Yvonne Marjorie Paujik - QUT Marjorie...Young Children‘s Understanding of Poverty Within a Framework of Sustainability: Action Research in a Kindergarten v 2.5.3 Children‘s perceptions

YOUNG CHILDREN’S UNDERSTANDING OF

POVERTY WITHIN A FRAMEWORK OF

SUSTAINABILITY: ACTION RESEARCH IN

A KINDERGARTEN

Yvonne Marjorie Paujik

Bachelor of Education (Early Childhood)

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Master of Philosophy (Education)

Faculty of Education

Queensland University of Technology

2019

Young Children‘s Understanding of Poverty Within a Framework of Sustainability: Action Research in a

Kindergarten i

Keywords

Action research, early childhood education and care, early childhood education for

sustainability, education for sustainability, pedagogy, project work, socio-political

sustainability, teacher-researcher

ii


Kindergarten

Abstract

This action research study explored young children‘s understandings of

poverty through a project approach undertaken by an early childhood educator, as

teacher-researcher in a Kindergarten classroom. Poverty was introduced to young

children as a topic for investigation because it is a complex sustainable issue that

affects people globally (UNESCO, 2001; World Bank, 2018). In order to understand

the issue and complexities of poverty, education has been identified as one of the

main factors in eradicating poverty (UN General Assembly, 2015). Therefore,

through Early Childhood Education for Sustainability (ECEfS), the child participants

in this research were supported to critically examine how current issues of poverty

are intertwined with democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010)

and to take action to improve the lives of those affected by poverty.

Along with children‘s meaning-making around poverty, the study examined

pedagogical conditions that supported investigations of socio-political aspects of

sustainability with young children. Data included observations of children‘s play,

children‘s artefacts, transcripts of teachers-led and child-led conversations, and

teacher reflective journal entries.

The study‘s theoretical framework drew on critical theory, with emphasis on

social change, equality and empowerment, and Derrida‘s (1991) concept of ‗ cinders‘

where interpretation was analysed on children‘s ‗unsettledness‘ about the topic of

poverty and its relations to social justice and marginalisation.

The findings showed that the children‘s understandings of poverty shifted and

reverted over the course of the project and were influenced by broader social events.


Kindergarten iii

Further, that the children‘s engagement with socio-political aspects of sustainability

were supported via purposeful and thoughtful pedagogies.

This study contributes to early childhood education for sustainability research

by moving beyond a prevalent focus on ‗greening‘ or environmental aspects of

sustainability to broader dimensions including socio-political issues. This study has

implications not only for educators, but also young children and how sustainability is

conceptualised with national policy and curriculum frameworks in Australia.

iv


Kindergarten

Table of Contents

Keywords .................................................................................................................................. i

Abstract .................................................................................................................................... ii

Table of Contents .................................................................................................................... iv

List of Figures ....................................................................................................................... viii

List of Tables ............................................................................................................................ x

List of Abbreviations ............................................................................................................... xi

Statement of Original Authorship .......................................................................................... xii

Acknowledgements ............................................................................................................... xiii

Chapter 1: Introduction............................................................................................. 1

1.1 Introduction to the Thesis .............................................................................................. 1

1.2 Background .................................................................................................................... 3

1.3 The Research Purpose and Aim ..................................................................................... 8

1.4 The Research Questions ................................................................................................. 9

1.5 Theoretical Framework ................................................................................................ 10

1.6 The Research Context .................................................................................................. 11

1.7 My Role as a Teacher-Researcher ................................................................................ 12

1.8 Research Design ........................................................................................................... 14

1.9 Significance .................................................................................................................. 16

1.10 Organisational Structure of the Thesis ......................................................................... 17

Chapter 2: Literature Review ................................................................................. 19

2.1 Introduction .................................................................................................................. 19

2.2 Understanding Sustainability ....................................................................................... 20 2.2.1 From environmental sustainability to socio-political sustainability .................. 25 2.2.2 Social sustainability: Peace, equality and human rights .................................... 26 2.2.3 Political sustainability: Democracy ................................................................... 26 2.2.4 Poverty: The socio-political sustainability focus in this study .......................... 28

2.3 Education for Sustainability ......................................................................................... 31 2.3.1 Early childhood education for sustainability .................................................... 34

2.4 Early Childhood Education and Care ........................................................................... 35 2.4.1 Early childhood curriculum and pedagogy ........................................................ 36 2.4.2 Conforming to society ...................................................................................... 37 2.4.3 Reforming to society ......................................................................................... 39 2.4.4 Transforming to society .................................................................................... 41 2.4.5 Critical reflection ............................................................................................... 44 2.4.6 The influence of child developmental theories on early childhood

curriculum and pedagogy ................................................................................... 47

2.5 Key Perspectives about Children ................................................................................. 50 2.5.1 Images of the child ............................................................................................. 50 2.5.2 Children‘s rights and sustainability. .................................................................. 53


Kindergarten v

2.5.3 Children‘s perceptions of poverty ......................................................................56 2.5.4 Children as active citizens ..................................................................................60

2.6 Theoretical Framework .................................................................................................65 2.6.1 Critical theory .....................................................................................................65 2.6.2 Derrida‘s cinders ...............................................................................................70

2.7 Chapter Summary .........................................................................................................72

Chapter 3: Methodology .......................................................................................... 74

3.1 Introduction ..................................................................................................................74

3.2 Methodology .................................................................................................................75

3.3 Qualitative Research Design .........................................................................................75

3.4 Action Research ............................................................................................................77 3.4.1 Participatory action research .............................................................................80 3.4.2 Critical action research .......................................................................................82 3.4.3. Educational action research ...............................................................................82 3.4.4 Teacher-Researcher in action research ...............................................................84

3.5 Context of the Study .....................................................................................................87 3.5.1 Research site ......................................................................................................87

3.6 The Project Approach as a Curriculum Framework .....................................................89 3.6.1 Introductory phase ..............................................................................................94 3.6.2 Synthesising phase .............................................................................................96 3.6.3 Culminating Phase ..............................................................................................99 3.6.4 Links between Action Research and the Three Phases of the Project

Approach ..........................................................................................................101

3.7 Participants .................................................................................................................103

3.8 Data Collection Methods ............................................................................................108 3.8.1 Action research folder ......................................................................................109 3.8.2 Creative artefacts ..............................................................................................110 3.8.3 Children and teacher‘s digital recordings and photographs .............................110 3.8.4 Conversations ...................................................................................................111 3.8.5 Observations of children...................................................................................113 3.8.6 Teacher-Researcher reflective journal entries ..................................................114 3.8.7 Curriculum planning .........................................................................................116

3.9 Data Analysis ..............................................................................................................118

3.10 Ethical Issues .............................................................................................................136

3.11 Research Limitations .................................................................................................141

3.12 Chapter Summary ......................................................................................................142

Chapter 4: Critical Incident 1: Children’s Shift in Understandings ................. 143

4.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................143

4.2 Synthesising Phase: Context for Critical Incident 1 ...................................................144

4.3 Critical Incident 1: Exclusion to Inclusion .................................................................148 4.3.1 Understanding inclusiveness ...........................................................................153

4.4 Children and teachers as co-researchers .....................................................................159

4.5 Making Children‘s Voices Visible in Understanding Inclusiveness ..........................161

4.6 Sustained Shared Thinking as Entry Ways to Beginning Conversations with Children167

vi


Kindergarten

4.7 The Role of Teacher-Researcher as Facilitator and Protagonist ................................ 168

4.8 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................... 175

Chapter 5: Critical Incident 2: Children’s Spontaneous Play on Exploring their

Meanings and Understandings on Poverty .......................................................... 179

5.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 179

5.2 Teacher-Researcher‘s Challenges in Finding Ways to Extend Children‘s

Understandings of Poverty ................................................................................................... 180

5.3 Context of Critical Incident 2 ..................................................................................... 182

5.4 Children as Active Learners ....................................................................................... 184 5.4.1 Rich Cat, Poor Cat spontaneous play episode ................................................ 187 5.4.2 Mutt Dog spontaneous play ............................................................................ 196

5.5 Children as Active Citizens ........................................................................................ 206 5.5.1 Healthy plates spontaneous play episode ........................................................ 208

5.6 Taken for Granted Views of Play ............................................................................... 215

5.7 The Importance of Play in ECEfS .............................................................................. 218 5.7.1 Reflections on my role as a teacher as facilitator............................................ 220 5.7.2 Reflections of the children as agents of change .............................................. 223 5.7.3 Reflections of the importance of child-led play in ECEfS.............................. 225

5.8 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................... 230

Chapter 6: Critical Incident 3: Merry Christmas – Children as Powerful

Consumers ............................................................................................................... 233

6.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 233

6.2 Context for Critical Incident 3 ................................................................................... 234

6.3 The Power of Marketplace at Christmas .................................................................... 236

6.4 Power of Position and the Teacher ............................................................................. 249

6.5 The Precursors before Critical Incident 3 .................................................................. 255

6.6 Caution on the Power of the Marketplace for Teachers ............................................. 265

6.7 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................... 269

Chapter 7: Critical Incident 4: Children’s Emerging Sense of Agency in

Understanding Issues of Socio-Political Sustainability ....................................... 272

7.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 272

7.2 Culmination Phase: Context for Critical Incident 4 ................................................... 273

7.3 Cinders and the Beginning of Children‘s Sense of Agency ....................................... 274

7.4 Children‘s emerging Critical Awareness and Sense of Agency ................................ 281

7.5 Critical Incident 4 ....................................................................................................... 292

7.6 Chapter Summary ...................................................................................................... 298

Chapter 8: Conclusion ........................................................................................... 300

8.1 Introduction ................................................................................................................ 300

8.2 Research Design and Theoretical Framework ........................................................... 303

8.3 Research Findings in Relation to Research Questions ............................................... 317


Kindergarten vii

8.4 Implications and Future Directions for Policy and Practices......................................330 8.4.1 Implications for National Quality Framework (NQF) .....................................330 8.4.2 Implications for child agency through ECEfS ..................................................333 8.4.3 Implications for ECEfS pedagogical practices ................................................334

8.5 Chapter Summary .......................................................................................................336

References ............................................................................................................... 339

Appendices .............................................................................................................. 357 Appendix A Impetus for discussion about the concept of ‗not having enough‘

after the shared reading session on the critical text; Maddi‘s fridge

(Brandt, 2014). .................................................................................................357 Appendix B Participant Information for QUT Research Project:

Parent/Guardian ................................................................................................358 Appendix C Children‘s consent form ......................................................................362 Appendix D Children‘s participation in different learning experience ...................363 Appendix E Coding and recoding cycle ..................................................................364 Appendix F Refinement from three categories and propositional statements to

two categories and propositional statements ....................................................365 Appendix G Human research ethics approval certificate ........................................366

viii


Kindergarten

List of Figures

Figure 2.1. Four dimensions of sustainable development (UNESCO, 2010). ..................... 23

Figure 2.2. Types of ECEC curricula as defined by MacNaughton (2003). ........................ 37

Figure 3.1. Kemmis and McTaggart (2001) action research spiral. ..................................... 78

Figure 3.2. The children‘s project work on making meaning about poverty. ...................... 93

Figure 3.3. The proposed study‘s action research cycle with the project approach

cycle taking place simultaneously at step 3 (Adapted from Harris

Helm & Katz, 2011; Kemmis and McTaggart, 2001; Stuhmcke,

2012). ........................................................................................................... 102

Figure 3.4. Example of coding. .......................................................................................... 123

Figure 3.5. Data included in the category of teaching strategies. ...................................... 125

Figure 3.6. Codes and categories are tabled to identify key themes. ................................. 126

Figure 3.7. A mind map of potential frameworks to address Research Question 1

and 2. ........................................................................................................... 128

Figure 3.8. Critical incidents at different phases of the project cycle. ............................... 131

Figure 3.9. Analysis of individual critical incident. ........................................................... 132

Figure 3.10. Visual representation of the critical incidents through the action

research cycle............................................................................................... 132

Figure 3.11. Refined and concise version of the critical incidents represented

through an action research cycle. ................................................................. 132

Figure 3.12. In-depth analysis using rhizomapping analysis on Critical Incident 2. ......... 135

Figure 3.13. Hart‘s ladder of children‘s participation (Hart, 1997). .................................. 138

Figure 4.1. The difference between a need and a want. ..................................................... 149

Figure 4.2. Drawing of ‗Scat Cat‘ the poor cat. ................................................................. 156

Figure 4.3. It‘s not okay!.................................................................................................... 164

Figure 4.4. A drawing of a girl and a dog, inspired from the book Mutt Dog. .................. 165

Figure 4.5. A homeless person inspired by the book Mutt Dog. ....................................... 166

Figure 5.1. Conceptual model of Children‘s Spontaneous Play on Understanding

Poverty. ........................................................................................................ 183

Figure 5.2. Weekly Planning for Week 2 and Week 3. ..................................................... 185

Figure 5.3. The beginning of the Rich Cat, Poor Cat play episode. ................................... 188

Figure 5.4. Poor Cat eating food. ....................................................................................... 189

Figure 5.5. Midway through the play, Poor Cat visits the doctors. ................................... 190

Figure 5.6. Geata joins in to calm Poor Cat down. ............................................................ 191

Figure 5.7. Closing of the play episode of Rich Cat, Poor Cat. ......................................... 193

Figure 5.8. The first stages the construction of Mutt Dog‘s home. ................................... 198

Figure 5.9. New children came in and join the construction of Mutt Dog‘s home. ........... 199


Kindergarten ix

Figure 5.10. Finishing the walls and floors of Mutt Dog‘s new home. ............................. 200

Figure 5.11. Inspecting the bedroom of Mutt Dog‘s new home. ....................................... 201

Figure 5.12. The final touches of Mutt Dog‘s bed room which was the addition of

an alarm bell. ............................................................................................... 202

Figure 5.13. A ‗baddy‘ infiltrates Mutt Dog‘s home. ........................................................ 204

Figure 5.14. Children using clay to make healthy food and sometimes treats. ................. 210

Figure 5.15. An example of a healthy plate. ...................................................................... 210

Figure 5.16. Painting the clay food. ................................................................................... 211

Figure 5.17. Children setting up the table. ........................................................................ 212

Figure 5.18. The finished table of food. ............................................................................ 212

Figure 5.19. Model of spontaneous play in ECEfS (influenced by MacNaughton,

2008; Rinaldi, 2006; Smidt, 2013). ............................................................. 219

Figure 5.20. Teacher-researcher‘s initial plans.................................................................. 222

Figure 5.21. Children‘s initial inquiries on the directions they want to take in this

project. ......................................................................................................... 222

Figure 6.1. Small groups of children working in different spaces in their

environment. ................................................................................................ 237

Figure 6.2. Children receiving presents for Christmas. ..................................................... 239

Figure 6.3. Cat celebrating Christmas. .............................................................................. 240

Figure 6.4. Children‘s ideas and suggestions on how to help those who are

experiencing poverty. .................................................................................. 242

Figure 6.5. Children‘s visual representations are displayed beside the sign in tablet,

(an electronic device where parents/caregivers sign-in/sign-out their

children‘s attendance from the Kindergarten during children‘s drop

offs and pickups) for families and friends to view and for children to

share their meaning makings with them. ..................................................... 246

Figure 6.6. Children brought donations of toys, books and clothes for a selected

charity and placed these under the Christmas tree. ..................................... 247

Figure 6.7. Action Research Folder. .................................................................................. 257

Figure 6.8. A donated present that reads ‗Love you people who dont have enof‖ ............ 267

Figure 7.1. Children using clay to mould items to be placed in the museum of

poverty. ........................................................................................................ 289

Figure 7.2. Ben‘s clay figure of sadness. ........................................................................... 290

Figure 7.3. Clay models that represent children‘s thinking and are displayed in the

sign in/out area. ........................................................................................... 291

Figure 8.1. Entryways for Critical Incident 2. ................................................................... 311

Figure 8.2. Entryways into Critical Incident 3. ................................................................. 313

x


Kindergarten

List of Tables

Table 3.1 Three different types of action research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2007) ............. 79

Table 3.2 Participants involved in the action research study on Poverty .......................... 104

Table 3.3 Identification of Critical Incidents in the research timeline .............................. 121

Table 8.1 Visual table of pedagogical conditions used to explore the topic of

poverty ......................................................................................................... 323


Kindergarten xi

List of Abbreviations

Australian Children‘s Education and Care Quality Authority ACECQA

Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations DEEWR

Developmentally Appropriate Practices DAP

Curriculum Lead Teacher CLT

Early Childhood Education and Care ECEC

Early Years Learning Framework EYLF

Early Childhood Education for Sustainability ECEfS

Education for Sustainability EfS

National Association for the Education of Young Children NAEYC

National Quality Framework NQF

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development OECD

Queensland Kindergarten Learning Guidelines QKLG

Sustainable Planet Project SPP

United Nations UN

United Nations Educational, Scientific, and Cultural Organisation UNESCO

xii


Kindergarten

Statement of Original Authorship

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet

requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the

best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously

published or written by another person except where due reference is made.

Signature: QUT Verified Signature

Date: _________________________


Kindergarten xiii

Acknowledgements

I am ever so grateful to be given this opportunity to be able to complete this

Master‘s thesis. Despite this long Masters journey, I would not change anything as it

has awarded me with a multiplicity of learning experiences and opportunities that I

am thankful for.

I am indebted to the patience, dedication and support from my supervisors,

Dr Melinda Miller, Dr Megan Gibson, and Professor Kerryann Walsh. I cannot thank

you all enough for our fortnightly meetings as well as the backwards and forwards of

emails in supporting me to get me to where I am today. Mel, Megan and Kerryann

have generously shared their time with me through their continuous encouragement,

insightful sharing of their wisdom and experiences, words of reassurance and moral

support, and continued provocations to ‗go beyond‘ the boundaries in order to

discover new ways of thinking and doing. For this, I am forever grateful for guiding

me in understanding critical ways in teaching and learning. I would like to extend my

sincere thanks to Professor Julie Davis, who was an invaluable mentor and

supervisor in my earlier stages of this thesis. It was such an honour to be working

with a person who has made such an impact to the field of ECEfS.

The completion of this thesis would not have been possible without the support

from the children, families and community of the research site. I am indeed

privileged to be working in a community that is very generous and supportive in my

personal journey. I thank you!

My parents have always encouraged me to pursue my education, no matter

how difficult the journey may seem. Even with them being so far away in distance,

xiv


Kindergarten

their words of encouragement have always been a comfort to me, knowing that I am

in the right track.

My husband, Val has always been my anchor from day one. He has seen me

gone through all emotions in my Masters journey, yet he continues to believe and

encourage me (despite being at the receiving end of my frustration and grumpiness),

patiently drives me back and forth to uni, has dinner ready for our family and is

always there for our children and me with his undivided love and support.

Finally, I dedicate this thesis to my beautiful children, Katelyn and Kaden. I

thank you for always giving me time to ‗finish my homework‘, and reminding me of

what‘s important in life through your endless love, cuddles and family time spent

during our ‗Friday movie-nights‘.

Chapter 1: Introduction 1

Chapter 1: Introduction

1.1 Introduction to the Thesis

In the field of early childhood education, Early Childhood Education for

Sustainability (ECEfS) has traditionally been conceptualised as young children

investigating areas of environmental concern, specifically in the environment with

activities such as gardening and being engaged in nature play (Davis, 2015). Little

attention has been afforded to young children acting for the environment, particularly

in other dimensions of sustainability including the socio-political dimension. This

study investigates young children‘s participation and engagement in a project on the

topic of poverty. Poverty was chosen for this research to bring awareness to how

young children are capable of exploring broader global sustainability issues beyond

the prevalent narrow dimension of environmental sustainability. The notion that

ECEfS is limited to a narrow focus on environmental issues is reinforced through

formal early childhood education learning frameworks in Australia. For example,

under the National Quality Framework (NQF), a national policy that regulates

assessment and quality improvement for early childhood education and care services

and outside school hours care services, learning and teaching about sustainability is

located under Quality Area 3: Physical environment. Under this quality area, the

focus is on children ―becoming environmentally responsible and showing respect for

the environment‖ (Australian Children‘s Education and Care Quality Authority

[ACECQA], 2013, Element 3.3.2, para 1). This study challenges this narrow focus

on the physical or natural environment and investigates children‘s engagement with

broader socio-political aspects of sustainability.

2


Poverty is a global issue that affects people worldwide (UNESCO, 2001;

World Bank, 2018). To eradicate global poverty, protect the planet, and create

prosperity for all, the United Nations (UN) has identified education as one of the

seventeen Sustainable Development Goals (UN General Assembly, 2015). Goal 4

commits all UN member states to ensuring education is inclusive, equitable and

lifelong, and cements education as the foundation for improving peoples‘ lives and

achieving sustainable development. This research about poverty aims to offer

entryways or new ways of thinking about ECEfS and young children, which reflects

the current images of children as capable and competent in exploring issues of

sustainability beyond the environmental dimension.

The study also aims to investigate pedagogical strategies and conditions that

support exploration of socio-political sustainability with young children in a

Kindergarten setting. This research examines how I, taking on a role of a teacher-

researcher, approached the topic of poverty as a focus of inquiry within ECEfS. The

study‘s theoretical framework draws on critical theory with emphasis on social

change, equality and empowerment, which support and enable me to analyse how to

best provide children with pedagogical conditions in their efforts to make meaning

about poverty. Using an action research methodology, this study aims to investigate

young children‘s constructions of poverty, and resulting citizenship actions aimed at

bringing change and awareness to those who experience poverty and its associated

social disadvantages.

I begin this chapter with the introduction to this research on ECEfS as

explained in Section 1.1. Section 1.2 identifies the background of the research. This

is followed by the research purpose and aim (Section 1.3) and the two research

questions (Section 1.4). Section 1.5 discusses the theoretical framework, followed by


the research context (Section 1.6), and a description of my role as a teacher-

researcher (Section 1.7). I then elaborate on the research design in Section 1.8, and

the overall significance of this research in Section 1.9. This chapter concludes with

the overall structure of the thesis in Section 1.10.

1.2 Background

A key premise explored in this thesis is that very young children are capable of

understanding real world issues that can be abstract, and at times confronting (Davis,

2015; Hawkins, 2010; Phillips, 2010). Issues such as terrorism, poverty and climate

change are already part of children‘s everyday lives through media such as

television, newspapers and conversations with peers and adults. When children are

invited into a dialogue about these issues, their thoughts and concerns can be

acknowledged, and they can be supported and empowered to make sense of the

complex world in which they live (Davis, 2010, 2015). Early Childhood Education

for Sustainability (ECEfS) offers an antidote (Davis, 2010, p. 29) that supports

children to be less frightened of the world and to become more knowledgeable

problem-solvers and potential change agents in regards to sustainability topics, issues

and practices. A key premise for ECEfS is building children‘s resilience (Davis,

2010). Through engaging children to be active participants in their learning, where

they are investigating these global issues of sustainability through inquiries, shared

discussions with each other, and expressing their authentic understandings of these

issues, young children are able to contribute in ways of managing and enacting

change towards solving these sustainability concerns (Davis, 2010) In part, this is

about engaging children to be critical thinkers in social, environmental and political

situations, encouraging them to develop diverse ideas, and the motivation and

4


perseverance to produce change for a more sustainable world (Hagglund &

Johansson, 2014; Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009).

Learning and teaching about sustainability issues can be complex as it brings

educators and children face to face with issues that are serious, discomforting and,

some might say, undesirable. Learning and teaching about sustainability can

therefore conflict with a romanticised idea of childhood in which children‘s

investigations into serious issues can be perceived as destroying their innocence

(Davis, 2010, 2015; Hendrick, 2015). In ECEfS, a romanticised image of the child

justifies the tendency for children to participate in wholesome activities such as

gardening, planting trees and recycling that are strongly linked to the physical

environment and nature (Elliott & Young, 2016). These types of practical activities

are seen to be developmentally appropriate; they allow children to see, smell, feel

and touch the natural environment. For example, children in Kindergarten settings

can be found observing the growth of sunflower seeds into fully-formed sunflowers,

or watching the breakdown of food for compost. Such activities provide immediate

experiences that children can engage with first-hand. While the reasoning behind the

value of such experiences seems sound based on consideration of children‘s stages of

development and interest, in this thesis I argue that this reasoning should not define

what children are capable of (or incapable of) understanding in relation to

sustainability more broadly (Hayward, 2012). In regards to learning and teaching

about sustainability, the overuse of narrowly-prescribed experiences can promote

somewhat weak messages in relation to the importance of active and critical

participation in addressing broader socio-political issues of sustainability, such as

poverty.


Sustainability is a difficult concept to define as it is abstract and multifaceted.

Definitions of sustainability are a result of social constructions of societies,

organisations and movements and vary substantially according to their social

contexts and use (Fien, 2004). To understand sustainability in the context of this

research, it is necessary to explore its meaning. Sustainability is defined by the World

Commission on Environment and Development (1987) Brundtland Report as

―meeting the needs of the present without compromising the needs of the future

generations‖ (p. 10). In the context of early childhood education, however,

sustainability is often viewed in a constricted mode, where environmental

management initiatives that engender protection of the natural environment including

gardening, composting, recycling, or tree planting are guised as transformative

sustainability practices (Elliott & Young, 2016; Hagglund & Johansson, 2014). As

noted above, when this understanding of sustainability dominates, it privileges

learning experiences that are viewed as naturally connected to the environment.

Although these learning experiences may be transformative in their own limited way,

this practice also consolidates a romanticised image of the child.

A romantic view of the child emerged from the works of French philosopher

Rousseau in the eighteenth century (Hendrick, 2015), who viewed young children as

embodying the virtues of innocence and purity. Within this view, contact with the

real world would be deemed corrupting and taking away childhood innocence

(Hendrick, 2015; James, Jenks, & Prout, 1998). Romanticised views of the child

have strengthened the justification that children need to be nurtured in nature and

natural environments. At the same time, children‘s young age and the dominance of

developmentally-appropriate practice (DAP) linked to learning and teaching in early

childhood contexts, has reinforced the use of concrete and hands-on experiences.

6


Based on a DAP perspective, children are to be taught according to their stages of

development, typically measured by age and stage (National Association for the

Education of Young Children [NAEYC], 2009). Through a DAP lens, children being

immersed in the natural environment and engaging in concrete hands-on activities

such as gardening are seen as developmentally-appropriate. According to ECEfS

researchers, Elliott and Young (2016), if children are simply involved in the physical

management of the environment in activities such as gardening, without

understanding the reasons behind the need to care for the environment, they are at

risk of missing out on the critical and transformative aspects that ECEfS has to offer.

Elliott and Young (2016) suggest that these types of experiences in which children

are encouraged to be nurturers of the natural world are especially prevalent in the

21st century and have emerged, in part, because of the perception that today‘s

children have a ―nature-deficit disorder‖ (Louv, 2014, p. 18). Children are

increasingly disconnected from the natural world; hence immersing children in

nature play is seen to be important to re-connect them with the natural world.

However, simply immersing children in the natural world without engaging them in

considering deeper reasons as to why it is important to care for the environment

excludes children from critical and transformative dialogues that underpin

sustainability (Elliott & Davis, 2009; Elliott & Young, 2016). When children are

limited only to learning experiences provided by adults that focus on environmental

management such as gardening, opportunities for them to be empowered as decision

makers and active agents of sustainability are lost.

A limited approach is not surprising, however, given the predominant vision

adopted in in the Australian national early childhood learning frameworks

(Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR], 2009),


and regulatory quality assessments (Australian Children‘s Education and Care

Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2018), with their focus on environmental

sustainability In early childhood contexts, it is rare for educators to document and

showcase children‘s abilities, actions and learning experiences in exploring issues of

socio-political sustainability. Arlemalm-Hagser and Davis‘ (2014) study comparing

Australian and Swedish ECEfS initiatives within formal early childhood learning

policies and curricula, highlighted a dominant focus on environmental sustainability

in both the Australian and Swedish contexts. In their study, examining the Australian

Early Years Learning Framework (DEEWR, 2009) and the Swedish Curriculum for

the Pre-school, known as Lpfö (Swedish National Agency for Education, 2010),

Arlemalm-Hagser and Davis (2014) found evidence of similarities between the

Australian and Swedish early childhood contexts to the extent that both recognised

the roles of humans, including young children, as environmental stewards in the care

of the natural environment. Yet, there were also contrasting differences, particularly

in the ways in which children‘s capabilities as critical thinkers and active agents of

change were framed. The Swedish learning framework was found to be more

transformative in the sense that it acknowledged that young children can be

competent critical thinkers and agents of change in the present moment, whereas the

Australian framework viewed young children in the terms of preparing them to be

critical thinkers and agents of change in the future.

Based on these identified similarities and differences in learning frameworks

applicable in early childhood education and care (ECEC), it can be argued that the

essence of sustainability practices is something that early childhood education

contexts strive for, yet they may encounter difficulties in embedding these into

children‘s everyday practices. Therefore, I argue that it is important that young

8


children are exposed to experiences beyond nature play and environmental

sustainability in order to build social responsibilities as citizens of the shared world

in which they live. As a result, this thesis will focus on how children engage with,

and make sense of an issue of socio-political sustainability such as poverty.

At the same time, it is important to understand the ways educators can

introduce a focus on socio-political sustainability into early childhood contexts. For

this reason, an action research methodology compromising a teacher-researcher

approach is used for this study. Action research is a methodology that allows

researchers to build new knowledge and to develop solutions to specific and context-

related concerns (Reason & Bradbury, 2008). In the context of this study, an action

research methodology supported my role as teacher-researcher in reflecting on

providing optimum pedagogical conditions for the children in their efforts to

investigate constructions of poverty. As a teacher-researcher, my practices will be

analysed in terms of teaching strategies used, barriers to implementation identified,

and what curriculum changes were initiated in each action research cycle in order to

support the learning of socio-political sustainability in a Kindergarten classroom. The

following sections introduce the purpose and aim of the research, the research

questions, the research design and research context, along with the significance of

this proposed research to the field of early childhood education.

1.3 The Research Purpose and Aim

The purpose of this study is to explore young children‘s participation and

engagement in a project around the topic of poverty. This study set out to challenge

the environmental lens as a primary way of engaging young children in sustainability

initiatives. Using an action research methodology, this study aimed to investigate

young children‘s constructions of poverty and resulting citizenship actions. By


initiating and extending conversations with children around socio-political issues,

namely poverty, a teacher-researcher can challenge, provoke or extend

understandings and misconceptions children may have of people who experience

poverty (Hammond, Hesterman, & Knaus, 2015). When children participate in

conversations and learning experiences, they are supported to become more and

critically aware about issues that impact particular groups in societies.

1.4 The Research Questions

Two research questions guide this study:

1. What are young children‘s understandings of poverty?

2. What pedagogies support young children to participate in investigations of

poverty within a socio-political framework of sustainability?

In relation to Research Question 1, poverty provides the focus for investigation

as it is an issue that affects people worldwide. The United Nations (2016) has

recognised eradicating poverty as the number one Sustainable Development Goal to

transform our current world. To achieve this goal, education plays a crucial role.

Education has the capacity to empower all children from developed and developing

countries on their rights, responsibilities, and capabilities to improve life conditions.

Poverty is not solely about a lack of financial income; it is also concerned with social

and political aspects which include issues of hunger and malnutrition, a lack of

access to education, and exclusion from processes of political decision making. As a

result, poverty is linked with peace, equality, human rights and democracy, key

concerns within the socio-political dimension of sustainability (UNESCO, 2005;

2010).

In relation to Research Question 2, carrying out an educational action research

project provides opportunities for teacher-researchers to be better informed about

10


their curriculum decision making and to consider changes in their practices

(Kemmis, 2009). In an early childhood context there are many inspirations and

theories that influence everyday teaching practices. One of these theories is critical

theory. Critical theory encourages us to challenge the taken-for-granted

understandings or ‗truths‘ that influence the practices of everyday life (Freire, 1998).

For this research, through the lens of critical theory, attention is brought to the

various constructions of poverty, and how these are influenced by broader social

forces. Through a critical theory lens, I analyse my own teaching practices within

this research and commit to better understanding pedagogical approaches that

support transformative teaching and learning central to ECEfS.

1.5 Theoretical Framework

Critical theory was employed as a framework to analyse my teaching practices

and the resources that I used to challenge children‘s taken-for-granted

understandings about poverty. As the teacher-researcher, I was concerned about how

my teaching practices reflected a transformative approach where children were

viewed as competent and active in socio-political dimensions of sustainability, with a

focus on poverty. At the same time, critical theory supported me to analyse any

taken-for-granted understandings children expressed about poverty and, as a result,

to challenge them to develop broader understandings.

Aligning with critical theory, Derrida‘s (1991) notion of cinders was used as

part of the theoretical framework for this research. Cinders can be explained as

children experiencing a cognitive dissonance about matters that relate to issues of

social justice. Derrida‘s (1991) cinders are symbolic, where the term was coined to

symbolise the notion of what is left from a burning fire, which are the cinders. The

cinders are, physically, what is left from a fire or, metaphorically, the lasting


impressions of a matter. In the context of this research, cinders are interpreted as the

things that ‗do not sit well‘ with young children, or the lasting impressions children

experience related to understandings about poverty.

1.6 The Research Context

The research site itself is an important feature of this research as it has a long-

standing history of research and project work around sustainability. This research site

is a long day care centre situated in an inner-city suburb of Brisbane, Queensland.

There are three classrooms in the centre, with children attending from the ages of 3 -

5 years old. The research site has 60 children attending the centre, with 44 children in

the Kindergarten programme. This action research study was conducted in a

Kindergarten room, with 21 participants ranging from 4 - 5 years of age. At the

centre, the curriculum supports children‘s physical, social, emotional and cognitive

development through a programme that is both teacher- and child-initiated. The

programme is play-based and adopts an inquiry learning approach, which

incorporates both indoor and outdoor learning spaces. The children in the centre

work in large and small groups as well as independently. The Kindergarten

curriculum is guided by the Australian national learning framework for children aged

birth-5 years, entitled Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning

Framework for Australia [EYLF] (DEEWR, 2009). Learning and teaching in the

centre are also guided by the Queensland Kindergarten Learning Guidelines

[QKLG] (Queensland Studies Authority, 2010) and the National Quality Framework

[NQF] (ACECQA, 2018).

As noted above, the site has a longstanding history with sustainability in the

early years that began with the Sustainable Planet Project (SPP) in 1997. The project

was a whole-centre collaboration that involved children, teachers, families and wider

12


community members (Davis, Gibson, Pratt, Eglington, & Rowntree, 2005). The

original project included whole-centre actions such as encouraging litter-less lunch

boxes, using food scraps from children‘s lunches to feed the worms and chickens,

using recycled resources, and buying sustainable cleaning products. According to

Davis et al. (2005), a key premise of the project was recognition of children‘s rights

as participants, co-learners and co-researchers. Children‘s voices were incorporated

into the centre‘s sustainability philosophy and practices through continuous

improvement of the centre‘s policies through intentional brainstorming sessions

involving teachers and children. The children were supported by staff to make

changes to their everyday living practices in the centre and at home, and to influence

their local community by engaging businesses in conversations around

environmental sustainability. Inspired by the Sustainable Planet Project (SPP), this

current study recognises the importance of children‘s participation and their

capabilities to engage with investigations of real-life issues and situations such as

poverty.

1.7 My Role as a Teacher-Researcher

As an early childhood educator at the research site, I acknowledge that learning

and teaching about sustainability in early childhood contexts in a way that goes

beyond a solely environmental-focus, is still relatively new. Further research is

required to provide educators and children with knowledge about optimum

opportunities for a wider scope of learning. However, as mentioned earlier, engaging

children in explorations of sustainability has previously tended to focus on children‘s

engagement with the natural environment. Although environmental sustainability

issues are very important concepts for young children to learn, as a teacher-

researcher I was interested in investigating children‘s wider experiences of


transformative engagement with sustainability issues that were beyond those

concerned solely with the physical or natural environment.

This study was designed to explore children‘s understandings of poverty and

their participation within a broader socio-political concept of sustainability

(UNESCO, 2010). The possibility of working with children as teacher-researcher

was appealing for several reasons. First among these was my stance on recognising

the active sociological child (James et al., 1998; Prout & James, 2015). The

sociological child is capable of comprehending abstract thoughts and concepts under

guidance and support, and is independent in making decisions based on their own

problem-solving skills and understanding (James et al., 1998; Prout & James, 2015).

In line with this powerful conception of young children‘s capabilities, I was able to

conceive that young children would be able to engage with notions of sustainability

including its more abstract social and political dimensions.

In the broader field of EfS, there are ample studies demonstrating that children

have capability to venture into arenas of understanding sustainability issues beyond

environmental sustainability concerns. The capacity of young children to engage

with more abstract global issues is a theme in studies by Hawkins (2010) and Phillips

(2010) who worked with children in Kindergarten (3-5 years) and the Preparatory

years (5-6 years) respectively, with a focus on social justice through the medium of

storytelling. Both Hawkins (2010) and Phillips (2010) found that young children

were able to comprehend abstract issues such as democracy, peace, equality and

human rights (UNESCO, 2010) and to initiate actions to address these matters. A key

component of these studies was utilising story-time sessions as a vehicle for shared

sustained thinking (Siraj-Blatchford, 2012). In these sessions, children were shown to

be actively listening and reflecting with one another. They were engaging as a

14


community, and were capable and sensitive to the diversity of issues focussed on

peace, equality, human rights and democracy (UNESCO, 2010). Drawing on these

studies, this action research study also used story-time events as a shared space for

children to reflect and provoke one another in a safe environment in which the

diversity of ideas and understandings about poverty was respected and nurtured. At

the same time, I was interested in gaining a better understanding of the educator‘s

role and to identify what teaching practices supported children to become active

participants in their own learning around this issue.

1.8 Research Design

This study employs an action research methodology (Kemmis, 2009). In action

research, cycles of gathering data, reflecting and deciding on a course of action are

undertaken. In this study, these cycles were employed to investigate with children

their constructions of poverty. Practitioner-led action research is an approach to

research that leads to new knowledge by way of investigating a specific concern

within an individual educational setting (Souto-Manning, 2012). Rather than being

generalizable, the outcomes of the research informed teaching and learning within

my own classroom context. The sustainability of the project was supported by an

existing relationship between the young children and me, and subsequently the

relevance of the topic of investigation to the research site (Solvason, 2013; Souto-

Manning, 2012).

This research sits within a qualitative paradigm that allows for a range of data

collecting methods. In line with an action research approach, the data collected were

flexible and emergent. As outlined in Chapter 3, the data collected included:

conversations between the children and myself as the teacher-researcher;

observations of children in play experiences linked to the project topic; children‘s


artefacts related to the topic of poverty such as drawings and stories; my research

journal entries; and my curriculum planning documents. A diverse range of data

collection methods were used as this supported the different ways in which children

communicated meaning (Smidt, 2013). Malaguzzi (1994), an early childhood theorist

and co-creator of the Municipal Preschool Programmes in Reggio Emilia, Italy,

proposed that children have ―100 languages‖ (p. 4) or multiple ways of

communicating meaning, be it through dance, drama, or a painting. These multiple

methods of data collection enabled ways of representing children‘s ‗voices‘, thereby

giving critical insights into their understandings of poverty.

Children‘s learning and participation in exploring poverty was supported in this

research through opportunities to be immersed in a project approach. Helm and Katz

(2011) define project work as an in-depth investigation into a topic of interest

through hands-on activities, experiments, questioning and research. Through a

project approach, children can be supported through dialogues between peers and

teachers about their understandings of poverty, and their roles as action-takers and

problem-solvers around this sustainability issue. According to Helm and Katz

(2011), project work is a method or approach where the children and teacher learn

collaboratively alongside one another as co-learners and co-researchers for extended

periods on a particular topic.

There are generally three phases to project work: the introductory phase,

synthesising phase, and culminating phase (Helm & Katz, 2011). In these phases,

provocations for learning about the chosen topic were undertaken in the form of real

life stories, pictures, story books and photographs that acted as prompts for children

to engage in sustained and rich dialogues about poverty. In the present study,

dialogues facilitated by me provided the children with opportunities to explore

16


poverty from their own stand-point, to critically explore the issue from other

children‘s perspectives, and to be provoked by raising contradictions and answering

questions guided by me as the teacher-researcher. This approach supported children

to become problem-seekers and problem-solvers around issues of sustainability and

to be empowered to take actions to address poverty through their individual and

collaborative investigations (Davis, 2015). These ideas will be elaborated further in

Chapter 3.

In project work, documentation plays an important feature in both the

recording of children‘s learning and as a tool for later reflecting of this learning

(Helm & Katz, 2011). In this action research study, I developed my own processes of

documenting my personal research. Thus, there is a close alignment between the

project approach that the children engaged in and the action research in which I

engaged. Indeed, there was some overlap of documentation data as some children‘s

documents also comprised data that were used for my own reflection as teacher-

researcher.

1.9 Significance

There are three areas of significance in relation to this research project. First, it

fills the ‗gap‘ in early childhood education for sustainability by broadening ECEfS

beyond the prevailing environmental lens. Second, it contributes to improving

teaching practices for ECEfS that enable broad investigations of sustainability issues.

Third, it contributes to a growing body of research about children as active agents.

This research provides data on successful strategies for embedding social and

political sustainability in the ECE curriculum in order for children to learn in a

manner that is participatory, rather than tokenistic (Hart, 1997).


This research was undertaken in a suburb that is categorised as high-

socioeconomic based on the Australian Government‘s Socio Economic Indexes for

Areas that was carried out on the 2011 census data (Australian Bureau of Statistics

[ABS], 2011). Due to the demographics of the research context, the topic of poverty

was chosen as a socio-political sustainability issue to explore with the children to

gather their understandings about this global matter. I acknowledge that because the

research site was situated within an urban University setting, I should not assume

that all families and children within the research community classify themselves as

high-socioeconomic. Therefore, the understandings that the children share in

response to explorations about poverty are authentic to each child participant.

1.10 Organisational Structure of the Thesis

This chapter provided an outline of the background, context and significance of

this research. In Chapter 2, I review literature related to ECEfS and identify research

gaps in this field. I then contextualise the study‘s theoretical frameworks based on

critical theory and Derrida‘s cinders which are introduced and explained. Chapter 3

outlines action research as the methodology, referring specifically to teacher-

researcher approaches to action research. Data collection and data analysis methods

are outlined, with a focus on Critical Incidents as the primary analytical tool.

Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7 are the data analysis chapters formed around four critical

incidents. These chapters synthesise both the findings and discussions of the action

research study. Chapter 8 begins with an overview and synthesis of the data chapters

in relation to the two research questions, which is followed by identification of

implications related to policy and practice.

Chapter 2: Literature Review 19

Chapter 2: Literature Review

2.1 Introduction

Chapter 2 presents a review of the literature that provides anchor points for this

study into exploring young children‘s understandings of poverty, as a socio-political

construct. To conduct this study, it was important to map key literature that explored

broad definitions of sustainability and ways to teach, explore and investigate

sustainability issues and concerns with young children revolving around themes of

peace, equality, human-rights and democracy (UNESCO, 2010). The literature

review explores definitions and terminologies relating to sustainability and early

childhood, and synthesis previous research carried out with young children in the

field of socio-political sustainability. Analysis of previous research supports

informed understandings of the research gaps. By reviewing past studies, I was able

to identify key critiques and identify possible ways to pursue the research problem. A

review of the literature also contributed to the theoretical framework, in analysing

and reviewing past methodologies or theoretical frameworks used, thus determining

an approach that would most suit my research purpose, aims and questions.

The literature review commences with an exploration of the understandings of

sustainability in Section 2.2. In this section, sustainability is defined using

UNESCO‘s (2010) four dimensions of sustainability. Through this definition of

sustainability, I highlight how there are various interrelated dimensions of

sustainability. UNESCO‘s (2010) four dimensions of sustainability are outlined, as

this highlights the importance of engaging young children with all dimensions of

sustainability, beyond environmental sustainability alone. This lays important

20


conceptual foundations for this study into young children‘s understandings of

poverty within a socio-political framework.

In Section 2.2, sustainability is defined and the dimensions of economic,

environmental, social and political sustainability are explored. Focus is placed on

social and political sustainability to gain clarity and understanding of these

dimensions. This Section then explores the topic of poverty, which is the primary

focus of this present study, and understandings of poverty in Australia.

Next, Education for Sustainability (EfS) is explored in Section 2.3, to

understand how the principles of EfS support young children to become participants

in investigations of complex sustainability issues. EfS is reviewed as a space to

support children to understand focussed socio-political key themes of peace,

equality, human rights and democracy (UNESCO, 2010) through immersing children

in the features of EfS that include critical thinking, participation and agency. Section

2.4 then explores the context of early childhood education and care, and the different

curriculum approaches that include conforming, reforming, and transforming to

society (MacNaughton, 2003). This research is positioned within transformative

education. An important feature of transformative curriculum is critical reflection.

Next, the review turns to the images of the child, their rights within sustainability,

roles as active citizens, and their understandings of poverty to understand young

children‘s agency and capability to participate in this research (Section 2.5). This is

then followed by the theoretical framework of the study (Section 2.6) and the chapter

summary (Section 2.7).

2.2 Understanding Sustainability

The definition of sustainability is contentious due to the nature of sustainability

being complex and abstract (UNESCO, 2005). Sustainability and its meanings are


dependent on terminologies and contexts. Sustainability and sustainable development

are terms that are often used interchangeably. Meanings and definitions of

sustainability can range from understandings of the actions or strategies required for

living to be sustainable, to the effects of unsustainable living for the future.

According to Fien (2004), sustainability is a state in which each and all of ecological,

political, social and economic contexts are sustainable, and in which each context

plays an interdependent role in influencing the others. According to UNESCO

(2002), sustainability is encompassed as a way of ‗thinking about the future‘ and

‗thinking about forever‘. Both of these sentiments underline that sustainability is

dependent on the actions of the human population and the ways that humans use and

share the world‘s finite resources. By contrast, the Australian Government

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts (2010) defines

sustainability as reducing our ‗ecological footprint‘ to preserve the quality of future

living, thus focussing more on the effects of unsustainable living.

The definition of sustainability that is most commonly accepted is from the

Brundtland Report (1987) which defines sustainability as ―meeting the needs of the

present, without compromising the needs of the future generations‖ (p. 10). This

definition was popularised by the World Commission on Environment and

Development report entitled Our Common Future (UNESCO, 2002), which

acknowledges sustainability has undergone multiple interpretations in different

contexts around the world in order to make the meaning clear and contextualised to

peoples‘ experiences. For example, in developed countries, a widely-embraced

definition of sustainability highlights how the world‘s rapid economic growth is

largely the result of the use of finite resources to increase our global productivity

(Commonwealth of Australia, 2009; Davis, 2015; Duhn, 2012). This definition

22


focuses on environmental sustainability and economic growth; particularly on how to

continue to strengthen the economy without increasing greenhouse effects on our

planet, the melting of the polar caps, and deforestation of land and water to name a

few. These are important concepts to understand and remain relevant in the 21st

century, but environmental sustainability and economic growth alone is not enough

to sustain the future for the next generation. There is general consensus in the

literature (e.g.,Davis, 2015; Miller, 2014) that a shift in focus is needed, for today‘s

generation to explore sustainability from a broader perspective incorporating social,

political and economic dimensions. The Brundtland Report‘s (1987) focus on

environmental sustainability evolved into ideas that encompassed socioeconomic and

political domains at the Rio Earth Summit (1992), and again at the Johannesburg

World Summit (2002) on Sustainable Development. Rapid developments in the 21st

century, were the catalyst for emergence of other areas of sustainability alongside

environmental development (UNESCO, 2005).

To represent a model of sustainability that goes beyond the concerns of

environmental sustainability, UNESCO‘s (2010) four dimensional model is used.

The UNESCO framework of sustainability (2010) provides a useful framework to

understand sustainability as four dimensions that are distinct, yet interconnected.

This sustainability framework is multidimensional, and goes beyond a narrower

focus where there may be only concerns about a particular dimension.


Figure 2.1. Four dimensions of sustainable development (UNESCO, 2010).

As depicted in Figure 2.1, sustainability is not solely about environmental

issues or concerns. Each individual dimension is interrelated, and dynamic. To more

fully understand the multiple dimensions of sustainability, further elaborations of

each dimension is provided below.

The dimension of economic sustainability considers the personal and societal

consumption of basic needs and wants in relation to humans. Economic sustainability

is about investigating the economic growth of individuals within a community and

the resulting impact on society and the environment (UNESCO, 2005). Economic

growth for individuals and societies in developed countries is well established in

comparison to neighbouring developing countries. The concern from this disparity of

economic development lies in the notion that developed countries have access to

economic growth because developing countries quite often bear the negative

consequences of the developed nations economic growth impact (Penn, 2005).

24


Environmental sustainability concerns the understanding of the fragility of the

physical environment which includes natural resources, flora, fauna and living

entities, usually non-human. These natural resources continue to affect and be

affected by the lifestyle of human beings (UNESCO, 2005). Quite often, people

affected by the destruction of the natural environment are not responsible for this

tragedy in the first place (Penn, 2005). Hence, environmental sustainability is not just

about knowing ways to be environmentally sustainable, instead it is about

understanding broader themes related to peace, equality, human rights and

democracy (UNESCO, 2010).

Broad themes of peace, equality, human rights and democracy can be related to

notions of policy and decision making (UNESCO, 2010). According to Fien (2004),

political sustainability is defined as ―political systems to which power is exercised

fairly and democratically to make decisions about the way social and economic

systems use the biophysical environment‖ (p. 185). Based on this definition, political

sustainability is inseparable from the social, economic and environment dimensions.

Political sustainability involves consideration of decision making, policy and power

that ultimately decides the direction of sustainable development. As Penn (2005)

states, there is inequality of power in regards to social and economic systems, as

those who are affected most by the negative consequences of global development are

those who have the least voice in decision making about these developments.

Therefore, it is important to understand that definitions of sustainability should

include notions of representation. Magis and Shinn (2009) state that principles of

social sustainability include human wellbeing, equity, democratic government and

democratic civil society. Social sustainability involves understanding the roles that

people undertake in transforming and changing practices that limit participation and


deny differences (UNESCO, 2005). In this dimension, social sustainability is

strongly linked to economic and political dimensions that place people at the centre.

The UNESCO four dimensions of sustainability are intertwined and it is not

possible to consider only one dimension in isolation, without highlighting its

relationship with the other dimensions. This study seeks to contribute to the most

under-represented areas in the literature on sustainability related to early childhood

education: social and political sustainability. These dimensions are explored in the

next section in further detail.

2.2.1 From environmental sustainability to socio-political sustainability

As mentioned above, the field of early childhood education has to this point,

primarily considered sustainability in terms of environmental sustainability. There

are various reasons for this which include the romanticised notion of young

children‘s innocence and their connectedness to nature (Hendrick, 2015) and the

current contemporary view of childhood as being disconnected with nature (Louv,

2014). In this research, I advocate that children have a right to explore beyond the

environmental sustainability dimension, in order to develop a holistic understanding

of sustainability. The chosen topic for the child participants in this study is poverty, a

global concern that affects people worldwide. Referring back to UNESCO‘s (2010)

framework of sustainability, dimensions of social and political sustainability involve

exploring themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights which underpin

issues surrounding poverty. The dimension of socio-political sustainability is the

focus of this research as it enables children to engage in, in-depth dialogue about

poverty as a local and global sustainability issue. As socio-political sustainability

was investigated in this research, the below sections explores these dimensions in

detail.

26


2.2.2 Social sustainability: Peace, equality and human rights

Based on the UNESCO (2010) model of sustainability, peace, equality and

human rights are features of social sustainability. These features are about being able

to participate as a member of society without being marginalised (Moss, 2014).

Understanding these features of social sustainability is about looking critically at the

ways that inequalities in socio-economic structures, such as age, class, race and

gender, can privilege some individuals and withhold participation for others (Moss,

2014). Those who belong to particular groups that are deemed as having power (e.g.,

adults versus children; males versus females, upper class versus working class etc.)

are privileged, and influential in regard to decision making in policies and politics

that directly and indirectly affect global development. Penn (2005) states that

globalism has the power to replace or impose existing traditions and identities, and as

a result creates social inequalities for those who are not in power or privileged.

According to Fraser, Dahl, Stoltz, and Willig (2004), these socio-economic structures

continue to marginalise certain individuals because power is not distributed equally

in societies. Fraser et al. (2004) identify this as a theory of recognition, where

recognition or power is based on hierarchical values of age, gender, race and class.

For example, in the context of this research, as children are positioned as lacking in

power on account of their age and status as non-equal participating members of a

society. Hence children can be marginalised and this requires consideration in the

research design.

2.2.3 Political sustainability: Democracy

Based on the UNESCO (2010) four dimensions of sustainability, democracy is

a feature of political sustainability. This feature relates to being able to participate as

a member of society without biases or marginalisation and being able to contribute to

the society in which one lives. When an individual genuinely becomes a participant,


there is an inherent sense of responsibility and democracy within self and an

acknowledgement of one‘s competence in becoming participants (Hart, 1997).

However, Millei and Imre (2009) suggest that children‘s participation, particularly in

the political context, is marginalised because children cannot execute decision-

making that affects social and political conditions. For this research, I am not

claiming that children‘s participation will influence change in policies or decision-

making. However, by inviting children to be engaged in everyday political dialogues

such as poverty, children can contribute to deepening understandings from their own

and other‘s perspectives about these complex issues and become genuine participants

within their immediate community. For children to develop their roles as genuine

participants in this research, children explore the context of poverty within their local

and national community. As Hayward (2012) states, when children explore real

community events and issues, it tells them that these are matters of great concern that

are happening within their immediate environment. For example, poverty is not

simply a crisis that affects people in far-away or less developed countries, but is a

social concern that can take place in developed countries such as Australia (Lister,

2008).

Hayward (2012) suggests that for children to deconstruct understandings

behind complex themes such as notions of peace, equality, human rights and

democracy (UNESCO, 2010), they need experience in understanding their moral

obligations and political responsibilities in critiquing how ‗fairness‘ is being

distributed. This theme of fairness seems abstract, particularly when fairness is

measured by an individual‘s morals. However, emergent studies have described ways

of successfully introducing these topics to children in early childhood settings to

explore social inequalities from both local and global perspectives (Hawkins, 2010;

28


Phillips, 2010). Phillips (2010) uses the medium of storytelling to introduce notions

of social justice through the main protagonist who often experiences injustice by

being silenced or by having their freedom constricted. Phillips listens to the feedback

from children, and uses this to guide the choice of follow-up stories depending on the

children‘s responses. In this way, children‘s voices and preferences are recognised,

and at the same time they are challenged through thought-provoking experiences via

new follow-up stories. Stories allow children to view others‘ perspectives and use

that experiences to critique and challenge taken-for-granted notions of how it is ‗fair‘

or ‗unfair‘ that some people live a life of privilege whilst others do not (Hayward,

2012; Phillips, 2010). Thus, storytelling provides a useful method for introducing the

concept of fairness to children and will be employed as part of this research on

exploring children‘s understandings of poverty will be discussed further in Chapter

3.

2.2.4 Poverty: The socio-political sustainability focus in this study

As discussed in Chapter 1, poverty was chosen as the focus of this study as it

affects people worldwide. Poverty is a growing concern that encompasses socio-

political issues relating to themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010). These themes however rarely enter the field of early childhood

education due to the romanticised image of children who are viewed in need of

protection from these themes that are deemed as complex and at times difficult to

comprehend (Hendrick, 2015). This research introduced the topic of poverty into a

Kindergarten classroom, to encourage and support children to explore complex

socio-political sustainability issues. The topic of poverty was introduced to the

children through appropriate everyday early childhood learning experiences such as

storytelling, the visual arts and the medium of play as explained further in Chapter 3.


Through these various learning experiences, as the teacher-researcher, I was able to

closely examine strategies that supported the children‘s active participation in

dialogues and conversations about complex issues.

The number one Sustainable Development Goal identified by the United

Nations is eradicating poverty (United Nations, 2016). By bringing this topic into the

realm of early childhood education, young children are enabled to explore complex

global issues that are related to social and political aspects of sustainability including

homelessness, hunger, marginalisation, access to education and participation in

policy making decisions. As this topic is explored with young children in an

Australian Kindergarten setting, it is important to understand the context of poverty

within Australia.

An estimated 2.5 million people live below the poverty line in Australia.

603,300 (17.7%) of those people are children (Australian Council of Social Service

[ACOSS], 2014). Poverty is defined using the measurement of living below or at 50

% of the median income (ACOSS, 2014). On a global scale however, Australia‘s

annual disposable income is higher than the OECD average (OECD, 2014).

According to this data, as a whole, Australia is not considered a nation in which

people live in extreme poverty. Access to basic needs such as water and food is

achievable (OECD, 2014). Nevertheless, those most at risk of experiencing poverty

include young children, sole parent families and Indigenous communities.

In relation to ‗relative poverty‘ however, Australia has a rate of 14.4 % of the

population falling into this category; higher than the OECD average of 11.3 %.

Relative poverty relates to a lack of access to resources to support inclusion in

society. For example, access to school, education, and health services are factors that

can either exclude or include those affected by poverty in Australian society

30


(Saunders, 2011). Hence, people who are at risk of poverty are also in some way at

risk of having poor education and health outcomes. Access to education and health

services are important rights and resources that will influence individuals‘

participation in their communities and society more broadly. This makes poverty

more than an economic problem in Australia; it is also a social problem. Further, this

provides an example of how socio-political issues of sustainability, such as poverty,

have multiple meanings.

Sims (2011) suggests that poverty is not solely about equal opportunities, it is

also about being able to participate. Participation is not linked to equality and access

to opportunities, it is also linked to having a voice and being heard in decision-

making processes that inform how a society is governed (ACOSS, 2015).

Unfortunately, due to prevailing inequality, the voices most often heard are those

with easy access to the mechanisms to participate in society. This means the interests

of those who are in power continue to be protected, particularly in policy-making

concerns (Oxfam Australia, 2014). Hence, people who are positioned as powerful

and valued in society will continue to have a strong voice in governmental policy,

despite not having first-hand experiences of marginalisation and poverty.

The literature reviewed on circumstances of poverty in Australia highlights a

need for advocacy and open dialogue with children on how poverty affects people

within Australian society (ACOSS, 2014; Hammond et al., 2015). Children are most

at risk of poverty. Providing children with opportunities to understand how poverty

affects Australian children can address this gap in understanding. The intention of

this project is not for children to critique the technicalities of distribution of income

and power, but for them to be involved in democratic discussions that include

notions of democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) as they


relate to poverty. When children are given an opportunity to explore these notions,

they are enabled to develop empathetic understandings about the world in which they

live. Later in Section 2.5.3, I outline examples from Weinger‘s (2000) study on

children‘s biases in understandings of poverty, thus highlighting a need for children

to participate in explorations of this issue in greater depth and in pedagogically sound

ways.

Possibilities for democratic dialogue can stem from embedding socio-political

issues of sustainability in ECEfS, where the teacher-researcher introduces issues of

global concern in a manner that is sensitive to young children and works

collaboratively with them to explore a topic in-depth. As mentioned in Chapter 1, I

undertook the role of teacher-researcher in this research. As the teacher-researcher, I

was interested in exploring and investigating different teaching strategies that can be

utilised in a Kindergarten setting when introducing young children to the dimensions

of socio-political sustainability. My role as teacher-researcher, which is elaborated

further in Chapter 3, was flexible, where I interchanged between the initiator of the

topic, and the facilitator and mediator of learning.

2.3 Education for Sustainability

Education for sustainability (EfS) is important to support people to understand

the effects of industrialisation and globalisation on the planet, for both human and

non-human species (Bonnett, 2002). Impacts of these activities include rapid

population growth, biodiversity losses, food insecurity, energy and water challenges,

and climate change. When economic concerns are considered ahead of social and

environmental concerns, without considering the consequences for the future, current

states of living will not be able to be sustained for both the natural environment and

32


all living beings (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009; Davis, 2015; Hagglund &

Pramling Samuelsson, 2009).

