1

ACTION RESEARCH REPORT

July, 2018

The impact of emergent science on communication and language in the EYFS - Giving children something to talk about.

Keywords

Emergent science, EYFS, constructivism, science capital, adult modelling & scaffolding, thinking aloud, communication and language, 4C’s, look, think, do and say, stories and

games

Research Question

If we create teacher supported learning opportunities for Nursery and Reception children through ‘looking, doing, and discussing science-based activities, will speaking skills then

increase, with children producing longer and more complex phrases specific to expressing their thinking?

Caitlin Plant Student Teacher (Student Teacher, Edgehill- final year)

Helen Priestman (Science Lead)

Highfield Primary School

Bridgenorth Avenue, Urmston

Greater Manchester

M41 9PA

The Expansive Education Network is coordinated by The Centre for Real-World Learning

The University of Winchester

For eedNET office use: Cite this work as:- Surname, Initials. (Year) Title. [online] URL created when uploaded to website. (accessed dd.mm.yy)

1

Context

Highfield is an average sized primary school in Trafford on the borders of Stretford and Urmston. It has 312 children on role including a part-time 52 place nursery. It is a one and half form entry school, which means some split year groups for teaching. The proportion of pupils known to be eligible for the pupil premium is below average. The proportion of pupils supported at school action is broadly average. The proportion at school action plus or with a statement of special educational needs is also broadly average. There is ample outdoors area including a large field, with a wooded area for Key Stage one (KS1) and Key Stage two (KS2). The nursery has a separate building with an enclosed outdoor play area providing grassed and hard paved areas for exploration. Reception has a smaller enclosed play area with ‘easy fall’ flooring and grassed areas with access to the large field and wooded area.

The issue we have addressed

Over the last eighteen months, we have focused on improving scientific enquiry in KS1 and KS2, designing and implementing six key science principles for science within the school to promote child-led enquiry (see Appendix 1).

SCIENCE PRINCIPLES AT HIGHFIELD PRIMARY SCHOOL

1. All children enjoy science. 2. Science is practical and children have time to learn through exploration. 3. Children are asking the questions and make choices in enquiries. 4. Children learn how to investigate systematically and learning is recorded in a variety of ways. 5. Children collaborate and everyone is involved. 6. Children talk about their learning using scientific vocabulary.

The change in practice has led to raising standards through school and has been instrumental in our gaining the Primary Science Quality Mark (PSQM) in summer 2017. PSQM is a highly successful unique award programme to develop and celebrate the profile of science teaching, learning and leadership in primary schools. (Appendix 2). Despite this, we found that children entering KS1 from the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) were challenged when expressing their thinking and observations. This skill is key to scientific enquiry. The gap defined the next step for our school to underpin the present practice from KS1 and 2 through our setting. We focused on two points from our key science principles linked to language (Highfield Primary, 2016):

3. Children can ask questions and make choices in their enquiries. 6. Children talk about their learning using scientific vocabulary

We also recognised some gaps in the teaching of science and giving appropriate scientific enquiry skills. Our aim is to promote the correct use of science language and vocabulary through play to support children making sense of the world. Through this, we want to put discussion and practical science into a key role in nursery and reception to promote speaking and listening skills.

2

Gaps in the teaching and attainment of science may be due to a lack of teacher and pupil ‘capital’. Grenfell (2014) describes Bourdieu’s meaning of capital as resources that bring social and cultural advantage. This means within education that, through being exposed to certain areas, it can develop one’s interest and understanding within a field. In this instance, it could be referred to as ‘science capital’. Skamp (2012) supports this theory through describing a teacher’s ‘science background’ as advantageous to the children’s scientific understanding. The acquisition of science capital could be developed through Harlen and McCrory’s (2011) reflection of these views, stating that the emotional reward gained through Skamp (op. cit.) and Grenfell’s (ibid) theories could increase motivation to engage with science. Therefore, we anticipate the increase of communication, language and enquiry skills, post-intervention. This thesis will be explored further, in relation to future targets with regards to staff, children and their families and home support. The outcomes of the research project were of specific interest to our Senior Management Team (SMT) as Communication & Language is an area for development in the EYFS within our School Development Plan (SDP) and outcomes of our research could have a positive impact for future outcomes. The SDP can be viewed in Appendix 3.

Review of current practice and literature

Teacher modelling is instrumental to thinking and talking aloud to support young children being able to express themselves using their developing language (Ovens and Wenham, 2011; Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2002). This approach upholds our research action plan, which uses a Vygotskyan approach of scaffolding through a social-constructivism experience (McMahon, 1997, cited in Pritchard and Woollard, 2010: 7-‘2010:7’). This approach was met through group discussion and teacher questioning, which, in reception, eventually led to posing a constructivist question ‘is a picked flower still alive?’ This question was devised by the children, using ideas and discussion to reach an agreement.

Using a scaffolding approach allows teachers to model language and science ideas, with a social-constructivism stance, resulting in children taking ownership by letting them play with this language (De Boo, 1999; Wellington and Osbourne, 2001). By using the constructivist method, we aim to raise achievement, engaging and enthusing pupils to develop their natural curiosity, as suggested by Ofsted (2013) in their ‘Maintaining Curiosity’ report.

