Vera do Vale is PhD in educational sciences and teaches in the the master courses of preschool education and primary education, at the Higher School of Education of Coimbra.

What is the state of the art regarding the use of the STEAM approach in early childhood education?

Before starting to talk about the state of the art in early childhood education, it is necessary to make a parenthesis about this approach. Sometimes these approaches appear to us as new, innovative and if we go back to the origin of STEM, which in the 90s, in the United States of America, saw the addition of the 'A' for arts, it emerged with the aim of pushing back expository practices and, consequently, reply to the students' lack of interest in the exact sciences. Basically, what is at the origin of the STEAM approach has to do with this and with the use of practices that make these contents more appealing and interesting for students. The idea of ​​interdisciplinary projects emerges as a solution, which I do not consider to be anything new and, above all, nothing new for early childhood education. In fact, it can be an interesting and alert approach for other levels of education, namely primary and middle school education.

Early school education has always been favored by luck, because it counted from an early age with pedagogues, and even pediatricians (Montessori, Pikler...), who laid the foundations of what is now considered innovative and makes pedagogical fashion. But in reality it is nothing more than a revisiting of principles that for some reason, which is perhaps important to reflect on, were blurred over a certain period of time and that now return to the educational current themes. For example, John Dewey advocated that educating means developing the ability to think, to decide about new situations and always of increasing complexity, assuming a methodology in which children question, plan, experiment, confirm hypotheses, cooperate with each other, always in an interactive process, which is what is advocated in the STEAM approach. We have other examples, Lilian Katz and Sylvia Chard, who in 1987 launched the project-based approach in childhood education, where in addition to addressing the theoretical components, they describe situations of how this methodology can be used, which, according to the authors themselves, was contemporary with the appearance of Reggio Emilia. Although Reggio Emilia comes from the post-war period, with Loris Malaguzzi, it gained notoriety from the 1980s and 1990s as an interesting approach for early childhood education.

Thus, we find these views more focused on listening, on interests, on children's potential and abilities, which also brings us an idea of ​​a competent child, with agency, who, while involved in learning, plays, researches, creates.

This wave also arrived in Portugal; for example, the pedagogue and poet Irene Lisboa, in opposition to the regime and who for many years published under the pseudonym Manuel Soares, published a book, in 1943, on modern educational trends, in which she collected the ideas of various pedagogues (Frobel, Pestalozzi, Dewey) and incorporated them into an innovation in pedagogy, also signaling the project methodology as a work that enhances a vision of School in which less is taught and more is learned.

Sérgio Niza and Rosalina Gomes de Almeida, when they started the Modern School Movement in 1965, the basis was very much directed according to Freinet's pedagogies, where the tonic is also that of an active child, initially more directed to primary school but which later widened its scope to preschool education. We cannot forget Teresa Vasconcelos, who dedicated herself to the issues of quality and project work in early childhood education, having worked with Lilian Katz.

Early childhood, nursery and pre-school education have this underlying question of democracy, of participation, of an active, questioning child, which comes to us now with this STEAM approach; I don't think it's very necessary to import this model into early childhood education.

In your opinion, what are the reasons that can justify this advance in early childhood education?

I feel that early childhood education has always had an advance in relation to other levels of education, for several reasons.

The fact that educators can manage and build their own curriculum that is provided by the OCEPE, (Curricular Guidelines for Preschool Education), published by the Ministry of Education, allows each educator to make decisions, given the group of children, the place and the context in which it finds itself, regarding its practices, setting a particular tone so that the practices are not monotonous from north to south of the country. The OCEPE themselves have very solid principles: development and learning as inseparable aspects in the child's evolution process; to recognize the child as the subject and agent of their own educational process.

Another principle that I find very interesting, and that I think STEAM is possibly based on, is the response to all children, somewhat along the lines of multiple intelligences. When each child is developing projects, they can demonstrate their areas of interest and skills in those areas, which is basically the added value of working with projects and is what the STEAM approach defends - an articulated construction of knowledge, although with an emphasis on some areas (science, technology, engineering, arts and mathematics).

The content areas contemplated in the OCEPE, the area of ​​personal and social development, expressions and communication, the domain of mathematics, physical education, language, knowledge of the world, the introduction to scientific methodology, offer an approach broader and richer, in my opinion, compared to STEAM.

How does the inclusion of the Arts in the STEM approach make this approach more complete?

STEAM included the 'A' of the arts because it considered there was a gap, and there was indeed, but also because it linked it to a socio-emotional dimension, which I disagree with.

