Childrens Interests, Inquiries and Identities Curriculum, Pedagogy, Learning and Outcomes in the Early Years (Helen Hedges) (z-lib.org)(KVTM)

136 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

approaches. Teacher-centredness was commonly viewed as representing didactic
teaching approaches, often of subjects, topics, and ideas devoid of authentic contextual
relevance to children’s lives, and as efforts towards promoting children’s academic
school readiness. This view of teaching may in itself be why many teachers have
avoided identifying as “teachers” within early childhood education.

Contemporary perspectives of curriculum and pedagogy are much more complex
and nuanced than such entrenched approaches would suggest. Children’s interests are
inspired and instigated by their life experiences. As noted in Chapter 2, interest
connects knowledge development and inquiry reciprocally with positive emotions
that, combined, become an important motivation for learning. Analytical thinking
about children’s interests helps to expose deeper levels of understanding of children’s
motivations, intentions, knowledge, knowing, and learning (Chapters 5–7).
Responsive, relational pedagogy draws on a range of approaches and strategies that
are fluid and dynamic (Chapters 6–7).

Yet, discussions of interests-based curriculum, or indeed teacher-centredness,
rarely consider how teachers’ own interests and knowledge might be posi-
tioned. It could be that teachers’ interests, along with the related knowledge
and decision-making, are significant contributors in determining the nature and
extent of children’s experiences. This is because teachers, first, create the
environment that children select from; second, determine if, when, and how
there might be teacher-initiated experiences offered; and, third, choose whose
and which interests will be recognised, identified, and responded to.

Teachers’ interests: limited literature

In considering this omission, I undertook an extensive search of my university’s
library databases. I could locate only three articles that highlighted teacher interests
across all sectors of teaching. The synonym “passion” used in the literature search
identified Alati (2005), and located a few further articles that did not connect the
passion with knowledge used to develop interests-related teaching so are not
included in what follows.

The personal and professional motives and experiences of secondary teachers of
foreign languages and intercultural competence in England were examined in
Gillian Peiser and Marion Jones’ (2014) project. During narrative interviews, some
teachers revealed that they had personal interests that influenced their decision-
making. Those teachers’ interests motivated some students to become engaged in
the subjects or topics taught. For example, one teacher had a strong interest in
history, which he introduced to his students through incorporating historical fig-
ures and places in dramatic stories he told about languages and cultures in his
teaching. Of interest in relation to other debates in this book, his managers were
not always enamoured of his curricular and pedagogical decisions, but he persisted
as he saw the way his teaching inspired interest in his students. The authors noted
ways that the constraints and contexts of prescribed curricula affected teachers’
decision-making. Early childhood teachers in some jurisdictions have more

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 137

autonomy and decision-making power around curriculum design and provision, so
paying attention to their personal and interests and experiences might be highly
relevant. Peiser and Jones drew on Kelchtermans (2009) and Korthagen (2004) to
argue that more attention needs to be paid to teachers’ personal lives and experiences
in order to understand their professional decision-making.

From the United States, Sergio Alati (2005) noted that, while children’s interests
remained paramount in the early childhood programme he provided, his enjoy-
ment of teaching occurred most when his own interests were involved. Alati sug-
gested such opportunities enable children to see teachers model the excitement of
interest-related learning. One example included was his interest in cooking that
illustrated ways he could incorporate domain-based knowledge of literacy, arts,
science, and mathematics into his teaching and enthuse children at the same time.
Alati also drew attention to teachable moments, spontaneous opportunities for a
teacher to add value to children’s learning. Alati shows that these moments incor-
porate teacher interest, experience, and warm pedagogical relationships.

In Aotearoa New Zealand, Suzanne Manning and Judith Loveridge’s (2010)
study took place in a Playcentre, an early childhood service where parents are the
children’s teachers. The study explored when and why these parents used their
interests and associated knowledge and skills during interactions with children. The
study found that, where parents used their interests, involvement levels and the
language parents used in interactions with children increased in quantity and qual-
ity. Of significance in relation to child-centredness, the authors also found ample
evidence that parents overlooked their own interests to focus on the provision of
an activities-based environment that met the philosophy, values, and expectations
of the setting. This suggested that constraints such as taken-for-granted, surface-
level, child-centred practices discourage teachers’ interests being utilised to stimu-
late children’s interests; rather they were of value in responding alone. The authors
wondered if teachers may need to sense permission to use their interests more
overtly in curricular provision.

Taken together, these articles suggested that teachers’ interests represent the
potential to expose children to new experiences, add richness and depth to children’s
experiences, and extend children’s thinking and learning. In this way teachers might
inspire, respond to, and extend children’s interests.

Highlighting teachers’ interests: a re-analysis

I now revisit four qualitative, interpretivist studies. The studies focused on chil-
dren’s experiences of early childhood education. Three studies were designed to
explore notions of children’s interests and ways that teachers identified and
responded to these (Hedges et al., 2011; Hedges & Cooper, 2014; Jones et al.,
2014). The fourth project explored the experiences of children learning in more
than one language in their families and centre settings (Podmore et al., 2016).

Secondary analysis of data has become somewhat accepted in qualitative work.
The rich data obtained in such studies can be re-analysed with a new question or

138 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

lens. Secondary analysis has been rightly accompanied by robust epistemologi-
cal, methodological, and ethical debates. In this case, I re-used data generated
in projects that I had led to investigate an additional question: “How might
teachers’ interests be positioned in early childhood curriculum and pedagogy?”
As I was fully involved in the original projects, and used a systematic, reflexive,
interpretive process, this chapter does not suffer from the typical issues sec-
ondary analysis is criticised for: the problems of fit, context, and verification
(Hammersley, 2010; Heaton, 2008).

While I had recognised and inquired about teacher interests during one project,
re-analysing data from across the projects revealed the ways teachers’ interests were
central to the curriculum and pedagogy children experienced. These findings also
typified provision of more challenging, authentic, and responsive early childhood
environments than traditional play activities alone. Although play was central, and
children could still choose whether or not to engage with teachers who were using
their interests, rich possibilities for curriculum and pedagogy became evident.
Teachers’ personal and cultural interests are now discussed in turn. In addition, I
describe some of the lingering influences of the long-held child-centred ethos on
teachers valuing and using their interests.

Teachers’ personal interests

Teachers’ interests—and the related knowledge—can deepen pedagogical
interactions with children. In considering the question of whose and which
interests created curriculum in the project reported in Hedges et al. (2011), it
became clear that teachers’ interests actually contributed many of the experi-
ences provided. For example, Christine’s interest in dance, Theresia’s in sewing, and
Louise’s in health, fitness, and cooking each contributed to the curriculum in a sus-
tained way. Christine led regular dancing practices and preparations over a number of
months for an annual winter disco for the children and their families. Theresia made
capes with children over a period of time, capes that were used subsequently in com-
plex socio-dramatic play. Louise cooked with the children every Friday. In this way, as
Alati (2005) articulated, the teachers were demonstrating knowledge, values, and atti-
tudes associated with having a sustained interest. Among them, during related peda-
gogical interactions with children, they encouraged children to develop
understandings about music, exercise, safety, use of technologies, nutrition, and health,
and explored children’s interests and inquiries about these as they arose.

In addition, teachers’ interests came to the fore in other ways. Barbara identified
walking, gardening, and photography as personal interests. In an interview, she
elaborated on one interest as follows:

I love nature and things. … I’m really passionate about kids knowing the
process of how things happen in nature and why things happen in nature …
because the kids watch the bumble bees on the flowers and the bumble bees
are doing a job.

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 139

Barbara reported enjoying her secondary education studies, unsurprisingly nomi-
nating biology as a subject of particular interest. Her interests provided subject
knowledge used in her teaching to respond to children’s interests and inquiries. For
example, many children had an ongoing interest in insects and animals. On one
occasion, 2-year-old Imogen wanted to find a caterpillar. Barbara took the
opportunity to help a number of children distinguish between the habitats, eating,
and excreting practices of caterpillars, snails, and aphids. On another day, a group
of teachers and children undertook a walk to a neighbouring park. The children
noticed and asked about insects, birds, and trees. Barbara named these for them,
sometimes also at the request of other teachers who did not know what they were.

Yet, these kinds of teacher interests and related knowledge—and the decision-
making that made these explicit—were not documented by the teachers. When I
asked about this omission during the study, teachers did not seem to recognise or
acknowledge the impact of their own interests. Once their consciousness was
raised, they stated that the reason for the lack of overt recognition was because
highlighting their own interests was in tension with their child-centred approaches,
expressed in their centre’s philosophy statement (a statement of beliefs under-
pinning their curriculum provision) and in both individual and teaching team
interviews. Some teachers’ recognition that they can legitimately stimulate chil-
dren’s interests, and that these interests then carry over into projects or activities
that children still effectively choose whether or not to engage in, was a benefit of
teacher participation in this project. One teaching team developed a display about
their interests and enactment in the curriculum to inform families, and later inclu-
ded a page in children’s assessment portfolios about themselves and their interests.

In another project, teacher Daniel was formerly employed as an electrician and
engineer (Hedges & Cooper, 2014). He retained an interest in these fields that was
evident in curriculum provision (see the treehouse project later in this chapter) and
pedagogical responses. On one occasion, Daniel enabled 16-month-old Brooklyn
to push a small toy car down the ramps of a multi-level toy carpark repeatedly.
Brooklyn later used his own body to experience the ramp, climbing and sliding
over and on it. This experience could easily have simply been interpreted at an
activity level, with an assumption that Brooklyn was interested in cars.

A few days later, Daniel video-recorded Brooklyn watching an older child ride a
bike up and down a ramp for some time outside. Brooklyn then decided to try this
activity with his own body, echoing his actions with the car park. Daniel kept a
watchful eye as the older child was still riding on the ramp. Daniel analysed and
documented Brooklyn’s actions as inquiring into the kind of everyday knowledge
represented in a number of scientific concepts, including ways the effect of gravity,
rotation, energy, and inertia were interacting on the car and, subsequently, his
body.

Without this specialist knowledge from engineering, it is possible that another
teacher may have discouraged Brooklyn from using his own body on the car ramp
or sharing the outside ramp with the older child for safety reasons, not recognising
deeper interests than cars per se, nor the concepts Brooklyn was exploring.

140 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

However, Daniel’s recognition of these concepts was not documented in
Brooklyn’s assessment portfolio; rather this analysis was articulated during
research team discussions.

Teachers’ cultural interests and identities

The same fate befell teachers’ cultural interests; little of what is described in this section
was documented in the centres involved either. Teachers’ cultural interests created
opportunities for children to be exposed to knowledge valued by communities and
cultures, consistent with Wells’ (1999) suggestion that the role of education is to do so.
In many settings in Aotearoa New Zealand, introducing te reo and tikanga M-aori—
M-aori language and culture, indigenous to the country—may be one of these
experiences. As a bilingual and bicultural curriculum document prioritising mana (see
Chapter 1), Te Wha-riki places a responsibility on teachers to incorporate te reo and
tikanga Ma-ori in authentic ways so that all children can learn their national language,
culture, and aspects of national identity, despite, in particular, there being few fluent
speakers of non-Ma-ori ancestry (Ritchie & Rau, 2013).

Kylie and Louise were both interested in te reo and tikanga Ma-ori, made efforts
in their professional learning to learn more about both, and brought these into the
curriculum without it being initiated by children, particularly at large group times.
Kylie and Louise’s actions also went beyond those of teacher interests influencing
curriculum choices to what might be regarded as “intentional teaching,” a term
originating in the United States (Epstein, 2007) to mean deliberate, thoughtful, and
purposeful teaching where teachers have specific outcomes or goals for children.
These are legitimate goals when they are valued by a community and culture, and
stimulate children’s interests. Children were enthusiastic about learning words from
the Ma-ori language, and aspects of the culture, and re-enacted these in their play
later. Being intentional and purposeful have been identified as elements of rela-
tional pedagogy in Chapter 6 that should not be misconstrued as teacher-centred
or didactic.

Children have a fundamental interest in developing and understanding their
cultural identities, particularly in increasingly linguistically and culturally diverse
communities. The example of Hunter and Simeon showed this interest in Chapter
6. To recap—and emphasise teachers’ interests—Hunter and Simeon both had a
range of heritages to draw on in developing their cultural identities, including
identifying features of a shared, cultural identity. On one occasion they explored
these identities through inquiry about national anthems played at sporting fixtures.
When Simeon’s questions got beyond the knowledge of the teacher he was with,
she directed him to Rosie, who shared the Chilean element of Simeon’s identity.
Rosie’s cultural identity-based interests validated Simeon’s identity-related interests
and inquiries, and enabled him to pursue these with authenticity. In turn, Rosie
redirected him to a teacher who shared Simeon’s Fijian heritage when he asked
questions about their anthem and sport. Rosie and Binita represent ways teachers’
interests and associated knowledge are important in developing children’s identities

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 141

in a global world. One response to children’s wider interest in cultural identities
was to create a display where children could bring in family photos and locate their
range of heritages on a world map.

Although some increasing diversity is becoming more common, in Aotearoa
New Zealand at least, early childhood teachers do not often themselves represent
the range of ethnicities and cultures of families in their centre (Cherrington &
Shuker, 2012). In contrast with Rosie’s active and enthusiastic involvement, in
another project (Podmore et al., 2016) teachers from linguistically and culturally
diverse backgrounds were initially reluctant to incorporate their own interests and
cultural knowledge related to the multiple languages they spoke fluently. As is
often reported elsewhere, teachers believed that parents of linguistically and cultu-
rally diverse children want them to learn to speak English with fluent teachers as a
primary reason for their participation in early childhood settings (e.g., see Chan,
2018). In initial parent surveys this desire was indeed expressed. Fieldwork obser-
vations and video episodes noted, however, children’s interest in speaking their
own languages as well as English. Older peers used home languages to help to
settle children who were newly arrived in the setting. Child peers played together,
with respect, agency, and shared humour, in their interactions and communication
when they spoke languages they shared other than English.

As the period of fieldwork progressed, and relationships between the research
team, teachers, and parents grew, multilingual parents and teachers expressed that
their actual, previously unstated, goal was for children to become bilingual or
multilingual, including in te reo Ma-ori. Teachers then gave themselves permission
to use their languages and cultural knowledge in both responsive and overt teach-
ing interactions. Children’s and teachers’ interest in languages was also enacted in
children being acknowledged as experts, sharing home language words and phrases
with teachers and peers. Documenting this shared interest in languages was a
notable outcome of the project in all settings.

Such research findings are more likely to arise in projects grounded in partici-
patory methodologies (Chapter 4) where trust is built over time and taken-for-
granted practices questioned. In this case, parent participants likely initially reported
what they thought the academic researchers expected to hear about children’s
languages learning and the purposes of English-medium settings. Over a period of
time, they became more comfortable in revealing their actual beliefs, home prac-
tices, and goals for their children. Similarly, the teachers believed they needed to
speak English primarily; later the richness of their multiple languages became
valued and legitimised in their pedagogy.