In many developing countries, issues of unsustainable development have more

serious consequences (Haughton & Hunter, 2003; Penn, 2005). The United Nations

(2016) Measuring Progress towards Sustainable Development Goals, particularly

Goal 1 in ending poverty in all its forms everywhere, states that the impact of

unsustainable development in developing countries has particular consequences for

people who are vulnerable, such as children and the elderly. In particular, lives are at

risk from issues such as poor sanitation, inadequate housing, and polluted air and

water, with many people living in poverty and unable to get out of the ‗poverty trap‘

(Penn, 2005). In developing countries, poverty is more than not having enough

monetary funds. It is about surviving in society by ensuring access to food, health

and education services. Understandings of the experiences of those in poverty can be

addressed in EfS. The role of EfS is vital not only for understanding the outcomes of

unsustainable patterns of development and ways of living, but to provide people,

especially those in wealthier communities, with opportunities to critically reflect on

ways in which they can transform and change current unsustainable practices so that

social and political sustainability is achieved (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009;

Davis, 2015; UNESCO, 2015).

EfS is founded on skills and values of critical thinking, participation,

democracy, action, and change for equality (Commonwealth of Australia, 2009;

Fien, 2004; UNESCO, 2015). These principles are influenced by critical theory

where people challenge the taken-for-granted ways of thinking and doing. Critical

theory brings the understanding that oppression and marginalisation based on

political structures such as gender, class, class and race are imposed on certain


people, which greatly affects the quality of their lives (Freire, 1998). Hence, in

education that is influenced by critical theory, participants are encouraged to be

involved in a curriculum that challenges these political structures. In this study about

children‘s understandings of poverty, a critical theory lens is twofold. First, it

supports the children‘s meaning-making about poverty by supporting them to

critically reflect on wider understandings about poverty that are not just restricted to

views of economics, possessions or acquisition of resources. Secondly, critical theory

supports demonstration of the ways that young children are capable and competent in

exploring complex issues of poverty and demonstrating agency over directions in

their learning in this research.

In relation to these principles, Bonnett (2002) views EfS as a frame of mind.

The author defines this as ―sustainability as a frame of mind is not simply the issue

of our attitude towards the environment, but represents a perspective on that set of

the most fundamental ethical, epistemological and metaphysical considerations

which describe human being‖ (p. 8). With this definition, sustainability stems from

the intrinsic essence of one‘s existence as opposed to mere duty of having to be

sustainable for the sake of inevitable negative consequences of unsustainable living.

Hence, in order to understand the notion of sustainability, it is vital that EfS is

transformative, participatory, critical and empowering. As mentioned above, EfS is

influenced by critical theory that recognises that there is a need to reduce

environmental and ecological scarcity in this world, while also fostering human

wellbeing and social justice. Thus, EfS requires a shift from education ‗about‘ the

environment to education ‗for‘ a sustainable future (Commonwealth of Australia,

2009; Davis, 2015; Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009; UNESCO, 2015). This

34


shift is a feature of early childhood education for sustainability (ECEfS) as explained

below.

2.3.1 Early childhood education for sustainability

ECEfS is a curriculum and pedagogy that supports the development of

transformative, empowering and participative education around the context of

sustainability issues and concerns within early childhood contexts (Davis, 2015).

Early childhood contexts include kindergartens, preschools, homes and other settings

that cater for children aged birth - 8 years. ECEfS is not external to early childhood

education, nor does ECEfS overtly introduce topics of environmental or

sustainability issues in a context that is outside of early childhood pedagogy. Instead,

ECEfS is transformative education that embraces core values that are entrenched in

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) and which support

children to develop as problem solvers, action takers and decision makers in

sustainability related matters (Davis, 2015; Elliott & Young, 2016). Until recently,

ECEfS has had a strong focus on environmental sustainability. However, a growing

body of research has demonstrated how critical issues of socio-political sustainability

can also enter the arena, where children are active democratic participants who

explore and take action around socio-political issues (Hammond et al., 2015;

Hawkins, 2010; Phillips, 2010). Children‘s democratic participation occurs when

children become active problem seekers and solvers.

The section below explores the various early childhood contexts and

curriculum approaches, to gain a clearer understanding of where to position and

embed the principles of EfS/ECEfS in order for children to be engaged as active

participants in the dimension of socio-political sustainability in a Kindergarten

classroom.


2.4 Early Childhood Education and Care

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) is viewed as education for young

children between the ages of birth - 8 years. The early years period of birth - 8 years

is widely recognised as the formative years to build the foundations for children‘s

social, emotional and cognitive development (ACECQA, 2018; DEEWR, 2009;

Pilcher & Fox, 2017). In recent years there has been particular attention on the

benefits of investing in early childhood programmes with research identifying that

attendance at high quality early childhood services can benefit children and societies

in multiple ways (OECD, 2017) including advancing well-being, learning and

development.

ECEC services cover a range of programmes for young children including

centre-based services and family day care (Department of Education, 2017). Centre-

based services include long day care centres that generally operate for at least 10

hours a day, for children from birth to school age, which include before and after

school care. Kindergarten programmes are also centre-based, where they operate

generally for 6 hours a day, for children in the year before they attend formal

schooling. Outside school hours care is provided for school age children as a

programme for before and after school. Family day care services are generally for

birth to before formal school aged children. Family Day Care, are home based

services in the private homes of registered providers through the family day care

scheme. There has been increasing attention to the quality of teaching in ECEC with

links made between teaching quality and children‘s growth and the community in

which they live (OECD, 2015; Pilcher & Fox, 2017). A high-quality teaching

programme recognises that young children are active learners who are competent in

making-meaning about their world, are natural explorers and have important roles as

36


contributors to society (OECD, 2015). High quality ECEC programmes support

young children to develop positive attributes through experiences that recognise their

strengths and diversity.

There is growing recognition that ECEfS can be a marker for quality in early

years education (Siraj-Blatchford, 2009) and therefore should be a part of ECEC

programmes across the globe. ECEfS invites children to be engaged with real-world

issues which require critical thinking and investigations into themes such as

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010). These are markers

of quality practice because they support children to develop higher order thinking,

problem-solving and resilience.

The section below elaborates on the different types of ECEC curriculum based

on the work of MacNaughton (2003), and considers how ECEfS can be positioned

within these different approaches.

2.4.1 Early childhood curriculum and pedagogy

There are a multiple of teaching and learning frameworks used in ECEC and

these reflect the evolving landscape of children‘s learning and development. For the

purpose of this study, MacNaughton‘s (2003) conceptualisation of ECEC curriculum,

was reviewed as a ―good fit‖ and also to reflect the evolving change of landscape for

ECEfS curricula. MacNaughton (2003) has identified three types of curricula that are

practiced in early childhood contexts as shown in in Figure 2.2. These are:

curriculum that conforms to society, reforms to society, and transforms to society.

Each of these curricula are influenced by particular theorists and reflects particular

time periods, which are now discussed.


Figure 2.2. Types of ECEC curricula as defined by MacNaughton (2003).

2.4.2 Conforming to society

This curriculum approach is focussed on children attaining specific outcomes

(MacNaughton, 2003). The knowledge and skills that are taught in the educational

context are orientated towards those that contribute towards success in future

workplaces. In turn, this indirectly makes these skills highly valued by society. In

order for teachers to continually ‗transfer‘ these highly valued skills and knowledge

to children, they promote a traditional curriculum that is highly structured with the

teacher in control. This outcomes-based approach reflects what similar to Giroux‘s

(2006) refers to as a cultural reproductive model, where children are taught to

reproduce the dominant or valued culture of society. Dominant cultural norms

position some children at the centre because their particular way of living is valued

over others (Giroux, 2006). Children who do not conform to normative patterns are

then at risk of being positioned in deficit ways or marginalised, and can be labelled

as ‗at risk‘, ‗lacking‘ or ‗in need of fixing‘. For children from the dominant culture

who are not required to question cultural norms and practices, it becomes difficult to

reflect critically on how socio-political norms are produced and reinforced. In this

38


research, the application of a conformist curriculum would limit children‘s

contributions and focus on teacher-directed constructions of poverty.

Within a conforming curriculum (MacNaughton, 2003) ECEfS would be

viewed and comparable to the approaches of an education about the environment. In

education about the environment (Davis, 2015), the curriculum would predominantly

be about learning concepts and knowledge about the environment and related issues.

Education about the environment remains prevalent in current ECEC contexts,

due to dominant romanticised image of children who are viewed as innocent and

having a natural connection to nature (Hendrick, 2015). As explored earlier in

Chapter 1, this romanticised image of children continues to be strengthened based on

various factors including the theory of recognition, (Fraser et al., 2004) and/or child

developmental theories based on fixed notions of children and childhood (National

Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC], 2009). These theories

construct an image of children who are in need of protection from the assumed more

knowledgeable and competent adult who has acquisition of knowledge that is more

valued and reputable in comparison (Prout & James, 2015). This deficit view

constructs children as secondary to adults due to their developmental age, as taken-

for-granted, and in need of protection and adult guidance. Children viewed through a

deficit lens, together with the image of the contemporary child who is increasingly

disconnected from the natural environment (Louv, 2014), is then subjected to a

conforming curriculum or education about the environment that is nature-by default

(Elliott & Young, 2016). A nature-by default curriculum is when educators perceive

experiences of being engaged in or about nature as adequate in ‗solving‘

contemporary issues of children‘s disconnection from nature and ensuring childhood

is protected (Elliott & Young, 2016). Thus, despite the value of activities such as


gardening, care of flora and fauna and nature play in ECEC, there is potential that

over-reliance on these activities can hinder children‘s further transformative

engagement with sustainability.

The recently revised NQF standard reiterates this conforming curriculum in

ECEfS. Quality Area 3 that states, ―children are supported to become

environmentally responsible and show respect to the environment‖ (Australian

Children‘s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA], 2017, p. 79). This

classification of ECEfS under the physical or natural environmental dimension then

risks preserving the education about the environment as the main way of engaging

children in sustainable thinking.

The introduction of the topic of poverty through a conforming curriculum lens,

thus provides a potential barrier to children in terms of developing critical skills and

agency to become transformative learners. Through a conforming curriculum, there

is risks that children are only given opportunities of learning about poverty that are at

a surface level, and restricted to themes that are deemed as ‗safe‘ by adults.

This present research recognises that children can be engaged with other

dimensions of sustainability beyond and about the environmental dimension. As

participants in this research about poverty, the children were given opportunities to

be engaged in global issues that relate to themes of democracy, peace, equality and

human rights (UNESCO, 2010), issues that relate to concerns of poverty, that are

beyond the environment dimension.

2.4.3 Reforming to society

Reformation curriculum is influenced by theorists such as Dewey, Froebel and

Montessori (MacNaughton, 2003). The theory behind this approach to curriculum is

that education can reform society by producing citizens who are independent. In

40


order to achieve reformation, the curriculum recognises children as co-constructors

of knowledge; where relationships, learning resources and teaching strategies attend

to notions of the holistic child (MacNaughton, 2003). Despite a focus on developing

the ‗whole child‘, this approach values individual children over social relationships

and how individuals influence and are influenced by others. In this research,

reformation is viewed within the realm of democratic participation. While individual

agency is important, collective agency is most desired in order to critical thinking

and action-taking amongst a collective group.

When the reforming curriculum is brought into the context of sustainability and

EfS, this curriculum approach can be compared to education in the environment.

Davis (2015) suggests that education in the environment is about children having

direct experiences in the environment. Examples include caring for a local waterway.

These experiences provide skills that support understanding about the importance of

caring for the environment. However, they focus more on tacit skills and may limit

opportunity for children‘s interest, dialogue and inquiries to influence the curriculum

and community.

Practices of education in the environment provide children with the

experiences of participating in collective learning experiences. However, issues arise

when educators guise education in environment as a transformative approach to

ECEfS (Davis, 2015). Therefore, even if children are collectively or collaborating in

a project investigating the environmental dimension, it is still restricted to education

in environment, if there are no opportunities for children to develop higher order

thinking to enact change for the environment. To achieve a transformative

curriculum or education for sustainability, it is important that children go beyond just

understanding why the care of the environment is important. Children will need to be


involved in authentic ways to care for the environment through social dialogues with

one another, where they ask questions and pursue their interests or challenges in

regards to the environment

As ECEfS increasingly recognises the importance of collaboration amongst

learners in dimensions of sustainability beyond the environment, there is still a wide

‗gap‘ in this, which results in ECEfS reverting back into the comfortable domains of

the environmental dimension. As a result, despite increased collective learning

amongst children, ECEfS is still limited, where the pedagogy is restricted to being in

the environment. That is not to discredit the importance of children being engaged in

environmental sustainability. Emerging research such as Stuhmcke‘s (2012) study

demonstrates how children can go beyond education in the environment, and be

active agents of change as both reformers and transformers when investigating issues

of environmental sustainability. The below section will now elaborate on the

transforming curriculum.

2.4.4 Transforming to society

A transforming curriculum is about recognising that there are injustices in the

world that warrant a theory of resistance and a voice for change (MacNaughton,

2003). Giroux (2006) states that resistance should enter the education domain to

empower those who are oppressed and those in power, to deconstruct power

relations. Power relations can be deconstructed provided that the teacher understands

their role as a social activist in the realm of education. The teacher or the social

activist understands the inequalities that exist in society, and challenges students to

be critically aware. As the teacher-researcher in this present study, it is important that

I reflect on the ways I resist and reproduce inequalities in working with young

children. Resistance includes giving a ‗voice‘ to those who are often marginalised in

42


society (e.g. children) through challenging everyday practices that continue to affect

their social wellbeing. Examples of marginalisation include exclusion from resources

such as education, based on the person‘s race, gender and class, which both Hawkins

(2010) and Siraj-Blatchford (2009) found in their studies. In these studies, the

findings were a result from the early childhood researcher‘s questioning techniques

with their child participants. Open-ended and focussed questionings were used with

young children to illicit authentic responses from them, which is a pedagogical

condition that I utilised for this present research, as elaborated later in Chapter 4.

Through these prompting questions, children were enabled to share their authentic

thoughts about poverty. At the same time, I needed to be aware of my own political

and social bias, which can potentially limit my ability to provide transformative

opportunities for specific children.

A transforming curriculum, coupled with my own personal understanding of

my potential biases, aligns well with education for sustainability. As the teacher-

researcher, it is important that children are positioned to be able to make decisions in

this research, and to have their voices represented as opposed to my role as the

teacher-researcher transmitting knowledge to them. ECEfS as Davis (2015) suggests

is transformative, where children are supported to become problem-solvers and take

action in their own contexts in order to create social change. Hence, MacNaughton‘s

conceptualisation of three curriculum approaches points towards the transforming

curriculum approach as best capturing the intent of this study, particularly in

supporting the children to be engaged in active meaning-making around poverty.

Emerging research recognises the importance of enacting a transforming curriculum

with young children around themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010) in that it can support them to develop critical thinking skills and


become agents of change (Hammond et al., 2015; Hawkins, 2010; Mackey, 2014;

Stuhmcke, 2012). As mentioned earlier, in Stuhmcke (2012), the children

investigated ways to care for a rainforest through a transformative project approach.

Through a transformative project approach, children were engaged in critical

thinking and conversations with one another in regards to ways to reduce rubbish to

the natural environment; protect the flora and fauna and ways to enact change to

support others to preserve the rainforest.

The child participants in Stuhmcke‘s (2012) study with Kindergarten-aged

children and their roles as agents of change in the care of a local rainforest,

demonstrate that investigations of environmental concerns can go beyond being

education in the environment, provided that children were actively engaged in

transformative thinking and action. Transformative actions came in the form of

children being active in investigating dialogues with one another, and experimenting

and communicating their thinking (i.e., through play and the visual arts) of how to

enact environmental stewardship. This transformative project approach was a method

that I employed in the present research on children‘s understandings of poverty. As

further discussed in Chapter 3, a project approach is a way of learning that the

children in the current research site are already familiar with. By critically reflecting

on Stuhmcke‘s (2012) research methods, I employed transformative approaches on

the current research on poverty that engaged children to be active in dialogues that

reflect themes around democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO,

2010), which are important concerns relating to poverty.

The importance of a transforming curriculum as suggested by MacNaughton

(2003) supports the work of Hagglund and Pramling Samuelsson (2009) on young

children‘s development of active citizenship through ECEfS. Despite recognition of

44


the importance of developing children‘s agency and active citizenship through EfS,

there is hesitancy to employ education for sustainability, as educators are unsure of

the practical ways by which to enact a curriculum for sustainability that develops

children‘s active citizenship, agency and critical skills (Somerville & Williams,

2015).

Education for sustainability is still relatively new, particularly in research

focussed on young children working in the domains of sustainability that go beyond

the prevalent environmental dimensions. This includes a lack of research into

engaging young children in understanding themes of democracy, peace, equality and

human rights (UNESCO, 2010). Understanding these themes of democracy, peace,

equality and human rights is important to support children‘s citizenship. Active

citizenship invites each person, including young children, to a dialogue about

complex and real-life events that are at times difficult. Engagement in such dialogue

supports children to build life-long dispositions and to take responsibility in working

towards a more sustainable world (Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009).

Unfortunately, in the context of Australian ECEfS, if formal learning frameworks

continue to reinforce ECEfS in a limited physical and environmental domain, then

educators who genuinely wish to explore themes of democracy, peace, equality and

human rights; can be left discouraged in finding ways to encourage children to foster

their active citizenship (Elliott & McCrea, 2015).

2.4.5 Critical reflection

Features of MacNaughton‘s (2003) research also heavily influence other

aspects of this research. As part of a transforming curriculum, critical reflection is a

facilitator of change because it challenges individuals to investigate power relations.

Critical reflection was important in MacNaughton‘s (2000) studies on power and


gender in early childhood contexts, in which the author was critical about how

everyday resources in an early childhood setting such as toys, books and language

influenced how children constructed their gender identity. In this research, critical

reflection enabled me to reflect on my role as the teacher-researcher. For example,

through Research Question 1, which questions ‗What are young children‟s

understandings of poverty?‘, it was important that conditions were provided for

children to construct genuine and authentic understandings of poverty as opposed to

me transmitting my knowledge to them. I needed to be critical of the language I used

to describe poverty and be reflective of the resources (e.g., books) that I used to

explore poverty. The children who participated in this research worked as co-

researchers. The directions of the study were dependent on them, where I would

reflect on the children‘s interest or aspects of particular learning experiences that

challenged them and then plan for appropriate follow-up experiences. In this sense,

my role was co-researcher, mediator and facilitator, where power was shared and

distributed between the children and me. Critical reflection is an important and

inherent component in action research methodologies, as explained in Chapter 3.

Through critical reflection processes in action research, I was able to reflect on how

to include aspects of socio-political sustainability within an early childhood

education context. This was possible by working with children, as opposed to

carrying out research on children.

Critical reflection on my role as the teacher-researcher supported me to reflect,

listen, and interpret the children‘s meaning-making about poverty (Dahlberg &

Moss, 2005). The meanings that were shared about poverty were viewed by me as

the children‘s contributions as co-researchers in this study. Critical reflection was

also an important component in reviewing the literature for this research, particularly

46


when I sought to evaluate the reasoning as to why children‘s participation beyond

environmental sustainability was limited in ECEfS. Evaluating literature on teaching

pedagogies and the ECEfS curriculum also supported me to understand what changes

could be implemented in my role as teacher-researcher to support children in

exploring the topic of poverty within an early childhood context.

Critical reflection was also an important component for the children where

critical reflections by them occurred via conversations with their peers;

brainstorming sessions after storytelling; and the use of the medium of the visual

arts. Through critical reflection, children were enabled through my support, to reflect

on taken-for-granted understandings about poverty. For children to become active

learners in dimensions of sustainability beyond the environment, it is important that

ECEfS is immersed in practices of critical reflection for both teacher and children.

Davis (2010) suggests that practices and cycles of critical reflection support ECEfS

to become a transformative pedagogy.

Through a transformative ECEfS curriculum, children in this study were

supported to become problem-seekers and solvers, who were actively finding ways

to create wider understandings about poverty and ultimately to create change (Davis,

2010). As children were active in cycles of critical reflection, the notion of power

and authority was shared between the children and adult, thus giving children power

to make decisions throughout the research. When children are genuine and active

participants in their learning, there is potential for them to become agents of change,

as they are immersed in cycles that require them to think, action and learn (Davis,

2010).

These actions correlate with the study‘s action research cycle of planning,

acting and observing, reflecting and revised planning, where each stage requires the


learner or participant to undergo cycles of self-reflection (Kemmis, McTaggart, &

Nixon, 2014). Critical reflection is an important feature of action research; however,

it is not simply about following these spirals or cycles of self-reflection in a periodic

manner. Instead critical reflection is about supporting the learner and participant to

achieve a sense of growth and development in their thinking and understanding

(Kemmis et al., 2014). In the context of this research, critical reflection involved

children in becoming active problem-solvers and potential agents of change around

understandings of poverty.

As the teacher-researcher in the current research, MacNaughton (2005) states

that critical reflection potentially supports my role in investigating power relations

that take place between people. By critically reflecting on practices, educators are

able to understand that there are multiple ways to make-meaning, and that there are

many ways of teaching and learning. According to the EYLF framework (DEEWR,

2009), critical reflection can be undertaken by using a set of overarching questions to

guide reflections on pedagogical practices. Reflective practice is important and

involves educators critically reflecting on particular teaching experiences in depth.

Aside from understanding the different ways children make meaning, critical

reflection also enabled me to understand that the different types of ECE curriculum

(as presented in Section 2.4.1) do not take place in isolation. Instead, approaches to

curriculum are influenced by various factors which include theories of child

development, as elaborated below.

2.4.6 The influence of child developmental theories on early childhood

curriculum and pedagogy

There are two main views of child development that shape how curriculum in

early childhood is framed. The first is the American National Association for the

48


Education of Young Children (NAEYC)‘s Developmentally Appropriate Practices

(DAP) (NAEYC 2009) viewpoint which strongly advocates that children evolve

incrementally (McLachlan, Fleer, & Edwards, 2013). What this suggests is that a

DAP curriculum will frame outcomes accordingly to children‘s ages.

Developmentally-appropriate play and learning experiences are offered to children

based on predicted developmental milestones. When DAP is based on typical

milestones, the teachers are able to promote optimal learning experiences that are

designed to support children to achieve success. Nevertheless, DAP is not without

critiques or challenges. Horn, Karlin, Ramey, Aldrige and Snyder‘s (2005) review of

DAP practices on children‘s development showed that DAP do suggest positive

outcomes for children but are not consistent. DAP is appealing in the sense that it

promotes positive development in young children, yet the outcomes of DAP are not

necessarily effective.

This research is embedded in reconceptualist thinking where early childhood

education is moving forwards via a critical early childhood curriculum. The culture

of the research site is strongly embedded in the Reggio Emilia educational

philosophy (Malaguzzi, 1994) which suggests a juxtaposition to DAP practices.

Through a reconceptualist lens, critiques of DAP focus on curriculum practices based

on the notion of a universal ‗truth‘ of how children develop and learn (Cannella,

2005). This then reinforces the notion of one way of being, and at the same time

disadvantages those who are positioned as different to the ‗truth‘ as lacking and

deficit. Grieshaber (2000) suggests that when ECEC is regulated and controlled by

these universal ‗truths‘, the curriculum is most likely one that prioritises the

dominant values, conditions and priorities of particular individuals. In this current


research, the ECEC curriculum supports the children in examining understandings of

poverty through actively being critical.

A second view that strongly shapes curriculum in early childhood education is

a cultural-historical view (McLachlan et al., 2013). A cultural-historical view of

development highlights the interplay between the contexts in which the child

participates, and their specific lived experiences. In other words, the child‘s

interactions with their social and physical environment which includes immediate

family, and community will define their developmental path (Fleer, Anning, &

Cullen, 2009; McLachlan et al., 2013). In this view, development is not based on the

child‘s age but instead is based on the relationships between the evolving social and

physical world and the child who is actively participating and co-constructing

meaning in their learning.

The section below explores how different perspectives about children

influences the early childhood curriculum. Contemporary images of the child

emphasises the importance of children‘s social relationships and recognises the

contemporary child as someone who is competent and capable of making-meaning

about their world (Fleer et al., 2009; McLachlan et al., 2013). I will first elaborate on

the past images of the child (previously explored in Chapter 1), that viewed children

through a romanticised or dependent lens, where they are passive beings that are in

need of protection from adults. I then highlight how contemporary images of children

recognise them as active participants who take an active role in their learning

experiences. It is important to understand how power is shared or owned by children

in contemporary curricula and the conditions that enable children to have power over

their learning. The notion of power is explored in the context of key perspectives on

50


children. These key perspectives include the image of the child, children‘s rights, and

the role of children as active citizens in the context of ECEfS.

2.5 Key Perspectives about Children

2.5.1 Images of the child

There are multiple images of the child at different historical points of time,

ranging from: the natural child destined for a moral good life; the evangelical child

who was suddenly viewed as not so innocent; the various childhoods (i.e. the

delinquent child, the schooled child, the psychological child); to the current paradigm

of children as active social beings (Hendrick, 2015). Historical views of children

positioned them as unreceptive, incompetent and as empty vessels that needed adults

to ‗transfer‘ knowledge upon them (Hendrick, 2015; James et al., 1998). This

romanticised view of children as innocent and in need of protection is influenced by

several factors including theories of Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP).

As explained, DAP is grounded in the notion that children reach optimum results

based on developmental ages and stages. For example, adhering strictly to Piaget‘s

preoperational stage (Tryphon & Voneche, 1996) children aged 2-7 years are thought

to be unable to conceptualise abstract thought and need concrete experiences. In the

context of sustainability, this justifies the romanticised notion of protecting children

from real-world issues, as these social concerns are deemed too abstract or distant

from children‘s everyday lives. Therefore, children were encouraged to be connected

with and be immersed in nature play through activities such as gardening,

composting and recycling.

As depicted in the Sustainable Planet Project (SPP), Stuhmcke (2012) studied

her own teaching practices and found that, environmental sustainability can be

transformative and empowering, when children are viewed as competent and invited


to engage as active problem-solvers and action-takers in matters of environmental

sustainability. The Sustainable Planet Project was a whole-centre collaboration that

involved the children, the teachers, the children‘s families and the immediate

community (Davis et al., 2005). The children worked alongside the teachers as co-

learners and co-researchers. They had their voices recognised through being involved

in the centre‘s sustainability philosophies and practices. The children were not only

involved in everyday sustainable practices such as encouraging the whole centre‘s

litter-less lunch boxes and use of recycled materials in their curriculum, but also

enacted change through their family life, the centre‘s sustainability philosophies and

with their immediate community.

In contrast, education focused on nature play or being immersed in

environmental management activities is often guised as education for sustainability

(Elliott & Young, 2016). As explained, this stems from the notion of children‘s

increasing disconnection from nature (Louv, 2014). However, to simply immerse the

‗innocent child‘ in nature play or conducting environmental management tasks such

as gardening and tree planting is to limit children‘s participation in sustainability

experiences that can be transformative and empowering.

One current and contemporary image of the child is the sociological child

(Hendrick, 2015; James et al., 1998). This view recognises that children‘s learning is

not just based on cognitive development, but also influenced by their social and

cultural environment. Theorists such as Vygotsky (Tryphon & Voneche, 1996) state

that children are products of social learning. Hence, to focus on the child in isolation

without incorporating past experience, culture, and context is to not support

children‘s capabilities as learners. Linking this understanding of the sociological

child to the topic of sustainability, children are capable of participating in projects

52


and topics that explore abstract sustainability concepts in partnership with

knowledgeable others. A small number of emerging studies have included young

children as co-researchers in participatory action research related to sustainability

issues (e.g., Hawkins, 2010; Phillips, 2010; Stuhmcke, 2012). For example, in

Stuhmcke‘s (2012) research, children took on the role of co-researcher together with

the author through engagement in a transformative project approach model on the

topic of caring for the environment, specifically on the preservation of rainforests. A

transformative project approach is a model of teaching and learning where children‘s

ideas and interests are used as the basis of critical inquiry and from there the teacher

acts as a facilitator for children to make changes or transform prior understandings

based on new collaborative understandings (Stuhmcke, 2012).

Collaboration with one another is an important process of making-meaning

about the world. The contemporary image of the child is one where children are

active beings who are capable of making-meaning and enacting agency in their social

lives (Prout & James, 2015). Rinaldi (2006) suggests that it is important for children

to make-meaning about their life, through working collaboratively with one another.

Through collaboration, ideas are shared with one another and understandings can be

negotiated and refined. It is through these dialogues, that critical learning takes place.

Through critical learning and reflection, children are able to compare, negotiate and

expand their prior understandings (Rinaldi, 2006).

Rinaldi (2006) suggests that in order for children to be active learners, a

pedagogy of listening is required. A pedagogy of listening is when children‘s ideas

and theories of meanings about their world are listened to, as opposed to the adult

transferring knowledge to the young child (Rinaldi, 2006). When children are

listened to, the image of the child is one that is active and competent of making-


meaning. The belief that children are not passive learners is when Moss‘ (2014)

notion of real utopia can take place, whereby meaningful learning occurs, and the

adult is aware of their power in the learning process. Qvortrup (2015) states that

children‘s voices need to be heard in the learning process. In this research, children‘s

perspectives, ideas, and questions about poverty are brought into the main forum to

be shared with others, as opposed to merely noting them down in a tokenistic way,

without taking further action. In the context of this research, it is important that

children‘s voices in regards to their understandings of poverty are heard, in order for

children to be active constructors of meaning.

As mentioned above, there are examples of emerging studies about children as

active co-researchers where children explore and investigate issues that relate to

sustainability concerns including issues of social justice (Hawkins, 2010; Phillips,

2010; Stuhmcke, 2012). Despite these images of children as active co-researchers

around issues of socio-political sustainability, there is risk of children‘s participation

being tokenistic leading to limitations in the ways in which sustainability is explored

(Elliott & Young, 2016). In the Section below, I consider children‘s rights with a

sustainability framework.

2.5.2 Children’s rights and sustainability.

There are risks that when children are viewed as passive and incapable,

children are potentially marginalised in society (Australian Child Rights Taskforce,

2018). Children are often excluded from decision making matters that directly affect

them. The United Nations Convention on the Rights of Child (UNCRC) (United

Nations, 1989) recognises this and states that all children and young people have the

right to participation in the decisions that affect them, to access relevant information,

and to express their feelings. This children‘s rights was a goal of this research, where

54


children were acknowledged and supported through recognising that they have

participation rights (Danby & Farrell, 2004; Davis, 2015; Farrell, 2016) in discussion

about issues of increasing relevance within a broad range of Australian communities.

For children to be able to exercise their rights authentically as competent and

social participants, the context has to be meaningful to the child. For example, in

Mackey‘s (2014) research, children were involved in the planning of the

environmental curriculum in their centre. Examples include the children being active

and taking a lead in the centre‘s recycling and waste management plan. Further, the

children acted as agents of change when they wrote a letter of concern to an art

supply company on its use of plastic wraps to secure bundles of paper and paints

used within the centre. Guided under the children‘s rights to participation, children‘s

voices were incorporated into the planning process, where they discussed issues of

environmental concerns, brainstormed solutions to these issues and enacted change

within the community. Research projects such as this, along with the research of

Stuhmcke (2012) mentioned earlier, ensure children‘s participation is meaningful

through authentic democratic learning processes.

The current research on socio-political sustainability on the other hand, is

potentially ‗abstract‘ as social justice is something that is not necessarily depicted.

Furthermore, as the participants are from middle class families, there could be an

assumption that the poverty will not be a genuine concern for them. Somerville and

Williams‘ (2015) own review tracing empirical research in the field of ECEfS,

emphasises that research with a focus on children‘s rights and voices is mainly about

advocacy for children‘s rights, as opposed to actually involving children in practical

research incorporating their rights. Thus, this research despite being ‗abstract‘, aims

to include children in exploring the socio-political issue of poverty that affects


children globally. Influenced by Mackey (2014) and Stuhmcke (2012), the present

research investigated understandings about poverty based on the children‘s authentic

inquiries and questions. For example, the investigation about poverty was

meaningful to children, as the questions and themes they investigated (e.g., Will a

visit to the doctor help the protagonist feel better; does a house complete with a bed

and an alarm system help the homeless?) were authentic inquiries to them, and

something that they had independently explored through the medium of play without

the need of adult intervention. This is further elaborated in Chapter 5.

In a study on children‘s understandings of poverty and food security with

children from a low-income community, Hammond et al. (2015) introduced the topic

scarcity of food as an impetus to introduce social sustainability. The use of

photographs showing a fridge full of food compared with one with little food was

used as a stimulus by the researchers to bring social sustainability issues into the

context of early learning. At the same time, the photographs served as a provocation

for children to think of others‘ experiences. The introduction of this stimulus was

authentic and sensitive on the part of the researchers. The use of binary provocations

(i.e., full fridge vs. a fridge with little food) to bring the topic of poverty was an

impetus for initiating conversation with children and a similar method that was

employed in this present study. Later as discussed in Chapters 4 and 7, I used the

critical text Rich Cat, Poor Cat (Waber, 1963) to initiate critical discussions relating

to binary thinking of rich and poor. At the same time, this intentional introduction of

binary thinking was also something that I was potentially reinforcing taken-for-

granted understandings about poverty and was something that I critically reflected on

in the later stages of the research, (see Chapter 6 for further discussion).

56


Young children see their educational or school setting as real life, where there

is no segregation between home and school (Katz & Chard, 2000). Hence, to not

introduce real life topics into educational settings is to legitimate the segregation of

home and school links. In this research as the teacher-researcher, I introduced the

topic as an impetus for children‘s thinking and to make the realities of poverty a

legitimate area of concern for children from middle class backgrounds who may

think that poverty only happens to others (Lister, 2008).

2.5.3 Children’s perceptions of poverty

Research on young children and their participation in broader spheres of

sustainability are current and emerging. However, there remains a research gap in

understanding ways to embed socio-political sustainability within early childhood

contexts. In relation to this research, it was important to review past research that has

been conducted in relation to children‘s perceptions of poverty. Weinger‘s (2000)

research on middle class children and children experiencing poverty was analysed

and evaluated as a way for me to understand the complexities around children‘s

perceptions of poverty. When interviewing middle class and poor children aged

between 5 - 14 years on their understandings of wealth and poverty in an American

primary school, Weinger (2000) found that the children attributed poverty to an

individual‘s actions. Attributes such as being lazy or not working hard enough were

some of the biases expressed by children about people who experience poverty.

Conversely, when the children were asked about their views on people who had

wealth, they believed that wealthy people had more resources and income due to

positive attributes of hard work, and diligence in education and work ethic. Except

for a small number of children, external socio-political structures were not

acknowledged as influencing social inequalities including poverty. Weinger suggests


that this is due to middle class children‘s incapability to go beyond their prejudices.

These prejudices include the assumption that all people who experience poverty are

responsible for their circumstances. The middle class children in Weinger‘s study

had some understandings of economic class bias, but could not empathise with the

social exclusion those in poverty experienced.

The findings of Weinger‘s (2000) study illuminates that ―… early in life

children internalise the divisions caused by intense income inequalities that

undermine common bonds, familiar connections, and mutual understandings among

people‖ (p. 146). Weinger‘s findings highlight how children are influenced by

stereotyping and bias within the society in which they live. Thus, the need to involve

children in dialogue about social realities is pertinent. When children are involved in

these dialogues, they can potentially begin to empathise how people experiencing

poverty are ostracised and excluded; a result that goes beyond individual actions or

attributes. Like America, where Weinger‘s study was conducted, Australia is a

developed country that is experiencing rates of relative poverty higher than the

average amongst OECD countries (OECD, 2014). This is important to acknowledge

in order to support children to understand that attributes such as laziness are

erroneous contributors to people being poor. Instead, poverty occurs because of

inequality in resources, participation and power (ACOSS, 2015).

Hammond et al. (2015) conducted a study on theories about wealth and poverty

via the context of access to food with Australian working-class school children aged

6 - 7 years. Their research was unique in the sense that it sought children‘s

perspectives and theories about why some families have less or more food than

others, indirectly supporting children‘s theorising about poverty. This differs from

other research that has focussed on older children‘s immediate experiences of

58


poverty and the consequences of being in poverty (e.g., Hammond et al., 2015). The

findings from the working-class Australian children in this study aligns with findings

of Weinger‘s study, where prejudice and bias are ingrained from an early age.

Despite children coming from a working-class background, they did not identify

themselves as people in poverty. The children argued that money and hard work

determines a person‘s wealth, whereas people experiencing poverty or were jobless,

was a result of their ‗laziness‘. As such, this study will provide additional insights

from younger children from a middle-class suburban area.

Aside from insights about children‘s perspectives on poverty, research on

responses to people experiencing poverty also warrants exploration. Sigelman‘s

(2012) research, conducted in the United States with children aged 6, 10 and 14

years, from a middle-class cluster, showed how an individual‘s status of being ‗rich‘

or ‗poor‘ affected how others would respond. For example, the findings depicted that

a reduced amount of support from the wealthy towards poor people was justified

because people in poverty were depicted as lazy or not hardworking. The findings of

Sigelman‘s study suggest that understanding about the binaries of wealthy and

poverty is contextual to the participants. This corroborates findings of Lister‘s (2008)

study wherein children from developed countries linked poverty to ‗others‘, viewing

poverty as a social issue happening only in developing countries.

In comparison, Camfield‘s (2010) research about poverty was carried out in a

developing country compromising five Ethiopian communities. This research

showed that perceptions of poverty were highly context specific. The participants in

Camfield‘s research were children from two cohorts; a younger cohort of 5-6 years,

and a cohort of 11-13 years, in both urban and rural communities. In the research, the

author refrained from asking the children their perceptions about poverty, as it was


deemed unethical to seek their first-hand experiences of severe deprivation.

Additionally, this was also seen as privileging those who were not experiencing

poverty, thus indirectly stigmatising the Ethiopian children who were experiencing

poverty. Instead, Camfield sought notions of children‘s ―ill-being‖ (p. 271) in

regards to their experiences of being in severe deprivation. The findings showed that

rural children as young as 5 were able to explain ill-being as highly linked to relative

poverty and social oppression. These children viewed poverty as exclusion from

resources that included social participation, for example feeling ashamed when they

lack appropriate clothing. For these children, having wellbeing in their community

where they were not socially ostracised was more important than material resources.

Thus, for this research that explores young children‘s meaning-making about

poverty, bringing awareness about how ‗others‘ are perceived allows for disruptions

to stereotypical misconceptions and opens up possibilities for deeper understanding

and acknowledgement of the circumstances and consequences of socio-political

inequalities. As noted in Weinger‘s (2000) study, children from developed countries

viewed poverty as a result from an individual‘s deficit efforts, thus making it an

experience that the poor can easily come out of, provided they try to be more

hardworking. This understanding runs the risks of stigmatising those experiencing

poverty. It is social exclusion or ill-being in society as found in Camfield‘s (2010)

study that results in poverty being viewed as something experienced only by ‗others‘.

Therefore, it is important that children understand these consequences, and be

challenged to critically explore their perspectives especially with respect to those

they position as ‗other‘. In understanding their own and other‘s perspectives and

experiences, children may become active citizens of this world.

60


2.5.4 Children as active citizens

As elaborated in the previous section, children are viewed as participating

members of their immediate community, who have the right to be involved in

decision-making processes that affect their lives and their communities. Active

citizenship involves children genuinely participating in shared social dialogues and

decision-making processes that involve the community in which they live (Hagglund

& Pramling Samuelsson, 2009; Phillips, 2010). Hagglund and Johansson (2014)

suggest that in the context of sustainability, children‘s rights need to extend beyond

their local and immediate environment towards rights and belongings in the

dimension of world citizenship. This means that children‘s belonging is two-fold:

they have belonging in the context of their local and immediate environment; and,

belonging as ‗active world citizens‘ through existence as human beings in a shared

world. Being an active citizen is about being critically aware of others and

understanding the negative consequences for future generations as a result of our

current actions.

Children‘s roles as active citizens in the context of sustainability, should not be

viewed as a scenario of ―doom and gloom‖ (Davis, 2010, p. 31) where they are

prepped to take responsibilities in solving the problems of today and the future.

Instead, viewing children as active citizens in the present is about giving them

opportunities for dialogue to develop understandings of self, others and their shared

world within an early childhood context. Hagglund and Johansson (2014) view

dialogue that takes place in early childhood contexts as ‗value conflicts‘ which are

important for children to become critical, transformative and active agents of change.

Experiences in value conflicts recognise that learning about sustainability is about a

community of learners with diverse ideas and ways of thinking. It is the


understanding of both conflict and shared knowledge that makes learning about

sustainability transformative and empowering.

The position I take in this study is that children are already viewed as active

citizens who have a connection and responsibility for all human and non-human

beings in this shared world. By exploring children‘s understandings of poverty, this

study builds on this responsibility to bring awareness to a socio-political issue of

sustainability. Through this lens, ECEfS provides young children opportunities to be

involved in everyday interactions or dialogues that challenge and question inequality.

These opportunities are explored through the everyday experiences of early

childhood curriculum in storytelling, dancing and pretend play, to name a few.

Nevertheless, there will always be challenges and hurdles in children‘s active

participation, and even more in their journey of being active citizens due to living in

the constraints of an adult political world (Millei & Imre, 2009). On a global scale,

restrictions in children‘s roles come in the form of external political structures that

limit their participation, for example in their inability to vote in society or to

purchase land. As Fraser et al. (2004) suggest inequalities of participation in society

are due to the hierarchies of external structures, such as age, gender, and class, thus

making children‘s participation in society low. MacNaughton, Hughes, and Smith‘s

(2007) study and that of Fraser et al. (2004), found that the extent of children‘s

participation within a community setting outside of early childhood contexts was

only as consultants as opposed to participants who were involved in genuine

decision-making processes to bring about change. In the study by MacNaughton et

al. (2007) children‘s opinions on public housing were listened to at surface level, but

no actions were taken as a result of the children‘s opinions. Even though

MacNaughton‘s (2003) transforming approach was used, and the children were

62


empowered through giving them a voice, the outcome was not transformative as it

did not produce social impact and change. The children in MacNaughton et al.‘s

(2007) research were perhaps constrained by their engagement in an adult governed

space. In Kindergartens, teachers need to be aware of the hierarchy of structures that

exist among children, among adults, and between children and adults. Any

opportunities to enable children‘s voices to be heard, be it to the school community,

homes and their wider community should be carefully facilitated by the teacher.

Another example of the imbalance between children and adults‘ participation

in community is seen in Phillips (2010) study whereby children‘s actions did not end

up being transformative because of constraints surrounding the power of adults. The

participants in Phillips (2010) study were children aged 5-6 years, who investigated

the equity of bird hunters, particularly with the endangered Coxen Fig parrot. The

children wanted to gather signatures on petitions from other children, in order to

bring awareness to the issue of extinction. They had the idea of using the petition to

bring awareness to the nurturing of fig tree seedlings for restoration of the birds local

habitat. By highlighting the plight of these endangered species, the children were

becoming social agents of change, as they wanted to bring awareness of the issue of

global animal hunting and how it can impact local spaces, such as the endangered

Coxen Fig parrot. However, the participants‘ efforts were in vain as they were

constrained by external adult forces, because the Principal of the site deemed it

inappropriate to carry out the act of gathering petitions from children in other classes.

Thus young children‘s participation can be influenced by power relations in adult

spaces. In the current research, I addressed this issue of hierarchical adult power

through evaluating potential hurdles from the community including other teachers,

families and the general community. Children‘s efforts on working with one another


should be supported and facilitated by all members of the community through

everyday conversations and discussions about global issues.

This was something that Gibson (2010) reflected on in the Sustainable Planet

Project outlined earlier in this chapter. In the early stages of the project, there were

varying challenges that were encountered by staff members and parents which

included having different levels of knowledge and expertise in environmental

matters, and varying levels of commitment in regards to implementing centre-wide

environmental initiatives such as the ‗litterless lunch‘ programme. Nevertheless,

despite early challenges, success in the Sustainable Planet Project was viable

because the staff members had a strong advocacy for young children as active

participants in their learning communities. Specifically, children were actively

engaged in the running of the Sustainable Planet Project, where they collaborated in

their learning environment with other children and the educators, and were involved

in the decision-making processes around their learning (Pratt, 2010). Some of the

examples of children taking agency as opposed to being passive recipients included:

participating in the waste management programme of the whole centre; reflecting

and changing the ways chemicals were used in the everyday cleaning; finding

alternate ways to efficiently use natural resources; and having a relationship with the

natural environment (Pratt, 2010). These are examples of sustainability initiatives in

an early childhood context that are not only restricted to adults, but also include the

roles of young children in carrying out their shared responsibility.

The above section explored key perspectives of the sociological child, the

global citizen and children with rights. The rapid growth of global change in the 21st

century has greatly influenced the rate of unsustainable living. As a result, an

increasingly globalised world requires all citizens to be sustainable in their everyday

64


living, practises and experiences. This includes having new skills of critical thinking,

dialogue, agency, and participation. ECEC can support children as they navigate a

world of multiple meanings and increasing diversity. However, despite education

being identified as a major key influence in children‘s learning experience as active

citizens, there is still limited research on how it may take place in the field of ECE

(Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009).

The small field of research involving active citizenship in early childhood is

highlights the term‘ children‘s citizenship‘ is ambiguous as it does not carry the same

weight as the term ‗adult citizenship‘ (Millei & Imre, 2009). Furthermore, as

discussed earlier, when sustainability is explored in the context of ECEC, the

dimensions of sustainability tend to be limited to dimensions of environmental

sustainability. This can be attributed to the notion of the romanticised child or

childhood as a stage of development, where children are passive and immature. In

order for children to ‗transform‘ into mature, active and competent people, children

will need to undergo a socialisation process of support from adults. Adults will need

to challenge their own views of children as needing adult protection from real world

issues. Emerging research has shown that the contemporary sociological child is able

to take an active role as participant in projects that explore issues of sustainability

that go beyond the environmental dimension (Hammond et al., 2015; Hawkins, 2010;

Mackey, 2014; Phillips, 2010; Stuhmcke, 2012). Yet, even though there are

emerging studies of children‘s involvement in sustainability outside the

environmental dimension, these are limited to a focus on advocacy as opposed to

empirical or pedagogical practice (Somerville & Williams, 2015). Thus, this present

research can contribute to the emerging empirical research in sustainability.


The next section explores the theories that frame the theoretical framework for

this research. The theories that are used for this research are theories that support this

research stance that advocates for young children as capable and competent learners,

who demonstrate agency in their learning.

2.6 Theoretical Framework

The theoretical framework for this study encompasses critical theory and

Derrida‘s (1991) notion of ‗cinders‘. Critical theory and Derrida‘s cinders were used

to guide this research, and support my analysis and understandings of the findings

from this research.

2.6.1 Critical theory

Critical theory supports challenging taken-for-granted practices that inform and

shape ways of doing, thinking and learning (Freire, 1998). The first generation of

critical theorists emerged after World War One. Under the directorship of the

Austrian Professor of Political Economy, Carl Grunberg, the Institute of Social

Research was established to protect communities from extreme political systems

(How, 2003). However, it wasn‘t until the 1930s that the themes and foundations of

modern-day critical theory evolved. Under the new directorship of Horkheimer, the

institute began critiquing the traditionalist standpoint that viewed scientific facts and

observations as ‗truths‘. Through critical theory, these so-called ‗truths‘ could be

dismantled by interrogating positivist understandings of ‗truth‘ through dialectical

reasoning (How, 2003).

Thus, critical theory is concerned with investigating the hidden ‗truths‘ about

ideas in immediate socio-cultural contexts, as well as within the dominant ideologies

in western societies (Freire, 1998). Critical theory brings to light hidden ‗truths‘ that

have become unquestioned facts of life about how people should act and think. For

66


example, critical theory recognises that facts are not fixed ‗truths‘; instead there are

multiple ways of making-meaning. Critical theory however, is not without critics.

Murphy (2013) explains that despite the potential of critical theory to expose the

many ways ‗truths‘ are constructed in society, it could still be labelled as a

propagandist approach. Additionally, critical theory has limitations when its sole

purpose is to criticize modernist or positivists approaches without providing an

alternative.

In this research, critical theory is relevant to analysis of the data in numerous

ways. In educational contexts, to be critical is to challenge the fixed ways about how

education is done and delivered (Freire, 1998; Giroux, 2006; Kemmis, 2009), and to

recognise that there are multiple ways that education can be executed. For this

research, critical theory supports challenges to the prevailing ways many teachers

teach sustainability in the early years. As explained in Chapters 1 and 2, many early

years educators focus solely on the environmental dimension of sustainability, with

curriculum practices reflecting didactic approaches, involving children in simplistic

or tokenistic ways. Ideally, teaching and learning about sustainability is multi-

dimensional and occurs via a transformative approach, where social critique and

children‘s participation guides education for sustainability (Davis, 2015). To be

critical is to challenge the norms that influence common ways of thinking about

ECEfS in early childhood education contexts. For example, a traditional view of

education sees it as a medium for transferring dominant ideologies to young children

(Freire, 1998; Giroux, 2006). This reflects education about the environment (see

Section 2.4.2), where knowledge is passed on or transmitted to children. Young

learners are seen to be passive, with little influence or power over their own learning.

The use of a critical theory lens enables me as a teacher-researcher to examine the


taken-for-granted discourses that influence the already politicised area of EfS. Using

critical theory, this research investigates possibilities for children‘s learning that

move beyond didactic approaches in EfS, to empowering children to become active

participants who explore, question and enact change around socio-political issues in

their local context.

The application of critical theory is not limited to the teacher‘s practices but is

also extended to the pedagogical conditions that the teacher creates. In this research,

it is important that I am reflective about the resources and provocations used to

explore the topic of poverty in a Kindergarten classroom. For example, in

MacNaughton‘s (2000) action research about gendered play, the discussion

highlighted how a medium such as a play space can shape children‘s understandings

about gender. Props such as princess tiaras and dresses in the home corner versus

lightsabers and swords in the cubby house are examples of hidden ‗truths‘ about how

play and the material choices provided in the environment can influence children‘s

understandings and enactment of gender. In this research, critical theory supports my

role as the teacher-researcher in reflecting on the everyday resources, teaching

strategies and messages chosen to promote views on poverty, wealth and related

issues. For example, visual cues used to promote notions of poverty, often involve

imagery of starving, sick children from developing countries, with some begging for

food or money. This example of poverty can potentially stereotype how poverty

should ‗look‘. Instead, visual cues of children experiencing poverty in both

developing and developed countries can be explored to understand that poverty looks

different across contexts and can also equate to individuals being social outcasts, or

having limited or no access to education. These examples of visual cues as everyday

68


resources can support children‘s understandings that poverty is more than financial

wealth.

In this research, critical theory also supports examinations of the ways children

can be positioned as active rather than passive learners. As elaborated throughout

Chapter 2, this research takes the stance of the sociological child as framed by Prout

and James (2015). This ‗new‘ sociological child is active and capable of

understanding complex ideas through problem-solving and problem-posing and

taking control of their learning. This view is different from the more deficit view of

the romanticised child who is incapable of understanding complex issues in the

world in which they live. Complex issues include climate change, the war on

terrorism and world poverty. Davis (2015) suggests that other social issues such as

gender bias and bullying often warrant attention from educators and concerned

parents. However, complex worldly issues often receive less attention. To deny an

opportunity to engage children in discussions about these concerns is to deny

children an opportunity to make meaning of the world to which they are already

exposed (Davis, 2015).

MacNaughton (2009) suggests that genuine engagement with children in

conversations about real-world issues results in intersubjectivity between both

educator and child. Intersubjectivity is when there is a genuine shared meaning-

making process. The educator seeks understandings from the children‘s points of

view. It is noted that the view of a balance of power between teacher and child is

ideal, however not necessarily always achievable. Nevertheless, through

conversation and dialogue, children and adults can critically reflect on circumstances

and conditions that can reinforce stereotypical thinking. As a result of collaborative


dialogue in this research, both the children and I moved toward a more critical and

informed ‗truth‘ about the issue of poverty.

Critical theory, together with critical action research, can be used to explore the

silent ‗realities‘ or taken-for-granted practices in life (Kemmis, 2009). In this

research, critical action research supports the discovery of silent realities through

inviting children to be a part of a shared dialogue in understanding the consequences

of social actions on the equality and wellbeing of all (Kemmis, 2009; Kemmis &

McTaggart, 2001). For example, a taken-for-granted ‗reality‘ is a stereotypical view

of poverty whereby people experience poverty because they are lazy or do not work

hard enough, compared with people who experience wealth. Such views were held

by children in research undertaken by Hammond et al. (2015), and Weinger (2000),

as explained earlier in this chapter. Based on prior research, I contend that if children

are not challenged or involved in a dialogue about issues concerning democracy,

peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010), there is the potential that their

emerging views of poverty will be unchallenged and reflect taken-for-granted norms

in society. As a result, poverty continues to become a problem of the ‗other‘, as

proposed by Lister (2008), whereby poverty does not affect children from developed

countries or particular social strata. In this research, children are supported by

pedagogical conditions that allow for deeper explorations of existing understandings

of poverty.

In summary, critical theory supports me to examine my own teaching practices

and the ways children understand poverty. As highlighted in the research questions,

critical theory can support me to reflect on their taken-for-granted teaching practices

to examine what pedagogical conditions best support explorations of socio-political

aspects of sustainability in a Kindergarten classroom. Kemmis (2009) provides the

70


example of how critical action research can change how teachers understand their

practice. For example when a teacher is able to shift their practices to a

transformative model of teaching, they understand the need to change the paradigm

of teaching from passive to critical and collaborative. In this research, each cycle of

action research supports changes to my teaching practices through critical reflection.

2.6.2 Derrida’s cinders

As explored above, critical theory is about seeking the many ways that

knowledge and ways of doing and thinking are constructed in social contexts (Freire,

1998). Critical theory unveils how socially-constructed meanings carry the risk of

only validating one way of thinking and doing, thus limiting multiple ways of

meaning-making. In this research, through critical theory, the children are supported

to understand many ways of making-meaning about poverty as opposed to seeking

one ‗truth‘ about poverty.

Jacques Derrida was a contemporary thinker who was influenced by the

educational theories of critical thinking. Derrida debated the place of seeking one

‗truth‘ of knowledge in a postmodern world. However, Derrida differed from

traditionalist critical theorists, in terms of ideology. As outlined above, a criticism of

critical theory is that it seeks ways of ‗righteousness‘ through exposing the

propaganda of modernist thinking in society and social institutions including

education (Murphy, 2013). Derrida, in contrast, was interested in deconstruction, or

the complicit differences in educational practices. Deconstruction seeks to expose,

and then to subvert, the various binary oppositions that underpin dominant ways of

thinking (Irwin, 2013).

In this research, Derrida‘s notion of cinders provides a useful tool for

deconstructing how young children make meaning about poverty. Derrida (1991), a


poetic writer, coined the term cinders to symbolically represent the remains of fire.

The cinders symbolises the traces of the fire, which suggests interpretation of the

traces of ‗truth‘. The cinders represent cognitive dissonance or unsettledness about a

particular issue. In the present study, cognitive dissonance or unsettledness came in

the form of being ‗unsettled‘ about the topic of poverty and related connections to

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010). In this sense,

Derrida‘s cognitive dissonance sits well alongside critical theory, where issues

related to social justice and power are explored and deconstructed. Derrida (1991)

suggests that children‘s cinders ―primes the dialectical process and opens history‖ (p.

44). Hence, analysing the cinders (Derrida, 1991) in children‘s thinking and actions

around poverty in this study provides insights into their existing and emerging

understandings about a complex issue related to socio-political sustainability.

For this research, I use the term cinders (Derrida, 1991) as both an analytical

tool for interpreting the data and a theoretical tool for conceptualising how ‗traces‘

around the topic of poverty became evident in the children‘s thinking and actions.

Through the cinders evident in what the children expressed and actioned, I am able to

critically interpret the meanings they attached to poverty and to identify themes that

continue to unsettle them over the course of the project. At the same time, I am able

to deconstruct my pedagogical practices, particularly in cases where I lean toward

more ‗modernist‘ thinking that only searched for one ‗truth‘ about poverty and

related issues, rather than genuinely hearing and honouring the children‘s voices,

thoughts, ideas and suggestions.

Moss (2014) suggests that when children‘s voices are used to lead the

curriculum, a real utopia can take place, as opposed to a curriculum based on pre-

determined educational learning outcomes. In this sense, when cinders (Derrida,

72


1991) in the children‘s thinking and actions are identified, explored and extended

upon, it is the children who take the lead in explorations and meaning-making. When

children take charge of their learning, they are demonstrating that they are capable

and competent beings, who can be active citizens of this shared world.

Cinders (Derrida, 1991) was part of Phillips‘ (2008) theoretical framework in a

study about children‘s critical awareness and intersubjectivity through transformative

storytelling. Through the method of storytelling, Phillips (2008) intentionally brought

children‘s attention to issues of social justice. From there, she used the concept of

cinders (Derrida, 1991) to interpret things that did not sit well with the children

through their comments and questions generated in storytelling workshops (p. 7). An

example of how Phillips (2008) utilised the concept of cinders was through her

interpretation of when the child participants showed emerging political

understandings about social justice through their unsettledness around a conservation

issue and actioned a petition to send to Government agencies. These young

participants showed how children are capable of participating in conversations

around socio-political issues and can demonstrate emergent understandings that are

transformative in nature.

2.7 Chapter Summary

In this chapter, the literature demonstrated how ECEfS can support children to

understand complex issues such as poverty and indirectly make sense of the world in

which they live. The chapter first investigated the complex definitions of

sustainability, focussing specifically on socio-political sustainability and the topic of

poverty. This was followed by an evaluation of EfS and ECEfS, and how ECEfS

could support children to explore the topic of poverty through critical thinking,


participation and agency. Next, aspects of ECEC curriculum and pedagogy were

investigated, and included discussions about the different approaches in early

childhood education and an exploration of the element of critical thinking which is

important in ECEfS. Key perspectives on children were investigated through the

image of the child, children‘s rights and sustainability, children as active citizens and

young children‘s understandings of poverty. Finally, this chapter concluded with

discussions about the research gap and theoretical framework. The next chapter

explores the methodology of this research. Action research, specifically teacher-

researcher, is discussed in detail.

74

Chapter 3: Methodology


3.1 Introduction

The purpose of this chapter is to locate a methodology that is an appropriate fit with the

research focus, and that supports exploration of the study‘s two research questions. In this

chapter, the methodology employed in this research is reviewed in Section 3.2. As the

research was emergent, flexible and had no prescribed hypotheses, I employed a qualitative

design which is explored in Section 3.3, specifically focusing on action research in Section

3.4. The specific method of this study was teacher-researcher action research, which is

examined in Section 3.4.4. Teacher-researcher action research was used in this research, to

investigate how young children understand poverty, along with the pedagogical conditions

that supported investigations of socio-political aspects of sustainability in a Kindergarten

context.

Section 3.5 describes the research site and is followed by the place of ―project work‖,

which is a form of teaching and learning employed in this research (Section 3.6). Project

work is a teaching method that the participants in this research were already familiar with,

and aligns well with an action research methodology. The participants in this research are

also introduced, to give a visual picture of the number of child participants, and the different

pedagogical experiences that they participated in (Section 3.7). Section 3.8 elaborates on the

data collection methods. Data analysis is explained through different approaches as seen in

Section 3.9.

Following on from discussion of the data analysis, consideration of the ethical issues of

working with young children is explored in Section 3.10. In this section, children‘s

participation is considered in relation to children viewed as ‗co-researchers‘ as opposed to

being involved in roles that are based on manipulation, decoration and tokenism (Hart, 1997).

Chapter 3: Methodology 75

The chapter concludes with discussion about the research limitations in Section 3.11, and the

chapter summary in Section 3.12.

3.2 Methodology

This research employed an action research methodology to investigate children‘s

understandings of poverty, and the pedagogical conditions that supported young children‘s

exploration of an issue related to socio-political sustainability in a Kindergarten classroom.

This study sits within a qualitative research design, as outlined in Section 3.3 below. Later in

this chapter, I outline teacher-researcher approaches to action research (Section 3.4.4), and

how this aligns well with the project approach (Section 3.6). The project approach was used

in this research to introduce the topic of poverty to the child participants.

To reiterate, this study‘s research questions were:

1. What are young children‘s understandings of poverty?

2. What pedagogies support young children to participate in investigations of poverty

within a socio-political framework of sustainability?

