BAGHDAD, 13 October 2004

A shortage of books and poor conditions in schools is slowing the

educational progress of Iraqi children, according to teachers in the capital,
Baghdad.

Teachers say the shortage means they are distributing one book between 10 students, something
that didn't happen during Saddam's Hussein time. "We started our year without the minimum
conditions needed to teach our students," Zina Obaidi, a science teacher at Kadhimya
secondaryry school in Baghdad, told IRIN.

After the fall of Saddam, all school books distributed by the regime were said to be full
of propaganda and were taken out of circulation. Some 64 million new textbooks are to
be reprinted this year. They will not contain references to the Baath party or images of
the former president.

Funds are coming in from a variety of donors for the new textbooks, including the United
States Agency for International Development (USAID).

Science in Early Childhood Classrooms: Content and

ProcessKaren Worth
Center for Science Education
Education Development Center, Inc.
Newton, Massachusetts

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

Introduction
In a world filled with the products of scientific inquiry, scientific literacy has become a necessity
for everyone. Everyone needs to use scientific information to make choices that arise every day.
Everyone needs to be able to engage intelligently in public discourse and debate about important
issues that involve science and technology. And everyone deserves to share in the excitement
and personal fulfillment that can come from understanding and learning about the natural
world.(National Research Council, 1996, p. 1)
Please help us keep ECRPfree to readers around the world by making a financial contribution to the journal.
Every little bit helps!

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

Children who have a broad base of experience in domain-specific knowledge (for example, in
mathematics or an area of science) move more rapidly in acquiring more complex skills.
Because these [mathematics and science] are privileged domains, that is, domains in which
children have a natural proclivity to learn, experiment, and explore, they allow for nurturing and
extending the boundaries of the learning in which children are already actively engaged.
Developing and extending childrens interest is particularly important in the preschool years,
when attention and self-regulation are nascent abilities. (Bowman, Donovan, & Burns, 2001, pp.
8-9)

This growing understanding of the value of science in early education comes at a time when the
number and diversity of children in child care settings and the number of hours each child
spends in such settings is increasing. Growing numbers of children live in poverty. More and
more grow up in single-parent homes and homes in which both parents work. Media have
become commonplace in the lives of the very young. Thus, experiences that provide direct
manipulation of and experience with objects, materials, and phenomenasuch as playing in the
sink, raising a pet, or going to the playgroundare less likely to occur in the home. More and
more, it is in the early childhood classroom where this kind of experience with the natural world
must take place, allowing all children to build experiences in investigation and problem solving
and the foundation for understanding basic science concepts.

These notes provide an image of science teaching and learning in the early childhood classroom
in which teachers and children are engaged in inquiries into scientific phenomenaanimal
behaviors and, more specifically, the behaviors of snails. They suggest the potential of 3- to 5-
year-old children to engage in the practices of science. These notes also provide a small window
into science for young children that is based on several beliefs that have guided my work: (1)
doing science is a natural and critical part of childrens early learning; (2) childrens curiosity
about the natural world is a powerful catalyst for their work and play; (3) with the appropriate
guidance, this natural curiosity and need to make sense of the world become the foundation for
beginning to use skills of inquiry to explore basic phenomena and materials of the world
surrounding children; and (4) this early science exploration can be a rich context in which
children can use and develop other important skills, including working with one another, basic
large- and small-motor control, language, and early mathematical understanding.

The Content of Science for Young Children

Children entering school already have substantial knowledge of the natural world, much of which
is implicit. Contrary to older views, young children are not concrete and simplistic thinkers.
Research shows that childrens thinking is surprisingly sophisticated. Children can use a wide
range of reasoning processes that form the underpinnings of scientific thinking, even though
their experience is variable and they have much more to learn. (Duschl, Schweingruber, &
Shouse, 2007, pp. 2-3)

The content of science for young children is a sophisticated interplay among concepts, scientific
reasoning, the nature of science, and doing science. It is not primarily a science of information.
While facts are important, children need to begin to build an understanding of basic concepts and
how they connect and apply to the world in which they live. And the thinking processes and skills
of science are also important. In our work developing curriculum for teachers, we have focused
equally on science inquiry and the nature of science, and contentbasic concepts and the topics
through which they are explored. In the process of teaching and learning, these are inseparable,
but here I discuss them separately.

