Indian children’s experiences and understandings of their transition from

Kindergarten to Class One

Anandi Sharma

B. Ed (University of North Bengal)

Submitted in total fulfilment of the requirements

of the degree of Master of Education (by Thesis Only)

December, 2017

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

The University of Melbourne

ii

DECLARATION

This is to certify that

i. this thesis comprises only my original work towards the Masters

ii. due acknowledgement has been made in the text to all other material used

iii. the thesis is (23,769) words in length, exclusive of figures, tables, references and

appendices

iv. the content of thesis has not been submitted for the award of any other degree or

diploma in any other tertiary institution

v. the research reported in this thesis was granted approval by the Human Research

Ethics Committee at The University of Melbourne (Project Number 0932458)

iii

DEDICATION

To the living God Almighty, Your constant mercies were renewed for me each morning -

sustaining me through every uncertainty and tempest – physical and spiritual, as I struggled

toward the completion of this work. This I dedicate for Your Glory.

To Leona Mary Norbu (daughter) and Ethan and NirvanTamang (nephews)

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

Firstly I acknowledge my Supervisor Dr Jane Marie Page (University of Melbourne). Dr.

Jane, I gleaned so much from your wealth of experience, valuable feedback and guidance.

Even across the seas with me in Kalimpong and you in Melbourne, I want to thank you

particularly for just being there – for your immense patience and forbearance, for

encouraging, supporting and cheering me on to bring this thesis to a conclusion. Thank you!

My desire is that your faith in me will be truly justified in this presentation – which you will

be able to say „I knew she would do it!‟

Dr. Kylie Smith, for intervening so to encourage and support me through to the completion of

my thesis, thank you.

Dr.Prasanna, you would always gently prompt me to analyse and conceive things through a

broader and unprejudiced perspective, thank-you.

A pause here to remember – the late Mrs Lalita Pradhan, Directress of Toddlers and Saptashri

Gyanpeeth – you so willingly opened the doors of your school for my research. You were

there when I needed you and I know you would have been truly very proud of this moment.

To you – the epitome of a true „teacher‟ I offer my deepest gratitude.

To all the teachers and students of Class One Toddlers who accepted me as one of their own,

without askance - thank you for your cooperation.

Children who participated in this project- for being you, I recall my times with you as being

one of the best times of this project. Often – every bit of this project was worthwhile because

of the sheer joy of having worked with you!!

I also acknowledge in deep gratitude the Scholarship Office of the University of Melbourne

for the scholarship I received, for all other financial assistance and for forbearance in the

length of time it has taken to complete this study.

iv

Phillipa Moylan, Genevieve Ryan and Tim Mattingsbrooke from MERI – if I don‟t mention

it, maybe you will never know that your kindness and assistance over and above the call of

duty has gone a long way in enabling this project to finally come to fruition. I also thank

Phillipa Moylan for so kindly arranging to post my study material to India.

Viki Norbu, my husband for his motivation and patience – this would not have been possible

without you beside me.

Leona (Pixu) my daughter, for being my source of inspiration, her very presence exudes such

joy I want to do my best for her.

Ama, Baba (my parents) and my father-in-law- for their continuous prayers and moral

support, it is now my turn to pray that this work brings you the joy and satisfaction of

knowing that your prayers have not gone unanswered.

Aji, my grandmother-in-law for her serene presence, listening ear and always positive

encouragement that very often calmed my restless mind.

Moneema, my mother-in-law, „just as iron sharpens iron so ….Proverbs 27:17, you have been

that iron friend for me. From you I learnt to move forward boldly not giving up even when

things seemed impossible. Thank you for the incredible sustenance I received from you.

Aunty Lizzie and uncle Jonah Lepcha you strengthened my faith, whenever I am weak, He is

strong and in that strength, I pulled through – thank you.

The PlanetShakers Urban Life Group- In a foreign land where we „desperately needed‟ more

than „desired‟ the sustenance of prayer and friendship – our need was met in you – thank you.

My friends who always stood by me- Monica Joseph, Jui Judith Gomes, Angela Wilson,

Sanjeev & Rachael Sunam, Moni & Sandip Shrestra -friends to both Viki and me. Thank you

for your friendship, moral support and help through our difficult times.

For all the „friends‟ in Melbourne – each acquaintance carries its own story. Suffice it to say

that every warm smile, every extended hand, every kind word mattered. Thank- you!!

v

ABSTRACT

The United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (1989) outlines children as being

right holders with the entitlement to express their views freely about matters concerning

them. The image of the young child outlined in the Convention as a competent social agent

has challenged National Parties that ratified the UNCRC (1989) to provide for and uphold

this right and ensure that opportunities for children‟s voices to be heard. The right to be heard

has, in turn, given rise to a growing interest in consulting children in researchabout matters

that impact on their lives.

While researchers have examined the topic of school transition it has i) relied heavily on the

perspectives of adults‟ and ii) been untaken in developing Western countries such as

America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. This study aims to address these gaps in

transition research by investigating the experiences and perspectives of 20 children in

Kalimpong, India on their transition from kindergarten to school. It employs a qualitative

approach using an interpretative paradigm, within a child rights framework design. Data was

collected through drawings and interviews. Content analysis was used to present a detailed

account of the study and its findings. It concludes that young Indian children have

considerable knowledge and understandings of themselves and their transition to school. This

information is vital to assisting teachers and policy makers to respond to issues raised by

children in the research. It also helps adults to gain a fuller understanding of how transition is

experienced and understood by young children.

vi

Table of Content

Declaration…………………………………………………………………………………...ii

Dedication……………………………………………………………………………………iii

Acknowledgements………………………………………………………………………….iii

Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………….v

Table of Contents……………………………………………………………………………vi

List of Tables………………………………………………………………….......................ix

Chapter 1: Introduction to the Research……………………………………………….......1

1.1 Background to the study ……………………………………............................................1

1.2 Significance of the Study………………………………………………………………….1

1.3 Organisation of the research study………………………………………………………...2

Chapter 2: Literature Review……………………………………………………………….4

2.1 Participation of children in early childhood education research………………......4

2.2 Research on transition from preschool/Kindergarten to school…………………...6

2.2.1 Methodologies and methods……………………………………………………..9

2.3 Issues around research in school transition……………………………….……...10

2.4 Children‟s Views on Transition to school………………………………………..12

2.4.1 Children‟s transition and moving from preschool/kindergarten to school……..13

2.4.2 Children‟s transition and the difference between preschool/kindergarten and

school………………………………………………………………………………...13

2.4.3 Children‟s transition and the physical environment……………………………15

2.5 Summary.....……………………………………………………………………...16

Chapter 3: Methodology……………………………………………………………………18

3.1 Introduction and purpose of the study…………………………………………...18

3.2 Research site and participants…………………………………………………....19

3.2.1 Sampling………………………………………………………………………..20

3.3 Research enactment………………………………………………………………22

vii

3.3.1 Obtaining permission from the gatekeepers…………………………………....22

3.3.2 Obtaining permission from the Directress……………………………………...22

3.3.3 Familiarizing myself with the school through voluntary work……………..….23

3.3.4 Obtaining consent from parents………………………………………………..24

3.3.5 Gaining informed assent from children………………………………………...24

3.4 Research ethos – rights based and ethical considerations………………………..25

3.5 Research methods/techniques…………………………………………………....27

3.5.1 Drawings……………………………………………………………………….27

3.5.2 Interviews………………………………………………………………………28

3.5.3 Choice of language for interviews……………………………………………..30

3.6 Rigour and trustworthiness through member checking………………………….30

3.7 Data management and analysis…………………………………………………..31

3.8 Research impact and tensions………………………………………………….....31

Chapter 4: Findings and Discussion.……………………………………………………...33

4.1 Theme 1: Experiences and understandings of the educational environment at

school………………………………………………………………………………...33

4.1.1 Similarities/differences between preschool /Kindergarten and primary school..35

4.1.2 Homework……………………………………………………………………...37

4.1.3 Examinations and tests………………………………………………………...38

4.1.4 More work less play…………………………………………………………...42

4.2 Theme 2: Experiences and understandings of the social environment…………..43

4.2.1 Relationship with teachers……………………………………………………..43

4.2.2 Relationship with friends……………………………………………………....46

4.2.3 Behaviour of children…………………………………………………………..47

4.3 Theme 3: Physical environment………………………………………………….49

4.3.1 Physical appearance of school……..…………………………………………..50

4.3.2 Physical setting/arrangement…………………………………………………..51

viii

4.4 Summary of findings…………………………………………………………….52

Chapter 5: Conclusion……………………………………………………………………...55

5.1 Key findings……………………………………………………………………………...55

5.2 Future implications……………………………………………………………………….57

5.3 Methodological considerations ………………………………………………………….59

5.4 Limitations and Future Directions………………………………………………………..60

References…………………………………………………………………………………...62

Appendices…………………………………………………………………………………..73

Appendix 1: The Indian context……………………………………………………...73

Appendix 2: Plain Language Statement for Principal………………………………..78

Appendix 3: Consent Form for Principal…………………………………………….81

Appendix 4: Plain Language Statement for Parents/Guardians……………………...83

Appendix 5: Consent Form for Parents/Guardians…………………………………..86

Appendix 6: Plain Language Statement for Children………………………………..88

Appendix 7: Consent Form for Children…………………………………………….90

Appendix 8: List of Interview questions……………………………………………..91

Appendix 9: Research Impact and Tensions…………………………………………92

Appendix 10: Principles outlined in the student school diary on examinations and

tests…………………………………………………………………………………...94

ix

List of Tables

Table One: Arrangements and schedule for preschool/Kindergarten and School…...95

Table Two: Research Participants…………………………………............................97

Table Three: Timeframe for data collection………………………………………….98

Table Four: Research data record/interviews/drawings……………………..............99

Table Five: The system of evaluation for academic sessions 2010 as per the student

school diary…………………………………………………………………………111

1

CHAPTER ONE

INTRODUCTION TO THE RESEARCH

1.1 Background to the study

There is a significant body of international research that highlights the significance of

children‟s transition from preschool to school. This research indicates that the way in which

the transition to school is experienced, determines a child‟s continuing school success and

future outcomes (e.g. Dockett & Perry, 2004; Entwisle & Alexander, 1998; Fabian, 2002;

Fabian & Dunlop, 2007; Kagan & Neuman, 1998; Margetts, 2009; Peters, 2010). Despite

this, however, two key clear gaps exist in the research literature on children‟s transition to

school. Firstly, the majority of the research on transition to school continues to be undertaken

in Western countries such as America, Europe, Australia and New Zealand. There has been

very little research undertaken in developing countries. Secondly, the research undertaken in

this area has relied heavily on adults‟ rather than children‟s perspectives on transition to

school.

Nevertheless, research has been directed towards addressing the above mentioned gaps, by

including children‟s perspectives on transition to school and taking their perspectives

seriously alongside those of teachers and parents (E.g. Chan, 2010; Griebel & Niesel, 2002;

Peters 2000; Wong, 2016). The major catalysts for gaining children‟s perspectives on

transition to school has been 1) the introduction of the United Nations Convention on the

Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) that positions children as right holders with the right to

be heard on all matters concerning them; and 2) the sociological perspectives of childhood

that position that children as capable of providing valuable insights on aspects of their lives

including transition to school. Currently, there is a small body of research has examined

children‟s perspectives on school transition (e.g. Wong, 2003; Dockett & Perry, 1999;

Einarsdottir, 2003; Griebel & Niesel, 1997; Peters, 2000; Yeo & Clark, 2005).

1.2 Significance of the Study

So far, literature on school transitions mainly incorporates studies undertaken in other

countries in particular Western countries. There remains a significant gap in the transition

literature that comprises a study with a child rights approach on school transition from India.

Studies and findings from other countries may not be applicable or entirely suitable to the

trends in the Indian context. My aim is to fill the gap by including Indian children‟s

perspectives on transition from kindergarten to school. The theoretical frames employed for

2

this study are the UNCRC and the Sociology of Childhood. It is also hoped that a study on

transition to school from India, provides new insights that contribute to the international body

of research around school transitions.

This research project aims to address the gap by exploring the experiences and

understandings of 20 young children from a school in Kalimpong town located in the state of

West Bengal in India, on their transition from kindergarten to class one (which is the first

year of school in India). With this purpose in mind the following aims were examined:

To explore the experiences and understandings of Indian children on transition from

Kindergarten to class one and

To explore the similarities and/or differences between the experiences and

understandings of Indian children and those from other countries.

1.3 Organisation of the research study

The study is presented in 5 chapters with references and appendices. A brief background of

early childhood education in India and Kalimpong is also presented in Appendix 1 of this

thesis, where I present in particular, the key initiatives/policies that the Indian government

has focused on both as a means of highlighting the Indian context and highlighting how

transition has been understood and enacted.

In Chapter two I focus on the key themes and findings underlying the international research

literature on children‟s transition to school. I note the lack of consensus in defining the term

transition and discuss the various ways transition has been understood. I highlight that there

are some prominent discrepancies between the two levels of kindergarten and primary school

across countries and discuss the early childhood education system of Australia as an

illustration of such discrepancies. I then establish the need for research to focus on a more

diverse sample of children‟s perspectives on transition to school. In so doing I highlight that

there is a gap in the literature that documents Indian children‟s experiences and

understandings on their transition to school.

Chapter three highlights how a qualitative rights based research paradigm offers a theoretical

and practical frame for foregrounding Indian children‟s perspectives on their transition to

school. I outline methods for building respectful practices that value children‟s voices in

research and locate my particular research project within this context. I describe my research

project and outline the two key questions around which the research was formulated:

3

1) What are the experiences and understandings of Indian children on transition from

kindergarten to class one?

2) What are the similarities and/or differences between the experiences and understandings of

Indian children and those from other countries?

Chapter four presents a discussion of the key themes sought from Indian children‟s

commentaries on their transition from kindergarten to school. Three main themes are

highlighted in relation to environmental conditions that either support or thwart smooth

transitions for children between kindergarten and school contexts namely:

1) Educational environment,

2) Social environment and

3) Physical environment.

The discussion also includes Indian children‟s perspectives on the above mentioned key

themes alongside the key themes outlined in the international research literature.

In chapter five I outline the key findings of this research study and provide a report on the

structure, the strengths and limitations of the research project along with recommendations

for further inquiry into children‟s transition to school experiences.

For the purposes of this study the services in the year prior to school will be referred to as

kindergarten or KG.

4

CHAPTER TWO

LITERATURE REVIEW

In this chapter I discuss the main purpose of the study by reviewing the international

literature on early childhood, in particular children‟s experiences and understandings on

transition from kindergarten to school. The chapter begins with an overview of perspectives

of young children in early childhood research as holders of rights in general and in particular

to matters of stressful transitions. This is followed by a review of the international literature

on transition in the early years, in particular the transition from kindergarten/preschool to

school/grade one/primary. The chapter incorporates a discussion on the various definitions

and understandings of the term transition, key issues raised in school transition research, key

findings and methodologies used.

2.1 Participation of children in early childhood education research

The changing conceptual understandings of children through a human rights perspective and

sociological perspectives of childhood have resulted in a shift in the ways children are

viewed, particularly in Western countries (Volger et.al, 2008). There are two key factors that

have influenced this understanding of children as holders of rights 1) the introduction of a

key international document - United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child

(UNCRC, 1989) and 2) the theorization of the key principles embedded in the UNCRC,

(UNCRC, 1989) in particular Article 12, the right to express views freely in all matters

affecting the child and Article 13, the right to freedom of expression. These two factors have

been the most influential in including children in research to have their views respected in

matters that impact on their rights.

The UNCRC (1989) is a key international document signed by all countries except the USA

and outlines national parties‟ obligations towards children. It has raised awareness of

children‟s participation rights in all contexts including research. The rights laid out by the

UNCRC are “universal rights applicable to all children...” (Lansdowne, 1996: 69) in

countries that have ratified the UNCRC, including India. Consequently, “whatever the culture

or background of the family, the Convention, including Article 12, does provide a universal

principle demanding respect for views of the child” (Lansdowne, 1996: 75). However, there

is no consensus that young children are capable of expressing their views. In 2005 the

General Comment No.7 was developed and adopted by the Committee on the Rights of the

Child to respond directly to the barriers in implementing the principles of the UNCRC in the

5

early childhood years. It notes that “Respect for the young child‟s agency – as a participant

in family, community and society – is frequently overlooked, or rejected on the grounds of

age and immaturity” (UNCRC et al., 2006: 40) and that these views of children have acted as

an obstacle to enacting young children‟s rights.Nonetheless, General Comment 7 (2005) has

played an important role in raising awareness that the rights of young children should be

recognized and taken seriously - “As holders of rights, even the youngest children are entitled

to express their views, which should be „given due weight in accordance with the age and

maturity of the child‟ (Article 12.1) and offers practical strategies for how Article 12 can be

implemented in early childhood settings.

Moreover, the theorization of the rights principles embedded in the new sociology of

childhood has given rise to the image of the child as a social actor. The new sociology of

childhood provides a theoretical paradigm that has conceptualized the key principles outlined

in the UNCRC and offers a view of children as active social participants, capable of

participating in relationships with others and actively shaping their lives (Brooker, 2001). As

a result, Article 12 of the UNCRC (1989) is interpreted as a vehicle through which

researchers can involve children in research and provide them with an opportunity to

participate, express and contribute in matters concerning themselves and the contexts in

which they live. This perspective is in direct contrast to traditional standpoints where children

have “often been perceived as objects of benevolence and passive recipients of care”

(UNCRC, 2006: 331).

Researchers, in turn, argue that young children should be viewed as holders of rights

(Christensen & James, 2000; 2008) active agents (Mayall, 2002; Woodrow, 1999) and

participants in research (Clark, 2005; MacNaughton, Hughes & Smith, 2007; Mayall, 2008).

Clarke and Moss (2001) argue that children are experts in making sense of their own lives

and are capable of expressing themselves. As a result researchers have been seeking ways to

emphasize the importance of acknowledging children‟s competencies and doing research

with children rather than on children (e.g. Christensen & James, 2000; 2008; Clarke & Moss,

2001; Lansdowne, 2005; Moss, 2007; White & Coady, 2006). These understandings/images

of children have been integrated into research on school transition. Several researchers, for

example, have emphasized that it is important to include children‟s voices, as they continue

to seek for ways and means to ensure that children have positive transition experiences. (e.g.

Brooker, 2008; Dockett & Perry, 2007; Fabian & Dunlop, 2006; Harradine & Clifford, 1996;

Knudsen-Lindauer & Harris, 1989; Lewit and Baker, 1995; Pianta & McCoy, 1997). In what

6

follows, I specifically focus on the literature around children‟s transition from Kindergarten

to School.

2.2 Research on transition from preschool/Kindergarten to school

While research on transition to school has developed into being „more focused, more

systematic, and increasingly instructive‟(Wagner, 2003: 13), there still remains a lack of

consensus on how transition is understood and researched, leading one researcher to

comment that transition cannot be „readily captured in one single definition‟ (Volger et.al,

2008: 1). Petriwskyj, Thorpe and Tayler, (2005) reviewed literature from three Western

countries to highlight that there have been evolving conceptualizations of the term transition

since 1990 and, that earlier understandings of transition are regarded as being as a „single-

time change event‟ (e.g., children‟s first day at primary school) which has now shifted to a

more nuanced understanding of transition as being a „multi-layered and multi-year process‟

(2005: 59-60).

To help understand the term transition better, Kagan and Neuman (1998) distinguish the term

by categorizing transitions into „vertical transition‟ and „horizontal transition‟. According to

their descriptions, vertical transitions involve changes related when moving from one level to

another, (e.g. from preschool/kindergarten to primary school) between separately located

educational settings as well as within a single setting. Horizontal transitions, on the other

hand, are described as the daily movements between different contexts (e.g. from home to

school). The former category of transitions is associated with the children‟s age and the

related environmental changes while the latter category involves changes on a daily basis

within a fairly shorter span of time (Johansson, 2007; Wagner, 2003).

While there is substantial research on transition in the early years that has focused on the

perspectives of adults, such as teachers and parents, researchers have started taking into

consideration the perspectives of children on transition. These have been conducted in

America (Ramey et al., 1998; Seeldt, 1997) Australia (Dockett and Griebel, 2017; Dockett &

Perry, 1999; 2002; 2003; 2004a; 2004b; 2004c; 2007; Margetts, 1999; 2007; Mirkhil, 2010;

Perry, Dockett & Howard, 2000; Potter & Briggs, 2003), Europe (Ackjesjo, 2014; Brostrom,

2001; 2003; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Einarsdottir, 2003; Eide & Winger, 1994; Fabian,

2000; Griebel & Niesel, 1997; 1999; 2002 ; Okane, 2007; Pramling & Graneld, 1993;

Pramling et al., 1995; Rasmussen & Smidt, 2002; Sahin, Sak & Tuncer, 2013; 2016; White &

Sharpe, 2007) New Zealand (Hayes et al., 2014; Ledger et al. 1998; Peters, 2000; Podmore et

7

al. 2003), Singapore (Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Yeo & Clark, 2005) and Hong Kong (Chan,

2010; 2012; Wong, 2003; Wong, 2016).

Researchers who have conducted studies on transition to school have primarily found

Bronfenbrenner‟s Ecological Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), and Vygotsky‟s Sociocultural

Theory (1978) helpful in framing and understanding the term transition. Bronfenbrenner‟s

Ecological Theory (Bronfenbrenner, 1979), places the child at the centre of the different

systems/contexts that directly or indirectly influence the child (e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003;

Dockett & Perry, 2007; Dunlop & Fabian, 2002; Rimm-Kaufman & Pianta, 2000). An

Ecological model of transition focuses on the links between the various contexts in which

young children grow and learn. Dockett and Perry (2007) suggest that such relationships are

crucial as they influence children‟s transitions. These researchers have sought the

perspectives of a number of different stakeholders (i.e. parents, teachers and children) and

focus on how different stakeholders understand and experience children‟s transition to

school.

