Auswahl der wissenschaftlichen Literatur zum Thema „Mats Rosengren“

<p>Informing and providing awareness is a part of mass media’s significant responsibilities and social and political documentaries is one of the effective frames in performing this significant duty on adults and university students. Therefore, the main purpose of this study is proposing favorite strategies for IRIB in making social and political TV documentaries with the aim of promoting state social capital for university students and adults. The method is in-depth interview with experts and utilizing the findings of another research titled “an analysis of the views of Communication Sciences students regarding the IRIB’s political and documentaries with an emphasis on the utilitarian approach and gratification level” adopting the Rosengren approach. Results showed that aggressive strategies are the most proper policies for the IRIB. Finally, the formulated aggressive strategies were prioritized and the most important strategy for this research is “producing social and political documentaries with informational approach in an accurate, precise, and comprehensive manner and considering other needs of audiences such as amusement, personal identity, and personal relationships”.</p>

AbstractThe Laurinswand section in the Rosengarten/Catinaccio Massif (Dolomites, Southern Alps, Italy) covers the Permian–Triassic boundary in a proximal marine setting. The section has been studied for palynology, ostracods and carbonate microfacies. Five microfacies types are defined for the carbonates of the Bellerophon Formation (Changhsingian) in this section. Ostracod assemblages from the upper Bellerophon Formation show a moderate to high diversity and mostly indicate normal marine conditions, with some samples from the upper Casera Razzo Member being dominated by eurytopic forms. The ostracod fauna follows transgressive-regressive trends with low diverse assemblages occurring in the regressive parts. These trends are also reflected in the microfacies and can be assigned to three sequences. Palynological assemblages are dominated by phytoclasts, which is typical for proximal marine environments. Sporomorphs are represented predominantly by bisaccate and asaccate pollen grains and are mostly minor components of the palynofacies. Other minor, but consistent components in the Bellerophon Formation are acritarchs, Reduviasporonites and unidentified possible algae or fungi. The latter are particularly abundant in samples with ostracod faunas indicating restricted conditions. The Werfen Formation (uppermost Permian to Lower Triassic) yielded quantitatively poor palynological assemblages, with one sample from the Tesero Member showing a notable increase in spores and spore tetrads. This is indicative of the so-called “spore spike”, a well-known signal from this interval. One sample from the overlying Mazzin Member demonstrated a high relative abundance of Reduviasporonites, which may be related to mass occurrences of this taxon in the Tesero Member at Tesero and at other localities near the Permian–Triassic boundary. Such a mass occurrence normally pre-dates the spore spike, whereas at the Laurinswand, the former post-dates the latter considerably.Das Profil an der Laurinswand im Rosengarten/Catinaccio-Massif (Dolomiten, Südalpen, Italien) umfasst die Perm-Trias-Grenze in einem proximalen, marinen Milieu. Das Profil wurde auf Palynologie, Ostrakodenfaunen und Karbonat-Mikrofazies untersucht. Fünf Mikrofaziestypen wurden für die Karbonate der Bellerophon-Formation (Changhsingium) definiert. Ostrakodenvergesellschaftungen aus der oberen Bellerophon-Formation weisen eine mittlere bis hohe Diver-sität auf und deuten überwiegend auf normalmarine Bedingungen hin, allerdings werden einige Proben aus dem oberen Casera-Razzo-Member von eurytopen Formen dominiert. Die Ostrakodenfauna folgt transgressiv-regressiven Trends, wobei weniger diverse Faunen in den regressiven Teilen auftreten. Diese Trends sind auch in der Mikrofazies reflektiert und können drei Sequenzen zugeordnet werden. Palynologische Rückstände werden von Phytoklasten dominiert, was typisch für ein proximales, marines Ablagerungsmilieu ist. Sporomorphe sind vor allem durch bisaccate und asaccate Pollenkörner vertreten und sind meist untergeordnete Komponenten der Palynofazies. Weitere untergeordnete, aber stetig auftretende Komponenten in der Bellerophon-Formation sind Akritarchen, Reduviasporonites und nicht identifizierte, mögliche Algen oder Pilzreste. Letztere sind besonders häufig in Proben, deren Ostrakodenfauna eingeschränkt marine Bedingungen anzeigt. Die Werfen-Formation (oberstes Perm bis Untertrias) lieferte wenige palynologische Rückstände, wobei eine Probe aus dem Tesero-Member einen bemerkenswerten Anstieg in der Häufigkeit von Sporen und Sporen-Tetraden aufwies. Dies ist ein Hinweis auf den sogenannten „spore spike“, ein bekanntes Signal aus diesem Zeitintervall. Eine Probe des darüber liegenden Mazzin-Members beinhaltete eine relativ große Menge an Reduviasporonites, was mit Massenvorkommen dieses Taxons nahe der Perm-Trias-Grenze, im Tesero-Member in Tesero und an anderen Orten, zusammenhängen könnte. Ein solches Massenvorkommen liegt normalerweise unterhalb des „spore spike“, wohingegen es an der Laurinswand deutlich darüber liegt.

