Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood Education in Germany

Wilfried Smidt

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2018
• ISBN:
  9781134874323
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Pedagogía
• Subtopic: Educación general

The importance of early childhood education has been emphasized by a large body of research that has demonstrated that children's cognitive and socio-emotional development is significantly influenced by the quality of the education and care received from their families and in preschool. Consequently, it is important to investigate factors that pertain to the provision of a high-quality education and high-quality care for young children.

This book addresses several important issues that are currently under discussion with respect to this topic. In particular, the book focuses on three topics presently under debate: the professionalization of pedagogues working in the field of early childhood education; the quality of education and care provided by families and preschools; and the promotion of children from socio-economically disadvantaged families. Providing an excellent overview of current research in Germany, this book will be useful to readers who are interested in international perspectives on early childhood education and who want to gain insight into relevant topics discussed in other countries. This book was originally published as a special issue of Early Child Development and Care.

Occupational activities of nonacademic and academic pedagogues working in the field of childhood education – an investigation of differences and predictor variables

Wilfried Smidt

Department of Early Childhood and Youth Education, University of Koblenz-Landau, Landau, Germany

Nonacademic and academic pedagogues working in childhood education are involved in multiple occupational activities. Theoretical frameworks focussing on career development and processes of professionalisation may provide hints about differences in the occupational activities of nonacademic and academic pedagogues as well as with regard to how personal, motivational, and contextual variables may influence the occupational activities of nonacademic and academic pedagogues. However, there is only limited research on these issues to date. The current study aimed to reduce this gap by using survey data from 563 nonacademic and 237 academic pedagogues working in childhood education in Germany. Occupational activities were captured with four composites representing administrating and advising, caring and educating, managing and monitoring, and advertising and publishing. With regard to the occupational activities, the findings indicated only small differences between nonacademic and academic pedagogues. Furthermore, the results revealed that personal, motivational, and contextual variables predicted pedagogues’ activities; however, the pattern of significant predictors differed between the vocational groups. The field of work and holding a managerial position were relatively consistent predictors in both vocational groups. The findings may contribute to the discussion about the professionalisation of nonacademic and academic pedagogues working in childhood education.

Introduction

Theoretical models focussing on the development of professional careers stress the importance of people’s activities, which are defined as concrete practices that people will execute or have already executed to achieve specific goals. Such activities are assumed to be influenced by a number of personal, motivational, and contextual aspects and may affect people’s further occupational development (Abele, 2002). Similarly, models that more specifically target the professionalisation of pedagogues such as school teachers and early childhood pedagogues (Kunter, Kleickmann, Klusmann, & Richter, 2013; Mischo & Fröhlich-Gildhoff, 2011; Vereinigung der Bayerischen Wirtschaft, 2012) emphasise the role of pedagogues’ occupational activities, which are presumed to affect personal career development (e.g. income, job satisfaction) as well as clients’ outcomes (e.g. children’s grades, competencies). In the context of educational research, pedagogues’ activities have been thoroughly investigated with regard to teaching quality and educational process quality in schools (Cadima, Peixoto, & Leal, 2014; Lipowsky et al., 2009; Pianta, Belsky, Houts, & Morrison, 2007) and preschools (Anders et al., 2012; Booren, Downer, & Vitiello, 2012; Smidt, 2012; Sylva et al., 2006; Tietze et al., 2013). However, far less is known about pedagogues’ patterns of occupational activities in a broader sense, although this approach has been used in educational research (Fuchs, 2003; Grunert & Krüger, 2004; Züchner, 2004). This approach focusses on a wide range of pedagogues’ occupational activities rather than on their interactions and teaching quality in a narrower sense. Studies that have employed this approach have assessed the extent to which pedagogues engage in occupational activities and the factors that might influence them. Referring to systematisations of pedagogues’ activities in educational settings (Giesecke, 2013; see also Lenzen, 2004; Prange & Strobel-Eisele, 2006), occupational activities such as educating, teaching, and advising have been often characterised as ‘educational’, whereas activities such as leading, planning, organising, and administrating have been labelled ‘multidisciplinary’ because they are not limited to education (Fuchs, 2003; Grunert & Krüger, 2004). It can be suggested that pedagogues’ occupational activities in educational settings might be different for situations that specifically require them to interact directly with clients (e.g. children, adolescents) versus situations that require more administrative and management-oriented actions and that may correspond with greater autonomy with regard to the development of a person’s own vocational profile (Thole & Cloos, 2006). In this regard, pedagogues’ occupational activities can be viewed as a kind of specialisation that may direct future career development and success as theoretical frameworks suggest (Abele, 2002; Kunter et al., 2013). This last issue increases in importance against the background in which, in Germany, there are nonacademic as well as academic pedagogues working in the field of childhood education. Thinking one step ahead, it might be the case that these vocational profiles correspond with a specialisation that is reflected in different occupational activities. However, despite the significant role of pedagogues’ occupational activities, only a few studies have focussed on this topic to date; this is particularly true with regard to the investigation of differences in the occupational activities of nonacademic and academic pedagogues as well as with regard to the identification of variables that predict pedagogues’ occupational activity patterns in educational settings. Therefore, relying on pertinent theoretical models (Abele, 2002; Kunter et al., 2013) and systematisations of pedagogues’ activities in educational settings (esp. Giesecke, 2013), the present study aimed to reduce this research gap by (a) investigating differences in the occupational activities of nonacademic and academic pedagogues working in childhood education (i.e. primarily preschool education; and to a lesser extent, fields of work such as after-school care, special education, and youth welfare services) and (b) investigating predictors of nonacademic and academic pedagogues’ occupational activities.

