Chinese Preschool Teachers’ Use of Concept Development Strategies to Elicit Children’s Higher-Order Thinking During Whole-Group Science Teaching

ABSTRACT

Research Findings: This study explores how Chinese preschool teachers’ enactment of Concept Development (CD) strategies, as measured by the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), might effectively elicit children’s higher-order thinking during whole-group science teaching. Participants included 25 Chinese preschool teachers and 800 young children (52% boys, mean age = 61.71 months). Research assistants observed and videotaped whole-group science activities (approximately 20-minutes) implemented by participating teachers. Each of the 25 videotape transcripts of whole-group science activities were analyzed and coded by two certified CLASS raters for 12 CD teaching strategies and their children’s corresponding responses. Statistical analysis revealed that, in these 25 science lessons, CD strategies were observed a total of 567 times, with the most frequently used strategy being Asking why and/or how questions (23.81%). Teachers’ educational levels, SES regions, and children’s age groups were positively associated with the occurrence of Asking why and/or how questions. In the 567 times that CD strategies were utilized, 25.22% elicited responses from children were coded as high-level responses. The frequency of why and/or how questions, problem solving, evaluation, and brainstorming had positive correlations with children’s high-level cognitive responses ratios. Qualitative analysis revealed that teachers’ ineffective use of CD strategies appeared related to inadequate wait time, lower level questions, and lack of intentionality regarding children’s prior knowledge and experiences. Practice or Policy: Teachers need extensive training and practice in enacting CD strategies through effective teacher-child interactions during science teaching, so as to strengthen children’s science concepts and promote children’s higher-order thinking.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the author(s).

Correction Statement

This article has been corrected with minor changes. These changes do not impact the academic content of the article.

Additional information

Funding

The study and the preparation of the manuscript were supported by (1) Macao Tong Chai Charity Association Grant [No. EF013/FED-HBY/2018/MTCCA]; (2) Humanities and Social Science of Ministry of Education Planning Fund [No. 19YJA880065]. The authors of this paper deeply appreciate the support.