The role of talk and discussion is key to developing science language. The means of learning science is through the increasingly specialised use of specific language and terminologies. Developing children’s capability to orally reason and engage in science reasoning is part of a journey that begins with the early encouragement and reassurance from supporting adults. Every child has ideas and as teachers we should seek to build an environment in which the verbal expression of those ideas and reasoning is fostered in developmentally appropriate activities. Using this approach can help develop the capability of argumentation in young children (Dale Tunnicliffe, 2013; McGuigan, 2016). During the intervention sessions children were encouraged to give reasons for their answers beyond ‘because I think so’ or just shrugging their shoulders. We gently challenged children with questions such as ‘why do you think so’, rephrasing as needed, giving time for the child to make a response, thereby nurturing the children to gain competence and confidence

3

Our Research Question

If we create teacher supported learning opportunities for Nursery and Reception children through ‘looking, doing, and discussing science-based activities, will speaking skills then increase, with children producing longer and more complex phrases specific to expressing their thinking?

Dunne and Peacock (2015) suggest that the learning environment and teacher questioning can enable children to express themselves scientifically. This could be nurtured through scientific enquiry, which can develop the children’s ability to engage in a scientific way (Brunton and Thornton, 2010; Dale Tunnicliffe, 2015; Roden, 2005).

This constructivist manner should be achieved through ‘working scientifically’ in the Science National Curriculum (DfE, 2013), where children will learn through enquiry, discussing and observing as a group, eventually taking onus and creating their own investigations.

Using these approaches through the application of our research question, we aim to create a science community of confident, clear and expressive thinkers and talkers within EYFS, in science and throughout the curriculum, transforming their knowledge and attitudes in a constructivist manner (Skamp, 2012).

The Project

A sample of five reception (four and five year olds) and six nursery (three and four year olds) children were used in the research. The sample did not include children with English as an additional language (EAL) or Special Educational Needs and Disabilities (SEN/D) children. In choosing the sample we looked for an equal mix of boys and girls assessed at working at age related expectations (ARE) for communication and language. We chose children meeting year group age related expectations (ARE) for speaking and listening using school assessment data. They were all native English speakers.

We constructed a checklist to decide criteria for language analysis. Using the checklist we recorded what children said and then transcribed the discourse to give rich qualitative data. Using a self-adapted ‘Myers chart’ (Dale Tunnicliffe, 2015: 15) we compared pre and post intervention language for the children to give more rigorous quantitative data. Two versions of the grid were used, further adapting the Myers chart (Appendix 4) to analyse reception children’s language. The adaption was made to include headings related to the type of response rather than the number of words used as the reception children’s speech was more complex and richer than the children in nursery.

We took photographs and made field notes to support our findings (Appendix 5 and Appendix 6).

We reviewed post-intervention school data from the DfE’s (2012) EYFS curriculum ‘Development Matters’ (Appendix 7). The areas of learning and development consulted were:

Understanding the World (UW - The world) 30-50 months – ‘Talks about why things happen and how things work’

and

Communication and Language (CL-Speaking) 30-50 months – ‘Questions why things happen and gives explanations.’ Asks e.g. who, what, when, how questions.

The consultation was to confirm whether the post-intervention school data would corroborate our results.

4

Types of questions children were exposed to during the intervention:

● Attention focusing – What is it doing, how does it feel? ● Measuring and counting – How many, how much, how heavy? ● Comparison – How are they alike, how are they different? ● Action- What if? ● Problem posing – How could we? ● Reasoning- What do you think, can you explain that?

Silences occur in all the transcripts in the first week of the nursery case study extracts between the end of the teacher’s questions and the opportunity for the child’s reply. There are four possible interpretations of these silences:

● the child was not paying attention ● the child was totally absorbed with the activity ● the child did not understand the question itself, the meaning being clouded by the question ● the child did not know the answer to the question and was reflecting.

Further research needs to be done to analyse and critically reflect upon these factors, in future practice.

The Intervention: Weekly paired ‘talk partner’ activities to promote scientific enquiry and language. (Appendix 13) These weekly ‘talking’ opportunities involved teachers using a variety of question stems including: attention focusing, comparing, rephrasing, problem solving and reasoning to support then promote children’s science language and enquiry skills. The intervention included games: ‘what’s in the bag’, ‘where is Wonder Cat’, blindfold ‘feely’ game and ‘pair and reason’ games (Appendix 8). To promote ‘child-led’ enquiry skills (Brunton and Thornton, 2010; Dale Tunnicliffe, 2015; Roden, 2005), we used a class puppet (Wonder Cat in nursery and Discovery Dog in reception), each of whom had a question for the children to give them a reason for their enquiry about. The strand of science from the National Curriculum (DfE, 2013) and Development Matters (DfE, 2012) which was explored was ‘plants’, which related to the main class focus for both year groups. The enquiry ran over six weeks in March and April 2018. Our data was collected, using voice recordings, photographs, participant observations and field notes. We compared child and teacher pre and post-intervention language for use of complexity of child language and support given through teacher questioning (De Boo, 1999; Dunne and Peacock, 2015; Ovens and Wenham, 2011; Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2002; Wellington and Osbourne, 2001)

Findings Nursery – pre-intervention The Stimulus: We went on a walk through the nursery garden to see what we would find after our introductory story of Little Red Riding Hood who loved flowers, so that was why she wandered off the path

5

on the way to Grandma’s House. We chanted “Walking through the Nursery Garden what will we see?” then we stopped and looked around and discussed with teacher support through questiuoning. We used homemade view finders to help focus attention (Appendix 9). See figure 1 78% child responses to teacher questioning were either non-verbal or one word.

