 

THESIS

I
I C LIBRARY
200 I ‘ Michigan State
University

 

 

 

This is to certify that the
thesis entitled

COMPARING EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS'
TEACHING BELIEFS AND INTENTIONS BETWEEN THE
US. AND TAIWAN

presented by

CHlA-YU SUI

has been accepted towards fulﬁllment
of the requirements for the

MA. degree in CHILD DEVELOPMENT

 

 

f %”d f/I.wf/L,n'_)__/

 

Major Professor’s Signature

///24‘L- {7 4/4 [WW]
r] /

 

Date

MSU is an Afﬁrmative Action/Equal Opportunity Employer

 

 

PLACE IN RETURN BOX to remove this checkout from your record.
To AVOID FINES return on or before date due.
MAY BE RECALLED with earlier due date if requested.

 

DATE DUE

DATE DUE DATE DUE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

5108 K:lProj/Acc&Pres/ClRC/DateDue.indd

 

COMPARING EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS’
TEACHING BELIEFS AND INTENTION S BETWEEN
THE US. AND TAIWAN

By

Chia-Yu Sui

A THESIS

Submitted to
Michigan State University
in partial fulﬁllment of the requirements
for the degree of

MASTER OF ART
Child Development

2009

ABSTRACT

COMPARING EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATORS’ TEACHING BELIEFS
AND INTENTIONS BETWEEN THE U.S. AND TAIWAN

By

Chia-Yu Sui
The purpose of this research was to examine (1) early childhood educators’ teaching
beliefs and intentions across two countries, the United States and Taiwan, and (2) the
relationship between teaching beliefs and intentions. F iﬁy early childhood teachers
and teaching aides working in child development laboratories afﬁliated with child
development or related programs at universities or colleges from the U.S. (N = 24)
and Taiwan (N = 26) participated in this study. The participants completed a
demographic survey. two open-ended questions, and a self-report Briefs and
Intentions Questionnaire (Wilcox-Herzog & Ward, 2004). Descriptive statistics.
Independent-Samples T Test. and Pearson Correlation were conducted for data
analyses. The results of this study indicate that early childhood educators’ teaching
beliefs differed in the two countries, the U.S. and Taiwan, whereas intentions do not.
The results also indicate that early childhood educators’ teaching beliefs are related to

their teaching intentions.

To my parents

iii

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

I would like to express my appreciation to those who helped me to complete

this thesis. First. I would like to thank Dr. Lillian Phenice, my major professor. She

always encouraged me when I doubted whether I could complete the thesis. Without

her encouragement, guidance, support, and assistance, I could not have completed the

thesis. Also, I want to thank Dr. Robert Griffore and Dr. Esther Onaga, my committee

members, for their helpful suggestions and comments on my thesis. Then, I would

like to thank you Dr. Fu-Mei Chen, my mentor in Taiwan, for her helpful suggestions.

I would like to thank the early childhood directors and educators from the

following institutions in the U.S. and Taiwan: Oakland University, Central Michigan

University, University of Michigan-Dearbom, Michigan State University, Cardinal

Tien College of Healthcare and Management, Chang Gung Institute of Technology,

the F u-Jen Catholic University, and Hungkuang University. Their participations

offered valuable information for this thesis.

Finally, I would like to thank my parents, Shun-Tien Sui and Suh-Jen Chen, and

my boyfriend, Gabriele Lepori, for their love and support.

TABLE OF CONTENTS

LIST OF TABLES .............................................................................. vii

LIST OF FIGURES ............................................................................ viii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCATION .............................................................................. 1
Purpose Statement ............................................................................. 2
Problem Statement.. .................................................................................................. 2
Theoretical Overview ......................................................................... 3
Research Hypotheses ........................................................................ 12
Deﬁnitions of Terms ......................................................................... l3

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE .................................................................. 14
Teachers’ beliefs .............................................................................. 14
Cultural Inﬂuence ............................................................................ 15
Early childhood education in the U.S. and in Taiwan ................................... l6

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY ............................................................. 18
Research Design Statement ................................................................. 18
Participants .................................................................................... l 8
Data Collection Procedure .................................................................. 19
Data Collected and Received ............................................................... 21
Research Instruments ........................................................................ 2]
Data Analysis ................................................................................. 22
Ethical Considerations ....................................................................... 23

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS ........................................................................................ 24
Demographic Characteristics ............................................................... 24
Teaching Beliefs .............................................................................. 25
Teaching intentions ........................................................................... 30
The Relationship between Teaching Beliefs and Intentions ............................ 33
CHAPTER 5
DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS, AND INPLICATIONS .................................. 35
Discussion .................................................................................... 35
Limitations of the Research ................................................................. 38
Implications for Further Research ......................................................... 39
APPENDICES
Appendix A Cover Letter (English Version) ............................................. 40
Appendix B Cover Letter (Chinese Version) ............................................. 41
Appendix C Research Participant Information and Consent Form
(English Version) .............................................................. 42

Appendix D Research Participant Information and Consent Form
(Chinese Version) ........................... ‘ .................................. 45
Appendix E Beliefs and Intentions Questionnaire (English Version) ................. 46
Appendix F Beliefs and Intentions Questionnaire (Chinese Version) ................. 51
BIBLIOGRAPHY .............................................................................. 56

vi

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1 Comparison of Participants’ Age, Experience, and Education
Between the U.S. and Taiwan ....................................................... 25

Table 2 Frequency Distribution Table of Teaching Beliefs Scores
Between the U.S. and Taiwan ....................................................... 26

Table 3 Independent-samples t Test for Teaching Beliefs
from the U.S. and Taiwan ............................................................ 27

Table 4 Teaching Beliefs Item-by-item Comparison (Mean Score) ...................... 28

Table 5 Comparison of Descriptions about Philosophy of Early Childhood
Education between the U.S. and Taiwan .......................................... 29

Table 6 Frequency Distribution Table of Teaching Intentions Scores
Between U.S. and Taiwan ........................................................... 30

Table 7 Independent-samples t Test for Teaching Intentions
from the U.S. and Taiwan ............................................................ 31

Table 8 Teaching Intentions ltem-by—item Comparison (Mean Score) .................. 32

Table 9 Comparison of Descriptions about Theory to Practice

Between the U.S. and Taiwan ....................................................... 33
Table 10 Correlation Between Teaching Beliefs and Intentions .......................... 34
Table II Correlation Between U.S. Teaching Beliefs and Intentions .................... 34
Table 12 Correlation Between Taiwan Teaching Beliefs and Intentions ................. 34

vii

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure l Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Human Ecosystem
of Children ............................................................................. 7

Figure 2 Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Human Ecosystem
of Early Childhood Educators ..................................................... 11

viii

CHAPTER 1

INTRODUCTION

Early childhood educators, teachers, and teaching aides, play an important role in
early childhood settings. This context is one of the most immediate and most inﬂuential
settings for developing children. According to Hsueh and Barton (2005), early childhood
educators’ personal beliefs and intentions about teaching can affect young children’s
developments and learning. For example, in the United States, a child-centered approach
with a developmentally appropriate philosophy is popular. In recent years, early
childhood education practices and early childhood educators in Taiwan have been
inﬂuenced by the Western child-centered and developmentally appropriate philosophy.
However, in Taiwan, the early childhood educators still maintain some traditional
Chinese cultural practices in early childhood education programs (Hsieh, 2004). Even
though early childhood programs in different countries hold similar principles and
teaching philosophy, it is hypothesized that teachers might have their own cultural
personal teaching beliefs and intentions which inﬂuence what is considered a
child-centered developmentally appropriate teaching practice. Consequently, the
researcher investigated whether there are signiﬁcant similarities and differences in
teaching beliefs and intentions (see p.13) of early childhood educators from two different

cultures, the United States and Taiwan.

Purpose Statement

The purpose of this research is to examine (1) early childhood educators’ teaching
beliefs and intentions across two countries, the United States and Taiwan, and (2) the
relationship between teaching beliefs and teaching intentions. Therefore, this
cross-cultural study will allow researchers to have a better understanding of whether
cultural context is an important factor when working with young children. Moreover, this
research may lead to a clearer idea about how the developmentally appropriate
philosophy of teaching young children in culturally different countries relate to their
teaching and intentions. This research may also provide insights into the cultural impact
of how informative concepts are expressed in teaching attitudes, beliefs, and directions in
early childhood programs for pre-service and in-service teachers, teaching aides, and
caregivers. Furthermore, this research may lead to ﬁiture studies examining how cultural

factors might affect early childhood teaching practices.

Problem Statement

Speciﬁc research questions of this study include:

1. Are there similarities and differencesin teaching beliefs and intentions among
teachers and teaching aides in early childhood programs afﬁliated with child
development or related programs at universities or colleges within the United States
and Taiwan?

2. Do teaching beliefs in the U.S. and Taiwan correlate with teaching intentions in early

childhood programs?