Theoretical approaches and empirical findings

With regard to the occupational activities of pedagogues, a distinction is often made between educational chore activities and multidisciplinary activities (Fuchs, 2003; Grunert & Krüger, 2004). Overall, genuine educational activities may be characterised as a form of social action; that is, educational activities are oriented towards engaging in activities with other people and therefore have an interactional character. The overarching aim of educational activities is to enable human beings to learn, and this aim is in turn related to the aim of achieving autonomy and maturity (Giesecke, 2013). Against this background, teaching, caring, educating (Fuchs, 2003; Grunert & Krüger, 2004), and advising (Fuchs, 2003) can be defined as genuine educational activities. However, the occupational activities of pedagogues are not confined to the aforementioned ones. Pedagogues work and are embedded in organisations such as preschools, schools, or after-school care centres, all of which are part of a society with a societal order that is characterised by specific value systems and norms. Therefore, for instance, pedagogues may also act politically to maintain the social order, they may be responsible for administrative and economic activities for purposes of business management, and they might perform medical activities to treat afflictions as well (Giesecke, 2013). Empirical studies on pedagogues’ occupational activities (Fuchs, 2003; Grunert & Krüger, 2004) have tried to operationalise the complexity of potential activities by referring to a category comprising of multidisciplinary activities (e.g. administrating, planning, personnel management, and managing financial resources) and a category comprising of specialised and rather noneducational occupational activities that have been characterised as less multidisciplinary (e.g. applying provisions and laws, nursing, programming, and being artistically engaged). However, there are also inconsistencies with regard to the categorising of activities: for instance, advertising and public relations are characterised as multidisciplinary (Fuchs, 2003) but also as specialised (Grunert & Krüger, 2004), indicating that the distinction between the aforementioned categories is not entirely clear.

The complexity of pedagogues’ occupational activities has also been discussed with regard to professionalisation, suggesting that being involved in complex and potentially precarious activities and tasks requires high-quality vocational training and an occupational socialisation (Helsper & Tippelt, 2011; Terhart, 2011). Against this background, however, only a few studies have focussed on differences in the occupational activities of differently skilled pedagogues. Grunert and Krüger (2004) investigated differences between pedagogues with an academic diploma degree and those with an academic master’s degree. Overall, the authors found quite similar profiles in the occupational activities of both groups of pedagogues. In another study, Thole and Cloos (2006) reported that the vocational activities of academic social pedagogues were to a greater extent management-related (e.g. planning, reflecting, and organising) and to a lesser extent determined by direct contact with clients compared with the vocational activities of nonacademic pedagogues.

Regarding potential predictors of occupational activities, theoretical frameworks concentrating on the development of professional careers in the context of lifespan development as well as frameworks that refer specifically to the professionalisation of pedagogues (Abele, 2002; Kunter et al., 2013) suggest that, in particular, personal variables (e.g. social demographics, personality traits), motivational variables (e.g. career goals, perceived self-efficacy), and contextual variables (e.g. working conditions, employment position, and household size) are important. With regard to the identification of predictors of pedagogues’ activities in childhood education, only a few studies have been conducted to date. However, the potential predictive importance of some variables may also be exemplified by research findings derived from other contexts. With regard to personal characteristics, there are some hints about the influence of socio-demographic variables. For instance, Fuchs (2003) found that female pedagogues were more frequently involved in activities involving direct contact with clients such as caring and educating, whereas the work of male pedagogues could instead be characterised by management-related activities. There are also other personal variables such as personality traits that may influence occupational activities across various occupations. For instance, there is evidence that the Big Five personality traits (Costa & McCrae, 1985) are associated with leadership qualities (Judge, Bono, Ilies, & Gerhardt, 2002) that might be particularly related to managerial, planning, and controlling activities. Motivational characteristics such as career goals (Abele, 2011) and goal orientations (Lipowsky, 2003) have also been postulated to be related to occupational activities. For instance, specific career goals may direct occupational activities, which in turn may be related to occupational development in terms of career success (Abele, 2002). Finally, contextual variables such as the field of work or a person’s hierarchical position are suggested to affect occupational activities. Focussing on pedagogues, Züchner (2004) found different foci of occupational activities depending on the field of work: for instance, the respondents stated that educational, caring, helping, and creative activities were more pronounced in preschools compared with other fields of work (e.g. youth social work, youth welfare services). It may also be assumed that the hierarchical position childhood pedagogues hold in their work organisation (e.g. a managerial position) may predict their occupational activities.

Purpose of the study

The present study was designed to examine differences in the occupational activities of nonacademic and academic pedagogues working in the field of childhood education and to investigate what predicts the occupational activities of these pedagogues. The study focusses on two groups of pedagogues working in childhood education in Germany. The first group consists of nonacademic pedagogues with a tertiary-level education received from nonacademic professional social pedagogy schools. In Germany, the...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• Notes on contributors
• Introduction: Contemporary issues in early childhood education in Germany
• Part 1: Professionalisation of pedagogues working in the field of early childhood education
• Part 2: Education quality in families and preschools
• Part 3: Promotion of children from socio-economic disadvantaged families
• Index