Researchers employing a sociocultural paradigm have conceptualized transition as a joint,

collective course that does not involve individuals separately or rely only on the ability of

individuals (Corsaro, 2002; Rogoff, 2003). A sociocultural framework differs from an

ecological framework as it does not position the child in the centre or separate the child from

their social and cultural contexts but rather considers how children learn through interaction

with their surrounding environments (Corsaro, 2002; Dockett & Perry, 2001). Dockett and

Perry (2007) argue that „transition to school marks a significant change in the ways a child

participates in the family and community‟ (p. 5) and that school transition is not only a

change for children but also involves a change for others involved with the child. Drawing on

sociocultural theory, Corsaro (2002) regards transition as a communally shared experience

for those involved (children, parents and educators) and strongly argues against transition

models that tend to lay emphasis on the individual. Rogoff (2003) determined that

participation in transition activities results in a change for children, parents as well as

educators. Accordingly, sociocultural perspectives have been influential in transition research

across the globe. For example in Hong Kong, Lam (2014) drew on a sociocultural perspective

when researching with children how they adapted from preschool to the school classroom.

Research using a sociocultural frame on children‟s transition from preschool/kindergarten to

school have also been conducted in Sweden (Ackjesjo, 2014), in New Zealand (Peters, 2000;

Podmore et al. 2003) and in Italy (Corsaro & Molinari, 2005).

8

The terms “change” and “process” are commonly employed in conceptualizations of

transition in both ecological and sociocultural theories to highlight that transition involves a

“process of change that is experienced when children move from one setting to another”

(Fabian & Dunlop, 2002: 3). Tayler et al., (2005) agree and argue that transition can be

understood by children‟s experiences during the following shifts:

The time between the first visit and settling in;

A change such as a long-term physical move from one physical locality to another

during, or at the end of, a school year;

Change of teacher(s) during a school year and

A change of children such as a group of children moving into or out of the class

during a period (pp55-69)

The above explanation has been employed by researchers in transition studies involving

young children. Several researchers, for example, conducted their studies by following the

children from preschool, preschool to grade one, (e.g. Brostrum, 2003; Corsaro & Molinari

2000; Ledger et al. 1998; Peters, 2000; Wong 2016) aiming to examine children‟s preschool

experiences; their expectations of primary/grade one; primary/grade one experiences; moving

to school; and the difference between preschool and primary/grade one. Other researchers

conducted studies during children‟s last few months in preschool seeking to explore

children‟s expectations about primary school/grade one (Eide & Winger, 1994; Einarsdottir,

2003). Studies were also conducted with children during the first few months of entering

school to find out how children adjusted to a new educational setting and class and to find out

what children thought of preschool and school and the differences between them (Clarke &

Sharpe, 2003; Pramling & Williams-Graneld, 1993; Pramling et al. 1995; Potter & Briggs,

2003). Some researchers sought children‟s perspectives both before and after the children

started school in order to examine whether their experiences were similar/different to their

expectations (Elliot, 1998; Griebel & Niesel, 2002). Others chose to conduct research in two

instances within the same year i.e. the first few months into grade one and towards the end of

children‟s time in grade one (Wong, 2003) to explore children‟s experiences of transition.

Regardless of which country in which these studies were conducted these researchers have

viewed transition to school as a process or progression rather than a one point or single time

event.

9

Despite the fact that transition has numerous definitions, there is a common agreement in the

wider research literature and transition to school is of implicit significance as it is a crucial

period (Brooker, 2008) in children‟s lives and thus cannot be overlooked. Researchers agree

that the way in which transition to school is experienced can determine a child‟s continuing

school success and future outcomes (e.g. Dunlop & Fabian, 2003; Entwisle and Alexander,

1998; Fabian & Dunlop, 2002; Kagan & Neuman, 1998). “Children both shape and are

shaped by their transition to school experiences” (Dockett & Perry, 2007: 47). Researchers

from several countries agree and lay an increasing emphasis on the significance of smooth

and coherent transitions (E.g. Boyle & Petriwskyj, 2014; Brooker, 2008; Brostrom, 2003;

Dockett & Perry, 2007; Dunlop, 2013; Fabian & Dunlop, 2006; Petriwskyj, 2005; Petriwskyj,

2010; Petriwskyj, Thorpe & Tayler, 2014). Ideologies underlying studies/research on

transitions in the early years influence the questions asked around transition and, in so doing,

highlight what a complex and multidimensional construct it is.

2.2.1 Methodologies and methods

Qualitative or quantitative and sometimes mixed methods have been adopted in studies that

have sought children‟s perspectives on the transition to school. While a variety of methods

were adopted to obtain data from children on their transition to school, the most common

method used was the interview method. The other methods used included participant

observation and some even used child-friendly methods (Punch, 2002) such as drawings and

props (e.g. photographs, picture books)

The majority of the studies used a qualitative approach to collect and analyze data (e.g.

Bostrum, 2003; Dockett & Perry, 2003; 2004; Einarsdottir, 2003; Ledger et al. 1998; Yeo &

Clarke, 2005; Clark & Sharp, 2003; Podmore et al. 2003; Pramling & Graneld, 1993; Peters,

2000; Okane, 2007). For their Starting School Research Project (SSRP) in Australia, Dockett

& Perry (e.g.1999; 2002; 2003; 2004a; 2004b; 2004c) have used a number of methods such

as informal interviews, drawings of school, picture books, artifacts, reflections, photographs

and videotapes of interactions to collect data from children. Other methods such as focus

groups interviews (Griebel & Niesel, 2003) and extended periods of observation (Dunlop,

2003, Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Peters, 2000) have also been used when engaging children

in transition research.

A small number adopted the quantitative approach (e.g. Margetts, 1999; 2007; Ramey et al.,

1998). These researchers collected data through surveys (Margetts, 1999) and questionnaires

(Ramey et al., Margetts, 2007)

10

Some of the studies used a mix of qualitative and quantitative methods with an aim to

compare children‟s perspectives to those of adults (e.g. Griebel & Niesel, 2000; Dockett &

Perry, 2002; 2004; Potter & Briggs, 2003; Wong, 2003; Margetts, 2006). Studies in Asia and

Australia have used both interviews and questionnaires and even provided training to older

children to carry out the task of interviewing the younger children (Yeo & Clarke, 2005;

Clarke & Sharpe, 2003). Others adopted interviews and focus group interviews with children

and questionnaires with adults (e.g. Griebel & Niesel, 2000; Wong, 2003; Dockett & Perry,

2002; 2004; Margetts, 2006,)

The use of some of the methods had both limitations and strengths. For example researchers

of the Singaporean study felt that their questionnaire was too long and the children

interviewers faced great difficulty obtaining answers and gaining cooperation during the data

collection process (Yeo & Clarke, 2005). On the other hand the various approaches employed

for the SSRP in Australia proved useful as the researchers were able to obtain a „great deal‟

of data that covered a range of topics and areas around school transitions (Dockett & Perry,

2007: 57)

2.3 Issues around Research in School Transition

The majority of the research on transition to school continues to be undertaken in Western or

developed countries such as America, Europe, Australia, New Zealand and Nordic countries.

The research literature reveals that understandings around transition to school vary within and

across various contexts and countries (e.g. Fabian & Dunlop, 2002). This relates to the

diversity in education systems, provisions and policies across and within countries. Starting

Strong II (2006) provides a description of the education systems of these countries and in so

doing highlights the range of early childhood and school systems that exist in OECD. Fabian

and Dunlop (2002) note that, while „preschool‟ and „primary school‟ are two educational

institutions that provide care and education for children, there are some prominent

discrepancies between them. Australian research highlights several variables that impact on

transition to school including 1) different layers of government with different histories,

responsibilities and goals for preschool and school (Children‟s Services, 2008; Elliot, 2006),

2) variations and differences in policy approaches and provision (Press & Hayes, 2000), and

3) lack of national goals and evidence to support policy, planning and development of co-

ordinated transition programs (Fabian and Dunlop; 2007; OECD, 2006; Pocock & Hill, 2007)

11

In addition there are many variables that exist in relation to children‟s transition from

preschool to school across countries such as Denmark, Finland, Germany, United Kingdom,

New Zealand and Singapore. These include:

Different terms used for preschool/year preceding the start of compulsory schooling

across nations: preschool, reception, preparatory, pre-primary, borneharve;

Preschool pedagogies: mostly play-based curriculum/ pedagogies; involving creative

activities; less hours; home-like atmosphere and

Different terms used for starting school: first grade; grade one; primary one;

preparatory; prep year, bornveklasse

Lack of consistency between preschool and school curricula

A concurrent issue in research on transition to school is the lack of consistency across

countries regarding when children transition to school (Brooker, 2008; Fabian & Dunlop,

2007; Volger et.al, 2008). In Australia the age at which children start school is 4, 5 and 6,

differing across states and regions (Dockett & Perry, 2007). In most of the Nordic countries

the compulsory starting school age is 6 (Brostrum & Wagner, 2003), so too in America and

New Zealand (Peters, 2000; Ramey et al., 1998; Seeldt, 1997). In most regions of the United

Kingdom, on the other hand, the age at which children start school is 4 (Fabian & Dunlop,

2002). In Singapore the compulsory starting school age is 7 (Yeo & Clarke, 2005).

Researchers involving both adults and children demonstrate that perspectives of children and

adults on transition to school are different (Clarke & Sharpe, 2007; Corsaro & Molinari,

2000; Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2001; 2003; 2004). For example children in Australia (Dockett

& Perry, 1999; 2003; 2004) were concerned about the rules they needed to adjust to in school

and whether they would have/find friends in school, while parents expressed concern over

their child‟s social adjustment- such as anxiety over relationship between their child and the

new teacher. In Singapore parents were anxious as to how their children would cope with

new subjects like Mathematics and English (Clarke & Sharpe, 2007). These studies

collectively highlight the importance of adults listening to children about their understandings

and feelings towards transition so to develop deeper understanding of these issues and how to

enact changes to support a positive transition to school (Dockett & Perry, 2004; Yeo &

Clarke, 2005).

12

Research thus highlights the many variables that need to be taken into consideration when

examining international research studies undertaken on children‟s transition to school. We

should recognize that since countries vary in their education systems and policies, the

questions that have framed research studies on transition and the findings may not be

applicable across multiple contexts. Nonetheless, a key finding from transition research

confirms that children from as young as five years of age were able to share comprehensive

accounts of their transition experiences and provide valuable and insightful information on

the transition to school (e.g. Dockett & Perry, 2007; Yeo & Clark, 2005). The following

section provides a detailed synthesis of young children‟s perspectives from the transition to

school research literature.

2.4 Children’s Views on Transition to school

Findings from these studies confirm that children from as young as five years of age were

able to share comprehensive accounts of their transition to experiences; and provide valuable

and insightful information on the transition to school (e.g. Yeo & Clark, 2005; Dockett &

Perry, 2007). The following section provides an overview of the international research on

children‟s perspectives on the transition to school.

2.4.1 Children’s transition and moving from preschool/kindergarten to school

A key research question driving the international research on transition is young children‟s

perspectives on moving from preschool to school. Transition studies highlighted that many

young children feel anxious about this transition. Several studies, for example, revealed that

children experience feelings of fear and anxiety over the unknown and worry about not

having friends (e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2004a; 2004c; Griebel &

Niesel, 2002; Peters, 2000; Potter & Briggs, 2003; Yeo & Clark, 2005). Children also

expressed concerns over who would be their new teacher and reported feelings of fear about

the personality of their new teacher (Brostrom, 2003). Icelandic children were generally

anxious that they might not be able to cope up with what was expected of them at school

(Einarsdottir, 2003). Children from a study in Italy were unhappy and concerned that they

would be expected to work more and play less at school (Corsaro & Molinari, 2000).

Yet other research studies on transition from preschool to school highlight that children had

positive perspectives on transition to school. Key themes in these studies include excitement

that they would be learning more and learning new things (e.g. Wong, 2003; Griebel &

Niesel, 2002), becoming clever and improve on their skills (e.g. Peters, 2000; Yeo & Clarke,

13

2005) making new friends, be in a higher grade (e.g. Wong, 2003; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003)

have play time/recess (e.g. Wong, 2003; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003;Corsaro & Molinari, 2000)

and PE lessons (e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Wong, 2003; Yeo & Clarke, 2005).

Consequently, children across the globe reveal a diversity/mix of positive and negative

perspectives on transition to school. For this reason it is important that children are consulted

about transitioning to school as it assists teachers/parents to understand more clearly the

issues that children experience when moving into a new/unfamiliar educational environment

and helps adults enact measures to support children to have a positive transition experience

2.4.2 Children’s transition and the difference between preschool/kindergarten and school

Another key theme that has emerged in research on young children‟s transition to school is

that young children have a clear understanding on the differences between preschool and

school and this feeds into their feelings towards transitioning across these services.

Researchers, who sought young children‟s views for example, found that children expected

school to be a more difficult and a serious learning place where they would be doing reading,

writing, and arithmetic and following rules (Dockett & Perry 2007; Eide& Winger, 1994;

Einarsdottir, 2003; Sahin et al., 2016). Likewise, in studies where researchers sought

children‟s views on the difference between preschool and school, children considered

learning to be play-based at preschool and school to be a more difficult and serious place of

learning. In other words children felt that in school there was less play and more work (e.g.

Griebel and Niesel, 2000; Pramling & Graneld, 1993; Sahin et al., 2016) including homework

and examinations (e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000). These findings

reveal the vast differences (in learning and curriculum) between preschool/preschool and

primary school levels and how these differences can generate negative feelings about school.

This raises the importance of consulting children in research so as to decrease the existing

gap/difference between the two levels and support children‟s transitions across education

systems.

Not only were children clear about the difference between preschool and school but they also

discussed how the differences between the two levels of education influenced their

experiences and perspectives on moving to school (Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro &

Molinari, 2000; Dockett & Perry 2007; Eide & Winger, 1994; Einarsdottir, 2003; Griebel and

Niesel, 2000; Pramling & Graneld, 1993). Children, for example, provided negative, positive

and mixed reports that were linked to a number of areas such as learning environment;

physical environment; rules; friends; family; teachers; knowledge and skills. In addition,

14

findings emerging from these studies (Chan, 2010; Wong, 2003; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003;

Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2000; 2003; 2004a; Eide & Winger, 1994;

Einarsdottir, 2003; Ezron, 2013; Griebel & Niesel, 2002; Peters, 2000; Potter & Briggs, 2003;

Sahin et al., 2016;Yeo & Clark, 2005) reveal that most of the issues raised by children are

caused by lack of continuity or connection between the two levels or settings. In the next two

paragraphs I provide examples of some of concerns raised by children around the world, on

the difference/lack of continuity between preschool/preschool levels and primary school.

Young children raised a number of concerns, in particular about the difference in the learning

and educational environments in preschool/preschool and primary school. One of the most

common findings in these studies was children‟s displeasure over not having enough freedom

of choice and having to conform to following rules and regulations and directions in school,

unlike preschool where they had freedom to choose activities (Chan, 2010, Wong, 2003;

Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2000; 2001;

2003; 2004a; Eide & Winger, 1994; Einarsdottir, 2003; Ezron 2013; Griebel & Niesel, 2002;

Peters, 2000; Potter & Briggs, 2003; Sahin et al., 2016; Yeo & Clark, 2005). For example,

children in a study from New Zealand talked with displeasure about having to follow a set

schedule for playing and working (Peters, 2000). Children also had an awareness of the

importance of rules in school settings. In the majority of studies, children expressed a desire

to be familiar with school rules. Children from Norway and Australia felt they needed to have

knowledge about the rules in order to settle into school (Dockett & Perry 2007; Eide &

Winger, 1994). Some young children, for example had a clear understanding that rules were

structured by their teachers (Yeo & Clarke, 2005). Young Singaporean children, for example,

felt rules was more about what children should not do rather than what children should do in

school. 67% of the children in this study discussed what they should not do at school while

33% children talked about what they should do at school(e.g. wear the proper uniform). Other

studies highlighted that not having knowledge about school rules was linked to anxiety and

fear in children. For example, children from a Hong Kong study spoke of being punished by

their teachers if they failed to conform to the rules e.g. not completing their homework

(Wong, 2003; Yeo & Clarke, 2005). Thus, children across the globe shared knowledge that

rules were developed by their teachers and had knowledge of school rules such as obeying

the rules and the outcome if they failed to obey them. Children felt that this knowledge was

important when starting school.

Another concern young children reported in research on transitioning to school was the

amount of time they had to spend in school. They disliked having longer hours in school and

15

sitting through structured lessons which was unlike how they had spent their time in

preschool (Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Griebel & Niesel, 2002; Peters, 2000; Yeo & Clark,

2005). In a Singaporean study, for example, children found the longer hours in school hard to

cope with and that they did not get to rest in the afternoons like they did in preschool. These

children expressed that they did not enjoy the literacy tasks of reading, writing and copying

as well as having to do a lot of homework (Yeo & Clark, 2005). Similarly children in

Germany (Griebel & Niesel, 2002) and Hong Kong (Wong, 2003) did not seem enjoy a lot of

set homework. Other young children spoke of not enjoying having to work more and were

sad about not getting to play enough or when they wished to (Brostrom, 2003; Clarke &

Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Peters, 2000; Pramling et al., 1995; Sahin et al,

2016; Seeldt et al. 1997; Yeo & Clark, 2005). For example Italian children expressed

discontent with the short play time and yearned for a longer recess so that they could play

more. They experienced difficulty sitting silently when having to complete reading and

writing tasks (Corsaro & Molinari, 2000). Children from Singapore mentioned the increased

amount of work that was required of them in school which they found challenging, which

was unlike the less rigid and more relaxed structure of preschool (Yeo & Clark, 2005).

Turkish children expected there would be more books in school and these books be

academically related and would not have colorful pictures and stories like those in preschool

(Sahin et al, 2016). Consequently, children across the globe have highlighted that a big

difference exists between the pedagogical approaches in the two educational systems (i.e.

preschool setting and primary school setting) and that this difference feeds into their

experience of transitioning to school.

2.4.3 Children’s transition and physical environment

Another key theme in young children‟s commentaries about transitioning to school was that

they found the physical size of the school buildings, playgrounds and larger number of

students overwhelming when they started school (Chan, 2010; Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2004a;

2004c; 2007; Griebel & Niesel, 2002; Peters, 2000; Sahin et al, 2016; Wong, 2016;Yeo &

Clark, 2005). School was described as „big‟ by children (Dockett & Perry, 2007; Yeo &

Clark, 2005). For example, Singaporean children‟s descriptions on the physical environment

of school included “School has a big hall”, “School has a big field” and “People are

bigger…” (Yeo & Clark, 2005: 5). Children from Turkey expected that the number of

children and furniture would be bigger in school (Sahin et al, 2016). Not being familiar with

the physical environment of the school resulted in negative experiences for children as they

felt anxious about being incapable of finding their way around and were afraid of getting lost

16

(Dockett & Perry, 2007). Children also expressed dislike over unclean and smelly toilets

(Yeo & Clark, 2005).

Young children transitioning to school also expressed concern about the noisy atmosphere in

certain areas of the school, due to the larger number of students (Dockett & Perry, 2004a;

Peters, 2000; Yeo & Clark, 2005). At the same time, some young children shared positive

accounts regarding the physical environment of school. Children expressed happiness and

excitement over having more facilities in school such as- the existence of a good eatery, a

basketball court, big playgrounds, a nice garden, well equipped libraries and computer labs

(Dockett & Perry, 2003; Peters, 2000; Yeo & Clark, 2005). Therefore, we find that children‟s

discussions on the physical environment of preschool and school were varied and they did not

all share the same perspectives.

Regardless of the different contexts in which research was undertaken, however, there are

some common conclusions shared across these collective studies. The studies collectively

highlight, for example, that children are competent informants of their life experiences and

when children‟s experiences and understandings are accepted and taken seriously it assists

adults in early years school settings to make changes to children‟s educational/learning and

physical environments so to support their smooth transition to school (Chan, 2010; Dockett &

Perry, 2004; 2007; Rosier & Macdonald, 2011; Sahin et al., 2013; 2016; Tayler et al., 2005;

Yeo & Clarke, 2005). In addition, this research further highlights that experiences and

understandings differ among children, even those children coming from similar educational,

socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, thus underlying that children are not a

homogenous group and that it is essential for adults to listen to and respond to a variety of

children‟s perspectives in order to understand and support the transition experience (Dockett

& Perry, 2004; Tayler et.al, 2014).

2.5 Summary

In this chapter I have outlined the key findings in the international research literature on

young children‟s transition to school. I have further established the need for research to focus

on a more diverse sample of children‟s and the importance of young children being consulted

on matters concerning them. In so doing I have highlighted that there is a gap in the literature

that documents Indian children‟s experiences and understandings on the transition to school

and honours Indian children‟s rights to be heard.

17

Transition to school studies has been undertaken in other countries across the globe and this

particular study is addressing a gap as there is a lack of research in India on school transition.

Studies and findings from other countries may not be applicable or entirely suitable to the

trends in the Indian context. In this way this study fills the gap in research by researching

how Indian children experience and understand the transition from preschool to class one.

Thus, it will bring additional data that will contribute to the diversity of the existing body of

research. The following chapter documents the research design and methodology employed

in undertaking this study.

18

CHAPTER THREE

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

3.1 Introduction and purpose of the study

A review of the international literature, in the previous chapter has established a gap in the

literature on Indian children‟s perspectives on transition to school. This research investigates

the understandings and experiences of young Indian children on their transition from

preschool to school and is formulated around two key questions:

What are the experiences and understandings of Indian children on transition from

preschool to class one?

What are the similarities and/or differences between the experiences and

understandings of Indian children and those from other countries?

In so doing it provides a voice for Indian children, and seeks to provide a vehicle for

documenting their experiences and understandings on the transition from preschool to

school/class one.

