain insights into teachers’ conceptualisations of science, mathematics and creativity education in real school life and in a range of contexts in the nine sample countries.
• To provide a deeper analysis of the implications of the mapped and compared approaches which would reveal the details of current practice and provide insights into whether and how children’s creativity is fostered and the emergence of appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics is achieved. This part of the research was accomplished through in-depth fieldwork involving the use of questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, and observations with teachers and children.
• To propose a set of curriculum design principles as concrete guidelines for European initial teacher training and continuous professional development programmes, which would foster creativity-based approaches to science and mathematics learning in preschool and the first years of primary education. The proposed principles are accompanied by illustrative teacher training materials aiming to clarify their applicability in complex and varied European educational contexts, thus facilitating implementation, evaluation and further development across Europe. This work was based on the findings of the above mentioned theoretical, comparative and in-depth field research, as well as through a process of continuous involvement of real-life communities of stakeholders from the nine sample countries (teachers, principals, teacher trainers, curriculum designers, policy makers, parents) in focus group discussions and testing and validation of the formulated curriculum design principles, implementing the methodology of curriculum design research.
• To exploit the results of the research at the European level as well as at national and institutional level, making them easily available to educational policy makers and other stakeholders, especially teacher training policy makers and institutions. This work had a special focus on teacher training, and is completed through the synthesis of all research outputs and their transformation into this Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children and also the set of Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders.
REFERENCES
CAPOBIANCO, B. and LEHMAN, J. 2006. Integrating technology to foster inquiry in an elementary science methods course: An action research study of one teacher educator’s initiatives in a PT3 project. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(2), 123-148.
CHAPPELL, K. 2008. Towards humanising creativity. UNESCO Observatory E-Journal 13, 1-10.
CRAFT, A. 2002. Creativity and Early Years education. London: Continuum.
CRAFT, A. 2011. Creativity and education futures. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
CRAFT, A. 2012. Childhood in a digital age: creative challenges for educational futures. London Review of Education, 10(2), 173-190.
ESHACH, H. and FRIED, M. N. 2005. Should science be taught in early childhood? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(3), 315-336.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2004. The teaching profession in Europe: Profile, trends and concerns. Report IV: Keeping teaching attractive for the 21st century-General lower secondary education: Key topics in education in Europe. Volume 3, Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2006. Science Teaching in Schools across Europe: Policies and Research. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 2007a. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European Agenda for Culture in a Globalizing World. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 2007b. Key competences for lifelong learning: European reference framework. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2011. Science education in Europe: National policies practices and research. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency EACEAE9 Eurydice, Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
GAGO, J. M., ZIMAN, J., CARO, P., CONSTANTINOU, C., DAVIES, G., PARCHMANN, I. et al. 2004. Increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe. Report Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
GIBSON, H. 2005. What creativity isn't: The presumptions of instrumentalism and individual justifications for creativity in education. British Journal of Educational Studies 53(2), 148-167.
GRUBER, H. 1989. Networks of enterprise in scientific creativity. In B. GHOLSON, W. R. SHADISH, R. A. NEIMEYER, A. C. C. HOUTS, (eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to meta-science. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.
HARLEN, W. 2008. Science as a key component of the primary curriculum: a rationale with policy implications. Perspectives on Education: Primary Science 1. Wellcome.
JOHN-STEINER, V. 2000. Creative collaboration New York. Oxford University Press.
LAEVERS, F. 2005. The curriculum as means to raise the quality of early childhood education: Implications for policy. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 13(1), 17-29.
MOYER-PACKENHAM, P., SALKIND, G. AND BOLYARD, J. 2008 Virtual manipulatives used by K-8 teachers for mathematics instruction: Considering mathematical, cognitive and pedagogical fidelity. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(3), 202-218.
SHAFFER, D. and KAPUT, J. 1998. Mathematics and Virtual Culture: an Evolutionary Perspective on Technology and Mathematics Education. Educational studies in mathematics, 37(2), 97-119.
SYLVA, K. 2009. Early Childhood Matters: Evidence from the effective pre-school and primary education project. London: Taylor and Francis.
WANG, F., KINZIE, M. B., McGUIRE, P. and PAN, E. 2010. Applying Technology to Inquiry-Based Learning in Early Childhood Education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(5), 381-389.
Project Results:
CONTRIBUTION OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In drawing together a review of policy-related and research-related literature covering fields including science and mathematics education in the early years, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as cognitive psychology and comparative education, the project’s Conceptual Framework provided a strong theoretical framework for the study.
Two particular features of the Conceptual Framework played key roles in fostering coherence and consistency in approach across the project and in themselves have the potential to contribute to future work in the field, the definition of creativity in early science and mathematics employed across the project and the synergies identified between inquiry based and creative approaches to learning and teaching, drawn from the reviews of science and mathematics education in the early years and creativity in education. The definition of creativity in early science and mathematics developed from the Conceptual Framework and subsequently refined through discussion with stakeholders is: Generating ideas and strategies as an individual or community, reasoning critically between these and producing plausible explanations and strategies consistent with the available evidence. This needs to be understood alongside the ‘Little c creativity’ definition (Craft, 2001) (as in Figure 1 in the attached document) insofar as this effort toward originality and value through imaginative activity drives creativity in other domains including early mathematics and science.
The project identified a number of synergies and differences between inquiry based science education (IBSE) and creative approaches (CA). The synergies identified are (see Figure 2):
• Play and exploration, recognising that playful experimentation/exploration is inherent in all young children's activity, such exploration is at the core of IBSE and CA in the Early Years.
• Motivation and affect, highlighting the role of aesthetic engagement in promoting children’s affective and emotional responses to science and mathematics activities.
• Dialogue and collaboration, accepting that dialogic engagement is inherent in everyday creativity in the classroom, plays a crucial role in learning in science and mathematics and is a critical feature of IBSE and CA, enabling children to externalise, share and develop their thinking.
• Problem solving and agency, recognising that through scaffolding the learning environment children can be provided with shared, meaningful, physical experiences and opportunities to develop their creativity as well as their own questions and ideas about scientifically relevant concepts.
• Questioning and curiosity, which is central to IBSE and CA, recognising across the three domains of science, mathematics and creativity that creative teachers often employ open ended questions, and promote speculation by modelling their own curiosity.
• Reflection and reasoning, emphasising the importance of metacognitive processes, reflective awareness and deliberate control of cognitive activities, which may be still developing in young children but which are incorporated into Early Years practice, scientific and mathematical learning and IBSE.
• Teacher scaffolding and involvement, which emphasises the importance of teachers mediating the learning to meet the children’s needs, rather than feel pressured to meet a given curriculum.
• Assessment for learning, emphasising the importance of formative assessment in identifying and building on the skills attitudes, knowledge and understandings children bring to school; supporting and encouraging children’s active engagement in learning and fostering their awareness of their own thinking and progress.
The definition of creativity as above, and the synergies between inquiry based and creative approaches, have been empirically tested in diverse classroom contexts across Europe throughout the project and have been found to be both appropriate and valid across geographic and age contexts (3-8). They have also proved productive and of interest more widely in the dissemination of the work of the project with varied stakeholders across and beyond Europe, including researchers, teachers and teacher educators.
The Conceptual Framework identified three broad strands that might be addressed across the phases of the project namely: Aims, purposes and priorities; Teaching, learning and assessment; and Contextual factors. These were further elaborated drawing on the curriculum dimensions associated with the ‘vulnerable spider web’: Rationale; Aims & Objectives; Learning activities; Teacher role; Assessment; Materials & Resources; Content; Grouping; Location; Time (see Figure 3), which identify key questions about aspects of learning in schools (van den Akker, 2007). The rationale in the middle of the spider web refers to the central mission of the curriculum. It is the major orientation point for curriculum design, and the nine other components are ideally linked to the rationale and preferably consistent with each other. The spider web illustrates the many interactions and interdependence of the parts but also their vulnerability. If you pull or pay too much attention to one of the components, the spider web breaks (van den Akker, 2007, p41).
The review of research findings related to creativity in learning and teaching was used to develop a List of Factors linked to these different dimensions that had been found to be associated with creativity in early science and mathematics. The curriculum dimensions and associated List of Factors provided an essential common framework across the different phases of research in capturing an in-depth empirical picture of conceptualisations, practices and outcomes related to opportunities for creativity in early science and mathematics.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The Creative Little Scientists project aimed to identify and characterise what, if any, creativity is evidenced in early science and mathematics (in relation both to children’s learning, and teachers’ pedagogy). As a consequence the study sought to produce a description or map of lived experience in Early Years science and mathematics education and to articulate what creativity in early science and mathematics looked like.
To reflect the conceptual and research foci and methodological framing developed in the Conceptual Framework, the research questions were framed around:
• capturing conceptualisations
• evidencing practice
• developing practice
and were:
RQ1. How are the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years in the partner countries conceptualised by teachers and in policy? What role if any does creativity play in these?
RQ2. What approaches are used in the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years in the partner countries? What role if any does creativity play in these?
RQ3. In what ways do these approaches seek to foster young children’s learning and motivation in science and mathematics? How do teachers perceive their role in doing so?
RQ4. How can findings emerging from analysis in relation to questions 1-3 inform the development of practice in the classroom and in teacher education (Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD))?
These questions were examined in relation to the curriculum dimensions and associated List of Factors found to be associated with creativity in early science and mathematics. In addition, for this study, these dimensions were grouped to reflect the two main foci of the fieldwork, informed by the pedagogical model developed by Siraj-Blatchford et al (2002) (see Figure 4), namely
• Pedagogical interventions (or interactions) documented by observing face to face classroom practice and listening to children’s reflections on this; and
• Pedagogical framing documented through teacher’s reflections on classroom practice and wider information concerning the teacher, school, curriculum and assessment.
The study also drew on wider contextual information concerning the teachers and schools and early years settings that participated in the fieldwork, and local curriculum and assessment policy to identify any enabling factors or barriers at the contextual level that might influence opportunities for creativity and inquiry in early science and mathematics.
To meet the project’s objectives and research questions, mixed methods were employed, combining quantitative approaches used in the surveys of policy and of teachers’ views based on the List of Factors, alongside qualitative approaches employed in the case studies of classroom practice and iterative processes associated with teacher education curriculum design research (see Figure 5). A total of 815 teachers from 605 schools (238 preschools and 367 primary schools) across the consortium countries participated in the teacher survey, and fieldwork was conducted on 48 different sites across partner countries resulting in 71 case studies of practices in Early Years science and mathematics education. The focus of the fieldwork in each country was on sites where there were indications that we would find ‘exemplary practices’ in fostering creativity and inquiry in early science and mathematics, covering all pupil age groups from age 3 up to 8 years and the range of provision of pre-primary and early primary education in the country. A total of 218 episodes of ‘exemplary practice’ were analysed and reported, including episodes focusing on science and mathematics and instances where science and mathematics were integrated in the episodes observed.
It was also recognized that policy and practice needed to be interpreted within partners’ particular national contexts, especially when making comparative judgments. As a result all phases of research were undertaken by local researchers and reported in separate National Reports. These were then synthesized to form overall Creative Little Scientists project reports, which are available on the project website (www.creative-little-scientists.eu).
KEY FINDINGS
RQ1. Conceptualisations of teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years by teachers (and in policy) in the partner countries. The role of creativity in these.
The explicit curriculum rationale for science education in nearly all partner countries was focused on children’s role as citizens and highlighted science and environmental awareness as a part of their life in general; this was also reflected in what teachers said. However the research findings revealed that teachers’ viewpoints regarding the rationale for science learning was in practice more holistic than what had been found in the policy documents in the partner countries. Learning aims and objectives were conceptualised by teachers as primarily contributing towards affective and social aspects of learning, such as increasing interest and positive attitudes towards science and science learning. These views contrasted with the emphasis in official policy documents on the development of knowledge and understanding of science and mathematics ideas and on process skills associated with scientific inquiry, especially in primary education.
In terms of learning activities, specific features of inquiry were conceptualised in both teachers’ views and through policy guidance. Teachers in the preschool and early primary science and mathematics classroom made reference to inquiry based learning, a key part of the policy framing in all countries, in particularly through learning activities associated with observation, questioning, communication and the use of simple tools, which all took a dominant place among inquiry related activities. Yet, despite this general conceptualization of inquiry based learning, teachers’ responses in fact rarely referred to inquiry activities related to practical investigations and using data to construct explanations.
In terms of conceptualisations about pedagogy teachers across the partner countries consistently and uniformly held a great appreciation for all valued pedagogical approaches that promote dialogue and collaboration in science amongst children, although teachers often failed to see the potential of these approaches for the development of creativity in children. This was consistent with policy which put some emphasis on their importance but included very limited reference to features of creativity that might be fostered through dialogue and collaboration and very limited guidance to support teachers in enabling creativity using classroom discussions and collaborative work.
There was an uneven treatment in both policy and reported practice of the approaches grouped in relation to the synergy motivation and affect. Learning approaches which are based on building on children’s prior experiences or relating science and mathematics to everyday life were amongst those reported as most frequently used by teachers and referenced in policy, although these were not highlighted as ‘creativity enabling’ either by teachers or by policy documents. In addition, approaches making use of drama or history to teach science and mathematics were promoted the least frequently both by teachers and in curricula, which also failed to make reference to their potential for creativity.
There was a similarly uneven treatment of approaches with reference to the synergy play and exploration. Preschool teachers reported using open forms of play and role play significantly more than early primary school teachers, and a greater proportion of preschool teachers also conceptualised these as ‘creativity enabling’. This was also reflected in preschool curricula across the partner countries with policy in the majority of them promoting playful exploration in preschool considerably more than in primary education. On the other hand teachers and policies of both phases were in agreement in fostering children’s physical exploration of materials, an approach also conceptualised as ‘creativity enabling’ by teachers and in policy, and especially for primary education.
Teachers, as well as policy guidance, emphasised teaching approaches linked to problem solving and agency across both phases of early years education. These approaches were also often suggested to foster children's creativity, particularly in preschool.
Learning approaches associated with questioning and curiosity and their importance in fostering creativity were similarly conceptualised by teachers and in policy guidance. Practices that encourage children to ask questions and foster their imagination were reported as frequently used by teachers, were emphasised in policy and were perceived by both as ‘creativity enabling’. In contrast, the role of teacher questioning and the value of varied approaches to children recording their ideas in supporting creative learning were given more limited recognition.
Learning approaches linked to fostering reflection and reasoning were perceived to have limited scope in promoting children’s creativity by both teachers and in policy documents, though teachers reported using them quite or very frequently.
In terms of teachers’ conceptualisations about scaffolding, teachers saw themselves as facilitators of children’s own inquiry, delaying instruction until the learner had had a chance to investigate and inquire on their own or with others. They were a little more reticent to allow children to find solutions on their own, although they strongly rejected the suggestion that they should first act as demonstrators of the correct solution before children investigate for themselves.
Assessment, especially formative assessment, was widely highlighted as an important area for development in both policy and practice in both preschool and primary phases. However, policy guidance in terms of both methods of assessment and criteria for assessing on-going progress was often found lacking which is reflected in considerable variability in assessment approaches found across partner countries.
A common tendency to focus on product instead of process in assessment, allied with the pressures of statutory summative assessment processes in a number of partner countries revealed a number of challenges related to assessment of inquiry and creativity. Whilst the assessment of science and mathematics was widely emphasised in policy, more limited attention was given to assessment of inquiry processes and procedural understanding, and even less to social and affective dimensions of learning across the majority of partner countries, even though these dimensions were often highlighted in the rationale and aims set out for early science and mathematics education. Teachers’ responses to the survey regarding their priorities for science assessment on the other hand were consistent with the frequency with which they indicated pursuing the corresponding aims and objectives in their science teaching.
Finally, there was very limited evidence in policy of a role for creativity either in the priorities or methods for assessment advocated. In particular, little attention was paid to multimodal forms of assessment or the involvement of children in assessment processes often associated with creative approaches to learning and teaching in the early years. Again here a contrast was noted between findings from the policy and teacher surveys as teachers reported taking account of children’s multimodal expressions for assessment purposes, especially in preschool.
RQ2. Approaches used in the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in early years: opportunities for inquiry and creativity.
Findings indicated considerable potential for inquiry and creativity in the opportunities teachers provided for the generation and evaluation of ideas and strategies in both preschool and primary settings. Opportunities for the generation of ideas, for example, were fostered by rich motivating contexts for play and exploration, whilst purposes for inquiry were linked to children’s everyday experiences and there was considerable scope for children’s decision making.
Dialogue and collaboration, promoted by widespread use of group work and teacher questioning, played important roles in encouraging the processes of reflection and explanation associated with the evaluation of ideas and strategies.
The potential of sensitive and responsive teacher scaffolding both to support independence and extend inquiry was underlined, particularly in relation to when to intervene and when to stand back in order to listen to and build upon children’s creative engagement and the development of their ideas and questions.
Opportunities for play were limited in primary settings. The value of play and exploration in the primary age phase could be more widely appreciated, for example in generating ideas and questions and fostering a feel for phenomena.
Findings suggested that the roles of varied forms of representation and the processes of representation (not just the product) in developing children’s thinking needed greater recognition, this included the role of ICT, particularly in preschool settings.
Assessment approaches observed were generally informal and formative and were based on observation and teacher questioning. There was limited evidence of the involvement of children in assessment, although interviews with children during fieldwork did indicate their capabilities to reflect on their learning and gave new insights into learning processes.
There were few examples of episodes involving the use of outdoor resources or non-formal settings for learning in museums or the wider community. Here differences were noted between preschool and primary settings. In a number of preschool settings, children had free access to outdoor areas, and the overall provision of space and staffing levels were more generous providing greater scope for practical exploration.
The aims of activities were often implicit. Where aims were made explicit, they rarely included an explicit focus on creativity although the promotion of creative dispositions was evident in the majority of episodes observed. In both preschool and primary settings there was a strong focus on social and affective factors of learning and the development of scientific and mathematical concepts and process skills was a common feature of episodes observed. Explicit focus on the nature of science was limited.
Findings underlined the important influence of teachers’ wider perspectives on learning and teaching, and their views of the nature of science and mathematics and understanding of creativity on the aims and approaches explicit or implicit in the activities observed. Teachers in most settings designed their own learning experiences with only a small proportion of episodes relying on textbooks or published schemes, where this was observed it was most common in the teaching of mathematics.
Partners commented on the greater scope for child-initiated activity and creative engagement in preschool settings, although this was not always recognised by teachers, and on the tendency for pressures of time and curriculum requirements to limit opportunities for children’s creativity and inquiry in primary settings.
RQ3. Ways in which these approaches seek to foster young children’s learning, interest and motivation in science and mathematics
Across the episodes there were many examples of children observing and making connections, for example drawing on prior learning or between experiences. Opportunities for children’s questioning were also present but not always recognised or built upon.
There was greater evidence of children’s engagement in the social dimensions of inquiry, explaining evidence and communicating explanations than might have been expected from the findings of policy and teacher surveys; this was often prompted by dialogue with peers and adults.
Explicit examples of children’s developing understanding of the nature of science were limited however starting points for the development of understanding of the nature of science was indicated in a number of episodes, in children’s reflections on learning in classroom discussion or in interviews with researchers.
Children’s inquiry skills and understandings noted in episodes were interconnected with evidence of a number of creative attributes. For example children’s motivation, curiosity and abilities to come up with something new were evidenced in raising questions and in their active pursuit of explorations and investigations. The episodes reported offered many examples of children’s sense of initiative and growing abilities to collaborate in deciding what to do in carrying out investigations. Children showed imagination, ability to make connections and thinking skills in offering explanations.
How do teachers perceive their role in doing so?
Teachers involved in the case studies often indicated that they had not previously thought about the approaches they adopted in terms of opportunities for inquiry and creativity. Fieldwork processes had prompted reflection on the nature of inquiry and creativity in early mathematics and science and how this might be fostered.
Most teachers made reference to the importance of encouraging and supporting young children’s engagement in early years science and mathematics as an important starting point for learning. Many emphasised the need to foster motivation and collaboration and provide a rich environment with space and time for exploration and problem-based learning, underlining key roles for teachers in encouraging reflection and making connections to promote children’s conceptual understanding and the application of ideas in varied settings.
In sharing their approaches limited explicit reference was made to the role of creativity or to features of inquiry in science and mathematics.
RQ4. How can findings emerging from analysis in relation to questions 1-3 inform the development of practice in the classroom and in teacher education (ITE and CPD)?
In the framework of the Creative Little Scientists project, a set of curriculum design principles, expressed as concrete guidelines, for European ITE and CPD programmes were developed with the purpose of enhancing the use of creative approaches to learning in pre-school and first years of primary school science and mathematics education. To this end, the methodology of curriculum design research was used.
The curriculum design research model in Figure 6 depicts the different phases – analytical, prototypical and assessment– of the design research process, as well as how the project’s research work and findings contributed to these.
The design principles and the successive guidelines were developed in collaboration with different relevant stakeholders in iterative cycles, represented by the gradually optimized and elaborated prototypes in Figure 6.
During the analytical phase, important issues from the Conceptual Framework and the associated literature reviews were combined with the corresponding viewpoints of the consortium partners and presented under the 10 curricular components (van den Akker, 2007), this time adapted to teacher education. Following further elaboration and feedback by the consortium partners, a draft version of the design principles (prototype 1) was prepared.
During the next phase, the prototypical phase, this draft version of design principles was evaluated and refined through iterative cycles with a view to developing curriculum guidelines for teacher education. In the first cycle, the draft version (prototype 1) of the prototypical design curriculum principles was adjusted for the purposes of teacher education, using a web-based expert appraisal panel, consisting of the Creative Little Scientists consortium partners. The results of this expert panel were analysed through negotiation and synthesis, and these results guided the development of prototype 2 of curriculum design principles.
In a following cycle, the draft prototypical design principles were evaluated in each of the partner countries by means of online focus groups for stakeholders. Moreover, they were analysed and further adjusted according to feedback from the partners, resulting in prototype 3 of curriculum design principles.
During the final cycle, prototype 3 was developed into the final set of curriculum design principles for teacher education. This was achieved through the organisation of face-to-face focus groups with teacher educators. Each partner provided context-specific examples of (best) practice, intended to clarify and illustrate the underlying messages of the final set of design principles. Additionally, the set of design principles was further refined based on the findings and implications in relation to research questions 1-3. These provided insights into the main focal issues that had to be addressed by teacher education in order to foster creativity in science and mathematics education in Early Years. They included:
• Perspectives on the nature of science and mathematics and the purposes of science and mathematics education in the early years.
• The characteristics and roles of creativity in learning and teaching in early mathematics and science.
• Use of the outdoor and wider school environment for learning in science and mathematics.
• Approaches to planning at whole school and class levels to maximize scope and flexibility to foster children’s inquiries and to provide opportunities for play and exploration (across both preschool and primary phases of education).
• Ways in which everyday learning activities can be opened up to allow space for children’s agency and creativity.
• The roles of questioning in supporting inquiry and creativity, different forms of teacher questioning, ways of supporting children’s questioning, recognising questions implicit in children’s explorations.
• Importance and roles of varied forms of representation, including the use of ICT, in supporting children’s learning processes.
• Assessment strategies and forms of evidence that can be used to support learning and teaching in early science and mathematics, the roles of peer and self-assessment.