The Arts are a form of expression, and one of the major shortcomings of STEM was precisely to focus on the areas of Engineering, Science, but leaving out a cultural and creative component, but the socio-emotional dimension still remains to be resolved.

Again, in my opinion, early childhood education is a step, or two, or three further ahead. Even because early childhood education and preschool education have a fabulous ally - play - which has been used more in rhetorical discourse, because when it is said that the child should play what we see is that playing and working are considered opposites; there is this division that sometimes even educators make. I insist that play is a fabulous ally, because through play the child demonstrates intrinsic motivation, which is also linked to general development and the development of skills, to the ability to create opportunities and autonomous discoveries that will enhance learning.

I emphasize that STEAM is important for higher educational levels, especially for primary school because, often, what is seen is that the joy and enthusiasm that children have when going to kindergarten is replaced by boredom at 7 and 8 years old, there is scientific research in this regard. Children remain seated, straight, silent, listening to the teacher for hours on end, we tend to forget that children have an energy and curiosity that is not put to use and a threshold of concentration and attention for expository contents.

In the transition, between pre-school education and primary school, it is imperative to innovate more, not least because we continue to find primary school classrooms organized according to an expository teaching practice, with tables and chairs lined up towards the board, not promoting interaction among children, and in this context, in fact, the STEAM approach could be beneficial, but I emphasize again that it is nothing new.

In your opinion, do you feel that what is emerging in terms of pedagogical innovation is what is often already being implemented in early childhood education?

I feel exactly that. The problem is that early school education was for a long time relegated to the background in the Portuguese educational panorama. Going back to the origins of early school education and the emergence of this new profession, early school education teacher training has always been the same as that of teachers at the primary school level, as well as in terms of salary and the misconception that remained, was that the early school teachers only played with the children. Depreciation of play, and of play as a source of learning, and appreciation of tangible products as at other levels of education (sometimes, what is developed with children is not immediately perceived).

Today this perception is more diluted, early school education teachers are the first professionals who come into contact with children, outside the family, so they need to have a very solid scientific training in various areas of knowledge. But there is still this misconception that anyone can be an early school teacher, when it is precisely the opposite.

As I have already mentioned, the fact that in early school education, each teacher can build and manage their own curriculum, is one of the greatest innovations. Not long ago, the primary school level was granted this privilege, the chance to implement curriculum flexibility.

From your experience, what do you consider urgent to improve in early childhood education in Portugal?

With the launch of the new OCEPE, in 2016, another step was taken, but in my opinion the new curricular guidelines could have advanced further, especially in socio-emotional development, in the issue of playing, and in reconnecting children with the outdoors and nature. The exterior spaces that were completely decimated of natural elements, as well as the time spent in that context, should be rethought.

It is also important to have reflective communities of educators, for example, when I started working, there was a council meeting of educators every month. Educators who worked in the same municipality met on Friday afternoon (they had that period assigned by the Ministry of Education), to discuss issues, implement joint projects, etc.... and that was lost over time. Now there are opportunities to meet in the Clusters of Schools where educators are integrated, but these spaces for reflection are often not used productively, they are used in a very bureaucratic way. In fact, educators are heavily burdened with bureaucracy and have been pushed to acculturate to the primary school level, which translates into the requirement to write hourly summaries, summative assessment of children and decontextualized activity plans. There is no useful time or space for reflection, for reading and discussing a book or an article. The joint reflection on the practices is much needed by the educators and also by the primary school teachers. Sometimes this happens in meetings, and the APEI (Association of Professionals in Childhood Education) has organized meetings where educators themselves can present and discuss their practices, but these are annual meetings, these types of events should be more regular.

On the other hand, the class of early school educators is aging rapidly; teachers aged 60 and over should no longer be working directly with children, it is clear that their energy is exhausted in their daily work, in the demand to respond to the individuality of each child and in bureaucratic meetings, not having time to read new research findings, and the early childhood area has been very fruitful in terms of research, to question and reflect on their practices or experiment with a new approach.

It is also urgent that the education of children from 0-3 years old be valued by the Ministry of Education and that educators in Nursery level have the same status as those who develop their profession in Kindergartens.

Another very important aspect is the initial training of new professionals. Training courses for teachers and educators must be rethought. Its structure after the Bologna process has not been fruitful. The same goes for continuous training regarding new approaches, I know that there are already some national and international projects on the STEAM approach, the Coimbra School of Education itself is developing an international project in this area, but it is necessary to provide conditions for teachers to attend training courses because, if you don't invest in training the teachers, innovation won't happen.

Explore other reflections from Professor Vera do Vale here.