Home → Releases → № 2 (56) →

The Concept of Continuity of Preschool and Primary General Education in the Era of Change

Pedagogical Education , UDC: 373 DOI: 10.25688/2076-9121.2021.56.2.02

Authors

  • Shiyan Olga Alexandrovna PhD in Pedagogy, Associate Professor
  • Le-van Tatyana Nikolaevna PhD in Pedagogy, Associate Professor
  • Lvovsky Vladimir Aleksandrovich PhD in Psychology, Associate Professor
  • Yakshina Anna Nikolaevna
  • Zadadaev Sergey Alekseevich PhD in Physics and Mathematics, Associate Professor

Annotation

The relevance of the study of the continuity problem is determined by the fact that both school and preschool education are in the process of transformation, in the conditions of updating the content and formats. This article aims to analyze the foundations of continui- ty between the educational levels that correspond to modern ideas about the opportunities of both preschool and primary school ages, as well as to develop those steps that will make the transition from kindergarten to primary school optimal for child development. The leading methods of studying the problem were theoretical analysis of sources and empirical research of the importance of new formations of preschool age for academic success following the re- sults of the first school year. The theoretical analysis consisted in working with domestic and foreign researches (including longitudinal ones) in the field of continuity of preschool and school educational stages. The empirical study included individual diagnostics of the abili- ty to cooperate, imagination and visual-figurative thinking of kindergarten graduates, conduc- ting a survey of kindergarten teachers regarding the cognitive and playful initiative of children (the questionnaires were developed on the basis of the Development Maps by N. A. Korotkova and P. G. Nezhnov), as well as assessments of the academic success of children in mathematics and Russian given by teachers at the end of the first school year. The study sample included 315 first graders from Moscow schools. As part of the pilot study, data was obtained that there is a relationship between new formations of preschool age and the academic success of child- ren in the first grade. Based on the theoretical analysis and pilot research, mechanisms have been developed to provide the continuity of preschool and primary general education, taking into account the specifics of the Moscow education system, in particular, such as organizing start modules that ensure transition, creating joint projects of preschool and school teachers within Moscow schools, etc.
Tags:
continuity; preschool education; primary school; new formations of age; initiative; educational independence; stages of education; starting module.

