What counts and matters in early childhood: Narratives of interests and outcomes

Abstract

Evidence of outcomes of the early years is highly dependent on what is considered as an outcome, the curriculum and relationships children experience, and the research designs and methods used to ascertain the value of early childhood education. This article reports from an original study in New Zealand that used narrative inquiry to interview young adults about their interests as children, ways these interests were stimulated and responded to, and the trajectory and outcomes of the interest in their lives-to-date. The findings suggest that interests provided sources of motivation, achievement, enjoyment and satisfaction in their lives, sustained the participants during difficult times, and led to a range of outcomes. This article argues that the evidence base for early childhood education needs to incorporate a broader view of what counts as outcomes and considers children’s interests thoughtfully as part of what matters. It also needs to include qualitative methodologies in studies seeking evidence of outcomes to enable the richness of human life experience and the social and cultural contexts of children’s upbringings to be captured.

Keywords

children’s interests curriculum early childhood education outcomes research design

Introduction

Some of my kindergarten friends, they would have a rugby ball there . . . and we would just muck around with it. (Craig)

I’d go directly to the dress-ups, put the shoes on my feet and then I would be Dorothy [from the Wizard of Oz] . . . they were my shoes, nobody else wore them, they were always on my feet. (Rachel)

I wanted to be a ballerina for a long time. But I [also] quite liked science; I wanted to be a doctor. (Susie)

In the last 50 years, provision of early childhood education (ECE) has grown internationally for educational, demographic change, and economic reasons. An eclectic and, at times, selective mix of research, policy, theory, ideology, popular wisdom and assumptions have guided ECE practices (Wood and Hedges, 2016). A long-standing question has concerned policymakers: What outcomes of ECE count and matter for children’s learning and lives? In examining this important question, three problems become apparent: the issue of outcomes is in itself contestable, outcomes are highly dependent on the curriculum children experience, and particular research designs have dominated the outcomes literature.

A number of curricular documents internationally suggest that children’s interests are a source of curricular planning. As the opening quotes suggest, in this article, I take up the challenge of investigating what kinds of outcomes might arise from an interests based approach and whether a focus on interests might have long-term outcomes. Findings from a narrative inquiry involving young adults suggest that possible outcomes are broad, and include dispositions for learning and life linked to identity formation. I make a case for broadening perspectives of what counts and matters as outcomes, argue that attention to interests can strengthen considerations of outcomes, and recommend that policymakers include qualitative methodologies in research designs seeking evidence of outcomes.

What counts and what matters?

There is a plethora of literature on the outcomes of ECE. The nature and scope of this article mean that coverage of studies is necessarily limited (see Mitchell et al., 2008 for an all-encompassing review of studies at that date). Those well-known and cited, alongside more recent ones, are selected to indicate historical and ongoing arguments. I raise three issues to examine what counts and what matters in the literature. First, I focus attention and critique on outcomes as a concept. I then offer some commentary related to outcomes and the type of curriculum or programme children experience. Finally, I draw attention to the matter of research design in ascertaining evidence of outcomes. These issues point to the need for a broader, holistic and nuanced understanding of outcomes.

Issue 1: contestable views on outcomes

Debates over which outcomes to emphasise are long-standing and continuing (see Le et al., 2019). Such debates often assume that the purpose of ECE is preparation for later education and life chances. Investment in ‘school readiness’ (Karoly et al., 2005) appeals to many governments and parents. The term has invited a number of critical debates about children’s capabilities, the age of starting school, and associated pedagogies and policies (Bingham and Whitebread, 2018), and continues to be the subject of research internationally (e.g. Haggerty, 2019; Kay, 2019). From this perspective, ECE becomes viewed as means of setting children up for success, often resulting in programmes and policies emphasising academic outcomes and preparation for school. The term ‘Baby PISA’ has even entered the lexicon (Pence, 2016) to reflect the narrow academic focus of specialist programmes and assessments and a connection with subsequent international comparison testing regimes.

Yet, as Haggerty (2019) and Kay (2019) remind us policy imperatives may not reflect children’s daily lives, wishes, and experiences of learning. Much research on learning indicates otherwise: that learning is broad, complex, in-depth, occurs in formal and informal environments, and is not time bound or coherent in ways measured by many academically focused assessments (Jarvis, 2012; Rogoff et al., 2016). A wider view of outcomes is necessary to capture children’s rich learning capabilities as they occur in the present alongside consideration of the future. Much of the literature that has reported on long-term outcomes of studies has placed cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes as separate, and debated which might be most important to emphasise for which groups (e.g. Heckman et al., 2013; Heckman and Karapakula, 2019a). Yet as Heckman et al. (2013) note, little is known about the mechanisms used in ECE to enable long-term effects. In this article, I explore the ideas that outcomes that mix cognitive and non-cognitive aspects may be valuable, and that the mechanism of interest might foster long-term outcomes.

Outcomes that combine cognitive and non-cognitive aspects holistically were explored in ECE research in New Zealand (NZ). Carr’s research (e.g. Carr, 2001) has focused on learning dispositions. Carr (2001) described a dispositional approach as learning strategies plus motivation, ‘a combination of inclination, sensitivity to occasion, and the relevant skill and knowledge’ (p. 21). Carr argues for a sociocultural perspective of dispositions to account for multiple contexts and relational influences on children’s learning. Capable learners develop positive dispositions for learning such as curiosity, concentration, persistence, contribution and communication that lead to and accompany knowledge development. A range of other dispositions identified since in both ECE and schooling include creativity, risk taking, collaboration, reflectivity, resourcefulness, reciprocity, imagination and resilience (Carr et al., 2009; Claxton et al., 2011). Research on the outcome of working theories – children’s inquiry and theorising about their lives and worlds (Hedges, 2014) – questions the narrowness of much research on outcomes to argue that outcomes incorporate not just knowledge, but skills and strategies, attitudes and expectations (Hedges and Cooper, 2014). These kinds of outcomes lead to an argument for developing curriculum that takes account of holistic and blended cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes in ways that are also responsive to research on children’s interests, learning and appropriate curriculum and pedagogy (Wood, 2013; Wood and Hedges, 2016). Perhaps, interests as a mechanism and in themselves might be examples of researchers thinking ‘more broadly about the myriad of outcomes to measure as children progress throughout their educational careers’ (Ansari and Purtell, 2018: 180).