3.3 Qualitative Research Design

Qualitative research is carried out when there are no known variables to explore the

research problem. A known variable is defined as something that can be expressed in

numbers or measured (Creswell, 2014). For example, a known variable such as temperature,

speed or area is quantifiable and measurable. In this research, there were no measurable

variables because the research was emergent, flexible and dependant on the participants. How

children respond to the research is also dependent on their social context. One aspect of this

study that contributes to the research problem is the notion of how ECEfS is focused strongly

on an environmental dimension. This research focused on children‘s understandings of

poverty, which is a dimension of socio-political sustainability. The findings from this

research fill a ‗gap‘ in research on ECEfS because it extends beyond environmental

76


sustainability. Children‘s direct participation and adult responsiveness to their voices are also

a feature as data emerged from the knowledge and meaning-making of the child participants

who explored and encountered the research problem (Creswell, 2014).

In qualitative research, Reifel (2011) suggests that data should not be viewed as

‗solutions‘ to a research problem but should instead serve as interpretations that allow for

new thinking. Thus, qualitative research was a fitting research design, as it enabled the child

participants to take on the role of social actors or active researchers in exploring the topic of

poverty (Mackey, 2014; MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009). This occurred through the teacher-

researcher‘s planned activities and the children‘s emergent learning and inquiries. While the

research was context-specific, analysis of the children‘s understandings and the pedagogical

conditions that supported deep exploration of poverty can provide insights for future planning

and teaching about dimensions of sustainability in ECEfS, beyond the environmental

dimension.

A qualitative design is appropriate for this research because it provides a useful strategy

for discovery and understanding a new and emergent area. Children‘s understandings of

poverty and pedagogical conditions for exploring socio-political aspects of sustainability are

emerging areas of research. Miles, Huberman, and Saldana (2014) emphasise that qualitative

analysis is about seeking what meanings people place on particular topics, places and

structures in their lives and connecting it to the social world in which they live. In the context

of this research, analysis focuses on children‘s understandings of poverty, along with my

work as teacher-researcher and the pedagogical conditions provided in a Kindergarten

context.

Miles et al. (2014) define qualitative data analysis as a ―focus on naturally occurring,

ordinary events in natural settings, so that we have a strong handle on what ‗real life‘ is like‖

(p. 11). This is relevant to this research, where qualitative analysis supported me to reflect on


my everyday role as an early childhood teacher in a Kindergarten classroom. Qualitative

analysis supports an understanding of how I afforded transformative ECEfS learning

experiences to young children. As qualitative research is also flexible, the influences of the

specific research context will strongly influence the data that is produced (Miles et al., 2014).

Thus, if this research were to be conducted in a different setting and/or with different

participants, the finding may also be different to these reported here.

3.4 Action Research

To complement the emergent characteristics of a qualitative research design, an action

research methodology was employed in this research. Action research was fitting because this

method seeks new knowledge or solutions for emergent issues or concerns that are context

specific (Stringer, 2008). Action research can be defined as a cyclical process that seeks ways

to solve or improve issues (Reason & Bradbury, 2008). Action research generates new

knowledge through cycles of practice and action that are contextual and thus specific to

different contexts. Kemmis and McTaggart (2001) describe cycles of action research as

stages that involve planning, acting, observing and reflecting, as shown in Figure 3.1. The

authors emphasise that this process is not rigid or distinct, but that each stage flexibly

overlaps with other stages in the cycle. The model of action research shown in Figure 3.1

demonstrates opportunities to reflect and analyse in-depth in each new cycle, resulting in

deeper understanding. As the teacher-researcher, I was able to review each cycle of planning,

acting, observing and reflecting, and to use those reflections before developing a revised

pedagogical plan for the next cycle of the research.

78


Figure 3.1. Kemmis and McTaggart (2001) action research spiral.

Stringer (2007) states that an action research methodology is not hierarchical, therefore

recognises that there are various factors that are involved in the process of constructing

knowledge and understanding. The analysis of data is carried out during the action research

cycles, rather than at the completion of data collection. This is critical in action research so

that researchers can evaluate their thinking and shift forwards and backwards between the

data collected. By interweaving analysis during data collection, the researcher can evaluate

the existing data and reflect on the possibility of collecting new data to ‗fill the gaps‘ that

emerge during ongoing analysis (Miles & Huberman, 1994).

Action research takes numerous forms and serves different purposes. Table 3.1 presents

a summary of three main types of action research. Here, the focus is on the purpose of the

research, the relationship between researcher and participants, and the decision-making

processes.


Table 3.1

Three different types of action research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2007)

In critical action research as outlined in Table 3.1, the relationship between the

researcher and participants is highly collaborative, where all participants have shared goals

and responsibility in the research (Kemmis, 2009). This is different to technical and

participatory research, where the relationships between the researcher and participants, albeit

reciprocal, involve the researcher holding the ‗power‘ in deciding the direction of the

research. In both technical and practical action research, the purpose of the research is to

improve outcomes, or improve the efficiency of professional practice. Furthermore, in critical

action research, as noted in Chapter 2, the research is carried out to challenge and critique

Technical Action

Research Practical Action Research Critical Action Research

Purpose of research Improving outcomes Educating practitioners so they

can improve their teaching

practices

Emancipating people and groups

from oppression and injustice.

Relationship between

researcher and

participants

The focus is on the

practitioner, the other

participants are regarded as

‗objects‘ of the research.

The others do not have

much subjective power

compared to the

practitioner.

There is a reciprocal relationship

between practitioner and others

who are involved in the research.

This is a collective research, where

socially constructed discourses are

explored in order for potential

changes to take place.

Decision making process The practitioner is in

charge of the research and

the decision-making

processes.

The practitioner is still in charge

of the research, but also considers

the views and opinions of others

who are involved and affected by

the research.

Decision making processes are

done collectively through

communicative spaces(Kemmis &

McTaggart, 2007).

80


taken-for-granted ways of thinking and doing that incapacitate peoples‘ opportunities for

equality. For technical and practical action research, the overarching purpose of improving

professional practice and issues in social settings does not necessarily incorporate the taken-

for-granted meanings that stem from socio-political conditions which continue to shape how

practitioners and educational institutions operate. In relation to Table 3.1 above, the three

different types of action research are not always clear cut and segregated; rather, the different

features overlap. Thus, in this research, elements of participatory and critical action research

can be explored to ensure the research is contextual and meaningful. The following sections

detail features of action research, with a focus on teacher-researcher action research.

3.4.1 Participatory action research

As mentioned previously, one of the key aims of this research was to understand

children‘s understandings of poverty as a socio-political issue that is rarely addressed in early

childhood curriculum (Hammond et al., 2015; Hayward, 2012). To explore and discuss such

a topic, children will need to participate in authentic ways in the research process. When

children are genuine participants, their thoughts, opinions and inquiries influence the

direction of the research. Features of participatory action research (PAR) (Kemmis &

McTaggart, 2001; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2007) were incorporated into this action research

study to ensure children were constructed as co-researchers. In this research, I worked

alongside children, as opposed to studying them. In this way, there was both a research focus

and pedagogical intent around hearing and responding to the children‘s voices (Swantz,

2008). The children were the main ‗actors‘ involved in the process of becoming co-

researchers or co-participants with me as teacher-researcher, as we co-created a democratic

forum to explore an issue of socio-political concern.

In the context of this research, the children were positioned as co-researchers because

they took on active roles in the generation, documentation and interpretation of data. The


children were able to take on these roles as co-researchers through the project approach. For

example, after children were introduced to the topic of poverty through storytelling, the

direction of the research was based on their questions and assumptions that were elicited

through whole-group and small-group brainstorming sessions. These investigations were

carried through in intentional and spontaneous teaching moments.

Intentional teaching experiences included open-ended conversations with me as the

teacher-researcher, where the children were able to share their understandings about poverty.

Through these conversations, children were generators of data because they were supported

to analyse, probe and even challenge any assumptions that they had about understandings of

poverty. As co-researchers, the children were also involved in the documentation of data,

which was done through the medium of the visual arts. The children‘s visual pieces such as

drawings, paintings and clay sculptures determined how data were analysed. As the children

were the creators of their visual pieces, I needed to seek clarification from them in order to

understand the meanings that were expressed and documented by them as researchers through

their art.

Spontaneous experiences carried out by the children also highlighted how they took on

the role as co-researchers. For example, through children‘s spontaneous play episode about

poverty, they explored themes such as democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010) based on their personal observations. Through conversations with peers,

where sharing and negotiating of meanings took place, the children adjusted their behaviours

and observations about poverty over time. It was through these conversations amongst peers

that children were able to interpret the real-world observations and data about poverty as co-

researchers with one another.

82


3.4.2 Critical action research

As well as PAR, there are elements of critical action research that featured in this

research. Critical action research is defined as a collective self-reflection by participants on

social situations in order to increase their collective justice and equality of the social and

educational practices they experience (Kemmis, 2009). There were elements of critical action

research in this study due to the topic explored ˗ a socio-political aspect of sustainability ˗

along with the use of critical theory to support data analysis. Issues such as poverty and other

socio-political concerns are rarely addressed in ECEfS (Hammond et al., 2015). Habermas

(as cited in Kemmis, 2009) proposes that ‗truth‘ or genuine understandings of an issue can

come from disparity between the reality of the lived experiences of the participants in

question and the constructions that a society poses. In other words, children need

opportunities to experience being a part of a community where they are genuinely listened to

and involved in discussions about everyday issues. By enabling children to be involved in

explorations and discussions including crises and issues about poverty, the research is

fostering these competent individuals to make sense of the world in which they live, and their

own life experiences (Danby & Farrell, 2004).

3.4.3. Educational action research

For this research, it is worth highlighting how this present action research study is also

educational action research, because it sought ways of implementing a pedagogy of socio-

political sustainability within an early childhood education context. The aim of this research

was to understand young children‘s understandings of poverty and the pedagogical conditions

afforded to children to explore the topic of poverty in a Kindergarten setting. Educational

action research takes place from ‗bottom to top‘ rather than ‗top to bottom‘. In educational

action research in classroom contexts, educators take control of the research in question and

decide the direction of the research, as opposed to ‗traditional‘ educational research whereby


the researcher, often an outsider, collects data to address issues or concerns about best

teaching practices (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2007).

Reason and Bradbury (2008) identify four main outcomes for educational action

research: improved professionalism and teaching practices; an increase in critical skills;

social and personal improvement; and a more socially just world. In an educational context,

the educator and students take on the role of the main actors who explore issues in their

immediate educational setting. Educational action research differs from other forms of

research as its participants are the main actors who will influence the specific research

questions and the solutions to the problems encountered. In this study, I initiated the problem

to be solved and the related research questions as the teacher-researcher, with the child

participants becoming co-researchers during the research process.

Action research in a classroom context can potentially raise issues, particularly when

trying to replicate the study in a different context or setting. Educational action research is

subjective and flexible, where the researcher takes into account the thoughts and reflections

of individual participants and those who are affected by the research. As a result, the findings

or discussions from this research cannot be applied directly to a different context, as this

research has unique and specific traits.

Despite the above mentioned issues, educational action research is appropriate for this

research, as the research site is my own Kindergarten classroom and the children‘s

perspectives or own voices about poverty were sought. Furthermore, in educational action

research, the teacher takes control of their own teaching practices, critically reflects and

changes their approach. The educator takes responsibility to make changes to their practices

throughout the research process in order to implement learning experiences that are

meaningful to the specific learners and classroom context. Next, I discuss the role of teacher-

researcher in action research.

84


3.4.4 Teacher-Researcher in action research

Teacher-research is defined as action research that takes place within a classroom

setting (Day & Townsend, 2009; Kennedy-Lewis, 2012; Solvason, 2013). One of the benefits

of the role of the teacher practicing action research in a classroom is to improve their teaching

practices and to enable growth as a professional (Solvason, 2013; Souto-Manning, 2012).

Teacher-researchers carrying out action research demonstrate the importance of subjective

inquiry, and acknowledgement of children‘s interests and individualism (Day & Townsend,

2009). A teacher-researcher approach to action research acknowledges the subjective interest

of a classroom, and the collaborative nature of exploring that interest or problem. Thus, as a

teacher-researcher, self-reflection on my own teaching practices was important to improving

teaching practices in the classroom and enabling children‘s voices to be heard (Day &

Townsend, 2009). Reflective practices are essential for making connections between theory

and practice, to result in better teaching practices for both educators and children (Stringer,

2007). In this study, the role of teacher-researcher supported me to reflect on my own

teaching beliefs, philosophies, practices and biases in respect to early childhood education for

sustainability, and early childhood education in general.

Teacher-researcher action research helps to improve the quality of the curriculum. In

this study, the curriculum in question is ECEfS specifically. ECEfS has the potential to

support children‘s roles in exploring sensitive issues such as poverty through its

transformative approach. As discussed in Chapters 1 and 2, although there has been some

increase in the practice of ECEfS outside the realm of environmental education, there are few

examples of how the socio-political dimensions of sustainability can be practiced. In short,

there is a need for more empirical grounding and evidence for practice on how to embed

these practices in children‘s daily learning in early years settings (Somerville & Williams,

2015).


In this study, explorations of poverty occurred within each action research cycle

through flexible facilitation. In relation to my role, this involved being flexible in different

cycles of the research, from initially adopting a directing facilitator role, then moving toward

a consulting facilitator role as the research progressed. This occurred in response to the

children‘s input, including their questions, responses, artefacts and spontaneous play episodes

centred around the topic under investigation. In this sense, the children took increased

responsibility for the project (Mackewn, 2008). As the teacher-researcher, I employed a range

of teaching strategies and learning experiences for the children to address a specific inquiry,

and from there developed a broad range of data collection and data interpretation methods to

examine the children‘s learning process. By doing this, I increased opportunities for the

children‘s participation in education for sustainability through a transformative approach to

ECEfS. A transformative pedagogy encourages active inquiry and supports problem-solving

and critical thinking, which in turn promotes agency (MacNaughton, 2003). These learning

attributes are the elements that I aimed to nurture through each reflective cycle of action

research.

In teacher-researcher action research, the flexibility of the teacher-researcher can

potentially become a barrier in the form of a dialectic dilemma, where the dual identities of a

teacher and researcher come into conflict with each other (Banegas, 2012; Frederickson &

Beck, 2010; Kennedy-Lewis, 2012; O‘Flynn, 2009). Kennedy-Lewis (2012) gives the

example of a teacher-researcher who experienced such identity conflict. The issue arose when

one of the student participants had difficulties in answering a given research question. The

dilemma involved whether the teacher-researcher should support the participant as the

teacher who takes into consideration their inside knowledge of the student and understands

their needs, or whether they should retreat from support as they adopt on the role of the

researcher and document that experience as ‗raw data‘ in the research. As teacher-researcher,

86


there is constant tension between the two identities and there is a risk of the dual roles

influencing data and collection, analyses and reporting. For this reason, it was critical to

continually reflect on my practices and responsibilities in the dual roles of teacher and

researcher, as seen through the data collection tool of a reflective diary, and through continua

questioning of my own teaching practice in Chapters, 4, 5, 6, and 7.

Despite the challenges of employing action research as a teacher-researcher, the

benefits of action research in improving the teacher‘s own professional practice is the motive

for it being chosen as the methodology in this research. Better understanding and the

potential for change in teaching practices can occur through the reflective practices and

inquiry processes that action research affords (Baumann & Duffy, 2001; Frederickson &

Beck, 2010; Murphy, Bryant, & Ingram, 2014). Adopting, this professional stance I was able

to research my own practice, learn about my own teaching, and improve educational

outcomes for the participating children. As teacher-researcher, I had familiarity and specific

educational insights and understandings of the classroom in which the research was

undertaken (Kennedy-Lewis, 2012; Murphy et al., 2014; Solvason, 2013; Vasconcelos,

2010). These insights included understanding the children‘s ways of learning, their current

interests and ways to extend them, in the context of an established trusting relationship. Trust

is important in the relationship between the teacher-researcher and the children in the

classroom, as it enables the research to be purposeful, and to be conducted in an environment

that provides familiar, everyday classroom experiences for young children (Vasconcelos,

2010). Within familiar everyday experiences, the data and the findings of the research have

contextual meaning that an educator can recognise and respond to both within the research

process, and in future teaching practice.


3.5 Context of the Study

3.5.1 Research site

As described in Chapter 1, the research site was a long day care centre situated on the

grounds of a large metropolitan university in Queensland. According to the Australian

Government‘s Socio Economic Indexes for Areas carried out on the 2011 census data

(Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS], 2011), this research site is categorised as a suburb

that is high-socioeconomic. Although the centre was located in an affluent area, I could not

assume that all children were from affluent families. Many parents who access the centre are

employees of the university, post graduate students, or residents within the local community.

The Kindergarten compromises three classrooms, with 60 children enrolled ranging from 3-5

years of age. There are 14 members of staff ranging in qualification from a 4-year Bachelor

degree in education, to a 2-year Diploma in Children‘s Services. A Board of Management

compromising Kindergarten staff members, university personnel, and parents of children in

the centre provide governance for the community-based Kindergarten. The educational

program offered at the centre aligns with requirements in the Early Years Learning

Framework [EYLF] (DEEWR, 2009), Australia‘s national early childhood education learning

framework, and the Queensland Kindergarten Learning Guidelines (Queensland Studies

Authority, 2010), the specific Queensland Kindergarten curriculum framework derived from

the EYLF and the National Quality Framework - an Australian national framework that

introduces quality standards to ensure ongoing improvement in education and care in prior to

school settings (ACECQA, 2018).

My role in this centre is the Curriculum Lead Teacher (CLT) in the Kindergarten

classroom with 22 children aged between 4-5 years. In each classroom in the centre, there is a

CLT, a tertiary educated teacher, and a qualified educator with a diploma from a vocational

institution. As the CLT, I am responsible for ensuring that the curriculum of the classroom

88


and the centre provides a balance of teacher-initiated and child-centred learning experiences

that are both intentional and spontaneous. As the CLT, it is my responsibility to ensure that as

a team we are holistically supporting children‘s learning and growth in the Kindergarten

program. A program that supports children‘s growth and learning holistically addresses

children‘s development across all areas including emotional, physical, and academic.

The long day care centre is unique as it has a long history of engagement with ECEfS,

commencing in 1997. Engagement with ECEfS was initiated by a past staff member‘s vision

to include environmentally responsible practices into everyday experiences at the centre. The

centre initiated a whole-centre project on sustainability, termed the Sustainable Planet

Project which stemmed from ideas shared at a staff professional development weekend. This

vision, that began almost two decades ago, continues to exist in the values held by current

staff and the practices and philosophy of the centre. There is also a current focus on

advocating for the Sustainable Planet Project to extend beyond greening practices or an

environmental focus only. The centre‘s ECEfS initiatives have featured in research projects

and academic and professional publications and presentations over many years, to the present

day.

Within the Sustainable Planet Project, children were viewed as capable contributors

to sustainability initiatives and became ―agents of change‖ (Gibson, 2010, p. 76) in their care

of the local environment and exploration of sustainability issues as part of everyday learning

experiences. Continuing to the present day, the whole-centre approach to ECEfS

compromises: litter less lunch boxes; using food scraps from children‘s lunches to feed the

worms and chickens; using recycled resources; and buying sustainable products. Within these

activities, children‘s rights as participants, co-learners and co-researchers are recognised and

actioned. Children‘s voices continue to be incorporated into the centre‘s sustainability

philosophy and children are supported by staff members to make changes in their immediate


community, and their wider world. Additionally, the centre has engaged in cross-disciplinary

approaches to sustainability with early childhood educators working together with engineers

to find out ways to reduce their ecological footprint or environmental impact in early

childhood learning centres (see McNichol, Davis, & O‘Brien, 2009). Hence, the setting,

context and community itself has a well-developed culture that encompasses the values and

philosophies of environmental sustainability. In this present study, the participation of young

children in exploring a topic relative to the social-political dimension of sustainability

supported the aim to move beyond environmental sustainability in centre practices. Thus, this

study was embedded within a history of engagement with ECEfS at the research site and

employed curriculum approaches familiar to teachers and children, as explored further below.

3.6 The Project Approach as a Curriculum Framework

Project work is a curriculum and pedagogical approach where children take on roles as

co-researchers. For this project, as teacher-researcher, I introduced poverty as a topic of

investigation in the Kindergarten classroom. This topic was initiated by me to move beyond

an environmental dimension on sustainability, and I aligned the focus of the research with the

EYLF Outcome 2: Children are connected with and contribute to their world (DEEWR,

2009). In line with this EYLF outcome, notions of reciprocal rights, active community,

respect and fairness were explored. The topic of poverty was initiated in acknowledgement of

how topics such as these are rarely addressed in early childhood contexts (Hammond et al.,

2015). As stated earlier, this was the case in the research site, where most issues initiated by

educators and children focussed on environmental concerns, such as the care of the native

bees, caring for chickens and possums in the kindergarten grounds, and recycling initiatives

involving families.

In a project approach, intentional teaching is a key strategy to introduce or extend

children‘s understandings of experiences that the children are keen to find out more about. As

90


the project approach is based on children‘s interests, the topics would be emergent and

flexible. Therefore, the educator in the initial stages of the project uses intentional teaching

practices as a guide to support children to nurture their ideas and creativity to develop the

project. Intentional teaching is a pedagogical strategy that supports children to develop higher

order thinking skills about a particular topic via the use of strategies such as role modelling,

open questioning, explaining in detail, and engaging children in shared problem solving

experiences (Connor, 2011). Intentional teaching requires the educator to be flexible in their

role, with the adoption of interchanging roles such as initiator, facilitator and mediator

depending on the changing learning context. Through documentation of children‘s learning,

the intentional teacher is able to plan for extended and follow-up experiences to support the

children‘s learning journey. The view of intentional teaching can often be misguided, based

on the notion that the educator holds power and ‗transfers‘ knowledge onto the child. Leggett

and Ford (2013) counter this view and propose that intentional teaching is a way to

understand how to develop children‘s intentional learning skills. Put another way, while the

educator intentionally teaches specific skills or knowledge, they also purposefully seek out

ways to support children to develop innate abilities to learn. Thus, although I purposely

introduced the topic of poverty into my Kindergarten classroom, I was also exploring

effective teaching strategies to support the children to build their innate learning skills within

a socio-political sustainability framework.

As the project approach has deep roots in co-constructivism, using this approach as

the basis for this study was not sufficient to bring about a transformative curriculum. Instead,

I focussed on both the co-constructing of knowledge between educator and children, together

with strategies to support children to become agents of change (Stuhmcke, 2012). Analysis of

the pedagogical conditions that supported this aim are a key focus in this research to address

Research Question 2.


As co-learners and co-researchers in this study, the children‘s documentation was a

primary form of data. Documentation is an important part of both project work and action

research, where different types of artefacts such as observations, transcripts of conversations,

children‘s drawings and teacher‘s reflections are produced and collected to make children‘s

learning visible (Helm & Katz, 2011). Through documentation, the educator makes use of the

different types of children‘s work to reflect and evaluate on the teaching practices that are

used for co-constructing meaning with children. As noted, project work is a common feature

of teaching and learning at the research site, and there was already a strong focus on

documentation of learning as everyday practice. Figure 3.2 shows the project work cycle used

to explore the topic of poverty in this study. The project approach and the action research

cycle are similar, and therefore compatible in working alongside one another. The main

phases of the project work are the introductory phase, synthesising phase and culminating

phase (Helm & Katz, 2011). Figure 3.2 outlines the learning experiences that took place each

week in this research study on children‘s understandings of poverty. The main components of

project work are: my role as the teacher-researcher and the interchangeable role of being an

initiator, mediator and facilitator (represented in italic text); the collaborative work between

the children and me (represented in normal text); and the children‘s role (represented in bold

red text). The underlined blue text outlines the timeline of the project work cycle. Week 1

was used as an introductory phase, where the topic of poverty was introduced to the

Kindergarten classroom as a whole-group. At this stage, children‘s initial thoughts, questions

and feedback were collected by me to plan for the next stages. Weeks 2 and 3 were the

synthesising phase, whereby the children and I actively worked toward making-meaning

about poverty. The directions of the learning experiences at this stage were a collaborative

effort. Finally, Week 4 was the culminating phase, where children‘s ideas and meanings were

analysed based on the research questions, and to further extend learning experiences.

92



Figure 3.2. The children‘s project work on making meaning about poverty.

Week 2: Synthesising phase

Learning experiences based on

observations

Intentional resources, materials

and pedagogical strategies to

support children’s understandings

about poverty

Intentional and focussed

discussions about poverty beyond

cause-effect understandings

Collaborative brainstorming sessions

Interacted with the learning

experiences and

Continued to raise questions of

interest in regards to the topic of

poverty Week 3: Synthesising phase

Co-researchers (Teacher-researcher and

the child participants)

Role was interchangeable between

facilitator and mediator.

Co-researchers and co-constructors of

meaning making about poverty.

Directed their own learning

experiences

Sought answers to their questions

Negotiate ways in making meaning

and problem solving.

Week 4: Culminating phase

Analyse and reflect on the data

collected.

Data analysed: 1.Children’s

understandings about poverty.

2.Pedagogical conditions that

supported children’s explorations in

meaning making about poverty.

A child suggested a gift donation to a

local charity for children experiencing

poverty. This was welcomed by a

majority of the children.

Reflected on their learning

experiences

Revisited past documentation and

experiences

Shared meaning making

experiences about poverty with

families and the community.

Demonstrated higher order critical

thinking and expressed meanings

about poverty that extended

beyond cause-effect

understandings.

Week 1: Introductory phase

Introduced topic of poverty through

shared reading

Record children’s questions, focussing on

critical points in the story that were

challenging and engaging

Reflect on how to further plan based on

observations

Collaborative brainstorming session.

Asked questions about poverty

Shared critical points about the story

Shared their own experiences of

poverty/ understandings of poverty

94


As an extension of Figure 3.2, I provide detail below about each phase of the

project approach, as they occurred in this study.

3.6.1 Introductory phase

This phase lasted for about one week. I introduced the concept of poverty,

recorded the children‘s interests and inquiries and noted potential directions for

further investigation. I introduced the topic of poverty through the story ‗Maddi‟s

Fridge‟ (Brandt, 2014). This fictional story tells the tale of best friends, Sofia and

Maddi who live in the same neighbourhood, and attend the same class. However,

Sofia is left in a dilemma when she discovers that Maddi has a next-to-empty fridge

at home, and is often hungry. The concept of ‗not having enough‘ was embedded

throughout the story, from not having enough nutritious food, to not having enough

warm clothing. This concept of ‗not having enough‘ provided the impetus for

discussions with the children (see Appendix A).

Despite the actual terminology of ‗poor‘, ‗rich‘, ‗poverty‘, ‗wealthy‘, not being

used by the author in the story of Maddi‟s Fridge, the children themselves associated

‗not having enough‘ with experiences of experiencing poverty. Each story telling

session ranged from 10-15 minutes and was then followed by a collaborative

brainstorming session. Some of the points of discussion from the whole-group

discussion included:

What the children understood about ‗not having enough‘;

The children‘s understandings of what could be done to support those who

‗don‘t have enough‘;

What the children wanted to know more about in terms of ‗not having

enough‘.


First teacher-researcher reflection point

After the introductory phase, a teacher-researcher has a reflective phase to

review the progress of the first cycle of planning, acting, observing and reflecting

(Kemmis & McTaggart, 2001; Kemmis et al., 2014) in order to move on to the

synthesising phase. As mentioned above, despite the terminology of poor, rich,

wealthy or poverty not being used in the text Maddi‟s Fridge, the children associated

and linked the experiences of ‗not having enough‘ (i.e., not having food, not having

enough clean clothes) with a lack of monetary funds. Comments such as they don‟t

have enough money…, they didn‟t work enough…, they wanted to save it (money)…

prompted me to reflect on cause-effect understandings of poverty, as explored further

in analysis of data in Chapter 4. As the teacher-researcher, I critically reflected on

how to extend and challenge cause-effect understandings about poverty, as shown

below. To do so, I asked a series of questions of myself:

How do I extend/challenge children‘s understandings about poverty from a

cause-effect lens (i.e., the understanding of meritocracy (Tait, 2016),

where a successful life is solely dependent on hard work regardless of a

person‘s gender, class, race)?

How do I extend/challenge the understanding that social markers (i.e.,

money, toys) will necessarily make a person experiencing poverty feel

happiness?

How do I extend/challenge the notion of children‘s altruism that revolves

around the cause-effect understanding that, to support those experiencing

poverty, one needs to provide them monetary support (i.e., donation of

money to the poor)?

96


What were some focal points from this introductory phase that influenced

the direction of the synthesising phase? For example, reflecting on what

resources would support me to challenge cause-effect understandings of

poverty (i.e., to challenge the idea that money or security of work will

necessarily equate financial security).

3.6.2 Synthesising phase

The duration of this phase was approximately two weeks. During this phase the

children and I collaborated to make meaning about poverty. The methods used to

carry out these explorations were open-ended and emergent depending on the

children‘s interests. These included:

Shared reading experiences with individuals, small-groups and the whole-

group to challenge the initial cause-effect understandings about poverty.

Children‘s literature varied and was dependent on the children‘s directions.

For example, the book Those Shoes (Boelts, 2007) was used to highlight

that monetary savings and job security did not necessarily rectify issues

that were associated with poverty. In the book Those Shoes, the main

character, Jeremy, seeks to acquire new shoes that are popular and owned

by most of his peers in school. His grandmother on the other hand, who is

in the work-force, cannot afford the new shoes and reasons with Jeremy

that he only wants the shoes as opposed to needing the shoes.

Small-group and whole-group brainstorming sessions to record children‘s

reflections after the shared reading experiences. For example, after reading

the book Those Shoes, a discussion arose on the difference between a need

and a want. As a result of this discussion, the books Rich Cat, Poor Cat


(Waber, 1963) and Mutt Dog (King, 2004) were introduced to the children

to elicit discussions on the concepts of wants and needs.

Open-ended and focussed questioning through individual or small-group

dialogues with the children about their understandings about poverty. For

small-group conversations, both open-ended and focussed questions were

used after a shared reading experience, and during children‘s meaning-

making in the visual arts. Open-ended questions included: What did you

think of this story, and about the difference between Sophia and Maddi‟s

fridge? Focussed question: On this page 12, it says some cats have their

own special towel, special hairbrush, special dish, special chair … Yet

there isn‟t anything very special in Scat‟s life … Why do you think poor cat

didn‟t have anything special; how did that make poor cat feel? In these

dialogues, my role was flexible and interchangeable between an initiator,

protagonist and facilitator, depending on the learning context. For one-to-

one shared conversations with a child, the type of questioning used was

flexible, where I began with an open-ended question to elicit the child‘s

authentic response. The question became focussed when I sought further

clarification (e.g., You said earlier he might be jealous. Why would he be

jealous of Ravi?). These shared conversations were uninterrupted and

dependent and responsive to the children‘s lead and interests. The

conversations were typically straight after a learning experience, but at

times could take place several days following the initial learning

experience. These dialogues will be reported in Chapter 4.

Visual art experiences where the children were invited to express or clarify

their meanings and understandings about poverty. The children were

98


invited by me after a shared reading experience to engage in an intentional

learning experience whereby they used visual arts to express or make

further meaning about poverty. The visual arts included drawings,

paintings and manipulating clay. The children‘s art pieces were an

expression of either their meaning making efforts in response to a story

about poverty (i.e., Rich Cat, Poor Cat; Maddi‟s Fridge); an original

expressive piece on meaning making (i.e., a drawing about what young

children experiencing poverty would like for Christmas); or a response to

an intentional teaching experience (i.e., making clay sculptures to

represent the ‗things‘ that needs to be removed from poverty).

Spontaneous and child-led role-playing experiences where children used

play as a vehicle to make meaning about poverty. The children used the

context of the shared reading experiences (i.e., Mutt Dog; Rich Cat, Poor

Cat; Maddi‟s Fridge) to role-play the characters from the stories. The

children were not replicating the characters specifically, but utilising these

roles to make-meaning about themes of poverty that included wellbeing,

homelessness and healthy eating. As these were child-led play

experiences, the children utilised their everyday spaces in the Kindergarten

including the block building area, the home corner, and using resources

such as clay. The play episodes were uninterrupted and I did not pressure

the children to ‗finish up‘ their play experiences, to fit to usual classroom

routines.

It was important that there was intersubjectivity between the children and

I, where there was shared power between the children and teacher-


researcher as co-researchers. This intersubjectivity was supported through

involving children in shared dialogues about poverty.

Second teacher-researcher reflection point

Similar to the first reflection point, the teacher-researcher undergoes another

reflective phase in order to review the progress of the second ‗cycle‘ of action

research (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2007; Kemmis et al., 2014). Some of my reflective

questions centred around:

The potential of play as a medium for children to make-meaning about

complex issues such as poverty;

Children being capable to demonstrate agency in their learning and

directing the experiences they wanted to explore. For example, exploring

themes of homelessness and belonging in the spontaneous play episodes

based on the story of Mutt Dog;

The conversations between the children and I, where understandings about

poverty were shared and refined in order to explore our meaning-making

further. I reflected on how these conversations were open-ended and how

this supported the children to take an active part and contribute their ideas.

My critical awareness of the children‘s powerful role as consumers,

particularly during the festive period. The duration of the research

coincided with the Christmas season and I reflected on the power of

Christmas and how it brought another layer of influence in how the

children made meaning about poverty.

3.6.3 Culminating Phase

The culminating phase offered ways for the children to express their

understandings about poverty as a result of participation in the research. The children

100


were invited to communicate their understandings about poverty through mediums of

their own choice. The children had numerous opportunities to express themselves via

the visual arts in both the research and the Kindergarten year, thus it was the

preferred choice in the culminating phase. This occurred over a one-week period, as

detailed further below.

Children documented their meaning-making experiences about poverty

through the visual arts. This included drawings, paintings and clay. The

children‘s meaning-making had shifted from the initial cause-effect

understandings to include wider themes of poverty. Examples of the

complex themes shared by children included wellbeing, acceptance, and

access to basic needs.

Children‘s meaning-making about poverty was shared with family

members through documenting their visual art pieces in strategic spaces in

the Kindergarten room (i.e., displaying their clay sculptures on the topic of

the ―Museum of Poverty‖ and their ―planning meeting‖ by the sign-in

tablet, when parents and carers sign in or out at the beginning and end of

the Kindergarten day). The children‘s displayed visual art pieces provided

families access to the research process and to the children‘s meaning-

making and understandings about poverty. These data are presented in

Chapter 7.

Collaboration on ideas of what the children could do for those

experiencing poverty occurred during this phase. One of the suggestions

included a gift donation to a foundation to support children experiencing

poverty. This suggestion stemmed from an individual child and was


welcomed by all children participating in the research. The children,

together with their families, brought in a gift donation to a local charity.

Third teacher-researcher reflection phase

In this final stage of reflection, I analysed and evaluated the overall project

work in relation to the purpose of my action research study. Data were analysed in

relation to the two research questions: (1) What are young children‟s understandings

of poverty? and (2) What pedagogies support young children to participate in

investigations of poverty within a socio-political framework of sustainability?.

Detailed discussion of the findings in relation to the two research questions is

presented in Chapter 8.

As highlighted above, the three project approach phases of introductory,

synthesising and culminating within the project approach were combined with the

cycles of action research. The section below highlights this integration in a visual

manner.

3.6.4 Links between Action Research and the Three Phases of the Project

Approach

For this research, critical dialogues took place between the children and I in

each action research cycle. These critical dialogues enabled both the children and I as

co-researchers to gain insights into existing and changing understandings of poverty

based on our discussions. The new insights from each cycle informed and influenced

future cycles, until there was a clear and refined understanding to the research

problem (Kemmis, 2009; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2007; Stringer, 2007). This cyclical

nature of action research has similarities to the curriculum planning approach

typically used by ECEC teachers in classrooms, and is visually represented in Figure

3.3. The project approach as a curriculum framework also reflects this cycle. Project

102


work and action research took place simultaneously in this research and Figure 3.3

below shows how both were integrated.

Figure 3.3. The proposed study‘s action research cycle with the project approach cycle taking place

simultaneously at step 3 (Adapted from Harris Helm & Katz, 2011; Kemmis and McTaggart, 2001;

Stuhmcke, 2012).

There were five steps in this action research.

Step 1 Plan – This stage served as the provocation of the research. As an early

childhood teacher, I had observed that ECEfS tended to be limited to learning

focused on environmental issues, reinforced by the formal prior-to-school learning

documents in Australia. As a Kindergarten teacher, I had observed children being

capable of understanding sustainability issues and concerns that go beyond the

environmental dimension. This provoked the idea for this present action research

2. Act

3. Observe

4. Reflect

5. Revised

plan

1.Plan

Action Research

The Project Approach

(in steps 3 and 4)

Introduction

First teacher-researcher reflective

phase

Synthesising phase

Second teacher-

researcher reflective

phase

Culminating phase

Third teacher-

researcher reflective

phase


study which involved introducing the children to the topic of poverty, a socio-

political issue.

Step 2 Act - The second step was about planning and devising ways to embed

ECEfS pedagogy that is transformative, empowering and critical in order for the

children to make-meaning about poverty. As a teacher-researcher, I investigated the

research literature to develop a conceptual framework for this present research.

Step 3 Observe - This step represented the actual project work carried out with

the children. In this stage, the Project Approach phase of introduction, synthesis, and

culmination (Helm & Katz, 2011) ran simultaneously. Data were gathered by me, in

response to the two research questions. The data collected included creative artefacts,

observations of children making-meaning about poverty and my teacher-researcher

reflections.

Step 4 Reflect - This was the data analysis stage. Data were analysed in relation

to Research Question 1 and 2 using the lens of critical theory (Freire, 1998) and

Cinders (Derrida, 1991).

Step 5 Revised plan - This step represented the ‗findings‘ and ‗implications‘ of

the action research. This research step demonstrated that the children were able to

explore sustainability issues beyond the environmental dimension, therefore ‗filling a

gap‘ in the field of ECEfS. The pedagogical strategies and conditions were also

presented to highlight strategies that potentially could be adopted in other early

childhood education contexts when exploring socio-political sustainability.

3.7 Participants

The participants compromised 21 children from my Kindergarten classroom.

Table 3.2 below provides details about the participants including their age at the time

104


of the research, the number of days they attended the centre each week, and the

number of years they had been part of the Kindergarten community. Pseudonyms are

used in place of real names.

Table 3.2

Participants involved in the action research study on Poverty

Participant

Age of child

at time of

research

Years

attended

Days

attended

Ava 5.0 2 5

Ella 5.0 1 5

Jon 5.7 2 5

Ronny 4.11 1 5

Kara 5.1 1 5

Mac 4.11 2 3

Ravi 4.10 1 3

Ann 4.7 1 5

Geata 5.1 1 3

Lola 4.11 1 3

Xavier 4.10 1 3

Carol 4.2 2 3

Phil 4.6 2 5

Jorge 5.5 2 3

Kavitha 4.11 1 5

Lee 5 2 5

Gina 4.11 2 5

Fred 4.9 2 5

Ben 4.7 1 5

Lawrence 5.2 2 3

Maggie 4.11 1 5

Prior to beginning the research, parental and child consent was sought. For all

parents of the children in the Kindergarten room, a participant information sheet

about this action research study was sent home to them with their child (see

Appendix B). The parent information sheet provided description of the research

including the research topic, research aim and research questions. It explained that


their child‘s participation was strictly voluntarily, and that they could choose to

withdraw their child‘s participation at any time without penalty, or affect to their

relationship with the teacher-researcher, teacher aide, and the centre. The parents

could also opt for their child to participate in the project about poverty with the

whole-class group, but to not participate in the research. The parents and children

who did not give consent to the research did not have their data collected.

The parent information sheet also acknowledged a perceived risk of coercion

with their child‘s participation and the teacher-researcher, given that the research was

to be conducted in my Kindergarten room. To address this, the parents were

welcomed at any time to email or set up a meeting with me or my University

Supervisors to clarify any questions or queries they had about the research.

Additionally, prior to carrying out this research with the children, I carried out a

whole-group discussion with the children on the proposed topic of poverty. I

introduced the children to some of the appropriate children‘s literature about poverty

used in the project, and invited questions from the children had about participating in

the project. In this session, I stressed that the children‘s participation was voluntary,

and that they could opt to not participate in this project at any time during the

research. The children‘s parents were invited to join in this session where I

introduced the topic of poverty to the children. Parents were also notified that

consent would be sought from their child prior to the research commencing through

appropriate consent forms that have visual cues for children (see Appendix C).

Following introduction of the research topic and clarification of any questions

or inquiries, visual consent forms were given out to the children (see Appendix C).

For the children‘s consent form, they were required to write or initial their names as

a form of consent, and visually circle a smiley face (indicating consent) or a

106


frowning face (indicating not to consent) as their consent to participate or to not

participate in the research. From the potential pool of participants, all were aged

between 4-5 years and attended the centre either, 5 or 3 days per week. The

participating children engaged in different learning experiences, and thus are

represented in forms of data (see Appendix D). Twenty-one child participants from a

potential 29 children in the class took part in this research. Although all parents

provided consent for their children to participate, some children did not consent to

their participation due to their desire to engage in other areas of interest and learning

experiences offered in the Kindergarten program.

All children in my Kindergarten classroom were invited to participate in the

research. This decision ensured that each individual had the opportunity to explore

issues of socio-political sustainability in the classroom space, with a specific focus

on meaning-making around the topic of poverty. Although a larger group of children

ensured a robust data set for this research, with large-group data collection, there is a

risk that the data collected is less concise in comparison with a small-group of

participants (Creswell, 2014; Stuhmcke, 2012). For example, in Stuhmcke‘s (2012)

study, she found it difficult to collect data from a whole-class, particularly when

recording all children‘s voices in a whole-group discussion. As the teacher-

researcher, I needed to be mindful of this during the data collection phase. Opening

the study to all potential participants yielded a diversity of views in regards to

gender, cultural background, learning interests and ways of communicating meaning.

The topic of poverty was introduced to all children in the classroom through a

project work approach as explained in Section 3.6. Project work was already familiar

to the children in the classroom. Project work is flexible and enables children to

move in-and-out of the project under investigation dependent on their interest (Helm


& Katz, 2011). In this sense, the current research project on the topic of poverty was

emergent, flexible and subjective to those who did choose to participate.

The group of 21 child participants proved to be an advantage as I was able to

work in close proximity with them as co-researchers. The group size meant that I was

able to record and document children‘s questions and comments in a more rigorous

and intimate manner in comparison to a larger-group experience where some

children‘s voices may have been omitted. Additionally, with smaller groups of

children, I was able to listen more proactively and be more responsive to the diverse

meanings they attached to poverty. Listening is not just restricted to a didactic

methodology, where the teacher uses the pedagogy of listening as a tool for teaching

or ways to impart knowledge. Instead, listening should be used as a medium to

support children to make sense of their existence in relation with others in this shared

world (Tisdall, 2016). When children are genuinely listened to, their multiple ways

of making meaning or children‘s ‗100 languages‘ is recognised (Clark & Moss,

2011; Smidt, 2013). The notion of the ‗100 languages‘ of communicating meaning,

as devised by Malaguzzi (1994) the founder of Reggio Emilia‘s educational

philosophy, is discussed further in Section 3.8 on data collection methods. Malaguzzi

(1994) suggests that it is important to have a pedagogy of listening when working

with children. Children‘s theories of their world are listened to, to understand how

they make-meaning and sense of the world in which they live. By listening to

children‘s ways of making-meaning, educators are then able to support them in

understanding different ways of life.

In this project, I had the support of the teacher aide in the classroom. Her role

was as a support person to the children and me in terms of taking photographs of the

children participating in the project, supporting children in the intentional teaching

108


experiences provided by me (i.e., through guiding children when using specific art

tools when children were using the medium of visual arts) and sharing any

observations of children exploring ideas about poverty when I was not present in the

room. For example, as will be seen in Chapter 4, the teacher aide shared with me

how the children were making links to themes of poverty when they were watching a

video about the fairy-tale, the Elves and the Shoemaker. The children were

commenting about the elves‘ appearances and linking appearance to social markers.

These discussions with the teacher aide were important for the research, as it

supported validation of my observations and analysis of the data.

3.8 Data Collection Methods

Data were collected over a period of four weeks, beginning in the mid-week of

November and ending late December 2016, prior to the Christmas holidays. In any

research, data is collected to give researchers some answers to the research questions

(Edwards, 2010; Reifel, 2011). The data collected in this action research study

helped to support the investigation of how children understand poverty and my own

pedagogical practices. As this is a qualitative research study, data were dependent on

the participants and context thus making the data collection process flexible and

emergent (Creswell, 2014; MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009). It is pertinent that the

data collected were a reflection of the purpose of this study, which was to make the

voices of children visible in relation to their understandings of poverty. Hence, the

specific data collection methods used were varied, as explored in the section below.

The multiplicity of data collection and methods are appropriate in the context of

early childhood, because children have multiple ways of meaning making and

communicating, as coined by Malaguzzi in reference to the ‗100 languages of

children‘, where meaning is not only restricted to verbal language but other various


mediums (Smidt, 2013). Thus, children‘s voices in this sense can come in the form of

multiple representations; be it from drawings, paintings, clay-making, play episodes

or music. Data were also collected from individual, small-group and whole-group

sessions in line with the orientation of the Kindergarten day, and the movements of

children as they engaged in different learning experiences. Additionally, data

collected using a variety of methods and from both the viewpoints of educator and

children, also ensured that ‗meaning‘ was represented from different perspectives

and understandings (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009).

The following section outlines the seven data collection methods, beginning

with explanation of the action research folder ˗˗˗ a repository for collecting emergent

data in the action research cycles.

3.8.1 Action research folder

The action research folder was a repository that served the purpose of

collecting emergent data in the action research cycles. It took the form of an A3

folder book, where data such as observations of children, children‘s drawings and

paintings and teacher-researcher reflective journal entries that were relevant to the

research questions were collated. Aside from collecting documentation on children‘s

participation in this research, my teacher-researcher reflections and weekly planning

were included to reflect my interpretations of children‘s learning. MacNaughton and

Hughes (2009) suggest that good and accurate data analysis begins with good

organisation of data. By organising the data and collating it into one place, it enabled

me to retrieve data and review it with ease. Stringer (2007) labels this stage of

gathering data as the ‗look‘ stage. In this stage, researchers are able to review the

collected data for problems, issues and themes. In the context of this research, I was

able to review all collected data related to children‘s understandings of poverty, and

110


the pedagogical conditions to support it via the one action research folder. In this

action research folder, I was not searching for ‗answers‘ to my research questions,

instead I was analysing the data for understandings on how and why children made

meanings of poverty in the ways that they did.

3.8.2 Creative artefacts

Creative artefacts that were produced by the children were varied and

represented the multiple ways they made meanings about poverty. As Reifel (2011)

suggests, communication and meaning-making can include creative artefacts such as

artworks, dancing, storytelling, and role-play. The creative artefacts collected

included the children‘s drawings, paintings, clay sculptures and planning meetings

(see Chapter 7 for examples). The creative artefacts were individual pieces the

children worked on both in collaboration with a small-group of peers, or one-on-one

with me. The impetus for producing creative artefacts stemmed both from teacher-

led learning experiences and child-led engagement with learning environments and

materials available across the day. The creative pieces collected for this research

were from all phases of the project, including the introduction, synthesising and

culminating phases. The children produced these artefacts to represent their initial

understandings, to clarify or accompany their verbal communication, and to suggest

transformative ways about how to support people experiencing poverty. Data

collected through a variety of methods of communication allows the teacher-

researcher to construct multiple dimensions of contextual understanding from the

data set (Efron & Ravid, 2013).

3.8.3 Children and teacher’s digital recordings and photographs

The digital camera, tablet and smart board are everyday items found in the

research setting and used both by teachers and children. When children take photos


or visual representations of experiences that interest them, this allows the viewer a

medium to understand children‘s lives, culture and viewpoints in a clearer manner

(Rasmussen, 2014). Additionally, the photos and recordings taken by the children

can act as an empowering tool as it gives those who are ‗quiet‘ a voice, and already

verbal and confident children a new way of understanding them through visual

representation. However, Rasmussen (2014) states there needs to be caution when

interpreting images taken by the child, as these photos are considered as only

‗bridges‘ to understanding children‘s meaning. What this means is that photos show

us only a glimpse of the complex world and meanings children attach to different

concepts.

For this research, photos used as data were a combination of visual images

taken by both individual children and me. The photos used as data were taken

predominantly from my point of view, particularly during intentional teaching

experiences or when I had observed the children being immersed in experiences

where they were exploring the topic of poverty. These photos allowed me to visually

analyse children‘s creative responses in ways that I may have missed through other

forms of communication. The photos were taken during different phases of the

project, including the introduction, synthesising and culminating phases. Photos

taken by the children were predominantly of their artefacts ˗˗˗ a familiar way in

which they documented their work in the classroom space.

3.8.4 Conversations

Conversations around poverty that took place between the children and I, and

the children with one another, were recorded via field notes. Informal and formal

conversations are a valuable source of data, as they give children and adults a voice

to be heard, and allow for genuine participation (Glesne, 2011). In total, 16

112


conversations were recorded for all phases of the research in individual, small-group

and large-group configurations. The conversations categorised as data were

collected, and analysed for understanding about how the children approached themes

such as democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) within their

explorations of poverty. The conversations were initiated with open-ended questions

so that the children could articulate their thoughts beyond giving a yes or no answer.

Glesne (2011) states that conversations that take place between both educator and

child can reflect both unstructured and semi-structured methods due to the flexibility

of qualitative research. Efron and Ravid (2013) suggest that these unstructured

conversations are more open, where the educator lets the conversation ‗take its

course‘. Such conversations were important, especially following an intentional

learning experience or a spontaneous observation, as I was able to gain clarification

about the children‘s experiences and understandings.

According to Efron and Ravid (2013), a more structured conversation is one

where the educator leads the children into a specific inquiry to add-depth and to seek

further clarification. Examples of a more structured conversation with the children is

seen in Chapter 4, following the introduction of the book Rich Cat, Poor Cat (Waber,

1963) which tells the tale of a stray cat‘s hardship and difficulty in finding a home,

food, friendship and love. An example of a focussed question I posed to one child,

Mac, was ―What could we do for cats that are shaggy (poor cats)?” This question

was purposefully focussed because I was seeking an indication of Mac‘s

understandings about transformative actions that could be undertaken to change Poor

Cat‘s circumstances.

The data collected from these conversations included individual, small and

large group conversations in multiple contexts, which were both spontaneous and


intentional. For example, as seen in Chapter 5, one recorded conversation occurred

amongst a group of children as they engaged in spontaneous child-led play about

poverty. For intentional learning experiences, conversations occurred during and

following the experience, or as a way to revisit a particular scenario several days

later.

3.8.5 Observations of children

Observations of children are a familiar tool for educators who document

children‘s thinking and action to make their learning visible (Rinaldi, 2006).

Examples of child observations recorded during this research included the three

spontaneous child-led play scenarios. As data, these three observations provided

insights into how children demonstrate agency in exploring complex issues, the

conversations that occur as part of their play, and how the medium of play enabled

the children to actively explore themes of socio-political sustainability. Recorded

observations were done through various mediums that included written observations

and photographic documentations.

The recorded observations are not superficial; they are examples of ‗thick

observation‘ where participants‘ personal narratives, relationships and identities are

inserted into the process of documentation (Vasconcelos, 2010). This occurs by way

of capturing children‘s talk in what is recorded, paying attention to how they create

relationships with others, objects and environments as they play, and considering

how they represent themselves and others through character work and the adoption

of discourse that align with different people and contexts. By observing and

recording the children‘s play scenarios, I was able to analyse their responses to

themes of poverty, including nonverbal gestures and body language (Efron & Ravid,

2013). Participant observation was appropriate for this study as I was the teacher in

114


the setting, thus I had already established ‗trust‘ with the participants which allowed

me a unique insider‘s perspective (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009).

3.8.6 Teacher-Researcher reflective journal entries

Journal entries were used to record my reflections after intentional and

spontaneous teaching experiences, along with my ongoing reflections about the role

of teacher-researcher. My teacher-researcher reflections showcased my emerging

questions as the research progressed. These questions related to: instances where the

children challenged my pre-conceived ideas and expectations related to investigating

the topic of poverty; critical interpretations of the ways the children made meaning

about poverty; and my biases as the adult in the research. Over the course of the

project I questioned whether I had silenced the children‘s voices or contradicted the

research aim to work with children. I also questioned the significance I attached to

different conversations and scenarios over others, along with the pedagogical

conditions I provided to children to extend investigations beyond environmental

themes of sustainability in an early childhood context. As Creswell (2014) and

MacNaughton and Hughes (2009) explain, it is through generating journal entries

from the field that the researcher can further delve into concepts or observations that

need further clarification, explore constraints, and reveal patterns in the research.

Critical reflection is an inherent part of action research. Within action research

cycles, critical reflection supports the analysis of data and directions within and

across action research cycles. Critical reflection also supports the researcher to

consider their positioning in the research, and the ways their thinking and actions

influence action research outcomes (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009). As a process,

critical reflection involves intentionally and systematically investigating my role as

the teacher-researcher in regard to my pedagogical practices and potential questions,


and issues or concerns I had about exploring the topic of poverty with young

children. MacNaughton and Hughes (2009) state that it is important that the teacher-

researcher reflects on their concerns and from there manages change to achieve

informed and improved teaching practices. In line with the two research questions

guiding this research, I employed critical reflection as a tool to reflect not only on my

role as teacher-researcher, but also on my pedagogical decision-making. Beyond the

immediate research process, I also employed critical reflection to reflect on the

potential for social change (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009) in terms of supporting

children to recognise their own agency, where they are capable and competent

learners in making decisions about the directions of their learning experiences.

Critical reflections recorded in my teacher-researcher reflective journal

included my reflections on the strategies or barriers that I encountered when carrying

out my role as the teacher-researcher. For example, as seen in Chapter 6, in the lead

up to the culmination phase (Week 4), the research coincided with the festive season

of Christmas. During this stage, I was challenged when the children appeared to

revert to their initial understandings about poverty despite the depth of conversations

and explorations that had occurred. The introductory phases (Week 1) of the project

showed that the children held cause-effect understandings about poverty. After

critically reflecting on this, I had intentionally provided the children with alternative

learning experiences around poverty in the following synthesising phases (Week 2

and 3) to broaden their understandings. As a result, the children demonstrated a shift

in meanings about poverty that went beyond initial cause-effect understandings.

However, when the research approached the culmination phase, the children

independently had decided that they wanted to make a local donation of toys to a

local charity, with the justification that those who would be receiving these gifts

116


would feel happy receiving them. It appeared as though the children had reverted

again to those initial cause-effect understandings about poverty, despite recognising

that social markers such as toys determined a person‘s participation in society (this is

explored further in Chapter 4).

At this stage of the research, I recognised it was not about the children gaining

one meaning or one ‗truth‘ about poverty. It was important that the children were

gaining access to making-meaning about poverty that was meaningful to them. Yet, I

also reflected on the possible tension of whether I was truly supporting children in

their meaning-making about poverty, or was my power as the adult pressuring

children to agree with what they ‗think‘ I wanted them to learn? MacNaughton

(2003) suggests critical reflection focussed on the power of the adult is about

analysing how much ‗freedom‘ children are given in this research, and analysing the

teacher‘s own role that either encourages children to conform or to be empowered.

3.8.7 Curriculum planning

My curriculum planning reflected learning experiences that were planned in

response to the children‘s inquiries, questions and interests as the project progressed.

Curriculum planning during the research represented the ‗revised plan‘ phase of the

action research cycle. The curriculum planning cycle was based on the previous

stages of children‘s explorations. Following documentation and reflection on the

children‘s interactions with the learning experiences, I was able to plan learning

experiences that further refined or challenged children‘s understandings about

poverty. It was important that my curriculum planning was incorporated as data to

document shifts in children‘s meaning-making about poverty, the barriers they

encountered when exploring themes centred on issues of democracy, peace, equality

and human rights (UNESCO, 2010), and their higher order thinking. The curriculum


planning was also emergent and flexible. Data representative of curriculum planning

included:

Reflections and evaluations after a learning experience (intentional and

spontaneous) - my jottings or notes of potential follow up experiences for

the child in relation to the observation on the learning experience.

Mind maps completed during brainstorming sessions to record the

children‘s questions and provocations after a shared storytelling

experience. The mind map was then analysed together with the children to

identify potential directions for further investigation.

Discussion with the teacher aide recorded as field notes. Discussions with

the teacher aide were important for data validation. The teacher aide

conveyed the children meaning-making about poverty in the classroom

during times I was not present in the classroom.

Communication with parents in the form of: weekly emails to families

about the learning experiences that took place including the project work

about poverty; daily diaries that included the explorations of specific

groups of children in learning experiences about poverty; and the end of

Term 4 newsletter that shared snippets of the children‘s dialogue in the

culmination phase of the project, about some of their suggestions on what

they could do to support people experiencing poverty.

Informal discussions or chats with parents were also recorded as field

notes or contributions in my weekly teacher-researcher reflection journals.

These discussions and comments were recorded as data to show that

children can demonstrate agency within their immediate environment,

118


particularly on issues related to socio-political aspects of sustainability.

The next section discusses the approach to data analysis.

3.9 Data Analysis

In qualitative research, analysing data is about representing the voice of the

participants and making their interpretations known (Edwards, 2010). Hence, the

analysis of data will be flexible, complex and potentially ambiguous (Edwards, 2010;

Reifel, 2011). Despite data being flexible, Edwards (2010) states that data can be

categorised and coded to identify key themes. Thus, for this research, a thematic

approach to data analysis was employed.

Thematic analysis is a type of analysis that searches for themes and patterns in

the research data based on the study‘s research literature. MacNaughton and Hughes

(2009) state that thematic analysis gives an overview of the data of the research,

where further refinement or analysis is needed to produce clearer understandings and

results. In the context of this research, data were analysed to produce understandings

about the ways children understood poverty, and how the pedagogies employed by

me as teacher-researcher supported and/or limited the children to investigate a socio-

political aspect of sustainability. Using a critical theory lens, data were analysed

from several points of reference including: children‘s meaning-making about poverty

(i.e., were their meanings of poverty aligned with broad themes of democracy, peace,

equality and human rights?) (UNESCO, 2010); representations of children‘s voices

(i.e., were children enabled to participate authentically in the research or was their

participation tokenistic?); and my own role as the teacher-researcher (i.e., was I

working with children or on children?).

For Research Question 1, data were analysed to represent children‘s

understandings of poverty. MacNaughton and Hughes (2009) suggest that the


‗voices‘ that the teacher-researcher analyses should not be only those that are

verbally heard, but also those that are inaudible. Data including children‘s artefacts

such as drawings, play episodes and photographs were also analysed as

representations of children‘s ‗voices‘.

For Research Question 2, data were analysed in relation to how my own

teaching practices both empowered and limited children‘s opportunities to be

knowledgeable and active participants in the investigation of poverty. When

analysing the balance between the educator‘s voice and children‘s voices, it is

pertinent that the children‘s ‗voices‘ are represented in both the presence of voices

and silences to analyse for power distributions (MacNaughton & Hughes, 2009).

Analysis of power distributions between the child participants and me as teacher-

researcher also feature in the response to Research Question 2.

Aside from thematic analysis, critical reflection together with critical incidents

were used in the analysis. Miles et al. (2014) suggest that critical incidents are

catalyst for analysis because an incident viewed as critical can be examined as a

specific moment in the research timeline that is deemed as crucial in the course of

understanding the topic. Understanding sequences of events is important in

qualitative research to understand the actual process and, the significant incidents

that either promote or eliminate the research aim and focus (Miles et al., 2014). In

this research, critical incidents were analysed to highlight the chronology of events

that supported children in making-meaning about poverty, shifts in the children‘s

thinking and actions, and the pedagogical conditions that promoted opportunities for

the children to make-meaning through sustained inquiry. Through critical incident

analysis, I was able to sift through the timeline of the research and be selective

towards processes and incidents that provided insights into how the children

120


understood poverty (RQ1) and the pedagogical conditions that supported their

participation in investigations of poverty within a socio-political framework of

sustainability (RQ2).

The critical incidents identified through analysis of the data are highlighted in

red in Table 3.3 below. Four critical incidents were identified in the research

timeline. These four critical incidents provided the scaffolding for data analysis and

discussion in Chapters, 4, 5, 6 and 7.