How to link insert

Shiyan, O. A., Le-van, T. N., Lvovsky, V. A., , . ., Yakshina, A. N. & Zadadaev, S. A. (2021). The Concept of Continuity of Preschool and Primary General Education in the Era of Change Bulletin of the Moscow City Pedagogical University. Series "Pedagogy and Psychology", № 2 (56), 23-46. https://doi.org/10.25688/2076-9121.2021.56.2.02
References
1. Agapov, A. M. (2020). The problem of transition between levels of education. [Problema perekhoda mezhdu urovniami obrazovaniia]. In S. N. Vachkova (Ed.) Education and the City: participation practices [Obrazovanie i gorod: praktiki souchastvuiushchego proektirovaniia: sb. st. po itogam Vtorogo ezhegodnogo mezhdunarodnogo simpoziuma] (pp. 252–264). Moscow: Ekon-Inform. (In Russian).
2. Ahtola, A., Poikonen, P. L., Kontoniemi, M., Niemi, P. & Nurmi, J. E. (2012). Successful handling of entrance to formal schooling: Transition practices as a local innovation. International Journal of Transitions in Childhood, 5 (1), 3–21.
3. Ahtola, A., Silinskas, G., Poikonen, P. L., Kontoniemi, M., Niemi, P. & Nurmi, J. E. (2011). Transition to formal schooling: Do transition practices matter for academic performance? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 26 (3), 295–302. DOI: 10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.12.002
4. Ashiabi, G. S. (2007). Play in the preschool classroom: Its socioemotional significance and the teacher`s role in play. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35 (2), 199–207. DOI: 10.1007/s10643-007-0165-8
5. Beloshistaia, A. V. (2002). Modern understanding of the implementation of continuity between preschool and primary levels of the education system [Sovremennoe ponimanie realizatsii preemstvennosti mezhdu doshkol’nym i nachal’nym zven’iami sistemy obrazovaniia]. Elementary school: plusminus, 2, 3–10. (In Russian).
6. Blatchford, P., Battle, S. & Mays, J. (1982). The First Transition. Home to preschool. Windsor: NFER.
7. Bodrova, E. & Leong, D. J. (2003). Chopsticks and counting chips: Do play and the foundational skills need to compete for the teachers` attention in an early childhood classroom? Young Children, 58 (3), 10–17.
8. Bredekamp, S. (2004). Play and school readiness. In E. F. Zigler, D. G. Singer & S. J. Bishop-Josef (Eds.). Children`s play: The roots of reading (pp. 159–174). Washington, DC: Zero to Three/National Center for Infants, Toddlers and Families.
9. Brostrom, S. (2005). Transition problems and play as transitory activity. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, Vol 30, 330 (3), 17–25.
10. Churbanova, S. M. & Koriagina, N. A. (2009). Creative development as a psychological prerequisite for successful teaching of primary school students (experimental study). [Tvorcheskoe razvitie kak psikhologicheskaia predposylka uspeshnogo obucheniia mladshikh shkol’nikov (eksperimental’noe issledovanie)]. Bulletin of the RSUH. Series “Psychology. Pedagogy. Education”, 7, 97–119. (In Russian).
11. Coggi, C. & Ricchiardi, P. (2014). La «school readiness» e la sua misura: uno strumento di rilevazione per la scuola dell`infanzia. Journal of Educational, Cultural and Psychological Studies, 1 (9), 283–309.
12. Davy`dov, V. V. & Kudryavtsev, V. T. (1997). Developing education: Theoretical basis of preschool and junior school stages continuity. [Razvivaiushchee obrazovanie: teoreticheskie osnovaniia preemstvennosti doshkol’noi i nachal’noi shkol’noi stupenei]. Voprosy psikhologii, 1, 3–18. (In Russian).
13. Doyle, O., Finnegan, S. & McNamara, K. A. (2012). Differential caregiver and teacher ratings of school readiness in a disadvantaged community. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 20 (3), 371–389. DOI: 10.1080/1350293X.2012. 704761
14. E`l`konin, B. D., Arkhipov, B. A., Ostroverkh, O. S. & Sviridova, O. I. (2015). Modernity and Age [Sovremennost’ i vozrast: sb. st.]. Moscow: Avtorskii klub. (In Russian).
15. Fabian H. & Dunlop A.W. (2007). Outcomes of good practice in transition processes for children entering primary school // Background paper for the Education for all global monitoring report 2007: strong foundations: early childhood care and education. Retrieved from https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000147463https://unesdoc.unesco.org/ark:/48223/pf0000147463 (access date: 10.10.2007).
