Advertisement

Curriculum Perspectives

, Volume 37, Issue 1, pp 39–49 | Cite as

Learning and learners in early childhood curricula: Australia, Japan and China

  • Karen Guo
  • Kiyomi Kuramochi
  • WanYing Huang
Research article

Abstract

Conceptions of learning and learners underpin and lend legitimacy to curriculum decisions. This study engages with the national early childhood curriculum documents of three countries, Australia, Japan and China in order to understand their conceptions of learning and learners. The lens through which we explore learning and learners is one that privileges curriculum as an important document in which the concepts of learning and learners are understood. The purpose of this cross-national comparison is twofold: it analyses learning and learners in each curriculum document to consider ways in which the concepts are constituted; and it compares the three curricula with regard to their expressions of the concepts in order to identify how national and global contexts influence early childhood curricula. Concept analysis provides an approach with which to explore learning and learners, and consequently a useful way of understanding them across the three documents. While findings highlight some similar articulations of the concepts, significant differences are detected. It is argued that the documents produce distinctive national and global versions of learning and learners. The study is expected to become a catalyst for national and international discussions of key curriculum terms.

Keywords

Learning, learners Early childhood curriculum Cross-national comparison Australia Japan China 

References

  1. Beckley, P. (2012). Learning in early childhood: A whole child approach from birth to 8. Los Angeles: SAGE.Google Scholar
  2. Burke, R. (2008). Becoming individuals together: socialization in the Japanese preschool sites. A Journal of Social Anthropology and Cultural Studies, 5(2), 135–160.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Carr, M., & Lee, W. (2012). Learning stories: Constructing learner identities in early education. London: Sage Publications.Google Scholar
  4. Chen, J., Masur, A., & McNamee, G. (2011). Young children’s approaches to learning: a sociocultural perspective. Early Child Development & Care, 181(8), 1137–1152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Davis, J., & Elliott, S. (2009). Exploring the resistance: an Australian perspective on educating for sustainability in early childhood. International Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 65–77.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR). (2009). Belonging, being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. ACT: Council of Australian Governments: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  7. Duhn, I. (2012). Globalizing childhood: assembling the bicultural child in the New Zealand early childhood curriculum, Te Whariki. International Critical Childhood Policy Studies, 1(1), 82–104.Google Scholar
  8. Edwards, S. (2014). Towards contemporary play: sociocultural theory and the digital-consumerist context. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 12(3), 219–233.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Gupta, A. (2014). Diverse early childhood education policies and practices: Voices and images from five countries in Asia. New York, NY: Routledge.Google Scholar
  10. Hargraves, V. (2014). Complex possibilities: working theories as an outcome for the early childhood curriculum. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 15(4), 319–328.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hegde, A. V., Sugita, C., Crane-Mitchell, L., & Averett, P. (2014). Japanese nursery and kindergarten teachers’ beliefs and practices regarding developmentally appropriate practices. International Journal of Early Years Education, 22(3), 301–314.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Hsueh, Y., Tobin, J., & Karasawa, M. (2004). The Chinese kindergarten in its adolescence. Prospects, 34(4), 457–469.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Hung, R. (2016). A critique of Confucian learning: on learners and knowledge. Educational Philosophy & Theory, 48(1), 85–96.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Katz, L. (2008). Another look at what young children should be learning. Exchange, 180, 53–56.Google Scholar
  15. Kervin, L. (2016). Powerful and playful literacy learning with digital technologies. Australian Journal of Language and Literacy, 39(1), 64–73.Google Scholar
  16. Law, W. (2013). Globalization, national identity and citizenship education: China’s search for modernization and a modern Chinese citizenry. Frontiers of Education in China, 8(4), 596–627.Google Scholar
