Evaluation of Parents' Views on An Early Childhood Science

Evaluation of Parents’ Views on An

Early Childhood Science Program

Including Activities in Out-of-School

Learning Environments

Gonca Uludağ,

Nefise Semra Erkan

1. Giresun University, Giresun, Türkiye

2. İstanbul Gelişim University, Istanbul, Türkiye

Abstract: Young children’s instinctive curiosity is essential in early

childhood science education. Efficacious science education is asso-

ciated with the characteristics of a qualified science program and

an effective learning environment. The out-of-school learning envi-

ronments make it easier to achieve the aims of science education in

early childhood with their opportunities and advantages. This sin-

gle case study aimed to reveal the views of the parents of children

aged 60-72 months who participated in an early childhood science

program that included science activities in out-of-school learning

environments, in the classroom, and at home. The Program, which

included parent involvement activities in the classroom, out-of-

school learning environments and at home, was implemented for

seven weeks. After completing all activities of the Program, the da-

ta obtained from the interviews with the parents were analyzed. The

findings showed that parents were interested in science and sup-

ported their children regarding science subjects, spent time at home

on science activities, and visited out-of-school learning environ-

ments with their children. It was determined that the out-of-school

learning activities of the Program contributed a lot to the child, and

the studies of parent involvement at home contributed variously for

both the child and the parents. The Program was effective as a

whole and parents requested its implementation throughout the

school year. Based on these findings, in this research, we discussed

the importance of frequently including science activities in out-of-

school learning environments and classroom activities in early

childhood and the parents’ involvement in the science education

process as valuable stakeholders.

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1966

Science Insights Education Frontiers 2023; 14(1):1965-1989.

Doi: 10.15354/sief.23.or085

How to Cite: Uludağ, G., & Erkan, N.S. (2023). Evaluation of parents’ views

on an early childhood science program including activities in out-of-school

learning environments. Science Insights Education Frontiers, 14(1):1965-

1989.

Keywords: Out-of-School Learning Environment, Science Education, Early Child-

hood, Parent Involvement

About the Authors: Gonca Uludağ, Assistant Professor, PhD, Department of Early Childhood Education, Giresun

University, Giresun, Türkiye. E-mail: drgoncauludag@gmail.com

Nefise Semra Erkan, Professor, PhD, Department of Child Development, İstanbul Gelişim University, İstanbul,

Türkiye. E-mail: nsemraerka[email protected]

Correspondence to: Assistant Professor Gonca Uludağ at Giresun University of Turkey.

Ethics: Ethics permission for the research was obtained from the Ethics Committee of Hacettepe University

(14.04.2015-76000869/433_1200). In addition, data collection permission was obtained from the local unit of the

Republic of Türkiye Ministry of National Education (12.05.2015-14588481-605.99-E.4942724).

Conflict of Interests: None

Creative Commons NonCommercial CC BY-NC: This article is distributed under the terms of the Crea-

tive Commons Attribution-NonCommercial 4.0 License (http://www.creativecommons.org/licenses/by-

nc/4.0/) which permits non-commercial use, reproduction and distribution of the work without further permission provided

the original work is attributed by the Insights Publisher.

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1967

Introduction

WHAT is science?” There is no doubt that there is no single answer to

this question. Paulu and Martin (1992) have defined science as observ-

ing what’s happening, predicting what might happen, testing predic-

tions, and trying to make sense of our observations. Science is a “body of

knowledge” or a “body of facts” associated with particular disciplines such

as biology, physics, chemistry, geology, astronomy, psychology, information

and communication technology, and so on) (Johnston, 2005, p.10-11). Sci-

ence involves the process of trial, error and retries (Paulu & Martin, 1992),

and this process brings about discoveries. Therefore, science is a process of

research, discovery and understanding (Uludağ & Erkan, 2020). Uludağ and

Erkan (2020) defined science as acquiring knowledge about the world by

using the innate sense of curiosity, discovery and learning, and the ways of

reaching knowledge (p.3).

Science is an exciting topic that attracts young children. Because

children like to know how things are, and science encourages them to test

how things work. Science, which is highly related to other fields, provides

recognition and understanding of the world (Kelly, 2015). Young children’s

curiosity about their daily lives and the world around them improves scien-

tific concepts, knowledge, skills and attitudes. The equal development of

these scientific concepts, knowledge, skills and attitudes is essential for chil-

dren not to develop alternative conceptions or misconceptions and positive

scientific attitudes (Johnston, 2005).

Science Education in Early Childhood

The aim of science education in early childhood is to improve children’s

knowledge of the world and to help them learn the methods to be used in

discovering, evaluating, reviewing and communicating this information, and

to nurture, enrich and sustain their natural interest in scientific knowledge

(Klahr et al., 2011). In early childhood, science education should provide

active participation of children in the process with a qualified program, en-

able hands-on experiences, be child-centered, develop a positive attitude to-

wards science, include knowledge and skills that will form the basis for bet-

ter understanding of scientific concepts and future science learning, enable

acquiring knowledge and getting to know the world by using sensory organs,

and develop science process skills (Conezio & French, 2002; Hachey & But-

ler, 2009; Mantzicopoulos et al., 2008; O’Connor & Rosicka, 2020; Pattison

& Dierking, 2019).

There are three main content areas of science education in early

childhood: life sciences, physical sciences, earth and space sciences

(Charlesworth & Lind, 2013; Lester, 2007). Children need to understand and

“

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1968

use these areas, focusing on science events, concepts, principles, theories and

models (National Research Council [NRC], 1996). Today, engineering,

technology and science applications are also included in the content (NRC,

2012). Characteristics, biology and ecosystems of living organisms in chil-

dren in the context of life sciences; properties of matter, sound, motion and

energy in the context of physical sciences; In the content of earth and space

sciences, it is aimed to structure the concepts of the Earth’s place in the uni-

verse and its systems, and the effects of human activities on these systems

(Vermont Early Learning Standards, 2015). A qualified science program and

an effective learning environment have a fundamental role in achieving the

goals of early childhood science education and in helping children learn sci-

ence content.

Out-of-School Learning Environment

The themes and key issues of 21st-century skills, emphasized in this century,

are built on four support systems, one of which is “learning environments”

(Partnership for 21st Century Learning, 2019). It is known that appropriate

learning environments positively affect child development (Özbay-Karlıdağ,

2021). Learning experiences of young children are best realized in environ-

ments where they can use all their senses (Kostelnik et al., 2014). The out-

of-school learning environments (OSLE) appeal to children’s senses and

stimulate them.

