# data[].attributes.body
Finally, it can be concluded that New Zealand's high-quality ECE services take precedence over lower-quality ECE services, allowing New Zealand to lay the groundwork for future ECE globally. New Zealand holds promising innovative change in ECE, however, these policies haven’t been in place long enough to determine satisfactory results. The dynamic combination of consecutive powers at work in ECE policy needs to be resolved in order to achieve optimum learning outcomes for the children. This leaves us with the question as to whether or not ECE in New Zealand will continue to work in unison as major political parties don’t show interest in full public provision of ECE services. The value of sharing precise societal ideas and outcomes for children still remains a valuable underlying factor of ECE policy in New Zealand and as such there exists an urge for the current policy to cater better for societal change. Again, there is lack of sufficient research on ECE in New Zealand.

# data[].attributes.headline
my part so far. Let me know if stuff doesnt make sense 

# data[].attributes.subject
my part so far. Let me know if stuff doesnt make sense 

# data[].attributes.body
I have to finish it just putting here so I don't delete it lol

# data[].attributes.body
Top three readings -highlighted in purple
Curriculum and Assessment- Aoife (yellow)
Public and private system and professionalization- Aoibheann (green)
School readiness and purpose and focus- Lauryn (blue)

# data[].attributes.body
what does ECCE look like in New Zealand, how do they approach curriculum, care and education, school readiness, pay and conditions etc and how does this speak to international policy and understandings of high quality practice.

# data[].attributes.headline
Early Childhood Education Policy Co-ordination under the Auspices of the Department/Ministry of Education: A Case Study of New Zealand. Early Childhood and Family Policy Series

# data[].attributes.subject
Early Childhood Education Policy Co-ordination under the Auspices of the Department/Ministry of Education: A Case Study of New Zealand. Early Childhood and Family Policy Series

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This UNESCO-supported case study report documents aspects of New Zealand's integration of the administrative auspices for early childhood care and education (ECCE) into the national education authority, the Department/Ministry of Education. The report is presented in nine sections. Following the introductory section providing a historical overview of early childhood education in New Zealand and describing early childhood services and shifts in their administration, Section 2 outlines the content prior to the decision to integrate ECCE administration into one department, thereby providing the context to give child care the same government support as ECCE services. Section 3 details the rationale for the administrative integration of ECCE. Section 4 presents the processes involved in administrative integration at the national level. Section 5 describes the processes for implementing the three major changes involved in administrative integration: (1) transfer of administrative responsibilities; (2) integrated training programs; and (3) Before Five policies. Section 6 outlines further developments following the administrative transfer of child care to the Department of Education, including the transfer of administration of the Maori language immersion centers from the Department of Maori Affairs to the Ministry of Education and the expansion of post-graduate early childhood study. Section 7 discusses the impact and subsequent developments of administrative integration, including increased participation in ECCE services, increasing concerns about program quality, and development of a strategic plan for early childhood education by the Labour party. Section 8 discusses remaining issues and challenges, including improving the coordination across ministries, achieving even-handedness by the two government funders of ECCE, and improving policy coherence for ECCE services. (Contains 69 references.) (KB)

Descriptors: Case Studies, Change Strategies, Child Care, Cooperation, Early Childhood Education, Educational History, Foreign Countries, Government Role, Maori, National Curriculum, Preschool Curriculum, Program Administration, Program Descriptions, Program Implementation, Public Policy, Trend Analysis

Early Childhood and Family Education Section, ED/BAS/ECF, UNESCO, 7 Place de Fontenoy, 75352 Paris 07 SP, France.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
ERIC - ED468561 - Early Childhood Education Policy Co-ordination under the Auspices of the Department/Ministry of Education: A Case Study of New Zealand. Early Childhood and Family Policy Series., 2002-Mar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This UNESCO-supported case study report documents aspects of New Zealand's integration of the administrative auspices for early childhood care and education (ECCE) into the national education authority, the Department/Ministry of Education. The report is presented in nine sections.

# data[].attributes.headline
Is New Zealand a world leader in Early Childhood Education? An examination of the empirical evidence in recent reports

# data[].attributes.subject
Is New Zealand a world leader in Early Childhood Education? An examination of the empirical evidence in recent reports

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NEW ZEALAND HAS A reputation for being a world leader in early childhood education (ECE); a reputation built on the development of innovative policies, high participation rates, high levels of teacher education, and the implementation of a national curriculum, Te Whāriki. A number of national and international reports have been used to support statements about the high quality of ECE in New Zealand. A closer examination of these reports, however, shows they provide insufficient attention to empirical information about children's learning and in some cases appear to be based on opinion rather than evidence. This article suggests that a downside of the belief that New Zealand is a world leader in ECE is that it may lead to complacency and a lack of willingness towards making evidence-based changes that could improve the wellbeing and learning of young children.

References

Carr, M. (2013). Making a borderland of contested spaces into a meeting place: The relationship from a New Zealand perspective. In Moss, P. (Ed.), Early childhood and compulsory education: Reconceptualising the relationship (pp. 92-111). London, UK: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Early Education Federation. (2013). Position paper: Quality in ECE. Wellington, NZ.
Google Scholar

Education Review Office. (2011). Literacy in early childhood services: Good practice. Wellington, NZ: Author. Retrieved from www.ero.govt.nz/assets/Uploads/Literacy-in-Early-Childhood-Services-Good-Practice.pdf.
Google Scholar

Lee, W. , Carr, M. , Soutar, B. , & Mitchell, L. (2013). Understanding the Te Whāriki approach: Early years education in practice. London, UK: Routledge.
Google Scholar

May, H. (2013). The New Zealand 'journey': Lessons from Te Whāriki 1993-2013. Keynote address at the Aistear in Action: Pathways to Quality Drumcondra.
Google Scholar

Melhuish, E. (2016). Longitudinal research and early years policy development in the UK. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 10(3). http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40723-016-0019-1
Google Scholar

Ministry of Education. (2014b). Terms of reference: Advisory group on early learning. Wellington, NZ: Author. Retrieved from https://education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/News/TORAdvisoryGroupOnEarlyLearning.pdf.
Google Scholar

New Zealand Educational Institute. (2016, Winter). 20 years of Te Whāriki. Education Aotearoa, p. 27.
Google Scholar

New Zealand Kindergartens Inc. (2014b). Kindergarten: A leader in early childhood education. Wellington, New Zealand: Author. Retrieved 28 June, 2017, from www.nzkindergarten.org.nz/LiteratureRetrieve.aspx?ID=127877.
Google Scholar

Ritchie, J. , & Buzzelli, C. (2011). Te Whāriki-the early childhood curriculum of Aotearoa New Zealand. In File, N. , Mueller, J.J. & Wisneski, D.B. (Eds.), Curriculum in early childhood education. Re-examined, rediscovered, renewed (pp. 146-159). London, UK: Routledge.
Google Scholar

Te One, S. (2013). Te Whāriki: Historical accounts and contemporary influences 1990-2012. In Nuttall, J. (Ed.), Weaving Te Whāriki: Aotearoa New Zealand's early childhood curriculum framework in theory and practice (2nd ed., pp. 7-34). Wellington, NZ: NZCER Press.
Google Scholar

Yoshikiwa, H. , Weiland, C. , Brooks-Gunn, J. , Burchinall, M. R. , Espinosa, L. M. , Gormley, W. T. , Ludwig, J. , Magnuson, D. P. , Zaslow, M. J. (2013). Investing in our future: The evidence base on preschool education. Ann Arbor, MI: Society for Research in Child Development.
Google Scholar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Is New Zealand a World Leader in Early Childhood Education? An Examination of the Empirical Evidence in Recent Reports - Ken Blaiklock, 2017

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NEW ZEALAND HAS A reputation for being a world leader in early childhood education (ECE); a reputation built on the development of innovative policies, high participation rates, high levels of teacher education, and the implementation of a national curriculum, Te Whāriki.

# data[].attributes.headline
New Zealand early childhood curriculum: The politics of collaboration

# data[].attributes.subject
New Zealand early childhood curriculum: The politics of collaboration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
(PDF) New Zealand early childhood curriculum: The politics of collaboration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PDF | The New Zealand early childhood curriculum, Te Whāriki (Ministry of Education [MoE],1996), is frequently hailed as a community inspired... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

# data[].attributes.headline
Constructions of Childhood in Early Childhood Education Policy Debate in New Zealand

# data[].attributes.subject
Constructions of Childhood in Early Childhood Education Policy Debate in New Zealand

# data[].attributes.headline
Te Whāriki revisited: How approaches to assessment can make valued learning visible

# data[].attributes.subject
Te Whāriki revisited: How approaches to assessment can make valued learning visible

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
In 2016, Te Whāriki: He Whāriki Mātauranga mō ngā Mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early Childhood Curriculum (Te Whāriki) (Ministry of Education [MoE], 2017), New Zealand's early childhood curriculum was updated for the first time in 20 years. Although the gazetted principles, strands and goals of the curriculum were not part of the update, the remainder of the curriculum was revised to meet the changing social and linguistic context, the revised national curriculum and associated documents, reviews of early childhood practice and relevant theory and research. The updated curriculum has reduced learning outcomes (from 118 to 20) and stronger guidance on the need for both informal and formal approaches to assessment to ensure children's learning in each strand are assessed. This article reflects on the changes between the 1996 and 2017 version of the curriculum in relation to assessment and the rationale for the changes. Approaches to both 'in the moment' and planned assessment are explored and the usefulness of approaches which enable teachers to reflect on 'discrepant data' and support children's learning in each strand are examined.

Introduction

In 2016 and early 2017, I was a member of the appointed writing team for the update of Te Whāriki. The writing team comprised both practising teachers and academics and we brought a range of expertise to the task. In addition, the Ministry had a group of internal and external experts who reviewed drafts of the document before and after it was released for consultation. Explanations of the process for the update are available on the New Zealand Ministry of Education website. I brought my research interests and expertise in curriculum design, assessment and evaluation to the rewrite, along with a platform of research on the teaching and learning of domain (subject) knowledge in early year's curriculum. Perhaps not surprisingly, I was allocated the tasks of leading the revision of the learning outcomes, and revising advice for assessment, evaluation and guidance for pedagogies for infants, toddlers and young children, along with input on the theoretical frameworks. Although each member had a portfolio of work, we had input into each section and the whole process of writing was collaborative. I have previously written about the reasons for the choice of 20 learning outcomes and the theoretical positions included (McLachlan, 2017), so here I will explore some of the things teachers may need to think about assessment as they enact the new curriculum.

