Greek Preschool Teachers’ Professional Features and Their Knowledge and Views of the Official Standards of Early Writing Teaching
pp. 55-72 | Available Online: March 2023 | DOI: 10.22521/edupij.2023.121.4
Filippos Tentolouris
Full text PDF |
2023 |
1397
Abstract
Background/purpose – The purpose of this study was to explore three null hypotheses regarding the association between Greek preschool teachers’ professional features with their knowledge and views of the official standards of early writing teaching which emphasize real communicative purposes.
Materials/methods – 494 teachers participated in an Internet-based survey and their answers to a 21-item digital questionnaire were analyzed through descriptive (calculation of frequencies) and inferential statistics (chi-squared tests).
Results – Two of the three null hypotheses cannot be supported and two statistically significant associations emerged: (a) teachers’ education level was associated with a comprehensive knowledge and use of the official standards, and (b) teachers with lower level academic qualifications and teaching experience of more than 10 years seem to reproduce a “phonics” approach.
Conclusion – It is argued that the introduction of curricula per se cannot alter teachers’ implementation of the phonics method, which is contrary to the official curriculum standards. It is suggested that redesigning writing practices to make them more compatible with the official standards should be a long-term and reciprocal project among teachers and policymakers.
Keywords: Early writing, emergent literacy, phonics method, in-service training.
ReferencesAarons, H. (2021). A Practical Introduction to Survey Design: A Beginner’s Guide. Sage.
Archakis, A., & Tsakona, V. (2013). Sociocultural diversity, identities, and critical education: Comparing conversational narratives at school. Critical Literacy: Theories & Practices, 7(1), 48-62.
Bingham, A. J., & Bunch, P. (2017). Navigating Middle of the Road Reforms through Collaborative Community. Democracy and Education, 25(2), Article 1. https://democracyeducationjournal.org/home/vol25/iss2/1
Bingham, G. E., Gerde, H. P., McRoy, K., Quinn, M. F., & Zhang, X. (2018). Integrating Writing into the Early Childhood Curriculum: A Frame for Intentional and Meaningful Writing Experiences. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(6), 601-611. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-018-0894-x
Birbili, M. (2017). The pedagogy of worksheets in early childhood settings: Teachers’ beliefs and practices. In A. Pinto & V. Pagnotto (Eds.), Focus on early childhood education (pp. 85-122). Nova Science.
Birbili, M., & Myrovali, A. (2020). Early childhood teachers’ relationship with the official curriculum: the mediating role of professional and policy context. Education Inquiry, 11(2), 110-125. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2019.1687080
Comber, B., & Kamler, B. (2004). Getting Out of Deficit: Pedagogies of reconnection. Teaching Education, 15(3), 293-310. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047621042000257225
Crawford, S., McCabe, S. E., & Pope, D. (2005). Applying Web-Based Survey Design Standards. Journal of Prevention & Intervention in the Community, 29(1-2), 43-66. https://doi.org/10.1300/J005v29n01_04
Dafermou, C., Koulouri, P., & Mpasagianni, E. (2006). Teacher’s Guide: Educational Planning-Creative Learning Environments. Organization for the Publication of School Books.
Delaney, K. K., Whyte, K. L., & Graue, M. E. (2020). A Vision of Early Childhood Curriculum Built on Strong Foundations. In J. J. Mueller & N. File (Eds.), Curriculum in Early Childhood Education: Re-examined, Reclaimed, Renewed (pp. 193-208). Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315103310
European Education and Culture Executive Agency. (2011). Teaching Reading in Europe: Contexts, Policies and Practices. https://data.europa.eu/doi/10.2797/60196
File, N. (2020). Curriculum and research: What Are the Gaps We Ought to Mind, Redux. In J. J. Mueller & N. File (Eds.), Curriculum in Early Childhood Education: Re-examined, Reclaimed, Renewed (pp. 1-16). Routledge. http://dx.doi.org/10.4324/9781315103310
Graham, S., Harris, K. R., & Chorzempa, B. F. (2002). Contribution of spelling instruction to the spelling, writing, and reading of poor spellers. Journal of Educational Psychology, 94(4), 669-686. https://doi.org/10.1037/0022-0663.94.4.669
Hellenic Statistical Authority. (2019). Data of kindergartens (beginning and end of the school year 2018-2019). https://www.statistics.gr/el/statistics/-/publication/SED11/-
Institute of Educational Policy. (2014a). Kindergarten Curriculum: Revised Edition. http://repository.edulll.gr/1947
Institute of Educational Policy. (2014b). Teacher’s Guide to Kindergarten Curriculum. http://repository.edulll.gr/1859
Ivanič, R. (2004). Discourses of writing and learning to write. Language and Education, 18(3), 220-245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500780408666877
Kalantzis, M., Cope, B., Chan, E., & Dalley-Trim, L. (2016). Literacies. Cambridge University Press. http://dx.doi.org/10.1017/9781316442821
Katsarou, E., & Tsafos, V. (2010). Multimodality in L1 Curriculum. Critical Literacy: Theories and Practices, 4(1), 48-65.
