Research on early childhood robotics education often focuses narrowly on teaching young children STEM (science, technology, engineering, and mathematics) concepts and skills. In this qualitative case study, our research team examined what happened when we worked with young children (age 7) and combined the technologies of robotics education with an inquiry approach, that is, an opportunity for students to collaboratively identify a problem arising from their own lived experiences and build a robot to solve it. We found that the process of children’s problem identification was dialogic, not only with peers and teachers but also with materials, as they defined and refined problems based on interactions with peers and objects. As this study was conducted at an economically disadvantaged public school in the Southern United States, we argue that early childhood robotics education has a great potential to engage young children in STEM learning in a personally meaningful manner and that an instructional approach fostering children’s inquiry and project-based learning through their problem finding and problem posing is effective in making STEM accessible to students from diverse backgrounds.

No abstract

No abstract

We engage in an affirmative feminist reading of the recent, predominantly Western, philosophical movement called the new materialisms—that is, we problematize the “new” while still valuing its contributions toward justice (Todd 2016; Schaeffer 2018). We put Sara Ahmed in conversation with María Lugones and Zoe Todd in order to recognize that not only have feminist scholars engaged in conversations around the material before publications of the “new” (Ahmed 2008; Lugones 2010; Todd 2016), but we also argue that the “new” creates a coloniality of non-modern knowledges that think and live some of the so-called groundbreaking ideas of the “new.” The new materialisms, then, function systematically to deny and silence the multiple and varied ways in which the concepts it engages have a prolonged and deep scholarship of theorization in both feminisms and non-modern knowledges. The significance of this, we contend, is not merely a question of semantics as (some) authors of the “new” purport—language matters. That is, language materializes the world; it affects. In engendering this philosophy as “new,” it acts, in effect, as a colonization that reinforces harmful and violent discourses of white, neoliberal, colonial capitalism (Lugones 2010) that some feminist theories seek to dismantle.

No abstract

The article is devoted to the study of the problem of the content of educational and pedagogical forecasting in Ukraine in the period 1917 – 1920. The author concludes that the content of educational and pedagogical forecasting in Ukraine in the period 1917-1920 is manifested in the development of its national paradigm, the search for variable systems and models, technologies and methods of training teachers. The problem of educational and pedagogical forecasting within certain limits is a component and objectively existing, independent, defining direction, which allows to study the holistic process of development of preschool, secondary and higher education in Ukraine, its features, color; identify the leading trends, ideas, creative experience of training, which determines the positive transformation of the values of Ukrainian society; to outline ways to update educational and pedagogical forecasting in modern socio-political and economic conditions and to update the accumulated material from the past in the realities of pedagogical theory and practice of today.

The article is devoted to the study of a personalized approach to the problem of educational and pedagogical forecasting in Ukraine in the early twentieth century. The author emphasizes that a personalized approach to the study of the problem of educational and pedagogical forecasting in the early twentieth century is the main prerequisite for the development of forecasting pedagogical thought, which must be specified. I.Ya. Franco saw the direction of educational influence in the mastery of scientific knowledge, the harmonious improvement of the body in the process of physical labor. S.F. Rusova, as the coryphaeus of preschool pedagogy, laid the foundation for the content of the educational process through the introduction of the native language, national holidays, and Christian values of the Ukrainian people. G.G. Vashchenko took the Christian ideal as the basis for predicting pedagogical phenomena and processes. P.P. Blonsky defended the independent nature of pedagogical science. І.І. Ogienko stressed the importance of native education, the formation of Christian virtue, justice, and diligence. B.D. Grinchenko defended the inseparable connection of education with the life and culture of other peoples. L. Ukrainka had the same opinion. The teacher insisted on the importance of considering the role of the teacher in the public school, sharply raised the issue of the struggle for social and national liberation of the Ukrainian people. T.G. Lubnets is considered the luminary of the theory of pedagogy. H.D. Alchevskaya entered the history of pedagogy in Ukraine as a prominent figure in the field of adult education, organizer of Sunday schools. І.М. Steshenko advocated the nationalization of secondary and higher education. Minister P.M. Ignatiev defined the organizational and pedagogical principles of educational and pedagogical forecasting through the reform of the education system.