While reading copious amounts of papers to inform my
research design, I have been reminded time and time again that my ontology
needs to be absolutely clear in order to create the most appropriate research
design. So what is a child’s reality? To explore this concept, I need to go
back to the history of how childhood has been socially constructed and how
research has delved into the processes of child development. This information
will help me to more clearly define my ontology of early childhood.
Constructions of childhood – a timeline
- In the middle ages children were just
seen as an 'adult in waiting' [Aries, 1962] (James & James, 2001)
- 1600s: Puritan dogma - children were seen
as innately evil and needed to be purged from their 'original sin' (Hendrick,
1997)
- Locke (1632-1704): Argument that children
were a blank slate to be shaped by their environment and experiences - focus
on becoming rather than being (Uprichard, 2008) (see also Qvortrup, 1994)
- After WW1, children became 'the future of
the nation' and needed to be preserved - rise in welfare state, preventative
medicines, interference of the state in family life (Kellett, 2014)
- UNCRC
(1989) Children have rights that need to be upheld provision, protection
and participation (Giddens, 1995, adds 'power')
- 21st century: perceptions of childhood
becomes heavily influenced by advertising and media, rise of digital media
and loss of outdoor play spaces. (Kehily, 2010)
- Current
construction: agency - the idea that children can operate in a
participatory way in their lives, making decisions based on their own
views and having a voice.
Child development theories
Piaget (1896-1980)
Clearly defined stages of cognitive growth, innate, gradual process of moving
from self to others.
- Sensorimotor - basic senses, all based on
what they can see, hear, smell and touch - approx birth-2
- Preoperational - development based on
symbolism, egocentric. Approx age 2-7
- Concrete - can use inductive reasoning
and apply to different situations. Approx age 7-11
- Formal operations - development of rational thought and construction of identity. Approx teenage years.
Vygotsky
(1896-1934) social constructivist model of child development -
zone of proximal development (area between what child can achieve on their own
and with the support of an adult). All development starts as an interaction
between the child and others, then develops to being an individual process. Vygotsky believed that
children had an innate sense of learning, but without the knowledge and support
of an adult providing sensitive interactions, they would not necessarily
progress. This theory lends itself to the idea of social learning within an appropriately
resourced environment.
Malaguzzi
(1920-1994) 'It’s necessary that we believe that the child is
very intelligent, that the child is strong and beautiful and has very ambitious
desires and requests.' Children have 100 languages, ways of communicating.
Adults are there to be protagonists and enable children's own thought
processes. Similar to
the theory of Vygotsky in terms of social and environment, but different in
that it moves
away from adults being the stronger, more powerful partner in an adult-child
interaction, and leads toward children having the power within themselves to
learn something, given the appropriate environment.
Bowlby
(1969) Attachment theory - children need good attachments to
develop socially and emotionally. This theory works
alongside – or even surrounding – the theory of social learning. I’ve seen a
meme which says you have to do the Maslow before you can do the Blooms! Maslow’s
hierarchy of needs basically contains a healthy attachment as the foundation
along with basic physical needs, and all learning comes after this.
Bronfenbrenner (1979) The ecology of human
development - children are situated within a variety of interlinked contexts
which all have an impact on the child's life and development. This theory holds much weight
and has previously been also used as a framework for many social science
studies. Bronfenbrenner developed it further to include more aspects alongside
the context – person characteristics, proximal processes and time. I used this
theory to frame my pilot study.
Child development: A UK perspective
In the UK, the Early Years sector is governed by the Department
for Education and assessed by Ofsted. The curriculum provides a standard
framework for child development, which encompasses several of the theories
mentioned above:
'Children are born ready, able and eager to learn.
They actively reach out to interact with other people, and in the world around
them. Development is not an automatic process, however. It depends on each
unique child having opportunities to interact in positive relationships and
enabling environments.' (Early Education, 2012)
The following statements from the ‘development matters’
document show the expected development of young children with regard to this
particular subject of house moves, which could help to shape my assessment of
their experience and understanding.