Issue 2: outcomes depend on the curricula children experience

The second issue of what counts and matters is debate over the kinds of curricular experiences provided for children. What kinds of experiences are offered, by whom, and for what purposes and goals, vary immensely and are not easily scaled-up for large numbers of diverse children (Bingham and Whitebread, 2018; Farran and Lipsey, 2016). Some programmes may reflect selective ideologies and emphases that nevertheless result from important concerns about children’s lives and experiences. For example, influential programmes in the United States have focused on providing assistance for children from low-income families, adopting a compensatory instructional model that assumed deficits in relation to middle-class children (e.g. Ansari et al., 2019; Schweinhart and Weikart, 1997). An emphasis on cognitive and academic skills was based on the belief noted earlier that developing school readiness was a primary task of ECE and that early intervention could overcome socio-economic disadvantage. Related outcomes studies often showed large positive gains for children, their education and life course, their families – including intergenerational effects – and societies (e.g. Barnett, 1995; Campbell et al., 2008; Heckman and Karapakula, 2019a, 2019b; Nores et al., 2005).

However, such studies promoted a deficit view of particular children and families, overlooked the potential of incorporating children’s cultural knowledge into their education and not all were longitudinal. Moreover, while these programmes have shown long-term value in terms of life course outcomes for those cohorts, scholars have realised that not all claims may be valid in relation to control groups. Insufficient data were collected about control group children’s home experiences and education or the quality of their subsequent schooling experiences, and studies were unable to specify the features that could be emulated in other programmes (Farran and Lipsey, 2016). Furthermore, the claims may not be so relevant in today’s world in order to continue to influence policy (Ansari and Purtell, 2018; Farran and Lipsey, 2016).

In contrast to academically focused instructional programmes, some curricular documents internationally advise teachers to offer children primarily play-based experiences (Bennett, 2005; Bertram and Pascal, 2002). The literature on the benefits of play and its connections with learning has grown in the past 20 years (see, for example, Brooker et al., 2014; Wood, 2013). One strong contemporary justification for play is that children are more likely to develop a range of outcomes when they have the ability to choose their own play-based learning activities and experiences.

The following studies focused on medium-term outcomes to see if different kinds of programmes had identifiable benefits. Marcon (1999, 2002) compared three different ECE models in the United States with later student school success. Key findings indicated that at the end of their sixth year in school, children whose ECE experiences had been academically focused obtained lower grades than children who had attended a child-initiated play-based programme. Those who had experienced play were shown to have more metacognitive awareness of their learning skills and strategies, more self-confidence and better social skills. Marcon suggested that children’s later school success was enhanced by more active, child-initiated early learning experiences and that academic progress may be impeded by introducing formal learning experiences too early. Montie et al. (2006) compared ECE experience and language and cognitive outcomes at age 7 for children across 10 different countries. Similarly to Marcon, their findings supported better outcomes occurring from programmes that incorporated play, and a mix of child-initiated activities and small group activities consistent with promoting active learning. Notwithstanding these arguments, other scholars have pointed to factors such as school, teacher and learning environment quality as confounding such findings (Ansari and Purtell, 2018; Farran and Lipsey, 2016).

There are also unhelpful contradictions in policymakers’ stances on academic readiness and the selection of research that recognises the importance of informal and play-based experiences for young children (Bingham and Whitebread, 2018) that also makes its way into policy. As noted, a common child-centred and play-based focus for ECE curricular policy statements internationally is to design curriculum around children’s interests. There is a rich body of research dating from Dewey’s work illustrating that the matter of interest plays out in many people’s lives as a strong motivation to learn. One potential problem with an interests based approach, however, is that developmental psychology has permeated ECE thinking and practice. This discourse has likely led teachers to focus on developmental outcomes achieved through participation in a range of play activities but not always consideration of what is learned from such provision or the role that teachers might have to stimulate or extend interests. Children’s interests are stimulated by their participation in activities and events in family homes and cultural communities. Sociocultural perspectives invite broader, thoughtful and analytical interpretations and responses from teachers (Chesworth, 2016; Hedges and Cooper, 2016; Hedges et al., 2011). A matter for teachers and researchers to explore is the extent to which interests can be drawn on to encourage academic and non-academic outcomes without the interest losing favour as motivation.

