Are preschoolers expected to learn difficult science constructs? A content analysis of U.S. standards

Abstract views: 1367 / PDF downloads: 294




Early science learning, Readiness standards, Educational policy, Abstract reasoning, Content analysis


In the current paper, we report on the recommendations for preschool science put forward in the educational standards of U.S. states. Our focus was specifically on whether educational standards recommend abstract science constructs—constructs that are difficult to learn. In Study 1, we focused on science constructs related to inquiry (i.e., activities geared towards the generation of scientific knowledge). And in Study 2, we focused on science constructs related to facts (i.e., established scientific knowledge). In each study, we developed a coding scheme to distinguish between concrete and abstract constructs and then determined the relative prevalence of each. Our findings show that preschoolers are indeed expected to learn abstract science constructs. At the same time, educational standards varied considerably across U.S. states. Implications for the field of early science learning are discussed.


Airasian, P. W., Cruikshank, K. A., Mayer, R. E., Pintrich, P. R., Raths, J., & Wittrock, M. C. (2001). A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: A revision of Bloom’s taxonomy of educational objectives (L. W. Anderson & D. R. Krathwohl, Eds.). Longman.

Andrews, G., & Halford, G. S. (2002). A cognitive complexity metric applied to cognitive development. Cognitive Psychology, 45(2), 153-219. DOI:

Blonder R., Benny N., & Jones, M. G. (2014). Teaching self-efficacy of science teachers. In R. Evans, J. Luft, C. Czerniak, & C. Pea (Eds.), The role of science teachers’ beliefs in international classrooms (pp. 3-15). Sense Publishers. DOI:

Bonawitz, E., Shafto, P., Gweon, H., Goodman, N. D., Spelke, E., & Schulz, L. (2011). The double-edged sword of pedagogy: Instruction limits spontaneous exploration and discovery. Cognition, 120(3), 322–330. DOI:

Brenneman, K. (2011). Assessment for Preschool Science Learning and Learning Environments. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 13(1), n1.

Brenneman, K., & Louro, I. F. (2008). Science journals in the preschool classroom. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(2), 113–119. DOI:

Brenneman, K., Stevenson-Boyd, J., & Frede, E. C. (2009). Math and science in preschool: Policies and practice. Preschool Policy Brief, 19, 1-12.

Chambers, J. H. (1991). The difference between the abstract concepts of science and the general concepts of empirical educational research. The Journal of Educational Thought, 25(1), 41-49.

Chi, M. T., & VanLehn, K. A. (2012). Seeing deep structure from the interactions of surface features. Educational Psychologist, 47(3), 177-188. DOI:

Crain, W. (2015). Theories of development: Concepts and applications. Psychology Press. DOI:

Dahl, A. (2017). Ecological commitments: Why developmental science needs naturalistic methods. Child Development Perspectives, 11(2), 79-84. DOI:

DeCuir-Gunby, J. T., Marshall, P. L., & McCullochh, A. W. (2011). Developing and using a codebook for the analysis of interview data: An example from a professional development research project. Field Methods, 23(2), 136-155. DOI:

Dinçer, S. (2018). Content analysis in scientific research: Meta-analysis, meta-synthesis, and descriptive content analysis. Bartın Üniversitesi Eğitim Fakültesi Dergisi, 7(1), 176-190. DOI:

Dumontheil, I. (2014). Development of abstract thinking during childhood and adolescence: The role of rostrolateral prefrontal cortex. Developmental Cognitive Neuroscience, 10, 57-76. DOI: (2021, July 31). Preschool science lesson plans.

Educational Development Center. (2013). Nurturing STEM skills in young learners, preK-3 (STEM Smart Brief). Successful STEM Education.

Eğmir, E., Erdem, C., & Koçyiğit, M. (2017). Trends in educational research: A content analysis of the studies published in international journal of instruction. International Journal of Instruction, 10(3), 277-294. DOI:

Erickson, D. M., & Ernst, J. A. (2011). The real benefits of nature play every day. Exchange, 33(4), 97-99.

Eshach, H., & Fried, M. N. (2005). Should science be taught in early childhood? Journal of Science Education and Technology, 14(3), 315-336. DOI:

Fisher, K. R., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Newcombe, N., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2013). Taking shape: Supporting preschoolers’ acquisition of geometric knowledge through guided play. Child Development, 84(6), 1872–1878. DOI:

Flavell, J. H. (1982). On cognitive development. Child Development, 53(1), 1-10. DOI:

Fleer, M. (1991). Socially constructed learning in early childhood science education. Research in Science Education, 21(1), 96–103. DOI:

Fleer, M., & Beasley, W. (1991). A study of conceptual development in early childhood. Research in Science Education, 21(1), 104–112. DOI:

French, L. (2004). Science as the center of a coherent, integrated early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 19(1), 138–149. DOI:

Gentner, D., & Kurtz, K. J. (2005) Relational categories. In W. K. Ahn, R. L. Goldstone, B. C. Love, A. B. Markman & P. Wolff (Eds.), Categorization inside and outside the laboratory: Essays in honor of Douglas L. Medin (pp. 151–75). American Psychological Association. DOI:

Gerde, H. K., Pierce, S. J., Lee, K., & Van Egeren, L. A. (2018). Early childhood educators’ self-efficacy in science, math, and literacy instruction and science practice in the classroom. Early Education and Development, 29(1), 70-90. DOI:

Gerde, H. K., Schachter, R. E., & Wasik, B. A. (2013). Using the scientific method to guide learning: An integrated approach to early childhood curriculum. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41(5), 315-323. DOI:

Gobert, J. D., & Buckley, B. C. (2000). Introduction to model-based in teaching and learning in science education. International Journal of Science Education, 22(9), 891–894. DOI:

Gopnik, A., Meltzoff, A. N., & Kuhl, P. K. (1999). The scientist in the crib: Minds, brains, and how children learn. William Morrow & Co.

Greenfield, D. B. (2015). Assessment in early childhood science education. In K. C. Trundle & M. Saçkes (Eds.), Research in early childhood science education (pp. 353-380). Springer. DOI:

Greenfield, D. B., Jirout, J., Dominguez, X., Greenberg, A., Maier, M., & Fuccillo, J. (2009). Science in the preschool classroom: A programmatic research agenda to improve science readiness. Early Education and Development, 20(2), 238-264. DOI:

Guo, Y., Piasta, S. B., & Bowles, R. P. (2015). Exploring preschool children’s science content knowledge. Early Education and Development, 26(1), 125-146. DOI:

Guo, Y., Wang, S., Hall, A. H., Breit-Smith, A., & Busch, J. (2016). The effects of science instruction on young children’s vocabulary learning: A research synthesis. Early Childhood Education Journal, 44(4), 359-367. DOI:

Hepburn, B., & Andersen, H. (2021). Scientific method. In E. N. Zalta (Ed.), The Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy (Summer 2021 edition). SEP.

Hox, J. (2010). Multilevel analysis: Techniques and applications (2nd ed.). Routledge.

Huitt, W. & Hummel, J. (2003). Piaget's theory of cognitive development. Educational Psychology Interactive, 3(2), 1-5.

Hunter, J., Monroe-Ossi, H., & Fountain, C. (2008). Young Florida naturalists: concept mapping and science learning of preschool children. In A. J. Cañas, P. Reiske, M. Åhlberg, & D. Novak (Eds.), Concept maps: Connecting educators. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on Concept Mapping. Tallinn, Estonia & Helsinki, Finland: University of Finland.

Kachergis, G., Gureckis, T. M., & Rhodes, M. (2019, July 24-27). Exploring informal science interventions to promote children’s understanding of natural categories [Conference presentation]. 41st Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society, Montreal, Canada.

Kelemen, D., Emmons, N. A., Schillaci, R. S., & Ganea, P. A. (2014). Young children can be taught basic natural selection using a picture-storybook intervention. Psychological Science, 25(4), 893-902. DOI:

Kenyon, L., Schwarz, C., & Hug, B. (2008). The benefits of scientific modeling: Constructing, using, evaluating, and revising scientific models helps students advance their scientific ideas, learn to think critically, and understand the nature of science. Science and Children, 46(2), 40–44.

Kirschner, P. A., Sweller, J., & Clark, R. E. (2006). Why minimal guidance during instruction does not work: An analysis of the failure of constructivist, discovery, problem-based, experiential, and inquiry-based teaching. Educational Psychologist, 41(2), 75–86. DOI:

Kloos, H., & Sloutsky, V. (2008). What’s behind different kinds of kinds: Effects of statistical density on learning and representation of categories. Journal of Experimental Psychology: General, 137(1), 52-72. DOI:

Kloos, H., Baker, H., & Waltzer, T. (2019). A mind with a mind of its own: How complexity theory can inform early science pedagogy. Educational Psychology Review, 31(3), 735–752. DOI:

Kloos, H., Baker, H., Luken, E., Brown, R., Pfeiffer, D. & Carr, V. (2012). Preschoolers learning science: Myth or reality? In H. Kloos, B. J. Morris & J. L. Amaral (Eds.), Current topics in children's learning and cognition (pp. 45-70). Tech - Open Access Publisher. DOI:

Kloos, H., Waltzer, T., Maltbie, C., Brown, R. D., & Carr, V. (2018). Inconsistencies in early science education: Can nature help streamline state standards? Ecopsychology, 10(4), 243-258. DOI:

Krippendorff, K. (1989). Content analysis. In E. Barnouw, G. Gerbner, W. Schramm, T. L. Worth, & L. Gross (Eds.), International encyclopedia of communication (Vol. 1, pp. 403-407). Oxford University Press.