Hijacking children’s interests?

Various aspects of teacher knowledge can come from in-depth interests and
experiences, as the examples offered thus far show. The following example illus-
trates this further, but also raises explicitly the dilemmas teachers experience in
adhering to child-centred approaches. Four-year-old Peter recognised Daniel’s

142 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

expertise and interest in engineering, outlined earlier regarding toddler Brooklyn.
Peter wanted to build a treehouse (see Jones et al., 2014). Therefore, the idea for the
construction came from a child who knew which teacher to approach for support. He
asked Daniel to help him draw a design and then set about building it. Peter acted
with wisdom and agency: without Daniel’s knowledge and expertise it was unlikely to
have become the significant, meaningful, and long-term project it became.

During the project, Daniel struggled to reconcile child-centred philosophies
with the pedagogical responses and contributions from his interests and related
knowledge that were central to the project.

In a way, I did hijack it. They built the design I wanted and thought was
manageable and that we were capable of accomplishing. But I felt ok about
that because you have to do something, have some input as a teacher. I am
very aware of making the power as balanced as possible, but I am also aware
that I have a role to play. Me being part of the project meant that they could
achieve much more than they would have done on their own. By themselves
it could have gone somewhere, but not very far.

(Jones et al., 2014, p. 47)

In using the word “hijacking” he appeared to view what children know and
lead as most valid and important. However, he also considered that teachers ought
to have contributions to children’s learning. While maintaining his awareness of a
balance of power, he offered his expertise and subject knowledge to lead the design
and construction of the treehouse. Later, through involving a large number of
children in every step of the treehouse design and construction, Daniel rationalised
that the treehouse represented the children’s interests and ideas primarily, and that
with his input it became a substantial and achievable project.

Opportunities for children to develop new interests may result from teachers
introducing original and innovative experiences based on their own specialist
knowledge and interests. The findings identified across these studies illustrate the
potential role of teacher interests to provide intentional, responsive, and worthwhile
interests-based curriculum and meaningful pedagogical relationships and interactions.
These teachers were not complete adherents to the hands-off legacy of child-cent-
redness. They enjoyed providing experiences beyond traditional play activities and
contributed actively to curriculum and pedagogy with their interests and knowledge.
Yet, teachers described child-centred philosophies as underpinning their teaching,
which meant that their own interests were visible in video episodes and field notes in
research projects, but under-recognised and undervalued in interviews, and rarely
documented in teaching, assessment, planning, and evaluation.

Rethinking teacher knowledge

In these four studies, teachers drew on a wide range of personal and professional
knowledge that was connected with their interests. In these instances, however,

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 143

long-standing practices arising from embedded understandings of child-centredness
subjugated teachers’ interests from being acknowledged as powerful contributors to
children’s experiences. I propose that if interests-related knowledge and its con-
tribution to children’s learning were more understood, accepted, and repositioned,
teacher interests could more openly and legitimately be included in considerations
of early childhood teacher knowledge, curricular provision, pedagogical responses,
and pedagogical documentation.

These findings prompted me to consider the literature on teacher knowledge.
Threads of teachers’ knowledge have been included in previous chapters; here I draw
these together more comprehensively and consider professional knowledge in more
depth. Identifying and articulating professional knowledge assists with increased pro-
fessionalism, recognition, and professional identity for early childhood teachers.

Early childhood teacher knowledge

Research in early childhood education since the 1990s has led to increased under-
standings of teaching and learning in the early years. It is now widely accepted
internationally in research that teachers need qualifications that represent specialised
knowledge of early childhood education in order to teach young children (e.g.,
Campbell-Barr, 2019a; Manning et al., 2019). Nevertheless, as noted in Chapters 1
and 3, government policy and funding for early childhood services in many
countries do not yet support solely employing fully qualified teachers.

Yet, a specialised knowledge base is a core criterion of a profession. A range of
international literature provides insights as to components of this knowledge base in
early childhood education. In some cases, this literature was designed to influence
policy recommendations; in others, to make the complexity of professional practice
more visible.

Verity Campbell-Barr and Julie Berry (2021) identify that structural imbalances
and perceptions of roles affect the way teachers are viewed, welcoming debates about
professionalism. They suggest that there are two equally important elements to this
debate: what constitutes professional knowledge, and how those in early childhood
roles come to learn and use this knowledge base. Teacher identity is strongly implied
in their work as critical to the relationship between the two elements.

Mathias Urban and a team undertook a document analysis of early childhood
competencies across Europe (Urban et al., 2011). The purpose of Urban et al.’s report
was to make policy recommendations for teacher competence and professionalisation.
Categories of competencies included: children’s holistic development and learning;
pedagogical strategies (e.g., play-based, languages learning, early literacy and numer-
acy); participating and communicating with children; partnering with families; inter-
personal team dynamics; educational leadership; ethics and care elements of early
childhood education; knowledge of diversity; and, knowledge of context.

Policymakers’ view of teachers as professionals is typically not in the same light
as, for example, medical professionals (Campbell-Barr, 2019a). Urban and his col-
leagues (2012) themselves criticised competence models as emphasising individual

144 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

performance and underemphasising decision-making and collective responsibility. I
note that much contemporary literature still uses the word “training” to describe
teacher education and preparation, a word in keeping with considering teaching as
straightforward rather than complex. A training apprenticeship—a practice-based
model of learning how to teach through acquiring competencies—risks being
regarded as sufficient.

Verity Campbell-Barr (2018, 2019a) has targeted competence models as evi-
dence of the need for “labour,” and as problematic with regard to shaping views of
teachers as professionals because they may not incorporate the kind of reflective
practices central to the myriad of curricular and pedagogical decisions made every
day. A focus on competencies is also problematic as it underplays the “ground-up”
perspectives of practice-based, experiential knowledge that contribute to a sense of
professional identity. In addition, it does not imply that a foundation of professional
knowledge or values is even necessary. Of note, Campbell-Barr (2019a) also denied
experiential knowledge as sufficient in itself, noting that there is no associated
knowledge progression.

Reflecting another, wider international debate, Campbell-Barr and Berry (2021)
rejected a divide between theory and practice, or even discussions of balance
between the two. This polarising, rather like those identified as besetting the field
in Chapter 3, does nothing to help explain the complexities of teachers’ minute-
by-minute decision-making that draws on theoretical and experiential knowledge,
nor advance advocacy for professionalism.

What knowledge might a specialist teaching qualification include? Campbell-
Barr (2019a) suggests that:

Choosing to be an early years professional is like choosing to study for several
different degrees at once … drawing upon psychology, sociology, biology,
social policy and more. In addition there are the challenges of learning to be
patient and empathetic, and then on top of that you need to know about
children’s interests, such as dinosaurs, deep sea creatures, wild flowers, insects,
fairies, cars … the list could go on. Appreciating the intricacies of professional
knowledge and skills in the early years is therefore about celebrating just how
much early years professionals know.

(p. 3)

While cognisant of Campbell-Barr and Berry’s (2021) concern that specifying
professional knowledge risks ignoring the multiple ways in which knowledge
might be recognised and learned, it seems useful to consider ways to categorise
foundational knowledge for early childhood teaching beyond disciplines, child
development, play, and values. Given the lack of empirical studies identifying
components of early childhood teachers’ knowledge, I looked towards some
models of teacher knowledge in other sectors for guidance and potential
application, including for where acknowledgement of teacher interests might
sit.

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 145

Two long-standing, seminal models of primary and secondary teacher knowl-
edge are, first, that of Carr and Kemmis (1986) who delineated seven categories of
teacher knowledge. These are: professional knowledge of pedagogy and curricu-
lum; educational theory; contextual knowledge of individual students, the class,
community, and culture; knowledge of effective teaching strategies; social and
moral theories and philosophies; common-sense knowledge; and the folk wisdom
of teachers. Similarly, Wilson et al. (1987) defined seven categories of teacher
knowledge: content; pedagogy; curriculum; learners and learning; contexts of
schooling; pedagogical content knowledge; and educational philosophies, goals,
and objectives.

Considering elements of these models and the broader scholarly literature in
early childhood education, it seems pertinent that early childhood teachers require
knowledge of curriculum and pedagogy applicable to young children; broad
knowledge of subject content to draw on in interests-related interactions with
children; deep theoretical knowledge of learning; insightful knowledge about
individual children, their families, and the communities and cultures of the educa-
tional context; knowledge of appropriate pedagogical strategies; understanding of
early childhood philosophy and associated politics; an ethical orientation to the care
of young children; and a range of general knowledge and experience to draw on.
These elements were all present within and across the examples of teachers’
engagement with children’s interests in Chapters 5–7, and inherent in the findings
on teachers’ interests in this chapter.

Most of these elements appear well accepted in the sector. However, the place
of subject content knowledge has a contentious history (Bruns et al., 2021; Hedges,
2014) important to resolve in order to address Bereiter’s (2002) criticism of the
artificial distance between children’s interests and subject matter. A reluctance to
use subject knowledge in teaching can be traced back to child-centred pedagogies
as well, where it was believed development happened naturally and adults did not
need to add input such as conceptual language to conversations with children (see
Chapters 3 and 7). A recent review of content knowledge in early childhood
education found two kinds of literature on subject knowledge in teaching: one on
domain-specific knowledge, with mathematics dominating the existing literature,
and the second, a practice domain, with specific knowledge about teaching and
children (Bruns et al., 2021). In these authors’ conceptualisation it is difficult to
distinguish practice knowledge from Shulman’s notion of pedagogical content
knowledge, a category that may offer a way forward to draw on subject knowledge
in relational interactions with children that stretch their thinking and knowledge
building (Hedges, 2014).

Further, rather than cling to the child-centred beliefs and practices promoted
through the lens of developmental theories, I have suggested throughout this book
that teachers’ understanding of early childhood practices would benefit from being
viewed through a sociocultural theoretical lens. Teacher interests bring forth rela-
ted professional knowledge, specifically knowledge of learners, curriculum and
pedagogy, subject content knowledge, and pedagogical content knowledge, as the

146 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

examples in Chapters 6, 7, and the present chapter have demonstrated. In turn, this
shift would support teacher consciousness about the role their interests play as part
of an argument for repositioning teacher interests and related knowledge in early
childhood education.

From knowledge to knowing

Campbell-Barr (2018, 2019a, 2019b) has offered scholarly discussions of the kinds
of knowledge required based on her extensive experiences in the United King-
dom, Scandinavia, and Europe, and analyses of teacher education curricula. She
suggested arguments about professionalism have eclipsed understandings of the
broad range of qualifications—and associated knowledge—that may be useful for
early childhood teachers. She also expressed concern that where policymakers hold
sway in determining qualification provision, important knowledge valued by the
field may be overlooked.

Reflecting the range of nomenclature for those working in early childhood
education, Campbell-Barr distinguishes between knowledge for the profession and
knowledge for teaching. A distinction between the theorised categories of seminal
models and the practical, everyday knowledge that teachers use in practice is cer-
tainly valuable. However, the roles of teachers of young children encompass the
same range as those deemed by policymakers to be “practitioners” in “childcare,”
or similar terminologies; that is relational and ethical carers, and add an educative
dimension under-recognised unless explicitly advocated for, including employment
of fully-qualified staff.

Campbell-Barr describes carefully “the complexities of coming to know how to
work with young children” (2019a, p. 3), associated responsibilities, and the kinds
of knowledge drawn on to use in daily engagements in specific contexts.

[T]he theoretical knowledge-base is rich and diverse, drawing on a range of
disciplines that provide opportunities for professionals to form different
knowledge combinations to meet the demands of practice. Coming to know
as a professional is also an ongoing process, as professionals experiment with
different knowledge combinations, but it is also ultimately an enriching and
rewarding process.

(p. 24)

Rather than using the singular term, professional knowledge, Campbell-Barr
(2019a) uses the plural knowledges to recognise the multi-disciplinary theoretical,
pedagogical, attitudinal, skill-based, and practical knowledges teachers draw on,
use, and evaluate simultaneously in their daily interactions with children, families,
and colleagues. In particular, Campbell-Barr introduces the idea of emotional
knowledge, termed emotionology, as one that sits outside traditional descriptions of
professional knowledge for teaching. This space has typically been occupied by
debates about professional love; Campbell-Barr is clear that this is just one debate

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 147

among considerations of relational and ethical attitudes and dispositions required,
such as respect, patience, sensitivity, empathy, and an ethic of care, all qualities
associated in Chapters 6 and 7 with relational pedagogy.

Campbell-Barr’s (2019a) description of teacher “knowing” is of a complex,
ongoing, and dynamic process with no end goal, a way that knowledges are
combined in context, and create a personal sense of teacher identity. This con-
ceptualising has similarities with Stephen Kemmis’ (2005) idea of “knowing prac-
tice,” a term for understanding knowledge “in the heads” (p. 391) of teachers as
they engage with learners. A further advantage of “knowing,” and an extension of
the argument in Chapter 3, is that:

Early years professionalism will not stagnate in one particular model of child
development, but will be able to draw upon the range of perspectives to
develop, evolve and experiment with professional practice … it could be that
it is early years professionals who will give rise to the next theories for the
early years professional knowledge-base. … [A strength of the profession]
comes from the willingness to consider different perspectives and being open
to challenge, as this can give rise to new ideas and theories.

(Campbell-Barr, 2019a, p. 51)

In a similar vein, and explicitly drawing on Kemmis’ notion of knowing practice,
Kate Ord and Joce Nuttall (2016) offer the concept of embodied knowing, a concept
aligned with knowledge for action, that brings to the fore the implicit role that
knowledge plays in pedagogical decision-making. They argue that this is an
appreciation that grows with experience as a teacher. Over time, teachers can
increasingly and fluidly relate to children, families, and colleagues without first
consciously stopping to think about any knowledge required to do so. As they
state, “teaching is inherently situational, relational, and practical” (p. 359).

Of significance, Ord and Nuttall’s (2016) conceptualisation helps to break down
another unhelpful polarity in education touched on earlier, that of theory and
practice. Their findings help to explain why demands to increase practical time in
teacher education will not be successful unless accompanied by increased oppor-
tunities to observe and dialogue with experienced teachers about their decisions
and practices. Moreover, much teacher education research finds newly qualified
teachers dissatisfied with their teacher preparation: Ord and Nuttall argued that
teachers simply have not had time and sufficient experience to incorporate and
value it fully in their work. Perhaps too, they have not had their own interests
acknowledged and recognised as significant, inspiring confidence in their teacher
development and identities.