Issue 3: particular research designs and contexts have dominated the literature

A third issue is that most funded outcomes studies have been undertaken in the United States and the United Kingdom, adopted quantitative designs and approaches (e.g. Melhuish, 2004), and used specifically designed tools to measure children’s largely academic progress in relation to ways of understanding outcomes built on developmental psychology (e.g. Barnett et al., 2008; Montie et al., 2006). Many influential studies also randomly assigned children to intervention and control groups (Barnett et al., 2008; Ramey et al., 2000; Schweinhart et al., 2005; Schweinhart and Weikart, 1997); as noted control groups varied and methods were not always robust (Farran and Lipsey, 2016). Such studies made no reference to, let alone considered or debated, the ethical principles that ought to accompany assigning children to such groupings and any potential detrimental effects of doing so, and assumed the relevance of a programme or intervention for all children regardless of cultural context. The tools and measures in such projects often failed to address the variable quality of the early childhood settings and factors that directly affect children’s potential learning (Burchinal et al., 2009). Such matters were uncovered in the important research of Siraj-Blatchford and Sylva (2004) in the United Kingdom when the switch was flipped from children’s outcomes to focus on teacher knowledge and practices. Outcomes studies rarely included rigorous observations of programmes, or interviews with teachers, families and children themselves. Moreover, this positivist agenda needs contesting in relation to evidence-based policy (Moss, 2015).

Perhaps, the harshest critique of outcomes evidence influencing ECE policy and investment has come from Penn and Lloyd (2007) who argued that only three ECE studies met any rigorous criteria for being able to claim any kind of long-term impact. More recently, Farran and Lipsey (2016) suggested the outcomes research ‘knowledge base was dangerously weak’ (p. 15), and Ang (2018) argued that debates are needed about the use of systematic reviews in policy.

Summary

In short, evidence about ECE outcomes is unclear and involves the following matters:

the issue of outcomes is contestable and ought to encompass holistic considerations of what counts and matters;

outcomes are highly dependent on the type of educational experiences children have and the quality of the teaching and learning environment;

a focus on interventions and/or school readiness is short-sighted and often prioritises academic achievement over important complementary non-cognitive abilities;

methods used in studies have lacked rigour therefore findings cannot be extrapolated to policy and scaled-up in provision;

evidence of long-term outcomes has been largely dependent on quantitative designs and interventions that have failed to respect ethical considerations and largely ignored the rich experiences and perspectives of children and families.

It is timely for researchers and policymakers to look differently at these matters. My small-scale exploratory project reported in this article sought to investigate if taking account of interests as a mechanism in educational programmes might have value. I assumed that value would include both cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes and be influenced by the degree to which interests continued to develop during children’s lives. The question guiding the study was ‘How might children’s interests contribute to long-term outcomes for learning and life?’

Methodology and methods

‘No test, no observational schedule, no checklist, will adequately uncover the richness of children’s minds and hearts’ (Clough and Nutbrown, 2019: 4). Moreover, in-depth descriptions of children’s and adults’ lives, with attention paid to the significant relationships, activities and events that shaped them and a range of outcomes to date, are simply unable to be adequately captured by the research designs noted earlier as dominating the outcomes literature. Nutbrown (2011) argued that early childhood research needed to ‘push out from the safe(r) boundaries of established methodologies and seek out the small stuff of childhood, in order to . . . differently influence policy, practice and research’ (p. 241), offering narrative and autoethnography as alternatives. Clough and Nutbrown (2019) advocate for more use of arts based methods to broaden policy and practice. Adair (2011) advocated for ethnographic approaches to be used in informing ECE policy. I explore the way that narrative inquiry could add to the suite of methods used to gauge outcomes and influence policy. Narrative researchers are interested in people’s lives, ‘. . . in the leading out of different lives, the values, attitudes, beliefs, social systems, institutions and structures, and how they are all linked to learning and teaching’ (Clandinin and Connelly, 2000: xxii).

Narrative involves making meaning from people’s life experiences and enables researchers to connect actions and events over time. They are not just ‘stories’ but relate to significant childhood experiences (Nutbrown, 2011), and wider societal demands and expectations. This study is situated within what Chase (2011) describes as narratives derived from lived experience revealed during in-depth interviews. Because young children’s memories are likely to be selective, partial (Hollway and Jefferson, 2000) and/or stimulated (Larkina and Bauer, 2010), the kinds of stories and memories shared are those that have a sense of ‘personal involvement and ownership’ (Bauer and Fivush, 2010: 303). Such research might make visible what has long-term impact in human lives and can help to create and solidify a positive identity over time (Bauer and Fivush, 2010; Nutbrown, 2011; Reese et al., 2010).

I used a snowball sampling technique to locate potential participants aged 18–25 years who lived in Auckland, NZ. I selected this age group as being at the beginning of adulthood and life course outcomes. I was curious about what memories of childhood experiences they could recall and reflect on, and to establish what place a strong interest played in their education¹ and lives-to-date. The key criterion for participation was that the young adult had a strong interest as a child. Institutional ethical approval requirements stipulated that a third party must approach potential participants. Although 14 potential young adults were identified, only 5 undertook the interview and transcript verification process. I adhered to ethical approval and principles of informed consent and voluntary participation and did not pursue potential participants beyond one phone call or email to follow up information sent to them. Each interview took between 1 and 3 hours to complete. While use of pseudonyms is common as ethical practice for reasons of confidentiality, these can counteract efforts at authenticity (Josselson, 2007). I offered the principle of credit, that is, to choose to be named. Some participants accepted this offer, hence a mix of real names and pseudonyms have been used in this article.

There was no assumption that participants had experienced early childhood programmes based on their interests. Four of the young adults who participated in the study had attended ECE prior to the introduction of an early childhood curriculum document in NZ that specified interests as one key source of curriculum. The other had attended ECE in Hong Kong. The process of being interviewed about significant interests contributed to further meaning making (Mills, 2001). The research experience stimulated conversations participants had with family members; some were reported in emails accompanying transcript verification, often as further verification or clarification. Childhood photos illustrating interests were received with two returned transcripts.