Museums, botanical gardens, zoos, science centers and aquariums are

OSLE and associating activities in these environments with the curriculum

and achieving learning outcomes is defined as out-of-school learning (Laçin-

Şimşek & Öztuna-Kaplan, 2022). OSLE start with the school garden and

spread towards the immediate environment (Loxley et al., 2010). Using these

environments in science education is interesting for children, increases learn-

ing motivation, develops scientific and social skills, develops positive atti-

tudes towards science, and makes learning in the classroom permanent and

meaningful (Öcal & Uludağ, 2022; Guardino et al., 2019). Therefore, parents’

use of these environments is as important as teachers’ use of these environ-

ments. Because one of the essential stakeholders in qualified science educa-

tion is parents.

Parent’s Role in Science Education

Young children’s first informal science experiences occur in their interaction

with their parents (Crowley et al., 2001). Parents may not have a strong sci-

ence infrastructure to experience science with their children, but there are

many opportunities to learn science in everyday life. For example, how long

it takes for a rose to bloom fully, to monitor and record changes in the Moon,

to monitor/track a kitten’s growth, to make cakes together, etc. (Paulu &

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1969

Martin, 1992). These informal experiences can also be transformed into a

more planned process with home-based and school-based parent involve-

ment activities when the child starts school.

Parent involvement refers to parents’ activities to support children’s

education (Camarero-Figuerola et al., 2020). Parent involvement is discussed

in two groups as participating in school and home activities (Martinez, 2015).

Parent involvement in science education is strongly recommended (The Na-

tional Science Teachers Association [NSTA], 1994). Parents encourage the

daily use of their children’s science concepts and process skills, helping

them develop the skills necessary for success. NSTA (1994) recommends

that parents give the child time to do science, listen to and talk to the child’s

questions, not avoid saying what they don’t know, and be eager to seek an-

swers to questions. Parents should also encourage the school to do science

activities and explore OSLE such as museums, airports and recycling centers

with the child.

Aim of the Research

The current research aimed to reveal the views of parents of children who

participated in an early childhood science program that included science ac-

tivities in OSLE, in the classroom, and at home. The following research

questions (RQ) were addressed with the study;

RQ1. Are parents interested in science, and how does the child answer ques-

tions about science?

RQ2. Do parents do science activities at home with child and visiting sci-

ence-related OSLE?

RQ3. According to the parents, what are the contributions of science-related

OSLE to the child?

RQ4. What are the parents’ views on the contribution of the Program’s ac-

tivities in OSLE and parent involvement at home?

RQ5. According to the parents, what are the Program’s contributions as a

whole to child?

RQ6. What are the parents’ interest in the Program and the reasons for their

interest?

Method

Research Model

The research is a descriptive case study and has a holistic single-case design.

Descriptive case studies deal with the “how” of a situation. The holistic sin-

gle case design covers a single unit of analysis (such as individual, organiza-

tion, and program) and is used to investigate unique situations and topics that

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1970

have not been studied before (Yin, 2018). This research is about describing

the effects of a specific program.

Study Group

The research included the parents of 27 children aged 60-72 months who at-

tended an official kindergarten and participated in the Program (mother: 18,

father: 9). The demographic characteristics of the parents were as follows: 41%

of their mothers and 60% of their fathers were between the ages of 35-40. 74%

of mothers and 66% of fathers had bachelor’s degree. 37% of mothers and

48% of fathers were self-employed.

In the selection of the school where the Program was applied, the

physical facilities of the school, the willingness of the school administration,

parents and classroom teachers to participate in the research, and the absence

of children in any other research during the time period in which the research

will be conducted were taken into consideration. In addition, since science

activities were carried out in both classroom and OSLE, it was considered

that the school was in the city center for ease of transportation and more ef-

fective use of time. In order to carry out science activities in the school gar-

den, security measures were taken (being surrounded by fences etc.) and the

choice was made among the schools, the ground of which were not covered

with asphalt, with a garden with trees, soil and green areas.

Content and Implementation of the Program

The Program was prepared by the researchers in line with expert views to

support the science process skills of children aged 60-72 months (Uludağ &

Erkan, in press). The Program consists of science activities in the classroom

and OSLE and parent involvement activities at home. In the Program, which

includes large and small group activities, there are 36 activities in total, 21 in

the classroom and 15 in OSLE. Based on the constructivist and science proc-

ess approach, the Program has seven gains and 24 indicators for observing,

comparing, classifying, measuring, data recording/communicating, inferring

and predicting skills. The Program includes life sciences, physical sciences,

earth and space sciences. The Program’s table of specifications is presented

in Table 1 (Uludağ & Erkan, in press).

The Program’s activities in the classroom and OSLE (Aquarium, In-

sect Festival School (IFS), Natural History Museum, Planetarium, Science

Center, Veterinary Anatomy Museum, school garden) were carried out by

the researcher for seven weeks, three days a week, in the classroom (Photo-

graph 1-2) for 45-50 minutes each, and OSLE for 2-3 hours once a week

(Photograph 3-8, taken by the researchers). In the evaluations made at

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1971

the end of the Program, it was determined that the Program positively af-

fected children’s science process skills (Uludağ & Erkan, in press).

Within the scope of the Program, complementary worksheets pre-

pared for the activities of the children during the week were delivered to the

parents by the teacher every Friday. These worksheets included activities

Table 1. The Program’s Table of Specifications.

Activity

Content

Area

Environments

Observing

Comparing

Classifying

Measuring

Data

recording/

communicating

Inferring

Predicting

Classroom

LS-PS

Classroom

LS-PS

Classroom

4-5

LS-PS

Science

Center

6-7

School

Garden

Classroom

10-11

Veterinary

Anatomy

Museum

LS-PS

Classroom

LS-PS

Classroom

Aquarium

LS-PS

Classroom

ESS

Classroom

PS-

ESS

Classroom

19-20

LS-

PS-

ESS

Natural

History

Museum

LS-

ESS

Classroom

PS-

ESS

Classroom

24-25

LS-PS

Science

Center

PS-

ESS

Classroom

27-28

LS-

ESS

School

Garden-

Classroom

LS-

ESS

Classroom

30-31

IFS

ESS

Classroom

ESS

Classroom

35-36

PS-

ESS

Planetarium

**Shows the scientific process skills related to the activity in the school garden (LS=Life Sciences, PS=Physical Sciences,

ESS=Earth and Space Sciences)

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1972

Photograph 1. Classifing of Seashells.

Photograph 2. Recognize Non-Standard Measurement Tools.

Photograph 3-4. Museum of Veterinary Anatomy - Examination of Frozen Samples.

Photograph 5. Science Center-Milk Experiments Workshop (Structure of Milk).

Photograph 6. Natural History Museum- Examination of the Cave Model.