In recent years, STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, and Mathematics) has received wide attention. STEAM complements early childhood learning needs in honing 2nd century skills. This study aims to introduce a loose section in early childhood learning to pre-service teachers and then to explore their perceptions of how to use loose parts in supporting STEAM. The study design uses qualitative phenomenological methods. FGDs (Focus Group Discussions) are used as data collection instruments. The findings point to two main themes that emerged from the discussion: a loose section that supports freedom of creation and problem solving. Freedom clearly supports science, mathematics and arts education while problem solving significantly supports engineering and technology education. Keywords: Early Childhood Educators, Loose-part, STEAM References: Allen, A. (2016). Don’t Fear STEM: You Already Teach It! Exchange, (231), 56–59. Ansberry, B. K., & Morgan, E. (2019). Seven Myths of STEM. 56(6), 64–67. Bagiati, A., & Evangelou, D. (2015). Engineering curriculum in the preschool classroom: the teacher’s experience. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 112–128. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2014.991099 Becker, K., & Park, K. (2011). Effects of integrative approaches among science , technology , engineering , and mathematics ( STEM ) subjects on students ’ learning : A preliminary meta-analysis. 12(5), 23–38. Berk, L. E. (2009). Child Development (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson Education. Can, B., Yildiz-Demirtas, V., & Altun, E. (2017). The Effect of Project-based Science Education Programme on Scientific Process Skills and Conception of Kindergargen Students. 16(3), 395–413. Casey, T., Robertson, J., Abel, J., Cairns, M., Caldwell, L., Campbell, K., … Robertson, T. (2016). Loose Parts Play. Edinburgh. Cheung, R. H. P. (2017). Teacher-directed versus child-centred : the challenge of promoting creativity in Chinese preschool classrooms. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1366(January), 1–14. https://doi.org/10.1080/14681366.2016.1217253 Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2016). Math, Science, and Technology in the Early Grades. The Future of Children, 26(2), 75–94. Cloward Drown, K. (2014). Dramatic lay affordances of natural and manufactured outdoor settings for preschoolaged children. Dejarnette, N. K. (2018). Early Childhood Steam: Reflections From a Year of Steam Initiatives Implemented in a High-Needs Primary School. Education, 139(2), 96–112. DiGironimo, N. (2011). What is technology? Investigating student conceptions about the nature of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 33(10), 1337–1352. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2010.495400 Dugger, W. E., & Naik, N. (2001). Clarifying Misconceptions between Technology Education and Educational Technology. The Technology Teacher, 61(1), 31–35. Eeuwijk, P. Van, & Zuzana, A. (2017). How to Conduct a Focus Group Discussion ( FGD ) Methodological Manual. Flannigan, C., & Dietze, B. (2018). Children, Outdoor Play, and Loose Parts. Journal of Childhood Studies, 42(4), 53–60. https://doi.org/10.18357/jcs.v42i4.18103 Fleer, M. (1998). The Preparation of Australian Teachers in Technology Education : Developing The Preparation of Australian Teachers in Technology Education : Developing Professionals Not Technicians. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education & Development, 1(2), 25–31. Freitas, H., Oliveira, M., Jenkins, M., & Popjoy, O. (1998). The focus group, a qualitative research method: Reviewing the theory, and providing guidelines to its planning. In ISRC, Merrick School of Business, University of Baltimore (MD, EUA)(Vol. 1). Gomes, J., & Fleer, M. (2019). The Development of a Scientific Motive : How Preschool Science and Home Play Reciprocally Contribute to Science Learning. Research in Science Education, 49(2), 613–634. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-017-9631-5 Goris, T., & Dyrenfurth, M. (n.d.). Students ’ Misconceptions in Science , Technology , and Engineering . Gull, C., Bogunovich, J., Goldstein, S. L., & Rosengarten, T. (2019). Definitions of Loose Parts in Early Childhood Outdoor Classrooms: A Scoping Review. The International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 6(3), 37. Hui, A. N. N., He, M. W. J., & Ye, S. S. (2015). Arts education and creativity enhancement in young children in Hong Kong. Educational Psychology, 35(3), 315–327. https://doi.org/10.1080/01443410.2013.875518 Jarvis, T., & Rennie, L. J. (1996). Perceptions about Technology Held by Primary Teachers in England. Research in Science & Technological Education, 14(1), 43–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/0263514960140104 Jeffers, O. (2004). How to Catch a Star. New York: Philomel Books. Kiewra, C., & Veselack, E. (2016). Playing with nature: Supporting preschoolers’ creativity in natural outdoor classrooms. International Journal of Early Childhood Environmental Education, 4(1), 70–95. Kuh, L., Ponte, I., & Chau, C. (2013). The impact of a natural playscape installation on young children’s play behaviors. Children, Youth and Environments, 23(2), 49–77. Lachapelle, C. P., Cunningham, C. M., & Oh, Y. (2019). What is technology? Development and evaluation of a simple instrument for measuring children’s conceptions of technology. International Journal of Science Education, 41(2), 188–209. https://doi.org/10.1080/09500693.2018.1545101 Liamputtong. (2010). Focus Group Methodology : Introduction and History. In Focus Group MethodoloGy (pp. 1–14). Liao, C. (2016). From Interdisciplinary to Transdisciplinary: An Arts-Integrated Approach to STEAM Education. 69(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873 Lindeman, K. W., & Anderson, E. M. (2015). Using Blocks to Develop 21st Century Skills. Young Children, 70(1), 36–43. Maxwell, L., Mitchell, M., and Evans, G. (2008). Effects of play equipment and loose parts on preschool children’s outdoor play behavior: An observational study and design intervention. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2), 36–63. McClure, E., Guernsey, L., Clements, D., Bales, S., Nichols, J., Kendall-Taylor, N., & Levine, M. (2017). How to Integrate STEM Into Early Childhood Education. Science and Children, 055(02), 8–11. https://doi.org/10.2505/4/sc17_055_02_8 McClure, M., Tarr, P., Thompson, C. M., & Eckhoff, A. (2017). Defining quality in visual art education for young children: Building on the position statement of the early childhood art educators. Arts Education Policy Review, 118(3), 154–163. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2016.1245167 Mishra, L. (2016). Focus Group Discussion in Qualitative Research. TechnoLearn: An International Journal of Educational Technology, 6(1), 1. https://doi.org/10.5958/2249-5223.2016.00001.2 Monhardt, L., & Monhardt, R. (2006). Creating a context for the learning of science process skills through picture books. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(1), 67–71. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-006-0108-9 Monsalvatge, L., Long, K., & DiBello, L. (2013). Turning our world of learning inside out! Dimensions of Early Childhood, 41(3), 23–30. Moomaw, S. (2012). STEM begins in the early years. School Science & Mathematics, 112(2), 57–58. Moomaw, S. (2016). Move Back the Clock, Educators: STEM Begins at Birth. School Science & Mathematics, 116(5), 237–238. Moomaw, S., & Davis, J. A. (2010). STEM Comes to Preschool. Young Cihildren, 12–18(September), 12–18. Munawar, M., Roshayanti, F., & Sugiyanti. (2019). Implementation of STEAM (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art, Mathematics)-Based Early Childhood Education Learning in Semarang City. Jurnal CERIA, 2(5), 276–285. National Research Council. (1996). National Science Education Standards. Washington, DC: National Academy