Additonally, based on these issues, the curriculum design principles which referred to the Content component of the teacher education curriculum were elaborated into a specific and concrete set of statements: the Teacher Outcomes. These Teacher Outcomes can be seen as important content recommendations for teacher educators to frame their courses.
Finally, fieldwork provided classroom examples for use in teacher education programs to illustrate and discuss the potential for creativity and inquiry within everyday classroom practices in early science and mathematics. The partners were asked to review their data of the in-depth fieldwork (images, interviews and classroom extracts) and to select those images, interviews or classroom extracts which were linked to one or more of the Teacher Outcomes and which could stand on their own. A grid was provided to guide this selection. Templates were then used to structure the materials. In total about 171 Exemplary Teacher Training Materials or templates are available. These are all structured in an Excel-file and can be found on the website www.creative-little-scientists.eu.
CURRICULUM DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND ASSOCIATED TEACHER OUTCOMES
This section presents one of the main outputs of Creative Little Scientists, which is the Curriculum Design Principles for teacher education, grouped under van den Akker’s (2007) curriculum components, and the related set of Teacher Outcomes (for the 'Content' component). It is important to note that while the components and design principles are presented in a list, the components are not in any hierarchical order and should not be viewed in isolation as they are all closely interconnected and highly interdependent. All of the design principles are meant to be seen as equally important and a foundation for different curricula development routes in Europe. They also represent the starting point for discussions with various groups of stakeholders, amongst them teacher education policy makers and teacher educators in training institutions.
0. Rationale
Teachers should foster inquiry and creativity in science and mathematics learning in preschool and the first years of primary school
1. Aims and Objectives
Competences for teachers
In teacher education teachers should:
1.1 Acquire secure content knowledge of science and mathematics ideas and processes, as well as the skills and competences to carry out inquiries.
1.2 Acquire the pedagogical content knowledge to foster inquiry and creativity in Early Years science and mathematics, including the use of inquiry approaches.
1.3 Become confident and develop positive attitudes towards learning and teaching science, mathematics using inquiry and creativity based approaches.
1.4 Acquire the skills to act as researchers and reflective practitioners in learning and teaching science and mathematics, and should become able to discern and reflect on innovative ideas.
1.5 Acquire the knowledge and skills to support the diverse interests and needs of young children in engaging creatively within the fields of science and mathematics.
Foci of teacher education
Teacher education should:
1.6 Emphasise the importance of science and mathematics education for personal and society development by advocating its role in the preparation of scientific and mathematic literate citizens as well as the role of creativity in these domains and in human development.
1.7 Emphasise the pedagogical synergies between IBSE and creative approaches in both science and mathematics learning and teaching.
1.8 Foster teacher learning outcomes aligned with creative science and mathematics teaching strategies and assessment methods.
1.9 Foster teachers’ creativity and their potential to be creative in science and mathematics.
2. Role of teacher educator
Teacher educator profile
Teacher educators of science and mathematics education should:
2.1 Combine content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and teaching practice of science and mathematics.
2.2 Be reflective practitioners who promote creative approaches in their practice, including inquiry and problem solving.
2.3 Be willing to try new things and be open to taking risks in their practice, so they can bring in (new) effective pedagogy and approaches in the fields of science and mathematics.
2.4 Have the skills to build partnerships (e.g. communities) with different science and mathematics education stakeholders such as schools, science research centers, science museums, scientific and mathematics associations at national and local level, etc.
2.5 Be encouraged to be actively involved in research and discussion networks about science and mathematics education pedagogy.
Teacher educator role
Teacher educators should:
2.6 Take into consideration teachers' prior knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, fears, preconceptions (incl. stereotypical images), learning styles and experiences associated with learning and teaching science, mathematics, and creativity, and organize appropriate learning activities.
2.7 Make explicit connections among content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and teaching practice of science and mathematics, as well as between these and the development of creativity.
2.8 Practically demonstrate a variety of roles in their interactions with teachers e.g. facilitator, supporter, coordinator, leader, motivator, role model.
2.9 Model inquiry- and creativity-based learning, teaching and assessment practices, by for example encouraging teachers’ decision making during inquiry processes, and sharing, evaluating and reflecting on outcomes.
2.10 Model how teachers should select science and mathematics materials and resources for fostering creativity in mathematics and science.
3. Learning activities
Teacher education should provide learning activities in science and mathematics which:
3.1 Are inquiry-based, addressing all essential features of inquiry (questioning, designing or planning investigations, gathering evidence, making connections, explaining evidence, communicating and reflecting on explanations), and their various purposes and degrees of structure and guidance (including open, guided and structured inquiries).
3.2 Bring out the synergies between inquiry-based science and mathematics and approaches directed at developing learner creativity.
3.3 Are interactive, within a rich, motivating context, and should encompass a range of formal and informal learning approaches and strategies. Examples of such activities include lesson planning, discussions focused on fostering creativity; demonstrations of good practice; outdoor learning; field trips; project work.
3.4 Integrate science and mathematics learning, making use of real life, meaningful and interactive contexts, and illustrating the potential of such interdisciplinary approaches for inquiry and creativity.
3.5 Provide teachers with opportunities to recognize and better understand both young children’s learning of science and mathematics and the role of creativity within this, through for example classroom observations, collection and analysis of evidence, talking to children.
3.6 Attend to teachers’ different approaches to their own learning and encourage their expression and representation of scientific and mathematics ideas in various modes.
3.7 Help teachers reflect on their own prior knowledge, (mis)conceptions (incl. stereotypical images) beliefs and attitudes about science, mathematics and creativity, using a variety of approaches, such as microteaching, peer-observations, learning journals.
3.8 Support teachers’ learning, by providing them with illustrative examples of diverse practices for them to critically examine opportunities for creativity and inquiry in learning, teaching and assessment.
3.9 Are a variety of individual and collaborative to promote teachers’ creative thinking skills and dispositions.
4. Assessment
Focus of assessment
In teacher education:
4.1 Teachers’ acquisition and development of science/mathematics content and pedagogical content knowledge, skills and attitudes should be assessed.
4.2 The development of teachers’ inquiry and creativity-based teaching and assessment approaches should be assessed.
4.3 Teachers’ acquisition and development of understanding about what it is to foster children’s creativity in science and mathematics should be assessed.
4.4 The development of teachers’ abilities to plan for, foster, reflect upon and assess children's creativity in science and mathematics education should be assessed.
Process of assessment
Teacher education should:
4.5 Promote teachers’ independence and responsibility in identifying their own progress and areas for development both in the fields of science and mathematics education and in the fostering of creativity within these fields.
4.6 Use different assessment strategies in order to assess holistically cognitive, social and affective aspects of science and mathematics learning, as well as tap into the potential for peer and self-assessment.
4.7 Use different forms of evidence (e.g. portfolios, teacher diary, observation lists, tests, essays, project work, teaching practice) for assessment purposes.
5. Content
Teacher education should:
5.1 Provide content knowledge about science and mathematics, including interesting and current topics, to be used in activities linked with everyday life.
5.1.1 Teachers should be able to pursue the social and affective objectives of children’s science and mathematics learning, in synergy with the corresponding cognitive ones.
5.1.2 Teachers should be able to make children aware of connections between science and mathematics learning and their everyday lives, in order to engage their motivation, interest and enjoyment in science and mathematics and foster curiosity and creativity.
5.2 Provide teachers with skills and competences to carry out practical investigations of science and mathematics in the classroom.
5.2.1 Teachers should be able to instigate and involve children in the design and conduct of practical investigations of science and mathematics in the classroom, as such activities can contribute to the development of children’s creativity.
5.2.2 Teachers should have a more detailed knowledge about the nature of inquiry and investigations in Early Years science and mathematics in order to be able to recognise the opportunities they offer both for creative learning and developing children’s creativity.
5.3 Advance teachers’ understandings about the nature of science and how scientists work, confronting stereotypical images of science and scientists.
5.3.1 Teachers should be able to advance children’s understanding about the nature of science and how scientists work, confronting stereotypical images of science and scientists.
5.3.2 Teachers should be able to recognize young children’s capabilities to engage with processes associated with the evaluation as well as generation of ideas in science and mathematics, since these processes are also important for the development of learner creativity.
5.3.3 Teachers should be able to use foster the processes of imagination, reflection and consideration of alternative ideas in supporting children’s understanding of scientific ideas and procedures and development of creativity.
5.4 Promote understandings about the nature and framings of creativity, characteristics of creative teaching and learning, and how creativity is manifest in Early Years science and mathematics.
5.4.1 Teachers should be able to recognize how creativity is manifest in Early Years science and mathematics and have knowledge of distinctions between features of creative teaching and creative learning.
5.5 Provide knowledge about how children’s creativity development could be enhanced and assessed within science and mathematics education.
5.5.1 Teachers should have detailed knowledge about the synergies between inquiry and creativity, such as play and exploration, motivation and affect, dialogue and collaboration, problem solving and agency, questioning and curiosity, reflection and reasoning; and teacher scaffolding and involvement, to support children’s creative learning and advance their creativity within science and mathematics education
5.6 Provide pedagogical content knowledge to stimulate inquiry and problem solving in science and mathematics education.
5.6.1 Teachers should have knowledge of all essential features of inquiry and problem solving (questioning, designing or planning investigations, gathering evidence, making connections, explaining evidence, communicating and reflecting on explanations), their different purposes, degrees of structure and guidance (including open, guided and structured inquiries), and varied opportunities they offer for creativity.
5.6.2 Teachers should be able to open up everyday learning activities to allow greater opportunities for inquiry, problem solving and scope for creativity.
5.6.3 Teachers should be able to recognise the key roles of children’s questioning and existing ideas (both implicit and explicit) of science and mathematics.
5.6.4 Teachers should be able to use a variety of strategies for eliciting and building on children’s questions and ideas during inquiry processes (before, during and after explorations and investigations).
5.6.5 Teachers should be able to foster opportunities for children’s agency and creativity in learning in inquiry and problem solving – in particular the importance of children making their own decisions during inquiry processes, making their own connections between questions, planning and evaluating evidence, and reflecting on outcomes.
5.7 Familiarise teachers with a range of formal and informal inquiry- and creativity-based learning, teaching and assessment approaches and strategies and their use in relation to authentic problems within the areas of science and mathematics.
5.7.1 Teachers should have knowledge of a range of formal, non-formal and informal learning, teaching and assessment approaches and strategies to promote creativity in their Early Years science and mathematics classroom.
5.7.2 Teacher should be able to use a range of strategies both formal and informal for supporting children’s extended engagement with an area of study and progression in learning in science and mathematics.
5.7.3 Teachers should be able to recognize and exploit the value of play and exploration in science and mathematics for fostering and extending inquiry and creativity, by for example prompting questions, eliciting ideas, providing opportunities for consideration of alternative strategies during children’s familiarisation with phenomena and events.
5.7.4 Teacher should be able both to build in new and to make the most of existing opportunities for child-initiated play, recognising and capitalising on the potential of children’s explorations beyond the teacher’s original intentions.
5.7.5 Teachers should be able to use a range of creative contexts and approaches for provoking children’s interest, motivation and enjoyment in science and mathematics, such as stories, poems, songs, drama, puppets, games.
5.7.6 Teachers should be able to use strategies for making and building on science and mathematics real life connections and applications for engaging creatively young children in science and mathematics learning.
5.7.7 Teachers should be able to assume a variety of roles in their interactions with the children e.g. allower, leader, afforder, coordinator, supporter, tutor, motivator and facilitator, to support children’s creativity and inquiry in science and mathematics.
5.7.8 Teacher should be able to use a variety of scaffolding techniques to promote creativity in science and mathematics, from standing back in order to observe, listen and build from the children’s interests, to intervening with appropriate questioning to support and extend inquiries.
5.7.9 Teachers should be able to use different assessment approaches and strategies and in particular those that involve children in the assessment processes, such as peer and self assessment, dialogue and feedback on progress, in the Early Years science and mathematics classroom.
5.7.10 Teachers should value and be able to make use of varied forms of assessment evidence (including children’s portfolios, individual or group records of activities), both to promote creative learning, through reflection and discussion in science and mathematics, and explicitly to inform teaching and longer term planning.
5.8 Enable teachers to design and assess creativity-enabling inquiry-based activities which are child-friendly and include both guided and open inquiries.
5.8.1 Teachers should be able to design and assess open-ended learning activities.
5.9 Enable teachers to make best use of and assess the various modes of expression and representation of science and mathematics learning to support inquiry and the development of creativity.
5.9.1 Teachers should be able to recognize and value children’s various forms of expression and representation of their ideas and learning in science and mathematics.
5.9.2 Teachers should be able to make best use of children’s preferred forms of expression and representation of their science and mathematics ideas to support inquiry and their creativity development.
5.9.3 Teachers should be able to select and use different approaches for and forms of recording children’s ideas and learning in science and mathematics at different stages of the learning process and for various purposes, including to support children’s reflection and reasoning processes.
5.9.4 Teachers should be able to use the various modes of children’s expression and representation of science and mathematics ideas (e.g. pictures, graphs, gestures, physical activities) for assessment purposes.
5.10 Enable teachers to recognize and build on children’s questionings, ideas, theories and interests for the teaching of science and mathematics.
5.10.1 Teachers should be able to use a range of strategies for picking up on children’s ideas, theories and interests.
5.10.2 Teachers should be able to build flexibility into planning to take advantage of unexpected events, children’s interests and questions.
5.11 Enable teachers to use questioning effectively and encourage children’s questions in order to foster creativity and inquiry.
5.11.1 Teacher should be able to use different forms of questioning at appropriate points to scaffold creative learning outcomes in science and mathematics, and in particular to encourage children’s reflections and explanations, foster their independence and extend their inquiry.
5.11.2 Teachers should value and be able to build on the potential of children’s own questions to foster their curiosity in science and mathematics, and support their generation and follow up, including those that are investigable.
5.12 Provide knowledge about early child development, the purposes and aims of science and mathematics education, and their place in the Early Years curriculum.
5.12.1 Teachers should have knowledge of the various purposes and aims of science and mathematics education in compulsory schooling.
5.12.2 Teachers should have knowledge of the prevailing academic rationale for the place of science and mathematics in the Early Years curriculum.
5.12.3 Teachers should have knowledge of the role of creativity in child development and in the fields of science and mathematics.
5.12.4 Teachers should be able to contribute towards the goal of preparing creative citizens, who have scientific and mathematic literacy.
5.12.5 Teacher should be able to align the aims and rationale for Early Years science and mathematics education with their teaching and assessment approaches and priorities.
5.12.6 Teachers should be able to support the diverse interests and needs of young children in engaging creatively within the fields of science and mathematics.
5.13 Provide teachers with knowledge about the relevant education policy guidelines and documents for science, and mathematics education (and the role of creativity in them) at national level, as well as about the corresponding policy trends at European level.
5.13.1 Teachers should have knowledge about the relevant education policy guidelines and documents for science, and mathematics education (and the role of creativity in them) at national level, as well as about the corresponding policy trends at European level.
5.14 Equip teachers with knowledge and skills to use a range of formal, non-formal and informal learning environments, including the outdoor environment, both the school grounds and the wider environment beyond the school, in their teaching of science and mathematics.
5.14.1 Teachers should be able to make use of varied settings for science and mathematics learning, including flexible use of the environment both indoors and out.
5.14.2 Teachers should be able to recognise and build on opportunities for informal learning in science and mathematics within the school environment, for example within day to day routines or child-initiated games and other activities in school classrooms or outdoor play areas.
5.14.3 Teachers should be able to elicit and build on children’s informal learning of science and mathematics outside school, at home or in the wider environment.
5.14.4 Teachers should be able to manage visits with children to the outdoor and wider environment beyond the school, addressing issues of health and safety, liaison with parents, building progression in experience inside the classroom.
5.15 Promote teachers’ use of group work to support children’s inquiry processes and creative learning.
5.15.1 Teachers should have knowledge of the value of collaboration for inquiry and creative thinking and learning.
5.15.2 Teachers should be able to purposefully use a variety of patterns of collaboration, shifting between individual and collaborative activity over time, to support children’s inquiry processes and creative learning.
5.15.3 Teachers should be able to organize group work, aligning ways of grouping children, task design, teaching and assessment strategies in different ways to promote collaboration amongst children in science and mathematics.
5.15.4 Teachers should be able to use resources and teacher intervention appropriately to foster collaboration in science and mathematics.
5.15.5 Teachers should be able to assess group work.
5.15.6 Teachers should be able to use effective strategies for sharing ideas and discussions from different groups.
5.16 Provide teachers with knowledge of approaches to timetabling and organizing cross-curricular project work.
5.16.1 Teacher should be able to use approaches to cross- thematic, cross-curricular and project work to promote creativity in science and mathematics.
5.16.2 Teachers should be able to use a variety of approaches to timetabling, within the existing curriculum and policy expectations to allow space for cross-curricula project work and child-initiated exploration and inquiry.
5.16.3 Teachers should be able to build connections across the curriculum of various kinds and with potential to contribute to children’s inquiry and creativity.
5.17 Address with teachers issues in ensuring rich provision, planning and use of resources (including digital resources) in and out of the classroom to support children’s inquiry and creativity.
5.17.1 Teachers should be able to organise and use materials (including everyday materials), resources (including ICT and natural resources) and equipment (including digital equipment and simple laboratory instruments) in the classroom, school and wider environment, both indoors and out, to support independent inquiry and creativity.
5.17.2 Teachers should be able to recognize the nature and potential of different materials and resources both to constrain and extend children’s explorations.
5.17.3 Teachers should be able to evaluate and select creativity enabling ICT resources for children to use in their inquiry.
5.17.4 Teachers should be able to evaluate provision for free flow play in their school settings.
5.17.5 Teachers should be able to develop and extend their own classroom resources to foster creativity in the Early Years science and mathematics classroom.
5.17.6 Teachers should be able to gain insights into children’s developing explorations and creativity based on their use of resources.
5.17.7 Teachers should be able to develop the school grounds and the outdoor classroom for use in science and mathematics education.
5.18 Encourage and assess the development of teachers’ literacy, numeracy and digital literacy skills through science and mathematics.
5.18.1 Teachers should develop their literacy, numeracy and digital literacy skills through science and mathematics.
6. Materials and resources
Teacher education should:
6.1 Provide ICT infrastructure and logistical support to teachers to access diverse learning materials and resources, which may include web-based resources, social media, videogames, online academic journals and databases, as well as other digital technologies, such as cameras, tablets, and other digital devices.
6.2 Facilitate and promote access to a variety of Early Years science and mathematics curriculum materials and resources fostering inquiry and creativity. These should be both for indoor and outdoor use and include everyday materials, picture and story books, building blocks, equipment for hands-on exploration.
6.3 Facilitate and promote access to materials and resources (including everyday materials) fostering inquiry and creativity in Early Years science and mathematics.
7. Grouping
Teacher education should:
7.1 Provide a range of learning trajectories to teachers to choose from according to their needs and preferences.
7.2 Promote collaborative learning practices, including peer learning, in science and mathematics education in order to foster creativity and inquiry.
7.3 Promote team teaching and working in the fields of science and mathematics education.
7.4 Support teacher collaboration, including at a distance through digital media and other ICT tools that make this possible.
7.5 Provide interaction and interdisciplinary collaboration opportunities amongst student teachers, in-service teachers, science experts, research scientists, teacher educators, children, and educational establishments and organizations.
8. Location
Teacher education should:
8.1 Take place in a variety of learning environments (formal, non-formal and informal, indoor and outdoor), including e.g. science museums, science research centers, natural habitats, etc., modelling their subsequent use for inquiry and creativity in the classroom.
8.2 Facilitate access to industries and research centres of science and mathematics to promote collaboration, sharing, visiting, and networking of teachers.
8.3 Provide opportunities for place-independent and collaborative learning, i.e. flexibility and variety of teaching locations.
9. Time
Teacher education should:
9.1 Provide time for teachers to interact with colleagues: e.g. collegial consultation/reflection, teamwork, mind mapping, vision-building.
9.2 Allow sufficient time for teachers to explore opportunities for creativity in learning and teaching in early science and mathematics and to gain confidence through the process.
9.3 Provide opportunities for time-independent (distance) learning.
9.4 Model different approaches to timetabling science and mathematics education, encouraging interdisciplinary and project work.
IMPLICATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Findings from the project have also contributed new insights into the opportunities for inquiry and creativity in policy and practice in early years science and mathematics education.
The policy and teacher surveys conducted across the varied contexts in the partnership, indicate potential for inquiry and creativity, shown for example in common emphases on the importance of play, exploration and investigation and the promotion of curiosity or thinking skills in policy and in the priority given by teachers to the importance of social and affective factors in learning. However whilst policy in many of the partner countries advocates inquiry-based approaches, there are relatively few explicit references to creativity in learning within policy documentation. Though creative dispositions (e.g. curiosity or thinking skills) are mentioned, these are not framed within overt aims to foster creativity in teaching and learning. In addition although in some instances general references to creativity and inquiry are expressed in policy, these are often not reflected in specific curriculum or assessment requirements. This provides arguably conflicting and incoherent support for teachers and schools. Furthermore the emphasis is generally on the generation of ideas with more limited indications of scope for creativity in the evaluation and development of ideas and strategies or of ways in which children’s involvement in assessment might contribute to these processes of evaluation.
The episodes reported in the Country Reports of fieldwork provide rich evidence of children’s capacities for inquiry and creativity. They illustrate features of pedagogy related to the synergies between inquiry-based and creative approaches identified in the Conceptual Framework, for example through an emphasis on motivation and affect, reflection and reasoning, opportunities for problem solving and agency and the encouragement of dialogue and collaboration. Episodes also indicate the potential for sensitive scaffolding through teachers standing back to watch and listen attentively as well as to intervene to extend children’s understanding in diverse ways. However findings from across the partnership suggest areas for further development and examination for example in relation to the more limited opportunities for play and for questioning reported in primary settings. It would be valuable to exemplify ways of creating such opportunities in the primary age phase within the greater constraints of time and curriculum requirements. Finally experiences during fieldwork in a number of settings highlighted the value of sharing fieldwork processes and outcomes with participants and the potential for the use of project findings to enhance recognition of opportunities for inquiry and creativity. This provided important feedback to inform development of the teacher training materials.
Findings suggest a number of implications for future research, particularly in relation to factors that were not strongly represented in the data such as:
• Opportunities for outdoor learning in the wider school environment
• The potential of children’s use of ICT to enhance inquiry and creativity
• Role of representation in varied modes in fostering young children’s reflection and reasoning
• Opportunities for exploring the nature of science with young children
Or aspects of practice that it was more difficult to observe with the limitations of staffing and time including:
• Role of free flow play in fostering inquiry and creativity over time
• Contribution of informal and non-formal approaches to young children’s learning in science and mathematics
• The contribution of peer and self-assessment to the development of creative dispositions in early science and mathematics.
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT ACROSS EUROPE IN EARLY YEARS SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION
A significant strand of the project was also the development of guidelines for policy development building on findings from the different phases of the study, summarised in the previous sections, and ongoing collaboration and dialogue with participants and other stakeholders. They are presented in relation to the key strands of importance in relation to opportunities afforded for inquiry, problem solving and creativity in early years mathematics and science: aims, teaching learning and assessment and contextual factors.