Photograph 7-8. Aquarium-Various Marine Animals and Snake Observations.

to reinforce children’s learning in the OSLE they visited and carried out ac-

tivities in the relevant week, activities to support science process skills, and

information notes about the OSLE to be visited the following week. These

worksheets aimed to increase the effect by repeating and reinforcing chil-

dren’s knowledge and involving parents in the process. Parents did the ac-

tivities on the worksheets with child and delivered the worksheets to the

teacher on the first school day of each week. For example, in the worksheets,

there were tasks such as chatting with children about the out-of-school learn-

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1973

Picture 1. A Drawing of the Aquarium Activities.

Child: “This is the tunnel we passed through, the stingrays were passing over us, here are they, I saw the

biggest stingray, I saw their eyes, this is the crocodile I drew. I never thought I’d see a real crocodile

(Laughs). It was moving very slowly, and I drew it here as moving slowly.”

Picture 2. A Drawing of the Activities of the Natural History Mu-

seum.

Child: “I drew the jaguar that we saw, this is the cave that we entered, the voices echo in the cave, that is

the flying dinosaur, they are no longer alive, that’s the tree trunk that we saw. We know the age of the

trees from these lines. I also saw the fossils; I drew them all differently because there were slightly differ-

ent ones.”

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1974

ing environment in which the activity was carried out in the relevant week,

asking children thought-provoking questions, asking children to draw the

objects/events they saw in the out-of-school learning environment and to ex-

plain their observations through these drawings (Picture 1-2), doing activi-

ties that support science process skills (comparing and sorting the cards

showing the life cycle of the chick, chatting about similar and different char-

acteristics of family members, conducting simple experiments and noting the

processes with the child’s expressions, etc.). These worksheets from the par-

ents were filed in separate folders for each child, thus ensuring that the tasks

were performed.

The data were obtained through interviews using an open-ended

questionnaire prepared by the researchers. In the first part of the form, ques-

tions about the parents’ age, parent type (father-mother), education level and

profession were included; in the second part, questions about whether the

parent is interested in science, the status of children’s answering science

questions, the status of carrying out science activities with the child and vis-

iting OSLE, and their views about the contributions of science-related OSLE

to the child were included. The questions in the second part aimed to deter-

mine the parents’ views on science and on performing science activities with

their children; thus, it was aimed to obtain preliminary information for the

answers to the questions in the third part. In the third part, questions were

asked to determine their views on the Program’s activities in OSLE, parent

involvement activities at home, their contributions in terms of children and

the request for implementation. The average duration of the interviews was

40 minutes.

Data Collection

The data were obtained immediately after the completion of the Program’s

activities. Necessary ethical and official permissions were obtained before

data collection. Participants were told that participation in the research was

voluntary and that they had the right to withdraw at any time. Confidentiality

and anonymity were guaranteed. Some of the interviews were conducted

face-to-face, and the researchers noted the answers given in writing. It was

determined that some parents could not participate in the face-to-face inter-

view due to reasons such as their work life, the presence of another child/

other children in need of home care, and the lack of transportation to school.

In this case, the data collection tool was delivered to the parents by the

teacher in printed form, and phone calls were made to willing parents.

Data Analysis

The data were analyzed using content analysis techniques. The content

analysis aims to reach concepts and relationships that explain the collected

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1975

data, and similar data are gathered and interpreted within the framework of

specific concepts and themes (Çepni, 2014). In this respect, the data were

first read within the predetermined framework in the research. As a unit of

analysis, words were used, codings were made according to the concepts ex-

tracted from the data, and direct quotations that could be used in the mean-

time were also noted. Then, the similarities and differences between the

codes were reviewed, and the themes were obtained. The data organized in

this way were supported by direct quotations. Two researchers carried out

the analysis process independently, and the formula (reliability=number of

agreements/total number of agreements + disagreements) was used to reveal

the coder reliability (Miles & Huberman, 1994, p.64). As a result of the cal-

culation, the percentage of agreement between the coders was determined as

91%. It is recommended that the inter-coder reliability rate should be 90%

and above (Miles & Huberman, 1994). Codes assigned to parents for use in

reporting data and direct quotations were presented in the findings.

Findings

Parent’s Interest in Science and Answering the Child’s

Science Questions

According to the findings obtained within the scope of RQ1, all parents

stated that they were interested in science and tried to clearly and under-

standably answer the child’s questions about science. However, some of the

parents stated that they investigated the answer of the question with the child

(n=8), some tried to explain the answer to the child’s question with examples

and practices (n=6), and some parents stated that they encouraged the child

to ask more questions (n=2). (n= the number of participants). The samples of

parents’ quotes follow:

Parent 1: “I am interested in science. I am happy when I see my

child’s desire to learn something. I explain it to him/her in a way

that he/she can understand and make him/her understand by giv-

ing examples.”

Parent 3: “I’m interested in science. Because I’m a chemist, my

daughter knows university life very well. We’re going to the lab

with him, and he knows how to experiment. Since I work at home,

he has an interest in science subjects. I explain his questions in

the most detailed way and explain them with practices; we spend

time together this way.”

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1976

Performing Science Activities at Home with Child and

Visiting Science-Related OSLE

According to the findings obtained within the scope of RQ2, some of the

parents stated that they did science activities at home with their child (n =

17), while some of the others stated that they could not do science activities

at home with their children because of lack of time (n = 5) and some of them

stated that they did not know what to do (n = 2). Three parents stated that

they did not do science activities with their children. However, they only did

science activities at home with children within the scope of the Program’s

parent involvement activities. The samples of parents’ quotes follow:

Parent 9: “Yes, sometimes we do. For example, we studied how

the seed became a plant. We planted seeds in the pots, growing

flowers, parsley and onions. We examined them.”

Parent 4: “No (we can’t do the activity). Because we are working

very hard and we do not have time.”

Twenty-four parents said they visited their children’s science-related

OSLE. The OSLE that parents visit with the child were the zoo (f = 15), the

greenhouse/botanical garden (f = 8), the aquarium (f = 5), the science center

(f = 3), the science museum (f = 2), the natural history museum (f = 2) and

nature (f = 2). Three parents stated that they could not make such visits due

to their busy working life [f = Frequency of code in data (raw count)].

The Contribution of Science-Related OSLE to Child

According to the findings obtained within the scope of RQ3, the codes and

frequencies related to the contribution of science-related OSLE to child are

presented in Table 2.

According to Table 2, parents thought that OSLE mostly aroused cu-

riosity in children and led them to explore. The samples of parents’ quotes

follow:

Parent 27: “We visited many museums, science museums, bo-

tanical gardens and zoos. My son mostly asked why and how

questions in these places we visited. Many things attracted his at-

tention, and he remembered the information even after a long

time.”

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1977

Table 2. The Contribution of Science-Related OSLE to Child.

