BLURRING BORDERS, RESPECTING CULTURE

Paper presented at the AARE 2001 International Education Research Conference, Perth, Western Australia, December 2-6th, 2001

Victoria Banham, Edith Cowan University & Dr Lily Wong, Advent Links-SAUC

_____________________________________________________________________

The international community recognizes that curriculum for preschool teacher education includes similar issues in childhood development and education. However, as collaborations between international institutions are increasing, of greater interest is how different cultures address generic and culturally specific curriculum issues and present these to their students to avoid the downloading effect. Singapore with its Asian and Confucian approach and Australia with its European approach collaboratively developed a curriculum framework that enabled teachers to be exposed to developmental and educational issues across the lifespan thus meeting the needs of the child, family and community. This paper examines the thinking and the actions that two international institutions underwent when creating a pre-school curriculum that ensured the socio-cultural determinants of both countries were met.

Worldwide, the impact of globalisation has created major economic, technological, political and social changes which has had a profound effect on societies over the past twenty years (Emy, 1993). Science and technology have played a major role in changing lifestyles, enhancing productivity, and propelling people ahead of their time. Many societies have been quick to adopt the advantages of other’s research and development and with their earned foreign exchange reserves, bought themselves a place in their global village, a seat on the information exchanges of the world. Both Australia and Singapore have been transformed into a complex society which has in turn, impacted on the decisions made in the curriculum created for early childhood teacher education in child care and kindergarrten/preschools.

Education has played a very vital role in this development. As populations become better informed and trained, the increased capacity to generate useful goods and services, has resulted in sustained positive growth narrowing the gap between the rich and the poor. With the development of knowledge-based economies, education will continue to take center stage in national and regional development. Each country must determine its place and pay its dues, if it hopes to enjoy its benefits. Indeed the Asian regional political leaders are so convinced that they are placing premiums on higher education and schooling in a massive way.

If one was to look critically at developments in education one might suggest that higher education seems to be going through a metamorphosis. During the last twenty years, the changes can be readily characterized by multi-syllabled words such as massification, universalization, diversification, privatization, cooperation, industrialization, internationalization, virtualization, networking, parallel processing, and trickle down effect.

Massification is a trend toward making education available and accessible to all in a non-discriminatory way, with flexible entry and exit points, and an optimal range of choice. Learning no longer involves academic pursuits, but focuses on coping with the pressures of modern living and recreational opportunities regardless of age, gender, or socioeconomic

status. Governments in Australia and most Asian countries are making efforts to help all its citizens cope with the high tech demands of the information and knowledge society for a highly education workforce. This is the process of Universalization. Diversification refers to the change in education in terms of structure, delivery modes, and standards. Multi-traced university entrance- junior college, TAFE, polytechnic, A levels, Special entry programs - coupled with distance learning programs, afford students the learning opportunities. Many governments are looking for ways out from shouldering the financial burden of higher education and trying to shift budgets to lower levels of education thus moving towards privatisation of education. Governments, most notably in Singapore are more willing to share the task with private partner-entrepreneurs, who want to enter into the educational arena. There is a gradual relaxing of long time firewalls of control between private and public education giving 'private schools' with adequate funding and financial support a change to provide quality curricular offerings. Cooperation between institutions has increased resulting in innovative joint ventures –twinning programs, consortiums, exchange programs, joint ventures, credit transfer—among institutions of higher education in different countries, offering more opportunities for students to move across national systems. To overcome the many existing unresponsive academic structures and rigid curricular traditions that do not readily lend themselves to supporting industry, many educational institutions have formed alliances with industry. These alliances or the industralization of education, bring great mutual benefits in terms of up to date equipment, professional practitioners, and cutting-edge ideas as well as a cheap source of trainable labor from the existing education structures. Internationalization has occurred as the world becomes more of a global village and the community demands a more international orientation as strangers work alongside each other. National borders are broken down by technological advances and an international orientation becomes a truly portable skill advantage.

The most recent direction has been virtualization or elearning. With the increasing use of electronic communications and miniaturization of technological tools in the delivery of education networks and parallel processing are developed, where knowledge and information are not physically stored or retrieved at a single location.

The trickled down impact is an interesting phenomenon that relates to the movement in higher education where the barriers for entry come down and secondary and elementary education are undergoing reforms to return to basics in education. There is an increased focus on life skills or lifelong learning rather than examination oriented curricula designed to funnel the brightest and the best into the elicit world of higher education.

It is apparent that higher education has undergone change but has curriculum direction kept pace with this change ? It may be suggested that perhaps within all this development, the role of curriculum appears to have made less progress. Indeed, creating curriculum to keep pace with these changes is no easy task especially when the rhetoric of ‘curriculum’ is used so broadly across so many contexts that it appears to have lost its credibility. The words of Nurot (1993) could become the conscious in reminding architects to be vigilant to avoid becoming too prescriptive in curriculum development and not keeping pace with the diversity and flexibility of current education directions..