Knowing, interests, and identity

These ideas of knowing, knowing practice, and embodied knowing, shed new and
important light on the complexity of teachers’ professional knowledge. They may

148 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

have some resonance with broad life experience brought to teaching, the personal
life experiences Korthagen (2004) and Kelchtermans (2009) valued, and related
interests and knowledge central to both intentional and responsive interests-related
curriculum and pedagogy. However, these ideas are yet to be connected, included,
or emphasised in any of this early childhood-focused literature. Further, given the
development of a professional identity that encompasses life experience brought to
teaching, as located in Peiser and Jones’ (2014) study earlier, and implicit in
Campbell-Barr, Ord and Nuttall’s work, I would argue that teacher knowing, as an
important concept, is tightly tied with another that grows with experience: teacher
professional identity.

Viewing teachers’ interests as funds of identity (see Chapter 6), the findings
presented in this chapter illustrated that deep, personal, and subject content
knowledge from interests inspired in families, schooling, and previous occupations
brought richness to interests-based curriculum and pedagogy. Connelly and Clan-
dinin (1988, 1999) and Connelly et al. (1997) brought attention some time ago to
the role of teacher life experience in narrative studies of curricular and pedagogical
decision-making. They show that aligning pedagogy with personal life experiences
and values is an important component of teacher professionalism and the develop-
ment of teacher identity. They introduced a term, “personal practical knowledge,”
to the elements of teacher knowledge, a term that aligns with Campbell-Barr’s
(2018, 2019b) idea of “practical wisdom,” a form of experiential knowledge gained
through melding personal and professional knowledge that risks being undervalued,
perhaps partly through using the word “practical” in the terminology. These ideas
also support Kelchtermans’ (2009) emphasis introduced in Peiser and Jones (2014)
about understanding teacher life experiences and biographies in order to under-
stand their teaching decisions and practices.

More recently, Kelchtermans (2017) and Korthagen (2017) have argued
cogently that teacher life experience must be front and centre of any thinking
about teacher education, development, identity, and ongoing learning. If such
attention were applied in early childhood education, while child-centred legacies
could ensure that children remain foregrounded, teachers would also value what
their own experiences, interests, and related knowledge could contribute—in ways
teachers in these four studies did not until their participation in research, fearing
these contradicted embedded child-centred beliefs and practices. Teachers could
also understand the way teacher interests are important in enacting relational ped-
agogies, as the examples in Chapters 6 and 7 particularly highlight.

Dilemmas to resolve through professional learning and research

In proposing a repositioning of teachers’ interests, and related personal and profes-
sional knowledge and identity, a number of tensions and dilemmas remain to be
explored in research and practice. A positioning of teachers whose interests-related
responses were limited to resource provision contrasts with the proposed position-
ing of teachers as analytical, responsive, knowledgeable, and ethical in their

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 149

understandings of children’s and teachers’ interests. Teachers interested in
exploring deeper interpretations of children’s interests (Chapters 5–7), and the
role that teacher interests might play, need support from researchers and educa-
tional leaders to identify what this means for professional learning and knowing
that will assist teachers to transform curriculum and pedagogy.

Such professional learning might include a shift in the way interest and chil-
dren’s interests are taught and understood in teacher education and teaching
practice. Remembering that these ideas began with Dewey (1913, see Chapter
2), Mark Jonas (2011) suggests that an understanding of Dewey’s fundamental
ideas would help to shift an inaccurate understanding of interest as reflecting an
object or topic in and of itself. In this way, teachers would understand better the
ways interests are “signposts for further educative experiences” (p. 124). This
understanding supports the provocations offered to early childhood education in
this book to make shifts from simplistic, child-centred understandings (Chapter 3)
to deep understandings that arise from such signposts (Chapters 5–7) and include
teachers’ interests (this chapter).

Another ongoing tension is that understanding and enacting sociocultural
theoretically informed practices requires a conscious move away from tradi-
tional, child-centred practices. Relational practices that epitomise teacher
knowing place teachers centrally in curriculum and pedagogy, without remov-
ing children’s enjoyment of play and inquiry, or repurposing these for peda-
gogical reasons and pre-determined outcomes in didactic ways. Relational
pedagogy allows teachers to draw on their professional knowledge and their
own knowledge and experiences in flexible and sensitive ways to promote
young children’s learning (Chapters 6–7).

More research is needed to exemplify possibilities for teacher interests in a range
of contexts, including those where curricular prescription, atomised outcomes, and
school readiness are creeping in. Here, the agency, resistance, and advocacy of the
teacher with an interest in history in Peiser and Jones’ (2014) study provides an
example to emulate. Teachers might be supported to engage in research-based
inquiry and sustained professional learning, to challenge taken-for-granted child-
centred or school readiness practices, to provide themselves with permission to use
personal interests in curricular and pedagogical provision and responses, and analyse
their knowledge base with regard to the literature on professional knowledge. This
would help teachers appreciate the potential contributions of their interests and
related knowledge, and increase their identity as professionals.

Further projects that explore teacher knowing as the ways in which teachers
draw on professional knowledge and interests, take a relational, mediational,
reflective, ethical, and analytical stance to teaching, and strive to include their own
interests and knowledge through intentional teaching and responsive pedagogies,
will benefit the future evidence base about early childhood education. These stu-
dies might also revisit teacher understandings and conceptualising of the term,
children’s interests, to sit alongside their contemporary professional learning (see
Birbili, 2019).

150 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

Summary

The important legacy of child-centredness is that children are central to early childhood
teachers’ thinking and practice. Children are empowered to make choices in their play,
to have some control over their learning, and to develop a range of knowledge, skills,
and attitudes as they do so. While this centrality remains vital, children’s potential
learning is enhanced when teachers value an active place for their own personal inter-
ests and related knowledge. In the four studies re-analysed in this chapter, teachers did
not initially recognise or acknowledge the impact of their own interests. Highlighting
teacher interests was viewed as being in tension with entrenched child-centred philo-
sophies and practices. Yet, interesting and worthwhile interests-based curriculum, that
stretched children’s experiences and minds, most commonly occurred when teachers’
interests and knowledge were involved, leading to an argument that teachers’ interests
are a strong contributor to curriculum and pedagogy.

A conscious shift to sociocultural understandings of child-centredness is achieved
through relational pedagogies and intentional, thoughtful, and analytical practices.
These findings about the role of teachers’ interests and knowledge support an
argument for repositioning teacher interests overtly in early childhood curriculum
and pedagogy. Such an argument acknowledges the significance of the personal
and professional knowledge inherent in interests. This knowledge might be more
explicit in scholarly discussions of teacher knowledge and knowing applied to the
early years, through considerations of the life experience teachers bring to their
work and identity development. It also supports the importance of teachers’ inter-
ests being made visible in curriculum, pedagogy, and assessment.

The teacher interests identified in this chapter derived from their own partici-
pation in sociocultural experiences in their lives. Some were derived from family
funds of knowledge, others from further life experience to create funds of identity.
How these were sparked, fostered, and sustained to become lifelong and significant
in their teaching was not ascertained. These matters are taken up in Chapter 9
which revisits interests as important to identity development beyond childhood.

References

Alati, S. (2005). What about our passions as teachers? Incorporating individual interests in
emergent curricula. Young Children, 60(6), 86–89.

Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Birbili, M. (2019). Children’s interests in the early years classroom: Views, practices and

challenges. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 23, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.
2018.11.006
Bruns, J., Gasteiger, H., & Strahl, C. (2021). Conceptualising and measuring domain‐specific
content knowledge of early childhood educators: A systematic review. Review of Education
(Oxford), 9(2), 500–538.
Campbell-Barr, V. (2018). The silencing of the knowledge-base in early childhood education
and care professionalism. International Journal of Early Years Education, 26(1), 75–89. https://10.
1080/09669760.2017.1414689
Campbell-Barr, V. (2019a). Professional knowledge and skills in the early years. Sage.

(Re)Positioning teachers’ interests 151

Campbell-Barr, V. (2019b). Professional knowledges for early childhood education and care.
Journal of Childhood Studies, 44(1), 134–146. https://10.18357/jcs.v44i1.18786

Campbell-Barr, V., & Berry, J. (2021). The professional self. In D. Maisey & V. Campbell-Barr
(Eds.), Why do teachers need to know about child development? (pp. 11–24). Bloomsbury Academic.

Carr, W., & Kemmis, S. (1986). Becoming critical: Knowing through action research. Falmer Press.
Chan, A. (2018). Chinese immigrant families’ aspirations for children’s bilingual learning in

New Zealand’s social spaces. International Journal of Early Years Education, 1–14. https://10.
1080/09669760.2018.1458598
Cherrington, S., & Shuker, M. J. (2012). Diversity amongst New Zealand early childhood
educators. New Zealand Journal of Teachers’ Work, 9(2), 76–94.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (1988). Teachers as curriculum planners: Narratives of
experience. Teachers College Press.
Connelly, F. M., & Clandinin, D. J. (Eds.). (1999). Shaping a professional identity: Stories of
educational practice. Teachers College Press.
Connelly, F. M., Clandinin, D. J., & He, M. F. (1997). Teachers’ personal practical
knowledge on the professional knowledge landscape. Teaching and Teacher Education, 13
(7), 665–674.
Dewey, J. (1913). Interest and effort in education. Houghton Mifflin.
Epstein, A. S. (2007). The intentional teacher: Choosing the best strategies for young children’s
learning. NAEYC.
Hammersley, M. (2010). Can we re-use qualitative data via secondary analysis? Notes on
some terminological and substantive issues. Sociological Research Online, 15(1), 1–7. https://
10.5153/sro.2076
Heaton, J. (2008). Secondary analysis of qualitative date: An overview. Historical Social
Research, 33(3), 33–45. https://doi.org/10.12759/hsr.33.2008.3.33-45
Hedges, H. (2012). Teachers’ funds of knowledge: A challenge to evidence-based practice.
Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 18(1), 7–24. https://10.1080/13540602.2011.
622548
Hedges, H. (2014). Children’s content learning in play provision: Competing tensions and
future possibilities. In L. Brooker, M. Blaise, & S. Edwards (Eds.), Sage handbook on play
and learning in early childhood (pp. 192–203). Sage.
Hedges, H., & Cooper, M. (2014). Inquiring minds, meaningful responses: Children’s interests,
inquiries and working theories. Final report to Teaching and Learning Research Initiative.
New Zealand Council for Educational Research. www.tlri.org.nz/tlri-research/resea
rch-completed/ece-sector/inquiring-minds-meaningful-responses-children’s
Hedges, H., Cullen, J., & Jordan, B. (2011). Early years curriculum: Funds of knowledge as a
conceptual framework for children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(2), 185–
205. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2010.511275
Jonas, M. E. (2011). Dewey’s conception of interest and its significance for teacher educa-
tion. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43(2), 112–129. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.
1469-5812.2009.00543.x
Jones, S., Hedges, H., & Lovatt, D. (2014). The Treehouse Project: Capitalising on a tea-
cher’s funds of knowledge. In H. Hedges & V. Podmore (Eds.), Early childhood education:
Pedagogy, professionalism, and philosophy (pp. 43–57). Edify.
Kelchtermans, G. (2009). Who I am in how I teach is the message: Self-understanding, vul-
nerability and reflection. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 15(2), 257–272. https://
10.1080/13540600902875332
Kelchtermans, G. (2017). Studying teachers’ lives as an educational issue: Autobiographical
reflections from a scholarly journey. Teacher Education Quarterly, 44(4), 7–26. www.jstor.
org/stable/90014087

152 (Re)Positioning teachers’ interests

Kemmis, S. (2005). Knowing practice: Searching for saliences. Pedagogy, Culture and Society,
13(3), 391–426. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681360500200235

Korthagen, F. (2004). In search of the essence of a good teacher: Towards a more holistic
approach in teacher education. Teaching and Teacher Education, 20, 77–97. https://10.
1016/j.tate.2003.10.002

Korthagen, F. (2017). Inconvenient truths about teacher learning: Towards professional
development 3.0. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(4), 387–419. https://10.
1080/13540602.2016.1211523

Manning, M., Wong, G. T. W., Fleming, C. M., & Garvis, S. (2019). Is teacher qualifica-
tion associated with the quality of the early childhood education and care environment? A
meta-analytic review. Review of Educational Research, 89(3), 370–415. https://10.3102/
0034654319837540

Manning, S., & Loveridge, J. (2010). Me too! Teachers’ interests as a curriculum resource.
Early Education, 46, 10–13.

Ord, K., & Nuttall, J. (2016). Bodies of knowledge: The concept of embodiment as an
alternative to theory/practice debates in the preparation of teachers. Teaching and Teacher
Education, 60, 355–362. https://10.1016/j.tate.2016.05.019

Peiser, G., & Jones, M. (2014). The influence of teachers’ interests, personalities and life
experiences in intercultural languages teaching. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice,
20(3), 375–390. https://10.1080/13540602.2013.848525

Podmore, V., Hedges, H., Keegan, P., & Harvey, N. (Eds.). (2016). Teachers voyaging in
plurilingual seas: Children learning in more than one language. New Zealand Council for
Educational Research.

Ritchie, J., & Rau, C. (2013). Renarrativizing indigenous rights-based provision within
“mainstream” early childhood services. In B. Swadener, L. Lundy, J. Habashi, & N.
Blanchet-Cohen (Eds.), Children’s rights and education: International perspectives (pp. 133–
149). Peter Lang.

Urban, M., Vandenbroeck, M., Lazzari, A., Peeters, J., & van Laere, K. (2011). Competence
requirements in early childhood education and care. European Commission. www.openaire.eu/
search?q=&Search=doi:10.2766/38368

Urban, M., Vandenbroeck, M., van Laere, K., Lazzari, A., Peeters, J. (2012). Towards compe-
tent systems in early childhood education and care: Implications for policy and practice.
European Journal of Education, 47(4), 508–526. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12010

Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Towards a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge
University Press.

Wilson, S., Shulman, L., & Richert, A. (1987). 150 different ways of knowing: Repre-
sentations of knowledge in teaching. In J. Calderhead (Ed.), Exploring teachers’ thinking
(pp. 104–124). Cassell.

9

INTERESTS, IDENTITIES, AND
OUTCOMES BEYOND CHILDHOOD

Introduction
Separating intellect and affect “is a major weakness of traditional psychology, since it
makes the thought process appear … segregated from the fullness of life, from the
personal needs and interests, the inclinations and impulses, of the thinker” (Vygotsky,
1986, p. 10). This chapter focuses on interests in the fullness of life. It considers further
ways young children’s efforts to learn reflect their interests and inquiries into personally
meaningful questions, their wish to understand, participate, and contribute knowl-
edgeably in their families and communities, and develop identities as learners and
citizens. It considers whether interests might be examples of researchers thinking
“more broadly about the myriad of outcomes to measure as children progress
throughout their educational careers” (Ansari & Purtell, 2018, p. 180).

Personal interests stemming from childhood might be utilised in a range of
schooling and community settings. I provide some insights into these matters
from a narrative inquiry project with young adults. Findings indicate the ways
that personal interests are complex biographical and historical phenomena that
progress and change over time in multi-faceted social and cultural contexts and
relationships—the fullness of life Vygotsky described—and contribute to capabilities
that springboard identity development.