Te Whāriki 1996 versus 2017: The context and rationales for change

The Minister of Education in the former National Government, Hekia Parata, commissioned the update, based on the recommendation of the Early Years Advisory Group report (MoE, 2015) to strengthen curriculum implementation and early learning continuity. She explains on Te Kete Ipurangi (see http://tewhariki.tki.org.nz/en/the-story-of-te-whariki/) that the revised curriculum "includes a stronger focus on bicultural practice, the importance of language, culture, and identity, and the inclusion of all children. The learning outcomes have been reviewed and condensed to twenty to enable a greater focus on "what matters here" when designing local curriculum".

The Minister determined there would be no changes to the gazetted parts of the curriculum - the principles, strands and goals. Beyond that, the guidance of the Early Years Advisory Group report (MoE, 2015), Education Review Office (ERO) reviews, recent research and societal changes needed to be reflected in the update. The further development of Te Whāriki a te Kōhanga Reo (curriculum for Kōhanga Reo, total immersion Māori language nests) to become a curriculum document in its own right (rather than Part B) was a major change, reflecting increased valuing of Māori immersion education.

The revised document includes stronger links to the New Zealand Curriculum (MoE, 2007), Te Mārautanga o Aotearoa (MoE, 2008), the national curriculum for Māori medium in Aotearoa/New Zealand, and Te Aho Matua (Tākao, 2010), a philosophical document that sets out principles for kura kaupapa Māori, total immersion primary schools. There is also the reduced number of learning outcomes - from 118 to 20 - and a stronger focus on assessment, progression and continuity in early learning. Kaiako (the term used for teachers, either trained or untrained) are portrayed as 'intentional' in the update and responsibilities for teachers are aligned to the practising teacher criteria (Education Council, 2015). There are suggestions leadership, organisation and practice, and questions for reflection for each strand. There is also revised guidance on assessment, which is the primary focus of this paper.

The revision was based on mounting evidence that the early childhood sector was struggling with implementation (ERO, 2007, 2013, & 2016). The ERO (2013) review of implementation of Te Whāriki in particular showed there was considerable variation in how the curriculum was implemented, and that teachers were struggling with implementing the principles and strands, assessing learning outcomes and reviewing the effectiveness of their local curriculum. Although New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI) (2014), the teachers' union, claimed that this was a result of increased privatisation of the sector and the reduction in funding for centres (from 100% for qualified staff to 80% under the National Government), the ERO reports revealed that centres with 100% qualified staff were also included in the percentages of centres seen to be struggling with implementation. Of particular concern was the ERO (2015) review of curriculum for infants and toddlers, which showed that centres with 100% qualified staff were included in the list of 'least responsive' services and were not promoting the strands of communication and exploration for children.

The Early Years Advisory Group report (MoE, 2015) stated that implementation of the curriculum had been subject to 'drift', the curriculum needed updating to recognise significant changes in society, needed alignment with the key competencies of the New Zealand curriculum to support transition to school, and that children's progress needed greater attention, using assessment for learning strategies. A stronger focus on children's learning outcomes was also recommended. An ERO (2016) review that synthesised 17 national reports identified the following features of effective practice in relation to Te Whāriki:

Anchors for practice - Te Whāriki and priorities for children's learning

Designing and implementing a responsive curriculum that responds to children with diverse backgrounds and needs

Positive foundations for children's learning: social and emotional competency; literacy and mathematics; and transition to school

Pedagogical leadership

Effective teaching practice

Assessment for learning

Internal evaluation for improvement

Learning partnerships for a responsive curriculum

It was with this backdrop that the revision of Te Whāriki was undertaken. A description of the process and the feedback received on the draft sent out for consultation is available on Te Kete Ipurangi (see http://tewhariki.tki.org.nz/en/the-story-of-te-whariki/). The next section will look more specifically at how assessment is conceptualised in the revised curriculum document.

The revised guidance on assessment

The original version of Te Whāriki (Ministry of Education, 1996) had this to say about assessment:

The purpose of assessment is to give useful information about children's learning and development to the adults providing the programme and to children and their families. Assessment of children's learning and development involves intelligent observation by experienced and knowledgeable adults for the purpose of improving the programme. Assessment occurs minute by minute as adults listen, watch and interact with a child or with groups of children. These continuous observations provide the basis of information for more in-depth assessment and evaluation that is integral to making decisions on how best to meet children's needs. In-depth assessment requires adults to observe changes in children's behaviour and learning and to link these to learning goals. Assessment contributes to evaluation, revision and development of programmes (p. 29).

There is further advice on avoiding comparisons between children, and to be wary of generalising from snapshots or individual pieces of information collected.

There are several issues arising from this definition of assessment. First, the only named method of assessment is observation, but the types and frequency are not specified. My own doctoral research (McLachlan-Smith, 1996), completed prior to the release of Te Whāriki, revealed kindergarten teachers using a range of methods for assessment, which included different types of observations and teacher: child interactions over games and puzzles to check oral language and domain knowledge such as literacy and mathematics. These practices were based on their understandings of learning and development, and interpretation was mainly based on stage theories such as Piaget's (1952). However, they did not use the dreaded checklists, which many see as the only alternative form of assessment, which feedback on the draft of Te Whāriki 2017 suggests.

Second, the purpose of assessment seems primarily focussed on improvement of the program, with only one sentence talking about the need for more in-depth assessment to help children's learning needs. This focus on programme improvement, rather than supporting children's learning may have caused confusion about the purpose of assessment. Certainly, ERO (2007, 2016) reports highlight centres having difficulties with assessment. These difficulties may stem from the focus on observation, programme improvement and the later emphasis on using learning stories as the primary tool for assessment in the assessment exemplars provided in Kei Tua o te Pae (MoE, 2005). Perkins (2013) has critiqued Kei Tua o te Pae for providing inadequate guidance on how teachers should observe children, understand the difference between formative and summative assessment, and write an effective learning story.

The Kei Tua o te Pae assessment exemplars, which were collected from centres around the country, and released in 20 books between 2005 and 2009, were developed to help support teachers with assessment related to Te Whāriki. All services received hard copies of the resource and the MoE funded professional development (PD) to support implementation during this period. In addition to this investment ($2.5 million annually for five years), MoE funded the development of Te Whatu Pōkeka (Ways of knowing) (MoE, 2009), the Kaupapa Māori (Māori principles or ideas) assessment exemplars, were developed to support total immersion teachers' engagement in assessment practices that align with kaupapa Māori approaches to assessment. Te Whatu Pōkeka also supports the notion of formative use of assessment information.

The Education Review Office (2007) report on assessment found wide variability in how the sector was coping with assessment using Te Whāriki and that teachers were having difficulties with using the learning story framework, despite the PD and the Kei Tua o te Pae resources. The review showed that about three quarters of centres had attended PD on the use of Kei Tua o te Pae, yet one third of services were not linking their assessment practices to current theory, research and Kei Tua o te Pae, suggesting PD and the resources had not changed practice. Furthermore, in half of centres reviewed parents' and children's 'voices'were not visible and the documentation was descriptive and focussed on enjoyment, rather than focussed on children's learning.

As argued elsewhere (McLachlan, 2008; Blaiklock, 2008), Kei Tua o te Pae states that "assessment for learning implies that we have some clear aims or goals for children's learning" (MoE, 2005, Book 1, p. 9) and that Te Whāriki provides the framework for defining what is to be learned. Kei Tua o te Pae urges teachers to make sure that "assessment notes what children can do when they are 'at their best' (MoE, 2005), which may have fuelled the prevailing discourse on only documenting children's strengths and overlooking the fact that some children will need more in-depth assessment, as the curriculum advocates. However, the assessment exemplars provided in Kei Tua o te Pae may not have helped teachers to understand the 'how' and the 'what' of assessment as much as anticipated. Stuart, Aitken, Gould and Meade's (2008) study of services that had participated in Kei Tua o te Pae PD showed that although teachers' awareness of assessment strengthened, they did not always use data collected for learning stories and included snapshots of events, rather than demonstrating continuity in children's learning.

A later review by ERO on how centres were implementing Te Whāriki found that many centres were using it as a selective curriculum (i.e. not implementing all principles and strands) and in most of the services there was little evidence of reference to goals and indicative learning outcomes in assessment, planning and evaluation processes (ERO, 2013). As previously discussed, the synthesis of 17 reports (ERO, 2016) highlights that services that are effective are able to use "assessment for learning" approaches to assessment and to create strong learning partnerships.

The lack of clarity around assessment and the difficulties that teachers were facing in using the recommended approaches to assessment were motivation to reconsider the guidance given (MoE, 2015). One of the responsibilities of teachers in the update is to be "attentive to learning and able to make this visible through assessment practices that give children agency and enhance their mana" (MoE, 2017, p. 59). The opening statement reads as follows: "Assessment makes valued learning visible. Kaiako use assessment to find out about what children know and can do, what interests them, how they are progressing, what new learning opportunities are presented and where additional support may be required"(MoE, 2017, p. 63).

This statement indicates that kaiako will know what the valued learning is. Elsewhere in the document, it is made clear that valued learning is the 20 learning outcomes, along with the aspirations for the child of parents and whānau. The update also more explicitly explains that assessment will be both spontaneous and planned, as the following quote indicates:

Assessment is both informal and formal. Informal assessment occurs in the moment as kaiako listen to, observe, participate with and respond to children who are engaged in everyday experiences and events. It leads directly to changes in the teaching and learning environment that will help children reach immediate and longer-term goals. More formal, documented assessment takes place when kaiako write up observations of children's engagement with the curriculum. They may also take photographs, make audio or video recordings and collect examples of children's work. By analysing such assessment information, gathered over time, kaiako are able to track changes in children's capabilities, consider possible pathways for learning, and plan to support these (MoE, 2017, p. 63)

This quote and the guidance that follows shows that teachers are expected to use a range of methods to assess how children are making progress over time. Teachers also need to understand that gathering evidence, such as photos, is not assessment and they will need to spend time synthesising and analysing any data gathered to create the assessment.

Although observation is still a valuable tool, it is not the only tool, and teachers will need to use a greater range of data gathering strategies to identify valued learning and 'make learning visible' (p. 63). Teachers will not be able to assess progress over time unless they use both planned and spontaneous assessment and this is a shift from the previous "minute by minute" guidance from 1996. Informal assessment thus leads to immediate changes to pedagogies, resources utilised or the organisation of the learning environment.