Science Inquiry and the Nature of Science

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

In our work, we have used a simple inquiry learning cycle (Worth & Grollman, 2003, p. 19) to
provide a guiding structure for teachers as they facilitate childrens investigations (Figure 1). The
cycle begins with an extended period of engagement where children explore the selected
phenomenon and materials, experiencing what they are and can do, wondering about them,
raising questions, and sharing ideas. This is followed by a more guided stage as questions are
identified that might be investigated further. Some of these may be the childrens questions,
others may be introduced by the teacher, but their purpose is to begin the process of more
focused and deeper explorations involving prediction, planning, collecting, and recording data;
organizing experiences; and looking for patterns and relationships that eventually can be shared
and from which new questions may emerge. This structure is not rigid, nor is it linearthus the
many arrows. And while it is used here to suggest a scaffold for inquiry-based science teaching
and learning, it closely resembles how scientists work and, in interesting ways, how children
learn.

This description of the practice of doing science is quite different from some of the science work
in evidence in many classrooms where there may be a science table on which sit interesting
objects and materials, along with observation and measurement tools such as magnifiers and
balances. Too often the work stops there, and little is made of the observations children make
and the questions they raise. Another form of science is activity-based science where children
engage in a variety of activities that generate excitement and interest but that rarely lead to
deeper thinking. There are a multitude of science activity books that support this form of science
in the classroom. Thematic units and projects are yet other vehicles for science work in the
classroom. These can be rich and challenging; however, they may not have a focus on science.
Transportation or a study of the neighborhood are typical examples that have the potential for
engaging children in interesting science but frequently focus more on concepts of social studies.If
these projects or themes are to truly engage students in science, care needs to be taken to be
sure that science is in the foreground, and the integration with other subject matter is
appropriate and related to the science.

Science Content
With an of the practice of science that guides how we approach science inquiry in the early
childhood classroom, we turn to the question of the content of science for this age. There are
many phenomena that can be explored, many questions to be explored, many basic concepts to
be introduced, and many topics to choose from, so rather than make a list of possible subject
matter and topics, following are key criteria for guiding decisions about topic selection.

At the core of inquiry-based science is direct exploration of phenomena and materials. Thus, the
first criterion is that phenomena selected for young children must be available for direct
exploration and drawn from the environment in which they live. The study of snails is an
example of an exploration that meets these criteria. Others include light and shadow, moving
objects, structures, and plant and animal life cycles. Examples of some that do not meet these
criteria include such popular topics as dinosaurs or space travel. While these are often brought
up by children because they are part of the media environment around them, they are not
appropriate content for inquiry-based science in the classroom because they present no
opportunity for direct exploration on the childrens part and even the simplest explanatory ideas
are developmentally problematic. Other topics often chosen in early childhood classrooms such
as the rain forest or animals of the Arctic (polar bears and penguins) may be based in
appropriate concepts (habitat, physical characteristics, and adaptation of animals), but these too
lack the possibility for direct engagement. Topics such as these need not be excluded. They can
be the subject of important dramatic play, elaborate discussion, and exploration using books and
other secondary sources. The problem arises when they take time away from or substitute for
inquiry-based science experiences.

The second criterion is that the concepts underlying the childrens work be concepts that are
important to science. For example, in the exploration of snails, the underlying concept is the
behavior of animals and how behaviors are related to physical structure and an animals way of
meeting its needs. Such an experience provides a base from which children will gradually
develop an understanding of adaptation and evolution. Studying shadows is another example,
where childrens experiences build a foundation for understanding a key concept about light
that it travels in straight lines. Working with balls on ramps is yet another example where
skillfully guided experiences build a foundation for later understanding of forces and motion.

