Introduction

The learning styles of children and scientists are similar because both groups learn by examining and investigating. Therefore, it would not be wrong to call children “little scientists.” Children are more likely to learn by natural means of doing research, which are as valuable as those conducted by scientists (Büyüktaşkapu 2010; Desli and Dimitriou 2014). Children’s curiosity and enthusiasm to make the world a more predictable place urges them to explore and make inferences through their experiences. However, guidance is needed to transform children’s curiosity and activities into a scientific endeavor. It is a fact that science has to be applied to carry out rich scientific inquiries (Nayfeld et al. 2011; Worth 2010). Preschool science education activities cover all kinds of learning that students experience with their senses, and teachers are responsible for guiding this process (Ayvacı et al. 2002).

According to Dewey, “Education is not preparation for life; education is life itself.” Similarly, according to Piaget, the best way for children to learn is through their own experiences, and therefore, there should be activities in which children can participate (Senemoğlu 2011). These facts also indicate that the best way for children to learn science is learning by living and doing. Posing questions, conducting research, collecting data, and seeking answers are the main factors affecting the efficiency of the process (Alabay 2013; Doğan 2010; Kuru 2015). Performance of students in pre-school science activities clearly shows that this is a natural process for learning science. Therefore, students should learn such science process skills as making observations, posing questions, conducting research, reviewing, classifying, applying trial and error method, solving problems, communicating, and establishing warm relationships. An acceptable science education for children aged 5–6 years consists of child-centered activities in which they actively participate (Olgan 2008; Ünal and Akman 2006). Science for young children is a process of doing and thinking, a process that anyone can participate in and contribute to, not just a list of facts and information discovered by other people (Brenneman and Louro 2008).

Recent research shows that children have the ability to use reasoning and questioning skills beginning in early childhood and beyond (NRC 2012). Teachers who guide children to science education through questions, research, and explanations can create a suitable environment for them by integrating the children’s life experiences into the classroom (NAEYC 2009). Teachers who prepare the environment for exploration, allow for observations, and offer opportunities for trial and error and discussion, contribute to scientific learning and make it more meaningful for children. Enriching science education with games, making it more interesting through interactive learning, and adjusting its complexity and difficulty based on age and developmental stages are of paramount significance for learning outcomes. These processes point to future educational trends (Murray 2019).

Preschool children are in need of more sources and opportunities than other age groups to acquire scientific knowledge, learn scientific concepts, develop science process skills, and make scientific inquiries (Alabay 2013). Sense-triggering activities designed by teachers provide students with the opportunity to explore and enquire. Activities that have previously served different purposes but contain familiar, enriching, and well-planned materials allow students to explore science (UNESCO 2017). Such activities help them to learn about different perspectives, make observations and inquiries, and develop controlled trial and error skills. Based on children’s enthusiasm to develop science process skills anytime and anywhere due to their interest and curiosity, they should be allowed to design their own unplanned activities and perform experiential learning (Brenneman and Louro 2008; NAAEE 2019).

It is sometimes the most effective method to leave natural learning to students’ desire to explore freely (SOtC 2018; Kıldan and Pektaş 2009). The task of teachers is to bring together interesting tools and materials under the name of the “science center” and make them available to students, who can freely choose among those tools and materials and use them in their inquiries with the help of their experiences. Natural phenomena and events can also be regarded as educational opportunities used in science education to achieve creative results. Activities based on the science center and other educational opportunities can also help teachers increase students’ curiosity, expand their knowledge, and make further explanations (Dubosarsky 2011). The use of out-of-class environments will increase children’s natural creativity and interest (SOtC 2018). Teachers can work together by using outdoor (nature) activities to find new ways to offer children opportunities to develop key science competencies such as problem-solving, communicating, reasoning, estimating, testing, observing, measuring, comparing, grouping, classifying, evaluating, and asking and answering questions, while also building non-cognitive skills including resilience, perseverance, and confidence in outdoor contexts that promote their agency, physical activity and well-being (Murray 2019).

