The different conceptions about the nature of attitudinal competences that students in ECEC Initial EProgrammes consider relevant are analysed and their implications in educational practice discussed. Dahlberg and Moss (2005), Fleer (2003), Moyles (2010) identify manifold components of competence required in ECEC. However, attitudinal competences are elusive aspects of professionalism and it is difficult to deal with them as an explicit object of discussion in Initial Education Programmes. A sociocultural perspective (Rogoff 2010) is applied to understand the perspectives that students, teachers and mentors develop on attitudinal competences as well as the conditions that affect the construction of a common knowledge (Edwards 2010, Littleton and Mercer 2013). Discourse analysis is applied to three focus groups interactions to highlight the elements students consider relevant in their conception of attitudinal competences and the perspectives that emerge. Data from a student survey are used to identify the impact of different perspectives on the attitudinal competences by students in ECEC. All parties signed an ethical protocol which was fully informative of the responsibility of researchers to guarantee the subjects of the respect of their conceptions about the research topic. Two different perspectives on the nature of attitudinal competences are recognised: in the first one, they are considered innate and gendered, in the other they are regarded as learnable, through the integration of theory and field experience. The analysis of contrasting perspectives about attitudinal competences can enable teachers to make them an explicit part of the curriculum and work out educational activities to promote their development.

Different conceptions about the nature of attitudinal competences among students in initial education programmes in Italy. Implications for initial education practice

SORZIO, PAOLO;
2014-01-01

Abstract

The different conceptions about the nature of attitudinal competences that students in ECEC Initial EProgrammes consider relevant are analysed and their implications in educational practice discussed. Dahlberg and Moss (2005), Fleer (2003), Moyles (2010) identify manifold components of competence required in ECEC. However, attitudinal competences are elusive aspects of professionalism and it is difficult to deal with them as an explicit object of discussion in Initial Education Programmes. A sociocultural perspective (Rogoff 2010) is applied to understand the perspectives that students, teachers and mentors develop on attitudinal competences as well as the conditions that affect the construction of a common knowledge (Edwards 2010, Littleton and Mercer 2013). Discourse analysis is applied to three focus groups interactions to highlight the elements students consider relevant in their conception of attitudinal competences and the perspectives that emerge. Data from a student survey are used to identify the impact of different perspectives on the attitudinal competences by students in ECEC. All parties signed an ethical protocol which was fully informative of the responsibility of researchers to guarantee the subjects of the respect of their conceptions about the research topic. Two different perspectives on the nature of attitudinal competences are recognised: in the first one, they are considered innate and gendered, in the other they are regarded as learnable, through the integration of theory and field experience. The analysis of contrasting perspectives about attitudinal competences can enable teachers to make them an explicit part of the curriculum and work out educational activities to promote their development.
File in questo prodotto:
Non ci sono file associati a questo prodotto.

I documenti in IRIS sono protetti da copyright e tutti i diritti sono riservati, salvo diversa indicazione.

Utilizza questo identificativo per citare o creare un link a questo documento: https://hdl.handle.net/11368/2807126
 Attenzione

Attenzione! I dati visualizzati non sono stati sottoposti a validazione da parte dell'ateneo

Citazioni
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.pmc??? ND
  • Scopus ND
  • ???jsp.display-item.citation.isi??? ND
social impact