Using the Scientific Method in Early Childhood Education Review of Gerde Schachter and Wasik

Hope K. Gerde, Rachel E. Schachter, and Barbara A. Wasik’s 2013 article, “Using the Scientific Method to Guide Learning: An Integrated Approach to Early Childhood Curriculum,” offers a practical argument: young children can learn science through the same broad habits that support inquiry in later education—observing, asking questions, making predictions, investigating, discussing evidence, and generating new questions. The article appeared in Early Childhood Education Journal, volume 41, pages 315–323, with DOI 10.1007/s10643-013-0579-4. It is best understood as a conceptual and practice-oriented article rather than a randomized experiment proving that one seven-step classroom method produces superior outcomes. The older version of this review repeatedly said “the results of the study showed” even though the article’s main contribution is its synthesis of research and its instructional framework. More than a decade later, the core idea remains consistent with current early-childhood guidance: science for young children should be active, inquiry-based, language-rich, and connected with play and real experiences rather than reduced to memorizing facts.

What the Gerde, Schachter, and Wasik Article Argues

The authors focus on how teachers can integrate science into early-childhood curriculum even when educators have limited time, confidence, or specialized resources. Their central idea is that scientific inquiry can organize learning across subjects. Children can: notice a phenomenon; ask a question; suggest an explanation or prediction; investigate; observe what happens; discuss evidence; represent findings; ask new questions.

Why Science Belongs in Early Childhood Education

Young children naturally investigate the world. They ask: Why did the ice disappear?; Why does this object roll farther?; What is inside the seed?; Why is one shadow longer?; Which objects will stick to a magnet?. These questions create opportunities for teachers to build scientific habits without turning preschool into an adult laboratory course.

Science Is More Than Learning Facts. A weak science curriculum may focus mainly on naming: animals; colors; weather words; body parts; planets. Those facts can be useful, but scientific learning also involves learning how to investigate. The Gerde article emphasizes process skills such as:

observation; questioning; prediction; investigation; analysis; communication.

The Scientific Method Must Be Developmentally Appropriate

Young children do not need to memorize a rigid list of scientific-method vocabulary before they can investigate. A preschool teacher can use the underlying logic in natural language: “What do you notice?”; “What do you think will happen?”; “How could we find out?”; “What happened?”; “What makes you think that?”; “What should we try next?”. This keeps the intellectual work while matching children’s development.

Observation, Questions, Predictions, Investigation, and Discussion

The 2013 article presents scientific inquiry as a cycle rather than a one-time activity. A practical classroom version can be represented as: Observe.; Ask a question.; Make a prediction or hypothesis.; Investigate or test.; Collect and represent information.; Interpret what happened.; Generate new questions.. The final step is important because real inquiry rarely ends completely. Observation. Observation is more than “looking.” Children can observe through: sight; hearing; touch when safe; smell when appropriate; measurement tools; comparison over time. Teachers can strengthen observation by asking children to describe specific differences. Questioning. Good science teaching makes room for children’s questions. Instead of immediately giving the answer, a teacher might ask: “How could we test that?” This changes the teacher from answer-provider to inquiry guide. Prediction and Hypothesis. Young children can make predictions before they understand formal statistical hypothesis testing. For example: “I think the big block will make the ramp car go farther.” The educational value lies in connecting an idea with a testable experience.

Investigation. Investigation should allow children to manipulate materials, repeat actions, notice patterns, and compare outcomes. Useful materials often include inexpensive objects: water; containers; ramps; balls; magnets; seeds; leaves; ice; flashlights; natural materials. Recording and Representing Findings. Children can document findings through: drawings; photographs; marks and symbols; simple charts; teacher-recorded dictation; graphs; collections of objects. Representation helps children revisit and communicate what they observed. Discussion Turns Activity Into Learning. A hands-on activity is not automatically scientific inquiry. The teacher should help children connect: what they predicted; what they did; what they observed; what evidence supports their explanation. Discussion makes thinking visible. New Questions. One investigation often creates another. If children discover that ice melts faster in sunlight, they may ask: Does a bigger ice cube melt more slowly?; What about indoors?; Does salt change what happens?. This iterative structure is closer to real scientific practice than a worksheet that ends with one “correct” answer.

How Current Early-Childhood Guidance Supports Inquiry

Current resources from the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) describe preschoolers posing questions, using tools, predicting outcomes, observing, documenting results, and discussing evidence across investigations that continue for days or weeks. NAEYC’s classroom guidance also describes science learning as involving questions, hypotheses or predictions, observation, experimentation, and representation of findings. This contemporary guidance reinforces the main contribution of Gerde, Schachter, and Wasik while using the broader language of inquiry and science practices.

