Advertisement

Enhancing Interactions: Understanding Family Pedagogy and Funds of Knowledge “on Their Turf”

Chapter

Abstract

Establishing partnerships with families that go beyond casual social interactions is an important goal for early childhood teachers. International evidence highlights the positive link between strong teacher-family partnerships and children’s learning (Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development [OECD] 2012). However, developing and sustaining strong partnerships with families can be challenging. This chapter is guided by a view of families as people with expertise. We discuss the value of home visits to gain insights into families’ pedagogy and funds of knowledge. Visiting families “on their turf” (Allen and Tracy 2004, p. 198) is a powerful method for understanding family pedagogy through the interactions that occur within families. We argue that understanding family pedagogy enhances teachers’ pedagogy, deepening learning interactions that occur within early childhood settings. We illustrate in this chapter the transformative power of visiting families to gain enhanced insights into family interactions for subsequent improved pedagogical interactions in an early childhood setting.

Notes

Acknowledgements

We wish to thank Zoe and her family for their generous participation in our study. Thanks to Auckland Kindergarten Association for funding release time for Daniel to write this chapter. We would like to thank the teachers and centre owner of Small Kauri ECE Centre and the New Zealand Council for Educational Research for TLRI funding. The University of Auckland Human Participants Ethics Committee approved the home visit postgraduate study (reference number 2012/8222) and the TLRI project (reference number 2012/7896).

References

  1. Allen, K., & Crosbie-Burnett, M. (1992). Innovative ways and controversial issues in teaching about families: A special collection on family pedagogy. Family Relations, 41(1), 9–11. doi: 10.2307/585385.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Allen, S. F., & Tracy, E. M. (2004). Revitalizing the role of home visiting by school social workers. Children & Schools, 26(4), 197–208. doi: 10.1093/cs/26.4.197.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Andrews, J., & Yee, W. C. (2006). Children’s ‘funds of knowledge’ and their real life activities: Two minority ethnic children learning in out-of-school contexts in the UK. Education Review, 58(4), 435–449. doi: 10.1080/00131910600971909.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Catarsi, E. (2012). Pedagogy for the family. Bolgna: I Libri di Emil.Google Scholar
  5. Cooper, M., Hedges, H., Ashurst, L., Harper, B., Lovatt, D., Murphy, T., & Spanhake, N. (2014). Transforming relationships and curriculum: Visiting family homes. Early Childhood Folio, 18(1), 22–27.Google Scholar
  6. Education Review Office. (2013). Working with Te Whāriki. Wellington: Education Review Office.Google Scholar
  7. Gonzalez, N., Mill, L., Tenery, M., Rivera, A., Rendon, P., Gonzales, R., & Amanti, C. (2005). Funds of knowledge for teaching in Latino households. In N. Gonzalez, L. Moll, & C. Amanti (Eds.), Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms (pp. 89–111). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  8. Greenfield, S. (2012). Nursery home visits: Rhetoric and realities. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 10(1), 100–112. doi: 10.1177/1476718X11407983.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Hedges, H., & Cooper, M. (2014). Inquiring minds, meaningful responses: Children’s interests, inquiries, and working theories. Final summary report. Retrieved from Teaching and Learning Research Initiative: http://www.tlri.org.nz/tlri-research/research-completed/ece-sector/inquiring-minds-meaningful-responses-children%E2%80%99s
  10. Hedges, H., & Cooper, M. (2015). Inquiring minds: Theorising children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies. doi: 10.1080/00220272.2015.1109711.
  11. Hensley, M. (2005). Empowering parents of multicultural backgrounds. In N. González, L. Moll, & C. Amanti (Eds.), Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms (pp. 143–151). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  12. Hujala, E., Turja, L., Gaspar, M., Veisson, M., & Waniganayake, M. (2009). Perspectives of early childhood teachers on parent-teacher partnerships in five European countries. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 17(1), 57–76. doi: 10.1080/13502930802689046.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Lawrence, P., Gallagher, T., & the Pen Green Team. (2015). ‘Pedagogic strategies’: A conceptual framework for effective parent and practitioner strategies when working with children under five. Early Child Development and Care, 185(11–12), 1978–1994. doi: 10.1080/03004430.2015.1028390.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Li, L., & Fleer, M. (2015). Family pedagogy: Parent–child interaction in shared book reading. Early Child Development and Care, 185(11–12), 1944–1960. doi: 10.1080/03004430.2015.1028398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Lovatt, D. (2014). How might teachers enrich children’s working theories: Getting to the heart of the matter. Early Childhood Folio, 18(1), 28–34.Google Scholar
  16. May, H. (2013). The discovery of early childhood (2nd ed.). Wellington: New Zealand Council of Educational Research.Google Scholar
  17. Ministry of Education. (1996). Te Whāriki: He whāriki matauranga mō ngā mokopuna o Aotearoa. Early childhood curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.Google Scholar
  18. Murray, J. (2015). Early childhood pedagogies: Spaces for young children to flourish. Early Child Development and Care, 185(11–12), 1715–1732. doi: 10.1080/03004430.2015.1029245.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development. (2012). Starting Strong III – A Quality Toolbox for Early Childhood Education and Care. Retrieved from http://www.oecd.org/edu/school/startingstrongiiiaqualitytoolboxforecec.htm
  20. Paradise, R., & Rogoff, B. (2009). Side by side: Learning by observing and pitching in. Ethos, 37(1), 102–138. doi: 10.1111/j.1548-1352.2009.01033.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Renwick, M. (1989). Keeping in touch: Teachers and partners in kindergartens. Dunedin: New Zealand Council of Educational Research.Google Scholar
  22. Tenery, M. (2005). La visita. In N. González, L. Moll, & C. Amanti (Eds.), Funds of knowledge: Theorizing practices in households, communities and classrooms (pp. 119–130). Oxon: Routledge.Google Scholar
  23. Whyte, K. L., & Karabon, A. (2016). Transforming teacher–family relationships: Shifting roles and perceptions of home visits through the funds of knowledge approach. Early Years. Advanced online publication. doi:  10.1080/09575146.2016.1139546.

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.The University of AucklandAucklandNew Zealand

Personalised recommendations