Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Assessing preschool children’s maps against the first four levels of the primary curriculum: lessons to learn

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Mathematics Education Research Journal Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

In Australia, more attention is being paid to inclusion of Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics (the so-called STEM subjects) concepts in early childhood education and care curricula. In addition, the focus on the quality of learning in the years prior to school is a growing priority, evidenced by pre-election promises to extend the national policy of universal access to 15 hours of preschool for 4-year-old children, to include 3-year-old children. It should not be assumed that this necessarily implies a pushdown of formal curricula into play-based early learning settings. Here, we focus on the M in STEM and in particular on spatial thinking. Drawing on data from a broader study, maps drawn by kindergarten children of the route from home to school were analysed according to the first three levels of the Australian Curriculum: Mathematics. Many children demonstrated spatial thinking capabilities that aligned with multiple content descriptions for Measurement and Geometry sub-strands at Year 2 level. Two children provided evidence of Year 3 content descriptions – a full 4 years ahead of the starting point of the Geometry and Measurement primary school curriculum. This highlights the importance of teachers in kindergartens and schools being attuned to the diverse capabilities demonstrated by children, as well as to the possibility that children’s capabilities may markedly exceed curriculum-guided expectations. (215)

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3
Fig. 4
Fig. 5
Fig. 6

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Australian Curriculum and Reporting Authority. (ACARA) (2014). Retrieved from https://www.australiancurriculum.edu.au/f-10-curriculum/. Accessed 6 Dec 2019

  • Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2016). Practicing engineering while building with blocks: identifying engineering thinking. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(1), 67–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1120521.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Barron, B., and Darling-Hammond, L. (2010). Teaching for meaningful learning: a review of research on inquiry-based and cooperative learning. In Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. San Francisco: John Wiley and Sons Inc. Retrieved from https://files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED539399.pdf. Accessed 6 Dec 2019

  • Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development. Cambridge: Harvard University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Bryant, P. (2009). Understanding space and its representation in mathematics: The Nuffield Foundation. Retrieved from https://www.nuffieldfoundation.org/sites/default/files/P5.pdf. Accessed 6 December 2019

  • Clements, D., & Battista, M. (1992). Geometry and spatial reasoning. In D. Grouws (Ed.), Handbook of research on mathematics teaching and learning (pp. 420–464). New York: Macmillan Publishing Company.

    Google Scholar 

  • Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2011). Early childhood teacher education: the case of geometry. Journal of Mathematics Teacher Education, 14(2), 133–148. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10857-011-9173-0.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Clements, D., & Sarama, J. (2014). Learning and teaching early math: The Learning Trajectories Approach. New York: Routledge.

  • Cohrssen, C., de Quadros Wander, B., Page, J., & Klarin, S. (2017). Between the big trees: A project-based approach to investigating shape and spatial thinking in a kindergarten program. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 42(1), 94–104. https://doi.org/10.23965/AJEC.42.1.011

  • Cohrssen, C., & Page, J. (2016). Articulating a rights-based argument for mathematics teaching and learning in early childhood education. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(3), 104–108.

  • Deans, J., & Cohrssen, C. (2015). Children dancing mathematical thinking. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(3), 61–67.

  • Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR). (2009). Belonging, being and becoming: the early years learning framework for Australia (EYLF). Canberra: Council of Australian Governments.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2013). Trends and tensions: Australian and international research about starting school. International Journal of Early Years Education, 21(2-3), 163–177. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2013.832943.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Einarsdottir, J., Dockett, S., & Perry, B. (2009). Making meaning: children’s perspectives expressed through drawings. Early Child Development and Care, 179(2), 217–232. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430802666999.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ginsburg, H. P., Lee, J. S., and Boyd, J. S. (2008). Mathematics education for young children: what it is and how to promote it. Retrieved from https://eric.ed.gov/?q=Mathematics+education+for+young+children%3a+what+it+is+and+how+to+promote+it&id=ED521700. Accessed 6 Dec 2019

  • Gould, P. (2012). What number knowledge do children have when starting kindergarten in NSW? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 37(3), 105–110.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawes, Z., LeFevre, J.-A., Xu, C., & Bruce, C. D. (2015a). Mental rotation with tangible three-dimensional objects: a new measure sensitive to developmental differences in 4- to 8-year-old children. Mind, Brain, and Education, 9(1), 10–18.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Hawes, Z., Tepylo, D., & Moss, J. (2015b). Developing spatial thinking: implications for early mathematics education. In B. Davis & Spatial Reasoning Study Group (Eds.), Spatial reasoning in the early years: Principles, assertions and speculations (pp. 29–44). New York: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Hedge, K., & Cohrssen, C. (2019.) Between the red and yellow windows: A fine-grained focus on supporting children’s spatial thinking during play. SAGE Open. https://doi.org/10.1177/2158244019829551