See figure 2

93% of teacher questions to children were simple semantic focusing questions, such as how many can you see, what colour is it, or what shape is it? There was lots of adult repetition of questions with rephrasing and waiting time to give the child time to think and try.

Only 13% of children’s responses to teacher questioning were five or more words and came from one child (N) (Appendix 10)

Post-intervention

See figure 3

There was a reduction in percentage of nonverbal or simple 1 word answers by children. Only 14% child responses to teacher questioning were either non-verbal or one word.

There was an increase of more complex sentences being given to show their knowledge. Now 39% of child responses to teacher questioning were 5 or more words. (Appendix 11)

See figure 4

There is a definite shift in the teachers question type with 45% now being challenge, problem posing questions; an indication of children’s increase in communication skills

93%

7%

FIGURE2:WEEK1- MEAN%TEACHERQUESTIONSTEMS

semanticfocusing comparative

6

Post intervention we are finding that the target group of nursery children are transferring their new communication skills to share observations from their own play too without prompting.

We have had anecdotal feedback from the SMT that they feel that the children are using a wider vocabulary when talking about what they are doing when they came into Nursery post intervention.

Reception – pre-intervention: We introduced Phillipson’s (2017) ‘4 C’s’ of working collaboratively (Appendix 12):

● Critical ● Caring ● Creative ● Collaborative

These collaborative techniques were used as a talking tool to facilitate good listening skills in reception children, so they had opportunity to learn from each other.

We used the same stimulus as for the nursery children. We went on a walk on the school field to see what we would find after our introductory story of Little Red Riding Hood who loved flowers, so that was why she wandered off the path on the way to Grandma’s House. We wanted to see what was growing on our field. (Appendix 13)

See figure 7

We found that 59% of teacher questions to the reception children were simple attention focusing ones and 21% were reasoning ones in response to children’s ability to answer the questions raised. An indication perhaps of children’s unfamiliarity with talking about their ideas in a science enquiry and the teacher providing more scaffolding through rephrasing and supporting through questions such as ‘what colour is? Or what shape is it?’

See figure 6

This correlates to the 55% of reception children's responses being simple statements. (See individual transcripts).

16% of reception children's responses were reasoning statements to the 21% reasoning teacher questions.

45%

3%

46%

6%

FIGURE4:WEEK6- TEACHERQUESTIONSTEMS%

semanticfocusing comparativeproblemposing reasoning

7

Figure 5

Key to graphs showing the Type of Teacher Questions or Child Response

AF Action focusing- what, where, why etc.

M&C Measuring & Counting- How many, how long, how heavy etc.

C Comparing

PS problem solving - how could we/you

Action Action - what if

R Reasoning- what do you think, can you explain that

NS & NV Nonspecific or nonverbal responses

Post-intervention

See figure 9

Now 84% of teacher questions to reception children are more complex (52% problem solving and 32% reasoning).

See figure 8

The complexity of children’s responses have also increased. 65.5% of reception children's responses were either problem solving or reasoning based reflecting their ability to use language to engage

55%

6%5%0%2%

16%

16%

FIGURE6:MEAN%CHILDREN'SRESPONSESWEEK1

AF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

8

In the final unrecorded reception session using field notes, the children initiated the enquiry. All the questions came from them with no prompting. The reception children’s question:

“If we water the dead one (plant) will it come back alive?”

We found indication, though not conclusive due to limitations of the intervention, that teacher support using a story or ‘problem to solve’ is a strategy to engage children in science in a way that promotes spoken language and communication. A trend was found, towards a positive impact on the complexity of children’s speech, including readiness to share thinking. We noted reception children came up with their own ideas and were self-initiating argumentation (McGuigan, 2016).

(See appendix 14 for all pre and post intervention pie charts for individual children.)

Impact of intervention/Lessons Learned

Teaching and learning science constructively, through a first-hand approach, gave the children a reason to discuss and compare ideas (Dale Tunnicliffe, 2013; Skamp, 2012). By so doing, collaboratively building on their language and communication skills.

Discussion is critical to science learning and an important part of the enquiry process and the development of science reasoning ((Ovens and Wenham, 2011; Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2002). Discussion encourages children to think about what they have experienced, listen to the experiences of others, and reflect on their ideas. Similarly playing games encourages children to observe closely and reflect on their experiences over time as well as build vocabulary and language structures (Harlen and Qualter, 2014; Skamp, 2012).

As Early Years teachers we must remember that experience alone through high quality provision is not the best way to approach teaching and learning. When analysed, it is reflection on experience that makes the teaching and learning technique applied in the interventions, educational. McMahon (1997, cited in Pritchard and Woollard, 2010: 7) could support the argument that this is social-constructivism in practice.

From these findings we have found that, in this instance, the approach used in the interventions in Early Years education is foundational to further science learning as children progress through school, and therefore should be built upon.