16. Fisher, K., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R. M., Singer, D. & Berk, L. E. (2010). Playing around in school: Implications for learning and educational policy. In A. Pellegrini (Ed.). The Oxford handbook of play (pp. 341–363). New York: Oxford University Press.
17. Galyer, K. & Evans, I. (2001). Pretend play and the development of emotion regulation in preschool children. Early Child Development and Care, 166, 93–108. DOI: 10.1080/0300443011660108
18. Gorlova, E. L. & Kuznetsova, Iu. A. (2016). Theoretical attitude to the issue of children of different psychological age [Teoreticheskoe otnoshenie k zadache u detei raznogo psikhologicheskogo vozrasta]. In the collection: Personality, intelligence, and metacognition: research approaches and educational practices: materials of the 1st All-Russian Scientific and Practical Conference with International Participation [Lichnost’, intellekt, metakognitsii: issledovatel’skie podkhody i obrazovatel’nye praktiki: materialy I Vseros. nauch.-prakt. konf. s mezhdunarodnym uchastiem] (pp. 413–421). Kaluga: Kaluga State University. (In Russian).
19. Gutkina, N. I. (2004). Psychological readiness for school. [Psixologicheskaya gotovnost` k shkole]. St. Petersburg: Piter. (In Russian).
20. Hamerslag, R., Oostdam, R. & Tavecchio, L. (2018). Inside school readiness: the role of socioemotional and behavioral factors in relation to school, teachers, peers and academic outcome in kindergarten and first grade. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26 (1), 80–96. DOI: 10.1080/1350293X.2018.1412035
21. Hirsh-Pasek, K., Golinkoff, R., Berk, L. & Singer, D. (2009). A mandate for playful learning in preschool: Presenting the evidence. New York, NY: Oxford University Press.
22. Hoffmann, J. D. & Russ, S. W. (2016). Fostering pretend play skills and creativity in elementary school girls: A group play intervention. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 10 (1), 114–125. DOI: 10.1037/aca0000039
23. Hoffmann, J. & Russ, S. (2012). Pretend play, creativity, and emotion regulation in children. Psychology of Aesthetics, Creativity, and the Arts, 6 (2), 175–184. DOI: 10.1037/a0026299
24. Karma, T. & Evans, M. (2001). Pretend Play and the Development of Emotion Regulation in Preschool Children. Early Child Development and Care, 166 (1), 93–108. DOI: 10.1080/0300443011660108
25. Khekman, Djzh. Djzh., Mun, S. Kh., Pinto, R., Savel`ev, P. A. & Iavits, A. (2010). Economic return from preschool education of children from disadvantaged families: lessons of the program “High / Scope Perry”. [Ekonomicheskaia otdacha ot doshkol’nogo obrazovaniia detei iz neblagopoluchnykh semei: uroki programmy «Khaiskoup Perri» ]. Finance and Business, 3, 39–51. (In Russian).
26. Khiuter, G. & Kvarkh, K. (2020). Save the game! After all, life is not just a function. [Spasite igru! Ved’ zhizn’ — eto ne prosto funktsiia]. Moscow: Resurs. (In Russian).
27. Kigan, R. (2017). Rejection of change: how to overcome resistance to change and unlock the potential of an organization. [Nepriiatie peremen: kak preodolet’ soprotivlenie izmeneniiam i raskryt’ potentsial organizatsii]. Moscow: Mann, Ivanov i Ferber. (In Russian).
28. Kravtsova, E. E. (1991). Psychological problems of children`s readiness for school. [Psikhologicheskie problemy gotovnosti detei k obucheniiu v shkole]. Moscow: Pedagogika. (In Russian).
29. Kravtsova, E. E. & Kravtsov, G. G. (2017). Psychology of game: a cultural and historical approach [Psikhologiia igry: kul’turno-istoricheskii podkhod]. Moscow: Lev”. (In Russian).
30. Lemche, E., Lennertz, I., Rothmann, C., Ari, A., Grote, K., Hafker, J. & Klann-Delius, G. (2003). Emotion-regulatory process in evoked play narratives: Their relation with mental representations and family interactions. Praxis der Kingderpsychologie und Kinderpsychiatrie, 52, 156–171.
31. Lillard, A. S., Lerner, M. D., Hopkins, E. J., Dore, R. A., Smith, E. D. & Palmquist, C. M. (2013). The impact of pretend play on children`s development: A review of the evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 139 (1), 1–34. DOI: 10.1037/a0029321
32. L`vovskii, V. A. (2002). The project of a pedagogical experiment on the formation of control and evaluation actions in a 4-years primary school [Proekt pedagogicheskogo eksperimenta po formirovaniiu deistvii kontrolia i otsenki v 4-letnei nachal’noi shkole]. Head Teacher of primary school, 6, 31–38. (In Russian).