Environment

Code

Zoo/Aquarium

Arousing curiosity

Raising awareness for animal protection

Leading to discovery

Helping to overcome the animal phobia

Providing a permanent learning opportunity

Greenhouse/Botanical garden

Leading to discovery

Ensuring that child learns about plants

Science center/Science museum

Arousing curiosity

Providing concrete learning opportunity

Natural history museum

Leading to discovery and research

Providing a permanent learning opportunity

*: Frequency of code in data (raw count)

Table 3. The Contributions of the Program’s Activities in OSLE.

Theme

Code

Learning process

Awakening the desire to learn

Making the learning process enjoyable

Providing new learning

Ensuring that learning is permanent

Making children want to go to school

Development of science process skills

Developing communication skills

Improving observing skills

Improving comparing skills

Developing predicting skills

Developing inferring skills

Science learning

Increasing interest in science/science subjects

Increasing the use of scientific terms and descriptions

Arousing interest in OSLE

Development

Helping to reduce animal phobia

Increasing love for animal

Increasing self-confidence

*: Frequency of code in data (raw count)

Parent 24: “We went to the zoo and aquarium. This place al-

lowed him to get to know animals and overcome his fear of ani-

mals a little bit. He began to wonder how the animals were fed

and how they were born.”

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1978

The Contributions of the Program’s Activities in OSLE

and about Parent Involvement at Home

According to the findings obtained within the scope of RQ4, the themes,

codes and frequencies obtained from the views on the contribution of the

Program’s activities in OSLE to children are presented in Table 3.

According to Table 3, the activities of the Program in OSLE contrib-

ute mostly to the children’s learning process. In addition, the parents stated

that the activities improved science process skills, increased their interest in

science-related subjects and positively affected their development. The sam-

ples of parents’ quotes follow:

Parent 5: “He describes all events in detail. That his hair flew

electrically at the Science Center, he made experiments with

vinegar, everything. All the activities and trips made him go to

school excitedly. He studies everything he sees more and more in

detail now. He establishes cause-effect relationships. “

Parent 10: “He returned very happy from all his trips. When he

came home, he gave detailed information about the events he had

experienced that day. He fondly described the fish in the aquar-

ium, the skeletons in the natural (historical) museum, and so on.

He has started to make more observations; he is examining his

surroundings in more detail. He also wants scientific explana-

tions for any event. He thinks the word science is very important.

It’s certainly easier for him to learn that way.”

The contributions of the Program’s activities about parent involve-

ment at home were grouped into two groups for child and parent. The themes,

codes and frequencies obtained from the views are presented in Table 4.

According to Table 4, the learning process is first in the category of

contributions for children. In this theme, it is seen that parents think that

their children enjoy working with them and learning the Program worksheets

at home and that this practice is educational and instructive for children.

However, some parents stated that their children started to be curious about

science and their interest increased. Some contributions are improving chil-

dren’s self-confidence and strengthening their communication skills. In addi-

tion, parents stated that the worksheets of the Program guided them in carry-

ing out science activities with children at home. The samples of parents’

quotes follow:

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1979

Table 4. The Contributions of the Program’s Activities About Parent

Involvement at Home.

Theme

Code

For

Children

Learning process

That it is enjoyable

Being educational/instructive

Reinforcing learning

Improving vocabulary

Science

Increasing curiosity/interest in science/science subjects

Improvement

Increasing self-confidence

Strengthening communication skills

For Parents

Counselling

Providing counselling in carrying out science activities

Offering the opportunity to follow up on the development of children

Interaction

Facilitating communication with children

Providing the opportunity to get to know children

*: Frequency of code in data (raw count)

Table 5. The Contributions of the Program as A Whole to Child.

Theme

Code

Science learning

Willing to learn about the science

Using scientific terms and making scientific explanations

Asking more questions on various science topics

Requesting science materials from the parents

Awakening the desire to be a scientist in children

Learning process

Willingness to research and discovery

Enjoying the learning process

Permanent learning

Willing to share learned information

Starting to like the school

Development of science process skills

Developing communication skills

Developing observation skills

Developing inference skills

*: Frequency of code in data (raw count)

Parent 9: “As soon as he comes from school, he asks about these

activities. –Mom, let’s see what’s going on- (on the worksheets).

–Let’s do it, he says. He’s started to be interested in everything.

When the activities are over, he says, “Any more”? So we started

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1980

to do other experiments, activities, and research information

from the internet.”

Parent 12: “I think it reinforces everything he has learned and

more within the Program. He talks about it all the time. He

started talking more about science at home. He shared what he

saw and learned through these activities (on the worksheet).

These events have been a guide also for me. I have learned what

my child can understand and learn.”

The Contributions of the Program as A Whole to Child

According to the findings obtained within the scope of RQ5, the themes,

codes and frequencies related to the contribution of the Program as a whole

to the child, according to parents’ views, are presented in Table 5.

According to Table 5, parents think that the curriculum contributes

mainly to the child in science learning; at the same time, it contributes vari-

ously to the development of the learning process and science process skills.

The samples of parents’ quotes follow:

Parent 11: “He says he loves science. His attention and interest

in his environment increased. He’s questioning everything now.

He asks us why-how everything he sees is done, he wants to learn

more, and he is very happy.”

Parent 8: “My child has become a child who wants to experiment

thanks to the Program. He’s also waiting for a scientific explana-

tion for every incident. He thinks the word science is very impor-

tant. While watching cartoons at home, I observed that he started

to choose those content that includes experiments and describes

animals. And the questions he asks amaze me. Planets, day and

night formation, germination of seeds, the natural life of insects...

He explains many subjects in his own words and tries to teach us.

He also wants to know what he doesn’t know.”

Parent 27: “His curiosity for science has increased, and he

wants to be a scientist. Actually, he always said he wanted to be a

painter. He questions the before and after of every event that

happens around him. He began to look for a reason as to why

this had happened. He draws pictures of how it rains. He tells the

lava of volcanos. He excitedly describes the science activities we

do at home to our family elders as a discovery, which makes us

very happy. This is spectacular.”

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1981

Parents’ Interest in the Program and the Reasons for Interest Accord-

ing to the findings obtained within the scope of RQ6, the implementation

period of the Program is seven weeks. However, all of the parents demanded

that the content of the Program be applied for one academic year. Because

according to parents, the Program is a program that is fun/instructive (f = 10),

effective/successful (f = 7), efficient/useful (f = 4), enjoyable/entertaining (f

= 4), engaging (f = 3), different (f = 3), allows parent involvement (f = 3),

supports the development of the child (f = 2), is loved by children and is

wanted to continue (f = 2). The samples of parents’ quotes follow:

Parent 13: “I want it to continue. So does my daughter. He says

he wants to learn more and see new places.”