The methodology chosen for this study reflects the human rights assumptions outlined at

outset of this thesis.The methodology and methods have been chosen to both reflect child

rights principles and to assist me to address the research questions

Crotty (1998) describes methodology as being “the strategy, plan of action, process or design

lying behind the choice and use of particular methods…” (3) This study implements a

qualitative approach using an interpretative paradigm (Patton, 1985) within a child rights

framework to capture the experiences and understandings of Indian children‟s transition to

school. A qualitative approach is characterized as being “inductive, emerging and shaped by

the researcher‟s experience” (Creswell, 2007:19). A qualitative method enables the researcher

to „hear silenced voices and „empower individuals to share their stories‟ (Cresswell, 2007:40)

as it focuses on obtaining rich data from individual children in their natural environments

(Cresswell, 2007). This is in keeping with my broader research imperative to incorporate an

under-represented group of children‟s experiences and perspectives on transition. As

indicated in my previous chapter, when conducting research with children one needs to be

mindful that children are not a similar group and it is important to listen to a variety of

children‟s perspectives (James & Prout, 1990). A qualitative approach enables researchers to

explore “the differences in each child and circumstance, enlarging understanding and

19

empathy” (Alderson, 2000: 83). The primary goal of a qualitative researcher is to gain

understanding through listening to the voices and views of the participants (Creswell,

2007:19) and „to add to knowledge‟ to specific issues (Bogdan & Biklen, 2003: 33). This

aligns with my study which is seeking young Indian children‟s experiences and

understandings on transition to school, with an aim to gain new knowledge on school

transitions.

An interpretative research approach aligns with a qualitative research design as it „seeks to

comprehend phenomena not on the basis of the researcher‟s perspective and categories, but

from those of participants in the situations studied…‟ (Miles & Huberman, 2002: 48), and

„with the goal being to document and interpret as fully as possible the totality of whatever is

being studied in particular contexts from the people‟s viewpoint or frame of reference‟

(Leininger, 1985:5) This approach aligns with my research study as it seeks to listen to and

document young Indian children‟s personal experiences and understandings and to highlight

key themes that arise from their perspectives.

3.2 Research site and participants

The selected school in which this research project was enacted is situated in the heart of

Kalimpong town in the Darjeeling District. This school was selected mainly as it is

representative of a typical school in India- i.e. it incorporates kindergarten and primary

school within a single setting. It is a privately owned school consisting of two closely but

separately located segments. The first segment incorporates Montessori, kindergarten,

primary classroom levels (up to Class 2) and a playground within a single setting. Table One

(Appendix 10) show the differences between these levels. The second segment is a later

extension of the school and incorporates the secondary and higher secondary classrooms

(Classes 3-10 +2) school hall and playground. The school is co-educational and caters to boys

and girls belonging to the local ethnic groups (Lepchas, Bhutias, Rais, Nepalese) residing in

the Darjeeling district as well children belonging to different cultures from other parts of

India (Bengalis, Biharis, Marwaris) and neighbouring countries (Nepal and Bhutan). The

school identifies itself as being an English medium school (i.e. where the medium of

instruction is in English or teaching is imparted in English), however all the children

attending this school are taught languages such as Hindi, Nepali and Bengali as second

language or third language from the kindergarten levels. Although both the segments come

under a single ownership, each functions individually and have separate set of staff (office

staff, assistants and teaching staff) and follow their own separate agendas on a daily basis.

20

The study took place in the natural settings of the first segment of the schoolwhich

incorporates the Montessori, kindergarten and primary levels within a single setting. In

addition to of the 523 children there were a total of 25 female teachers, 9 maids, 2 office staff

and a security person with separate responsibilities to carry out inside the school. Table One

gives a brief overview of the arrangements distribution and timings for preschool/

kindergarten and school.

The participants of this study involved a cohort of 20 children (10 boys and 10 girls) studying

in class one who were within 5-7 years of age. Although there are equal number of boys and

girls, there is no gender criterion for this study, the 20 children were identified by the teachers

(See below in Sampling Section). Also, during my voluntary work I found there were 5

children who were new entrants into class one. (Often, parents decide to transfer their

children from one educational setting and admit them to another). Although I had not planned

this, I assumed if these 5 children could take part in my study it would also provide for me

the opportunity to explore whether making the transition from separate settings or within

similar settings influences children‟s experiences and experiences of and perspectives on

transition. I shared my views with the teachers who helped form the group. Thus, 75% (15

out of 20) of the participants had been attending the selected school where the study took

place from the Montessori level and had made the transition from kindergarten to class one

within the same setting, 25% participants (5 out of 20) were the only new entrants and had

made the transition to class one from another school and setting. Distribution and features of

the participants are summarized in Table Two (Appendix 10).

3.2.1 Sampling

The sampling strategy employed in this study was purposive sampling (Patton, 2002). A

purposive sample is a sample selected because those selected have the needed information

(Fraenkel & Wallen, 2000:669). Based on the assumption that children within the age group

of 5-7 can share their experiences and understandings of transition from kindergarten to class

one (Dockett et.al, 2002), a group of 20 children in class one were purposefully sampled to

participate in the study in order to gain multiple perspectives and in-depth data. A small

group often helps facilitate a more personal relationship between the researcher and

participants (Tisdall, et.al, 2009). Therefore it was anticipated that focusing on a small group

of individual children would allow me to spend more time with the participants and develop a

close relationship and create a sense of rapport. This in turn would assist me to collect rich

data and information by spending time to build trust and respectful relationships.

21

The specific purposeful sampling strategy that was used to sample the participants was

criterion based sampling (Patton, 2002). Criterion sampling „involves selecting cases that

meet some predetermined criterion of importance.‟ (Patton, 2001:238). One class of children

sampling helped me identify and better understand how the participants of this study (i.e.

Indian children) who have made the transition from kindergarten to class one experience and

understand transition to school.

As a result of the multiple factors impacting on the study such as time constraints, the large

number of children studying in class one and the lack of familiarity with the children, I

worked alongside the Directress of the selected primary school to develop a protocol outlined

regarding the selection of children in the study to ensure that we could meet the goals

outlined above and capture a range of individual children‟s perspectives in order to gain

diverse experiences of transition.

It was decided that the class teachers teaching the children that would take part in the study

would identify the 20 children studying in class one using the following criteria as a sampling

guide:

15 children who have experienced transition from Kindergarten to

class one from within one single setting;

5 children who have experienced transition from Kindergarten to class

one from another setting/school;

Children who were between the age range of 5-7 years and studying in

class one;

Children who seemed to have settled into class one well and appeared

to be progressing well and

Children who did not seem to have settled well into class one and do

not appear to be progressing well.

22

3.3 Research enactment

Ethical clearance for this study was gained from the University of Melbourne Human

Research Ethics Committee where the principle requirements are: informed consent,

confidentiality and anonymity of participants, the right to withdraw, data confidentiality and

minimal potential risk to the participants. This process supported me to consider several

issues prior to and during the research process that included:

Gaining entry through the gatekeepers (Directress, teachers);

Familiarizing myself with the school through voluntary work;

Organizing an agenda for data collection;

Gaining informed consent from the parents and

Gaining informed assent from children.

3.3.1 Obtaining permission from the Gatekeepers

As a qualitative interpretative researcher it also became essential for me to „position‟ (Graue

& Walshe, 1998) myself in order to relate with those I was researching. Positioning oneself

depends upon „attitude‟ and „relationships‟ and „building rapport can be hard‟ (Graue &

Walsh, 1998: 99). In my case, therefore, not only was I seeking to build respectful

relationships with the participants but also with the Gatekeepers which involved the

Directress as well as daily gatekeepers (Graue & Walsh, 1998) such as teachers and helpers

(non-teaching staff who assist teachers in looking after the children particularly during recess

and lunch) in order to conduct my study. My own cultural background and life story assisted

in this process as I was born and brought up in Kalimpong and completed my entire

schooling in one of the schools of Kalimpong. I was familiar to the trends of the social

setting where my study was undertaken. I had a good command of the local language, Nepali.

3.3.2 Obtaining permission from the Directress

Obtaining permission from the Directress of the school was a straightforward process. Over a

few international calls and emails I explained my study to her and ask her if she would be

willing to allow me to conduct the study in her school. Through her support of the study I

was able to acquire an informal consent from her before I reached the research setting.

However, as per the Human Ethics research Committee protocols I had to ensure that she did

not feel pressured to have me conduct my study at her school. Thus, I had to get a formal

23

consent from her before I could proceed any further with the study and ensure that she did not

feel obligated to support me to conduct this research. Consent was obtained from the

Directress after providing her with the details and aims of the study. The Plain Language

Statement and Consent Form for the Directress can be found in Appendices 1 and 2 of the

thesis.

Table One (Appendix 10) shows there are four sections of class one due to the large number

of students studying in class one. Since I was reliant on teachers teaching class one for choice

of participants, the Directress introduced the four different teachers of the four sections of

class one (i.e. I-A, I-B, I-C and I-D) and asked them to consider participating in the study.

These teachers were purposefully sampled as I felt they would be in a better position than me

in identifying the likely participants for my study as per my earlier explained sampling

criteria. In order to keep within clear protocols and to ensure that the teachers did not feel

pressured to participate, we organized for a meeting over lunch that would take place within

the school premises. I sat with the four teachers and explained to them 1) my study, 2) that if

I was allowed to assist them in their classrooms it would facilitate me in familiarizing myself

with the school and likely participants and 3) on the rationale behind them selecting

participants for my research. The teachers agreed to participate in supporting the enactment

of the research study.

3.3.3 Familiarizing myself with the school through voluntary work

Dockett et al. (2009) advocate children need to be given time prior to making a choice on

whether to take part in a research study or not. These researchers recommend that researchers

spend time in the research setting, familiarizing themselves with the children and work at

building relationships based on trust and respect with the children prior to seeking consent.

This aligns with the work of child rights researchers who stress the importance of adults

providing time to build relationships with children in research (Graue&Walshe, 1998,

Landsdowne, 2005). Keeping this in mind I did some voluntary work to engage with the

children prior to conducting my research. Voluntary work was characterized by me being

present in the school from 8:20 a.m. in time for the morning assembly and attending class in

all the four sections of class one (i.e. Sections A, B, C and D) in different periods throughout

the day. Each of the teachers in the four sections offered me their table and chair, introduced

me to the children as “Ma‟am Anandi”, allowed me to go through the class registers, and

observe how classes and teaching were conducted. For the next few days I did the same and

tried to learn more about the children than just their names, through their teachers and my

24

own observations. I maintained a research journal on which I wrote down all that I observed

and felt. Moreover the teachers agreed in allowing me two periods each in all four sections of

class one to conduct a full lesson on my own. I began my voluntary work from 17th March to

26th

March, 2010 with the 20th

and 21st being a weekend (no school). Undertaking voluntary

work in these 8 days supported me to build respectful relationships with the children and the

teachers. This process was a valuable way to see the daily routines of the school, familiarize

myself with the children and teachers, develop a sense of trust, build relationships with

participants, teachers, prior to the enactment of the research.

3.3.4 Obtaining consent from parents

The Directress and teachers felt that it was not necessary to seek consent from parents since

the teachers had already selected the likely participants. I had to explain to them that as per

the Human Research Ethics Committee in Melbourne it was essential that I gain parents‟

consent before conducting research with their children. The teachers respected that and

collected the selected children‟s diaries in order to write a note to their parents asking if they

could be present for a meeting in the school.

Following the parents‟ expressions of interest in their children participating in the study, they

were given a plain language statement and consent form. Copies of the plain language

statement and consent form written in English and Nepali were made available to the

parents/guardians of individual children keeping in mind that there might be some

parents/guardians with differing English literacy skills. The plain language statement for

parents can be found in the Appendices 2 and 3.

I also explained to parents/guardians verbally in Nepali the purpose of the study and how

their children would be asked to participate. Opportunities were provided for them to ask

questions and have any immediate questions or concerns clarified before they gave their

consent. In general all the parents perceived my study positively and agreed that children are

good informants and thus provided consent.

3.3.5 Gaining informed assent from children

Informed assent from the children was also sought after my voluntary work in the school and

after gaining consent from the parents

Seeking young children‟s assent is in keeping with a child rights approach and is believed to

have a positive impact on children. Save the Children (2004) note that “Providing the child

25

with information means enabling him or her to gain skills, confidence and maturity in

expressing views and influencing decisions” (p. 5). Several researchers further highlight the

significance of informed assent and right to withdraw when conducting research with

children (Coady, M. 2001; Greene and Hill, 2005; Freeman and Mathison, 2009;

Landsdowne, 2005). It is also important to note that children can feel obligated to participate

in research. I sought to minimize a sense of obligation on the children‟s part by building trust

and by making an effort to provide the children with full information (Penn, 2008), including

the right to not participate in the study and to withdraw at any time. The children were also

given opportunities to ask any questions that they might have about the research.

Following this process 20 children (10 boys, 10 girls – between 5-7 years of age) participated

in the research (for which see Table two in the Appendix). They were invited to be at the

Montessori classroom after their lunch break. I read out and explained the plain language

statement with information about the study and what would be required of the participants.

This was done in an unhurried manner and in Nepali, so that the children were able to follow

and understand everything clearly. Children were given a consent form to fill in. First I read

out and explained the consent form, I then asked the children to fill out by themselves as I re-

read the consent forms as to guide them through the form. When we came to the part where

they had to fill in their names I asked them to choose their own pseudonyms, then come up to

me (i.e. to the teacher‟s desk) one by one once they were ready and whisper into my ears their

pseudonyms before we wrote them. By allowing children to choose their own pseudonyms

and to whisper them into my ears I was acknowledging children‟s competence; giving them a

sense of control to help minimize unequal power relations; and establishing trust and rapport

through the nature of confidentiality (McNaughton, G. et.al, 2008). The plain language

statement and consent forms for children can be found in the Appendix 5 and 6.

3.4 Research ethos – rights based and ethical considerations

This section is divided into two parts- first I have addressed the various principles that need

to be considered prior to enactment of research with children and second- I have outlined

how I have taken into consideration the addressed principles throughout the enactment of my

research. Several early childhood researchers have highlighted the importance of ethical

considerations when conducting research with children (e.g. Alderson, 2008; Brooker, 2001;

Coady, M. 2001; Freeman and Mathison, 2009; Graue&Walshe, 1998; Gollop, 2000;

Landsdowne, 2005; MacNaughton et al., 2008; Morrow and Richards, 1996; Punch, 2002).

Researchers, for example, highlight the importance of the ethical dimensions of young

26

children‟s right to participate as per Articles 12 and 13 of the Preamble to the UNCRC (1989)

(Alderson, 2008; Landsdowne, 2005; MacNaughton et al., 2008). Other researchers lay

emphasis on the importance of researchers informing children and the right to withdraw and

discuss what difficulties children possibly would have to face when they do not have

knowledge of the research study (Coady, M. 2001, Freeman and Mathison, 2009;

Landsdowne, 2005). Some researchers highlight the unequal power relationships that can

exist in research where the adult researcher is more likely to have more control or authority

than the child in the research. They also suggest ways to avoid unequal power relations (e.g.

Landsdowne, 2005; Mayall, 2000; MacNaughton, et. al, 2008; Morrow and Richards, 1996;

Punch, 2002). Other researchers draw attention to the importance of adults providing time to

build relationships with children before involving them in research studies (Graue & Walshe,

1998, Landsdowne, 2005).

Some commentators stress the researcher‟s responsibility to provide opportunities for

children to be comfortable and express themselves and thus avoid risks of anxieties during

interviews (Brooker, 2001; Freeman and Mathison, 2009; Gollop, 2000). For example,

according to Freeman and Mathison (2009: 92) “…children, whether because of age,

language ability, attention span, will promote different forms of interaction.” As a result my

research was formulated around a number of rights-based and ethical considerations. It

intersects with a qualitative design and interpretative approach as it acknowledges children as

competent informants on their lives. It gives rise to 7 key considerations –

1) Informed consent and the right to withdraw;

2) Unequal power relations;

3) Use of child- friendly methods;

4) Choice of language for interviews;

5) Opportunities provided to children during research;

6) Competencies of children; and

7) Confidentiality and anonymity of participants.

The above mentioned principles have also been taken into consideration throughout the

enactment of my research. Since point 1) Informed consent and the right to withdraw have

already been addressed earlier, the following section explains how I have considered the

27

other points in my study. In order to minimize the unequal power relations I decided that the

data collection would be conducted within the familiar natural settings of the school premises

so that the children could feel more at ease (Brooker, 2001). The Directress suggested that

since the Montessori children would not be having any classes after lunch (as shown in Table

1), their classrooms were available for me to utilize. Gollop (2000) describes the importance

of enacting research in physical settings that children are comfortable with and to set up in

such a way as to establish rapport with children. These Montessori classrooms were well

ventilated, spacious, had clean carpets, good chairs and working tables, bright and colourful

handicraft, toys, resources and learning tools for little children and the children were familiar

with them as they had their daily classes in them. Therefore, the Montessori classrooms

seemed a suitable venue for me to carry out the research procedures such as: gaining consent

from parents, seeking informed assent from children as well as conducting the drawing

sessions and interviews.

The time of the day the research was enacted was a further consideration in supporting the

children to feel comfortable. According to the Directress and the teachers, the children had 7

periods a day with a lunch break in between. They had the literacy-based activities such as

reading, writing, numbers etc. completed during the morning classes and the extra-curricular

activities such as drawing, colouring, singing, games, dancing kept for the afternoon. It was

decided that the participating children would undertake the research in the afternoon so that

they would not miss any important lessons or have to miss out on their lunch breaks or have

to stay back in school after school hours for my data collection. The timeframe for my data

collection is provided in Table Three in the Appendix.

3.5 Research Methods/Techniques:

For the collection of data, this research study sought a multi-method approach which

involved drawings and semi-structured interviews with Indian children within 5-7years of

age. A multi method approach is recommended in order to increase validity and to confirm

that the accounts being presented are understood by the participants (Silverman, 2001).

3.5.1 Drawings

In order to gather the required information, the participants were invited in small groups to

take part in a drawing session prior to a semi-structured individual interview to gather the

required data. All 20 participants were invited and seated in groups of four in the Montessori

classroom and were asked to draw something about school. Drawing is considered be a

28

„child-friendly method‟ (Brooker, 2001; Morrow, 1999; Punch, 2002). These researchers

suggest that the use of child-friendly methods in collecting data from children is a way to

minimize unequal relations. Drawing is also considered an approach that is of interest to

children (Dockett & Perry, 2007). The use of drawings when engaging children in research

can help children feel more comfortable when they talk, as it can divert eye contact (Dockett

& Perry, 2007). Drawings have proved to be a very useful and successful method when

gathering information from children on their transition to school experiences (Dockett and

Perry, 2007; Einarsdottir, J. et.al, 2009). Therefore, collecting data by asking the children to

draw could help children to minimize unequal relationships as it might make them feel part of

the research giving them maximum opportunity to provide their views. For this particular

study, drawings were used as a method to assist the children to feel comfortable to talk about

their transition experiences in a non-pressured manner. Drawing is one of the activities that

the children are familiar with in the primary schools of India. The drawing session took place

within the natural settings of the school since drawings along with their interpretation create

powerful and versatile representations of understandings and expereinces, particularly in

familiar and comfortable environments (Kress, 1997 cited in Dockett & Perry, 2005: 79). The

children were asked draw something about school and then to speak about their drawings as

research indicates that children‟s drawings provide some insight into their thinking and they

alone would have insight to what they were drawing and how it is relevant to the issue of

moving to school (Dockett & Perry, 2007).

3.5.2 Interviews

I employed semi-structured interviews with individual children as they are considered as a

child-friendly method for recognising “… to a greater degree the individuality of the

interviewee and the valuing of his or her personal interpretations of their experience” (Conell,

et.al, 2007: 317). The use of interviews fits into my research question as it seeks to capture

the experiences and understandings of Indian children on their transition from kindergarten to

school. The interview questions for this particular study has been drawn from previous

research literature (outlined in chapter two) on school transition where researchers have

sought children‟s preschool experiences; their expectations of primary/grade one;

primary/grade one experiences; moving to school; and the difference between preschool and

primary/grade one. (e.g. Bostrum, 2003; Chan, 2010; 2012; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro

& Molinari 2000; Ezron, 2013; Ledger et al. 1998; Peters, 2000; Potter & Briggs, 2003;

Pramling& Williams-Graneld, 1993; Pramling et al. 1995; Sahin et al., 2016; Wong, 2016).

Interviews can be described as personal or “face to face” interaction (Berg, 1995:30) which

29

“invites and persuades individuals to think and to talk- that is to discourse- their needs, wants,

expectations, experiences, and understandings” (Nunkoosing, 2005: 699). It allows the

researcher to explain the rationale behind the research more fully and to discuss the

interview, use probes and respond to any questions a respondent might have (Adams &

Schvaneveldt, 1991). Therefore, the use of interviews is most suitable for this particular study

it aims to provide an opportunity for young Indian children‟s voices to be heard and to gain

information from Indian children on their experiences and understandings on transition to

school. The interview questions for this study can be found in Appendix 7.The interview

questions had been drawn from previous research literature on school transition. Researchers

from previous research on the transition to school have sought children‟s preschool

experiences; their expectations of primary/grade one; primary/grade one experiences; moving

to school; and the difference between preschool and primary/grade one. (e.g. Peters, 2000;

Ledger et al. 1998; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Bostrum, 2003; (Clarke & Sharpe, 2003;

Potter & Briggs, 2003; Pramling & Williams-Graneld, 1993; Pramling et al. 1995). More

details have been provided in Chapter Two.

The interviews with the children were conducted on completion of the drawing session. Grey

(1998) cautions that it is not likely that participants will share their views freely and openly

especially with someone they do not know personally or is meeting for the first. “…it is the

relationship an interviewer can establish with the child which is at the heart of a „good‟

interview.” (Gollop, 2000: 34). However I had already established a rapport with the children

and it was hoped that a further sense of “rapport” and “trust” would be created through the

interviews and drawing as it could lead to a greater willingness to participate (Adams &

Schvaneveldt, 1991:212).

The proposed study was explained to the participating children before the drawing session

and before the start of an interview. Keeping the children fully informed facilitated children‟s

sense of involvement and ownership in the research (Gollop, 2000). This was done to support

the individual children participating in this study gain a more detailed and clearer

understanding of the proposed study.