I followed thematic data analysis procedures common to qualitative studies (Braun and Clarke, 2013) and the advice of Gibbs (2007) to look for events, experiences and accounts, and themes of relationships and belonging in narratives. Transcripts were read and re-read carefully, identifying first the significant experiences relayed. These experiences were then categorised into segments related to people (relationships with parents, teachers, peers), places (homes, schools, extra-curricular activity centres) and events (family routines and activities, transitions between classrooms/teachers and education settings, critical incidents). In turn, as again advised by Gibbs, these categories were analysed for themes related to the literature across the categories. The strongest finding about interests related outcomes was that there were a complex combination related to cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes, the latter specifically dispositions for learning and life.

Findings: narratives of interests and outcomes

These young adults’ stories revealed that their childhood interests had a significant influence in their lives. Interests were commonly inspired and supported by families, often continued through extra-curricular activities, and provided ongoing enjoyment and satisfaction in their lives. Educational settings played a range of roles in relation to interests. At critical incident or transition points in their lives, the interests motivated and sustained participants. I have attempted to capture the richness of these narratives in the following synopses of the participants’ interests and life course to the point of interview. These illustrate the trajectories of one central interest from childhood and ways this supported dispositional and identity (non-cognitive) outcomes alongside academic (cognitive) outcomes.

Craig

Craig’s family engaged in a variety of sports from netball and tennis (mother), athletics, cricket and rugby (father and grandfather), boxing (grandfather), soccer and rugby (older brother), and rugby and cricket (younger brother). Immersed in sport, Craig began playing rugby before the age of 5. These family members supported this interest throughout his life-to-date. His childhood goal was to play for the ‘All Blacks’, the national rugby team. Craig reported watching sport on television and identifying with players who created possible future identities:

Here’s someone who . . . got into the All Blacks. . . . I felt he was like myself, naturally skilled probably not, but he was training hard and got to where he was through determination so I felt like he was someone I could relate to.

Craig’s memories of ECE were a preference to play outside with his friends, developing ball skills in particular:

Some of my kindergarten friends, they would have a rugby ball there . . . and we would just muck around with it.

He recalled neither encouragement nor discouragement from teachers. At primary school, he did not enjoy structured class sports as much as playing sports with friends at lunchtime.

Aged 12, Craig injured his back playing rugby and undertook a long period of intensive rehabilitation:

I guess if you didn’t really want to play sport again you might not do it.

Despite this setback, Craig eventually played for his secondary school’s top rugby team.

His first opportunity to choose to study Physical Education occurred in the last 2 years of schooling:

[W]hen you got to learn about the body, anatomy, how things work and that’s when I got interested in what I do now. So it was like understanding well, I run, but what makes you run?

Craig’s interest in sport led to him completing a 1-year tertiary certificate in sports and recreation. A lecturer in event promotions became a significant influence. Craig’s career plans at the time of interview therefore spanned roles as a boxing trainer, manager, promoter and event organiser, rugby coach and trainer, and personal trainer for people with a range of personal goals from rehabilitation through to achieving potential.

Craig’s childhood interest had encouraged him over time to develop an identity related to various sporting activities. He developed dispositions of participation, involvement and competitiveness in team and individual sports. He also developed perseverance and effort to develop skill in something he felt he was not naturally good at, courage and resilience following a potentially career-limiting injury, curiosity about how the body functions, and contribution and reciprocity towards other people’s goals. Members of his family had consistently assisted the development, commitment to and continuity of this interest and related dispositions, while education facilities and teachers waxed and waned in their contribution towards academic outcomes, achievements and career plans.

Germaine

Germaine’s strongest interest was also a sporting pursuit: gymnastics. Her memories of childhood involved playing with Lego^™, puzzles and art at home, while her private kindergarten in Hong Kong provided structured early academic activities that she also enjoyed. When her family emigrated to NZ, they supported Germaine to join a gymnastics club. Schoolteachers had no influence in the development of her long-term interest in gymnastics; indeed Germaine commented that most were completely unaware of this interest and her successes:

At primary school, gym was such a secret thing for me.

Yet, by the age of 10, she had chosen rhythmic gymnastics as her specialist discipline and was training for 10–20 hours per week. By age 12, she was competing in individual and group events at national and international events. Germaine’s major motivations were enjoyment and participation. At the end of her first year at secondary school, she won an award for the top female sportsperson to the surprise of teachers and peers who knew nothing of her interest. One long-term coach was significant in her continued involvement, goal setting and achievements. She had ensured the school was informed about Germaine’s achievements. In addition, the participation of particular friends contributed to continuity of the interest:

My initial [thinking about tertiary studies] was like just go with interest and hope that everything would fall into place.

Germaine enrolled in university for a conjoint Bachelor of Arts and Science degree majoring in sports science. A key motivation for the major was an assurance received that lecturers would be sympathetic to absences due to competing at national and international gymnastics events. During her time at university, she also became involved in coaching and judging as part of a long-term commitment to the sport:

I really want to do something to give back into gymnastics in the future.

In relation to dispositions, Germaine’s childhood interest in gymnastics, coupled with the roles of a particular coach and three peers, had encouraged the development of participation, involvement and competitiveness in team and individual events, perseverance at tasks, skills and goals that required many hours of committed training, and future thoughts about reciprocity and contribution to the sport beyond participation. The central interest had also led her to study sport science.

Rachel

Rachel had early personal memories of a strong interest in the female lead characters in books and movies. Her ECE experiences focused on imagining herself as the character of Dorothy from the Wizard of Oz. She particularly enjoyed dramatic play, reading books and arts related activities:

I’d go directly to the dress-ups, put the shoes on my feet and then I would be Dorothy [from the Wizard of Oz] . . . they were my shoes, nobody else wore them, they were always on my feet. (Rachel)

When she began primary school, Rachel’s goal was to be a primary school teacher, a goal she related to her interest in female lead characters:

My new entrant teacher I just absolutely adored.