Table 3.3

Identification of Critical Incidents in the research timeline

Project

timeline Key events and critical incidents

Week 1 As the teacher-researcher, I introduced the project work on the topic of poverty through storytelling

Collaborative brainstorming session about poverty.

The children shared understandings about poverty that were focussed primarily on cause-effect understandings.

Various pedagogical strategies were used to introduce and explore the topic of poverty including the medium

of visual arts, storytelling and shared dialogue.

Week 2 As teacher- researcher, I maintained a focus on exploring the topic of poverty.

The children‘s responses to the teacher-led learning experiences were recorded.

Critical Incident 1: A shift in understanding: the children’s meaning making about poverty highlighted a

shift in understanding from cause-effect explanations of poverty to include to themes of power, and

equality in line with notions of social justice.

Various pedagogical strategies were continued to explore the topic of poverty including the visual arts,

storytelling and shared dialogues.

Week 3 Teacher-researcher and the children continued explorations of poverty through various pedagogical mediums

including the visual arts, play, storytelling and dialogue.

Critical Incident 2: Children’s agency: the children were observed taking on more active roles in deciding

the directions of explorations of poverty and the choice of mediums for these explorations. The children

independently led explorations of poverty through the medium of play.

Beginning of the Christmas festive period

End of synthesising phase: Teacher-researcher initiated some suggestions from the children about how they

want to share their understandings or meanings about poverty with others including parents.

Critical Incident 3: Reverting back: the suggestions from the appeared to revert back to the initial cause-

effect understandings about poverty recorded in the first week.

Week 4 Christmas period (a month leading up to Christmas)

The children suggested donations of gifts to a local charity

Critical Incident 4: Transformative actions: the children demonstrated further agency and more

transformative understandings about ways to support people experiencing poverty.

122


The identification of critical incidents (Hughes, 2008) supported understanding

about significant moments experienced by me and the children when undertaking

investigations around poverty - a topic aligned with the socio-political dimension of

sustainability. Halquist and Musanti (2010) suggest that critical incidents do not

simply happen. Instead, they are created by how we interpret a particular incident

deemed as significant. It is through analysis, and in-depth investigations of the

underlying structures of particular incidents, that makes the moment critical. As

shown in Table 3.3, I identified four critical incidents across all phases of the project

work, based on underlying structures of the incidents including shifts in the

children‘s understandings of poverty, the children‘s demonstrations of agency via

independent explorations of poverty, and the pedagogical conditions I created as

teacher-researcher that supported children‘s agency.

Identifying the four critical incidents entailed several steps in the data analysis

process. As explained in Section 3.4, analysis on the data took place in each phase of

the research, as opposed to analysing the whole data set at the completion of the data

collection phase. Documentation collected during the research was analysed and

interpreted on a daily and weekly basis. Undertaken, I now elaborate on each step of

the data analysis process.

Step 1

Step 1 of the analysis was about understanding what stories or understandings

that the children were communicating in response to the project topic about poverty.

For this research, I scanned each documentation piece and began coding for different

interpretations. For example, in Figure 3.4, the documentation analysed was on the

dialogue between Mac and I, which was based on the story of Rich Cat, Poor Cat

(Waber, 1963). The green codes were what I interpreted as Mac‘s reasoning of why


those experiencing poverty faced difficulty in friendships. Mac‘s reasoning of Poor

Cat being shaggy, not having an owner, and being dirty are interpreted as barriers by

me for those experiencing poverty. The red text represented some of my reflections

and thinking, and the highlighted blue texts were what I identified as pedagogical

conditions that were used in this conversation between Mac and me. Here, I had used

the pedagogical strategies of provocation, open-ended questioning, seeking

clarification and listening to Mac‘s theories of meaning-making about poverty.

Figure 3.4. Example of coding.

After coding each piece of documentation produced throughout the research

and developing a refined list of codes, the codes were then grouped into categories.

Coding is a way to assign units of meanings to specific data of the research (Miles &

Huberman, 1994). For this research, the various data were grounded or deductively

analysed into specific codes that provided insights about how the children made

124


meaning about poverty, and the pedagogical conditions that supported the children in

their meaning-making.

The action of searching for different codes and grouping the codes into distinct

categories was repeated throughout the research process as I engaged with emerging

data. Miles and Huberman (1994) describe this process as cycles of coding and re-

coding, until the codes were further refined into specific schemes or categories. This

process of categorising codes supported my analysis by grouping the various data

and its different versions into common clusters and concepts. The specific categories

in which the codes were grouped ranged from categories such as specific teaching

conditions, interactions between children, and children‘s understandings about

poverty. After another cycle of categorising and re-categorising, propositional

statements were developed (see Appendix E). Miles and Huberman (1994) state that

propositional statements are developed to formalise findings and conclusions into a

succinct explanation.

The process of coding, categorising and developing a propositional statement

initiated 16 codes. Data from this research were first clustered by me with pencil to

paper, where I manually attached units of meaning to specific data that I interpreted

as significant. In these beginning stages of coding, there were some data classified as

co-occurring codes. The reason for this was because at different times of the data

analysis stage, the data was both ―interpretive‖ and then ―inferential‖ (Miles &

Huberman, 1994, p. 57). For example, initial analysis of the data showed what I

interpreted as the code ‗fairness‘. This code emerged in the initial stages of the

project where children would discuss their understandings about the experiences of

people experiencing poverty. I had interpreted these conversations as children‘s

emerging awareness of ‗fairness‘. However, after a cycle of coding and recoding,


different patterns were interpreted by me with the same data. The children‘s

emerging awareness of ‗fairness‘ could also be interpreted as their sense of

‗reasoning‘. Fairness was viewed through the lens of interpreting children‘s

meaning-making about poverty, whereas reasoning was viewed through the lens of

me as teacher-researcher attempting to infer the pedagogical conditions that allowed

space for meaning-making. The initial list of codes was further refined to eight

codes, which then underwent categorising. The categorising process resulted in the

refined list of eight codes being further reduced to six codes. From there, I developed

propositional statements of the data together with my supervisors. The propositional

statements were refined during this process.

Figure 3.5 below shows examples of the numerous codes related to the

category of ―teaching strategies‖ that were identified in relation to my work as

teacher-researcher. These codes were attached to examples of the range of strategies

I employed and documented during the project. Teaching strategies ranged from

brainstorming sessions, using ICTs, providing a range of mediums for learning (e.g.,

visual arts mediums, storytelling), and children documenting their work.

Figure 3.5. Data included in the category of teaching strategies.

126


Step 2

Following a rigorous process of coding and categorising, themes were

identified in response to the two research questions, literature review and the

theoretical framework guiding the research. This step alone was rigorous and

required several cycles to reduce the amount of data so that the data set reflected a

concise representation of (1) children‘s meaning making about poverty and (2) the

pedagogical conditions that supported the children to explore a topic aligned with the

socio-political dimension of sustainability. Initially, I identified three themes, (shown

in Figure 3.6 below). However, after another further refinement of themes through

re-categorisation, the three themes were further refined to two (see Appendix F).

Figure 3.6. Codes and categories are tabled to identify key themes.

The initial themes identified were (1) basic needs, (2) pedagogy and (3)

developing empathy. However, after reflection, consultation with my supervisors and

revisiting the children‘s data, the themes were further refined to two main themes


that best reflected the research questions. Through critical reflection, the third theme

which explored children‘s development of empathy was removed after revisiting and

reflecting back on the data, and rigorously analysing how the data best represents the

two research questions.

Through further discussions with my research supervisors, my attention was

brought to Derrida‘s (1991) work on cinders. Derrida‘s (1991) notion of cinders

allowed me to interpret cognitive dissonance experienced by the children, or those

moments that did not ‗sit well‘ with them when exploring the complex issue of

poverty and related themes of marginalisation or acceptance. Furthermore, through

this lens, I expanded my view beyond the children‘s meaning-making or making

predictions. Through the lens of cinders, I had a refreshed way of thinking about the

children as active citizens – a key thread in the literature and research on early

childhood education for sustainability (as reviewed in Chapter 2). Further reflection

on the data using Derrida‘s notion of cinders was another critical aspect of the data

analysis process, which led me to Step 4, focussed on critical incidents.

Step 4

Hughes (2008) defines critical incidents as significant moments that took place

in the research process, which are then used to redefine current understanding and

knowledge. As a result of the analysis of the refined themes and propositional

statements (see Appendix F), I was then able to construct a mind map of potential

frameworks for the two research questions. In Step 4, further critical reflection on the

data was used to devise a mind map in Figure 3.7 which outlines the frameworks for

addressing the research questions.

As observed in the purple section of Figure 3.7, further analysis of my teaching

strategies included questioning such as: were my teaching practices empowering the

128


children or were they silencing them to voice their understandings?, was there a

genuine shared power between the children and me as teacher-researcher?, did my

teaching practices reflect many ways of teaching and learning, and that there is no

one ‗truth‘ to teaching? Asking further questions about the data supported me to

identify the four critical incidents that frame the data analysis chapters in this thesis –

Chapters 4, 5, 6, and 7. In Figure 3.7, the blue and red sections represent the children

and their attempts to make meaning about poverty. The purple section represents my

teaching strategies or pedagogical conditions that supported the children in their

meaning-making efforts about poverty, and the green section represents potential

critical incidents that I interpreted as significant in the initial stages of data analysis.

Figure 3.7. A mind map of potential frameworks to address Research Question 1 and 2.


Various analytic cycles, revisiting the children‘s data, and further reading of

the literature led me to reflect and identify the four critical incidents. As Halquist and

Musanti (2010) suggest, critical incidents are not immediately obvious, instead

thoughtful understanding and investigation on the researcher‘s part is required to

identify critical incidents in the research process. Below, I briefly preview the four

critical incidents which frame the analysis presented in the four data chapters.

Critical Incident 1: A shift in understanding: the children‘s meaning-making

about poverty. This was a significant moment in the research because it showed that

when the children were introduced to a variety of learning experiences about poverty,

they were able to reflect on these different perspectives and show their critical

thinking around emerging awareness of complex themes such as marginalisation and

acceptance. The children had demonstrated a depth in thinking that shifted away

from the initial cause-effect understandings (Critical Incident 1 is detailed in Chapter

4).

Critical Incident 2: Children‟s agency: the children were observed taking on

more active roles in deciding the directions of explorations of poverty and the choice

of mediums for these explorations. The children led explorations of poverty through

the medium of play. Critical Incident 2 prompted me to reflect on my teaching

pedagogy and provided me with ‗food for thought‘ about specific pedagogical

conditions that supported explorations of complex topics in early childhood contexts.

This critical incident was a significant moment in the research timeline because it

contributed to the research, by giving me an alternative view of the types of every

day Kindergarten pedagogical contexts that can be used to explore socio-political

issues of sustainability and how play can be used as a space for children to explore

cinders (Derrida, 1991) (Critical Incident 2 is detailed in Chapter 5).

130


Critical Incident 3: Reverting back: the children‘s suggestions appeared to

revert back to the initial cause-effect understandings about poverty recorded earlier

This Critical Incident coincided with the lead up to the Christmas period. Children‘s

meaning-makings about poverty appeared to take a backwards step. This significant

incident made me reflect on the power of the external environment, in this case the

power of Christmas and how it influenced the children‘s meaning-making

experiences (Critical Incident 3 is detailed in Chapter 6).

Critical Incident 4: Transformative actions: the children demonstrated further

agency and more transformative understandings about ways to support people

experiencing poverty. At this stage of the research, my role was more of a facilitator,

where children were independently taking the lead in this project in terms of deciding

what they would like to share with others about poverty, and the methods and ways

to do so. The thoughts and suggestions on ways the children wanted to support

people experiencing poverty demonstrated depth, reflection and critical thinking that

challenged taken-for-granted ways of thinking about poverty. For example, some

suggestions included the rights to education for all, and eliminating sadness, which

showed depth in thinking, in comparison to those earlier in this project that revolved

around cause-effect understandings of poverty (Critical Incident 4 is detailed in

Chapter 7).

As a result of understanding the importance of critical incidents, further

analysis and refinement was undertaken on specific moments of the project that I

interpreted as defining moments. These critical incidents were moments that

demonstrated (1) how children immersed themselves in exploring socio-political

sustainability and (2) the pedagogical conditions to support young children in making

meaning of these complex issues. These critical incidents took place in different


phases of the project. As seen in Figure 3.8 below, the critical incidents took place

across the research timeline, which suggests that significant moments of learning can

be found throughout the introduction, synthesising and culmination periods as

opposed to only at the end of a project, in the culmination phase.

Figure 3.8. Critical incidents at different phases of the project cycle.

After locating the critical incidents in the timeline of the project, the data

aligned with each critical incident underwent further cycles of analysis (see Figures

3.9, 3.10, 3.11 below). The analysis was visually represented through a table and

cycle diagram, where each critical incident was aligned with the prior-determined

codes and categories.

132


Figure 3.9. Analysis of individual critical incident.

Figure 3.10. Visual representation of the critical incidents through the action research cycle.

Figure 3.11. Refined and concise version of the critical incidents represented through an action

research cycle.


Step 5

Finally, for each critical incident, an analysis influenced by Deleuze and

Guattari‘s (1987) rhizome approach analysis approach was undertaken. A rhizome

approach allowed me to understand multidimensional meanings, subjectivity and

meaning-making related to specific critical incidents (Zollo, 2017). According to

Deleuze and Guattari (1987), the rhizome approach concerns the notion of multiple

entryways as opposed to a linear cause-effect meaning. In this research, each

identified critical incident had multiple entryways or relationships which

demonstrated complexity as opposed to it being a result of an ordered linear or

hierarchal cause-effect motion in the action research cycle.

A rhizome approach to data analysis was useful for this research because it

provided me with in-depth understanding about how the critical incidents, or those

specific moments that were deemed by me to be significant in the research, were not

a result of a predictable and linear effect of children simply being immersed in

project work. Instead, a rhizome approach to data analysis allowed me to analyse the

multiple ‗threads‘ of relationships with all its messiness (represented as red messy

lines in Figure 3.12 below) and understand how these messy lines or relationships are

central to responding to the two key research questions. Specifically, through

rhizomapping analysis, I was able to identify that children‘s understandings of

poverty are flexible and complex and can represent the values of their environment

which are ever-evolving.

In this approach, the rhizome or the critical incident is always in the middle.

The reason the critical incident is positioned the middle is because it is not

hierarchical, and there are no clear lines of beginning or ending. Instead, the focus of

rhizome analysis is on the connections and the relationships that form new concepts

134


and understandings. This type of analysis fitted well with the cycles of action

research, because the analysis was non-linear due to the various underlying structures

that make up each critical incident. For example, with Critical Incident 2 (see Figure

3.12), developing a rhizomap whereby the critical incident is juxtaposed with

underlying structures or other contributing factors influenced how Critical Incident 2

was shaped. Other factors that framed Critical Incident 2 included the children‘s

experiences in Critical Incident 1, learning frameworks that guide educators‘ work in

early childhood contexts, the children‘s familiarity with the medium of the visual

arts, the research questions, and the research aims. The red ‗messy‘ and ‗squiggly‘

lines represented the various reflective cycles that I undertook to analyse these

underlying structures or contributing factors, which then provided entryways into the

framing of Critical Incident 3.


Figure 3.12. In-depth analysis using rhizomapping analysis on Critical Incident 2.

By analysing each critical incident in depth, I was able to understand the

underlying structures and the multiple ‗truths‘ that made it critical. Steps 1-5 have

shown that the analysis undertaken with the data throughout the timeline of the

research was continuous, non-linear and in constant motion through the various

cycles of action research.

The following section explores ethical issues that revolve around conducting

research with young children.

136


3.10 Ethical Issues

When research is carried out with living beings, ethical clearance is needed to

ensure that the research does not do harm to participants. In the past, working with

children required consent from the parents of the child, however current practices

also now recommend consent from children themselves (NSW Commission for

Children and Young People, 2005). The genuine participating child should be

informed and fully understand the purpose and consequence of the research that is

undertaken and freely choose to participate or to not participate (Efron & Ravid,

2013; NSW Commission for Children and Young People, 2005). For this research,

ethical clearance from the University Research Ethics Committee was obtained

(Approval No 1600000945- see Appendix G). Consent from parents and children

was sought prior to commencing the research.

Obtaining consent from children is as important as obtaining consent from

adults. Consent from children acknowledges their rights to privacy, as well as

ensuring they have an informed understanding about their participation in the

research. Seeking consent from children is important enables them to make a choice

that may be different to those made by adults (NSW Commission for Children and

Young People, 2005). Children need to fully understand their participation in a

manner that respects the individual children‘s context and competency. This is

undertaken in a child-friendly manner where information sheets and consent forms

are articulated in ways that children can easily understand. As stated earlier, I used a

consent form where children were required to write and/or initial their name as a sign

of their consent (see Appendix C) and a visual representation for children to choose

to represent whether they choose to participate (represented by the smiling face) or

not to participate (represented by the frowning face).


Danby and Farrell (2004) stress that listening to children supports challenging

the power imbalance between adults and children. However, from this theoretical

standpoint, ―a key challenge in listening to children in research is making decisions

with them, not just for them‖ (Danby & Farrell, 2004, p. 42). Therefore, it is

pertinent that a pedagogy of listening (Rinaldi, 2006) involves children being

immersed in later critical dialogue that stems from initial genuine interest. When

children are listened to, they can then make authentic decisions. By listening to

children, researchers are acknowledging their rights to participate in experiences that

concern them. As outlined above, in this research data were collected using a range

of methods to ensure the children‘s voices were represented in multiple ways.

Despite contemporary views of children‘s rights to participation and ethics

and its strong links to the competent sociological child, children‘s participation will

always be linked to notions of power and agency (Danby & Farrell, 2004). Farrell

(2016) states that despite growing recognition of the sociological child who can

exhibit competence, children‘s participation in research and therefore the ethics of

everyday life is still ‗controlled‘ by the decision-making and practices of the people

in power. In this research, it was important to critically reflect on how the research

design presented both opportunities and challenges to power relations between adults

and children, and that children‘s participation was genuine.

In any research or educational practice involving children, it is important that

their roles are not manipulated or used as decoration in a tokenistic manner (Hart,

1997). The different levels or forms of participation available to children are shown

in Hart‘s Ladder of Participation in Figure 3.13 below.

138


Figure 3.13. Hart‘s ladder of children‘s participation (Hart, 1997).

Manipulation, decoration or tokenisms are metaphors used by Hart (1997) to

depict how children‘s roles are non-participatory. In Hart‘s view, children‘s presence

is tokenistic when it appears as though children are active participants, but in reality,

it is the adult‘s messages that are being foregrounded under the guise of children‘s

voices.

The degree of children‘s participation will vary and is context specific. The

most important part of children‘s participation is choice (Hart, 1997), meaning

children should be able to decide which level of participation they are comfortable to

enter. Hence, in this research, it is the teacher-researcher‘s responsibility to ensure

that the research is designed to maximise opportunities for each individual to

participate at a level to which they choose, and to their fullest abilities. When


children are provided with different transformative practices to create and

communicate meaning, the rights of the child are valued and respected.

EfS is a curriculum and pedagogical approach that welcomes participatory

inquiry. For example, the EfS aligned ―Crow Project‖ (Åberg & Lenz Taguchi, 2005)

was a learning project that started from listening to the inquiries of children about

crows. The educator and children worked as co-researchers in investigating a

genuine interest from the children‘s perspectives. The project was not about the

educator passing on scientific facts about crows to children; instead, the inquiries

came from the children‘s interests. Some of their inquiries included: wanting to know

how crows kissed; why crows had back claws; and what a crow‘s eyes looked like.

The Crow Project was an example of participatory inquiry, because it was not

concerned with right or wrong answers. The children were authentic participants

because their inquiries were listened to and taken seriously. Additionally, they were

able to listen to other peoples‘ theories and understandings, which resulted in

learning from one another. Inspired by the child-focussed aspects of the Crow

Project, this present study about poverty used the children‘s interest and inquiries to

influence the direction and outputs of the project even though I, as the teacher-

researcher, determined the overall issue to be investigated. A balance between

teacher-led and child-led learning is important for children‘s participation to be

genuine (Hart, 1997).

Linking ethical issues back to the theoretical framework used in this study

around critical theory and Derrida‘s notion of cinders, it is important that as teacher-

researcher, I was critical of how the research design both supported and constrained

the children‘s participation despite my intentions to view them as competent

140


participants. Farrell (2016) explains this as the realities of a world where adults are in

power and will continue to make decisions.

Another ethical issue relevant to action research that I raised initially in Section

3.4.4, is the notion of the dialectic role of teacher and researcher. In this role, the dual

identities of teacher and researcher can collide with each other (Banegas, 2012;

Frederickson & Beck, 2010; Kennedy-Lewis, 2012; O‘Flynn, 2009). In Stuhmcke‘s

(2012) research, she too faced a dilemma between the role of supportive teacher

working with young children to clarify understandings, and the role of a researcher

who would let the project ‗run‘ its course and let children independently determine

the direction of the project. I experienced this dilemma in my research, and explore

the dialectic nature of the teacher-researcher role in Chapter 6. In Chapter 6, the

collision of my dual-identities coincided with the festive season of Christmas. In this

phase of the research, the children appeared to revert to initial cause-effect

understandings about poverty despite in-depth explorations that had resulted in shifts

in their meaning-making. This occurrence created a dilemma where I needed to

decide whether to challenge the children‘s viewpoints or follow their lead and

direction. After reflection, I did not challenge the children‘s viewpoints, instead

supporting them by creating opportunities for them to reflect on their initial

understandings and prior learning experiences around poverty.

The dialectic dilemma of the teacher-researcher role was present in all stages of

this research and a key focus during the reflective phases of the action research

cycles. When reflection is carried out alone, Souto-Manning (2012) cautions against

a tendency to self-praise, as opposed to being critical. This caution is often cited in

action research studies because of the focus on improving attitudes and practices and

producing outcomes. To counter the hierarchical researcher-researched power


imbalance (Souto-Manning, 2012), I purposefully included the children in the

reflective phases of this action research study. As stated by Danby and Farrell

(2004), ethical dilemmas arise when emergent research data that should be

representative of children‘s voices unfortunately become tokenistic when data are

heavily translated using only an adults lens and voice.

3.11 Research Limitations

The outcomes of action research studies are not generally transferable to other

contexts, as they are responsive to issues relevant to individual contexts or regions

(Stringer, 2007). Therefore, this research is not a ‗one size fits all‘. There is potential

for transference of pedagogical conditions that supported investigations of a socio-

political aspect of sustainability across early childhood contexts, as explored further

in the concluding chapter of this study, Chapter 8.

As the teacher-researcher in this study, my interpretations of the data around

the children‘s meaning-making around poverty are specific to the group of children

with whom I worked, including their prior experiences, family circumstances and our

geographic location. The ways in which the children participated would likely be

interpreted or measured differently from others within the field dependent on their

individual curriculum approach and pedagogy. Moss (2014) acknowledges that

qualitative research often cannot be replicated due to the unique individualised

samples and contexts. However, Moss contests that if the reason for research is to

solely achieve transferability into multiple contexts, then the notion of producing

new knowledge, theory and change is pointless. The present action research study

was carried out to generate changes to existing practices and to form contemporary

knowledge and thinking in understanding the application of ECEfS in one

Kindergarten context. Specifically, this research sought ways to understand how to

142


engage young children in sustainability concerns that went beyond the environmental

dimension, along with the pedagogical conditions that supported sustained

investigation. Therefore, despite the research limitations in producing generability,

the resulting contemporary knowledge that was a result of the discussions from the

research is valid, with potential to transfer aspects of the findings to a range of early

childhood contexts.

3.12 Chapter Summary

In this chapter, I identified action research as the methodology for this study,

with a specific focus on teacher-researcher action research projects. Together with a

critical perspective, action research was identified as an appropriate methodology

used to explore ECEfS in the dimension of socio-political sustainability through

project work. The following four chapters present data and analysis from the study,

framed by critical incidents identified in the children‘s responses to exploring

poverty.

Chapter 4: Critical Incident 1: Children‘s Shift in Understandings 143

Chapter 4: Critical Incident 1: Children’s Shift in Understandings

4.1 Introduction

This chapter presents and discusses Critical Incident 1 which took place in the

initial synthesising phase of Week 1 in the action research cycle. This first Critical

Incident is about how children‘s understandings of poverty were challenged to

become more inclusive of broader understandings of poverty. First, in Section 4.2, I

will describe the synthesising phase in the research and the context that served as a

catalyst for the investigation. In this section, I use data to illustrate the children‘s

initial understandings of poverty. Then, in Section 4.3, I introduce Critical Incident 1,

and elaborate on how children appeared to demonstrate a shift in their constructions

of poverty from an initial cause-effect understanding to broader understandings

which included themes of exclusion and inclusion in society. I specifically explore

representations of children‘s beginning understandings of poverty.

The following sections, Section 4.4 and 4.5 elaborate on how Critical Incident

1 responds to Research Question 2; the pedagogies that support children in exploring

understandings of poverty. The first pedagogical strategy is analysed in Section 4.4

which explores the roles of both educator and child as co-researchers. This is an

important aspect of this research, where children are viewed as active, as opposed to

passive participants. This is then followed by Section 4.5; which presents a second

pedagogical strategy concerned with ways to make children‘s voices visible in issues

of socio-political sustainability. These pedagogical methods involved the use of the

visual arts as a medium by which children could represent their ideas, and the use of

a variety of open-ended questioning techniques in order for children to critically

reflect on their understandings of poverty. Next Section 4.6 explored ways to create

144

Chapter 4: Critical Incident 1: Children‘s Shift in Understandings

sustained shared thinking (Siraj-Blatchford, 2012) or spaces where both teacher-

researcher and child were engaged in conversations that extended the narrative

through which children formulated understandings about poverty. Section 4.7

analyses my interchanging roles as a teacher-researcher in supporting children‘s

explorations of poverty. Each section is interwoven with teacher-researcher

reflections to depict the importance of my changing role in the action research cycle

as both a facilitator and protagonist. Finally, this chapter ends with Section 4.8 which

gives a succinct summary of this chapter on Critical Incident 1.

4.2 Synthesising Phase: Context for Critical Incident 1

This Critical Incident 1 took place in the synthesising phase of the Project

Approach cycle (Helm & Katz, 2011). Prior to the synthesising phase, was the

introduction phase, where I had introduced children to the topic of poverty via the

use of age-appropriate critical texts. The synthesising phase of the Project Approach

is characterised as a period where children explore a topic of interest and

demonstrate curiosity with in-depth investigations (Helm & Katz, 2011). These

investigations can include researching information using books, carrying out real-life

experiments, or going on an excursion. In the synthesising phase in this study,

children were exploring the relationship between employment and money as a result

of their responses to the provocation provided by me as teacher-researcher. This

provocation involved me reading the book Maddi‟s Fridge (Brandt, 2014) to the

whole Kindergarten class. Maddi‟s Fridge is a children‘s picture book that explores

the concept of poverty and hunger through two main characters who are best friends.

In this text the character, Sophia, always has a full fridge of nutritious food at her

home while the other character, Maddi, always has an empty fridge at home. In the

first week of the synthesising phase, following the book reading in the previous


week, I invited children to engage with me in a brainstorming session putting

forward their initial reactions to the text. In the brainstorming session, we first re-

visited Maddi‟s Fridge again by reflecting on some of the illustrations in the text and

focussing on the visual provocations in the book. We took time to examine and

elaborate on two focus provocations. The first one involved the character Sophia

realising that her best friend does not always have food in her fridge, and the second,

a dilemma that Sophia faced when Maddi asks her to keep this revelation a secret

from others. The class were enthusiastic to share their thoughts about Maddi and

Sophie. To give focus to our discussions, I used focussed open-ended questions.

These questions and children‘s responses included:

Teacher-researcher question: What did you think of this story, and about the difference

between Sophia and Maddi’s fridge?

Ava: People who didn‟t have enough food, don‟t have enough

money. They want to save money so that they don‟t have to

go to work.

Ella: When my mum and dad don‟t have enough money, they go to

the bank. Maybe they need to go to the bank

(Ava and Ella, 7.11.16)

Teacher-researcher question: What about Maddi, what do you think about her

fridge not having food in it?

Jon: Maybe they weren‟t working hard enough. They were always

at home in the story. We could send their kids to kindy and

set an obstacle course, so their mums can go to work.

Ronny: Maybe they wanted to save money to get more important

stuff like the adult things like computers and phones.

(Jon and Ronny, 7.11.16)

The children‘s initial responses appeared to include the notion that poverty is a

result of people simply not having enough employment or savings accrued. The

consequences of people experiencing a lack of employment or savings, then results

in people unable to have affordances such as food. These initial views highlight

146


children‘s understandings that poverty is measured by one‘s employment and the

financial wealth it produces. This understanding aligns with findings in Weinger‘s

(2000) study, where young children aged 5-14 years, from both middle and low

income demographics, expressed a cause-effect understanding in regards to the

relationship between employment and wealth. The children in Weinger‘s (2000)

study expressed oversimplified views of people who experienced poverty without

consideration of other life factors that go beyond employment or financial wealth.

Furthermore, the findings of Weinger‘s (2000) study showed that the young children

reasoned that people who experienced poverty were lazy compared to those who

were more affluent. They assumed people with wealth were more hardworking and

able to hold employment. In addition, Weinger‘s (2000) study also explored how

children from low and middle income families perceived the relationship between a

person‘s socio-economic class and their friendship choices. These understandings

showing cause-effect views of the relationship between employment and wealth were

also found in Hammond et al.‘s (2015) study. Hammond et al. (2015) explored how

children aged 6-7 years, from low socioeconomic backgrounds, viewed wealthy and

poor families‘ access to food. The children in this study viewed poverty as a result of

laziness or lack of effort in employment. In data from the studies presented above, a

key theme is that money is accessible, whether by means of ―saving‖, ―go[ing] to the

bank‖ or ‗go[ing] to work‖. In the present study, this line of thinking positions the

book character, Maddi (and by extension, people generally), as individually and

wholly responsible for their circumstances and able to rectify issues of access to food

or lack of it with relative ease. Here, the children offered solutions to poverty and a

resulting lack of access to food based on the actions of adults in their own lives,

perhaps reflective of middle-class values of hard-work, self-discipline, thrift and


ambition. This cause-effect thinking has its foundations in the idea of meritocracy

(Tait, 2016). Tait (2016) suggests that meritocracy is the belief that, opportunities for

a successful and positive life are within reach for anyone regardless of factors such

as gender, race, and class, provided one works hard for it. However, what this idea of

meritocracy does not consider is the social context and the meanings and powers that

are constructed within it. Tait (2016) takes the example of schools, and the

meritocratic belief that one‘s success in school is a direct result of personal effort and

hard-work. This cause-effect understanding, does not take into account factors of a

student‘s background, for example, the difference in social capital typically existing

between middle, working, and under-class backgrounds (Tait, 2016). The student

from a middle-class background is most likely to have the cultural language and

beliefs that are reflective of the dominant beliefs of society, which in turn are also

indirectly the beliefs reflected by the school institution. Therefore, to suggest that

schools are spaces of meritocracy is a myth (Tait, 2016). In the context of this

research, children‘s views about people experiencing poverty as being able to gain

easy access to money via effort, can be linked to this notion of meritocracy; the idea

that money is accessible provided you put effort into gaining it.

Using a critical lens, however, access to money does not simply equate to

putting optimum effort into it. Other factors in the social context deeply influence the

barriers or opportunities to this access. Using Tait‘s (2016) example of social class,

experiencing poverty does not simply mean having lack of access to economic assets

such as money. Social class, or in this case degrees of poverty can be manifested in

many ways through the social markers they possess such as the way they dress, the

locations of their homes, and the language that they use (Tait, 2016). Desired social

148


markers are those markers that hold power in the society in which they live and

which, indirectly, determine participation in society.

At the end of the first week of the synthesising phase, with a broader

understanding underpinned by the idea of meritocracy, I reflected on the children‘s

initial understandings of poverty. The children‘s simplified cause-effect

understandings of poverty were prominent and in response I intentionally planned for

learning opportunities to broaden the children‘s understandings. I now elaborate on

Critical Incident 1 as a result of my teacher-researcher reflections and explain my

resulting pedagogical choices.

4.3 Critical Incident 1: Exclusion to Inclusion

In response to my interpretation of the children‘s initial understandings of

poverty gleaned via engagement with the text Maddi‟s Fridge, I next chose the

critical text Those Shoes (Boelts, 2007) to support broadening children‘s ideas of

poverty. The text Those Shoes was introduced to the whole class. Introducing this

text coincided with finishing up the children‘s exploration of the book Maddi‟s

Fridge, which resulted in providing the children opportunities to be challenged with

a different perspective to their initial cause-effect understandings of poverty and

employment. In the story Those Shoes, the main character, Jeremy, wants to own a

particular type of shoe that he perceives to be popular and on-trend in his

community. Despite Jeremy‘s grandmother having some savings, she is unable to

afford those particular shoes. This, in turn, makes Jeremy feel sad and upset. As the

teacher-researcher, my intention around introducing this book was to highlight how

people who are in the work-force, but do not have financial savings, may still remain

financially insecure. Through focussed open-ended questions, I aimed to create

conditions whereby the children could potentially develop broader understanding of


the relationship between employment, income, and consumerism. Furthermore, the

children were able to relate the notion of consumerism through sharing their thoughts

during whole-class discussion on the differences between a ‗need‘ and a ‗want‘

through their individualised experiences. A sample of my recording of the children‘s

comments is shown in Figure 4.1 below. This is followed by specific examples of

some of the children‘s expressed thoughts.

Figure 4.1. The difference between a need and a want.

Ava: A want is something like you want a Pokemon toy … not a

need. A need is something important you need … like a hat

for outdoors.

Jon: Want is … I want it because I just want it … I‟m really

jealous (said in an angry tone and with hands crossed) …

Need is something you already have and you need it because

it is special … like I need something for my collage.

(Ava and Jon, 14.11.16)

These excerpts show children exploring the concepts of want and need by

referring to specific examples of a ‗want‘ such as ―a Pokemon toy‖ and a ‗need‘ such

150


as ―a hat for outdoors‖. Both Ava and Jon expressed an understanding that ‗needs‘

are important and special in comparison to a ‗want‘. For example, Ava

acknowledged that current pop culture toys are not a ‗need‘ and linked this to her

understanding that a ‗need‘ is something more important and integral to one‘s

physical wellbeing, such as a hat for sun protection. This was reiterated by Jon when

he expressed that a ‗want‘ is a personal desire and used bodily kinaesthetic actions

(i.e., tone of voice, crossed hands) to express that a ‗want‘ is linked to jealousy, a

powerful emotion, as opposed to something that is simply important in day-to-day

activities.

A critical point in the exploration of the text Those Shoes was when the

children began to make connections between how these ‗wants‘ which could also be

considered as social markers (Ridge, 2006) could exclude some people from social

group participation, as seen here in one child‘s comment:

Kara: Well, yes … cause Jeremy and the other boy always only played

together… and then when he did have those shoes … then he

played with those who had the same shoes.

(14.11.16)

This comment shows awareness of how social markers including possessions

determine boundaries for inclusion and exclusion; in this case, who has access to

play and why access is denied or granted dependent on access to social markers such

as popular brand of shoes. Awareness of equity regardless of circumstances was

expressed by another child in this way:

Jon: Yes it doesn‟t matter poor, rich, everyone should be the same.

(14.1.16)

To further illustrate children‘s emerging understandings, an extract of my

teacher-researcher‘s reflections is given below. This particular reflection was


important in this project as it signified to me a growth in children‘s understandings of

poverty. Children‘s initial understandings of poverty were those revolving around

notions of wealth and employment. However, for this specific experience with the

text Those Shoes, children in this study were supported to develop a wider

understanding of poverty that went beyond a narrow conception of poverty as cause-

effect and its relationship to employment. In my reflections, I wrote:

After questioning children through scaffolded questions, the children

especially Kara had highlighted the notion of inclusiveness. The fact that the

children who wore stripey shoes, would only play with them (those who

initially did not have these stripey shoes in the beginning of the story, but

then had those stripey shoes in the later part of the story) once they had the

same „social appearance‟. Kara also clearly uses labels: poor and rich.

(Teacher-Researcher Reflection, 14.11.16)

Referring back to the findings of Weinger‘s (2000) study with children aged 5-

14 years from middle and low-income backgrounds, it was the children from low-

income backgrounds who were more able to understand the emotional state of those

who were experiencing poverty compared to the children from middle-class

backgrounds. Weinger (2000) suggested that the reason for this was the first-hand

experience of poverty for poorer children. However, the children in the present study

showed that first-hand experience of poverty was not a pre-requisite for

understanding.

As noted in Chapters 1 and 3, the centre in which the present research was

undertaken was located in a relatively affluent suburb classified as high-

socioeconomic according to the Australian Government‘s Socio-Economic Indexes

for Areas index (SEIFA) based on 2011 census data (Australian Bureau of Statistics

[ABS], 2011). Based on this categorisation, although the research site was situated in

a relatively high socio-economic status, an assumption should not be made that all

152


children attending the centre were from affluent family backgrounds. However, the

children participating in this study were able to demonstrate broader understandings

about impacts of poverty including social inclusion or exclusion. These findings

appear to show that the children were able to identify social marginalisation and

resulting emotional states as a consequence of poverty, despite not having first-hand

experience of poverty.

This observation that the children in this study were able to understand poverty

in ways extending beyond cause-effect was of interest when analysing the data

because these findings appear to challenge Lister‘s (2008) concept of ‗othering‘ the

poor. Lister (2008) suggests that ‗othering‘ takes place when those who do not

experience poverty hold inaccurate beliefs about those who do experience poverty.

An example of ‗othering‘, for example, could include children‘s justifications that

those in poverty deserve no support due to their own laziness or lack of agency. This

sense of ‗othering‘ also emerged in MacNaughton‘s (2000) studies on gender

identities in early childhood contexts. Children‘s gender identities are formed as a

result of socially-constructed notions of gender they observe and experience in their

everyday lives. This includes early childhood context in which there is potential for

gendered play spaces and the reinforcement of gender stereotypes by early childhood

educators (MacNaughton, 2000). Narrow classifications of gender can then influence

how children construct, enact and resist particular gender identities and how they

‗other‘ peers based on gender choices (MacNaughton, 2000). In relation to poverty,

‗othering‘ can occur through simplistic ideas that do not take into account broader

complexities. In this research, the children‘s emergent understandings showed an

awareness that poverty is more than an economic problem as identified by Kara

when she reasoned: ―Well, yes … cause Jeremy and the other boy always only played


together… and then when he did have those shoes … then he played with those who

had the same shoes‖. The focus on social implications, as seen here and above,

suggests that young children are capable of making sense of poverty from a range of

perspectives that reflect the complexities of the issue beyond the considerations of

their own socio-economic position.

Broader understandings of poverty embrace social aspects such as

inclusiveness. According to Camfield (2010), inclusiveness involves a sense of

belonging and acceptance in the wider community for those who are socially

oppressed due to experiences of poverty. Camfield‘s (2010) study of 100 children

from poverty-stricken parts of Ethiopia showed that children would rather have a

sense of belonging and acceptance in their communities than have access to basic

needs such as food and shelter. Therefore, in relation to the current study, it was

noteworthy that children from an area characterised by socio-economic advantage

could readily understand that poverty can include or exclude a person‘s participation

and inclusion in society. In the initial stages of the synthesising phase of this project,

the growth in understanding about links between poverty and inclusiveness was

critical given the children‘s initial understandings of poverty (as explored in the

impetus Maddi‟s Fridge), revolved around ideas of jobs, income, and consumerism.

A shift occurred for some children following the introduction of the text Those

Shoes; a key pedagogical decision based on observations and analysis of the

children‘s initial understandings.

4.3.1 Understanding inclusiveness

Children‘s broadening thoughts and ideas on inclusiveness are exemplified in

the following excerpt:

154


Jorge: Yeah. Cause we all need to be kind to one another, and it doesn‟t

matter what we wear right?.

(14.11.16)

A further example of children engaging with the concept of inclusiveness was

when children explored the critical text Rich Cat, Poor Cat (Waber, 1963). This

exploration was carried out in Week 3 after the introduction of Maddi‟s Fridge and

the subsequent brainstorming session, and the intentional reading of Those Shoes and

open-ended focused questioning. As detailed above, at this stage of the action

research cycle, the children were beginning to express understandings of poverty that

went beyond the initial conceptions of cause-effect shown in Week 1 of this research.

The theme of Rich Cat, Poor Cat is literally implied by the title. Notions of wealth

and poverty are explored through the primary characters of two cats; one rich and

one poor. This text was first read aloud to the whole-class and then examined

critically and collaboratively by the children with the teacher-researcher. This

entailed skills of inference in supporting the children to understand when themes and

ideas are implied, but not directly stated. Early years researcher, Phillips (2008),

labels this type of reading as transformative storytelling (p. 2). Transformative

storytelling is when stories are intentionally elaborated in ways that bring children‘s

attention to potential unjust and unfair scenarios in the storyline. To enable children

to extend their thinking beyond the representations evident in the text Rich Cat, Poor

Cat, focussed and open-ended questioning was employed. Prompting questions were

asked intentionally, to support the children opportunities for broader thinking and

discussions on poverty that were not necessarily represented in the text or images

within the book. For example, some of the reflections that I considered important to

highlight included how Poor Cat may have felt when it was frightened away from

public spaces and the impact this had on Poor Cat‘s emotional wellbeing. And, why


did the public not like Poor Cat but favoured Rich Cat? Some of the focussed

questions played out, in practice, thus:

Teacher-researcher question: On this page 12, it says some cats have their own

special towel, special hairbrush, special dish,

special chair … Yet there isn’t anything very

special in Scat’s life … Why do you think poor

cat didn’t have anything special; how did that

make poor cat feel?

Teacher-researcher question: Some cats go through life surrounded by happy

and friendly faces … Why is it that Scat has to

look for these friendly faces? Where were his

friends? Why wasn’t he surrounded by happy

faces? (Referring to page 10)

(Teacher-Researcher, 21.11.16)

In response to Rich Cat Poor Cat, excerpts from children‘s conversations were

collated with particular focus on those in which themes of inclusiveness and

belonging were evident, as seen in the following exchange:

Marginalisation based on social appearance was also referenced in Mac‘s

drawings. In Figure 4.2 below, Mac has done a painting that constituted his

critique of the text Rich Cat, Poor Cat after it was re-read again to him and his

peers by me. After the story telling session, Mac was invited to do a painting of

his thoughts about the text. In his painting, Mac expressed his understanding of

how Poor Cat must feel as a result of not having an ‗accepted‘ social

appearance. The accompanying description was as follows:

Mac: He is feeling blue. Blue means sad cause‟ he doesn‟t have an

owner. Without an owner you know, he looks quite shaggy.

(20.11.16)

156


Figure 4.2. Drawing of ‗Scat Cat‘ the poor cat.

Another child also shared some thoughts of inclusiveness via a painting. I then

referred back to his painting and checked back with him for clarity in the following

exchange:

Teacher-researcher: You said earlier he might be jealous. What would he be

jealous of Ravi?

Ravi: Yeah of course. They (Rich Cat) have nice things, nice

holidays, and nice food. Then Scat Cat (Poor Cat) has none.

So he might be jealous that he too wants to have those

things.

(21.11.16)

Going back to the first extract, Mac positions Rich Cat as being responsible for

the inclusion and belonging of ―shaggy cats (Poor Cat)‖. Poor Cat is absolved of

individual responsibility for a lack of inclusion, as seen when Mac said ―it‘s not their

fault, you know‖. This positioning differs from Ravi‘s thoughts expressed in his

painting. In the second extract, Ravi points to the link between inclusion and

emotional wellbeing. According to Ravi, because Poor Cat does not possess the

―nice things‖ that Rich Cat has, Poor Cat may feel a sense of ―jealousy‖ and thus


possibly resent not having these ―nice things‖ or worse, he may even begrudge Rich

Cat for his possessions.

These young children have shown that they hold capacity to understand

abstract issues of socio-political sustainability such as poverty. For the children to be

able to critique and analyse the characters of Rich Cat and Poor Cat and link it to

social inclusiveness or exclusiveness demonstrates that real world issues such

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) can be explored in

the context of early childhood classrooms. When children have opportunities to

explore and express their thoughts on real-world issues such as poverty, children

begin understanding that they are part of wider communities and realise they can

influence the decisions and understandings of others (Hagglund & Pramling

Samuelsson, 2009). Another example of children‘s critical commentary on socio-

political issues is evidenced in the exchange below which was part of the children‘s

discussion on Rich Cat, Poor Cat:

Ann: He is sad because he has no friends, look there is a person

feeding him now… he will be happy soon (Line 1)

Teacher-researcher: Why does he have no friends? (Line 2)

Ann: Cause he doesn‟t have friends. No one wants to be his

friend. He is dirty, and the other cats are always clean (Line

3)

Teacher-researcher: Why wouldn‟t the clean cats be friends with him? (Line 4)

Ann: He has to be clean, if not no one wants to go next to him.

Then they would get dirty too (Line 5)

Teacher-researcher: What if he was clean too? Would he be able to be friends

with the other clean cats? (Line 6)

Ann: Yeah, he would… they all would be friends (Line 7)

Teacher-researcher: But even if they were dirty; that doesn‟t mean he is not a

nice friend (Line 8)

Ann: Yeah, but being nice and clean is good, and not be dirty and

hungry like Scat Cat. (Line 9)

(21.11.16)

158


In the example above, Ann is expressing understandings about her ideas of

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) towards those

experiencing poverty. Based on the conversation, Ann‘s perspective is that Poor Cat

is sad because he has no friends due to his dirty appearance. Here, Ann suggests that

the characteristics of being clean and being nice are both required for inclusion to

occur. Meanings of ―good‖ are attached to sameness in terms of both Poor Cat and

Rich Cat demonstrating cleanliness and characteristics of being ―nice‖. By the same

token, meanings of exclusion are attached to the idea that difference in the form of

being ―dirty‖ is undesirable and transferrable to others by mere proximity; “no one

wants to go next to him … they would get dirty too”. This binary understanding of

children, the difference between clean versus dirty, or good versus bad is a result of

their development in organising understandings of their world. Glover (2016)

suggests that when children organise their world through these categories (girl and

boy, good and bad, clean and dirty), they also learn the messages that are attached to

these binaries. These messages that children receive will continue to influence the

meanings or judgements that children make on these binaries (Glover, 2016).

Therefore, if the social context gives messages to children that being ‗clean‘ or

having a desired social appearance is perceived as good, then children will continue

to value the ‗clean‘ and continue to outcast the ‗dirty‘ based on these accepted

values. A lack of distinction between physical and emotional-based characteristics

shows how, despite some growth in broader understandings of poverty during this

phase of the project, some children continue to draw on constructions of poverty that

position individuals experiencing poverty as responsible for their own circumstances

and, in this case, also responsible for their resulting appearance. Thus, it is important

in situations such as these that I, as a teacher-researcher, critically reflect on the


potential messages children construct and find ways to expand on that binary

thinking (rich and poor, clean and dirty) to be more inclusive of diversity and to

support children to go beyond categorising others based on appearances.

4.4 Children and teachers as co-researchers

The exchange shown in the extract directly above shows that children can

explore issues beyond environmental domains of sustainability to include social and

economic domains, and the educator‘s role in such learning experiences is crucial.

Ann was able to share her theory on poverty because she was part of a dialogue that

enabled her to share her thoughts and justify her thinking. The notion of being a co-

researcher and co-learner with children, is something that I was very conscious of,

particularly as one of the aims of this research was to ensure that the research was

done with children as opposed to on children as explained in Chapter 3. As a co-

researcher with children, I tried always to be an active listener (Rinaldi, 2006), as

observed in the conversation with Ann. This pedagogy of listening means that

children‘s thoughts and ideas are heard instead of being dismissed and replaced with

knowledge from a presumed ‗more knowledgeable‘ person (Rinaldi, 2006). In my

role as the teacher-researcher and employing a pedagogy of listening, it was possible

for me to challenge Ann to a higher-order level of thinking through sharing my own

thoughts as depicted in line 8 (on the previous page). Here, I had pointed out that

friendship does not have to be based on social appearances. Ann then responds by

agreeing that friendships not based on social appearances are possible, yet most

likely not probable. It matters that the question was posed, regardless of the child‘s

response, because it enabled me insight into Ann‘s thinking and current level of

understanding. This created entry points for further discussions. At the point of the

conversation, my aim was not to dispute Ann‘s thinking; rather, to ensure that the

160


children, as co-researchers, had time and space to participate in a shared dialogue,

that enabled them to be inquisitive, to seek clarification and most importantly to be

heard. As suggested by Siraj-Blatchford (2008) social sustainability is about issues

related to the broader political or structural concerns that affect the quality of

people‘s lives and their social inclusion into societies. These issues of socio-political

sustainability despite rarely entering the context of the early years, need to be

introduced in the early years because young children are already immersed in a

culture of taken-for-granted assumptions that privilege people from affluent Western

countries (Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009; Siraj-Blatchford, 2008). Based

on the children‘s shared dialogue and thinking such as the conversation above

between Ann and me, it was important that I made informed pedagogical decisions

about what ideas I would challenge to diminish stereotypical thinking and bias

regarding the notion of outward signifiers of wealth relation to social inclusion and

exclusion. To me, this was a socio-political sustainability issue as stereotypical

thinking and bias towards outward signifiers can potentially lead to social exclusion

of others, particularly those experiencing poverty. I saw this as important because

findings from Weinger‘s (2000) study showed that children were most likely to form

friendships with peers who were from the same socio-economic class due to

sameness. If children are using social appearances or other visible social markers to

determine friendships, it is pertinent that they are exposed to conversations about

issues such as themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO,

2010), in order to develop a wider understanding of their world and how they and

others are positioned. Some of the experiences that can be extended in an early

childhood context to expose children to issues of judgement based on social

appearance is through transformative storytelling (Phillips, 2008) or critical role


playing. In this context, I would highlight the injustice one may experience solely

due to discrimination on the colour of one‘s skin, gender, or socio-economic status.

These exposures to broader socio-political issues are important to share with

children. This enables children to build understanding about diverse social

communities and how social markers in societies including experiences of poverty

can influence one‘s access and participation (Saunders, 2011).

4.5 Making Children’s Voices Visible in Understanding Inclusiveness

Observations and reflections on Critical Incident 1, have led me to question

how it is possible for the children to show emerging understanding about issues

related to socio-political aspects of sustainability. Concepts of inclusion and the

power related to access to social resources were highlighted in co-constructed

conversations between the children and me. These types of conversations with

children where notions of power and inclusion are explored were important, as they

enabled the children time and space to be supported to challenge taken-for-granted

meanings and practices that shape society. When educators actively listen to

children, particularly when they are making meaning of the diverse world around

them, the educator is acknowledging the space for dialogue is opened to ―Others‖

(Dahlberg & Moss, 2005, p. 100 ), where the uncertainty of thoughts that enter the

space are viewed as possibilities to finding new meanings. Glover (2016) suggests

when adults avoid children‘s attempts and questions at making-meaning about the

diversity of their world, adults continue to make taken-for-granted knowledge and

understandings the normative of life. Hence, in this context, if adults do not attempt

at listening to children‘s meanings about poverty, we are not enabling children

opportunities to question their understandings of these issues that are taking place in

society. As a result, the learning space of the children then becomes biased towards

162


their own taken-for-granted understandings and, we enable children to continue to

hold on to attached meanings that society has given to issues linked with race, gender

and social class. Scarlet and Fargher (2016) suggest that to avoid this bias, a place

and space for listening and incorporating different ways of understanding is essential

in order to rethink, reshape and reconfigure pedagogical practices.

The medium of the arts is an example of a pedagogical practice that holds

much promise as an anti-bias approach (McArdle & Ohlsen, 2016). Time and space

for dialogue and reflection through conversations and arts-based learning experiences

create opportunities for children to connect themes of inclusiveness, fairness,

difference and belonging to their everyday lived experiences and circumstances

within their own communities (Hatzigianni, Miller, & Quinones, 2016). In the

context of this research, specifically in the medium of arts, there was a genuine

shared power between the children and me, as I had little experience in this medium.

McArdle and Ohlsen (2016) suggest that the art pedagogies allow for these active

understandings in democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010)

because the relationship of educator and child are not hierarchical, particularly if the

educator has little to no-expertise in art. In this sense, the educator could not transmit

their expertise or knowledge to the learner. Therefore, in this initial phase of the

project, there was evidence of shifts in understanding for some children from narrow

to broader constructions of poverty. According to Hammond et al. (2015), the

opportunity to explore different viewpoints of poverty is important as it challenges

misconceptions and stereotypical thinking that children can have towards those who

experience poverty.

The children‘s developing skills in inferring more subtle themes in texts and

imagery continued over the course of the project. Due to the regular practice of co-


constructing knowledge together with me, the children began to demonstrate agency

in leading critical discussions and exploring through play, issues associated with

poverty. To illustrate this, I draw on the example of a teacher aide sharing with me

that she had aired a short video of the classic fairy tale, The Elves and The

Shoemaker with the children. The teacher aide reported that the children immediately

started to share their thoughts about the poor elves (based on their tattered clothes

and lack of shoes) and their relationships with the shoemaker, and how they could all

remain friends despite their differences (Teacher-Aide, 30.11.16). That is, the

children showed emerging understanding that acceptance and friendship are not

determined by the difference in social appearance or apparent signifiers of social

class.

Other instances where the children showed emerging socio-political awareness

were evident in their drawings. Take the example, below in Figure 4.3 which shows a

poster that was authored and illustrated by one of the children, Geata, during the

culmination phase of this project. The culmination phase in the Project Approach is

when children share and express their refined understandings of meanings, in this

case, the meanings of poverty as a result of participating in this project (Helm &

Katz, 2011). The culmination phase of this project, took place in Week 4. After I had

sought the children‘s suggestions on how to share their new meanings and

understandings, Geata suggested that they could prepare posters and hang these on

the gate entrance of the centre to share with the Kindergarten families. When

constructing this poster, Geata sought support from me to spell specific words for her

poster. For example, I supported Geata by phonetically sounding out chosen words

so that she could transcribe these onto her poster. “It‟s not okay to be naughty to

others or make them feel left out” was the message Geata wanted to share with her

164


Kindergarten community, as a result from this project. This message was chosen by

Geata, after weeks of engaging with different critical texts and engaging with themes

of poverty via mediums of communication such as the arts and play. These mediums

of play, drawing, clay and shared dialogues gave Geata opportunities to explore her

understandings of poverty, and reflect upon and refine these understandings while

engaged in weeks of exploration and investigation of meaning.

Figure 4.3. It‘s not okay!.

Socio-political awareness of inclusiveness and exclusiveness was not limited

only to the culmination phase, but was evident throughout the whole Project

Approach cycle. Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5 are other examples where understandings

of inclusion and exclusion were shown by children through their drawings.

Figure 4.4 and Figure 4.5 were drawn by two different children, on different

days after the book Mutt Dog was read to the whole class during Week 3 of this


project. Mutt Dog (King, 2004) is the tale of a dog that experiences homelessness but

longs for a sense of belonging to someone.

Figure 4.4. A drawing of a girl and a dog, inspired from the book Mutt Dog.

Figure 4.4 was drawn by Kara. The accompanying commentary for this picture

explains that:

Kara: This is a sad girl with an empty home. And this is her dog,

which just has a bone… but nothing else.

166


Figure 4.5. A homeless person inspired by the book Mutt Dog.

Figure 4.5 was drawn by Lola. In Lola‘s drawing her meanings were summed

up when she explained of Mutt Dog:

Lola: He has no home, no one wants to be his friend because

he is different and has no home. Someone wants to steal

his clothes, but he wants to be safe, all the time,

anytime.

The common themes from these drawings by Kara and Lola are that they have

interpreted their characters to have no homes, just like the character Mutt Dog of the

same titled book. Both children also highlight, how the experience of being homeless

can be ―empty‖ and ―different‖. These insights via their drawings and explanations,

show these children‘s understandings of how being bereft of possessions or homes

can lead to a feeling of disconnection and a sense of not belonging to a community.

The opportunity for children to think critically on socio-political issues such as

poverty was a result of the nature of this action research project carried out in this


particular site. Through action research, children were able to be a part of the shared

dialogue in deconstructing how some ‗realities‘ in life were marginalising to some

and yet not to others (Kemmis, 2009; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2001). In the case of

Critical Incident 1, children were beginning to develop understandings that ‗social

markers‘ that were considered valuable in society such as social appearances

exemplified by the case of Rich Cat, Poor Cat and possessions such as owning a

specific type of shoe such as those depicted in Those Shoes. The children began to

realise that these social markers determined a person‘s inclusion in or exclusion from

society.

The children‘s explorations of poverty as a key socio-political issue appears to

have also been shared with their parents at home. Two parents, on separate

occasions, shared with me that their children had started to talk about the project at

home. They shared how relevant they thought it was, particularly for people coming

from a country that is different from Australia (Parent Comment, 16.11.16). This

parent comment highlights children‘s agency, and their capability to share

information and influence others within their social worlds.

4.6 Sustained Shared Thinking as Entry Ways to Beginning Conversations

with Children

A key aspect of this research, in responding to Research Question 2, was to

understand the teacher‘s pedagogy in exploring issues of socio-political sustainability

in an early childhood context. In response to Research Question 2, What pedagogies

support young children to participate in investigations of poverty within a socio-

political framework of sustainability? it is important to understand and reflect on the

teaching strategies, methods or the „how to‟ of introducing socio-political

sustainability in early childhood teaching and learning. The resources and strategies

168


that I employed in Critical Incident 1 ranged from reading critical texts with the

children, using the method of storytelling to introduce issues such as democracy,

peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) and initiating conversations

through focussed and open-ended questioning to create sustained shared thinking

(Siraj-Blatchford, 2012) between the children and me. According to Siraj-Blatchford

(2012), sustained shared thinking takes place when both teacher and child become

co-learners and co-researchers as opposed to the teacher transmitting knowledge or

facts to the child.

In this project, the children were invited into spaces of sustained shared

thinking in order for me to hear their voices and understand their thinking. Children‘s

voices on socio-political issues of sustainability remain lacking in research in early

childhood education (Hawkins, 2010), thus limiting the voices of children on issues

beyond environmental concerns such as fairness, inclusion, differences and

belonging. In relation to Critical Incident 1, a variety of teaching strategies such as

critical questioning (Dahlberg & Moss, 2005) and active listening (Rinaldi, 2006;

Smidt, 2013) were intentionally used by me. These specific teaching strategies were

used to support and extend children‘s emerging understandings of poverty and its

connection to material wealth to include other concepts such as the relationships

between poverty, social participation and marginalisation. Besides the utilisation of

teaching strategies, resources and props to support learning experiences, it is also

critical to examine my own personal understandings of my professional role in

supporting children‘s understandings of poverty.

4.7 The Role of Teacher-Researcher as Facilitator and Protagonist

The role of the teacher in the classroom is never straightforward. It is flexible

and interchangeable based on different stages of a project and different meaning


making threads that emerge. An example of my interchanging role as a teacher-

researcher is illustrated below. In this context, after reading Rich Cat, Poor Cat

(Waber, 1963), Mac and I were conversing about the notion that the character Scat

Cat was potentially marginalised from forming friendships with other rich cats, due

to Scat Cat‘s outer appearance. Here, the focus of analysis is my interchanging role

as the teacher-researcher.