Throughout the course of the one-to-one interview the researcher was mindful to ensure that

each child was clear about the questions being asked, was not under any kind of stress but

rather felt encouraged and happy to take part. From time to time the participants were being

reminded that they had the right to discontinue or withdraw at any time and were also assured

of confidentiality. This was done by speaking gently, making clarifications where necessary,

30

using probes, giving positive feedback and encouragement (e.g. you are doing very well), and

observing individual children to gauge whether they understood gestures. Giving children a

sense of control facilitates in minimizing unequal relationships as well as establishing a good

rapport with children (Gollop, 2000: 27).

3.5.3 Choice of Language for interviews

As the children were all from non-English speaking backgrounds and attending an english-

medium school (i.e. where education is imparted in English) it was possible that they may not

be able to fully understand or speak the English language fluently. Each child was allowed to

respond in both English and Nepali whichever one they chose to use at any given point of

time. This was to avoid hindering children‟s participation (A Guide to General Comment 7

United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child, 2006) and to encourage and respect the

individual children‟s choices and abilities. 17 children preferred to do the interview in Nepali.

Two children preferred to use both English and Nepali. As I have spent most of my life in

Kalimpong and am fluent in Nepali, there were no language and cultural barriers during the

interview. Rather this supported communication with individual children during the drawing

and the interview.

3.6 Rigour and trustworthiness through member checking

Lincoln and Guba (1985) have argued that member checking is a sound means of

guaranteeing rigour or trustworthiness of the study. Member checking is a technique used to

ensure credibility and “involves taking data, analyses, interpretations, and conclusions back

to the participants” to let them “judge the accuracy of the account” (Creswell, 2007: 208).

Member checking can support the researcher to confirm key points with the children. From a

child rights perspective it is a means of encouraging children‟s voices in the interpretation of

the data. This enables adult researchers to ensure that their interpretations are in keeping with

individual children‟s meanings.

According to Lincoln and Guba (1985) “Member checking is both informal and formal and it

occurs continuously” (p. 314). This enables researchers to undertake member checks during

any time of the research process. While, an informal member checking began during each

interview with the children through my recapping of the key content during the course of the

interview, after I completed each transcript I also read out to individual children what they

said during our interviews. Due to some setbacks, however, which will be discussed later in

this paper, I was unable to perform member checking with every child. Nonetheless, I

31

listened to the interviews saved in the recorder and made quick notes on the main points and

took opportunities to meet 16 participants individually, to offer them an opportunity to

express their views, make corrections and add or remove any information. I went through the

main points/answers provided for each of the interview questions checking/asking whether

they concurred to what heard. None disagreed to what they had already shared instead they

added more emphasis by providing more details on their experiences at school. During

member-checking children seemed chirpier than during interviews. Possibly, a second round

of interviews before member checking would have produced more informative data.

Nonetheless, member checks was both a possible and useful procedure for me as a researcher

as the second meeting with the 16 participants enabled me to feel assured that in the main my

recording of the data was in keeping with children's perspectives on what they said.

3.7 Data management and analysis

All the drawing commentaries and interviews were audio-recorded, transcribed and

translated into English. For data storage all the collected data was handed over to my

Principal Supervisor to be locked in a separate filing cabinet in the CEIEC at the University

of Melbourne.

Content analysis was used as the main method of analysis. It is a process of „combing‟ the

data where both content and context are taken into account in identifying themes (Edwards

2001). The drawing commentaries and interviews were transcribed and translated into

English. After reading the translated transcripts several times I began breaking up and coding

the data according to content themes from the children‟s commentaries and from the key

concepts embedded in the transition literature using the interview questions as a focus. This

was done using Microsoft Excel Sheet. I then identified themes and categories from the data.

There were a broad number of predetermined categories that arose from the interview

questions (e.g. „friends‟ „educational environment‟). However, within and in addition to the

predetermined categories as expected more themes and categories began to emerge from the

data. Through the use of grids the data was sorted under themes by hand and further coding

(Miles & Huberman, 1994).

3.8 Research Impact and Tensions

There were several factors that adversely impacted on the enactment of my research with the

children as well the write up of my thesis for completion. The main factors that affected the

smooth progress of my research work included abrupt strikes and the closure of schools,

32

ongoing electricity strikes and increased incidents of murder, arson and violence. Further

explanations on these have been provided in Appendix 9.

This chapter has documented a framework of the research study procedures: methodology,

methods and ethical considerations. In the following chapter I present: i) Indian children‟s

accounts on their experiences and understandings on the transition from kindergarten to

school and ii) themes that have emerged from the data

33

CHAPTER FOUR

FINDINGS AND DISCUSSION

This chapter discusses the findings/results of the study and addresses the following research

questions:

What are the experiences and understandings of Indian children on transition from

Kindergarten to class one?

What are the similarities and/or differences between the experiences and

understandings of Indian children and those from other countries?

It outlines the children‟s commentaries under three main themes 1) Educational environment,

2) Social environment and 3) Physical environment

4.1 Theme 1: Experiences and understandings of the educational environment at school

The children who participated in this study believed “serious learning” occurred from the

Kindergarten levels through to school. Seventeen of the twenty children who participated in

the study, for example, described Kindergarten as a place of structured learning. They

described being required to undertake academic work that involved doing lots of reading and

writing for various subjects such as English Grammar, English Literature, Science,

Arithmetic and Nepali/Hindi/Bengali. They also described following a set time table and

prescribed syllabus, homework, complete academic tasks and sitting through regular tests and

examinations at kindergarten. Children also noted strategies for learning that were required

for specific subjects. For example Rajdip mentioned mathematics and learning tables: “Add,

minus – this is what they taught us. They even taught us tables.”Pranab stated: “We were

taught science…and given writing and once finished then we were given sums, tables and

then school got over.”Prashant remembered finding learning mathematics in Kindergarten

difficult at first but used strategies to assist him to make it easier:“Ma‟am used to teach us to

do ball sums…First it was difficult then at later it became easy. When it was

difficult I used to take out the new books and study in school.” Barbie spoke about learning

various subjects in Kindergarten: “Ma‟am taught a, e, i, o, u and addition, we did ka kha ga

gha anga (Nepali alphabets) and subtraction, like take away.”

34

These commentaries are different to those of children from Germany (Griebel & Niesel,

2002), Sweden (Pramling & Grenald, 1993), New Zealand (Peters, 2000), whose experience

of preschool was as a place where learning activities were unstructured, play was a core part

of learning and children were given the freedom to decide on which activity they preferred to

do. Children from Singapore, Italy, Sweden, Iceland, Norway, also described preschool as a

place where they got to play a lot, with minimal academic work (Clarke & Sharpe, 2003;

Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Einarsdottir, 2003; Yeo & Clark, 2005). In comparison, Indian

children‟s reports shared clearly reveal that they follow a fixed timetable at the kindergarten

levels and academic content is given more importance than play. Details over playtime which

is given later in this chapter will show that play time is restricted to P.T. classes which

happen only once a week. These commentaries highlight that different cultural values exist

across countries regarding what is appropriate to learn at kindergarten and that these values,

in turn, will shape children‟s experiences of transition to school. As the following discussion

highlights how these values play out in terms of subject content and teaching and learning

approaches in these settings influences young children‟s experiences of and attitudes towards

school.

Secondly, consistent with findings from other studies e.g. Singapore (Clarke & Sharpe

2002;Yeo & Clarke 2003), Italy (Corsaro & Molinari, 2002), the children who participated in

this study also understood primary school as a place of learning where the foremost priority

was hard work and serious learning. Fourteen children, for example, acknowledged school as

being a place of learning and that they attended classes to learn e.g. study, write, and do tests

and exams. When asked: What is the importance of coming to school/what does school mean

to you? Many children highlighted that school was for learning, for example: “To learn”

(Suraj); “I understand studies/learning by School” (Rajdip), “the most important thing about

School is to study/learn… they teach us new things in Science…and show us how to draw

new things” (Benten). Indian children believed learning in school was linked with positive

benefits such as: learning new things, improving reading and handwriting, learning to draw

better, learning to write better, taking down homework, and learning for tests and

examinations to do well in them. Prashant, for example, understood that learning at school

involved practicing and improving skills over time: “School means to learn a lot of things.

We have to learn, write, even handwriting gets better, draw better in that thing called

computer, later in life, drawing things becomes easier.”

Children highlighted that the transition to school was a positive experience as it assisted them

to become more intelligent/clever/smarter. Panu, for example, thought the most important

35

thing about coming to school was: “To become intelligent/clever.” They also believed that

improving skills was a matter that needed to be taken seriously. It gave them a sense of

achievement and happiness particularly when they gained approval/appreciation from their

elders (e.g. the teacher putting their work up for display in the classroom). Amrita said:

“Earlier, my handwriting was very bad but now it has become really good, even my mother

said so. Ma‟am liked my work and pasted it in the classroom.” The children also associated

the importance of learning at school to future goals. For example Amrita stated “The thing

about school is good, they teach you well and you can become someone big like a doctor…”

and Prashant thought they came to school to learn so that they could “…work in the office,

army, to become a doctor, to become a pilot.” These positive perspectives of schools are

consistent with European, Australian and Singaporean research where children reported

positive view of themselves as learners in school, (Dockett & Perry, 2001; Yeo & Clarke,

2003), that they would be learning more and learning new things, (e.g. Wong, 2003; Griebel

& Niesel, 2002) become clever and improve on their skills (e.g. Peters, 2000; Yeo & Clarke,

2005) and be in a higher grade (e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Wong, 2003)

4.1.1 Similarities/differences between kindergarten and school

When asked “Can you tell me about moving from Kindergarten to Grade One?” and “Is

Kindergarten different from Grade One? Why do you say so?” the children spoke of

continuity: “it is the same”-(Deki Dolma) or “same same”-(Suraj) or “I think they are the

same”-(Panu) or “there is no difference I find them the same”-(Priety). 90% of the children

reported that they studied the same subjects and followed similar structure of curriculum at

both levels. Amrita and Panu, for example, discussed the text books that the teacher used in

Kindergarten and how these were similar to the ones used in class one. Amrita stated for

example: “She taught us from a science book similar to the one we use in class one”.The

children reported that the similarity in learning and curriculum between kindergarten and

school made the transition an „easy‟ experience. Neha and Prashant, for example, highlighted

that continuity in the curriculum and revision of what they learnt in Kindergarten for the first

few weeks of their time in class one. Neha stated:

“I find them the same because both teach alphabet and used similar strategies to

learn the alphabet. They made us write a-b-c-d there and here too they make us write

a-b-c-d and make us make charts here and there also they made us make charts.”

Prashant declared:

36

“Now it is easy. What they teach in KG they teach the same in class one. In upper

Kindergarten (U.KG) we were taught math, 1, 2, 3, one hundred, two hundred, one

zero, one zero and two. In U.KG they had already taught us eleven e-l-e-v-e-n and in

class one too they are teaching the same.”

Barbie stated: “They are the same. They teach us the same things like add, subtract which is

easy”

Children also noted that the school curriculum included enjoyable activities such as drawing,

games, annual sports, quizzing, a spelling bee and an annual concert for children. These

activities were regarded by the children as „fun activities‟‟ that occurred throughout the year

alongside their academic/educational learning activity. 80% of the children in this study

identified drawing and colouring activities as being enjoyable in their Kindergarten as well as

in their class one curriculum. For example, “A lot of things... Writing…drawing…I like

colouring and drawing. (Deki) and “To come to class one I felt nice, it was good. There were

a lot of drawings in class one but in U.KG, we did less drawing” (Benton). The knowledge of

the availability of these experiences generated positive feelings in the children towards

making the transition to school.Thus, these children‟s commentaries highlight that the

continuity of activities such as drawings contributed to positive experiences in children and

could contribute to children‟s positive feelings towards moving to school.

The main difference in learning noted by the children was that the workload in class one was

more than kindergarten because of the additional subjects that children had to do in class one

For example: “In KG there‟s less to learn and in class one there‟s more learning to do.”

(Dolly) and “They did not teach us literature in KG but in class one we are taught literature

and it is nice, I have fun.” (Rajdip) In addition some children noted that the learning was

harder due to new subjects such as second language subjects (i.e. Hindi/Nepali). For example

Rajdip noted he had faced some difficulty with reading in Nepali: “I found Nepali a bit

difficult. Writing is not that difficult, reading is.” Similarly, Prashant mentioned undertaking

new subjects and finding the second language subjects difficult. He expressed anxiety and

fear of failing those subjects: “In class one, they teach Nepali and Hindi as well. In the

beginning it was difficult. I got scared…we could fail and doing homework would be

difficult… It is easy now.” These commentaries highlight the way in the academic subject

content of a service influences and shapes children‟s perspectives and experiences of

transition.

37

International research studies cite variation/discontinuity in the curriculum/pedagogy between

preschool and school as a major contributor to children‟s negative experiences on transition

to school (e.g. Bostrum, 2003; Boyle & Petriwskyj, 2014; Dockett & Perry, 2001; Dunlop,

2013; Fabian & Hilary, 2002; Garpelin, 2014; Hayes et al., 2014; Petriwskyj, 2010; Tayler,

et.al, 2014; ). Longer hours, more writing and learning, introduction to homework and

exams/tests/assessments, lesser playtime (e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro & Molinari,

2000; Griebel and Niesel, 2000; Pramling & Graneld, 1993) in primary school are noted by

children as factors that make it challenging for them to cope with the transition to school.

Indian children in this study however faced minimum difficulty on transitioning to primary

school as a result of the continuity in curriculum and this continuity generated in the main

positive feelings towards school. At the same time while the continuity of content between

kindergarten and school supported children‟s transition experience, new subject content in the

first year of school still shaped children‟s experiences of and attitudes towards school and

could result in feelings of anxiety about coping with the new academic content.

The children‟s commentaries in this study however also highlighted that the

demand/emphasis on academic achievement seemed more prevalent in India than other

countries. Children from international transition studies(e.g. Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro

& Molinari, 2000; Dockett & Perry 2007; Eide & Winger, 1994; Griebel and Niesel, 2000;

Einarsdottir, 2003;Sahin et al., 2016) expressed concerns over coping with learning/education

system on moving from kindergarten to school (e.g. from play based learning in kindergarten

to serious/structured learning in school) their major concerns on transitioning to school rules,

adjustment to school/classroom/new teachers, friends physical environment. Children in this

study expressed less concern over rules, teachers, and adjustment about going to school;

rather their concerns were associated with the academic requirement of school system. Some

of the major issues arising from Indian children‟s discussions around school transitions were:

homework, examinations/tests and lack of playtime. This suggests that the degree of

continuity/discontinuity children face when starting school shape their experiences of and

attitudes towards school.

4.1.2 Homework

Homework was one of the key themes that arose from children‟s discussions about going to

school and what happened at school. Homework involved writing assignments or preparation

for a test/assessment on a completed lesson. Dolly, for example, spoke about the demands of

documenting homework as soon as it was given:

38

“We write down our homework in our diaries in the evening before school gives over

and even write during the day…and if we are late we need to write it down quickly,

quickly, and put it away into our bags because we don‟t need to show it we have to do

it at home that‟s why.”

For many children the routines around learning involved attending tuition classes directly

after school. Neha, Pranab, Deki Dolma, for example, mentioned the need to attend tuition

immediately after school. Neha also mentioned not getting any playing time as a result of this

time commitment:

“I leave from school and I will go directly to Bhalukhop for tuitions without even

playing or having anything to eat… I only study, I like to study…I get back home from

tuitions at night then have tea then change my clothes but do not get to play because

then it is time to have dinner. After dinner again I have to sit and study.”

Homework caused both positive and negative experiences and understandings among Indian

children. For example, Sasan and Muskan liked homework. Sasan stated “Homework is fun, I

enjoy it.” Children had unpleasant experiences with homework due to high expectations and

pressure from parents. For example:

Lhasang: I cry as I study at home.

Researcher: Why?

Lhasang: My mother beats me. Yesterday she hit me here (showing me his cheek) and

my father hit me and I banged myself on to the fridge like this „dwonga‟.

Pranab‟s experience with homework also contributed to fear and negative feelings:

“I go home after school, play for some time and once it‟s 4 start studying, after 4

everybody Debika, Swastika, Rodhika, me my younger sister, younger brother my

mother... my mother is a teacher she teaches at home. Uhh...I‟ve lost an eraser and

my mother may hit me… my mother really hits hard when we don‟t learn.”

4.1.3 Examinations and Tests

In addition to concerns about homework, 90% children in the current study drew on their past

and present experiences of regular tests and examinations/assessments. These commentaries

included negative and positive views of learning at school. Moving from Kindergarten to

school in India involves more rigorous testing of the children‟s academic progress. In U.KG

39

children had to sit through the main two exams i.e. the half yearly examinations and the

yearly/final examination, but no monthly tests. These tests/exams determined each child‟s

promotion/demotion/retention and academic aptitude. The principles outlined in the student

school diary on examinations and tests can be found in Appendix 8 and the System of

Evaluation for Academic Session 2010 as per the student school diary can be found in Table

4 of the Appendix.

Children‟s commentaries highlight that the prospect of achieving well in tests/examinations

was a factor that contributed to children‟s positive views of transition to school. Six children

reported positive views of tests/exams. These children were extremely pleased with their

performance in tests and formed positive views of themselves as being proficient learners

through their test results. The majority of children discussed feeling relieved after passing

their examination at kindergarten and moving to class one. At the same time children (e.g.

Deepesh, Dolly and Amrita) developed a sense of high esteem about themselves as being

successful learners and achievers. Deepesh reported: “…I was successful when I was in KG

and so I came here class one) maybe I will succeed here and go to class two.” This in part

would be attributed to children feeling that they attained knowledge through tests: “I like

doing tests if you do tests then you learn everything so I like doing tests a lot.”(Deki)Dolly

enjoyed learning that took place at school and believed that attending school and doing

tests/exams was assisting her to become smarter. Her understanding of becoming

smarter/intelligent was a good thing as it meant getting good results:

Researcher: What is the most important thing about school?

Dolly: To learn and write and do tests and exams. I enjoy it.

Researcher: Why?

Dolly: Because then I become more clever/smarter/.

Researcher: And?

Dolly: Then I come first first and get a big/good result.

Several children, for example, noted their academic achievements by stating the marks they

acquired in the tests as they stated: “…I got 20 on 20 in the unit test… I feel nice because we

get marks for it.”(Panu); “…the test marks was upon 16 and I got 16 upon 16.”(Prashant);

“…last week I was happy because I got the whole thing right and got 20 upon 20 in my

Nepali test.”(Pranab)

40

For other children feeling positive about exams was linked to being able to study/learn in a

higher class level which in turn was linked to a higher status in the school.. For example,

Amrita professed: “…I like to be a senior”. Dolly stated: “…because we go to a higher

class”.

Several children further noted adults (parents/teachers) rewarded them when they did well in

tests/exams at preschool: “Whoever did well in tests and exams, the teachers would put up

their names outside for everyone to see. It felt good and the Madams also gave us sweets”

(Panu). Muskan associated getting a high rank and achieving well in Kindergarten with

positive feelings about herself as a good learner and getting rewarded by her mother: “I like

to study my mother tells to study do nicely be first first then I will bring to you teddy bear,

Barbie doll that‟s why.”Prashant recalled receiving rewards when he achieved well in a test:

“…My mother bought things like Cadbury for 5 Rupees, she also took me to the Children‟s

Park.” Thus, they looked forward to attaining good results in their tests/exams and

receiving rewards from their teachers or parents.

Other children reported feelings of fear and anxiety in relation to tests. These commentaries

highlighted an awareness that much emphasis is laid on academic assessment right from pre-

school levels and the consequences of not achieving high marks. For example Apriti was

anxious about tests/examinations:

“Now we are going have our monthly tests…They make us do tests one after another

even when the big exam is not going on we are doing tests… Aboooooi (an expression

of fear) I feel so thing when I have to do tests. I feel like I want to say something like, I

don‟t want to do the test, but Maam will beat me.”

Three children shared both positive and negative experiences about doing tests at school.

Barbie‟s experience of doing exams was linked to negative feelings of fear and anxiety over

the pressure of achieving well in exams but she felt positive that her mother would give her a

reward if she did well:“I feel afraid…Will I come first or second or last…Mummy says I have

to come first…I will get books.”Similarly, Lhasang believed that school made him more

intelligent and that getting high marks in his exams would be a rewarding experience for him

as it would please his mother. On the contrary not getting good results meant he would get

punished.

Researcher: What is the most important thing about school?

Lhasang: To be clever in learning.

41

Researcher: What do you meanby the word „clever‟?

Lhasang: I don‟t know how to explain that. My mother, you see, if I get good/high

marks in my exams then my mother will be very happy….No. I cannot get bad/low

marks because my mother will beat me.

Pranab similarly noted how his feelings towards tests were linked to his results:

“I don‟t know these tests, I had worked a lot at home and came to school but I didn‟t

do well in the Maths test. The teacher gave me all wrong. But last week I was happy

because I got the whole thing right and got 20 upon 20 in my Nepali test.”

Children also noted the importance of attending school and being present for tests. For

example: “Even when I am sick I come to school…For exams when, what do you call

that…absent…we should never be absent during exams… Because if you are absent then we

ruin our studies and will have to go back to KG.” (Neha) and “I don‟t want to be absent I

want to don‟t be absent...I will be fail in exam I don‟t want to be absent…I had never failed

because I was never absent and so even in this school I am not going to be absent.”

(Muskan)

These commentaries highlight that some children had a clear understanding that being absent

or missing out on school could lead to hindrances in their learning and result in some serious

consequences for them. Thus the fear of missing exams was directly linked to pressure

around achieving good academic results.

Two children (Muskan and Sushmita) out of the 5 participants who made the transition from

other settings expressed concern/anxiety over entrance tests. A form of test known as the

„Entrance‟ or „Admission‟ is generally held before the start of each academic year for any

newcomer or child seeking admission Their commentaries on examinations suggests that the

system of entrance exams results in pressure, tension, and anxiety in not just the children who

sit for the entrance exams/tests but for their parents as well as we know from Muskan‟s

experience when she sought admission into the school: “I have feel, I felt really afraid that I

might spoil the test or what. My mother was also very worried outside but it was really easy

and I got very good.”