Children found the play and learning activities motivating and interesting and were always willing to take part. The use of games, the view finder, puppets and the story problem were a hook to initially focus and motivate the children. (Dale Tunnicliffe, 2013; McGuigan, 2016; Ofsted, 2013).

Nursery children especially responded well to the puppet as it took on a role during the journey of discovery, creating an environment for the children to talk to Wonder Cat about their ideas.

9

Next steps

We intend to present the findings to our SMT, delivering in-service training (INSET) to the EYFS team in September to put an adapted programme into practise.

We are also looking to share the outcomes of our research project with other local schools to show how science can be used to encourage the promotion of language skills in the EYFS.

We would like to develop this research further. There is a growing recognition that, guided by skilful teachers, children’s experiences in the Early Years can have significant impact on their later learning. In addition, science may be a particularly important domain in early childhood, serving not only to build a basis for future scientific understanding but also to build important skills and attitudes for learning. We want to continue to foster science capital (Grenfell, 2014; Skamp, 2012) between the pupil’s home and school life, embedding the relationship through extra-curricular activities, such as Science clubs and trips as we believe this will promote ‘real science talk’ opportunities for the children.

10

References

BRUNTON, P. AND THORNTON, L. (2010). Science in the early years. Los Angeles: SAGE.

DALE TUNNICLIFFE, S. (2015). Starting Inquiry-based Science in the Early Years. Taylor and Francis.

DALE TUNNICLIFFE, S. (2015). Talking and doing science in the early years. 1st ed. Oxon: Routledge.

DE BOO, M. (1996) Developing Thinking and Understanding in Young Children by Sue Robson. Oxon: Routledge

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (2012). Development Matters in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS).

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION (2013). Science programmes of study: key stages 1 and 2.

DUNNE, M. and PEACOCK, A. (2015). Primary Science - A Guide to Teaching Practice. 2nd ed. London: SAGE.

DUSHL, R. & JIMENEZ ALEXANDRE, M.P. (2012) ‘Epistemic foundations for conceptual change’. In The journey from child to scientist, Carver, S.M. & Shrager, J. (Eds.), 245–262. Washington DC: American Psychological Association (APA)

GRENFELL, M. (2014). Pierre Bourdieu. 2nd ed. [ebook] Acumen. Available at:

https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/lib/edgehill/reader.action?docID=3061159&query= [Accessed 6 Feb.

2018].

HARLEN, W. and MCCRORY, P. (2011). ASE guide to primary science education. Hatfield, Herts.: Association

for Science Education.

HARLEN, W, & QUALTER, A. (2014) The Teaching of Science in Primary Schools 6th Edition. Abingdon: Routledge

KINGS COLLEGE LONDON, Science Museum (2014) Science Capital. Available at: https://www.kcl.ac.uk/sspp/departments/education/research/Research-Centres/cppr/Research/currentpro/Enterprising-Science/01Science-Capital.aspx

MCGUIGAN, L. (2016) ‘Helping children to express their ideas and move towards justifying them with evidence: A developmental perspective’. In the Journal of emergent Science,11, 34-37.

OFSTED (2013) Maintaining curiosity: a survey into science education in schools. Retrieved from: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment data/file/379164/ Maintaining_20curiosity_20a_20survey_20into_ 20science_20education_20in_20schools.pdf

PHILLIPSON, N. DR. (2017) Author of Dialogic Education: Mastering core concepts through thinking together, Routledge 2017 ISBN: 978-1-138-65651-2 (hbk) ISBN: 978-1-138-65652-9 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-315-62186-9 (ebk)

PRITCHARD, A. and WOOLLARD, J. (2010). ‘Psychology for the Classroom: Constructivism and Social

Learning.’ 1st ed. [ebook] Oxon: Routledge.

11

RODEN, J. (2005). Primary Science Reflective Reader. Exeter: Learning Matters.

SHARP, J.G., HOPKIN, H. & LEWTHWAITE, B. (2011) ‘Teacher perceptions of science in the national curriculum: findings from an application of the science curriculum implementation questionnaire in English primary schools’, International Journal of Science Education, 33, (17), 2407–2436

SIRAJ-BLATCHFORD, J. & SIRAJ-BLATCHFORD, I. (2002) 'Discriminating between Schemes and Schema in Young Children’s Emergent Learning of Science and Technology', International Journal of Early Years Education, 10, (3), 205–214

SKAMP, K. (2012). Teaching primary science constructively. South Melbourne, Vic: Cengage Learning

Australia.

WENHAM, M. and OVENS, P. (2011). Understanding primary science. Los Angeles: SAGE.

WEAVERS, G. (ed.)(2001 )Made you look, made you think, made you talk. Sandbach:Millgate House Publishers. ISBN 978-0-9556260-2-9

WELLINGTON, J. & OSBOURNE, J. (2001) Language and Literacy in Science Education. Open University Press Buckingham · Philadelphia. ISBN ISBN 0 335 20599 2 (hb) 0 335 20598 4 (pb)

12

Appendices

Appendix 1:

PRINCIPLES FOR TEACHING AND LEARNING SCIENCE AT HIGHFIELD PRIMARY SCHOOL

• All children enjoy science. • Science is practical and children have time to learn through exploration. • Children are asking the questions and make choices in enquiries. • Children learn how to investigate systematically and learning is recorded in a variety of

ways. • Children collaborate and everyone is involved. • Children talk about their learning using scientific vocabulary.