  • Levine, S. C. (2011). Fostering young children's spatial thinking: an important but often neglected aspect of early mathematics. Proceedings of the Achievement Gap Initiative (AGI) and Children's Defense Fund Research-to-Practice Conference, Harvard University. Retrieved from http://www.agi.harvard.edu/presentations/2011Conference/10AGI2011Levine.pdf. Accessed 6 Dec 2019

  • Lim, B.-R. (2004). Challenges and issues in designing inquiry on the web. British Journal of Educational Technology, 35(5), 627–643.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Lowrie, T. (2010). Primary students’ decoding mathematics tasks: the role of spatial reasoning. Proceedings of the Teaching Mathematics? Make it count ACER Conference, Melbourne, Australia. Retrieved from https://research.acer.edu.au/research_conference/RC2010/17august/. Accessed 6 Dec 2019

  • Lowrie, T., Logan, T., & Ramful, A. (2017). Visuospatial training improves elementary students’ mathematics’ performance. British Journal of Educational Psychology, 87(2), 170–186. https://doi.org/10.1111/bjep.12142.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • MacDonald, A., & Lowrie, T. (2011). Developing measurement concepts within context: children's representations of length. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 23(1), 27–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Masters, G. (2016). Monitoring student growth. Teacher Magazine (25th July 2016) ACER: Camberwell Retrieved from: https://www.teachermagazine.com.au/columnists/geoff-masters/monitoring-student-growth. Accessed 6 Dec 2019

  • McLean Davies, L., Anderson, M., Deans, J., Dinham, S., Griffiin, P., Kameniar, B., et al. (2012). Masterly preparation: embedding clinical practice in a graduate pre-service teacher education programme. Journal of Education for Teaching, 39(1), 93–106.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Mulligan, J. (2010). Reconceptualising early mathematics learning. In C. Glascodine & K. Hoad (Eds), Teaching Mathematics? Make it count. Proceedings of the Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER) Numeracy Conference. ACER pp. 47 – 52.

  • Mulligan, J., Woolcott, G., Mitchelmore, M., & Davis, B. (2018). Connecting mathematics learning through spatial reasoning. Mathematics Education Research Journal, 30(1), 77–87. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-017-0210-x.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Murdoch, K. (2015). The Power of Inquiry. Northcote, Vic: Seastar Education.

    Google Scholar 

  • Newcombe, N. S., & Frick, A. (2010). Early education for spatial intelligence: why, what and how. Mind, Brain, and Education, 4(3), 102–111.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Owens, K. (2015). Introduction. In Visuospatial reasoning: An ecocultural perspective for space, geometry and measurement education (pp. 1-16). London: Springer International Publishing.

  • Papic, M., Mulligan, J., & Mitchelmore, M. (2011). Assessing the development of preschoolers' mathematical patterning. Journal for Research in Mathematics Education, 42(3), 237–269.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Pollitt, R., Cohrssen, C., Church, A., & Wright, S. (2015). Thirty-one is a lot! Assessing four-year-old children's number knowledge during an open-ended activity. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(1), 13–22.

  • Pollman, M. J. (2010). Blocks and beyond: strengthening early math and science skills through spatial learning. Baltimore: Paul H. Brookes.

    Google Scholar 

  • Shulman, L. S. (1986). Those Who Understand: Knowledge Growth in Teaching. Educational Researcher, 15(2), 4-14. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/1175860.

  • Shumway, J. F. (2013). Building bridges to spatial reasoning. Teaching Children Mathematics, 20(1), 44–51.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tepylo, D., Moss, J., & Hawes, Z. (2014). The malleability of spatial reasoning and its relationship to growth in competence. In P. Liljedahl, C. Nicol, S. Oesterle, & D. Allan (Eds.), Proceedings of the 38th Conference of the International Group for the Psychology of Mathematics Education: PME 38. Canada: Vancouver.

    Google Scholar 

  • Uttal, D. H., Miller, D. I., & Newcombe, N. S. (2013). Exploring and enhancing spatial thinking: links to achievement in science, technology, engineering, and mathematics? Current Directions in Psychological Science, 22(5), 367–373. https://doi.org/10.1177/0963721413484756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • van Oers, B. (2013). Challenges in the innovation of mathematics education for young children. Educational Studies in Mathematics, 84(2), 267–272. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10649-013-9509-z.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Yelland, N. (2011). Reconceptualising play and learning in the lives of young children. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(2), 4–12.

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Faculty of Education, Meng Wah Complex, University of Hong Kong, Pokfulam Road, Hong Kong, Hong Kong SAR

    Caroline Cohrssen

  2. Melbourne Graduate School of Education, University of Melbourne, 4/100Leicester Street, Melbourne, Victoria, 3000, Australia

    Catherine Pearn

Authors
  1. Caroline Cohrssen
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Catherine Pearn
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Caroline Cohrssen.

Additional information

Publisher’s note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Cohrssen, C., Pearn, C. Assessing preschool children’s maps against the first four levels of the primary curriculum: lessons to learn. Math Ed Res J 33, 43–60 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00298-7

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Revised:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13394-019-00298-7

Keywords

Search

Navigation