33. Marcon, R. A. (2002). Moving up the grades: Relationship between preschool model and later school success. Early Childhood Research & Practice 2002, 4 (1), 1–26.
34. Margetts, K. & Kienig, A. (Eds.). (2013). International Perspectives on Transition to School: Reconceptualising beliefs, policy and practice (1st ed.). London: Routledge. DOI: 10.4324/9780203111802
35. Miller, E. & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the Kindergarten: Why Children Need to Play in School. College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood. Retrieved from https://eric. ed.gov/ ?id=ED504839 (access date: 12.10.2009).
36. Nisskaia, A. K. (2019). The challenge of transition to school. Overview of international practice of children`s training, ensuring continuity of educational content, interaction between parents and educational organizations [Problema perekhoda k obucheniiu v shkole. Obzor mezhdunarodnykh praktik podgotovki detei, organizatsii preemstvennosti obrazovatel’nogo soderzhaniia, vzaimodeistviia roditelei i obrazovatel’nykh organizatsii]. Preschool Education Today, 1 (13), 18–33. (In Russian). DOI: 10.24411/1997-9657-2018-10037
37. Reilly, E. (2016). The role of play in preparing children for big school. Transitions Children`s Research Digest, 3 (2), 45–50.
38. Remorenko, I. M., Shiian, O. A., Shiian, I. B., Shmis, T. G., Le-van, T. N., Koz`mina, Ia. Ia. & Sivak, E. V. (2017). Key Issues for the Implementation of the Federal State Educational Standard for Preschool Education According to the Results of Applying Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale (ECERS-R): “Moscow-36” [Kliuchevye problemy realizatsii FGOS doshkol’nogo obrazovaniia po itogam issledovaniia s ispol’zovaniem «Shkal dlia kompleksnoi otsenki kachestva obrazovaniia v doshkol’nykh obrazovatel’nykh organizatsiiakh (ECERS-R)»: «Moskva-36»]. Preschool Education Today. Theory and practice, 2, 16–31. (In Russian).
39. Schweinhart, L. J. & Weikart, D. P. (1997). The high / scope preschool curriculum comparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 117–143. DOI: 10.1016/S0885-2006(97)90009-0
40. Slobodchikov, V. I. & Zuckerman, G. A. (1996). Integral division into periods of general psychic development. [Integral’naia periodizatsiia obshchego psikhicheskogo razvitiia]. Voprosy psikhologii, 5, 38–50. (In Russian).
41. Smirnova, E. O. (2014). Types of preschool games. [Vidy` igry` doshkol`nika]. Preschool Education Today. Theory and practice, 6, 74–78. (In Russian).
42. Sylva, K., Melhuish, E.C., Sammons, P., Siraj, I. & Taggart, B. (2008). Final Report from the Primary Phase: Pre-school, School and Family Influences on Children`s Development during Key Stage 2 (Age 7–11). London: Nottingham: DCSF Research Report 61 / Institute of Education, University of London.
43. Tomlinson, H. B. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in the kindergarten year – Ages 5–6. In C. Copple & S. Bredecamp (Eds.). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs (pp. 186–216). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
44. Ulanovskaya, I. M. (ed.) (2015). Assessment of metasubject competencies of primary school graduates. [Otsenka metapredmetnykh kompetentsii vypusknikov nachal’noi shkoly]. Moscow: MGPPU. (In Russian).
45. Venger, L. A., Martsinkovskaia, T. D. & Venger, A. L. (1994). Is your child ready for school. [Gotov li vash rebenok k shkole]. Moscow: Znanie. (In Russian).
46. Worthington, M. & Van Oers, B. (2016). Pretend play and the cultural foundations of mathematics. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24 (1), 51–66. DOI: 10.1080/1350293X.2015.1120520
47. Zuckerman, G. A. (2016). Play and Learning: How the Two Leading Activities Meet. [Igra i uchenie: vstrecha dvukh vedushchikh deiatel’nostei]. Cultural-historical psychology, 12 (2), 4–13. (In Russian). DOI: 10.17759/chp.2016120201
48. Zuckerman, G. A. & Chudinova, E. V. (2018). Diagnosis of the ability to learn. [Diagnostika umeniia uchit’sia]. Moscow: Avtorskii klub. (In Russian).
49. Zuckerman, G. A. & Venger, A. L. (2015). Development of educational independence [Razvitie uchebnoi samostoiatel’nosti]. Moscow: Avtorskii klub. (In Russian).
Download file .pdf 361.96 kb