Appendix 2:

PSQM: Find information at http://www.psqm.org.uk/

Appendix 3

Highfield SDP- Focus EYFS

EYFS Action Plan: Points for action following Autumn review:

NOTES: Ensure all EYPP (Nursery) & PP (Rec) data collated by end of Sept

Letters for January intake sent out – November 2017

Subject: EYFS Phase leader: C.Brown Team members: EYFS staff

(NB foci for action should refer to the School Improvement Plan and priorities identified in the review of the previous action plan unless other priorities have been identified)

AUTUMN TERM

Focus for action Task/s

Timescale

(projected completion dates)

Resources/

Personnel Success criteria Evaluation & Next Steps

• Com

munic

ation

&

langu

age

• Improve standards in C&L (identified as a concern over

past few years)

• Modelling good speaking & listening

• Research project, science based, to promote questioning

& use of specific language

• Circle times, RWI, Letters & Sounds & activities planned

to support Sp & List

• Individuals requiring additional Sp & Lang support

identified

Throughout academic year

All EYFS

team

Research –

HP & CP

Sp & Lang

intervention –

LG & AH

• Children in EYFS display good

communication skills – speaking &

listening

• Children use wide range of language ,

ask questions to find further information

Children are demonstrating good communication skills – improved listening since baseline

Observations / discussions evidence good language skills for many EYFS children

87% expected / expected + at end of Rec year

Research findings to be shared at Sept INSET

• Gro

wth

Mind

set

• Promote concepts related to Growth Mindset throughout

EYFS

• Parents informed via leaflet, newsletters, noticeboards,

website & displays

• Language of learning promoted

• Activities to develop resilience, team work, ‘I can’ attitude

Introduce (re-visit) during

Transition & then ongoing

throughout academic year

All staff

• Children demonstrate a ‘Growth

Mindset’ through their approach to

learning, relationships & use the

Language of Learning

• Evidence: Class book, displays,photos,

pupil voice

Introduction to Growth Mindset – Language of Learning

Range of activities & books to model / explore Growth Mindset

13

Appendix 4:

Myers Chart Nursery

Name of child:

Date

Activity:

Activity area

Equipment/resources needed

Curriculum links (CLL,MD,PSE, PD)

Assumed previous knowledge Skills expected to be acquired Appropriate skill they knew and used

New vocab for activity

Words child uses Complexity of phrases

1 2-3 4 5 5 +

Adults cue questions

Child’s questions

What happens

Childs account

Comments: photos Learners approach, new skills mastered, skills used Involvement: Leuven scale (1-5) - Assessment comments and next steps

14

Myers Chart Reception

Name of child:

Date

Activity:

Activity area

Equipment/resources needed

Curriculum links

Assumed previous knowledge

Skills expected to be acquired

New vocab for activity

Sc Words child uses

Types of statements/Questions

AF

M&C

C

A

PS

R

NV NS

Adults cue questions

Child’s questions

What happens

Childs account

Comments: photos Learners approach, new skills mastered, skills used Involvement: Leuven scale (1-5) Assessment comments and next steps

15

Key to graphs showing the Type of Teacher Questions or Child Response

AF Action focusing- what, where, why etc.

M&C Measuring & Counting- How many, how long, how heavy etc.

C Comparing

PS problem solving - how could we/you

Action Action - what if

R Reasoning- what do you think, can you explain that

NS & NV Nonspecific or nonverbal responses

Appendix 5:

Photos of a Wondercat activity in nursery - Similarities and Differences between everyday objects.

Children were introduced to my special patterned bag along with Wondercat to see if we could describe what was inside. Can children describe what they see? What are they used for? How are they different /the same?

16

Appendix 6:

Field notes examples

Appendix 7:

Development Matters- Areas of Learning & Development

The World

30-50 months

•Comments and asks questions about aspects of their familiar world such as the place where they live or the natural world. •Can talk about some of the things they have observed such as plants, animals, natural and found objects. •Talks about why things happen and how things work. •Developing an understanding of growth, decay and changes over time. •Shows care and concern for living things and the environment

Early Learning Goals

Early Learning Goal Children know about similarities and differences in relation to places, objects, materials and living things. They talk about the features of their own immediate environment and how environments might vary from one another. They make observations of animals and plants and explain why some things occur, and talk about changes

Speaking and Listening

30-50 months

•Beginning to use more complex sentences to link thoughts (e.g. using and, because). •Can retell a simple past event in correct order (e.g. went down slide, hurt finger). •Uses talk to connect ideas, explain what is happening and anticipate what might happen next, recall and relive past experiences. •Questions why things happen and gives explanations. Asks e.g. who, what, when, how. •Uses a range of tenses (e.g. play, playing, will play, played). •Uses intonation, rhythm and phrasing to make the meaning clear to others. •Uses vocabulary focused on objects and people that are of particular importance to them. •Builds up vocabulary that reflects the breadth of their experiences. •Uses talk in pretending that objects stand for something else in play, e,g, ‘This box is my castle.’

17

40-60months

•Extends vocabulary, especially by grouping and naming, exploring the meaning and sounds of new words. •Uses language to imagine and recreate roles and experiences in play situations. •Links statements and sticks to a main theme or intention. •Uses talk to organise, sequence and clarify thinking, ideas, feelings and events. • Introduces a storyline or narrative into their play.

