International Perspectives of Children’s Learning

Critical comparison of Singapore and New Zealand's model of early years education

Education is influenced by many factors. Other than legislation, social cultural events and policies (Faulkner and Coates, 2013); the learning environment, pedagogy, curriculum and adult’s skills and beliefs (both parents and educators) plays a critical role in the quality of education for young children. According to the Economic Intelligence Unit (2012), early childhood education around the world was benchmarked based on three factors. When enrolling a child into a preschool other than the availability and affordability of the school, the quality of children’s learning is taken into consideration. There are many factors that governs quality therefore, in this paper, we will compare two early childhood curriculum models in two different countries - Singapore’s national curriculum – Nurturing Early Learners (NEL) framework and New Zealand’s national curriculum – Te Whāriki Curriculum. As Singapore’s quality of early childhood education is ranked at a low 30th position as compared to New Zealand at 6th position, the comparison of these two models will clarify why the results reflected a vast difference. This paper will discuss the comparison of the models based on their history, underpinning philosophies, curriculum, and the learning environment in line with an educator’s professional philosophy.

History

Singapore’s cultural influences dated all the way back to key historical events such as the British colony in 1819, the Japanese Occupation during World War II (1942-1945), merger with the Federation of Malaya in 1963 and gaining her independence after the expulsion from Malaysia in 1965 (Lim, 2007). Once under the British colonisation, Singapore became one of the Commonwealth countries after gaining independence (Ministry of Foreign Affairs, 2019). Therefore, the English language was being recognised by the country even though the national language is Malay. Over the years, this small and independent nation has adopted and integrated many educational practices from other countries such as United Kingdom, the United States of America and Australia (Ng, 2017). After cumulative development and change, Singapore’s educational system grew to be adaptable to changes. In the pursuit of excellence, the NEL Framework was published by the Singapore’s Ministry of Education (MOE) in 2012 as a guide for early childhood educators in designing and implementing a national curriculum for young children aged four to six years old (Ministry of Education, 2012).

The birth of New Zealand’s early childhood education was in 1889, Dunedin (McLachlan, 2011) where the it started out as a means to care for the children of the low-income families while their parents were at work. McLachlan (2011) shared that in 1935, changes to the education sector were made after the first Labour government was introduced. The changes were based on John Dewey’s theory of active participation through real life experiences for young children’s learning and Freudian theories ‘free play’. In the mid-80s, after the election of the fourth Labour government, early childhood education which was previously governed by the Department of Social Welfare, had moved to the Department of Education (McLachlan, 2011). This development provided new regulations and financial support that enabled the early childhood industry to be established New Zealand.

In 1993, Helen May and Margaret Carr in consultation with the natives and representatives of various early childhood group, developed and distributed a draft of the Te Whāriki – a national curriculum. The final version of the national curriculum was revised and distributed in three years later. The curriculum is designed for children from birth to school entry – typically at five years old as early childhood education is not compulsory in New Zealand (Ministry of Education, 2017). Twenty years later, the curriculum was revised again to recognise and reflect the societal changes, shifts in policy and research around early childhood pedagogy and practice. Similar to the original, Te Whāriki, the new curriculum Te Whāriki a te Kōhanga Reo share the same framework of principles and strands, emphasising on the development of knowledge, skills, attitudes and dispositions that supports lifelong learning.

The NEL Framework and Te Whāriki curriculum were both developed by the country’s government to provide early childhood providers with a guide to designing and implementing a curriculum for children’s learning. The difference is in New Zealand, all licensed early childhood centres are required to enact a curriculum within their service however the use of Te Whāriki is not an explicit requirement (McLachlan, 2011). Unlike in Singapore, every provider of early childhood education is required to use the NEL framework in their curriculum in order to be awarded the Singapore Pre-School Accreditation Framework (SPARKS) certification – a national accreditation for a good quality education and care awarded by the Early Childhood Development Agency in Singapore (Ministry of Education, 2012). Both frameworks have been revised to reflect the growth and development of the respective countries in terms of educational policies, social cultural events and new legislations.

Underpinning Philosophies

Both frameworks reflect the works of Lev Vygotsky’s sociocultural theory for children’s learning. Vygotsky believes that social interaction plays a critical role in children’s learning and development (Feeney et al., 2019). In the NEL Framework, early childhood educators play a role of a facilitator (Ministry of Education, 2013) as they assist in shaping children’s social interactions with their friends, community and their environment to extend their learning. The NEL Framework advocates Vygotsky’s view of a social child by recognising that their development is influenced by the various social and cultural contexts they live in. Similarly, can be said about the Te Whāriki curriculum as it is densely influenced by New Zealand’s culture to begin with. The curriculum builds on the notion of Vygotsky’s ideas as early childhood educators encourage and support children’s learning by affirming their identity and culture, reinforcing their relationship with knowledge and creating positive expectations for their learning (Ministry of Education, 2017). In this context, both models share the similarities of how their curriculum depends on social interaction with parents, educators, peers and the community. However, The NEL Framework also draws from John Dewey’s inquiry-based theory whereby the child is viewed as an active learner through authentic experiences and active participation in the process of inquiry (Feeney et al., 2019). This is reflected in the curriculum when the early childhood educators are encouraged to plan their curriculum with the belief that children are curious, active and competent learners. As for the Te Whāriki curriculum, it does not share the same belief as Dewey even though it reflects his theory of active participation through real life experiences for young children’s learning. In its curriculum guide, it states that the curriculum strongly believes in Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system instead, as they believe that children’s learning should be supported by cultivating their relationships with their family (microsystem), community (mesosystem) and wider local (exosystem), national (macrosystem) and global (chronosystem) influences (Vélez-Agosto et al., 2017; Ministry of Education, 2017). This supports one out of the four of the principals of the curriculum – family and community.