Theoretical Overview

Urie Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human development describes how the
environment or context, in which a developing human being lives, affects the person’s
development. From Bronfenbrenner’s early work, the basic deﬁnition of the ecology of
human development is:

the ecology of human development involves the scientiﬁc study of the
progressive, mutual accommodation between an active, growing human being and
the changing properties of the immediate settings in which the developing person
lives, as this process is affected by relations between these settings, and by the
larger contexts in which the settings are embedded. (1979, p.21)

The Bronfenbrenner’s model, ecology of human development, includes four ecological
system levels: microsystem, mesosystem, exosystem, and macrosystem (See Figure 1).
Later, Bronfenbrenner added another dimension, the chronosystem, and renamed the
model as “bioecological” (Bergen, 2008).

The microsystems are the immediate settings that the developing person, namely
the child in this study, experiences. The most important components of a microsystem are
activities, roles, and the interpersonal relations that occur at this level (Thomas, 2005). In
this study; for example, young children’s microsystems include the home, preschool, and
playground. Children spend eight hours per day in preschools where they engage in
various activities and interact with others such as teachers, parents, and other children.
Children are inﬂuenced by the people in these settings, and at the same time the children

also inﬂuence the people in these settings.

The mesosystem refers to interrelations among two or more microsystems. For
example, there are interactions between the home microsystem and the preschool
microsystem. Children spend time at home and in preschool, and each of these
microsystems is important for their development. However, the relations between the
people inside the home and those inside the preschool may also affect the children due to
teachers-parents interactions. For example, if parents distrust preschool teachers, the
parents’ attitudes may affect their relationships with the teachers, their children, and other
parents. An extreme case of this example is from the researcher’s experience in Taiwan,
where a grandmother accused that the researcher and co-teacher that they did not provide
an adequate snack and lunch to her grandson. Because she thought her grandson did not
gain any weight, she questioned the teachers in a loud voice in front of other parents.
After a discussion, the grandmother was satisﬁed by the answer giving by the teachers.
This caregiver-teacher communication led to the teachers paying more attention to the
little boy during snack and lunch time, as they tried to encourage the boy to eat more. In
addition, the grandmother’s distrust of teachers has had a slight negative effect on
teachers’ images of other parents and possibly other parents’ image of their children
teachers. Another example occurred while observing in a U.S. preschool laboratory. A
Head Teacher noticed that a Chinese girl’s parents were unsatisﬁed with the teachers
which also included a negative image of the child center. The parents thought the teachers
did not love their child and made the child sick because the teachers forgot to dress their
child with a scarf and gloves before going outside in the winter. The parents reminded the
student teachers many times, but the situation did not change. The parents thought the

teachers were not caring people and expressed their ideas in front of their child. Their

attitude can indirectly affect how their child thought about the school and teachers. It
might be one of the reasons why they transferred to another school the following semester.
These are examples of the interrelationships between two microsystems which form the
level called mesosystem.

The exosystem refers to settings that do not involve the developing person directly,
yet what happens in these settings will inﬂuence the person’s development. For example,
although children do not spend many hours at their parents’ work place, the context
including various events and policies at their parent’s workplace can affect the child. If
the parents work late, the time that they spend with their children is reduced, or their
children may have to stay at a child care center longer. Another good example of the
exosystem comes from school board meetings. Children do not attend the school board
meeting; however, the decisions made in those meetings may directly or indirectly affect
the welfare of children in the center.

The macrosystem encompasses the microsystem, mesosystem, and exosystem. All
these levels include and are impacted by the cultural milieu such as cultural beliefs and
values, economic systems, public policies, and societal norms. For example, one
country’s laws may affect the developing person’s educational and growth opportunities.
A clear example is in the policies and requirements of schooling. Both the U.S. and
Taiwan require school attendance; however, the age ranges and years for compulsory
school attendance are different. In the U.S., the age of compulsory attendance for
elementary and secondary education is usually 12 academic years with kindergarten
being an option in many areas of the country. These requirements vary from state to state

beginning at age 5 and usually ending at 18 years old (U.S. Department of Education,

2005). In Taiwan, all children from 6 to 15 are required to attend 6 years of elementary
schooling and 3 years of junior high school (Ministry of Justice of the Republic of China,
2009). There are many macrosystemic policies that affect a developing child’s context
whether growing up in the United States or in Taiwan.

The chronosystem focuses on the effect of time on the person within contexts and
environments, and it emphasizes the interacting nature of these changes (Muuss, 1996).
Developmental changes were usually caused by life events or experiences such as the
birth of a sibling or puberty (Bronfenbrenner, 1989). For example, a family structure
might change due to an addition of a new born baby in the household which affect the
developing child. The interactions between the mother and the child are different before
and after the arrival of a new baby in the family. It is assumed that the ecological systems
are constantly changing and interacting, and any change in a given system will impact
other systems (Bergen, 2008). For example, at the home microsystem, a child getting sick
may change the parents’ work schedules, and one of the parents may need to be absent
from work to take care of the sick child. There may be other changes in other parts of the
microsystems or in the mesosystems such as in the school and peer groups. Therefore, the
chronosystem allows for the process of dynamism and change within any cultural

context.

Figure l Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Human Ecosystem of Children

THE MACROSYSTEM OR CULTURAL MILIEU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

MESOSYSTEM
MICROSYSTEM 1 MICROSYSTEM 2
HOME PRESCHOOL
PERCEIVED PERCEIVED
H - Activity ° Activity ‘—‘
- Role - Role
° Interpersonal - Interpersonal
relations relations
V V
EXOSYSTEM 1 EXOSYSTEM 2
Parent’s MICROSYSTEM 3 School board
workplace PLAYGROUND meeting
PERCEIVED
Activity
Role
- Interpersonal
relations
EXOSYSTEM 3
State level regulations
of playground
Time
CHRONOSYSTEM

 

Source: Adapted from Comparing Theories of Child Development (p.353), by

R. Murray Thomas. 2005, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

 

 

According to Bronfenbrenner’s theory, the transactions within the human
ecological system will inﬂuence the individuals’ development and behaviors; therefore, it
can be also applied to early childhood educators (See Figure 2).

In this study, the microsystems of early childhood educators include the home,
child development laboratory, and community. Teachers design the curricula, prepare
materials, arrange the classroom, interact with children, observe children, evaluate
children’s development, communicate with children’s parents, and work with other adults
such as co-teachers, student teachers, or volunteers in child development laboratories.
Teachers inﬂuence the people in the laboratories as well as the people in the laboratories
are inﬂuenced by the teachers.

The mesosystem refers to interrelations among two or more microsystems. For
example, teachers spend time in the child development laboratory and the community,
and each of these two microsystems is important to the teachers. Also, there are
interactions between the child development laboratory microsystem and the community
microsystem. The relations between the people inside the child development laboratory
microsystem and those inside the community microsystem may affect teachers. For
instance, if the child development laboratory has a good image and a good relationship
with the community, teachers may get more resources and support for their teaching from
the community.

The exosystems of early childhood educators may include their families’ schedules,
professional research application meetings, as well as the average economic status of the
children’s parents in the communities. However, a teacher’s decision not to participate in

a research application meeting to review research applications may have consequences.

The result may affect the teachers’ ability to garner resources and have a say in what
happens. If the committee members of the meeting approve the application, teachers will
have to assist with the on going research, even though it may sometimes interrupt their
teaching practices. Another example of this is the teachers’ family schedules. If the
teachers’ spouses are not available to stay home with their children in the evenings or on
the weekends, the teachers may not be able to join most school activities held at nights or
on the weekends.

The cultural beliefs and values, economic systems, public policies, and social
norms of the United States are different from those of Taiwan. Teachers and teacher aides
in the U.S. and Taiwan are working in different macrosystems which then inﬂuence all
other ecosystemic levels. In Taiwan, early childhood educators as those in the U.S. are
deeply inﬂuenced by developmentally appropriate practices of the Developmentally
Appropriate Practice Guidelines, which were established by child development specialists
and early childhood professionals. The DAP was based on three important types of
knowledge: age-appropriate practice, individually appropriate practice, and culturally
appropriate practice (Nelson and Nelson, 2006). However, Taiwanese early childhood
educators’ teaching practices still include some Taiwanese culture-based practices
inﬂuenced by Confucianism (Hsien, 2004). Therefore, under differing ecological systems,
the researcher has assumed that cultural factors will inﬂuence the teaching beliefs and
intentions among teachers and teaching aides in early childhood programs afﬁliated with
child development or related programs at universities or colleges within the United States
and Taiwan. Although in both countries early childhood teachers adopt the practice of the

Developmentally Appropriate Philosophy (DAP), the beliefs and intentions of the

teachers may differ and intentions inﬂuence their teaching practices because of cultural
inﬂuences. By carrying out this study, it is hoped that these similarities and differences
will be made clear for those interested in cultural inﬂuences in implementing early

childhood education programs.