Aims
The aims of the curriculum should
Give greater recognition to young children’s capabilities to engage with processes associated with evaluation as well as the generation of ideas in science and mathematics.
One of the four key common drivers for an increased research focus on science and mathematics education and creativity in the early years classroom identified by the Creative Little Scientists Conceptual Framework calls for growing recognition of young children’s capabilities and the importance of early years education in building on children’s early experiences and promoting positive skills and dispositions. The review of relevant literature revealed an increasing recognition of children’s capacities to take ownership of their own learning and take part in decision making in matters that affect their lives in the present. The review of policy notes a lack of coherence in policy in this aspect, for example a mismatch between rationale or aims that might emphasise the promotion of inquiry skills and creative dispositions, and assessment methods and criteria that allow limited opportunities for children to show their capabilities. Having said this, teachers need help to recognise more fully young children’s capabilities to engage with processes associated with the evaluation as well as generation of ideas in science and mathematics.
Foster the role of social and affective dimensions of learning and their connection with cognitive dimensions of learning such as engagement, evaluation skills and understandings related to the nature of science.
The aims, objectives, and content of the science curriculum in partner countries give considerable emphasis to the development of knowledge and understanding of science ideas and process skills associated with scientific inquiry than to social and affective factors of science learning. The review of policy across partner countries showed that social and affective dimensions of learning are given more limited attention compared to cognitive dimensions. More particularly, the majority of policy documentation inspected lacked emphasis on promoting positive attitudes to learning and interest in early years science education.
Teaching, learning and assessment
Curriculum content and policy guidance should
Emphasise the important roles of play-based approaches, child–initiated activity and practical investigation in both preschool and early primary school.
The Creative Little Scientists Conceptual Framework considers playful experimentation and exploration is inherent in all young children's activity; such exploration is at the core of IBSE and CA in early years settings. The significance of play in early learning is widely recognised in the literature but also represents the focus of considerable research within both IBSE and CA. Policy in the majority of partner countries promotes playful exploration in preschool considerably more than in primary education, with guidance that suggests a recognition of its value in promoting creative skills and dispositions. This different pedagogical approach between the two stages was apparent in the classroom observations of the in-field research. Preschool teachers use open forms of play and role play significantly more than early primary school teachers, and a greater proportion of preschool teachers also conceptualise these as ‘creativity enabling’. Play was the factor that featured least in primary settings. The value of opportunities for play and exploration in the primary age phase could be more widely appreciated, in generating ideas and questions and a feel for phenomena. Findings from across the partnership reveal areas for further development and examination for example in relation to the more limited opportunities for play and for questioning reported in primary settings. It would be valuable to exemplify ways of creating such opportunities in the primary age phase within the greater constraints of time and curriculum requirements.
Give detailed attention to key features of problem solving and inquiry based learning and teaching particularly with regards to providing sufficient space and time in the curriculum for problem solving and inquiry to study areas in depth. Emphasise also the need for space and time for teachers to develop inquiry approaches and explore opportunities for creativity in learning and teaching in early science and mathematics.
Curriculum and assessment requirements, and space and time at school level can constrain teaching approaches, particularly in primary settings. Findings from the in-field research reveal pressures of time and curriculum requirements that drastically limit opportunities for children’s creativity and inquiry in both settings. This tendency is observed consistently in both preschool and primary education, although feature more strongly in primary education. Most teachers emphasised the need to provide a rich environment with space and time for exploration and problem-based learning, underlining key roles for teachers in encouraging reflection and making connections to promote children’s conceptual understanding and the application of ideas in varied settings. The case studies indicated ways in which school organisation of resources, space, staffing and timetabling can support, or act as a barrier, to creativity and inquiry both in teaching and learning. Findings indicated that more flexible timetabling and the more holistic approaches to learning and teaching commonly associated with preschool settings allowed teachers greater flexibility to follow children’s interests over time and to revisit experiences, making provision for children to encounter ideas in a range of contexts. The challenge here was often less one of time but of recognising and building on children’s emerging interests, skills and creative ideas.
Include more explicit and detailed focus on the role of creativity in early science and mathematics. Provide explanation and illustration of the nature of creativity in learning and teaching in early years science and mathematics.
Findings from all research phases of the project suggest that a more explicit and detailed focus in policy on the role of creativity in early science and mathematics would be helpful. Where explicit references are made to creativity in policy they are often in very general terms without provision of guidance about what this might mean in the context of early science and mathematics. The review of policy across partner countries identified implicit connections to creativity in policy for early years science and mathematics, but these need to be drawn out and exemplified to support teachers in translating policy priorities concerning creativity into specific classroom practices. Furthermore, while certain teaching approaches are often signaled as associated with creativity, such as problem solving and the use of digital technologies, there is limited indication in policy of how such approaches might be used to foster creativity or inquiry in early science and mathematics.
Promote the role of inquiry activities in supporting the children’s understanding of science ideas and nature of science. Give more attention to reflection, consideration of alternative ideas building on the social and collaborative features of learning and inquiry.
Approaches to teaching and learning associated with inquiry and creativity are widely included in policy guidance in partner countries. In preschool, priority is given to play and fostering autonomy, while greater importance is afforded to investigation and problem solving in primary education. It was notable however that in most countries, references to the role of discussion of alternative ideas and understandings related to the nature of science were rarely made in official guidance. Similarly, official guidance rarely indicated roles for creativity associated with the development of science ideas, reflected in limited attention given to fostering imagination or discussing alternative ideas in the teaching approaches advocated. In more general terms, connections to creativity in policy were largely associated with the generation, rather than the evaluation of ideas. In seeking to foster opportunities for inquiry and a role for creativity, greater recognition could be given in policy to the roles of imagination, reflection and consideration of alternative ideas in supporting children’s understanding of scientific ideas and procedures. Consideration of alternative ideas is also connected to social factors in learning and the provision of opportunities for development of understandings associated with the nature of science. Explicit focus on the nature of science was limited, as evident by the findings from the policy and teacher surveys and the in-field research conducted by Creative Little Scientists.
Recognise the importance and roles of varied forms of representation, including the use of ICT, in supporting children’s learning processes.
The research indicates that the role of varied forms of representation in learning could be more widely recognised. There are important roles for expression and recording in different modes in encouraging reflection and evaluation of ideas, strategies and learning and providing a basis for discussion and dialogue with others. These may take many forms: children’s talk, gestures, drawing, their writing and text-making questioning assumptions, redefining problems and considering what else might be possible, and may involve the use of digital technologies. Children’s creativity is revealed through these means as well as their understandings. In whatever form children have expressed their ideas, the teacher, in focusing the young learners’ attention on how they think about something, fosters the child’s meta-cognitive awareness, helping them to make the implicit more explicit. While there were examples of children’s employment of diverse forms of expression across the episodes, this was another factor where partners suggested that the range of approaches might be extended, in particular to incorporate children’s greater use of ICT. Fieldwork indicated the value of dialogue with children about their recordings, and the potential of representation and expression, not just for recording outcomes, but for fostering reflection and reasoning processes.
Encourage meaningful and authentic contexts for inquiry, linked for example, to: events and experiences in everyday life; children’s interests and concerns; questions emerging from cross-curricular projects or explorations; and issues in the wider environment beyond school.
Notwithstanding the recognition that IBSE and CA both include attention to problem solving in exploratory contexts, in which questions, collaboration, motivation and reflection play a significant role, the efficacy of these approaches depend in large part on the teacher’s role, scaffolding children’s learning. Findings from the review of policy suggest that limited attention is given in policy to contexts for learning such as drama, stories, historical projects or everyday experiences in the environment. Exemplification would be valuable of the kinds of contexts teachers can provide, and ways of capitalising upon them to foster inquiry and creativity. The results of the in-field research indicated the important contribution of rich, motivating contexts in generating ideas, questions and interests, but also the need for teacher sensitivity to features of inquiry and emerging ideas implicit in young children’s explorations, as well as for time and teacher flexibility to build on these.
Create coherence in assessment between the aims and objectives of learning and priorities in assessment. More attention should be given to social and affective and inquiry related issues in assessment guidelines.
A common theme to emerge across the research carried out by the project was lack of policy guidance in terms of both methods of assessment and criteria for assessing on-going progress, resulting in considerable variability in approaches adopted among partner countries. The findings also revealed particular challenges in assessment related to inquiry and creativity, linked to a common tendency to focus on product rather than process in assessment requirements, allied with the pressures of statutory summative assessment processes in a number of partner countries. For example while assessment of science ideas is widely emphasised in policy, more limited attention is given to assessment of inquiry processes and procedural understanding and even less to social and affective dimensions of learning, although these dimensions are often highlighted in the rationale and learning aims set out for early science and mathematics education. This mismatch identified between rationale/aims of science education and guidance provided for assessment in official policy across partner countries however is not apparent in teachers’ views, where a consistency on valuing social and affective dimensions of teaching and learning is evident throughout the spider-web curriculum dimensions and assessment in particular.
Foster the development of on-going assessment strategies and criteria for assessment to better reflect the emphasis on inquiry and creativity in the aims for science and mathematics in the early years.
Policy in relation to assessment showed the widest variation across partner countries. In many cases findings reflected the limited guidance for science assessment and inconsistencies in emphasis across different elements in curriculum policy. There is very limited evidence in policy of a role for creativity either in the priorities or methods for assessment advocated across partner countries. Greatest emphasis is given to the assessment of science ideas. Understandings and competencies in relation to scientific inquiry are emphasised in assessment policy in a minority of countries and in only a few instances are attitudes a priority for assessment in science. In general, guidance in relation to assessment methods is limited in the majority of countries across the Creative Little Scientists consortium.
Provide further guidance on formative assessment approaches to support classroom practices. Assessment methods should be clearly linked to the multimodal approaches used in classroom practices. Policy statements should foster the use of children’s involvement in assessment and provide increased opportunities to mirror the children’s various strengths and opportunities in their learning.
While the importance of formative assessment is increasingly recognised in policy, the Report on Mapping and Comparing Recorded Practices indicates that further guidance would be valuable to support classroom practices in assessment. Areas highlighted in particular include: the use of multimodal forms of assessment to give young children opportunities to show best what they understand and can do; ways of involving children in peer and self-assessment to support children’s reflection on inquiry processes and outcomes; and criteria to assess progression in learning, particularly in relation to inquiry and the development of dispositions associated with creativity. In the majority of partner countries there is very limited or no mention of the value of drawing on a variety of evidence such as pictures, graphs and relevant gestures for assessment purposes. Again here a contrast was noted between findings from the policy and teacher surveys as the teachers’ responses to the relevant survey items showed that teachers’ approaches to assessment tend to include evaluation of children’s responses in varied modes, particularly in Greece, Romania, and in England where preschool teachers reported taking account of children’s multimodal expressions for assessment purposes. The same cannot be said concerning teachers’ employment of peer and self-assessment practices, as only about half the teachers surveyed reported that they used these quite or very frequently. The alignment in findings from both policy and teacher surveys concerning the limited role of peer and self-assessment suggests that the locus of the judgment in assessment in early years education is firmly in the hands of teachers with limited involvement of children.
Contextual factors
Findings from across the project also identified a number of contextual factors of importance in fostering creativity and inquiry in early science and mathematics. Findings from the teacher survey and fieldwork in schools indicate there is a need to:
Ensure sufficient resources and facilities in schools to support practical inquiry and problem solving in early science and mathematics.
Across the Country Reports partners identified the influence of resources on the opportunities provided for inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics. In some Country Reports lack of resources was identified as presenting a challenge in implementing inquiry and problem-based approaches to learning and teaching. Partners identified the need in particular for further funding to support the use of ICT to support and extend children’s problem solving and inquiry processes and the development of the whole school environment, in particular the outdoor environment to support learning.
Extend opportunities for ongoing professional development in early science and mathematics.
The importance of on-going opportunities for and entitlement to teacher professional development was emphasised in Country Reports. At present access to Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is very varied across the partnership. Further recognition is needed of the value and importance of continued training and qualifications. The Country Reports identified key priorities for teacher education to support inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics. The importance of space and time for teachers to practise inquiry approaches, to explore opportunities for creativity in learning and teaching in early science and mathematics and to gain confidence were emphasised. Reports highlighted the need for knowledge and understanding of child development and early learning in science and mathematics to be included in teacher education programmes to support teachers in recognising and building on children’s interests, ideas and explorations. Finally the need for further training for teachers was identified in the use of the environment to support learning and teaching in science and mathematics, both the school environment indoors and out and the wider environment and community beyond the school.
Encourage dialogue with parents and the wider community concerning the aims of science and mathematics education in the early years including the development of skills, processes and attitudes associated with inquiry and their roles in developing not just factual knowledge but long term understanding of concepts.
The different phases of the project associated with the policy and teacher surveys and the fieldwork in schools have indicated opportunities provided in policy for promoting inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics. For example the aims for science and mathematics education indicated in both policy and practice across partner countries reflected a common emphasis on fostering young children’s curiosity and motivation and the importance of young children’s explorations and investigations. However common challenges have also been identified associated with the demands of curriculum content and a focus on summative assessment in primary schools. Both can result in a focus on factual knowledge rather than deeper understanding and attention to outcomes at the expense of the development of skills, attitudes and processes associated with inquiry and creativity. During fieldwork processes a number of teachers across partner countries commented on the pressures they felt from parents to focus on factual knowledge and grades.
REFERENCES
van den AKKER, J. 2007. Curriculum design research. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds), An Introduction to Educational Design Research. Enschede: Axis Media-ontwerpers.
Potential Impact:
POTENTIAL IMPACT OF CREATIVE LITTLE SCIENTISTS
The expected impact for Creative Little Scientists, as it was listed in the relevant EU Work Programme, read:
“A clear picture of existing activities and practices and the related main challenges will contribute towards the training of preschool staff and primary school teachers in order to avoid the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images about science and mathematics. This will improve the basic skills of all children, and promote creativity leading to the subsequent development of entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate.”
The Creative Little Scientists project has directly contributed towards the realisation of this impact at the European level. It constitutes a timely, fine-targeted contribution to a better understanding, at the European level, of the potential available (albeit not explicitly acknowledged and mostly unexploited) on the common ground that science and mathematics education in pre-school and early primary school can share with creativity. Importantly, this better understanding is produced through both the generation of original new knowledge about the deeper nature and implications of existing practices that foster effective combinations of creativity with science and mathematics education in pre-school and early primary school, as well as through the sharing of knowledge and experiences across Europe and from parts of Europe which are more advanced in this field (e.g. the UK) to other European regions.
Based on this better understanding, Creative Little Scientists has taken a decisive step beyond ‘research for the sake of knowledge’ towards facilitating the application of the generated knowledge in order to exploit practically the above mentioned potential. This have been achieved through the proposition of guidelines, curricula and exemplary materials for relevant teacher education in the various European contexts – a step that secures that teachers, the main enablers of change in education, can be informed about, and empowered to make creative use of the opportunities available in this area.
In parallel, the project has ensured the exploitation of its findings and outcomes widely in Europe by all stakeholder groups, importantly including policy makers, by bestowing to them a set of concrete recommendations for further practice at European and national levels.
Thanks to these actions, it can be expected that, if Europe and the stakeholder groups take advantage of the new understandings and tools that the project has provided, new policies and initiatives will soon emerge which will contribute significantly to an enhancement of science and mathematics education in Europe.
More precisely, in the long term, the young children who will be taught science and mathematics through inquiry based techniques, which will enable and exploit creativity, will: a) achieve appropriate learning outcomes, including more positive attitudes towards science and mathematics learning; and b) have better chances than today’s European pupils to become creative, innovative citizens in tomorrow’s Europe, with obvious benefits for the continent’s and the member states’ economies and societies.
The impacts of the project which have been summarised in the above paragraphs can be described in further detail and in connection to the steps that have been taken for their realisation, as follows.
A better understanding of the areas under investigation, at the European level
The Creative Little Scientists project has provided Europe with a clear picture of existing and possible practices, as well as their implications and the related opportunities and challenges, in the intersection of creativity and science and mathematics education in pre-school and the early years of primary school, up to the pupil age of eight.
The project has produced a clear and detailed conceptual framework comprising the issues at stake and the parameters which need to be addressed in all stages of the research. This was realised by drawing together a review of policy-related and research-related literature covering fields including science and mathematics education in the Early Years, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as cognitive psychology and comparative education. In other words, this conceptual framework has arisen from a critical cross-disciplinary examination of the state-of-the-art in the related fields of knowledge, bringing them together in new ways and creating new synergies. As such it has a great cross-disciplinary practical importance and value for future studies with this interest.
Two particular features of the conceptual framework played key roles in fostering coherence and consistency in approach across the project and in themselves have the potential to contribute to future work in the field, the definition of creativity in early mathematics and science employed across the project and the synergies identified between inquiry based and creative approaches to science and mathematics learning and teaching in the early years. The definition of creativity and the synergies between inquiry-based and creative approaches, as described in detail in the section above on the project’s main results, have been empirically tested in diverse classroom contexts across Europe throughout the project and have been found to be both appropriate and valid. They have also proved productive and of interest more widely in the dissemination of the work of the project with varied stakeholders, including researchers, teachers and teacher educators.
The project has also produced a map and a comparative assessment of existing policy and teacher conceptualisations of science and mathematics education in pre-school and first years of primary school, and the role of creativity in these, in the nine sample countries. Such a map and comparative assessment has provided the European policy makers with unique and new insights into whether inquiry based and creative approaches are emphasised in national policy documents and teachers’ reported practices in the early years, an educational phase which traditionally has escaped the focus of large scale research. At the time when the recommendations of important European reports in science and mathematics education urge countries to implement innovative curricula and ways of organising the teaching of science that address the issue of low student motivation, and ensure that science education engages students before the age of 14 with science and scientific phenomena, such a comprehensive map and comparative assessment is invaluable.
Finally, the project has carried out a deeper analysis of the implications of the mapped and compared approaches revealing the details of current practice and providing insights into whether and how children’s creativity is fostered and the emergence or appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics is achieved. As far as the latter is concerned, a particular focus was placed on (but not limited to) issues of central importance in the current science and mathematics education discourse, including inquiry-based and problem-based learning, teaching and assessment, generating children’s interest in science and mathematics, avoiding the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images, and considering gender, socio-economical and cultural issues. Now that EU research focus has just moved from the theme of ‘Science and Society’ (FP7) towards the theme of ‘Science with and for Society’ (Horizon 2020), these deeper insights produced by Creative Little Scientists pave the way to the transition.
Development and proposition of guidelines for teacher training in Europe
The Creative Little Scientists project has also transformed the knowledge generated through the above research activities into a concrete contribution towards the training of preschool staff and primary school teachers, so that they are empowered to exploit the potential of creativity-based approaches to science and mathematics education for young children. To achieve this, the project has developed a set of curriculum design principles and curricula as concrete guidelines for European initial teacher training and continuous professional development programmes, which will foster creativity-based approaches to science and mathematics learning in preschool and the first years of primary education.
The value of any educational research should be judged by the impact its findings have in the school classroom and in the educational experiences of students and teachers. Acknowledging how important this is and that teachers are gate keepers of any change, the proposed principles and curricula are accompanied by illustrative teacher training materials, which exemplify their applicability in complex and varied European educational contexts, thus facilitating implementation, evaluation and further development across Europe.
Enabling policy making
In order to facilitate Europe to make best use of the findings of the research, the Creative Little Scientists consortium has carried out a series of carefully designed dissemination activities targeted appropriately to all stakeholder groups (teachers, school leaders, teacher trainers, curriculum developers, policy makers).
Furthermore, in order to exploit the results of the research at the European level as well as at national and institutional levels, the project has synthesised all research outputs into an accessible Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children and a concrete set of Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders.
Thanks to these actions, it can be expected that, if Europe and the stakeholder groups take advantage of the new understandings and tools that the project has provided, new policies and initiatives will soon emerge which will contribute significantly to an enhancement of science and mathematics education in Europe, in at least two ways: First, by supporting the emergence of appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics through inquiry based techniques enhanced with the strengths of creativity, further helping to avoid the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images about science and mathematics in children, and attracting children’s interest to science and mathematics. Second, by connecting science education with Europe’s wider educational goals of improving the basic skills and promoting creativity in all children today and in the near future – which subsequently can lead to the development of entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate in tomorrow’s adult citizens.
Benefits of a European approach
These crucial contributions of the project require a European rather than a national or local approach. Certain parts of Europe, such as the UK, appear to be more advanced in the explorations of both creativity in education as well as science and mathematics in education for young children, than most of the other countries. It is clear that Europe needs to and can benefit from the transfer of knowledge and practices from these more sensitive contexts to the less advanced – something that is realized through the Creative Little Scientists project, which has recruited top level experts in these fields from the UK and put them in collaboration and exchange with experts from countries from the north, south, east and west of Europe.
Further, even in advanced contexts such as that of the UK, the common ground that seems to be shared by creativity and inquiry based science and mathematics education was far from explored and mapped in detail – much less so when the focus comes to pre-school and the early years of primary school. Since the benefits for Europe from a more ‘creativity-based’ science and mathematics education of young children appear to be of crucial importance in the present and near future, leaving the national contexts alone to develop the interest to explore and exploit this common ground would have led to a loss of opportunity for a timely intervention. The Creative Little Scientists project, through carefully designed comparative techniques, has produced rich understandings of the various European contexts by looking at a sample of selected countries; in this way, after the short period of two years Europe is now in a position to design informed, research-grounded policies and initiatives for the effective marriage of creativity with science and mathematics education for young children. This would not have been possible under any circumstances without an initiative such as this project at the European rather than national or local level.
MAIN DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES AND EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS
The project’s Description of Work set clear objectives for the dissemination and exploitation of project results. The corresponding Work Package aimed to disseminate the messages and outputs of the project widely in Europe and beyond through targeted communication actions addressing all stakeholders (teachers, school administrators, teacher trainers, curriculum designers, policy makers, parents); and exploit them at the European level as well as at national, regional/local and institutional level, making them easily available to educational policy makers and other stakeholders, especially teacher training policy makers and institutions.
Development of the dissemination and exploitation plan
To realize these objectives, the consortium, led by EA, developed a concrete plan for dissemination and exploitation which specified the methodology to be followed for the design, implementation, coordination and monitoring of all project activity. Actions foreseen in it both informed the communities of stakeholders, policy makers and the wider public about the project, as well as carefully targeted school communities, stakeholder groups and individuals in order to attract their interest and establish their involvement in the various stages of the field-based research. In this respect, the dissemination and exploitation plan was a management and design tool for continuous planning and adaptation to the conditions arising throughout the project. In addition, the plan included provisions about the nature and timing of specific dissemination and exploitation related actions.
The dissemination and exploitation plan covered three distinct phases which followed the project’s development. Each phase included different kinds of dissemination materials and activities, specifically designed to reach the target audiences. The dissemination strategy began by introducing the project widely in the first 8 months (October 2011-May 2012); built momentum in the following 18 months (June 2012-November 2013) as the research progressed through targeted dissemination opportunities designed to ensure target audiences’ active participation in the project; and culminated in the last 4 months (December 2013-March 2014) with the organisation of the Final Project Workshop and the development of the Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children and Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science. The Final Workshop along with the two very important deliverables were used to present and explain the research findings to an audience which consisted of selected key players who can mobilise their organisations and professional networks to exploit the project results.