Science Supports Language, Literacy, Mathematics, and Social Learning

Science creates a natural reason to use language. Children need words to: describe properties; compare objects; explain predictions; ask questions; report findings; disagree constructively. Vocabulary can develop because words are attached to concrete experiences. Science and Literacy. Teachers can connect investigations with literacy through: informational books; labels; class charts; dictated observations; drawing and emergent writing; shared reading related to the investigation. This integration is one of the article’s major strengths. Science and Mathematics. Scientific investigations naturally use mathematics. Children may: count; measure; sort; compare; identify patterns; make simple graphs. For example, a plant investigation may involve measuring height each week and representing changes on a class chart. Science and Social Skills. Inquiry also creates opportunities for: turn-taking; collaboration; listening; negotiating methods; sharing tools; explaining disagreements. Scientific learning is therefore not isolated from social-emotional development.

What Inquiry Can Look Like in a Preschool Classroom

Children notice that toy cars travel different distances down different ramps. The teacher asks: “What could make the car go farther?” Children might test: ramp height; surface texture; different cars; starting position. The teacher helps them change one feature at a time when possible. Example 2: Seeds and Plants. Children plant seeds under different conditions. They can explore: light; water; soil; time; growth. Daily observation makes change visible and creates a reason to record information. Example 3: Shadows. Children can trace shadows outdoors at different times. Questions may include: Why did the shadow move?; When is it longest?; Can we make a bigger shadow?. This combines observation, measurement, drawing, and discussion. Example 4: Water. NAEYC describes young children investigating how different forces move water. Children can use:

droppers; tubes; funnels; containers; sponges. The important part is not merely playing with water. The teacher encourages prediction, observation, comparison, and explanation.

Teacher Knowledge Matters More Than Expensive Materials

The 2013 article discusses barriers to high-quality early science, including teacher confidence and resources. Teachers do not need to know every scientific answer. A productive response can be: “I’m not sure. How could we find out?” This models intellectual honesty and curiosity. Teachers Still Need Content Knowledge. Being willing to investigate does not make subject knowledge irrelevant. Teachers need enough understanding to: choose safe activities; recognize important concepts; avoid reinforcing misconceptions; ask productive questions; connect observations with accurate explanations. Low-Cost Science. Early science does not require expensive laboratory equipment. NAEYC’s 2025 practitioner discussion emphasizes that nature itself can provide rich inquiry opportunities through: soil; trees; gardens; rocks; weather; local organisms. The quality of teacher questioning matters more than the price of the materials.

Long-Term Investigation Is Usually Richer Than One-Off Demonstration. A dramatic demonstration may entertain children, but long-term investigation can produce deeper understanding. Repeated experiences allow children to: revise ideas; compare days; notice exceptions; develop vocabulary; build evidence. This is why growing plants, observing weather, or investigating ramps over time can be more valuable than isolated “science tricks.”

Play and Scientific Inquiry Can Support Each Other

Play and science are not opposites. Children often discover a scientific problem during play. For example, block play may lead to questions about: balance; stability; weight; height; structure. The teacher can extend the investigation without taking ownership away from children. Do Not Turn Preschool Science Into a Rigid Worksheet. A common mistake is interpreting “scientific method” as requiring every four-year-old to complete a formal sequence labeled: Problem → Hypothesis → Procedure → Data → Conclusion. That can make inquiry less developmentally appropriate. The underlying reasoning matters more than terminology. Children Can Revise Ideas. A wrong prediction is not failure. If a child predicts that a large object will always sink and then observes a large piece of wood floating, the discrepancy creates learning. Teachers can ask: “What do you think now?” Science requires willingness to revise ideas when evidence changes.

Equity, Multilingual Learners, and Children With Disabilities

High-quality inquiry should be accessible to all children. Teachers should consider: language differences; disabilities; sensory needs; cultural knowledge; access to materials; different ways of communicating understanding. Multilingual Learners. Scientific investigation can support multilingual children because meaning is carried through: objects; actions; gestures; drawings; repeated vocabulary; peer interaction. Teachers can allow children to use home languages while building new scientific vocabulary. Children With Disabilities. Inquiry can be adapted through: larger tools; visual supports; accessible containers; alternative communication; partner participation; sensory adjustments. The goal is participation in reasoning, not identical physical performance.