I show that adopting interest-based approaches in education may promote posi-
tive outcomes and life experiences that lead to identity development, strengthening
the central argument of this book about the goal of children’s interests-based
learning. However, while interests-based approaches might be justifiable in
schooling settings to strengthen motivation, academic, intellectual, and affective
outcomes, and future identity development, the messages from these young adults
offer some cautions about assumptions that interests might be recognised and
drawn on in education more widely.

DOI: 10.4324/9781003139881-9

154 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

Interests and education

Chapter 2 discussed ways that interest can provide a source of curiosity, motivation,
and engagement for learners. From a sociocultural perspective, the growth of interests
is deeply embedded in views of children as competent learners, and the mutually
constitutive connections between the individual and sociocultural environment: the
people, places, and things that foster important informal and interests-based learning.
Family and community funds of knowledge are vital in stimulating and devel-
oping interests through children’s participation in everyday life (see Chapter 5).
In applying the concept of funds of identity to early childhood education (see Chapter
6) questions arise of ways interests might be enduring, become self-sustaining, and
support longer-term achievements through life.

Particular inspiration for the study reported in this chapter came from Mihalyi
Csikszentmihalyi’s (1996) book. He interviewed 91 successful people immersed in
a range of occupations from science to politics to the arts. One finding was that all
had a significant interest as a child. While these particular interests did not always
lead to their careers, their presence, and the skills and attitudes promoted by having
a deep interest, were a noteworthy connection between those interviewed. Csiks-
zentmihalyi’s finding raises questions about the possibilities, purposes, and processes
of interests-based education in and beyond early childhood.

The separation of intellect and affect Vygotsky warned of has been evident in the
primary and secondary sectors in New Zealand.1 Curriculum policy has been
superseded by concerns over students’ performance in international global rankings
(Ell & Grudnoff, 2013), echoing the debates in early childhood education discussed
in Chapter 3 about Baby PISA (Pence, 2016), early academic learning and pushdown
curriculum (e.g., Dampney et al., 2018 re: literacy). The New Zealand Curriculum
(Ministry of Education, 2007) itemises “key competencies”—thinking; using lan-
guage, symbols, and texts; managing self; relating to others; and participating and
contributing—as focal outcomes. These outcomes align with learning dispositions in
Te Wha-riki as an example of a pathway to school. For many years, however, policy
assessment targets governed by national standards in literacy and mathematics, and
attention to the National Certificate for Educational Achievement in schools, over-
rode key competencies as priorities in teacher thinking and planning (Ell & Grudn-
off, 2013). In both policy foci, in order for students to leave with sufficient
qualifications for employment or university study, assessment of subject-related
knowledge and skills has taken priority. A report on the teaching of mathematics and
science in secondary schools noted that “Descriptors of practice that focused on
working with students’ interests, in contexts relevant to their lives, or that allowed
them to take some responsibility for their own assessment decisions, were neither
prioritised nor practised” (Hipkins & Neill, 2003, p. 92).

The national standards were abolished, and removed from the Education Bill, by
the government in 2018. However, it is likely that, with the neoliberally oriented
global discourse still swirling, some form of academic targets will reappear in the
policy agenda of a future government with different views. It is therefore vital that

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 155

this debate about academic outcomes continues because of its potential flow-on
effect to school readiness, which has been the experience of other countries inter-
nationally (see Chapter 3).

These kinds of affordances and constraints present in sectors beyond early
childhood education determine whether learners can connect their interests with
expected learning engagements. They also “inform what learner identity posi-
tions … such as the science learner and the inquiry-based learner—are made
available to students regarding the knowledge and skills that they are and are not
supposed to identify with” (Verhoeven et al., 2021, p. 3). Recent moves to address
concerns about student achievement have led to some primary schools considering
whether children need more time in play-based learning to echo the experiences and
success of students in countries in these testing regimes, such as Scandinavian
countries where children also start school at a later age. A recent move has then
been to introduce play-based learning to transition children through from early
childhood education into schooling for periods of six months to three years
depending on the school (Hedges, 2018).

There have been a few research projects about play-based learning inter-
nationally and teachers’ roles within this approach to pedagogy (e.g., Fisher, 2021;
Jay & Knaus, 2018; Milne & McLaughlin, 2018; Walsh et al., 2019). While it is
likely that young children enjoy this kind of educational approach as it affords
them some decision-making and agency in what they engage with in schooling,
what is missing, to my mind, from these concerns and shifts, is attention to the
power of interests and informal learning, and to family and community knowledge.
Rather, play-based learning is viewed as a transition measure.

Another contemporary move in primary and secondary settings has been to what
are termed modern or innovative learning environments (Byers et al., 2018a, 2018b).
These are often large, open plan spaces, where multiple teachers work with large
numbers of children, therefore not unlike many early childhood environments.
Such environments position learners and learning as central, and so have included
reference to interests as a potential focus, for example in so-called “inquiry” or
“passion” projects (Ministerial Advisory Group, 2018). Some of these projects
appear to arise from student initiative, so in that case could reflect interests in terms
of “real questions” (Wells, 1999, p. 91). Others appear to be selected from topics
pre-determined by teachers, reflecting Wells’ concern that inquiry becomes
method rather than stance. These projects are integrated across subjects and work
towards a range of outcomes. Integrating diverse topics, projects, and learning
experiences makes it more likely that students can develop connections between
their life contexts and be engaged in education.

In tertiary settings, most courses of study have pre-determined learning outcomes.
Educational experiences and activities are designed to lead towards these. In some
programmes, learners may be encouraged to draw on their life experiences to develop
engagement with content. In such instances learner interests may come to the fore, but
are rarely a focus in themselves, or able to be incorporated in summative assessments.
However, there is inspiration in Shelley Turkle’s (2008) book Falling for Science: Objects

156 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

in Mind about teaching science in the tertiary sector. Turkle included an assignment
early in her course about students’ activity interests (the “objects” of the title) as chil-
dren, and ways these connected with informal science learning. Turkle collected these
essays over a number of years, and published those of students who have gone on to be
leaders and thinkers in their fields of expertise. Her work both aligns with Czikszent-
mihayli’s and shows some potential for drawing out and connecting student interests
to academic content in tertiary education.

Special education may be another environment in which learner interests can
be located and used. Kristine Barnett’s (2013) son was diagnosed as autistic at
the age of 2. Jake was assigned to a special education setting that neither
understood nor brought out his abilities. He had an extraordinary interest and
knowledge of astrophysics from a very young age. In this memoir, Barnett
writes about the education she provided for him at home, and ways she sup-
ported opportunities in schooling and the community to nurture his knowl-
edge. Her son flourished, and attended university from the age of 9. At the
time of writing, at the age of 22, he is regarded as a promising scholar of
theoretical physics.2 Barnett suggests that parents can help their children find
what she describes as their “spark,” a word that encapsulates the idea prevalent
in this book that a strong interest can inspire positive emotions, curiosity,
inquiry, and knowledge building.

Education settings are then important potential contexts for recognition and
application of learners’ interests. They form settings that might shed light on how
an individual’s interests are recognised and understood as embedded in socio-
cultural practices. However, these settings may not offer the same affordances as
those regarded as more informal. This book has shown ways that family, commu-
nity, and cultural settings provide access to experiences that stimulate and extend
interests in ways that educational settings may not recognise. Hunter’s funds of
knowledge from home and church were included in Chapter 5. Beyond the
childhood years, Hollett and Hein (2019) researched in the context of skateparks
(see Chapter 2), and Azevedo (2019) added further insights into interests research
through the context of amateur astronomy clubs (see Chapter 6).

Esther Slot et al.’s (2020) study investigated the multiple, intersecting mechan-
isms through which adolescents’ interests were sustained across contexts over a
period of 16 months. Six mechanisms explained their findings, mechanisms worthy
of future attention. These were: goal setting (e.g., “I want to become better at
playing soccer”); biographical (personal) identification (e.g., “I have always enjoyed
playing soccer”); progress valuation, that is valuing knowledge or skill progression
(e.g., “I have learned more about physiology”); chronotopical captivation, that is
ongoing curiosity (e.g., “I am keen to know how this team continues to per-
form”); engagement appreciation (e.g., “playing this game was fun/enjoyable/
relaxing”); and substantive participation (e.g., “I found class interesting; I did well
on an assignment”). These mechanisms have alignment with capability theory and
could be useful incorporated into assessment in early childhood education and
beyond.

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 157

Hence, I have for some time reflected on the following questions. How might
interests play out over time in a range of educational settings from early childhood to
tertiary? What might the family and community experiences of young people offer to
discussions of the role of personal interests and their sustainment across contexts? How
might answering these questions contribute to understandings about interests-based
approaches in education? I therefore investigated the following research question: “How
might children’s interests contribute to long-term outcomes for learning and life?”

Method and participants

The design of this study differs from those exploring children’s interests (see
Chapter 4) so requires some introduction. I adopted narrative methods (Clandinin,
2007) in order to gain a rich understanding of young people’s lives. Narrative
involves making meaning from people’s life experiences recounted as stories. These
stories often relate to significant childhood experiences and connections with wider
societal demands and expectations. Narrative research is a relational endeavour that
makes sense of complex experiences to situate people and phenomena in history,
time, and society (Josselson, 2006, 2007).

The relationship between researcher and participants is one of narrator and listener.
I therefore generated data during in-depth interviews designed to have participants
talk retrospectively and freely about their personal interests, and ways these interests
were fostered and sustained over time. I was also interested in finding out what place
and effect, if any, early interests had had in their educational experiences, and current
life choices and career planning.

First-person narratives that ask participants to describe people, places, and events
from childhood onwards rely on memory and perceptions. Humans have few early
memories, so stories are likely to be selective and varied (Hollway & Jefferson, 2000).
Memories are also created through the stories of events, routines, and people told by
significant others, and use of photographs and other artefacts (Bauer, 2006; Larkina &
Bauer, 2010). The kinds of stories and memories are those that have a sense of
“personal involvement and ownership” (Bauer & Fivush, 2010, p. 303) and hence
suit an approach designed to elicit stories about interests.

I located potential participants aged 18–25 years using a snowball sampling
technique. As noted in Chapter 1, I had heard stories of, for example, children
who had played with LegoTM constantly and became architects or engineers. The
key criterion for participation, therefore, was that the young adult had a strong
interest as a child that had continued in some way during their lives into early
adulthood; I was not seeking those with particular achievements as per Csikszent-
mihalyi’s (1996) study. Following the ethical approval conditions meant that five
young adults participated. While usual ethical practice is to offer confidentiality, use
of pseudonyms in narrative studies can be fraught and possibly be a hindrance to
the relationship (Josselson, 2007). I offered the principle of credit, that is, to choose
to be named (see Chapter 4 re: credit and children). This principle was also an
attempt to ensure ownership and authenticity of stories participants shared with

158 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

me. The research experience stimulated conversations participants had with family
members; some of these were reported in emails accompanying transcript verifica-
tion, often as further substantiation or clarification. I also received copies of child-
hood photos and drawings illustrating interests with two returned transcripts.

I adopted thematic analysis procedures (see Braun & Clarke, 2021). In this way the
significant stories relayed were first identified, then categorised into segments related to
people—parents, teachers, peers; places—homes, schools, extra-curricular/community
activity centres; and events—family routines and activities, transitions between
classrooms/teachers and education settings, critical incidents. In turn, these
categories were analysed for themes related to points of connection or dis-
juncture between interests-based learning and educational institutions. Of note,
the experience of being interviewed about significant interests contributed to
further meaning making for participants (Mills, 2001). As one participant, Craig,
noted at the end of his interview:

I’ve found it quite interesting. … [W]hen you look back on your childhood,
things started making sense a little bit.

The impact of childhood interests

Childhood interests had a significant impact in the lives of the participants. In
keeping with Csikszentmihalyi’s (1996) findings, interests were most commonly
inspired and supported by families initially, and continued and extended through
family support and community groups. It was clear in the stories that interests
created ongoing achievement, enjoyment, and satisfaction. Of significance, formal
education played a minor role in sustaining interests until at least secondary
schooling. In fact, schooling experiences sometimes threatened to derail interests.
Yet, at critical incident or transition points in their lives, interests often motivated
and sustained the participants through difficult times.

I attempt to capture the richness of these narratives in the following summaries
of the participants’ interests and life course to the point of interview, within the
constraints of chapter word limits. These illustrate the trajectories of one central
interest from childhood. They also bring out ways the interest supported disposi-
tional and identity (i.e., affective) outcomes alongside intellectual (i.e., cognitive/
academic) outcomes, reflecting Vygotsky’s (1986) point about their interrelation-
ship in the fullness of life, and Sen’s (1985) focus on the importance of capabilities
in creating well-being and agency, and the freedom to make choices.

Susie

Susie had dual interests and goals as a young child:

I wanted to be a ballerina for a long time. But I [also] quite liked science; I
wanted to be a doctor.

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 159

Susie’s parents supported both interests, neither of which Susie could identify as
emanating from her parents’ interests or experiences. Susie took ballet classes until
the age of 17 when a back injury prevented her from continuing to pursue this
interest. Susie’s parents were keener on her becoming a doctor because they felt it
had better longer-term career prospects.

Her parents supported her early interest in science at home:

Both my parents let me do little experiments, like mixing together the differ-
ent chemicals and getting explosions, or just cooking as well.

However, she remembered very little of her kindergarten experiences, apart from
noting that, aligning with her ability to participate at home perhaps, rather than
play with the playdough, “I’d want to make the playdough they had.”

Susie recalled that she enjoyed maths at primary school, but her science interest
continued to be nurtured more at home. Her parents regularly took her on trips, for
example, to a planetarium. She also fondly remembered a school trip to a museum of
transport and technology that had an interactive science display. She said that she
“tried to recreate some of the stuff myself” afterwards at home.

At secondary school, when she was able to make subject choices, she chose “all the
sciences: physics, chemistry, biology,” but made an important point connected with
teachers as models of interests (Chapter 8) and relational pedagogy (Chapters 6 and 7):

I actually didn’t like biology until 7th form. … [B]ecause of the teacher I
started to see how cool biology was … when you have a teacher that’s really
enthusiastic and wants to be there it makes all the difference.

At the conclusion of secondary school, Susie’s academic grades were sufficient to
undertake a foundation year in medical health sciences at university. After that
year, however, she was not selected to undertake a medical degree. At the time of
interview, she was studying for a biomedical degree instead, so had continued to
follow her interest in science towards a new career goal of medical research. Susie’s
experience as a recipient of a scholarship that had enabled her to participate in a
research team over a university summer break inspired her new goal.

Susie’s experiences showed that her science interest was prominent in her subject
choices and academic outcomes from childhood onwards. She also demonstrated
many dispositions as intellectual and affective outcomes resulting from her interest
in science. She was curious about all science-related matters and developed persis-
tence in her schooling when science subjects were not taught in a way that sti-
mulated and extended her interest. She imagined an identity as a “chemist” in
childhood. She demonstrated resilience when she was unsuccessful at medical
admission, followed by renewed curiosity and persistence in alternative studies, and
contribution in her goal to contribute to medical research. Susie’s parents were the
most significant, enduring supporters of her interests and ambitions; two teachers,
one at secondary school and one at university, also assisted her interest to develop.