At primary school ‘I just got involved in everything’: choir, orchestra, speech competitions and school productions. Aged 11, she attended drama classes at a local theatre company and began 10 years of involvement with the group. During her secondary schooling, Rachel’s favourite subject was English but she achieved equally well across arts and science subjects. She also studied drama as a subject for 4 years. Meantime, she continued to participate in speech and drama at a local theatre company. When she was 17, she was cast as Dorothy in the Wizard of Oz.

At the juncture of secondary and tertiary studies, no longer certain that teaching was her vocation, Rachel sought advice from a school career counsellor:

She pointed me in the direction of speech language therapy . . . it was psychology and it was linguistics and it was anatomy.

Rachel was thoroughly enjoying the intellectual challenge of her speech language therapy studies at the time of interview.

Rachel’s interests in books and drama led to a range of identity and dispositional outcomes over time. Rachel identified strongly with, and imagined herself, as female lead characters, which led to dispositions for participation and collaboration in production roles and responsibilities, and dispositions for competition and perseverance as she vied for roles. At the same time, she was achieving well in related subject studies that combined with advice led to her choice of university studies. Her parents, some teachers and a drama coach were the most influential people in sustaining these interests.

Susie

Susie had dual interests and goals as a young child:

I wanted to be a ballerina for a long time. But I [also] quite liked science; I wanted to be a doctor.

Susie’s parents were keener on the latter option because of the longer term career prospects medicine offered; nevertheless, Susie also took ballet classes until the age of 17.

Her parents supported her early interest in science at home:

Both my parents let me do little experiments, like mixing together the different chemicals and getting explosions or just cooking as well.

She remembered little of her kindergarten experiences, apart from noting that rather than play with the playdough ‘I’d want to make the playdough they had’.

Susie recalled that she enjoyed maths at primary school but recalled that her science interest continued to be nurtured more at home. Her parents took her on trips to museums and a planetarium. She fondly remembered a school trip to a museum of transport and technology that had an interactive science display and that she ‘tried to recreate some of the stuff myself’ subsequently at home. At secondary school, when she was able to make choices of school subjects, she chose ‘all the sciences, physics, chemistry, biology’:

I actually didn’t like biology until 7th form. . . . [B]ecause of the teacher I started to see how cool biology was. . . . when you have a teacher that’s really enthusiastic and wants to be there it makes all the difference . . . .

Susie was accepted into university to undertake a foundation year in medical health sciences. At the time of interview, she was studying for a biomedical degree after not being selected to pursue a medical degree. She was considering a medical research career beyond that.

Susie demonstrated many dispositions in her life resulting from her interest in science. She was curious about all science-related matters and developed persistence in her schooling when science subjects were not taught in a way that stimulated and extended her interest. She imagined herself as a ‘chemist’, demonstrated resilience when she was unsuccessful at medical admission, further curiosity and persistence in in-depth studies, and contribution in her goal to contribute to medical research. Susie’s parents were the most significant enduring supporters of her interests and ambitions; a few teachers also assisted her interest to develop.

Zara

Zara had virtually no memories of her early experiences at home or at the kindergarten she had attended. Her first significant memory related to her long-term interest was at about the age of 8. Her family watched medical documentaries and reality television shows together. Zara became fascinated:

For as long as I can remember I wanted to be a doctor or in the medical field. . . . I just remember watching that and thinking oh that’s so exciting.

Zara reported that both parents were delighted with this goal and supported her through her schooling.

At primary school, she was placed in an ‘accelerant’ class, hence must have been recognised as possessing intelligence and potential. Yet, in relation to her goal, she recalled few science opportunities. When she began secondary school, she chose subjects to study:

. . . [w]ith the thought of I’m going to med[ical] school at the end of it so every decision I made in high school was based on what I was going to do when I left.

Zara related extensively the biology, chemistry and physics she had studied, and the topics she had enjoyed the most. She commented that she felt fortunate to have good teachers for biology and chemistry in particular:

[Students] can tell when teachers want to do what they’re doing or when they’re not really into their jobs so I think having a teacher that’s really into it makes a massive, massive difference.

Zara positioned herself carefully to obtain the best possible grades for university entry. Through secondary school and to the time of interview, she also continued to watch television programmes and current affairs items with medical story lines. She noted that this remained part of family rituals and enjoyment of spending time together.

Like Susie, Zara’s first year of university was a foundational health sciences course. At the end of the year, she had obtained the required grades to gain an interview for medical school admission, but unexpected personal circumstances meant she did not complete the interview. Zara experienced some disappointment at the loss of such a long-held and keen goal, but her broader interest in the medical field enabled her to overcome this, to undertake pharmacy studies and later hospital-based employment successfully and enjoyably.

The dispositions that Zara exhibited during her life were risk taking and imagination, then determination and focus as every decision at secondary school related to her goal. She showed curiosity in her pursuit of science subjects, contribution in her goal of becoming part of a ‘helping’ profession, perseverance and resilience when her goal was not achieved and an alternative was planned and followed through. Her family and specific secondary school teachers who were enthusiastic and knowledgeable supported her interest and achievement most strongly.

Discussion: holistic views of outcomes from interests and narratives

The findings of this study point to matters pertinent to the three issues outlined earlier about the evidence used to inform ECE policy decisions. First, holistic outcomes warrant more attention than has been investigated thus far. Second, the study provides some evidence that ECE curricular policy statements ought to continue to maintain reference to children’s ability to enact their interests in play activities as interests can inspire later successful and enjoyable human lives. Third, the use of narrative inquiry in this study adds new dimensions and considerations to outcomes research designs.