Kerr, J. (2018). Challenging technocratic logics in teacher education: Seeking guidance from Indigenous and Aristotelian traditions. Research in Education, 100(1), 83-96. https://doi.org/10.1177/0034523718762169
Kress, G. (2015). Semiotic work: Applied Linguistics and a social semiotic account of multimodality. AILA Review, 28(1), 49-71. https://doi.org/10.1075/aila.28.03kre
Kubota, R., & Miller. E. (2017). Re-examining and re-envisioning criticality in language studies: Theories and practice. Critical Inquiry in Language Studies, 14(2&3), 129-157. https://doi.org/10.1080/15427587.2017.1290500
Magos, K. (2012). “…, but I cannot do research”: Action Research and early childhood teachers. A case study from Greece. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 18(3), 331-343. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2012.629839
Mihai, A., Butera, G., & Friesen, A. (2017) Examining the Use of Curriculum to Support Early Literacy Instruction: A Multiple Case Study of Head Start Teachers, Early Education and Development, 28(3), 323-342. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1218729
Moore, J., & Schleppegrell, M. (2020). A focus on disciplinary language: Bringing critical perspectives to reading and writing in science. Theory Into Practice, 59(1), 99-108. https://doi.org/10.1080/00405841.2019.1685337
Official Gazette of the Greek Government. (1962). The curriculum of the state kindergartens. 124-9/8/62.
Official Gazette of the Greek Government. (1989). Curriculum of the preschool education. 208-26/9/89.
Olkishoo, R. S., Gichuru, F. M., Khayeka-Wandabwa, C., Owaki, M. F., Wamalwa, S., Marinda, P. A., & Xu, W. (2019). Preschool Teachers in Bottom-top Curriculum Change-Invigoration and Implementation. Educational Process: International Journal, 8(4), 222-232. http://dx.doi.org/10.22521/edupij.2019.84.2
Pedagogical Institute. (2003). The Cross Thematic Curriculum Framework for Kindergarten. http://ebooks.edu.gr/info/cps/27deppsaps_Nipiagogiou.pdf
Peterson, S. S., Parr, J., Lindgren, E., & Kaufman, D. (2018). Conceptualizations of writing in early years curricula and standards documents: International perspectives. The Curriculum Journal, 29(4), 499-521. https://doi.org/10.1080/09585176.2018.1500489
Rentzou, K. (2015). Prevalence of burnout syndrome of Greek child care workers and kindergarten teachers, Education 3-13, 43(3), 249-262. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2013.804853
Richards, J. C. (2006). Communicative Language Teaching Today. Cambridge University Press.
Ritchey, K. D. (2008). The building blocks of writing: Learning to write letters and spell words. Reading and Writing, 21(1-2), 27-47. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11145-007-9063-0
Rose, D. (2015). New developments in genre-based literacy pedagogy. In C. A. MacArthur, S. Graham, & J. Fitzgerald (Eds.), Handbook of Writing Research (pp. 227-242). Guilford.
Saiti, A., & Saitis, C. (2006). In‐service training for teachers who work in full‐day schools. Evidence from Greece. European Journal of Teacher Education, 29(4), 455-470. https://doi.org/1080.026187606000944779
Simon-Vandenbergen, A. M. (2014). Systemic-functional approaches to discourse. In K. P. Schneider & A. Barron (Eds.), Pragmatics of Discourse (pp. 125-164). de Gruyter. http://dx.doi.org/10.1515/9783110214406
Stamelos, G., & Bartzakli, M. (2013) ‘Good practice’ school advisors in Greek education: the difficulty in linking collaborative networks, communities of practice and quality culture. Teacher Development, 17(4), 448-464. https://doi.org/10.1080/12664530.2013.825638
Stellakis, N. (2012). Greek kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and practices in early literacy. Literacy, 46(2), 67-72. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1741-4369.2011.00573.x
Stellakis, N. (2015). Teaching spelling in pre-primary education: Preschool children’s texts about their world(s). The OMEP Ireland Journal of Early Childhood Studies, 9(1), 43-52. https://omepireland.ie/wp-content/uploads/2019/07/An-Leanbh-Og-Volume-9-2015.pdf
Stellakis, N. (2017). Literacy Practices in Kindergarten. In T. Karalis, V. Komis, & L. Sotiropoulos (Eds.), Contemporary Research Trends in the Preschool and First School Age (pp. 277-284). New Tech Pub.
