Understanding the Under 3s and the Implications for Education

Sylvie Rayna, Ferre Laevers

• Publisher: Routledge
• Year: 2016
• ISBN:
  9781134925353
• Edition: 1
• Topic: Didattica
• Subtopic: Didattica per la prima infanzia

This book originated from an awareness of the persistent lack of knowledge supporting a more respectful reception and approach to the youngest in our changing societies. It follows initiatives of networks of researchers from several countries, sharing insights from current studies carried out in their different cultures. Introduced by a state of art review-like chapter on birth to 3 literature, the book, which can be pictured as a composition, begins with a journey inside the creativity of these young persons and a picture of a companionable learning. It deals with the role of the spatial and physical dimensions of the setting and pictures how the educator can create meaningful participation and launch early exercises in democracy, with respect for diversities. It provides a deeper understanding of a pedagogical accompaniment based on 'participatory alliance' and of the development of communication and language. The text will be a useful addition to researchers, practitioners, and other stakeholders.

This book was originally published as a special issue of the European Early Childhood Education Research Journal.

INTRODUCTION

Understanding children from 0 to 3 years of age and its implications for education. What’s new on the babies’ side? Origins and evolutions

Our views on infancy and toddlerhood have greatly changed during recent decades, as already documented by previous reviews of ECEC literature (Plaisance and Rayna 1997; Rayna and Plaisance 1998). But increasing knowledge induces a need for continuing research, particularly with regard to the under-3s. Today there is a growing awareness of the persistent lack of knowledge supporting a more respectful welcome of the youngest in our changing societies. This consideration has stimulated recent initiatives, such as a review of research focussed on this field, within a network of researchers from seven countries coordinated by Jan-Erik Johansson (2010). This Themed Monograph on Birth to 3, of the EECER journal that we have been honoured to edit, fits into this movement.

Without aiming, within this editorial, to make a state of the art review on birth to 3 literature, we can mention that since the early 1970s, understandings of the young child, its care and education, has been radically modified by a number of studies, grounded in various value-based cultural contexts and thus using various theoretical and methodological frameworks (David 1999). Research, which emerged from questions raised by earlier studies or as attempts to respond to social or political needs, is now developing at the crucial moment when new paradigms develop and urge us to rethink early childhood education and care, in its whole, as well as ‘with’ young children (Swadener and Kessler 1991; Burman 1994; Cannella 1997; Dahlberg, Moss, and Pence 1999; Brougère and Vandenbroeck 2008; Pascal and Bertram 2009). A short journey across a selection of studies, published in English and French, display some significant approaches and discoveries, across a range of disciplinary frameworks and particular themes and objects of research, which have provided some building bricks for an understanding of birth to 3, in diverse contexts. This research had opened new perspectives for the care and education of the youngest, both in the minority and the majority world.

Current research on birth to 3 is following the path forged by a few pioneers, in different countries, who have played a major role for our research area. Among them is Charlotte Bühler (1931) who provided analyses of infants’ and toddlers’ development, and particularly of early peer interactions, observed in a centre-based setting in Austria. The enhancement of early social behaviours has supported the idea of the baby as a social being from birth, as argued elsewhere by Henri Wallon. The dominating positivist psychological approaches and laboratory settings as well as the hegemonious traditional conceptions of mother’s role have slowed down the development of such observational work in centres, or families. Despite Jean Piaget’s inspiring systematic observations of his own infants – already during the 1930’s –, the generalised use of recording technologies, allowed only some decades later the rebirth of very young children’s observations which began to be carried out in institutions, also according to the rhythm of ideological evolutions of the different countries towards mothers’ role and day-care centres for very young children. The work, from the 1970s, of two contributors of this issue, Colwyn Trevarthen (1979 a, b, 1982), Trevarthen and Hubley (1978) and Tullia Musatti and Panni (1981) illustrates this.