Formal assessment is used much more deliberately to identify if children are learning across all the strands of the curriculum and if children need support to achieve any specific learning outcomes. This will of course also mean that teachers are unable to be selective about only documenting learning in some strands of the curriculum, as ERO (2013) identified, and will need to ensure that children do get opportunities for learning in all strands. This approach also requires centres to have a system for gathering data over time and for reflection on how the information is used for curriculum planning over the short, medium and long term.

The next section will look at some ways in which teachers might think about assessment within the revised curriculum framework.

Moving forward: Assessing children using Te Whāriki 2017

Elsewhere, I have argued for teachers to use a broader conception of assessment with young children (McLachlan, Edwards, Margrain & McLean, 2013). The reason is, as Hipkins (2007) argues, that learning is more like a roadmap than necessarily orderly and sequential and therefore teachers have to be alert to children's diverse learning pathways and journeys. However, teachers need to know of the usual progressions in learning and development, as this can help them to identify when children are not progressing typically and may need further support.

Within this conception of assessment, the concept of 'need' is synonymous with 'right' for the very young; children have the right to be assessed appropriately and to receive focused support for any identified learning needs or to have their learning strengths extended (McLachlan et al., 2013).

The reference to the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC) in the revised curriculum signals the obligation on teachers to support children's rights to health and education. The curriculum states: "Kaiako work to uphold and protect children's rights, interests, and points of view from the earliest ages" (p. 61). Assessment is one of the ways in which children can have their needs and rights recognised. The dominant discourse on only assessing children's strengths is arguably problematic, as ignoring children's learning needs may negate their legislated rights to an education. An obvious example is the identified challenges children are facing with oral language development in early childhood (ERO, 2017); teachers must assess oral language and arrange early intervention as required.

The MoE's Assessment Online website identifies three distinct approaches to assessment: 'assessment of learning', 'assessment for learning' and 'assessment as learning'. Assessment of learning examines what children know or can do - it is usually retrospective and looks at learning that has occurred and skills and abilities achieved.

Assessment for learning is described as the process of gathering and analysing information as evidence about what children know, can do and understand. It is part of an on-going cycle, which includes planning, documenting and evaluating children's learning (Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations, 2010, p. 17). Typically learning stories involve elements of both assessment of and for learning, as they have both summative and formative elements. Assessment as learning focusses on children and emphasises assessment as a process of metacognition (knowledge of one's own thought processes).

Assessment as learning is an active process of cognitive restructuring that occurs when children interact with new ideas and critically assess their own progress. We are likely to see assessment as learning when children are involved in or reflect on their own assessment. The strategies of feed up, feedback and feedforward (Fisher & Frey, 2009) are useful ways to include children in assessment, plan for further learning and support children's developing mana and agency. Using these definitions, children's progress is a result of learning, development and assessment. All three approaches to learning can be used by early childhood teachers as part of assessment and portfolio development.

On-going assessment processes should document the different pathways that children take to reach learning outcomes. In order for this to occur, culturally and linguistically inclusive assessment, teaching, and curriculum practices must prevail (Bowman, Donovan & Burns, 2001; Puckett & Black, 2008). One way of ensuring this occurs is for teachers to identify what each child brings to the learning context and make curriculum decisions aimed at fostering further learning and development.

Research shows that a variety of assessment measures should be used in order to identify "what each child brings to the interaction" (Bowman, Donovan & Burns, 2001, p. 234) and to use this information for curriculum planning (Bagnato, 2007; Puckett & Black, 2008).

Ensuring that assessment is fair and meaningful is a core aspect of effective assessment of young children (Bagnato, 2007). Outside of early childhood education the effectiveness of assessment is often considered in terms of whether or not it is fair, valid and reliable (Absolum, 2006). However, in Te Whāriki teachers must also consider whether the assessment benefits children and their learning, is appropriate to children's age and cultural experiences, and values parental contribution.

In the sociocultural view of learning adopted in the curriculum, children are seen as active and contributing agents in their social contexts and learning and therefore also in their assessment. When teachers know what children can do, understand children's interests, are aware of areas where children require additional support, and involve children and families, they can plan curriculum that supports further learning.

Featherstone (2011) suggests that planning for assessment needs to include long-term, medium-term and short-term planning. Long-term planning looks at procedures for the whole group of children and usually over a whole year. It will include the annual review of procedures, methods, possible topics of study and the methods or resources for tracking children's progress. Medium-term planning bridges the gap between long and short-term planning and involves reflecting every six to eight weeks on whether the short and long-term plans have been achieved and if children are making progress. Short-term planning involves the day-to-day collection of observations, sticky notes, photographs and examples of children's work that are collected as part of daily activities.

Collectively this information may be used immediately for assessing 'where to next' for children's learning and later used in a child's learning portfolio for reflecting on progress over time. As part of planning for assessment, the teaching team will need to plan for how much and what type data is gathered, how often teachers have specific time for analysis of data collected and preparation of assessment documentation, and how assessment information will be shared with children and with families.

Although norm referenced assessment is rarely used with young children, because comparison or ranking of early learning is both unnecessary and extremely difficult (Bagnato, 2007), the uses of criterion referenced and ipsative assessment are relevant. Criterion referenced assessment is used for assessing individual achievement, without reference to other children. Usually this sort of assessment is not scored, but uses a yes/no rubric and is particularly useful for screening purposes to identify if children have any specific developmental or physical issues.

As part of observation, teachers may use the learning outcomes and the 'evidence of learning and development' criteria in each strand to identify if children are showing signs of progression. For instance, in the exploration strand, for the learning outcome "Moving confidently and challenging themselves physically - te wero ā-tinana", kaiako may look for evidence that children are showing "Control over their bodies, including locomotor and movement skills, agility and balance, and the ability, coordination and confidence to use their bodies to take risks and physical challenges" (p. 47). Using criteria for observation will help teachers to focus what they are looking for as evidence of children's learning.

Similarly, ipsative assessment is a useful tool. Ipsative assessment involves assessing a child's performance against their own earlier performance, with a view to determining whether any improvement has been made. Such assessment might involve using the same task before and after new a curriculum focus or activity to check improvement in children's understanding, or taking note of a child's performance on a task over a period of time to monitor change. The benchmark against which any change in performance is measured is the child's own performance, not the performance of other children.

This idea is similar to an Individual Plan, which is used with children with special needs. In this case, however, the assessment is used with any child for whom progress over time needs to be followed. For example, my grandson is currently having difficulties with hearing and been referred to an ear, nose and throat specialist. The outcome of his hearing difficulties is that he is displaying some language delay, difficulties with pronunciation of certain words and is dropping beginning consonant sounds (for example nail for snail and pider for spider). As his teacher, it would be useful to record examples of his language at regular intervals and to match the findings of observations or recordings of his language to the MoE's "Much more than words" book on oral language development. Strategies for helping language development are in the booklet, as well as guidance on when referral to speech language therapists should be done.

Assessment is a time consuming aspect of any teacher's role and therefore data collection systems and analyses needs to be simple and straightforward, while also providing opportunities for 'discrepant data' to be gathered. Discrepant data, which both informs and surprises, can challenges teachers' assumptions about children and can supports shifts in teaching practice (Earl & Timperly, 2015; Mitchell & Cubey, 2003).

Teachers can usefully think about the different ways that data could be collected to help with assessment of the learning outcomes in each strand and provide them with multiple ways of looking at learning. For instance, if I were assessing children's learning in the communication strand, I would construct a list of ways of gathering data as evidence of learning. Table 1 presents some possible ways of gathering data on learning in the Communication strand.
Table 1: Assessment methods for the Communication strand

Communication/mana reo: Learning Outcomes

Possible methods of gathering assessment data over time

Using gesture and movement to express themselves | he kōrero ā-tinana

Video recordings/audio recordings of children's progress in non-verbal and verbal communication
Anecdotal observations of ability to express emotion in a positive manner.
Parent/whānau feedback on common gestures or movements used for communication.

Understanding oral language and using it for a range of purposes | he kōrero ā-waha

Audio/video recordings of children's language acquisition over time, particularly use of syntax, vocabulary and awareness of sounds in language, such as rhythm, rhyme and alliteration.
Documentation/recordings of second language learners' use of the dominant language in a ranger of contexts and for a range of purposes.
Feedback from parents on children's use of language and literacy in the home and centre environments.

Enjoying hearing stories and retelling and creating them | he kōrero paki

Event sampling of children's engagement with story reading and storytelling.
Documentation/recording of storytelling, telling jokes, drama and singing.
Observations of children retelling stories within play contexts.
Children's reflections on their portfolios and retelling of events.

Recognising print symbols and concepts and using them with enjoyment, meaning and purpose | he kōrero tuhituhi

Event sampling, video recordings and other observations of children's engagement with print and emergent reading behaviours.
Collection of artefacts of children's work that demonstrate increasing interest and engagement with symbols and with writing.

Recognising mathematical symbols and concepts and using them with enjoyment, meaning and purpose | he kōrero pāngarau

Event sampling, video recording and other observations of children's engagement with symbols and mathematical tasks.
Collection of artefacts of children's work that demonstrate increasing interest and engagement with maths tasks, resources, puzzles and games and other evidence of mathematical thinking.

Expressing their feelings and ideas using a wide range of materials and modes | he kōrero auaha

Collection of artefacts of children's work or learning stories of children's ability to express themselves creatively through the arts.
Video/audio recordings of children using materials and modes to express themselves.

Obviously, this list is not exhaustive, but may be a starting point for thinking about what formal approaches to assessment might involve to assess learning outcomes over time. Although there is contention around the use of online portfolios (Hooker, 2015), there is evidence that their use increases family/whānau engagement with assessment portfolios and enables the use of digital technologies to capture snippets of audio and video as part of the portfolio gathered and reflected on over time.

Some of the more informal, on-the-run ways that Featherstone (2011, p. 82) advocates include some the following:

Observing children through planned and informal activities

Tracking children and activities

Taking photos and other recordings

Talking with children as they play and work, asking and answering questions

Collecting copies of children's work

Listening to children as they talk, read and sing

Eavesdropping on and watching children at play

Talking with parents about children's achievements

Getting children to help collect artefacts for their portfolio

Listening to children as they report back to the whole group of children

Talking to children about what you are finding out about their learning.

Assessment in these terms is highly dynamic - it is related to what happens this morning, this afternoon and tomorrow, while making sure that simple ways of gathering evidence of 'valued learning' are used.