A third criterion is that the focus of science be on concepts that are developmentally appropriate
and can be explored from multiple perspectives, in depth, and over time. When children have
many and varied opportunities to explore a phenomenon, they come to the final stages of inquiry
with a rich set of experiences on which to base their reflections, their search for patterns and
relationships, and their developing theories. In our example of the snails, the teacher focuses the
childrens attention first on description. But the next step might be to compare the snails motion
to that of an earthworm and a sow bug. This might be followed by observing their own
movement and that of other familiar animals and a continuing discussion about similarities and
differences and how movement relates to where an animal lives and how it gets its food. In
contrast to this depth and breadth are experiences with phenomena such as magnets that are
very engaging, but once children have noted what they do, there is little else to explore. With a
range of experiences, children are more likely to be able to think about connections among
them, question their nave ideas, and develop new ones.

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

While not a criterion for the selection of content for an individual unit, across a year, the science
program should reflect a balance of life and physical science. For many reasons, teachers are
more comfortable with the life sciences and steer away from physical science. This leaves out
explorations of deep interest to children and deprives them of the challenges and excitement of
experimentation. Inquiry into life science is different from inquiry into physical science, the
former being more observational, taking place slowly over time. Inquiry in the physical sciences
is more experimental with immediate results. Both are important, so it is balance that is
important in an early childhood science program.

The Classroom

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

Science in the Child-Centered Curriculum

There are many definitions for child-centered curriculum that fall along a continuum. At one
end is the belief that much of the curriculum is centered on the childrens ideas and questions. It
is co-constructed by the child and the teacher. At the other end is a structured program with
little child input except during free time. The reality of a good science curriculum is that it sits
in between these extremes. The phenomena and the basic concepts are determined by the
teacher, perhaps because of an interest she has observed in the classroom, but this need not be
the case. Once a phenomenon is introduced and children begin their explorations, their questions
may guide much of what follows.

From this perspective, the question to be asked is not, Whose question is it? but rather, Are
the children engaged? Children need to own the content, but it need not necessarily be initiated
by them. In the example above, water was the teachers science focus. But the idea of pipes and
Water Town clearly belonged to the children.

Materials for Science

The selection of and access to materials are critical to science. It is through the materials that
children confront and manipulate the phenomenon in question. To the extent possible, the
materials must be open ended, transparent, and selected because they allow children to focus on
important aspects of the phenomenon. This is in contrast to materials that by their appearance
and the ways in which they can be manipulated guide what children do and think. One example
of the difference is the prefabricated marble run. Rather than creating their own roadway for
marbles and struggling to make it work, the marble run has done the thinking for the children.
All they need to do is drop the marble in and watch it roll. This is very different from using blocks
and some form of gutter materials where they need to grapple with the slope, the corners, the
intersection of the parts, and solve the problem of getting the marble to reach their finish line.
Another example is the use of transparent tubing, droppers, and funnels in the water exploration
as described in the teachers journal above. The materials themselves are open ended, and the
movement of water visible. A third example is the use of multiple kinds of blocks and
construction materials when investigating structures. In such an investigation, Legos might be
temporarily removed because the fact that they snap together reduces the challenge of building
towers and walls and thus reduces the focus on the forces at work.

Time and Space for Science

Good science investigations take place over extended time, both short term and long term.
Engaged children may stay with something for significant periods of time, and some children
may need time to get involved. The typical schedule in the classrooms of young children often
militates against inquiry-based science learning. Short 20- or 30-minute activity or choice times
allow children to start but not continue their work. In addition, if science work is episodic and not
available regularly during the week, continuity is lost and the opportunity to draw conclusions
reduced. Science also needs to be talked about and documented. This, too, takes time. Science
needs space. If children are to engage with phenomena in many different ways, activity may
need to be spread out in the classroom and outdoors. Building structures may happen in the
block area, on table tops, in the sand table. Germinating seeds need to be put somewhere, as do
plants that are growing in other ways and interesting collections from outdoors. An investigation
of shadows might include a shadow puppet theater, a darkened alcove for playing with
flashlights, and a lamp and screen to explore shapes. The implication of this need for space and
time is that focusing on a science study may require that other things be set aside or changed.
The morning circle routine might become a science talk a couple of time a week. The dramatic
play corner might be a shadow puppet theater, and the water table might be closed to dish
washing and baby doll bathing.