The NEL Framework also draws from Jean Piaget’s cognitive development theory which is missing from the other model. The Te Whāriki curriculum channels Jerome Bruner’s constructivist theory instead which is a sharp contrast to the beliefs of Piaget stages of development. According to Bruner, there are three modes of representation – enactive (action based), iconic (image based) and symbolic (language based) (McLeod, 2019). Piaget’s theory of cognitive development consists of three basic components – schemas, adaptation and the four stages of cognitive development: sensorimotor, pre-operational, concrete operational and formal operational (Feeney et al., 2019).

Curriculum and Learning Environment

With the influence of the underpinning philosophies of each model, when designing and implementing curriculum for young children’s learning and development, both models highlights the role of early childhood educators and the importance of children’s learning environment. In Singapore, it is important for children to be ready for formal education in Primary One (Ministry of Education, 2013), therefore the NEL Framework consists of six learning areas for early childhood educators to focus on when planning a progressive curriculum for young children. The six areas are: (1) aesthetics and creative expression which focuses on both fine and performance arts, (2) discovery of the world which focuses on finding out why and how things occur through investigations, (3) language and literacy which focuses on building a strong foundation for a good command of the English language, (4) motor skills development which focuses on developing healthy habits and safety awareness as well as building a strong mind and body, (5) numeracy which helps improve cognitive development through simple relationships and patterns using numbers and spatial concepts, lastly, (6) social and emotional development focuses on instilling strong moral values, respect for diversity and developing positive relationships with others (Ministry of Education, 2012). The role of an early childhood educator is to facilitate the learning areas while nurturing six learning dispositions encapsulated in the acronym PRAISE – perseverance, reflectiveness, appreciation, inventiveness, sense of wonder and curiosity and engagement (Ministry of Education, 2012). When the learning areas and dispositions are carefully constructed into a lesson, it aims to prepare children to become independent adult learners, active contributors to their community and proud citizens who appreciates the values and heritage of Singapore.

The Te Whāriki framework does adopts a social pedagogic approach, whereby it is child-centred and requires early childhood educator to respond to children’s interests through quality interaction. Their learning outcomes are based on principles and strands as seen in the table below:

Principles	Strands
A curriculum that empowers children to learn and grow Reflects the holistic way children learn and grow Wider world of family and community is an important part of the curriculum Learning through responsive and reciprocal relationships with their ecological systems	Children’s health and well-being are protected and nurtured Instils a sense of belonging Every contribution by a child towards their learning is valued Communication through language and symbols of their own and other cultures are promoted and protected Learning through active exploration of the environment

(Blaiklock, 2010)

There are no guidelines on subject content or learning areas as these learning outcomes are ‘indicative’ rather than ‘definitive’.

Both models highlight the importance of using children’s environment as the third teacher. They encourage educators to build a relationship between the child and their immediate environment to promote a sense of belonging and develop curiosity to discover new interests and knowledge. However, New Zealand has more natural environment to provide children the space to explore such as rivers, mountains and hills as compared to the urban city of Singapore whereby children’s interaction with the natural environment is limited to outdoor spaces such as parks and playgrounds. The indoor classrooms are required to provide a safe space with child-sized materials and resources for children’s independent learning.

Professional Philosophy

As an early childhood educator in Singapore, it is evident through observation and assessments that children are capable of learning many things when provided with the right guidance and encouragement. This is strongly supported by Lev Vygotsky’s zone of proximal development theory where educators are facilitators for children to reach their optimal potential (McLeod, 2018). The sociocultural theorist also believes that it is important for children to learn from knowledgeable others. In addition to sharing the perspective as him, as an early childhood educator with five years of experience, it is also evident that children learn best through personal experience after observing their growth and development. Education theorist John Dewey also supports this belief when he argued that the quality of an educational experience is important and he stresses on how the social and interactive process of learning is critical in children’s learning (Feeney et al., 2019). With both theorist supporting this professional philosophy as an early childhood educator, lessons and activities planned with the guide of the Singapore’s early childhood education framework – “Nurturing Early Learners: A Curriculum for Kindergartens in Singapore” (Ministry of Education, 2013) for children’s holistic development has proven to be beneficial for both educators and children. Every educator has a set of personal belief that ignites the passion to teach young children, therefore when the educator’s set of belief and the pedagogy the school adopts are not in line; it would be difficult for the educator to design and implement quality education for children’s learning.