Parent 26: “I really want it to continue throughout the year. At

the beginning of this year, my daughter and I made a list of

places to visit. Places visited under this Program were also on

our list, and there were even more. This work seems like a mira-

cle to us. I think it supports his development, and he asked us for

a telescope as a gift on his birthday. We were very surprised.”

Parent 4: “(The Program) It should continue until the year ends.

I think this training is very useful. I would love for my child to be

interested in science. I think this training is the first step for him.

So we did things with our child that we never thought we would

do because of the busy schedule. We spent time with him. My son

learned new things, and I think it was very effective.”

Discussion

As a result of the research, it was determined that all parents were interested

in science, and they tried to answer the child’s questions about science

clearly and understandably. The answers to the questions that were unknown

by some parents were investigated together with children, the answer to the

child’s question was tried to be explained with examples and practices, and

the child was encouraged to ask more questions. Accordingly, it can be said

that parents find it essential to encounter science-related issues at an early

age and have a positive approach to encouraging the child to learn. Kıldan

and Pektaş (2009) determined that preschool teachers think parents are es-

sential in encouraging the child’s curiosity about science-related issues. Par-

ents play a critical role in their children’s observation, discovery and re-

search of the world they live in (Zucker et al., 2021, p.3). However, the en-

thusiasm and courage of the parents can ignite the child’s interest in science

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1982

(Paulu & Martin, 1992). Aktamis et al. (2008) concluded in their research

that parents’ interest in science helps children grasp the importance of sci-

ence in daily life.

It has been determined that many parents do various science activities

with their children at home; however, a few cannot do such activities due to

a lack of time and not knowing what to do. Some parents stated that they

only did science activities within the scope of the Program’s activities about

parent involvement at home with the child. Accordingly, it can be said that

some situations prevent the realization of parent-child interaction in science,

and the Program plays a mediating role in performing science activities at

home. In the research conducted by Erkan et al. (2016), it was determined

that reasons such as lack of time, intensity of working life, intensity of

housework, lack of pedagogical knowledge are the factors that prevent

home-based parent involvement of parents whose children attend early

childhood education institutions. Directing parents to parent involvement

activities, the teacher’s guide for parents, and planning home-based partici-

pation are also important parts of the education process. According to

Mumpini et al.’s (2021) research, parents already have a proper understand-

ing of early childhood science learning and can theoretically support the

child.

Most parents stated that they visited OSLE with the child. The most

important of these environments are the zoo, greenhouse/botanical garden

and aquarium. Some parents point to busy work life as why these environ-

ments cannot be visited. Science and technology museums, anatomy muse-

ums, history museums, science centers, science camps, planetariums,

aquariums, national parks, zoos, botanical gardens, school gardens, farms,

nature centers (lake, river etc.), industrial establishments, hospitals, post of-

fices, digital environments, cinema and theatres, historical open areas, librar-

ies, educational environments of non-governmental organizations, camps

conducted within a specific program are OSLE (Cabello & Ferk Savec, 2018;

Çolakoğlu, 2019; Eshach, 2007; Laçin-Şimşek, 2020; Republic of Türkiye

Ministry of National Education, 2019; Walsh & Straits, 2014). Although it is

pleasing for parents to visit these environments with their children, it is seen

that one of the reasons for not being able to participate in science activities at

home is the intense work life and, accordingly, not being able to spare time.

However, it is a fact that parents’ good planning of the balance and time

management between their work lives and the needs of their children plays

an essential role in the child’s development.

Parents explained the contribution of OSLE for children, mostly

through the zoo and aquarium, and stated that OSLE arouse children’s curi-

osity and lead them to explore. In the research of İnce and Akcanca (2021),

parents stated that using OSLE in early childhood education provides many

advantages for children’s cognitive, affective, social and life skills. Ramey-

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1983

Gassert (1997) states that environments such as science centers, museums,

and zoos provide motivational, engaging, enjoyable, and non-threatening,

hands-on opportunities.

According to the parents, the Program’s activities in OSLE contribute

various contributions to children in terms of the learning process, develop-

ment of science process skills, and science learning and development. At this

point, we would like to mention the importance of the planning and imple-

mentation process, one of the most critical dimensions of the activities to be

carried out in OSLE with preschool children. It can be predicted that taking

children out of school will raise parents’ concerns. İnce and Akcanca (2021)

determined that parents whose children continue early childhood education

experience various concerns about possible accidents and hazards in out-of-

school activities, high-class size, the structure of the OSLE and how to meet

the needs of the child. Uludağ (2021) determined that preschool teachers

face parent-based problems such as concerns about their children’s safety

and health problems, negative attitudes towards their children’s participation

in activities, finding these activities unnecessary, and not wanting to pay

transportation and entrance fees. Fear and anxiety about out-of-school activi-

ties are essential obstacles to realising these activities (Dillon et al., 2006).

However, a good planning process and appropriate practices in this direction

will reduce parents’ anxiety and ensure active use of the environment. As a

matter of fact, in the current research, parents were the supporters of the

process and stated the contribution of the activities.

It is obvious that the use of OSLE in science education in early

childhood is related to the perspectives of teachers and parents in these envi-

ronments. Teachers may be shy about carrying out activities in these envi-

ronments due to environmental opportunities, security problems, parental

problems and problems related to themselves (lack of knowledge and experi-

ence, etc.) (Uludağ, 2021). However, it is known that parents do not prefer

these environments for reasons such as costly use and security problems

(İnce & Akcanca, 2021; Uludağ, 2017). Each preschool setting will have its

unique possibilities and constraints for using science as a context for early

childhood learning. However, small actions by both preschool teachers and

parents can make a big difference in highlighting the joy and curiosity of

science (Raven & Wenner, 2022).

Parents stated that the Program’s activities parent involvement at

home contribute to the child and themselves. Parents are an indispensable

part of early childhood education. However, parent involvement in early

childhood education is an important opportunity for children to learn. Powell

et al. (2010) found that parent involvement in early childhood education con-

tributes to children’s academic, cognitive and social development. In addi-

tion, parent involvement is also effective in developing children’s self-

esteem and self-efficacy skills (Graham & Kankpi, 2020; Mishra, 2012).

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1984

Parent involvement in science education positively affects children’s science

achievement and attitudes towards science (Fleer & Rillero, 1999; Reinhart

et al., 2016). According to Güler and Hazır Bıkmaz (2002), preschool teach-

ers think that cooperation with the family is essential for effective science

education and that the child should be given some responsibilities at home.

