Mapping and appraisal of Scandinavian research in ECEC institutions (2006-2007)
description
Transcript of Mapping and appraisal of Scandinavian research in ECEC institutions (2006-2007)
Conference concerning Nordic research in the field of early childhood education and care:
Quality and relevance for policymaking
Oslo/Gardermoen, 18.-20.11.2009
Thomas Moser, Vestfold University College Katrin Hjort, Bente Jensen, Inge Johansson, Sven Erik Nordenbo, Niels Ploug & Michael Søgaard Larsen
Mapping and appraisal of Scandinavian research in ECEC institutions (2006-2007)
PRESENTATION - OVERVIEW
1. Background and purpose of the project
2. Method and procedure
3. Selected results
4. Conclusions and future perspectives
Funding:
The Danish Evaluation Institute
Conducted by:
Danish Clearinghouse for Educational Research
The Danish School of Education
University of Aarhus, Copenhagen
in 2007-2008
BACKGROUND
PURPOSE OF THE PROJECT
• In general: Providing research based knowledge Policy development, research and practice
• Develop research based knowledge for future (Danish) policy development (“evidence based”)
• Systematic mapping and appraisal of Scandinavian research projects and -results in early childhood education institutions is demanded (Lack of knowledge)
• Establish a free accessible research database
• Make Scandinavian research accessible for non Scandinavian researchers, practitioners, policy providers and public (English language)
EVIDENCE - BASED PRACTICE
Evidentia = clearness, certainty
Evidence based practice: A term introduced by David Sackett (public health)
A systematically and balanced use of the best existing evidence from clinical research combined with clinical evaluation
No new form of “technocracy” !!!
THREE SOURCES OF KNOWLEDGE FOR EVIDENCE BASED PRACTICE
RESEARCH BASED
EVIDENCE
USER EXPERIENCE
AND INTENTIONS
PROFESSIONAL EXPERIENCE
AND COMPETENCY
EVIDENCE- BASED
PRACTICE
Professor Sven Erik Nordenbo, Danish School of Education
Professor Katrin Hjort, University of Southern Denmark Odense (2007)
Senior lecturer Bente Jensen, Danish School of Education
Professor Inge Johansson, University of Stockholm, Sweden
Professor Jan Kampmann, Roskilde University, Denmark (2006)
Senior lecturer Michael Søgaard Larsen, Danish School of Education
Professor Thomas Moser, Vestfold University College, Norway
Research Director Niels Ploug, Statistics Denmark
RESEARCHER GROUP
SCANDINAVIAN COUNTRIES 19 million inhabitants
80-90 % of the 1-5/6 years old are enrolled in ECE-institutions
5,5 mill.
4,6 mill.
9,0 mill.
Nordic:
Scandi-navian:
PRESENTATION - OVERVIEW
1. Background and purpose of the project
2. Method and procedure
3. Selected main findings
4. Conclusions and future perspectives
Systematical mapping*)
characterizing main tendencies
Re-description
Descriptionof main
themes/topics
Implicationsfor pratice, policy and research
THE MAPPING PROCESS IN GENERAL
Searching literature
”Qualifying” the hits
*) Following the EPPI-Centre data extraction and coding tool for education studies Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre, Institute of Education, London University
PROCEDURE SEARCH IN DATABASE
RESSOURCE HITSDanish pedagogical base 141
Researchdatabase (Denmark, betaversion) 22
NORBOK 69
Bibsys Forskdok (Norway) 394
Libris (Sweden, betaversion) 238
Forskning.se (Sweden) 2
www.skolporten.com (Sweden) 7
Hand search of
Scand. Journal of Educational Research 0
ERIC 3
References from Review Group 2
References from other researchers 7
1114 references identified
Reference screening Screening of titles and abstracts
879 references excludedCriteria: wrong institution or document type
171 documents included1st phaseIncluded documents
Reference doublets 64 doublets identified1095 unique references identified
1 document Not provided documents
Full texts screeningScreening på baggrund af dokumentets tekst
Provided documents 170 documents
64 documents excludedCriteria: wrong institution or document type
2nd phaseIncluded documents
106 documents included 2006: n=52; 2007:5 n=54;
Search hits
PROCEDURESEARCHING AND IDENTIFYING DOCUMENTS
Systematical mapping
characterizing main tendencies of 106
studies
Re-description of 106 studies
EPPI – Reviewer 15 dimensions123 questions
Descriptionof six specific themes/topics
Implicationsfor pratice, policy
and research
52 Swedish 27 Danish
27 Norwegian
PROCEDURE MAPPING AND APPRAISAL
15 dimensions123 questions
PRESENTATION - OVERVIEW
1. Background and purpose of the project
2. Method and procedure
3. Selected results Purpose, research design and –
methods
Specific themes and issues
4. Conclusions and future perspectives
FOUR PUBLICATIONS SO FARhttp://www.dpu.dk; http://www.eva.dk
Purpose, research design and –methods
N=106 scientific publications2006: n=522007: n=54
RESULTS