 

10

Figure 2 Bronfenbrenner’s Ecological Model of Human Ecosystem of Early Childhood

Educators

THE MACROSYSTEM OR CULTURAL MILIEU

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

I

 

EXOSYSTEM 3

 

 

 

The average economic

status of children’s

 

parents

 

Time
CHRONOSYSTEM

 

 

 

 

 

 

MESOSYSTEM
MICROSYSTEM 1 MICROSYSTEM 2
CHILD
HOME DEVELOPMENT
LABORATORY
PERCEIVED PERCEIVED
- Activity - Activity
——> ° Role - Role *—
° Interpersonal - Interpersonal
relations relations
MICROSYSTEM 3
" COMMUNITY VI
EXOSYSTEM 1 EXOSYSTEM 2
Families’ PERCEIVED Research
- Actrvrty
schedules - Role application
' Interpersonal meeting
relations

V

 

 

Source: Adapted from Comparing Theories of Child Development (p.353), by

R. Murray Thomas, 2005, CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

11

:1

Research Hypotheses

According to the research questions, the following hypotheses will be tested in this
study.
Ho 1: Teaching beliefs do not vary between U.S. and Taiwanese early childhood teachers
and teaching aides.
Ha 1: Teaching beliefs vary between U.S. and Taiwanese early childhood teachers and
teaching aides.
Ho 2: Teaching intentions do not vary between U.S. and Taiwanese early childhood
teachers and teaching aides.
Ha 2: Teaching intentions vary between U.S. andTaiwanese early childhood teachers and
teaching aides.
Ho 3: Teaching beliefs are not associated with teaching intentions in early childhood
education.
Ha 3: Teaching beliefs are associated with teaching intentions in early childhood
education.
Ho 4: Teaching beliefs in the U.S. are not associated with teaching intentions in early
childhood education in the U.S.
Ha 4: Teaching beliefs in the U.S. are associated with teaching intentions in early
childhood education in the U.S.
Ho 5: Teaching beliefs in Taiwan are not associated with teaching intentions in early
childhood education in Taiwan.

Ha 5: Teaching beliefs in Taiwan are associated with teaching intentions in early

12

childhood education in Taiwan.

Definitions of Terms

The following deﬁnitions are used in this study.
Teaching Beliefs

Belief refers to a strong feeling that something is true or real (Macmillan English
Dictionary, 2002).

In this study, teaching beliefs refer to how teachers think and what they believe
about teaching young children.
Teaching Intentions

Intention refers to a plan in someone’s mind to do something (Macmillan English
Dictionary, 2002).

In this study, teaching intentions refer to what teachers want or plan to do when

they teach young children.

13

CHAPTER 2

REVIEW OF LITERATURE

Teachers’ beliefs

Early childhood educators play an inﬂuential role in children’s early experiences.
Their beliefs, values, and professional behaviors stimulate and facilitate children’s
development and learning (Hsueh & Barton, 2005). Every day in classrooms, teachers
have to make hundreds of decisions to deal with a variety of situations as they work with
children and adults. For example, when teachers encounter a disciplinary problem in the
classroom, they have to decide what practice is a better way to deal with the problem.
There are many ways to discipline 3 child, and a teacher must make a decision, and the
choice depends upon a teacher’s beliefs. Teachers’ beliefs about child-rearing practices
will also affect the child-care environment (Chazvini & Mullis, 2002). Teachers vary
widely in their teaching practices, and their beliefs are oﬁen associated with their
teaching practices. Many studies indicate that teachers’ beliefs are highly related to their
behaviors. It is well documented that teachers’ beliefs are positively associated with their
classroom behaviors and practices (Charlesworth, Hart, Burts, & Hernandez, 1991).
Stipek and Byler (1997) found preschool and kindergarten teachers’ beliefs about
appropriate and effective practices for young children were significantly correlated with
their practices in their classroom.

However, not all the studies support teachers’ beliefs being highly related to their

14

behaviors. From a 3-year study, Simmons and her colleagues (1999) found that teachers
believed and claimed they taught in student-centered ways, but the result of the studies
showed their teaching practices were teacher-centered. In Wilcox-Herzog’s study (2002),
she examined 47 early childhood educators’ teaching beliefs and teaching actions, and

she found no relationship between teachers’ beliefs and actions.

Cultural Inﬂuence

Research shows culture and contexts may be factors inﬂuencing teachers’ teaching
beliefs. Hsueh and Barton (2005) found despite under shared cultural beliefs, educators’
professional practices and beliefs are based upon the backgrounds educators come with.
According to Walsh (2002), his study found there were different teachers’ beliefs about
children’s natural sensibleness in U.S. school settings and-Japanese ones. For example, in
Taiwanese early childhood education settings, teaching practices include developmentally
appropriate practices inﬂuenced by DAP Guidelines, but also contain some Taiwanese
culture-based practices inﬂuenced by Confucianism (Hsien, 2004). Moreover, according
to the researcher’s personal observations and experiences, the researcher noticed several
similarities and differences between Taiwan and U.S. early childhood teachers and their
settings. Although in both countries, teachers espouse very similar philosophy and
principles of working with children, the practices in these two settings were very different.
For example, both settings offer snacks in the morning, however, the ways in which it is
carried out is different. In the U.S., snacks are offered during the free choice time period

meaning children can go to get their snacks whenever they want to during the free choice

15

time. While in Taiwan, all children at the child development laboratory have their snacks
at the same time, and the snacks are prepared by a cook in the kitchen found in the
laboratory. Therefore, when teachers in Taiwan design their curriculum, their schedules
are less ﬂexible since they have to include a designated snack time. Also, in Taiwan,
teachers are expected to encourage children to ﬁnish all their servings. The amount
offered is based on an individual’s situation. In the U.S., teachers allow children to
express their thoughts and decisions in order to determine for themselves if they do not
wish to ﬁnish their snacks. Although these programs apply a different teaching practice in
serving snacks, the outcomes of these two programs are similar in order to achieve their

goals. In the other words, there is no absolutely correct way to teach young children.

Early childhood education in the U.S. and in Taiwan

There are no national or centralized early childhood programs, curriculum
standards, philosophical approaches, and professional requirements in the U.S.
Developmentally appropriate practice (DAP) recommended by the National Association
for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) has inﬂuenced and has been used widely
among the early childhood programs in the U.S. (McMullen, 1999). As stated earlier the
position statement of NAEYC points out that DAP is based on three important types of
knowledge: age-related human characteristics, individual variation, and social and
cultural contexts. Most of early childhood educators are in programs permeated with
DAP-related values (Dunn & Kontos, 1998; McMullen & Alat, 2002).

In Taiwan, there are two systems of early childhood education — kindergartens and

16

preschools. They are regulated by different government departments, however, they are
very similar in teacher training and teaching practices. There are a variety of early
childhood programs or approaches in Taiwan because of no national standardized
curriculum (Wei, 1995). Also, early childhood education in Taiwan has been changing
due to the integration of traditional Chinese beliefs and Western teaching beliefs. For
example, in Taiwan, most teachers represent the two dominant systems of early childhood
education based under the child-centered principles such as DAP and traditional practices
(Hsieh, 2004; Lin, Gorrell, & Silvem, 2001). Today, teachers or future teachers are taught
with a child-centered philosophy using methods that are in conﬂict with the traditional
cultural values in which teachers try to support the parental wishes that emphasize

children’s academic achievement (Hsieh, 2004).

17

CHAPTER 3

RESEARCH METHODOLOGY

Research Design Statement

This non-experimental study was carried out in a quasi-natural setting and was
cross sectional in nature. A convenience sample of early childhood teachers and teaching
aides in the U.S. and Taiwan were identiﬁed, all of whom were working in child
development laboratories affiliated with child development or related programs at

universities or colleges. This inferential survey design utilized a univariate analysis.

Participants

Fifty early childhood teachers and teaching aides working in child development

laboratories affiliated with child development or related programs at universities or

colleges within the U.S. and Taiwan participated in this study. Twenty-four participants

were from Michigan, the U.S., and 26 participants were ﬁ'om Taiwan.

18

Data Collection Procedure

The United States

The data were collected from January to March 2009 in the U.S. The researcher
contacted the directors of the early childhood education programs afﬁliated with child
development or related programs at universities or colleges within Michigan, U.S. by
email to explain the purpose and procedure of the study and to ask for their support in
allowing the participation of their center teachers in the study. There was immediate
support by four university institutions, the Oakland University Lowry Center for Early
Childhood Education, the Central Michigan University Human Growth and Development
Laboratory, the University of Michigan-Dearbom Early Childhood Education Center, and
ﬁnally after weeks of waiting for a positive response, the approval came from Michigan
State University Child Development Laboratory. After getting the directors’ approval and
consent for the centers to participate, the researcher mailed a pre-paid envelope, the SIRB
approved Research Participant Information and Consent Forms, and the self-reported
questionnaires which include 37 statements, two open-ended questions, and a
demographic survey to the directors and asked them to distribute the materials to the
teachers and teaching aides in their centers. The teachers who participated in the study
were requested to sign the research consent forms. After completing the consent forms
and the questionnaires, the teachers were then asked to put the consent forms and the
questionnaires into small envelopes and seal the envelopes for conﬁdential reasons.
Lastly, the teachers put all the small envelopes into the prepaid envelope, and the director

mailed the prepaid envelope back to the researcher.