Teacher-researcher: … Why would you think Scat Cat does not have friends …

just because of their shaggy coats? (Line 1)

Mac: Well … I don‟t know … but it‟s making those shaggy cats

feel so sad, and lonely, and it‟s not okay to feel like so alone

and also scared. (Line 2)

Teacher-researcher: Yes I agree Mac. Well, how about those soft cats? Maybe

they should try being friends with shaggy cats? (Line 3)

Mac: They wouldn‟t because they‟re too clean, and are scared

they might get too dirty from hanging out with the shaggy

cats. (Line 4)

Teacher-researcher: Hmmm … but that doesn‟t mean they still can‟t be friends or

have fun with a shaggy cat, what do you think? (Line 5)

Mac: Yeah, they can. But most times soft cats hang around with

soft cats, and shaggy cats with shaggy cats. That‟s why the

shaggy cats always get angry, because they want to be soft

too … but they can‟t because they have no owners. (Line 6)

Teacher-researcher: And then they are sad too, cause they want to hang out with

the soft cats. But the soft cats won‟t let them? (Line 7)

Mac: Yeah … and it‟s not their fault you know. Shaggy cats want

to hang out, but the soft cat‟s won‟t, cause their too scared

to get dirty. (Line 8)

Teacher-researcher: What could we do for cats that are shaggy? (Line 9)

Mac: They all should have a home, an owner to love them. They

just want to be happy, and not be lonely I think. (Line 10)

Teacher-researcher: Thanks for sharing that with me Mac, I‟m so glad we had

this chat. (Line 11)

(Mac, 21.11.26)

In this conversation, my role switched from that of an initiator of a topic to that

of a facilitator (Mackewn, 2008) as seen in the different types of questions used in

170


the dialogue. This changing of roles can be seen beginning with my first question in

line 1. The first question in line 1, shows me asking direct yet open-ended question,

where I had initiated Mac‘s thoughts on the reasoning behind Poor Cat‟s lack of

friends, “Why would you think Scat Cat has no friends …”. This appears in contrast

to the question in line 7, “… But the soft cats won‟t let them?”, where I am acting as

a subtle facilitator with a less direct or specific question to tap into emotion. The

reason for this facilitating moment as opposed to an initiating moment, was because I

had taken Mac‘s theory of why shaggy cats were angry and sad (as a result of not

being able to have friendships with soft cats due to their social appearance as

represented in line 6) and extended on his theory by asking a question to explore the

link between social appearances and acceptance by peers. I did not bring in new

theory into the discussion, nor did I discredit Mac‘s theory of how social markers

influence a sense of belonging. Instead it was ‗unpacked‘ by me through a question

(represented as line 7), in order to encourage Mac to give more depth to his theory. A

variety of strategies such as questions, provocations, and clarifications were

proposed to Mac, to facilitate his thinking. According to Fusco (2012), there are

three types of questioning strategies that can be used within a community of learners.

These types of questions are: literal, inferential, and metacognitive questions. Literal

questions are ‗closed ended‘ questions that require specific information, facts or a

simple yes or no response. Inferential questions are more ‗open-ended‘ questions to

stimulate responses that go beyond the text, or responses that relate to not-so-obvious

information that was not explicitly stated in the text itself. Finally, metacognitive

questions are the type of questions that require the learner to reflect on their own

authentic learning and thinking as a result of the specific question that is being asked

(Fusco, 2012). To illustrate how I had used these different types of questions in this


research, I will again return to the dialogue above to illustrate how the choice of

questions can support children to be co-constructors of meanings in dialogue. Here,

Fusco‘s (2012) description of the different types of questions will be used as a

framework. The question represented in line 1 is an inferential question, “Why would

you think …‖ in which I was seeking his views on why Scat Cat had no friends. As I

was seeking his thoughts about the scenario, Mac was able to give a response “… it‟s

not okay to feel like so alone and also scared”. Importantly, this concept was not

explicitly stated in the book, therefore eliciting further thinking from him. My next

question represented as line 3 is also an inferential question, because it shows that I

was listening to him ―Yes, I agree‖ and further sought clarification from him to go

beyond his initial response when I asked him an extended open-ended question “ …

How about those soft cats?”. Literal questions were also asked as represented in line

7, when I sought clarification from Mac with his previous response, ―But the cats

won‟t let them?”. Finally, in this same dialogue too, I had also asked a metacognitive

question (represented as line 9) when I asked Mac “What could we do for cats that

are shaggy?” In using this question, I was interested in knowing what Mac could do

in this scenario, thus indicating to him, that his ideas were important and valued. As

it can be seen, there was a range of different types of questions that were used in this

dialogue, that encouraged Mac to share genuine responses that reflected his thinking

as opposed closed ended questions that only demanded recalled ‗answers‘ to the text

of Rich Cat, Poor Cat. Furthermore, because Mac and I, have an established

relationship, where I was also Mac‘s regular classroom teacher, I was then able to

support him to be engaged in conversation as I had background knowledge and

understanding of Mac‘s preferred ways responding. The questions that were used to

provoke thought, were purposeful and specific to him, thus allowing the conversation

172


to be more authentic and meaningful to both parties (Murphy et al., 2014; Solvason,

2013; Vasconcelos, 2010).

Another example of how I had adopted the role of facilitator is illustrated

below. The same conversation between Mac and I will be used to illustrate the

different roles of the teacher-researcher. In the first part of the example below, my

initial focus of the conversation was to seek clarification from Mac about his

thoughts on why shaggy cat would feel marginalised as a result of his social

appearance:

Teacher-researcher: … Why would you think Scat Cat doesn‟t have friends just

because of his shaggy coat?

Mac: Well … I don‟t know … but it‟s making those shaggy cats

feel so sad, and lonely, and it‟s not okay to feel like so alone

and also scared.

(Mac, 21.11.26)

In Mac‘s response, he does not directly answer the question being asked.

Instead, he extends on the question to introduce consequences of not having friends

such as ―feel[ing] so sad, and lonely‖, thus demonstrating perspective taking and

empathy. As the teacher-researcher, I was aware of my role as a co-learner and

understood that the issue raised by Mac was important to him, thus acknowledged as

valid ways of Mac‘s attempts of understanding poverty. Therefore, in order to co-

construct meaning, I used Mac‘s interest as a way to engage with him to better

understand what he was saying and exploring. I also had co-constructed meaning

with Mac through dialogue that utilises different types of pedagogical strategies. This

included using a variety of different types of questions such as provocations, open

ended and focussed questioning. These pedagogical strategies are depicted in the

interaction below again with Mac. This data extract is a continuation of the extract

featuring Mac, presented above:


Teacher-researcher: Hmmm … but that doesn‟t mean they (rich, soft cats) still

can‟t be friends or have fun with a shaggy cat, what do you

think? (Line 1)

Mac: Yeah, they can. But most times soft cats hang around with

soft cats, and shaggy cats with shaggy cats. That‟s why the

shaggy cats always get angry, because they want to be soft

too … but they can‟t because they have no owners. (Line 2)

Teacher-researcher: And then they are sad too, cause they want to hang out with

the soft cats. But the soft cats won‟t let them? (Line 3)

Mac: Yeah … and it‟s not their fault you know. Shaggy cats want

to hang out, but the soft cat‟s won‟t, cause their too scared

to get dirty. (Line 4)

Teacher-researcher: What could we do for cats that are shaggy? (Line 5)

Mac: They all should have a home, an owner to love them. They

just want to be happy, and not be lonely I think. (Line 6)

(Mac, 21.11.26)

From this example, it can be seen that I did not ‗transmit‘ knowledge or ‗facts‘

to Mac. According to Stuhmcke (2012), the teacher‘s role as a facilitator is important

in instances such as these, to support children to question and to make changes to

their existing understandings. This occurs through the development of collaborative

understandings that are developed through shared conversations. In the example

above, from line 1 to line 3, Mac and I are making sense of why shaggy cats are

always angry. The shaggy cats are always angry because they want to hang out with

soft cats, but the soft cats won‘t hang out with those who are not soft, therefore

resulting in shaggy cats feeling ostracised. In this interaction, co-construction

between Mac and I took place. It is an example in which both teacher-researcher and

child, study meaning and make sense of their world, through critical thinking and

interpreting observations of their world as they converse and interact with one

another (MacNaughton & Williams, 2009). In the same conversation, from line 4 to

line 6, I had engaged with Mac‘s statement that it isn‘t the shaggy cat‘s fault, and

empowered Mac through seeking his suggestions on how to support shaggy cat to

174


feel better. This is another episode of how co-construction of meaning occurred

between teacher-researcher and child. Moss (2014) and Rinaldi (2006)suggests that

this co-construction of meaning between two people makes learning authentic as it is

reflective of the social aspects of that specific context. I had acknowledged as valid

Mac‘s understandings of why the cat, itself, was not at fault as valid, and sought to

clarify meaning through continued shared discussions.

This example of dialogue between Mac and I highlights the importance of co-

constructing meaning with children as opposed to children acquiring knowledge and

facts from the teacher. This view is shared by Rinaldi (2006) and Moss (2014) who

view early childhood educational contexts, as spaces where learning takes place

through shared conversations between the people who live in that space. Thus,

knowledge is a social construction between communities of learners, as opposed to

knowledge being a passive entity being transmitted onto learners. Hence, in this

context of introducing socio-political sustainability in the field of early childhood, it

is pertinent that meaning is constructed in a manner that is collaborative between one

another as opposed to passively transmitted from the teacher. As Davis (2015) states,

ECEfS requires an active role from children, where the children are critical learners

and involved in making changes for a more sustainable world. Different to education

in or about sustainability, where the teacher conveys knowledge to children, socio-

political sustainability warrants collaboration between teacher and child in making-

meaning about a particular topic of interest. Thus, in the context of this research of

making-meaning on poverty, it is important that children‘s thinking and questions are

pursued as research that warrant investigations and analysing of meaning.

An example used in this research to extend children‘s emerging questions was

through the medium of storytelling. The medium of storytelling is critical because it


provides opportunities for children to be co-researchers of this research. For Critical

Incident 1, storytelling was used on numerous occasions including as a provocation

to introduce the topic of poverty to children, and as a critical text extension based on

children‘s initial responses. In both Hawkins (2010) and Phillips (2010) studies, the

medium of storytelling was also used to support children to explore socio-political

issues in age appropriate ways. Through storytelling, I was able to support children‘s

development of critical thinking by ways of building on their initial responses to the

story or text. From there, children can be challenged to rethink any misconceptions

and to have multiple views in order to make informed understandings (Hawkins,

2010; Phillips, 2010). For example, in this research, following the introduction phase

of this project, I was able to extend children‘s understandings of poverty through

another storytelling session. Pedagogical decision-making ensured that the selection

of the second story created space to extend children‘s thinking further to become

more critical of others‘ perspectives of poverty.

4.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter presented and discussed the first Critical Incident in this research

via exploring children‘s understandings of poverty. It showed how children shifted

their initial understandings of poverty that revolved around the notion of cause-effect

understandings to broader conceptualisations of poverty to include themes of

inclusiveness. In the initial stages or the introduction phase of this research,

children‘s understandings of poverty revolved around themes that were linked to

monetary funds and employment. In these early stages, children expressed cause-

effect understandings about poverty where, for example, people who were

experiencing poverty was due to the notion that they did not save enough money or

had no employment. Through my teacher-researcher reflections, in order to challenge

176


and extend children‘s initial understandings, the critical text of Those Shoes, was

introduced to children. This text was one of several critical texts that served as my

intentional plan for transformative storytelling sessions in which, as teacher-

researcher, I encouraged children to be critical and reflective of the scenarios in

particular stories, specifically bringing attention to themes of democracy, peace,

equality and human rights, (Phillips, 2008; UNESCO, 2010). The Critical Incident

forming the catalyst for this research was identified when some children began to

share expanded ideas of poverty, specifically on the links between inclusion and

poverty. The children were beginning to make sense of how social markers, that are

predominantly reflective of the dominant culture of people in power, can potentially

marginalise others, namely those experiencing poverty. These understandings of

inclusion and exclusion were also evident in other experiences with children, where

they represented these expanded understandings of inclusion and poverty through the

visual arts and in shared dialogues with me.

This chapter also analysed how this Critical Incident responded to Research

Question 2: What pedagogies support young children to participate in investigations

of poverty within a socio-political framework of sustainability? For Critical Incident

1, these pedagogical conditions included creating a space for both children and I to

work as co-researchers. What this entailed was that I had engaged children to

become active contributors of a shared dialogue about poverty through texts such as

Rich Cat, Poor Cat and Those Shoes. I was open to children‘s understandings as

opposed to transmitting knowledge of poverty to them. The chapter then concluded

by highlighting my interchanging role as a facilitator and a protagonist. As the

teacher-researcher, I had an interchanging role because meaning making is never

constant nor is it linear. Depending on where children were at in regards of them


constructing understandings of poverty, I became a facilitator of learning to support

them to extend their understandings of poverty and became a protagonist when

children‘s understandings need to be provoked or challenged. What was most

pertinent was that I did not ‗transmit‘ knowledge onto children, and instead invited

them to be active contributors of a shared dialogue. It is through active

conversations, that both children and I were able to share ideas and meaning,

challenge each other‘s narratives and then refine our understandings on poverty. This

chapter explored how children were able to understand socio-political issues of

poverty through intentionally planned experiences by me as the teacher-researcher.

The next chapter carries on this notion that children can explore wider issues of

worldly sustainability issues, but this time through their own agency. Specifically, it

analyses how children independently explore their understandings of poverty through

spontaneous play episodes.

Chapter 5: Critical Incident 2: Children‘s Spontaneous Play on Exploring their Meanings and Understandings on

Poverty 179

Chapter 5: Critical Incident 2: Children’s Spontaneous Play on

Exploring their Meanings and Understandings on Poverty

5.1 Introduction

This chapter will analyse three child-led play experiences of children making-

meaning about poverty. Before I elaborate on the context of Critical Incident 2 and

its specific child-led play episodes, in Section 5.2 I draw attention to the dilemma I

as the teacher-researcher encountered when planning for ways to challenge and

extend children‘s learning based on the beginning dialogues we had on poverty. In

order to support children‘s ways of meaning making about poverty, one of the

challenges I encountered, was to ensure that my own power and biases as an adult

did not ‗take over‘ children‘s means of making-meaning of poverty. Then, in Section

5.3, I elaborate on the context of Critical Incident 2, and highlight how Critical

Incident 2 supported children‘s emerging roles as active learners and active citizens.

It is through these emerging roles that the specific play episodes are introduced and

elaborated. Both emerging roles of children as active learners and active citizens are

evident in each play episode; however, for the purpose of this data chapter, these

emerging roles will be analysed separately. For the analysis of children as active

learners (Section 5.4), the play episodes of Rich Cat, Poor Cat (Waber, 1963) and

Mutt Dog (King, 2004) are used as examples to showcase children‘s active roles in

leading these spontaneous play episodes. Next, the analysis of children as active

citizens is presented in Section 5.5, via the play episode of Healthy Plates. In Section

5.6, I move to explore taken-for-granted views of play in early childhood contexts,

and the risks play can be used as a ‗blanket‘ statement to imply that children are

automatically involved in meaning-making episodes simply because they are

180

Chapter 5: Critical Incident 2: Children‘s Spontaneous Play on Exploring their Meanings and Understandings on Poverty

involved in play experiences (Grieshaber & McArdle, 2010). In Section 5.7, I

examine the importance of play within the context of early childhood education for

sustainability (ECEfS) (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie, 2013), and how it can support

children to take ownership on their meaning making processes in relation to global

sustainability issues. Finally, Section 5.8 concludes this chapter with a chapter

summary.

5.2 Teacher-Researcher’s Challenges in Finding Ways to Extend Children’s

Understandings of Poverty

From the beginning of this research, as the teacher-researcher, I gave careful

thought to planning ways for young children to explore the subject of poverty that

would raise awareness and extend their thinking. In the introduction phase of the

Project Approach cycle, critical texts that were considered age-appropriate were used

to introduce the concept of poverty to children and these were made readily available

for the children to access at any time. It was in the synthesising phase of the Project

Approach that I was challenged to find ways to further explore the concept of

poverty that would be authentic and meaningful to the children. When spontaneous

play episodes took place, initiated by the children themselves, I was pleased and at

the same time reassured about how children were very capably engaging with the

concept and participating as co-researchers in the research to explore socio-political

aspects of sustainability. For this Critical Incident 2, the analytical lens that I took

included understanding the ‗how‘ of this Critical Incident in terms of what

pedagogical conditions supported children to demonstrate initiative in extending

explorations of poverty.


Poverty 181

While observing the children in these spontaneous play episodes I was very

conscious to not disrupt them and, at the same time was mindful of giving them

uninterrupted time and space to continue with their play unhindered by boundaries

including routines and other time constraints. In the initial stages of this research, I

found difficulty in planning an intentional play episode that explored the concept of

poverty because I didn‘t want the learning experience to be tokenistic or unethical.

Therefore, when the children themselves independently engaged in spontaneous play

on the concept of poverty, I chose not to disrupt it. At this current stage of analysis, I

am reminded of Malaguzzi‘s views about the image of the teacher (Malaguzzi, 1994;

Smidt, 2013). The image of the teacher, is more than just about teaching children,

instead, the teacher can be likened to the image of the child; potential of a hundred

languages. The teacher is a researcher; a listener; a protagonist; a thought-provoker a

collaborator; a scientist; an audience; but most importantly a person who creates

relationships and follows the directions of the child (Malaguzzi, 1994; Smidt, 2013).

This concept of the image of the child and the image of the teacher, having multiple

ways of meaning-making is also shared by Moss (2014), who suggests, instead of

teachers ‗transmitting‘ dominant meanings that are valued in society to young

children, teachers should be creating spaces that can enable children to create

authentic understandings of about their world. Wood‘s (2009) highlighted that it was

important in play for children to be active players and construct their own meaning

and understandings. Quite often, educators can unintentionally ‗take over‘ a play

episode because there is a specific concept that the educator would like to reinforce.

However this means that the educator is taking control of the play episode and

indirectly taking away the potential for children to have ownership of their learning

experiences (Wood, 2009). As a result, the opportunity for children to have a critical

182


learning space is then lost which in turn can reinforce the notion of children as

passive learners. When learners are viewed in this passive light, the power balance

between the student and the educator is unbalanced, with a heavy emphasis on the

power of the educator, who is presumed to be the more knowledgeable person

(Freire, 1998).

In this critical incident, the children independently initiated and carried out

their learning about poverty through play. The children were in control of their

learning. I had created pedagogical conditions that enabled children to take control of

their learning by not interrupting their play, especially as it took place around

midday, close to the usual pack-up routine leading to lunch. In this sense, I had

supported an opportunity for children to be co-researchers with their peers. Power

was shared as the children initiated and controlled their own explorations, allowing

them to make their own meanings and understandings through play. These

spontaneous play episodes on poverty are what formed Critical Incident 2.

5.3 Context of Critical Incident 2

Critical Incident 2 occurred in the beginning of Week 2, of this research. The

children demonstrated agency in using spontaneous forms of play to explore

meanings of poverty. The play experiences were not educator planned or initiated.

The three self-initiated play experiences explored in this section depict children as

active learners and affirm their role as active citizens as represented in Figure 5.1

below. The scenarios also highlight the importance of play for ECEfS.


Poverty 183

Figure 5.1. Conceptual model of Children‘s Spontaneous Play on Understanding Poverty.

The spontaneous play episodes took place during the synthesising phase of the

project approximately 1.5 weeks after the introduction of the topic of poverty via

storytelling sessions. In the days and weeks after the intentional introduction of this

topic, children were invited to share their thoughts and understandings about poverty

through various intentionally planned learning experiences. These intentional

learning experiences included the mediums of drawing, painting, and clay; critical

reading of extended texts on poverty, and large and small group conversations that

enabled children to share their thinking. Throughout the project, children and their

families had open access to the resources that were used, such as children‘s picture

books on poverty, and the documentation folder that traced the project‘s progress.

Additionally, children‘s physical representations such as their art work expressing

thoughts on poverty where also displayed for the purpose of validating children‘s

expressions of poverty, and to stimulate individual and peer reflection.

For analysis of the spontaneous play episodes in Section 5.4, I will refer back

to the conceptual model seen in the above Figure 5.1 above. First, I will explore the

Critical Incident 2: Children’s

spontaneous play on poverty

Children as active learners

Children as active citizens

184


content and context of the children‘s play and how they enable children to be active

learners in exploring issues of poverty. Second, I analyse how play experiences

focussed on socio-political issues such as these give children the opportunity to

develop their roles as active citizens. Finally, I reiterate the value of play in

supporting children to explore issues related to socio-political aspects of

sustainability.

5.4 Children as Active Learners

Critical Incident 2 is significant because it indicates a shift in the children‘s

level of participation, specifically their role in curriculum decision making. In this

critical incident, children had independently extended their understandings of

poverty through the medium of play, thus self-directing their learning on the topic.

As reviewed previously in Chapter 3, Hart‘s (1997) ladder of participation is

important for understanding what I mean by children‘s ―level of participation‖ (p.

40-41). Hart proposed eight steps representing young people‘s participation levels.

The first six levels of the ladder show adults deciding children‘s participation,

whereas the seventh and eighth levels show a shift from adult- to child-initiated

decision-making, in which children take over the initiator role from the adult. In

Critical Incident 2, the children appeared to be showing actions commensurate with

Step 7: the children independently took initiative to role-play characters from a

children‘s book exploring poverty that was read to them in the days prior to the play.

The actions of children in this spontaneous play could be classified as child-initiated

and directed (Hart, 1997). This was a significant moment in the research and was

identified in my reflections after the play episode, as well as in my weekly planning.

Below are excerpts from my teacher-researcher reflection and a photograph of the


Poverty 185

weekly planning in Figure 5.2 with the relevant statement circled in red. These depict

the change in role for children in exploring the topic of poverty.

How amazing was it that Lola, Ravi, Xavier, Carol and Geata were able to

carry out a play exploring themes of poverty. A role-playing experience on

poverty was something I wanted to plan out, but I wasn‟t sure how to come

about doing this, without being unethical or tokenistic to people who experience

poverty. What props could I have provided? How does a person experiencing

poverty look like? How do I initiate play on poverty? Is it even ethical to

pretend to role play as a person who experiences poverty?

Little did I know, the children took it on themselves and role-played Scat Cat

from Rich Cat, Poor Cat. From what I saw, there were even new characters‟

such as doctors and nurses that were introduced to help Scat.

Here, I was unsure of not wanting to be tokenistic, unaware that I was the one

who potentially had a narrow view of poverty. The children did not in any way

mention about money or not having enough of things. Instead, they looked at

themes around, food, health and friendship.


Figure 5.2. Weekly Planning for Week 2 and Week 3.

Three child-led spontaneous play episodes form Critical Incident 2. The first

play episode was observed when a group of children consisting of Lola, Ravi,

186


Xavier, Carol and Geata were roleplaying the character of Poor Cat from the text

Rich Cat, Poor Cat (Waber, 1963). The second play episode involved observations

of Jon, Phil, Kara and Ben with the wooden construction blocks in which the

children had designed and built a house for the homeless character of Mutt Dog

(King, 2004). In the story of Mutt Dog, a homeless dog is in search of a place and

family to call home. The third and final children‘s spontaneous play episode that was

analysed revolved around children using clay and moulding it to symbolically

represent healthy plates. These healthy plates were a response from the group of

children in regards to the prior group discussions and conversations around the topic

of access to food. In this third play episode, the children conclude that everyone

should have access to a healthy plate of food, including those experiencing poverty.

However, before I evaluate each of the three play episode in detail, I bring

attention to Derrida‘s (1991) notion of cinders. As explored in Chapter 2, Derrida‘s

(1991) cinders form part of the theoretical framework of this research. In the

presentation of this data, I introduce the notion of ‗cinders‘ (Derrida, 1991) as a way

to show how the children in these play episodes were able to confront and challenge

taken-for-granted thinking on complex issues such as poverty. Derrida (1991) coined

the term cinders to represent the cognitive dissonance that one experiences as a result

of critically reflecting on situations that involved themes of democracy and social

justice. Derrida, a writer who began writing in the 1960s, deconstructed literatures of

various philosophers ranging from Plato to Heidegger. Derrida critiqued the writings

of these philosophers to review and question how ‗truth‘ in society comes to light. As

a poetic writer, the concept of cinders was used because of their close association to

fire. When fire burns out, what is left are cinders. Cinders represent the traces of the

fire, despite the fire itself not physically being there anymore. These cinders are the


Poverty 187

symbolic critique of the traces of truth and impossibilities of the paradigms of

society. For example, a cinder would look like a deconstruction of the ‗taken-for-

granted‘ ways of thinking in society. Cinders bring into question whose voices are

represented in society, whose are silenced, and whose continue to serve in power. In

Critical Incident 2, I am interested in exploring what I interpreted as the children‘s

cinders, in their play episodes which have been given the titles: Rich Cat, Poor Cat

(Section 5.4.1); Mutt Dog (Section 5.4.2); and Healthy Plates (Section 5.5.1).

5.4.1 Rich Cat, Poor Cat spontaneous play episode

This play experience took place approximately one week after the book, Rich Cat,

Poor Cat was introduced to the whole class. Children had opportunities for both

whole and small-group discussions about the lead characters of this book. For the

children‘s own reflection and reference, the book Rich Cat, Poor Cat was placed on

the class book shelf to ensure open access for all children and families. As observed

in their self-initiated spontaneous role-play, Lola played the character of Poor Cat,

while Carol, Ravi, Xavier and Geata played the characters of cat owners, cat doctors

and guardians. In this specific play episode, my role was primarily an observer,

giving the children space to play without interruption.

The play took place on the veranda of the classroom and merged into the

classroom halfway through the play. The children initiated this move to indicate the

change of setting from the Poor Cat eating to visiting the doctor. The play itself

extended for most of the morning, with Lola, Ravi, Xavier, Carol and Geata. It

commenced just after morning tea and extended through to lunch time.

188


Figure 5.3. The beginning of the Rich Cat, Poor Cat play episode.

In Figure 5.3, the photograph shows Lola taking on the role of Poor Cat, as she

approached Ravi and Xavier on the veranda. Ravi and Xavier were already working

together with an electronic tablet for a language programme. As shown in the photo,

despite my close proximity to the play (I was already outside with a different group

of children), I was mindful to not disrupt the children‘s play. Lola, Ravi, and

Xavier‘s play caught my attention when I overheard the content of their

conversation. During the play, the following exchange occurred:

Lola: Meow, Meow

Ravi: Hi Kitty

Xavier: You are cute

Lola: I am hungry

(Lola, Ravi, Xavier, 23.11.16)


Poverty 189

From the above dialogue, Lola initiates play with Ravi and Xavier when she

approaches them and starts to engage in conversation with them. Lola immediately

sets the context, by suggesting she is a cat and putting the predicament of the story,

that she is hungry, as the scene of the play.

Figure 5.4. Poor Cat eating food.

Figure 5.4 shows child Lola who plays the role of Poor Cat being

fed by the two other children. This play scene of feeding the cat goes back and

forth between the children. Some excerpts from this scene are as below:

Ravi: Have some food; you must be hungry. I will look after you

and you can stay with me. Let‟s check you so you can feel

better kitty (line 1)

Xavier: Let‟s go to the doctor, you look sick (line 2)

Lola: Thank you so much doctor, I need medicine, but I couldn‟t

buy any. Now I feel better (line 3).

(23.11.16)

190


From the above excerpts, what appears to happen here is that Ravi makes a

connection between hunger and wellbeing. This is seen in line 1, when he said “…

you must be hungry… Let‟s check you so you can feel better kitty”. Similarly in line

2-3, wellbeing is also connected to one‘s health as Poor Cat feels much better after

knowing she has access to medication. Figures 5.3 and 5.4 showed the character

Poor Cat exploring issues that included around the idea of wellbeing. From the

examples in children‘s conversations, it was important for them that Poor Cat

experienced a sense of wellbeing through having basic needs of food and medical

attention met.

Figure 5.5. Midway through the play, Poor Cat visits the doctors.

In Figure 5.5, Lola is brought inside into the home corner area that is set up as

a doctor‘s clinic. Carol and Geata were in the midst of a doctor‘s game prior and

were not a part of the play episode that began on the veranda. Just as Lola arrived


Poverty 191

into the home corner area, Carol and Geata immediately invited Lola to lie on the

doctor‘s bed.

Lola: I‟m scared (line 1)

Carol: Don‟t be scared. You need a shot. Let me hear your heart. I

will look after you (line 2)

From Figure 5.5, it appears that Lola as Poor Cat is fearful of the doctor as

evident in the comment in line 1 “I‟m scared” and her body language showing her

hands in her mouth. Nevertheless, Carol responds in a gentle manner to Lola,

recognising her fear, but also reassuring her when she says “Don‟t be scared… I will

look after you” in line 2. From here, it appears that Carol recognises that in order to

ease the anxious Lola, she must be reassuring.

Figure 5.6. Geata joins in to calm Poor Cat down.

192


As seen in Figure 5.6, Geata joins in the play. Here she is invited in to the

doctors‘ clinic to calm down Poor Cat‟s anxieties. Some excerpts of this scene are

seen below:

Carol: Geata is here kitty,

Geata: Don‟t be scared, I will help you.

Carol: There, all better. Hey let‟s go for a picnic to eat. Let‟s go

together Scat Cat.

Lola: Meow, meow.

This photograph above shows the children midway through their play. Here, it

appears that there was a different sense of wellbeing beyond the physical that was

observed in the first stage of the play. As explained in Figure 5.6, Carol had invited

Poor Cat to a picnic after the doctor‘s visit. The above situation depicts a kind and

gentle presence possibly of how ‗others‘ should treat those such as Poor Cat who are

experiencing poverty. Not stopping at just warranting that Poor Cat‟s physical

wellness was taken care of, Carol and Geata, as seen in Figure 5.6, also ensured that

Poor Cat‟s emotional wellbeing was cared for when they sat by her bedside while

assuring her.


Poverty 193

Figure 5.7. Closing of the play episode of Rich Cat, Poor Cat.

The ending of this play episode is depicted in Figure 5.7 where Carol, Lola,

Ravi, and Xavier are on the inside mat, having a picnic while enjoying the treats in

their basket.

Through these series of photographs, it can be seen that children are capable of

exploring topics of poverty using their own interests and via their own inquiries.

Furthermore, it is obvious that children experience these opportunities to co-

construct understandings through dialogue with one another. Play provided dialogue

for negotiations, confrontations and sharing in their ways to make meaning about

issues of poverty. Hagglund and Johansson (2014) suggest that it is these dialogues

with hallmark differences in children‘s ideas and opinions are integral to learning

about sustainability, particularly its socio-political dimensions. As coined by

Malaguzzi, the value of play episodes cannot be discounted, as spaces such as these

allow children an important medium to communicate meaning, their thoughts,

194


questions and ideas about poverty through the medium of play. The scenarios the

children were exploring included themes of hunger, wellbeing, security, and

friendship. The findings emerging from these play episodes align with the findings of

studies by Hammond et al. (2015) and Hawkins (2010), where preschool-aged

children were able to understand themes of democracy, peace, equality and human

rights (UNESCO, 2010) centring on poverty. In Hammond, Hesterman and Knaus‘

(2015) study, the children were able to share significant insights on issues of social

sustainability in the context of poverty and its link to food security. In Hawkins‘

(2010) study children were also able to express their understandings of various issues

of socio-political sustainability through educator-initiated storytelling experiences.

The ideas that were independently explored by children in this research included

themes of wellbeing, and friendship, which in turn support the findings of Camfield‘s

(2010) study of Ethiopian children‘s understandings of poverty. As noted in Chapter

2, the children who experienced poverty in Camfield‘s study suggested that their

social wellbeing and acceptance into society were more important than access to

basic needs such as food and shelter.

Themes of wellbeing were a result of the children‘s collaboration through play,

wherein ideas were shared and negotiated. As the teacher-researcher, this resulting

theme of wellbeing was what I interpreted as the children‘s ‗cinders‘. For example,

when the children in Figure 5.6 were treating Poor Cat in the doctor‘s surgery, I

interpreted this play scenario as an experience where there appeared to be no sense of

‗othering‘ due to life circumstances (Lister, 2008). The notion of Poor Cat being

treated differently simply because of his or her appearance would be something that

possibly ‗did not sit well‘ with the children. In other words, if the children were to

‗other‘ Poor Cat, it should appear as though they did not empathise with Poor Cat‟s


Poverty 195

predicament of not being able to go to the doctors. Instead, the children treated Poor

Cat with a sense of dignity and acceptance. This sense of acceptance and wellbeing

also featured in MacNaughton‘s (2000) study on gender identities in early childhood

contexts. Using a poststructuralist feminist lens, MacNaughton‘s (2010) study found

that gender identity is shaped by the dominant views of society. This is reflected by

the types of props provided in home corner and the language used with young

children. For example, teacher talk such as ―big strong boys should be outdoors‖ or

―all the girls should play mothers in the home corner‖ can continue to give children

oversimplified views and fixed labels for defining gender. Instead, MacNaughton

(2000) suggests that to be inclusive of all genders, it is pertinent that children are

invited to be a part of dialogues about gender and to challenge taken-for-granted

meanings about gender. This spontaneous play on poverty where the children were

role playing together despite one‘s social class, potentially can instil the

understanding of acceptance of others despite personal circumstances. This is

because in the actual text of Rich Cat, Poor Cat; Poor Cat deals with difficulties in

friendship and belonging due to not having an owner and being ostracised from

society due to his poor appearance. However, in their play, Lola, Carol and Ravi

were not re-creating the story that was based on the book where the cat had no peers.

Instead, towards the end of their play, they invited the Poor Cat to play in the park,

thus determining their own directions and outcomes for a character that was

experiencing poverty. It is this autonomy of children involved in decision-making

processes in their own learning experiences what Moss (2014) labels as ―real

utopias‖ (p. 15). Real utopias are recognition that learning is not simply based on

learning outcomes. Instead it is the acknowledgement that there are many ways of

learning, and many possibilities for children to understand the world that they live in.

196


These real utopias can be understood through Moss‘s (2014) previous research

examining young children‘s play in the Crow Project (Åberg & Lenz Taguchi, 2005).

This project explored the children‘s own authentic interests in crows such as the

shape of the crow‘s feet, the colour of the crow‘s eye, and how crows kiss each other.

From this study, Moss (2014) explained that children were able to better understand

different concepts or topics about crows because the interest was child-led and

therefore meaningful to them. As children were exploring topics that were of interest

to them, they took ownership and lead the direction of the project. Similar can be

said about the three play episodes that form Critical Incident 2, whereby the children

initiated play around the topic of poverty via extension of the characters in Rich Cat,

Poor Cat. In this Critical Incident, children were interested in whether Poor Cat had

enough food to eat, whether a visit to the doctor could cure him, and if Poor Cat

would like to have a play date in the park. Hence, in the context of this research,

despite the topic of poverty being initially introduced by me for the purpose of this

study, real utopia‘s where children‘s learning experiences are authentic to them have

potential through child-led play (Moss, 2014). It is through these children‘s play

experiences where themes surrounding issues of democracy, peace, equality and

human rights (UNESCO, 2010) became more meaningful to the children as they

explored and extended on themes introduced through this research.

5.4.2 Mutt Dog spontaneous play

The second spontaneous play episode forming Critical Incident 2 was

influenced by the story Mutt Dog (King, 2004), where Jon, Phil, Kara and Ben had

independently built a wooden block home for Mutt Dog to help the title character to

have a home to go home to, complete with additional features such as a bed, an alarm

and a fridge. In the context of this play episode, the story of Mutt Dog was read to


Poverty 197

the children as a whole-group days prior to this play episode occurring. When the

book was first introduced to the children, they were invited to be a part of whole and

small-group conversations about the primary character Mutt Dog. Like all resources

in this project, this book was placed in an easy accessible space for children and

families to return to at any time.

Phil and Jon were observed frequently engaging in block construction. From

elaborate towers and buildings, cubby houses to transportation vehicles such as cars,

rockets and boats, Phil and Jon have a shared interest in construction and consistently

work together and share ideas in the block play area.

In this particular play episode, I was situated at the indoor art studio with a

small-group of children. From where I was working, I could observe Phil and Jon

busily working in the block area that was also indoors. My attention was requested

by Phil and Jon when they announced from their side of the room that they would be

building a home for Mutt Dog. This building task took most of the day. As the

building site was indoors, Phil and Jon were able to have minimal distraction from

peers. Their collaborative construction grew in terms of the number of children who

joined them, temporarily, throughout the day as they came and went from inside to

outside and noticed the elaborate construction.

After the children finished their building collaboration, Jon, and Phil shared

some of the features of Mutt Dog‟s home with me. The photographs below are

explanations that were recounted from our interaction.

198


Figure 5.8. The first stages the construction of Mutt Dog‘s home.

Figure 5.8 depicts the beginning of their construction. Here, Phil and Jon begin

the construction by building an enclosure for Mutt Dog‘s House which includes a

wall. The wall is circled in red.


Poverty 199

Figure 5.9. New children came in and join the construction of Mutt Dog‘s home.

As can be seen in Figure 5.9, there are two new friends, Kara and Ben who

have just entered the classroom and noticed Phil and Jon‘s building. They asked if

they could join in the building. Jon reminded them to walk around the enclosure and

wall. The enclosure is indicated by the red line.

Jon: Don‟t knock the blocks down guys. Walk around it, if not he

won‟t have a safe home.

(Jon, 24.11.16)

200


Figure 5.10. Finishing the walls and floors of Mutt Dog‘s new home.

In the above Figure 5.10, Phil is observed building another wall on the other

side of Mutt Dog‘s home, while Jon finishes off the bedroom and remaining

enclosures of the house.


Poverty 201

Figure 5.11. Inspecting the bedroom of Mutt Dog‘s new home.

In this Figure 5.11, Phil is examining the bedroom where they have also

included a bed, circled in green, for Mutt Dog.

Phil: His bed

(Phil.24.11.16)

202


Figure 5.12. The final touches of Mutt Dog‘s bed room which was the addition of an alarm bell.

Toward the end of the construction, an alarm can be seen in Mutt Dog‟s

room as shown in Figure 5.12. The alarm bell is indicated by the Blue Star in

the picture below. Phil has used a red circle lid as its alarm and taped it onto

Mutt Dog‟s bedroom wall.

Phil: There is an alarm bell, to scare off any baddies, because

Mutt Dog needs to feel safe.

(Phil, 24.11.16)

Based on the photographs and comments for Figures 5.8 to 5.12 in relation to

constructing walls, enclosures and alarm bells, it appears that the children were

making links between homelessness and safety. This link is demonstrated in

examples such as when Jon in relation to Figure 5.10 stated, “Don‟t knock the blocks

down guys. Walk around it, if not he won‟t have a safe home”. Further, in Figure

5.12 “There is an alarm bell, to scare off any baddies, because Mutt Dog needs to

feel safe”.


Poverty 203

Specifically, for Figure 5.12, when Jon made the comment, there was a degree

of firmness in his voice as though to ensure that his voice was heard by all. Jon was

in a sense trying to exert safety for the homeless Mutt Dog in this context.

Expressing thoughts about safety, danger and protection is a departure from the

image of the child who is in need of protection by adults (Hendrick, 2015; James et

al., 1998). Instead, in this play episode, these children were able to demonstrate that

they can have a voice in real-world issues related to poverty such as the potential for

danger, homelessness and lack of safety. Exploring real-world issues through play

was a focus of the studies by Edwards and Cutter-Mackenzie (2013), Hawkins

(2010) and Stuhmcke (2012). However, the themes and issues explored in these

studies related to environmental concerns, such as the child-led exploration of

concepts of recycling bin trucks in the sandpit (Stuhmcke, 2012). In Edwards and

Cutter-Mackenzie‘s (2013) study, the play was teacher-led through purposely framed

play-based learning experiences which focussed on care of the environment.

However, in Hawkins‘ (2010) study, there was evidence of children exploring

aspects of social justice through play, specifically in understanding diversity of

cultures and acceptance of people with disabilities. In Hawkins‘ (2010) study, this

occurred via an intentional teaching moment, whereby the educator was a facilitator

of the play, who introduced specific resources such as food from different cultures

for home corner and a wheelchair for children to use and explore in the classroom

space. Despite success in using play as a medium for exploring issues related to the

studies above, teacher-led and child-led play scenarios, there remains limited

research on using play as a medium to explore issues of socio-political sustainability,

specifically.

204


Figure 5.13. A ‗baddy‘ infiltrates Mutt Dog‘s home.

In this last Figure 5.13, a child from the next room has entered Mutt Dog‘s

home. Phil quickly rings the alarm (blue star) and warns the child or ‗bad guy‘ to get

out of Mutt Dog‟s home.

Phil: Get out baddy! This is Mutt dog‟s home.

(Phil, 24.11.16)

After Phil and Jon protect Mutt Dog‘s home, they both discuss the balance

between warding off the ‗bad guys‘ and welcoming the ‗good guys‘. This was

reflected when Phil said

Phil: He needs friends, cause‟ he might be lonely.

(Phil, 24.11.16)

The construction of a home for the homeless Mutt Dog, gave the children the

opportunity to reflect on homelessness and the affordances of safety a home brings.

As mentioned earlier, when this home was built by the children, they added in


Poverty 205

features of an enclosure, a wall and an alarm bell to symbolise safety and protection

that being homeless does not necessarily provide. In the text of Mutt Dog, there were

issues of feeling safe that were touched by the author, where homeless people would

often sleep in places that were open such as under a bridge that was ‗open‘ to danger.

However, in the midst of ensuring that Mutt Dog was safe in this block home, the

children also reflected on understandings of belonging and its links to homelessness.

When Phil said, “He needs friends, cause‟ he might be lonely” in relation to Figure

5.13, the comment gives insights to children‘s capabilities to extend their

understanding in a manner that is not just about poverty.

This was another example that I had interpreted using Derrida‘s (1991) notion

of cinders. The suggestion that another child wanted to infiltrate Mutt Dog‟s home

was something that Phil strongly objected to, for various possible reasons. One could

suggest that the main reason that Phil objected to his block building being torn down

was because he had spent a long time designing and physically building this

structure. However, what made me interpret this moment as a cinder was Phil‘s

comment about relationships, and acceptance. Comments such as this demonstrated

how play experiences have potentiality to enable children to develop transformative

thinking around ways to improve the lives of those experiencing poverty. In this

play, opportunities for children to be critical were evident when they expressed

emerging understandings that despite Mutt Dog having a home for protection, it

would not necessarily be sustainable if he did not have friends. Similar to the

previous play of Rich Cat, Poor Cat, this interpretation of Mutt Dog also showed the

children‘s ability to collaborate with one another, without the support of the

educator.

206


This suggests that children can become decision-makers in terms of the

direction of their learning. In each of these play episodes, the children were in charge

of the resources that they used and the content that they explored. For example, in the

play Mutt Dog, the open-ended wooden blocks, were used to symbolically represent

a strong home to protect Mutt Dog with its walls and borders. As the play episode

involved several different children, the opportunity for conflict and miss-

understandings were high, however it is through these conflicts of values (e.g., not

stepping on the boundary wall) that the children are able to reflect and share a refined

understanding of poverty together. This was certainly the case in Phillips‘ (2008)

study, where children aged 5-6 years were able to independently carry out their own

storytelling sessions after participating in a five week storytelling workshop with the

researcher. In these workshops, the children were invited to participate and critique

specific stories that delve on issues of social justice. The findings of Phillips‘ (2008)

study showed that children were aware of particular scenarios of social injustice,

which was demonstrated in their own self independent storytelling sessions. When

the children engaged in spontaneous episodes such as Mutt Dog and Rich Cat, Poor

Cat, they indirectly developed their roles as active citizens. Their active citizenship

was evident when they became critically aware of situations experienced by others

through critiquing, role-playing and questioning themes of security, wellbeing and

safety, as linked to their initial investigations of poverty with me as teacher-

researcher.

5.5 Children as Active Citizens

The spontaneous play episodes that form Critical Incident 2 also support the

foundations of children‘s emerging status as active citizens. A notion of being an

active citizen is the critical awareness of how personal actions should not contribute


Poverty 207

to negative consequences for others (Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009;

Phillips, 2010). Play reinforces the notion that children are citizens of their world and

have important roles to fulfil in order to sustain it (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie,

2013). In this Critical Incident 2, children demonstrated that they are active citizens

through the observations of two elements, as suggested by Phillips (2008) through

her medium of transformative storytelling. In Phillips‘ transformative storytelling

sessions, children were able to critique political discourses such as the link between

an endangered bird to environmental deforestation, when she shared the story of the

Lonely Coxen‘s Fig parrot (Phillips, 2008) to 5-6 year olds. These young children in

Phillips‘ research showed awareness of the injustices faced by these endangered

birds through critical awareness and intersubjectivity. Instead of accepting the notion

that the Coxen Fig parrot were getting endangered simply because trees were cut

down to build houses for people, these children were critically questioning the need

for those people to move to South East Queensland (the area of these endangered

birds) despite its link to endangering these birds. These two important elements were

identified through cinders (Derrida, 1991), or the after thoughts that children had

beyond the initial storytelling session. It is these after thoughts that were observed by

Phillips as evidence of transformed understanding, attitudes and behaviours.

In the context of this research, ‗cinders‘ were evident in the three spontaneous

play episodes, whereby the children extended on the initial impetus provided by me

to explore themes related to poverty in more depth through their actions and

behaviours of being in character. The elements of critical awareness and

intersubjectivity were evident in these play episodes. What I interpreted from the

children‘s dialogues in their play was that they appeared to be critically aware of

multiple factors (i.e., hunger, homelessness, friendship) associated with poverty as

208


opposed to cause-effect understandings of poverty simply just being associated with

money or employment (see Chapter 4 for more discussion). The other element of

intersubjectivity was evident in Critical Incident 2, as these play episodes were

spontaneous and did not involve me as the teacher-researcher. It was observed that

the children were active in their dialogues with one another, where they shared ideas

about concepts and understandings of poverty, and problem-solved or negotiated

differences of opinions. I will now go to the third spontaneous play episode to

deconstruct how these play experiences supported children‘s roles as active citizens.

5.5.1 Healthy plates spontaneous play episode

This play episode took place around the initial stages of the project in the first

week. A couple of days after reading the book Maddi‟s Fridge, I had intentionally

planned for a learning experience that used clay as a provocation for children as a

response to an earlier brainstorming session about the basic need to have food. In this

learning experience, we had used clay to represent the healthy food that every child

should be able to have access. Some of the comments from the children when they

were moulding their plates of healthy food (i.e., healthy plates) are depicted below:

Lola: It‟s not fair is it that some people have food, and some

people don‟t have food.

Geata: No one should be hungry, it‟s not healthy.

Jorge: You know people who don‟t eat don‟t have energy you know.

So they should have food, to play and also have energy like

us. We eat a lot… everyone should eat and have food too.

Kavitha: People go hungry if they don‟t eat. I‟ve made them some

meat and sausage even if I don‟t eat meat.

Ava: We have so much food, like 100 things. We can share it with

them.

(10.11.16)


Poverty 209

The children made links between the basic need of food and health and

wellbeing. ―It‘s not fair‖, ―it‘s not healthy‖, and ―[to] have energy‖ are examples of

children‘s beginning sense of agency, where there was emerging awareness of others,

and going beyond the fact of accepting that some people have food, while others do

not. Another example was children‘s reflection from the text Maddi‟s Fridge, where

they recognised that it is unfair for some people to have food, while others do not.

This is mentioned by Lola, when she comments about the unfairness of this situation.

This comment shows that Lola rejects the notion that it is acceptable food as a basic

necessity, is only accessible to some people and not all. This sentiment is also

reflected in comments by Jorge who both identify consequences of not having access

to food. Kavitha and Ava then suggests ways to counter such circumstances, through

making food and sharing food with those experiencing hunger. Kavitha‘s comments

that she has made some meat and sausage even if “I don‟t eat meat” demonstrates

high level cognitive ability to engage with self-reflective perspectives talking in

which children understand that their own position and experiences may be different

to others (Keenan, Evans, & Crowley, 2016).

210


Impetus of the play (Day before)

Figure 5.14. Children using clay to make healthy food and sometimes treats.

Figure 5.15. An example of a healthy plate.


Poverty 211

Figure 5.16. Painting the clay food.

Figure 5.14 to 5.16 show children in action during the planned teaching

episode of making healthy plates out of clay. As seen in the photographs, children

started off with clay on empty plates. Picture books on food were used as references

for images of food that the children could use to sculpt their clay food. When they

had finished their clay food, they then painted the clay and left it to dry on an art

table. The next day when the painted clay had dried, the children took the initiative to

‗set up‘ the table. The class teacher aide had helped the children with the extra props

needed such as the cutlery and table cloth. It was only after the children had finished

setting up the table that they then showed me what they had done.

Teacher-researcher: Wow, what‟s this?

Geata: It‟s food to share with everyone who might be hungry.

Ava: Everyone should have a healthy plate.

(11.11.16)

212


Figure 5.17. Children setting up the table.

Figure 5.18. The finished table of food.


Poverty 213

Figures 5.17 and Figure 5.18 depict a table setting that the children co-

constructed in reference to ensuring everyone especially those experiencing poverty,

do not go hungry. Based on these series of photos, the elements of critical awareness

and intersubjectivity could be observed. As a result of successive readings and

exploration of the text Maddi‟s Fridge, it was observed that children potentially

showed emergence of critical awareness. This awareness was reflected in their

reasoning about how it was unfair that some people had limited access to food while

others had ample access as a result of their social class. The children responded to

this by making representations of healthy plates for those in hunger. Their

independent action of setting the table, including paying attention to aesthetic

elements such as a floral centrepiece, in these early stages of the project,

demonstrated children‘s emerging sense of responsibility to care for those who may

experience hunger. The idea that Maddi‟s Fridge was empty, and their awareness

that there were many people just like Maddi could be conceptualised as cinders

(Derrida, 1991) that did not sit well with children. Furthermore, there was also

intersubjectivity or conflict of values that was observed, when these group of

children shared their different opinions on the relationship between hunger and

wellbeing when constructing and setting up their table of food to be shared as shown

in Figures 5.14 to 5.18. For example, there were differences of opinion in regards to

what constituted basic needs to food, where there was debate on what type of food

(i.e., basic staples such as pasta, bread, meat; to specific healthy food such as fresh

fruit and vegetable; and access to sometime-food such as treats) people experiencing

poverty should have access to. Rinaldi (2006) labels such active conversations that

occur through play as social dialogues where children experience theory building,

conflicts of interest and knowledge rebuilding that are essential in the construction of

214


meaning. In the play episode on healthy plates, there was the potential for children to

build theories about the relationship between poverty and access to basic needs such

as healthy food. This was through dialogue with one another, where they showed

awareness of the importance of sustenance to their overall wellbeing and

functionality, thus making a symbolic ‗plate‘ to represent the importance of

addressing a basic human need.

The emergence of children‘s active citizenship could also be observed in the

two play experiences of Rich Cat, Poor Cat and Mutt Dog. In the first play scenario,

these children were exploring the role of Scat Cat the Poor Cat. In their play, Carol,

Lola, and Ravi did not simply role-play the character straight from the book. Instead

they explored themes of inclusiveness, having access to basic needs such as food and

healthcare that were not explicitly mentioned in the book itself. This was something

that I interpreted as the children potentially responding to their ‗cinders‘ or the things

that did not sit well with them as they were finding ways of being inclusive for Poor

Cat. In the second scenario, Jon, Phil and Kara had built a home for Mutt Dog. While

building a home from wooden construction blocks, the children touched on issues of

belonging, homelessness and safety, which are issues that are complex, real and ever

present in the world today. To these children, the realisation that poverty can result in

homelessness and challenges to personal safety security were responded to through

the children‘s actions of building houses complete with beds and security alarms. It

is through this purposefully framed play (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie, 2013) that

children can be immersed in transformative and critical thinking, where they can

explore such issues with one another and challenge misconceptions of poverty. Davis

(2015) states that ECEfS is not just about doom and gloom education as reflected in

the play scenarios above. Instead, these play experiences were as Wood (2009)


Poverty 215

suggests, opportunities that enabled children to be critical and capable of challenging

cultural reproduction and taken-for-granted thinking about poverty. In these play

episodes, there was potential for children to challenge notions of poverty based on

cause-effect conceptions. Through Critical Incident 2, children explored

understandings about poverty with more depth where the topics such as

homelessness, friendship and hunger were investigated. These themes went beyond

the initial cause-effect understandings of poverty (refer to Critical Incident 1 in

Chapter 4 for further elaboration).

As play is a prominent vehicle for learning in early childhood and in the culture

of this research site, the children were already competent in using play as a vehicle

for communication and exploration. Hence, when they were engaged in play

episodes exploring concepts of poverty, there was that potential of play to be used as

a medium of support in making explorations and dialogues around poverty to be

meaningful to them. Despite play being a prominent medium used in early childhood

contexts, it is important also to be able to distinguish whether play allows for

children to explore their own natural inquisitiveness, or whether it is disguised as an

opportunity to pass on the adult‘s agenda. Play in early childhood contexts, and

specifically the links with ECEfS will be discussed in more detail below.

5.6 Taken for Granted Views of Play

The medium of play is such an important fixture in early childhood education

contexts to a point where it becomes an unquestionable assumption that play equates

to early childhood education. As Ailwood (2003) and Grieshaber and McArdle

(2010) suggests, this relationship between play and early childhood education stems

back to the historical times of philosophical thinkers such as Rousseau in the

216


eighteenth century (Hendrick, 2015), who advocated for children to be immersed in

play. At that time there was a persistent view that play would support children‘s

natural development and it would bring great benefits. As a result, play was seen as a

medium that naturally developed children‘s lifelong skills such as problem-solving,

exploring, making hypotheses; skills that would prepare children for adult life.

Unfortunately, these views can be taken for granted, and used in a ‗blanket‘

statement that play is beneficial, ‗natural‘ and inclusive for all children (Grieshaber

& McArdle, 2010).

Taking these views for granted runs the risks of not questioning how play can

potentially privilege some children by way of perpetuating cultural norms, languages

and cultural capital; not questioning if play experiences are fair and inclusive for all

participants of the play; and not questioning these ‗taken-for-granted‘ notions that

play is natural and beneficial for all the children (Grieshaber & McArdle, 2010). In

this research, and in my teaching practice, the stance I took was not an unquestioning

one. It was important that I understood how play could support (or not support)

children‘s evolving constructions of theories about their world. In the context of this

research, I needed to be cautious of how play could allow children to be co-

constructors of concepts about poverty through play experiences that were

purposeful to them. For example, referring back to the spontaneous play on Rich Cat,

Poor Cat, the finale of that specific play experience involved peers inviting Poor Cat

to a picnic. I interpreted the children‘s actions of welcoming Scat Cat into their social

circle as an experience in which where children were linking themes of poverty to

wellbeing. I came to this conclusion yet was cautious not to make a ‗blanket‘

statement that their play was ‗learning play‘ simply because they were role-playing


Poverty 217

well with each other. I was conscious not to assume they were problem-solving and

negotiating but to look for evidence of this in the data.

Upon further reflection, Malaguzzi‘s notion of children‘s one hundred

languages (Rinaldi, 2006), strengthens the idea that the children in these play

episodes were active participants as opposed to being passive contributors in their

play. Children can be said to be passive or governed by play when the play has been

propped with resources or pre-determined themes that do not invite children to

socially-construct meaning with one another (Ailwood, 2003). Take for example, in

MacNaughton‘s (2000) study on gendered play, a young boy who was interested in

items such as bottled perfumes, understood that his curiosity in perfumes could

potentially disrupt the accepted views of what society defines as being a boy. These

deterrents for children can come in many forms from the resources that are provided

in the home corner to the teacher‘s own personal beliefs on gender identity. Hence,

in this research context, I took a stance that children were agents of their own

learning because of their initiative to carry out that play experience independent of

my input and direction. As a teacher-researcher in this study, there were no ‗set‘

resources that were given to children, and I was not a part of the immediate social

dialogue in that specific play. Instead the children resourced themselves by finding

their own props to use, and were able to engage in dialogue with peers as opposed to

being in conversation with me. This removed my position as the more

knowledgeable one, and instead allowed the children to take ownership of the

process in constructing their theories and then reconstructing these in dialogue with

peers (Moss, 2014). Therefore, based on these observations, I had interpreted that the

themes that emerged such as poverty and wellbeing were a result of children‘s own

enquiries as opposed to an adult-directed transmission of particular understandings

218


about poverty. At the same time, as suggested by Grieshaber and McArdle (2010), I

am also cautious that I am not taking-for-granted that the appearance of these

particular themes in their play are ‗blanket‘ statements that these types of play were

‗purposeful play‘, simply because children were engaged.

This is echoed in Edwards and Cutter-Mackenzie‘s (2013) study of play in EfS

albeit focussed on an environmental theme, which found that children are more likely

to benefit from play if it was purposeful to them. What this entails is that children

should have opportunities to have access to resources, opportunities to be engaged in

dialogue with both teacher and peers about sustainability issues and to have different

mediums to explore meaning be it through art, experiments and play. The next

section will explore how play combined with optimum pedagogical conditions can

provide a space for children to make meaning within the context of ECEfS.

5.7 The Importance of Play in ECEfS

The spontaneous play episodes that were child led was a critical incident in this

research, because it demonstrated the notion that complex issues such as poverty can

enter the context of early childhood education in a manner that is meaningful and

appropriate to young children. The fact that these play episodes were independently

led by children, further reiterates that children are competent and capable in

investigating everyday issues that take place in this world despite it being

complicated or at times unsettling.


Poverty 219

Figure 5.19. Model of spontaneous play in ECEfS (influenced by MacNaughton, 2008; Rinaldi, 2006;

Smidt, 2013).

Figure 5.19 represents a conceptualisation of how child-led play was able to

support my role as a teacher-researcher in utilising the value of play as a medium for

ECEfS in exploring wide dimensions of sustainability beyond the environmental

dimension. On the left side of the model is the role of the teacher as a facilitator. The

teacher or educator supports the child through promoting children‘s learning in a rich

learning environment. In addition, the teacher is also a scaffolder of children‘s

learning (Rinaldi, 2006; Smidt, 2013) where the child is provoked and challenged to

develop broader knowledge and understandings. The sphere depicts children as

active agents of change. Children are supported to be agents of change because in the

Com

pet

ent

Cri

tica

l-co

nst

ruct

ive S

caffold

ed learn

ing

Rich

learnin

g co

ntex

t

220


present, children are viewed as capable and competent beings who can understand

complex issues. Due to this image of the child, children are supported in learning

through being immersed in socially constructive and critical learning environments.

It is the merging of these two polar ends of the sphere that makes the convergent

sphere in the middle possible. Children are able to independently carry out complex

and critical play because of the rich experience and knowledge as a result of co-

learning with the teacher, and the respect and believe in children that they are

capable individuals who can problem solve and take charge of their own learning.

5.7.1 Reflections on my role as a teacher as facilitator

In this research, my role as the teacher-researcher was flexible, where it

interchanged between being a facilitator, a researcher or as the protagonist that

followed the lead of the child. Rinaldi (2006) and Moss (2014) suggest when the

educator is seen in this light, it takes away that notion that the educator is the

assumed more knowledgeable person that ‗transmits‘ knowledge to learners. This

type of teaching that ‗transmits‘ ‗knowledge is ineffective in current world

experiences as each person‘s experiences are individual and unique and not

necessarily reflective of what is transmitted by the educator. The issue of viewing the

educator as the transmitter of knowledge discounts individual children‘s social

context. Instead, the educator is a researcher who is constantly combining theory

together with practice (Rinaldi, 2006).

In the context of these three different spontaneous play episodes, my role was

of a facilitator. The groups of children in these play episodes, collaboratively and

organically explored themes that were related to poverty that was of interest to them.

As the teacher-researcher, I did not contribute to the conversations that took amongst

the children and instead chose to sit back and observe the spontaneous play episode


Poverty 221

that took place. After reflecting on the three spontaneous play episodes, I was

reminded of my personal hesitancies of letting the children use the medium of play

as a space for exploring complex world issues such as poverty. My hesitancy in the

use of play as a medium of making-meaning, was fear that the play may become

tokenistic, unethical and potentially harmful to both the children, and the people who

do experience poverty. Nonetheless, when the collaborative conversations amongst

the children took place, the children demonstrated both a sense of inquisitiveness and

confidence in exploring themes such as hunger, wellbeing and homelessness, that

were possibly a result of having ownership over their specific play episodes. These

were topics that adults would potentially label as unsettling to introduce to young

children, yet the children in these play episodes were able to demonstrate that they

were capable in exploring these themes through an appropriate and organic medium.

As the teacher-researcher, the potentiality of me introducing these themes in a

meaningful way would have not been the same as how the children themselves

spontaneously carried out the play episodes.

Returning back to my beginning stages of planning this project work on

poverty, as seen in Figure 5.20, the way I approached introducing and facilitating

children‘s learning on this topic, were based on my personal ideas of where the

research could potentially lead to.

222


Figure 5.20. Teacher-researcher‘s initial plans.

Figure 5.21. Children‘s initial inquiries on the directions they want to take in this project.