Assessment Through Observation and Documentation

Assessment can occur through observation of: questions children ask; predictions; use of evidence; vocabulary; drawings; ability to compare findings; changes in explanation. A teacher can document learning without relying only on formal tests.

Strengths, Limitations, and What Has Changed Since 2013

It presents science as a process rather than a list of facts.; It integrates science with literacy, language, and other curriculum areas.; It provides a structure teachers can apply to many topics.; It treats children as capable investigators.; It recognizes teacher-confidence and resource barriers. Limitations and Cautions. The article should not be read as proof that one fixed seven-step method is the only correct way to teach young children. Important cautions include: inquiry should remain developmentally appropriate; children need content knowledge as well as process skills; teacher guidance matters; activities should be inclusive; one classroom framework does not replace broader curriculum planning. What Has Changed Since 2013?. The language of science education has increasingly emphasized science and engineering practices, sustained inquiry, evidence, explanation, and interdisciplinary learning. Current NAEYC materials still support the core habits highlighted by Gerde and colleagues, but teachers now have a wider set of resources for: inquiry; equity; engineering; environmental exploration; documentation. Connection With the General Scientific Method. MyArticles’ guide to the applications of the scientific method explains hypothesis testing, variables, correlation, causation, experimental design, and common research errors in more formal contexts. Early-childhood classrooms use the same underlying habits in simpler and more exploratory forms.

Questions Teachers Can Use During Inquiry. The quality of teacher language can determine whether an activity stays at the level of entertainment or develops into sustained reasoning. Useful prompts include: “What is the same and what is different?”; “What changed since yesterday?”; “What evidence do we have?”; “Can you show me what you noticed?”; “Does everyone agree? Why or why not?”; “What could we change and try again?”. These questions encourage children to explain rather than guess what answer the teacher wants. Family and Community Connections. Early science can extend beyond the classroom without requiring parents to become science teachers. Families can contribute: photos of seasonal changes; objects from safe nature walks; questions children ask at home; knowledge about gardening, cooking, weather, animals, tools, or local environments. Community knowledge can make investigations culturally meaningful and demonstrate that scientific observation is part of everyday life. Documentation Helps Teachers Plan the Next Step. Documentation is useful not only for assessment. It can guide curriculum. If children’s drawings and comments show that many still believe a heavier object always falls faster or that a plant “eats” soil, the teacher has evidence about what to investigate next. Good documentation therefore supports an inquiry cycle for teachers as well as children: Observe children → interpret their thinking → plan an experience → observe again → revise teaching.

Why the Article Still Matters. The Gerde, Schachter, and Wasik framework remains relevant because it addresses a persistent curriculum problem: science can disappear from early education when teachers feel less confident teaching it than literacy or mathematics. Integrating inquiry across the day offers a practical solution. A single investigation can generate conversation, new vocabulary, measurement, drawing, collaboration, nonfiction reading, and scientific reasoning without creating a completely separate curriculum block. Conclusion. Gerde, Schachter, and Wasik’s 2013 article remains valuable because it treats young children as capable scientific thinkers. Its strongest contribution is not a rigid seven-step formula. It is the idea that observation, questioning, prediction, investigation, evidence, and new questions can organize meaningful early learning. Current NAEYC guidance continues to support this inquiry-centered approach. Children can investigate plants, water, ramps, shadows, soil, motion, weather, and everyday materials while simultaneously developing language, literacy, mathematics, collaboration, and problem-solving skills. The teacher’s role is critical: provide safe and interesting materials, listen to children’s ideas, ask questions that deepen thinking, help children document evidence, and introduce accurate concepts at the right moment. High-quality early science does not require turning preschoolers into miniature laboratory technicians. It requires taking their curiosity seriously and giving them repeated opportunities to ask, test, observe, explain, and wonder again.

Conclusion

The Gerde, Schachter, and Wasik article remains useful because it frames early-childhood science as a process of observing, questioning, predicting, investigating, representing evidence, talking about findings, and generating new questions. The strongest modern interpretation is not to turn preschool science into a miniature adult laboratory method, but to preserve the logic of inquiry in developmentally appropriate ways. Teachers need enough content knowledge to notice children’s ideas and extend them, but expensive equipment is rarely necessary. Long-term investigations, play, documentation, inclusive participation, and purposeful discussion can help young children build scientific habits of mind while also supporting language, mathematics, collaboration, and curiosity.