Communication and dissemination materials and activities
The work necessary for the design, implementation, coordination and monitoring of the various communication and dissemination activities of the project, in accordance with the priorities and objectives of the project and the provisions of the dissemination and exploitation plan included (but was not limited to) the following actions:
• Creation and continuous operation and update of a dedicated project website, which became available already on the second project month and has been maintained since, including after the end of the funded period. The website has provided up-to-date information on the project, raised awareness and facilitated participation in all stages of the research. It is in the consortium’s working language (English), with aspects addressing the local communities of stakeholders who were involved in the project in each country available in all eight European languages covered by the consortium (Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Portuguese, Romanian). In the 30-month duration of the project, 21 News items have been published raising awareness about both project dissemination activities and its main research findings.
• Creation and wide circulation of printed and electronic dissemination materials, which were used in the effort to inform schools and other stakeholders about the project and gain their interest and involvement in the field research. Such materials included:
o A leaflet describing the Creative Little Scientists project objectives, providing general information about the project aims and vision, as well as publicising the project website. It was produced by EA in digital format for partners’ easy printing and translation in the national languages. The leaflet served as the main dissemination tool for the project in all events that Creative Little Scientists partners participated during the first six months of the project. Localised versions were handed out in national conferences and events in the nine participating countries.
o A poster summarizing the aims and objectives of the project to use in a dissemination event in Finland.
o A 12-page brochure summarising the main points of the project’s conceptual framework and its first research phase results from the policy and teacher surveys, in an easy-to-read format for practitioners and school leaders. This brochure served the project in many occasions and generated interest for the field-based research. It was disseminated by all project partners widely in conferences (national and international), meetings and other communication opportunities (online and offline).
o Five short electronic newsletters, containing a summary of the project news and achievements. These were sent by e-mail to stakeholders in the project’s database of contacts, who had opted through the website to receive them.
• Activities promoting schools’ stakeholders’ involvement in the field work. The wide spectrum of networks and collaborations of all partners were mobilised to achieve this. Examples of these activites include: invitation letters and e-mails to teachers and schools to participate in the research; communication about the project and its research through the Journal of Emergent Science, the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) website and directly to all the members of the ‘Early Years SIG’ of ESERA. Other networks and associations used to promote project activities included the Hands-on Science Network, British Educational Research Association (BERA), European Educational Research Association (EERA) and the Association for Science Education (ASE).
• Using other important projects and networks across Europe, in which all project partners are involved, to make the Creative Little Scientists project outcomes available beyond the nine partner countries. Examples of such projects and networks are:
o The FP7 project PATHWAY (via its partner EA) with partners in 13 countries.
o The FP7 project FIBONACCI (via its partner NILPRP) with partners in 25 countries.
o The FP7 project Pri-Sci-Net (via its partner UoM), with partners in 14 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project INSTEM (via its partners NILPRP and EA), with partners in 9 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project CREAT-IT (via its partners EA and OU), with partners in 6 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project TODDLER (via its partner AUC), with partners in 8 countries.
o ‘Hands-on Science Network’ (via its partner UMinho), with members in 10 countries.
o The FP7 project SECURE, with partners in 10 countries.
o The FP7 project SiS-Catalyst, with partners in 13 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project ‘Early Change’, with partners in 13 countries.
o The LLP Ccomenius network CREANET, with partner in 10 countries.
• Dissemination of the project and its outcomes through presentations, symposia and workshops in national and international conferences and meetings, as appropriate. Examples of significant conferences (with more than 100 participants) in which the project participated are:
o EECERA 2012 (Porto, Portugal - 30 August 2012), UMinho, Audience size: 400, Audience: Teachers, researchers
o Hands-on Science Conference/HSCI2012 (Antalya, Turkey – 19 October 2012), UMinho and NILPRP, Audience size: 500, Audience: Teachers, researchers, students
o Semaine de la recherche et de l'innovation (Amiens, France – 28 November 2012), UPJV, Audience size: 500, Audience: Parents, Teachers, Researchers
o 3rd Panhellenic Preschool Education Conference (Ioannina, Greece – 11-13 May 2012), EA, Audience size: 600, Audience: Teachers, Researchers
o 7th Panhellenic Conference in Preschool Science Education (Florina, Greece – 20 October 2012), EA, Audience size: 500, Audience: Teachers, School advisors, Researchers
o ECER 2012 (Cadiz, Spain – 19 September 2012), EA/UEF/IoE, Audience size: 1000. Audience: Researchers
o Greek National Conference on ‘How is physics supposed to be taught today?’ conference (Thessaloniki, Greece – 9 March 2013), EA, Audience size: 700, Audience: Teachers, School advisors, Researchers
o British Educational Research Association Conference, (Manchester UK, September 2012), Audience: Researchers, lecturers involved in teacher education, local education authority advisers, teachers.
o NARST 2013 Annual Meeting (National Association for Research in Science Teaching) (Puerto Rico, USA, 6-9 April 2013); IoE/EA/UEF; Conference Audience size: 1200; Audience: Researchers, Curriculum Developers, Teacher Educators, Policy Makers.
o ESERA 2013 Conference (European Science Education Research Association) (Nicosia, Cyprus – 2-7 September 2013); EA/IoE/UEF/OU/BG/UoM/UBO/AUC/NILPRP; Conference Audience size: 1200; Audience: Researchers, Curriculum Developers, Teacher Educators, Policy Makers.
• Organisation of a training summer school for 18 early years teachers and teacher educators from across Europe in Crete (Greece) on June 30th - July 5th, 2013, in the framework of the COMENIUS In-Service Training Programme (http://cls2013.ea.gr). The course contributed to the evaluation and refinement of the curriculum design principles developed by the project, on one hand, while providing an excellent opportunity to broaden the dissemination of findings widely among practitioners from the 9 partner countries, as well as from a variety of other European countries.
• Organisation of national dissemination events of the major final project outputs in Malta, Romania and the UK, organized by the corresponding partners, and targeted to teachers and teacher educators.
• Organisation of the Final Project Workshop on “Enabling Creativity through Science and Mathematics in Early Years Education”, which took place under the auspices of the Greek Ministry of Education and the Greek Presidency of the European Council at Ellinogermaniki Agogi school premises in Pallini, Attica, Greece, on 22-23 March 2014. Over 100 participants from a variety of EU countries attended the two-day event and came together to discuss the project findings and important outcomes such as the Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children, the Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science, the Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training, and the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials. The audience consisted of representatives of collective bodies as well as individuals, covering all stakeholder groups (policy makers, curriculum designers, teacher trainers, teachers, school administrators, parents). A website (http://conference.creative-little-scientists.eu) was built especially for the purposes of the conference and contained all the necessary information about the conference programme, travel and venue, registration and about the project Creative Little Scientists in general.
Development of final report and recommendations
According to the project’s Description of Work, the findings of the research were to be communicated to all stakeholders in easily accessible and useful formats. This would contribute to maximum efficiency of the whole of the dissemination and exploitation effort and served as the main outcome of the project in terms of dissemination, as well as exploitation. All research outcomes of the project were thus synthesised in an easy to read, yet highly informative, thought and action provoking Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children. In addition, a separate document of a similar nature, the Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders, was produced to provide concrete recommendations for further practice at the European, national and institutional level, addressing educational policy makers and stakeholders, importantly including pre-schools and primary schools as well as teacher training policy makers and institutions. Both the final report and the recommendations became available in time to be presented and discussed at the Final Project Workshop. Comments received during the Workshop were integrated to produce the final versions of the reports. Both reports were composed in the English language, but executive summaries of them have become available in the eight European languages covered by the consortium (Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Portuguese, Romanian).
Overview of the relevant project deliverables
In summary, the dissemination and exploitation activities of the project has produced the following deliverables:
• D6.1: Dissemination and exploitation plan
• D6.2: Project website
• D6.3: Project dissemination materials
• D6.4: Activities promoting schools’ and stakeholders’ involvement in the field work
• D6.5: Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children
• D6.6: Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science Education
• D6.7: Final project workshop
Overall, the dissemination and exploitation activities that have been carried out in the project have provided the necessary conditions of awareness and motivation that will allow Europe and the stakeholder groups to take advantage of the new understandings and tools that the project has provided. Following the Final Project Workshop, for example, the project has been informed that some of its teacher training materials have already been used:
• at the Second International INSTEM Conference in Halle, Germany, 25-27 March 2014, to demonstrate some important principles of inquiry and creativity to an audience of around 55 teachers, teacher educators and researchers in science and mathematics education; and
• in a course for preschool teachers and practitioners, by the Early Childhood Department of the University of Ioannina.
It can therefore be expected that new policies and initiatives will soon emerge which will contribute significantly to an enhancement of science and mathematics education in Europe, by supporting the emergence of the wished learning outcomes, as well as by connecting science and mathematics education with Europe’s wider educational goals of improving the basic skills and promoting creativity in all children today and in the near future, and of developing entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate in tomorrow’s adult citizens (as explained analytically in the previous section).
Further exploitation of results
Exploitation of the project’s results, according to the Dissemination and Exploitation Plan mostly depends on effectively communicating the main outcomes of the project to all target audiences. The main outcomes of the project are deliverables that have been identified in the Dissemination and Exploitation Plan as pillars of the overall dissemination and exploitation, for partners to focus their dissemination efforts on and effectively address the diverse needs of different target audiences. These key deliverables are:
• D2.2 Conceptual Framework
• D3.4 Comparative Report
• D4.4 Report on Practices and their Implications
• D5.2 Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training
• D5.3 Exemplary Teacher Training Materials
• D6.5 Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children
• D6.6 Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science
The majority of the above deliverables have already been disseminated by partners during the project in a variety of events and meetings as well as within the participating institutions. As already described, findings from these deliverables have been presented and explained by project partners in all dissemination activities carried out such as conference presentations (national and international), curriculum consultation meetings, meetings with local authorities and schools, workshops and the summer school organised in July 2013.
Throughout the project, findings from each work package have been shared with students on teacher education courses and Master’s programmes which are offered by the partners’ institutions, presented in meetings and workshops to each partner’s network of schools and explained to other members of staff within the partner institutions. As a result, materials which were produced by the project were used and tested out with a range of different audiences (teachers, policy makers, stakeholders, researchers, teacher educators).
The exploitation of results for Creative Little Scientists has already resulted in a number of activities planned by the project partners. The Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training were used to give advice to the STEM platform of the Flemish Government concerning STEM education in Teacher Education, as well as in a large-scale project in Flanders (STEM voor de basis) to improve the pedagogical approach concerning STEM education in Flanders. Similarly, the Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science has informed recent attempts to reform the Finnish science education curriculum, according to an Advisor to the Finnish National Board of Education. Moreover, the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials were used to inform a number of workshops, such as a workshop for educators and curators at the Natural History Museum in London, England and most notably the teacher training summer school in Crete on July 2013. The summer school itself served as the starting point to two Erasmus+ proposals, led by EA, one for a teacher training activity (KA1) and one for school strategic partnership (KA2) which will propose a curriculum for a teacher education course aimed at promoting creativity in early years science education submitted on April 30, 2014.
After the conclusion of the project, the consortium, committed to continuing the work of Creative Little Scientists, identified a number of appropriate exploitation activities that will succeed in exploiting the project results at the European level as well as at national and institutional level, making them easily available to educational policy makers and other stakeholders, especially teacher training policy makers and institutions. Examples of future exploitation activities include:
• The narrative episodes of the in-field research (D4.4) the content of the Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training (D5.2) and the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials (D5.3) will be used by the Department of Early Childhood Education in Artevelde University College (Belgium) to frame the 3rd-year teacher education course ‘Young children inquire inside and outside the classroom’. Additionally, the episodes and Exemplary Teacher Training Materials concerning the Nature of Science will be used in the PWO project ‘Nature of Science’ (www.natureofscience.be) as well as in the interENW project. In the latter, a Community of Practice is created with teacher educators from all over the Flemish region of Belgium (www.stembasis.be).
• Project deliverables will be used by the BG Research department in the UK for future dissemination, including when teaching students on the Early Years BA degree, Primary Education BA degree and the MA in Education, including the Mathematics Specialist Teachers Certificate.
• The Exemplary Teacher Training Materials developed in the project will also be used on IoE teacher education programmes in the academic year 2014-2015 both at the Institute of Education and in partnership schools, in England.
• UMinho in Portugal is planning on organising a two-day dissemination conference/workshop in the beginning of 2015 which will invite teacher educators, school teachers, headmasters and other stakeholders and will present the Creative Little Scientists conclusions, host discussion round tables and workshops based on the case studies conducted in Portuguese schools and included in the Creative Little Scientists Final Report. To promote the event, a press conference will be held aiming to raise general public awareness on creativity in Science and Mathematics education in the Early Years. UMinho will also carry out oral and poster presentations at the “11th Hands-on Science International Conference: Science Education with and for Society” to be held at the University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, July 21 to 25, 2014 with an estimated multinational audience of 250 teachers and educators (www.hsci2014.info).
• In Romania, NILPRP is planning to use the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials developed in the project during the implementation of the national project “Inquiry-based education in science and technology – i-BETS”, as support for teachers CPD.
• UEF in Finland, will participate on a nationwide development project, which has been funded by Ministry of Education (total funding of 5 million Euros) and serve as an expert in promoting creativity in early years science. UEF will provide teacher education activities to increase creativity and inquiry-based approaches in early years science based on the outcomes of and knowledge generated by the Creative Little Scientists project.
• In France, UPJV will organise a symposium on June 20, 2014 at the University of Toulouse “Construct objects to develop knowledge”. One of the sessions of the conference will present the outcomes of Creative Little Scientists, including some of the narrative episodes observed in French schools during the project.
• In Malta, UoM has been working towards the creation of a nationwide network of professionals with an interest in early science and mathematics, as well as in creativity. Although there are a number of professionals active in the relevant areas, there is no network in Malta to bring these people together to exchange opinions, findings and spark new collaborations. The network was set up informally during the Creative Little Scientists project cycle and there is the intention to continue the work after the project. A next network meeting is set for the 28th May 2014. The recommendations developed as a result of the Creative Little Scientists project will also be exploited to bring to the forefront the needs with respect to promoting creativity in early years science and mathematics education. The Maltese Minister of Education has expressed a direct interest in the project recommendations and a meeting is set for 9th June 2014. This meeting will be an opportunity to take the Creative Little Scientists results to the main driver in education in Malta as well as try and find a platform for further support for the Early Years network to continue working in the future.
• In Greece, EA being a school itself, has planned training of its preschool and first years of primary school staff in September 2014, using the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials.
• In terms of publications, project partners have already identified academic and professional journals to target for publication of papers on the findings of Creative Little Scientists. At least one paper on the project will be submitted (led by EA) for the peer-reviewed Book of Selected Papers out of the ESERA 2013 international conference. In addition, EA has been invited to lead a publication as part of the Science Education Research Series, the international, multidisciplinary book series of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA). Moreover, at least one journal article from the project will be submitted for a special issue of Education 3-13 which is being guest-edited by Professors Cremin and Craft for publication in summer 2015. The article will be written in collaboration with Dr Glauert at the Institute of Education and Dr Compton at Bishop Grosseteste. Finally, at least one article is expected to be accepted for publication at the book “Hands-on Science: Science Education with and for Society” in late August 2014. New opportunities for collaboration and publication are continuously explored by partners.
• Finally, the consortium will continue to present the project results in international and national conferences. BG will present the teacher education templates to the Mathematics Subject Development group and organise a workshop on Creative Little Scientists for the Universities’ Council for Education of Teachers (UCET) Annual Conference on 4th and 5th November 2014 in Birmingham, UK. IoE has submitted a paper which has been accepted for the British Educational Research Association conference in London in September 2014 and has been invited to present the work of the project at the National Advisors and Inspectors Group for Science Summer Conference in July 2014. A paper by IoE and EA will be presented at the EECERA conference in Crete in September 2014 in a symposium organized by other members of the Early Years Science SIG, focusing on the project’s research methodology and findings. UMinho will give an oral presentation at the “II Congresso de Ciência e Desenvolvimento dos Açores”, 27 june 2014, Angra do Heroísmo, Azores, Portugal, followed up by a paper to be published in the proceedings. UBO has been invited to give a presentation of the project including its results at a “House of Little Scientists” meeting in June 2014 in Berlin.
Additionally to the planned actions presented in this section, project partners will continue to mobilise their organisations and professional networks to exploit the project results.
List of Websites:
Project public website: http://www.creative-little-scientists.eu
Contact details of Project Coordinator:
Dr. Fani Stylianidou
Ellinogermaniki Agogi
Dimitriou Panagea Str.
GR- 153 51 Pallini, Greece
Tel: +30 210 8176788
Fax: +30 210 6032554
E-mail: fani@ea.gr
Creative Little Scientists is a 30-month EU funded comparative study working across nine participating countries: Belgium, Finland, France, Greece, Germany, Malta, Portugal, Romania and the UK. The project focused on the relationships and synergies between science and mathematics education and creativity in preschool (children aged 3+) and early primary school (up to the age of 8). Creative Little Scientists documented current reality in the nine partner countries of the study, through survey and classroom focused research. The definition of creativity in early science and mathematics developed from the Conceptual Framework and subsequently refined through discussion with stakeholders is: Generating ideas and strategies as an individual or community, reasoning critically between these and producing plausible explanations and strategies consistent with the available evidence. This needs to be understood alongside the ‘Little c creativity’ definition (Craft, 2001).
The project identified synergies between inquiry based science education and creative approaches: Questioning and Curiosity; Motivation and Affect; Problem Solving and Agency; Dialogue and Collaboration; Play and Exploration; Reflection and Reasoning. The definition of creativity as above, and the synergies between inquiry based and creative approaches, have been empirically tested in diverse classroom contexts across Europe throughout the project and have been found to be both appropriate and valid across geographic and age contexts (3-8). However, there were often differences between policy and practice, between pre-school and early primary approaches, and whether the approaches were conceptualized as developing creativity. Learning approaches that addressed Motivation and Affect were common in both practice and policy but were not seen as creativity enabling. In contrast, Play and Exploration were seen as creativity enabling but were more prominent in pre-school classes.
Findings indicated considerable potential for inquiry and creativity in the opportunities teachers provided for the generation and evaluation of ideas and strategies in both preschool and primary settings. Opportunities for the generation of ideas, for example, were fostered by rich motivating contexts for play and exploration, whilst purposes for inquiry were linked to children’s everyday experiences and there was considerable scope for children’s decision making.
Across the episodes from the fieldwork there were many examples of children observing and making connections, for example drawing on prior learning or between experiences. Opportunities for children’s questioning were also present but not always recognised or built upon. There was greater evidence of children’s engagement in the social dimensions of inquiry, explaining evidence and communicating explanations than might have been expected from the findings of policy and teacher surveys; this was often prompted by dialogue with peers and adults. Explicit examples of children’s developing understanding of the nature of science were limited however starting points for the development of understanding of the nature of science was indicated in a number of episodes, in children’s reflections on learning in classroom discussion or in interviews with researchers.
A major outcome of the project is a set of curriculum design principles that was devised for teacher education. These are supported by a set of specific teacher outcomes and an extensive series of materials based on the fieldwork episodes, which illustrate the various teacher outcomes and design principles.
The key policy recommendations from the project related to:
• the aims of the curriculum, especially the processes associated with evaluation, as well as the generation of ideas in science and mathematics and fostering the social and affective dimensions of learning;
• teaching, learning and assessment, especially the roles of play-based approaches extending into primary school, space and time to develop inquiry approaches, focus on the nature of science and the role of creativity in science and mathematics, varied forms of representation, authentic contexts and issues around formative assessment;
• contextual factors, especially ensuring sufficient resources and facilities, on-going professional development and dialogue with parents and the wider community concerning the aims of science and mathematics in the early years.
Reference
Craft, A. (2001). Little c Creativity. In Craft, A., Jeffrey, B. and Leibling, M. Creativity in Education. London: Continuum. pp 45 – 61.
Project Context and Objectives:
CORE DRIVERS FOR CREATIVE LITTLE SCIENTISTS
The project Creative Little Scientists was informed by at least four key drivers that set the context for an increased research focus on science and mathematics education and creativity in the early years classroom:
• The role of an economic imperative within education
Research and policy literatures reveal that there are economic factors driving the focus on science and mathematics education as well as the inclusion of creativity in the classroom. Today’s knowledge economy dictates an imperative for countries to train scientists capable of competing globally (European Commission, 2006) and the European Commission emphasises the role of educators in this, with the European Commission documents (2007a, 2007b) identifying basic competence in science as a part of the spectrum of key attributes contributing to individuals’ personal fulfilment and development, active citizenship, social inclusion and employment. Moreover, the European Commission (2011) report emphasised the need for educators not only to foster science learning with confidence but to be able to reflect on their teaching and students’ learning – reflecting a strong European perspective that educators have a vital role to play in developing creativity in science education.
• The role played by science, mathematics and creativity in the development of children and of citizens.
As well as succeeding as scientists in the 21st century knowledge based society, it is perceived as important to develop socially aware and responsible citizens. Education must therefore strive to achieve this aim in the development of the child. There is growing recognition that scientific literacy plays an increasingly critical role not just for 21st century society, but for individuals (Harlen, 2008). Developing scientific and mathematical literate individuals then becomes an important part of the development of the child and the citizen. Looking at the world from a scientific perspective enriches the understanding and interaction with phenomena in nature and technology, empowers students (and therefore future adults) to take part in societal discussions and decision-making processes, and gives them an additional element from which to form interests and attitudes (Gago et al., 2004). As the need for more innovative thinkers increases, so the need to improve attitudes and the importance of scientific reasoning skills become more important. Indeed, in order to compete globally as future scientists, it is further important that individuals develop the skills and confidence to apply their knowledge in innovative ways. In Europe then, scientific literacy is viewed as a dimension of ‘democratic citizenship’, as an informed citizen can better contribute to the decisions of the community to which she/he belongs (European Commission, 2004).
Creativity is also framed as a valuable dimension in the lives of all. Craft (2002) and Gibson (2005) see creativity as an inherent capability in all people and an important part of childhood. As a dimension of fostering creative citizens, the latter part of the 20th century saw increased focus on the role of dialogue and collaboration in creativity. The field was influenced by Gruber’s (1989) and John-Steiner’s (2000) work and has been developed by many in education, most recently by Chappell (2008) who highlights the interplay between individual, collaborative and communal creativity.
• The role of early years education in building on children’s early experiences and in promoting positive skills and dispositions.
There is also increasing recognition that young children’s early educational experiences impact on later outcomes, not only in terms of educational attainment but also their attitudes towards learning (Sylva, 2009). In relation to science, this is reflected in six assertions by Eschach and Fried (2005:315) about why children benefit from early exposure to science: 1) Children naturally enjoy observing and thinking about nature; 2) Exposing students to science develops positive attitudes to science; 3) Early exposure to scientific phenomena leads to better understanding later in a more formal way; 4) The use of scientifically informed language at an early age influences the eventual development of scientific concepts; 5) Children can understand scientific concepts and reason scientifically; 6) Science is an efficient means for developing scientific thinking.
