This post was originally published on here
A Charles Sturt University study published in Research in Science Education has mapped a three-stage pathway showing how educator planning, play-based action and reflective practice can work together to strengthen young children’s scientific literacy. The research is based on video observations in one preschool, but it offers a practical lens for ECEC teams aiming to make science learning visible, sustained and intentional.
Science learning in the early years often starts with everyday questions: Why does it sink? What happens if it melts? How can it balance? In many services, these moments emerge through play. The challenge is not whether play can support science learning, but how educators can intentionally extend it over time without turning play into a worksheet.
A new Australian study has proposed a three-stage continuum that describes how educators can plan for play-based science experiences, support children’s engagement and then reflect on the learning to shape what comes next. The research, led by Charles Sturt University academics, positions scientific literacy as more than “knowing facts”. It frames scientific literacy as children building science concept knowledge by relating ideas to experience and applying them in play.
The study used a qualitative design in a naturalistic preschool setting. Researchers collected more than seven hours of digital video across three science play experiences, alongside educator input through a professional learning session and informal discussions. Rather than testing a single “science activity”, the work explored how scientific literacy develops as a process supported by educator intentionality.
The authors note that early childhood scientific literacy remains under-explored compared to primary and secondary contexts, particularly when it comes to understanding how development occurs through play and educator decision-making.
The framework describes a continuum with three connected stages:
- Planning
Planning is positioned as more than gathering resources. The study describes educators identifying the science concepts that can be developed, selecting materials and designing a play experience that supports children to connect concepts with action. In practice, this planning stage draws attention to the “why” behind the experience: what concept or relationship is likely to be in reach, and what prompts, materials or provocations make that learning more likely to surface. - Play-based action and production phases
This stage focuses on children’s engagement with the play experience as educators support participation, exploration and the development of ideas. The paper describes the role of familiarisation and building from children’s everyday experiences. It also highlights the importance of extending play across interconnected experiences, rather than treating science as a one-off event. - Pedagogical reflection
Reflection is positioned as the engine that sustains scientific literacy over time. Educators review what occurred, what concepts became visible, and what might be planned next. The authors argue that intentional reflection helps educators design subsequent experiences that build on emerging understandings, supporting gradual progress in higher-order learning.
Why this matters for early childhood teams
The practical value of the framework is the way it makes “intentional teaching” observable in a play-based context. Instead of positioning intentionality as direct instruction, the continuum frames it as an ongoing cycle: plan with purpose, teach within play, then reflect to extend learning.
This aligns closely with the EYLF v2.0 emphasis on play-based learning and intentional teaching, and with National Quality Standard expectations for thoughtful program design and ongoing assessment and planning. Music, construction, loose parts, outdoor environments and group projects can all become science-rich contexts when educators make the learning intention clear and revisit it across time.
For service leaders and educators, the continuum can be translated into a few practical levers:
- Plan for concepts, not activities
A “volcano experiment” can be exciting, but scientific literacy grows when experiences return to concepts children can revisit: changes in states of matter, cause and effect, force and motion, living things, patterns, or sustainability concepts. - Use play to make thinking visible
During play-based science experiences, educators can support scientific literacy through observation, purposeful language and well-timed questions. Prompts that encourage children to predict, compare, test and explain can extend thinking without taking over the play. - Design for continuity across the week
The study emphasises the value of interrelated and interconnected science play. For services, that can mean revisiting materials, keeping a “science table” open for several days, returning to children’s theories in group time, or documenting a question that becomes the focus of follow-up provocations. - Reflect as a team, not only as individuals
Pedagogical reflection becomes more powerful when it feeds into shared planning. Brief reflection routines at the end of the day, what worked, what children noticed, what will be offered next, can support consistent intentionality across the team.
The study draws on one preschool context, which means the framework should be treated as a practice lens rather than a universal prescription. Group size, staffing patterns, learning environments and community contexts vary widely across ECEC. The authors also point to the need for further research across diverse settings.
Even so, the framework offers a useful reminder: science learning in the early years does not need to compete with play-based practice. With intentional planning and reflective cycles, play can become the context where scientific literacy is built, tested and strengthened over time.
Source: Roy G, Sikder S and Letts W, Understanding the Process of Scientific Literacy Development among Children in the Early Years Through Play and Intentionality, Research in Science Education (2025).
