Pre-service and Experienced Early Childhood Educators' Perceptions of Their Work with Families.
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Family involvement in children's early education has been associated with advantages for both children and parents (Corter Pelletier, 2005). Although the outcomes of family involvement in child care settings have not been documented to the same extent as in school settings, there is growing evidence to suggest that children, families and childcare staff all benefit from these partnerships (Ghazvini Readdick, 1994; Owen, Ware Barfoot, 2000). Early childhood educators (ECEs) in Canada and around the world are expected to establish partnerships with families and family involvement in child care has been extolled as a pillar of high quality child care (Mathers, Eisenstadt, Sylva, Soukakoukou Ereky-Stevens, 2014; Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development, 2006; 2012). In spite of this, there is evidence to suggest that these partnerships may not be routinely established (Howe, Jacobs, Vukelich Recchia, 2013; Perlman Fletcher, 2012). While it seems reasonable to suppose that the challenges of establishing partnerships between child care staff and families are multiply determined, the two papers presented in this dissertation focused on the prior experiences, perceptions and motivations of 432 pre-service and 30 practicing ECEs. The first study examined the influence of pre-service ECEs' biographical experience of parent involvement on their perceptions of parent and ECE knowledge, the importance and feasibility of variety of family involvement activities and their level of preparation for these activities. The second study explored soon-to-graduate ECE students' and experienced ECEs' motivation to work with families, the qualities and skills they valued and what, specifically, they thought parents and ECEs knew about child development and learning. Results indicated that pre-service ECEs' biographical experience of parent involvement was related to their perceptions of parent knowledge, and their cohort (beginning or graduating) was associated with their perceptions of the importance of parent involvement activities. Although virtually none of the participants' motivation to enter the field was directly related to supporting families, the qualities and characteristics they generally valued were those necessary for establishing partnerships with families. These findings underscore the need for further research on the influence of ECE training in relation to services for families.
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 | 0.003 | 0.008 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.003 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.004 | 0.000 |
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".