The Development of Time Concepts by Kindergarten Children

Stephens, Lois; Dutton, Wilbur H.

doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.1969.tb08398.x

Cited by 4 publications

(1 citation statement)

References 6 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Such studies into knowledge have stimulated vast amounts of research and writing directly applicable to preschool science education. Examples of such research and writing are Stendler (1962), Santa Barbara and Par6 (1965), Almy, et al (1966), Bever, et al (1968), Emrich (1968), Raven (1968), Stephens andDutton (1969), Harper, et al (1969), Renner, et al (1971), and Gillespie (1972). In general, these and similar reports suggest that knowledge develops in an orderly fashion.…”

Section: Studies Of Knowledge and Its Development In Young Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

A decade of preschool science: Promises, problems, and perspectives

Riechard

1973

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Section: Studies Of Knowledge and Its Development In Young Childrenmentioning

confidence: 99%

A decade of preschool science: Promises, problems, and perspectives

Riechard

1973

Science Education

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

A summary of research in science education for the years 1968‐1969: Elementary school level

Gallagher

1972

J Res Sci Teach

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

One hundred twenty-four research reports were included in the bibliography. This compares with 120 in the previous ERIC Center review, A Summcuy ofResearch in Science Education for rhe Years of 1965-1967.jQ Although different criteria may have influenced bibliographic inclusion in this review and the earlier one, these figures provide a rough indication that the quantity of research related to science instruction at the elementary school level has increased. Since the earlier review covered a three-year period, a sizable increase in the yearly volume of research is indicated.Not all of the reports included in the bibliography were reviewed. Criteria for inclusion were: significance of the question investigated, validity of research design, rigor of data interpretation, and adequacy of reporting. Since all the criteria are somewhat subjective, the biases of the reviewer undoubtedly entered into judgments.Reports reviewed were categorized as follows: New elementary science programs: studies of the effects of instruction Studies of the impact of instruction: Pre-school and primary school Studies of the impact of instruction: intermediate grades Developmental studies without instruction Studies of cultural influences on intellectual development and science learning Studies of teacher education Studies of teacher behavior and characteristics Instrument development Miscellaneous studies. This categorization, which does not coincide precisely with the ERIC classification scheme, was chosen because the reviewer felt it represented a more functional grouping of the studies reported during 1968 and 1969. *Sponsored by the Educational Resources Information Center of the United States Offices of Education and The Ohio State University. Prepared phsuant to a contract with the Office of Education, United States Department of Health, Education, and Welfare. Points of view or opinions expressed herein do not necessarily represent official Office of Education position or policy.

show abstract

A Comparison of Two Methods For Teaching Younger Children to Tell Time

Nibbelink

Witzenberg

1981

School Sci & Mathematics

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Cape Girardeau, Missouri Overview/Definitions This article reports a comparison of two methods of teaching second graders to read time from a regular clock. Method A followed the traditional sequence: telling time on the hour, on the half hour, on the quarter hour, on the five minute readings and finally on any reading. Method B followed the sequence: on or after the hour using an hour hand only, on any reading with each minute mark numbered, on any reading with only five minute marks numbered and finally on any reading with no minute marks numbered.With Method A the strategy is to get the children to assign hour.'minitte readings for increasingly more times shown. Skills usually stressed with this traditional sequence include counting by fives and counting beyond multiples of five. With Method B the strategy is more to get the children to assign hour:minute readings with fewer minute marks numbered.To some degree, Method A (traditional) is based on the proposition that reading a clock is largely a matter of counting and counting beyond multiples of five. Method B, on the other hand, is based on the proposition that to a significant degree reading a clock is a matter of memorizing numbers for positions. Many adults, after all, are quite comfortable with watches showing no numbers. Another contrast is that Method A is more a "task analysis" approach while Method B is more a "field" approach.Both methods used demonstration clocks two feet in diameter. With Method B a set of rims was included, a rim for each stage of further limiting the numbered minute marks. RationaleJudging from textbook practices, where reading a clock belongs in the curriculum is largely an open question. For the most part, it is ignored, given at best a few back-of-the-book pages in the mathematics text over a 429

show abstract

The Development of Time Concepts by Kindergarten Children

Cited by 4 publications

References 6 publications

A decade of preschool science: Promises, problems, and perspectives

A decade of preschool science: Promises, problems, and perspectives

A summary of research in science education for the years 1968‐1969: Elementary school level

A Comparison of Two Methods For Teaching Younger Children to Tell Time

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About