of Sciences. Nicholson, S. (1972). The Theory of Loose Parts: An important principle for design methodology. Studies in Design Education Craft & Technology, 4(2), 5–12. O.Nyumba, T., Wilson, K., Derrick, C. J., & Mukherjee, N. (2018). The use of focus group discussion methodology: Insights from two decades of application in conservation. Methods in Ecology and Evolution, 9(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1111/2041-210X.12860 Padilla-Diaz, M. (2015). Phenomenology in Educational Qualitative Research : Philosophy as Science or Philosophical Science ? International Journal of Educational Excellence, 1(2), 101–110. Padilla, M. J. (1990). The Science Process Skills. Research Matters - to the Science Teacher, 1(March), 1–3. Park, D. Y., Park, M. H., & Bates, A. B. (2018). Exploring Young Children’s Understanding About the Concept of Volume Through Engineering Design in a STEM Activity: A Case Study. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 16(2), 275–294. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-016-9776-0 Rahardjo, M. M. (2019). Implementasi Pendekatan Saintifik Sebagai Pembentuk Keterampilan Proses Sains Anak Usia Dini. Scholaria: Jurnal Pendidikan Dan Kebudayaan, 9(2), 148–159. https://doi.org/10.24246/j.js.2019.v9.i2.p148-159 Robison, T. (2016). Male Elementary General Music Teachers : A Phenomenological Study. Journal of Music Teacher Education, 26(2), 77–89. https://doi.org/10.1177/1057083715622019 Rocha Fernandes, G. W., Rodrigues, A. M., & Ferreira, C. A. (2018). Conceptions of the Nature of Science and Technology: a Study with Children and Youths in a Non-Formal Science and Technology Education Setting. Research in Science Education, 48(5), 1071–1106. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-016-9599-6 Sawyer, R. K. (2006). Educating for innovation. 1(2006), 41–48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tsc.2005.08.001 Sharapan, H. (2012). ERIC - From STEM to STEAM: How Early Childhood Educators Can Apply Fred Rogers’ Approach, Young Children, 2012-Jan. Young Children, 67(1), 36–40. Siantayani, Y. (2018). STEAM: Science-Technology-Engineering-Art-Mathematics. Semarang: SINAU Teachers Development Center. Sikder, S., & Fleer, M. (2015). Small Science : Infants and Toddlers Experiencing Science in Everyday Family Life. Research in Science Education, 45(3), 445–464. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11165-014-9431-0 Smith-gilman, S. (2018). The Arts, Loose Parts and Conversations. Journal of the Canadian Association for Curriculum Studies, 16(1), 90–103. Sohn, B. K., Thomas, S. P., Greenberg, K. H., & Pollio, H. R. (2017). Hearing the Voices of Students and Teachers : A Phenomenological Approach to Educational Research. Qualitative Research in Education, 6(2), 121–148. https://doi.org/10.17583/qre.2017.2374 Strong-wilson, T., & Ellis, J. (2002). Children and Place : Reggio Emilia’s Environment as Third Teacher. Theory into Practice, 46(1), 40–47. Sutton, M. J. (2011). In the hand and mind: The intersection of loose parts and imagination in evocative settings for young children. Children, Youth and Environments, 21(2), 408–424. Tippett, C. D., & Milford, T. M. (2017). Findings from a Pre-kindergarten Classroom: Making the Case for STEM in Early Childhood Education. International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, 15, 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9812-8 Tippett, C., & Milford, T. (2017). STEM Resources and Materials for Engaging Learning Experiences. International Journal of Science & Mathematics Education, 15(March), 67–86. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10763-017-9812-8 Veselack, E., Miller, D., & Cain-Chang, L. (2015). Raindrops on noses and toes in the dirt: infants and toddlers in the outdoor classroom. Dimensions Educational Research Foundation. Yuksel-Arslan, P., Yildirim, S., & Robin, B. R. (2016). A phenomenological study : teachers ’ experiences of using digital storytelling in early childhood education. Educational Studies, 42(5), 427–445. https://doi.org/10.1080/03055698.2016.1195717

