Abstract:
Improving the quality of Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) practice is a key focus in Australia, and improving the translation between research and practice through professional learning is one recommendation for achieving this. Research on evidence use in ECEC practice is limited, and supporting the use of evidence in educational contexts is under conceptualised. This presentation proposes a Bourdieusian conceptual framework to understand ECEC practitioners' (co-educators, teachers, and leaders) evidence use.
ECEC settings vary widely, from single kindergartens to multi-room long day services. Positions within these services are determined based on qualification levels. These range from bachelor-qualified kindergarten teachers to certificate or diploma-qualified educators, and various leadership positions. This PhD research project aimed to understand these ECEC practitioners’ use of evidence through a Bourdieusian framed case study design, focusing on the kindergarten rooms in one specific setting.
A case study methodology was employed to gain a deep understanding of practitioner perspectives and included a mapping of the field through a literature review of evidence use expectations within ECEC practice. The case study was bounded by the kindergarten rooms in a North Melbourne long-day care center and included 17 practitioners across three defined positions (nine co-educators, four teachers, and four leaders). Data was collected through semi-structured interviews, artifact collection, and observations. Data was analysed thematically using a conceptual framework derived from the Bourdieusian concepts of field, habitus, and capital and designed to support the conceptualisation of evidence use enablers at an individual, organisational, and system level.
The conceptual framework provided the tools to understand how different practitioner habitus and capital positioned each practitioner in the ECEC setting (field). These positions afforded the practitioners varying degrees of agency. Practitioners with a teaching qualification and room leader role reported being well supported to use evidence. Practitioners with a co-educator role, despite valuing evidence and evidence use in their practice, reported challenges in using evidence, particularly lacking the time or opportunity to engage with research evidence. Those in leadership positions reported they expected and supported practitioners to use evidence but were often constrained by governance considerations.
Various aspects of the individual, organisational and system related supports and challenges were identified in relation to the specifics of the ECEC setting and the individuals positioned within that setting. The conceptual framework provided a tool to analyse the perceptions of a diverse group of practitioners in a unique setting and could be useful for future research.
ECEC settings vary widely, from single kindergartens to multi-room long day services. Positions within these services are determined based on qualification levels. These range from bachelor-qualified kindergarten teachers to certificate or diploma-qualified educators, and various leadership positions. This PhD research project aimed to understand these ECEC practitioners’ use of evidence through a Bourdieusian framed case study design, focusing on the kindergarten rooms in one specific setting.
A case study methodology was employed to gain a deep understanding of practitioner perspectives and included a mapping of the field through a literature review of evidence use expectations within ECEC practice. The case study was bounded by the kindergarten rooms in a North Melbourne long-day care center and included 17 practitioners across three defined positions (nine co-educators, four teachers, and four leaders). Data was collected through semi-structured interviews, artifact collection, and observations. Data was analysed thematically using a conceptual framework derived from the Bourdieusian concepts of field, habitus, and capital and designed to support the conceptualisation of evidence use enablers at an individual, organisational, and system level.
The conceptual framework provided the tools to understand how different practitioner habitus and capital positioned each practitioner in the ECEC setting (field). These positions afforded the practitioners varying degrees of agency. Practitioners with a teaching qualification and room leader role reported being well supported to use evidence. Practitioners with a co-educator role, despite valuing evidence and evidence use in their practice, reported challenges in using evidence, particularly lacking the time or opportunity to engage with research evidence. Those in leadership positions reported they expected and supported practitioners to use evidence but were often constrained by governance considerations.
Various aspects of the individual, organisational and system related supports and challenges were identified in relation to the specifics of the ECEC setting and the individuals positioned within that setting. The conceptual framework provided a tool to analyse the perceptions of a diverse group of practitioners in a unique setting and could be useful for future research.