160 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

Zara

In keeping with the cautions about human memory capacity, Zara had virtually no
memories of her early experiences at home or at the kindergarten setting she
attended before beginning school. Her first significant memory related to her long-
term interest was from around the age of 8. As a shared interest inspired by her
parents, her family watched medical documentaries and reality television shows
together. Zara became naturally absorbed into this routine and then fascinated with
medical programmes herself. As with Susie, she reported:

For as long as I can remember I wanted to be a doctor or in the medical
field … I just remember watching that, and thinking oh, that’s so exciting.

Zara told me that both of her parents were delighted, and supported her through
her schooling with this goal in mind.

At primary school, she was placed in what she described as an “accelerant” class,
suggesting teachers recognised her as having intelligence and potential. Yet, in
relation to her goal, she recalled few science opportunities in that class. When she
began secondary school then, she deliberately chose subjects to study:

[W]ith the thought of I’m going to med[ical] school at the end of it, so every
decision I made in high school was based on what I was going to do when I left.

Zara recalled extensively the biology, chemistry, and physics subjects she had stu-
died, and the topics she had enjoyed the most. She commented that she felt for-
tunate to have good teachers for biology and chemistry in particular. In keeping
with Susie’s comments about teachers modelling interests and being enthusiastic
about their roles, she said:

[Students] can tell when teachers want to do what they’re doing or when
they’re not really into their jobs, so I think having a teacher that’s really into it
makes a massive, massive difference.

Zara studied hard and positioned herself carefully to obtain the best possible grades for
university entry. Like Susie, Zara’s first year of university was a foundational health
sciences course. At the end of the year, she had obtained the required grades to gain an
interview for medical school admission. Unexpected personal circumstances meant she
did not complete the interview. Zara experienced disappointment at the loss of such a
long-held and keen goal, but decided not to re-apply the following year. With sup-
port, her broader interest in the medical field enabled her to divert her interest to
undertaking pharmacy studies. At the time of interview, she was enjoying her
employment as a pharmacist in a hospital-based setting.

Zara’s academic achievements related to her interest were therefore significant.
The affective elements most prominent again were dispositions. Those that Zara

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 161

exhibited during her life, that were associated with her interest, were initially risk
taking and imagination, then determination and focus as every decision at secondary
school related to her goal. She showed curiosity in her pursuit of science subjects,
contribution in her goal of becoming part of a “helping” profession, perseverance and
resilience when her original long-standing goal was not achieved, and an alternative
was enacted. Her family, and specific secondary school teachers who were enthusiastic
and knowledgeable, supported her interest and achievements most strongly.

Rachel

Rachel had early personal memories of a strong interest in the female lead char-
acters in books and movies. This interest arose from her parents reading to her, and
making movies available for her to watch. In particular, her early childhood edu-
cation experiences focused on imagining herself as the character, Dorothy, from
the Wizard of Oz.

I’d go directly to the dress-ups, put the shoes on my feet and then I would be
Dorothy [from the Wizard of Oz] … they were my shoes, nobody else wore
them, they were always on my feet.

She recalled that, while dressed as Dorothy, she particularly enjoyed dramatic
play, reading books, and arts-related activities.

When she began primary school, Rachel’s goal was to be a primary school tea-
cher, a goal she related during the interview to her interest in female lead char-
acters. She recalled great enthusiasm for her primary school experiences inside and
outside the classroom:

I just got involved in everything—choir, orchestra, speech competitions and
school productions.

Aged 11, Rachel also began attending drama classes at a community theatre com-
pany. This began 10 years of involvement with the group. A drama teacher/coach
there was a significant motivator.

She definitely encouraged us and … we just sort of did everything in terms of,
I was there for so long, we covered everything you could in terms of theatre,
so we did theatre sports and acting styles and all sorts.

During her secondary schooling, Rachel’s favourite subject was English, but she
achieved equally well across arts and science subjects. She also studied drama as a
subject for four years. Meantime, she continued to participate in speech and drama
at the local theatre company. When she was 17, she was cast as Dorothy in the
Wizard of Oz. She noted on her returned transcript: “I’d, in some ways, achieved
the childhood dream of being Dorothy.”

162 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

At the juncture of secondary and tertiary studies, Rachel was no longer certain
that she wanted to be a teacher. She sought advice from a school career counsellor
who suggested an option that brought together her broad academic achievements.

She pointed me in the direction of speech language therapy … it was psy-
chology and it was linguistics and it was anatomy.

Rachel was thoroughly enjoying the intellectual challenge of her speech language
therapy studies at the time of our interview.

Rachel’s interests in books and drama led to a range of identity and dispositional
outcomes over time. Rachel identified strongly with, and imagined herself, as
female lead characters, which led to dispositions for participation and collaboration
in production roles and responsibilities, and dispositions for competition and per-
severance as she vied for roles. At the same time, she was achieving well academi-
cally in related subject studies that, combined with advice, led to her choice of
university studies. Her parents, some school teachers, and a community drama
coach were the most influential people in sustaining these interests to date. Coa-
ches were also significant influences on the next two young adults.

Craig

Craig’s parents, brothers, and grandfather were immersed in a variety of sports:
netball, tennis, athletics, cricket, rugby, soccer, and boxing. Unsurprisingly then,
Craig began playing rugby before the age of 5. These family members all supported
his sporting interests throughout his life-to-date. His childhood goal was to play for
the “All Blacks,” the national rugby team (see also Hunter and Simeon, Chapter
6). Craig reported watching sport on television with his family, identifying with
players who created possible future identities for him to emulate.

Here’s someone who … got into the All Blacks … I felt he was like myself,
naturally skilled probably not, but he was training hard and got to where he
was through determination so I felt like he was someone I could relate to.

Craig’s memories of kindergarten were limited, but he recalled a preference to play
outside with his friends, developing ball skills in particular. “[W]e used to always play
with the rugby ball at least once a day.” He recalled no involvement of teachers—
“they wouldn’t come out and help organise a game”—but neither were there any
attempts to discourage or divert this interest. Craig’s ability to self-select from play-
based learning experiences enabled him to pursue the interest stimulated by his family.

At primary school, he did not enjoy structured class sports as part of physical
education in the curriculum. Craig also found the teachers lacked the expert
knowledge of his favourite sports he already had due to his family experiences. He
preferred playing sports with friends at lunchtimes despite the presence of teacher
supervision.

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 163

At primary school we found when we used to play rugby it [could] get quite
rough … they did try to get a teacher to supervise [at] lunchtime. The teacher
used to … come along and make sure it didn’t get too out-of-control … but
we didn’t really like the teachers watching to be honest, it was just like killing
the game and stopped us from doing what we enjoyed.

At the age of 12, Craig injured his back playing rugby for a local club team, and
undertook a long period of intensive rehabilitation. He indicated the resilience and
persistence that a strong and sustained interest motivates: “I guess if you didn’t
really want to play sport again you might not do [the rehabilitation].” Despite this
setback, and due to these dispositions, Craig eventually played for his secondary
school’s top rugby team.

His first opportunity to choose to study physical education as a subject occurred
in the last two years of his schooling. Craig recalled this being:

[W]hen you got to learn about the body, anatomy, how things work and
that’s when I got interested in what I do now. So it was like understanding
well, I run, but what makes you run?

Craig’s interest in sport led to him to tertiary education. He completed a one-year
certificate in sports and recreation. During that year, a lecturer in event promotions
became a significant influence. Craig’s career plans at the time of interview there-
fore spanned roles as a boxing trainer, manager, promoter and event organiser,
rugby coach and trainer, and personal trainer for people with a range of personal
goals from rehabilitation through to achieving potential.

Craig’s childhood interest had encouraged him over time to develop an identity
related to various sporting activities and associated roles. He developed dispositions
of participation, involvement, and competitiveness in team and individual sports.
He also developed perseverance and effort to develop skill in something he felt he
was not naturally good at, courage, resilience, and persistence following a poten-
tially career-limiting injury, curiosity about how the body functions, and later still,
contribution and reciprocity towards other people’s goals.

Members of Craig’s family had consistently assisted the development, commit-
ment to, and continuity of, this interest and related dispositions, while education
facilities and teachers varied in their contribution towards academic outcomes,
achievements, and career plans. He was not sure how much teachers knew about
his interest until secondary school, a theme continued next with Germaine, whose
central interest was also sports related.

Germaine

Germaine’s strongest childhood interest was gymnastics. Her memories of childhood
also involved LegoTM, puzzles, and art at home, while her private kindergarten in
Hong Kong provided structured early academic activities that she also enjoyed.

164 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

When her family emigrated to New Zealand, they supported Germaine to join a
gymnastics club. Schoolteachers had no influence in the development of her long-
term interest in gymnastics. Indeed, Germaine commented that most were com-
pletely unaware of this interest and her successes: “At primary school, gym was
such a secret thing for me.”

By the age of 10, she had chosen rhythmic gymnastics as her specialist discipline.
She was training for 10–20 hours per week, a significant commitment. By age 12,
she was competing in individual and group events at national and international
events. Germaine’s major motivations were reported as enjoyment and participa-
tion, but she clearly also enjoyed her successes.

At the end of her first year at secondary school, Germaine won an award for the
top female sportsperson, as her coach had notified the school of her achievements.
This came as a surprise to her teachers and peers who knew nothing of her interest.
Her long-term coach was significant in her continued involvement, goal setting,
and achievements. She ensured the school was informed about Germaine’s progress
and accomplishments. In addition, the participation of particular friends over a long
period of time contributed to continuity of the interest. Unlike Craig, Germaine
did not study physical education at school.

When it came to plans beyond schooling, Germaine said:

My initial [thinking about tertiary studies] was like just go with interest and
hope that everything would fall into place.

She enrolled at university for a conjoint Bachelor of Arts and Science degree
majoring in sports science. A key motivation for the major was not an academic
interest per se, but an assurance received that lecturers would be sympathetic to
absences due to her competing at national and international gymnastics events.

During her time at university, Germaine also became involved in coaching and
judging as part of a long-term commitment to the sport. “I really want to do
something to give back into gymnastics in the future.” At the time of our inter-
view, two years into the four of her studies, she had no specific employment or
career-related plans.

In relation to dispositions, Germaine’s childhood interest in gymnastics, coupled
with the contributions of a particular coach and three peers, had encouraged the
development of participation, involvement, and competitiveness in team and indi-
vidual events. She had also demonstrated perseverance at tasks, skills, and goals that
required many hours of committed training. She was considering future thoughts
about reciprocity and contribution to the sport beyond participation.

Enduring interests in the fullness of life

The narratives of these five young adults illustrate ways that commitment to
enduring interests might provide sustained motivation within “the fullness of life.”
Interests and knowledge, and intellect and affect, can build together in mutually

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 165

constitutive relationships, where academic, intellectual, and affective goals and
outcomes are reinforced and grow over time. Given their interests-related experi-
ences as children and adolescents, all five participants had developed identities, and
followed paths towards career and community goals that drew on these interests.
The findings of the study point first to considerations of the matters of focus in this
book: the origins and continuity of interests, and the way that sustained interests
might lead to identity formation. Moreover, in relation to this particular chapter, it
sheds some insights on the use of interests in educational settings. The findings also
lend themselves to reflections about interests as outcomes.

The historical, social, and cultural origins of interests

The study contributes further evidence that children’s lived experiences in their
families and communities are what primarily drive their interests and learning
(Chesworth, 2016; Hedges & Cooper, 2016; Hedges et al., 2011). Yet, it is possi-
ble that, as noted in Chapters 2 and 5, families may not recognise these embedded
and tacit cultural practices as significant, nor the role both people and practices play
in stimulating and encouraging children’s interests. For families, their everyday
activities and practices are simply an implicit part of their funds of knowledge. As
Craig commented:

That was just what you did … I remember it never used to have to be “do
you want to” or “you have to”, it would just be “enrolment is on tomorrow
night” so we used to go down and enrol and that was it.

Yet, for Craig, Zara, Susie, and Rachel, funds of knowledge fostered capability
development and became important sources of funds of identity over their lives
to date.

Within educational settings, teachers need to make concerted efforts to
understand the depth of interest possibilities that may be implicit in everyday
family and community activities and practices. This may be most vital for
children whose backgrounds are different to the teachers. The young adults in
the present study were among those who participate and achieve well, with all
continuing to tertiary studies. Research has also established that utilising inter-
ests can help turn around deficit discourses and experiences of under-achieving
students. For example, Comber and Kamler (2004) describe ways teachers vis-
iting family homes enabled teachers to tap into interests-based motivations and
improve student achievement by transforming curriculum and pedagogy.

Connecting with Chapter 8, these young adults noted that knowledgeable and
enthusiastic teachers were also critical to interest-related motivation and
achievement. Teachers cultivating learners’ existing interests and curiosity is vital
alongside stimulating new interests through introducing new content and
experiences in education.

166 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

Sustaining interests

The study’s evidence suggests that interest trajectories can develop over time in
self-motivated ways, in turn creating capability and identity trajectories. Play-based
environments of early childhood settings first afforded opportunities for three par-
ticipants’ interests to grow. However, teachers in these settings fluctuated in
encouraging and shaping opportunities for these participants’ interests to flourish.
For all five young adults, their interests then developed significantly outside the
formal education system through family, sports, or other community and cultural
activities. Families played an important role in influencing and supporting
opportunities for them to pursue interests that provided intrinsic motivation for
most to later perform and achieve well in certain school subjects. Interests
therefore developed with support from significant adults and peers within and
outside of education contexts in ways that reflect the approaches and qualities of
relational pedagogy (Chapters 6 and 7).

Learners are astute in ascertaining which interests, knowledge, and practices are
acceptable in educational settings. Equally important is teachers’ avoidance of inter-
fering or redirecting interests. As Craig commented in relation to teacher supervision
of lunchtime rugby games, “it was just like killing the game and stopped us from doing
what we enjoyed.” On the other hand, too much attention, encouragement, and an
emphasis on achievement may actually decrease motivation, commitment, and
engagement. Teacher use of interest must therefore retain affective dimensions and
not become an unwanted source of diversion to academic content. Where teachers
were unaware, and/or the setting perhaps did not deem the child’s interest as impor-
tant as other pursuits, the young adults’ interests continued outside the formal educa-
tion system in important community settings.

Slot et al.’s (2020) intersecting mechanisms of interest sustainment are also visible
in these findings. Goal setting and biographical identification were strongly aligned
with funds of identity as each young adult imagined their future self and worked to
achieve their goals. Each was able to utilise their interests as motivation for aca-
demic learning and evaluate their progress with this learning. Their ongoing curi-
osity about topics and subjects related to their interest. Engagement in different and
substantive ways, in family, education and community contexts, with significant
adults and peers, sustained their interests from childhood to early adulthood.