  17. Liu, Y., & Feng, X. (2005). Kindergarten educational reform during the past two decades in mainland China: achievement and problems. International Journal of Early Years Education, 13(2), 93–99.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. McLachlan, C., Fleer, M., & Edwards, S. (2012). Early childhood curriculum: Planning, assessment and implementation. New York: Cambridge University Press.Google Scholar
  19. Millei, Z. (2011). Governing through early childhood curriculum, ‘the child’ and ‘community’. European Education, 43(1), 33–55.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Millei, Z., & Jones, A. (2014). The Australian early childhood curriculum and a cosmopolitan imaginary. International Journal of Early Childhood, 46(1), 63–79.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2008). Course of study for kindergarten. Kisaburo Tokai.Google Scholar
  22. Ministry of Education in China. (2001). Guidelines for kindergarten education. Beijing: Beijing Normal University Press.Google Scholar
  23. Mori, M., Nezu, A., Samizo, C., Naito, T., & Ishizuka, M. (2008). The meaning of play and learning for 0–3 year old children in Japan. In P. Samuelsson & M. Fleer (Eds.), Play and learning in early childhood setting: International perspectives (pp. 111–135). London: Springer.Google Scholar
  24. National Institute for Educational Policy Research (2016). Preschool education and care. http://www.nier.go.jp/English/educationjapan/pdf/201109ECEC.pdf. Accessed on 3 March 2016.
  25. Nyland, B., & Ng, J. (2016). International perspectives on early childhood curriculum changes in Singapore and Australia. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(3), 465–476.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Paliologou, I. (2016). Children under five and digital technologies: implications for early years pedagogy. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 24(1), 5–24.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Petriwskyj, A. (2014). Early years national curriculum documents: revisiting inclusive education. Curriculum Perspectives, 34(1), 22–28.Google Scholar
  28. Raban, B. (2011). A new era in early years learning. Research Developments, 26(3), 9–11.Google Scholar
  29. Scahill, J. (2013). A Japanese education. Quadrant, 57(11), 94–97.Google Scholar
  30. Smith, K. (2015). Deconstructing discourses to rupture fairy tales of the “ideal” childhood. In J. Wyn & H. Carhill (Eds.), Handbook of children and youth studies (pp. 21–32). Singapore: Springer Science + Business Media.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Sutterby, J. A. (2012). Early education in a global Context. Bingley, U.K.: Emerald Book Serials and Monographs.Google Scholar
  32. Tobin, J., Hsueh, Y., & Karasawa, M. (2009). Preschool in three cultures revisited: China, Japan and the United States. Chicago: University of Chicago Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Tobin, J., Hayashi, A., & Zhang, J. (2011). Approaches to promoting creativity in Chinese, Japanese and US preschools. In J. Sefton-Green, P. Thomson, K. Jones, & L. Bresler (Eds.), The Routledge international handbook of creative learning (pp. 150–158). Oxon, England: Routledge.Google Scholar
  34. United Nations Committee on the Rights of the Child. (2005). General comment No. 7, Implementing child’s rights in early education. http://www.refworld.org/docid/460bc5a62.html. Accessed 1 March 2016.
  35. Waite-Stupiansky, S., & Cohen, L. E. (2013). Learning across the early childhood curriculum. Bingley: Emerald Group Publishing Limited.Google Scholar
  36. Walker, L. O., & Avant, K. C. (2005). Strategies for theory construction in nursing. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.Google Scholar
  37. Wandschneider, S., & Crosbie, S. (2013). Play, think, link, learn: building language skills in the early years of education. Educating Young Children: Learning & Teaching in the Early Childhood Years, 19(1), 25–26.Google Scholar
  38. Woodhead, M. (2006). Changing perspectives on early childhood: Theory, research and policy. Background paper presented at the Education for All Global Monitoring Report 2007 Strong Foundations: Early Childhood Care and Education. http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001474/147499e.pdf. Accessed 13 April 2016.
  39. Zhou, A., Ma, X., & Hajime, A. (2007). Parental expectation of early childhood education: comparison between China, Japan and Korea. Frontiers of Education in China, 1, 140–147.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Zhu, J., & Zhang, J. (2008). Contemporary trends and developments in early childhood education in China. Early Years, 28(2), 173–182.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Australian Curriculum Studies Association 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Arts and EducationDeakin UniversityBurwoodAustralia
  2. 2.Faculty of EducationTokyo Gakugei UniversityKoganeiJapan
  3. 3.Bangde Vocational CollegeShanghaiChina

Personalised recommendations