There are equivalent arguments made about young children’s creative capacities and the benefits of fostering their creative potential (e.g. Craft, 2002; Laevers, 2005). These tend to highlight that children are naturally curious and actively seek to problem find and problem solve, making connections and imagining what might be as they explore ideas and ask questions of themselves and others. In the process, it is posited, they develop their capacity to take risks and to engage creatively.
• The role of a digital or technological imperative within education.
Science, mathematics and creativity have evolved through rapid advances in digital technologies, which are shaping new literacies. Shaffer and Kaput (1998) argue that as mathematics is inseparable from the tools we use, such as calculators and computers, it is evolving with ‘virtual’ culture. Other digital technologies are not only altering the demands involved in recording and calculating, but are also gradually removing the demands of collecting, organising and presenting data. Various authors (e.g. Capobianco and Lehman, 2006; Wang et al., 2010) have claimed that technology is able to support inquiry in a variety of ways, including data collection, stimulating questioning and supporting thinking. There have also been examples of technology promoting creative behaviours in mathematics, such as generating more ideas and incorporating more elements in their patterns (Moyer-Packenham et al., 2008) or gaming, with children using hand held as well as fixed console digital technology to collaborate with others in generating content and understandings (Craft, 2011, 2012). Thus capabilities in science, mathematics and creativity are enabled through the rapid evolution of digital technologies but also to a degree demanded by these.
Alongside these wider societal issues, the project was informed by changing perspectives on children and increased awareness of the child as an active and competent meaning-maker. There is increasing recognition of children’s capacities to take ownership of their own learning and take part in decision making in matters that affect their lives in the present.
All three areas, science, mathematics and creativity are powerfully framed within a 21st century neo-liberal narrative around economic imperatives for flexible innovative thinkers who are also knowledgeable, competent and enthusiastic about science and mathematics, and who are also literate citizens in these areas. Economic factors therefore are significant, as are comparisons between countries’ achievements although it is important to question assumptions about how learning in the Early Years will ultimately translate to later economic gains and how comparative evaluations can be framed. Indeed, in the Early Years it is important to consider other reasons for greater attention to the relationships between science, mathematics and creativity. Looking at the world from a scientific perspective enriches the understanding and interaction with phenomena in nature and technology, empowers students (and therefore future adults) to take part in societal discussions and decision-making processes, and gives them an additional element from which to form interests and attitudes (Gago et al., 2004).
PROJECT OBJECTIVES
In the light of the above, the Creative Little Scientists project was a very timely intervention which set an overall twofold aim:
a) to provide Europe with a clear picture of existing and possible practices, as well as their implications and the related opportunities and challenges, in the intersection of science and mathematics learning, and creativity in pre-school and the first years of primary education (up to the pupil age of eight); and
b) to transform the knowledge generated through this into concrete contributions towards both relevant policy development and the training of preschool staff and primary school teachers so that they are empowered to exploit the potential of creativity-based approaches to Early Years science and mathematics learning.
Through this, in the long term the project aimed to enhance science and mathematics education in Europe in at least two ways. First, by supporting the emergence of appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics, helping to avoid the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images about science and mathematics in children, and attracting children’s interest to science and mathematics. Second, by connecting science education with Europe’s wider educational goals of improving the basic skills and promoting creativity in all children today and in the near future which subsequently can lead to the development of entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate in tomorrow’s adult citizens.
To achieve this aim, the Creative Little Scientists project brought together a consortium comprising expertise of the highest level and quality in the areas of science and mathematics education in Early Years, creativity in education, cognitive psychology, and comparative educational studies. This consortium designed and carried out a research programme which comprehensively integrated elements of comparative research, in-depth field research and curriculum design. The research was carried out in a sample of nine European countries (Belgium, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Malta, Portugal, Romania, and the UK), which were carefully selected to represent a wide spectrum of educational, economic, social and cultural contexts, as well as a wide spectrum of practices regarding science and mathematics education in general, science and mathematics education in Early Years, and creativity in education.
In this context, the research was operationally defined in terms of the following specific objectives:
• To define a clear and detailed Conceptual Framework comprising the issues at stake and the parameters which needed to be addressed in all stages of the research. This was achieved through extensive reviews of policy-related and research-based literature at the beginning of the project. The literature reviews comprehensively and consistently covered areas as diverse as science and mathematics education with a focus on pre-school and first years of primary school, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, related teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as relevant issues from the wider areas of cognitive psychology and comparative education.
• To map and comparatively assess existing approaches to science and mathematics education in pre-school and first years of primary school (up to the pupil age of eight) in the nine sample countries, highlighting instances of, or recording the absence of, practices marrying science and mathematics learning, teaching and assessment with creativity. Such practices were mapped and compared consistently on the basis of a List of Factors which was developed in the light of the Conceptual Framework to define the scope, aspects to be addressed, and the dimensions for the comparison. To achieve this, the consortium conducted: (a) desk research looking at records of policies, curricula, reports and assessments of school practice in the nine sample countries; and (b) a questionnaire survey aiming to gain insights into teachers’ conceptualisations of science, mathematics and creativity education in real school life and in a range of contexts in the nine sample countries.
• To provide a deeper analysis of the implications of the mapped and compared approaches which would reveal the details of current practice and provide insights into whether and how children’s creativity is fostered and the emergence of appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics is achieved. This part of the research was accomplished through in-depth fieldwork involving the use of questionnaires, interviews, focus groups, and observations with teachers and children.
• To propose a set of curriculum design principles as concrete guidelines for European initial teacher training and continuous professional development programmes, which would foster creativity-based approaches to science and mathematics learning in preschool and the first years of primary education. The proposed principles are accompanied by illustrative teacher training materials aiming to clarify their applicability in complex and varied European educational contexts, thus facilitating implementation, evaluation and further development across Europe. This work was based on the findings of the above mentioned theoretical, comparative and in-depth field research, as well as through a process of continuous involvement of real-life communities of stakeholders from the nine sample countries (teachers, principals, teacher trainers, curriculum designers, policy makers, parents) in focus group discussions and testing and validation of the formulated curriculum design principles, implementing the methodology of curriculum design research.
• To exploit the results of the research at the European level as well as at national and institutional level, making them easily available to educational policy makers and other stakeholders, especially teacher training policy makers and institutions. This work had a special focus on teacher training, and is completed through the synthesis of all research outputs and their transformation into this Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children and also the set of Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders.
REFERENCES
CAPOBIANCO, B. and LEHMAN, J. 2006. Integrating technology to foster inquiry in an elementary science methods course: An action research study of one teacher educator’s initiatives in a PT3 project. Journal of Computers in Mathematics and Science Teaching, 25(2), 123-148.
CHAPPELL, K. 2008. Towards humanising creativity. UNESCO Observatory E-Journal 13, 1-10.
CRAFT, A. 2002. Creativity and Early Years education. London: Continuum.
CRAFT, A. 2011. Creativity and education futures. Stoke on Trent: Trentham Books.
CRAFT, A. 2012. Childhood in a digital age: creative challenges for educational futures. London Review of Education, 10(2), 173-190.
ESHACH, H. and FRIED, M. N. 2005. Should science be taught in early childhood? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(3), 315-336.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2004. The teaching profession in Europe: Profile, trends and concerns. Report IV: Keeping teaching attractive for the 21st century-General lower secondary education: Key topics in education in Europe. Volume 3, Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION, 2006. Science Teaching in Schools across Europe: Policies and Research. Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 2007a. Communication from the Commission to the European Parliament, the Council, the European Economic and Social Committee and the Committee of the Regions on a European Agenda for Culture in a Globalizing World. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION 2007b. Key competences for lifelong learning: European reference framework. Brussels: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
EUROPEAN COMMISSION. 2011. Science education in Europe: National policies practices and research. Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency EACEAE9 Eurydice, Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency.
GAGO, J. M., ZIMAN, J., CARO, P., CONSTANTINOU, C., DAVIES, G., PARCHMANN, I. et al. 2004. Increasing human resources for science and technology in Europe. Report Luxembourg: Office for Official Publications of the European Communities.
GIBSON, H. 2005. What creativity isn't: The presumptions of instrumentalism and individual justifications for creativity in education. British Journal of Educational Studies 53(2), 148-167.
GRUBER, H. 1989. Networks of enterprise in scientific creativity. In B. GHOLSON, W. R. SHADISH, R. A. NEIMEYER, A. C. C. HOUTS, (eds.), Psychology of science: Contributions to meta-science. Cambridge; Cambridge University Press.
HARLEN, W. 2008. Science as a key component of the primary curriculum: a rationale with policy implications. Perspectives on Education: Primary Science 1. Wellcome.
JOHN-STEINER, V. 2000. Creative collaboration New York. Oxford University Press.
LAEVERS, F. 2005. The curriculum as means to raise the quality of early childhood education: Implications for policy. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 13(1), 17-29.
MOYER-PACKENHAM, P., SALKIND, G. AND BOLYARD, J. 2008 Virtual manipulatives used by K-8 teachers for mathematics instruction: Considering mathematical, cognitive and pedagogical fidelity. Contemporary Issues in Technology and Teacher Education, 8(3), 202-218.
SHAFFER, D. and KAPUT, J. 1998. Mathematics and Virtual Culture: an Evolutionary Perspective on Technology and Mathematics Education. Educational studies in mathematics, 37(2), 97-119.
SYLVA, K. 2009. Early Childhood Matters: Evidence from the effective pre-school and primary education project. London: Taylor and Francis.
WANG, F., KINZIE, M. B., McGUIRE, P. and PAN, E. 2010. Applying Technology to Inquiry-Based Learning in Early Childhood Education. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(5), 381-389.
Project Results:
CONTRIBUTION OF THE CONCEPTUAL FRAMEWORK
In drawing together a review of policy-related and research-related literature covering fields including science and mathematics education in the early years, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as cognitive psychology and comparative education, the project’s Conceptual Framework provided a strong theoretical framework for the study.
Two particular features of the Conceptual Framework played key roles in fostering coherence and consistency in approach across the project and in themselves have the potential to contribute to future work in the field, the definition of creativity in early science and mathematics employed across the project and the synergies identified between inquiry based and creative approaches to learning and teaching, drawn from the reviews of science and mathematics education in the early years and creativity in education. The definition of creativity in early science and mathematics developed from the Conceptual Framework and subsequently refined through discussion with stakeholders is: Generating ideas and strategies as an individual or community, reasoning critically between these and producing plausible explanations and strategies consistent with the available evidence. This needs to be understood alongside the ‘Little c creativity’ definition (Craft, 2001) (as in Figure 1 in the attached document) insofar as this effort toward originality and value through imaginative activity drives creativity in other domains including early mathematics and science.
The project identified a number of synergies and differences between inquiry based science education (IBSE) and creative approaches (CA). The synergies identified are (see Figure 2):
• Play and exploration, recognising that playful experimentation/exploration is inherent in all young children's activity, such exploration is at the core of IBSE and CA in the Early Years.
• Motivation and affect, highlighting the role of aesthetic engagement in promoting children’s affective and emotional responses to science and mathematics activities.
• Dialogue and collaboration, accepting that dialogic engagement is inherent in everyday creativity in the classroom, plays a crucial role in learning in science and mathematics and is a critical feature of IBSE and CA, enabling children to externalise, share and develop their thinking.
• Problem solving and agency, recognising that through scaffolding the learning environment children can be provided with shared, meaningful, physical experiences and opportunities to develop their creativity as well as their own questions and ideas about scientifically relevant concepts.
• Questioning and curiosity, which is central to IBSE and CA, recognising across the three domains of science, mathematics and creativity that creative teachers often employ open ended questions, and promote speculation by modelling their own curiosity.
• Reflection and reasoning, emphasising the importance of metacognitive processes, reflective awareness and deliberate control of cognitive activities, which may be still developing in young children but which are incorporated into Early Years practice, scientific and mathematical learning and IBSE.
• Teacher scaffolding and involvement, which emphasises the importance of teachers mediating the learning to meet the children’s needs, rather than feel pressured to meet a given curriculum.
• Assessment for learning, emphasising the importance of formative assessment in identifying and building on the skills attitudes, knowledge and understandings children bring to school; supporting and encouraging children’s active engagement in learning and fostering their awareness of their own thinking and progress.
The definition of creativity as above, and the synergies between inquiry based and creative approaches, have been empirically tested in diverse classroom contexts across Europe throughout the project and have been found to be both appropriate and valid across geographic and age contexts (3-8). They have also proved productive and of interest more widely in the dissemination of the work of the project with varied stakeholders across and beyond Europe, including researchers, teachers and teacher educators.
The Conceptual Framework identified three broad strands that might be addressed across the phases of the project namely: Aims, purposes and priorities; Teaching, learning and assessment; and Contextual factors. These were further elaborated drawing on the curriculum dimensions associated with the ‘vulnerable spider web’: Rationale; Aims & Objectives; Learning activities; Teacher role; Assessment; Materials & Resources; Content; Grouping; Location; Time (see Figure 3), which identify key questions about aspects of learning in schools (van den Akker, 2007). The rationale in the middle of the spider web refers to the central mission of the curriculum. It is the major orientation point for curriculum design, and the nine other components are ideally linked to the rationale and preferably consistent with each other. The spider web illustrates the many interactions and interdependence of the parts but also their vulnerability. If you pull or pay too much attention to one of the components, the spider web breaks (van den Akker, 2007, p41).
The review of research findings related to creativity in learning and teaching was used to develop a List of Factors linked to these different dimensions that had been found to be associated with creativity in early science and mathematics. The curriculum dimensions and associated List of Factors provided an essential common framework across the different phases of research in capturing an in-depth empirical picture of conceptualisations, practices and outcomes related to opportunities for creativity in early science and mathematics.
RESEARCH QUESTIONS
The Creative Little Scientists project aimed to identify and characterise what, if any, creativity is evidenced in early science and mathematics (in relation both to children’s learning, and teachers’ pedagogy). As a consequence the study sought to produce a description or map of lived experience in Early Years science and mathematics education and to articulate what creativity in early science and mathematics looked like.
To reflect the conceptual and research foci and methodological framing developed in the Conceptual Framework, the research questions were framed around:
• capturing conceptualisations
• evidencing practice
• developing practice
and were:
RQ1. How are the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years in the partner countries conceptualised by teachers and in policy? What role if any does creativity play in these?
RQ2. What approaches are used in the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years in the partner countries? What role if any does creativity play in these?
RQ3. In what ways do these approaches seek to foster young children’s learning and motivation in science and mathematics? How do teachers perceive their role in doing so?
RQ4. How can findings emerging from analysis in relation to questions 1-3 inform the development of practice in the classroom and in teacher education (Initial Teacher Education (ITE) and Continuing Professional Development (CPD))?
These questions were examined in relation to the curriculum dimensions and associated List of Factors found to be associated with creativity in early science and mathematics. In addition, for this study, these dimensions were grouped to reflect the two main foci of the fieldwork, informed by the pedagogical model developed by Siraj-Blatchford et al (2002) (see Figure 4), namely
• Pedagogical interventions (or interactions) documented by observing face to face classroom practice and listening to children’s reflections on this; and
• Pedagogical framing documented through teacher’s reflections on classroom practice and wider information concerning the teacher, school, curriculum and assessment.
The study also drew on wider contextual information concerning the teachers and schools and early years settings that participated in the fieldwork, and local curriculum and assessment policy to identify any enabling factors or barriers at the contextual level that might influence opportunities for creativity and inquiry in early science and mathematics.
To meet the project’s objectives and research questions, mixed methods were employed, combining quantitative approaches used in the surveys of policy and of teachers’ views based on the List of Factors, alongside qualitative approaches employed in the case studies of classroom practice and iterative processes associated with teacher education curriculum design research (see Figure 5). A total of 815 teachers from 605 schools (238 preschools and 367 primary schools) across the consortium countries participated in the teacher survey, and fieldwork was conducted on 48 different sites across partner countries resulting in 71 case studies of practices in Early Years science and mathematics education. The focus of the fieldwork in each country was on sites where there were indications that we would find ‘exemplary practices’ in fostering creativity and inquiry in early science and mathematics, covering all pupil age groups from age 3 up to 8 years and the range of provision of pre-primary and early primary education in the country. A total of 218 episodes of ‘exemplary practice’ were analysed and reported, including episodes focusing on science and mathematics and instances where science and mathematics were integrated in the episodes observed.
It was also recognized that policy and practice needed to be interpreted within partners’ particular national contexts, especially when making comparative judgments. As a result all phases of research were undertaken by local researchers and reported in separate National Reports. These were then synthesized to form overall Creative Little Scientists project reports, which are available on the project website (www.creative-little-scientists.eu).
KEY FINDINGS
RQ1. Conceptualisations of teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in Early Years by teachers (and in policy) in the partner countries. The role of creativity in these.
The explicit curriculum rationale for science education in nearly all partner countries was focused on children’s role as citizens and highlighted science and environmental awareness as a part of their life in general; this was also reflected in what teachers said. However the research findings revealed that teachers’ viewpoints regarding the rationale for science learning was in practice more holistic than what had been found in the policy documents in the partner countries. Learning aims and objectives were conceptualised by teachers as primarily contributing towards affective and social aspects of learning, such as increasing interest and positive attitudes towards science and science learning. These views contrasted with the emphasis in official policy documents on the development of knowledge and understanding of science and mathematics ideas and on process skills associated with scientific inquiry, especially in primary education.
In terms of learning activities, specific features of inquiry were conceptualised in both teachers’ views and through policy guidance. Teachers in the preschool and early primary science and mathematics classroom made reference to inquiry based learning, a key part of the policy framing in all countries, in particularly through learning activities associated with observation, questioning, communication and the use of simple tools, which all took a dominant place among inquiry related activities. Yet, despite this general conceptualization of inquiry based learning, teachers’ responses in fact rarely referred to inquiry activities related to practical investigations and using data to construct explanations.
In terms of conceptualisations about pedagogy teachers across the partner countries consistently and uniformly held a great appreciation for all valued pedagogical approaches that promote dialogue and collaboration in science amongst children, although teachers often failed to see the potential of these approaches for the development of creativity in children. This was consistent with policy which put some emphasis on their importance but included very limited reference to features of creativity that might be fostered through dialogue and collaboration and very limited guidance to support teachers in enabling creativity using classroom discussions and collaborative work.
There was an uneven treatment in both policy and reported practice of the approaches grouped in relation to the synergy motivation and affect. Learning approaches which are based on building on children’s prior experiences or relating science and mathematics to everyday life were amongst those reported as most frequently used by teachers and referenced in policy, although these were not highlighted as ‘creativity enabling’ either by teachers or by policy documents. In addition, approaches making use of drama or history to teach science and mathematics were promoted the least frequently both by teachers and in curricula, which also failed to make reference to their potential for creativity.
There was a similarly uneven treatment of approaches with reference to the synergy play and exploration. Preschool teachers reported using open forms of play and role play significantly more than early primary school teachers, and a greater proportion of preschool teachers also conceptualised these as ‘creativity enabling’. This was also reflected in preschool curricula across the partner countries with policy in the majority of them promoting playful exploration in preschool considerably more than in primary education. On the other hand teachers and policies of both phases were in agreement in fostering children’s physical exploration of materials, an approach also conceptualised as ‘creativity enabling’ by teachers and in policy, and especially for primary education.
Teachers, as well as policy guidance, emphasised teaching approaches linked to problem solving and agency across both phases of early years education. These approaches were also often suggested to foster children's creativity, particularly in preschool.
Learning approaches associated with questioning and curiosity and their importance in fostering creativity were similarly conceptualised by teachers and in policy guidance. Practices that encourage children to ask questions and foster their imagination were reported as frequently used by teachers, were emphasised in policy and were perceived by both as ‘creativity enabling’. In contrast, the role of teacher questioning and the value of varied approaches to children recording their ideas in supporting creative learning were given more limited recognition.
Learning approaches linked to fostering reflection and reasoning were perceived to have limited scope in promoting children’s creativity by both teachers and in policy documents, though teachers reported using them quite or very frequently.
In terms of teachers’ conceptualisations about scaffolding, teachers saw themselves as facilitators of children’s own inquiry, delaying instruction until the learner had had a chance to investigate and inquire on their own or with others. They were a little more reticent to allow children to find solutions on their own, although they strongly rejected the suggestion that they should first act as demonstrators of the correct solution before children investigate for themselves.
Assessment, especially formative assessment, was widely highlighted as an important area for development in both policy and practice in both preschool and primary phases. However, policy guidance in terms of both methods of assessment and criteria for assessing on-going progress was often found lacking which is reflected in considerable variability in assessment approaches found across partner countries.
A common tendency to focus on product instead of process in assessment, allied with the pressures of statutory summative assessment processes in a number of partner countries revealed a number of challenges related to assessment of inquiry and creativity. Whilst the assessment of science and mathematics was widely emphasised in policy, more limited attention was given to assessment of inquiry processes and procedural understanding, and even less to social and affective dimensions of learning across the majority of partner countries, even though these dimensions were often highlighted in the rationale and aims set out for early science and mathematics education. Teachers’ responses to the survey regarding their priorities for science assessment on the other hand were consistent with the frequency with which they indicated pursuing the corresponding aims and objectives in their science teaching.
Finally, there was very limited evidence in policy of a role for creativity either in the priorities or methods for assessment advocated. In particular, little attention was paid to multimodal forms of assessment or the involvement of children in assessment processes often associated with creative approaches to learning and teaching in the early years. Again here a contrast was noted between findings from the policy and teacher surveys as teachers reported taking account of children’s multimodal expressions for assessment purposes, especially in preschool.
RQ2. Approaches used in the teaching, learning and assessment of science and mathematics in early years: opportunities for inquiry and creativity.
Findings indicated considerable potential for inquiry and creativity in the opportunities teachers provided for the generation and evaluation of ideas and strategies in both preschool and primary settings. Opportunities for the generation of ideas, for example, were fostered by rich motivating contexts for play and exploration, whilst purposes for inquiry were linked to children’s everyday experiences and there was considerable scope for children’s decision making.
Dialogue and collaboration, promoted by widespread use of group work and teacher questioning, played important roles in encouraging the processes of reflection and explanation associated with the evaluation of ideas and strategies.
The potential of sensitive and responsive teacher scaffolding both to support independence and extend inquiry was underlined, particularly in relation to when to intervene and when to stand back in order to listen to and build upon children’s creative engagement and the development of their ideas and questions.
Opportunities for play were limited in primary settings. The value of play and exploration in the primary age phase could be more widely appreciated, for example in generating ideas and questions and fostering a feel for phenomena.
Findings suggested that the roles of varied forms of representation and the processes of representation (not just the product) in developing children’s thinking needed greater recognition, this included the role of ICT, particularly in preschool settings.
Assessment approaches observed were generally informal and formative and were based on observation and teacher questioning. There was limited evidence of the involvement of children in assessment, although interviews with children during fieldwork did indicate their capabilities to reflect on their learning and gave new insights into learning processes.
There were few examples of episodes involving the use of outdoor resources or non-formal settings for learning in museums or the wider community. Here differences were noted between preschool and primary settings. In a number of preschool settings, children had free access to outdoor areas, and the overall provision of space and staffing levels were more generous providing greater scope for practical exploration.