At some point for each of these young people, a significant person had had a major
influence at a critical life juncture through helping to set study and/or career goals that
incorporated their major lifelong personal interest; this led to significant development of
capabilities, and, at the same time, enabled multiple identities to develop. Csikszentmi-
halyi (1996) noted how vital it is to have families and/or “an understanding teacher, a
lucky break … a mentor … to recognise the interest when it shows itself, nurture it, and
provide the opportunities for it to grow” (pp. 181–182). Csikszentmihalyi highlighted
the role of interest and curiosity during childhood and the important role families played
in fostering these. However, he also noted how ineffectual schools and teachers had
often been in recognising and nurturing interests of the participants in his study.

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 167

Aligning with this study’s findings, Csikszentmihalyi points to the potential role
interests might play to achieve valued outcomes, in the fullness of life, that satisfy and
fulfil human ambitions and expectations. Nevertheless, there is a delicate balance to
achieve and a range of related considerations. As has been evident many times in this
book, the notion of learning interests is a complex phenomenon that needs very
careful consideration if personal interests are to be drawn on in explicit ways in edu-
cation. The most important implications may be that using interests as vehicles for
learning may require teachers to re-think aspects of planning and engagement. Inte-
grated and cross-curricular approaches that are playful and enjoyable, and that retain
the affective dimensions of interest development as the academic engagement increa-
ses, might be prioritised. In addition, holistic attention to interests across settings may
lead to sustained learner identity development opportunities.

Interests and identity development

In Chapter 6, I argued that young children’s ultimate goal is to develop multiple,
positive identities. I posed that young children’s deep-seated interests respond to
the following fundamental inquiry question: How can I build personal, learner and
cultural identities as I participate in interesting, fulfilling and meaningful activities with my
family, community and culture? Similarly, the young adults in the present study
engaged in identity development through their interests. Identity interests are a
strong response to earlier provocations about the need for adult recognition of
children’s interests at more profound levels. The experiences of these young adults,
therefore, add weight to this argument.

According to narrative perspectives on identity construction, identity is the result
of the stories that people tell to themselves and others as they seek to make
meaning of their lives and histories, and construct futures. In narrative accounts of
identity formation, identity is always something in-process rather than a fixed state.
These young adults’ interests, and ways they developed over time, built strong
learner identities that intersected with, and positively influenced, other identities
developed simultaneously that were related to life and career goals. As noted ear-
lier, many of these interests originated in family funds of knowledge, later in other
experiences too that became funds of identity. Further, Slot et al. (2020) coined the
term funds of learner identity, defined as “deep, long-term learning-related goals,
values and beliefs that people develop in relation to the sociocultural affordances
and constraints that they experience” (p. 3). As these findings illustrate, whether or
not these young people could enact agency to pursue their interests and funds of
learner identity in all education settings was contingent on whether these were
recognised. Hence, their long-term goals related to employment and life were also
influenced by these funds, and associated affective dimensions.

In addition, for some there was a critical incident when they realised that their
significant interest may not lead to a long-held goal. For each participant, there was
a way to continue past this moment, indicating signs of maturity and resilience to
find alternative pathways to utilise the interest differently and sustain motivation.

168 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

Interests and curriculum

The findings provide support for studies in the context of early childhood educa-
tion that the interests children develop in their families and communities matter,
and can “count” in relation to educational opportunities and achievements long
valued in outcomes research. Interest is a mechanism that provides motivation for
lifelong learning. Early childhood curricular documents can justify a focus on play,
interests, and choices as being responsive to research on what motivates learning.
Early childhood practices also need to ensure that teachers are thoughtful, analy-
tical, and responsive in their recognition and selection of interests to follow up in
curriculum and pedagogy.

I asked participants at the end of their interview about their thoughts on the
value of interests in early childhood curriculum. Rachel’s response has validity
beyond early childhood:

Well from my experience if they had quashed my “I want to be Dorothy” it
probably would have completely changed my interest, my sort of path where
I’m at now … I have learned best through what I loved, if they were trying to
teach me something and at the same time trying to say don’t be Dorothy then
that would have been really hard. … So if you can build on interests then of
course you’re going to learn better because you’re actually interested in it.

Teasing out in future research further factors that support—or otherwise—the
mechanism of interest to lead curriculum across settings is vital.

Future research

These participants, naturally, had trouble recalling childhood memories that may
have added further substance to these findings. A future study might also obtain the
perspectives of parents, teachers, and other significant adults to deepen insights into
children and young adults’ interests and connections with holistic notions of out-
comes across life trajectories.

Clearly, another limitation in this particular study was the small number of par-
ticipants and the use of a snowball technique that perhaps discouraged a diversity of
participants. Adopting qualitative methods often means small numbers of partici-
pants are involved in in-depth and more time-consuming methods. However, with
large-scale funding, qualitative methods can complement quantitative in carefully
designed research and invite diversity of participants. Studies might use a mixed
methods approach such as an online survey design followed by interviews for a
selected number of participants.

Further, all participants in this study were supported to pursue their interests,
albeit not always in educational settings, and were able to pursue higher education.
A study in a different community, and internationally, might reveal how con-
siderations of interests and outcomes, and ways these align with life trajectories, are

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 169

more discontinuous (Verhoeven et al., 2021), and need to reflect social justice and
equity issues. Continuing Slot et al.’s (2020) work, what structural, political, and
attitudinal affordances and constraints might some children and young people
encounter as they attempt to pursue interests through their lives? Such findings
would contribute to the debates central to this book.

Summary

Learning, interests, and identity development are connected beyond childhood.
This chapter has drawn attention to Vygotsky’s phrase “the fullness of life”
(Vygotsky, 1986, p. 10). I have gone beyond childhood through a small study
designed to test further the arguments central to this book: identifying the histor-
ical, cultural, and social sources of personal interests; the ways interests might be
sustained over time in family, community, and educational settings; and, how
interests can lead to a range of outcomes that reflect the holistic emphases of cap-
ability theory such as freedom, agency, well-being, and identities. The narratives of
five young adults add substance to these arguments.

The chapter has also addressed the debates about ways that interests might be worthy
of attention in educational settings beyond early childhood. For many learners, an
interests-based approach is appropriate. It can enhance achievement, motivation, invol-
vement, and assist learners to develop positive identities as lifelong learners and con-
tributing citizens. I have also cautioned that undue or inappropriate attention, or
teachers lacking awareness of learner experiences, can have the opposite effect. Teachers
and parents can listen closely to children to gauge the necessary cues about the role, use,
and sustainment of interests in learning. Defining interests-based approaches as based on
deep interpretations of interests related to identity development, encouraging these with
sensitivity, and fostering positive intellectual, academic, and affective outcomes over
time, is critical to authentic understandings of interests as a powerful mechanism for, and
mediator of, learning opportunities, and their role in the fullness of life.

Notes

1 In New Zealand, early childhood education is available to age 5, primary school
approximately 5–12 years of age, secondary school approximately 13–18 years and tertiary
education at any age with appropriate entry qualifications.

2 For example, see https://www.thextraordinary.org/jacob-barnett (accessed June 20, 2021).

References

Ansari, A., & Purtell, K. (2018). Commentary: What happens next? Delivering on the pro-
mise of preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 45, 177–182. https://10.1016/j.
ecresq.2018.02.015

Azevedo, F. (2019). A pedagogy for interest development: The case of amateur astronomy
practice. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 23, 1–9. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.lcsi.
2018.11.008

170 Interests and outcomes beyond childhood

Barnett, K. (2013). The spark: A mother’s story of nurturing, genius and autism. Random House.
Bauer, P. (2006). Event memory. In D. Kuhn & R. Siegler (Eds.), Handbook of child psy-

chology. Vol 2: Cognition, perception, and language (6th ed., pp. 373–425). John Wiley.
Bauer, P., & Fivush, R. (2010). Editorial: Context and consequences of autobiographical

memory development. Cognitive Development, 25, 303–308. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.
cogdev.2010.08.001
Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2021). One size fits all? What counts as quality practice in
(reflexive) thematic analysis? Qualitative Research in Psychology, 18(3), 328–352. https://doi.
org/10.1080/14780887.2020.1769238
Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018a). Comparative analysis of the impact of
traditional versus innovative learning environment on student attitudes and learning out-
comes. Studies in Educational Evaluation, 58, 167–177. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.
2018.07.003
Byers, T., Imms, W., & Hartnell-Young, E. (2018b). Evaluating teacher and student spatial
transition from a traditional classroom to an innovative learning environment. Studies in
Educational Evaluation, 58, 156–166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.stueduc.2018.07.003
Chesworth, L. (2016). A funds of knowledge approach to examining play interests: Listening
to children’s and parents’ perspectives. International Journal of Early Years Education, 24(3),
294–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2016.1188370
Clandinin, D. J. (2007). Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology. Sage.
Comber, B., & Kamler, B. (2004). Getting out of deficit: Pedagogies of reconnection.
Teaching Education, 15(3), 293–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047621042000257225
Csikszentmihalyi, M. (1996). Creativity: Flow and the psychology of discovery and invention.
HarperCollins.
Dampney, A., Newbury, J., & McAuliffe, M. (2018). Exploring early childhood teachers’ beliefs
and practices in emergent literacy: Does practice vary by the socioeconomic status of the
children? New Zealand International Research in Early Childhood Education, 21(2), 1–18.
Ell, F., & Grudnoff, L. (2013). The politics of responsibility: Teacher education and persis-
tent underachievement in New Zealand. The Educational Forum (West Lafayette, Ind.), 77
(1), 73–86. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131725.2013.739023
Fisher, J. (2021). To play or not to play: Teachers’ and headteachers’ perspectives on play-
based approaches in transition from the Early Years Foundation Stage to Key Stage 1 in
England. Education 3–13. https://10.1080/03004279.2021.1912136
Hedges, H. (2018). Play-based learning: Questions and invitations from early childhood edu-
cation. Set: Research Information for Teachers, 3, 60–64. https://doi.org/10.18296/set.0119
Hedges, H., & Cooper, M. (2016). Inquiring minds: Theorizing children’s interests. Journal of
Curriculum Studies, 48(3), 303–322. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2015.1109711
Hedges, H., Cullen, J., & Jordan, B. (2011). Early years curriculum: Funds of knowledge as a
conceptual framework for children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(2), 185–
205. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220272.2010.511275
Hipkins, R., & Neill, A. (2003). Shifting balances: The impact of level 1 NCEA on teaching of
mathematics and science. Report to the Ministry of Education. Ministry of Education. www.
educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/schooling2/curriculum/5339
Hollett, T., & Hein, R. (2019). Affective atmospheres and skatepark sessions: The spatio-
temporal contours of interest. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 23, 1–13. https://doi.
org/10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.12.001
Hollway, W., & Jefferson, T. (2000). Doing qualitative research differently: Free association, nar-
rative and the interview method. Sage.

Interests and outcomes beyond childhood 171

Jay, J., & Knaus, M. (2018). Embedding play-based learning into junior primary (year 1 and
2) curriculum in WA. The Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 112–126. http://
dx.doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n1.7

Josselson, R. (2006). Narrative research and the challenge of accumulating knowledge.
Narrative Inquiry, 16(1), 3–10. https://doi.org/10.1075/ni.16.1.03jos

Josselson, R. (2007). The ethical attitude in narrative research: Principles and practicalities. In D.
J. Clandinin (Ed.), Handbook of narrative inquiry: Mapping a methodology (pp. 537–566). Sage.

Larkina, M., & Bauer, P. J. (2010). The role of maternal verbal, affective, and behavioral support
in preschool children’s independent and collaborative autobiographical memory reports.
Cognitive Development, 25, 309–324. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cogdev.2010.08.008

Mills, J. (2001). Self-construction through conversation and narrative in interviews. Educa-
tional Review, 53(3), 285–301. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131910120085883

Milne, J., & McLaughlin, T. (2018). Examining the teacher’s role in play-based learning:
One teacher’s perspective. Set: Research Information for Teachers, 3, 44–50. doi:10.18296/
set.0117

Ministerial Advisory Group. (2018). NCEA review: Discussion document big opportunities.
Ministry of Education. https://conversation.education.govt.nz/conversations/ncea-ha
ve-your-say/big-opportunities-he-aria-nui/

Ministry of Education. (2007). The New Zealand curriculum. Ministry of Education.
Pence, A. (2016). Baby PISA: Dangers that can arise when foundations shift. Journal of

Childhood Studies, 41(3), 54–58. https://doi.org/10.18357/jcs.v41i3.16549
Sen, A. (1985). Well-being, agency and freedom: The Dewey lectures 1984. The Journal of

Philosophy, 82(4), 185–203. www.jstor.org/stable/2026184
Slot, E. M., Vulperhorst, J. P., Bronkhorst, L. H., van der Rijst, R. M., Wubbels, T., &

Akkerman, S. F. (2020). Mechanisms of interest sustainment. Learning, Culture and Social
Interaction, 24, 125–137. https://10.1016/j.lcsi.2019.100356
Turkle, S. (Ed.). (2008). Falling for science: Objects in mind. MIT Press.
Verhoeven, M., Polma, J. L., Zijlstra, B. J. H., & Volman, M. (2021). Creating space for
agency: A conceptual framework to understand and study adolescents’ school engagement
from a funds of identity perspective. Mind, Culture and Activity, 28(2), 125–137. https://
10.1080/10749039.2021.1908363
Vygotsky, L. (1986). Thought and language (A. Kozulin, trans.). MIT Press.
Walsh, G., McGuinness, V., & Sproule, L. (2019). “It’s teaching … but not as we know it”:
Using participatory learning theories to resolve the dilemma of teaching in play-based
practice. Early Child Development and Care, 185(7), 1162–1173. https://10.1080/
03004430.2017.1369977
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge
University Press.

10

TAKING CHILDREN’S INTERESTS
SERIOUSLY

Interests-related curriculum and pedagogy

Understanding children’s interests more deeply: addressing the
folklore
To recap, children’s interests are a long-standing foundation for early childhood
curriculum and pedagogy. Folklore about interests associates them with child-
centred philosophies and child development theories where children’s interests are
made visible through their self-selected play. Further, both child-centredness and
child development theories view children’s development as occurring naturally,
leaving early childhood teachers wondering what input they might offer beyond
further resourcing a well-equipped play environment. Throughout this book, I
have discouraged surface-level and uncritical interpretations of children’s interests.
Defining interests as play activities selected from a range pre-selected by adults is
highly questionable.

On a positive note, child-centred philosophies and theories have placed
children central to thinking about what is valued in early childhood education.
However, they have also led to narrow views of learning, curriculum, peda-
gogy, and outcomes, and have trivialised understandings of interests. As noted
in Chapter 1:

[T]he most profound of children’s questions seldom relate to activities of the
moment. They relate to the larger issues and forces that shape the world—
birth, death, good, evil, power, danger, survival, generosity, adventure. …
Adults, even the most “child-centered”, tend to trivialize children’s interests,
making them out to be more mundane and egocentric than they really are,
and thus positing a distance between children’s interests and intellectual subject
matter that is greater than it needs to be.