Also to be mentioned is René Spitz’ and John Bowlby’s largely disseminated studies on separation and attachment. While they have inspired entry procedures in day-care centres and considerations on transitions, often combined with other approaches, as noticed in Italy (Mantovanni, Restuccia Saitta, and Bove 2000; Musatti and Rayna 2010), they have also simultaneously discredited centre-based, out-of-home care. Thanks to innovative and contesting approaches of important figures during the 1960s, such as Irène Lézine in France, ways were opened to/for a new outlook on day-care centres and women’s work, investigations ‘in contexts’ or researching for quality. The contribution of Irène Lézine in this was not only due to her use of recording technologies, but also to the development of new ideas expressed in her Psychopedagogy of Infancy (1964) and other contributions, such as MHO publications about play and toys (1965), or other papers contesting the medical model or the ‘so-called maternal deprivations’ widely spread by clinical psychology (1976).

In the same period, historical perspectives joined the psychological ones. Let us mention Philippe Ariès (1960) who was at the origin of a stream of important studies, in France, on the representation of childhood, including studies of birth, nursing and infancy as well as the history of preschool services, centre-based as well as family daycare. In Italy, the ongoing construction of early childhood pedagogical culture, including the infants’ and toddlers’ one, has been analysed within its local contexts by their different actors and partners. Numerous publications report on the extraordinary experiences of/by Reggio Emilia and other municipalities (Edwards, Gandini and Forman 1998; Gandini and Pope Edwards 2001; Rinaldi 2006). The historian, Egle Becchi, recently published the history of the Pistoia’s one La pegagogia del buon gusto (2009).

Then, diverse historical and sociological approaches – joined by demographical and economical ones – have also deepened the field, focusing on some particular themes. For instance in France, the way early skills and learning have been represented over the past centuries (Garnier 1995) or cultural practices and resources – play, toys, books – (Brougère 1995; Manson 2001, 2010) have been explored. Recent developments in the sociology of childhood, which has emerged in other parts of Europe and in the United States with Berry Mayall (2002) or William Corsaro (1997), nowadays are beginning to include the under-3s, as shown by Marjatta Kalliala, in this issue, in her attempt to put different images of the child in dialogue.

Without going further in the overview, we must not forget that, beyond Europe, other pioneers have stimulated research and changes for the under-6s, including the under-3s, as demonstrated by Miwako Hoshi-Watanabe (2010) for Japan, within combinations of traditional cultural views (Kojima 1986) with some occidental understandings. Also in South America, a succession – and some combinations – of studies, generally imported from minority countries, has also been observed, from the dominant psychological ones, followed by the psycho-pedagogical ones then by some sociological ones, as in Brazil (Vittoria and Rabello Baretto 2007; Haddad and Nascimento 2007; Rosemberg 2007). Let us notice that Paolo Freire’s spirit is influencing, in turn, current studies carried out in Europe, as shown in this issue by Julia Oliveira-Formosinho’s and Sara Barros Araújo’s article.

As mentioned, presenting a full review of the research could not be our ambition here, because it would turn out to be inevitably partial. From our perspective we can however mention some key points concerning methods and issues related to research in early childhood and particularly on the birth to 3 age range. Working with the most dominated persons (the youngest and their carers, mostly women still being involved, mothers as well practitioners), means that power issues, at their multiple levels, are to be underlined, with inevitable paradigmatic shifts at the level of the education of the little ones and with regard to the training or accompaniment of the adults. Researching both rigorous tools and ethical positions to go ahead in these directions is a feature shared by studies in this issue, such as those by Florence Pirard or one of the editors.

A monograph as a composition

A monograph can be pictured as a composition, a piece of music or painting. This metaphor brings the role of the editors into light as making an interpretation, like a performer, in which the parts of this composition, the voices and sounds or shapes and colours are brought to an entity. A challenging task demanding an open mind and ‘close’ listening.