19

Taiwan

Like in the U.S., the survey followed a similar procedure. The researcher emailed
and called the directors of the Child Care Laboratory of Cardinal Tien College of
Healthcare and Management, the Child Care Laboratory of Chang Gung Institute of
Technology, the Fu-J en Catholic University Kindergarten, and the Child Development
Laboratory of Hungkuang University to explain the purpose and procedure of the study
and ask their consents to allow the participation of their centers’ teachers to participate in
the study. After getting the directors’ consent, the researcher mailed the directors a
pre-paid envelope, which included the Chinese version of the Research Participant
Information and Consent Form, the Chinese version of the self-reported questionnaires,
and small stipends for directors and participants. For validity reasons, the translated
Chinese version of the Research Participant Information and Consent Form was reviewed
by an associate professor at Fu-J en Catholic University, Taiwan. Small stipends were
given to the directors and participants in Taiwan as it is customary to offer stipends to the
participants. This practice was advised by a Taiwanese research professor. After the
teachers completed the consent forms and the questionnaires, the teachers were asked to
put the consent forms and the questionnaires into the small envelopes and seal the
envelopes for conﬁdential reasons. Lastly, the teachers put all the small envelopes into

the prepaid envelope and the director mailed the prepaid envelope back to the researcher.

20

Data Collected and Received

The United States

Questionnaire packets which contained the Research Participant Information and
Consent Forms and the Briefs and Intentions Questionnaires, two open-ended questions
and demographic surveys were distributed to 34 early childhood teachers or teaching
aides working in child development laboratories afﬁliated with child development or
related programs at universities or colleges in Michigan, U.S. Thirty packets were sent
back, and 24 consent forms and questionnaires were completed. The usable response rate
was 70.6 percent.
Taiwan

Twenty-seven early childhood teachers or teaching aides working in child
development laboratories affiliated with child development or related programs at
universities or colleges in Taiwan participated in this study. All packets were sent back,
but only 26 participants completed the consent forms and questionnaires. There was a

96.3 percent response rate.

Research Instruments

The Beliefs and Intentions Questionnaire is an established measure based on
teacher sensitivity, teacher verbal involvement, teacher nonverbal involvement, and
teacher play styles. This instrument assesses teachers’ and teaching aides’ beliefs and

intentions (Wilcox-Herzog & Ward, 2004). Based on the research of Wilcox-Herzog and

21

Ward (2004), the Cronbach’s alpha is .85. The questionnaire includes two parts: teaching
beliefs and teaching intentions. There are 17 statements for teaching beliefs, 20
statements for teaching intentions. Each statement is rated on a 5-point Likert scale with
1 “never” and 5 “always.” Total scores of teaching beliefs and teaching intentions are
counted separately. Higher scores in teaching beliefs indicate stronger beliefs about the
importance of behaving in sensitive and involved manner toward children. In teaching
intentions scale, higher scores imply intentions were more sensitive and involved in
nature. Besides, in order to explore the relationship between the teachers’ teaching beliefs
and their teaching practices and to understand the teachers’ background information, two
open-ended questions and demographic surveys were added to the measure. The English
version of the beliefs and intentions questionnaire was translated into Mandarin Chinese
by the researcher, a Chinese native speaker. Then, the Chinese version of the
questionnaire was translated back into English by a ChineSe native speaker with a
Master’s degree in Early Childhood Education from the U.S. These procedures were

followed to ensure validity of the translation.

Data Analysis

Data were coded by the researcher and analyzed by using the SPSS Statistic 16.0
software. Demographic Characteristics of the sample from the U.S. and Taiwan are
shown by using descriptive statistics. To compare the teaching beliefs and teaching
intentions between the U.S. and Taiwan, the Frequency distribution and

Independent-samples t Test were conducted. Also, Pearson Correlation was used to

22

examine the relationship between the teaching beliefs and teaching intentions. To
compare U.S. and Taiwanese participants’ responses to the open-ended questions related
their philosophy of early childhood education and teaching intentions, the data were

coded by thematic methods.
Ethical Considerations

This research project and the Research Participant Information and Consent Form
were reviewed and approved by the Social Science/Behavioral/Education Institutional
Review Board (SIRB) at Michigan State University. All participants were provided the
Research Participant Information and Consent Forms, for the purpose to inform the
participants about the study, to convey that their participations were voluntary, to explain
risks and beneﬁts of their participation, to notify them that all the information they
provided would be confidential, and to indirectly empower them to make informed

decisions in their role as an early childhood teacher.

23

CHAPTER 4

RESULTS

Demographic Characteristics

Demographic characteristics of the participants were obtained from the
demographic surveys which provided the age, gender, experience, and education level of
the participants from the U.S. and Taiwan. There were 24 early childhood educators and
teaching aides working in child development laboratories affiliated with child
development or related programs at universities or colleges in Michigan. The number of
years of working within early childhood programs in the U.S. was an average of 11.19
years (range = 03-35). All of them were females with an average age of 36.5 years (range
= 21-58). Most participants held Bachelor’s Degrees (43.48%) and Master’s Degrees
(47.83%), one had a High School Diploma (4.35%), and one was a Doctoral Candidate
(4.35%). Twenty-seven early childhood female educators and teaching aides with an
average age of 30.52 years (range = 21-48) were from Taiwan. The average length of
teaching was 6.16 years (range = 05-19). The majority of the participants held
Bachelor’s Degrees (80.77%), 11.54% of them had Master’s Degrees, and 7.69% had an
Associate’s Degree. The comparison of participants’ age, experience, and education

between the U.S. and Taiwan is presented in Table 1.

24

Table 1

Comparison of Participants’ Age, Experience, and Education Between the U.S. and

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Taiwan
U.S. Taiwan
(N = 24) (N = 26)
Age Range 21-58 years 21-48 years
Mean 36.5 years 30.52 years
Length of Range 03-35 years 05-19 years
Teaching Mean 11.19 years 6.16 years
Education High School 4.35% 0%
Diploma
Associate’s Degree 0% 7.69%
Bachelor’s Degree 43.48% 80.77%
Master’s Degree 47.83% 11.54%
Doctoral 4.35% 0%
Candidate
Teaching Beliefs

The total scores of teaching beliefs were calculated from the self-reported beliefs

questionnaires which contains 17 statements. Though all efforts were made to ensure that

all questionnaires were precisely prepared, it turned out that two inaccuracies were

involuntarily introduced by the researcher in the Chinese version of the questionnaires.

Statement number 9 was not accompanied by a corresponding 5-point Likert scale, and

statement number 11 was printed in an incomplete form which was missing the last two

words. As such, statement number 9 and number 11 were both discarded in the English

and Chinese versions of the questionnaires when carrying out the empirical analysis. The

25

 

total possible score ranged from 15 to 75. The mean score of teaching beliefs for the U.S.
was 53.96 (r = 48-58), and for Taiwan the mean scores was 55.96 (r = 48-64). Around 70
percent of U.S. participants, their scores of teaching beliefs were within the range
between 51 and 56, whereas more than 60 percent of Taiwanese participants’ scores were
within the range between 54 and 59. The frequency distribution table of the teaching

beliefs between the U.S. and Taiwan is presented in Table 2.

Table 2

Frequency Distribution Table of Teaching Beliefs Scores Between the U.S. and Taiwan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Teaching Beliefs Scores U.S. Taiwan
(R = 15-75) (N = 24) (N = 26)
48-50 3 12.5% 3 11.54%
51-53 8 33.33% 3 11.54%
54-56 9 37.5% 6 23.08%
57-59 4 16.67% 10 3 8.46%
60-62 0 0% 3 11.54%
63-65 0 0% 1 3.85%
Mean 53.96 55.96
SD 2.73 4.04

 

 

 

Independent-samples t Test was used to compare the overall mean scores for the
responses of the teaching briefs from the early childhood educators within the U.S. and
Taiwan. The test of the equality of variances by Levine showed there was not enough
evidence to reject such a hypothesis. Results indicated that there was a signiﬁcant
difference between the two mean scores of teaching beliefs from the U.S. and Taiwan;

therefore the null hypothesis that teaching beliefs do not vary between U.S. and

26

 

Taiwanese early childhood teachers and teaching aides was rejected (t = -2.039, p < 0.05),
and in particular the evidence suggested Taiwanese early childhood educators had higher

scores (See Table 2 and Table 3).

Table 3

Independent-samples t Test for Teaching Beliefs from the U.S. and Taiwan

 

 

 

t df Sig. Mean Std. Error
Difference Difference
Teaching -2.039 48 .047 -2.003 0.982
Beliefs

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This research design did not plan to examine the relationships between teaching
beliefs items, therefore item-by-item comparison in this study were not carried out.
However, when coding the data, the researcher noticed that although the mean scores of
teaching beliefs from the U.S. and Taiwan were close, there were some obvious
differences in the responses of items between U.S. and Taiwanese participants. In Table 4,
the numbers in bold represent the mean scores of teaching beliefs from the U.S. and
Taiwan differ indicating more than a 1.5 points (r = 0.08-2.56) difference. U.S.
participants had higher scores in statement number 4, yet Taiwanese participants showed
stronger beliefs on statements number 12 and number 14. Statements indicate “making
children do (number 12 andl4)” versus “encouraging children to do (number 4).” Also,
the statements number 4 and number 12 are “with adult assistance” versus “without adult

assistance.”