Summary and conclusions

Assessment of children's learning is important for making valued learning visible (MoE, 2017, p. 63) in the update of Te Whāriki, and more importantly for ensuring that all children have the best opportunities to learn within their early childhood setting. Although many services will already have good systems and procedures in place for long, medium and short term approaches to assessment, the evidence of many ERO reviews suggests that teachers in some services have struggled with the advice and guidance provided for Te Whāriki 1996. I am hopeful that the stronger guidance given in Te Whāriki 2017 will help teachers with assessment and to understand that effective assessment is not something that can be done using only minute-to-minute approaches. A portfolio of children's assessment data will involve using a range of different methods to collect sometimes discrepant data that provides evidence of children's learning and development over time and challenges teachers to think critically about how to support learning and development.

References

Absolum, M. (2006). Clarity in the classroom. Auckland: Hodder Education

Bagnato, S.J. (2007). Authentic assessment for early childhood intervention: Best practices. New York: The Guilford Press.

Blaiklock, K. (2008). A critique of the use of learning stories to assess the learning dispositions of young children. New Zealand Research in Early Childhood Education, 11, 77 - 87.

Bowman, B., Donovan, S., & Burns, S. (2001). Eager to learn: educating our pre-schoolers. Report of Committee on Early Childhood Pedagogy. Commission on Behavioural and Social Sciences and Education National Research Council. Washington, DC: National Academy Press.

Earl, L. & Timperley, H. (2015). Evaluative thinking for successful educational innovation. (OECD Education Working Papers, No. 122). Paris: OECD Publishing.

Education Council. (2015). Practising teacher criteria. Retrieved from https://educationcouncil.org.nz/content/practising-teacher-criteria

Education Review Office. (2007). The quality of assessment in early childhood. Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/publications/the-quality-of-assessment-in-early-childhood-education/

Education Review Office. (2013). Working with Te Whāriki. Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/publications/working-with-te-whariki/

Education Review Office. (2016). Early learning curriculum. Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/publications/early-learning-curriculum/

Education Review Office. (2017). Extending their language - expanding their world: Children's oral language (birth - 8 years). Retrieved from http://www.ero.govt.nz/publications/extending-their-language-expanding-their-world/

Featherstone, S. (2011). Catching them at it: Assessment in the early years. London: A & C Black Publishers.

Fisher, D. & Frey, N. (2009). Feed up, back, forward. Multiple Measures, 67(3), 20 - 25.

Hipkins, R. (2007). Assessing key competencies: Why would we? How could we? Ministry of Education Implementation Pack for Schools. Wellington, New Zealand: NZ Council for Educational Research.

Hooker, T. A. (2015). Assessment for learning: A comparative study of paper-based portfolios and online ePortfolios. Early Childhood Folio, 19(1) 17-24.

McLachlan, C.J. (2008). Early literacy and the transition to school: Issues for early childhood and primary educators. New Zealand Research in Early Childhood Education, 11, 105-118.

McLachlan, C. (2017). 'Not business as usual': Reflections on the 2017 update of Te Whāriki. Early Education, 62.

McLachlan, C., Edwards, S., Margrain, V. & McLean, K. (2013). Children's learning and development: Contemporary assessment in the early years. Sydney, NSW: Palgrave MacMillan.

McLachlan-Smith, C.J. (1996). Emergent literacy in New Zealand kindergartens: An examination of policy and practices. (Doctoral thesis, Massey University, Palmerston North, New Zealand).

Ministry of Education. (1996). Te whāriki: He whāriki mātauranga mō ngā mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early childhood curriculum. Wellington: Author.

Ministry of Education. (2005). Kei Tua o te Pae/Assessment for Learning: Early Childhood Exemplars. Retrieved from: http://education.govt.nz/early-childhood/teaching-and-learning/assessment-for-learning/kei-tua-o-te-pae-2/

Ministry of Education. (2007). New Zealand Curriculum. Retrieved from http://nzcurriculum.tki.org.nz/The-New-Zealand-Curriculum

Ministry of Education. (2008). Te Marautanga o Aotearoa. Retrieved from http://tmoa.tki.org.nz/Te-Marautanga-o-Aotearoa

Ministry of Education. (2009). Te whatu pōkeka. Kaupapa Māori assessment for learning. Early childhood exemplars. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media Limited.

Ministry of Education. (2015). Report of the Advisory Group on Early Learning. Retrieved from http://www.education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Ministry/consultations/Report-of-the-Advisory-Group-on-Early-Learning.pdf

Ministry of Education. (2017). Te whāriki: He whāriki mātauranga mō ngā mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early childhood curriculum. Retrieved from https://education.govt.nz/assets/Documents/Early-Childhood/ELS-Te-Whariki-Early-Childhood-Curriculum-ENG-Web.pdf

Ministry of Education. (n.d.). Assessment Online. Retrieved from http://assessment.tki.org.nz/

Mitchell, L. & Cubey, P. (2003). Professional development in early childhood settings: Best evidence synthesis iteration (BES). Retrieved from https://www.educationcounts.govt.nz/publications/series/2515/5955

Perkins, M. (2013). Omissions and presuppositions in Kei tua o te pae: A critical discourse analysis. Research in Early Childhood Education, 16, 71-82.

Piaget, J. (1952). The origins of intelligence in children. New York: International Universities Press.

Puckett, M.B. & Black, J.K. (2008). Meaningful assessment of the young child: Celebrating development and learning. (3rd ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

The Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2010). Educators being, belonging & becoming: Educators' guide to the early years learning framework for Australia. The Australian Government Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations for the Council of Australian Governments.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Te Whāriki revisited: How approaches to assessment can make valued learning visible

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
In 2016, Te Whāriki: He Whāriki Mātauranga mō ngā Mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early Childhood Curriculum (Te Whāriki) (Ministry of Education [MoE], 2017), New Zealand's early childhood curriculum was updated for the first time in 20 years.

# data[].attributes.headline
Understanding the Te Whāriki approach: Early years education in practice

# data[].attributes.subject
Understanding the Te Whāriki approach: Early years education in practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Understanding the Te Whāriki approach: Early years education in practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Understanding the Te Whāriki approach: Early years education in practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
The Post Primary Teachers' Association (PPTA) asked the New Zealand Council for Educational Research (NZCER) to provide an overview of the research literature on barriers and supports for women to succeed in secondary school leadership. The PPTA plan to use this review to help shape future work to address gender-based inequities.

# data[].attributes.headline
Towards the Right of New Zealand Children for Free Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.subject
Towards the Right of New Zealand Children for Free Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.provider_name
International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
4265 Accesses

5 Citations

13 Altmetric

Metrics

Abstract

This paper provides an historical and policy overview of early childhood education in New Zealand. The analysis is framed around the introduction, in July 2007, of the government's policy of 20 hours-a-week free early childhood education for three and four year old children in teacher-led early childhood programmes. This initiative extended a raft of policies intended to improve quality participation in early childhood as part of the Government's ten year Strategic Plan Pathways to the Future: Ngã Huarahi Arataki 2002-2012. A key plank of this policy is that by 2012 all adults working in teacher-led services will have teaching qualifications. Realising this has been challenging and the implementation of the '20 hours free' policy became a controversial media story. From age five, all New Zealand children have long had a 'right as a citizen' to free schooling. There was a level of expectation from parents that this 'right' had been extended to early childhood education. The policy was not so bold. This paper outlines the journey towards matching the rights of the school aged and preschool aged child for free education. The '20 hours free' policy is an important step in the process. The paper concludes with an early commentary on the issues that this policy raises in relation to: the rights of children and parents, the costs of quality, and the conflicting roles of government, community, and private enterprise in the provision of early childhood services.

New Zealand Overview

Free Kindergarten Associations were established in New Zealand from the 1890s. The government provided a small subsidy linked to emerging state interest in moral reform and child health (May, 1997). Early childhood education underwent a transformation during the second half of the twentieth century. Progressive education policies promoted preschool for three and four year olds as a benefit for children prior to school entry at age five. New early childhood services emerged to meet new needs. Each service brought a new rationale for broadening the state's interest and investment in the early years. Since 1989, government policy has incorporated the diversity of early childhood services and sought to redress earlier divides, for example between, care and education, majority and minority cultures, as well as privately owned and community operated services. Some divides have remained difficult to bridge and new divides have emerged.

New Zealand has a high level of participation in early childhood education with 98% of all four year olds and 20% of children under two years old attending a diverse range of early childhood programmes (Ministry of Education, 2007b). Nevertheless, there are disparities across locations and in the level of participation for each child. The government's 10 year Strategic Plan, Pathways to the Future: Ngã Huarahi Arataki 2002-2012 (Ministry of Education, 2002), is intended to enhance quality participation in early childhood. A new funding policy differentiates between teacher-led and parent-led services (Ministry of Education, 2005). The costs of the former are recognised in the policy commitment that, by 2012, all staff working in teacher-led services will hold teaching qualifications. Implicit too, in the funding policy, is the acknowledgement that early childhood teachers attain pay parity with school teachers (May, 2005). Kindergarten teachers, who are employed under the State Sector Act have had pay parity since 2002. The implementation of pay parity for teachers in childcare is underway although not yet guaranteed in the private sector.

Kindergarten associations are still key providers of early childhood education but in 1992 dropped the term 'free' from their name as they began to charge fees to supplement government funding, rather than ask for 'voluntary donations'. However, the kindergarten tradition of part day 'almost free' early childhood education for three and four year old children is embedded in the New Zealand psyche, even if it not accessible for all. Parents had come to expect to pay more substantive fees for younger aged children and/or for longer hours available in childcare settings. Despite the government subsidy for all children, and childcare subsidies on fees for low income families or children with special needs, affordability remained an issue for parents.

The Announcement

In the 2004 Budget Speech in Parliament, Michael Cullen, the Minister of Finance in the Labour-led Government, promised the introduction in 2007 of 20 hours-a-week-free early childhood education for three and four year old children in teacher-led community owned services.

The announcement was a surprise, although officials had been quietly costing and negotiating a politically acceptable package for a year. Previously in 2001, the Minister of Education, Trevor Mallard, had rejected the recommendation of the Strategic Plan Working Group, "for whanau [family] and families to have a universal entitlement to a reasonable amount of free, high quality early childhood education" (Strategic Plan Working Group, 2001, p. 5). This was described by the Minister as 'blue skies thinking' and 'fiscally irresponsible' (Mallard, 2001). In 2002, when the Prime Minister, Helen Clark, launched the government's Strategic Plan, the recommendation for free early childhood education did not materialise. Within a year the Minister had instructed his officials to cost a proposal for free early childhood education (Ministry of Education, 2003). They did so reluctantly.2

Budget cartoon of the Minister of Finance Michael Cullen.