(Bereiter, 2002, p. 301)

DOI: 10.4324/9781003139881-10

Taking children’s interests seriously 173

Bereiter’s criticism encapsulated my reasons for looking for deeper, analytical, and
theorised understandings and explanations of children’s interests. Responding to
Bereiter requires teachers and researchers to reconsider the concept of children’s
interests, and have respect for children’s ways of learning and knowing. We tri-
vialise children’s interests when we associate them with activity choices; equating
activities with interests connects with Bereiter’s idea that these are “mundane and
egocentric.”

In particular, the powerful informal learning arising from interests-based
engagements has been under-recognised. Therefore, school readiness, promoted by
increasingly neoliberal policies worldwide (see Chapter 3), threatens to take a
central position unless we can confidently offer a radical re-thinking of education
(Moss & Roberts-Holmes, 2021). Such re-thinking through this book involves
articulating the value and complexity of informal learning, viewing children as
competent learners who have—and continue to develop—capabilities, and creating
holistic possibilities for curriculum, pedagogy, and outcomes.

The powerful relationship between interests and learning

Chapter 2 outlined the powerful relationship between interests and informal
learning that shows informal learning is not oppositional to formal learning. Infor-
mal learning is interactive and embedded in meaningful activity and social interac-
tions. Learning builds on individual initiative, interest, and choice. Assessment
occurs within activities, highlighting interests and capabilities. In these ways, lear-
ners enhance existing knowledge and skills, and innovate, developing new ideas
and skills (Rogoff et al., 2016). I connected these ideas with inquiry as a stance to
learning through the work of Wells (1999) and Lindfors (1999).

I posed new principles to support understandings of interests-based learning that
respect children’s ways of knowing and learning. These principles underpinned
material in later chapters.

Significant learning in the early years is largely informal, rich with possibility,
and promoted through authentic, collaborative, community participation
(Chapters 3, 5, 6, and 9).

Learning in the early years involves children having opportunities to act on
learning, including to recreate, represent, and internalise experiences in play
(Chapters 3, 5, 6, 7, and 8).

Children benefit when adults empower their learning in ways that are
responsive to their interests and with good knowledge of children and their
families, communities, and cultures (Chapters 3, 5, 6, 7, 8, and 9).

Children’s efforts to learn reflect their interests and inquiry into personally
meaningful questions, and a wish to understand and participate knowledgeably
(Chapters 6 and 9).

While intentional and purposeful, informal interests-based learning can appear
disorganised because it is fluid and dynamic (Chapter 7).

174 Taking children’s interests seriously

Children’s life experience might be limited, but their thinking, inquiry and use
of imagination reflects effort, and therefore may have its own internal logic
and sophistication (Chapters 6 and 7).

Holistic learning outcomes might recognise the interrelationship of intellect,
affect, and imagination in the development of knowledge, skills, and disposi-
tions useful to children’s inquiries (Chapters 5, 6, 7, and 9).

These principles mean that young children’s ways of learning and knowing are
informal, rich, dynamic, and personally meaningful. Engagement in participatory,
collaborative, reciprocal, and responsive relationships is essential. The principles
suggested a need for deeper, holistic, and multimodal ways of understanding
children’s interests.

Taking children’s interests seriously: deeper interpretations

To get to deeper, theorised understandings of children’s interests, we can get as
close as possible to children’s experiences through participatory methods (Chapter
4). These methods involve child participants who are respected by a researcher
being clear about their role and how it differs from that of other adults with whom
children are familiar.

I have offered several, deeper interpretations of interests inspired by sociocultural
theoretical concepts. These have been, and can be, utilised and applied across
geographic and cultural contexts: funds of knowledge (Chapters 5 and 9), funda-
mental inquiries and funds of identity (Chapter 6), and working theories (Chapter
7). These interpretations are responsive to Bereiter’s exhortation to take children’s
interests seriously and see them beyond the activities of the moment. Children’s
interests are far from trivial, mundane, and egocentric: they reflect children’s pre-
sent and growing understanding of their worlds, participating, collaborating, and
contributing knowledgeably and meaningfully in the fullness of life (Chapter 9).

Funds of knowledge is a concept based on the premise that people have
competence from their life experiences in families and communities. Children
are immersed in funds of knowledge through their daily lives, simultaneously
learning everyday knowledge of subjects such as literacy, numeracy, science, the
arts, economics, and so on. They recreate and practise some of these funds of
knowledge in play interactions in early childhood education settings. Visits to
families can be transformative for teachers, leading to enhanced relationships,
authentic curriculum, and empowered children.

Fundamental inquiry questions offer a deeper interpretation of the nature and
content of what really inspires children’s interests—the serious and sometimes exis-
tential questions children have that lead them to inquiring deeply into what is
meaningful to them, and learning the associated subject matter. The overarching
interpretation of children’s interests is represented in the question: “How can I build
personal, learner, and cultural identities as I participate in interesting, fulfilling, and
meaningful activities with my family, community, and culture?” Seven questions that

Taking children’s interests seriously 175

align with the focus of capability theory on opportunities to develop freedoms,
agency and well-being, derive from this fundamental question (see Chapter 6).

In formulating these questions, I explored how children’s interests reflect children’s
desire to understand the complexity of their worlds, use their agency to make meaning
from their experiences, engage others in their inquiries, and build identities as learners
and contributors. These interests “relate to the larger issues and forces that shape the
world” and show there is no “distance between children’s interests and intellectual
subject matter” (Bereiter, 2002, p. 301) through inviting teachers to offer conceptual
language as they engage in exploring these interests. In fact, not using conceptual
language short-changes children (Gelman & Brenneman, 2004; Lewis et al., 2019) and
disrespects the depth and seriousness of children’s interests.

The overarching question about identities, and connections between funds of
knowledge and interests, led to analysing interests using the concept of funds of
identity. People develop extensive interests, knowledge, and skills through
socioculturally mediated interactions across broad contexts of experience. Indivi-
duals then draw on experiences that have particular interest and meaning for
them to create their identities. Whether or not children’s interests and learning
are recognised and responded to as funds of identity in education settings again
depends largely on teachers’ relationships with, and knowledge of, children and
their families.

These interpretations led to consideration of the ways children express their
growing interests-related knowledge in their inquiries. The final interpretation of
children’s interests offered related to holistic learning outcomes, specifically learning
dispositions and working theories. These outcomes are consistent with capability
theory and views of children as competent learners who use their agency to direct
their own learning. Learning dispositions and working theories incorporate all of
children’s ways of knowing and learning through embodied, linguistic, cognitive,
communicative, participatory, and social efforts to learn. They help us to see how
complex and constantly in-progress interests-related learning is. Children’s working
theories represent children’s ways of knowing and learning, and their desires to
communicate, contribute, and act on their worlds in ways that, in keeping with
capability theory, enhance their agency, belonging, well-being, and exploration.

These deeper, analytical, theorised, and exemplified interpretations explain why
we need to go beyond activities in order to not trivialise children’s interests.
Rather, we ought to take children’s interests seriously. Figure 10.1 is a model for
recognising and understanding children’s interests that brings together these
interpretations.

Recognising children’s interests analytically is central to children being empow-
ered to learn. Observing and analysing play is fundamental to noticing interests,
and understanding the origin of interests more deeply before considering ways to
extend and expand. Understanding children’s ways of knowing and learning
involves an inquiry stance, positioning learning dispositions and working theories
centrally to this stance, focusing on children’s funds of knowledge and identity, and
using fundamental inquiry questions to build interests-based curriculum.

176 Taking children’s interests seriously

activity- funds of Children’s
based knowledge ways of
interests and identity knowing
and
Play learning

fundamental
inquiry

questions

FIGURE 10.1 Recognising and understanding children’s interests

All elements of this model feed back and forth into each other so need to be
considered together to foster deep analysis of children’s interests and their place in
curriculum and pedagogy. In turn, these understandings require professional
knowledge and responses beyond mere provision and supervision of play activities,
and policy that supports associated teacher understandings of curriculum, pedagogy,
learning, and outcomes.

Furthermore, in Chapter 8, where I focused on teachers’ interests, I showed that
worthwhile and authentic curriculum is co-constructed when children’s and tea-
chers’ interests align. I argued that teachers’ interests ought to be included in dis-
cussions of professional knowledge that underpin all understandings of children’s
interests and related curriculum and pedagogy.

Interests are powerful in connection with curriculum, pedagogy, learning, and
outcomes. There is extensive recent research about children’s interests that can be
used to speak back to the selective use of research and theory by policymakers
(Wood, 2020). It will take commitment and energy, including advocacy for
teaching qualifications, a baseline criterion for knowledgeable and confident prac-
tice amongst an otherwise split international workforce (Cameron, 2020).

I have also shown the power of interests beyond the early years—in the lives of
young adults—in a study that connects with others internationally. Policymakers
ought to pay more attention to limitations in current evidence in their decision-
making about curricular policy, pedagogical advice, outcomes foci, and teachers’
professional knowledge.

In connecting children’s interests and inquiries with capability-framed, holistic
learning outcomes I have shown ways that, through working theories, interests also
serve to connect children’s ways of learning and knowing with the scientific
knowledge and principles that underpin established understandings and further

Taking children’s interests seriously 177

investigations of the world that follow the early years. There is no need for “a
distance between children’s interests and intellectual subject matter.”

Playful and integrated curriculum and pedagogy, that promotes everyday
knowledge and connections to scientific knowledge through children’s zones of
proximal development and holistic outcomes, depend on teachers’ ability to act on
possible links between play and content in a genuine way. This contrasts with
trying to slip content disingenuously into children’s play, emphasising subject
matter such as literacy and numeracy as if it were the only end goal of play, or
teaching content didactically as common school readiness approaches espouse (see
Hedges, 2014a).

Children’s learning has personal meaning and content. It can follow unexpected
trajectories. Children’s ways of learning and knowing involve innovative thinking
and thoughtful problem solving. Children’s searches for relevant information show
a connection with intellectual subject matter. This connection differs from the
linear progressions of school-subject learning that might be present in school
readiness expectations.

The main argument of this book is that teachers and researchers need to be more
analytical about children’s interests. This means that teachers who have a founda-
tion of contemporary professional knowledge, which includes adopting an ongoing
reflective and critically inquiring stance (Campbell-Barr, 2019; Cooper et al.,
2019), can articulate, and advocate for, new forms of professional knowledge and
approaches to curriculum and pedagogy in early childhood education that take
children’s interests seriously.

A way forward: working theories

All these considerations lead to the question of how we might do curriculum and
pedagogy differently. What should be our focus for curriculum decision-making?
Next, I make an argument for positioning working theories centrally in research,
teaching, and policy to incorporate academic, intellectual, and affective elements of
learning.

Curriculum approaches centred on children’s interests, inquiries, and working
theories point to directions remote from teacher-directed activities focused on
subjects such as literacy and numeracy. As Vygotsky (1986) stated, “direct teaching
of concepts is impossible and fruitless” (p. 15); instead he recommended that
learning should call on, and be made relevant to, children’s daily lives and cultural
practices.

Similarly, Dewey’s (1938) wisdom regarding education was that:

It is not the subject per se that is educative or that is conducive to growth.
There is no subject that is in and of itself, or without regard to the stage of
growth attained by the learner, such that inherent educational value can be
attributed to it.

(p. 46, italics in original)

178 Taking children’s interests seriously

Rather … if an experience arouses curiosity, strengthens initiative, and sets up
desires and purposes that are sufficiently intense to carry a person over dead
places in the future, continuity works in a very different way. Every experi-
ence is a moving force. Its value can be judged only on the ground of what it
moves forward and into. … It is then the business of the educator to see in
what direction an experience is heading.

(p. 38)

Both Vygotsky and Dewey were also clear decades ago that developing a learner
identity involves subject matter.

Working theories arise from the dispositions of curiosity and interest, have their
own “moving force,” and promote holistic views of learning and outcomes. Chil-
dren’s working theories reflect the interpretations offered of children’s interests,
inquiry as stance, children’s ways of knowing and learning, agency, imagination,
and uphold the centrality of play. From a sociocultural perspective, as Vygotsky
(1986) noted, play acts as its own zone of proximal development in which children
explore their own sense-making of life experiences. Play is an active, conscious
realisation of children’s current understandings and working theories about human
life, as well as providing evidence of shared—or unshared—experiences and
understandings between children.

Centring curriculum and pedagogy on holistic outcomes such as working the-
ories and associated learning dispositions means that teachers need to go beyond
the surface of theories to try to interpret children’s inquiry acts. It is also important
to identify the connections between bigger ideas and theories that children are
creating, expressing, and acting upon. These bigger ideas may include connections
to knowledge building about matters connected with fundamental inquiry ques-
tions, again addressing Bereiter’s accusation of an artificial gap between interests
and knowledge. These matters form substantive topics teachers can plan curriculum
for in specific contexts once children have a foundation of everyday concepts and
exploratory experiences.

Working theories offer a way to incorporate academic, concept-based, intellectual,
and affective goals in curriculum policy. I have illustrated, in Chapter 7, ways that
the constituent components of working theories—knowledge about the world, skills
and strategies, attitudes, and expectations—might be understood within complex
views of learning and curriculum rather than as ways to identify and atomise learning
and “tick off” school readiness. In addition, the transition from everyday to scientific
understandings is unlikely to be as coherent as is suggested by either developmental
theories, the organisation of disciplinary knowledge, or the staged and linear pro-
gression presented within some curriculum policy frameworks. Building curriculum
around working theories allows for the personal nature of what matters to children
to be central, for non-linear learning trajectories to be respected, and for content to
be addressed in more creative and responsive ways.

Within a working theories conceptual framing, changes in children’s knowledge
and understanding become evident over time. The development of content

Taking children’s interests seriously 179

knowledge and ways of knowing involve discrepant and retrogressive steps, spirals
of learning, knowledge building and creativity, emotions, and imagination (Egan,
2009; Hedges, 2014b; Wells, 1999). Working theories are nevertheless progressive
in different ways, requiring detailed attention to their subtleties and complexities.

Wood and Hedges (2016) argued that much of what is taught directly or indir-
ectly in any approach to pedagogy is not learned exactly or immediately as neoliberal
testing regimes imply. With any teaching, children need time to ponder, digest,
embody, ruminate, wonder, check out, and play with their ideas and theories, vali-
date these with others (peers and adults), make connections, and address mis-
understandings, gaps, and inconsistencies using their own ways of learning and
knowing. Children experiment through dialogue, co-construction, and, sometimes,
trial and error. In their seemingly random meanderings of intellectual inquiry, chil-
dren grasp fragments of ideas through working theories that then become connected
to more coherent wholes, eventually to become understood in curricular terms as
subject or disciplinary knowledge much later in their educational experiences.