Actually it should be the duty of teachers to motivate students to study science, stimulate their curiosity, and encourage them to ask questions and do research, and thus, helping children to shape science concepts and phenomena in their minds (Toyama 2016). Teachers, regardless of their rank or grade, must fulfill this task (Ünal and Akman 2006). Preschool children tend to be suspicious of scientific facts, concepts, and natural events, because they tend to perceive things in a concrete way. Therefore, scientific phenomena and concepts should be presented to preschool children in a more concrete way (Dağlı 2014; Greenfield et al. 2009). To facilitate learning, teachers should use age and developmentally appropriate methods, strategies and techniques rather than didactic method to teach the concepts that are abstract or difficult to understand (Ünal and Akman 2006). Facilitated by educators, the students’ natural curiosity drives their learning processes, and the overarching topics are integrated across the array of subject areas (NAAEE 2019). Activities that are easy to perceive entertain children and allow them to take pleasure in what they do. Thus, students learn and develop positive attitudes while having fun (Conezio and French 2002). Other factors that makes information more concrete are tools and materials. Science centers and materials used in pre-school education should contain stimuli that support students’ development and improve their attitudes towards science (Trundle and Saçkes 2012). Activities in science centers allow students to develop various skills implicitly or explicitly. Science centers and materials, which help students develop skills that are necessary to explore, question, observe, research, define, classify, sort, group, and store and develop new ideas, should be stimulating and rich, and also allow students to interact with each other (Guo et al. 2015; Piasta et al. 2014).

The aim of this study is to determine preschool teachers’ science education activities, the problems they encounter and solutions they devise, and the methods and techniques they use during those activities. The main question of the study is “What is the relationship between preschool teachers’ views of science education activities and their actual science education activities in their classrooms?

Method

Design

Phenomenology, which is a qualitative research design, was used. People’s perceptions of the world originate from their sensory experiences of things and personal interpretations of those experiences. Phenomenological research deals with how we bring together the facts that we experience in understanding the environment (Patton 2014). Phenomenology is a research design that aims to highlight perspectives, perceptions, and experiences (Ersoy 2016). Phenomenology was the design of choice in this study, as the aim was to understand and interpret preschool teachers’ views of science education and their science education activities in reality.

Participants

The study sample consisted of female preschool teachers of primary schools in the central district of Muş, during the 2017–2018 academic year. Participants were recruited using criterion sampling, which is a purposeful sampling method. The basic concept of criterion sampling is to include appropriate situations according to predetermined criteria (Merriam 2013; Yildirim and Simsek 2012). Those teaching children aged 60–66 months, and whose teaching was observed, were included in the study. It was assumed that experience might also have an effect on results, and therefore, only those with at least 3 years of professional experience were included in the study. The final inclusion criterion was voluntary participation. The initial sample consisted of 15 teachers; however, 3 teachers were excluded from the study because they gave superficial answers to probe questions. Therefore, data were collected from 12 teachers through one-on-one interviews and observations. All participants were women and worked in kindergartens in the districts of the city of Muş. They had 3 to 15 years of professional experience. Of these teachers, 5 had 3 years of experience, 4 had 6 years of experience, and 3 had 10 or more years of experience.

Instruments, Procedures, and Data Analysis

Data were collected using a semi-structured interview form and through structured observations in the classrooms of the participants who were interviewed. The aim of qualitative research in which phenomena and related themes are defined in detail through in-depth analysis using multi-source data collection tools, is to highlight experiences and perceptions and meanings attached to them regarding a phenomenon or a case (Creswell 2007; Yildirim and Simsek 2012). Interviews provide people with the opportunity to express their behaviors, feelings, and insights in their own words, which allows others to understand their world views, perspectives, and experiences (Merriam 2013; Patton 2014). Observations help obtain a comprehensive and longitudinal image of behaviors and phenomena in determined environments (Yildirim and Simsek 2012). The researchers consulted with a preschool educator, a classroom educator, and a science educator to develop an interview form. Participants were interviewed at their convenience at their workplaces. Observations were conducted for 4 months once a week, on specific dates in the classrooms, and field notes were taken during each observation. Classroom observations were also videotaped, and each recording was repeatedly reviewed to enrich the field notes.