MAIN TOPICS OR FOCUS AREAS
N= 106 (52/54) NUMBER OF STUDIES
TOTAL 2007 2006
Teaching and learning 23 12 11
Assessment 16 8 8Equal opportunities 13 5 8Curriculum 11 5 6Organisation & Leadership 10 5 5Policy 10 3 7Classroom management 5 1 4Teaching as a career 4 1 3Methodology 4 1 3Other 41 25 16
N= 106 (52/54) NUMBER OF STUDIES
TOTAL 2006 2007
Content in ECE-institutions 35 13 22
Basic values and ethics 32 16 16
Assessment, evaluation, quality assurance and -development 31 23 8
Methods and practices 17 10 7
Purpose, aims and goals of ECE 17 4 13
Work with/based upon governmental/public documents (act; law; curriculum)
10 5 5
RESEARCH ISSUES AND TOPICS – DIDACTIC PERSPECTIVE
N= 106 (52/54) NUMBER OF PUBLICATIONS
TOTAL 2006 2007
Description
57 32 25
Exploration of relationships
54 23 31
What works? 21 14 7
Methods development 8 5 3
Reviewing/synthesising research
6 4 2
THE PURPOSE OF RESEARCH IN THE STUDIES
RESEARCH APPROACHESN= 106 (52/54)
TOTAL 2006 2007
Ethnography* 42 20 22Case study 21 11 10Cross-sectional study 18 11 7
Document study 18 9 9Views study 16 5 11
Action research* 9 5 4
One group post-test only* 5 2 3One group pre-post test* 5 1 4Systematic review 4 2 2Case-control study* 3 1 2Secondary data analysis 3 2 1 Other review (non systematic) 2 2 0Cohort study* 2 1 1Experiment with non-random allocation to groups* 1 0 1
Experiment with random allocation to groups* 0 0 0
N= 106 (52/54) NUMBER OF STUDIES
TOTAL 2006 2007
Staff 1 working in ECE-institutions
79 39 40
Children 52* 21* 31*
Parents 19 11 8
Staff 2: “around” institutions (administration, local, regional or national municipalities, union-representatives, politicians, connsultants, etc.)
14 9 5
Not specified or ”others” 5 3 2
SAMPLES - MAIN FOCUS ON ...
*Only three studies 2006 and nine 2007 address exclusively children
N= 106 (52/54) 2007 2006TOTAL N % N %
The position of the institution in
society31 16
30 %
15 28 %
Political or economic
background and context
14 2 4 % 12 23 %
Historical or cultural
background and context
9 611 %
3 6 %
Category not applicable
57 3259 %
25
48 %
THE PRE-SCHOOL INSTITUTIONS IN A SOCIAL PERSPECTIVE
SIX SPECIFIC THEMES AND TOPICS (2006/2007)
1. Play, learning and care, curriculum: 44 studies (26/18)
2. Vulnerability, social inequality, in-/exclusion in institutions: 16 studies (9/7)
3. Professionals, teachers: 79 studies (39/40)
4. Parents and institutions: 19 studies (11/8)
5. Implementation of legislation and curricula: 6 studies (2/4)
6. Health: 4 studies (1/3)
PRESENTATION - OVERVIEW
1. Background and purpose of the project
2. Method and procedure
3. Selected results
4. Conclusions and future perspectives
MAIN CONCLUSIONSOF THE 2006 & 2007 MAPPING
• Ethnography and case oriented studies focused on micro-processes, learning and professional work are predominating
• Little focus on political, social cultural and economical frames and their implications for the practical work
• Surprisingly little focus on children
• Inquiries aiming at the family’s social background, economical situation and its implications for the work in preschool institutions are rather rare
• The caring dimension of the pedagogical work is only examined in a few studies (few studies of the youngest children)
• Comparative studies are missing (local; international)
• The researchers’ craftsmanship. (What is in the research process? Explicitly about research methods and design)
• Few intervention studies, no experimental studies almost no longitudinal studies
SOME CHALLENGES• Questioning and developing the relation between research,
evaluation and practice
• Taking the “holistic” approach seriously also in research. A widened view of learning and the dynamics of learning (including the assessment/testing issue)
• The institutional frames for inclusion- as well as exclusion-processes
• The importance of the interaction with parents and the relations between the professionals and parents
• The relationships between political level, practitioners/professionals and practice (secure and develop quality)
• Combining micro and macro perspective, qualitative and quantitative approaches, cross sectional and longitudinal studies, description and intervention
SOME CONSIDERATIONS CONCERNING POLICY MAKING
• Using this and other reviews and mappings actively and critically – cross national/Nordic
• Funding further research mappings, perhaps also “back in time”
• Contribute to disseminate the findings on different levels
• Establishing a formal cooperation between the Scandinavian/Nordic countries (“Nordic/Scandinavian Clearinghouse for Educational Research”)
• Establishing national centers for research based knowledge
The Danish School of EducationUniversity of AarhusTuborgvej 164DK-2400 København NVtel: (+45) 8888 9969fax: (+45) 8888 9922http://www.dpu.dk/site.aspx?p=9882