Discussion and Representation in Science

Discussion and representation are both critical to science learning and an important part of the
inquiry process and the development of science reasoning. Both in small groups and in large
ones, discussion encourages children to think about what they have experienced, listen to the
experiences of others, and reflect on their ideas. Similarly, representation using a variety of
mediaincluding drawing, writing, and collageencourages children to observe closely and
reflect on their experiences over time as well as build vocabulary and language structures.
George Forman, emeritus professor at the University of Massachusetts, in an unpublished
comment says it this way, Experience is not the best teacher. It sounds like heresy, but when
you think about it, its reflection on experience that makes it educational (Conference
presentation).

The Teachers Role

The teachers role is critical to childrens science learning, and it is a complex one that is
informed by her knowledge of children, of teaching and learning, and of pedagogical science
knowledge. I want to highlight just one of thesepedagogical science knowledge. Childrens
scientific inquiry is guided by the teachers explicit understanding of the important underlying
science concepts of the focus she has chosen. For example, the childrens work with water in the
teacher journal above is indeed about pipes and Water Town, but it is also about how water
flowsa basic property of liquids. While explicit teaching of the concept is not appropriate, the
structure of the experiences and the teachers facilitation is guided by her understanding of the
concepts and how children learn them. Her questions, comments, and probes draw the childrens
attention to the conceptin this case, that water flows and flows down. In the study of snails,
described earlier, the children were interested in lots of thingswhether snails liked each other,
how they had babies, how they got in their shells. In the notes, we see the teacher picking up on
one of those interests and a basic characteristic of animal behavior and adaptationhow they
move. This kind of teacher guidance and facilitation is based in each teachers understanding of
the concepts behind the childrens work and enables her to encourage children to notice and
reflect on key aspects of the phenomenon they are exploring.

Conclusion

For many years, the role of early childhood education has been focused on childrens social,
emotional, and physical development as well as very basic skills in language and arithmetic.
Although work with materials is fundamental to early childhood, focusing childrens thinking on
the science of these experiences is rare. Science activities often are seen as vehicles for the
development of vocabulary and skills such as small motor coordination, counting, and color and
shape recognition. These activities are not parts of long-term explorations or sequenced into
projects focused on the science concepts and emphasizing the processes of scientific inquiry.
This is exacerbated when teachers are uncomfortable with science, have little science
background, and lack confidence in their abilities to teach science to children.

In many settings, the new knowledge about childrens cognitive potential is not being used to
broaden and deepen the science curriculum to include more in-depth and challenging
experiences. Instead, the increasing concern about reading has reinforced the almost singular
focus on learning basic skills of literacy, numeracy, and socialization. It also is bringing to the
early childhood setting increased pressure for accountability, leaving little room for childrens rich
play and exploration of the world around them.

The exploration of the natural world is the stuff of childhood. Science, when viewed as a process
of constructing understanding and developing ideas, is a natural focus in the early childhood
program. As described here, childrens inquiry into appropriate phenomena is not only the place
to build foundational experiences for later science learning, it is fertile ground for the
development of many cognitive skills. It also is a context in which children can develop and
practice many basic skills of literacy and mathematics. Finally, science is a collaborative
endeavor in which working together and discussing ideas are central to the practice.

Science in Early Childhood Classrooms: Content and

Process

Go to:
Parent involvement and student academic performance: A multiple
mediational analysis
Parent involvement in a child's early education is consistently found to be positively associated
with a child's academic performance (Hara & Burke, 1998; Hill & Craft, 2003; Marcon,
1999; Stevenson & Baker, 1987). Specifically, children whose parents are more involved in their
education have higher levels of academic performance than children whose parents are involved
to a lesser degree. The influence of parent involvement on academic success has not only been
noted among researchers, but also among policy makers who have integrated efforts aimed at
increasing parent involvement into broader educational policy initiatives. Coupled with these
findings of the importance of early academic success, a child's academic success has been found
to be relatively stable after early elementary school (Entwisle & Hayduk, 1988;Pedersen,
Faucher, & Eaton, 1978). Therefore, it is important to examine factors that contribute to early
academic success and that are amenable to change.