Abstract:

Technology education is part of early childhood education. What technology teaching preschool teachers offer children have mainly been investigated qualitatively. Technology is an integrated part of both the preschool environment and children’s interest, and both international and Swedish studies show that concerning teaching of artefacts there is room for improvements. However, as most research has been small-scaled and offers contradictions regarding preschool teachers’ conceptions of technology and what they teach, this paper investigates what aspects of artefacts the staff in a Swedish municipality address in their teaching and how often. A digital questionnaire was conducted prior to professional development. The questionnaire was based on research results and was administered to all 324 employees in preschools within the municipality.

A total of 211 responded. However, a post analysis revealed that some respondents did not work with children, thus leaving 184 respondents, both preschool teachers (n=85) and childcare attendants (n=99). Their answers were analysed descriptively. On the question How often do you initiate an activity or use an opportunity to let children explore some technological object?, it varied; Every day 38 (21%), A few times a week 51 (28%), A few times a month 58 (32%), A few times a quarter 19 (10%), Less than a few times a quarter 10 (5%), Never 8 (4%). Hence, in the next step the answers of 176 (184-8) respondents were analysed. It comprised of 12 items concerning what they include in the teaching of artefacts and how frequently they do it (5-point Likert Scale, Never-Always). For instance, 112 respondents Always include item 12 The name of the object in their technology teaching. Then the data were reduced to three options; Never/Almost never became Typically not included (TnI) and Almost always/Always became Typically included (TI). Sometimes (S) remained the same. The reduction made it more obvious what the respondents Typically not include or Typically include. The next analytical step was to determine if an item was TnI or TI, which was done logically based on proportions. For instance; each item was analysed for qualified majority TI/(TnI+S) > 3 (i.e. at least 75 % of all respondents chose TI) or TnI/(TI+S) > 3 (i.e. at least 75 % of all respondents chose TnI). A complete description of the logic will be provided in the full paper.

The result shows that some items serve as fundaments in the artefact teaching, here denoted: The common artefact teaching practice. In this Swedish municipality the teaching of artefacts in preschools is mainly focused on Naming the artefacts; To address the intended use of that artefact; Other possible use of that artefacts and What problems the artefact solves.

Also, there are items that staff tend not to include, here denoted The missing artefact teaching practice. Both the development of artefacts and human’s use of different abilities in that development are not included in the artefact teaching practice. The different items were; The historical development of artefacts; The future development of artefacts and The abilities/knowledge used by humans. Finally, there are items related to the teaching of artefacts that may or may-not be considered as part of the artefact teaching, here denoted The may-be artefact teaching practice. In the full paper the implications concerning preschool artefact teaching is discussed.

Keywords:

Artefact, technology education, preschool.