In 2004, the '20 hours free' policy was more limited than originally conceived by the Working Group and avoided the broader issue of 'entitlement'. However, parents whose children attended private centres immediately realised that they would be disadvantaged. In the lead up to the 2005 election the issue became one of difference between the 'centre-left' Labour, and the 'centre-right' National political parties. Mallard's media headline 'Free early childhood education to go under National' (Mallard, 2005) responded to an address by the National Party's education spokesperson, Bill English, who told the mainly private operators attending the Early Childhood Council Annual Conference in May 2005 addressed "We oppose the 20 Hours Free policy. There's no research base for it whatsoever, it's not based in any evidence, there's no socio-economic reason for that policy." (English, 2005)

The Minister of Education's response outlined the rationale for the '20 hours free' policy as follows (Mallard, 2005):

Research shows that regular, quality and intensive early childhood education makes a positive impact on children's learning later in life. These findings are entirely consistent with other major studies undertaken in the United States and the United Kingdom. Bill English and his party have clearly decided it is much cheaper to ignore those findings and scrap the policy. This would mean around 86,000 children and their families around New Zealand will miss out. (p. 1)

The political scrapping between the 'left' and 'right' continued. In the heat of the election campaign the Prime Minister announced the extension of the policy to privately owned centres. This appealed to parents although not necessarily to the private centre owners whose finances would come under increased government scrutiny. Conversely, the National Party offered childcare tax rebates for working parents and tax cuts for everyone. The election was narrowly won by a Labour-led coalition and planning began towards implementing the '20 hours free' policy.

The following sections provide an overview of early childhood policy development in New Zealand framed around the shifting perceptions concerning rights, access, and provision of early childhood education. The story begins in the 1930s, concluding in the 2000s with further comment on the free early childhood policy amidst emerging debates concerning the citizenry rights of the preschool aged child.

Outside State Interest: Being Fair

In 1931, at the height of the world economic Depression, the government's small subsidy to free kindergartens was cut, and an outcry ensued. The tenor of the media campaign highlighted the 'injustice' and 'unfairness' of a 'crime' against the most 'innocent', 'poor' and 'youngest' in the education system (May, 1997, p. 150). This view of fairness and justice for the youngest and most vulnerable children was to become a persuasive argument by early childhood advocates, and still has currency in its unmet expectations.

A much quoted statement on education in 1939 from the first Labour government Minister of Education, Peter Fraser, signalled reforms that shaped New Zealand education over the remainder of the century. The statement remains a measure of the responsibilities of government in relation to the education of the citizen child (Fraser, 1939):

The government's objective, broadly expressed, is that every child: whatever his level of ability, whether he be rich or poor, whether he live in town of country, has a right as a citizen, to a free education of the kind for which he is best fitted and to the fullest extent of his powers. (p. 2) [emphasis added]

The statement, however, did not consider preschool aged children. From 1935 the first Labour government laid the foundations of a welfare state in which the interests of preschool aged children were subsumed within policies to provide safety nets for families and the priorities of infant and maternal health. World War II delayed the implementation of this education vision but heightened expectations concerning the role of the state in creating a fairer and more just society. By the end of the war the Labour government was considering a new role for the state in preschool education, promoted as a social benefit for children, a preparation for learning at school, and a support to mothers (May, 2001).

Government Policy Interest: Psychological Benefit

New policies for the support of kindergartens with trained teachers and play centres with trained mothers were heralded (Department of Education, 1947). No government over the next 40 years pretended they could meet the demand if every three and four year old child sought a place in a preschool program. However, there was a growing expectation from parents that their children attend preschool prior to school entry. The government's interest in early childhood was framed around the perceived psychological benefits of a part-day planned educational experience, outside of the home in the company of other children and supported by trained adults.

Alongside the notion of benefits was a concern about the harm to children who attended the growing number of childcare centres (May, 2003). While professional opinion decreed childcare as potentially harmful (Bowlby, 1951), there was no government policy to either enhance or curtail its growth. In 1960 the government introduced the first childcare centre regulations, but with no funding to ensure that the children received comparable educational benefits to the children attending play centre or kindergarten.

In the 1960s, the notion of psychological benefit was broadened to include a view that some children were disadvantaged at school. The context was the presence of Maori children in schools who had rarely attended preschool, by comparison with their Pakeha (non Maori) peers who had been more often 'advantaged' by a preschool experience. Through community endeavours, a flurry of Maori preschools were established (Pewhairangi, 1983). The rhetoric was one of 'compensatory education', to 'catch up' Maori children to the same level as Pakeha children (Irwin, 1989). There was, however, no political obligation to ensure that all Maori children could access a suitable preschool.

Government Caution: Issues of Equity

During the 1970s and 1980s the language of rights became embedded in the politics of early childhood along with campaigns for women's rights, children's rights and Maori rights. Participants on a 1971 women's liberation march in Auckland demanded 'Free Mum, Free Dad, Free Me, Free Childcare (May, 2003)', challenging the policy rationale of protecting children from the possible harm of childcare. Childcare advocates argued that all children had a right to the same level of government support irrespective of the kind of early childhood service they were attending. Successive governments sidestepped the ramifications of these demands until 1989 (Meade, 1990).

The advocacy for new early childhood policy was also fuelled by demands by women for the right to participate equally in public life (May, 2001). Political interest, however, focussed on expanding the provision of part day kindergartens and play centres. By 1973, 46% of three and four year olds were attending some kind of early childhood institution, including childcare. That demand still outstripped provision was deemed an equity issue and there was cautious government consideration of the question, 'Who gets to preschool?' (Barney, 1975). Factors of location, social class and ethnicity were cited as the key factors in a child's 'chances' to participate in early childhood education.

Liberation politics created a more radical analysis of the experience of the rights of Maori people, almost landless, and whose language and culture was besieged. From 1982, the emergence of Maori language immersion centres, Nga Kohanga Reo, became a flagship of resistance by Maori to educational integration, and a demonstration that self-determination was the only way (Jenkins & Ka'ai, 1994). Donna Awatere ( 1984) rejected older notions of 'catch up' through participation:

Kindergartens have frightened Maori people off preschool education...Maori parents won't take their children there, not because they don't want to, but because kindergartens, in particular and playcentres to a lesser extent don't meet their needs. (p. 41)

Many Maori were advocating for the right of their children to be in an early childhood institution and/or school, operated by Maori, and immersed in Maori language (Jenkins & Ka'ai, 1994).

The Government's Before Five (Lange, 1988) reforms of 1989 were intended to redress the policy divides between the 'haves' and 'have-nots' for children, cultures, staff and services. Prime Minister, David Lange, proclaimed that early childhood would have 'equal status' with the rest of the education sector (see preface). The report Education to be More (1988) recommended equitable funding across the diverse early childhood institutions. The rights of children, women and minority groups were positioned to the fore. Anne Meade ( 1990, p. 96) described the impact of the reforms as enabling 'Women and children [to] gain a foot in the door'. The reality of implementing these policies in the 1990s was, however, fraught with difficulty and incomplete (Meade & Dalli, 1992).

Government Reform: Economic Agendas

Government education policy during the 1990s was linked to economic agendas (Mitchell, 1995). The rationale of political interest was towards achieving 'quality outcomes' with measurable economic value. National curricula were justified as essential tools for ensuring high 'educational standards'. Previous 'problems' were redefined as 'risks' (Beck, 1992). Children not participating in early childhood education were perceived as a 'risk', with potential economic consequences of their not achieving the expected educational outcomes.

The earlier emphasis on rights and equity was undermined by government intentions to deregulate its older responsibilities. The sector almost lost its recently achieved, 'universal' 30 hour-a-week subsidy per child. The government promoted the idea of a targeted funding regimen calculated on financial need (Dalli, 1993). This did not materialise. Research and advocacy by scholars such as Anne Smith became a crucial tool to demonstrate the necessary elements of quality in early childhood institutions to ensure positive educational benefits for children (Smith, 1996a, 1996b).

Alternatively, the first national early childhood curriculum, Te Whãriki (Ministry of Education, 1996) recaptured the earlier focus on equity issues. The foundation principles concern the 'empowerment' of children as 'confident and competent learners' through the premise of 'responsive reciprocal relationships' (Ministry of Education, 1996, p. 9). Grounded in the rights of children, Te Whãriki acknowledges the rightful place of indigenous Maori knowledge and aspirations (Reedy, 1995) as well as the settler and migrant cultures from other lands (Nuttall, 2003). Government had intended that new national curricula across the sectors should define educational outcomes for children as a measure of accountability. Te Whãriki positioned the consideration of the culture, rights and interests of children and their families as a crucial foundation for delivering 'quality outcomes' (Carr & May, 1999).

During the 1990s the government's market-led policies favoured the establishment of profit making childcare services. In 1992, 42% of education and care centres were privately owned. By 2001, the balance had tipped to 51% (Ministry of Education, 2001). Many private centre owners lobbied for lesser qualifications for staff and had lower rates of pay and conditions for staff than in the community sector (Mitchell, 2002a). In 1999 a change from a Nationalled to a Labour-led government spearheaded a shift in direction.

Strategies for Change: Towards Citizenry Rights?

The new government signalled its readiness to address outstanding issues in the sector. The role of early childhood education was on the agenda of many governments and, like New Zealand, there were economic rationales for its support (OECD, 2001). Amidst some concern at such interest, new debates were emerging. Gail Sloan Cannella ( 1997) wrote:

If early childhood education was reconceptualized as the pursuit of social justice for younger children, new images would emerge as the framework for action...the practice of radical democracy and the willingness to take revolutionary action. (p. 169)

Gail Sloan Cannella was attempting to deconstruct 'childhood' as being separate and distinct from 'adulthood'. This, she argued, had positioned children as second-class citizens. Gunilla Dahlberg ( 2000) told a New Zealand audience:

Early childhood institutions...need to be open to all families with young children. Access should not be constrained either by cost or by admission criteria, for example the employment of parents. To be so, early childhood institutions should be largely or wholly resourced and available as a right to all local children, as such being not only forums but also community institutions. (p. 8)

The notion of 'participating as a citizen' went beyond statistical measures of the benefits of participation by children in early childhood education programmes.