The aims of activities were often implicit. Where aims were made explicit, they rarely included an explicit focus on creativity although the promotion of creative dispositions was evident in the majority of episodes observed. In both preschool and primary settings there was a strong focus on social and affective factors of learning and the development of scientific and mathematical concepts and process skills was a common feature of episodes observed. Explicit focus on the nature of science was limited.
Findings underlined the important influence of teachers’ wider perspectives on learning and teaching, and their views of the nature of science and mathematics and understanding of creativity on the aims and approaches explicit or implicit in the activities observed. Teachers in most settings designed their own learning experiences with only a small proportion of episodes relying on textbooks or published schemes, where this was observed it was most common in the teaching of mathematics.
Partners commented on the greater scope for child-initiated activity and creative engagement in preschool settings, although this was not always recognised by teachers, and on the tendency for pressures of time and curriculum requirements to limit opportunities for children’s creativity and inquiry in primary settings.
RQ3. Ways in which these approaches seek to foster young children’s learning, interest and motivation in science and mathematics
Across the episodes there were many examples of children observing and making connections, for example drawing on prior learning or between experiences. Opportunities for children’s questioning were also present but not always recognised or built upon.
There was greater evidence of children’s engagement in the social dimensions of inquiry, explaining evidence and communicating explanations than might have been expected from the findings of policy and teacher surveys; this was often prompted by dialogue with peers and adults.
Explicit examples of children’s developing understanding of the nature of science were limited however starting points for the development of understanding of the nature of science was indicated in a number of episodes, in children’s reflections on learning in classroom discussion or in interviews with researchers.
Children’s inquiry skills and understandings noted in episodes were interconnected with evidence of a number of creative attributes. For example children’s motivation, curiosity and abilities to come up with something new were evidenced in raising questions and in their active pursuit of explorations and investigations. The episodes reported offered many examples of children’s sense of initiative and growing abilities to collaborate in deciding what to do in carrying out investigations. Children showed imagination, ability to make connections and thinking skills in offering explanations.
How do teachers perceive their role in doing so?
Teachers involved in the case studies often indicated that they had not previously thought about the approaches they adopted in terms of opportunities for inquiry and creativity. Fieldwork processes had prompted reflection on the nature of inquiry and creativity in early mathematics and science and how this might be fostered.
Most teachers made reference to the importance of encouraging and supporting young children’s engagement in early years science and mathematics as an important starting point for learning. Many emphasised the need to foster motivation and collaboration and provide a rich environment with space and time for exploration and problem-based learning, underlining key roles for teachers in encouraging reflection and making connections to promote children’s conceptual understanding and the application of ideas in varied settings.
In sharing their approaches limited explicit reference was made to the role of creativity or to features of inquiry in science and mathematics.
RQ4. How can findings emerging from analysis in relation to questions 1-3 inform the development of practice in the classroom and in teacher education (ITE and CPD)?
In the framework of the Creative Little Scientists project, a set of curriculum design principles, expressed as concrete guidelines, for European ITE and CPD programmes were developed with the purpose of enhancing the use of creative approaches to learning in pre-school and first years of primary school science and mathematics education. To this end, the methodology of curriculum design research was used.
The curriculum design research model in Figure 6 depicts the different phases – analytical, prototypical and assessment– of the design research process, as well as how the project’s research work and findings contributed to these.
The design principles and the successive guidelines were developed in collaboration with different relevant stakeholders in iterative cycles, represented by the gradually optimized and elaborated prototypes in Figure 6.
During the analytical phase, important issues from the Conceptual Framework and the associated literature reviews were combined with the corresponding viewpoints of the consortium partners and presented under the 10 curricular components (van den Akker, 2007), this time adapted to teacher education. Following further elaboration and feedback by the consortium partners, a draft version of the design principles (prototype 1) was prepared.
During the next phase, the prototypical phase, this draft version of design principles was evaluated and refined through iterative cycles with a view to developing curriculum guidelines for teacher education. In the first cycle, the draft version (prototype 1) of the prototypical design curriculum principles was adjusted for the purposes of teacher education, using a web-based expert appraisal panel, consisting of the Creative Little Scientists consortium partners. The results of this expert panel were analysed through negotiation and synthesis, and these results guided the development of prototype 2 of curriculum design principles.
In a following cycle, the draft prototypical design principles were evaluated in each of the partner countries by means of online focus groups for stakeholders. Moreover, they were analysed and further adjusted according to feedback from the partners, resulting in prototype 3 of curriculum design principles.
During the final cycle, prototype 3 was developed into the final set of curriculum design principles for teacher education. This was achieved through the organisation of face-to-face focus groups with teacher educators. Each partner provided context-specific examples of (best) practice, intended to clarify and illustrate the underlying messages of the final set of design principles. Additionally, the set of design principles was further refined based on the findings and implications in relation to research questions 1-3. These provided insights into the main focal issues that had to be addressed by teacher education in order to foster creativity in science and mathematics education in Early Years. They included:
• Perspectives on the nature of science and mathematics and the purposes of science and mathematics education in the early years.
• The characteristics and roles of creativity in learning and teaching in early mathematics and science.
• Use of the outdoor and wider school environment for learning in science and mathematics.
• Approaches to planning at whole school and class levels to maximize scope and flexibility to foster children’s inquiries and to provide opportunities for play and exploration (across both preschool and primary phases of education).
• Ways in which everyday learning activities can be opened up to allow space for children’s agency and creativity.
• The roles of questioning in supporting inquiry and creativity, different forms of teacher questioning, ways of supporting children’s questioning, recognising questions implicit in children’s explorations.
• Importance and roles of varied forms of representation, including the use of ICT, in supporting children’s learning processes.
• Assessment strategies and forms of evidence that can be used to support learning and teaching in early science and mathematics, the roles of peer and self-assessment.
Additonally, based on these issues, the curriculum design principles which referred to the Content component of the teacher education curriculum were elaborated into a specific and concrete set of statements: the Teacher Outcomes. These Teacher Outcomes can be seen as important content recommendations for teacher educators to frame their courses.
Finally, fieldwork provided classroom examples for use in teacher education programs to illustrate and discuss the potential for creativity and inquiry within everyday classroom practices in early science and mathematics. The partners were asked to review their data of the in-depth fieldwork (images, interviews and classroom extracts) and to select those images, interviews or classroom extracts which were linked to one or more of the Teacher Outcomes and which could stand on their own. A grid was provided to guide this selection. Templates were then used to structure the materials. In total about 171 Exemplary Teacher Training Materials or templates are available. These are all structured in an Excel-file and can be found on the website www.creative-little-scientists.eu.
CURRICULUM DESIGN PRINCIPLES AND ASSOCIATED TEACHER OUTCOMES
This section presents one of the main outputs of Creative Little Scientists, which is the Curriculum Design Principles for teacher education, grouped under van den Akker’s (2007) curriculum components, and the related set of Teacher Outcomes (for the 'Content' component). It is important to note that while the components and design principles are presented in a list, the components are not in any hierarchical order and should not be viewed in isolation as they are all closely interconnected and highly interdependent. All of the design principles are meant to be seen as equally important and a foundation for different curricula development routes in Europe. They also represent the starting point for discussions with various groups of stakeholders, amongst them teacher education policy makers and teacher educators in training institutions.
0. Rationale
Teachers should foster inquiry and creativity in science and mathematics learning in preschool and the first years of primary school
1. Aims and Objectives
Competences for teachers
In teacher education teachers should:
1.1 Acquire secure content knowledge of science and mathematics ideas and processes, as well as the skills and competences to carry out inquiries.
1.2 Acquire the pedagogical content knowledge to foster inquiry and creativity in Early Years science and mathematics, including the use of inquiry approaches.
1.3 Become confident and develop positive attitudes towards learning and teaching science, mathematics using inquiry and creativity based approaches.
1.4 Acquire the skills to act as researchers and reflective practitioners in learning and teaching science and mathematics, and should become able to discern and reflect on innovative ideas.
1.5 Acquire the knowledge and skills to support the diverse interests and needs of young children in engaging creatively within the fields of science and mathematics.
Foci of teacher education
Teacher education should:
1.6 Emphasise the importance of science and mathematics education for personal and society development by advocating its role in the preparation of scientific and mathematic literate citizens as well as the role of creativity in these domains and in human development.
1.7 Emphasise the pedagogical synergies between IBSE and creative approaches in both science and mathematics learning and teaching.
1.8 Foster teacher learning outcomes aligned with creative science and mathematics teaching strategies and assessment methods.
1.9 Foster teachers’ creativity and their potential to be creative in science and mathematics.
2. Role of teacher educator
Teacher educator profile
Teacher educators of science and mathematics education should:
2.1 Combine content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge, and teaching practice of science and mathematics.
2.2 Be reflective practitioners who promote creative approaches in their practice, including inquiry and problem solving.
2.3 Be willing to try new things and be open to taking risks in their practice, so they can bring in (new) effective pedagogy and approaches in the fields of science and mathematics.
2.4 Have the skills to build partnerships (e.g. communities) with different science and mathematics education stakeholders such as schools, science research centers, science museums, scientific and mathematics associations at national and local level, etc.
2.5 Be encouraged to be actively involved in research and discussion networks about science and mathematics education pedagogy.
Teacher educator role
Teacher educators should:
2.6 Take into consideration teachers' prior knowledge, skills, attitudes, beliefs, fears, preconceptions (incl. stereotypical images), learning styles and experiences associated with learning and teaching science, mathematics, and creativity, and organize appropriate learning activities.
2.7 Make explicit connections among content knowledge, pedagogical content knowledge and teaching practice of science and mathematics, as well as between these and the development of creativity.
2.8 Practically demonstrate a variety of roles in their interactions with teachers e.g. facilitator, supporter, coordinator, leader, motivator, role model.
2.9 Model inquiry- and creativity-based learning, teaching and assessment practices, by for example encouraging teachers’ decision making during inquiry processes, and sharing, evaluating and reflecting on outcomes.
2.10 Model how teachers should select science and mathematics materials and resources for fostering creativity in mathematics and science.
3. Learning activities
Teacher education should provide learning activities in science and mathematics which:
3.1 Are inquiry-based, addressing all essential features of inquiry (questioning, designing or planning investigations, gathering evidence, making connections, explaining evidence, communicating and reflecting on explanations), and their various purposes and degrees of structure and guidance (including open, guided and structured inquiries).
3.2 Bring out the synergies between inquiry-based science and mathematics and approaches directed at developing learner creativity.
3.3 Are interactive, within a rich, motivating context, and should encompass a range of formal and informal learning approaches and strategies. Examples of such activities include lesson planning, discussions focused on fostering creativity; demonstrations of good practice; outdoor learning; field trips; project work.
3.4 Integrate science and mathematics learning, making use of real life, meaningful and interactive contexts, and illustrating the potential of such interdisciplinary approaches for inquiry and creativity.
3.5 Provide teachers with opportunities to recognize and better understand both young children’s learning of science and mathematics and the role of creativity within this, through for example classroom observations, collection and analysis of evidence, talking to children.
3.6 Attend to teachers’ different approaches to their own learning and encourage their expression and representation of scientific and mathematics ideas in various modes.
3.7 Help teachers reflect on their own prior knowledge, (mis)conceptions (incl. stereotypical images) beliefs and attitudes about science, mathematics and creativity, using a variety of approaches, such as microteaching, peer-observations, learning journals.
3.8 Support teachers’ learning, by providing them with illustrative examples of diverse practices for them to critically examine opportunities for creativity and inquiry in learning, teaching and assessment.
3.9 Are a variety of individual and collaborative to promote teachers’ creative thinking skills and dispositions.
4. Assessment
Focus of assessment
In teacher education:
4.1 Teachers’ acquisition and development of science/mathematics content and pedagogical content knowledge, skills and attitudes should be assessed.
4.2 The development of teachers’ inquiry and creativity-based teaching and assessment approaches should be assessed.
4.3 Teachers’ acquisition and development of understanding about what it is to foster children’s creativity in science and mathematics should be assessed.
4.4 The development of teachers’ abilities to plan for, foster, reflect upon and assess children's creativity in science and mathematics education should be assessed.
Process of assessment
Teacher education should:
4.5 Promote teachers’ independence and responsibility in identifying their own progress and areas for development both in the fields of science and mathematics education and in the fostering of creativity within these fields.
4.6 Use different assessment strategies in order to assess holistically cognitive, social and affective aspects of science and mathematics learning, as well as tap into the potential for peer and self-assessment.
4.7 Use different forms of evidence (e.g. portfolios, teacher diary, observation lists, tests, essays, project work, teaching practice) for assessment purposes.
5. Content
Teacher education should:
5.1 Provide content knowledge about science and mathematics, including interesting and current topics, to be used in activities linked with everyday life.
5.1.1 Teachers should be able to pursue the social and affective objectives of children’s science and mathematics learning, in synergy with the corresponding cognitive ones.
5.1.2 Teachers should be able to make children aware of connections between science and mathematics learning and their everyday lives, in order to engage their motivation, interest and enjoyment in science and mathematics and foster curiosity and creativity.
5.2 Provide teachers with skills and competences to carry out practical investigations of science and mathematics in the classroom.
5.2.1 Teachers should be able to instigate and involve children in the design and conduct of practical investigations of science and mathematics in the classroom, as such activities can contribute to the development of children’s creativity.
5.2.2 Teachers should have a more detailed knowledge about the nature of inquiry and investigations in Early Years science and mathematics in order to be able to recognise the opportunities they offer both for creative learning and developing children’s creativity.
5.3 Advance teachers’ understandings about the nature of science and how scientists work, confronting stereotypical images of science and scientists.
5.3.1 Teachers should be able to advance children’s understanding about the nature of science and how scientists work, confronting stereotypical images of science and scientists.
5.3.2 Teachers should be able to recognize young children’s capabilities to engage with processes associated with the evaluation as well as generation of ideas in science and mathematics, since these processes are also important for the development of learner creativity.
5.3.3 Teachers should be able to use foster the processes of imagination, reflection and consideration of alternative ideas in supporting children’s understanding of scientific ideas and procedures and development of creativity.
5.4 Promote understandings about the nature and framings of creativity, characteristics of creative teaching and learning, and how creativity is manifest in Early Years science and mathematics.
5.4.1 Teachers should be able to recognize how creativity is manifest in Early Years science and mathematics and have knowledge of distinctions between features of creative teaching and creative learning.
5.5 Provide knowledge about how children’s creativity development could be enhanced and assessed within science and mathematics education.
5.5.1 Teachers should have detailed knowledge about the synergies between inquiry and creativity, such as play and exploration, motivation and affect, dialogue and collaboration, problem solving and agency, questioning and curiosity, reflection and reasoning; and teacher scaffolding and involvement, to support children’s creative learning and advance their creativity within science and mathematics education
5.6 Provide pedagogical content knowledge to stimulate inquiry and problem solving in science and mathematics education.
5.6.1 Teachers should have knowledge of all essential features of inquiry and problem solving (questioning, designing or planning investigations, gathering evidence, making connections, explaining evidence, communicating and reflecting on explanations), their different purposes, degrees of structure and guidance (including open, guided and structured inquiries), and varied opportunities they offer for creativity.
5.6.2 Teachers should be able to open up everyday learning activities to allow greater opportunities for inquiry, problem solving and scope for creativity.
5.6.3 Teachers should be able to recognise the key roles of children’s questioning and existing ideas (both implicit and explicit) of science and mathematics.
5.6.4 Teachers should be able to use a variety of strategies for eliciting and building on children’s questions and ideas during inquiry processes (before, during and after explorations and investigations).
5.6.5 Teachers should be able to foster opportunities for children’s agency and creativity in learning in inquiry and problem solving – in particular the importance of children making their own decisions during inquiry processes, making their own connections between questions, planning and evaluating evidence, and reflecting on outcomes.
5.7 Familiarise teachers with a range of formal and informal inquiry- and creativity-based learning, teaching and assessment approaches and strategies and their use in relation to authentic problems within the areas of science and mathematics.
5.7.1 Teachers should have knowledge of a range of formal, non-formal and informal learning, teaching and assessment approaches and strategies to promote creativity in their Early Years science and mathematics classroom.
5.7.2 Teacher should be able to use a range of strategies both formal and informal for supporting children’s extended engagement with an area of study and progression in learning in science and mathematics.
5.7.3 Teachers should be able to recognize and exploit the value of play and exploration in science and mathematics for fostering and extending inquiry and creativity, by for example prompting questions, eliciting ideas, providing opportunities for consideration of alternative strategies during children’s familiarisation with phenomena and events.
5.7.4 Teacher should be able both to build in new and to make the most of existing opportunities for child-initiated play, recognising and capitalising on the potential of children’s explorations beyond the teacher’s original intentions.
5.7.5 Teachers should be able to use a range of creative contexts and approaches for provoking children’s interest, motivation and enjoyment in science and mathematics, such as stories, poems, songs, drama, puppets, games.
5.7.6 Teachers should be able to use strategies for making and building on science and mathematics real life connections and applications for engaging creatively young children in science and mathematics learning.
5.7.7 Teachers should be able to assume a variety of roles in their interactions with the children e.g. allower, leader, afforder, coordinator, supporter, tutor, motivator and facilitator, to support children’s creativity and inquiry in science and mathematics.
5.7.8 Teacher should be able to use a variety of scaffolding techniques to promote creativity in science and mathematics, from standing back in order to observe, listen and build from the children’s interests, to intervening with appropriate questioning to support and extend inquiries.
5.7.9 Teachers should be able to use different assessment approaches and strategies and in particular those that involve children in the assessment processes, such as peer and self assessment, dialogue and feedback on progress, in the Early Years science and mathematics classroom.
5.7.10 Teachers should value and be able to make use of varied forms of assessment evidence (including children’s portfolios, individual or group records of activities), both to promote creative learning, through reflection and discussion in science and mathematics, and explicitly to inform teaching and longer term planning.
5.8 Enable teachers to design and assess creativity-enabling inquiry-based activities which are child-friendly and include both guided and open inquiries.
5.8.1 Teachers should be able to design and assess open-ended learning activities.
5.9 Enable teachers to make best use of and assess the various modes of expression and representation of science and mathematics learning to support inquiry and the development of creativity.
5.9.1 Teachers should be able to recognize and value children’s various forms of expression and representation of their ideas and learning in science and mathematics.
5.9.2 Teachers should be able to make best use of children’s preferred forms of expression and representation of their science and mathematics ideas to support inquiry and their creativity development.
5.9.3 Teachers should be able to select and use different approaches for and forms of recording children’s ideas and learning in science and mathematics at different stages of the learning process and for various purposes, including to support children’s reflection and reasoning processes.
5.9.4 Teachers should be able to use the various modes of children’s expression and representation of science and mathematics ideas (e.g. pictures, graphs, gestures, physical activities) for assessment purposes.
5.10 Enable teachers to recognize and build on children’s questionings, ideas, theories and interests for the teaching of science and mathematics.
5.10.1 Teachers should be able to use a range of strategies for picking up on children’s ideas, theories and interests.
5.10.2 Teachers should be able to build flexibility into planning to take advantage of unexpected events, children’s interests and questions.
5.11 Enable teachers to use questioning effectively and encourage children’s questions in order to foster creativity and inquiry.
5.11.1 Teacher should be able to use different forms of questioning at appropriate points to scaffold creative learning outcomes in science and mathematics, and in particular to encourage children’s reflections and explanations, foster their independence and extend their inquiry.
5.11.2 Teachers should value and be able to build on the potential of children’s own questions to foster their curiosity in science and mathematics, and support their generation and follow up, including those that are investigable.
5.12 Provide knowledge about early child development, the purposes and aims of science and mathematics education, and their place in the Early Years curriculum.
5.12.1 Teachers should have knowledge of the various purposes and aims of science and mathematics education in compulsory schooling.
5.12.2 Teachers should have knowledge of the prevailing academic rationale for the place of science and mathematics in the Early Years curriculum.
5.12.3 Teachers should have knowledge of the role of creativity in child development and in the fields of science and mathematics.
5.12.4 Teachers should be able to contribute towards the goal of preparing creative citizens, who have scientific and mathematic literacy.
5.12.5 Teacher should be able to align the aims and rationale for Early Years science and mathematics education with their teaching and assessment approaches and priorities.
5.12.6 Teachers should be able to support the diverse interests and needs of young children in engaging creatively within the fields of science and mathematics.
5.13 Provide teachers with knowledge about the relevant education policy guidelines and documents for science, and mathematics education (and the role of creativity in them) at national level, as well as about the corresponding policy trends at European level.
5.13.1 Teachers should have knowledge about the relevant education policy guidelines and documents for science, and mathematics education (and the role of creativity in them) at national level, as well as about the corresponding policy trends at European level.
5.14 Equip teachers with knowledge and skills to use a range of formal, non-formal and informal learning environments, including the outdoor environment, both the school grounds and the wider environment beyond the school, in their teaching of science and mathematics.
5.14.1 Teachers should be able to make use of varied settings for science and mathematics learning, including flexible use of the environment both indoors and out.
5.14.2 Teachers should be able to recognise and build on opportunities for informal learning in science and mathematics within the school environment, for example within day to day routines or child-initiated games and other activities in school classrooms or outdoor play areas.
5.14.3 Teachers should be able to elicit and build on children’s informal learning of science and mathematics outside school, at home or in the wider environment.
5.14.4 Teachers should be able to manage visits with children to the outdoor and wider environment beyond the school, addressing issues of health and safety, liaison with parents, building progression in experience inside the classroom.
5.15 Promote teachers’ use of group work to support children’s inquiry processes and creative learning.
5.15.1 Teachers should have knowledge of the value of collaboration for inquiry and creative thinking and learning.
5.15.2 Teachers should be able to purposefully use a variety of patterns of collaboration, shifting between individual and collaborative activity over time, to support children’s inquiry processes and creative learning.
5.15.3 Teachers should be able to organize group work, aligning ways of grouping children, task design, teaching and assessment strategies in different ways to promote collaboration amongst children in science and mathematics.
5.15.4 Teachers should be able to use resources and teacher intervention appropriately to foster collaboration in science and mathematics.
5.15.5 Teachers should be able to assess group work.
5.15.6 Teachers should be able to use effective strategies for sharing ideas and discussions from different groups.
5.16 Provide teachers with knowledge of approaches to timetabling and organizing cross-curricular project work.
5.16.1 Teacher should be able to use approaches to cross- thematic, cross-curricular and project work to promote creativity in science and mathematics.
5.16.2 Teachers should be able to use a variety of approaches to timetabling, within the existing curriculum and policy expectations to allow space for cross-curricula project work and child-initiated exploration and inquiry.
5.16.3 Teachers should be able to build connections across the curriculum of various kinds and with potential to contribute to children’s inquiry and creativity.
5.17 Address with teachers issues in ensuring rich provision, planning and use of resources (including digital resources) in and out of the classroom to support children’s inquiry and creativity.
5.17.1 Teachers should be able to organise and use materials (including everyday materials), resources (including ICT and natural resources) and equipment (including digital equipment and simple laboratory instruments) in the classroom, school and wider environment, both indoors and out, to support independent inquiry and creativity.
5.17.2 Teachers should be able to recognize the nature and potential of different materials and resources both to constrain and extend children’s explorations.
5.17.3 Teachers should be able to evaluate and select creativity enabling ICT resources for children to use in their inquiry.