Data were analyzed using inductive content analysis. To get a general idea for data encoding, all interview transcriptions and field observation notes were read several times, and video recordings were examined again and again. Interview and observational data were coded in the light of the sub-objectives of the study. Sub-themes and themes were developed, and findings were defined and interpreted. For reliability, a fourth expert reviewed the codes and themes. Data were presented in tables after a consensus was reached.

Results

The themes, sub-themes, categories, and codes of each research question are presented in tables. Quotes from interviews and field notes are used for clarity and illustrative purposes.

Materials That Should be Available in Science Centers

The first subquestion investigated participants’ views of ideal materials for science centers, while observations investigated what kind of materials were actually available in the science centers in their classrooms. Table 1 presents participants’ views of materials that should be available in science centers for science education.

Table 1 Materials that should be available in science centers
Full size table

The materials that participants thought should be available in science centers were grouped under the themes of “artificial” and “natural.” Under the theme of “artificial,” puzzles are under the category of “educational toy” while human dummies and dental, eye, and world models are necessary in science centers. They thought that magnets as testing equipment, magnifying glasses as instruments for observation, and scales, clocks, compasses, thermometers and rulers as measuring instruments should be available in science centers. They also pointed out that science centers should have such recyclable materials as garbage bags, X-ray films, sea shells and plastic containers, and such everyday life objects as glass jars, trays, plates, drinking straw, cups, flour, sugar, salt and mirrors. They pointed out the necessity of graphs, maps, a strip of seasons, a calendar, and pictures under the category of artificial audio-visual materials. The category of “plant” contains leaves, seeds, pine cones and flowers. Fish and turtles were in the category of “animal” under the subtheme of “animate,” while stone, earth, water, sand and fossils were under the subtheme of “inanimate.” Table 2 shows the materials that are actually available in participants’ classrooms and their use.

Table 2 Materials in science centers
Full size table

In describing the actual available materials, participants mentioned almost every material that they indicated should be in the science center. The classroom observations showed that there was a large difference between materials participants thought should be included in a science center and the materials that were actually available in the science centers in their classrooms, indicating that they did not put their beliefs into practice, and that likewise, they used very few of the materials that were in the science centers for science activities.

Factors Affecting Material Selection and Use

The second subquestion investigated participants’ views of factors affecting their selection of materials for science centers and the use of those materials (Table 3).

Table 3 Factors affecting participants’ use of materials
Full size table

All participants cited reasons under the themes of internal and external factors for the tools and materials they use for science education. Some participants stated that it was important for students to use scientific thinking, prediction, and observation skills. According to others, the outcomes and indicators in the preschool education curriculum could be used to choose materials according to the developmental characteristics of students, the flexibility of the curriculum should be utilized, and conditions allowing child-centered practices should be established.

Some participants expressed external factors such as lacking some materials due to high prices and not receiving enough support from students’ parents. Some others stated that they did not supply some materials as they considered them to be safety hazards and elements with the potential to cause accidents in the classroom. Some others stated that educational settings facilitating learning by living and doing were effective in concretizing learning and providing sample experiences.

Methods and Techniques Considered to be Used in Science Activities

The third subquestion investigated participants’ views and criteria for the selection of methods and techniques that they thought should be used in science activities. The observations regarding this subquestion also elicited information about what methods and techniques participants actually used in science activities. Table 4 presents participants’ views of methods and techniques they think should be used in science activities.

Table 4 Participants’ views of methods and techniques for science activities
Full size table

For science activities, participants specified the following twelve methods and techniques: on-site observation, question-and-answer, direct instruction, experiment, showing and getting it done, discussion, inquiry, case, drama, play, presentation, and problem solving. In general, participants associated science process skills with these methods and techniques. They associated observation skills with inquiry, experiments, drama, showing and getting it done, while they associated on-site observation, and classification skills with showing and getting it done, discussion and problem solving. Having stated that communication skills were used in almost every technique, they associated prediction skills with question-and-answer and direct instruction. They also stated that child-centered question-and-answer, experiment and discussion techniques should be used to help students develop comparison and inference skills. Table 5 presents participants’ views of factors they take into account before using the methods and techniques.