Making relationships: Uses a familiar adult as a secure base
from which to explore independently in new environments, e.g. ventures away to
play and interact with others, but returns for a cuddle or reassurance if becomes
anxious. (16-26 months, p.8)
– this relates to attachment theory and how the close relationships a child has
with their main caregivers should help to support their resilience throughout a
house move of any kind.
Self-confidence and self-awareness: Is more outgoing towards
unfamiliar people and more confident in new social situations. (30-50m, p.11) – as they become a little
older, they may show resilience throughout a house move due to increased
awareness of self.
Managing feelings and behaviour: Can usually adapt behaviour
to different events, social situations and changes in routine. (30-50m, p.13) – as previous.
Understanding: Developing
understanding of simple concepts (e.g. big/little) (22-36 months, p.17) -
moving house is not a simple concept! And… Able to follow a
story without pictures or props. (40-60+ months, p.18) - so if we just talk
about something that is happening, perhaps they can't envisage it until this
age, which is why having stories or props might be helpful.
Speaking: Uses vocabulary
focused on objects and people that are of particular importance to them. (30-50
months, p.20) - argument for analysing every word spoken! If children do verbalise
their feelings, every word will count.
Reading: Describes main
story settings, events and principal characters. (30-50 months, p.29) – this would be relevant
if we read stories about moving house together as the child may be able to
recall the events and relate them to their own situation.
Shape, space and measures: Understands some talk about
immediate past and future, e.g. ‘before’, ‘later’ or ‘soon’. (22-36 months,
p.35) – this is highly
relevant to a house move because the situation is time bound, with a before and
after.
People and communities: Remembers and talks about significant
events in their own experience. (30-50 months, p.38) – this would be a good
reason to work with the child to create their own story of moving house and
what it meant to them, as it is likely to be a significant event for them.
The world: Enjoys
playing with small-world models such as a farm, a garage, or a train track.
(22-36 months, p.39) – This is one of the
reasons why I wanted to use doll’s house play as one of my support
strategies/information gathering exercises.
Technology: Shows an
interest in technological toys with knobs or pulleys, or real objects such as
cameras or mobile phones. (30-50 months, p.42) – A good reason to use a
camera for the children’s own photography.
Exploring and using media and materials: Understands that they can
use lines to enclose a space, and then begin to use these shapes to represent
objects. (30-50 months, p.44)
– This is a good argument for utilising children’s drawings as data.
Being imaginative:
Beginning to use representation to communicate, e.g. drawing a line and saying
‘That’s me.’ (22-36 months, p.45) And… Engages in imaginative
role-play based on own first-hand experiences. (30-50 months, p.46) – Again, further arguments
for the use of drawings and doll’s house role play as part of the methodology.
Conclusion
I
couldn’t ever say that I fully understand what reality is for a child. Due to
the subjectivity of research with young children, I cannot clearly define my
ontology in a scientific way. However, I can summarise! So here’s my attempt to
explain my ontology in a short paragraph:
References
Alanen, L. (2017).
Childhood studies and the challenge of ontology. Childhood, 24(2),
147–150. http://doi.org/10.1177/0907568217704539
Aries,
P. (1962) Centuries of childhood. London: Cape
Early Education. (2012). Development Matters in the Early Years Foundation
Stage, 1–47. Retrieved from
https://www.early-education.org.uk/development-matters-early-years-foundation-stage-eyfs
Giddens,
A. (1995) Sociology. Oxford: Polity Press
Hendrick
(1997) 'Constructions and reconstructions of British childhood: An interpretive
survey, 1800 to present', in A. James and A. Prout (eds), Constructing and
reconstructing childhood, 2nd edition. Basingstoke: Falmer press
James, A., & James, A. L. (2001). Childhood: Toward a theory of
continuity and change. The Annals of the American Academy of Political and
Social Science, 575(May), 25–37.
Kehily,
M.J. (2010) 'Childhood in crisis? Tracing the contours of crisis and its impact
upon contemporary parenting practices', Media culture and society, 32(2):
171-85
Kellett (2014) 'Images of childhood and their
influence on research', in Clark, A., Flewitt, R., Hammersley, M. and Robb, M.
(eds) Understanding research with children and young people. London: Sage
Uprichard, E. (2008) 'Children as being and becomings:
Children, childhood and temporality', Children and society, 22(4): 303-13