5.17.4 Teachers should be able to evaluate provision for free flow play in their school settings.
5.17.5 Teachers should be able to develop and extend their own classroom resources to foster creativity in the Early Years science and mathematics classroom.
5.17.6 Teachers should be able to gain insights into children’s developing explorations and creativity based on their use of resources.
5.17.7 Teachers should be able to develop the school grounds and the outdoor classroom for use in science and mathematics education.
5.18 Encourage and assess the development of teachers’ literacy, numeracy and digital literacy skills through science and mathematics.
5.18.1 Teachers should develop their literacy, numeracy and digital literacy skills through science and mathematics.
6. Materials and resources
Teacher education should:
6.1 Provide ICT infrastructure and logistical support to teachers to access diverse learning materials and resources, which may include web-based resources, social media, videogames, online academic journals and databases, as well as other digital technologies, such as cameras, tablets, and other digital devices.
6.2 Facilitate and promote access to a variety of Early Years science and mathematics curriculum materials and resources fostering inquiry and creativity. These should be both for indoor and outdoor use and include everyday materials, picture and story books, building blocks, equipment for hands-on exploration.
6.3 Facilitate and promote access to materials and resources (including everyday materials) fostering inquiry and creativity in Early Years science and mathematics.
7. Grouping
Teacher education should:
7.1 Provide a range of learning trajectories to teachers to choose from according to their needs and preferences.
7.2 Promote collaborative learning practices, including peer learning, in science and mathematics education in order to foster creativity and inquiry.
7.3 Promote team teaching and working in the fields of science and mathematics education.
7.4 Support teacher collaboration, including at a distance through digital media and other ICT tools that make this possible.
7.5 Provide interaction and interdisciplinary collaboration opportunities amongst student teachers, in-service teachers, science experts, research scientists, teacher educators, children, and educational establishments and organizations.
8. Location
Teacher education should:
8.1 Take place in a variety of learning environments (formal, non-formal and informal, indoor and outdoor), including e.g. science museums, science research centers, natural habitats, etc., modelling their subsequent use for inquiry and creativity in the classroom.
8.2 Facilitate access to industries and research centres of science and mathematics to promote collaboration, sharing, visiting, and networking of teachers.
8.3 Provide opportunities for place-independent and collaborative learning, i.e. flexibility and variety of teaching locations.
9. Time
Teacher education should:
9.1 Provide time for teachers to interact with colleagues: e.g. collegial consultation/reflection, teamwork, mind mapping, vision-building.
9.2 Allow sufficient time for teachers to explore opportunities for creativity in learning and teaching in early science and mathematics and to gain confidence through the process.
9.3 Provide opportunities for time-independent (distance) learning.
9.4 Model different approaches to timetabling science and mathematics education, encouraging interdisciplinary and project work.
IMPLICATIONS AND DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE RESEARCH
Findings from the project have also contributed new insights into the opportunities for inquiry and creativity in policy and practice in early years science and mathematics education.
The policy and teacher surveys conducted across the varied contexts in the partnership, indicate potential for inquiry and creativity, shown for example in common emphases on the importance of play, exploration and investigation and the promotion of curiosity or thinking skills in policy and in the priority given by teachers to the importance of social and affective factors in learning. However whilst policy in many of the partner countries advocates inquiry-based approaches, there are relatively few explicit references to creativity in learning within policy documentation. Though creative dispositions (e.g. curiosity or thinking skills) are mentioned, these are not framed within overt aims to foster creativity in teaching and learning. In addition although in some instances general references to creativity and inquiry are expressed in policy, these are often not reflected in specific curriculum or assessment requirements. This provides arguably conflicting and incoherent support for teachers and schools. Furthermore the emphasis is generally on the generation of ideas with more limited indications of scope for creativity in the evaluation and development of ideas and strategies or of ways in which children’s involvement in assessment might contribute to these processes of evaluation.
The episodes reported in the Country Reports of fieldwork provide rich evidence of children’s capacities for inquiry and creativity. They illustrate features of pedagogy related to the synergies between inquiry-based and creative approaches identified in the Conceptual Framework, for example through an emphasis on motivation and affect, reflection and reasoning, opportunities for problem solving and agency and the encouragement of dialogue and collaboration. Episodes also indicate the potential for sensitive scaffolding through teachers standing back to watch and listen attentively as well as to intervene to extend children’s understanding in diverse ways. However findings from across the partnership suggest areas for further development and examination for example in relation to the more limited opportunities for play and for questioning reported in primary settings. It would be valuable to exemplify ways of creating such opportunities in the primary age phase within the greater constraints of time and curriculum requirements. Finally experiences during fieldwork in a number of settings highlighted the value of sharing fieldwork processes and outcomes with participants and the potential for the use of project findings to enhance recognition of opportunities for inquiry and creativity. This provided important feedback to inform development of the teacher training materials.
Findings suggest a number of implications for future research, particularly in relation to factors that were not strongly represented in the data such as:
• Opportunities for outdoor learning in the wider school environment
• The potential of children’s use of ICT to enhance inquiry and creativity
• Role of representation in varied modes in fostering young children’s reflection and reasoning
• Opportunities for exploring the nature of science with young children
Or aspects of practice that it was more difficult to observe with the limitations of staffing and time including:
• Role of free flow play in fostering inquiry and creativity over time
• Contribution of informal and non-formal approaches to young children’s learning in science and mathematics
• The contribution of peer and self-assessment to the development of creative dispositions in early science and mathematics.
KEY RECOMMENDATIONS FOR POLICY DEVELOPMENT ACROSS EUROPE IN EARLY YEARS SCIENCE AND MATHEMATICS EDUCATION
A significant strand of the project was also the development of guidelines for policy development building on findings from the different phases of the study, summarised in the previous sections, and ongoing collaboration and dialogue with participants and other stakeholders. They are presented in relation to the key strands of importance in relation to opportunities afforded for inquiry, problem solving and creativity in early years mathematics and science: aims, teaching learning and assessment and contextual factors.
Aims
The aims of the curriculum should
Give greater recognition to young children’s capabilities to engage with processes associated with evaluation as well as the generation of ideas in science and mathematics.
One of the four key common drivers for an increased research focus on science and mathematics education and creativity in the early years classroom identified by the Creative Little Scientists Conceptual Framework calls for growing recognition of young children’s capabilities and the importance of early years education in building on children’s early experiences and promoting positive skills and dispositions. The review of relevant literature revealed an increasing recognition of children’s capacities to take ownership of their own learning and take part in decision making in matters that affect their lives in the present. The review of policy notes a lack of coherence in policy in this aspect, for example a mismatch between rationale or aims that might emphasise the promotion of inquiry skills and creative dispositions, and assessment methods and criteria that allow limited opportunities for children to show their capabilities. Having said this, teachers need help to recognise more fully young children’s capabilities to engage with processes associated with the evaluation as well as generation of ideas in science and mathematics.
Foster the role of social and affective dimensions of learning and their connection with cognitive dimensions of learning such as engagement, evaluation skills and understandings related to the nature of science.
The aims, objectives, and content of the science curriculum in partner countries give considerable emphasis to the development of knowledge and understanding of science ideas and process skills associated with scientific inquiry than to social and affective factors of science learning. The review of policy across partner countries showed that social and affective dimensions of learning are given more limited attention compared to cognitive dimensions. More particularly, the majority of policy documentation inspected lacked emphasis on promoting positive attitudes to learning and interest in early years science education.
Teaching, learning and assessment
Curriculum content and policy guidance should
Emphasise the important roles of play-based approaches, child–initiated activity and practical investigation in both preschool and early primary school.
The Creative Little Scientists Conceptual Framework considers playful experimentation and exploration is inherent in all young children's activity; such exploration is at the core of IBSE and CA in early years settings. The significance of play in early learning is widely recognised in the literature but also represents the focus of considerable research within both IBSE and CA. Policy in the majority of partner countries promotes playful exploration in preschool considerably more than in primary education, with guidance that suggests a recognition of its value in promoting creative skills and dispositions. This different pedagogical approach between the two stages was apparent in the classroom observations of the in-field research. Preschool teachers use open forms of play and role play significantly more than early primary school teachers, and a greater proportion of preschool teachers also conceptualise these as ‘creativity enabling’. Play was the factor that featured least in primary settings. The value of opportunities for play and exploration in the primary age phase could be more widely appreciated, in generating ideas and questions and a feel for phenomena. Findings from across the partnership reveal areas for further development and examination for example in relation to the more limited opportunities for play and for questioning reported in primary settings. It would be valuable to exemplify ways of creating such opportunities in the primary age phase within the greater constraints of time and curriculum requirements.
Give detailed attention to key features of problem solving and inquiry based learning and teaching particularly with regards to providing sufficient space and time in the curriculum for problem solving and inquiry to study areas in depth. Emphasise also the need for space and time for teachers to develop inquiry approaches and explore opportunities for creativity in learning and teaching in early science and mathematics.
Curriculum and assessment requirements, and space and time at school level can constrain teaching approaches, particularly in primary settings. Findings from the in-field research reveal pressures of time and curriculum requirements that drastically limit opportunities for children’s creativity and inquiry in both settings. This tendency is observed consistently in both preschool and primary education, although feature more strongly in primary education. Most teachers emphasised the need to provide a rich environment with space and time for exploration and problem-based learning, underlining key roles for teachers in encouraging reflection and making connections to promote children’s conceptual understanding and the application of ideas in varied settings. The case studies indicated ways in which school organisation of resources, space, staffing and timetabling can support, or act as a barrier, to creativity and inquiry both in teaching and learning. Findings indicated that more flexible timetabling and the more holistic approaches to learning and teaching commonly associated with preschool settings allowed teachers greater flexibility to follow children’s interests over time and to revisit experiences, making provision for children to encounter ideas in a range of contexts. The challenge here was often less one of time but of recognising and building on children’s emerging interests, skills and creative ideas.
Include more explicit and detailed focus on the role of creativity in early science and mathematics. Provide explanation and illustration of the nature of creativity in learning and teaching in early years science and mathematics.
Findings from all research phases of the project suggest that a more explicit and detailed focus in policy on the role of creativity in early science and mathematics would be helpful. Where explicit references are made to creativity in policy they are often in very general terms without provision of guidance about what this might mean in the context of early science and mathematics. The review of policy across partner countries identified implicit connections to creativity in policy for early years science and mathematics, but these need to be drawn out and exemplified to support teachers in translating policy priorities concerning creativity into specific classroom practices. Furthermore, while certain teaching approaches are often signaled as associated with creativity, such as problem solving and the use of digital technologies, there is limited indication in policy of how such approaches might be used to foster creativity or inquiry in early science and mathematics.
Promote the role of inquiry activities in supporting the children’s understanding of science ideas and nature of science. Give more attention to reflection, consideration of alternative ideas building on the social and collaborative features of learning and inquiry.
Approaches to teaching and learning associated with inquiry and creativity are widely included in policy guidance in partner countries. In preschool, priority is given to play and fostering autonomy, while greater importance is afforded to investigation and problem solving in primary education. It was notable however that in most countries, references to the role of discussion of alternative ideas and understandings related to the nature of science were rarely made in official guidance. Similarly, official guidance rarely indicated roles for creativity associated with the development of science ideas, reflected in limited attention given to fostering imagination or discussing alternative ideas in the teaching approaches advocated. In more general terms, connections to creativity in policy were largely associated with the generation, rather than the evaluation of ideas. In seeking to foster opportunities for inquiry and a role for creativity, greater recognition could be given in policy to the roles of imagination, reflection and consideration of alternative ideas in supporting children’s understanding of scientific ideas and procedures. Consideration of alternative ideas is also connected to social factors in learning and the provision of opportunities for development of understandings associated with the nature of science. Explicit focus on the nature of science was limited, as evident by the findings from the policy and teacher surveys and the in-field research conducted by Creative Little Scientists.
Recognise the importance and roles of varied forms of representation, including the use of ICT, in supporting children’s learning processes.
The research indicates that the role of varied forms of representation in learning could be more widely recognised. There are important roles for expression and recording in different modes in encouraging reflection and evaluation of ideas, strategies and learning and providing a basis for discussion and dialogue with others. These may take many forms: children’s talk, gestures, drawing, their writing and text-making questioning assumptions, redefining problems and considering what else might be possible, and may involve the use of digital technologies. Children’s creativity is revealed through these means as well as their understandings. In whatever form children have expressed their ideas, the teacher, in focusing the young learners’ attention on how they think about something, fosters the child’s meta-cognitive awareness, helping them to make the implicit more explicit. While there were examples of children’s employment of diverse forms of expression across the episodes, this was another factor where partners suggested that the range of approaches might be extended, in particular to incorporate children’s greater use of ICT. Fieldwork indicated the value of dialogue with children about their recordings, and the potential of representation and expression, not just for recording outcomes, but for fostering reflection and reasoning processes.
Encourage meaningful and authentic contexts for inquiry, linked for example, to: events and experiences in everyday life; children’s interests and concerns; questions emerging from cross-curricular projects or explorations; and issues in the wider environment beyond school.
Notwithstanding the recognition that IBSE and CA both include attention to problem solving in exploratory contexts, in which questions, collaboration, motivation and reflection play a significant role, the efficacy of these approaches depend in large part on the teacher’s role, scaffolding children’s learning. Findings from the review of policy suggest that limited attention is given in policy to contexts for learning such as drama, stories, historical projects or everyday experiences in the environment. Exemplification would be valuable of the kinds of contexts teachers can provide, and ways of capitalising upon them to foster inquiry and creativity. The results of the in-field research indicated the important contribution of rich, motivating contexts in generating ideas, questions and interests, but also the need for teacher sensitivity to features of inquiry and emerging ideas implicit in young children’s explorations, as well as for time and teacher flexibility to build on these.
Create coherence in assessment between the aims and objectives of learning and priorities in assessment. More attention should be given to social and affective and inquiry related issues in assessment guidelines.
A common theme to emerge across the research carried out by the project was lack of policy guidance in terms of both methods of assessment and criteria for assessing on-going progress, resulting in considerable variability in approaches adopted among partner countries. The findings also revealed particular challenges in assessment related to inquiry and creativity, linked to a common tendency to focus on product rather than process in assessment requirements, allied with the pressures of statutory summative assessment processes in a number of partner countries. For example while assessment of science ideas is widely emphasised in policy, more limited attention is given to assessment of inquiry processes and procedural understanding and even less to social and affective dimensions of learning, although these dimensions are often highlighted in the rationale and learning aims set out for early science and mathematics education. This mismatch identified between rationale/aims of science education and guidance provided for assessment in official policy across partner countries however is not apparent in teachers’ views, where a consistency on valuing social and affective dimensions of teaching and learning is evident throughout the spider-web curriculum dimensions and assessment in particular.
Foster the development of on-going assessment strategies and criteria for assessment to better reflect the emphasis on inquiry and creativity in the aims for science and mathematics in the early years.
Policy in relation to assessment showed the widest variation across partner countries. In many cases findings reflected the limited guidance for science assessment and inconsistencies in emphasis across different elements in curriculum policy. There is very limited evidence in policy of a role for creativity either in the priorities or methods for assessment advocated across partner countries. Greatest emphasis is given to the assessment of science ideas. Understandings and competencies in relation to scientific inquiry are emphasised in assessment policy in a minority of countries and in only a few instances are attitudes a priority for assessment in science. In general, guidance in relation to assessment methods is limited in the majority of countries across the Creative Little Scientists consortium.
Provide further guidance on formative assessment approaches to support classroom practices. Assessment methods should be clearly linked to the multimodal approaches used in classroom practices. Policy statements should foster the use of children’s involvement in assessment and provide increased opportunities to mirror the children’s various strengths and opportunities in their learning.
While the importance of formative assessment is increasingly recognised in policy, the Report on Mapping and Comparing Recorded Practices indicates that further guidance would be valuable to support classroom practices in assessment. Areas highlighted in particular include: the use of multimodal forms of assessment to give young children opportunities to show best what they understand and can do; ways of involving children in peer and self-assessment to support children’s reflection on inquiry processes and outcomes; and criteria to assess progression in learning, particularly in relation to inquiry and the development of dispositions associated with creativity. In the majority of partner countries there is very limited or no mention of the value of drawing on a variety of evidence such as pictures, graphs and relevant gestures for assessment purposes. Again here a contrast was noted between findings from the policy and teacher surveys as the teachers’ responses to the relevant survey items showed that teachers’ approaches to assessment tend to include evaluation of children’s responses in varied modes, particularly in Greece, Romania, and in England where preschool teachers reported taking account of children’s multimodal expressions for assessment purposes. The same cannot be said concerning teachers’ employment of peer and self-assessment practices, as only about half the teachers surveyed reported that they used these quite or very frequently. The alignment in findings from both policy and teacher surveys concerning the limited role of peer and self-assessment suggests that the locus of the judgment in assessment in early years education is firmly in the hands of teachers with limited involvement of children.
Contextual factors
Findings from across the project also identified a number of contextual factors of importance in fostering creativity and inquiry in early science and mathematics. Findings from the teacher survey and fieldwork in schools indicate there is a need to:
Ensure sufficient resources and facilities in schools to support practical inquiry and problem solving in early science and mathematics.
Across the Country Reports partners identified the influence of resources on the opportunities provided for inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics. In some Country Reports lack of resources was identified as presenting a challenge in implementing inquiry and problem-based approaches to learning and teaching. Partners identified the need in particular for further funding to support the use of ICT to support and extend children’s problem solving and inquiry processes and the development of the whole school environment, in particular the outdoor environment to support learning.
Extend opportunities for ongoing professional development in early science and mathematics.
The importance of on-going opportunities for and entitlement to teacher professional development was emphasised in Country Reports. At present access to Continuing Professional Development (CPD) is very varied across the partnership. Further recognition is needed of the value and importance of continued training and qualifications. The Country Reports identified key priorities for teacher education to support inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics. The importance of space and time for teachers to practise inquiry approaches, to explore opportunities for creativity in learning and teaching in early science and mathematics and to gain confidence were emphasised. Reports highlighted the need for knowledge and understanding of child development and early learning in science and mathematics to be included in teacher education programmes to support teachers in recognising and building on children’s interests, ideas and explorations. Finally the need for further training for teachers was identified in the use of the environment to support learning and teaching in science and mathematics, both the school environment indoors and out and the wider environment and community beyond the school.
Encourage dialogue with parents and the wider community concerning the aims of science and mathematics education in the early years including the development of skills, processes and attitudes associated with inquiry and their roles in developing not just factual knowledge but long term understanding of concepts.
The different phases of the project associated with the policy and teacher surveys and the fieldwork in schools have indicated opportunities provided in policy for promoting inquiry and creativity in early science and mathematics. For example the aims for science and mathematics education indicated in both policy and practice across partner countries reflected a common emphasis on fostering young children’s curiosity and motivation and the importance of young children’s explorations and investigations. However common challenges have also been identified associated with the demands of curriculum content and a focus on summative assessment in primary schools. Both can result in a focus on factual knowledge rather than deeper understanding and attention to outcomes at the expense of the development of skills, attitudes and processes associated with inquiry and creativity. During fieldwork processes a number of teachers across partner countries commented on the pressures they felt from parents to focus on factual knowledge and grades.
REFERENCES
van den AKKER, J. 2007. Curriculum design research. In T. Plomp & N. Nieveen (Eds), An Introduction to Educational Design Research. Enschede: Axis Media-ontwerpers.
Potential Impact:
POTENTIAL IMPACT OF CREATIVE LITTLE SCIENTISTS
The expected impact for Creative Little Scientists, as it was listed in the relevant EU Work Programme, read:
“A clear picture of existing activities and practices and the related main challenges will contribute towards the training of preschool staff and primary school teachers in order to avoid the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images about science and mathematics. This will improve the basic skills of all children, and promote creativity leading to the subsequent development of entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate.”
The Creative Little Scientists project has directly contributed towards the realisation of this impact at the European level. It constitutes a timely, fine-targeted contribution to a better understanding, at the European level, of the potential available (albeit not explicitly acknowledged and mostly unexploited) on the common ground that science and mathematics education in pre-school and early primary school can share with creativity. Importantly, this better understanding is produced through both the generation of original new knowledge about the deeper nature and implications of existing practices that foster effective combinations of creativity with science and mathematics education in pre-school and early primary school, as well as through the sharing of knowledge and experiences across Europe and from parts of Europe which are more advanced in this field (e.g. the UK) to other European regions.
Based on this better understanding, Creative Little Scientists has taken a decisive step beyond ‘research for the sake of knowledge’ towards facilitating the application of the generated knowledge in order to exploit practically the above mentioned potential. This have been achieved through the proposition of guidelines, curricula and exemplary materials for relevant teacher education in the various European contexts – a step that secures that teachers, the main enablers of change in education, can be informed about, and empowered to make creative use of the opportunities available in this area.
In parallel, the project has ensured the exploitation of its findings and outcomes widely in Europe by all stakeholder groups, importantly including policy makers, by bestowing to them a set of concrete recommendations for further practice at European and national levels.
Thanks to these actions, it can be expected that, if Europe and the stakeholder groups take advantage of the new understandings and tools that the project has provided, new policies and initiatives will soon emerge which will contribute significantly to an enhancement of science and mathematics education in Europe.
More precisely, in the long term, the young children who will be taught science and mathematics through inquiry based techniques, which will enable and exploit creativity, will: a) achieve appropriate learning outcomes, including more positive attitudes towards science and mathematics learning; and b) have better chances than today’s European pupils to become creative, innovative citizens in tomorrow’s Europe, with obvious benefits for the continent’s and the member states’ economies and societies.
The impacts of the project which have been summarised in the above paragraphs can be described in further detail and in connection to the steps that have been taken for their realisation, as follows.
A better understanding of the areas under investigation, at the European level
The Creative Little Scientists project has provided Europe with a clear picture of existing and possible practices, as well as their implications and the related opportunities and challenges, in the intersection of creativity and science and mathematics education in pre-school and the early years of primary school, up to the pupil age of eight.
The project has produced a clear and detailed conceptual framework comprising the issues at stake and the parameters which need to be addressed in all stages of the research. This was realised by drawing together a review of policy-related and research-related literature covering fields including science and mathematics education in the Early Years, creativity in education, creativity as a lifelong skill, teaching and teacher training approaches, as well as cognitive psychology and comparative education. In other words, this conceptual framework has arisen from a critical cross-disciplinary examination of the state-of-the-art in the related fields of knowledge, bringing them together in new ways and creating new synergies. As such it has a great cross-disciplinary practical importance and value for future studies with this interest.
Two particular features of the conceptual framework played key roles in fostering coherence and consistency in approach across the project and in themselves have the potential to contribute to future work in the field, the definition of creativity in early mathematics and science employed across the project and the synergies identified between inquiry based and creative approaches to science and mathematics learning and teaching in the early years. The definition of creativity and the synergies between inquiry-based and creative approaches, as described in detail in the section above on the project’s main results, have been empirically tested in diverse classroom contexts across Europe throughout the project and have been found to be both appropriate and valid. They have also proved productive and of interest more widely in the dissemination of the work of the project with varied stakeholders, including researchers, teachers and teacher educators.