Table 5 Participants’ views of factors they take into account when determining methods and techniques
Full size table

When choosing methods, participants stated that they took different factors into consideration under the categories of “child,” “physical conditions” and “reasons for use.” They stressed the importance of age, developmental characteristics, readiness, interest and willingness, and talent and individual differences under the category of “child.” They emphasized the significance of materials, environmental opportunities, and classroom size under the category of “physical conditions.” They highlighted the relevance of active engagement, outcomes, games, objectify, drama and the principle of moving from simple to complex with the way they chose methods. Table 6 presents the methods and techniques that participants actually actively use in science education.

Table 6 Methods and techniques that participants actively use in science education
Full size table

Participants specified twelve methods and techniques that could be used in science activities. The 4-month observations showed that some participants used some of those methods and techniques in science activities. This results indicated that participants failed to put their ideas into practice.

Skills Expected to be Gained by Students through Science Activities

The fourth subquestion investigated participants’ views of skills that they expected their students to develop through science activities. The observations regarding the subquestion also elicited information on what concepts and skills participants actually concentrated on in science activities that they implemented in their classrooms. Table 7 presents participants’ views of the skills they expect their students to develop through science activities.

Table 7 Participants’ views of skills they expect their students to develop through science activities
Full size table

Participants argued that science activities provided students with the opportunity to develop observation, curiosity, objectify and active engagement skills, which are skills to access information. They were also of the opinion that science activities encouraged students to develop concentration, hand–eye coordination, recognition, memory-retention, prediction, transfer-association and comparison skills, which are mental skills. Finally, they maintained that science activities helped students become more self-confident, aware and environmentally conscious. They stated that they mostly used experiment, question-and-answer, trip, showing and getting it done and inquiry methods to help students to develop those three skill sets. Table 8 presents the concepts and skills that participants actually concentrate on in science activities that they implement in their classrooms.

Table 8 Concepts and skills that participants actually concentrate on in science activities
Full size table

Participants associated skills with methods and techniques used in science activities. While some participants referred to the methods they tried to use, many referred to the methods that were supposed to use. For 4 months, we observed not only the methods that participants used, but also the concepts and skills on which they concentrated. Participants focused on people, animals, and health-hygiene under the category of life science, on the three states of matter under the category of physical science, and on weather conditions and seasons under the category of earth science. Participants wanted their students to develop skills to access information and scientific process skills. They used the question-and-answer technique in particular to help students develop skills to access information. In science activities, most participants did not pay much attention to curiosity, attention, or application skills, which are three of the skills to access information. They focused on communication, prediction, and observation skills, which are three of the scientific process skills.

Problems that Participants Encounter in the Implementation of Science Activities and Their Solutions to Those Problems

The fifth subquestion investigated the problems participants encountered and solutions they devised when applying science activities (Table 9).

Table 9 Problems participants encountered and solutions they devised during science education
Full size table

Most participants stated that they encountered problems due to the fact that classrooms were small and overcrowded and that they did not have the materials needed to perform science activities. Participants also complained about the lack of parental involvement in education and argued that ordinary science activities were enough to provide students with outcomes and indicators. As solutions to their problems, some participants were of the opinion that school management should be involved while others stated that the Internet, national and local projects or in-service courses could be used to learn about different perspectives and rich activities. Table 10 presents the problems that participants actually encounter in science activities and their solutions to those problems.

Table 10 Problems that participants actually encounter in science activities and their solutions to those problems
Full size table

Observations showed that participants had problems under the categories of method, physical conditions, teacher, child and material categories. All classrooms were overcrowded and not in a very good condition. Most participants were unprepared, and therefore, uncreative with regards to their activities. Most students were bored because the science activities performed in their classrooms were dull, uninteresting, and uncreative. To overcome this problem, two teachers used out-of-class settings, which made science activities more fun and productive for students. Teachers can make up for the shortage of materials and parents can observe their children develop process skills in natural settings where parental involvement is achieved through good communication. The methodological problems were teachers’ failure to arouse students’ interest and curiosity, their insistence on using teacher-centered thinking and lack of parents’ support. All kinds of activities performed in different natural environments that enabled active use of different senses were more efficient and productive for students. During this process, both teachers and students who had a chance to get fresh air and relax had a more enjoyable time.