In New Zealand, Linda Mitchell ( 1999) called for 'a new debate about childhood', in which, "Early childhood institutions be conceptualised as community institutions playing an important role in fostering a democratic society. (p. 1)" She argued that early childhood policy must be framed around children's rights (Mitchell, 2002b). There was advocacy from a coalition of groups, for a 'new agenda for children' as a 'priority for policy' (Child Poverty Action Group, 2001, 2003) with particular reference to the right of all children to benefit from the country's resources. A government response was to formulate a policy Agenda for Children (Ministry for Social Development, 2002). Reconsidering early childhood policy was one part of this. A new partnership between the government and the sector would need to be forged.

The government embarked upon a 10 year strategic plan for the sector, Pathways to the Future: Ngã Huarahi Arataki 2002-2012 (Ministry of Education, 2002; Dalli & Te One, 2003). Fully realising the vision for children embedded within Te Whãriki was a key driver of the strategic plan's goals for quality participation. Another goal, 'promoting collaborative relationships', recognised the role of early childhood education (beyond the benefits for individual children) in community development.

In May 2007, the midway point in the implementation of the plan, the Ministry of Education hosted a symposium, 'Travelling the Pathways to the Future: Ngã Huarahi Arataki' (Ministry of Education, 2007a). There was a 'celebration' about the positive consequences of the strategic plan for the sector, but there was still much to evaluate particularly in relation to: a widening divide between teacher-led and parent-led services; difficulties in some locations of meeting the phasing-in of requirements for qualified teachers in centres, and the balance of the new partnership between government and the early childhood sector (Meade & Royal-Tangaere, 2007).

The '20 hours free' policy, soon to commence, was hailed by government as a further initiative to encourage access, although the debate surrounding its implementation was becoming heated. Peter Moss, from the United Kingdom, told symposium delegates that New Zealand was 'leading the wave' of early childhood innovation. More particularly, New Zealand had 'confronted the wicked issues' with the development of an integrated and coherent national approach to funding, regulation, curriculum development, and qualifications (Moss, 2007b). Moss ( 2007b) identified further challenges towards overcoming constraints to participation. He suggested a 'universal entitlement to a free ECE service from 12 months', a re-echo of the original ideal positioned by the Strategic Plan Working Group in 2001. Within two months the actual '20 hours free' policy, if not the universal ideal, was about to start.

Considering the Free Early Childhood Policy

The immediate impact of the '20 hours free' policy was on the quarterly Consumer Price Index which reported a drop of 32.4% in the cost of early childhood to parents causing a 5.2% drop in the price of education (Statistics New Zealand, 2007). With the policy only in its first year of operation, it is too soon to fully evaluate its long term consequences. The government has been monitoring the participation rates. By February 2008, 76% of centres including home based services were participating, benefiting 83% of all three and four year old early childhood enrolments (Ministry of Education, 2008). Only half of privately operated centres had joined the scheme.

The following snapshots of the media debate surrounding the implementation of the policy highlight some key issues regarding government policy for early childhood education as well as revealing the divided interests of the early childhood sector in New Zealand.

Issues of Rights and Provision

There was an early realisation by parents that the '20 hours free' policy was flawed if the centre their child(ren) attended had not opted into the scheme, or if they lived in small towns, rural settings or certain city suburbs where parents had little choice in the kind of service available. Unlike schools there is no public ownership of early childhood services; the provision of early childhood services is fully in the community and private domain. The NZ Herald (2007, January 17) newspaper raised the fear early on with the headline that 'Thousands face missing out on free pre-school.' This concern was fuelled by the Early Childhood Council recommending to its private owner members majority not to participate in the scheme. Member centre parents of the 50,000 children received a pamphlet entitled, 'Early Childhood Education. Why your child might miss out?' The reason given was the level of subsidy that providers would receive from the government so that 20 hours could be free. The sentiments of rights came to the fore (Early Childhood Council, 2007):

The government promised free ECE for your child. Please act now to make sure you get what you were promised. It is only fair-no ifs, no buts, no maybes. (p. 2)

Parents from the largest city, Auckland, formed the lobby group '20 hours free please'; organised a petition to government and maintained a lively website campaign.3 Like the Council, these parents situated the problem as one of insufficient funding for centres to opt into the scheme. Conversely, the Minister of Education, Steve Maharey, saw the reluctance of some providers to join the scheme as the 'problem'. Maharey seemed to be supporting the notion of 'entitlement' that the policy did not promise, when he told the reporter for the front page story of the Sunday Star Times (2007, June 17) newspaper that 'free early childhood is about the principle of 20 hours free and right of young New Zealanders to that education' [emphasis added].

Issues of Government Funding and Business Interests

The government's dilemma was to determine a level funding that covered the real costs of providing the free hours, firstly across different locations but more contentious was the divide between community and privately owned centres. In the original 2004 policy only community owned centres were eligible. The dynamic of the private sector had been changing during the 2000s with big business and the share-market becoming politically powerful players. The increased government funding associated with the Strategic Plan stimulated a level of private sector investment that could not be matched by community organizations. Corporate chains such as ABC Learning Centres, Kidicorp, and Kindercare had become significant providers with proactive strategies to buy out individual private owners and even community centres. The Australian owned ABC company is reputed to have 'made millionaires' of many New Zealand centres owners who sold out since its arrival in New Zealand in 2006 ( NZ Herald, 2008, February 29). The relentless complexity of implementing the raft of Strategic Plan initiatives and the '20 hours free' policy was cited as a key reason for selling.

Deborah Brennan ( 2007) has been analysing the impact of business, and in particular the ABC Learning Centres, on early childhood policy in Australia. She cites one private owner who states:

The childcare business is the best business I've had in my life. The government pays subsidies, the parents pay you two weeks in advance and property prices keep going up. (p. 217)

The share market, however, had its risks. In February 2008, ABC, the world's biggest publicly listed owner of childcare centres took a 60% drop in its shares overnight. The company's rapid expansion in Australia, Britain, the United States, and New Zealand was deemed the cause, sending ripples of concern amongst parents using its 116 centres in New Zealand ( NZ Herald, 2008, February 29). In Australia, a concerned Federal Government promised support due to its reliance on ABC's 1095 centres for childcare provision across the country ( Brisbane Times, 2008, February 27). At the time of writing the future of ABC is less clear but it intends to continue its operations in New Zealand.

During its nine-year term, the New Zealand Labour-led government had slipped in its promised resolve to support the community sector, although it has not advanced the interests of private childcare operators to the extent or level of the Australian monopoly. Linda Mitchell has tracked the differences between private and community early childhood provision in New Zealand (Mitchell, 2002a). After a media release of research data indicating lesser quality in private centres (Mitchell & Brooking, 2007), and in the heat of the free early childhood debate, Mitchell argued (New Zealand Council for Educational Research, 2007, May 6):

If the government remains reliant on the commercial sector to ensure all children can get up to 20 hours free, then it becomes vulnerable to those services' demands for higher government funding, not to spend solely in their centre but also so they can offer private investors-who may not even be New Zealanders-a return on investment.

On the same day the Sunday Star Times (2007, May 6) reported:

Education Minister Steve Maharey issued a warning to the main commercial chains, telling them that they cannot expect to continue to make profits on the back of heavy government subsidies for childcare...with the growing emphasis on quality care there would be little scope for private operators to deliver a return to shareholders.

Maharey foresaw that, "the sector will over time become more and more like compulsory schooling and the chances of making a profit were almost nil." The consequence for the Minister was a reprimand from the New Zealand Commerce Commission after the share prices of these companies immediately fell, due to the Minister's comments. This was deemed to be political interference.

Kidicorp did join the '20 hours free' scheme, but only after the government conceded that legally there was nothing to stop centres, like schools, charging an optional fee. This has been controversial. The level of funding was also a concern to some community centres. Barnardo's childcare organization claimed that for the time being they would carry the costs of the shortfall (Barnardo's, 2007, January 19). The Auckland Kindergarten Association was a reluctant joiner of the scheme and intended to charge and 'optional fee' of 50 centres per hour to meet the shortfall. This was considerably less than Kidicorp whose 'optional fee' was $3.75 per hour. The opposition National Party claimed, through its education spokesperson, M. P. Katherine Rich, that the '20 hours-a week-free policy' was a 'fraud' (Rich, 2007). The policy would not have eventuated under a National Government, however if elected in 2008 they are unlikely to dismantle the policy.

Issues of Quality and Costs

The Early Childhood Council described the free early childhood policy as 'dangerous' and 'the biggest threat to quality of early childhood in our generation' ( NZ Herald, 2007, April 27). There is some justification that the policy can undermine quality, but the issue is also about the extent to which fees from parents and subsidies from the government should fund the actual costs of quality provision, or be used in part to enhance profits. It is ironic that the Council's statement is made on behalf of providers who have traditionally resisted any policy that could increase costs and reduce profits (Mitchell, 1995, 2002b). The strategic plan was intended as an investment in quality with the requirement that all staff in teacher-led centres must be qualified teachers. The private sector had traditionally employed the minimum of qualified staff and strongly resisted the policy.

The strategic plan policies have significantly increased the costs of early childhood education. This is recognised in the government's 2005 funding model, benchmarked to the number of qualified staff employed and a collective agreement linked to pay parity (Ministry of Education, 2005). On the other hand, the new regulatory framework intended for implementation in 2008 (Ministry of Education, 2007b) has attempted to keep the costs down with little shift in the minimum staffing ratios. This is the heart of the issue because the government funding to implement the '20 hours free' policy is based on the regulated standard. Many centres have higher staffing ratios than the regulated standards. The private owners of the Treehouse centres termed their 'optional fee' a 'quality education surcharge'. This was intended to cover the cost of 'good staff ratios, guest speakers, a beautiful and aesthetic learning environment and provision of nutritional and sumptuous morning tea' ( NZ Herald, 2007, June 17). The Consumer Price Index survey indicated that one in seven providers were charging an optional fee as of September 2007, effecting 34% of children attending participating centres and home-based services (Statistics New Zealand, 2007).

Further Debates

This early commentary is intended to identify the issues and illustrate the polarity of the rhetoric of the '20 hours free' policy. The divides in this debate make apparent the structural tensions that underpin early childhood policy in New Zealand Balancing the multiple interests in the early childhood sector is difficult. These can be summarised as follows: (a) interests of centre providers in balancing the business of free early childhood education with the costs of quality, (b) interests of private business in protecting its profit levels, (c) interests of community services towards being the preferred provider, (d) interests of early childhood teachers in achieving full professional status and pay parity, (e) interests of parents in gaining access to free early childhood education, and (f) interests of government in increasing participation in cost effective quality early childhood.