In line with this finding, it is seen that the Program is a science program that

contributes to both children and parents with the dimension of parent in-

volvement at home. It is known that many science programs/projects are im-

plemented in various countries related to science education in early child-

hood and parent involvement plays an essential role in them. Preschool

Pathways to Science, ScienceStart! are among these programs. Kefi (2020)

states that parent involvement is one of the most important strategies of early

childhood science education programs. Therefore, it is clear that the Pro-

gram’s parent involvement activities at home play an essential role in the

success of the Program. However, it can be said that parents’ interest in sci-

ence is also effective in the success of the Program. Sahin-Cakır and Uludag

(2022) determined that parents’ perceptions about science and participation

in science activities in early childhood were positive.

According to the parents, the program as a whole contributed to the

child’s science learning, the development of the learning process, and sci-

ence process skills. It is known that OSLE has many benefits for K-12 chil-

dren (Anderson et al., 2000; Armağan, 2015; Attisano, 2021; Balçın & Ya-

vuz-Topaloğlu, 2019; Bamberger & Tal, 2008; Bozdoğan & Kavcı, 2016;

Dağal & Bayındır, 2016; DeMarie, 2001; Dohn, 2011; Erten & Taşçi, 2016;

Erentay, 2013; Gerber et al., 2001; Hoisington et al., 2010; Li, 2022; Neill,

2008; Sobel et al., 2022; Okur-Berberoglu et. al., 2013; Toprakkaya, 2016;

Uludağ & Erkan, in press; Ürey & Çepni, 2014). Civelek and Özyılmaz-

Akamca (2018) determined that preschool education supported with outdoor

activities improves the science process skills of preschool children and that

children find the activities enjoyable. However, the Program, which is a

seven-week program, has been a program with its content that all the parents

demanded to be implemented for an academic year. The reason for this re-

quest was explained as the Program being enjoyable/instructive, effec-

tive/successful, beneficial/useful, entertaining/enjoyable, engaging, different,

enabling parent involvement, supporting the child’s development and being

loved and desired by children to continue. Accordingly, it is possible to say

that the Program serves its purpose.

Conclusion and Recommendations

According to the research results, parents are interested in science and try to

answer their child’s questions about science clearly and understandably.

They usually spare time for science activities with children at home and visit

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1985

various OSLE with children. It has been determined that these environments

arouse curiosity in children and lead them to explore. The Program’s activi-

ties carried out in OSLE contribute to children’s learning process, science

process skills, science learning and development, and the Program’s parent

involvement studies have various contributions for both children and parents,

the Program generally contributes to children in terms of science learning,

learning process and science process skills. In addition, due to its many posi-

tive features, parents wanted the Program to be applied throughout the entire

academic year.

Early childhood science education is essential for children to know

and understand the world, develop science process skills, and form the basis

of further science learning. Considering that young children need concrete

materials, effective learning environments and real hands-on experiences for

learning, the active use of OSLE also gains importance. To achieve science

acquisitions in early childhood education, activities in OSLE, which are suit-

able for learning science and performing science activities, should also be

included as classroom activities. Based on this result, we suggest that the use

of this and similar content science programs should be widespread and that

the active use of OSLE should be included in early childhood education

policies. We also suggest making cooperation to benefit from OSLE with

systematic and planned practices in early childhood science education to

support parent involvement in early childhood science education.

Limitations

The research has a limitation. The analysis is based on the experiences of

parents whose children participated in the Program and who are also a part

of parent involvement and their observations of changes/development in

their child. In future studies, studies can be conducted to determine the con-

tribution of this Program to science learning in later years (for example, pri-

mary school). It is possible to research with larger working groups. Mixed

method studies can be designed to compare results. Parents’ views could be

addressed in terms of various variables, but these were not the aim of this

research. This research aimed to reveal the effects of a program based on us-

ing OSLE in science education with parents’ evaluations. All the results are

considered an opportunity to construct subsequent relevant research on the

importance of using OSLE in early childhood science education.

Acknowledgment

We would like to thank the children who participated in the Program and the par-

ents who participated in this research. We also thank the reviewers for their criti-

cism and suggestions about the article. The research was presented as an oral

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1986

presentation at the X. International Congress of Educational Research in Türkiye

(Nevsehir) on 27-30 April 2018.

References

Aktamış, A., Ünal, A., & Ergin, P. (2008). The

effect of their parents on students’ atti-

tudes towards science. Journal of Social

Policy Studies, 14(14):39-48.

Anderson, D., Lucas, K. B., Ginss, I. S., &

Deirking, L. D. (2000). Development of

knowledge about electricity and mag-

netism during a visit to a science museum

and related post-visit activities. Science

Education, 84(5), 658-679.

Armağan, B. (2015). Outdoor learning environ-

ments in elementary school fourth grade

science teaching: An action research. Un-

published master’s thesis. Dokuz Eylül

University.

Attisano, E. (2021). Investigating children’s

naturalistic explorations in a living history

museum. Unpublished doctoral thesis.

University of Waterloo.

Balçın, M. D., & Yavuz-Topaloğlu, M. (2019).

Investigation of primary school students’

perceptions towards engineers and scien-

tists at out-of-schoollearning environ-

ments. Ordu University Journal of Social

Science Research, 9(1):157-170.

Bamberger, Y., & Tal. T. (2008). Multiple out-

comes of class visits to natural history

museums: The students’ view. Journal of

Science Education and Technology,

17(3):274-284.

Bozdoğan, A. E., & Kavcı, A. (2016). The ef-

fects of out of class teaching activities to

secondary shool students’ academic

achievement in science course. Gazi

Journal of Education Sciences, 2(1):13-30.

Cabello, V. M., & Ferk Savec, V. (2018). Out-

of-school opportunities for science and

mathematics learning: Environment ad the

third educator. LUMAT: International

Journal on Math, Science and Technology

Education, 6(2):3-8. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.31129/LUMAT.6.2.35

Camarero-Figuerola, M., Dueñas, J.M., &

Renta-Davids, A.I. (2020). The relation-

ship between family involvement and ac-

ademic variables: A systematic review.

Research in Social Sciences and Technol-

ogy, 5(2):57-71. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.46303/ressat.05.02.4

Charlesworth, R., & Lind, K.K. (2013). Math

and science for young children (7th Ed.).

Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Cengage

Learning.

Civelek, P., & Özyımaz-Akamca, G. (2018). The

effect of outdoor activities on scientific

process skills of preschool children.

Kastamonu Education Journal,

26(6):2011-2019.

https://doi.org/10.24106/kefdergi.2297

Conezio, K. & French, L. (2002). Science in the

preschool clasroom: Capitalizing on chil-

dren’s fascination with the everyday

world to foster language and literacy de-

velopment. Young Children, 57(5):12-18.

Crowley, K., Callanan, M. A., Tenenbaum, H.