Participants’ Views of How Science Education Can be Improved

Table 11 presents participants’ views of how science education can be improved.

Table 11 Participants’ views of what should be done to improve science education
Full size table

All participants expressed their views on increasing the quality of science education activities. Their statements were grouped under the categories of method, material, and technique. Most participants stated that such methods as objectifying, integrating with play, using on-site observations, and associating science activities with real life could be used to adjust content according to the level of students. Participants who performed scientific experiments were of the opinion that open-ended experiments with simultaneous information should be used. All participants agreed that school management should help with the supply of materials and that out-of-class science activities with natural materials should be designed and implemented.

Discussion and Conclusion

This study investigated preschool teachers’ views of science education activities and the science education activities that they actually carried out, and reached the following results.

According to the first subquestion regarding investigating participants’ views of materials that should be available in science centers and materials that are actually available in science centers, participants stated that science centers should contain audio-visual materials, everyday life objects, and recyclable materials as artificial objects; measurement, observation, and test tools as equipment; dummies and models as toys; and animate (plants and animals) and inanimate objects (stone, water, soil, sand and fossil) as natural materials. Observations showed that the classrooms of participants mostly had artificial materials such as dummies and models (human, world, tooth), and measurement, observation, and equipment for experiments. Participants used audio-visual materials, everyday life objects, and recyclable materials less. Participants preferred plants and flowers as natural materials, and stones as inanimate objects. These results show that participants prefered artificial materials to natural materials. Although they stated that equipment and toys should be available, they preferred using dummies, models, equipment, and real objects in their classrooms. Although participants stated that they wanted to have plants and animals in their classrooms, they only had different types of plants (flowers) in their classrooms. This result shows that what participants imagine their science centers should be like does not match the science centers they actually have. This might be due to the fact that participants could not put their creative ideas into practice. There are some conflicting results in literature. Ayvacı, Devecioğlu and Yiğit (2002) reported that most teachers supplied materials necessary for activities either by themselves or by external aid. Doğan and Simsar (2018) pointed out that almost all teachers used similar materials in conducting science education activities. Brenneman and Louro (2008) stated that journals and books that can be used in classrooms help preschool students learn new words, ask new questions, and develop ideas about science. It is also reported that using an aquarium for scientific activities on floating and sinking improves the scientific thinking and curiosity of preschool children (Dubosarsky 2011; Eshach 2006; French 2004), and teachers also stimulate this curiosity by using activities from daily life (art, cooking etc.) (Kumar and Whyte 2018; Conezio and French 2002). For example each of these fundamental science process skills can be easily integrated into all areas of the arts (visual and performing arts including music, movement, and dance) in early childhood, and by this means children can feel themselves to be like artists or scientists (Morrison 2012).

According to the second subquestion investigating participants’ views of factors affecting their selection of materials for science centers and the use of those materials, participants addressed the topics of the child, materials, the program, and the economy as external factors. The developmental characteristics of children and their related ability to establish a relationship between cause and effect, the development of science process skills, and a lack of self-confidence, affected the materials selection of participants. Lack of materials and ease of access to materials were also two external factors that affected the material selection of participants. The outcomes and indicators, flexibility and child-centered nature of the curriculum were other factors that affected the material selection of participants. The lack of family support and high price of materials also had a negative effect on the material selection of participants. Participants stated that they paid attention to method choices and developing a sense of responsibility for students as internal factors in material selection. This result shows that participants mostly take external factors into account when selecting materials. The developmental characteristics of students play an important role in the selection of materials. Moreover, inexpensive costs of materials and the financial support of students’ parents are important in material selection. Participants choose methods by taking into account the development and interest of students. Dağlı (2014) reported that the most important criterion for effective learning is the teacher’s awareness of students’ interest and prior knowledge. Therefore, our result is consistent with the literature. On the other hand, there are some studies that argue that teachers should focus on new activities and methods while addressing the subjects of science or mathematics that students had difficulty comprehending before (Atkins 2018; Kumar and Whyte 2018; Desli and Dimitriou 2014). This result is different from ours. Simple outdoor trips and games can help to improve children’s science process skills such as observation, exploration, inquiry, communication, and social skills (NAAEE 2019). Also such scientific studies play a more active role in early years education. STEM learning is a prominent and valued feature of twenty-first century early years education across the world (SOtC 2018).