STEAM-based learning is a global issue in early-childhood education practice. STEAM content becomes an integrative thematic approach as the main pillar of learning in kindergarten. This study aims to develop a conceptual and practical approach in the implementation of children's education by applying a modification from STEAM Learning to R-SLAMET. The research used a qualitative case study method with data collection through focus group discussions (FGD), involving early-childhood educator's research participants (n = 35), interviews, observation, document analysis such as videos, photos and portfolios. The study found several ideal categories through the use of narrative data analysis techniques. The findings show that educators gain an understanding of the change in learning orientation from competency indicators to play-based learning. Developing thematic play activities into continuum playing scenarios. STEAM learning content modification (Science, Technology, Engineering, Art and Math) to R-SLAMETS content (Religion, Science, Literacy, Art, Math, Engineering, Technology and Social study) in daily class activity. Children activities with R-SLAMETS content can be developed based on an integrative learning flow that empowers loose part media with local materials learning resources. Keyword: STEAM to R-SLAMETS, Early Childhood Education, Integrative Thematic Learning References Ali, E., Kaitlyn M, C., Hussain, A., & Akhtar, Z. (2018). the Effects of Play-Based Learning on Early Childhood Education and Development. Journal of Evolution of Medical and Dental Sciences, 7(43), 4682–4685. https://doi.org/10.14260/jemds/2018/1044 Ata Aktürk, A., & Demircan, O. (2017). A Review of Studies on STEM and STEAM Education in Early Childhood. Journal of Kırşehir Education Faculty, 18(2), 757–776. Azizah, W. A., Sarwi, S., & Ellianawati, E. (2020). Implementation of Project -Based Learning Model (PjBL) Using STREAM-Based Approach in Elementary Schools. Journal of Primary Education, 9(3), 238–247. https://doi.org/10.15294/jpe.v9i3.39950 Badmus, O. (2018). Evolution of STEM, STEAM and STREAM Education in Africa: The Implication of the Knowledge Gap. In Contemporary Issues in Science, Technology, Engineering, Arts and Mathematics Teacher Education in Nigeria. Björklund, C., & Ahlskog-Björkman, E. (2017). Approaches to teaching in thematic work: early childhood teachers’ integration of mathematics and art. International Journal of Early Years Education, 25(2), 98–111. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2017.1287061 Broadhead, P. (2003). Early Years Play and Learning. In Early Years Play and Learning. https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203465257 Canning, N. (2010). The influence of the outdoor environment: Den-making in three different contexts. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18(4), 555–566. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2010.525961 Clapp, E. P., Solis, S. L., Ho, C. K. N., & Sachdeva, A. R. (2019). Complicating STEAM: A Critical Look at the Arts in the STEAM Agenda. Encyclopedia of Educational Innovation, 1–4. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-2262-4_54-1 Colucci, L., Burnard, P., Cooke, C., Davies, R., Gray, D., & Trowsdale, J. (2017). Reviewing the potential and challenges of developing STEAM education through creative pedagogies for 21st learning: how can school curricula be broadened towards a more responsive, dynamic, and inclusive form of education? BERA Research Commission, August, 1–105. https://doi.org/10.13140/RG.2.2.22452.76161 Conradty, C., & Bogner, F. X. (2018). From STEM to STEAM: How to Monitor Creativity. Creativity Research Journal, 30(3), 233–240. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2018.1488195 Conradty, C., & Bogner, F. X. (2019). From STEM to STEAM: Cracking the Code? How Creativity & Motivation Interacts with Inquiry-based Learning. Creativity Research Journal, 31(3), 284–295. https://doi.org/10.1080/10400419.2019.1641678 Cook, K. L., & Bush, S. B. (2018). Design thinking in integrated STEAM learning: Surveying the landscape and exploring exemplars in elementary grades. School Science and Mathematics, 118(3–4), 93–103. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12268 Costantino, T. (2018). STEAM by another name: Transdisciplinary practice in art and design education. Arts Education Policy Review, 119(2), 100–106. https://doi.org/10.1080/10632913.2017.1292973 Danniels, E., & Pyle, A. (2018). Defining Play-based Learning. In Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development (Play-Based, Issue February, pp. 1–5). OISE University of Toronto. DeJarnette, N. K. (2018). Implementing STEAM in the Early Childhood Classroom. European Journal of STEM Education, 3(3), 1–9. https://doi.org/10.20897/ejsteme/3878 Dell’Erba, M. (2019). Policy Considerations for STEAM Education. Policy Brief, 1–10. Doyle, K. (2019). The languages and literacies of the STEAM content areas. Literacy Learning: The Middle Years, 27(1), 38–50. http://proxy.libraries.smu.edu/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=eue&AN=133954204&site=ehost-live&scope=site Edwards, S. (2017). Play-based learning and intentional teaching: Forever different? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 42(2), 4–11. https://doi.org/10.23965/ajec.42.2.01 Faas, S., Wu, S.-C., & Geiger, S. (2017). The Importance of Play in Early Childhood Education: A Critical Perspective on Current Policies and Practices in Germany and Hong Kong. Global Education Review, 4(2), 75–91. Fesseha, E., & Pyle, A. (2016). Conceptualising play-based learning from kindergarten teachers’ perspectives. International Journal of Early Years Education, 24(3), 361–377. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2016.1174105 Finch, C. R., Frantz, N. R., Mooney, M., & Aneke, N. O. (1997). Designing the Thematic Curriculum: An All Aspects Approach MDS-956. 97. Gess, A. H. (2019). STEAM Education. STEAM Education, November, 2011–2014. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-04003-1 Gronlund, G. (n.d.). “ Addressing Standards through Play-Based Learning in Preschool and Kindergarten .” Gronlund, G. (2015). Planning for Play-Based Curriculum Based on Individualized Goals to Help Each Child Thrive in Preschool and Kindergarten Gaye Gronlund. Gull, C., Bogunovich, J., Goldstein, S. L., & Rosengarten, T. (2019). Definitions of Loose Parts in Early Childhood Outdoor Classrooms: A Scoping Review. The International Journal of Early Childhood Education, 6(3), 37–52. Hapidin, Pujianti, Y., Hartati, S., Nurani, Y., & Dhieni, N. (2020). The continuous professional development for early childhood teachers through lesson study in implementing play based curriculum (case study in Jakarta, Indonesia). International Journal of Innovation, Creativity and Change, 12(10), 17–25. Hennessey, P. (2016). Full – Day Kindergarten Play-Based Learning : Promoting a Common Understanding. Education and Early Childhood Development, April, 1–76. gov.nl.ca/edu Henriksen, D. (2017). Creating STEAM with Design Thinking: Beyond STEM and Arts Integration. Steam, 3(1), 1–11. https://doi.org/10.5642/steam.20170301.11 Inglese, P., Barbera, G., La Mantia, T., On, P., Presentation, T., Reid, R., Vasa, S. F., Maag, J. W., Wright, G., Irsyadi, F. Y. Al, Nugroho, Y. S., Cutter-Mackenzie, A., Edwards, S., Moore, D., Boyd, W., Miller, E., Almon, J., Cramer, S. C., Wilkes-Gillan, S., … Halperin, J. M. (2014). Young Children’s Play and Environmental Education in Early Childhood Education. PLoS ONE, 2(3), 9–25. https://doi.org/10.1586/ern.12.106 Jacman, H. (2012). Early Education Curriculum. Pedagogical Development Unit, FEBRUARY 2011, 163. https://www.eursc.eu/Syllabuses/2011-01-D-15-en-4.pdf Jay, J. A., & Knaus, M. (2018). Embedding play-based learning into junior primary (Year 1 and 2) Curriculum in WA. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 43(1), 112–126. https://doi.org/10.14221/ajte.2018v43n1.7 Kennedy, A., & Barblett, L. (2010). Supporting the Early Years Learning Framework. Research in Practise Series, 17(3), 1–12. Keung, C. P. C., & Cheung, A. C. K. (2019). Towards Holistic Supporting of Play-Based Learning Implementation in Kindergartens: A Mixed Method Study. Early Childhood Education Journal, 47(5), 627–640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-019-00956-2 Keung, C. P. C., & Fung, C. K. H. (2020). Exploring kindergarten teachers’ pedagogical content knowledge in the development of play-based learning. Journal of Education for Teaching, 46(2), 244–247. https://doi.org/10.1080/02607476.2020.1724656 Krogh, S., & Morehouse, P. (2014). The Early Childhood Curriculum : Inquiry Learning Through Integration. Liao, C. (2016). From Interdisciplinary to Transdisciplinary: An Arts-Integrated Approach to STEAM Education. Art Education, 69(6), 44–49. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1224873 Lillard, A. S., Lerner, M. D., Hopkins, E. J., Dore, R. A., Smith, E. D., & Palmquist, C. M. (2013). The impact of pretend play on children’s development: A review of the evidence. Psychological Bulletin, 139(1), 1–34. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0029321 Maxwell, L. E., Mitchell, M. R., & Evans, G. W. (2008). Effects of Play Equipment and Loose Parts on Preschool Children’s Outdoor Play Behavior: An Observational Study and Design Intervention. Children, Youth and Environments, 18(2), 37–63. McLaughlin, T., & Cherrington, S. (2018). Creating a rich curriculum through intentional teaching. Early Childhood Folio, 22(1), 33. https://doi.org/10.18296/ecf.0050 Mengmeng, Z., Xiantong, Y., & Xinghua, W. (2019). Construction of STEAM Curriculum Model and Case Design in Kindergarten. American Journal of Educational Research, 7(7), 485–490. https://doi.org/10.12691/education-7-7-8 Milara, I. S., Pitkänen, K., Laru, J., Iwata, M., Orduña, M. C., & Riekki, J. (2020). STEAM in Oulu: Scaffolding the development of a Community of Practice for local educators around STEAM and digital fabrication. International Journal of Child-Computer Interaction, 26, 100197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijcci.2020.100197 Moomaw, S. (2012). STEM Begins in the Early Years. School Science and Mathematics, 112(2), 57–58. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1949-8594.2011.00119.x Peng, Q. (2017). Study on Three Positions Framing Kindergarten Play-Based Curriculum in China: Through Analyses of the Attitudes of Teachers to Early Linguistic Education. Studies in English Language Teaching, 5(3), 543. https://doi.org/10.22158/selt.v5n3p543 Pyle, A., & Bigelow, A. (2015). Play in Kindergarten: An Interview and Observational Study in Three Canadian Classrooms. Early Childhood Education Journal, 43(5), 385–393. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-014-0666-1 Pyle, A., & Danniels, E. (2017). A Continuum of Play-Based Learning: The Role of the Teacher in Play-Based Pedagogy and the Fear of Hijacking Play. Early Education and Development, 28(3), 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1220771 Quigley, C. F., Herro, D., & Jamil, F. M. (2017). Developing a Conceptual Model of STEAM Teaching Practices. School Science and Mathematics, 117(1–2), 1–12. https://doi.org/10.1111/ssm.12201 Ridgers, N. D., Knowles, Z. R., & Sayers, J. (2012). Encouraging play in the natural environment: A child-focused case study of Forest School. Children’s Geographies, 10(1), 49–65. https://doi.org/10.1080/14733285.2011.638176 Ridwan, A., Rahmawati, Y., & Hadinugrahaningsih, T. (2017). Steam Integration in Chemistry Learning for Developing 21st Century Skills. MIER Journail of Educational Studies, Trends & Practices, 7(2), 184–194. Rolling, J. H. (2016). Reinventing the STEAM Engine for Art + Design Education. Art Education, 69(4), 4–7. https://doi.org/10.1080/00043125.2016.1176848 Sancar-Tokmak, H. (2015). The effect of curriculum-generated play instruction on the mathematics teaching efficacies of early childhood education pre-service teachers. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(1), 5–20. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2013.788315 Sawangmek, S. (2019). Trends and Issues on STEM and STEAM Education in Early Childhood. Képzés És Gyakorlat, 17(2019/3-4), 97–106. https://doi.org/10.17165/tp.2019.3-4.8 Science, A. I. (n.d.). STEM Project-Based Learning. Spencer, R., Joshi, N., Branje, K., Lee McIsaac, J., Cawley, J., Rehman, L., FL Kirk, S., & Stone, M. (2019). Educator perceptions on the benefits and challenges of loose parts play in the outdoor environments of childcare centres. AIMS Public Health, 6(4), 461–476. https://doi.org/10.3934/publichealth.2019.4.461 Taylor, J., Bond, E., & Woods, M. (2018). A Multidisciplinary and Holistic Introduction. Varun A. (2014). Thematic Approach for Effective Communication in Early Childhood Education Thematic Approach for effective communication in ECCE. International Journal of Education and Psychological Research (IJEPR), 3(3), 49–51. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/289868193 Wang, X., Xu, W., & Guo, L. (2018). The status quo and ways of STEAM education promoting China’s future social sustainable development. Sustainability (Switzerland), 10(12). https://doi.org/10.3390/su10124417 Whitebread, D. D. (2012). The Importance of Play. Toy Industries of Europe, April, 1–55. https://doi.org/10.5455/msm.2015.27.438-441 Wong, S. M., Wang, Z., & Cheng, D. (2011). A play-based curriculum: Hong Kong children’s perception of play and non-play. International Journal of Learning, 17(10), 165–180. https://doi.org/10.18848/1447-9494/cgp/v17i10/47298 Zosh, J. M., Hopkins, E. J., Jensen, H., Liu, C., Neale, D., Hirsh-Pasek, K., Whitebread, Solis, S. L., & David. (2017). Learning through play : a review of the evidence (Issue November). The LEGO Foundation.

Having been introduced in Sweden in the 1980’s, one would perhaps have thought postmodern philosophy to be a thing of the past. As it turns out, the debate on postmodernism is still very much alive. But the term ‘postmodernism’ in 2021 is complex and sometimes misunderstood. In public discourse, the term has moved beyond its status as a continental philosophy or as a denomination for certain historical conditions of the late twentieth century. Today, it appears, people use ‘postmodernism’ as an invective for relativism, post-truth and ‘empty words’. Two books, published in 2020, even warn the Swedish people for a postmodern invasion of both the academics and Swedish government. The humanities, apparently, are especially corrupted by postmodern thinking. Is this true? As a rhetorician, I ask myself to what extent postmodern theory has had an influence on Swedish rhetoric in the 40 years since the discipline was re-established within higher education.  This essay examines course syllabuses, teaching material, Swedish articles in the periodical Rhetorica Scandinavica, doctoral theses, and the complete works published by Sweden’s eight professors of rhetoric. Early on, I found that there was very little information available about the development of  Swedish rhetoric –even less about a postmodern rhetoric in a Swedish context. Thus, this essay is to be looked at as both a history of Swedish postmodern rhetoric – the first of its kind – and as an examination of the occurrence of postmodern theory within Swedish rhetoric. I find that postmodernism has not, as opposed to the critics’ claims, played a key role in the development of Swedish rhetoric. Its presence has, however, significantly increased within the field of rhetoric since 2010, and I discuss why that might be. Further, I discuss what can be said to define the Swedish postmodern rhetoric, and what the future might hold for this specific branch of rhetorical studies and research.