R., & Allen, E. (2001). Parents explain

more often to boys than to girls during

shared scientiﬁc thinking. Psychological

Science, 12(3):258-261. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1111/1467-9280.0034

Çolakoğlu, M. H. (2019). Okul programlarına

Stem yaklaşımı ve okul dışı öğrenme

ortamlarının entegrasyonu [Stem ap-

proach to school programs and integration

of out-of-school learning environments].

In F. Köseoğlu, & U. Kanlı (Eds.), Okul

duvarlarının ötesinde öğrenme yolculuğu:

Bilim-teknoloji merkezleri ve bilim

müzeleri [Learning journey beyond

school walls: Science-technology centers

and science museums] (pp.27-44). Ankara:

Nobel Academic Publishing.

Çepni, S. (2014). Araştırma ve proje

çalışmalarına giriş [Introduction to re-

search and project studies] (7th Ed.).

Trabzon: Celepler Printing.

Dağal, A. B., & Bayındır, D. (2016). The effects

of museum visits on preschoolers’ posi-

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1987

tive emotions and knowledge levels to-

wards museums. The Journal of

Internatioal Education Science, 3(6):264-

281.

DeMarie, D. (2001). A trip to the zoo: Chil-

dren’s words and photographs. Early

Childhood Research & Practice, 3(1):1-

27.

Dillon, J., Rickinson, M., Teamey, K., Morris,

M., Choi, M. Y., Sanders, D., & Benefield,

P. (2006). The value of outdoor learning:

Evidence from research in the UK and

elsewhere. School Science Review,

87(320):107-111.

Dohn, N. B. (2011). Situational interest of high

school students who visit an aquarium.

Science Education, 95(2):337-357.

Erkan, S., Uludağ, G., & Dereli, F. (2016). An

investigation on the perceptions of pre-

school teachers, school administrators and

parents on parent involvement. Ahi Evran

University Journal of Kırşehir Education

Faculty, 17(1):221-240.

Erten, Z. & Taşçi, G. (2016). Developing activi-

ties of out of the school learning envi-

ronments for science classes, and analys-

ing their effects on students’ scientific

process skills. Erzincan University Jour-

nal of Education Faculty, 18(2):638-657.

Eshach (2007). Bridging in-school and out-of-

school learning: formal, non-formal, and

informal education. Journal of Science

Education and Technology, 16(2):171-

189.

Fleer, M., & Rillero, P. (1999). Family involve-

ment in science education: What are the

outcomes for parents and students?. Stud-

ies in Science Education, 34(1):93-114.

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1080/030572699085601

Gerber, B. L., Cavallo, A. M. L., & Marek, E. A.

(2001). Relationships among informal

learning environments, teaching proce-

dures and scientific reasoning ability. In-

ternational Journal of Science Education,

23(5):535-549.

Graham, S. P., & Kankpi, T. (2020). Parental

role in preschool child education: The

case of Anomabo in the central region of

Ghana. International Journal of Academic

Research in Education and Review,

8(6):146-151. DOI:

https//doi.org/10.14662/IJARER2020.210

Guardino, C., Hall, K.W., Largo-Wight, E., &

Hubbuch, C. (2019). Teacher and student

perceptions of an outdoor classroom.

Journal of Outdoor and Environmental

Education, 22(2):113-126. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1007/s42322-019-

00033-7

Güler, D., & Hazır Bıkmaz, F. (2002). Teachers’

views on the realization of the science ac-

tivities in preschools. Educational Scienc-

es and Practice, 1(2):249-267.

Hachey, A.C., & Butler, D.L. (2009). seeds in

the window, soil in the sensory table: Sci-

ence education through gardening and na-

ture-based play. Young Children,

64(6):42-48.

Hoisington, C., Sableski, N., & DeCosta, I.

(2010). A walk in the woods. Science and

Children, 48(2):27-31.

İnce, S., & Akcanca, N. (2021). Parents’ views

on out-of-school learning environments in

preschool education. Mehmet Akif Ersoy

University Journal of Education Faculty,

58:172-197.

Johnston, J. (2005). Early explaration in science

(2nd Ed.). USA: Open University Press.

Kefi, S. (2020). Erken çocukluk dönemi fen

eğitimi programları [Science education

programs in early childhood]. In G.

Uludağ (Ed.), Erken çocukluk döneminde

fen eğitimi: Çocuğun keşif yolculuğu

[Science education in early childhood:

The child’s journey of discovery] (pp.

463-490). Ankara: Nobel Academic Pub-

lishing.

Kelly, L. (2012). Is science import ant in the

early years?: Exploring good practice. In

D. Stead, & L. Kelly (Eds.), Inspiring

science in the early years (pp.1-15). New

York: Open University Press.

Kıldan, O., & Pektaş, M. (2009). Preschool

teachers’ views regarding the teaching of

the subjects related to science and nature

during early childhood. Ahi Evran Uni-

versity Journal of Kırşehir Education

Faculty, 10(1):113-127.

Klahr, D., Zimmerman, C., & Jirout, J. (2011).

Educational interventions to advance

children’s scientific thinking. Science,

333(6045):971-974. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1204528

Kostelnik, M.J., Soderman, A.K., & Whiren,

A.P. (2014). Developmentally appropriate

curriculum- best practices in early child-

hood education (5th Ed.). London: Pear-

son.

Laçin-Şimşek, C. (2020). Introduction [Giriş]. C.

Laçin Şimşek (Ed.), Fen öğretiminde okul

dışı öğrenme ortamları [Out-of-school

learning environments in science teaching]

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1988

(2nd ed., pp. 1-18). Ankara: Pegem Acad-

emy Publishing.

Laçin-Şimşek, C., & Öztuna-Kaplan, A. (2022).

The effect of a project implemented in a

science center on teachers’ self-efficacy

beliefs in organizing trips to out-of-school

environments. Science Insights Education

Frontiers, 12(2):1701-1718. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.15354/sief.22.or060

Lester, S. (2007). Science through the year:

Grades pre-K-K. USA: Teacher Created

Resources.

Li, Q. (2022). Effects of different types of digital

exhibits on children’s experiences in sci-

ence museums. The Design Journal,

25(1):126-135.

Loxley, P., Dawes, L., Nicholls, L., & Dore, B.

(2010). Teaching primary science promot-

ing enjoyment and developing under-

standing (1st Ed.). Pearson Education

Limited.

Mantzicopoulos, P., Patrick, H. &

Samarapungavan, A. (2008). Young chil-

dren’s motivational beliefs about learning

science. Early Childhood Research Quar-

terly, 23:378-394. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2008.04.0

Martinez, A. (2015). Parent involvement and its

affects on student academic achievement.

Unpublished master’s thesis, California

State University.

Miles, M. B., & Huberman, A. M. (1994). Quali-

tative data analysis: An Expanded

Sourcebook (2nd Ed.). CA:SAGE Publi-

cations.