The children‟s commentaries highlight that there are cultural values and pressures around

children succeeding academically at school. These children noted that parents and teachers

rewarded academic success and some children‟s commentaries indicate that their own

42

feelings of success were in part measured by how well they succeeded at school. In addition

children were fearful of not succeeding and adults‟ use of punishment fed into this. The

structure of school further led to children‟s feelings towards academic success for instance

children undertaking entrance examinations and being streamed into classes, in turn, placed

pressure of children, parents and adults for children to succeed.

4.1.4 More work less play

Another aspect the children in this study raised in relation to learning and curriculum was the

dichotomy between work and play. In particular, a major concern expressed by the Indian

children about their transition to school was the lack of playtime. Concern with lack of

playtime is consistent with findings from other studies (Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Yeo &

Clark, 2005). In their discussions children from both India and other transition studies have

reported that schools require academic lessons to be taken seriously and given first place with

less importance/significance given to children‟s playtime. However, the issues around

playtime for children across the globe was more about 1) their enjoyable experiences of play

in kindergarten and 2) about lack of playtime in school and missing the freedom to play in

school (Brostrom, 2003; Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Peters, 2000;

Pramling et al., 1995; Seeldt et al. 1997; Yeo & Clark, 2005). For example Italian children

expressed discontent with the short playtime in school and yearned for a longer recess so that

they could play some more. Some experienced difficulty sitting silently when having to

complete reading and writing tasks (Corsaro & Molinari, 2000). For Singaporean children the

extra workload restricted play, they reported the increased amount of work that was required

of them in school which they found challenging, a situation unlike kindergarten which was

less rigid and more relaxed (Yeo & Clark, 2005).

Similarly the Indian children in this study raised the issue of „less playtime‟ however,

children in India experience less play in both kindergarten and school where they follow a

rigid timetable at both levels where their playtime is restricted to once a week or only during

Physical Training (PT) periods. For example, according to the children‟s reports they had to

follow a fixed timetable. For example Rajdip stated: “We get to play only on Fridays. Friday

is games day, that‟s why.” Sasan was asked to talk about how he spent his time in school and

he pointed out: “Only at PT time we are allowed to play.”Apriti stated: “They don‟t allow us

to play in class one, we have a timetable we don‟t go to play every day only during PT on

Fridays.”Muskan also stated that they got to play and use the swing only during PT classes:

“On Mondays we have PT and we get to play on the swing only in PT time.”

43

Despite the fact that Indian children did not question this system, it did seem they were

unhappy and trying to point out that they did not get enough play time. In comparison and

considering the literature on school transitions lack of playtime seems more of a concern for

Western children. This highlights different countries have different cultural values of play in

kindergarten and school and these shape children‟s perspectives on play in school.

However, it is interesting to note that while these children did seem unhappy about the issue

of little/lack of playtime they also understood or looked upon play as being problematic too.

They understood that they were in school to learn, write and study hard in order to obtain

good marks in their tests/exams and a high rank in their school reports. Play or more play

time would only be a hindrance to their academic progress. For example Lhasang felt they

did not get to play enough in Kindergarten because they were expected to study for exams:

“Then we had to sit for exams, we had to learn a lot so that we did not spoil or fail in the

exams so that is why we did not play too much.”

The above discussed understanding of children on playtime could be due to the earlier

discussed point that the Indian curriculum is more similar across kindergarten to school levels

and the children are used to less time to play. Despite the fact that the right to play is outlined

in the UNCRC (1989) it has not been integrated into the pre-school curricula around the

world and thus, is shaped by cultural values towards learning.

4.2 Theme 2: Experiences and Understandings on the Social Environment

Social relationships with teachers and friends/peers/classmates were a major theme of the

children‟s commentaries. The nature of the teacher and behaviour of children in

school/classrooms had both negative and positive impacts on children on their transition to

school.

4.2.1 Relationships with Teachers

Children from India and around the world highlight that their relationships with teachers and

other children impact on how they feel about transition to school. All 20 participants raised

issues related to their relationships with teachers that were both negative and positive and

impacted on how they felt towards their first year in school.

The children noted the prevalence of harsh discipline such as corporal punishment in

kindergarten. They reported that some teachers used punitive measures and used sticks to

beat them as a means of disciplining them. Children recalled dreading those harsh beatings

44

and their commentaries highlight their fear and dislike over the punitive nature of their

Kindergarten teachers. For example:

“In KG I didn‟t like getting a beating from MadhooMaam because she beat us really

hard…The Maams were talking and we were playing. AmbikaMaam never made us

write she would only beat us and make us sleep. I didn‟t like getting a beating from

Maam because she beat us really hard.” (Pranab)and

“We used to be playing in KG and when Maam used to come and the boys would all

be quiet…Oh my goodness! If MaamBhutia saw us playing and not paying attention

she would get angry and beat us badly.” (Apriti)

Of interest, none of the children from this current study questioned the teachers‟ use of

punitive measures (i.e. harsh beatings and scolding). These actions, however, contributed to

children‟s negative experiences and relationships with their teachers.

These findings stand in strong contrast to children from international research studies. Only a

very small number, for example, 4 Singaporean children reported negative experiences (e.g.

being scolded) by their preschool teachers (Yeo & Clarke, 2005). Findings from studies

across the globe indicate that children had positive experiences with their kindergarten

teachers. Children remembered their teachers from kindergarten to have been good natured

and kind. Icelandic children were concerned who their new teacher would be and missed their

preschool teacher (Einarsdottir, 2003).

These findings show that the pedagogical orientation of kindergarten systems between Asian

(India in particular) countries differ from other countries and influence children‟s feelings

towards teachers at school. In countries with an emphasis on a child-centered approach,

special focus is given to developing a warm and pleasant environment for children in which

they are encouraged and respected as individuals. While on the other hand Kindergarten

systems in Asian countries such as India, focus less on children‟s individual needs but rather,

lay emphasis on developing discipline in children from an early age in order to enforce

compliance to the school norms that are generally reinforced by children‟s parents and

teachers. Against this background it is interesting to note transition studies reveal that even

though the children who would be moving to school had had positive experiences with their

preschool teachers, they were very anxious about what the nature of their new teacher at

primary school (e.g. Bostrum 2003;Einarsdottir, 2003; Wong, 2016). Those who had already

made the transition to school described it as an alarming experience as they come face to face

45

with teachers who yelled, scolded (e.g. Wong, 2003; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Potter &

Briggs, 2003; Wong, 2016) and even beat them (Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Yeo & Clark, 2005).

In contrast, Indian children expressed excitement as to who would be the next teacher and did

not express any concern or fear. Their views and understandings about the role of their

teachers changed when they moved from kindergarten to school. They had developed a

positive picture of their class one teachers on making the transition and settling into school.

They realized that teachers were harsh and beat them only if they misbehaved in the

classroom or didn‟t maintain silence during class. Children liked their class one teachers

more than their teachers from Kindergarten that added to their positive experiences in making

the transition to school. Possibly, the experiences these children had with their kindergarten

teachers, assisted them in understanding teacher expectations/demands and in learning to

respond to those expectations, which, in turn, helped them to establish positive relationships

and views about their class one teachers.

Some children believed that it is essential for the teacher to be stern sometimes. They looked

upon the punitive measures exercised by their teachers as a positive and necessary action and

in this we find that punishment meant for correction or improvement is acceptable in schools

in India. On transition to school children began to acknowledge both the unruly behaviour of

their classmates as well as the influential place the teacher held with the charge in making

sure there was some order in the classroom as well as within the School premises. For

example Apriti justified her school teacher‟s actions: “Sometimes Maam shouts because some

students are always up to mischief and if we move from our seats Maam will beat us…Maams

have to correct our books and there are so many children and so much of noise so Maam

asks us put our heads down.”Her report on the teacher also included: “With only one Maam

it is difficult. There are so many students in class and the boys go on making noise, they jump

around and behave badly, even during lunch.”

Children also spoke of their teachers as the main source of learning. They acknowledged that

through the teacher they would learn new knowledge, and skills such as drawing and dancing.

Moreover, children were aware that teachers gave first priority to their academic

performance. They reflected on the rewards given by their teachers when they performed well

both in kindergarten and class one. Amrita, for example, recollected positive exciting

memories of dancing activities. They included the teacher being pleased with and rewarding

them for their performance. She also recalled an amusing incident about one of her friends

that still made her laugh. These added to Amrita‟s positive feelings about school:

46

“Maam had made us practice dancing for the school programme. After we do our

dance well Maam takes us to the staff room and gives us sweets. Last time that‟s what

she did after we danced to a song she brought us to the staff room and gave us lots of

lollipops…but Sudarshana had to be a boy and I was the girl…We don‟t like it. I feel

really embarrassed…even Yasmin had to wear a daurasural (costume for

men)…Uhhh after the programme one girl… Sudarshana, she went on saying please

wipe off my moustache please wipe it off and I tried but it just wouldn‟t come off and

she changed into her frock and had to go home along with the moustache. She went

off feeling very angry (Giggles).

Rewards and approvals given by teachers also motivated the children to achieve well not just

in their academic subjects but also in the co-curricular activities. They longed for their own

work to be excellent so as to gain approval from their teachers and have their work displayed

in the classroom. Amrita, for example, spoke of gaining her teacher‟s approval and having

her work displayed in the classroom: “Because if it isn‟t good then they won‟t paste it. Last

time I made a chart with good drawing and handwriting and my Maam pasted it with cello

tape on the wall for all to see”.

Several transition researchers have noted that teachers impact on young children‟s

experiences and understandings of school transition. (E.g. Wong, 2003; Clarke & Sharpe,

2003; Corsaro & Molinari, 2000; Fabian and Hilary, 2002; Potter & Briggs, 2003; Tayler

et.al, 2014; Wong, 2016; Yeo & Clark, 2005) and the important role they play in supporting

young children‟s transition to school (Dockett & Perry, 2001; 2013). As the children‟s

commentaries attest teachers‟ behavior in kindergarten and school shaped how they felt about

their transition to school. In this way they highlight the social and relational nature of

children‟s experiences and perspectives of school. This is highlighted further in the following

section that notes the ways in which friendships shape young children‟s experiences and

understandings of school transition.

4.2.2 Relationships with friends

Many transition studies (Clarke & Sharpe, 2003; Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2000; 2013; Corsaro

& Molinari, 2000; Potter & Briggs, 2003; Tayler et.al, 2014; Yeo & Clark, 2005) have found

that continuity of friendships positively impacts on children‟s feelings towards transition to

school. A common theme expressed by children across countries included concern about

being separated from friends when transitioning from preschool to school, fear of not having

friends , finding and making new friends at school or being rejected by other peers at school.

47

These feelings contributed to children feeling overwhelmed when transitioning to school (e.g.

Wong, 2016; Yeo & Clarke, 2002).

This was true of the children who participated in this study. They spoke about friends missing

each other when they got separated and placed into different sections/classrooms even when

in the same school setting. This, in turn, had a negative impact on children‟s transition to

school

“Friends get separated. My friend Deepesh has gone to Section C and Praneet is now

in Section B. Only two friends AdityaKhanna and Abhishek came with me to Section

D. We miss each other in class so we lie to the teacher that we want to use the toilet

during class hours and go peeping into each other‟s classrooms to see our friends. I

do that too. But we meet during lunch. Actually Me, Praneet, Deepesh, Abhishek and

Aditya we... we were in the same section from Montessori and in lower Kindergarten

(L.KG) and U.KG too. Now in Class one, we have been separated and I think of

them.”(Prashant)

Sasan who made the transition within the same setting was extremely sad that his

kindergarten friend left for another school. The pseudonym he has chosen for himself was his

friend‟s name. Thus loss of friends can contribute to feeling negative about the transition to

school.

Sandipan who was one of the 5 children who made the transition to school from another

setting expressed sadness and missed his friends from his old school: “I liked studying out

there only. I did not think that my father would ever put me into any other school. Over there

I had a lot of friends and I did not like leaving them.”

Whether children make the transition to school from other settings or within the same setting

separation from friends or moving up with the same friends/classmates influenced children‟s

experiences of and attitudes towards school.

4.2.3 Behaviour of children

In addition, behaviour of children impacted on children‟s experiences of and attitudes

towards transition to school. This was a key issue for children during leisure/lunch break,

PT/games classes and inside the classroom when a teacher was not present. Apriti, for

example, did not like the noise generated by boys play: “During lunch there are too many

48

boys and they are really noisy and I get fed up.” Similarly, Pinky also had an issue about the

boys‟ behaviour during the lunch break and reported them to teachers:

“Boys fight during lunch…I don‟t know they fight, hit each other that is what

happens. We tell aunty (helpers) and she writes down their names. We say this one or

that one is being naughty so write his name. Aunty writes down the names and gives

the list of names to the class teacher. The teacher gives them a beating”.

Barbie also described reporting children to teachers: “They hit inclass and we report it to

Maam.”

Lhasang, Sasan, Pranab and Amrita expressed concern about safety during PT/Games classes.

Lhasang was anxious about being hurt during the next PT class as he stated: “Tomorrow we

have to wear our games dress and again my friends will make me fall as we play, I injured

my leg last time. Amrita dreaded the games period as she was scared and anxious about the

way boys played and herself getting hurt:

“Whenever we have games period this Aaron goes whoosh and then he jumps off from

the slide. Oooo I feel scared when he does that. It‟s not fun playing with boys. There‟s

that roundish swing I feel afraid that they will push me…and friends keep having fun

pushing and my head keeps getting banged.”

Lhasang Lepcha described the wild and unsafe playing styles when boys got together to play

during lunch break and games period. He, however seemed to enjoy the way they played and

thought it was fun and nothing serious:

“Whenever I play my other friends they make me fall down, one of them had their

shoe‟s heel coming off. When we were running and playing he fell…last time we fell a

number of times when playing football…I fell by accident but they also push and make

each other fall especially Rajdip and Yudel. But that is not much of a problem. We

continue playing even with Rajdip and Yudel too. That is just us friends fooling

around and having fun.”

Sasan expressed concern about children calling each other mean names. He mentioned an

incident that occurred after lunch break inside the classroom:

“After lunch, we get back into class. The teacher is usually late and my friends are up

to mischief… that Dipesh, he keeps calling Adiyash a fat gorilla. I don‟t like it so I tell

him – “Oye Dips, don‟t do that”, and Seraphim too is mischievous.”

49

These commentaries attest that peers‟ behaviour contributed to negative feelings about their

school environment. Similarly, children from a longitudinal study in Asia reported

children‟s/friends‟ certain behaviours such as bullying, pushing that had led to unhappiness

and social stress about the transition to school (Wong, 2016). These commentaries highlight

the ways in which young children‟s transition experiences are shaped by the social

relationships they have with adults and children in kindergarten and school settings.

4.3 Theme 3: Physical environment

A common theme arising in international studies on children‟s transition to school can be a

challenging experience for children as it involves moving from one physical environment to

another. The concerns reported by children in Australia (Dockett & Perry, 1999; 2004a;

2004c; 2007) New Zealand (Peters, 2000) Germany (Griebel & Niesel, 2002) and Singapore

(Yeo & Clark, 2005) were linked primarily with the size of the buildings and playground and

number of students. Of interest, 15 of the 20 children in this study had made the transition to

school within the same setting. They did not express any feelings of fear or anxiety over the

school buildings or large number of students in their perspectives on transitioning to school.

70% of the children discussed the physical environment of their school. The transition from

kindergarten to class one for these children was actually only moving into a different

classroom within a setting or physical surrounding they were already familiar with. Therefore

the whole complexity of moving into a larger physical school was alleviated as the

kindergarten and primary school spaces were co-located in a single setting.

In addition, the children in the study making the transition from a separate setting expressed

also delight over the new school‟s physical environment and the availability of more

resources. Muskan, Sushmita and Rajdip however reported being particularly happy with the

new physical surroundings especially because they would be studying in a bigger school.

They expressed happiness about the school having more buildings, cleaner toilets and better

equipment on the playing field. Muskan, for example was happy about moving to a new

school because it had more playing equipment than in her kindergarten: “There are also

slides here very nice, that (her older school) only one swing.” Sushmita was relieved to see

that the walls and toilets in the new school were cleaner, unlike the school where she attended

Kindergarten where the walls and classrooms were so filthy and had disturbed and saddened

her:

“I found the school so fantastic when I first came here. In my old school the other

friends have made the walls so…by scribbling all over…eeeww, it was so dirty little

50

children would urinate and poo all over. I feel it is better here in this school. There it

was so smelly...”

Similarly, 23 percent of Singaporean children in a transition to school research reported they

were happy about the buildings and facilities in their new setting. Factors such as nicely

decorated classrooms and having the scope to make contributions towards their

school/classrooms contributed to their feelings of happiness (Yeo & Clarke, 2005).

4.3.1 Physical Appearance of school

Indian children‟s experiences of the physical environment revolved mostly around the

appearance of their classrooms. They expected school to look a certain way and to have

visual aids. The physical appearance of the classroom was important to these children who

were enthusiastic and worked towards making their classrooms look attractive by making

their own contributions to decorate their classrooms with colourful handwork, charts,

hangings and paintings. The commentaries below highlight the children‟s positive interest in

handwork, charts, hangings and paintings in their classrooms. Sushmita, for example, on

moving to class one and a new school was particularly pleased about making the transition

into a school that looked lovely with all kinds of handwork put on display. As Sushmita‟s

commentary attests, nicely decorated classrooms make children happy and motivated to

attend school:

“Now I have come to a new school and it is so good, see look at all these charts the

stuff pasted on the walls around and these apples hanging here, I really like

them…there in my old school they did not do these things.”

Decorated classrooms also contributed to Prashant‟s positive experiences when asked about

his memories about kindergarten as he stated: “I used to feel good because there used to be

hangings and decorations.” Thus the way in which the physical setting was decorated

contributed to children‟s perspectives on both the kindergarten and school setting.This, in

part, was related to children contributing to the decorations in the physical setting. Amrita,

Neha, Panu and Pranab spoke of bringing their own charts and handwork to create an

atmosphere of learning in their classroom. It gave these children a sense of happiness, pride

and achievement when they got their work displayed that added to children‟s positive sense

of transition to school. Pranab for example shared his own contributions to displays in his

kindergarten and class one and talked about how the children themselves completed the

handwork and charts and brought them to school:

51

“…these things handwork and craft, we make these things and bring them.I

had made them in U.KG there are three pieces of my handwork and now in

class one there is one piece of my handwork.”

Neha shared her memories of making charts in Kindergarten and how she was busy preparing

a chart for class one as well: “In U.KG I used to make charts just like the ones in this

room…tomorrow I will bring a chart I have made myself but I still have not done the

colouring.” Moreover, Indian children connected the physical environment to learning as

their contributions towards the physical environment of their school or classroom included

attractive drawings from and about the things they learnt from the text books that they used in

school. These activities were not necessarily completed in school during school hours instead

most of their work was done in their houses with some assistance from older siblings or

parents. For example, Amrita spoke about the drawings on the charts she made: “Did you see

that flower, and the elephant that has been made, the ones Maam has put up there in class

one...I did them from the science book and my father helped me make them.”

Scarcely decorated classrooms created negative feelings in children. For example Rajdip

noticed and identified the difference in display/appearance between the classrooms. He also

stated that he liked the classrooms he thought had more material on display more than his

own classroom. He made comparisons between the Montessori classroom where the

interview was being held and his class one classroom. He was disappointed that the

Montessori classroom had more resources and looked more attractive than class one:

“This classroom has so many different things. The paintings and charts are nicer and

the blackboard is nice too over here. It is so nice it‟s good, it‟s better than our class

room even the benches here are so nice and the tables upstairs are this small.”

Thus the physical appearance of a school shaped Indian children‟s feelings about moving to

school. The children‟s commentaries highlight that the physical environment can contribute

to children‟s positive views of transition to school. Contributing to the physical setting

created, in part, to these positive views. Moreover, the children‟s commentaries highlight that

decorating the physical settings at school provided them with a sense of belonging and an

identity within the new school environment.

4.3.2 Physical setting/arrangement

The physical settings/classroom arrangement was another factor that children discussed under

the theme physical environment. Both set of children those who had moved from other

52

physical settings and those who hadn‟t all noted how their previous and present classrooms

were organised and how this influenced their experiences and understandings about school.

For example, Lhasang was glad about moving to class one because he felt that the physical

set up in Kindergarten caused uneasiness that, in turn, had hindered his learning experiences:

“There was a blackboard that side and a blackboard at the front of the

class…Numbers used to be written on the blackboard at the back and on the one in

front english. Having to turn back was quite a problem I felt uncomfortable and I

would get squashed.”

Pranab described having two teachers in one classroom as a challenge: “…it‟s too

chaotic in KG. Madhoo Maam and Ambika Maam have fights. They are always

chatting or fighting and they make everyone do head down including me.”

Out of the 5 children who had made the transition from a separate setting one child (Muskan)

expressed feeling overwhelmed and anxious about the larger number of students and the

challenge of having to compete with so many for first position in her academics:

Muskan: In KG there were five of us and I studied nicely, in nursery and kg I came

first first.

Researcher: What is it like moving to Class one?

Muskan: Amamam!! Um I got really shocked…so many students!! My mother too was

shocked there were almost 50 students inside one class she said. I got very worried

and thought now who is going to come first out so many students.

4. 4 Summary of findings

This chapter has provided three key themes related to Indian children‟s experiences and

understandings of school. These have been discussed and compared to the international

research literature and are summarized below:

53

Key theme Indian Children’s experiences and

understandings

Children’s experiences and understandings

reported in research literature

Educational Environment

1) Continuity of educational experiences

across settings:

Play versus structured learning at

kindergarten

2) Experiences and Understandings on

moving to School

Indian children experienced greater

continuity of academic learning across

kindergarten and school settings and this

resulted in a positive and seamless transition

to school experience.

Indian children view school as a serious

place of learning where priority was given

to academics/learning and hard work. They

linked going to school with positive

benefits.

Demand for academic achievement in India

seemed more prevalent causing children to

experience much pressure around academic

success.