Early Learning Goals

Children express themselves effectively, showing awareness of listeners’ needs. They use past, present and future forms accurately when talking about events that have happened or are to happen in the future. They develop their own narratives and explanations by connecting ideas or events.

Appendix 8:

Starter Games to play to encourage talk in Science:

1. Feely Game: match the objects • Collect a selection of various fabrics different textures. Cut 2 of each fabric. • Stick one to a rigid piece of cardboard and put the other in a feely box. (Challenge children with

similar textures- start with only a few fabrics) • Children touch and feel and talk about the wall in pairs or with the teacher. After a few minutes ask

them to match the fabrics in the box without taking them out- just by touch. (Alternative) Feely Game- Slime or Goo with everyday objects in it. - Children to describe what they feel like, look like.

Can extend by blindfolding or closing eyes.

Key Questions

What does it feel like?

Are there any that feel the same?

Why do you think it is that one?

Can you make up some words to describe it?

Key vocabulary to use and explore: feel, touch, texture, senses, material, fabric, similar, different, rough, smooth, bumpy, scratchy, soft

2. Blindfold Challenge • Collect interesting objects- teddy, box of pencils, bar of soap, hairbrush, slipper, a tube of sealed

smarties • Get some blindfolds, or use scarves (if child scared could close eyes (no sneaky peeking) • The child feels the object and must try to describe it before saying what it is, can use smell, and

sound to help.

18

Key Questions

What does it feel like?

Do you think you have ever held an object like this before?

What helped you to decide what it was?

What can you hear or smell that might help you to guess what it is?

Was it difficult or easy to work out? Why?

Key vocabulary to use and explore: senses, touch, feel, sight, see, smell, sound, hear, similar, different, texture

3. Bags of fun • Put a selection of objects inside a square of patterned fabric for a pair of children to explore (old

mobiles, washed fruit, stones, stretchy things, animals made of different things, fasteners, small bottles of liquid,)

• Create a sense of excitement and mystery – can look inside. I have found it, but not know what is in it.

• Children can handle the objects, and peek in bag. They need to decide what all the items have in common. Then look for differences. Can they find the odd one out?

• Encourage creative language and imaginative suggestions for how things are linked. Key questions

Do you know how these things are used?

What do they feel, look, smell like?

How are these things different from each other?

Can you find something that is the same about them all?

What words can you use to describe the things? You can make some up if you wish.

Key vocabulary to use and explore: senses, touch, feel, sight, see, smell, sound, hear, similar, different,

4. Where is a favourite toy? Take photos of toy in various places around the classroom, school building, and grounds- laminate.

• Share the photos with the children and ask them to decide where the photo was taken. Try to make the photo challenging.

• Can they predict where the toy is and then look for evidence to see if this is right.

Key questions

How can you tell where …. is today?

What’s behind… in the photo?

19

Does more than one place look like this?

What helped you to decide where … is?

How can you tell which room this is?

Has anything changed since the photo was taken?

Vocabulary: Name of places, describing words for place.

5. Find Me a Rainbow To make children aware of the huge variety of colours in the environment.

• Prepare sample palettes for children to use • Put splashes of different colour down one side of the card and a strip of double sided tape down

the adjacent side. Three to 4 colours for youngest children.

• Give children their colour palettes (pairs) tell them to find colours to match those on their palette- scattered across the field, ground.

• Give time to talk and explore- then to collect. Only need small bits which can be stuck on the palette

• Challenge different shades of one colour e.g. green. • Up to you if wish to allow manufactured products. • Children can compare theirs with another group.

Alternatively (find shades of green or other colours, look for objects that shouldn’t be there ‘man-made’).

Key Questions

How many of these colours do you think you can find outside?

Where do you think you will find the different colours?

Which colour do you think you will find the most often?

Will the range of colours change if we go out in autumn or spring?

Vocabulary – flowers, leaves, berries, living, dead, natural, manufactures, colour, shade

6. We’re going on a ………….hunt. – A take on we’re going on a bear hunt • Can be any focus, helping to focus children’s attention. Take homemade telescopes, binoculars

or focusing squares (made from lollipop sticks tied into a square using making tap with a handle, then hung on wool round their necks.

• Show lots of enthusiasm and interest in what you see and model your thinking aloud. • Collect objects, or take photo’s showing respect for environment.

Stem starters

What will we find?

Where do you think we’ll find………?

20

What does it look like?

What does it feel like?

Is it similar to…?

Similar to ‘We’re going on ……. Hunt’ Walking through the ………………..(school, playground, park, trees, classroom etc.) what will we see?

Vocab- subject dependent

Most of the ideas taken and developed from ‘Made you look, made you think, made you talk.- written by Gaynor Weavers Millgate House Publishers 2008

Appendix 9:

View finders

To make:

4 lollipop sticks joined to make a square.

Make a necklace so children can wear it round their neck.

Use to focus attention.

21

Appendix 10:

Child N responses

Transcript 1 & 2 Children J & N – 1st March (Nursery)

Week 1 we’re going on a walk in our nursery garden, what will we see? Use of view finders to focus attention

LO: find out what vocab they use, complexity of speech, what they observe.

