Amissah-Essel Salome, Hagan John Elvis, Schack Thomas
Department of Health, Physical Education, and Recreation, University of Cape Coast, P.O. Box 5007 Cape Coast, Ghana.
Neurocognition and Action-Biomechanics-Research Group, Faculty of Psychology and Sport Sciences, Bielefeld University, D-33501 Bielefeld, Germany.
Eur J Investig Health Psychol Educ. 2020 Dec 18;10(4):1158-1175. doi: 10.3390/ejihpe10040081.
(1) Background: The last few decades have seen researchers giving considerable attention to the physical context of early childhood care and development (ECCD) centers because many of the underlying processes that link physical context are quite similar to psychosocial environmental factors regarding child development. However, research on the physical environments, and the employees' understanding of the importance of physical environments, is often underestimated. The purpose of this study was to assess the quality of the physical environments of ECCD centers in the Cape Coast Metropolis, Ghana, and ascertain whether being a private or public center (center auspices) would be associated with the quality of its physical environment. A further inquiry into the educators' understanding of the importance of physical environment on children's developmental outcomes was made. (2) Methods: Using a sequential explanatory mixed-methods research design, all 160 ECCD centers in the Cape Coast Metropolis were assessed using a modified version of the Children's Physical Environment Rating Scale (CPERS) and a semi-structured interview guide. (3) Results: Descriptive statistics indicated that more than half of the ECCD centers, 56%, rated "fair" on the quality of their physical environment. Although the locations and sites of these centers were of good quality, other physical environmental characteristics (i.e., "Planning of the Centre", "Building as a Whole" and "Outdoor Space") of ECCD centers were also rated to be fair. A Chi-square test showed that center auspices (i.e., being private or public) were not significantly associated with the quality of the physical environments of the centers [χ = 2.490, > 0.05], suggesting no significant difference between private and public ECCD centers in terms of the quality of their physical environment. A follow-up qualitative inquiry identified two themes as reasons why play yards in early years' schools were not good: a ''lack of funding" and "governmental support". (4) Conclusions: Our findings suggest that the physical environments of ECCD centers are, to some extent, compromised. Stakeholders (e.g., Ghana Education Service, non-governmental/religious organizations, and private entrepreneurs) should help improve the quality of physical environments and also provide financial assistance for the provision of basic equipment (e.g., learning materials) for private and public ECCD centers in the Cape Coast Metropolis. Educators require in-service training to boost their in-depth understanding of the importance of physical environments on children's developmental outcomes. Future studies could target children's perceptions of their preschools' physical environments as useful empirical information to help guide appropriate policy interventions.
(1) 背景：在过去几十年里，研究人员相当关注幼儿保育与发展（ECCD）中心的物质环境，因为许多与物质环境相关的潜在过程与影响儿童发展的社会心理环境因素非常相似。然而，对物质环境以及员工对物质环境重要性的理解的研究常常被低估。本研究的目的是评估加纳海岸角都会区ECCD中心的物质环境质量，并确定中心是私立还是公立（中心主办机构）是否与其物质环境质量相关。此外，还进一步探究了教育工作者对物质环境对儿童发展成果重要性的理解。(2) 方法：采用序列解释性混合方法研究设计，使用儿童物质环境评分量表（CPERS）的修订版和半结构化访谈指南对海岸角都会区的所有160个ECCD中心进行评估。(3) 结果：描述性统计表明，超过一半（56%）的ECCD中心在物质环境质量方面被评为“中等”。虽然这些中心的位置和场地质量良好，但ECCD中心的其他物质环境特征（即“中心规划”、“整体建筑”和“户外空间”）也被评为中等。卡方检验表明，中心主办机构（即私立或公立）与中心物质环境质量没有显著关联[χ = 2.490，P > 0.05]，这表明私立和公立ECCD中心在物质环境质量方面没有显著差异。后续的定性探究确定了早年学校操场不佳的两个原因主题：“资金短缺”和“政府支持不足”。(4) 结论：我们的研究结果表明，ECCD中心的物质环境在一定程度上受到了损害。利益相关者（如加纳教育服务局、非政府/宗教组织和私人企业家）应帮助提高物质环境质量，并为海岸角都会区的私立和公立ECCD中心提供基本设备（如学习材料）的资金援助。教育工作者需要接受在职培训，以加深他们对物质环境对儿童发展成果重要性的理解。未来的研究可以针对儿童对其学前物质环境的看法，将其作为有用的实证信息，以帮助指导适当的政策干预。