Issue 1: holistic outcomes count and matter

Rather than continue debates about the relative value and positioning of cognitive and non-cognitive outcomes, my findings support the supposition noted earlier that holistic notions of outcomes that combine cognitive and non-cognitive features count and matter. In their narratives, these young adults illustrated ways that interest was important in their daily lives in their families and communities, and that commitment to ongoing interests and the dispositions these encouraged provided sustained motivation and contributed to educational achievements throughout their lives-to-date. In addition to academic/cognitive outcomes, dispositions of curiosity, participation, involvement, competition, imagination, collaboration, contribution, reciprocity, perseverance, and resilience were evident. Interests also led to a range of identity-related outcomes that may continue to stand them well through their adult life.

Dispositions certainly matter in ECE and at school (Carr et al., 2009). In this study, dispositions assisted development of learning and early career identities. Dispositions were encouraged and developed through participation in activities that often motivated the participants long before intellectual curiosity was stimulated and academic study choices and outcomes became important. Carr et al. (2009) suggest that the dispositions of reciprocity, resilience and imagination are vital. Reciprocity and imagination were evident in each of these five young adults’ narratives as they imagined future identities through possible roles and responsibilities built on their interests that contributed to and/or ‘gave back’ to society. As they grew older, for some there was a critical incident when they realised that their significant interest may not lead to a long-held goal. For each participant, there was a way to continue past this moment, indicating signs of maturity and resilience to find alternative pathways to utilise the interest differently and sustain continued self-motivation. ‘An aspect of resilience is to be able to more confidently bounce back from fragility, confusion and powerlessness, and to recognise where to go for support’ (Carr et al., 2009: 97).

Issue 2: interests count and matter in curriculum

The findings support that interests children develop in their families and communities matter, and can ‘count’ in relation to educational opportunities and achievements long valued in outcomes research alongside life and identity directions. Interest may be a mechanism that provides motivation for lifelong learning and therefore one justifiable basis for curricular planning.

ECE curricular documents can justify a focus on play, interests and choices as being responsive to research on what motivates learning (Rogoff et al., 2016). ECE practices also need to ensure that teachers are thoughtful, analytical and responsive in their recognition and selection of interests (Chesworth, 2016; Hedges and Cooper, 2016; Hedges et al., 2011) and avoid forcing a connection between interests and outcomes so that the motivational value of interest is lost. When participants were asked at the end of their interview about their thoughts on the value of interests in early childhood curriculum, Rachel commented:

Well from my experience if they had quashed my ‘I want to be Dorothy’ it probably would have completely changed my interest, my sort of path where I’m at now. . . . I have learned best through what I loved, if they were trying to teach me something and at the same time trying to say don’t be Dorothy then that would have been really hard. . . . So if you can build on interests then of course you’re going to learn better because you’re actually interested in it.

Rather like the growing critiques of long-standing research on intervention studies, teasing out further factors that support – or otherwise – the mechanism of interest to lead curriculum is vital.

A related and relevant contribution of this study is to highlight the role of important and influential adults in stimulating and supporting interests, in participants’ homes and educational and community environments. Csikszentmihalyi’s (1996) study of 91 exceptional people from a range of occupations from science to politics to the arts found that all had a significant interest as a child. Csikszentmihalyi highlighted the role interest and curiosity played during the childhoods of these adults and how vital it is to have families and/or ‘an understanding teacher, a lucky break . . . a mentor . . . to recognise the interest when it shows itself, nurture it, and provide the opportunities for it to grow’ (pp. 181–182).

Identification of interests can also help turn around deficit discourses about students who are not achieving well and might otherwise be subjected to compensatory programmes. Comber and Kamler (2004) describe ways teachers visiting family homes enabled teachers to tap into interests based motivations and improve student achievement by transforming curriculum and pedagogy. These suggestions of the potential role interests could play to achieve a range of outcomes through ECE and school curricula that value interests seem worthy of closer attention in policymaking and related research.

Issue 3: qualitative methods can complement quantitative designs

To date most well-cited studies on ECE outcomes have adopted largely quantitative designs. This study provides a small contribution to the suggestion that broader research approaches be used to obtain different, important evidence for policymakers about what counts and matters (Adair, 2011; Clough and Nutbrown, 2019; Nutbrown, 2011). In short, the richness of human lives, relationships and interactions, and the social and cultural influences on and contexts of these are not captured in typical approaches to assessing and measuring the outcomes of ECE. Quantitative work can be complemented by qualitative designs, including narrative studies.

In relation to the use of narrative, as noted earlier first-person narratives where participants are asked to relate people, places and events from childhood onwards rely on memory and perceptions that are likely to be selective and varied (Hollway and Jefferson, 2000). As evident in this study, people may have little memory of events in the early years; often memories have been created through the stories of events, routines and people told by significant others, and/or use of photographs and other artefacts (Bauer, 2006; Larkina and Bauer, 2010; Nutbrown, 2011). A future study might then also obtain the perspectives of parents, teachers and other significant adults to deepen insights into children and young adults’ interests and connections with holistic notions of outcomes across life trajectories.

Clearly, another limitation in this particular study is the small number of participants and the use of a snowball technique that perhaps discouraged diversity of participants. Adopting qualitative methods often means small numbers of participants are involved in in-depth and more time-consuming methods. However, with large-scale funding qualitative methods can complement quantitative in carefully designed research and invite diversity of participants. Studies might use a mixed methods approach such as an online survey design followed by interviews for a selected number of participants.