The project has also produced a map and a comparative assessment of existing policy and teacher conceptualisations of science and mathematics education in pre-school and first years of primary school, and the role of creativity in these, in the nine sample countries. Such a map and comparative assessment has provided the European policy makers with unique and new insights into whether inquiry based and creative approaches are emphasised in national policy documents and teachers’ reported practices in the early years, an educational phase which traditionally has escaped the focus of large scale research. At the time when the recommendations of important European reports in science and mathematics education urge countries to implement innovative curricula and ways of organising the teaching of science that address the issue of low student motivation, and ensure that science education engages students before the age of 14 with science and scientific phenomena, such a comprehensive map and comparative assessment is invaluable.
Finally, the project has carried out a deeper analysis of the implications of the mapped and compared approaches revealing the details of current practice and providing insights into whether and how children’s creativity is fostered and the emergence or appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics is achieved. As far as the latter is concerned, a particular focus was placed on (but not limited to) issues of central importance in the current science and mathematics education discourse, including inquiry-based and problem-based learning, teaching and assessment, generating children’s interest in science and mathematics, avoiding the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images, and considering gender, socio-economical and cultural issues. Now that EU research focus has just moved from the theme of ‘Science and Society’ (FP7) towards the theme of ‘Science with and for Society’ (Horizon 2020), these deeper insights produced by Creative Little Scientists pave the way to the transition.
Development and proposition of guidelines for teacher training in Europe
The Creative Little Scientists project has also transformed the knowledge generated through the above research activities into a concrete contribution towards the training of preschool staff and primary school teachers, so that they are empowered to exploit the potential of creativity-based approaches to science and mathematics education for young children. To achieve this, the project has developed a set of curriculum design principles and curricula as concrete guidelines for European initial teacher training and continuous professional development programmes, which will foster creativity-based approaches to science and mathematics learning in preschool and the first years of primary education.
The value of any educational research should be judged by the impact its findings have in the school classroom and in the educational experiences of students and teachers. Acknowledging how important this is and that teachers are gate keepers of any change, the proposed principles and curricula are accompanied by illustrative teacher training materials, which exemplify their applicability in complex and varied European educational contexts, thus facilitating implementation, evaluation and further development across Europe.
Enabling policy making
In order to facilitate Europe to make best use of the findings of the research, the Creative Little Scientists consortium has carried out a series of carefully designed dissemination activities targeted appropriately to all stakeholder groups (teachers, school leaders, teacher trainers, curriculum developers, policy makers).
Furthermore, in order to exploit the results of the research at the European level as well as at national and institutional levels, the project has synthesised all research outputs into an accessible Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children and a concrete set of Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders.
Thanks to these actions, it can be expected that, if Europe and the stakeholder groups take advantage of the new understandings and tools that the project has provided, new policies and initiatives will soon emerge which will contribute significantly to an enhancement of science and mathematics education in Europe, in at least two ways: First, by supporting the emergence of appropriate learning outcomes in science and mathematics through inquiry based techniques enhanced with the strengths of creativity, further helping to avoid the emergence of misconceptions and stereotypical images about science and mathematics in children, and attracting children’s interest to science and mathematics. Second, by connecting science education with Europe’s wider educational goals of improving the basic skills and promoting creativity in all children today and in the near future – which subsequently can lead to the development of entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate in tomorrow’s adult citizens.
Benefits of a European approach
These crucial contributions of the project require a European rather than a national or local approach. Certain parts of Europe, such as the UK, appear to be more advanced in the explorations of both creativity in education as well as science and mathematics in education for young children, than most of the other countries. It is clear that Europe needs to and can benefit from the transfer of knowledge and practices from these more sensitive contexts to the less advanced – something that is realized through the Creative Little Scientists project, which has recruited top level experts in these fields from the UK and put them in collaboration and exchange with experts from countries from the north, south, east and west of Europe.
Further, even in advanced contexts such as that of the UK, the common ground that seems to be shared by creativity and inquiry based science and mathematics education was far from explored and mapped in detail – much less so when the focus comes to pre-school and the early years of primary school. Since the benefits for Europe from a more ‘creativity-based’ science and mathematics education of young children appear to be of crucial importance in the present and near future, leaving the national contexts alone to develop the interest to explore and exploit this common ground would have led to a loss of opportunity for a timely intervention. The Creative Little Scientists project, through carefully designed comparative techniques, has produced rich understandings of the various European contexts by looking at a sample of selected countries; in this way, after the short period of two years Europe is now in a position to design informed, research-grounded policies and initiatives for the effective marriage of creativity with science and mathematics education for young children. This would not have been possible under any circumstances without an initiative such as this project at the European rather than national or local level.
MAIN DISSEMINATION ACTIVITIES AND EXPLOITATION OF RESULTS
The project’s Description of Work set clear objectives for the dissemination and exploitation of project results. The corresponding Work Package aimed to disseminate the messages and outputs of the project widely in Europe and beyond through targeted communication actions addressing all stakeholders (teachers, school administrators, teacher trainers, curriculum designers, policy makers, parents); and exploit them at the European level as well as at national, regional/local and institutional level, making them easily available to educational policy makers and other stakeholders, especially teacher training policy makers and institutions.
Development of the dissemination and exploitation plan
To realize these objectives, the consortium, led by EA, developed a concrete plan for dissemination and exploitation which specified the methodology to be followed for the design, implementation, coordination and monitoring of all project activity. Actions foreseen in it both informed the communities of stakeholders, policy makers and the wider public about the project, as well as carefully targeted school communities, stakeholder groups and individuals in order to attract their interest and establish their involvement in the various stages of the field-based research. In this respect, the dissemination and exploitation plan was a management and design tool for continuous planning and adaptation to the conditions arising throughout the project. In addition, the plan included provisions about the nature and timing of specific dissemination and exploitation related actions.
The dissemination and exploitation plan covered three distinct phases which followed the project’s development. Each phase included different kinds of dissemination materials and activities, specifically designed to reach the target audiences. The dissemination strategy began by introducing the project widely in the first 8 months (October 2011-May 2012); built momentum in the following 18 months (June 2012-November 2013) as the research progressed through targeted dissemination opportunities designed to ensure target audiences’ active participation in the project; and culminated in the last 4 months (December 2013-March 2014) with the organisation of the Final Project Workshop and the development of the Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children and Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science. The Final Workshop along with the two very important deliverables were used to present and explain the research findings to an audience which consisted of selected key players who can mobilise their organisations and professional networks to exploit the project results.
Communication and dissemination materials and activities
The work necessary for the design, implementation, coordination and monitoring of the various communication and dissemination activities of the project, in accordance with the priorities and objectives of the project and the provisions of the dissemination and exploitation plan included (but was not limited to) the following actions:
• Creation and continuous operation and update of a dedicated project website, which became available already on the second project month and has been maintained since, including after the end of the funded period. The website has provided up-to-date information on the project, raised awareness and facilitated participation in all stages of the research. It is in the consortium’s working language (English), with aspects addressing the local communities of stakeholders who were involved in the project in each country available in all eight European languages covered by the consortium (Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Portuguese, Romanian). In the 30-month duration of the project, 21 News items have been published raising awareness about both project dissemination activities and its main research findings.
• Creation and wide circulation of printed and electronic dissemination materials, which were used in the effort to inform schools and other stakeholders about the project and gain their interest and involvement in the field research. Such materials included:
o A leaflet describing the Creative Little Scientists project objectives, providing general information about the project aims and vision, as well as publicising the project website. It was produced by EA in digital format for partners’ easy printing and translation in the national languages. The leaflet served as the main dissemination tool for the project in all events that Creative Little Scientists partners participated during the first six months of the project. Localised versions were handed out in national conferences and events in the nine participating countries.
o A poster summarizing the aims and objectives of the project to use in a dissemination event in Finland.
o A 12-page brochure summarising the main points of the project’s conceptual framework and its first research phase results from the policy and teacher surveys, in an easy-to-read format for practitioners and school leaders. This brochure served the project in many occasions and generated interest for the field-based research. It was disseminated by all project partners widely in conferences (national and international), meetings and other communication opportunities (online and offline).
o Five short electronic newsletters, containing a summary of the project news and achievements. These were sent by e-mail to stakeholders in the project’s database of contacts, who had opted through the website to receive them.
• Activities promoting schools’ stakeholders’ involvement in the field work. The wide spectrum of networks and collaborations of all partners were mobilised to achieve this. Examples of these activites include: invitation letters and e-mails to teachers and schools to participate in the research; communication about the project and its research through the Journal of Emergent Science, the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA) website and directly to all the members of the ‘Early Years SIG’ of ESERA. Other networks and associations used to promote project activities included the Hands-on Science Network, British Educational Research Association (BERA), European Educational Research Association (EERA) and the Association for Science Education (ASE).
• Using other important projects and networks across Europe, in which all project partners are involved, to make the Creative Little Scientists project outcomes available beyond the nine partner countries. Examples of such projects and networks are:
o The FP7 project PATHWAY (via its partner EA) with partners in 13 countries.
o The FP7 project FIBONACCI (via its partner NILPRP) with partners in 25 countries.
o The FP7 project Pri-Sci-Net (via its partner UoM), with partners in 14 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project INSTEM (via its partners NILPRP and EA), with partners in 9 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project CREAT-IT (via its partners EA and OU), with partners in 6 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project TODDLER (via its partner AUC), with partners in 8 countries.
o ‘Hands-on Science Network’ (via its partner UMinho), with members in 10 countries.
o The FP7 project SECURE, with partners in 10 countries.
o The FP7 project SiS-Catalyst, with partners in 13 countries.
o The LLP Comenius project ‘Early Change’, with partners in 13 countries.
o The LLP Ccomenius network CREANET, with partner in 10 countries.
• Dissemination of the project and its outcomes through presentations, symposia and workshops in national and international conferences and meetings, as appropriate. Examples of significant conferences (with more than 100 participants) in which the project participated are:
o EECERA 2012 (Porto, Portugal - 30 August 2012), UMinho, Audience size: 400, Audience: Teachers, researchers
o Hands-on Science Conference/HSCI2012 (Antalya, Turkey – 19 October 2012), UMinho and NILPRP, Audience size: 500, Audience: Teachers, researchers, students
o Semaine de la recherche et de l'innovation (Amiens, France – 28 November 2012), UPJV, Audience size: 500, Audience: Parents, Teachers, Researchers
o 3rd Panhellenic Preschool Education Conference (Ioannina, Greece – 11-13 May 2012), EA, Audience size: 600, Audience: Teachers, Researchers
o 7th Panhellenic Conference in Preschool Science Education (Florina, Greece – 20 October 2012), EA, Audience size: 500, Audience: Teachers, School advisors, Researchers
o ECER 2012 (Cadiz, Spain – 19 September 2012), EA/UEF/IoE, Audience size: 1000. Audience: Researchers
o Greek National Conference on ‘How is physics supposed to be taught today?’ conference (Thessaloniki, Greece – 9 March 2013), EA, Audience size: 700, Audience: Teachers, School advisors, Researchers
o British Educational Research Association Conference, (Manchester UK, September 2012), Audience: Researchers, lecturers involved in teacher education, local education authority advisers, teachers.
o NARST 2013 Annual Meeting (National Association for Research in Science Teaching) (Puerto Rico, USA, 6-9 April 2013); IoE/EA/UEF; Conference Audience size: 1200; Audience: Researchers, Curriculum Developers, Teacher Educators, Policy Makers.
o ESERA 2013 Conference (European Science Education Research Association) (Nicosia, Cyprus – 2-7 September 2013); EA/IoE/UEF/OU/BG/UoM/UBO/AUC/NILPRP; Conference Audience size: 1200; Audience: Researchers, Curriculum Developers, Teacher Educators, Policy Makers.
• Organisation of a training summer school for 18 early years teachers and teacher educators from across Europe in Crete (Greece) on June 30th - July 5th, 2013, in the framework of the COMENIUS In-Service Training Programme (http://cls2013.ea.gr). The course contributed to the evaluation and refinement of the curriculum design principles developed by the project, on one hand, while providing an excellent opportunity to broaden the dissemination of findings widely among practitioners from the 9 partner countries, as well as from a variety of other European countries.
• Organisation of national dissemination events of the major final project outputs in Malta, Romania and the UK, organized by the corresponding partners, and targeted to teachers and teacher educators.
• Organisation of the Final Project Workshop on “Enabling Creativity through Science and Mathematics in Early Years Education”, which took place under the auspices of the Greek Ministry of Education and the Greek Presidency of the European Council at Ellinogermaniki Agogi school premises in Pallini, Attica, Greece, on 22-23 March 2014. Over 100 participants from a variety of EU countries attended the two-day event and came together to discuss the project findings and important outcomes such as the Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children, the Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science, the Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training, and the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials. The audience consisted of representatives of collective bodies as well as individuals, covering all stakeholder groups (policy makers, curriculum designers, teacher trainers, teachers, school administrators, parents). A website (http://conference.creative-little-scientists.eu) was built especially for the purposes of the conference and contained all the necessary information about the conference programme, travel and venue, registration and about the project Creative Little Scientists in general.
Development of final report and recommendations
According to the project’s Description of Work, the findings of the research were to be communicated to all stakeholders in easily accessible and useful formats. This would contribute to maximum efficiency of the whole of the dissemination and exploitation effort and served as the main outcome of the project in terms of dissemination, as well as exploitation. All research outcomes of the project were thus synthesised in an easy to read, yet highly informative, thought and action provoking Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children. In addition, a separate document of a similar nature, the Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders, was produced to provide concrete recommendations for further practice at the European, national and institutional level, addressing educational policy makers and stakeholders, importantly including pre-schools and primary schools as well as teacher training policy makers and institutions. Both the final report and the recommendations became available in time to be presented and discussed at the Final Project Workshop. Comments received during the Workshop were integrated to produce the final versions of the reports. Both reports were composed in the English language, but executive summaries of them have become available in the eight European languages covered by the consortium (Dutch, English, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Portuguese, Romanian).
Overview of the relevant project deliverables
In summary, the dissemination and exploitation activities of the project has produced the following deliverables:
• D6.1: Dissemination and exploitation plan
• D6.2: Project website
• D6.3: Project dissemination materials
• D6.4: Activities promoting schools’ and stakeholders’ involvement in the field work
• D6.5: Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children
• D6.6: Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science Education
• D6.7: Final project workshop
Overall, the dissemination and exploitation activities that have been carried out in the project have provided the necessary conditions of awareness and motivation that will allow Europe and the stakeholder groups to take advantage of the new understandings and tools that the project has provided. Following the Final Project Workshop, for example, the project has been informed that some of its teacher training materials have already been used:
• at the Second International INSTEM Conference in Halle, Germany, 25-27 March 2014, to demonstrate some important principles of inquiry and creativity to an audience of around 55 teachers, teacher educators and researchers in science and mathematics education; and
• in a course for preschool teachers and practitioners, by the Early Childhood Department of the University of Ioannina.
It can therefore be expected that new policies and initiatives will soon emerge which will contribute significantly to an enhancement of science and mathematics education in Europe, by supporting the emergence of the wished learning outcomes, as well as by connecting science and mathematics education with Europe’s wider educational goals of improving the basic skills and promoting creativity in all children today and in the near future, and of developing entrepreneurial skills and the ability to innovate in tomorrow’s adult citizens (as explained analytically in the previous section).
Further exploitation of results
Exploitation of the project’s results, according to the Dissemination and Exploitation Plan mostly depends on effectively communicating the main outcomes of the project to all target audiences. The main outcomes of the project are deliverables that have been identified in the Dissemination and Exploitation Plan as pillars of the overall dissemination and exploitation, for partners to focus their dissemination efforts on and effectively address the diverse needs of different target audiences. These key deliverables are:
• D2.2 Conceptual Framework
• D3.4 Comparative Report
• D4.4 Report on Practices and their Implications
• D5.2 Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training
• D5.3 Exemplary Teacher Training Materials
• D6.5 Final Report on Creativity and Science and Mathematics Education for Young Children
• D6.6 Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science
The majority of the above deliverables have already been disseminated by partners during the project in a variety of events and meetings as well as within the participating institutions. As already described, findings from these deliverables have been presented and explained by project partners in all dissemination activities carried out such as conference presentations (national and international), curriculum consultation meetings, meetings with local authorities and schools, workshops and the summer school organised in July 2013.
Throughout the project, findings from each work package have been shared with students on teacher education courses and Master’s programmes which are offered by the partners’ institutions, presented in meetings and workshops to each partner’s network of schools and explained to other members of staff within the partner institutions. As a result, materials which were produced by the project were used and tested out with a range of different audiences (teachers, policy makers, stakeholders, researchers, teacher educators).
The exploitation of results for Creative Little Scientists has already resulted in a number of activities planned by the project partners. The Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training were used to give advice to the STEM platform of the Flemish Government concerning STEM education in Teacher Education, as well as in a large-scale project in Flanders (STEM voor de basis) to improve the pedagogical approach concerning STEM education in Flanders. Similarly, the Recommendations to Policy Makers and Stakeholders on Creativity and Early Years Science has informed recent attempts to reform the Finnish science education curriculum, according to an Advisor to the Finnish National Board of Education. Moreover, the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials were used to inform a number of workshops, such as a workshop for educators and curators at the Natural History Museum in London, England and most notably the teacher training summer school in Crete on July 2013. The summer school itself served as the starting point to two Erasmus+ proposals, led by EA, one for a teacher training activity (KA1) and one for school strategic partnership (KA2) which will propose a curriculum for a teacher education course aimed at promoting creativity in early years science education submitted on April 30, 2014.
After the conclusion of the project, the consortium, committed to continuing the work of Creative Little Scientists, identified a number of appropriate exploitation activities that will succeed in exploiting the project results at the European level as well as at national and institutional level, making them easily available to educational policy makers and other stakeholders, especially teacher training policy makers and institutions. Examples of future exploitation activities include:
• The narrative episodes of the in-field research (D4.4) the content of the Guidelines and Curricula for Teacher Training (D5.2) and the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials (D5.3) will be used by the Department of Early Childhood Education in Artevelde University College (Belgium) to frame the 3rd-year teacher education course ‘Young children inquire inside and outside the classroom’. Additionally, the episodes and Exemplary Teacher Training Materials concerning the Nature of Science will be used in the PWO project ‘Nature of Science’ (www.natureofscience.be) as well as in the interENW project. In the latter, a Community of Practice is created with teacher educators from all over the Flemish region of Belgium (www.stembasis.be).
• Project deliverables will be used by the BG Research department in the UK for future dissemination, including when teaching students on the Early Years BA degree, Primary Education BA degree and the MA in Education, including the Mathematics Specialist Teachers Certificate.
• The Exemplary Teacher Training Materials developed in the project will also be used on IoE teacher education programmes in the academic year 2014-2015 both at the Institute of Education and in partnership schools, in England.
• UMinho in Portugal is planning on organising a two-day dissemination conference/workshop in the beginning of 2015 which will invite teacher educators, school teachers, headmasters and other stakeholders and will present the Creative Little Scientists conclusions, host discussion round tables and workshops based on the case studies conducted in Portuguese schools and included in the Creative Little Scientists Final Report. To promote the event, a press conference will be held aiming to raise general public awareness on creativity in Science and Mathematics education in the Early Years. UMinho will also carry out oral and poster presentations at the “11th Hands-on Science International Conference: Science Education with and for Society” to be held at the University of Aveiro, Aveiro, Portugal, July 21 to 25, 2014 with an estimated multinational audience of 250 teachers and educators (www.hsci2014.info).
• In Romania, NILPRP is planning to use the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials developed in the project during the implementation of the national project “Inquiry-based education in science and technology – i-BETS”, as support for teachers CPD.
• UEF in Finland, will participate on a nationwide development project, which has been funded by Ministry of Education (total funding of 5 million Euros) and serve as an expert in promoting creativity in early years science. UEF will provide teacher education activities to increase creativity and inquiry-based approaches in early years science based on the outcomes of and knowledge generated by the Creative Little Scientists project.
• In France, UPJV will organise a symposium on June 20, 2014 at the University of Toulouse “Construct objects to develop knowledge”. One of the sessions of the conference will present the outcomes of Creative Little Scientists, including some of the narrative episodes observed in French schools during the project.
• In Malta, UoM has been working towards the creation of a nationwide network of professionals with an interest in early science and mathematics, as well as in creativity. Although there are a number of professionals active in the relevant areas, there is no network in Malta to bring these people together to exchange opinions, findings and spark new collaborations. The network was set up informally during the Creative Little Scientists project cycle and there is the intention to continue the work after the project. A next network meeting is set for the 28th May 2014. The recommendations developed as a result of the Creative Little Scientists project will also be exploited to bring to the forefront the needs with respect to promoting creativity in early years science and mathematics education. The Maltese Minister of Education has expressed a direct interest in the project recommendations and a meeting is set for 9th June 2014. This meeting will be an opportunity to take the Creative Little Scientists results to the main driver in education in Malta as well as try and find a platform for further support for the Early Years network to continue working in the future.
• In Greece, EA being a school itself, has planned training of its preschool and first years of primary school staff in September 2014, using the Exemplary Teacher Training Materials.
• In terms of publications, project partners have already identified academic and professional journals to target for publication of papers on the findings of Creative Little Scientists. At least one paper on the project will be submitted (led by EA) for the peer-reviewed Book of Selected Papers out of the ESERA 2013 international conference. In addition, EA has been invited to lead a publication as part of the Science Education Research Series, the international, multidisciplinary book series of the European Science Education Research Association (ESERA). Moreover, at least one journal article from the project will be submitted for a special issue of Education 3-13 which is being guest-edited by Professors Cremin and Craft for publication in summer 2015. The article will be written in collaboration with Dr Glauert at the Institute of Education and Dr Compton at Bishop Grosseteste. Finally, at least one article is expected to be accepted for publication at the book “Hands-on Science: Science Education with and for Society” in late August 2014. New opportunities for collaboration and publication are continuously explored by partners.
• Finally, the consortium will continue to present the project results in international and national conferences. BG will present the teacher education templates to the Mathematics Subject Development group and organise a workshop on Creative Little Scientists for the Universities’ Council for Education of Teachers (UCET) Annual Conference on 4th and 5th November 2014 in Birmingham, UK. IoE has submitted a paper which has been accepted for the British Educational Research Association conference in London in September 2014 and has been invited to present the work of the project at the National Advisors and Inspectors Group for Science Summer Conference in July 2014. A paper by IoE and EA will be presented at the EECERA conference in Crete in September 2014 in a symposium organized by other members of the Early Years Science SIG, focusing on the project’s research methodology and findings. UMinho will give an oral presentation at the “II Congresso de Ciência e Desenvolvimento dos Açores”, 27 june 2014, Angra do Heroísmo, Azores, Portugal, followed up by a paper to be published in the proceedings. UBO has been invited to give a presentation of the project including its results at a “House of Little Scientists” meeting in June 2014 in Berlin.
Additionally to the planned actions presented in this section, project partners will continue to mobilise their organisations and professional networks to exploit the project results.
List of Websites:
Project public website: http://www.creative-little-scientists.eu
Contact details of Project Coordinator:
Dr. Fani Stylianidou
Ellinogermaniki Agogi
Dimitriou Panagea Str.
GR- 153 51 Pallini, Greece
Tel: +30 210 8176788
Fax: +30 210 6032554
E-mail: fani@ea.gr