The third subquestion investigated participants’ views and criteria for the selection of methods and techniques they thought should be used in science activities. Observations elicited information on the methods and techniques participants actually used in their classrooms for science activities. They stated that on-site observation, question-and-answer, direct instruction, experiment, demonstration, inquiry, case, drama, play, presentation, and problem-solving methods should be used. They stated that when choosing these methods and techniques, they considered their students’ ages, developmental characteristics, interests and willingness, individual differences, and readiness and skills. Moreover, they stated that the reasons (active engagement, outcomes, play, learning by living and doing, objectifying, associating with life, from simple to complex) for the use of methods and techniques were also important. According to them, environmental and physical conditions (material, environmental opportunities, classroom size) should also be taken into consideration. Class size is one of factors affecting the quality of education (Kalkan and Akman 2009). Normally 15–20 children is appropriate. However, the class sizes in which the research was conducted were far above normal. This situation affected teachers negatively. In practice, participants used presentation/instruction, question-and-answer, showing and getting it done, and demonstration experiments. However, they did not use drama, on-site observation, discussion, play, problem solving, or case methods. In theory, participants emphasized the methods that increased students’ interest and curiosity and focused on questioning, but did not use those methods in their classrooms for science activities. This result shows that participants do not actually take into account the criteria that they claim they do when choosing methods and techniques. There are studies reporting that teachers take different variables into consideration when choosing methods and techniques (Alabay 2013; Dubosarsky 2011; Büyüktaşkapu 2010; Doğan 2010; Inan, Trundle and Kantor 2010; Brenneman and Louro 2008; Karamustafaoğlu and Kandaz 2006). Our result is not consistent with the literature. On the other hand, it is stated that familial background, readiness, and mathematics and language skills have a greater effect on knowledge of science among preschool children than do methods and techniques (Greenfield et al. 2009; Guo et al. 2015).

The fourth subquestion investigated participants’ views of skills that they expected their students to develop through science activities. Observations elicited information on what concepts and skills participants actually concentrated on in the science activities they implemented in their classrooms. In terms of skills to access information, participants stated that they wanted their students to develop skills related to observation, curiosity, objectification, and active engagement. In terms of mental skills, participants expressed that they would like for their students to develop transfer-association, prediction, hand–eye coordination, comparison, recognition, concentration, and memory-retention skills. In terms of affective skills, participants stated that they wanted their students to develop sensitivity to nature, self-confidence, and awareness. Observations showed that participants focused on concepts including life science, earth science and physical sciences, and concentrated on process skills (communication, prediction, observation) and skills to access information (questioning, curiosity, paying attention, and application). Although, in theory, participants stated that they wanted their students to develop access to information, and mental and affective skills, their focus was limited to access to information skills in practice. Although participants did not present any theoretical explanation about concepts, they gave importance to concepts in practice. The observation note, “In most classrooms, cleaning times, and health, cleaning and hygiene were addressed before breakfast. Instructions about hand washing and personal hygiene were presented. In some classes, “Mr. Microbe” experiment was performed. Students had the opportunity to practice and learn about the importance of handwashing in a comparative way” (Table 8), is an example of this. It is stated that physics-, biology- and chemistry- based concepts can be perceived and understood by pre-school children (Guo et al. 2015; Toyama 2016; Dubosarsky 2011; Nayfeld et al. 2011). It is stated that science and mathematics education enables preschool children to have experiences with the world and that they can obtain outcomes that allow them to internalize scientific concepts through their mental process skills (Atkins 2018; Kumar and Whyte 2018; Kuru 2015; Veziroğlu 2011). Our results are not consistent with the literature. Participants’ practice and theory differ, which might be due to the general culture and family structure of students, the city where teachers live, and creativity