27

Table 4

Teaching Beliefs Item-by-item Comparison (Mean Score)

 

 

 

 

Teaching Beliefs U.S. Taiwan
0“ = 24) 1N = 26)
1. When children hit each other, teachers should help them to 4.83 4.58
understand each other's feelings.
2. During group time, teachers should encourage children to sit 3.79 3.56
and listen most of the time.
3. Teachers should plan some novel activities that will 4.5 4.28

challenge children to try new experiences (sometimes with
adult assistance).

 

 

 

 

 

 

4. Teachers should encourage children to pick up their toys 5 3.12
(with adult help) during clean-up time.

5. When a child takes a toy from another child, teachers should 3.75 4.65
observe and see what happens.

6. Teachers should speak to children at their own level (e.g., 4.70 4.62
use language familiar to young children, make eye contact).

7. Teachers should talk to children like adults (e.g., use long 2.33 2.15
sentences and words unfamiliar to young children).

8. Teachers should encourage children to use good manners 4.33 4.54
(even if children don't always use them).

10. Teachers should put a variety of interesting activities out 4.54 4.69

during free choice time and then let children make their
own activity choices.

 

 

 

 

 

12. Teachers should make children pick up all of their toys 1.79 3.42
(without adult help) during clean-up time.

13. When a child throws playdough one time, teachers should 4.42 4.2
remind her that playdough is for rolling.

14. When children hit each other, teachers should make them 1.79 4.35
apologize (say sorry) to each other.

15. When many children in the class lose interest during story 3.5 3.42
time, teachers should stop and go on to something else.

16. When many children in the class lose interest during 1.92 2.19

storytime, teachers should make them sit on their bottoms
until the story is ﬁnished.

 

 

17. When a child takes a toy from another child, teachers 2.92 2.65
should intervene quickly.

 

 

 

To compare U.S. and Taiwanese participants’ philosophy of early childhood
Education open-ended questions, see Table 5 for thematic comparison of the participants’
descriptions from the U.S. and Taiwan. Taiwanese teachers wrote “teachers should

28

 

respect children” and “polite manners and moral education are important” as parts of
their philosophy of early childhood education, yet no U.S. teacher mentioned it in their

responses.

Table 5
Comparison of Descriptions about Philosophy of Early Childhood Education Between the

U.S. and Taiwan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Philosophy of Early Childhood Education U.S. Taiwan
(number of (number of
participants) participants)
1. Children learn through play and doing. 10 2
2. Children learn through investigating and 9 3
exploring environment and various materials.
3. Children are active learner. 3 11
4. Teachers are guides or facilitators. 5 15
5. Teachers should support children’s interests. 6 3
6. Children are individuals and should be treated 4 15
that way/child-centered.
7. Teachers should provide developmentally 4 5
appropriate activities.
8. Teachers should provide safe and warm 4 5
environment.
9. Teachers should respect children. 0 6
10. Polite manners and moral education are 0 3
important.

 

 

 

 

29

Teaching Intentions

The total scores of teaching intentions were calculated from the self-reported
beliefs questionnaires which contains 20 statements. The possible range of the total score
is from 20 to 100. The mean score of teaching intentions for the U.S. was 86.46 (r =
71-100), and for Taiwan the mean scores was 85.31 (r = 66-99). The majority of both U.S.
and Taiwanese participants’ scores of teaching intentions were within the range of 81 to
95. The frequency distribution table of the teaching intentions between the U.S. and

Taiwan is presented in Table 6.

Table 6

Frequency distribution table of Teaching Intentions Scores Between U.S. and Taiwan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Teaching Intentions U.S. Taiwan

Scores (N = 24) (N = 26)
m = 20-100)
66-70 0 0% 1 3.85%
71-75 2 8.33% 3 11.54%
76-80 2 8.33% 3 11.54%
81-85 6 25% 4 15.38%
86-90 7 29.17% 9 34.62%
91-95 4 16.67% 4 15.38%
96-100 3 12.5% 2 7.69%
Mean 86.46 85.31
SD 7.08 8.11

 

 

 

 

3O

Independent-samples t Test was used to compare the overall mean scores for the
responses of the teaching intentions from the early childhood educators within the U.S.
and Taiwan. The test of the equality of variances by Levine showed there was not enough
evidence to reject such a hypothesis. There was not enough evidence to reject the null
hypothesis that teaching intentions do not vary between U.S. and Taiwanese early

childhood teachers and teaching aides (t = .597, p > 0.05) (See Table 7).

Table 7

Independent-samples t Test for Teaching Intentions from the U.S. and Taiwan

 

 

 

t df Sig. Mean Std. Error
Difference Difference
Teaching .533 48 .597 1.151 2.16
Intentions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This research design did not plan to examine the relationships between teaching
intentions items, therefore item-by-item comparison in this study were not carried out.
However, when coding the data, the researcher noticed that although the mean scores of
teaching intentions from the U.S. and Taiwan were close, there were some differences in
the responses of items between U.S. and Taiwanese participants. In Table 8, the numbers
in bold represent the mean scores of teaching intentions from the U.S. and Taiwan which
differ more than 0.7 points (r = 0.06-0.77). U.S. participants had higher scores in
statement number 16, yet Taiwanese participants were more likely to indirectly inﬂuence

behavior as on statements number 9 and number 11.

31

Table 8

Teaching Intentions Item-by-item Comparison (Mean Score)

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Teaching Intentions U.S. Taiwan
(N =24) (N = 26)
l. I §t down on the ﬂoor and play with children. 4.54 4.23
2. I speak warmly to the children when I interact with them. 4.79 4.12
3. I watch children play. 4.29 3.85
4. I ask children open-ended questions rather than yes-no ones. 4.54 4.31
5. I engage children in two-way conversations about their play. 4.5 4.12
6. I am enthusiastic about children's activities and efforts (e.g., 4.43 4.5
I congratulate them when they do good job).
7. I help children use play materials. 4.08 4.42
8. I talk with children about their play. 4.54 4.35
9. I make suggestions for how to use materials. 3.42 4.19
10. I listen attentively when children speak to me. 4.92 4.46
11. I help children remember to clean up as they ﬁnish 4 4.77
activities.
12. I hug and hold children. 4.17 4.64
13. I get involved in children's dramatic play. 4.04 4.35
14. I am ﬁrm with children when it is necessary. 4.71 4.65
15. I talk with children in order to enhance their play. 4.5 4.08
16. When children talk to me, I restate their comments. 4.17 3.46
17. When I describe what children are doing, I give extra 4.08 3.77
information (e.g., "Your red car is going really fast").

18. I help children ﬁnd activities to play with. 3.92 4
19. I enjoy being with children. 4.96 4.58
20. I show children the appropriate way to use play materials. 4.04 4.46

 

To compare U.S. and Taiwanese participants’ responses to the open-ended
questions about how to put their beliefs into practices, Table 9 represents the thematic
comparison of the participants’ descriptions from the U.S. and Taiwan. U.S. and
Taiwanese participants had similar responses about how they put their beliefs into

practices.

32

 

Table 9

Comparison of Descriptions about Theory to Practice Between the U.S. and Taiwan

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Teaching Intentions/Practices U.S. Taiwan
(number of (number of
participants) participants)
1. Let children explore environment and materials. 1 3
2. Help and support children as needed. 4 3
3. Children are encouraged to be problem-solvers. 5 4
4. Teachers provide activities and materials which 2 4
children are interested.
5. Observe and document children. 4 5
6. Use open-end activities and conversations. 2 6
7. Provide various materials and activities. 5 2
8. Provide age-appropriated activities. 1 7
9. Curriculum is designed incorporating 3 l
all/multiple domains of development.
10. Parents/families are welcome into classroom. 3 1

 

 

 

The Relationship between Teaching Beliefs and Intentions

Pearson Correlation analysis was conducted to examine whether there was a

relationship between the teaching beliefs and teaching intentions. The analysis revealed

that teaching beliefs and intentions were positively associated (R = .348, p < 0.05) (See

Table 10). Moreover, the relationship between U.S. teaching beliefs and intentions was

also examined. Table 11 shows that U.S. teaching beliefs were not associated with

teaching intentions (R = .197, P > 0.05 ). However, teaching beliefs in Taiwan were

positively associated with teaching intentions (R = .493, p < 0.05) (See Table 12).

33

 

Table 10

Correlation between Teaching Beliefs and Intentions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Beliefs Intentions
Beliefs 1 .000 .348*
Intentions .348* 1 .000
* p < .05
Table 11

Correlation between U.S. Teaching Beliefs and Intentions

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

U.S. Beliefs U.S. Intentions
U.S. Beliefs 1.000 .197
U.S. Intentions .197 1.000
Table 12

Correlation between Taiwan Teaching Beliefs and Intentions

 

Taiwan Beliefs

Taiwan Intentions

 

Taiwan Beliefs

1.000

.493 *

 

Taiwan Intentions

 

.493*

 

l .000

 

 

*p<.05

 

34

 

 

 

CHAPTER 5

DISCUSSION, LIMITATIONS, AND INPLICATIONS

Discussion

The characteristics of the demographic data show that U.S. early childhood
educators working in child development laboratories afﬁliated with child development or
related programs at universities or colleges are six years older than Taiwanese early
childhood educators. The U.S. educators have ﬁve years more on teaching experience
than the early childhood educators in Taiwan. According to the researcher’s opinion and
observations, parents of young children in Taiwan generally prefer young early childhood
teachers because the parents think young teachers are more energetic to work with young
children. Teachers’ ages are one of parental criteria for choosing a preschool and making
a decision (Hsieh, 2008). It is also found in Liu’s study (2006) that the older kindergarten
teachers in Taiwan are more concerned about their appearances and maintaining their
physical energies since they think that parents care more about teachers’ appearances and
their physical energies.