Western children experienced more play at

kindergarten and the lack of play at school

contributed to them feeling anxious about

school

Western children view school as a serious place

of learning where priority was given to

academics/learning and hard work. They linked

going to school with positive benefits.

Western children‟s concerns were mostly

associated to rules, new teachers, lack of play,

adjustment, friends etc.

Social Environment

Relationship with teachers

Relationship with Friends

Behaviour of peers/friends

Indian children‟s transition to school

experiences is shaped by the behavior and

attitude of their kindergarten and school

teachers.

Teachers who were harsh and used punitive

measures caused negative feelings in

children especially when in kindergarten. It

mattered to children about what teachers

thought and they were very happy when

their teachers appreciated their work and

gave them rewards for their achievements.

Moving to school with the same friends

from kindergarten; separation from friends

from kindergarten affected Indian children‟s

feelings about school.

Indian children experienced social stress

towards school when they came across

children who hit, behaved badly inside the

class, called others mean names, played in a

wild and unsafe manner especially the boys

during P.T. or lunch

Western children‟s transition to school

experiences is shaped by the behavior and

attitude of their kindergarten and school

teachers.

They had positive experiences with their

teachers in kindergarten finding them to be

good natured and kind. On moving to school

they were faced with teachers who often

scolded them and beat them and these

experiences led to negatives views about

moving to school.

Fear of not having friends; making new friends;

fear of rejection from peers caused feelings of

anxiety among Western children when

transitioning to school.

Western children experienced social stress

when they came across children who bullied,

pushed etc.

Physical Environment 75% children in this study made the All Western children made the transition from

54

transition within the same setting.

Indian children‟s foremost concern was the

appearance of the school/classrooms. In

particular well decorated school classrooms

added to their positive feelings about

school. They contributed towards decorating

their school/classrooms with charts,

drawings, paintings and handicraft with

enthusiasm. This gave them a sense of

happiness and belonging towards school.

one physical setting to another. Due to this they

were overwhelmed by the size of the buildings,

playground, larger number of children etc.

Also, finding their way around a new setting

caused in them anxiety.

In the conclusion that follows I will draw out the key implications of this research and

highlight ways in which further research on young children‟s transition to school can be

progressed.

55

CHAPTER FIVE

CONCLUSION

This study set out to address Indian children‟s experiences and understandings of Indian

children on transition from Kindergarten to school and to explore the similarities and

differences between the experiences and understandings of Indian children to children from

other countries.

5.1 Key findings

My research confirms that young children are competent informants of their lives. The

children in this study offered detailed and nuanced commentaries on their experiences of

transition and identified the factors that shaped their feelings and experiences of transition.

This honours and confirms child rights literature that highlights the value and importance of

offering young children opportunities to discuss issues that impact on their lives. It also

highlights that Article 12 of the UNCRC which states - “As holders of rights, even the

youngest children are entitled to express their views, which should be „given due weight in

accordance with the age and maturity of the child‟ (Article 12.1) can be enacted with children

5-7 years of age. In this way my study confirms it is essential that we take young children‟s

perspectives into consideration in research and listen to what children say about their

experiences and understandings on the transition to school. When we do this we create a

more balanced account of transition to school and in so doing are more likely to create

systems and policies that reflect teachers‟, parents‟ and children‟s experiences and

understandings of transition.

In addition, the children‟s commentaries confirmed that the the cultural context in which

children grow shapes their experiences and understandings of school (Fabian & Dunlop,

2007: 13). For example 70% of the children in this study understood that the most important

thing about school was to learn. Indian children take learning in school very seriously and

their reports on learning in school highlight the pressure within the Indian culture of being

successful and high achievers. Children in this study associated the importance of learning to

a number of positive benefits such as improving on their work habits/skills (e.g. handwriting,

drawing); gaining new knowledge; becoming clever; achieving well in their tests/exams;

gaining approval from teachers and parents and getting a good job/becoming successful in the

future. These understandings were not indicative of children from other countries (e.g.

56

America, Australia, New Zealand, United Kingdom and Europe) and indicate that cultural

values shape children‟s experiences and understandings of transition to school.

This finding aligns with an ecological perspective that highlights the ways in which

systems/contexts directly or indirectly influence the child. In addition in India kindergartens

and schools share similar pedagogical orientations and curricula and are most often co-

located – this influenced how children felt about transition. 90% Indian children in this study,

for example, spoke of the similarity in the structure systems at the two levels. Even those

children in this study who transitioned across different contexts still noted continuity in the

curriculum between kindergarten and school. This was markedly different to transition

studies undertaken in other countries such as where kindergartens and schools were very

different and not co-located.

Moreover a key finding of this study was the way in which young children‟s experiences and

understandings of transition were shaped by their social relationships with teachers, parents

and children. Several children brought up issues regarding their experiences with teachers

and parents and how these contributed to both negative and positive understandings on school

transitions. Children‟s commentaries indicate that in India both teachers and parents lay great

emphasis on the importance of not only succeeding but also high achievement in academic

subjects. The use of punitive measures such as scolding and beating by teachers and parents

in their effort to reinforce the importance of academic learning put Indian children under

immense pressure. The children reported their distress over making their parents angry or

being beaten by their parents. Teachers‟ emphasis on academic performance also impacted on

how children felt about going to school, and how teachers would fail them if they missed out

on an exam by being absent Alongside, gaining approval from their teachers and parents on

their school progress became integral for these Indian children. They felt encouraged and

eager to acquire excellent academic results on realising it would gain them commendation

and often rewards from their parents and teachers. This trait caused children to enjoy going to

school.

Continuity of friendships is an important aspect of transitioning to school for children in

India. In both cases, if in case of separation from friends and placed into different sections for

those transitioning within the same setting or separated because they have transitioned from

other settings, children experience unhappiness. Children‟s feelings towards school were also

shaped by the behaviour of their classmates/peers. Certain actions in particular of the boys‟

such as hitting, calling mean names, and the wild, unsafe behaviour during P.T./lunch breaks

57

and often in the classrooms when the teacher wasn‟t around instigated fear and dread among

children.

This finding confirms the new sociology of childhood perspective- children are active social

participants, capable of participating in relationships with others and actively co-constructing

their understandings in and through their relationships with others (Brooker, 2001). These

children‟s perspectives of school were shaped by their active role as learners and they

identified how relationships with teachers, parents and peers influenced how they felt about

transition and the kindergarten and school environments including learning, examinations etc.

This also confirms they are individuals and while they shared similar perspectives there were

also individual variations in experiences and attitudes.

It further confirms a key perspective embedded in the rights and transition literature that

experiences and understandings differ among children, even those children coming from

similar educational, socio-economic and cultural backgrounds, thus underlying that children

are not a homogenous group and the importance of listening to a variety of children‟s

perspectives in order to understand the transition experience (Docket & Perry, 2003; 2004).

5.2 Future implications

A significant feature that determines children‟s transition experiences is continuity of

teaching and learning approaches and content across settings. Unlike other transition studies,

Indian children‟s commentaries reveal an existence of continuity in learning across the

kindergarten and school settings, and the positive benefits this has in making their transition

to school experiences stress-free and seamless. Children particularly mentioned the transition

being an easy one because they began school with a revision of what they had learned in

kindergarten; doing the same subjects; use of series of similar looking text books; had begun

doing tests/exams from the kindergarten levels and continued the same in school etc.

Play-time in school appears as a major concern for children around the world and India.

While Indian children enjoyed continuity of learning they raised issues with playtime among

other issues regarding tests/exams and homework etc. across other transition studies this

study also found that serious learning in India took place from the kindergarten levels and

continued even in school, with utmost emphasis importance on academic learning and less on

play. Children from other studies recalled how positive their preschool experiences were

owing to the child-centred approach with lots of play-time and how moving to school was

difficult because of the lack of play-time. Thus more consideration given to including play

58

times in first year of school could be advantageous towards children‟s positive school

experiences.

Differing from other transition studies physical punishment appears as a culturally tolerated

means of reinforcing educational values in India. Children in this study expressed

apprehensions regarding pressure from teachers and parents to secure outstanding academic

results and this created a negative impact on children. Schools in India need to be aware that

such acts of punishment are not condoned in UNCRC and that these have adverse effects on

children going to school. Perhaps doing away with corporal punishments and replacing it

with being more informative in their communication with children for example instead of

scolding/beating a noisy child during class the teacher could inform the child that his

behaviour would disturb his classmates and hinder the completion of their work. Teachers

need to understand children are not a homogenous group and attempt to be more patient with

them and use words of encouragement. All this would enhance children‟s enjoyment of

school and allow them to work with ease rather than under pressure.

Social relationships with friends significantly influence children‟s experiences around school

transitions both in India and other transition studies. Anxiety over separation from friends and

finding/not finding new friends was a major issue for children transitioning from one setting

to another from other transition studies. In this study too children reported missing friends,

even for those making the transition within the same setting- having been together for the

past years (Montessori, L.KG and U.KG) and suddenly being separated into different sections

in class one Hence, with consideration to this concern brought up from listening to children,

placing children who know each other together in the first year of school to assure continuity

of friendships would add to children‟s positive experiences in school in India and all over.

Physical environment is an important aspect affecting children‟s transition experiences for

children in India making the transition within similar settings and/or across the globe where

children moving across settings. Appearance of the school affected children‟s outlook, in

particular nicely decorated schools and classrooms gave them a positive and happy feeling

about attending school. Moreover, they took joy and worked with enthusiasm to contribute in

making their physical environment look attractive and colourful. Such adornments and

having their own work put up for display gave children a sense of belonging and positive

feelings about school. This could be further enhanced by cutting down on academically

oriented classes and providing children with fun periods for drawing, colouring and doing

59

artwork. In this way they get to both enjoy extra-curricular activities more often as well as

more opportunities to contribute towards the school‟s physical environment.

For children across the globe where transition implicates moving across settings, experience

shock and are overwhelmed by the physical environment (size of buildings, older children,

larger number of children. Thus, having time in kindergarten to know new settings prior to

starting school could minimize feelings of anxiety towards school.

5.3 Methodological considerations

Drawings were a suitable method for consulting children in research in particular how the use

of drawings helps minimize unequal power relations (Brooker, 2001; Morrow, 1999; Punch,

2002) and allows children to feel more comfortable when they talk, as it can divert eye

contact (Dockett & Perry, 2007). These explanations were consistent with my research as use

of drawings did assist me to develop rapport and relationships with the participants before the

interviews. However, drawings as a method did not prove to be a clear source of information

about school as presented in Table Four of the Appendices which shows that children from

this study drew other things neither did they prove very useful in ascertaining all that children

shared in their interviews. I had asked the children to draw anything about their school and

what they thought about their school but I refrained from prompting the children or regularly

asking them the questions as I did not want to control how they understood my query nor

seem imposing as my use of drawings as a method was also to build rapport with the children

before the interviews. Perhaps for this reason I was not successful as other research studies

(e.g. Dockett and Perry, 2007; Einarsdottir, J. et.al, 2009) in gaining children‟s school

transitions experiences from drawings. Thus, this becomes a cultural consideration as Indian

children from this study preferred to give information about their transition to school

experiences by speaking and not through a drawing. It confirms Indian children understood

drawing as an extra-curricular activity at school that they enjoyed a lot, something they

would be evaluated for; and gain approval or recognition for if done well.

The main source of information was got from interviews. Employing interviews conforming

with recommendations provided by children researchers such as: use of drawings as a means

of building rapport and lessening unequal relationships (Brooker, 2001; Dockett&Perry,

2007; Morrow, 1999; Punch, 2002) semi-structured interviews as being a child-friendly

method (Conell, et.al, 2007); use of interviews allow an individual to think, talk and share

their experiences (Nunkoosing, 2005) and allows the interviewer time to explain, probe and

respond to children‟s questions (Adams & Schvaneveldt, 1991)for collecting data from

60

Indian children turned out to be successful method in gaining information on their transition

understandings and experiences. This establishes the use of interviews as a useful tool for

conducting research with children and a valuable source of information on children‟s school

experiences.

5.3 Limitations and future directions

The study raises further research questions. This study focuses on the experiences and

understandings of a small population of Indian children on transition from kindergarten to

school. Findings across the globe establish how children‟s commentaries differ from those of

adults e.g. teachers, parents, principals (e.g. Chan, 2012; Dockett & Perry 2007). Therefore, it

would be useful to conduct transition to school research in India in which the perspectives of

both children and adults (teachers and parents) are taken into consideration. Such research

could highlight how parents and teachers in India experience and understand transitions as

well as determine whether their perspectives are similar /dissimilar to those of Indian

children.

In addition, the 20 Indian children who were purposefully sampled in this study is a small

group. Forty percent of the 158.79 million children in India are 0-6 years of age (Census,

2011) of the Indian population. It is thus important a larger group of children from different

regions of India, and from diverse forms of educational settings or sectors providing early

childhood education in India and diverse approaches in curriculum (See Appendix 9) should

be consulted in order to determine whether the findings of this study is revelatory of the more

encompassing perspectives of young Indian children.India is a diverse country which

comprises 28 states and 7 Union territories and is multi-ethnic, multilingual and multi-

religious and while, research in this area in India would assist discussions/policy

developments on transition to school that suits the local context, further research is required

to establish whether children‟s views in this study are applicable to other contexts, and thus it

would be worthwhile to conduct research across other parts of the country as well.

Researchers establish that later learning is affected by how they experience transition in early

years (e.g. Dockett & Perry, 2004; Fabian & Dunlop, 2007; Kagan & Neuman, 1998;

Margetts, 2009; Peters, 2010). This study consulted children who had just completed (2

months) of transition from Kindergarten to school. Further research could be undertaken at a

later time of the class one year to establish whether children‟s experiences and

understandings of transition change over time. Thus, there is a need for a longitudinal

research in India on children‟s transition to school experiences and understanding.

61

In conclusion, through participation in this study, these young Indian children were able to

provide much information about their lives, in particular about their experiences in

transitioning to school. The findings of this study show that children have considerable

knowledge, experience and understandings of themselves and the environments in which they

grow. They were able to share their experiences and understandings about being in

Kindergarten; on their transition to school; their relationships with their teachers and peers;

and about the benefits and concerns about going to school etc. in a clear and detailed manner.

Moreover, their accounts have added to the literature and knowledge around children‟s

perspectives on the transition from kindergarten to school. For example, while there is much

similarity in the issues raised by children from this particular study and children across the

globe on transition to school, the major concerns for Indian children were also considerably

different to those children of other studies. This has confirmed that children‟s perspectives

are shaped by the cultural context in which they grow and the relationships through which

they co-construct meaning. With this in mind, children should be provided further

opportunities to take part in research as it gives us adults an opportunity to acquire a more

nuanced, detailed and realistic understanding of young children‟s lived experiences and

understandings on matters concerning them. However, it should be noted that conducting

research with children also brings with it a responsibility to take young children‟s views into

consideration when reframing policies and practices at the kindergarten and school contexts.

The opportunity to conduct this research has allowed me examine young Indian children‟s

experiences and understandings of transition to school. This research was conceived as a

means of addressing 1) a dearth of research on transition and 2) research involving young

children on issues around transition to school and children‟s rights. This research has

confirmed the value and importance of research with young children.

62

References:

Ackesjo, H. (2014). Children‟s Transitions to School in a Changing Educational Landscape:

Borders, Identities and (Dis-) Continuities. International Journal of Transitions in

Childhood, Vol.7.3-15

Adams, G. &Schvaneveldt, J. (1991).Understanding Research Methods – 2nd Ed. New

York: Longman Publishing Group.

Alderson, P. (2000). 12 Children as Researchers The Effects of Participation Rights on

Research Methodology. Research with children: Perspectives and practices, 241.

Alderson, P. (2008). Young Children's Rights: Exploring Beliefs. Jessica Kingsley Publishers.

Bhattacharya, A.K. (1981). Nutritional deprivation and related emotional aspects in Calcutta

children.Child Abuse and Neglect, 5(4), 467-474.

Bogdan, R., &Biklen, S. K. (2003). Qualitative research for education: An introduction to

theory and methods. Boston: Allyn and Bacon.

Boyle, Tess & Petriwskyj, Anne (2014) Transitions to school: reframing professional

relationships. Early Years: An International Research Journal, 34(4), pp. 392-404.

Bromstrom, S. (29 August to 1 September 2000). Communication & Continuity in the

Transition from Kindergarten to School in Denmark. Paper related to poster

symposium on “transition”. At EECERA 10th European Conference on Quality in

Early Childhood Education, University of London.

Bromstrom, S. (2003). Transition from Kindergarten to School in Denmark: building bridges.

In S. Bostrum and J. Wagner (Eds) Early Childhood Education in Five Nordic

Countries: Perspectives on the Transition from Preschool to School. Denmark: Trykt

hos Narayana Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979) The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and

Design. Cambridge, M: Harvard University Press.

Brooker, L. (2001). Interviewing children. In G. MacNaughton, S, A. Rolfe & I. Siraj-

Blatchford (Eds.) Doing Early Childhood Research International Perspectives on

Theory and Practice. (pp.162-173), Crows Nest Australia: Allen &Unwin.

63

Brooker, L. (2008). Supporting transitions in the early years. Maidenhead: Open University

Press.

Bryman, A. 2004. The nature of qualitative research.InSocial Research Methods (pp.265-

290). Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Chan, W. L. (2010). The Transition from Kindergarten to Primary School, as experienced by

Teachers, Parents and Children in Hong Kong. Early Child Development and Care,180(7),

973-993.

Chan, W. L. (2012). Expectations for the transition from kindergarten to primary school

amongst teachers, parents and children. Early Child Development and Care, 182 (5),

639-664.

Christensen, P. M., & James, A. (2000).Researching children and childhood: Cultures of

communication. In P. Christensen & A. James (Eds.), Research with children:

Perspectives and practices (pp. 1–8). New York: Falmer Press.

Christensen, P. & James, A. (2008). Researching with Children: Perspectives and Practices

(2nd

Edition). Routledge

Clark, A. and Moss, P. (2001). Listening to Young Children. The Mosaic Approach. London.

National Children‟s Bureau.

Clarke, C., Sharpe, P. (2003). Transition from Preschool to primary School: An overview of

the personal experiences of children and their parents in Singapore, Transitions.

European Early Childhood Educational Research Journal Monograph Series, 1: 15-

24

Clark, A. (2005) Listening to and involving young children: A review of research and

practice. Early Child Development and Care.175 (6): 489–505

Coady, M. 2001. Ethics in early childhood research. In G. MacNaughton, S. A. Rolfe & I.

Siraj-Blatchford (Eds.) Doing Early Childhood Research International Perspectives

on Theory and Practice.pp.64-74, Crows Nest Australia: Allen &Unwin

Cosaro, W. A. & Molinari, L. (2000).Priming events and Italian children‟s transition from

Preschool to primary School: Representation and action, Social Psychology

Quarterly, 63(1) pp16-33.

64

Creswell, J. W. 2007. Qualitative Inquiry & Research Design: Choosing Among Five

Approaches. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Denzin, N. K., & Lincoln, Y. S. (2005). The SAGE handbook of qualitative research.

Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications.

Dockett, S., and Perry, B. (1999). Starting School: What do children say? Early Child

Development and Care, 159: 107-119

Dockett, S. and Perry, B. 2001.Starting School: Effective Transitions.Early Childhood

Research and Practice.Volume 3 Number 2.http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v3n2/dockett.html

Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2004). Starting School: perspectives of Australian children, parents

and educators.Journal of Early Childhood Research, 2(2): 171-89.

Dockett, S., and Perry, B. (2005). Children‟s drawings: experiences and expectations of

School. International Journal of Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood.3(2): 77-

89

Dockett, S. & Perry, B. (2007). Children's transition to school: Changing expectations. In A-

W. Dunlop & H. Fabian (Eds.), Informing transitions in the early years: Research

policy and practice. (pp. 92-104). Maidenhead, England: Open University Press.

Dockett, S. and Perry, B. (2007).Transitions to School Perceptions, Expectations,

Experiences.Universityof New South Wales Press Ltd. Sydney

Dockett, S. and B. Perry. 2013. Families and the transition to school. In International

perspectives on transition to school: Reconceptualising beliefs, policy and practice,

ed K. Margetts and A. Kienig 111-121. Milton Park: Routledge.

Dunlop, A. W. (2002). „Perspectives on Children as learners in the transition to School‟. In

Fabian and, H. and Dunlop, A.W. (Eds.) Transitions in the Early Years: debating

continuity and progression for children in early education. London: Routledge

Falmer

Dunlop, A-W. 2013. Curriculum as a tool for change in transition practices: In International

perspectives on transition to school: Reconceptualising beliefs, policy and practice,

ed K. Margetts and A. Kienig 134-5-146. Milton Park: Routledge.

65

Einarsdottir, J. (2003). When the bell rings we have to go inside: Preschool children‟s views

on primary School. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, Themed

Monograph Series, 1: 35-50

Elliot, A. (2006). Early Childhood Education.Pathways for quality and equity for all

children, Australian Council for Educational Research, Melbourne.

Entwisle, D.R. and Alexander, K.L., (1998). Facilitating the transition to first grade: the

nature of transition and research on factors affecting it.Elementary School Journal.

98 (4): 351-64.

Ezron, M. (2013).Transitioning from early childhood to primary education: What the

practitioners say.International Journal of Management Sciences, 1(7), 228-231.

Fabian, H. (2002). Children starting school: A guide to successful transitions and transfers

for teachers and assistants. London: David Fulton.

Fabian, H. (2002). Empowering children for transitions.In H. Fabian& A.-W. Dunlop (Eds.),

Transitions in the early years (pp. 123–134). London: Routledge.

FabianH.,& Dunlop A.-W. (2006). Outcomes of good practice in transition processes for

children entering primary school.Paper commissioned for the EFA Global

Monitoring Report 2007, Strong Foundations: Early Childhood Care and Education,

Geneva.

Fabian, H. (2007). Informing transitions.In A.-W. Dunlop & H. Fabian (Eds.), Informing

transitions in the early years: Research, policy and practice (pp. 3–17). Maidenhead:

McGraw-Hill/Open University Press.

