THIS PAPER CRITICALLY REFLECTS on the appropriateness of the methodological framework adopted in an exploratory study of young children's experiences of participation in their early childhood centre and home environments. The Mosaic and Ecocultural approaches informed the study's methodological framework as these approaches were seen to be complementary and child-friendly. While some of the data collection tools were not as successful in the current study as they have been reported in previous research, there was support for the usefulness of the Mosaic approach as an effective, adaptable and child-focused research methodology. Further, the Ecocultural approach was found to provide an appropriate and meaningful way of talking with young children about their daily routines and everyday home life.
Get full access to this article
View all access options for this article.
References
1.
BernheimerL. P., GallimoreR.,&WeisnerT. (1990). Ecocultural theory as a context for the individual family service plan. Journal of Early Intervention, 14(3), 219–233.
2.
BraunV.,&ClarkeV. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3, 77–101.
3.
ClarkA. (2007). A hundred ways of listening: Gathering children's perspectives of their early childhood environment. Young Children, 62(3), 76–81.
4.
ClarkA. (2010). Transforming children's spaces: Children's and adults' participation in designing learning environments.London: Routledge.
5.
ClarkA.,&MossP. (2001). Listening to young children: The Mosaic Approach.London: National Children's Bureau.
6.
ClarkA.,&StathamJ. (2005). Listening to young children: experts in their own lives. Adoption&Fostering, 29(1), 45–56.
7.
DockettS.,&PerryB. (2003). Children's views and children's voices in starting school. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 28(1), 12–17.
8.
DockettS.,&PerryB. (2005). Researching with children: insights from the Starting School Research Project. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 507–521.
9.
EideB. J.,&WingerN. (2005). From the children's point of view: methodological and ethical challenges. In ClarkA., KjorholtA. T.&MossP. (Eds), Beyond listening: Children's perspectives on early childhood services (pp. 71–90). Great Britain: The Policy Press.
10.
EinarsdottirJ. (2005). Playschool in pictures: children's photographs as a research method. Early Child Development and Care, 175(6), 523–541.
11.
EinarsdottirJ., DockettS., &PerryB. (2009). Making meaning: children's perspectives expressed through drawings. Early Child Development and Care, 179(2), 217–232.
12.
FraserS. (2006). Authentic childhood: Experiencing Reggio Emilia in the classroom (2nd ed.). Canada: Thomson Nelson.
13.
GallimoreR., WeisnerT., BernheimerL. P., GuthrieD.,&NihiraK. (1993). Family responses to young children with developmental delays: accommodation activity in ecological and cultural context. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 98(2), 185–206.
14.
GallimoreR., WeisnerT., KaufmanS. Z.,&BernheimerL. P. (1989). The social construction of ecocultural niches: family accommodation of developmentally delayed children. American Journal on Mental Retardation, 94(3), 216–230.
15.
GraceR.,&BowesJ. (2009). Using an ecocultural approach to explore young children's experiences of prior-to-school care settings. Early Child Development and Care, 1–13.
16.
GraueM. E.,&WalshD. J. (1995). Children in context: interpreting the here and now of children's lives. In HatchJ. A. (Ed), Qualitative research in early childhood settings (pp. 135–154). United States of America: Praeger Publishers.
17.
GreenfieldC. (2011). Personal reflection on research process and tools: Effectiveness, highlights and challenges in using the Mosaic Approach. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(3), 109–116.
18.
HarcourtD. (2008). Constructing ideas and theories about quality: The accounts of young children in two early childhood classrooms in Singapore. Queensland University of Technology, Brisbane. Retrieved 2 January, 2012, from http://eprints.qut.edu.au/16658/.
19.
JesuvadianM. K.,&WrightS. (2009). Doll tales: foregrounding children's voices in research. Early Child Development and Care, 1–9.
20.
KirkS. (2007). Methodological and ethical issues in conducting qualitative research with children and young people: a literature review. International Journal of Nursing Studies, 44, 1250–1260.
MossP., ClarkA., &KjorholtA. T. (2005). Introduction. In MossP., ClarkA.&KjorholtA. T. (Eds), Beyond listening: children's perspectives on early childhood services (pp. 1–16). Bristol, UK: The Policy Press.
23.
O'KaneC. (2008). The development of participatory techniques: facilitating children's views about decisions which affect them. In ChristensenP.&JamesA. (Eds), Research with children: Perspectives and practices (2nd ed.). London: Routledge.
24.
ProutA.,&JamesA. (1997). A new paradigm for the sociology of childhood? Provenance, promise and problems. In JamesA.&ProutA. (Eds), Constructing and reconstructing childhood: Contemporary issues in the sociological study of childhood (pp. 7–33). London: Falmer Press.
25.
PunchS. (2002). Research with children: the same or different from research with adults?Childhood, 9, 321–341.
26.
StephensonA. (2009). Horses in the sandpit: photography, prolonged involvement and ‘stepping back’ as strategies for listening to children's voices. Early Child Development and Care, 179(2), 131–141. doi: 10.1080/03004430802667047
27.
UN (United Nations). (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child.Geneva: UN.
28.
UN (United Nations). (2005). Conventions on the Rights of the Child: General Comment No. 7 (2005).Geneva: UN.
