Childrenâs learning: observing everyday practices in a preschool setting
Bibliographic record
Abstract
AbstractThis qualitative study examines in depth how young children’s learning takes place in an early childhood classroom and more specifically how curriculum is constructed for young children. The purpose of this study was to examine young children’s learning within an early childhood educational setting to better understand the everyday interactions and decisions that occur. The study took place in a non-profit and provincially funded day care centre, also known as a Centre de la Petite Enfance (CPE), in an urban setting in Montreal, Quebec. The overarching research question addresses how learning takes place in an early childhood classroom: How does early childhood learning take place in a pre-school classroom in the greater Montreal area? More specifically: What everyday approaches does the early childhood teacher use for early childhood learning? What role does the early childhood teacher play in children’s learning? What role do the children play in their learning?How does the context support children’s learning (if it does)? This study, which allowed for extensive on-site observations and which focused on phenomena that occurred in a natural setting, uncovered and identified the multiple ways in which an educator can support children’s learning and the ways in which children are engaged in their learning. The research was authentic and conducted within an environment familiar to both the children and educator. Data consisted of field notes, interviews, memos, documentation, photographs and digital recordings. The process of analysis and interpretation used a constructivist lens, and recognized the complexities involved in an educator supporting children’s learning. The examination of themes showed a classroom where the children’s interests and learning were consistently valued, supported, and facilitated. The data revealed how the numerous strategies, organization of the environment, longevity of topics and scaffolding, promoted and stimulated children’s learning. The study indicated that the educator, the environment and the children play a crucial role in their learning. It was the interconnectedness between the everyday practices together that supported children’s learning. This study suggests how an educator’s awareness of everyday learning of children in a specific group frames the curriculum choices and provides a base for shared meaning making. Focusing on accounts of everyday practices can help identify depth and relationships within practices that might not have previously been recognized. This study supports the idea that students in educational teaching programs should be educated to recognize children’s everyday learning and how to use it as a base for building and extending children’s knowledge through curriculum choices to develop experiences that make it possible for children to demonstrate (apply) everyday learning.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.005 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.008 | 0.007 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.004 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.005 | 0.001 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".