Fraenkel, J. R., &Wallen, N. E. (2000). How to design and evaluate research in education.

New York: McGraw-Hill Higher Education.

Freeman, M. &Mathison, S. (2009) Researching Children‟s Experiences. Guilford Press:

New York.

Garpelin, A. (2014). Transition to School: A Rite of Passage in Life International

Perspectives on Early Childhood Education and Development. In B. Perry, S.Dockett

and A. Petriwskyj (Eds).International Perspectives on Early Childhood Education

and Development 9.Transitions to School - International Research, Policy and

Practice.Springer Dordrecht Heidelberg New York London.

66

Ghai, 1975; Ghai, O.P. (1975).Effect of marasmic malnutrition on subsequent mental

development.Journal of Indian Pediatrics 12.

Gollop, M. (2000).Interviewing children: A research perspective.In A. B. Smith, N. J.

Taylor & M. M. Gollop (Eds.) Children‟s voices: Research, policy and practice.(pp.

18-36). Auckland: Pearson Education.

Graue, M. E., &Walshe, D. (1998).Studying children in context: theories and methods and

ethics. London. Sage Publications

Green, S. M. & Hill, M. (2005).Researching Children's Experience: Methods and

Approaches. Sage Publications Ltd

Griebel, W. and Niesel, R. (2002).Co-constructing transition in Kindergarten and School by

children, parents and teachers. In Fabian and, H. and Dunlop, A.W. (Eds.)

Transitions in the Early Years: debating continuity and progression for children in

early education. London: RoutledgeFalmer,

Griebel, W. &Niesel, R. (1999).“From Kindergarten to School: a Transition for the

Family,” 9th

European Conference on Quality in Early Childhood Education-How

does early childhood education lead to life-long learning?” Helsinki Finland

Gupta, A. (2007). Going to School in South Asia.Edited by Amita Gupta (2007). Greenwood

Press, Westport CT USA

Harradine, C. C., & Clifford, R. M. (1996). When are children ready for kindergarten? Views

of families, kindergarten teachers, and childcare providers. Paper presented at the

Annual Meeting of the American Educational Research Association, New York.

Hayes, J.; McLachlan, C. & Sewell, A. (2014).Starting School in New Zealand: Peer

Learning During the Transition to School.International Journal of Transitions in

Childhood. 7, 16-27

James, A. &Prout, A. (1990). Constructing and Reconstructing Childhood: Contemporary

Issues in Sociological Study of Childhood. London: Falmer.

James &Prout, 1997James, A. and Prout, A. (Eds) (1997) Constructing and Reconstructing

Childhood.Contemporary Issues in the Sociological Study of Childhood. London and

Washington, DC: Falmer Press.

67

Johansson, I. (2007) Horizontal transitions: what can it mean for children in the early years?

Pp. 33–44. In: Dunlop, A.-W. andFabian, H. (Eds) Informing Transitions in the Early

Years. Research, Policy and Practice.Maidenhead: The Open University Press.

Kagan, S.L. &Neuman, M. J. (1998).Lessons from three decades of transition research.The

Elementary School Journal. 98(4): 365-379.

Kagan, S.L. Lynn, S and Tarrant, K. (2010). Transitions for Young Children: Creating

Connections across Early Childhood Systems. Brookes Publishing Company. PO Box

10624, Baltimore.

Knudsen-Lindauer, S. L., & Harris, K. (1989). Priorities for kindergarten curricula: Views of

parents and teachers. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 4(1), 51-61.

Lansdown, G. (2005). Can you hear me? The right of young children to participate in

decisions affecting them. Working Paper 36. Bernard van Leer Foundation, The

Hague, The Netherlands

Lam, M.S. (2014) Transition to early childhood education: Parents‟ use of coping strategies

in dealing with children‟s adjustment difficulties in Hong Kong.Australian Journal of

Early Childhood.39(3): 111-120.

Lama, M.P. (2001).Sikkim Human Development Report.Government of Sikkim. Social

Science Press: New Delhi.

Ledger,E., Smith, A. and Rich, P. (1998). 'Do I go to school to get abrain? 'The transition

from kindergarten to school from the child's perspective, Childrenz Issues, 2 (1): 7-

11.

Leininger, M. M. (1985). Qualitative research methods in nursing.Orlando, Fla: Grune&

Stratton.

Lewit, E. M., & Baker, S. L. (1995).School readiness. The Future of Children, 5(2), 128-139.

Lincoln, Y.S. &Guba, E. G. (1985).Naturalistic Inquiry. Sage Publications: London.

MacNaughton, G., Smith, K., Hughes, P., Lawrence, H. &Olcay, M. (2006).Listening to

young children: new insights, challenges and possibilities. Melbourne: CEIEC

MacNaughton, G., Hughes, P., & Smith, K. (2007). Early childhood professionals and

children‟s rights: Tensions and possibilities around the United Nations General

68

Comment no. on children‟s rights. International Journal of Early Years Education,

15(2), 161–170.

Margetts, K. (July 14-17, 1999). “Transition to School: Looking Forward,” AECA National

Conference, Darwin.

Margetts, K. (2009). Early transition and adjustment and children‟s adjustment after six years

of schooling.Journal of European Early Childhood Education Research, 17(3), 309-

324.

Margetts, K. (2007). Preparing Children for School-Benefits and Privileges.Australian

Journal of Early Childhood. No. 2, pp 43-50

Margetts, K. (2007). Understanding and supporting children: shaping transition practices. In

H. Fabian and A-W Dunlop (Eds).Informing Transitions: Bridging Research, Policy

and Practice.(Chapter 8, pp 107-119). Open University Press: London

Mayall, B. (2002). Towards a sociology of childhood. Maidenhead, England: Open

University Press. Meadows, S., &Cashdan,

Miles, M. &Huberman, A. (1994).Qualitative Data Analysis.Sage.

Miles, M.B. &Huberman, M. (2002).The Qualitative Researcher‟s Companion. Sage

Ministry of Women and Child Development.(2007). Report of working group on

development of children for the eleventh five year plan (2007B 2012). New Delhi:

Government of India.

Ministry of Human Resource Development (2005).Department of Women of Children

Development.National Plan of Action for Children. New Delhi: Government of

India.

Mirkhil, M. (September 2010). "I want to play when I go to school:" Children's Views on the

transition to school from kindergarten. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood

35(3), 134-139.

Morrow, V. and Richards, M. (1996), The Ethics of Social Research with Children: An

Overview. Children & Society, 10: 90–105.

Moss, P. (2007).Meetings across the Paradigmatic Divide in Educational Philosophy and

Theory, Vol. 39, No. 3, Blackwell Publishing. USA.

69

National Institute of Public Cooperation and Child Development.(2007). Select Issues

concerning ECCE in India. Background paper prepared for Education for All Global

Monitoring Report 2007 Strong Foundations: Early Childhood Care and

Education.efareport@unesco.org

Nunkossing, K. (2005). The problems with interviews.Qualitative Health Research 15(5)

698-706

O‟kane, M. (2007). “The transition to School in Ireland: What Do the Children Say?”

International Centre for Early Childhood development and Education Conference,

Vision into Practice: Making Quality a Reality in the Lives of Young Children.

Patton, M. Q. (2001). Qualitative Research and Evaluation Methods (2nd Edition). Thousand

oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Patton, M.Q. (2002). Qualitative Research & Evaluation Methods CA: Sage

Paitnaik, J. (1998). Early Childhood Education India: History, Trends, Issues, and

Achievements. Early Childhood Education Journal, 24(1) 11-16

Peters, S. (29 August- 1 September 2000). Multiple perspectives on continuity in early

learning and transition to School.Paper presented at the European Early Childhood

Education Research Association Conference. London.

Peters, S. (2010). Shifting the lens: Re-framing the view of learners and learning during the

transition from early childhood education to school in New Zealand. In D. Jindal-

Snape (Ed.), Educational transitions: Moving stories from around the world (pp. 68–

84). New York: Routledge.

Petriwskyj, Anne (2005) Pedagogical Issues in Transition to School. In Enhancing Learning

and Teaching: Pedagogy, Technology and Language. Post Pressed, Australia,

Queensland, Flaxton, pp. 67-82.

Petriwskyj, A., Thorpe, K. and Tayler, C. (2005) „Trends in construction of transition to

school in three western regions, 1990–2004‟, International Journal of Early Years

Education, vol. 13, no. 1, pp. 55–69.

Petriwskyj, Anne (2010) Kindergarten transitions and linkages to primary school-readiness

reconceptualised. In Peterson, Penelope, Baker, Eva, & McGaw,

Barry (Eds.) International Encyclopedia of Education. Elsevier, Oxford, pp. 120-125.

70

Petriwskyj, Anne, Thorpe, Karen, & Tayler, Collette (2014) Towards inclusion: Provision for

diversity in the transition to school. International Journal of Early Years

Education, 22(4), pp. 359-379.

Pianta, R.C. & McCoy, S.J. (1997). The first day of school: The predictive validity of early

school screening. Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 18, 1-22

Pramling- Samuelsson, I. and Lindahl, M. (1991).Awareness and the real-life world, Infant‟s

First Experience in Preschool.Paper presented at the 10th

International Human

Science Research Conference, Goteborg, Sweden.

Pramling, I., &Willams-Graneld, P. (1993).Starting compulsory school.Preschool teachers‟

conceptions and children‟s experience.Paper presented at the OMEP Asia-Pacific

Region International Conference, Osaka, Japan.

Prasad, V., & Singh, D. (2002).The young child. In E.G.Thukral (Ed.), Children in

Globalizing India: Challenging our conscience.(pp. 139 164). New Delhi: HAQ:

Centre for Child Rights.

Press, F & Hayes. (2000). OECD Thematic Review of Early Childhood Education and Care

Policy: Australian Background Report, Commonwealth of Australia, Canberra.

Prout, A. (2003).Participation policy & childhood. In C. Hallet& A. Prout (eds) Hearing the

voices of children: Social policy for a new century. London: RoutledgeFalmer. 11-25

Pocock, B.; Hill, E. & Elliot, A. (2007). Introduction in Kids Count: Better early childhood

education and care in Australia, Sydney University Press, Sydney.

Podmore, V.N. &Mapa, L. (2003). Sociocultural Perspectives on Transition to School from

Pacific Islands Early Childhood Centres. International Journal of Early Years

Education. 11(1): 33-42.

Potter, G. & Briggs, F. (2003). Children talk about their early experiences at School.

Australian Journal of Early Childhood. 28(3): 44-49.

Punch, S. 2002, Research with children: The same or different from research with adults?

Childhood.9(3), 321-41.

71

RamazanSak, İkbal Tuba ŞahinSak&NuranTuncer. (2016) Turkish Preschool Children's

Perceptions and Expectations Related to 1st-Grade Education, Childhood Education,

92:2, 149-154.

Ramey, S.L. & Ramey, C.T. (1998). The Transition to School: Opportunities and Challenges

for Children, Families, Educators, and Communities. The ElementarySchool Journal,

Vol. 98, 4, 293-295.

Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. Oxford: Oxford University

Press.

Sahin, İ. T., Sak, R., &Tuncer, N. (2013). A comparison of preschool and first grade teachers

views about school readiness. Educational Sciences: Theory & Practices, 13(3), 1691-1713

Sharpe, P. (2002). School days in Singapore: Young children‟s experiences and opportunities

during a typical School day. Childhood Education. 79: 9-14

Silverman, D. (2001). Doing Qualitative research: A practical handbook. London: Sage

Swaminathan, M. (1996).Introduction: Proceedings of Consultation on NGO Government

Partnership for Child Care, Madras. Tamil Nadu: Indian Council for Child Welfare

& M.S. Swaminathan Research Foundation.

Tisdall, E. Kay M., John M. Davis, and Michael Gallagher. Researching with Children and

Young People: Research Design, Methods and Analysis. Los Angeles: SAGE.

UNCRC (United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child) (2006) A Guide to General

Comment7:„Implementing Child Rights in Early Childhood‟The Hague: Bernard van

Leer Foundation

Volger, P; Crivello, G. and Woodhead, M. (2008) Early childhood transitions research: A

review of research, theory, and practice.Working Paper No. 48. The Hague, The

Netherlands: Bernard Van Leer Foundation.

White, G. & Sharp, C. (2007). 'It is different...because you are getting older and growing up.'

How children make sense of the transition to year one.European Early Childhood

Education Research Journal, 15(1), 87-102.

Wong, C. (2003). A study of Children‟s Difficulties in Transition to School in Hong Kong,

Early Childhood Development and Care,173(1): 83-96

72

Wong, M. (2016), A longitudinal study of children's voices in regard tostress and coping

during the transition to school, Early Child Development and Care, 186:6, 927-946.

Woodrow, C. (1999). Revisiting images of the child in early childhood education: Reflections

and considerations.Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 24(4), 7-12

Yeo, L. S. & Clarke, C. (2005). Starting School- a Singapore story told by children.

Australian Journal of Early Childhood.30(3): 1-8

73

APPENDICES

Appendix 1: The Indian Context

India is a nation that is multi-ethnic, multireligious, and multilingual and comprises of 28

states and 7 territories (Library of Congress, 2004; Gupta, 2007). Following China, it is the

second most populated country in the world, with a population of 1.21 billion out of which

40% constitute of children with 158.79 million being children in the 0-6 age group (Census,

2011). The priority given to the needs of children in India dates back to thousands of years

but initiatives directed towards early childhood development and care are documented from

the nineteenth century (Swaminathan, 1996). In recent decades particular attention has been

directed towards strengthening and expanding early childhood services (Ghai, 1975;

Bhattacharya, 1981; Paitnaik, 1998; Gupta, 2007).

After gaining independence, the Indian Constitution was framed in 1950. Constitutionally,

the responsibilities for the provision of early childhood services were divided between the

Federal and the State Governments. The Indian Constitution recognised the significance of

early childhood care and education for children‟s long term development and has guided

policy formation in India. The Fundamental Right, Article 15(3) of the Constitution affirms:

“Nothing in this Article shall prevent the State from making special provisions for women

and children.” Against this background policies within the Directive Principles of State

Policy of the Constitution of India were developed to support the strengthening of early

childhood care and education. The significant Articles included: Articles 24, 39(e) and (f),

42, 45 and 47 as they give attention to benefits for a child‟s welfare such as prevention of

deployment of children below 14 years of age in harmful livelihoods, protection against

manipulation and ethical and material abandonment and raising the level of nutrition and

health and the provision of free and compulsory education for children under 14 years of age.

More recently, the development of policies and planning for early childhood development in

India has evolved from welfare to rights (MoCWD, 2007). Article 21-A in the Indian

Constitution (86th Amendment) Act 2002 clearly specifies that elementary education as a

fundamental right, thus implying that every child has a right to education. This has resulted in

recent and significant legislation, Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education

(RTE) Act, 2009, which became operative on 1st April, 2010. This was significant as Article

45 of The Constitution (Eighty-sixth Amendment) Act, directed the State to “provide free and

compulsory education to all children up to the age of fourteen” it not obligate/compel the

state/government to provide preschool education for young children as it states: “The State

74

shall endeavour to provide early childhood care and education for all children until they

complete the age of six years.”

Over the decades there have been a number of initiatives directed towards the provision for

early childhood care and education (ECCE) services in India (MoCWD, 2007; Sharma). The

establishment of the National Policy on Education (NPE) in 1969, which called for a child

centred approach in primary School education, was a useful mechanism for preparing early

childhood policy in India. In addition the conceptualisation of early childhood education as

an investment by the Ministry of Human Resource Development (MHRD) saw the

establishment of the Department of Women and Child Development (DWCD) which, in turn,

developed a National Plan of Action for Children (NPAC) in 1992 in order to implement the

plans of National Policy of Education (NPE). NPAC for Children aimed to ensure the UN

Declaration of Rights was implemented in order to address the issues of child development

and child protection.” For example one key goal of the NPAC is to provide free and

compulsory education to all children in the 6-14 years of age (NPAC, 2005: 24).

Another major initiative by the Government of India that are aimed towards achieving its

goal of universalizing early childhood education was the launch of the Integrated Child

Development Scheme (ICDS) on 2nd

October 1975. The ICDS was a non-formal Preschool

education service that was established to provide for the holistic development in the children

0-6 years of age. Preschool education specifically aimed to 1) prepare children for primary

Schooling and 2) offer substitute care for the younger siblings to free the older siblings –

especially girls to attend school. This initiative has been recognized as one of the main

contributions made by the government to achieve its aim of universalizing education for ECE

under EFA, as envisaged in the Dakar conference held in April, 2000.

Other initiatives towards building and strengthening early childhood services included the

District Primary Education Programme (DPEP), in 1994. The purpose under the DPEP was to

integrate preschools with primary schools. This was proposed through (a) reallocating the

ICDS centres to primary school premises, and (b) matching the timings with primary Schools

(MoCWD, 2007). The recent Sarva Shiksha Abhiyan (SSA) (Hindi expression for the

'Education for All' Movement, www.ssa.nic.in/) which was launched in 2001 to ensure the

continuation of these initiatives. These government programmes or Early Childhood Care and

Education (ECCE) centres have been designed to support children with their transition to

primary school. The NPE and NPAC recommend that the ECCE centres be child oriented

75

with more focus on play and less/no formal methods of the 3 Rs (Reading, Writing and

Arithmetic).

In recent years the policies relating to early childhood development in India have evolved

from welfare to rights-based initiatives (MoCWD, 2007). Globally, India is a signatory of the

United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child (UNCRC, 1989); the World Conference

on Education for All (1990) World Education Forum (2000) and United Nations Millennium

Declaration and Millennium Development Goals (MDGs). Article 21-A in the Indian

Constitution (86th Amendment) Act 2002, for example, clearly specifies elementary

education as a fundamental right, This has resulted in recent and significant legislation, the

Right of Children to Free and Compulsory Education (RTE) Act, 2009, which became

operative on 1st April, 2010. This has led to noticeable progress in provision and attendance

of young children in early education and care services for children in India. As per the

District Information System for education, enrolments at elementary level increased from 169

million in 2005-06 to 188 million in 2009-10 in India (DISE, 2011) and the number of out of

School children has reduced from approximately 32 million in 2002-03 to 7.06 million in

2006. However, whether the country will achieve its goal and commitment to the above

mentioned international organizations in universalizing education is a longer-term task and

remains to be seen.

ECEC in Kalimpong

This study has been undertaken in a School in Kalimpong town in West Bengal, India. With a

small area of 1,056 km2 and an elevation of 1,250 metres Kalimpong is one of the three

subdivisions of the Darjeeling District. (http://darjeeling.gov.in/kalimpong.html) According

to the last Census of India (2001) Kalimpong‟s population was 42,980.

(http://www.censusindia.net/results/town.php)

The Darjeeling District is the northern-most district of the State of West Bengal in India. It is

commonly known as „Darjeeling Hills‟ or „Darjeeling Himalayas‟ as it is located at the

foothills of the Himalayas. (Khawas, 2000: 2). In common with other parts of India, it is a

district that is multi-ethnic, multi-lingual and multi-cultural. Some of the major ethnic groups

in the Darjeeling are the Nepalese (with more than 15 ethnic groups, castes and tribes e.g.

Rai; Sherpas; Limboo) and the Lepchas (Khawas, 2000). Examples of the non-native groups

are the Tibetans, Bengalis, Chinese, Marwaris and Biharis. Languages spoken are

predominantly Nepali, followed by Hindi, English, Bengali (Khawas, 2000).

76

The Darjeeling District is well known for providing the best schools in the entire Eastern

Himalayan region (Lama, 2001: 55). These have attracted numerous students from other parts

of India (e.g. Bihar, North-eastern states) as well as students from neighbouring countries

(e.g. Bhutan, Nepal, Bangladesh) (Lama, 2001: 55). However, there are no official

documents providing details about the education system in Kalimpong.

Since there are no documents providing details about the education system in Kalimpong the

information provided below was given to me by the Office of the Sub-Inspector of Schools,

Kalimpong Primary Education Sector Dealing Officials: Mrs. Gita Sherpa and Mr. Pemba

Sherpa.

a) Primary schools in Kalimpong are registered with the Darjeeling District School Board in

Darjeeling (DDSB). The DDSB in turn is directly under the West Bengal State Government

Directorate of School Education. The registered schools in Kalimpong are categorized into:

i) Kalimpong Intensive (Rural) Area. The number of primary schools that have been

registered in this area is 81. Here children are enrolled into school at the ages of 4, 5 and 6

ii) Kalimpong Urban (town) Area. The number of primary schools registered in this area is

17. Here children are enrolled into school at the age of 3 onwards.

b) The primary schools in Kalimpong are established in the following Sectors: follow

formatting

i) Government sector- fully funded and governed by the State/Central Government: The

government funds the free issue of books, mid-day meals, teacher‟s salaries and school

maintenances in these schools and oversees the governance of these schools. The government

primary schools are also called Junior Basic Schools. Normally these primary schools

commence only from class 1. However depending upon the need (e.g. under aged children,

no other schools in the locality) some schools also cater to pre-primary requirements. Source

Pre-primary is referred to as „Nursery‟. In this section they have 1-A, 1-B and 1-C. 1-B and

1-C cater to pre-primary requirements and 1-A is where Class 1 commences. Source Some

primary schools cater up to Class 4 and some up to Class 6. The stipulated teacher child ratio

for all registered schools is 1:40. Teaching in government primary schools is in the local

vernacular which in the Darjeeling District is Nepali. English is taught as a subject.

ii) Semi-Government Sector- registered with the Government and fulfilling various criteria as

stipulated by the Education Board to ensure parity of education. Teachers‟ salaries are paid

77

by the Government as per Government scales but all other charges are on school account-

raised through fees.

iii) Private Sector- fulfills the stipulated criteria by the Education Board but charge fees and

pay teachers‟ salaries in accordance to the school expenses. Some schools in the private

sector have been established to cater specifically to pre-primary requirements following

methodologies based on western influences (e.g. Montessori, Froebel). Schools under the

private sectors use English as a medium of instruction/teaching is done in the English

language from the pre-primary levels. Private sectors desiring recognition need to be

registered with the DDSB.

c) The minimum qualification required of a primary school teacher is a pass in the Class 10

or 12 Board Examination.