Take this Figure 5.20 in comparison to the children‘s first brainstorming

session on poverty, (shown in Figure 5.21), there is a difference in where I predicted

the direction of learning could take place in relations to the children‘s inquiries about

poverty. In Figure 5.20, I had planned for explorations around understandings of


Poverty 223

poverty from a ‗broader‘ definition of poverty. However, what the children were

interested in (this was in the early stages of the introduction phase of the project

work) as depicted in Figure 5.21, was initial cause-effect understandings of poverty. I

was reminded of the power that I brought into this context and the potential of it to

‗take over‘ children‘s ownership of authentic forms of inquiry. Freire (1998) refers to

this as being critically aware of the taken-for-granted understandings that we pass on

as ‗truths‘. These ‗truths‘ run the risk of limiting children‘s opportunities to

understand the issue of poverty through multiple lenses and explorations that support

broader definitions and understanding.

Therefore, it was important that I was constantly aware of my role as a

facilitator of learning as opposed to a transmitter of knowledge. As presented earlier,

the children of these play episodes, were independent in exploring the themes around

poverty to the extent of even choosing their own props and resources. There were

multiple times during the play, where I began to question my own role as a

facilitator, specifically in experiences where children demonstrated independence

without the need for a teacher. However, I was reminded that the role of a facilitator

was not narrowly to simply ‗facilitate‘ and leave children to their own devices. By

facilitating the children‘s learning, I was documenting their learning experiences in

order to make their learning visible, and to further observe where their learning

direction was leading in order to use it as part of reflection for the action research

cycle. By taking a step back as a facilitator, I was enabling children to become co-

researchers with me in this research.

5.7.2 Reflections of the children as agents of change

The opportunity for children to carry out spontaneous play experience on

poverty was possible, due to my personal belief that children are capable and

224


competent to explore abstract issues of socio-political sustainability. Nonetheless, I

am not naïve to claim that this sentiment or advocacy for children‘s capability was

the main reason of children demonstrating their emerging roles as agents of change.

Moss (2014) states that when the term competent is used to describe children, it is

simply not stating that children achieve a set of predetermined skills. Instead, a

competent and capable child is one that is able to rebuild their original theories after

facing negotiation and conflict with other social participants. This competent child

understands that learning and knowledge is a process that involves multiple learners

(Moss, 2014).

The children in these collaborative and spontaneous play episodes

demonstrated agency due to various factors and reasons. However, one of the main

contributing factors for children‘s emerging sense of agency in being agents of

change is due to their participation in conversations and dialogues about these

complex issues throughout the research. These spontaneous play episodes took place

in the synthesising phase of the project, yet prior to this, the children were always a

part of the dialogues about complex issues of poverty, be it with me or amongst their

peers. Moss (2014) states that learning is a process that involves sharing ideas,

negotiating conflicting ideas, and finally refining understandings. When children

miss out on the opportunity to be social participants that are involved in dialogue

with one another, they also potentially risk opportunities to be agents of change.

Transformative change takes place when children are invited to be a part of a social

process that recognises that learning is not based on outcomes but where they are

able to participate in a context that is complex and evolving (Moss, 2014). Hence, in

this research, to support children to become agents of change, knowledge around

poverty was not ‗transmitted‘ to children. Instead the children were invited to be


Poverty 225

participants of learning, and in the play episodes, being a participant of learning was

when the children were being engaged in role-play dialogue about themes of

homelessness, wellbeing and acceptance with one another. As this was a play

experience that occurred among the children, they could have shared power with one

another, in an instance in which they were not subjected to adult ‗power‘.

5.7.3 Reflections of the importance of child-led play in ECEfS

In reference to this research, the children were able to spontaneously explore

issues of socio-political sustainability because of the rich learning experiences in the

prior introductions and synthesising phase of the project. The children, together with

me, were immersed in critical discussions and conversations about poverty,

expressed thoughts and ideas through storytelling, drawings, and clay sculpting.

From these shared experiences in different mediums of meaning-making, the

children and I were enabled to collaboratively build meanings about poverty through

being immersed in dialogue.

In this research, the value of the medium of play, as a space for meaning-

making cannot be discounted. Whilst the data from this research suggest that children

are capable of investigating their ideas of the experiences of people in poverty

through play, there remains limited studies of the use of play to explore socio-

political aspects of sustainability. Nevertheless, from this Critical Incident 2, data

shows that it is possible for children to explore complex real world issues that are not

restricted to just ‗natural‘ play in the environment (Davis, 2015).

In response to Research Question 2 (understanding the pedagogical conditions

that support children‘s participation within the dimensions of socio-political

sustainability) it was important to understand how play, which is an important feature

in early childhood education, can be used by children as a medium to explore

226


understandings of socio-political sustainability. As explored above, the critical play

incidents took place when a group of children on three separate occasions

independently took initiative to extend understandings of poverty through play. In

the first play episode, a group of children were role playing the main character Scat

Cat supported by the introduction of carers and doctors. Here the children linked

understandings of poverty with wellbeing. In the second play episode, children were

in the block area constructing a home for the character, Mutt Dog. Here, the blocks

were used to represent Mutt Dog‟s new home and the importance of safety and

having friends. Wood (2009) suggests that when children use play as a vehicle to

make meaning, the children are using this opportunity to reflect on their ideas about

the cultural reproductions of power in their world as opposed to play simply being

about a child‘s world. Finally, in the third play episode of the healthy plate, children

used the medium of clay to sculpt healthy food sculptures to symbolise healthy plates

to share with those who did not have access to food. In this third play episode, the

impetus for children to make a table full of healthy food and share it with others was

a result of the previous shared dialogues they had from the shared reading of the

book Maddi‟s Fridge. Just like the previous two play episodes, the children were

enabled to have multiple conversations with one another, and challenge each other‘s

narrations about their world (MacNaughton, 2009). In this case, the children were

challenging each other‘s narrations and understandings of poverty.

The children in these three play episodes were independent of adult direction.

The themes that were explored were collaboratively actioned out by them for various

potential reasons which include curiosity or uncertainty. As the children took

direction of their own learning, they were able to decide on the protagonist of the

play, actions and strategies to solve the dilemma and be creative with one another.


Poverty 227

Edwards and Cutter-Mackenzie (2013) labels this type of play as purposefully-

framed play. Purposefully-framed play is where children are provided with resources

to support their exploration of certain ideas and concepts and are encouraged to be

engaged in social dialogues amongst peers with minimal adult engagement and

support (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie, 2013).

These open-ended play episodes did not happen in a vacuum, instead were

built upon from children‘s prior engagement in discussions and storytelling

experiences in the introduction phase of the project, engagement in using the medium

of the visual arts to make meaning about poverty, as well as their familiarity and

experiences in the medium of play throughout their Kindergarten and home

experiences. The medium of play, is a space where children are enabled to

individually or collaboratively make meaning and explore issues about their world

(Smidt, 2013). For example, in the first play episode of Maddi‟s Fridge, the context

of this play episode started off from the first week in the introduction phase of the

project work. I had just read the book Maddi‟s Fridge to children as an introduction

to this project. After the book was read, the children and I brainstormed some ideas

of what they thought about the two main characters. One character always had a full

fridge of food at home, whilst the other character had a scarce fridge at home. The

children were quick to decide that the character‘s family with a scarce fridge had no

employment, or had no savings. The children‘s initial understandings of poverty in

the first week were revolved around understandings of cause-effect. The children‘s

initial understandings of poverty were recorded as my teacher-researcher reflection

shown below.

228


How interesting it was that in the book itself, there was never any mention of

the terminology or word money or poor.

Yet, some children were quick enough to point out that this was an issue of

being poor, and that Maddi and her family simply lacked enough funding to buy

the necessities in food. Some of our friends also pointed out that Maddi‟s family

might not have enough money, because Maddi and her sibling were not part of

the work force, therefore were unable to receive wages or money to support

their family.

Some things to ponder from these conversations with children are reflection on

what taken for granted thinking‟s we have, and how we can challenge those

thinking‟s. For example, the thinking that people who are poor are sad or that

those who don‟t have enough money, is a result of not having employment. A

recent study (ACOSS, 2016) shows us that a significant portion of people who

receive wages (32%) is not a guaranteed indicator of keeping them above the

poverty line, especially when their jobs are low paying and insecure. Further

things we can explore include

• Explore the notion that, those who experience poverty are not just people who

don‟t work/ are lazy

• It isn‟t about having toys, money, or materialism things that necessarily make

people happy.

(Teacher-Researcher Reflection 8. 11. 2016)

My specific teacher-researcher reflection in my journal entry during that first

week highlighted my interpretation that the children‘s initial understandings of

poverty were linked to cause-effect understandings such as lack of unemployment

(circled in blue). I reflected on this and planned for ways to extend and challenge that

understanding as represented in the red circle. This action of planning and reflecting

on each learning experience would have been carried out multiple times in the course

of this research. In other words, before this spontaneous play episode, children would

have had many opportunities to be engaged in conversation and experiences of

making meaning about poverty. It is this context of being an active participant that

makes mediums such as play, valuable. Therefore, when it was time for the children

to revisit their initial understandings again, the children used the medium of play to

reinterpret meanings (Edwards & Cutter-Mackenzie, 2013). For example, in the


Poverty 229

children‘s third play episode on Maddi‟s Fridge (making clay sculpted food to

symbolise healthy plates), the children were exploring themes of wellbeing, where it

was important to have access to basic needs such as food. This is different to their

first recorded understandings on the story of Maddi‟s Fridge (as reflected by me in

the blue circle in my teacher-researcher reflection above). The children have used

this medium of play as a space to refine and reinterpret meanings about poverty,

where their meanings are more complex and extended beyond the initial cause-effect

understandings.

Additionally, in the children‘s play episodes, the conversations that took place

allowed for what Hagglund and Johansson (2014) labels as ‗value conflicts‘ where

children are not just passive receivers of knowledge. For example, in the play

episode of Mutt Dog, in Figure 5.13, there was a value conflict of a child wanting to

knock the structures of Mutt Dog‟s home. However, Phil, one of the children who

had built this wooden home for Mutt Dog quickly instructs the other child to get out

of the home and essentially to not knock it down. Phil‘s reasoning was so that Mutt

Dog has a home, in order for Mutt Dog to not feel lonely. Dialogues such as this,

support children‘s emerging awareness of how being sustainable is essentially about

being a part of a community of diverse learners.

Therefore, the medium of play is a valuable space for exploring themes of

sustainability which include the dimensions of socio-political sustainability. Wood

(2009) suggests that opportunities for play should never be outcome oriented. These

play experiences were critical because it was not a planned play experience from me

for the children to understand a specific aspect of poverty per se. Instead, the

children took authority in making their play experience meaningful, because the

topic that was re-interpreted was one that was chosen by the children themselves.

230


5.8 Chapter Summary

This chapter has explored children‘s meaning-making ways of understanding

poverty through the medium of play. Before the specific play episodes were

analysed, this chapter first looked at the challenges I encountered, from the

perspective of myself as the teacher-researcher, in providing opportunities to extend

and challenge children‘s understandings of poverty. One of the challenges in

planning for an experience regarding the topic of poverty, was ensuring that the

intentional teacher-led experiences were not tokenistic or unethical.

The children surprised me when they independently and cooperatively led

spontaneous play on understanding poverty amongst themselves. This spontaneous

play what formed Critical Incident 2. The chapter then elaborated on the context for

Critical Incident 2, and highlighted two emerging roles for children that were a result

of these spontaneous play episodes. The first emerging role was children as active

learners and the second was children as active citizens. Both roles were constantly

intertwined in these play episodes, however for the purpose of the analysis in this

chapter, these were explored separately within the specific context of the three

spontaneous play episodes.

The chapter ended with a discussion on the medium of play within the realm of

ECEfS, including the taken-for-granted views of play and the benefits of play in

meaning-making about socio-political sustainability issues. The next chapter will

elaborate on the beginning stages of the culminating phase of this project, where the

children share their refined and broader understandings of poverty with others. This

is the context in which Critical Incident 3 took place. Unlike the previous critical

incidents that explored children‘s shift of understandings of poverty and their agency


Poverty 231

in forging understandings of these issues, Critical Incident 3 is about the challenges

of exploring poverty within the Christmas festive season at the centre.

Chapter 6: Critical Incident 3: Merry Christmas – Children as Powerful Consumers 233

Chapter 6: Critical Incident 3: Merry Christmas – Children as

Powerful Consumers

6.1 Introduction

This chapter presents and discusses Critical Incident 3 which took place in the

later stages of this research, just prior to the culminating phase of the project. Before

exploring Critical Incident 3, it is worth briefly revisiting Critical Incident 1 and 2.

Both of these critical incidents took place in the synthesising phase of the project. In

the synthesising phase, the children were exploring meanings about poverty. In

Critical Incident 1 and 2, analysis was focussed on the children and their ways of

meaning-making. By contrast, analysis of Critical Incident 3 is focussed on how the

external environment and context mediated the children‘s learning about poverty. In

Section 6.1, I introduce Critical Incident 3 before describing the context for this

critical incident in Section 6.2. In Section 6.3, I will then explore the concept of the

Power of Marketplace. MacNaughton‘s (2009) ―Power of the Marketplace‖ (p. 70)

theorises how the environment, or in this case how the celebration of Christmas has

the potential to influence children‘s emerging understandings of poverty. This is

followed by Section 6.4 in which I explore MacNaughton‘s (2009) ―Power of

Position‖ (p. 69) which, in the context of this study, questions the powers of the

adults in children‘s learning environments and how their ―position‖ influences the

learning that takes place. This specifically applied to critically examining my power

in this space as a teacher-researcher. In Section 6.5, to fully understand Critical

Incident 3 it is important to revisit events and circumstances (the ―precursors‖) that

occurred leading up to the incident. Section 6.6 uses my reflections as the teacher-

researcher to provide cautionary perspectives generating some new understandings

234

Chapter 6: Critical Incident 3: Merry Christmas – Children as Powerful Consumers

about how the Power of the Marketplace can mediate children‘s learning around

socio-political issues including poverty. Finally, this chapter concludes with a

summary of Critical Incident 3 in Section 6.7.

6.2 Context for Critical Incident 3

Critical Incident 3 occurred at the beginning of the culminating phase, which

took place in Week 3 of the final term of the school year. In Australia, the school

year is divided into four terms, and Kindergartens also follow this calendar. The final

term typically covers the months September to December. The project‘s culminating

phase thus coincided with the lead-in to the festive season of Christmas which is

celebrated widely in Australia, including in Kindergarten settings. In the project

approach, the culminating phase is a period where children share and educate others

about their learning around the topic explored in the project under focus (Helm &

Katz, 2011).

Critical Incident 3 was highly influenced by the approaching of the festive

season of Christmas. According to MacNaughton (2009), the season of Christmas

can invoke the ―Power of Marketplace‖ (p. 70), which in turn influences children‘s

environments. MacNaughton (2009) defines the Power of the Marketplace as the

conditions of power that continually influence how people, including children, make

meaning in an increasingly globalised world. For example, in relation to the early

childhood context in which this study was set, the Power of Marketplace was brought

directly into the Kindergarten as the Christmas theme gained momentum. In a

Marketplace the meanings that influence children can be narrow and, quite often,

belong to particular groups of people. Hence, in an early childhood context, this can

mean including the theme of Christmas into the early childhood curriculum, along

with its strongly commercialised aspects. Dau and Jones (2016) suggest, in their


book exploring the inclusiveness of various celebrations that are taught in early

childhood contexts, that educators must reflect on the messages of celebrations that

are celebrated in the early childhood curriculum, and consider whether Christmas,

being a dominant western cultural artefact, is actually reflective of the needs and

cultures of the children and families who are part of the centre.

This Power of Marketplace can also include the environmental culture of the

early childhood context. In this specific research setting, during the final term of the

kindergarten year, end of year celebrations appear to be carried out for two reasons.

The first reason is to celebrate children and their journey throughout the

Kindergarten year, and the second is to celebrate the festive season of Christmas.

Over the December Christmas period and through January, the centre is closed,

coinciding with the Queensland school summer holidays. Thus, this culture of

celebrating Christmas relates partially to its timing at the end of the Kindergarten

year and provides an opportunity for a whole-centre celebration before the

Kindergarten year closure. Christmas is also a dominant western cultural practice. As

mentioned in the previous chapters, the research site is located within the grounds of

a large metropolitan University. The cultural practice of Christmas in the centre is

that each Kindergarten room has an end-of-year celebration that incorporates a

Christmas party. During this time, the classrooms typically adorn their rooms with

aesthetic decorations, which include a Christmas tree. This is then followed by a

whole-of-centre Christmas celebration, which normally takes place the week prior to

the kindergarten closing for the school holidays. For these Christmas celebrations,

families prepare a communal feast, where there is entertainment and Santa Clause

appears. Upon reflection, the Power of the Marketplace, including the culture of the

research site during the festive period can dictate the meaning of Christmas, and this

236


context was crucial to and formed Critical Incident 3. The following section explores

the Power of Marketplace in relation to the specific event of Christmas which

interceded Critical Incident 3.

6.3 The Power of Marketplace at Christmas

In the beginning stages of this study, or approximately 6 - 7 weeks before

Christmas, the pedagogical conditions created by the context and me as the

pedagogical leader in the classroom, enabled children to engage in experiences that

were not necessarily influenced by the theme of Christmas. The celebration of

Christmas in western cultures is linked to historical events and spiritual beliefs of

particular Christian religious groups. Unfortunately, in contemporary culture,

Christmas has become heavily associated with commercialisation and

competitiveness. Dau and Jones (2016) write that Christmas can potentially become

an equity issue, where the commercialisation and competitiveness are beyond the

means of most families, in a world in which everything seems focussed on gaining

the latest popular toy and/or merchandise. If Christmas is not reflective of the needs

of the children and family members in the early childhood setting, and only

celebrated because it is a dominant celebration in western culture, then there are risks

for marginalisation for those families who do not practice Christmas (Dau & Jones,

2016).

As mentioned earlier, in this research site, Christmas is a cultural celebration

that is practiced in this setting. Together with the ―Power of Marketplace‖ via media

advertisements and visual signifiers in the external environment, Christmas and its

influences were present during this project. Going back to Critical Incidents 1 and 2,

some of the meaning-making around poverty demonstrated by the children went

beyond cause-effect understandings of poverty. In both Critical Incident 1 and 2,


different groups of children showed emerging understandings of inclusiveness and its

correlation with poverty and were even independently able to explore meanings of

inclusiveness through play. These critical incidents did not carry Christmas themes.

Shifts in children‘s understandings of poverty became evident as Christmas

drew near and Christmas signifiers were present in their environments which

included the immediate Kindergarten setting. This appeared to influence the

children‘s meaning-making on this issue of poverty. Critical Incident 3 took place in

the beginning stages of the culminating phase. I had invited individual children and

small-groups of children to share their emerging understandings of poverty to a

wider audience including their peers, family members and children from other

classrooms in the Kindergarten. The children had a choice on whether to work

individually or in small-groups. The physical space that children were invited to

work in included a designated quiet space away from others or within the more

relaxed classroom atmosphere as depicted in the below photographs shown in Figure

6.1 below.

Children working in a small group inside the classroom. Children working outdoors, in a quiet space.

Figure 6.1. Small groups of children working in different spaces in their environment.

238


One of the mediums that I had invited the children to use in order to share their

emerging meanings was through the medium of the visual arts. This included

opportunities to represent meaning through paintings, drawings and clay. Even

though the medium of visual arts was suggested by me, the children were

autonomous in their expressions of poverty via this art form. Making-meaning

through art is one of the many ways that children share their thoughts in early

childhood contexts; thus, the experience provided a valuable medium through which

the children could communicate their understandings. Meaning-making through

painting, drawing, clay sculpture and digital art are part of the everyday curriculum

at this research site. Children have access to spaces for artistic expressions and can

use various art tools that support them to make meaning. Furthermore, children in

this research site are familiar with the creative spaces and tools, as they have had

multiple opportunities to explore them throughout the kindergarten year.

Additionally, quite often the Kindergarten teachers themselves used the visual arts as

a way to communicate meaning with children.

In this setting, especially for this research topic, Christmas can be seen in

children‘s art pieces. The analysis of these artworks is based on both the visual cues

and verbal description given by children, when their work was re-visited by both the

child artist and me. This revisiting of children‘s pictures involving a discussion

between the child and I allowed for co-construction and clarity of meaning. Below

are some examples of children‘s visual illustrations as another way for children to

express meanings about poverty.


Here, Lee shared:

Lee: This is the kids, without adults … they are lonely … but they

are about to have friends who bring them presents for

Christmas

(23.11.16)

Figure 6.2. Children receiving presents for Christmas.

Other children related Christmas to meanings of poverty linked addressing

basic human needs and overall wellbeing.

240


Carol: This is a happy cat, because he has a home, and a family …

and he isn‟t lost. He lives in a unit and will be celebrating

Christmas soon.

(22.11.16)

Figure 6.3. Cat celebrating Christmas.

Figure 6.4 pictures show children making-meaning through the visual arts, but

in the context of what they (the child artist) could do to support those experiencing

poverty. The artworks were later transcribed by me together with commentary

provided by the individual child artist.


ILLUSTRATIONS COMMENTARY

Ann‟s planning meeting which includes

providing those experiencing poverty with some

yummy food. The red circle highlights a

Christmas tree, where Ann indicated that a

beautiful tree is also needed for those

experiencing poverty to have.

Gina‟s planning meeting which includes getting

rid of loneliness. Alongside Gina‟s ideas on

loneliness, she also shared (as seen in red circled

columns) celebrating Christmas and having a

Christmas tree are important to support those

experiencing poverty.

Carol‟s planning meeting which includes a home

to go to. The red circle visually depicts, a full

fridge and Christmas as a way to support those

experiencing poverty.

242


Figure 6.4. Children‘s ideas and suggestions on how to help those who are experiencing poverty.

Figure 6.4, shows the ‗template‘, a four-square grid that was used almost daily

in a planning meeting during the Kindergarten group time. A planning meeting is an

everyday practice in the daily routine of the centre. It is a time where both educator

and children come together as a group, and plan or map out the learning experiences

of the day. The experiences that are decided by children and educator are both

intentional and spontaneous. The planning meeting is often ‗mapped‘ out through a

four-square grid map, for children to visually see what their day ‗looks‘ like and also

for children to take agency in their choice of learning experiences. This planning

meeting usually takes place in the morning, after the children‘s morning tea. The

educator is the person who would usually scribe children‘s suggested learning

experiences on the grids, but children themselves have also had opportunities to

become scribers. In Critical Incident 3, the children used this grid spontaneously,

outside of the daily group time, to express their ideas. This experience was

orchestrated by me but the direction of the experience was decided by the children.

After reflecting on the previous phases of this project, and incorporating children‘s

strengths in the visual arts, I intentionally planned to use the medium of the visual

arts to tap into children‘s emerging understandings of poverty. The art materials

available included transparency cards and white board markers. When these

materials were distributed to a small-group of children who were keen to join in, I

asked them to express some of their thoughts about their emerging understandings of

poverty. Immediately, one of the children in that group suggested holding a planning

meeting of the things that they could do for those experiencing poverty.

For this self-initiated ‗planning meeting‘ template, children divided the card

into a four-square grid, and visualised what they could do to support those


experiencing poverty. Each of the four-squared boxes depicts children‘s

understandings of poverty: what they thought they could do for support to those

experiencing poverty and what children experiencing poverty might be like. As

explained by children Carol, Ava, and Gina, their meaning making included

drawings of having a home to go to, some yummy food and getting rid of loneliness.

However, the theme of Christmas (circled in red) also prevailed in most of the

children‘s art representations. This prevalence of Christmas in their visual

illustrations indicated the children‘s awareness of happenings in their external

environment and this awareness potentially influenced their choice to feature

Christmas in their planning meeting. As mentioned earlier, the signifiers of

Christmas were also present in the Kindergarten because during this festive season

the classrooms were decorated with Christmas decorations including a Christmas

tree. These aesthetics in the classroom and perhaps their engagement with signifiers

in their external environment (e.g., supermarkets, shopping malls, street signs)

potentially mediated children‘s understandings of how they might support those

experiencing poverty during this festive period.

As MacNaughton (2009) suggests, the Marketplace will continue to influence

children‘s meanings of their world through entertainment or lifestyle industries. For

example, in Figure 6.2, it appears that Lee‘s visual interpretation of Christmas in the

context of poverty is that the feeling of loneliness can be negated with the receiving

of a present. From this example, it seems that the Power of Marketplace has instilled

the understanding that commodities such as presents can result in a person achieving

desirable feelings such as an antidote to loneliness. However, what is interesting

when I interpreted the children‘s visual illustrations is that it appears the children

were also capable of constructing meanings of poverty that were value free of the

244


powers of marketplace. Figures 6.4 show the theme of Christmas (circled in red) was

present in children‘s representations, alongside other understandings of poverty such

as a home to go to and a full fridge (Carol), family (Ann) and getting rid of being

lonely (Gina) that were scribed by me when seeking clarity from children about their

visual illustrations. The presence of these meanings, alongside representation of

Christmas, demonstrate that children are capable of making multiple meanings of an

issue such as poverty independent of the Power of Marketplace. Despite the children

appearing to be able to express meanings of poverty alongside representations of

Christmas, Dau and Jones (2016) propose that it is important to be mindful that all

celebrations are inclusive to all members of the kindergarten setting. Therefore,

despite the potential Power of the Marketplace and the commercialised aspect of

Christmas, there may also be children and families who have understandings of

Christmas that are meaningful and important without these narrow and commodified

meanings attached to them.

Using a critical theory lens, it is pertinent to understand how the global

marketplace, as well as authentic individualised understandings influence how

children make sense of socio-political issues. What this entails is, understanding how

children‘s different environments influence their understandings of poverty. This

includes the external environment via the ways of talking about and symbolising

celebrations that are accepted and valued in communities, families, and cultures. This

Kindergarten research site was located within a large metropolitan University, in a

suburb classified by the Australian Government‘s Socio-Economic Indexes for Areas

(SEIFA) index (ABS, 2011) as relatively affluent. Understanding this external

environment together with knowledge of the individual children‘s own internal


family and cultural environments, is important for making sense of the meanings

children attach to poverty as these are inherently framed by their environment.

Yet, the meanings about poverty, and the Christmas influences that children

bring to Kindergarten were not static. Children‘s emerging understandings of poverty

were extended via different types of learning experiences. As the teacher-researcher,

I envisioned opportunities for children to be involved in multiple and complex

explorations, such as the visual arts is important in order to support children‘s

emerging understandings of poverty. In this research site, the children had multiple

avenues, or 100 ways (Rinaldi, 2006) for communicating about poverty that enabled

their expressions of multiple themes. The term 100 languages of children coined by

Malaguzzi (Malaguzzi, 1994; Rinaldi, 2006; Smidt, 2013) refers to the multiple ways

in which children could make meaning; ways that go beyond the dominant ways of

communicating meaning in education settings such as via, verbal language alone. For

example, in Figure 6.4 , the children were able to express their ideas about poverty

drawing on multiple themes, for example, having access to basic needs such as food

(Ann and Carol); having a healthy wellbeing by getting rid of loneliness (Gina), and

the need for Celebrating Christmas (Gina). By allowing children to express meaning

in multiples ways, aside from verbally, I was able to ‗listen‘ to children‘s

understandings (Rinaldi, 2006; Smidt, 2013), and reflect on the many layers of

influences that shaped children‘s understandings of poverty, particularly during the

festive season. Figure 6.5 in the following section demonstrates how visual arts are

used as a way to share meanings of poverty with children‘s family members.

246


Figure 6.5. Children‘s visual representations are displayed beside the sign in tablet, (an electronic

device where parents/caregivers sign-in/sign-out their children‘s attendance from the Kindergarten

during children‘s drop offs and pickups) for families and friends to view and for children to share their

meaning makings with them.

Throughout the culmination phase of this project, the children had shared

various understandings of poverty, and suggestions on how to support those

experiencing poverty. One of their suggestions to support those experiencing poverty

was through donations of gifts to those experiencing poverty. This will be elaborated

further in the ensuing sections. The opportunity for children to action their intentions

by way of donating gifts to those experiencing poverty was supported by me. Figure


6.6 shows the end point of this endeavour. Each child, together with the support of

their parents, brought in a donation to be made to a local charity. The gifts were

collected, wrapped, and stored under the classroom‘s Christmas tree, which had been

set up two weeks beforehand. The gifts were arranged to be collected by a local

representative of the charity during the centre‘s Christmas party.

Figure 6.6. Children brought donations of toys, books and clothes for a selected charity and placed

these under the Christmas tree.

However, in reference to Figure 6.6, the pedagogical decision of erecting a

Christmas tree two weeks prior to the children generating the idea for donated

Christmas gifts also needs to be considered. Upon reflection, it appeared that the

visual appearance of the Christmas tree in the classroom may have mediated

children‘s decision-making processes in some way. I noted the presence of Christmas

tree images in the children‘s drawings in Figure 6.4. In other contexts, such as

248


shopping centres, on television, and radio, there were campaigns launched with a

similar theme of providing gifts for people in need. Although these campaigns were

not directly present in the Kindergarten classroom, these concepts may have been

part of the children‘s external environments. Hence, the notion of donating presents

to those who are experiencing poverty may have emerged. Therefore, as highlighted

earlier, despite the commercialised Power of the Marketplace children are also able

to tune in and build upon other messages integral to the way that Christmas is

enacted. As explored earlier, Christmas can be, strongly associated with

consumerism, competitiveness and acquisition, and further reinforced via symbolic

cues such as the presence of the Christmas tree in children‘s learning space. These

messages of consumerism can indirectly present themselves to children despite the

best of intentions. However, this research also showed that children can hold

multiple meanings of poverty even when bombarded with Christmas symbols.

Hence, as Dau and Jones (2016) explain, there needs to be deep considerations

of the reasons why a certain celebration is undertaken in the early childhood centre,

and of its place in the curriculum. Arguably, this is especially important in settings

where understandings of Christmas highly influenced by the Power of the

Marketplace. Reflection is needed in regards to whether celebrations such as

Christmas are undertaken due only to environmental pressures such as

MacNaughton‘s (2009) Power of Marketplace or if they accurately represent the

children, their families, and cultures in the setting.

Intensifying marketplace pressures can overshadow alternative meanings of

Christmas that include messages of love, peace and hope. For example, later in

Section 6.5, kindergartener, Maggie (23.11.16) made the comment: ‗imagine a world

without presents‖ and ―give[ing] them presents to make them happy too‖, as her


suggestion of ways on how to support those who experience poverty. In this learning

context, Maggie and a small-group of her peers appeared to be exploring ways on

how to ‗give‘ to those who experienced poverty. It may also be plausible that the

children were focused on their own moral acts of charity. Set against the backdrop of

Christmas, it appeared that the children‘s proposed independent acts of donating

presents to those experiencing poverty were generous acts. While, this is encouraging

in relation to their moral development (Jackson, 2014), it is important to also

consider how Christmas and the Power of the Marketplace shapes children‘s

understandings about ways of addressing poverty simply via charity.

MacNaughton (2009) suggests that there is no escaping the Power of

Marketplace as it constitutes the everyday context in which children live.

Increasingly, this context is becoming a globalised and commodified world

(Hendrick, 2015). The world in which children live continually influences their

attempts at meaning-making, particularly through outlets such as toys, entertainment

and clothing. As demonstrated in the findings of MacNaughton‘s (2009) study on

gender play and gender construction, the Marketplace has the capability to

continually meditate how children make meaning. This includes children‘s cultural

meanings related to race, class and gender (MacNaughton, 2009).

MacNaughton (2009) also suggests that there are other factors aside from the

Marketplace that continue to affect children, including the Power of Position (p. 69).

In the next section, I will use this concept to elaborate on the power of the teacher‘s

position.

6.4 Power of Position and the Teacher

As the teacher-researcher, I was conscious of how Christmas had played a role

in children‘s decision-making processes during this project. At the same time, I was

250


also conscious of my role in the classroom, and my power of position. The Power of

Position (MacNaughton, 2009) can potentially ‗silence‘ children in regards to their

being engaged in dialogue with others to make meaning about issues such as poverty.

At the same time, I needed to be aware that my own understandings about poverty

did not fall into a clear binary of right or wrong in relation to how the children made

meaning of poverty. In the context of this research, specifically in the lead up to

Critical Incident 3, I questioned if in the responses the children gave, and the

concepts about poverty they were able to reflect, were authentically what the children

understood or were what I as an adult wanted to hear? Putting it bluntly, were the

children‘s responses in during our learning experiences a result of transformational

knowledge or the indoctrination of the teacher? (Teacher-Researcher Reflection

25.11.16).

From the reflection in my journal above, I knew that the Power of my own

Position was certainly in question. According to Freire (1998), construction of

meaning is never value free or individualistic. Instead, meanings are always

influenced by the power of the culture in question. Upon reflection, in Critical

Incident 1, I carried out the role of teacher and facilitator, interchanging it as the

children progressed in this phase. In this phase, there were several intentionally-

planned learning experiences implemented as a response to children‘s initial

understandings of poverty. Critical Incident 1 and 2 reflected a shift in learning for

children, where they expanded how they made meaning of poverty, and

demonstrated agency to explore these concepts through spontaneous play and forms

of creative expression.

However, in Critical Incident 3, even though I had orchestrated experiences, it

was the children who led the discussions and pursued the direction of wanting to


donate presents. With this child-initiated suggestion, the children showed enthusiasm

over the type of presents that should be given, possibly because this conversation

was more of a child-child dialogue. Jordan (2009) suggests that when child-child

dialogue takes place, the intersubjectivity between the two speakers is shared.

Intersubjectivity is the opportunity between two or more people to have shared

dialogue, to undergo conflicted understandings and then have opportunity to refine

those understandings to develop shared meaning (Jordan, 2009; Phillips, 2010;

Rinaldi, 2006). When there are opportunities for each speaker to be equal

participants in meaning making, the power is also shared.

In Critical Incident 3, children‘s intersubjectivity or the power between

children appeared to be shared. This was apparent when the children themselves

sought clarification from a peer who suggested making donations of presents. The

children went on to share some thoughts as to what they wanted to donate gifts and

the reasoning behind their suggestions. From the conversation amongst them, it

appeared as though the children expressed their thoughts amongst peers, without

being subjected to the Power of Position in the form of the more knowledgeable

teacher. As seen in the excerpt above, the children were confidently making

statements about their thinking and only once sought the advice of the teacher when

Kara asked, Could we give them something that we don‟t need, say if we have two of

the same toy?

In contrast to Critical Incident 1, my role in Critical Incident 3 was one of

constantly interchanging from a teacher to a facilitator of learning through the

pedagogy of listening (Rinaldi, 2006). I had actively listened to the theories that

children were making and supported their understandings through facilitating further

understandings. Some of the teaching pedagogies that were used included

252


intentional-planned experiences (Connor, 2011), focussed questioning (Fusco, 2012),

and carrying out opportunities to express meaning through different mediums

(Rinaldi, 2006; Smidt, 2013). Nevertheless, my actions as the teacher-researcher

seem to support Moss‘ (2014) and Jordan‘s (2009) explanations of the contradictory

role of the scaffolding teacher. Although the aim of this research was for children to

be agents of their own learning in regards to exploring understandings of poverty, as

Moss (2014) and Jordan (2009) propose, the role of the scaffolding teacher can

potentially hinder children‘s self-agency role, due to the scaffolding teacher being

the assumed as the more knowledgeable person. If the aim of the scaffolding teacher

is for children to achieve certain learning goals, then opportunities for

transformational learning can potentially be lost (Moss, 2014).

The image of the teacher (Rinaldi, 2006) who scaffolds their students is one

that stemmed from Vygotsky‘s social constructive theory (Vygotsky, van der Veer,

& Valsiner, 1994). The idea of scaffolding is that a more knowledgeable person

supports the learner in order for the learner to achieve a skill, an understanding or a

developmental milestone. Therefore, within the context of this research, this theory

would suggest that children were ‗scaffolded‘ towards attaining specific

understandings and meanings of poverty. When children are scaffolded by the more

knowledgeable teacher to attain specific goals, it may undermine the learner as a co-

constructor of knowledge (Moss, 2014). Although it seems a sound strategy,

scaffolding may, indirectly allow for the Position of Power to be continually held by

the teacher.

Hence, in these circumstances, it is important that there is shared

intersubjectivity between the educator and the children. As suggested by Jordan

(2009), intersubjectivity is when both educator and child share the power between


them. What this entails is that both educator and child are enabled to construct

meaning through sharing ideas, having their values conflicted and finally re-

organising those understandings to make new and shared meanings (Rinaldi, 2006).

In Critical Incident 3, there appeared to be intersubjectivity in the children‘s

discussions, where they are seeing each other as equals with shared power between

them. It is possible that the children participating in this research were comfortable

enough with each other to share their thoughts about presents or gifts, despite

knowing that those suggestions were potentially ‗not the ones‘ expected by me as

their teacher.

The children‘s meaning-making was not without influences from the

environment. As the timing of their discussions coincided with the festive season,

and the constant reminders and visual cues associated with Christmas, it was not

surprising that the power of social markers had ‗crept‘ in this project. The power of

Christmas was also something that I grappled with it, as shown in the following

reflection from my teacher-researcher reflective journal:

However, the time frame of this research also coincided with the Christmas

festive season, adding much pressure and difficulty to carry on with exploring

this topic. This topic despite being very important is not necessarily authentic to

the children‟s everyday life experiences. There were countless times throughout

this research, where I felt frustrated and lonely as it was too much hard work to

continue on with exploring „big‟ themes like social injustice, equality and

poverty. It certainly felt much easier to join in the festive season of Christmas

joy and wonder.


Referring to the above excerpt, if I had chosen to ‗give up‘ and to simply ‗join

in‘ the festive period, I would not have created the learning conditions for children to

have critical dialogues about poverty. Rinaldi (2006) suggests that teachers need to

create spaces where children are listened to and spaces where they can be immersed

254


in dialogue. In the context of Critical Incident 3, if I had not pursued and persevered

with the direction of the research, then opportunities for children to arrive at refined

meanings about poverty, particularly in the context of Christmas, could have been

lost. Christmas has Marketplace Power to influence people, particularly children,

with ‗accepted‘ or culturally-valued meanings of the festive season. Therefore, if

spaces to have critical conversations about Christmas and its links to poverty are not

created, there is potential for children to create knowledge for themselves that is not

critically framed. A critical framing matters for explorations of socio-political issues

because it allows children in this context to understand and go beyond that cause-

effect understanding of poverty to associations with consumerism and

merchandising.

This sentiment was also reiterated by a parent of one of the children in this

study, when she commented that it was important for her child to be aware of other

children and their experiences because “Brisbane doesn‟t always have these

situations, or it isn‟t obvious at least” (Parent Comment, 18.11.17). This comment

highlighted the importance of inviting children to be a part of conversations that are

not necessarily based on their everyday experiences, yet are important to building

awareness and empathy.

In situations such as these, as adults, who ‗naturally‘ have these Powers of

Positions over children, it is vital that we are aware of our position. As mentioned

above, the Power of Position gives the person in question power to ‗push‘ their

agendas and values onto others. Therefore, when children do challenge our

expectations or our own valued constructions, we need to question our Power of

Position. To illustrate this, when the children had decided that they wanted to donate

material presents, if I had continued to practice my Position of Power, I would have


dismissed their suggestions because presents do not ‗fit‘ in with the previous

explorations of ‗social markers‘ and how they should not be used as a marker for

inclusion. If I did dismiss this notion suggested by the children, then I could have

potentially hindered the children‘s attempts to understand their role in acts of charity

and ultimately reinforce my own Power of Position.

The next section takes a deep dive into the context leading up to Critical

Incident 3. In order to fully understand the why Critical Incident 3 is a significant

part of this research, it is useful to revisit Critical Incidents 1 and 2. Critical Incidents

1 and 2 took place in the project‘s synthesising phase, where children were building

and constructing meaning about poverty. As stated by Helm and Katz (2011),

synthesising occurs when children build and construct meanings about a particular

interest. Concepts and understandings the children explored included inclusiveness

and exclusiveness, access to basic needs, and the concept of how certain ‗social

markers‘ are powerful. The methods used by the children and I to explore these

concepts included storytelling, representation through visual art, and spontaneous

play. However, as stated earlier in this chapter, these precursors before Critical

Incident 3, related to children‘s meaning-making. Therefore, it is important to

understand the shift in thinking, from children‘s initial understanding to meaning-

making influenced by the external influences and factors such as Christmas.

6.5 The Precursors before Critical Incident 3

The transition from the synthesising phase to the culminating phase was led by

me, the teacher-researcher. The reasons for the timing of this transition to the

culminating phase were twofold: the fact that the Kindergarten year was drawing to a

close; and the ‗open-endedness‘ of the Project Approach (Helm & Katz, 2011).

Open-endedness is characteristic of projects that stem from exploring child-initiated

256


interests. In theory, the projects synthesising phase does not have a timeline, as it is

dependent on whether or not children‘s interests and explorations are sufficiently

fulfilled in order to proceed to the next stage, the culminating phase. In this research,

the synthesising phase was not straightforward as the children lead the directions of

the research and these directions were not linear. Nevertheless, due to time

constraints, the project transitioned to the culmination phase in Week 3 of the

research, or approximately 5-6 Weeks before Christmas. In preparation for the

culminating phase, I initiated a small-group discussion with six children to explore

what actions they would like to take next. As stated above, the culminating phase is a

period where children express and share with others their learning as a result of

participating in the research (Helm & Katz, 2011). For this research, children would

be sharing their expanded or refined understandings of poverty with their peers and

others including their families. As a lead-in to the culminating phase, the children

and I revisited what had occurred over the course of the synthesising phase. To recap

on the synthesising phase, the small group of six children and I reflected on what had

taken place, using my Action Research Folder (shown in Figure 6.7) as a prompt.


Figure 6.7. Action Research Folder.

Reflections focused on past learning experiences such as the creative artefacts

produced by the children (e.g., drawings of their interpretations of Rich Cat, Poor

Cat), and the documentation of children being active researchers around the topic of

poverty (e.g., photographs of children in brainstorming sessions; photographs of

children using digital technology to search for images of children from different parts

of the world). Following the small-group reflection, I asked a focussed question

about how the children could share their learning with others. Some excerpts from

this conversation included:

258


Teacher-researcher: We have done so much exploring about those who don‟t

have enough and understood some of the things that were

experienced by them as not being fair, like not having

enough food or how people didn‟t want to be friends with

them.

Now, how can we share what we now know with other

people? What can we do for those who don’t have enough?

Ava: Have a party, so we can share our food and things.

Ben: More books to read about this.

Ronny: We should bring a toy like my brother‟s school. They bring a

toy or present or books and put it under a tree for other

children who don‟t have Christmas presents.

It was this last suggestion by Ronny which became the impetus for other

children to build on this idea in the culminating phase. There was an immediate

interest from this group of six children, evident when they started to engage in

conversation with one another about the possibility of bringing in a present as a

donation as seen below:

Carol: We should give and share our things. I think they would like

lots of presents, we can buy them presents.

Kara: Could we give them something that we don‟t need, say if we

have two of the same toy?

(23.11.16)

The comments above showed the children‘s intention of wanting to share and

to give others presents during the festive season. Carol suggested that receivers of the

gifts would want lots of presents, while Kara wanted to give things that she doesn‟t

need. Beyond highlighting intentions for gift giving, the data showed the children‘s

awareness of categories of difference. For example, the use of ―we‖ and ―them‖ to

distinguish between themselves, and those to whom they would share presents.

Additionally, the idea of ―buy[ing] them presents‖ and ―give[ing] them something

we don‘t need‖ also positions ―them‖ as not having social markers such as presents.


At the same time, there was also a sense of altruism from children, when the

following comments were shared:

Maggie: Imagine a world without presents … imagine if they didn‟t

have any presents at all. That‟s why it‟s important for us to

give them presents to make them happy too.

Ann: Giving presents away especially to those who need them,

will make us happy … not just them. They might need toys or

books.

(23.11.16)

The conversation above depicts that the children in this study viewed presents

as something that could influence one‘s emotional state; in this case, resulting in

happiness for both giver and receiver. This understanding contradicts some of the

shared dialogue in Critical Incident 1, whereby a key idea explored involved social

markers (e.g., shoes) and how these influence one‘s sense of belonging and

participation in society. This was a shift in understanding from the children‘s initial

ideas of cause-effect, where a person was viewed to have social markers provided

they work hard to be able to afford them. Following many explorations and

conversations, the children were showing emerging understandings of inclusiveness,

whereby social markers should not determine one‘s membership in social contexts.

Yet, in Critical Incident 3, the data above showed how the children constructed

the idea that social markers are important and vital to determine happiness.

Furthermore, it is not just the possession of social markers alone, but the

understanding that the children (―we‖) would provide welfare to ―them‖ to give a

sense of fulfilment. In this context, self-fulfilment is the children knowing that their

actions could make the gift-receiver happy, thus giving a sense of fulfilment to them

as the gift-giver. This understanding positions those who are experiencing poverty as

dependent on those who are not to ensure their happiness.

260


After hearing these suggestions from children, I reflected on these

contradictory understandings of inclusiveness and social markers, the emerging

themes of altruism, and the use of the terms ―us‖, ―we‖ and ―them‖. These reflections

were recorded within my Teacher-Researcher reflective journal:

I feel as though we have reverted back to the first week. When I asked the

children what direction they wanted to take next in the project, most of the

children want to do a donation through giving toys or presents away. The idea

of donation is great, however I feel as though children did not truly understand

the concepts of inclusion and exclusion that were explored over the past weeks.


After reflecting on Critical Incident 3, my thoughts initially went back to the

teaching and learning experiences that took place at the beginning of the synthesising

phase of this project. In the first week of the synthesising phase, the children‘s

interests revolved around the explorations of how poverty and the lack of resources

can influence how a person is either included or marginalised from social

participation in society. For example, in Those Shoes (14.11.16) Jeremy felt sad

because he did not possess the latest shoes that were on trend, which were also

owned by most of his school peers. As a result, Jeremy experienced a sense of

exclusion.

From the example above, and in the intentional teacher-led activity (14.11.16),

children appeared to understand how those shoes or social markers potentially

excluded Jeremy from his peer group. In this previous activity, the children

expressed the idea that possession of specific social markers can determine one‘s

inclusion into society, and that everyone should be treated equally regardless of

social class. This shift in the children‘s thinking, highlighted the importance of

listening to children‘s theories and attempts at meaning-making, and providing


appropriate pedagogical conditions to challenge and extend that cause-effect

thinking. Pedagogical conditions such as open-ended questions, having conversations

with children and providing children with a variety of resources, such as different

types of appropriate aged children books on poverty were some of the conditions

used to support children to broaden their understandings on poverty.

Therefore, when the children commented that it was hard to imagine a world

without presents, or that giving away presents to them (receiver) will not only make

them happy but us (giver) as well, it made me reflect on the meanings children were

attaching to poverty. For example, I wondered whether the research provided

children with opportunities to speak openly and whether they truly had access to

shared decision-making with me. From their responses, it seemed that children were

reverting back to their initial understanding that one‘s happiness is determined by

possession of social markers, despite sharing emerging understanding about how a

lack of social markers could also lead to exclusion. These contradictions became the

focus of my reflections in the early days of the culminating phase in my teacher-

researcher reflective journal:

How do I extend these understandings of the link between social markers

and how they can influence one‟s inclusion or exclusion into society?

Children are showing understanding and awareness in the differences

between people (e.g., us versus them), how do we deter that notion that the

difference between us and them is that „we can save them‟?

There is certainly difference between people in this world, but how do we

ensure that children have positive messages about differences?


Similar understandings about difference or the notion of ‗us‘ and ‗others‘ were

also found in MacNaughton‘s (2009) study of eight 4-year olds‘ constructed

meanings of gender. In MacNaughton‘s study, the author used the example of two

262


items; a blue badge and a female doll. In MacNaughton‘s (2009) study, she explored

the meanings attached to items and how it influenced the behaviours and responses

from people who encountered it. In the study, a female doll had a blue badge pinned

to it, which resulted in this female doll being laughed at by some children. The

reason the children had laughed at this doll was due to the constructed meaning of

the colour blue and its symbolic attachment to males. Therefore, when a female

counterpart has a male symbol or an ‗other‘ symbol attached to it, that female

counterpart was at risk of being subjected to derogatory behaviour, such as being

laughed at. An educator in MacNaughton‘s study realised this and pursued this

gender incident with the children in question. When pursued by the educator in

regards to symbolism such as colour and its link to gender, the children agreed that

gender should not be symbolised by colours despite using this symbolisation prior,

when they were laughing at the female doll. In short, the children demonstrated

understanding that the choice of colours should not determine who is ‗us‘ or ‗them‘.

However, in that study, MacNaughton also makes the point that the children

may have agreed with the educator‘s point of view because they knew that it was

time to be ‗silent‘. MacNaughton (2009) suggests that situations such as these are a

result of the Power of Position. The Power of Position is defined as situations where

children construct meanings in an already established space of power. Therefore, the

meanings that children construct are never isolated, and are deeply influenced by the

established meanings constructed by the people who hold the power. Hence, what

was alarming in MacNaughton‘s study was the idea of how children knew when to

silence their constructed meanings, that were different to those perceived as

acceptable to the person in power; in this case, the educator. Therefore, in the case of

Critical Incident 3, it was important to know if and when children were ‗silencing‘


themselves in the presence of adults. In instances in which children know to be

silent, the notion of researching with children is lost. There is then the risk of

children becoming non-participatory participants (Hart, 1997). According to Hart

(1997) if children‘s presences only appear to be as active participants, but are

restricted by pressures of others including those of the adults, then children‘s

participation presence can be tokenistic. If children feel the need to be silent with

adults about their understandings of complex sociol-political issues, this would be

counter-productive. To address this, adults must reflect on the pedagogical

conditions which includes the Power of Position of the teacher.

Glover (2016) suggests that children make evaluative judgements on others

particularly when their life experience is different. The social context in which

children live will assign value to particular social markers such as language,

appearance and possessions including the latest toys, gadgets and trends. As a result

of these understandings, children make judgements based on those who do, or do not,

have access to commodities and social markers. The possession (or non-possession)

of social markers indicates to children that some things are valued, whilst others are

not. Thus, what would be alarming in this Critical Incident 3, regardless of children‘s

evaluative judgements, would be that children were pressured to stay ‗silent‘ in the

presence of their teacher and discussions about poverty. When children enact the

need to be ‗silent‘, opportunities for listening and engaging in dialogues about

unequal power relationships are lost (Glover, 2016).

In the context of this research, the possibility of children‘s ‗silence‘ should not

be ‗reflected‘ on or ‗searched for‘ only in the later part of the research. In the light of

reading about the Power of Position, during the culmination phase, when children

shared their refined understandings of poverty with others, I needed to be more

264


cautious of ensuring that children‘s refined understandings of poverty were heard and

shared with others. I was also more vigilant that children were not pressured to be

silenced. Nevertheless, it was pertinent to understand that my Power of Position was

present throughout the action research, not only at this point.

To illustrate this, within the context of the precursors prior to Critical Incident

3, it was my intention to challenge children‘s initial cause-effect understandings of

poverty. For example, I wanted to challenge the understanding that an individual‘s

experience of poverty was due to their not saving enough money or committing to

employment. To challenge this understanding, I intentionally planned for experiences

that supported and broadened children‘s understandings to go beyond the links

between poverty and employment, and poverty and monetary sources. Nevertheless,

in doing so, I had also indirectly used my own Power of Position by providing

children with resources that may limit their understandings of poverty to those I

wanted to champion. For example, the intentional choice to use the book Rich Cat,

Poor Cat reiterated binaries inherent in some understandings of poverty (e.g.,

good/bad; clean/dirty; better/worse) where one was clearly more valued than the

other. Another example was in my choice of the text, Those Shoes which also had

potential to further exemplify deterministic thinking with the use of the term ‗those‘,

which subtly implied ‗those‘ shoes were more highly valued than ‗this‘ shoes. As

MacNaughton (2005), drawing on the work of Derrida (1991) states, it is essential

that teachers deconstruct the meanings that are attached to classroom activities, in

order to expose the various underlying ‗truths‘ that shape how teachers make

meaning of the world.

Children make meaning through being immersed and engaged in their social

contexts. These social contexts include the cultures of their societies, their families,


and the myriad others they encounter in their daily lives. Hence, meaning is never

totally predictable, and instead is influenced by environments. MacNaughton (2005)

using Deleuze and Guattari‘s (1987) concept of rhizomatic, suggests that children

cannot ‗be‘ knowledgeable in a linear manner. Instead children are constantly

‗becoming‘ knowledgeable as a result of the values, beliefs of the environment and

society that they live in. The term rhizomatic is defined as flexible, dynamic, and

lateral logic that is influenced by complexity and change (MacNaughton, 2005).

Thus based on this understanding of rhizomatic, children‘s meanings of poverty

should constantly be challenged to reflect the flexibility, dynamic and complexity of

social contexts as opposed to a predictable cause-effect understanding. In order to

challenge this cause-effect understanding, it is pertinent that deconstruction of

meaning is done throughout the whole action research cycle in order to challenge

underlying assumptions and meanings that continue to ascribe value to the

knowledge of some and marginalise others. Hence, despite my own biases or Power

of Position, it is important that I am aware that am not ‗transmitting‘ knowledge to

children, but instead are supporting children in ‗becoming‘ knowledgeable through

encouraging them to contribute, challenge and deconstruct various meanings

attached to understandings of poverty.

The next section will explore how pedagogical conditions, despite our

intentions are never isolated and are constantly influenced by the Power of

Marketplace.

6.6 Caution on the Power of the Marketplace for Teachers

Despite children showing capability of making meaning about poverty

alongside the understandings of Christmas, it is important to bring attention back to

the aim of this research, particularly in this culminating phase. The reason for this

266


action research was to understand ways to broaden children‘s experiences with

sustainability issues that go beyond environmental themes. Therefore, it was

important that key themes such as democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010) as outlined in Section 2.2.2 of Chapter 2‘s Literature Review, are

highlighted throughout this research. Below is an excerpt from my teacher-

researcher‘s journal, which shows reflection on this ethical issue.

Nevertheless, the festive season together with the power of marketing,

commercialisation and consumerism, the festive season tends to be about the

latest „hot‟ toy on children‟s wish list. As a result, when we talked about how we

could contribute to help those who did not have enough, the suggestions that

children came up with, were naturally linked to Christmas and presents … As a

team, the majority of the children agreed that they want to give a present to

children who could not afford Christmas, or have a present for Christmas.

These are all great suggestions from children themselves; however, it is

pertinent that children understand too that this act of giving does not

necessarily mean that they have „saved the world from poverty‟…

(Teacher-Researcher Reflection, 23.11.16).

From the above excerpt of my Teacher-Researcher Reflection, the notion of

children ‗saving the world from poverty‘, reminded me of Hart‘s (1997) ladder of

participation, specifically children‘s active participation, and the degree of it being

participatory or non-participatory. For children to be active participants of this

research, it was important that the children‘s voices were heard, particularly in issues

of poverty, however not at the risk of them being manipulated under the guise of

children becoming saviours. The idea of children independently wanting to give

presents away should not be confused with tokenistic actions of children ‗saving the

world‘. Figure 6.8, is an example of how children‘s intentions may potentially

become tokenistic.


Figure 6.8. A donated present that reads ‗Love you people who don‘t have enof‖

Figure 6.8 depicts how children can also use their donations as mediums of

communication. Here, we have a gift that a child, with the support of her teacher, has

written a special message for the child receiving this gift.

As suggested by Davis (2015), ECEfS is not about producing future citizens

who can solve today‘s world problems. Instead, ECEfS is about enabling children to

have responsibilities in understanding these world issues and contributing to ways to

address them. In order for children to be able to understand their responsibilities in

participating and contributing to the dialogues of today‘s socio-political issues,

Rinaldi (2013) suggests that there is a need to re-imagine the image of the child. The

image of children as weak, and in need of protection or that children are in

preparation to be adults is widely circulated in society. Children should be viewed as

capable and competent members of the community with rights to be involved in

experiences that affect them. These experiences include understanding and exploring

268


socio-political issues such as poverty. Rinaldi (2013) suggests that young children

are capable to be constructors of knowledge that can go beyond tokenistic

understandings, if children are supported and involved in experiences that require

decision-making and critical thinking. Hence, in the context of this research, children

need to be involved in discussions regarding poverty, where their voices and

concerns are listened to by the teachers. For example, in Figure 6.8, it is the child‘s

intention to donate their gift to those experiencing poverty. This intention of this

specific child should not be restricted to the child doing their part in ‗solving‘

poverty. Instead, the next experience the child could benefit from is being involved

in critical conversations that question the foundations of poverty that might include

topics based on democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010).

These conditions for children‘s participation however, are dependent on the educator.

If the educator views children in this passive view of children needing protection, the

risk of children‘s participation becomes tokenistic. Furthermore, if the educator

deems issues such as socio-political sustainability as inappropriate to children, it

indirectly suggests that children are incompetent in understanding everyday issues of

this world they live in. For this research context, the image of the child has always

been one where children are recognised as members of their community. I had

supported children, particularly when exploring issues of socio-political

sustainability through finding ways to support children‘s learning processes. Thus, it

was important in the last phase of the project, that I broadened, clarified and

challenged children‘s understandings of poverty to rise beyond the tokenistic nature

that they have ‗saved‘ the world.


6.7 Chapter Summary

Critical Incident 3 has explored children‘s understandings of poverty under the

conditions of power over which children themselves do not have direct control over.

These conditions of Power are MacNaughton‘s (2009) Power of the Marketplace and

the Power of Position.

In the context of this research, the Power of the Marketplace comes in the form

of the festive season of Christmas. The culmination stage of this research also

coincided with the festive Christmas period, thus heavily influencing the

environment of children‘s everyday lives including the environment in the research

site. At this stage of the research, the aesthetics of the kindergarten site was that the

rooms were decorated with Christmas decorations and the upcoming school holidays

approaching over at this period. Christmas has increasingly become a festive period

that is deeply saturated with messages of consumerism and competitiveness. Dau and

Jones (2016) suggest that it is important to reflect on the reasons why celebrations

such as Christmas are celebrated, and its place in the early childhood curriculum.

For this research context, the Power of Christmas has appeared to influence a

group of children‘s meanings of poverty. In comparison with Critical Incident 1 and

2, the children‘s dialogues and visual arts demonstrate a shift of meaning of their

understandings on poverty. In Critical Incident 1 and 2, children showed growing

awareness of how the acquisition of particular social makers can influence one‘s

inclusion or exclusion into society. Under this understanding, those who did not

possess these social markers (predominantly those who experience poverty) are

subjected to marginalisation by society. However, when poverty was explored in the

context of Christmas, a small-group of children appeared to resort back to

understandings that social markers are important to one‘s wellbeing, despite the prior

270


understandings that depict how social markers should not determine one‘s

acceptance into society.

The Power of Position was also explored, where in this research context, my

position as the adult in the classroom was questioned, particularly how it positions

me to have an assumed power over the young children in the. The educator or adult,

naturally has an assumed more knowledgeable position in comparison to young

children. As explored in the chapter, this Power of Position has the risk of

marginalising children‘s participation in this research. In the example given above in

Section 6.4, the Power of Position explored how a group of children involved in

discussions of what they could do to support those experiencing poverty, there

seemed to be intersubjectivity amongst themselves as equal contributors to the

dialogue. In this example the children shared various suggestions that included

making donations of gifts to other children experiencing poverty. MacNaughton

(2009) shared that the risks of the position of the educator is that children feel

pressured to ‗silent‘ themselves.

Finally, this chapter concluded with the deconstruction of the Power of the

Marketplace, or in this research site, this Marketplace came in the guise of the power

of Christmas. During this action research, as Christmas coincided with the last stages

of the research, the effects of Christmas, particularly the commercial side of it, had

played a powerful influence in children‘s meaning makings about poverty.

Data analysis in this chapter had shown that the Power of the Marketplace

(MacNaughton, 2009) or in this case, the Power of Christmas had strong influence on

how children understand and make meaning about poverty. As a result, it was

pertinent that children were exposed to conversations about poverty and themes of

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) particularly in the


context of the Power of the Marketplace in order to challenge children to have a

broader and critical understanding of poverty.