Almost absent from the media debate was the central issue regarding the interests of children except for rhetoric about some children possibly missing out on services. The policy is a result of political, professional, and scholarly consensus that participation in quality early childhood is a significant benefit for children both 'here and now' in their daily life but also in the future at school and beyond. While there is still no right or entitlement for access to free early childhood education, New Zealand is inching towards this in both policy and rhetoric. This paper has outlined both the past and recent journey this has taken towards considering the rights of the preschool child 'citizen' as similarly unproblematic as the understood and undisputed rights of the school child 'citizen'.

While 'travelling the pathways to the future it will, however, be necessary to consider further the interests of children and the possibilities of what participation as a citizen child might mean in terms of pedagogy and policy. Alan Prout ( 2003) has argued that:

Childhood has been turned into a project. In a large part this project has been concerned with children's protection and provision rather than their social participation...that is the tendency to see them as a group to be socially shaped rather than socially included.This was a twentieth century failure that could, given the will and the resources, be remedied in this century. (p. 3)

The principles of both Te Whãriki ( 1996) and Pathways to the Future: Ngã Huarahi Arataki 2002-2012 (2002) demonstrate some reassurance that New Zealand has the vision for conceptualising the participating citizen child within early childhood education. Advocacy has ensured the political will and the resources. However, this case study of the '20 hours free' policy has highlighted the complexity of translating visionary ideals into workable policy and allowing multiple pathways and perspectives for the journey.

It is timely though in this election year (probably decided by the time of publication) that the significance of the Labour-led Government's initiatives in early childhood policy is newsworthy across the wider spectrum of New Zealand politics. In the view of Colin James, an esteemed political commentator, Labour will lose the election but in a headlined obituary on 'Labour's Legacy' he states:

When it comes time to memorialise Labour's fifth spell in office, it may be remembered most lastingly for early childhood education... Making early childhood systematic...takes us deep into a zone of policy debate: on citizens' access to participation in our economy and society. This debate is no longer just about the absence of legal or administrative impediments. It is about what constitutes genuine capacity to participate... So early childhood education is investing in infrastructure, just like building roads. It is arguably Labour's most important initiative, its biggest idea. ( Otago Daily Times, 2008, February 19)

That James has understood exactly the breadth of the vision is reassuring even if, in his commentary, he concludes:

Who though it up and drove it? Trevor Mallard, back in the 1990s and then as minister. It will be his memorial too. ( Otago Daily Times, 2008, February 19)

Certainly, the policy needed New Zealand's hard politician in the Cabinet and probably a female Prime Minister, Helen Clark, in power, but James was ignorant of the concerted and at times cohesive advocacy across the sector required to shift the government's interest in early childhood education from its selective and cautious gaze of earlier years (May, 2003). Jocelyn Harris reminded James of one campaigner whose 40-year academic career was instrumental:

All praise to Trevor Mallard...but let us not forget the bold and pioneering contribution of policymakers such as Prof Anne Smith...who did the research, presented the data and carried out the lobbying and advising so that this fundamental change in thinking about child care and education in early childhood became a reality. ( Otago Daily Times, 2008, March 1)

A New Platform for Advocacy

At the time of writing the New Zealand Institute of Education- Te Riu Roa (NZEI-TRR), the organization representing primary and early childhood teachers, has called a meeting of representatives of the community organizations representing or providing early childhood education. The author has been asked to be the chair. The intent is to build broader support for the fledgling NZEI-TRR campaign 'Quality public ECE: A vision for 2020' (New Zealand Institute of Education-Te Riu Roa, 2007). This campaign is in it infancy but likely to gain momentum during the forthcoming election. NZEI-TRR is seeking consensus for a partnership across the community providers of early childhood education to oppose the growing commercial for-profit presence in the educational sector and the use of taxpayers money to enhance its profits. NZEI-TRR argues that publicly funded early childhood education is central to realising the rights of children and their families to participate in early childhood education and claim that the commercial interests of wealth accumulation conflict with the education and community values of Pathways to the Future: Ngã Huarahi Arataki 2002-2012 (New Zealand Institute for Education-Te Riu Roa, 2007).

Commercial operators are able to set up and access public money wherever they see a business opportunity. There is no mechanism to ensure that responsive, community-oriented services are universally available. Low income communities, migrant communities, Maori and Pacific families and rural communities are those most likely to miss out. (p. 2)

Winning this debate will be difficult because neither of the major political parties is inclined towards full public provision of early childhood services. Indeed, the community sector itself would be wary of ending their current independence by a full takeover. Such a campaign may divide an early childhood educational sector that has been successful in forwarding policy by working cohesively when necessary. The task of the meeting of community groups will be, in the first instance, to explore the possibilities for halting the tide of private take-overs and shifting the balance of provision back towards government support for community ownership. Convincing successive governments that public ownership of early childhood services is the essential stepping-stone towards realising the full rights of preschool children to a free early childhood education will be a long-term campaign. The New Zealand success story has been about 'travelling the pathways to the future' with a cohesive vision and policy. The present risk is that very different 'pathways' might emerge. Neglecting to support this campaign may prove detrimental to the possibility of genuine social participation of the preschool citizen child

Notes

1. 1.

Parent-led services include playcentres staffed by parents, as well as some Kohanga Reo and Pacifica childcare centres that have a parental presence for licensing purposes, and/or staff who might speak Maori or a Pacific Island language but do not have [sufficient] staff with teaching qualifications.

2. 2.

The first funding proposal for the strategic plan from officials came under strong criticism from Linda Mitchell because it had backed away from universal entitlements. Mitchell had been a member of the Strategic Plan working group and on the technical working group to develop funding models. She expressed her concerns to the Minister after which the officials were instructed to go back to the 'drawing board' and consider the possibilities of free early childhood.

3. 3.

References

1. Brennan, D. (2007). The ABC of child care politics. Australian Journal of Social Issues, 42(2), 213-225.

Google Scholar

2. Hasan, A. (2007). Public policy in early childhood education and care. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 1(1), 1-10.

Article Google Scholar

3. May, H. (2002). 'Blue skies' talk in the 'playground', Delta, 54(1/2), 9-28.

Google Scholar

4. Meade, A. (1990). Women and children gain a foot in the door. New Zealand Women's Studies Journal, 6(1/2), 96-111.

Google Scholar

5. Ministry of Education. (2007b). Update on the ECE regulatory review. Retrieved September 4, 2007, from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=index%26indexid=882

6. Ministry of Education. (2008). Free ECE monthly monitoring report. Retrieved February 4, 2008, from http://www.minedu.govt.nz/index.cfm?layout=document%26doc

7. Moss, P. (2007a). An exercise in international learning. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 1(1), 11-23.

Article Google Scholar

8. Reedy, T. (1995). Knowledge and power set me free. Keynote address addressed at the 6th Early Childhood Convention, Auckland, New Zealand.

Download references

Author information

Affiliations

Dean, College of Education, University of Otago, PO Box 56, Dunedin, New Zealand

Helen May

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Helen May.

About this article

Download citation

early childhood

policy

rights

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Towards the Right of New Zealand Children for Free Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This paper provides an historical and policy overview of early childhood education in New Zealand. The analysis is framed around the introduction, in July 2007, of the government's policy of 20 hours-a-week free early childhood education for three and four year old children in teacher-led early childhood programmes.

# data[].attributes.headline
An Analysis of New Zealand's Changing History, Policies and Approaches to Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.subject
An Analysis of New Zealand's Changing History, Policies and Approaches to Early Childhood Education

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
NEW ZEALAND HAS AN INTERNATIONALLY unique approach to early childhood education, which includes a bicultural early childhood curriculum, a robust infrastructure of organisation and management overseen by the New Zealand Ministry of Education, and a growing reputation for innovation in early childhood teaching and learning. This paper examines how the current model of early childhood education emerged, the policy decisions that enabled current systems to be developed, the importance of the early childhood curriculum, teacher education and professional development, and recent developments during a time of recession in New Zealand. Some recommendations for early childhood education, based on the New Zealand experience, are proposed.

References

Cullen, J. (2008, November). Outcomes of Early Childhood Education: Do we know, can we tell, and does it matter? Herbison Lecture, NZARE conference, Massey University, Palmerston North.
Google Scholar

McLachlan, C. , Fleer, M. , & Edwards, S. (2010). Early childhood curriculum: Planning, assessment and implementation. Melbourne, Vic., Australia: Cambridge University Press.
Google Scholar

McLachlan-Smith, C. J. (2001, December). The Quality Journey: preliminary analyses of implementation in 72 early childhood centres. Paper presented at the New Zealand Association for Research in Education Conference, Christchurch College of Education.
Google Scholar

Stover, S. (2011). Play's progress? Locating play in the educationalisation of early childhood in Aotearoa New Zealand. Unpublished Ph.D thesis, AUT University, Auckland.
Google Scholar

Wylie, C. , Hodgen, E. , Hipkins, R. , & Vaughn, K. (2009). Competent Learners on the edge of adulthood: A summary of key findings from the Competent Learners @ 16 project. Wellington: NZCER.
Google Scholar

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
An Analysis of New Zealand's Changing History, Policies and Approaches to Early Childhood Education - Claire McLachlan, 2011

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
NEW ZEALAND HAS AN INTERNATIONALLY unique approach to early childhood education, which includes a bicultural early childhood curriculum, a robust infrastructure of organisation and management overseen by the New Zealand Ministry of Education, and a growing reputation for innovation in early childhood teaching and learning.

# data[].attributes.headline
Aotearoa-New Zealand: an overview of history, policy and curriculum

# data[].attributes.subject
Aotearoa-New Zealand: an overview of history, policy and curriculum

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Aotearoa-New Zealand: an overview of history, policy and curriculum.

# data[].attributes.headline
Discourses of economic investment and child vulnerability in early childhoo...

# data[].attributes.subject
Discourses of economic investment and child vulnerability in early childhoo...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Discourses of economic investment and child vulnerability in early childhoo...