There are two teacher training centres in the Darjeeling District namely

1) Government Teacher Training Institute which is in Kalimpong

2) Junior Bachelor of Training College which is in Darjeeling.

However, teachers teaching at the primary levels are categorized into:

i) „A‟ Category or Trained

ii) „B‟ Category or Untrained

d) Integrated (ICDS) and Shishu Shiksha Kendras (SSK) schools are other establishments in

Kalimpong. There are approximately 300 ICDS centres divided into 3 blocks in the

Kalimpong sub-division. (Kalimpong, ICDS Office). The SSK was launched by the State

Government of West Bengal in 1997-998 with the aim of universalizing primary education.

78

Appendix 2: Plain Language Statement for Principal

Project title: Indian Children‟s Experiences and Understandings on the Transition from

Kindergarten to Grade One

Respected Principal/Directress,

This research project is being conducted as part of a Masters study by Mrs.Anandi Sharma

under the supervision of Dr. Jane Page and Lecturer PrasannaSrinivasan of the Centre for

Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood (CEIEC), at the University of Melbourne.

This research project aims to explore the experiences and understandings of young children

in India on the transition from Kindergarten to Grade One. In order to do this the researcher

will undertake interviews and drawing sessions to gather information, from 24 children

studying in Grade One of a primary School in India.

If you choose to allow 24 students studying in Grade One of your School to participate in this

study, each one of them will be involved in drawing and a semi-structured interview, which

will last for about thirty minutes each. The interviews and drawing commentaries will be

audio recorded.

You can be assured that the participating students‟ contribution as well as your School‟s

name will remain anonymous in the study as pseudonyms will be used in place of their real

names.

You can also be assured that all the data and information got from your child will remain

confidential. The data will be kept safely in locked facilities of the researcher‟s home, to

which only the researcher will have access throughout her stay in India for data collection.

On returning to Melbourne after data collection, apart from the research Supervisors no one

else will have access to the data collected.

The data will be locked in a separate filing cabinet in the CEIEC at the University of

Melbourne for five years before being destroyed. Feedback will be provided and results from

the research will be made available to you on completion of the thesis arising from this

research project.

Your decision to allow the students from your School to participate is entirely voluntary and

you can withdraw their participation at any time without comment or penalty.

79

This project has been given clearance from the Human Research Ethics Committee in

Melbourne.

Should you decide to have your students participate, you will need to sign a consent form

which will be kept by the researcher,

If you have any ethical concerns or complaints concerning ethical conduct of this research

project, you can direct them to the-

Executive Officer

Human Research Ethics,

The University of Melbourne

Ph: 83442073

Fax: 93476739

If you have any questions relating to this research project please feel free to contact the

researcher or the research Supervisors.

Contact for Research Supervisors

1) Dr. Jane Page

Deputy Director Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood and

Assistant Dean (Equal Opportunity)

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

East Wing, Elisabeth Murdoch building

The University of Melbourne

Tel: 613 8344 4502

Fax: 613 9347 9380

Email: jpage@unimelb.edu.au

2) Lecturer, PrasannaSrinivasan

Room G, 42 B, Elisabeth Murdoch Building,

80

Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood,

Melbourne Graduate School Studies,

The University of Melbourne

Tel: 03 8344 4025

Email: srip@unimelb.edu.au

Contact for Researcher

Mrs Anandi Sharma

Researcher (Masters Student)

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

The University of Melbourne

Tel: 274056 (India)

Mobile: 0091 9832535522 (India)

0061 449924673 (Australia)

Email: a.sharma6@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au

Thank you for taking the time to read this research information sheet.

Yours sincerely,

Mrs Anandi Sharma Norbu

81

Appendix 3: Consent Form for Principal

Project Title: Indian Children‟s Understandings and Experiences on the Transition from

Kindergarten to Grade One

This research project is being conducted by Anandi Sharma under the supervision of Dr. Jane

Page and Lecturer PrasannaSrinivasan in the Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early

Childhood (CEIEC) at the University of Melbourne, as part of a Masters of Education

This research project aims to explore the experiences and understandings of young children

in India on the transition from Kindergarten to Grade One.

On signing this consent form you are indicating that you:

• Have received, read and understood the information sheet concerning the research

project.

• Have had any questions answered to my satisfaction.

• Have had the opportunity to ask further questions and have them answered by

contacting the researcher.

• Agree to have 24 students studying in Grade One of my School to be individually

interviewed, take part in drawing and have the interviews and commentaries made on the

drawing audio-recorded.

• Understand that anonymity of my School and participating students will be preserved.

• Understand that confidentiality of all data and information got from the participating

students will be preserved

82

• Know that my decision to allow 24 children from my School to participate in this

research project is entirely voluntary, and I can withdraw my School from the research

project at any time, including withdrawal of any information the participants have provided;

and that there will not be any comment or penalty for doing so.

• Understand that after I have signed this consent form it will be kept by the researcher.

Name of Principal: ______________________________

Signed: _________________________

Date: ____________________

83

Appendix 4: Plain Language Statement for Parents/Guardians

Project title: Indian Children‟s Experiences and Understandings on the transition from

KindergartenPreschool to Grade One

Dear Parent/Guardian,

This research project is being conducted as part of a Masters study by Mrs.Anandi Sharma

under the supervision of Dr.Jane Page and Lecturer PrasannaSrinivasan of the Centre for

Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood (CEIEC), at the University of Melbourne.

This research project aims to explore the experiences and understandings of young children

in India on the transition from Kindergarten to Grade One. In order to do this the researcher

will undertake interviews and drawing sessions to gather information, from 24 children

studying in Grade One of a primary School in India.

If you decide to allow your child to participate in this study, she will be involved in drawing

and a semi-structured interview, which will last for about thirty minutes. The interview and

drawing commentaries will be audio recorded.

You can be assured that his/her contribution will remain anonymous in the study as

pseudonyms will be used in place of your child‟s real name.

You can also be assured that all the data and information got from your child will remain

confidential. The data will be kept safely in locked facilities of the researcher‟s home, to

which only the researcher will have access throughout her stay in India for data collection.

On returning to Melbourne after data collection, apart from the research Supervisors no one

else will have access to the data collected.

The data will be locked in a separate filing cabinet in the CEIEC at the University of

Melbourne for five years before being destroyed. Feedback will be provided and results from

the research will be made available to you on completion of the thesis arising from this

research project.

Your decision to allow your child to participate is entirely voluntary and you can withdraw

your child‟s participation at any time without comment or penalty.

This project has been given clearance from the Human Research Ethics Committee in

Melbourne. Should you decide to have your child participate, you will need to sign a consent

form which will be kept by the researcher.

84

If you have any ethical concerns or complaints concerning ethical conduct of this research

project, you can direct them to the-

Executive Officer

Human Research Ethics,

The University of Melbourne

Ph: 83442073

Fax: 93476739

If you have any questions relating to this research project please feel free to contact the

researcher or the research Supervisors.

Contact for Research Supervisors

1) Dr. Jane Page

Deputy Director Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood and

Assistant Dean (Equal Opportunity)

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

East Wing, Elisabeth Murdoch Building

The University of Melbourne

Tel: 613 8344 4502

Fax: 613 9347 9380

Email: jpage@unimelb.edu.au

2) Lecturer, PrasannaSrinivasan

Room G, 42 B, Elisabeth Murdoch Building,

Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood,

Melbourne Graduate School Studies,

85

The University of Melbourne

Tel: 03 8344 4025

Email: srip@unimelb.edu.au

Contact for Researcher

Mrs.Anandi Sharma

Researcher (Masters Student)

Melbourne Graduate School of Education

The University of Melbourne

Tel: 03552 274056 (India)

Mobile: 0091 9832535322 (India)

0061 449924673 (Australia)

Email: a.sharma6@pgrad.unimelb.edu.au

Thank you for taking the time to read this information sheet.

Kind regards,

Anandi Sharma

86

Appendix 5: Consent Form for Parents/Guardians

Project Title: Indian Children‟s Perspectives on the transition from Kindergarten to Grade

One

This research project is being by Anandi Sharma as part of her Masters of Education under

the supervision of Dr. Jane Page and Lecturer PrasannaSrinivasan who are both from the

Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood (CEIEC) at the University of

Melbourne for this research project.

This research project aims to explore the experiences and understandings of young children

in India on the transition from Kindergarten to Grade One.

On signing this consent form you are indicating that you:

• Have received, read and understood the information sheet concerning the research

project.

• Have had any questions answered to my satisfaction.

• Have had the opportunity to ask further questions and have them answered by

contacting the researcher.

• Agree to have my child take part in drawing and an interview and have his/her

drawing commentaries and interview audio-recorded.

• Understand that anonymity of my child will be preserved.

• Understand that confidentiality of all data and information got from my child will be

preserved

87

• Know that your decision to allow my child to participate is entirely voluntary and that

I my child can withdraw at any time from the research project, including withdrawal of any

information my child has provided; and that there will not be any penalty or comment for

doing so.

• Understand that after I sign this consent form it will be kept by the researcher.

Name of Parent/Guardian: _________________________________________

Signed: ____________________

Date: ____________________

88

Appendix 6: Plain Language Statement for Children

Project Title: Indian Children‟s Experiences and Understandings on the Transition from

Kindergarten to Grade One

Hello Children! I am Anandi Sharma. I am a student at the University of Melbourne and I

would like to invite you to take part in a project that I am doing. When I finish my project it

will be part of my degree called a “Masters”. My teachers, Dr. Jane Page and Lecturer

PrasannaSrivnivasan are helping me with my project. They are called my “Supervisors” and

they work at the Centre for Equity and Innovation in Early Childhood.

Your School Principal, Mrs LalitaPradhan has given me permission to send you this letter.

After listening to this letter, you can decide if you would like to take part in this project. Your

parents have also agreed for you to take part in my project, if you are interested.

Since I know that you have been coming to School, I hope you might tell me what School is

like. If you do so I can tell your parents, teachers and Principal. Then your School can

become a better School.

If you choose to take part, I will be asking you to share with me your experiences and

thoughts about going from Kindergarten to Grade One. I will also be asking you to draw

pictures of what it is like at School. For this I am going to visit you once for about thirty

minutes. I will be using a tape-recorder to record whatever you speak about to help me

remember everything you have said to me.

Only my Supervisors and I will know what you have said to me, nobody else will know

because I will not use your real names for this project. So you do not have to worry at all. If

you like you can choose a name or I can choose one for you.

Remember that if you do not want to draw what I ask you to or answer a question you don‟t

have to. You can even stop any time and take a break and finish later or you can tell me that

you don‟t want to do it anymore. I will not be angry with you.

If you have any questions you can talk to your Principal or teachers or parents. If they are

unable to answer them for you then they can ask me or my Supervisors, or the Research

Ethics Office at the University for you.

I will need to know whether you would like to take part in this project or not. For this you

just have to write Yes or No and your name and the date on a consent form that I have

89

prepared for you. I will keep your consent form safely after you have completed it. Thank

you very much for giving me your time in listening to this letter.

90

Appendix 7: Consent Form for Children

My name is _____________________________________________________.

Put a tick √ inside the square boxes.

Anandi

I know I don‟t have to do this

By saying Yes means that:

I will be drawing pictures about my time in School and talking about my drawing to Anandi.

I will be answering questions that Anandi asks me, about my experiences and thoughts about

I know that whatever I tell Anandi will be tape-

I know that my real name will not be used for the project so no one will know what I have

told Anandi

Fill in the blank by writing YES if you want to take part in my project OR writing NO if you

do not want to take part in my project

I would like to say ____________ to taking part in this research project.

Do you have a name other than your own, that you would like me to use when I talk about

what you have said?

YES NO

Name: -----------------------------------------------------

91

Appendix 8: List of interview questions

1. Would you like to tell me about your Kindergarten experiences?

2. Can you tell me about how you spend your time in school?

3. Can you tell me about moving from Kindergarten to Grade One?

4. Is Kindergarten different from Grade One? Why do you say so?

5. What is the most important thing about school? / What does school mean to you?

92

Appendix 9: Research Impact and Tensions

There were several factors that adversely impacted on the enactment of my research with the

children as well as the completion of my thesis and these have been specified below.

Easter holidays

I had arrived in Kalimpong in April on a month‟s data collection duration. Apart from the

unexpected strikes and closures, it was also when the schools closed for the Easter holidays

from 2nd

April to 5th

April, 2010 and during this time I did not have access to the children,

teachers or parents. The time lapse also caused a breach in the continuity of inter-action with

the children, which meant having to re-establish rapport with them as I was actually not a

regular face as one of their own teachers.

First Unit tests

My visit also co-incided with the School First Unit Tests that were from the 6th

to 13th

April,

2010. This was a time when the children needed to concentrate on their own studies and my

inter-acting with them at this stage would be a distraction. Even the parents had to be assured

that my inter-action with the children would not interfere in their normal school routine and

especially their Tests. Immediately after their First Unit tests the school remained closed on

the 14th

of April for Pahilo Baishak (Nepali New Year)

Political Unrest

During the enactment of my research project the Darjeeling Hills Sub-Division (of which

Kalimpong is one sub-division) was essentially in the midst of an ongoing political upheaval

known as the Gorkhaland Agitation or the demand for a separate Statehood which in fact

goes back to the 1980s. This phase was when the Agitation was at its peak and the relentless

social disturbances, which were part of the people‟s movement, had heightened to a point of

severe disruption of everyday life (Khawas, 2000). Some that affected the smooth progress of

my research work particularly from the 23rd

of April, 2010 onwards included:

Abrupt Strikes which include closure of vehicular movement/closure of

schools/closure of government and local offices, markets and generally brought life to

a standstill in the District.

93

The agitation also brought with it recurring incidents of murder, arson and violence

that created an atmosphere of fear and apprehension.

As a result one of the lessons that I learnt as a researcher was that while it is important and

useful to plan the study, unwarranted circumstances and situations do occur, which should be

provisionally considered in the process of planning the research.

Disruption and non-supply of electricity

One major factor I had not contended with was the non-availability of electricity. As part of

the on-going political agitation in the District of Darjeeling one of the non-co-operative

movements adopted by the agitating ruling party was non-payment of Government bills

which included electricity bills, motor-vehicle taxes and telephone bills. The non-payment of

Electricity Bills continued from almost the beginning of April 2008 to July, 2011

(www.kalimponginfo). On the part of the Department of Electricity, while supply of

electricity was not altogether withdrawn, they implemented drastic and erratic power cuts.

This was a major disruption and frustrating experience mainly considering the time frame

within which the data collected was to be written and recorded thus impacting on my ability

to complete all the transcripts, conduct member checking to increase validity, data analysis

and thesis write up.

94

Appendix 10: Principles outlined in the student School diary on Examinations and

Tests:

“Promotion depends on the cumulative assessment of pupils throughout the whole year and

not on the basis of their achievement in any particular examination. It is to be noted that a

student who has failed to appear for his/her Annual examination due to medical reason, is

NOT eligible for promotion to higher class unless s/he has passed the Half Yearly

Examination on the whole and ALL the Term Tests.”

95

List of Tables

Table One: Arrangements and Timings for Preschool/Kindergarten and School

Level No. of children in a

single class/section

Staff Timings

Montessori 30 (approx.) 1 Teacher

1 Helper

8:45am-11:45am (2 hrs. only

everyday)

Lower

Kindergarten

(L.KG)

30 (approx.) 1 Teacher

1 Helper

8:30am-11:15am (morning half)

11:15am-12:00pm (45mins

lunch break)

12:00pm-2:20pm (afternoon

half)

2:20pm (School gives over)

Upper

Kindergarten

(U.KG) Three

Sections

35 (approx.) in each

section

1 Teacher

1 Helper

8:30am-11:15am (morning half)

11:25am-12:00pm (35 mins

lunch break)

12:00pm-2:35pm (afternoon

half)

2:35pm (School gives over)

Class One

Four Sections

35-45(approx.) in

each section

1 Teacher 8:30am-12pm (morning half)

12:00pm-12:30pm (30 mins

lunch break)

12:30pm-2:45pm (afternoon

half)

2:45pm (School gives over)

96

Class Two

Four Sections

35-45 (approx.) in

each section

1 Teacher 8:30am-12pm (morning half)

12:00pm-12:30pm (30 mins

lunch break)

12:30pm-2:55pm (afternoon

half)

2:55pm (School gives over)

97

Table Two: Research Participants

Names of Participants (Pseudonyms) Gender Date of Birth

1. Amrita Female 16.09.2003

2. Apriti Female 08.01.2004

3. Barbie Female 23.04.2004

4. Deki Dolma Female 24.04.2004

5. Dolly Female 03.06.2004

6. Muskan (new entrant) Female 14.10.2003

7. Neha Female 31.10.2004

8. Pinky Female 09.01.2004

9. Preity Female 26.05.2004

10. Sushmita (new entrant) Female 21.02.2004

11. Benten Male 27.12.2003

12. Deepesh Male 29.12.2003

13. LhasangLepcha Male 02. 04 2004

14. Panu Male 18.04.2004

15. Pranab Male 25.04.2004

16. Prashant Male 05.09.2003

17. Rajdip (new entrant) Male 05.2.2004

18. Sandipan (new entrant) Male 29.09.2004

19. Sasan Male 14.12.2003

20. Suraj (new entrant) Male 17.04.2004

98

Table Three: Timeframe for Data Collection

Months, Dates and Days Activity

March 12th 2010 (Friday)

March 15th

2010 (Monday)

March 16th

2010 (Tuesday)

March 17th

(Wednesday)-26th

(Friday) , 2010

Leave for India for data collection

Contact the Directress Miss Lalita Pradhan by

phone

Visit the Directress and if possible begin Voluntary

work at the school the very day.

Voluntary work to familiarize with selected school

and likely participants

Organize an agenda for data collection

Complete procedures of Plain Language

Statements and Consent forms with parents and

children

March 29th

(Monday)- April 8th

(Thursday), 2010

April 9th

-12th

, 2010

April 13th

(Tuesday)- April 16th

(Friday), 2010

April 19th

(Monday) – 22nd

(Friday), 2010

Begin data collection.

Transcription and ongoing analysis

Contact Supervisors via e-mail to inform them of

the progress.

School closes for Easter break

Continue with transcription and on going analysis

Member checking with participants from the

completed transcripts

Continue with data collection

Transcription and ongoing analysis

Contact Supervisors via e-mail to inform them of

the progress

Member checking using the completed transcripts

from the second half of data collection.

Extend my gratitude towards the Directress and

participants

99

Table Four: Research Data record/interviews/drawings

Names of

Participants

(Pseudonyms)

Gender Date of

Birth

(DOB)

Language

preferred by

participant

for interview

Interviews

Year, month, minutes,

length: page/lines

Drawings

sb/cl/h/p/s/o

Amrita Female 16.09.2003 Nepali 2010/04/34:24 / 22/ 565 h

Apriti Female 08.01.2004 Nepali 2010/04/34:11 / 16/ 728 o

Barbie Female 23.04.2004 Nepali 2010/04/26:49 / 13/369 h

Deki Dolma Female 24.04.2004 Nepali 2010/04/12:54 / 10/250 h/s

Dolly Female 03.06.2004 Nepali 2010/04/20:51 / 12/299 sb

Muskan Female 14.10.2003 English and

Nepali

2010/04/42:28 / 26/669 cl

Neha Female 31.10.2004 Nepali 2010/04/41:47 / 14/389 h

Pinky Female 09.01.2004 Nepali 2010/04/14:04 / 10/234 h/s

Preity Female 26.05.2004 English and

Nepali

2010/04/24:34 / 15/655 h/p

Sushmita Female 21.02.2004 Nepali 2010/04/50:1 / 29/759 h

Benten Male 27.12.2003 Nepali 2010/04/18:54/15/675 o

Deepesh Male 29.12.2003 Nepali 2010/04/35:23 / 14/627 h

Lhasang Lepcha Male 02. 04 2004 Nepali 2010/04/22:14 / 13/334 cl/p

Panu Male 18.04.2004 Nepali 2010/04/27:05 / 15/677 h

Pranab Male 25.04.2004 Nepali 2010/04/21:32 / 14/353 o

Prashant Male 05.09.2003 English and

Nepali

2010/04/27:16 / 19/862 o

Rajdip Male 05.2.2004 Nepali 2010/04/41:00 / 22/977 cl/p

100

Sandipan Male 29.09.2004 Nepali 2010/04/17:11 / 10/427 o

Sarsang Male 14.12.2003 English and

Nepali

2010/04/20:43 / 14/624 h

Suraj Male 17.04.2004 English and

Hindi

2010/04/15:11 / 11/470 cl

sb: School building; cl: classroom; h: house/castles; p:people; s: scenery/surrounding

environment; o: others (vehicles, toys, cartoon characters etc), n: nothing

Presented below are the drawings of the participating children.

101

102

103

104

105

106

107

108

109

110

111

Table Five: The System of Evaluation for Academic Session 2010 as per the student

School diary

1st monthly test Full marks 20 Pass marks 10

Half Yearly Examination Full marks 80 Pass marks 40

2nd

monthly test Full marks 20 Pass marks 10

Yearly Examination Full marks 80 Pass marks 40

Total marks for all subjects

e.g. English, Mathematics,

Science etc

Full marks 100 Pass marks 50

Hindi/Nepali/Bengali Full marks 100 Pass marks 45

Minerva Access is the Institutional Repository of The University of Melbourne

Author/s:

Sharma, Anandi

Title:

Indian children's experiences and understandings of their transition from kindergarten to

class one

Date:

2017

Persistent Link:

http://hdl.handle.net/11343/214167

File Description:

Indian children's experiences and understandings of their transition from kindergarten to

class

Terms and Conditions:

Terms and Conditions: Copyright in works deposited in Minerva Access is retained by the

copyright owner. The work may not be altered without permission from the copyright owner.

Readers may only download, print and save electronic copies of whole works for their own

personal non-commercial use. Any use that exceeds these limits requires permission from

the copyright owner. Attribution is essential when quoting or paraphrasing from these works.