The fifth subquestion investigated the problems that participants claimed they encountered and solutions they devised when applying science activities. Observations elicited information on what kind of problems participants actually encountered and solutions they devised when applying science activities. They expressed their opinions in the following areas: (1) settings and conditions (lack of materials, overcrowded classrooms, physical obstacles), (2) child-related problems (commotion, individual differences, accident risk, inaptitude, getting bored easily/indifference), (3) teacher-related problems (making do, lack of self-confidence, shyness-fear, density and fatigue), and (4) method-related problems (failure to involve parents, failure to adjust level). Unattended structured observations were conducted for 4 months once a week on specific dates in the classrooms of interviewers, at this period revealed method-based problems (failure to involve parents, poor time management, teacher-centered thinking, failure to arouse curiosity and interest), problems with physical conditions (overcrowded classrooms, lack of space, being confined to indoors), teachers-based problems (being unprepared, being uncreative, indifference), child-related problems (commotion, indifference), and material-related problems (failure to use nature, lack of materials). It was observed that the number of children in the classes in which the research was conducted varied between 24 and 32. This situation, which is more than the recommended 15–20 students, according to normal standards (MoNE 2013), leaves teachers in a difficult position. This situation also affects the quality of education negatively (Kalkan and Akman 2009). In addition, it has been noticed that there are more methodological problems. Although participants emphasized lack of self-confidence, density and fatigue as teacher-related problems, observations revealed that participants were unprepared, did not care about the activities they performed and did not use their creativity. We can, therefore, state that participants’ theory and practice differ. There are some studies indicating that preschool teachers find it enough when they get their students to actively participate in the process, to establish cause and effect relationship, to have a sense of curiosity and to develop basic skills (Dönmez-Usta and Ültay 2017; Afacan and Selimhocaoğlu 2012; Özbey 2006). However, our results are not consistent with the literature. Studies that emphasize the role of teachers in preschool science education activities report that the preparedness of teachers has a great impact on students’ attitudes towards science learning (Olgan 2008; Ünal and Akman 2006; Appleton 2003; Osborne et al. 2003; Abell and Roth 1992). This might be because (1) teachers do not pay attention to real field applications, (2) they are not enthusiastic about improving their practice and experimenting with new approaches, or (3) training on different methods and techniques is limited in the cities in which they work. In addition, it was seen that only two of the teachers were more interested in science activities and tried to find solutions to the problems encountered than the others. Based on interviews with teachers; these two teachers spent most of their childhoods in natural village settings with their families. In this case, it can be said that the past experiences of individuals may have affected their tendencies in the future.

The sixth subquestion investigated participants’ views of what should be done to improve the quality of science education. Participants emphasized a child-centered approach, on-site observation, and gamification under the category of method. They also stated that integrative activities that enabled objectification and active student engagement, enhance their curiosity, associate new knowledge with life, and were appropriate for age and developmental characteristics of students were important. They particularly stated their views on the use of drama as a method. In terms of materials, they focused on supply of materials, natural materials and designing out-of-class activities. “We have difficulty supplying materials. School management should give some support. If not, then natural settings should be used. Yes, science education materials are a bit expensive. But we should use recyclable materials and objects from our own home” (Table 11) is an example to this. Participants emphasized the importance of open-ended and simultaneous design of experiments. There are studies on the effectiveness of such experiments (Atkins 2018; Kumar and Whyte 2018; Piasta et al. 2014; Alabay 2013; Büyüktaşkapu 2010). When there are more free learning environments in which natural educational resources can be used, children will be able to receive a higher quality science education (NAAEE 2019), and this will help to enhance the use of different and effective teaching methods among teachers (UNESCO 2017).