Larimore, R. A. (2020). Preschool science education: A vision for the future. Early Childhood Education Journal, 48(6), 703–714. DOI:

Larson, A. L., & Rahn, N. L. (2015). Vocabulary instruction on Sesame Street: A content analysis of the Word on the Street initiative. Language, Speech, and Hearing Services in Schools, 46(3), 207–221 DOI:

Metz, K. E. (1995). Reassessment of developmental constraints on children’s science instruction. Review of Educational Research, 65(2), 93-127. DOI:

National Center for Educational Statistics (NCES). (2021). The condition of education: Preschool and kindergarten enrollment (Annual Report). Institute of Educational Sciences (IES).

Novak, J. D. (2010). Learning, creating, and using knowledge: Concept maps as facilitative tools in schools and corporations (2nd ed.). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Oppermann, E., Hummel, T., & Anders, Y. (2021). Preschool teachers’ science practices: Associations with teachers’ qualifications and their self-efficacy beliefs in science. Early Child Development and Care, 191(5), 800-814. DOI:

Park, M. H., Dimitrov, D. M., Patterson, L. G., & Park, D. Y. (2017). Early childhood teachers’ beliefs about readiness for teaching science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 15(3), 275-291. DOI:

Piaget, J., & Inhelder, B. (1969). The psychology of the child. Basic Books.

Piasta, S. B., Pelatti, C. Y., & Miller, H. L. (2014). Mathematics and science learning opportunities in preschool classrooms. Early Education and Development, 25(4), 445-468. DOI:

Rosch, E. (1978). Principles of categorization. In E. Rosch & B. B. Lloyd (Eds.), Cognition and categorization (pp. 27–48). Lawrence Erlbaum Associates.

Saçkes, M., Trundle, K. C., & Bell, R. L. (2013). Science learning experiences in kindergarten and children’s growth in science performance in elementary grades. Education and Science, 38(167), 112-125.

Saçkes, M., Trundle, K. C., & Flevares, L. M. (2009). Using children’s literature to teach standard-based science concepts in early years. Early Childhood Education Journal, 36(5), 415-422. DOI:

Saçkes, M., Trundle, K. C., Bell, R. L., & O’Connell, A. A. (2010). The influence of early science experience in kindergarten on children's immediate and later science achievement: Evidence from the early childhood longitudinal study. Journal of Research in Science Teaching, 48(2), 217-235. DOI:

Saidi, T., & Sigauke, E. (2017). The use of museum based science centres to expose primary school students in developing countries to abstract and complex concepts of nanoscience and nanotechnology. Journal of Science Educational Technology, 26(5), 470-480. DOI:

Sawyer, K. (Ed.). (2006). The Cambridge handbook of learning science. Cambridge University Press. DOI:

Seefeldt, C., Galper, A., & Jones, I. (2007). Active experiences for active children: Science. Pearson/Merill Prentice Hall.

Shtulman, A., Neal, C., & Lindquist, G. (2016). Children’s ability to learn evolutionary explanations for biological adaptation. Early Education and Development, 27(8), 1222–1236. DOI:

Sobel, D. M., & Legare, C. H. (2014). Causal learning in children. WIREs Cognitive Science, 5(4), 413-427. DOI:

Sodian, B., Zaitchik, D., & Carey, S. (1991). Young children's differentiation of hypothetical beliefs from evidence. Child Development, 62(4), 753-766. DOI:

Trundle, K. C., & Smith, M. M. (2017). A hearts-on, hands-on, minds-on model for preschool science learning. Young Children, 72(1), 80-86.

Tu, T. (2006). Preschool science environment: What is available in a preschool classroom? Early Childhood Education Journal, 33(4), 245-251. DOI:

United States Bureau of Labor Statistics (2021, October 22). Preschool Teachers.

Vosniadou, S. (Ed.). (2009). International handbook of research on conceptual change. Routledge. DOI:

Wiser, M., & Smith, C. L. (2008). Learning and teaching about matter in grades K-8: When should the atomic-molecular theory be introduced. In S. Vosniadou (Ed.), International handbook of research on conceptual change (pp. 205–239). Routledge.

Worth, K. (1999). Science in early childhood classrooms: Content and process. STEM in Early Education and Development.




How to Cite

Ocasio, A., Waltzer, T. ., Caudy, C., & Kloos, H. (2021). Are preschoolers expected to learn difficult science constructs? A content analysis of U.S. standards. Journal of Childhood, Education & Society, 2(3), 365–391.