My teaching philosophy is that a child learns best when he/she is happy. Therefore, it is important to build a safe and trustworthy relationship between the child and the adult before constructing new knowledge and learning experiences. Both models compared in this paper supports this belief, however, with the culture of excellence in Singapore, the Te Whāriki model will most likely not be accepted by the society, simply because of the lack of focus on subject content. The learning areas are woven through the strands instead of having definitive learning goals for the different learning areas as given in the NEL framework. Personally, it would be a challenge for an educator who is not properly equipped with the necessary knowledge and skills to design and implement a specialised content for young children’s learning. Furthermore, the NEL Framework focuses on getting young children ready for formal schooling in Primary One with proper learning goals in line with school readiness, as compared to Te Whāriki model which is densely focused on reaffirming children’s identity and culture. The understanding of learning areas such as science, mathematics and the arts are woven through its strands rather than focused on as a subject content. Taking into consideration how Bronfenbrenner’s ecological system affects children’s growth, development and learning; the Te Whāriki curriculum, despite its strong social pedagogic approach, it does not fit into Singapore’s multi-racial and academic driven culture.

Conclusion

In conclusion, Singapore is ranked at a low 30th position as compared to New Zealand being in the top 10 of the survey conducted by the Economic Intelligence Unit (2012) due to the fact that Singapore’s early childhood education is relatively new as compared to New Zealand. The NEL Framework was only launched in 2012 as compared to the Te Whāriki model which has been around and revised for over twenty years. Despite the lack of definitive learning goals, the later has been a huge part of shaping New Zealand’s early childhood education sector for two decades. It is a model accepted by the country and its people as it is culturally appropriate and signifies the roots and history of the country into young children. The NEL Framework has its strengths in driving young children in Singapore to be independent and confident lifelong learners, however, it still requires revision and assessment to ensure that the framework delivers a quality education for young children’s learning. As quality is measured by various factors, aside from the models itself, the skill set of an educator designing and implementing activities based on either model should also be considered. In the event the two countries swap their models, the educators will need the necessary training in using the new models to deliver quality education for young children even though both models stand out in their own way. With similar underpinning theories but different learning goals, it all comes down to the educator’s beliefs and skill set when delivering meaningful learning experiences for young children.

References

Blaiklock, K. (2010) Te Whāriki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum: is it effective?. International Journal of Early Years Education, 18(3), pp. 201-212.

Economist Intelligence Unit. (2012) Starting well: Benchmarking early education across the world, London: The Economist Unit Limited.

Faulkner, D., and Coates, E. (2013) Early childhood policy and practice in England:twenty years of change. International Journal of Early Years, 21(2-3), pp. 244- 263.

Feeney, S., Moravcik, E., Nolte, S. (2019) Who am I in the lives of children?: An introduction to early childhood education. 11th edn. New York: Pearson Education, Inc.

Lim, M., and Y, S. (2007) Exploring Colonization: Situating young children’s experiences within the multiple contexts of globalizating Singapore. Teachers College, Columbia University.

McLachlan, C. (2011) An analysis of New Zealand’s changing history, policies and approaches to early childhood education. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(3), pp. 36-44.

McLeod, S. (2018) Lev Vygotsky. Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/vygotsky.html [Accessed 1 December 2019].

McLeod, S. (2019) Bruner – Learning Theory in Education. Available at: https://www.simplypsychology.org/bruner.html [Accessed 3 December 2019].

Ministry of Education. (2012) Raising the quality of kindergartens: Greater MOE support. [press release] 20 March. Available at: https://www.moe.gov.sg/news/press-releases/raising- the-quality-of kindergartens--greater-moe-support [Accessed 16 December 2019].

Ministry of Education. (2013) Nurturing Early Learners: A Curriculum for Kindergartens in Singapore. Educators’ Guide: Overview. Available at: https://www.nel.sg/qql/slot/u143/Resources/Downloadable/pdf/nel-guide/nel-edu-guide- overview.pdf [Accessed 7 December 2019].

Ministry of Education. (2017) Te Whāriki He whāriki mātauranga mō ngā mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early Childhood Curriculum. Available at: https://education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/ELS-Te-Whariki-Early- Childhood-Curriculum-ENG-Web.pdf [Accessed 29 November 2019].

Ministry of Foreign Affairs. (2019) The Commonwealth. Available at: https://www.mfa.gov.sg/SINGAPORES-FOREIGN-POLICY/International Organisations/The-Commonwealth [Accessed 13 December 2019].

Ng, J. (2011) Preschool curriculum and policy changes in Singapore. Asia-Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 4(1), pp. 91-122.

Vélez-Agosto, N. M., Soto-Crespo, J. G., Vizcarrondo-Oppenheimer, M., Vega Molina, S. & Coll, C. G. (2017) Bronfenbrenner’s bioecological theory revision: Moving culture from the macro into the micro. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 12(5), pp. 900-910.