Taber, K. S. (2018). The Use of Cronbach’s Alpha When Developing and Reporting Research Instruments in Science Education. Research in Science Education, 48, 1273-1296. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9602-2
Tatto, M. T. (2019). Professional Knowledge and Theories of Teaching and Learning. In A. T. Tatto & I. Menter (Eds.), Knowledge, Policy and Practice in Teacher Education: A Cross-National Study (pp. 257-267). Bloomsbury.
Theodorou, E., Philippou, S., & Kontovourki. S. (2017). Caught between worlds of expertise: Elementary teachers amidst official curriculum development processes in Cyprus. Curriculum Inquiry, 47(2), 217-240. http://dx.doi.org/10.1080/03626784.2017.1283591
Traianou, A. (2019). Greece: Towards ‘Europeanization’? In A. Traianou & K. Jones (Eds.), Austerity and the Remaking of European Education (pp. 147-176). Bloomsbury. https://doi.org/10.5040/9781350028517.0012
Traianou, A. (2021). The intricacies of conditionality: education policy review in Greece 2015–2018. Journal of Education Policy, 38(2), 342-362. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680939.2021.1986641
Ure, C., & Raban, B. (2001). Teachers’ beliefs and understandings of literacy in the pre-school: pre-school literacy project stage 1. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 2(2), 157-168. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2001.2.2.3
Whyte, S. (2019). Revisiting Communicative Competence in the Teaching and Assessment of Language for Specific Purposes. Language Education & Assessment, 2(1), 1-19. https://dx.doi.org/10.29140/lea.v2n1.33
EDUPIJ News!
ANNOUNCEMENT
Message from the Editor-in-Chief,
We would like to inform our authors, reviewers, and stakeholders that EDUPIJ has entered Scopus’s re-evaluation process, as officially communicated (dated 2025-12-09). This assessment is a standard quality assurance practice applied to indexed journals and aims to ensure sustained editorial quality, ethical integrity, and alignment with Scopus’s evolving evaluation framework.
EDUPIJ welcomes this process and views it as an opportunity to further consolidate its editorial governance, strengthen publication ethics, and enhance peer-review rigor.
Strengthening Editorial and Ethical Standards
To ensure full compliance with international best practices and to proactively address Scopus evaluation criteria, the following measures have been formally implemented:
1. Selective Acceptance Policy for 2026 and Beyond
In response to increased submission volume in 2025 (see Journal Metrics: https://edupij.com/index/sayfa/18/journal-metrics), EDUPIJ will adopt a more selective acceptance policy starting in 2026 and continuing in the years ahead. In doing so, the geographic distribution of authors will also be taken into account to ensure that editorial decisions are informed by transparent, year-to-year submission and authorship patterns. Acceptance rates will be carefully aligned with editorial capacity to ensure a rigorous double-blind peer review process supported by active reviewer engagement and uncompromised editorial oversight. This policy reflects our commitment to quality-driven growth rather than volume-based expansion, and it directly addresses observations that the geographic spread of authors has changed significantly during the same period by ensuring that any such shifts are systematically monitored and considered within our quality assurance framework.
In line with this approach, we have adopted a Publication Volume Policy, enacted on 2025-12-07, which establishes clear upper limits on annual publication volume and defines a framework for maintaining EDUPIJ’s output at sustainable, long-term levels, comparable to pre-2025 volumes under normal conditions. This policy is also publicly available at https://edupij.com/index/sayfa/41/publication-volume-journal-metrics-policy.
From 2026 onwards, our objective is to maintain a moderate and stable annual volume, prioritising quality and selectivity rather than growth.
2. Enhanced Author and Manuscript Integrity Screening
All submissions now undergo mandatory integrity checks, including automated screening for retraction history and potential ethical risks prior to peer review. These procedures are designed to safeguard originality, research integrity, and transparency at every stage of the editorial process.
3. Establishment of a Publication Ethics Review Committee
A dedicated Publication Ethics Review Committee has been constituted to evaluate high-risk submissions, oversee ethical investigations when necessary, and ensure consistent adherence to COPE guidelines and internationally recognized publishing standards. All ethical decisions are documented and managed through a structured, transparent process.
Ongoing Commitment:
EDUPIJ remains firmly committed to rigorous double-blind peer review, transparent editorial policies, responsible scholarly communication, and the advancement of high-quality educational research at an international level.
Our journal continues to demonstrate steady progress in terms of international visibility, indexing coverage, and citation performance. We are confident that the Scopus re-evaluation process will further support the journal’s long-term sustainability and academic impact.
We sincerely thank our authors, reviewers, and the broader scholarly community for their continued trust and contribution to EDUPIJ.
Sincerely,
Prof. Turgut Karaköse, Editor-in-Chief
Posted: 2025-12-09