In addition, the educators in the U.S. have a higher percentage of Master’s degrees
than those in Taiwan. It seems there are higher educational requirements in U.S. child
development laboratories affiliated with child development or related programs at
universities or colleges than those in Taiwan.

The ﬁrst purpose of this research is to examine early childhood educators’ teaching

35

beliefs and intentions across two countries, the United States and Taiwan. The results
indicate a variation of early childhood educators’ teaching beliefs that reﬂect a cultural
representation of the U.S. and of Taiwan. It is consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s
ecological model of human development, which assumes that the environment or context,
in which a developing human being lives, affects the person’s development. However,
there is no enough evidence to support that teaching intentions varied between U.S. and
Taiwanese early childhood educators.

When looking at the responses of each item from U.S. and Taiwanese early
childhood educators, there are some obvious differences between these two groups of
teachers. The differences may be caused by cultural factors. For example, when asking
the beliefs about encouraging children to pick up their toys during clean-up time
(statements number 4 and number 12), U.S. teachers have stronger beliefs about
encouraging children to pick up their toys with adult help, yet Taiwanese teachers are
more likely to agree with making children pick up their toys without an adult’s help. In
addition, Taiwanese teachers have stronger beliefs about making children apologize (say
“I am sorry”) to each other when children hit each other (statement number 14).

Although statistically teaching intentions do not vary between U.S. and Taiwanese
early childhood educators, there are some differences between two groups of teachers.
For example, Taiwanese teachers are more likely to make suggestions on how to use
materials and help children remember to clean up as they ﬁnish their activities than U.S.
teachers (statements number 9 and number 11). However, U.S. teachers are more likely to
restate children’s comments when children talk to them (statement number 16).

From the teachers’ responses to the open-ended questions about their philosophy of

36

early childhood Education, Taiwanese teachers wrote “teachers should respect children”
and “politeness and moral education are important” as parts of their philosophy of early
childhood education, yet not one U.S. teacher mentioned it. These differences may reﬂect
cultural factors. In traditional Taiwanese society, polite manners and teachers’ authority
were valued. Nowadays, Taiwanese early childhood teachers have been inﬂuenced by
child-centered principles; however, they still keep and maintain some traditional
Confucianism cultural values of their macrosystem (Hsieh, 2004). In addition, this
ﬁnding is consistent with Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of human development,
which assumes that individual’s development is affected by the surrounding context. For.
example, U.S. and Taiwanese early childhood teachers grew up in different macrosystems
which include different cultural beliefs and values, economic, public policies, and social
norms.

The second purpose of this research is to examine the relationship between
teaching beliefs and teaching intentions. The results indicate that there is not enough
evidence to support that teaching beliefs are related to teaching intentions of U.S. early
childhood educators. For Taiwanese teachers, there is a significant relationship between
their teaching beliefs and intentions indicating that they may be more socially sensitive.
Overall, early childhood educators’ teaching beliefs are related to their teaching
intentions, and this ﬁnding is consistent with previous research that suggests teachers’

beliefs are related their intentions (Wilcox-Herzog & Ward, 2004).

37

Limitations of the Research

It is important to note there are several limitations of this study. First of all, the
sample size of 24 early childhood educators from the U.S. and 26 early childhood
educators from Taiwan is fairly small. Also, the samples are only from four university
institutions of each country and cannot represent all early childhood educators in the U.S.
and Taiwan. Therefore the ﬁndings of this study cannot be generalized to other early
childhood educators in the U.S. and Taiwan.

Second, the items of the research instrument, Beliefs and Intentions Questionnaire,
focus on the teaching beliefs and intentions about interactions with children. Therefore,
the ﬁndings of this study cannot be generalized to other early childhood educators’
teaching beliefs and intentions such as dimensions of academic achievements or
discipline.

Third, this study utilizes a univariate analysis, so it does not control other factors
such as children’s age or teachers’ teaching experience that may inﬂuence teaching
beliefs and intentions. For example, teachers may have different teaching beliefs and
intentions when they teach two year-old children and ﬁve year-old children.

Finally, this study examines the early childhood educators’ teaching beliefs and
intentions from their self-report questionnaires. Therefore, the data do not reﬂect what
exactly are the similarities and differences between the teaching beliefs and intentions of
U.S. and Taiwanese early childhood educators. Moreover, the data do not reﬂect the
educators’ teaching behaviors and actions in the childhood settings. Teaching beliefs and

intentions do not always correspond to teaching behaviors and actions. For ﬁthher studies,

38

researchers may apply other research methods such as observational designs to examine

the relationships between the beliefs, intentions, and practice.

Implications for Further Research

This research involves early childhood educators’ teaching beliefs and intentions
representing two countries and cultures. The results suggest that teaching beliefs vary
between U.S. and Taiwanese early childhood educators, even though the
Developmentally Appropriate Practices (DAP) is emphasized in both countries. Future
studies examining how cultural factors might affect teaching beliefs, intentions, and
practices in early childhood settings could lead to important ﬁndings about the impact of
culture on teaching practices. Moreover, this study may provide insights into the cultural
impact of informative concepts that are found in teaching attitudes, beliefs, and directions
in early childhood programs for pre-service and in-service teachers, teacher aides, and

caregivers.

39

APPENDIX A

Cover Letter (English Version)

Dear Sir/Madam,

I am currently a graduate student in Child Development at Michigan State University, and
I have been working on my thesis, “Comparing early childhood educators’ teaching
beliefs and intentions between the U.S. and Taiwan.” I am writing to ask for your consent
as I would like to invite your school teachers to participate in the study. The teachers will
be asked to sign the research consent forms and complete the Teaching Beliefs and
Teaching Intentions Questionnaires which include 37 statements and 2 open-ended
questions. The participation in this study will take about 10 to 15 minutes. All the
information obtained for the purpose of this study will be conﬁdential and will be kept in

a locked ﬁle.

If you have any questions regarding this study, please feel free to contact me by e-mail

at suichiay@msu.edu. Thank you very much for your consideration.

Sincerely,

Chia-Yu Sui

4O

APPENDIX B

Cover Letter (Chinese Version)

EiEé‘JliI/Pﬁﬁ Eff:

ﬁEEIE’ﬁfRiHiK‘EWiChigan State University)iﬁﬁzﬁiiﬁ5$gra
:lrliiéﬁf-i-i‘il‘ﬁiiéfi ’ ﬁEWEEEEERﬁE-ﬁéﬁﬁ ’ E Elﬁiﬁgﬁéﬁfﬁ 3%
— rtbiiElfaé‘EéﬁkbﬁEéiﬁ/iEEAEéfJZiiEiEE-JEEELEEEJ’ ﬁEZﬁEEiﬁ
Eifﬁﬁlﬁﬁméﬁvtéféﬁéﬁéﬁfffﬁ ° ﬁfﬁ‘i’rﬁ’éf‘sl 98 #2 H fﬂiﬁﬁlfffﬁ ’ lfﬁEEEi
é‘JEEIfEE-iﬁgft’zifffﬁfﬂEEE’i’M’iFuiE ’ l’a'iEl’Q-Eﬂﬁﬁak‘gli’z} 3 EEG.”
EEE’LEEE EEE 37 iEliEa‘EﬁE/B. 24131153531??? EOE 10~15 67%? ° WEWEEEE
xraiaaaeerareE-IarﬁomaéiaawaiﬁwmoEraaa/maera-Hr
iiié‘Jtn’iﬁﬁ ’ isﬁﬁéll‘ﬁthﬁfﬁﬁiééﬂgéﬁﬁtE °

315Eléii€iff$éﬁz¥i§rﬂinizﬁﬁ ’ ﬁvﬁ'siﬁﬁfﬁéfbfffﬁﬁiiﬁéﬁiifai ’ EEEEEEE °

ﬁt 9‘] Eff; 7% E suichiay@msu. edu

E’ﬂitﬁlﬁik‘a’é EEEEEEEEE

LEE-E tea-a

41

APPENDIX C

Research Participant Information and Consent Form (English Version)

You are being asked to participate in a research study. The purpose of this docmnent is to
provide a consent form to inform you about the study, to convey that participation is
voluntary, to explain risks and beneﬁts of participation, and to empower you to make an
informed decision. You should feel free to ask the researcher any questions you may
have.

1.

Who will be conducting the study?

Chia-Yu Sui

Graduate Student in Child Development
Department of Family and Child Ecology
Michigan State University

Email: suichiay@msuedu

Phone: 517-353-3633
What is the purpose of the research and who is being asked to participate?

The purpose of the research is to study and compare early childhood educators’
teaching beliefs and intentions between the U.S. and Taiwan. Early childhood
teachers or teaching aides who are working in child development laboratories
affiliated with universities or colleges in the U.S. and Taiwan are being asked to
participate.

