幼儿教育课程:新西兰奥特亚罗瓦和英格兰的全球政策论述和国家层面的回应

Elizabeth Wood, Helen Hedges
{"title":"幼儿教育课程:新西兰奥特亚罗瓦和英格兰的全球政策论述和国家层面的回应","authors":"Elizabeth Wood, Helen Hedges","doi":"10.1002/curj.280","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"In early childhood education (ECE), global policy discourses influence national policy frameworks for curriculum, pedagogy and assessment practices. Although aspects of these discourses travel across national boundaries via policy borrowing, we argue that consideration is needed of the cultural–historical evolution of country‐level systems, their epistemological foundations and different goals or aspirations. We combine a cultural–historical perspective with critical policy text analysis to examine two curricular frameworks—England's Early Years Foundation Stage and Aotearoa New Zealand's Te Whāriki. Both nations share similar historical influences and timeframe for the development of ECE policies from the 1990s, but with different local responses, principles and values. Three questions about curriculum inform our policy text analysis: how are children are positioned and understood; what knowledge is valued and what outcomes are valued? The analysis indicates similar influences and discourses, but with dissimilar responses to these questions and distinctive ways of understanding curriculum in each country. We argue that although global discourses promote generic policy drivers and goals, country‐level policy responses need to be understood genealogically and locally in relation to cultures, contexts and values. Taking a global–local approach to policy analysis also raises critical questions about the opportunities and limitations of policy borrowing across international contexts and the importance of contextualisation.","PeriodicalId":508528,"journal":{"name":"The Curriculum Journal","volume":"122 3","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-06-06","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Curriculum in early childhood education: Global policy discourses and country‐level responses in Aotearoa New Zealand and England\",\"authors\":\"Elizabeth Wood, Helen Hedges\",\"doi\":\"10.1002/curj.280\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"In early childhood education (ECE), global policy discourses influence national policy frameworks for curriculum, pedagogy and assessment practices. Although aspects of these discourses travel across national boundaries via policy borrowing, we argue that consideration is needed of the cultural–historical evolution of country‐level systems, their epistemological foundations and different goals or aspirations. We combine a cultural–historical perspective with critical policy text analysis to examine two curricular frameworks—England's Early Years Foundation Stage and Aotearoa New Zealand's Te Whāriki. Both nations share similar historical influences and timeframe for the development of ECE policies from the 1990s, but with different local responses, principles and values. Three questions about curriculum inform our policy text analysis: how are children are positioned and understood; what knowledge is valued and what outcomes are valued? The analysis indicates similar influences and discourses, but with dissimilar responses to these questions and distinctive ways of understanding curriculum in each country. We argue that although global discourses promote generic policy drivers and goals, country‐level policy responses need to be understood genealogically and locally in relation to cultures, contexts and values. Taking a global–local approach to policy analysis also raises critical questions about the opportunities and limitations of policy borrowing across international contexts and the importance of contextualisation.\",\"PeriodicalId\":508528,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"The Curriculum Journal\",\"volume\":\"122 3\",\"pages\":\"\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-06-06\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"The Curriculum Journal\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.280\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"The Curriculum Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1002/curj.280","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

在幼儿教育(ECE)中,全球政策话语影响着各国的课程、教学法和评估实践政策框架。虽然这些论述的某些方面通过政策借鉴跨越了国界,但我们认为需要考虑国家层面制度的文化历史演变、其认识论基础以及不同的目标或愿望。我们将文化历史视角与批判性政策文本分析相结合,研究了两个课程框架--英格兰的 "幼儿基础阶段 "和新西兰的 "Te Whāriki"。从 20 世纪 90 年代开始,这两个国家在制定幼儿教育政策方面有着相似的历史影响和时间框架,但却有着不同的地方反应、原则和价值观。有关课程的三个问题为我们的政策文本分析提供了依据:如何定位和理解儿童;重视哪些知识;重视哪些成果?分析表明,每个国家都受到类似的影响和论述,但对这些问题的回应却不尽相同,对课程的理解也各具特色。我们认为,尽管全球论述提倡通用的政策驱动力和目标,但国家层面的政策回应需要结合文化、背景和价值观,从谱系和地方角度加以理解。采用全球-地方的方法进行政策分析还提出了一些关键问题,即在国际背景下借鉴政策的机会和局限性以及背景化的重要性。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Curriculum in early childhood education: Global policy discourses and country‐level responses in Aotearoa New Zealand and England
In early childhood education (ECE), global policy discourses influence national policy frameworks for curriculum, pedagogy and assessment practices. Although aspects of these discourses travel across national boundaries via policy borrowing, we argue that consideration is needed of the cultural–historical evolution of country‐level systems, their epistemological foundations and different goals or aspirations. We combine a cultural–historical perspective with critical policy text analysis to examine two curricular frameworks—England's Early Years Foundation Stage and Aotearoa New Zealand's Te Whāriki. Both nations share similar historical influences and timeframe for the development of ECE policies from the 1990s, but with different local responses, principles and values. Three questions about curriculum inform our policy text analysis: how are children are positioned and understood; what knowledge is valued and what outcomes are valued? The analysis indicates similar influences and discourses, but with dissimilar responses to these questions and distinctive ways of understanding curriculum in each country. We argue that although global discourses promote generic policy drivers and goals, country‐level policy responses need to be understood genealogically and locally in relation to cultures, contexts and values. Taking a global–local approach to policy analysis also raises critical questions about the opportunities and limitations of policy borrowing across international contexts and the importance of contextualisation.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Moving from transmissive to transformative: Closing the policy‐practice gap in teacher professional learning in Scotland Towards a motivating language acquisition curriculum Unique practices in teaching affective learning in a higher education applied curriculum Recontextualising Stenhouse: Instantiations of the ‘teacher as researcher’ metaphor in Greece and Cyprus Perspectives from university tutors on the use of collaborative enquiry‐based approaches to develop pre‐service teachers' pedagogies and understanding of inclusive practice
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1