In the following chapter that which presents Critical Incident 4 (which took

place during the festive season as well), the children in this research demonstrated

that there were able to take self-agency and take action. What was different in

Critical Incident 4 was that children began to show emerging signs of activism. Jones

(2016) suggests activism takes place when one calls for change and action towards

experiences that involve themes such as democracy, peace, equality and human

rights (UNESCO, 2010). This awareness for the advocacy of social and active

change reflects children‘s broadening understandings of poverty. Critical Incident 4

is not a predictable cause-effect incident resulting from Critical Incident 3. Instead

there are various factors influencing this critical incident, which will be presented in

the following chapter.

272

Chapter 7: Critical Incident 4: Children‘s Emerging Sense of Agency in Understanding Issues of Socio-Political Sustainability

Chapter 7: Critical Incident 4: Children’s Emerging Sense of

Agency in Understanding Issues of Socio-Political Sustainability

7.1 Introduction

This chapter will present and analyse Critical Incident 4. Critical Incident 4

reflects the children‘s transformative ideas on how to improve the lives of people

who experience poverty. This Critical Incident 4 was not planned, rather it emerged

from children‘s cinders (Derrida, 1991) or their developing sense of empathy on this

research topic. In this chapter, as in previous chapters, I begin in Section 7.2 by

elaborating on the context of Critical Incident 4 in order to understand how the

environmental influences may have acted as an ignition for children‘s beginning

cinders. Next, in Section 7.3, the meanings of ‗cinders‘ as employed by Derrida

(1991) are explored in depth to identify when these beginning cinders emerged in the

timeline of the research. These cinders are important aspects of this research. The

cinders highlight and locate children‘s beginning thoughts that acted as stimulus to

their transformative ideas on how to support those who are experiencing poverty.

These transformative ideas are viewed as children‘s emerging critical awareness and

sense of agency in Section 7.4, and this forms the foundations of Critical Incident 4.

Critical Incident 4 is where children began to share initial ideas on how they could

support those who are experiencing poverty. These transformative ideas are

reflective of MacNaughton‘s (2003) transforming curriculum where learners

recognise that there are injustices in their world, and seek change to further improve

the lives of those affected by injustice. Finally, in Section 7.5, I focus on two

separate conversations with two children which exemplify the Critical Incident, and

explore children‘s sense of agency on what actions they could potentially take for

Chapter 7: Critical Incident 4: Children‘s Emerging Sense of Agency in Understanding Issues of Socio-Political

Sustainability 273

those experiencing poverty. This chapter concludes in Section 7.6, with a summary

of the importance of understanding children‘s emerging sense of agency, and how it

can instigate children‘s transformative ideas, particularly in tackling socio-political

issues such as poverty.

7.2 Culmination Phase: Context for Critical Incident 4

The context of Critical Incident 4 is the culmination phase of this action

research. According to Helm and Katz (2011), the culmination phase is a period

where learners share their refined understandings with others at the end of their

project cycle. For the context of this research, despite the flexibility of both action

research and the Project Approach, the culmination phase timeline was intentionally

proposed by me in recognition of the upcoming event of Christmas, and the ending

of the Kindergarten year for the children. For Critical Incident 4, this period occurred

approximately 4 weeks before Christmas. Therefore, even though Critical Incident 4

was not an intentional experience planned by me, the context of it had potentially

influenced children‘s decision-making. On reflection, children‘s directions of this

research would possibly be different if the culmination phase was not restricted by

the Christmas period and the end of the Kindergarten year.

It is worth highlighting that the pedagogical conditions for Critical Condition 4

are predominantly conditions that children are already familiar with. At this stage of

the year, children would have had many different experiences with these pedagogical

conditions. For example, the decision to use storytelling sessions as a way to engage

children in conversations about worldly issues such as poverty; using the visual arts

as a medium to represent thinking‘; and enabling unfettered access to time and space

to be engaged in meaningful exploration. These were pedagogical conditions

cultivated intentionally at the centre in which the research took place.

274


Nevertheless, despite the Kindergarten year coming to an end, this data

analysis chapter draws attention to children‘s cinders or their emerging sense of

agency and empowerment within the busyness of the culmination phase. As the

teacher-researcher, it is this emerging sense of agency that interested me and is

closely analysed to uncover ways in which children can be engaged in explorations

about socio-political sustainability issues such as poverty. This emerging sense of

agency is now explored below through the symbolic idiom of Derrida‘s (1991)

Cinders.

7.3 Cinders and the Beginning of Children’s Sense of Agency

As explored in Chapter 2, Derrida (1991) coined the term cinders to represent

the cognitive dissonance that one experiences as a result of critically reflecting on

situations that involved themes of democracy and social justice. Derrida (1991)

suggests that the term cinders is about deconstructing taken-for-granted meanings

and practices in everyday society that has become the norm of living. Cinders are

about understanding whose voices continue to be privileged or silenced. In this

present research, I explored the children‘s cinders, or their cognitive dissonance in

response to their meaning-making about poverty. These cinders are interpreted

through dialogues with the children, the children‘s artefacts, and storytelling sessions

that explored themes that include understandings of democracy, peace, equality and

human rights (UNESCO, 2010), and their beginning sense of agency. The children‘s

beginning sense of agency highlights that they are critically reflective about the

experiences of others experiencing poverty and can problem-solve ways to support

people experiencing such circumstances.

For this research on children‘s understandings of poverty, children‘s sense of

agency, where children shared insight and reflection about the things that were a


Sustainability 275

concern to them, was not restricted to the project‘s culmination phase, or the final

phase of the action research timeline. As stated earlier, the culmination phase is

conceptualised as a period where children share or act upon on their refined

understandings of the particular subject under investigation (Helm & Katz, 2011). In

the context of this research, children‘s beginning sense of agency to problem-solve

these concerns of poverty can be traced back to the earlier stages of the synthesising

phase. It was these beginning understandings that potentially became children‘s

cinders in their connections between an individual‘s wellbeing and their access to

basic needs. Examples of these cinders which were evident in the children‘s data are

seen below:

Lola: Scat has no home, and is tired and hungry. He needs to eat,

like eat a lot. Poor cat must be chased a lot too

Teacher-Researcher: How does that make you feel Lola?

Lola: Sad, and maybe a bit angry, cause it‟s not Scat‟s fault you

know. He doesn‟t have a home, and all those humans and

other animals try and hurt him. He‟s only trying to get food,

so he has to steal cause he has no one to give him food or a

home.

Teacher-Researcher: Wow, what a great way to explain it to me. What do you

think we could do to change or help Scat the Cat, so that he

doesn‟t feel that way?

Lola: We need to make sure all cats are the same, so everyone has

enough food, no one is chased, everyone gets to go on a

holiday to Venice, everyone doesn‟t get chased, everyone

gets a present.

Teacher-Researcher: Yes Lola. How could we do this? Can you give us some

examples of what you would do?

Lola: Well, we could tell everyone here to be more kinder and to

be more loving. And not to be so mean just because we are

sometimes different.

(Lola, 21.11.26)

This exchange between Lola and I occurred in the synthesising phase or Week

3 of the research project. At this stage of the project the whole-class had already been

276


busy immersed in various explorations on the ideas and understandings of poverty

through detailed exploration of children‘s texts on poverty, having big and small-

group discussions to share and refine understandings of poverty, expressing ideas of

poverty through the visual arts, as well as actively making decisions in their own

spontaneous play exploring their ideas of poverty. These past experiences in the

synthesising stage demonstrate that the children built foundations of their sense of

agency through being active participants in social dialogues with one another, by

collaborating in decision-making processes, and finding ways to problem solve

issues related to poverty. In this context of the above, we had recently revisited the

text Rich Cat, Poor Cat (Waber, 1963) again, and I had read the book aloud with her,

in response to her request. This time, Lola and I were able to be engaged in

conversation with one another, which gave me opportunity to work alongside her to

reflect on our growing understandings of poverty.

Lola‘s understandings of poverty based on the conversation above, appeared to

depict an emotional connection to this topic. When Lola was asked about her feelings

in regards to the situation of Scat Cat not having access to basic needs such as a

home and food, emotions including ‗sad‘ and ‗angry‘ were shared by Lola,

particularly at the point in the story when Scat Cat has to steal food, and as a result,

is hurt by other cats. As this story of Rich Cat, Poor Cat was a revisited story, this

sense of sadness and anger seemed to stay with Lola long after the story experience

was complete. I began to consider whether this was a cinder for her; wherein she

expressed disagreement with the treatment Scat Cat received despite, Scat Cat having

done the wrong thing (i.e., stealing). To Lola, Scat Cat had no choice but to resort to

stealing, because Scat Cat needed access to food for survival. When pursued further,

Lola suggested that to help Scat Cat, we all need to make sure everyone ―is the


Sustainability 277

same‖, to be ―kinder‖ and to not be ―so mean‖ because of our differences. Lola‘s

sense of agency enabled her to makes sense of Scat Cat doing the wrong thing by

stealing, because she reasoned that it was more important to Scat Cat‘s wellbeing and

survival particularly as Scat Cat was experiencing poverty. This sense of cognitive

dissonance was something that Phillips (2008) also found in her study involving 5 - 6

year olds and their responses to a local bird becoming endangered due to the

deforestation of its habitat as a result of a growing human population. In Phillips‘

study, one the young participants rejected the notion of growth in population and

infrastructure, despite the benefits it could bring economically. For this participant,

the cinder or sense of agency was for the Coxen Fig Parrot, at risk of extinction due

to the deforestation of land to make way for housing growth. Similar to Lola, this

child readily rejected moral norms in favour of justice. Lola was able to make sense

of Scat Cat stealing food, yet at the same time was unaccepting of the behaviour of

other cats who had hurt Scat Cat. Based on social norms, the actions of both Scat Cat

(stealing) and other cats (hurting) could be interpreted as morally wrong; however,

Lola‘s cinders and sense of agency were ignited by Scat Cat‘s situation. To Lola, it

was important that Scat Cat had access to food, shelter and a sense of belonging in

order to survive his situation, despite knowing that stealing was morally wrong. This

demonstrates that young children are capable of reflecting on real-world issues that

take place around them. Through the dialogue between Lola and I, she was able to

share insights of things that did not sit well with her, and problem-solve the issues

through suggesting ways Scat Cat could possibly survive.

Another example of where children in this research demonstrated a sense of

agency can be observed in another recurring conversation between Mac and me. This

specific conversation was also recounted in the previous chapter.

278


Teacher-Researcher: You mean cats like Scat Cat? What do you think of that

Mac? Scat Cat not being liked cause he was shaggy?

Mac: Yeah, it wasn‟t fair. Cause he didn‟t choose to not have an

owner. He didn‟t have anyone to keep him soft.

Teacher-Researcher: And if only he would have an owner, then he can be

soft…and then maybe have friends?

Mac: Yeah, maybe the other cat‟s would like him

Teacher-Researcher: But that wouldn‟t be fair too though, to like someone only

because he was soft. What about the cats who were shaggy

then?

Mac: Sad, because they can‟t help it. It‟s not their fault … they

have no owners … they can‟t get nice combs or washes…

but it‟s not their fault. So they have to feel blue all the time.

And it‟s not their fault.

Teacher-Researcher: Yes Mac, I agree that is isn‟t Scat Cat or other shaggy cat‟s

fault. But whose fault would it be? Why are those like Scat

Cat not having friends just because of their shaggy coats?

Mac: Well… I don‟t know… but it‟s making those shaggy cats feel

so sad, and lonely, and it‟s not okay to feel like so alone and

also scared.

In this conversation, when I had enquired about Mac‘s thoughts in regards to

why poor cats with shaggy coats would not have friends, Mac was unable to give a

specific reason. However, he was able to explain the consequences of Scat Cat being

ostracised due to his appearance which resulted in Scat Cat being sad and lonely.

In reflecting on both Lola and Mac‘s dialogues, their emerging sense of agency

and awareness of others was evident. For both children, it appeared that the notion

that Scat Cat was treated differently simply because he was poor was unacceptable to

them. Instead, through comments such as „not to be mean because we are different‟

or „it‟s not okay to feel alone and scared‟ demonstrates children‘s perceptions that

wellbeing (specifically in this case, social interactions and personal safety) is a

necessity for everyone regardless of appearance or actions, perhaps the outward

signifiers of social class. Conversations such as these further reiterate that children

are active learners and have a sense of agency, because they are able to critically


Sustainability 279

reflect on real-world issues such as poverty, and to suggest ways to change and

support those experiencing poverty.

The children‘s sense of agency, as interpreted through Derrida‘s (1991) cinders

in relation to their conversations, is an important component for this current research.

These conversations provide entry ways to support children to recognise and to be

critically aware of themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010) that can take place within social contexts. Although the social

contexts in these conversations were from fictional storytelling scenarios, it was

important to listen to the children‘s reasoning and understanding. In order to

recognise children‘s emerging sense of agency, a pedagogy of listening (Rinaldi,

2006) is vital. As explored in previous chapters, a pedagogy of listening is not a

straightforward process of simply ‗listening‘ to children. A pedagogy of listening

involves tuning in to the relationships that children build with others and to their

environments in their attempts to make sense of their world (Malaguzzi, 1994;

Rinaldi, 2013). Thus, in the context of this research, a pedagogy of listening is about

being critical to the social and political factors that influence children‘s sense of

empathy. Take for example the conversations above between Lola and me, and the

exchange between Mac and me. Lola states that it is ‗not Scat‟s fault‘ that he had to

steal food, because he is home[less], tired and hungry. For Mac, no one wants to be

Scat‘s friend because of his appearance, a factor that Mac attributes to not having an

owner to help maintain Scat Cat‘s physical appearance. For both Lola and Mac, it

appears that their reasoning of why Scat Cat is treated unfairly is due, in part, to

these limited and possibly binary understandings of more versus less; clean versus

dirty; and guilty versus innocent. The understanding that a person (or in this case a

storybook character) is more valued because they have more (e.g., having a house

280


and food versus not having a house or access to food), or that they appear cleaner,

allowed me to tune into and listen to the cultural values representative of these

children‘s immediate contexts.

By ‗listening‘ to Lola and Mac‘s reasoning, I was able to reflect on appropriate

directions to further provoke and challenge their understandings of poverty to include

understandings that would go beyond binary reasoning. By ‗listening‘ to children,

pedagogical conditions were created to give alternate understandings of their world

that are broader in terms of the values of the children‘s immediate context. When

educators listen and tune in to children‘s reasoning, it enables them to understand

how children theorise their world (Glover, 2016). In this research, as established

earlier, the children‘s reasoning about poverty was influenced by their tacit

understanding that powerful forces determine what wealth and poverty look like

(e.g., wealthy people have clean appearances whereas poor people have dirty

appearances). Based on these insights, further experiences poverty were intentionally

planned to be more inclusive and to increasingly call for collaboration from the

children. This was so that the children were challenged to share their understandings

of poverty with others.

By listening to children theorising about their world, the teacher-researcher can

enable transformative change in children‘s learning. Moss (2014) states that

transformative change takes place when young children are enabled to take charge of

the direction and decisions within learning experiences. For example, in the context

of this research, when I engaged with a child‘s cinders or the issues that did not sit

well with them, I recognised that these issues were important for that child, and

supported them to pursue their thoughts and interests. In this sense, the success of the

learning experience was not measured by a preconceived ‗educational outcome‘ that


Sustainability 281

needed to be met, but rather by ‗new possibilities‘ opened up by the children where

their learning could be meaningful and authentic (Moss, 2014).

To encourage these ‗new possibilities‘ or future experiences of meaning

making, it is also pertinent that I was conscious of how the present experiences were

shaping children‘s search for ‗truth‘ in this world. Derrida (as cited in MacNaughton,

2005) states that these ‗truths‘ need to be deconstructed in order for children to be

exposed to the multiplicity of various meanings and ways of knowing. For example,

using the example of Lola above, her binary understanding of clean versus dirty

could be viewed as ‗othering‘ or valuing one person over the other based on physical

appearance alone. In this sense, if Lola‘s binary understandings were not challenged,

she may have continued to reinforce the idea that people experiencing poverty are

less desirable. Hence, in this context, as the teacher-researcher, it is important to

reflect on future learning experiences that can challenge binary thinking, and the

impacts of present experiences that can further reinforce power imbalances that have

potential to create injustices in societies. For classroom educators, this includes the

choices of texts in the classroom (e.g., the intentional introduction of the book of

Rich Cat, Poor Cat) and the immediate environment of such as location and related

demographic and cultural meanings.

The next section will explore an example of how I supported children to pursue

their cinders. By engaging children in learning experiences, I enabled them to pursue

their own interests, and in doing so, I indirectly supported their critical awareness

and sense of agency.

7.4 Children’s emerging Critical Awareness and Sense of Agency

Children‘s critical awareness about the themes of democracy, peace, equality

and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) inherent in the concept of poverty did not

282


progress in a linear manner throughout this action research timeline. Nevertheless, as

the research was entering the culmination phase, children‘s sense of agency and

critical awareness had developed to a point where children were showing emerging

understanding about the perspectives of others, and were able to provide suggestions

for improving the lives of those experiencing poverty. This occurred primarily in the

culmination phase of this research, where children were able to share their refined

understandings through dialogue with others and creative artefacts. One opportunity

occurred via a joint learning experience between a small-group of children and me.

In this teaching experience, I had invited children to be part of a dialogue that

explored some of their more refined understandings about people experiencing

poverty. This group of children requested to work with clay to express their

meanings, a common occurrence in this research site with its heavy focus on the

medium of visual arts. Visual representations that include clay sculptures, paintings

and drawings are mediums that are common to children from the start of the

Kindergarten year, and are able to be used by the children on a daily basis. The

children participating in this study were thus familiar with the use of various art tools

and techniques including techniques of manipulating clay with specific clay

instruments. Therefore, when the children requested to work with clay, they were

already experienced with this medium. Pedagogical conditions around the clay

experience included children working in small-groups, a quiet space away to work

away from the other activities of the Kindergarten room, access to clay tools, and

time to be immersed in their clay manipulation, which included no looming pressure

to ‗pack up‘ in line with the regular routine of the day.

As the children were manipulating their clay, I posed a question to the group:


Sustainability 283

Teacher-researcher question: How can we use this clay and share some of our

thoughts about poverty?

Carol: Maybe we can make sculptures of something, making

something like an object

Teacher-researcher: What object would that be, that is linked to the things you all

have been doing these past few weeks in kindy?

Jon: Maybe something like things we want to give to people who

are poor, or things that they need.

Carol: Yeah, sculptures of things they need, or things they don‟t

need.

Teacher-Researcher: Yes, Sculptures of things that is needed and not needed.

Jon: We can then display or something, dry it and paint it, like in

a museum

Teacher-researcher: A museum of poverty…

Jon: Yes, a museum of poverty!

Teacher-researcher question: What would you display in a museum of poverty?

What are some of the things that are needed or not

needed in poverty?

This exchange became the impetus for the clay learning experience was

significant to me, as it signalled a moment where children were taking initiatives in

this project as co-researchers; as individuals they showed agency in leading their

exploration of this topic and thereby indirectly influenced the direction of the project.

A shift of power from teacher to children was reflected in the teacher-researcher

journal entry below.

284


What would you display in a Museum of Poverty?

This was a great collaboration between this group of children and the

teacher. I felt as though that we were working alongside one another as

opposed to me taking on the role of „mentor‟. Before this project started,

(Conformation stage), I was aware of the changing roles of the teacher-

researcher, and the potential risk of that binary between teacher and

researcher. However, in this specific learning experience, I felt that the children

were co-researchers, as their input was valued, and was influential in the

decision making process of how this “What would you display in a museum of

poverty?” would look like. Reflecting on Danby and Farrell (2004) study, as a

teacher, I had to ensure that this experience (and the whole project) was

ethically done with and for children. I say with, as it is important for this

research, that children are depicted in a light where they are very capable of

participating in projects such as these, which are very real in this world. Now, I

also say for, because I am also aware of my own „natural‟ power that comes

with being an adult, and being their teacher. Particularly in real life issues such

as poverty, with this „natural‟ power, it is important that is used to support

children to let others know that this is what children want to share, this is what

they understand, this are their voices. With that understanding of power too, I

have to be very cautious that their voices are authentic, and not tokenistic,

where it is masked with adult agendas.


As seen in the reflection above, that shift in roles was evident and important to

highlight. Despite this project being initiated by me, when children took control or

were involved in the decision-making processes, the project developed potential to

be meaningful for children and to be something they would want to participate in.

Moss (2014) refers to this as a space for transformative change, when children

become genuine participants of their learning, without being pressured to be in a

learning space that prioritises outcomes and evidences. Transformative change is

when learners entwine the past and the present to create possibilities for new

directions in learning (Moss, 2014). In pedagogical practices that acknowledges

transformative changes, there is not necessary a ‗blueprint‘ of learning for children to

achieve. Instead, a context of alternative possibilities (Moss, 2014) is created with

potential for meaningful learning. It was one of the aims of this research to show that

young children were capable of exploring socio-political issues of sustainability,


Sustainability 285

such as poverty. Hence, when children demonstrated agency, and wanted to share

their awareness of poverty through clay work, it showed that under certain

pedagogical conditions, children were able to input and lead their learning on what

might be considered a relatively challenging topic.

In this specific learning experience there were a several pedagogical conditions

that were orchestrated by me. This included inviting children to use physical items

such as clay tools, and high quality clay, which children were already familiar in this

Kindergarten. However, the conditions that created space for Moss‘s (2014)

transformative change were those that provided children with time and space to be

engaged in dialogue with one another. These conditions included having

uninterrupted time to explore and manipulate with the clay despite it being close to

‗pack up‘ time, and space away from the ‗busyness‘ of the daily routines of the

Kindergarten where children are away from other peers and could constructively

work in small groups. Working with small groups of four at a time, I posed the

following question: What would you display in a museum of poverty? What are some

of the things that are needed or not needed around poverty?

In responding to the questions through the medium of clay, the children had the

opportunity to express their understandings of poverty through words, actions and

artefacts. As this was a small group activity, the space for children to share, explain

and refine their understandings was created and they could discuss their clay

sculptures, while at the same time justify or refine their meaning-making when

conversing with others. It is through these shared dialogues that the children were

demonstrating their emerging sense of agency, where they collaborated, critically

reflected and problem solved issues related to poverty with one another. Below are

286


some excerpts of children‘s comments about what they would display in the museum

of poverty.

Teacher-researcher question: What would you display in a

museum of poverty? What are some

of the things that are needed or not

needed around poverty?

Ava: Families … how do you be you, if you have no mums and

dads

Ella: Sadness, no food, no anything to play with … that should be

in the museum so that there is nothing like that again.

Ann: Happiness to be happy

Gina: Enough food! Healthy food like zucchini

Carol: More food!

Fred: Things like toys

Ben: Getting rid of sadness

Ravi: Having stuff like shoes, to run and play soccer … we all need

that

Kara: A sad face … we shouldn‟t have to feel sad. We all feel sad

… but we shouldn‟t have to.

Mac: Sadness … it‟s like not crossing the finishing line

Lola: Not having enough … they need enough like us.

From the excerpts above, there are a variety of suggestions around what people

experiencing poverty need, and what could be included in a museum of poverty. The

suggestions made by this group of children included economic factors such as

money; basic needs such as food; and social-emotional aspects that include families

and wellbeing, happiness and sadness. Social markers of wealth and advantages such

as shoes and toys were also included, indicating that they were attuned to how these

items could give those experiencing poverty affordances of being included by others.

For example, the linking of the social marker of shoes to the sport of soccer

(football), where children can be a part of a team sport. These comments represent

the children‘s views on what they think people experiencing poverty would need or

not need. As seen in the comments above, the children‘s understandings or


Sustainability 287

awareness of poverty were varied, as there is no one determined way to explain or

understand poverty. Children‘s understandings of poverty varied from cause-effect

understandings exemplified by the simple link between wealth/poverty and money,

to more complex understandings linked to broader substance and wellbeing. What is

important in experiences such as these is that children were able to share a variety of

meanings between one another and interpret these through dialogue and the medium

of clay.

As the children‘s different comments suggest, the depth of empathy varied

from child to child. Nevertheless, there was a growth in the children‘s

understandings evident here in comparison to the first few weeks of the project.

Here, the children were able to give a diverse range of suggestions about how to

improve the lives of those experiencing poverty. This is in contrast to the first phase

(e.g. 7.11.16 as presented in Chapter 4) of the project, which saw children sharing

their initial understandings of poverty after being introduced to the topic through a

whole-group shared reading session of Maddi‟s Fridge (Brandt, 2014). In these

beginning stages of the project, the children were asked to share their initial thoughts

of poverty through the context of the story characters, Maddi and her best friend

Sofia, who often did not have enough food in her home. At this stage of the project,

the majority of children explained that the only way to address poverty was by

acquiring more money.

Similarly in Hammond et al. (2015) study, children were also empowered with

various suggestions in terms of how they could support those experiencing poverty.

The 6-7 year olds in that study were engaged in discussions of poverty through

reflecting on their own and other families‘ access to food. Additionally, they also

looked at two hypothetical families‘ fridges, where one family had a full fridge of

288


food versus the other family who had a bare fridge. The children in that study linked

families‘ occupations such as the high paid mining occupations and its access to a

larger quantity of food, as one of the various theories as to why some families had a

full fridge, while others had a limited access to food. The children in Hammond et al.

(2015) study theorised several ways that they could support those experiencing

poverty which ranged from economic and social factors to influences for popular

culture. These included working harder, saving money, having a garage sale and

busking and singing popular and current pop culture songs. Similar to this research,

the children had a variety of suggestions on how to support those experiencing

poverty, ranging from the economic factors (e.g., having access to food and shoes) to

more complex factors such as social and emotional wellbeing (e.g., healthy food,

getting rid of sadness). Insights from this small-group of children depict the many

layers of children‘s understandings of poverty. The findings in the present study,

similar to the findings of Hammond et al. (2015) show that complex subjects such as

socio-political issues of sustainability can be discussed with children, despite the

many variations in their awareness of poverty. Furthermore, by inviting children into

these dialogues, they are able to become engaged in critical discussions with both

adults and peers, thus becoming protagonists in their own community of learners.

The below photographs provide insights into how clay was able to offer the

children opportunities to be engaged in these critical discussions of poverty. Figure

7.1 to 7.2 show children working with the medium of clay. The clay was used as a

medium to represent their thinking based on the impetus question above.


Sustainability 289

Figure 7.1. Children using clay to mould items to be placed in the museum of poverty.

The photographs in Figure 7.1 show a group of children using the medium of

clay as a medium to express meaning. In this session, children were provided with

clay and specialised clay tools for them to shape and mould the clay into 3D

representations of their thoughts about poverty in order to display these sculptures in

the ‗Museum of Poverty‘. Additionally, I had also supported children‘s experiences

in this meaning-making process by allowing children to work in a space that was

away from the business of the day-to-day activities (working at the outside veranda,

away from other children in the classroom) and unrushed time to be engaged in clay

making. In this experience, my role was as a co-researcher. While children were busy

constructing their sculptures, I would share some of their prior comments of what

they wanted to display in the museum of poverty, both as a reminder and a reflection

tool for them.

290


Figure 7.2. Ben‘s clay figure of sadness.

In Figure 7.2, Ben has physically sculpted a ‗sad frown‘ on the clay face as a

response to his notion of ‗getting rid of sadness‘. In this context, Ben was able to use

action (a physical frown) to express his interpretations of sadness and its place in the

museum of poverty.


Sustainability 291

Figure 7.3. Clay models that represent children‘s thinking and are displayed in the sign in/out area.

Figure 7.3 shows the finished clay pieces of individual children. These clay

artefacts were displayed alongside documentation of their thinking, in a common

space that is shared and easily and regularly accessed by family members. This was

another pedagogical decision made by me, to support children to make their thinking

visible with other people in their communities, specifically their families. By

displaying children‘s artefacts, children were empowered to make their voices about

these issues heard. At the same time, it also enabled families to engage with and

potentially continue discussions with their child on the topic we were exploring.

When children are empowered in their communities, it gives them the

opportunity to know that they, too, can influence the world in which they live

(Hagglund & Pramling Samuelsson, 2009). For this learning experience, the children

and I displayed their sculptures for parents to view (as seen in Figure 7.3). This was

an opportunity to share children‘s work and let their views become part of the

broader conversations, and thereby promote further learning. Their clay sculptures

enabled other ways to express what the children were learning about poverty (e.g.,

292


Ben‘s frowned clay face as seen in Figure 7.2 to indicate sadness). Through inviting

families to ‗listen‘ to the children‘s clay sculptures and accompanying

documentation, others were offered the opportunity to join in complex dialogues

such as this one about poverty. As mentioned above, the positioning of the Museum

of Poverty was intentional, to invite family members into the dialogue.

Throughout this experience, my role was constantly evolving. I shifted forward

and backwards, constantly changing between being the role of a mentor, facilitator,

or protagonist. Particularly in the earlier part of this research, I initiated learning

experiences and dialogues to support children‘s engagement with the project.

Through constant reflections, my roles shifted, depending on the direction of the

project. Nevertheless, it had always been important that children become co-

researchers or co-protagonists in this research. Despite numerous studies with

children as co-researchers in aspects of social sustainability (Hawkins, 2010;

Phillips, 2010), there remains limited research with children in the roles of co-

researchers and protagonists. The following two separate conversations with Geata

and Lawrence demonstrate that conversations with children can support their

growing sense of agency and their roles as agents of change in issues of socio-

political sustainability.

7.5 Critical Incident 4

This conversation between Geata and Lawrence took place during the final

stage of this research, which was at Weeks 4. At this stage, individual or small

groups of children, were invited by me to share some of their growing

understandings about poverty. The children were given an open-ended context where

they were provided with drawing materials, previous story books that they had read

that explored poverty and the action research folder that showed documentations of


Sustainability 293

children in action in this project. Both Geata and Lawrence were involved in this

experience, and used the visual arts as a way to share their meaning-making around

poverty. As mentioned earlier, the visual arts is a medium of communication that the

children in this centre are very familiar with and use quite frequently to express their

thinking. The children have access to a variety of drawing materials that include

various drawing tools (e.g., pens, crayons, paint) and blank canvases (e.g., different

sized, coloured and textured paper, cardboard, fabric), hence, it was natural that the

visual arts would be used as an invitation to children to share their meaning making.

Both Geata and Lawrence had worked on a visual art piece that depicted their

growing understandings of poverty. It was their art pieces that provided the catalyst

for my conversations with them. As the teacher-researcher, I used their art pieces as a

way for them to share their critical insights, and in a way to co-constructively work

with them to develop shared understandings of poverty.

Critical theory is important to the analysis of data because it allows

understanding and critique of the influences that shape children‘s meanings of this

world. In order for children to become agents of change, it is important that children

are able to understand how certain meanings and influences; particularly meanings

that are valued in society, are continually shaping how they make sense of the world

in which they live. According to Freire (1998) the meanings that children bring into

education settings are never subjective, and are constantly influenced by the

meanings that are valued in society. Through a critical theory lens, the children are

invited to be critical of the taken-for-granted meanings that are attached to poverty,

particularly the dominant western ideologies of poverty (Penn, 2005). Hence, it was

important in this research, that the meanings that children bring are not something

that developed independently, but were influenced by wider society and inherent

294


values. In relation to concept of class, the context of class, MacNaughton (2009)

suggests that the Power of Expectations heavily influences the meanings children

attach to social structures such as poverty. The Power of Expectations helps to

explain how certain social actors are ‗expected‘ to behave and relate to one another.

Thus, in terms of social class, there are expected patterns of behaviours and

relationships among those who are wealthy or advantaged and those who are poor or

disadvantaged. The following conversation with Geata demonstrates the power of

expectations in relation to poverty.

Geata: People all need food!

Teacher-Researcher: Yes, we do need food to live and grow and be healthy.

Geata: Yes, but not everyone has food all the time.

Teacher-Researcher: What do you mean?

Geata: Well, people who are poor, may not have healthy food all the

time. Or worst, no food at all. And it‟s not okay then that we

do have lots of food, and they don‟t.

Teacher-Researcher: What do you think we could do about this?

Geata: Well, we could donate food to the poor.

Teacher-Researcher: Would that help with them having food all the time?

Geata: Maybe, maybe not all the time. But we could then make sure

that they do.

Teacher-Researcher: How would we be able to do that you think? Any

suggestions?

Geata: Well, we all should play a part. We should all do something,

and not just do it today ... but all the time to make sure no

one is without food. Cause there are lots of people in this

world. Maybe I don‟t know… maybe even telling other

schools about this. Schools can help too.

Teacher-Researcher: Why schools Geata?

Geata: Well in St Peters, they do lots of things like this. Cause

Danny‟s teachers there…. And other children... we can all

teach each other about helping one another.

Teacher-Researcher: Wow, I think starting from schools is a great idea. Geata. I

think you are on to something here. Schools are a good

place to start and make some changes.


Sustainability 295

Geata: Yes, school and going to school can make a change.

Teacher-Researcher: A change to who?

Geata: Everyone of course! Everyone should go to school, then we

can all learn, and we all cannot be like this… you know not

have some food while others have.

In this conversation, I was seeking suggestions from Geata in regards to what

could be done to support people experiencing poverty. Geata made a suggestion to

donate food. She stated that people who are poor may not have healthy food, and that

they do not have lots of food. This claim that people who are poor do not have

healthy food or do not have lots of food are examples of MacNaughton‘s (2009)

Power of Expectations, where it is assumed that people experiencing poverty do not

or cannot eat healthily. Nevertheless, rather than discrediting what she has shared, I

pursued her understanding by encouraging her to consider what actions could be

undertaken to support those who do not have enough to eat. Upon listening to her

ideas and suggestions, it is possible that Geata has also shown emergence of

activism. Jones (2016) defines activism as taking actions to change unfair and unjust

situations and behaviours. Geata had made suggestions not only at a surface level,

where food should be donated, but also added a call for a deeper level of social

change. When she suggests that change should be done not just for today, it appears

to show her emerging understandings that change or social transformation needs to

go beyond a single donation of food. In this case, Geata has used the context of

school to champion this change. When school was suggested as a space to advocate

for change, it indirectly also depicted Geata‘s understanding about the place of

schools in the Power of Marketplace. As explored in the previous chapter,

MacNaughton (2009) states that the Power of the Marketplace, represents forces in

the increasingly globalised spaces in which children live. Schools or ‗Marketplaces‘

are spaces that children do not create, but are nonetheless constantly mediating what

296


they learn and make meaning of in their world. Hence, by inviting children to be in

dialogue with the teacher-researcher, children such as Geata are able to understand

and be critical of issues that need to change. The notion of “… we all cannot be like

this …” demonstrates a beginning understanding that there needs to be active change

for social justice to be achieved.

I next look at a conversation between Lawrence and me, and his emerging role

as an active agent of change in socio-political sustainability in the following

dialogue:

Lawrence: Not having enough! They need enough like us.

Teacher-Researcher: Can you explain a bit more to me Luke, what do you mean

when you say enough like us.

Lawrence: Enough, like enough. We aren‟t poor.

Teacher-Researcher: How do we know if someone is poor or not.

Lawrence: Well, we have enough… we have food, we have things in our

house, we go to school, we have toys and things. This is

what everyone needs.

Teacher-Researcher: I‟m glad you think all of these things especially school

is important Lawrence.

Lawrence: Well yeah… we need to go to school. School will help us to

learn new things. Everyone needs school, but not everyone

goes to school too.

Teacher-Researcher: And how will that help people, how will learning new things

help people?

Lawrence: It helps them to have enough... you know to go to school and

then when they are adults, so that they don‟t have to be

hungry, or not have a house or toys like that.

In the above conversation, Lawrence uses social markers as a guide to

differentiate between social classes. The ‗expectation‘ that one who possesses

house[ing], school, toys and things are examples of the power of expectation that

MacNaughton (2009) suggests, where it is assumed that one whom experiences


Sustainability 297

poverty does not have access to such social markers. Nevertheless, at the same time,

Lawrence was also critical that these social markers are also basic needs that

‗everyone‘ should have access to, and something that should be inclusive to all. Just

like Geata, Lawrence recognises that there are issues of democracy, peace, equality

and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) when there is no universal access to basic needs

such as food, and in Lawrence‘s case, the universal access to school. As Hawkins

(2010) found in her study with Kindergarten-aged children, the children were able to

recognise that treating people unfairly based on the grounds of their social class was

unethical, particularly for those who experienced poverty. In Hawkins (2010) study,

the medium of storytelling was used as provocation for children to be engaged in

conversations with peers and their teachers. Through stories, children were able to

articulate issues of social justice or injustice experienced by those who were

different. Similar to the children in Hawkins‘ (2010) study, both Geata and Lawrence

were able to show emerging understanding about the social injustice experienced by

those in poverty. It is through the conversations that Geata and Lawrence could

reflect on possible actions to advocate for social change, as seen in Geata placing

responsibility on the actions of schools.

The opportunity for children to have conversations such as these allowed me to

have insights into children‘s and their capabilities as social beings in their own right,

as opposed to viewing children as passive and developmentally incapable of enacting

change. Prout and James (2015) suggests that a passive view of children is dominant

in today‘s society, partly due to the developmental view that children are in

‗preparation‘ to become adults. With this passive understanding, children are deemed

to constantly need care and protection to be moulded into fully developed adults.

Ultimately, if these understandings (or images of the child) are preserved, then

298


children will continue to be silenced in matters relevant to their immediate context

and lives. Teachers may not engage in dialogues that both challenge and support

children because they view children as needy rather than competent. This potentially

denies children‘s rights to participate in decisions affecting their lives. Rinaldi (2013)

advocates that the image of children should be that in which they are constructed as

competent and capable. The image of the child is a social construct that is heavily

influenced by social and political motivations. Hence, if children are viewed by

powerful adults as weak, then the potential for children to be ‗listened‘ to, and to

become strong and active constructors of knowledge can be stripped away (Rinaldi,

2013).

Qvortrup (2015) recommends that children‘s voices need to be heard, not so

that they can be segregated from the protection of families, but for society to

understand the authentic needs and interest of children as full members of a society.

In the context of this research, it was important that children‘s voices were heard, in

order to understand their meaning-making around poverty. If I did not have authentic

conversations with Geata and Lawrence, the opportunity to recognise their

capabilities in exploring issues of socio-political sustainability may have been lost.

As it was, these conversations enabled insights into the children‘s transforming ideas.

7.6 Chapter Summary

This fourth and final data chapter explored children‘s beginning sense of

agency in relation to finding ways to support those who experience poverty. The

chapter began by using the concept of Derrida‘s (1991) cinders to understand, the

framing of children‘s emerging sense of agency. As mentioned earlier, cinders

represent the cognitive dissonance between the truth and what could be. In other

words, it is that space where children are confronted and challenged in regards to the


Sustainability 299

taken-for-granted ways of thinking in society particularly in regards to issues of

social justice such as poverty.

It is from children‘s cinders that emerging transformative ideas developed.

Children‘s sense of agency in this research site was evident, through the rich

conversations that took place between the children and me. As the teacher-

researcher, I had engaged in dialogues with the children, and picked through their

cinders or instances where issues of poverty ‗did not sit well‘ with them. The chapter

then looked at children‘s transformative ideas on how to support those experiencing

poverty. These transformative ideas were represented by clay structures and

displayed in the children‘s Museum of Poverty. This chapter closed with examples of

conversations with two individual children to exemplify Critical Incident 4, where

the children‘s sense of agency was apparent. The following chapter is the conclusion

chapter which gives an overall summary of the research design and theoretical

framework of this present research, the findings from this research and the

implications for future policies and practices.

300

Chapter 8: Conclusion


8.1 Introduction

This study was an action research project undertaken with children in a

Kindergarten setting. The aim of study was to investigate children‘s understandings

of poverty, within a socio-political framing of sustainability and participation in

ECEfS. The focus on a socio-political aspect of sustainability was purposeful to

disrupt the prevailing environmental or ‗greening‘ approach to ECEfS adopted in

Australian early years contexts. By seeking ways to understand how children made

meaning about poverty, this study also examined various pedagogical conditions that

supported the introduction of socio-political aspects of sustainability within an early

childhood context.

In this conclusion chapter, I highlight the findings of this action research study

based on the two research questions:

1. What are children's understandings of poverty?

2. What pedagogies support young children to participate in investigations of

poverty within a socio-political framework of sustainability?

Based on the findings of this study, I argue that it is important to introduce

children to broad issues of sustainability that go beyond the environmental

dimension. This research demonstrated that children are capable and competent in

exploring complex issues of socio-political sustainability, thus disrupting the

romanticised image of the child in which childhood is viewed as a time of innocence

and naivety, and challenging the notion that children have limited capacity to

understand complex and sensitive issues of global sustainability. Based on this

historical view of the innocent and incapable child, children‘s experiences with

Chapter 8: Conclusion 301

sustainability to this point have primarily been limited to play with nature and other

sustainable ‗maintenance‘ practices such as gardening (Elliott & Young, 2016).

Experiences in nature play or environmental sustainability are important for children

to be immersed in, yet are not necessarily sufficient to generate broader learning

required in a 21st century increasingly globalised world (Elliott & Young, 2016).

Despite benefits and advances of globalisation, various complex issues also arise.

These include sensitive and multi-layered issues that revolve around the unequal

distribution of wealth, the silencing of some voices in societies, and the sustainability

of globalisation itself.

Introducing young children to wider themes of sustainability enables

opportunities to extend their understandings and awareness of sustainability issues

beyond the natural environment (Hagglund & Johansson, 2014; Hagglund &

Pramling Samuelsson, 2009). Through this action research, the participating children

demonstrated a growing interest in exploring and understanding the teacher-

introduced topic of poverty - a socio-political sustainability issue. The children‘s

willingness to be involved in exploring issues of socio-political sustainability was

observed through the active conversations that took place between educators and

children, and among the children themselves. Conversations about poverty stemmed

from collaborative brainstorming sessions, engagement with children‘s literature,

spontaneous play experiences and the production of artefacts through other mediums

of communication including the visual arts.

The children who participated in this research were part of conversations that

explored poverty-related themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010). These themes were explored in a Kindergarten classroom, in an

early childhood long day care context. Some of the examples of the children‘s

302


explorations, as presented in Chapters, 4, 5, 6 and 7, included their deconstructing

the experiences of a fictional character‘s acceptance into peer social groups despite a

lack of access to social markers such as the latest commercial toy. Their explorations

also included deconstructing the experiences of a homeless character (a stray dog),

and making sense of Christmas and its associated commercialisation. In this research,

pedagogical conditions such as utilising the context of shared reading experiences

and using various mediums of communication such as drawing, clay, and play,

further supported the children‘s participation in both small and large-group

conversations about poverty.

Opportunities for children to participate in conversations about topics such as

poverty and to explore the complexities around democracy, peace, equality and

human rights (UNESCO, 2010) was critical to the introduction of a socio-political

framing of sustainability in this early childhood context. Hagglund and Johansson

(2014) suggest that within a group setting, open discussion about complex issues

presents greater opportunities for value conflict and differences in opinions, and for

this to forge deeper understandings between participants. In this research, differences

in opinions about poverty among the child participants allowed for ongoing

refinement of understandings, and for the children to consider actions that could

mitigate experiences of poverty for individuals and society more broadly. Thus, the

act of participating in open conversations was important for learning to take place.

Through ongoing dialogue and negotiations of conflicting ideas, children shared their

understandings with one another, compared meanings, and revisited their thinking

over time (Moss, 2014; Rinaldi, 2006).

At the same time, as the teacher-researcher, it was pertinent that I reflected

critically on my own identity as a teacher, my framing of socio-political


sustainability and my positioning in this research. In order to provide optimum

pedagogical conditions for this exploration of sustainability, it was important for me

to be aware of what knowledge I was privileging in the research process, including

my own understandings and beliefs about poverty. In honouring children as active

agents of their own learning, it was important to be critical of the understandings and

knowledge that shaped or could influence pedagogical conditions for learning. An

important component of this action research study was not only to explore children‘s

understanding of poverty, but also to ensure that the research was done with children

as opposed to on them. Therefore, a primary methodological condition was

children‘s participation in making-meaning about poverty, rather than me as teacher-

researcher transmitting knowledge about poverty to the children.

I will now elaborate on how the research design and theoretical framework

supported the findings of this action research study (Section 8.2). Following this, I

present conclusions on the key findings of this research for the two research

questions (Section 8.3). Finally, the chapter concludes with a summary of the study‘s

implications, future directions for policy and practice, and suggestions for

prospective research (Section 8.4).

8.2 Research Design and Theoretical Framework

The key aims of this research were to examine children‘s understandings of

poverty, and to consider pedagogical conditions that supported explorations of socio-

political aspects of sustainability beyond the prevailing environmental dimension.

ECEfS supports children‘s experiences and understandings of how this globalised

world is increasingly becoming unsustainable for all living and non-living beings

(Davis, 2015). Nevertheless, when issues of sustainability are explored in an early

childhood context, romanticised images of children as innocent and passive can

304


detract from explorations of sustainability issues relevant to children‘s lives and the

world, globally. Furthermore, discourses of children gradually becoming detached

from nature (Elliott & Young, 2016) have resulted in increased pressure for adults to

ensure that children are making connections to their natural environments; hence a

focus on the environmental dimension of sustainability prevails. Issues of

environmental sustainability are important within an early childhood context.

However, they may not necessarily be sufficient for providing children with

opportunities to examine broader issues of global sustainability. Concepts such as

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) – all elements of

socio-political sustainability - have much relevance to children‘s lives in today‘s

diverse and globalised world. In this research, socio-political aspects of sustainability

were foregrounded to ensure the participating children had access to authentic and

meaningful forms of engagement with issues aligned with a more holistic view of

sustainability. The focus on poverty was pertinent to the children who participated,

given the demographic characteristics of the local area (a relatively affluent area) and

children‘s family circumstances (the children were from a diverse array of

backgrounds as explained in Chapter 3).

The research design employed in this study facilitated effective ways to

introduce socio-political aspects of sustainability within an early childhood context.

In addition to finding ways to expand children‘s experiences of sustainability beyond

the natural environment, it was important that the methodology was appropriate for

the age of children who participated, my role as teacher-researcher, and the

Kindergarten context. For this reason, an action research methodology was chosen

for the research design. The cyclic nature of action research, with phases of planning,

acting, observing and reflecting (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2001) aligned well with the


early childhood planning cycle. The early childhood planning cycle that was used in

this research was the Project Approach (Helm & Katz, 2011). The Project approach

is a project-based way of learning where children explore and investigate topics of

their interest through real-world investigations and explorations that include

excursions, research through information books, and carrying out experiments.

The cyclic nature of action research, with the phases of planning, acting,

observing and reflecting (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2001) aligned well with the early

childhood Project Approach (Helm & Katz, 2011). The project approach also reflects

a cyclical way of planning and implementing curriculum and pedagogy with young

children where it involves a cyclical introduction, synthesising and culminating

phase (Helm & Katz, 2011). Within action research and the project approach, there is

ongoing opportunity for critical reflection. In both action research and the project

approach, critical reflection informs each phase before moving on to the next phase

(e.g., in action research in-between each step of planning, acting, observing and

reflecting there is a space for teacher-researcher reflection. This aligns with the

project approach, where in-between each steps of introduction, synthesising and

culminating, there is a space for teacher-researcher reflection.). Additionally, in both

action research and the project approach, documentation is an important feature.

Documentation (e.g., children‘s artefacts, children‘s dialogue transcripts,

observations of children exploring the topic of poverty) is used to make children‘s

learning visible, and used as data for analysis. As the action research cycle and

project approach align well with one another, there was opportunity for the children

and I as the teacher-researcher to work as co-researchers and be engaged in critical

dialogue about the topic of poverty.

306


Within this planning cycle, there was ongoing opportunity for critical reflection

to best support, extend or challenge the learning experiences that occurred over the

course of the project. The cyclical nature of action research removes the notion of

researcher-participant hierarchies and acknowledges that the researcher is not the

expert (Stringer, 2007). Instead, in action research, the researcher is viewed as a

facilitator or catalyst who assists the research stakeholders, in this case, the

participating Kindergarten children. In this way, my role as the teacher-researcher

was to facilitate the children‘s participation in this research using strategies designed

to tap into their meanings of poverty. The role of researcher as a facilitator of

meaning-making is congruent with the role of the teacher as a facilitator of learning,

and in adopting this approach, the notion of the teacher-researcher as being in a

position of power is broken down.

The children who participated in this research were viewed as co-researchers,

where their active participation in exploring aspects of socio-political sustainability

enabled meaning to be made about sustainability issues beyond environmental

concerns. Stringer (2007) states that active involvement of participants in action

research installs a sense of ownership because they are involved in the decision-

making processes in the research. These aspects of self-agency and ownership were

important in this research, particularly as the research was carried out with young

children. Consistent with the pedagogical approach adopted at the Kindergarten, and

the centre‘s philosophy, the notion that I, as the adult, would transmit knowledge to

children was dismissed as children were seen as central contributors to this research

through their active participation. To enable children to actively contribute to this

research, as opposed to being passive recipients of knowledge communication was

central to this research. As mentioned earlier in this chapter, it was this act of


children participating in open conversations where learning could take place.

Conversations with one another about complex issues in their world enabled the

children to share their thoughts and understandings, listen to one another‘s

provocations and questions, and from there to gain clarity around their own meaning-

making about poverty. These collaborative conversations were evident through

various appropriate communication mediums such as play, storytelling, and the

visual arts. The children‘s participation was authentic and there were diverse

opportunities for children to participate. Action research acknowledges that learning

contexts differ according to social context. Thus, through action research, I was able

to support children‘s learning in an individualised manner and uphold the notion that

there is no one single way to explore socio-political sustainability.

The cyclical nature of action research highlights that the path to finding new

knowledge or clarity on a particular issue or topic is never straightforward, linear or

static. Similarly, with children‘s learning, using the cyclical nature of action research,

I was able to analyse data from the start of data collection and continue this through

the study. As explained previously in Chapter 3, this continuous cycle of analysing

and reflecting in action research allowed me to identify critical incidents that took

place during the research. Critical incidents were then used as a unit of analysis. In

identifying critical incidents in the data, I was able to find entry points for analysing

children‘s understandings about poverty, and consider the contributing pedagogical

conditions that supported children‘s attempts at meaning-making.

Complex issues require ongoing critical reflection, investigation, and

exploration. In this study, exploration of the complex issues of poverty was

undertaken over time, through various modes of learning (i.e., visual arts, dramatic

play, group discussion), in structured and informal ways, and directed by both

308


educator and children. Presenting learning about poverty to children in a transmissive

way, following Hart (1997), is considered to a form of ―manipulation‖ (p. 40),

―decoration‖ and ―tokenism‖ (p. 41). Hart‘s (1997) ladder of participation was used

as a guide in this current research for me as the teacher-researcher to have an in-

depth understanding about the difference in children‘s participation as authentic or

tokenistic. Hart‘s ladder of participation was originally developed as a way to

consider children‘s participation in projects, as opposed to children‘s participation in

research (Hart, 1997). For this current research, however, Hart‘s (1997) notion of

children‘s participation in forms of ―manipulation‖, ―decoration‘ and ―tokenism‖

were considered within the action research cycle to support evaluation of my

relationship with the children, specifically whether this action research was working

with children or working on children.

Therefore, through the fluid nature of action research with its emphases on

egalitarian relationships between researchers and participants, children‘s

understandings of poverty were explored in a more authentic and equitable manner.

Action research recognises that knowledge of and meaning-making will be socially

constructed (Kemmis & McTaggart, 2001). In this research, the children were invited

to explore various social constructs of poverty and in doing so, to come up with

deeper and broader understandings about of poverty. This was evident in the

research, for example when children used the medium of clay to make sculptures as a

representation of their understandings on what they would like to change about

poverty, as presented in Chapter 7 which examined the children‘s emerging sense of

agency in relation to issues of socio-political sustainability. It was also evident when

children used spontaneous play as a medium to enact and explore themes associated

with poverty such as homelessness, wellbeing and security, as presented in Chapter


5. In contrast, a transmissive way of introducing new concepts to children would not

have taken into consideration children‘s prior experiences and understandings of

poverty, nor would it have provided the kind of flexibility required for children to

engage deeply with the subject matter of poverty. Such an approach would likely

result in tokenistic forms of participation.

One of the benefits of using action research was its orientation to ―self-

reflective spirals‖, where reflection took place at every stage of the action research

cycle (Kemmis et al., 2014, p. 18). Through ongoing reflection, I was able to reflect

on the children‘s questions or moments that provoked or unsettled them (and myself)

after a learning experience took place. From there, I sought ways, experiences, and

resources to support the children‘s inquiries by challenging and extending their

existing understandings, as seen in Chapter 4 which documented a shift in the

children‘s understandings. After I had introduced poverty to the children in a

storytelling session with the story of Maddi‟s Fridge (Brandt, 2014), a brainstorming

session resulted in the sharing of cause-effect understandings about poverty. These

cause-effect understandings included a sense that poverty was a personal condition

and perhaps even a personal failing; children voiced views that poverty was a result

of a person not being hardworking enough and not saving enough money.

Afterwards, I reflected on the children‘s comments, and explored ways to challenge

these initial understandings. From there I introduced another story, Those Shoes

(Boelts, 2007), through another storytelling session. In Those Shoes, the protagonist

of the story is in the situation of having financial security (i.e., is a hardworking

person with savings) yet still experiences poverty. The focus of this story was not on

financial security, but on social marginalisation as a result of not having desirable

social markers.

310


Another brainstorming session followed in which a group of children together

with me had a conversation about their thoughts and moments of provocation from

the story. Through my intentional and open-ended questioning, I engaged the

children in dialogue about their thoughts. From these dialogues, the children

demonstrated what appeared to be a shift or an expanded understanding about

poverty. I would not have been able to gather evidence of children‘s authentic

understandings or questions that they had about poverty, if I had introduced the topic

of poverty in a transmissive way. At the same time, my critical reflection and desire

to work with children enabled me to identify storytelling as an appropriate medium

via which to explore these complex issues because, in storytelling sessions, the

power between the children and I, as the teacher-researcher was shared. Stories

allowed the children to engage and share their many and varied thoughts including

things that did and did not sit well with them. Furthermore, as this was a

Kindergarten setting, utilising the medium of storytelling was natural and familiar to

the children.

In this study, being aware of the many ways children make meaning of their

world and providing pedagogical conditions to support meaning-making, resulted in

authentic engagement with the socio-political issue of poverty in a Kindergarten

setting. This notion of the various factors that influenced the children‘s and my

meaning-making around poverty are represented in Figure 8.1 below. Figure 8.1

highlights that Critical Incident 2 (Children‟s spontaneous play on exploring their

meanings and understandings on poverty), did not progress in a linear way from

Critical Incident 1 (Children‟s shift in understandings). Instead, there were multiple

pathways and connections between these critical incidents as represented by the

various red lines drawn in Figure 8.1.


Figure 8.1. Entryways for Critical Incident 2.

Figure 8.1 focused on Critical Incident 2, highlights the children‘s experiences

in exploring understandings of poverty. The figure above depicts the various

interconnecting elements in Critical Incident 2 which are represented by the red lines.

I mapped Critical Incident 2 (positioned in the central of the diagram) against Critical

Incident 1, two policy documents, the research questions, and aims and the children‘s

prior experiences in specific pedagogical conditions. The various red lines represent

312


both the connections and tensions between these various elements in Critical Incident

2. These entanglements of red lines ultimately make their way to the entryways for

Critical Incident 2 (positioned at the bottom of Figure 8.1).

Resisting the notion that there would be only one possibility for interpreting the

multiple pathways and connections between these Critical Incidents, these lines are

―squiggly‖, representing that these are not straightforward (or linear) and singular. In

Critical Incident 2, three different small groups of children had independently

explored their understandings of poverty through the medium of play. For all play

experiences, children independently resourced their own learning tools in their play

experiences and directed the play experiences. Some of the interconnections and

tensions influencing Critical Incident 2 included children‘s prior experiences in

Critical Incident 1, their exposure to different pedagogical conditions, and mediums

via which to make meaning. The lines also draw together small and large-group

conversations, and the teacher-researcher‘s beliefs about the competent child. The

red lines can be likened to the iterative cycles of reflection within an action research

methodology. In critically reflecting on drawing these ‗red lines‘, I was able to be

more cognisant of the actions that were supporting and influencing children‘s

entryways into Critical Incident 2.

This reflective strategy was used for other Critical Incidents throughout the

timeline of this research. I will elaborate on another example to highlight how the

research design enabled for critical reflection in different situations with different

children, when exploring understandings of poverty. Figure 8.2 below shows the

multiple pathways and connections leading to Critical Incident 3 (Merry Christmas-

Children as powerful consumers). These are again represented by red lines. In Figure

8.2, I mapped Critical Incident 3 (positioned in the centre of the diagram) again


against several key elements to highlight the different manifestations of power that

created tensions resulting in Critical Incident 3. Critical Incident 3 is mapped against

MacNaughton‘s (2009) theory of the Power of the Marketplace and Position. Critical

Incident 1 and 2 are also mapped with Critical Incident 3 to highlight the children‘s

journey in this research to Critical Incident 3. As a result of these tensions and

connections, represented by the squiggly red lines, I was able to analyse, map out and

thus identify the entryways for Critical Incident 3.

Figure 8.2. Entryways into Critical Incident 3.

Children explored meanings attached to poverty in the context of Christmas. In

Critical Incident 3, findings showed that children‘s understandings of poverty were

linked strongly to notions of happiness via social markers such as gifts. The

314


commercialisation of the gift-buying process during Christmas was strengthened via

theory offered in the power of the marketplace (MacNaughton, 2009). The power of

this marketplace is a space where children have no control. This phase of research

proved challenging as I needed to explore with the children ways to challenge and

disrupt links between Christmas and consumerism.

In this research, it was important that children were engaged in ways to

explore and make meanings about poverty. However, in Critical Incident 3, children

were immersed in a context (the impending arrival of Christmas) that served to

amplify how social markers such as commercialised items could create a sense of

acceptance and belonging. This is represented in Figure 8.2 above, where the ―power

of the marketplace‖ (MacNaughton, 2009, p. 71) gives sense that the marketplace is

important and valued. Dau and Jones (2016) suggest that when events such as

Christmas are linked to themes of purchasing power, competitiveness, and

acquisition of material goods, equity issues may arise, particularly for those who

cannot afford certain types of gifts, or whose families choose to celebrate differently.

In upholding the children‘s agency in making-meaning about poverty, in this

research there were tensions that I experienced in my role as the teacher-researcher.

These tensions were something that I had encountered more than once in the cyclical

nature of action research. In this instance, I was challenged to reflect on the ethical

issues inherent in the children warranting that social markers were important for

inclusion into society, despite the notion that not everyone had equal access to these

social markers.

Despite the action research design highlighting the ‗messiness‘ of the data

analysis process, applying the theoretical frameworks in the study seemed more

straightforward. The theoretical frameworks that were used in this research were


frameworks that supported images of children who have agency and are active

learners in their own learning (James et al., 1998; Prout & James, 2015). The

findings from the data analysis as a result from the iterative cycles of reflection in

this action research, resulted in a need for a theoretical concept to capture the

somewhat intangible latent quality of children‘s learning experiences and the tension

and challenge experienced by the teacher-researcher.

Derrida‘s (1991) conception of cinders contributed an important theoretical

imagery to the analytical phase of this study. According to Derrida, cinders represent

the lasting impressions or cognitive dissonance one experiences as a result from

critical reflections on themes revolving around issues of poverty and socio-political

sustainability. In this research, Derrida‘s cinders were used as an analytical tool. The

data were analysed subjectively by me for ‗cinders‘ or lasting impressions. These

data came in the form of children‘s conversations about poverty, the visual artefacts

created by children which included clay sculptures, drawings and paintings as well as

children‘s play episodes.

In this research, I interpreted ‗cinders‘ as experiences where children

questioned and challenged the situations of those experiencing poverty. It is possible

that these experiences created lasting impressions for children; impressions formed

from their explorations catalysed by storytelling sessions about poverty, the

intentional questions I asked that probed themes of poverty, and spontaneous

collaborative experiences in their play. Using Derrida‘s notion of ‗cinders‘, children

can be positioned as independently able to be critical about the ethical dilemmas that

simply did not sit well with them.