What procedures will be performed for research purposes?

After getting your consent, you will be requested to sign the research consent form,
and then complete a demographic survey and a self-report questionnaire, Briefs and
Intentions Questionnaire which includes 37 statements and 2 open-ended questions.
Your participation in this study will take you about 10 to 15 minutes. The research
consent form and the questionnaire will be sent to the laboratories, centers, and
kindergarten by mail.

What are the potential beneﬁts for taking part in this study?
You will not directly beneﬁt from your participation in this study. However, your
participation in this study may contribute to a better understanding about (1) teaching

beliefs and intentions among early childhood educators (2) comparison of the
teaching belief and intentions in the U.S. and Taiwan.

42

. What are the potential risks of participating in this study?

There are no foreseeable risks associated with participation in this study.

. Who will know my participation in this study?

All information obtained for the purpose of this study will be conﬁdential and will be
kept in a locked ﬁle cabinet for a minimum of 3 years, and only researchers will have
access to the information. The data for this study are being collected anonymously,
and the result of the study will be presented using group variable with no reference to
individual answers. Your conﬁdentiality will be protected to the maximum extent
allowable by law.

. Is my participation in this study volunteer?

Your participation in this research study is voluntary, and you may change your mind
at any time and withdraw without any effect.

Will I be charged for the participation and will I get any compensation for the
participation?

You will neither be charged nor receive money or any other form of compensation for
participating in this study.

43

Research Consent Form
(Signature Page)

If you have any concerns or questions regarding this study, please feel free to contact the
researcher, Chia-Yu Sui, at 517-353-3633, or email suichiay@msuedu.

If you have questions or concerns about your role and rights as a research participant,
would like to obtain information or offer input, or would like to register a complaint
about this study, you may contact, anonymously if you wish, the Michigan State
University’s Human Research Protection Program at 517-355-2180, Fax 517-432-4503,
or e-mail irMQmsuedu, or regular mail at 202 Olds Hall, MSU, East Lansing, MI 48824.

 

I have read all of the above statement and explanation. By signing this form, I agree to
participate in this study and conﬁrm that my participation is voluntary.

 

 

 

 

Signature of Participant Date
Chia-Yu Sui Date
Researcher

44

APPENDIX D

Research Participant Information and Consent Form (Chinese Version)

fi’EéiJEg‘li {if}:
ﬁEEEEﬁtﬁNikE‘Wichigan State UniversitﬂiféﬁifﬂEifEEE/‘E

fiiiéiJ’E-f-‘il‘ﬁfiéa‘i ’ ﬁﬁﬁ‘ffﬁf‘iEEﬁbRﬁﬁﬁﬂﬁ ’ E ﬁilfiiﬁgﬁﬁﬁgﬁf‘éﬁ
—FEREEEEEE%EE%M¥EAEEEEEEEEEEEJHEEZEEE
EEEEEEEE°WEWEEEEEEE*EEEEEEEEEEEE’MEN
Eﬂiéﬁskffl‘h‘ 3 EEI‘EEEEEEE ’ $EE37IEiEi¥ﬁéﬁ21EE§EEE ’ .‘E‘JE‘IOJS
77 5E ° EI’TEWEI’HI’IIHEEIE’LX‘IEE‘ ° ETEEIIQEQ‘JWJB/J ’ illiﬁﬁE'I‘ﬁﬁlh"fri-ﬁ§€&

EUEREIEQ’JIEEIJEIEE ’ ﬁviﬁié’sifﬁS‘E‘fIEEifﬂiiF-‘i ’ Ekifﬂiﬁl‘ﬁﬁfifaﬁié
*5 ° ﬁéﬁEﬁfi‘é’ ESE suichiay@msuedu

\

In?
3

EETaEz’REEEEEELEWE’EEEEEEEmﬁo

 

 

 

 

EEEEZ 8%
EEE
WEEEE BE

45

APPENDIX E
Beliefs and Intentions Questionnaire (English Version)

(Wilcox-Herzog & Ward, 2004)

(Permitted to use from Dr. Wilcox-Herzog)

. Teaching Beliefs

Please circle the number which matches your teaching beliefs most.

Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always
When children hit each other, teachers should I 2 3 4 5
help them to understand each other's feelings.
During group time, teachers should encourage 1 2 3 4 5
children to sit and listen most of the time.
Teachers should plan some novel activities that l 2 3 4 5
will challenge children to try new experiences
(sometimes with adult assistance).
Teachers should encourage children to pick up 1 2 3 4 5
their toys (with adult help) during clean-up time.
When a child takes a toy from another child, I 2 3 4 5
teachers should observe and see what happens.
Teachers should speak to children at their own I 2 3 4 5
level (e.g., use language familiar to young children,
make eye contact).
Teachers should talk to children like adults I 2 3 4 5
(e.g., use long sentences and words unfamiliar to

young children).

46

10.

ll.

12.

l3.

I4.

15.

l6.

l7.

Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always

Teachers should encourage children to use good
manners (even if children don't always use them).
When a child throws playdough one time, teachers
should tell her to leave the playdough area.
Teachers should put a variety of interesting
activities out during free choice time and then let
children make their own activity choices.
When children play, teachers should sit down
sometimes and talk with them about what they are
doing.
Teachers should make children pick up all of their
toys (without adult help) during clean-up time.
When a child throws playdough one time, teachers
should remind her that playdough is for rolling.
When children hit each other, teachers should
make them apologize (say sorry) to each other.
When many children in the class lose interest
during story time, teachers should stop and go on
to something else.
When many children in the class lose interest
during story time, teachers should make them sit
on their bottoms until the story is ﬁnished.
When a child takes a toy from another child,

teachers should intervene quickly.

47

l

2

3

4

5

Teaching Intentions

Please circle the number which matches your teaching intentions most.

Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always

I get down on the ﬂoor and play with children.

I speak warmly to the children when I interact with
them.

I watch children play.

I ask children open-ended questions rather than
yes-no ones.

I engage children in two-way conversations about
their play.

I am enthusiastic about children's activities and
efforts (e.g., I congratulate them when they do
goodjob)

I help children use play materials.

I talk with children about their play.

I make suggestions for how to use materials.

. I listen attentively when children speak to me.

. I help children remember to clean up as they ﬁnish

activities.

. l hug and hold children.

. I get involved in children's dramatic play.

. I am ﬁrm with children when it is necessary.

. I talk with children in order to enhance their play.

. When children talk to me, I restate their comments.

48

l

l

2

2

l\)

3

3

4

4

5

5

I7.

18.

19.

20.

When I describe what children are doing, I give

Never Seldom Sometimes Usually Always

extra information (e.g., "Your red car is going really

fast").

I help children ﬁnd activities to play with.

I enjoy being with children.

I show children the appropriate way to use play

materials.

49

l 2 3 4 5
l 2 3 4 5
l 2 3 4 5
l 2 3 4 5

C. Open-ended Questions
1. What is your philosophy of early childhood education? Please describe brieﬂy.

2. How do you put your belief into practices? Please describe brieﬂy.

D. Background Information

 

 

1.Age:

2. Gender: Male __ Female __

3. Length of Teaching:

4. Educational Attainment: High School Diploma __ Associate Degree
Bachelor’s Degree __ Other

 

Thank you very much for your participation!!

50

APPENDIX F

Beliefs and Intentions Questionnaire (Chinese Version)

ﬁﬁsﬁtﬂl’n‘lﬁ

(Wilcox-Herzog & Ward, 2004)

. ﬁﬁlﬁﬁ;

aaaaaaseaaaamaao

$532: 1%? £3? '3??? .435:

. ﬁﬁbfﬂﬁﬁftﬁﬂiaggﬁﬁé‘ézﬁﬁﬁl’dzlﬁi'ﬁ 1 2

aaaaao

. ﬁlﬂﬁﬁiﬁﬂﬂi,ﬁﬁﬂéﬁﬁiﬁtﬁbfik’éﬂ’ﬁﬁrfa‘i 1 2

aaaaao

. £3ﬁﬂE€Z3i3+*1§#ﬁiﬁ%iﬁfﬂ,itih’a’izbfi’g? 1 2

msawaaaaaemaar) .
. Hiram—ﬁat, stewemiamamimmab 1 2

"Filitaiztﬁ- °

. awaaamaaa—reiaa,aéaﬁrszzaa 1 2

iii THEE? °

51

3

4

5

10.

11.

12.

13.

14.

15.