# data[].attributes.headline
What troubles early childhood educators in NewZealand: a 20-year cross-sectional study of ethicaldifficulties in early childhood practice

# data[].attributes.subject
What troubles early childhood educators in NewZealand: a 20-year cross-sectional study of ethicaldifficulties in early childhood practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

For more than 20 years, the New Zealand early childhood (EC) sector has had guidance about how to deal with situations of ethical difficulty in daily practice through the ECE Code of Ethics. This paper reports on three surveys undertaken at 10-year intervals that sought to understand EC educators' experiences of such situations, and how they addressed them within their EC settings. An analysis of educators' stories of ethically troubling situations from the three data-sets traced shifts and similarities in the content reported, and in how educators responded to these challenges over the two-decade period. We situate this analysis alongside changes in the New Zealand ECE policy context during the same time frame. We argue that a connection exists between the reported situations and teachers' responses to them, and changes within the policy and professional context of daily EC practice.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
What troubles early childhood educators in New Zealand: a 20-year cross-sectional study of ethical difficulties in early childhood practice

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract For more than 20 years, the New Zealand early childhood (EC) sector has had guidance about how to deal with situations of ethical difficulty in daily practice through the ECE Code of Ethics. This paper reports on three surveys undertaken at 10-year intervals that sought to understand EC educators' experiences of such situations, and how they addressed them within their EC settings.

# data[].attributes.headline
Understanding the the Whariki approach: Early Years in education practice 

# data[].attributes.subject
Understanding the the Whariki approach: Early Years in education practice 

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Marino Institute of Education: Log in to the site

# data[].attributes.headline
Recent policy developments andthe “schoolification” of earlychildhood care and education inAotearoa New Zealand 

# data[].attributes.subject
Recent policy developments andthe “schoolification” of earlychildhood care and education inAotearoa New Zealand 

# data[].attributes.headline
New Zealand early childhood curriculum: The politics of collaboration

# data[].attributes.subject
New Zealand early childhood curriculum: The politics of collaboration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
(PDF) New Zealand early childhood curriculum: The politics of collaboration

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
PDF | The New Zealand early childhood curriculum, Te Whāriki (Ministry of Education [MoE],1996), is frequently hailed as a community inspired... | Find, read and cite all the research you need on ResearchGate

# data[].attributes.headline
Te Whāriki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum: is it effective?

# data[].attributes.subject
Te Whāriki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum: is it effective?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Te Whāriki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum: is it effective?

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Te Whāriki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum, has received much praise since its introduction in 1996. There is, however, little research evidence about the implementation or effectiveness of the curriculum in early childhood centres. This article raises questions about the structure and content of Te Whāriki.

# data[].attributes.headline
Weaving Te Whāriki - Aotearoa New Zealand's Early Childhood Curriculum Document in Theory and Practice (2nd ed.)

# data[].attributes.subject
Weaving Te Whāriki - Aotearoa New Zealand's Early Childhood Curriculum Document in Theory and Practice (2nd ed.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This 2nd edition is now out of stock, but is still available from our partners Fishpond or The Book Depository or Amazon

Edited by Joce Nuttall

The only volume to bring together New Zealand and international commentary on the history, implementation, and influence of Aotearoa New Zealand's groundbreaking early childhood curriculum framework. This new edition contains substantial updates of the chapters in the first edition, plus four new chapters: on Pasifika perspectives, working with infants and toddlers, transition to school, and perspectives on play. Authors from New Zealand, Australia, Denmark and the United Kingdom offer their analysis of Te Whariki in ways that will be accessible to student teachers, early childhood educators, academics, and policy makers alike.

The chapters cover:

Historical and cultural perspectives

The history and development of the framework

The commitment to biculturalism underpinning Te Whariki

Pasifika perspectives on early childhood education

Comparison with the parallel development of schools' curriculum in New Zealand

Teaching and learning with Te Whariki

Working with infants and toddlers

Inclusive education

Te Whariki as a guide for bicultural practice

Assessment practices

Teachers' co-construction of curriculum in childcare

Transition to school

International and critical perspectives

The influence of Te Whariki on Australia's early childhood framework

Te Whariki from a Danish perspective

The place of play in early childhood curriculum documents in New Zealand and England

Future directions

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Weaving Te Whāriki - Aotearoa New Zealand's Early Childhood Curriculum Document in Theory and Practice (2nd ed.)

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This 2nd edition is now out of stock, but is still available from our partners Fishpond or The Book Depository or Amazon Edited by Joce Nuttall The only volume to bring together New Zealand and international commentary on the history, implementation, and influence of Aotearoa New Zealand's groundbreaking early childhood curriculum framework.

# data[].attributes.headline
Children's rights and early childhood policy: A NewZealand story

# data[].attributes.subject
Children's rights and early childhood policy: A NewZealand story

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
This paper begins with a brief historical overview of children's rights in Aotearoa New Zealand and then examines some of the key early childhood education documents since the 1984 Labour Government's reform agenda, the great experiment (Kelsey, 1995), which not only changed the language of education but also revolutionized the sector administratively. An important and recurrent theme is an enduring obsession with children in the future, which is common to all the policies and documents reviewed.

Après un bref aperçu historique des droits de l'enfant en Nouvelle-Zélande, cet article analyse quelques uns des principaux textes relatifs à l'éducation de la petite enfance, produits dans le cadre du programme de réformes du gouvernement travailliste depuis 1984, la grande expérimentation (Kelsey, 1995), qui n'a pas seulement changé le langage de l'éducation mais a également révolutionné les aspects administratifs du secteur. Un thème important apparaît de manière récurrente et quasi obsessionnelle à travers toutes les politiques et textes examinés : les enfants dans l'avenir.

Ausgehend von einem kurzen geschichtlichen Abriss der Kinderrechte in Neuseeland (Aotearoa) werden einige wichtige Dokumente zur Frühpädagogik seit der Reform der Labour-Regierung im Jahr 1984 untersucht. Dieses große Experiment (Kelsey, 1995) brachte nicht nur eine neue Sprache der Bildung mit sich, sondern revolutionierte außerdem die gesamte Verwaltung des Sektors. Ein wichtiges und immer wieder kehrendes Thema ist eine anhaltende leidenschaftliche Befassung mit Kindern in der Zukunft, die in allen untersuchten Grundsätzen und Dokumenten zu finden ist.

Este artículo comienza con una breve visión global histórica de los derechos de los niños en Nueva Zelanda y continúa con el examen de algunos de los documentos clave sobre la enseñanza en la primera infancia, a partir de la reforma del gobierno laborista de 1984. Ésta no solo cambió el lenguaje de la enseñanza sino que también revolucionó al sector desde un punto de vista administrativo. Un tema que es importante y recurrente es la continuada obsesión con los niños en el futuro, algo común en todas las políticas y documentos estudiados.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Children's rights and early childhood policy: A New Zealand story

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
This paper begins with a brief historical overview of children's rights in Aotearoa New Zealand and then examines some of the key early childhood education documents since the 1984 Labour Government's reform agenda, the great experiment (Kelsey, 1995), which not only changed the language of education but also revolutionized the sector administratively.

# data[].attributes.headline
EMBRACING NEOLIBERALISM? A RECONSIDERATIONOF THE RESTRUCTURING OF A NEW ZEALANDNONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION

# data[].attributes.subject
EMBRACING NEOLIBERALISM? A RECONSIDERATIONOF THE RESTRUCTURING OF A NEW ZEALANDNONGOVERNMENTAL ORGANIZATION

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
EMBRACING NEOLIBERALISM? A RECONSIDERATION OF THE RESTRUCTURING OF A NEW ZE...

# data[].attributes.headline
Barriers to and facilitators of inclusion for children with disabilities in early childhood education

# data[].attributes.subject
Barriers to and facilitators of inclusion for children with disabilities in early childhood education

# data[].attributes.headline
Looking back, looking forward: three decades of early childhood curriculum development in Aotearoa New Zealand

# data[].attributes.subject
Looking back, looking forward: three decades of early childhood curriculum development in Aotearoa New Zealand

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.readable_text
Abstract

In this reflection on early childhood curriculum development in Aotearoa New Zealand since the mid-1980s, the author identifies some of the factors that were influential in the genesis, and subsequent implementation, of Te Whariki. The article concludes with a discussion of possible future directions in early childhood curriculum, including issues in policy and practice that remain unresolved.

**********

There is a Maori proverb that states that in order for the canoe to know where it is going it has to understand where it has come from. This is an apt metaphor for understanding the last 20 years, and thinking about the next 10 years, in early childhood curriculum development in Aotearoa New Zealand. The release of Te Whariki: He whariki mataranga mo nga mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early Childhood Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1996) marked a turning point for early childhood education in New Zealand, but the development of Te Whariki had been preceded by at least 10 years of rapid development in early childhood provision. These developments had, in their own right, flowed from decades of debate about the nature and purpose of early childhood services in New Zealand and elsewhere (May, 1997, 2001). Almost 10 years after the publication of Te Whuriki, 2005 has been marked by another milestone in early childhood education in New Zealand: the release of Kei tua o to pae: Assessment for Learning: Early Childhood Exemplars (Ministry of Education, 2004).

In the first part of this article I describe where the canoe has come from, tracing the genesis of Te Whariki, particularly from 1986 onwards. Next, I reflect on the period from 1986 until today, and the present status of early childhood curriculum development in New Zealand, including the place of Kei tua o to pae. In the final part of the article I speculate on future directions, highlighting those questions that, in my view, remain unresolved.

The origins of Te Wharki

The story of how Te Whariki was conceptualised, drafted, written, and consulted upon remains one of the great unwritten PhD theses in education in New Zealand. Te One (2003) gives an article-length account of the process of Te Whariki's development, and the thinking of the leader writers of the document has been well documented (Carr & May, 1991, 1993a, 1993b, 1994, 2000; May & Carr, 2000; Reedy, 2003). Less is recorded about the context for the development of Te Whariki provided by the years prior to the writing of the early childhood curriculum framework (begun under contract to the Ministry of Education by the University of Waikato in 1990). In this section, I reflect on a number of key influences in the early childhood field which, with the benefit of hindsight, help explain the nature of Te Whariki, as well as subsequent developments in the field.

The 1980s were characterised by renewed interest in the educational potential of good-quality early childhood education, following on from the calls of "second wave" feminists of the 1970s who had largely subsumed early childhood services into a...

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
Looking back, looking forward: three decades of early childhood curriculum development in Aotearoa New Zealand

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.description
Abstract In this reflection on early childhood curriculum development in Aotearoa New Zealand since the mid-1980s, the author identifies some of the factors that were influential in the genesis, and subsequent implementation, of Te Whariki. The article concludes with a discussion of possible future directions in early childhood curriculum, including issues in policy and practice that remain unresolved.

# data[].attributes.headline
New Zealand Kindergartens 2005 to 2010: Funding and operational changes.

# data[].attributes.subject
New Zealand Kindergartens 2005 to 2010: Funding and operational changes.

# data[].attributes.attachment_link.title
New Zealand Kindergartens 2005 to 2010: Funding and operational changes.