To Örebro University

Topic/idea and arguments for the topic’s importance

In our project, we seek to understand transition challenges for early years science teaching. We have combined third generation models of Activity Theory (Engeström, 2001) and formative interventions (Penuel 2014) to describe obstacles and opportunities that surface when teachers from different school forms strive to construct a shared object: pedagogical continuity in science education.

In our analytical work, we have first constructed triangle models to describe activities and activity systems for preschools, preschool classes and primary school classes. The activity systems have then been compared across school forms. When comparing activity systems across school forms, we realised that some of the critical factors for continuity are not included in conventional triangle models. Consequently, we would like to share and discuss three methodological issues:

1. There is no room for frame factors such as policy agendas, class sizes, time schedules, and access to premises/personnel in conventional triangle models. Yet, in our analyses we discovered that teachers drew on frame factors in their boundary work (cf. Gieryn 1983) towards other school forms.
2. In many AT studies, the community node consists of a description of various stakeholders within the activity system. In our previous work, we have instead used the community node to describe the educational culture of the community (e.g., Sundberg et al. 2018). There, the educational culture includes overarching views of how children learn, what counts as good or desirable learning and the role of the teacher for children’s learning (cf. Biesta 2011). Since our studies show that the educational culture is crucial to how and whether science is afforded the children (Sundberg et al. 2018), we would like to discuss the place for educational cultures within AT models.
3. When comparing the activity systems, the role of each teacher’s professional experience and science confidence has emerged as a critical factor for pedagogical continuity in science education. For example, teachers with strong science competence as well as confidence or teachers with work experience from both preschool and primary school seem less occupied with boundary work towards other school forms. In our current work, we have tentatively described teacher experience and competence within the subject node. This, in turn, has lead to our grappling with the relation between the subject node and the community node, with regards to the educational culture.

All or some of these issues may be discussed depending on the interest of the participants in the reflection space.

Information about empirical data in our current project

Our data was collected in three Swedish school units, each comprising at least one preschool, one preschool class and one class from the first three grades of primary school. Together the three units comprise 4 preschools, 4 preschool classes and 4 grade 1-3 classes. We conducted focus group discussions (10) with teachers across the school forms within each unit, classroom observations of implementations (49) and individual interviews with 21 teachers, before and after the project (35 in total).