To start, the title of this work indeed suggests in what way the seven contributions hold together: this monograph is a collection of research articles focusing on the youngest children, babies and toddlers. The initiative to give this early age explicit attention in an EECERA publication must not surprise, as suggested before. Where the first EECERA conferences were echoing educational research on preschool, increasingly research with under-3s has become well-represented, particularly from the 5^th EECERA conference which took place in Paris in 1995. The growing number of articles published in the EECER Journal shows this evolution.

Nevertheless we have to acknowledge that educational research highlighting this particular age range is limited, despite the increasing number of studies in this field. Many researchers, while noticing with Donna Berthelsen (2010) the ‘youthfulness’ of this research field in numerous countries, currently point to the need for and potential of research with regard to this age range. Recent systematic reviews of research on the under-3s in the Nordic countries (Broström and Hansen 2010; Greve and Solheim 2010; Hännikäinen 2010; Johansson and Emilson 2010) together with the recent growth of doctoral dissertations in their countries, support this conclusion. John Bennett (2008) and others, building on comparative surveys and international studies – Starting Strong I and II (OECD 2001, 2006) - made a strong plea to prioritize research on the youngest children. Part of their argument is how much poverty can affect this early age.

At the same time we can see that the findings of – particularly psychological – research on the youngest children are most fascinating and inspiring for the whole of the educational system. If developmental psychology could and still can be the subject of legitimate contestation by post-structuralist views (criticising the concept of normalization and other impoverishing effects in early education), arguments from this discipline are now confirming and developing the image of the very young child as a rich and competent citizen. This new strong message is most fruitful in the light of the continuous process of emancipation and empowerment of the under-3s sector in education…and beyond that age! The exciting experience that was ours when being involved in studies with babies as a member of a research team in Paris (Sinclair et al. 1982; Stambak et al. 1983; CRESAS 1991) is now lived by those who are involved in studies with the youngest children, their families and the practitioners who take care of them. They realize how research of this early period of life opens an incredibly rich window and laboratory offering great perspectives for the whole of the educational field.

This key message is at the heart of the first contribution, by Colwyn Trevarthen, who can be considered, internationally, as one of the main contributors to the field of Birth to 3. His innovative work carried over recent decades, is inspiring a growing number of areas, including the early curriculum, prevention on illiteracy, autism, etc. We were honoured by his immediate, generous and enthusiastic response to our invitation to participate in this issue. Trevarthen takes us into an intriguing journey that in the end leaves us with a particular sense of wonder, an awareness of the richness and strengths these young persons bear in themselves. This understanding inevitably brings about a fundamental shift in our attitude and approach in relation to the under-3s. To lead us to this point, he confronts us with research findings in which ‘taking into account the perspective of a young child’ is the common approach. The harvest of this endeavour is rich and varied and documented by subtle observations and sensitive descriptions of what goes on in children. It celebrates ‘the creativity of early childhood,’ the ‘helpful intelligence children can offer,” the child’s ‘capacities for regulating intimate encounters,’ the capability to ‘share the “communicative musicality”’ and ‘show aesthetic preferences,’ the urge ‘to learn expressions in dialogue,’ the demonstration of ‘an increasing self-awareness’ in infants and how at less than 16-months of age they ‘can organize themselves [–] into a working group.’

It pleads for ‘a more generous theory of human motivation,’ for ‘adventurous play,’ ‘to welcome and support the motives of the child,’ to acknowledge children’s rights and to ‘sustain practices [–] that serve these rights well.’

All this leaves us with an impressive view of the child’s mind. Not just as a general statement, but underpinned by a convincing articulation of processes that are not commonly acknowledged but clearly there if we want to see them.

Trevarthen has set the tone or given the canvas his ground layer. Let’s describe how the following contributions fit into this frame and together make a rich composition.