Mishra, L. (2012). Parental involvement in early

childhood care education: A study. Inter-

national Journal of Psychology and Be-

havioral Sciences, 2(2):22-27. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.5923/j.ijpbs.20120202.0

Mumpuni, E.K., Sholeha, V., Murni, E.S., &

Sidiq, Y. (2021). Parent understanding to

support children science activity at home.

Advances in Social Science, Education

and Humanities Research. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.2991/assehr.k.220503.0

National Research Council [NRC] (1996). Na-

tional science education standarts. Ac-

cessed 01 April 2017. Available at:

https://www.nap.edu/read/4962/chapter/1

National Research Conuncil [NRC] (2012). A

framework for K-12 science education:

Practices, crosscutting concepts, and core

ideas. Accessed 08 April 2015. Available

at: https://bit.ly/3BieofL

National Science Teachers Association [NSTA]

(1994). Parent involvement in science ed-

ucation. NSTA Board of Directors. Ac-

cessed 06 September 2022. Available at:

https://bit.ly/3QjvRsA

Neill, P. (2008). Science and the outdoor class-

room. Extensions Curriculum Newsletter

of the High/Scope Foundation, 22(5), 1-7.

O’Connor, G., & Rosicka, C. (2020). Science in

the early years. Paper 2: Science inquiry

skills. Australian Council for Educational

Research. Available at:

https://research.acer.edu.au/early_childho

od_misc/16

Okur-Berberoğlu, E., Sezer, B., Güder, Y., &

Yalçın-Özdilek, Ş. (2013). Outdoor

hydrobıology actıvıty’s effect on students’

affective perspective, case study:

çanakkale, science camp. Kastamonu Ed-

ucation Journal, 21(3):1177-1198.

Öcal, E., & Uludağ, G. (2022). Erken çocukluk

dönemi fen eğitiminde drama

uygulamaları [Drama applications in early

childhood science education]. Ankara:

Nobel Academic Publishing.

Özbay-Karlıdağ, İ. (2021). Creating learning

environments in preschool classrooms:

perspectives of pre-service preschool

teachers. International Journal of Pro-

gressive Education, 17(3):337-342.

Partnership for 21st Century Learning (2019).

Framework for 21st century learning. Ac-

cessed 01 August 2020. Available at:

https://bit.ly/3RDqXb5

Pattison, S.A., & Dierking, L.D. (2019). Early

childhood science interest development:

Variation in interest patterns and parent–

child interactions among low-income

families. Science Education, 103(2):362-

388. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1002/sce.21486

Paulu, N., & Martin, M. (1992). Helping your

child learn science. USA: Oxford Univer-

sity Press.

Powell, D. R., Son, S., File, N., & San Juan, R.

R. (2010). Parent–school relationships

and children’s academic and social out-

comes in public school pre-kindergarten.

Journal of School Psychology, 48(4):269-

292. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsp.2010.03.002

Ramey-Gassert, L. (1997). Learning science

beyond the classroom. The Elementary

School Journal, 97(4):433-450.

Rawen, S., & Wenner, J.A. (2022). Science at

the center: Meaningful science learning in

Uludağ & Erkan. (Türkiye). Parents’ Views on An Early Childhood Science Program.

SIEF, Vol.14, No.1, 2023 1989

a preschool classroom. Journal of Re-

search in Science Teaching, 1-31. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1002/tea.21807

Reinhart, M., Bloomquist, D., Strickler-Eppard,

L., Czerniak, C. M., Gilbert, A.,

Kaderavwk, J., & Molitor, S. C. (2016).

Taking science home: Connection schools

and families through science activity

packs young children. Science Education,

1:3-16. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12152

Republic of Türkiye Ministry of National Educa-

tion (2019). Okul Dışı Öğrenme Ortamları

Kılavuzu [Out-Of-School Learning Envi-

ronments Guide]. Accessed 13 August

2020. https://bit.ly/3RCmVQi

Sahin-Cakır, Ç, & Uludag, G. (2022). Parent

involvement in pre-school science activi-

ties: What do parents think about it?.

Journal of Science Learning, 5(1):141-

153. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.17509/jsl.v5i1.33912

Sobel, D. M., Stricker, L. W., & Weisberg, D. S.

(2022). Relations between children’s ex-

ploration in a children’s museum and their

reflections about their exploration. Child

Development, 00:1-15.

https://doi.org/10.1111/cdev.13821

Toprakkaya, İ. M. (2016). An investigation of

the effectiveness of inquiry based science

activities applied in the outdoor space on

scientific process skills for the children

between 55-72 months. Unpublished mas-

ter’s thesis. Okan University.

Uludağ, G. (2017). The effect of using out-of-

school learning environments for science

education on preschool children’s science

process skills. Unpublished doctoral the-

sis, Hacettepe University, Ankara.

Uludağ, G. (2021). Views of preschool teachers

on using out-of-school learning environ-

ments in preschool education. Interna-

tional Online Journal of Education and

Teaching, 8(2):1225-1249.

Uludağ, G., & Erkan. N. S. (in press). Effect of

the Science Education Program with the

Activities in the Out-of-School Learning

Environments on the Science Process

Skills of the 60-72 months old children.

Hacettepe University Journal of Educa-

tion. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.16986/HUJE.20200647

Uludağ, G., & Erkan. N.S. (2020). Erken

çocukluk döneminde fen eğitimi ve önemi

[Science education and its importance in

early childhood]. In G. Uludağ (Ed.),

Erken çocukluk döneminde fen eğitimi:

Çocuğun keşif yolculuğu [Science educa-

tion in early childhood: The child’s jour-

ney of discovery] (pp.1-31). Nobel

Akademic Publishing.

Ürey, M. & Çepni, S. (2014). The evaluation of

the effect of the science-based and

ınterdisciplinary school garden program

on students’ attitudes towards science and

technology course from different varia-

bles. Ondokuz Mayis University Journal

of Faculty of Education, 33(2):537-548.

Vermont Early Learning Standards (2015).

Vermont Agency of Education. Accessed

07 September 2022. Available at:

https://bit.ly/3TSmqDI

Walsh, L., & Straits, W. (2014). Informal sci-

ence learning in the formal classroom.

Science and Children, 51(9):54-58.Yin,

R.K. (2018). Case study research and ap-

plications: Design and methods (6th Ed.).

SAGE Publications.

Zucker, T., Montroy, J., Master, A., Assel, M.,

McCallum, C., & Yeomans-Maldonado,

G. (2021, January 7). Expectancy-value

theory & preschool parental involvement

in informal STEM Learning. DOI:

https://doi.org/10.35542/osf.io/h3tj

Received: 16 September 2022

Revised: 04 October 2022

Accepted: 27 October 2022