FEEWEEZliFHﬁé‘féififiéﬁa'gUél-ﬁmzﬁﬁi
ﬁi’iﬁﬁéﬁﬁiﬂﬁaiWﬁﬁﬁ) °

7?: 8&5 fail} ﬁtéﬁéaliifﬁﬁl’iﬁﬁi/xéﬁéﬂ lé'lﬁa : {£33
€551", Lx&lifﬁ£hfé$§lt.ﬁéﬁégli) °
7téﬁﬂs§€§cﬁiﬁtfi§liﬁ li£8¥éﬁiﬁl§uﬁiﬁéﬁal7li

fiiiﬁ$éﬁﬁﬁiél> °

ié‘zhﬁt—zéiraei»:k, aétﬁzzza maraaaa °

9 eh #i $58%Faﬁ, %8%ﬂé%.€&§%¥§7ﬁ&éﬁiﬁﬁ
$995563 reﬁt? °
:aaeaa. €8%:%8%ﬁEEZc-L:Ti£%€rt%§a
mME&MHa°
424145217488},%8ME%Z%§#J£&5£€5§A#J

it?) Hi] ”F mama °

axiafa—i—ﬁﬁasidk, :EéiiﬂEeZﬁaittasif-z
Wyatt!) °
aaaanaaa, :eéwazzaimrﬁﬁtaiéﬁk

(ﬁﬁt’Fﬂ) °
"é’é‘ﬁi P9??? ,fﬂii'tﬁé‘ﬁaaﬁfkikﬁﬁﬁ. %8Fﬁ

ﬁesztr‘a-Jhéaaig. Eiﬁiiﬁifﬁltiﬁéfz .

52

$834; 4%? 7533} ’5“? .4323:

1

2

3

4

5

16.

17.

iﬁimé%§£§¥%ﬁt£§$i$k%éai@3%. 7%81‘3
E3Z£2léttlrﬁéﬁéﬁiﬁ3§ﬁiléi$éai °
55%Sﬂiiéﬁeldzéf1§€.% “l’iéiiztﬁ. %8W§.%Ziﬂi£

ﬁA°

$i¥$li1
$38 $ﬁﬂi~ﬁ¥f5 ﬁsﬁiﬁ'i’ 698185541: °

. ﬁdﬁﬁhﬁﬁiﬁiﬂlfir‘ﬁﬁn

"af‘ﬁifaivbﬁéiﬁﬁ, 4W??? iﬁﬂriiéﬁéaﬁfnﬁbﬁa
2513a .

ﬁé%%£%ao

ﬁFa’ibﬁftfrﬁﬁi’iéﬁFﬂﬁE, ﬁa$£Rﬁ¥ﬁ§éﬁFﬁﬁé°
ﬁﬁﬁgﬁiﬁﬁa‘éﬁvzﬁia talclrﬁéﬁiézélv
ﬁﬁﬁﬁtzhfaéﬁiaﬁﬁg‘ﬁﬁélﬁu:"é‘zﬁfvﬁﬁéb
23858.88}, ﬁﬁiéﬁltlﬁ) .
aramaaaaiertzswiﬁo

ﬂaw/12.2%. aewrﬁéssatio

ﬁﬁﬁﬁbfiﬁﬁﬁébﬂﬁlﬁ ‘éEH/%H893¥3§°

53

(iii (R? 753% $81? 49.7%

4&3: (Pa? 753% 715’"??? .433

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

10. aaaraaaa—a. Mam-Ma .

1Laaaaiaxwauwﬁuwuw

1aﬁaaaao

13ﬁ%ﬁ%ﬁﬁ%ﬁﬁﬁ°

14. %%’%8% ﬁlﬂﬁéiéﬁi‘tﬁibfv

15. ﬁfuzbfeéﬁt‘éafzié: Ttﬁﬁlﬂtﬁéﬁﬁéb

16. affaifvﬁémgﬁ, ﬁéa‘iﬂzfrﬁéﬁao

17. ﬁﬁféiﬁﬁyﬁalﬁﬁuﬂﬁtﬁ. ﬁﬁﬁéﬁﬁéﬁé‘m
(lé'lﬁuzl$éﬁélé$-¥Rai%3F’$"H%) °

1&aaaaaaagaaaao

19. ﬂitivfwzhﬁaﬁrﬂ°

20. ﬁﬁi’éiﬂ’éﬁ‘éﬁﬁﬁﬁ ﬁtﬂﬁﬁlﬁﬁi 75‘2‘2“:o

54

7:32: 1:24 788% ”Mt 88:.

1

1

2

2

3

3

4

4

5

5

C-ﬁﬁﬂ

1.%%ﬁﬁﬁﬁﬁ%%£ﬁ§%ﬁ$ﬂﬁ°

2.%aﬁaaawmamwaeaama%o

D.&$?ﬁ
1.$%:
2.HWZS #

3.ﬁ$$§z

 

4.aaﬂaza¢ma 3%

aaaaaamaau

55

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Bergen, D. (2008). Human development: traditional and contemporary theories. Upper
Saddle River, New Jersey, Pearson Prentice Hall, Inc.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: experiments by nature
and design. Cambridge, Harvard University Press.

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1989). Ecological system theory. Annals of Child Development, 6,
187-249.

Charlesworth, R., Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., & Hernandez, S. (1991). Kindergarten
teachers beliefs and practices. Early Child Development and Care, 70(1), 17-35.

Clarke-Stewart, K. A. (1991). A home is not a school: The effects of child care on
children’s development. Journal of Social Issues, 47, 105-123.

Dunn, L., & Kontos, S. (1997). Research in review: What have we learned about
developmentally appropriate practice? Young Children, 52(5), 4-13.

Ghazvini, A., & Mullis, R. L. (2002). Center-based care for young children: Examining
predictors of quality. The Journal of Genetic Psychology, 163(1), 112-125.

Howes, C., & Sakai, L.M. (1992). Family day care for infants and toddlers. In D. L.
Peters & A. R. Pence (Eds), Family day care: Current research for informed
public policy (pp.115—128). New York: Teachers College Press.

Hsieh, C. Y. (2008). Parental Choice of preschool in Taiwan. Retrieved April 18, 2009,
from http://opus.bath.ac.uk/12267/1/HsiehiPHD.pdf

Hsieh, M. F. (2004). Teaching practices in Taiwan’s education for young children:
Complexity and ambiguity of developmentally appropriate practices and/or
developmentally inappropriate practices. Contemporary Issues in Early
Childhood, 5(3), 309-329.

Hsueh, Y., & Barton, B. K., (2005). A cultural perspective on professional beliefs of
childcare teachers. Early Childhood Education Journal," 33(3), 179-186.

56

Lin, H. .L., Gorrell, J ., & Silvem, S. B. (2001). Taiwan’s early childhood preservice
teachers’ professional beliefs. Journal of Research in Childhood Education;
15(2), 242-255.

Liu, W. H. (2006). The study of aged kindergarten teachers ’concerns. Retrieved from
Electronic Theses and Dissertations System. (O94TMTC1767002). [In
Mandarin].

Macmillan English Dictionary. (2002). Oxford: Macmillan Education.

McMullen, M. B. (1999). Characteristics of teachers who talk the DAP talk and walk the
DAP walk. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 13(2), 216-230.

McMullen, M. B., & Alat, K. (2002). Education matters in the nurturing of the beliefs of
early childhood professionals. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 4(2).
Retrieved October 30, 2008 from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n2/index.html

Ministry of Justice of the Republic of China. (2009). Compulsory Education Law.
Retrieved February 1, 2009 from
http ://1aw.moj .gov.tw/Scripts/OuerﬁlA.asp?Ful1Doc=all&Fcode=HOO7000l

Muuss, R. E. (1996). Theories of adolescence (6th ed). New York: The McGraw-Hill
Companies, Inc.

NAEYC (1996). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs
serving children from birth through age 8: A position statement of the National
Association for the Education of the Young Children. Retrieved October 30,
2008 from hgpzﬂwwwnagc.org/about/positionsasp

Nelson, L. S., & Nelson, A. E. (2006). Child care administration. Tinley Park, IL: The
Goodheart-Willcox Company, Inc.

Phillips, D: A., & Howes, C. (1987). Indicators of quality in child care: Review of
research. In D. Phillips (Eds), Quality in child care: What does research tell us?
(pp. 1-19). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young
Children.

Simmons, P. E., Emory, A., Carter, T., Coker, T., Finnegan, B., Crockett, D., et a1. (1999).
Beginning teachers: Beliefs and classroom actions. Journal of Research in

Science Teaching, 36(8), 930-954.

Stipek, D. J ., & Byler, P. (1997). Early childhood education teachers: Do they practice
what they preach? Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 305-325.

Thomas, R. M. (2005). Comparing Theories of Child Development (6th ed.). Belmont,
CA: Thomson Wadsworth.

S7

U.S. Department of Education. (2005). Education in the United States: A brief overview,
Washington, DC.

Walsh, DJ. (2002). The development of self in Japanese preschool: Negotiating space. In
L. Bresler & A. Ardichvili (Eds), Multiple paradigms for international research
in education: Experience, theory, and practice (pp. 213-245). New York: Peter
Lang.

Wang, M. C., Haertel, G D., & Walberg, H. J. (1993). Toward a knowledge base for
school learning. Review of Educational Research, 63(3), 249-294.

Wei, M. H. (1995). Current trends of philosophies in early childhood education. Taipei:
Hsin-Lee. [In Mandarin].

Wilcox-Herzog, A. (2002). Is there a link between teachers’ beliefs and behaviors? Early
Education & Development, 13(1).

Wilcox-Herzog, A., & Ward, S. L. (2004). Measuring Teachers’ Perceived Interactions

with Children: A Tool for Assessing Beliefs and Intentions. Early Childhood
Research & Practice, 6(2).

58

LIB

mllllllllllllllll lllllllllllllllllllll llllllllllss
3 1293 03062 6356