Another limitation is that the participants in this study were all supported to pursue their interests, albeit not always in educational settings. Each participant perhaps shared similar socio-economic backgrounds and was encouraged to pursue higher education. A study in a different community within NZ, or internationally, might reveal how considerations of interests and outcomes and ways these align with life trajectories need to reflect social justice and equity issues. What structural, political and attitudinal enablers and constraints might some children and young people encounter as they attempt to pursue interests through their lives? How might these findings contribute to the debates outlined in this article?

Conclusion: what counts and matters

Questions of what counts and what matters in ECE comprise a complex problem. Many outcomes studies to date have sought to address the nature, extent, and longevity of highly selective outcomes beginning in the early years of life. Most made no reference to national or local curricular policy documents, which in ECE internationally draw attention to the importance of play, a mix of outcomes, and that curriculum design might consider children’s interests. Previous research designs have commonly been quantitative and used specially-designed tools and measures to assess children rather than captured capabilities in naturally occurring learning, and neglected valuing the perspectives of families and children themselves. Moreover, while some studies identified initial academic outcome enhancement, in the medium term, a washout effect was apparent which brought into question the value of associated intervention programmes, and eventually the evidence itself.

This article explored through narrative inquiry outcomes of young children’s interests. Five young adults revealed ways their interests had endured through their early lives, influenced schooling, extra-curricular and family activities, led into tertiary education and, for some, early career decisions. Outcomes of these interests reflected identity and disposition development as a blend of cognitive and non-cognitive elements, and were connected with career and non-career goals. I have argued that a range of outcomes count and matter. Outcomes that are holistic and combine cognitive and non-cognitive aspects need to feature in any future studies. Interests that take account of and value children’s home and community experiences can be a mechanism for curricular provision to foster these outcomes. In addition, alternative research designs need to be considered to complement existing evidence of the value of ECE. Qualitative methods can capture the richness and detail of human life, enable the social and cultural contexts children are raised in to become visible, and illustrate ways human resilience overcomes unanticipated experiences and events. Understandings of interests and qualitative designs need to be utilised in future questions of what counts and what matters. Only in this way can decisions about ECE policy and investment reflect the range and depth of children’s life experiences and outcomes.

Footnotes

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

ORCID iD

Helen Hedges

Notes

References

Adair

(2011) Advocating for ethnographic work in early childhood federal policy: problems and possibilities. Anthropology and Education Quarterly 42(4): 422–433.

Ang

(2018) Methodological reflections on the use of systematic reviews in early childhood research. Journal of Early Childhood Research 16(1): 18–31.

Ansari

Purtell

(2018) Commentary: what happens next? Delivering on the promise of preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 45: 177–182.

Ansari

Pianta

Whittaker

, et al. (2019) Starting early: the benefits of attending early childhood education programs at age 3. American Educational Research Journal 56(4): 1495–1523.

Barnett

(1995) Long-term effects of early childhood programs on cognitive and school outcomes. The Future of Children 5(3): 25–50.

Barnett

Jung

Yarosz

, et al. (2008) Educational effects of the tools of the mind curriculum: a randomized trial. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 23(3): 299–313.

Bauer

(2006) Event memory. In: Kuhn

Siegler

(eds) Handbook of Child Psychology Vol. 2, Cognition, Perception and Language. 5th ed. New York: John Wiley & Sons, Inc., pp. 373–425.

Bauer

Fivush

(2010) Context and consequences of autobiographical memory development. Cognitive Development 25(4): 303–308.

Bennett

(2005) Curriculum issues in national policy-making. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 13(2): 5–23.

10.

Bertram

Pascal

(2002) What counts in early learning? In: Saracho

Spodek

(eds) Contemporary Perspectives on Early Childhood Curriculum. Greenwich, CT: Information Age Publishing, pp. 241–259.

11.

Bingham

Whitebread

(2018) School readiness in Europe: issues and evidence. In: Fleer

Van Oers

(eds) International Handbook of Early Childhood Education. Dordrecht: Springer, pp. 363–391.

12.

Braun

Clarke

(2013) Successful Qualitative Research. Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.

13.

Brooker

Blaise

Edwards

(eds) (2014) The SAGE International Handbook of Play and Learning in Early Childhood. London: SAGE.

14.

Burchinal

Kainz

Cai

, et al. (2009) Early Care and Education Quality and Child Outcomes [OPRE Research to Policy Brief #1]. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation.

15.

Campbell

Wasik

Pungello

, et al. (2008) Young adult outcomes of the Abecedarian and CARE early childhood educational interventions. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 23(4): 452–466.

16.

Carr

(2001) Assessment in Early Childhood Settings: Learning Stories. London: Paul Chapman.

17.

Carr

Smith

Duncan

, et al. (2009) Learning in the Making: Disposition and Design in Early Education. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

18.

Chase

(2011) Narrative inquiry. In: Denzin

Lincoln

(eds) The Sage Handbook of Qualitative Research. 4th ed. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE: 421–434.

19.

Chesworth

(2016) A funds of knowledge approach to examining play interests: listening to children’s and parents’ perspectives. International Journal of Early Years Education 24(3): 294–308.

20.

Clandinin

Connelly

(2000) Narrative Inquiry: Experience and Story in Qualitative Research. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

21.

Claxton

Chambers

Powell

, et al. (2011) The Learning Powered School: Pioneering 21st Century Education. Bristol: TLO Limited.

22.

Clough

Nutbrown

(2019) Exploring the place of arts-based approaches in early childhood education research. Journal of Early Childhood Research 17(1): 3–13.

23.

Comber

Kamler

(2004) Getting out of deficit: pedagogies of reconnection. Teaching Education 15(3): 293–310.

24.

Csikszentmihalyi

(1996) Creativity: Flow and the Psychology of Discovery and Invention. New York: Harper Perennial.