Working theories, therefore, allow for some freedom and creativity in how
children engage with emerging ideas and concepts in a range of subjects. Working
theories provide insights into the intricate ways that children learn and make
meaning of their lives and experiences, using dispositions such as curiosity, colla-
boration, and perseverance, all vital to becoming thoughtful, sociable, literate, and
contributing members of families and societies.

A spiral curriculum

The unpredictable trajectory of children’s learning that working theories represent
are evidence of children’s multiple interests and search for meaning about all
aspects of their lives. What kind of curriculum might result? How might these
considerations add another perspective to Bereiter’s provocation about the poten-
tial gap between children’s interests and intellectual subject matter, and thinking
about school readiness?

Jerome Bruner noted in his book published in 1960, that its most controversial
statement was the following:

We begin with the hypothesis that any subject can be taught effectively in
some intellectually honest form to any child at any stage of development. It is
a bold hypothesis and an essential one in thinking about the nature of the
curriculum. No evidence exists to contradict it; considerable evidence is being
amassed that supports it.

(p. 33)

This is a provocative statement that aligns with the central ideas in this book that
children are capable and competent learners, that informal learning is powerful, and
that there are potential connections between everyday and scientific knowledge
through the mechanism of working theories (Hedges, 2012). This statement is

180 Taking children’s interests seriously

compelling too for considerations of the conceptual possibilities inherent in chil-
dren’s interests. There are, naturally, caveats about the degree to which a subject
can be taught related to children’s maturity and life experiences (see Chapter 2).
Perhaps this is partly what Bruner meant by an “intellectually honest form.”

Moreover, Bruner (1960) did not advocate for direct teaching through this state-
ment. He outlined the importance of the roles of perception and intuition in children’s
learning, and ways that research to that date—over 60 years ago—acknowledged chil-
dren’s capabilities. These also form ways that a subject could be addressed through
inquiry in an intellectually honest form. Bruner reasoned that didactic teaching did not
enable the “excitement about discovery” (p. 20), nor develop the dispositions of curi-
osity and inquiry necessary for learning. For Bruner, learning and knowledge building
required access to information alongside ongoing opportunities to apply and transform
knowledge in new situations while simultaneously evaluating the value of that infor-
mation, a point in alignment with Wells’ (1999) spiral of knowing. He implied that,
where children had great motivation and deep interest, related subject information
could be imparted through participatory and mediated teaching.

Bruner’s view of curriculum making involved the notion of a spiral curriculum,
where connections between intuitive, everyday knowledge are linked in multiple
ways and through varied opportunities. Applied to working theories, the spiral can be
viewed as curriculum making that begins with selected principles and information
aligned with children’s intuitive and other early interests-based understandings, that are
returned to in a recursive, iterative, and increasingly complex manner many times—
that is, in early childhood and beyond—as working theories are improved or stalled,
but gradually become more useful for acting on the world. Understanding, rather than
the performance of decontextualised academic achievement, was Bruner’s focus.

Bruner stated that:

If the hypothesis … is true—that any subject can be taught to any child in
some honest form—then it should follow that a curriculum ought to be built
around the great issues, principles, and values that a society deems worthy of
the continual concern of its members.

(Bruner, 1960, p. 52)

The idea of great issues, principles, and values as the basis for curriculum resonates
with the notion of fundamental inquiry questions as the ideas that underpin chil-
dren’s interests and that drive their learning.

Clearly a spiral curriculum, learning, and education can happen where interests
are valued. This is an idea Bruner championed to redress concerns about the
didactic nature of teaching, a concern that has crept into early childhood education
over the years through a decontextualised focus on school readiness being achieved
through teacher-led approaches. Bruner’s ideas about “readiness” in 1960 were
those of a child-focused approach to curriculum making that kept returning to, and
deepening, interests and knowledge. This approach to readiness is worth returning
to today.

Taking children’s interests seriously 181

Relational pedagogy

The final matter to (re)address is that of relational pedagogy as foundational to an
interests-based curriculum (Chapters 6 and 7). Relational pedagogy involves tea-
chers having sophisticated professional knowledge and skills (Chapter 8) to engage
with children and foster their learning in ways that recognise the fundamental
inquiries that underpin children’s play and learning. Working theories represent
children’s efforts to express and then recontexualise everyday concepts towards
scientific ones in ways that connect with their prior knowledge and experiences—
learning that teachers can support via subject matter.

Empowering children to express theories in multiple ways and inquire into, puzzle
over, critique, reform, and reframe their many theories is vital. Such empowerment
requires a relational approach to pedagogy where teachers (1) know children and their
interests and families well; (2) ensure there are opportunities for children to recreate,
represent, and internalise play experiences; (3) utilise a range of pedagogical strategies
appropriate to children, topic, and context; (4) avoid “hijacking” interests through
surface interpretations, misunderstandings, or a desire to divert to academic learning;
and (5) use conceptual language to extend children’s understandings.

The example of teacher Ruth in Rebecca Lewis et al.’s (2019) study illustrates that
teachers need to become conscious of ways a child-centred positioning limits oppor-
tunities for children in matters of interest and inquiries. Ruth engaged closely with
children’s interests using a variety of questions designed to elicit children’s ideas and
working theories, but missed opportunities to extend children’s knowledge overtly
through follow-up curriculum planning and locating the subject knowledge needed to
extend children’s understandings. More of these kinds of collaborative and fine-
grained studies of practice hold promise for the potential of children’s interests to
become vectors for deep learning, to which teachers contribute subject matter—thus
closing the distance Bereiter posited between children’s interests and subject matter.
Future studies could also tease out ways that academic learning is incorporated in
respecting children’s ways of knowing and learning, beyond the example of Chloe in
Chapter 7, to explicitly address and re-think school readiness agendas.

Such projects could offer more empirical evidence of ways that relational peda-
gogy aligns with Wood’s (2014) Mode B: adult-guided play. This mode encoura-
ges an exploratory and educative view of play, and mediational pedagogical
relationships that include explicit encouragement of language and conceptual
development. In this way, children retain some of the benefits and freedoms of
child-centredness, and have some agency in the direction and pace of their learning
through interactions with teachers that foster learning more explicitly. Relational
pedagogy is central to harnessing the potential of children’s interests.

A model for interests-based curriculum and pedagogy

All the new ways to understand interests, curriculum, pedagogy, and outcomes in
this book lead to a model for curriculum and pedagogy (Figure 10.2). As with the

182 Taking children’s interests seriously

spiral relational
curriculum pedagogy

holistic children’s
outcomes: and teachers’
interests and
working
theories and knowledge

learning
dispositions

FIGURE 10.2 A model for interests-based curriculum and pedagogy

earlier model bringing together interpretations of children’s interests (Figure 10.1),
the elements of this model feed back and forth into each other, and ought to be
considered collectively to create curriculum and pedagogy meaningful and
responsive to children’s interests.

I position learning dispositions and working theories as the central outcomes
concepts in this model to respect children’s interests and ways of learning and
knowing. A spiral curriculum assists focusing on the nature and content of what
matters to children while understanding their ways of learning. Relational pedagogy
ensures that teachers engage deeply with children’s interests-based learning, including
related subject matter. The elements of this model can address the concerns of those
promoting school readiness through recognising and locating ways to assess children’s
learning through a capability approach.

Conclusion

Children’s interests have long been a source of curriculum. This book has positioned
interests-based curriculum and pedagogy as founded on contemporary, deep, analy-
tical, and theorised interpretations of children’s interests, coupled with understandings
of children’s ways of learning and knowing that respect the power of informal, inter-
ests-based learning. Through my own research and that of others internationally, I
have shown the important role people, places, and things play in inspiring, fostering,
and extending children’s interests and related learning across different settings. I have
theorised children’s interests as reflecting children’s funds of knowledge, fundamental

Taking children’s interests seriously 183

inquiry questions, funds of identity, and working theories. Inquiry as a stance
demonstrates the broad and holistic learning potential of interests through outcomes
such as learning dispositions and working theories, outcomes that challenge neoliberal
approaches to understandings of school readiness.

To bring the book’s content and arguments together, I have offered two models
in this chapter that capture the nature and content of: (1) deeper and more
insightful recognition of children’s interests in the early years; and (2) components
of curriculum, pedagogy, and learning outcomes that respect children’s interests,
inquiries, and working theories, and incorporate teachers’ interests and related
knowledge. Both models bring together the empirical findings of my research
programme, and act to respond to Bereiter’s criticism through locating ways to
take children’s interests seriously.

I have also argued that attention to children’s learning dispositions and working
theories provides a way forward for interests-based curriculum and pedagogy.
Understandings of children’s ways of learning and knowing mean that a spiral
curriculum offers possibilities as an approach. Relational pedagogy enables teachers
to be intentional in planned and spontaneous engagements with children’s interests,
and requires some subject matter knowledge to draw on in interactions. Such
profound interpretations and understandings mean a foundation of professional
knowledge is an important goal. There is important work ahead for researchers,
teachers, and policymakers to explore these possibilities further.

References

Bereiter, C. (2002). Education and mind in the knowledge age. Lawrence Erlbaum.
Bruner, J. (1960). The process of education. Harvard University Press.
Cameron, C. (2020). Towards a “rich” ECEC workforce. In C. Cameron & P. Moss (Eds.),

Transforming early childhood in England: Towards a democratic education (pp. 67–82). UCL Press.
Campbell-Barr, V. (2019). Professional knowledges for early childhood education and care.

Journal of Childhood Studies, 44(1), 134–146. https://10.18357/jcs.v44i1.18786
Cooper, M., Hedges, H., & Williamson, J. (2019). Reconceptualising professional learning

as knotworking: Actualising the transformative potential of Te Wha-riki. In A. C. Gunn &
J. Nuttall (Eds.), Weaving Te Wha-riki: Aotearoa New Zealand’s early childhood curriculum
document in theory and practice (3rd ed., pp. 57–70). NZCER.
Dewey, J. (1938). Experience & education. Collier Books.
Egan, K. (2009). Students’ development in theory and practice: The doubtful role of
research. In H. Daniels, H. Lauder, & J. Porter (Eds.), Educational theories, cultures and
learning (pp. 54–67). Routledge.
Gelman, R., & Brenneman, K. (2004). Science learning pathways for young children. Early
Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(1), 150–158. https://10.1016/j.ecresq.2004.01.009
Hedges, H. (2012). Vygotsky’s phases of everyday concept development and the notion of
children’s “working theories.” Journal of Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(2), 143–152.
https://10.1016/j.lcsi.2012.06.001
Hedges, H. (2014a). Children’s content learning in play provision: Competing tensions and
future possibilities. In L. Brooker, M. Blaise, & S. Edwards (Eds.), Sage handbook on play
and learning in early childhood (pp. 192–203). Sage.

184 Taking children’s interests seriously

Hedges, H. (2014b). Young children’s “working theories”: Building and connecting
understandings. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 12(1), 35–49. https://10.1177/
1476718X13515417

Lewis, R., Fleer, M., & Hammer, M. (2019). Intentional teaching: Can early-childhood
educators create the conditions for children’s conceptual development when following a
child-centred programme? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 44(1), 6–18. https://10.
1177/1836939119841470

Lindfors, J. (1999). Children’s inquiry: Using language to make sense of the world. Teachers College
Press.

Moss, P., & Roberts-Holmes, G. (2021). Neoliberalism and early childhood education: Markets,
imaginaries and governance. Routledge.

Rogoff, B., Callanan, M., Gutierrez, K. D., & Erickson, F. (2016). The organization of
informal learning. Review of Research in Education, 40, 356–401. https://doi.org/10.3102/
0091732X16680994

Vygotsky, L. S. (1986). Thought and language. MIT Press.
Wells, G. (1999). Dialogic inquiry: Toward a sociocultural practice and theory of education. Cambridge

University Press.
Wood, E. (2014). The play-pedagogy interface in contemporary debates. In L. Brooker,

M. Blaise, & S. Edwards (Eds.), The Sage handbook of play and learning in early childhood
(pp. 145–156). Sage.
Wood, E. (2020). Learning, development and the early childhood curriculum: A critical
discourse analysis of the Early Years Foundation Stage in England. Journal of Early Child-
hood Research, 18(3), 321–336. https://10.1177/1476718X20927726
Wood, E., & Hedges, H. (2016). Curriculum in early childhood education: Critical questions
about content, coherence, and control. The Curriculum Journal, 27(3), 387–405. https://doi.
org/10.1080/09585176.2015.1129981

INDEX

Note: italic page numbers indicate figures; page numbers followed by n refer to notes.

academic outcomes 9, 11, 33, 47, 48, 49, art 2, 15, 71, 78, 85–86, 105, 137, 163
assessment 9, 22, 33, 47, 48, 52, 63, 86,
110, 177; and national standards/targets
154–155 115, 121, 150; and learning dispositions
accountability 33, 45, 47 116, 117; and working theories 115,
116–117, 119
activities, interests as 3, 8, 9, 13, 15, 16, 41, authentic learning 19, 20, 23, 77–78, 140
78–79; and funds of knowledge 77, 78; as autonomy 34, 40, 45, 116, 137
trivialization of interests 4, 172–173, 175 Azevedo, Flávio 25, 110, 156

Adams, Kate 97 Baby PISA 48, 154
babycams 70
adolescents see youths/young adults Barnett, Kristine 156
affect see emotion/affect belonging, sense of 6, 94, 95
agency 6, 10, 26, 27, 33, 38, 40–41, 45, 50; Bereiter, Carl 11, 94, 96, 124, 174, 175,

and biological/developmental child 183; and interests–knowledge gap 4, 22,
52–53; and capability theory 115, 117, 37, 145, 172–173, 178, 181
119, 158, 175; collaborative 106–107; Berk, Laura 98
and funds of identity 95, 111; and funds Berry, Julie 143, 144
bilingual/bicultural communities 80, 140–141
of knowledge 77, 79, 80, 85, 91, 94; and Birbili, Maria 4, 42, 44
bodily functions 11, 123, 127, 128,
participatory research 60; of teachers 149 129–130
Brenneman, Kimberley 127–128
Alati, Sergio 136, 137, 138 Britain (UK) 146, see also England
Broström, Stig 34, 40
Amanti, Cathy 60 Bruner, Jerome 60, 121, 179–180
Buzzelli, Cary 50, 51, 52, 115, 117, 130
Ang, Lynn 61, 64
Cameron, C. 47
Anning, Angela 4 Campbell-Barr, Verity 135, 143, 144,

Ansari, A. 153 146–147, 148

anthropology 20, 36, 59, 60, 80
Aotearoa New Zealand 1–2, 154, 169n1;

curriculum document in seeTe Wha-riki;
funds of knowledge project in 83–89;
identity development in 101–104;
teachers’ interests in 137, 140–141;
teachers’ professionalism in 5; working
theories in 121–123
Areljung, Sofie 123–124