At the same time, in sifting through these ‗cinders‘, I was able to reflect on

children‘s beginning critical awareness on issues within socio-political realms of

316


sustainability. For example, as explored in Chapter 7 (Children‟s emerging sense of

agency in understanding issues of socio-political sustainability) there were several

instances in which I had interpreted a group of children as becoming critically aware

of the injustices experienced by those in poverty. As a result, I was able to support

critical awareness by encouraging the children to further extend their meaning-

making in ways that might delve more deeply into their ‗cinders‘ or their potential

lasting impressions of situations that did not sit well with them. These further

experiences were not to provoke a ‗solution‘ to poverty, but were a way for the

children to express their agency - their individual transformative approaches related

to achieving socio-political sustainability.

This action research was also influenced by critical theory. Critical theory is

about challenging the taken-for-granted practices and knowledge that shape how

society functions (Kemmis, 2009; Kemmis & McTaggart, 2001). Critical theory

proposes that power in society is subjective and unbalanced, thus resulting in more

than one ‗truth‘, such as the values that shape society. In this research, critical theory

was relevant in several ways. The first related to the notion of working with children

as co-researchers. By using a critical theory, I had a firm image of and belief in

children as capable of exploring complex themes such as poverty and socio-political

sustainability. Applying this theory in this research enabled me to introduce the topic

of poverty to young children and to trust that they would be able to explore these

experiences, stories or images through appropriate mediums. Through a critical lens,

I was able to reflect on the children‘s own learning directions and plan for

appropriate experiences to extend or challenge their prior understandings. In this

way, critical theory influenced the pedagogies I used, such as questioning,

collaborating with children and breaking down the power differential between


educator and children. This is vastly different from pedagogical approaches in which

the educator is viewed as the transmitter of knowledge to students (Freire, 1998).

Critical theory provided the lens through which to understand and explore the notion

of why children can do socio-political sustainability. Using a critical lens, I was able

to interpret and understand how the present research findings demonstrated that the

children were interested and capable of exploring the topic of poverty, and themes

that are associated with socio-political sustainability as co-researchers.

In addition, critical theory was fitting for this research because it was relevant

to the topics being explored - children‘s understandings on poverty. There was the

possibility that children in the immediate research site may not have had immediate

experiences of poverty and it was important that the children‘s understandings of

poverty were extended beyond their initial cause-effect understandings. The

meanings children attach to poverty may reflect the taken-for-granted assumptions in

society. However, because children were also invited to be critical thinkers in the

research through their participation in sustained dialogue, the possibilities for

children to explore the many ‗truths‘ inherent in conceptions of poverty was feasible.

With the various contributing factors influencing the research design and

theoretical framework, the findings for each research questions were understandably

complex and intricate. I elaborate on these findings in relation to the two research

questions in the sections below.

8.3 Research Findings in Relation to Research Questions

Research Question 1: What are children‟s understandings of poverty?

From Critical Incident 1 (Children‟s shift in understandings) to Critical

Incident 4 (Children‟s emerging sense of agency in understanding issues of socio-

318


political sustainability), the analysis showed that there were shifts in the children‘s

understandings of poverty from the initial idea of cause-effect. Initially, the

children‘s understandings revolved around the concept of poverty and its links to

employment and savings. However, these understandings did expand further during

the research, with increasingly complex themes of homelessness, marginalisation and

change explored by the children as seen in subsequent critical incidents.

This cause-effect view appeared in different cycles of the timeline of the

research, and was not limited only to the initial stages. Cause-effect understandings

came up again in the culmination phase of Critical Incident 3. Given that the study

took place in the weeks prior to Christmas, there was particular consideration of this

impending event as an influencing factor. Several weeks into the study, the children

appeared to revert back to initial cause-effect understandings, with the reiteration that

social markers, such as gifts, were important factors for group belonging and

acceptance. With critical reflection being key to the action research methodology, it

was important to consider that the children‘s reversion to the initial cause-effect

understanding of poverty could be due to the pervasive marketization of Christmas to

young children as consumers. Penn‘s (2005) case studies of countries that experience

high rates of poverty concluded that it is important to not oversimplify poverty to

cause-effect understandings. There are various contributing factors to poverty that

revolve around themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO,

2010). To limit poverty to simplified cause-effect understandings can be unjust and

unethical, especially for those who experience poverty.

Despite children shifting between cause-effect understandings and more

inclusive understandings of poverty, the findings demonstrated that children were

able to share their thoughts on issues of socio-political sustainability with others


through dialogues with other children, and with me and their teacher-aide. Being

immersed in conversations with others, children demonstrated their emerging self-

agency and intersubjectivity. Rinaldi (2006) states intersubjectivity or

―interdependency‖ as a space where power is shared between all people (p. 185). As

shown in the critical incidents, children were part of dialogues with different groups

of people and through different mediums.

When children are afforded opportunities to contribute to dialogues, and make

meaning together about a complex issue such as poverty, their sense of agency is

expanded (Moss, 2014; Rinaldi, 2006). In this research, the children‘s sense of

agency showcased their capabilities to explore important and complex issues that

deal with concepts such as democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO,

2010). These concepts were explored through every day experiences in the

kindergarten classroom such as storytelling, roleplaying, the visual arts and

constructing with clay. This suggests that global sustainability issues can be explored

by children through an appropriate context, where children are valued as contributors

to meaning.

Research Question 2: What pedagogies support young children to participate

in investigations of poverty within a socio-political framework of sustainability?

For Research Question 2, the research design of the action research was

beneficial for exploring various pedagogical conditions to best support children‘s

participation in socio-political sustainability. One of the hallmarks of action research

in carrying out this study with young children was the element of critical reflection.

MacNaughton (2005) states that critical reflection is an important tool to support

teacher‘s professional development. It is also used as a medium through which to

understand power imbalances between people and institutions in society. In this

320


research context, critical reflection was used to explore and understand social justice

issues including the themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights as

outlined by UNESCO (2010), that is inherent in experiencing poverty.

Through critical reflection, I explored various ways of how my teaching

practices supported or became a barrier to children‘s understandings of poverty. This

was particularly apparent in Critical Incident 2, when the children independently

took agency for exploring their understandings of poverty through play. In

comparison to Critical Incident 1, the teaching strategies I drew on had a strong

element of intentionality (ACECQA, 2018; Connor, 2011; DEEWR, 2009), including

story telling followed by brainstorming conversations about poverty. By contrast in

Critical Incident 2, the children enacted self-agency as they explored themes of

poverty through roleplaying. This shift in focus across Critical Incident 1 and Critical

Incident 2 demonstrated that children were confident to explore themes of poverty

under familiar pedagogical conditions, in this case, the medium of play. Additionally,

the utilisation of the medium of play to explore complex issues such as poverty,

demonstrates that themes of global sustainability outside of environmental

dimensions can be explored in early childhood contexts. After critical reflection, I

concluded that my teaching practices in this context were both supporting yet also

potentially constricting. My teaching practices acted as a support through Critical

Incident 1, because I was able to initiate conversations and dialogues about poverty

with children through the story reading experience. However, my teaching practices

were also potentially constricting in Critical Incident 2. If I had not valued the

medium of play, uninterrupted time for play, and open-environments for play as a

vehicle for spontaneous learning experiences, the children‘s self-agency may not

have occurred or have been interpreted by me as a critical incident.


The medium of play was valuable for learning and it emerged in three different

spontaneous play episodes as explored in Chapter 5. In these learning experiences,

children were independent of educator direction. In Critical Incident 2, the children

were able to have meaningful conversations among themselves, their peers. In my

own critical reflection, I was reminded of children‘s capabilities to explore complex

issues in play and admit that, at first, I found difficulty in letting children take the

lead in utilising the medium of play. One of the reasons for my hesitancy in

facilitating play that explored poverty was my fear that the play may turn out to be

tokenistic, unethical or at worst, harmful. Yet, as the project unfolded, children

demonstrated confidence and curiosity to explore themes such as homelessness and

marginalisation that were potentially controversial and challenging themes. They

seemed to want to know more about these themes that adults might suppose would

be unsettling to them. This incident demonstrates and highlights that adults do not

necessarily need to be present for the learning and further exploration to occur.

When the children took the initiative to explore poverty through play, it

demonstrated to me that there would be more than one way of teaching and learning

about the socio-political dimension to sustainability. Moss (2014) labels this type of

learning as ―real utopia‖ (p. 15), where learning is not based on outcomes. Rather,

learning emanates from the things that children are genuinely interested in and

curious about. This view conceptualises ―learning‖ as the many ways people make

meaning of the world (MacNaughton, 2005). Indeed, in this action research project, I

was able to understand that there are many ways to introduce children to concepts of

socio-political sustainability, and to explore these themes with them, despite a

dominant view that young children are too innocent and naive to explore such issues.

Table 8.1 below depicts the pedagogical conditions that were used in this research to

322


explore socio-political issues of poverty within a Kindergarten context. As the

duration of this research took place during the last Kindergarten term and towards the

end of the Kindergarten year, all children have had experiences of these pedagogical

conditions at various times of the year. Therefore, these pedagogical conditions are

experiences that are familiar to the children.


Table 8.1

Visual table of pedagogical conditions used to explore the topic of poverty

Pedagogical conditions that promote opportunities for children to explore socio-political sustainability in a Kindergarten classroom

Pedagogical conditions How these conditions were drawn on to explore socio-political sustainability

Forms of play

Imaginative play

Constructive play through wooden

block constructions

Symbolic play through the use of

clay

Enabled self-agency in determining the themes of poverty explored.

Ownership of their play about poverty without adult intervention.

A space for imagination and curiosity about themes of poverty (Kolbe, 2014).

A space for collaborative meaning-making about real-world issues such as homelessness.

Visual arts pedagogy

Clay and appropriate clay tools

Drawings/Paintings

As a medium (that is not verbal) to express thoughts and understandings about poverty

It is anti-bias, as the child is the ‘artist and author’; therefore the adult seeks clarification from

the child artist (McArdle & Ohlsen, 2016)

Enabled to represent their meanings about poverty in a 3d form (Kolbe, 1997).

Used symbolically i.e. making clay food in healthy plates (Critical Incident 2).

Easily accessible throughout the research timeline and used in different contexts.

Used to represent their initial thoughts, and then their expanded understandings of poverty.

324


Variety of drawing/painting

utensils

To clarify and reiterate meanings of poverty to others including the teacher-researcher.

To share and communicate transformative thinking on ways to enact change.

Resources

Child appropriate literature- to

introduce various ‘truths’ about

poverty.

Digital camera and tablets

Books on themes of poverty where the main protagonist is a child or an animal character.

Themes of poverty include themes of acceptance, friendship, homelessness, wellbeing.

A space to share ideas about poverty, both in a large or small group.

As a way for transformative storytelling (Phillips, 2008).

To document and make children’s learning visible.

Styles of questioning (Fusco, 2012)

Literal – closed ended questions

that require specific information or

facts, or yes, no answers.

Inferential – Open ended questions

to stimulate responses beyond the

text or not obvious in the text that

was not explicitly stated.

Metacognitive – requires the person

to reflect on their thinking and

A space to initiate sustained shared thinking (Siraj-Blatchford, 2012).

Various questioning techniques that include focussed and open-ended questioning that were

dependent on context.

Used in shared dialogues and brainstorming sessions.

Allowed for shared intersubjectivity between participants.


learning, questions.

Environment

Children have unpressured time and space

Ample or uninterrupted time to explore and investigate without the need to confirm to the

routine and structure of the day (Gandini, 2011)

Open-ended and flexible space to suit the different themes of exploration-

Able to ‘move’ around freely to in play without the need of adult presence

326


I will now discuss on each pedagogical condition, and how it supported the

children in this research to explore socio-political themes of sustainability in the

form of the topic on poverty.

Forms of play

As seen from the above table, there were various forms of play that the

children used to explore the topic of poverty. Through ownership of their own play,

children were able to investigate and clarify their understandings about poverty.

Vygotsky suggests that the main actors (i.e., the children) act as scaffolding agents to

one another, and support each other to a zone of proximal development. The zone of

proximal development is when a person reaches a higher-order level of thinking as a

result from the shared interactions and understandings amongst one another

(Vygotsky et al., 1994)

Through play, the children were independent of adult direction, collaborative

in decision-making on the themes explored, and had ample uninterrupted time and

space to be engaged in their play. It was through intersubjectivity with one another

that a shared power existed between each child in spaces in which they shared

ownership (Rinaldi, 2006).

Resources

The use of children‘s storybooks was intentional as storytelling was part of

the everyday curriculum and a familiar medium used in the Kindergarten context.

Through the protagonist in the stories, the children were able to explore the ‗points of

view‘ of those experiencing poverty, and to understand poverty beyond cause-effect

reasonings. This was undertaken through transformative storytelling sessions

(Phillips, 2008) where the children were supported to explore understandings of


poverty as linked to themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights,

(UNESCO, 2010) that were not necessarily explicitly stated in the literature.

Other resources such as digital cameras and visual art tools such as pencils,

paints, clay and clay tools were easily accessible to children throughout the day.

These resources were placed at designated spaces to enable children to be

independent in choosing their resources when wanting to do research (i.e., referring

back to a specific book to clarify meaning) or expressing meaning (i.e., accessing

clay together with appropriate clay tools to make a sculptor to express thoughts about

poverty). These resources were important elements to support children in

documenting their learning and making their ‗voices‘ visible for both children and

their families to sustain shared conversations about poverty.

Visual arts pedagogy

The visual arts are an important medium for children to express their thoughts,

understandings and to make meaning (Wright, 2012). However, for this research, the

children‘s visual arts were not analysed based on technical symbols (i.e., the choice

of colour or the thickness of lines in a drawing) but instead for symbolic

representations. Each finished ‗product‘ was revisited by me and the child to clarify

and ensure shared meaning. In this way, the visual arts has potential to become anti-

bias (McArdle & Ohlsen, 2016) as the children and I worked collaboratively in

making-meaning about poverty as opposed to me transmitting knowledge as the adult

and teacher.

The research site utilises the visual arts in the spirit of children‘s ‗100

languages‘ (Malaguzzi, 1994). In this research, the children had used different

mediums of the visual arts at different points of the research, (i.e., introduction,

culmination, and synthesising phases) as well as in various learning contexts (i.e.,

328


both teacher-led and child-led learning experiences) to express meanings about

poverty.

Styles of questioning

As the teacher-researcher, I was able to analyse the children‘s understandings

of poverty through individual, small-group, and large-group conversations and

brainstorming sessions. Children built theories and understandings of the world

through being immersed in dialogue with one another. It is through this dialogue, that

children were able to pose questions, clarify meaning, negotiate conflicts in values

and, from there, refine understandings (Rinaldi, 2006).

In these shared dialogues, I employed various questioning techniques (Fusco,

2012), depending on what information I was trying to elicit from the children. The

various questions utilised were intentionally both open-ended and focussed, which

supported children to be more thorough and critical with their responses, beyond a

single ―yes‖ or ―no‖ reply. As a result, the conversations that occurred between the

children and I were collaborative. We worked together to problem-solve and refine

meanings about poverty. This, in turn, produced a space for sustained shared thinking

(Siraj-Blatchford, 2012) about the topic of poverty.

Environment

The environment was an important factor in this research. Malaguzzi (as cited

in Gandini, 2011) suggests that the environment acts as the third teacher, with a

flexible environment that is in-tune with the ways children make meaning together

with the educators creating spaces for collaborative learning. For this research, I

recognised the importance of providing children uninterrupted time and space to

research, explore and express meanings about poverty. As Halquist and Musanti

(2010) suggest, critical moments are made out of ‗ah-ha‘ moments that are


significant in understanding a phenomenon. If I were to dismiss children‘s attempts

at meaning-making and pressure them to either ‗finish up‘ or ‗pack-up‘ their play (as

seen in Chapter 5) to comply with the Kindergarten routine, I would have also

indirectly exercised my ―power of position‖ over children, where I restricted their

efforts for self-agency and independence in making-meaning about poverty

(MacNaughton, 2009, p. 69).

The pedagogies listed above were conditions that were familiar to children

and practiced throughout the year. As a result, when it came time for this research,

the children were independent in utilising these pedagogies and resources. At the

same time, because of the children‘s independence, they were able to have their

voices heard around themes of democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010) when participating in this research study. Optimum pedagogical

conditions thus supported the environment to become a transformative curriculum

(MacNaughton, 2003) where children were enabled to challenge my role as the

assumed knowledgeable person, and demonstrate competency in becoming co-

researchers of this in this inquiry.

Throughout this action research project, critical reflection was vital as I

considered my own ―power of position‖ (MacNaughton, 2009, p. 69) and my role as

a teacher. As MacNaughton (2009) explains, adults are more often viewed as holding

power, with children viewed as inconsequential and subjected to ‗silence‘ themselves

in the presence of the assumed more knowledgeable person, in this case, the adult.

Historically, children have been viewed as passive in relation to adults who are

viewed as active. As elaborated in Chapter 2, the romanticised image of children as

carefree and ignorant is prevalent, particularly when it comes to their perceived

capacity to explore themes of socio-political sustainability. Young children are

330


deemed as innocent and in need of protection from knowing about complex and

troubling global issues. Adding to this, Elliott and Young‘s (2016) nature by default

discourse for young children in the 21st century contributes to the justification for a

focus solely on environmental sustainability in early childhood contexts. However,

through critical reflection at each stage of the action cycle, the children showed

interest in exploring the topic of poverty, thus demonstrating that they are capable of

exploring complex and serious themes of socio-political sustainability in their early

childhood classroom. The next section elaborates on the implications resulting from

the findings of this action research study.

8.4 Implications and Future Directions for Policy and Practices

The findings from this research are a result from the ongoing cycles of data

analysis which included analysis on four Critical Incidents that took place throughout

the project timeline. The research analysis and findings were focused on the study‘s

two research questions. The research questions related to children‘s competencies in

exploring complex and sensitive global sustainability issues such as poverty, and the

teacher‘s pedagogical conditions that supported children‘s experiences with socio-

political sustainability. The research findings point to several implications for the

future direction of ECEfS within the Australian early childhood landscape and the

educator‘s role in implementing ECEfS that extends beyond environmental

sustainability.

8.4.1 Implications for National Quality Framework (NQF)

This research has implications for the Australian National Quality Framework

that classifies children‘s experiences with sustainability under Quality Area 3, the

physical environment. Recently, the Australian Children‘s Education and Care

Quality Authority revised its quality standards (ACECQA, 2017). In the revised


NQF, sustainability continues to be classified under Quality Area 3, which relates to

the physical environment. However, in the recent round of changes, there were

changes made to the wording of the standard and element descriptors for this specific

quality area. The previous standard description was: children are supported to

become environmentally responsible and show respect for the environment. The new

standard description is: the service cares for the environment and supports children

to become environmentally responsible. The aim of this standard is to guide children

to achieve positive attitudes towards sustainable practices for the natural

environment (ACECQA, 2017). This change in terminology is possibly to make the

quality standard succinct, but there is also perhaps an unintended consequence. The

new wording inadvertently promotes a view of sustainability that is limited to the

environmental (or natural) domain, rather than a broader view that encompasses

social, political and economic sustainability. When children are provided only with

learning experiences encouraging their engagement with the natural environment,

they are limited to learning experiences about or on the environment. It is

understandable, therefore, that their connections to the environment would be limited

to ‗maintenance‘ tasks such as gardening, planting trees, recycling and being

engaged in nature play (Arlemalm-Hagser & Davis, 2014; Davis, 2015). Limiting

Quality Area 3 to promoting narrow conceptions of environmental sustainability

inadvertently relegates social, political and economic dimensions of sustainability

(UNESCO, 2010) to the margins. It reinforces views ECEfS in its totality is not

suitable for young children. This may lead to it being seen as a curriculum area that

is no longer taught (Elliott & McCrea, 2015).

Continued dependence on environmental sustainability to the neglect of socio-

political sustainability presents challenges for teachers who wish to incorporate

332


learning experiences that encompasses all dimensions of sustainability (Elliott &

McCrea, 2015). The aim of this research was to explore children‘s understandings of

poverty, and to identify pedagogies that can support young children to participate in

investigations of poverty within a socio-political framework of sustainability. The

findings from the four Critical Incidents show that the children were capable of

exploring and engaging deeply with issues of socio-political sustainability. As stated

by Arlemalm-Hagser and Davis (2014), children are not to be subjected to social,

political and economic issue ‗dumps‘, rather children can be invited to explore

complex issues from their perspectives through their everyday Kindergarten

curriculum and pedagogy. In the present research, when the children collaborated

with me or with their peers in exploring issues of poverty that ‗did not sit well‘ with

them or themes that they were curious about, they were also indirectly disrupting

socially taken-for-granted meanings associated with poverty. These collective social

critiques were undertaken through brainstorming sessions after a shared book, a play

experience, and through engagement with the visual arts.

Opportunities such as these provided the children the time and space to be able

to critically reflect on issues such as democracy, peace, equality and human rights

(UNESCO, 2010) in a social context that was appropriate. The children who were

participating in this research were a part of a shared conversation where their

thoughts and ideas about poverty were aired and negotiated. It is through these

shared conversations with peers and adults that moral and ethical dilemmas can be

potentially challenged and understandings widened. Rinaldi (2006) suggests that it is

through these conversations and dialogues that meanings are constructed. These

shared meanings are important aspects of installing active citizenship, particularly in

this increasingly complex and globalised world, where individualist perspectives


appear to be more valued over collective perspectives (Arlemalm-Hagser & Davis,

2014).

This research demonstrated that the children participating were capable of not

only exploring socio-political sustainability issues, but were also capable in

contributing to shared dialogues about sensitive and complex issues. Somerville and

Williams‘ (2015) research has shown that even though children‘s voices are

increasingly visible in research in regards to EfS, this visibility is limited only to the

extent of advocacy. In the context of this research, children were observed to take

initiative, and demonstrated their agency in regards to actions or strategies on how

they could support those experiencing poverty. For example, they moulded clay

sculptures to symbolise their thoughts about aspects of poverty that they wanted to

abolish. They engaged in discussions about the right to education as articulated by

the two children, Geata and Lawrence. During a one-on-one conversation with them

in Critical Incident 4, Lawrence suggested that each child should have access to

school, and Geata suggested that it was important that other spaces including schools

should be made aware of the importance of being kind to everyone. These

suggestions from Lawrence and Geata (as presented in Chapter 7) show that young

children can explore sustainability issues beyond the realm of environmental

sustainability, and suggest their generation of solution-focussed ideas.

8.4.2 Implications for child agency through ECEfS

As explored earlier in Chapter 1, ECEfS initiatives in Australia are

predominantly environmentally focussed (Arlemalm-Hagser & Davis, 2014). The

Early Years Learning Framework (DEEWR, 2009) document also highlights that

despite the rhetoric of child agency, it appears that child agency is feasible only in

the context of play (Arlemalm-Hagser & Davis, 2014). According to the EYLF

334


(DEEWR, 2009) child agency is defined as when children are a part of decision-

making processes in their lives, and can have impact on their social worlds. The

problem is that it gives the perception that there is only one way of achieving agency,

and that is through play. Bringing this into the context of ECEfS, specifically within

a socio-political sustainability context, there were various ways in which the children

demonstrated agency other than through play experiences. Therefore, to suggest that

children would only be able to demonstrate agency during play is misconceived.

As explored in the data chapters, the other mediums where child agency was

shown beyond the prevalent dimensions of sustainability was evident through play,

the visual arts, brainstorming sessions and storytelling. Taking the example of

Critical Incident 4 (Children‟s emerging sense of agency in understanding issues of

socio-political sustainability), critical thinking and child agency were both evident.

In Critical Incident 4, through Derrida‘s (1991) cinders, the cognitive dissonance

children experienced about those experiencing poverty depicted an ethical dilemma

experienced by children. The suggestions of going to school to achieve change were

some of the examples that showed children are capable of becoming agents of

change. Therefore, in order to support children‘s agency, it is pertinent then that

complex issues of this world should be addressed and brought into conversations but

the pedagogical conditions for this learning should be established beforehand.

8.4.3 Implications for ECEfS pedagogical practices

This perception of EfS and ECEfS as being complex, and predominantly nature

focussed were findings that Davis (2015), and Elliott and McCrea (2015) reported in

their research. One of the main reasons for these shortcomings in teaching and

practicing is thought to be due to educators being unable to access examples of

pedagogical practices and sound empirical evidence on how to explore these themes


(Somerville & Williams, 2015). The findings from this research showed that children

explored themes of poverty in the context of various every-day early childhood

pedagogical conditions. These conditions included the medium of storytelling, the

visual arts and play. To illustrate, some specific examples include the fictional tale of

Mutt Dog (King, 2004) in Critical Incident 2, which gave the children opportunities

to explore the topic of homelessness in subsequent play with wooden block

constructions, and the utilisation of clay to make sculptures for the children‘s

Museum of Poverty as seen in Critical Incident 4.

These various experiential opportunities were able to be provided to the

children due to the critical reflections I undertook when carrying out the action

research. Critical reflection was important in understanding ECEfS as it supported

me to reflect on the multiple mediums children used to explore poverty and enabled

disruption of one ‗truth‘. Instead, critical reflection empowered me to reflect on the

multiple ‗truths‘ in our shared spaces (MacNaughton, 2005).

The pedagogical conditions were important in supporting the children to

explore and understand issues of sustainability beyond the scope of environmental

sustainability. Nevertheless, this research is also limited because it represents the

findings of only one Kindergarten classroom. Despite this, even if the results are

restricted, this research highlighted that it is possible to carry out socio-political

sustainability with young children. The notion that global sustainability issues were

too complex or abstract to enter realms of early childhood were dismissed in this

research, as the children demonstrated that they were capable in exploring these

issues. The children not only explored these issues of poverty alongside their peers

and me, but were also confident in carrying out independent explorations

independently without my intervention or support. In the context of this research, the

336


pedagogical conditions that I created were not chosen to transmit one version of

poverty, but instead utilised everyday spaces in the classroom to invite conversations

about poverty in a Kindergarten.

8.5 Chapter Summary

This study demonstrated that children were able to explore the topic of poverty

because there was sustained dialogue about the elements of poverty such as

democracy, peace, equality and human rights (UNESCO, 2010) that were

foundational to building children‘s awareness around this global issue. The aim of

this research was never about finding ‗one‘ truth about poverty; rather, about finding

ways to empower children to be heard in their understandings of poverty. The design

for future research requires the element of ensuring children‘s voices are represented

in conversations when exploring complex issues of sustainability.

The pedagogical conditions afforded in this study were every-day Kindergarten

classroom teaching practices that are transferable to other early learning contexts

when exploring wider themes of sustainability.

This present research has shown the value of young children exploring themes

of sustainability outside the prevalent environmental dimension. In this this study,

the children contributed to shared dialogue about the challenges of poverty, despite

this issue being complex and at times difficult. The children participating in this

research had shared critical and creative insights, and suggestions on ways to enact

change in eradicating poverty as a global concern. Therefore, ECEfS can be

transformative and support children to explore wider dimensions of sustainability,

provided they are active participants in processes of asking questions, exploring

problem-solving and sharing ideas. As a result, children are empowered in knowing

that they can become agents of change, problem-solvers and solution seekers (Davis,


2015) in combating issues of sustainability, including the dimensions of socio-

political sustainability.

References 339

References

Åberg, A., & Lenz Taguchi, H. (2005). Lyssnandets pedagogic: etik och demokrati i

pedago-giskt arbete. Stockholm: Liber. Stockholm: Liber.

Ailwood, J. (2003). Governing early childhood education through play.

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 4(3), 286-299.

Arlemalm-Hagser, E., & Davis, J. (2014). Examining the rhetoric: A comparison of

how young children‘s participation and agency are framed in Australian and

Swedish early childhood education curricula. Contemporary Issues in Early

Childhood, 15, 231-244.

Australian Bureau of Statistics [ABS]. (2011). Census of population and housing:

Socio-economic Indexes for areas Retrieved from

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/allprimarymainfeatures/8C5F5

BB699A0921CCA258259000BA619?opendocument

Australian Child Rights Taskforce. (2018). What are child rights? Retrieved from

http://www.childrights.org.au/child-rights/what-are-child-rights/

Australian Children‘s Education and Care Quality Authority [ACECQA]. (2013).

Quality area 3: Physical environment. Retrieved from

http://acecqa.gov.au/Physical-environment


Revised national quality standard and other changes from 1 Feb 2008.

Retrieved from

https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/acecqa/files/NQF/RevisedNQSa

ndOtherChanges_2.pdf


Guide to the National Quality Framework. Retrieved from

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/allprimarymainfeatures/8C5F5BB699A0921CCA258259000BA619?opendocument

http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/[email protected]/allprimarymainfeatures/8C5F5BB699A0921CCA258259000BA619?opendocument

http://www.childrights.org.au/child-rights/what-are-child-rights/

http://acecqa.gov.au/Physical-environment

https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/acecqa/files/NQF/RevisedNQSandOtherChanges_2.pdf

https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/acecqa/files/NQF/RevisedNQSandOtherChanges_2.pdf

340 References

https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-03/Guide-to-the-

NQF_0.pdf

Australian Council of Social Service [ACOSS]. (2014). Poverty in Australia 2014.

Retrieved from

http://www.acoss.org.au/images/uploads/ACOSS_Poverty_in_Australia_201

4.pdf

Australian Council of Social Service [ACOSS]. (2015). Inequality in Australia: A

nation divided [Video file]. Retrieved from

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8FUbds7tNU

Banegas, D. (2012). Identity of the Teacher-Researcher in Collaborative Action

Research: Concerns Reflected in a Research Journal. Profile, 14(2), 29-43.

Baumann, J., & Duffy, A. (2001). Teacher-researcher methodology: Themes,

variations and possibilities. . The Reading Teacher, 54(6), 608-615.

Boelts, M. (2007). Those Shoes. Sommerville, Massachusetts: Candlewick Press.

Bonnett, M. (2002). Education for sustainability as a frame of mind. Environmental

Education Research, 8(1), 9-20.

Brandt, L. (2014). Maddi's fridge. Chicago: Flashlight Press.

Camfield, L. (2010). ‗Stew without bread or bread without stew‘:Children‘s

understandings of poverty in Ethiopia. Children & Society, 24(4), 271-281.

Cannella, G. S. (2005). Reconceptualizing the field (of early care and education): If

'western' child development is a problem, then what do we do? In N. Yelland

(Ed.), Critical Issues in Early Childhood Education (pp. 17-39). Berkshire,

UK: McGraw-Hill Education.

Clark, A., & Moss, P. (2011). Listening to young children: The mosaic approach (2

ed.). London: NCB.

https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-03/Guide-to-the-NQF_0.pdf

https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2018-03/Guide-to-the-NQF_0.pdf

http://www.acoss.org.au/images/uploads/ACOSS_Poverty_in_Australia_2014.pdf

http://www.acoss.org.au/images/uploads/ACOSS_Poverty_in_Australia_2014.pdf

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=y8FUbds7tNU

References 341

Commonwealth of Australia. (2009). Living sustainably: The Australian

government‟s national action plan for education for sustainability.

Retrieved from http://aries.mq.edu.au/pdf/national_action_plan.pdf

Connor, J. (2011). Thinking about intentions. Retrieved from

http://www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/nqsplp/wp-

content/uploads/2012/05/EYLFPLP_E-Newsletter_No4.pdf

Creswell, J. (2014). Educational research: planning, conducting and evaluating

quantitative and qualitative research (5th ed.). French Forest, Sydney:

Pearson Australia.

Dahlberg, G., & Moss, P. (2005). Ethics and politics in early childhood education.

Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge Falmer.

Danby, S., & Farrell, A. (2004). Accounting for young children‘s competence in

educational research: New perspectives on research ethics. The Australian

Educational Researcher, 31(3), 35-49.

Dau, E., & Jones, K. (2016). Revisiting celebrations with young children. In R.

Scarlet (Ed.), The anti bias approach in early childhood (3 ed., pp. 135-144).

Australia: MultiVerse Publishing.

Davis, J. (2010). Young Children and the Environment Early Education for

Sustainability. New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Davis, J. (2015). What is early childhood education for sustainability and why does it

matter? In J. Davis (Ed.), Young children and the environment: Early

education for sustainability (2 ed., pp. 7-31). Melbourne, Vic: Cambridge

University Press.

Davis, J., Gibson, M., Pratt, R., Eglington, A., & Rowntree, N. (2005). ‗Creating a

culture of sustainability: From project to integrated education for

sustainability at Campus Kindergarten‘. In W. Filho (Ed.), The international;

handbook of sustainability research (pp. 563-594). Paris: UNESCO.

http://aries.mq.edu.au/pdf/national_action_plan.pdf

http://www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/nqsplp/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/EYLFPLP_E-Newsletter_No4.pdf

http://www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/nqsplp/wp-content/uploads/2012/05/EYLFPLP_E-Newsletter_No4.pdf

342 References

Day, C., & Townsend, A. (2009). Practitioner action research: Building and

sustaining success through networked learning communities. In S. N. B.

Somekh (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of educational action research (pp. 178-

189). London: UK: Sage Publications.

Deleuze, G., & Guattari, F. (1987). A thousand plateus: Capitalism and

schizophrenia. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.

Department of Education. (2017). Definitions of early childhood services. Retrieved

from https://qed.qld.gov.au/earlychildhood/service-

providers/framework/resources/definitions

Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations [DEEWR]. (2009).

Belonging, being and becoming: Early years learning framework for

Australia. Retrieved from http://files.acecqa.gov.au/files/National-Quality-

Framework-Resources-

Kit/belonging_being_and_becoming_the_early_years_learning_framework_f

or_australia.pdf

Department of the Environment, Water, Heritage and the Arts. (2010). Sustainability

curriculum framework: A guide for curriculum developers and policy makers

Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia Retrieved from

https://cpl.asn.au/sites/default/files/journal/Sustainability%20Curriculum-

Framework.pdf.

Derrida, J. (1991). Cinders (N. Lukacher, Trans.). Lincoln: University of Nebraska

Press.

Duhn, I. (2012). Making ‗place‘ for ecological sustainability in early childhood

education. Environmental Education Research, 18(1), 19-29.

Edwards, A. (2010). Qualitative designs and analysis. In G. MacNaughton, S. Rolfe,

& I. Siraj-Blatchford (Ed.), Doing early childhood research: International

perspectives on theory and practice (pp. 155-176). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen

& Unwin.

https://qed.qld.gov.au/earlychildhood/service-providers/framework/resources/definitions

https://qed.qld.gov.au/earlychildhood/service-providers/framework/resources/definitions

http://files.acecqa.gov.au/files/National-Quality-Framework-Resources-Kit/belonging_being_and_becoming_the_early_years_learning_framework_for_australia.pdf




https://cpl.asn.au/sites/default/files/journal/Sustainability%20Curriculum-Framework.pdf

https://cpl.asn.au/sites/default/files/journal/Sustainability%20Curriculum-Framework.pdf

References 343

Edwards, S., & Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2013). Pedagogical play types: What do they

suggest for learning about sustainability in early childhood education?

International Journal of Early Childhood, 45(3), 327-346.

Efron, S., & Ravid, R. (2013). Action research in education: A practical guide. New

York, NY: The Guilford Press.

Elliott, S., & Davis, J. (2009). Exploring the Resistance: An Australian Perspective

on Educating for Sustainability in Early Childhood. International Journal of

Early Childhood, 41(2), 65-77. doi:10.1007/BF03168879

Elliott, S., & McCrea, N. (2015). Gaps and challenges informing professional

learning about early childhood education for sustainability. The Social

Educator, 33(3), 17-28.

Elliott, S., & Young, T. (2016). Nature by default in early childhood education for

sustainability. Australian Journal of Environmental Education, 32(1), 57-64.

Farrell, A. (2016). Ethics in early childhood research. In A. Farrell, S.L. Kagan, &

E.K. Tisdall (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of early childhood research (pp. 3-

30). London, UK: Sage Publications.

Fien, J. (2004). Education for Sustainability In R. Gilbert (Ed.), Studying society and

environment: A guide for teachers (3 ed., pp. 184-200). South Melbourne:

Thomson.

Fleer, M., Anning, A., & Cullen, J. (2009). A framework for conceptualising early

childhood education. In A. Anning, J. Cullen, & M. Fleer (Ed.), Early

childhood education: Society and culture (pp. 187-203). London, UK: SAGE

Publications.

Fraser, N., Dahl, H., Stoltz, P., & Willig, R. (2004). Recognition, redistribution and

representation in capitalist global society: An interview with Nancy Fraser.

Acta Sociologica, 47(4), 374-382.

344 References

Frederickson, L., & Beck, S. (2010). Caught in the crossfire: Education research in

context. International Journal of Research and Method in Education, 33(2),

135-149.

Freire, P. (1998). The Paulo Freire reader. New York, NY: Continuum.

Fusco, E. (2012). Effective questioning strategies in classroom: a step-by-step

approach to engaged thinking and learning. New York, NY: Teachers

College Press.

Gandini, L. (2011). Connecting through caring and learning spaces. In C. Edwards,

L. Gandini, & G. Forman (Eds.), The Hundred Languages of Children The

Reggio Emilia Experience in Transformation. (3 ed., pp. 317-342). Santa

Barbara: ABC-CLIO.

Gibson, M. (2010). Leadership for creating cultures of sustainability. In J.Davis

(Ed.), Young children and the environment: Early education for sustainability

(pp. 76-103). New York, NY: Cambridge University Press.

Giroux, H. (2006). The Giroux reader. Boulder: Paradigm Publishers.

Glesne, C. (2011). Becoming qualitative researchers: An introduction (4th ed.).

Boston: Pearson.

Glover, A. (2016). Children and bias In R. Scarlet (Ed.), The anti bias approach in

early childhood (3 ed., pp. 3-16). Australia: MultiVerse Publishing.

Grieshaber, S. (2000). Regulating the early childhood field. Australian Journal of

Early Childhood, 25(2), 1-6.

Grieshaber, S., & McArdle, F. (2010). The trouble with play. Berkshire: McGraw-

Hill Education.

Hagglund, S., & Johansson, E. (2014). Belonging, value conflicts and children‘s

rights in learning for sustainability in early childhood. In J. Davis, & S. Elliott

References 345

(Ed.), Research in early childhood education for sustainability: International

perspectives and provocations (pp. 38-48). Milton Park, Abingdon:

Routledge.

Hagglund, S., & Pramling Samuelsson, I. (2009). Early childhood education and

learning for sustainable development and citizenship. International Journal of

Early Childhood, 41(2), 49-63.

Halquist, D., & Musanti, S. (2010). Critical incidents and reflection: Turning points

that challenge the researcher and create opportunities for knowing

International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 23(4), 449-461.

Hammond, L., Hesterman, S., & Knaus, M. (2015). What‘s in your refrigerator?

Children‘s views on equality, work, money and access to food. International

Journal of Early Childhood, 47(3), 367-384.

Hart, R. (1997). Children‟s participation: The theory and practice of involving young

citizens in community development and environmental care. New York: NY:

Taylor and Francis.

Hatzigianni, M., Miller, M., & Quinones, G. (2016). Karagiosis in Australia:

exploring principles of social justice in the arts for young children.

International Journal of Education and the Arts, 17(25), 17-25.

Haughton, G., & Hunter, C. (2003). Sustainable cities. New York, NY: Routledge.

Hawkins, K. (2010). A cry to teach for social justice: Linking early childhood

education, participatory action research and children‟s literature

(Dissertation), University of Southern Queensland, Brisbane, Qld.

Hayward, B. (2012). Children, citizenship and environment: Nurturing a democratic

imagination in a changing world. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Helm, J. H., & Katz, L. (2011). Young investigators: The project approach in the

early years. New York, NY: Teachers College Press.

346 References

Hendrick, H. (2015). Constructions and reconstructions of British childhood: An

interpretative survey, 1800 to the present. In A. James, & A. Prout (Ed.),

Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood (pp. 29-53). New

York, NY: Routledge.

Horn, M., Karlin, E., Ramey, S., Aldrige, J., & Snyder, S. (2005). Developmentally

appropriate practices on children's development: A review of research and

discussion of methodological and analytical issues The Elementary School

Journal, 105(4), 325-351.

How, A. (2003). Critical Theory. In I. Craib (Ed.), Traditions in social theory.

Houndmills, Basingtoke, Hampshire: Palgrave Macmillan.

Hughes, H. (2008). Critical incident techniques. In S. Lipu, K. Williamson, &

A.Llyod (Ed.), Exploring methods in information literacy research (pp. 49-

66). Wagga Wagga, NSW: Centre for Information Studies, Charles Stuart

University

Irwin, J. (2013). Derrida and educational research. In M. Murphy (Ed.), Social theory

and education research (pp. 171-183). Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Jackson, L. (2014). ‗Won‘t Somebody Think of the Children?‘ Emotions, child

poverty, and post-humanitarian possibilities for social justice education.

Educational Philosophy and Theory, 46(9), 1069-1081.

doi:10.1080/00131857.2014.931430

James, A., Jenks, C., & Prout, A. (1998). Theorizing childhood. Cambridge, UK:

Blackwell Publishing.

Jones, K. (2016). Developing critical thinking and activism In R. Scarlet (Ed.), The

anti bias approach in early childhood (3 ed., pp. 169-182). Australia:

MultiVerse Publishing.

References 347

Jordan, B. (2009). Scaffolding learning and co-constructing understandings. In A.

Anning, J. Cullen, & M. Fleer (Ed.), Early childhood education: Society and

culture (pp. 47-60). London, UK: SAGE Publication Ltd.

Katz, L., & Chard, S. (2000). Engaging children‟s minds: The project approach.

Stamford, Conn: Ablex Publishing Corporation.

Keenan, T., Evans, S., & Crowley, K. (2016). An introduction to child development

(3rd ed.). London: SAGE.

Kemmis, S. (2009). Action research as a practice based practice. Educational Action

Research, 17(3), 463-474.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2001). Participatory action research In N. Denzin, &

Y.Lincoln (Ed.), The handbook of qualitative research (2 ed., pp. 567-605).

Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Kemmis, S., & McTaggart, R. (2007). Participatory Action Research:

Communicative action and the public sphere. Retrieved from

http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/21157_Chapter_10.pdf

Kemmis, S., McTaggart, R., & Nixon, R. (2014). The action research planner:

Doing critical participatory action research. Singapore: Springer Singapore.

Kennedy-Lewis, B. (2012). When a teacher becomes a researcher: Using self-

narrative to define one‘s role as a participant observer. Theory Into Practice,

51(2), 107-113.

King, S. (2004). Mutt Dog. Australia: Scholastic Australia.

Kolbe, U. (1997). Clay & children : more than making pots. Watson, ACT:

Australian Early Childhood Association.

Kolbe, U. (2014). Children's imagination : creativity under our noses. Byron Bay,

NSW: Peppinot Press.

http://www.corwin.com/upm-data/21157_Chapter_10.pdf

348 References

Leggett, N., & Ford, M. (2013). Understanding the roles educators and children play

as intentional teachers and intentional learners within the Early Years

Learning Framework. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(4), 42-50.

Lister, R. (2008). Povertyism and „othering‟: Why they matter. Paper presented at the

‗Challenging Poverty—the Media and Politicians‘, Brighton.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/social/tuc15539-f0.pdf

Louv, R. (2014). Last Child in the Woods : Saving our Children from Nature-Deficit

Disorder. London, UK: Atlantic Books.

Mackewn, J. (2008). Facilitation as action research in the moment. In P. Reason, &

H. Bradbury (Ed.), SAGE handbook of action research: Participative inquiry

and practice (pp. 615-628). London: SAGE Publications.

Mackey, G. (2014). Valuing agency in young children: Teachers rising to the

challenge of sustainability in Aotearoa New Zealand early childhood context

In J. Davis, & S. Elliott (Ed.), Research in early childhood education for

sustainability: International perspectives and provocations Milton Park,

Abingdon: Routledge.

MacNaughton, G. (2000). Rethinking gender in early childhood education. St

Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

MacNaughton, G. (2003). Shaping early childhood: Learners, curriculum and

contexts. Berkshire, England: McGraw-Hill International.

MacNaughton, G. (2005). Doing Foucalt in in early childhood studies: Applying

poststructural ideas. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

MacNaughton, G. (2009). Exploring critical constructive perspectives on children's

learning. In A. Anning, J. Cullen, & M. Fleer (Ed.), Early childhood

education: Society and culture (pp. 61-71). London, UK: SAGE Publications,

Ltd.

http://www.tuc.org.uk/social/tuc15539-f0.pdf

References 349

MacNaughton, G., & Hughes, P. (2009). Doing action research in early childhood

studies: A step-by-step guide. Berkshire, England: McGraw- Hill Education.

MacNaughton, G., Hughes, P., & Smith, K. (2007). Young children‘s rights and

public policy: Practices and possibilities for citizenship in the early years.

Children & Society, 21(6), 458-469.

MacNaughton, G., & Williams, G. (2009). Techniques for teaching young children:

Choices for theory and practice (3 ed.). French Forest, NSW: Pearson

Education Australia.

Magis, K., & Shinn, C. (2009). Emergent principles of social sustainability. In J.

Dillard, V. Dujon, & M. King (Ed.), Understanding the social dimensions of

sustainability (pp. 15-44). Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Malaguzzi, L. (1994). Your image of the child: Where teaching begins. Retrieved

from https://www.reggioalliance.org/downloads/malaguzzi:ccie:1994.pdf

McArdle, F., & Ohlsen, A. (2016). Anti-bias curriculum art: art comes before the

idea and after it. In R. Scarlet (Ed.), The anti bias approach in early

childhood (3 ed., pp. 203-216). Australia: MultiVerse Publishing.

McLachlan, C., Fleer, M., & Edwards, S. (2013). Development and learning: How

views of development shape how curriculum is framed. In C. McLachlan, M.

Fleer, & S. Edwards (Ed.), Early childhood curriculum: Planning,

assessment, and implementation (2 ed., pp. 30-45). Melbourne, Vic:

Cambridge University Press.

McNichol, H., Davis, J., & O‘Brien, K. (2009). An ecological footprint for an early

learning centre: Identifying opportunities for early childhood sustainability

education through interdisciplinary research. Environmental Education

Research, 17(5), 689-704.

Miles, M., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Qualitative data analysis: An expanded

sourcebook. USA: Sage Publications.

https://www.reggioalliance.org/downloads/malaguzzi:ccie:1994.pdf

350 References

Miles, M., Huberman, A. M., & Saldana, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A

method sourcebook (3 ed.). Thousand Oaks, California: SAGE Publications.

Millei, Z., & Imre, R. (2009). The problems with using the concept of ‗citizenship‘ in

early years policy. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 10(3), 280-290.

Miller, M. (2014). Intercultural dialogues in early childhood education for

sustainability: Embedding Indigenous perspectives. In J. Davis, & S. Elliott

(Ed.), Research in early childhood education for sustainability: International

perspectives and provocation (pp. 63-78). Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Moss, P. (2014). Transformative change and real utopias in early childhood

education: A story of democracy, experimentation and potentiality.

Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Murphy, D., Bryant, H., & Ingram, H. (2014). When we inquire into our own

practice: An early childhood teacher research group. The New Education,,

10(1), 28-34.

Murphy, M. (2013). Social theory and education research: an introduction. In M.

Murphy (Ed.), Social theory and education research: Understanding Foucalt,

Habermas, Bourdieu and Derrida (pp. 3-17). Milton Park, Abingdon:

Routledge.

National Association for the Education of Young Children [NAEYC]. (2009).

Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving

children from birth through age 8: A position statement of the National

Association for the Education of Young Children. Retrieved from

http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSDAP.pdf

NSW Commission for Children and Young People. (2005). Participation: Count me

in! Involving children and young people in research. Retrieved from

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/522228/publications/taking_participation_serio

usly/Count_me_in.pdf?t=1462427568628

http://www.naeyc.org/files/naeyc/file/positions/PSDAP.pdf

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/522228/publications/taking_participation_seriously/Count_me_in.pdf?t=1462427568628

http://cdn2.hubspot.net/hubfs/522228/publications/taking_participation_seriously/Count_me_in.pdf?t=1462427568628

References 351

O‘Flynn, S. (2009). Teacher/researcher: An unsustainable identity. In H. Daniels, H.

Lauder, & J. Porter (Ed.), Knowledge, values and educational policy: A

critical perspective (pp. 282-294). London: Routledge.

OECD. (2014). Society at a glance 2014 highlights: Australia OECD social

indicators. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/australia/OECD-

SocietyAtaGlance2014-Highlights-Australia.pdf

OECD. (2015). Starting strong IV: Monitoring quality in early childhood education

and care. Retrieved from http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-

Management/oecd/education/starting-strong-iv_9789264233515-en#page1

OECD. (2017). Starting Strong 2017: Key OECD Indicators on Early Childhood

Education and Care. Paris: Starting Strong, OECD Publishing.

Oxfam Australia. (2014). Still the lucky country? The growing gap between rich and

poor is a gaping hole in the G20 agenda. Retrieved from

https://www.oxfam.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/2014-66-G20-

Report_FA_WEB-2.pdf

Penn, H. (2005). Unequal childhoods: Young children's lives in poor countries.

Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Phillips, L. (2008). Provoking critical awareness and intersubjectivity though

"transformative storytelling". Paper presented at the AARE 2008

International Education Conference, Brisbane.

Phillips, L. (2010). ‗Social justice storytelling and young children‘s active

citizenship‘. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 31(3),

363-376.

Pilcher, S., & Fox, S. (2017). State of ealy learning in Australia 2017. Retrieved

from Canberra, ACT:

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/everyonebenefits/pages/73/attachmen

ts/original/1504689599/ELEB-Report-web.pdf?1504689599

http://www.oecd.org/australia/OECD-SocietyAtaGlance2014-Highlights-Australia.pdf

http://www.oecd.org/australia/OECD-SocietyAtaGlance2014-Highlights-Australia.pdf

http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/starting-strong-iv_9789264233515-en#page1

http://www.keepeek.com/Digital-Asset-Management/oecd/education/starting-strong-iv_9789264233515-en#page1

https://www.oxfam.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/2014-66-G20-Report_FA_WEB-2.pdf

https://www.oxfam.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/06/2014-66-G20-Report_FA_WEB-2.pdf

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/everyonebenefits/pages/73/attachments/original/1504689599/ELEB-Report-web.pdf?1504689599

https://d3n8a8pro7vhmx.cloudfront.net/everyonebenefits/pages/73/attachments/original/1504689599/ELEB-Report-web.pdf?1504689599

352 References

Pratt, R. (2010). Practical possibilities and pedagogical approaches for early

childhood education for sustainability In J.Davis (Ed.), Young children and

the environment: Early education for sustainability (pp. 104-153). New York,

NY: Cambridge University Press.

Prout, A., & James, A. (2015). A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood?:

Provenance, promise and problems. In A. James, & A. Prout (Ed.),



Queensland Studies Authority. (2010). Queensland Kindergarten Learning

Guideline. Retrieved from

https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/p_10/qklg.pdf

Qvortrup, J. (2015). A voice for children in statistical and social accounting: a plea

for children's rights to be heard. . In A. James, & A. Prout (Ed.),



Rasmussen, K. (2014). Children taking photos and photographs: A route to

children‘s involvement and participation and a ‗bridge‘ to exploring

children‘s everyday lives. In G. Melton, A. Ben-Arieh, J. Cashmore, G.

Goodman, & N. Worley (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of child research (pp.

443-471).

Reason, P., & Bradbury, H. (2008). Introduction. In P. Reason, & H. Bradbury (Ed.),

The SAGE handbook of action research: Participative inquiry and practice (2

ed., pp. 1-11). London, UK: SAGE

Reifel, S. (2011). Observation and early childhood teaching evolving fundamentals.

Young Children, 55(2), 62-65.

Ridge, T. (2006). Childhood poverty: a barrier to social participation and inclusion.

In E. K. M. Tisdall, J. M. Davis, A. Prout, & M. Hill (Eds.), Children, young

https://www.qcaa.qld.edu.au/downloads/p_10/qklg.pdf

References 353

people and social inclusion (pp. 23-38): Policy Press at the University of

Bristol.

Rinaldi, C. (2006). In dialogue with Reggio Emilia: Listening, researching and

learning Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Rinaldi, C. (2013). Re-Imagining childhood: The inspiration of Reggio Emilia

education principles in South Australia. Retrieved from Adelaide, South

Australia: https://www.education.sa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net691/f/reimagining-

childhood.pdf

Saunders, P. (2011). Down and out: Poverty and exclusion in Australia. Bristol: The

Policy Press.

Scarlet, R., & Fargher, D. (2016). Creating anti-bias environments: Rethinking,

reshaping and reconfiguring. In R. Scarlet (Ed.), The anti bias approach in

early childhood (3 ed., pp. 17-26). Australia: MultiVerse Publishing

Sigelman, C. (2012). Rich man, poor man: Developmental differences in attributions

and perceptions. Journal of Experimental Child Psychology, 113(3), 415-429.

Sims, M. (2011). Social inclusion and the early years learning framework: A way of

working. Castle Hills, NSW: Pademelon Press.

Siraj-Blatchford, I. (2012). Curriculum, pedagogy and progression in sustained

shared thinking. Every Child, 18(3), 34-45.

Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2008). The implications of early understandngs of inequality,

science and technology for the development of sustainable societies. In I.

Samuelsson & Y. Kaga (Eds.), The contribution of early childhood education

to a sustainable society. Paris: UNESCO.

Siraj-Blatchford, J. (2009). Editorial: Education for sustainable development in early

childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 9-22.

https://www.education.sa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net691/f/reimagining-childhood.pdf

https://www.education.sa.gov.au/sites/g/files/net691/f/reimagining-childhood.pdf

354 References

Smidt, S. (2013). Introducing Malaguzzi: Exploring the life and work of Reggio

Emilia‟s founding father. Milton Park, Abingdon: Routledge.

Solvason, C. (2013). Research and the early years practitioner-researcher. Early

Years, 33(1), 90-97.

Somerville, M., & Williams, C. (2015). Sustainability education in early childhood:

An updated review of research in the field. Contemporary Issues in Early

Childhood, 16(2), 102-117.

Souto-Manning, M. (2012). Teacher as researcher: Teacher action research in teacher

education. Childhood Education, 88(1), 54-56.

Stringer, E. (2007). Action Research. Thousand Oaks, USA: SAGE Publications Inc.

Stringer, E. (2008). Action research in education. Columbus, Ohio: Prentice Hall.

Stuhmcke, S. (2012). Children as change agents for sustainability: An action

research case study in a kindergarten. (Dissertation), Queensland University

of Technology, Brisbane, Qld.

Swantz, M. (2008). Participatory action research as practice. In P. Reason, & H.

Bradbury (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of action research (pp. 31-48). London,

UK: SAGE.

Swedish National Agency for Education. (2010). Curriculum for the preschool Lpfo

98 revised 2010. Retrieved from https://www.skolverket.se/om-

skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-

publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws

%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FBlob%2Fpdf2704.pdf%3Fk%3D2

704

Tait, G. (2016). Making sense of mass education (2nd ed.). Port Melbourne, Victoria:

Cambridge University Press.

https://www.skolverket.se/om-skolverket/publikationer/visa-enskild-publikation?_xurl_=http%3A%2F%2Fwww5.skolverket.se%2Fwtpub%2Fws%2Fskolbok%2Fwpubext%2Ftrycksak%2FBlob%2Fpdf2704.pdf%3Fk%3D2704





References 355

Tisdall, E. K. (2016). Participation, rights and ‗participatory‘ methods. In A. Farrell,

S.L. Kagan, & E.K. Tisdall (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of early childhood

research (pp. 73-88). London, UK: Sage Publications.

Tryphon, A., & Voneche, J. (1996). Piaget-Vygotsky: The social genesis of thought.

London, UK: Taylor and Francis.

UN General Assembly. (2015). Transforming our world: The 2030 agenda for

sustainable development. Retrieved from

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

UNESCO. (2001). Education and poverty eradication. Retrieved from

http://www.unesco.org/education/poverty/news.shtml

UNESCO. (2002). What is sustainable development? Retrieved from

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-

URL_ID=2963&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

UNESCO. (2005). Teaching and learning for a sustainable future. Retrieved from

http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/mod02.html

UNESCO. (2010). Four dimensions of sustainable development. Retrieved from

http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/popups/mod04t01s03.ht

ml

UNESCO. (2015). Education: Education for sustainable development (ESD).

Retrieved from http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-

international-agenda/education-for-sustainable-development/

United Nations. (1989). United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child.

Retrieved from http://www.unicef.org/crc/

United Nations. (2016). Sustainable development goals: 17 goals to transform our

world. Retrieved from

ttp://www.un.org/sustainabledevelopment/sustainable-development-goals/

https://sustainabledevelopment.un.org/post2015/transformingourworld

http://www.unesco.org/education/poverty/news.shtml

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=2963&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

http://portal.unesco.org/en/ev.php-URL_ID=2963&URL_DO=DO_TOPIC&URL_SECTION=201.html

http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/mod02.html

http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/popups/mod04t01s03.html

http://www.unesco.org/education/tlsf/mods/theme_a/popups/mod04t01s03.html

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/education-for-sustainable-development/

http://www.unesco.org/new/en/education/themes/leading-the-international-agenda/education-for-sustainable-development/

http://www.unicef.org/crc/

356 References

Vasconcelos, T. (2010). Case study. In G. MacNaughton, S. Rolfe, & I. Siraj-

Blatchford (Ed.), Doing early childhood research: International perspectives

on theory and practice (pp. 327-344). Crows Nest, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Vygotsky, L., van der Veer, R., & Valsiner, J. (1994). The Vygosky reader. Oxford,

England: Wiley-Blackwel.

Waber, B. (1963). Rich cat, poor cat. Boston, Massachusetts: Scholastic.

Weinger, S. (2000). Economic status: Middle class and poor children‘s views.

Children & Society, 14(2), 135-146.

Wood, E. (2009). Developing a pedagogy of play. In A. Anning, J. Cullen, M. Fleer

(Ed.), Early childhood education: Society and culture (pp. 35-46). London,

UK: SAGE Publications Ltd.

World Bank. (2018). Understanding Poverty. Retrieved from

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview

World Commission on Environment and Development. (1987) Our common future.

Oxford: Oxford University Press.

Wright, S. (2012). Ways of knowing in the arts. In S. Wright (Ed.), Children,

meaning-making and the arts (2nd ed., pp. 1-29). Frenchs Forest, N.S.W.:

Pearson Australia.

Zollo, L. (2017). Initial teacher education for early childhood teachers: A

rhizomatous inquiry. (PhD Thesis), Queensland University of Technology.

http://www.worldbank.org/en/topic/poverty/overview

Appendices 357

Appendices

Appendix A Impetus for discussion about the concept of ‘not having

enough’ after the shared reading session on the critical

text; Maddi’s fridge (Brandt, 2014).

358 Appendices

Appendix B Participant Information for QUT Research Project:

Parent/Guardian

Appendices 359

360 Appendices

Appendices 361

362 Appendices

Appendix C Children’s consent form

Appendices 363

Appendix D Children’s participation in different learning experience

Participant Participation as represented in the range of data collection methods

Sm

all-

gro

up

con

ver

sati

on

Bra

inst

orm

ing

sess

ion

Ind

ivid

ual

con

ver

sati

on

Dra

win

gs/

Pai

nti

ng

s

Cla

y-M

akin

g (

bo

th

Mu

seu

m o

f

Po

ver

ty,

Hea

lth

y

Pla

tes)

Pla

y e

pis

od

e

Par

tici

pat

ion

an

d

ob

serv

atio

n

thro

ugh

app

eara

nce

in p

ho

tog

raph

s

Ava X X X X X X X

Ella X X X

Jon X X X X X X

Ronny X X X X

Kara X X X X X X X

Mac X X X X X X X

Ravi X X X X X X

Ann X X X X X X X

Geata X X X X X X X

Lola X X X X X X X

Xavier X X

Carol X X X X X X X

Phil X X

Jorge X X X X X X X

Kavitha X X X X X

Lee X X X X X X

Gina X X X X X

Fred X

Ben X X

Lawrence X X X X

Maggie X X X

364 Appendices

Appendix E Coding and recoding cycle

Appendices 365

Appendix F Refinement from three categories and propositional

statements to two categories and propositional statements

Three categories and propositional statements identified

Final two refined categories and propositional statements

366 Appendices

Appendix G Human research ethics approval certificate

Documents

Yvonne Marjorie Paujik - QUT Marjorie...Young Children‘s Understanding of Poverty Within a Framework of Sustainability: Action Research in a Kindergarten v 2.5.3 Children‘s perceptions