T- What have you found down there Jack? I can see you’re touching the snow, what are you thinking about it?

J- it’s like that, it isn’t hot

T- What do you mean it is like that and it isn’t hot?

(J moves the snow with his finger)

T I can see you’re moving the snow with your finger Is that what you’re telling me?

What else can we find out here?

Walking thro the nursery garden what else will we see?

What can you see N?

T what are you seeing thro your window?

What have you found?

What is it?

N- it’s a stone

T- What can you tell me about it?

N- it’s hard

T- What else

N- it’s hard

T- What else can you tell me? What shape? What colour? How does it feel?

N – it’s smooth

J- I’ve found some stones

T- what can you tell me about them?---------

J- Hard

T- What else?

T- What else can we find? What is growing? What can see on the field?

(Children looking unsure, no verbal)

T- (Modelling thinking and talking aloud) Grass- is it growing?

What’s all this- grass- peeping through.

What’s this- water- where did it come from?

22

What have you found there J.

J- Stones

T- The snow is coming down again, the leaves are blowing around.

Can you see the snow coming down J?

T –what are you stamping on J

J- a stick (a root from the tree)

T- Where is it coming from? (to encourage J /N showing knowledge of roots coming from a nearby tree)

N- it’s branch, comes from under the ground?

T- Where does it come from?

N- the tree

T- Affirming comes from the tree

Do you what that stick is called? ………………………….. A tree

The roots are in the ground come from the tree.

Look for one more thing (lots of encouragement to look. Taking to N who has gone under the slide)

What have you found?

N- x marks the spot.

I can see soil- what will be in there

N- Worms

T anything else

Could be other things, as no snow.

J & N- no more answers, just looking thro the windows/ view finders

23

Appendix 11:

Myers Charts example showing some of Nursery 5 or more words analysis

Child C

Name of child: CH WK 6

Date: 19.4.18

Activity: Week6-GamewhereisWonderCat

We’regoingonawalkinournurserygardentoseewhat’salive

Activity area- UW & C & L Look at similarities and differences. Talk about patterns

Equipment/resources needed Viewfinders, recorder, camera, plants

Curriculum links (CLL,MD,PSE, PD) CLL – speaking and listening

Assumed previous knowledge Can talk about some of the things they have observed such as plants, animals, natural and found objects. Name familiar garden plants and natural objects (generic- tree, grass, flower, stones, soil etc Some describing vocabulary- stick, leaf, flower etc Uses talk to connect ideas, explain what they see Builds up vocabulary that reflects the breadth of their experiences.

Skills expected to be acquired New describing vocab for game to say where WC is Names of different objects, simple descriptive language Appropriate skill they knew and used

New vocab for activity Roots, stem, daisy, dandelion, weed

Words child uses Stones, soil, roots, body, alive Everyday phrases-

Complexity of phrases

1 X

2-3 X X X

4 X

5 X X X

5 + X X X X

Adults cue questions (1-2 for each response from children) What can you see? What can you tell me? How do you know it’s alive/ dead? Will a plant live if it’s been cut?

Child’s questions

What happens High level interaction and enthusiasm from the teacher with modelling thinking and talking about her observations. Chn very engaged and having fun. Wanted to continue.

Childs account

Comments: photos Learners approach, new skills mastered, skills used Involvement: Leuven scale (1-5) - 5 Enthusiasm, motivation, observation skills, comparing objects Assessment comments and next steps Continued activities to promote vocabulary & observations

24

Name of child: AB

Date: 19.4.18

Activity: Week6-GamewhereisWonderCat

We’regoingonawalkinournurserygardentoseeifplantshavebodies

Activity area- UW & C & L Look at similarities and differences. Talk about patterns

Equipment/resources needed Viewfinders, recorder, camera, plants

Curriculum links (CLL,MD,PSE, PD) CLL – speaking and listening

Assumed previous knowledge Can talk about some of the things they have observed such as plants, animals, natural and found objects. Name familiar garden plants and natural objects (generic- tree, grass, flower, stones, soil etc Some describing vocabulary- stick, leaf, flower etc Uses talk to connect ideas, explain what they see Builds up vocabulary that reflects the breadth of their experiences.

Skills expected to be acquired Names of part of plant New describing vocab for game to say where WC is Appropriate skill they knew and used

New vocab for activity Roots, stem, daisy, dandelion, weed

Words child uses Stick, leaf, flowers, dig, seeds, long, onion Everyday phrases-

Complexity of phrases

1 X X X X

2-3

4 X X X X

5 X

5 + X X

Adults cue questions (1-2 for each response from children) What can you see? What can you tell me? What is that part called? Can you tell me the different parts of your body? Challenge- Do plants have bodies like us

Child’s questions Can I dig more? Let me see more?

What happens High level interaction and enthusiasm from the teacher with modelling thinking and talking about her observations. Chn very engaged and having fun. Wanted to continue.