That brings us to Rosemary Roberts’ article on ‘companionable learning’, an articleissued from her doctoral thesis and field experience. The link with the first contribution is readily made: the faculties of very young children so well articulated by Colwyn Trevarthen are predominantly displayed in interactions. This approach is not only in line with the breaking views of Vygotski, Roberts also bears on the concept of the ‘two person system’ introduced by Bronfenbrenner. From here a new dimension is introduced in the debate: the concept of ‘wellness’ and the interdependency between the wellness of the child and ‘the level of parental, familial, communal, and social wellness.’ Rosemary Roberts’ research is an attempt to develop a theoretical model in which ‘normal well-being’ is synonymous with ‘normal development.’ It is a search for the ‘components of young children’s holistic resilient well-being.’ The concept of ‘companionable learning’ is defined as ‘the mutual state of intersubjectivity that involves the child and the adult (or sibling or peer) both learning together in an equal, reciprocal dialogue.’ To grasp this phenomenon Roberts introduces the term ‘diagogy’ to correct the one-sidedness of the traditional concept of ‘pedagogy.’ This learning situation is the pivot around which four constructs of well-being revolve. The first refers to physical well-being, the second to communication covering ‘all interactions with the world,’ the third pinpoints the state of well-being attached to the combination of belonging-and-boundaries, and the fourth highlights ‘agency.’ The image of the child transcending these intertwined concepts is characterized by a deep sense of respect for the child’s needs combined with the acknowledgement of the capability of children to engage in reciprocal relations. This goes up to the point of taking a responsibility – as a child – in the co-construction of the social reality. The concept of ‘collective well-being’ as an underlying ethical dimension expresses what ‘companionable learning’ in the end should bring about and gives meaning to a ‘caring disposition’ as part of the person’s profile. Another aspect of Roberts’ approach is the holistic nature of her analysis, which ties in with the actual paradigm shift in education. Even if categories can be identified, understanding the processes of ‘diagogical’ interactions is only possible when we can see how the emotional, social, cognitive and physical components are part of one and a unique flow. Never can the cognitive part be separated from how a person is experiencing (in the affective sense) the world of objects and people.

Although very much at a reflective level, Roberts’ analysis provides clear cut criteria to guide practice. ‘Companionable learning’ takes place in ‘emotionally charged interactions within secure relationships’ and is about ‘development that flows from active engagement with the world and the people in it.’ This brings us not only close to Trevarthen’s view, but fits very well in the advocacy for involvement or engagement as process-indicators for the quality of the provision as incorporated in Csikszentmihayli’s (1979) concept of flow, in Experiential Education (Laevers and Heylen 2003) and in the Effective Early Learning Project (Bertram and Pascal 2009).

From the angle of ‘companionable learning’ to the article of Tullia Musatti and Susanna Mayer is a small step. To start, their previous studies on peer interactions in early educational centres and intense and continuous involvement in analysing best practices, as in Pistoia nidi, have substantially raised our understanding of children’s early socialization. In this contribution we are taken through a detailed analysis of a particular type of interactions in which ‘reciprocal attention’ and ‘shared engagement’ by the children is seen as a mark of success, as we found in the former contribution. The study focuses on the impact of the gain of independent locomotion of toddlers on their social and cognitive experiences, with p...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Half Title
• Title Page
• Copyright Page
• Table of Contents
• Citation Information
• 1. Introduction: Understanding children from 0 to 3 years of age and its implications for education. What’s new on the babies’ side? Origins and evolutions
• 2. What young children give to their learning, making education work to sustain a community and its culture
• 3. Companionable learning: a mechanism for holistic well-being development from birth
• 4. Sharing attention and activities among toddlers: the spatial dimension of the setting and the educator’s role
• 5. Early education for diversity: starting from birth
• 6. Look at me! Does the adult truly see and respond to the child in Finnish day-care centres?
• 7. From the curriculum framework to its dissemination: the accompaniment of educational practices in care facilities for children under three years
• 8. Promoting language in under 3s. Assessing language development and the quality of adult intervention
• Panel of referees and translators
• Index