25.

Farran

Lipsey

(2016) Evidence for the benefits of state prekindergarten programs: myth & misrepresentation. Behavioral Science & Policy 2(1): 9–18.

26.

Gibbs

(2007) Analyzing biographies and narratives. In: Flick

(eds) Analyzing Qualitative Data. London: SAGE, pp. 56–72 (Encyclopaedia Entry).

27.

Haggerty

(2019) Navigating the entanglements: curriculum and assessment priorities in transitioning to school. PhD Thesis, Victoria University of Wellington, Wellington, New Zealand.

28.

Heckman

Karapakula

(2019a) Intergenerational and intragenerational externalities of the Perry preschool project. Report, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, May.

29.

Heckman

Karapakula

(2019b) The Perry preschoolers at late midlife: a study in design-specific inference. Report, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, May.

30.

Heckman

Pinto

Savelyev

(2013) Understanding the mechanisms through which an influential early childhood program boosted adult outcomes. The American Economic Review 103(6): 2052–2086.

31.

Hedges

(2014) Young children’s “working theories”: building and connecting understandings. Journal of Early Childhood Research 12(1): 35–49.

32.

Hedges

Cooper

(2014) Engaging with holistic curriculum outcomes: deconstructing ‘working theories’. International Journal of Early Years Education 22(4): 395–408.

33.

Hedges

Cooper

(2016) Inquiring minds: theorizing children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies 48(3): 303–322.

34.

Hedges

Cullen

Jordan

(2011) Early years curriculum: funds of knowledge as a conceptual framework for children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies 43(2): 185–205.

35.

Hollway

Jefferson

(2000) Doing Qualitative Research Differently: Free Association, Narrative and the Interview Method. London: SAGE.

36.

Jarvis

(ed.) (2012) The Routledge International Handbook of Learning. London; New York: Routledge.

37.

Josselson

(2007) The ethical attitude in narrative research: principles and practicalities. In: Clandinin

(ed.) Handbook of Narrative Inquiry: Mapping a Methodology. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE, pp. 537–566.

38.

Karoly

Kilburn

Cannon

(2005) Early Childhood Interventions: Proven Results, Future Promise. Santa Monica, CA: RAND Corporation.

39.

Kay

(2019) School readiness: a culture of compliance? PhD Thesis, Sheffield University, England.

40.

Larkina

Bauer

(2010) The role of maternal verbal, affective, and behavioural support in preschool children’s independent and collaborative autobiographical memory reports. Cognitive Development 25(4): 309–324.

41.

V-N

Schaack

Neishi

, et al. (2019) Advanced content coverage at kindergarten: are there trade-offs between academic achievement and social-emotional skills? American Educational Research Journal 56(4): 1254–1280.

42.

Marcon

(1999) Differential impact of preschool models of development and early learning of inner-city children: a three-cohort study. Developmental Psychology 35(2): 358–375.

43.

Marcon

(2002) Moving up the grades: relationships between preschool model and later school success. Early Childhood Research and Practice 4(1): 2–24.

44.

Melhuish

(2004) A Literature Review of the Impact of Early Years Provision on Young Children, with Emphasis Given to Children from Disadvantaged Backgrounds. London: National Audit Office.

45.

Mills

(2001) Self-construction through conversation and narrative in interviews. Educational Review 53(3): 285–301.

46.

Mitchell

Wylie

Carr

(2008) Outcomes of Early Childhood Education: Literature Review. Report to the Ministry of Education. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.

47.

Montie

Xiang

Schweinhart

(2006) Preschool experience in 10 countries: cognitive and language performance at age 7. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 21(3): 313–331.

48.

Moss

(2015) Where am I? Position and perspective in researching early childhood education. In: Farrell

Kagan

Tisdall

EKM

(eds) Sage Handbook of Early Childhood Research. London: SAGE, pp. 89–102.

49.

Nores

Belfield

Barnett

, et al. (2005) Updating the economic impacts of the High/Scope Perry Preschool program. Educational Evaluation and Policy Analysis 27(3): 245–261.

50.

Nutbrown

(2011) A box of childhood: small stories at the roots of a career. International Journal of Early Years Education 19(3–4): 233–248.

51.

Pence

(2016) Baby PISA: dangers that can arise when foundations shift. Journal of Childhood Studies 41(3): 54–58.

52.

Penn

Lloyd

(2007) Richness or rigour? A discussion of systematic reviews and evidence-based policy in early childhood. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood 8(1): 3–18.

53.

Ramey

Campbell

Burchinal

, et al. (2000) Persistent effects of early childhood education on high-risk children and their mothers. Applied Developmental Science 4(1): 2–14.

54.

Reese

Jack

White

(2010) Origins of adolescents’ autobiographical memories. Cognitive Development 25(4): 352–367.

55.

Rogoff

Callanan

Gutiérrez

, et al. (2016) The organization of informal learning. Review of Research in Education 40(1): 356–401.

56.

Schweinhart

Weikart

(1997) The high/scope preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly 12: 117–143.

57.

Schweinhart

Montie

Xiang

, et al. (2005) Lifetime Effects: The High/Scope Perry Preschool Study through Age 40. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope Press.

58.

Siraj-Blatchford

Sylva

(2004) Researching pedagogy in English pre-schools. British Educational Research Journal 30(5): 713–730.

59.

Wood

(2013) Play, Learning and the Early Childhood Curriculum. 3rd ed. London: SAGE.

60.

Wood

Hedges

(2016) Curriculum in early childhood education: critical questions about content, coherence and control. The Curriculum Journal 27(3): 387–405.