Childs account

Comments: photos Learners approach, new skills mastered, skills used Involvement: Leuven scale (1-5) - 5 Enthusiasm, motivation, observation skills, comparing objects Assessment comments and next steps Continued activities to promote vocabulary & observations

25

Appendix 12:

4 C’s in detail See: http://21stcenturylearners.org.uk/?p=906

Appendix 13:

Approach’s to the intervention for the action research project

Starting the science process in the EYFS- science is not just about content it is about ‘doing science’

Note: Teacher to show interest and model thinking aloud – don’t give the impression you know all the answers- ‘we are exploring together’

Question stems to use to start the observational dialogue in children age 3 to 5 years

Semantic focusing and zooming

Can you …………? see that plant, tree, flower, animal

What is…….? What colour, height

Where is ……..? where is it growing

How many……? Leaves, petals, legs, wings

What …………. ? do the leaves look like, petals, shape

Can ……..? you see any more of them, how do you know?

Challenge Questions

Why do you think………..? it grows there, that animal is there

Where do you? Think that animal lives

What is different about? 2 green plants (include trees) 2 animals

What is the same about? 2 plants, animals

The Intervention Science Focus

This term in Reception and Nursery the focus is habitats and the plants and animals we find in our school grounds.

Story to use as a stimulus – Red Riding Hood

• Starter activity to read the story – if not already read by Amy to the whole class. Then use as a reference with a letter from her. We want to look and see what we already know.

Question after reading: If you go down to the woods today- what would Red Riding Hood find in our school grounds?

26

• How can we help her? What is growing/living outside? What plants and animals do we know? • Are all parts of the field (habitats outside) the same? • Are they the plants/animals there all year round? What do the animals eat? • Why are they there?

Ideas for each session

To use starter games to encourage language skills each week as part of the focus group work – to improve vocabulary. (See appendix 8 games to plan). Though the games can be done at another point in the week.

Main activities – Refer back to Little Red Riding Hood being interested in our field – she likes looking at plants etc.

• Which plants do children know? What language do they use? Could go out with a clip board Children name what they know and respond to your questions? Make view finders (lollipop stick2 or use kitchen roll to view plants). ‘We’re going on a plant hunt……’

Talk with children: I see/ I think/ I wonder

What do they come up with? Use post-it’s to put ideas down. Possible to plan from their thinking with scaffolding from us after the initial search outside for what’s growing.

Some possibilities with reference to 30-50, 40- 60 & ELG’s for The World

Also links to 3 prime areas and Characteristics of Effective Learning.

• ‘Walking through the grass/trees, bushes what do we see? ‘What shape are the plants- leaves (circles, triangles, rectangles oval…)? Size of plants large/small. Make a leaf mobile/ necklace picture.

• Parts of plants- What are the main outside parts of our own bodies, plants have a body too - dissect plants with bulbs & plants with roots. Pull out of soil so children can see. What shapes do you see? Look at shape of different plants and fruits.

• Are all plants green? Find green things outside. (Natures palette) Chance for discussion and talking about each other’s.

• Is a tree a plant? Look at the trees on our field. Can the children name parts of the tree? Can we identify them? Get children’s ideas. Collecting things in a matchbox- how many things can we collect? Make up a story about the objects.

Audio record whilst talking with the groups & take photos where relevant.

27

Results- transcribe using the Myers Grids: Go through script- naming language, describing- colour, size, length of phrases used by the child, child’s questions, and level of interest/involvement (Leuven)

Teacher Evaluation Note: Questions used (planned or spontaneous) Socratic Pumping Throwing back Challenged further Semantic, focusing & zooming FRAMING Question – based prelude Question-Base Summary (Evaluation) HIDDEN QUESTIONS (example of such questions)

What are they thinking, what are they going to do? -Socratic - pumping, challenge

Making suggestions, asking what they think will happen- constructive challenge

Can you describe what you have done found out – question-based summary

Can they describe any patterns they have found – further challenge

28

Appendix 14

Nursery – pie charts

16%

17%

0%

17%17%

33%

CHILDNWEEK1NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

0%

33%

0%17%17%

33%

CHILDNWEEK6NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

33%

0%67%

0%0%0%

CHILDABWEEK1NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

0%

37%

0%36%

9%

18%

CHILDABWEEK6NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

17%

50%

33%

0%0%0%

CHILDAVWEEK1NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

17%

0%0%

33%

17%

33%

CHILDAV- WEEK6NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

10%

30%

40%

10%10%0%

ChildCH- Week1

NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

0%8%

25%

8%25%

34%

CHNV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

29

Reception pie charts

Week 1 Week 6

Week 1 Week 6

Week 1 Week 6

50%

25%

25%0%0%0%

CHILDJ- WEEK1NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

0%20%

40%0%

40%

0%

CHILDJWEEK6NV 1word 2words 4words 5words 5+words

41%

9%9%0%2%

24%

15%

TYPEOFRESPONSEHGAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

38%

0%0%0%8%

46%

8%

HG%RESPONSESAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

42%

6%12%0%0%21%

19%

TYPEOFRESPONSEJKAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

19%0%0%0%

28%48%

5%

JK%RESPONSESAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

63%3%3%0%3%

18%

10%

TYPEOFRESPONSEBAAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

9%0%0%0%

27%

55%

9%

BA%RESPONSESAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

30

Week 1 Week 6

Child absent

Week 1 Week 6

80%

5%1%0%0%2%12%

TYPEOFRESPONSESACAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

50%

6%1%1%2%18%

22%

TYPEOFRESPONSEFKAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV

25%

0%0%0%0%

50%

25%

AC%RESPONSESAF M&C C Action PS R NS&NV