This paper suggests that curriculum has been provided with the opportunity to take its place in the global village. It will demonstrate how two cultural contexts collaborated to create a curriculum that met the socio-cultural and determinants of both cultural contexts to deliver a program that withstood academic rigor and scrutiny. It provides a framework that directed the thinking underpinning the curriculum. This paper presents a journey from conception to delivery with questions and dilemmas that faced the architects throughout the process.

Framework for thinking

Two words - meaning and direction - underpinned the development of the curriculum. Consequently, the questions that predicated all thinking throughout the development focused equally on how the curriculum would be designed and for whom it was being designed. These questions were:

Is this meaningful to both cultural contexts?

Does this provide direction to the action?

As Wood (1987:2) noted,

..intercultural education broadens the range of reasons for our actions, for we learn to think in terms of the dynamics of social systems, to get enough inside the thinking of others to respect their values (which is not the same as accepting them), and to grow in our imaginative capacity to identify with people different from us.

By focusing on these questions the architects determined that the curriculum needed to be an action and a developmental framework that was culturally relevant and had a social purpose.

The process first required an examination of the meaning of curriculum. Smith & Lovat (1993) have provided some direction in suggesting that when examining the meaning of curriculum one needs to be cognizant that:

1. People use the word to mean different things and it is important to understand the meaning of the word when it is used.

2. Each usage of the word is embedded in ideology or set of beliefs about education. 3. Different usages and meanings of the word suggest a number of issues and

concerns that are central to the nature of curriculum work itself.

What Smith & Lovat (1993) were reminding the architects of was that is not meaningful to contexts to either import or impose a curriculum framework that has not been developed within a socio cultural context. That is, what has been developed in one socio cultural context may not be meaningful and relevant to the context to which it is being imported. This presented the first dilemma.

Dilemmas for action

Dilemma 1: The thinking

How to develop a curriculum that would meet the determinants and cultural diversity of the two contexts as each context possessed its own determinants and ideological perspective. The situation as presented to the architects is outlined in Figure 1.

The curriculum needed to meet the requirements of the main players being:

However, as demonstrated in Figure 1, there were some threads that were universal and others that were diverse and different across the contexts. It is this diversity that brings richness to the curriculum. The threads that weave the diversity together can be seen as being acknowledged by all educators of teachers of children.

Figure 1: Common threads within diversity

Australia Common threads Singapore

Current course: Bachelor of Social Science (Children & Family Studies)

Target: Children and family service workers

Primary focus: Ecological issues in development of children, family &

• Knowledge informs action

• An understanding of development

• Skills in working with children

Current course: Diploma in Early Childhood Education

Target: Teachers in child care centres

Primary focus: curriculum issues; child development; teaching process

community; play as a vehicle for learning; curriculum as an action

Macro issues: University guidelines/structures/

Processes;

Child Care worker recognition from State Government;

National Childcare Accreditation guidelines

• Research as a basis for change

• Requirements of macro and micro environments need to be met

• Academic honesty and rigor

Macro issues: Advent Link-SAUC guidelines/ structures/processes;

Department for Community Development & Sports guidelines and accreditation;

Cultural expectations of teacher in child care

Process to solve dilemma 1

To begin to solve this dilemma the architects utilised a four step process (Banham, 1999).

• Reflection - on what was currently required in early childhood care and education in both contexts

• Assessment - of whether the proposed curriculum accounted for this refection • Reconstruction - of the proposed curriculum to ensure a balance was created across

both contexts • Action - to create a curriculum framework that was accepted by both contexts.

For this process to be functional the architects needed to be clear about what is said needs to be undertaken (description) and what is really undertaken (action). Action only has meaning in context and it only has meaning when the requirements of the contexts are part of the action. Action does not simply happen but it is rather a conscious decision about such things as content, teaching and learning styles and organisation of the learning environment (McLeod, 1987:19). What McLeod was suggesting is that we need to examine our proposed curriculum from two perspectives. First a macro perspective (broad cultural/ contextual environment) and second, a macro perspective (student, children & community) to ensure that all players take an active role in the development process. These are conscious decisions.

As can be noted in Figure 1 the two curriculums, although offering education for teachers in child care centres, possessed different foci. The direction and meaning were similar and resulted in the identification of common threads. These common threads were used as a basis for the collaborative curriculum.

Dilemma 2: Action - articulating the meaning and direction to meet many masters

The architects needed to have an understanding of the perspective being represented by both cultural contexts in order to provide meaning and direction to the common threads identified in Figure 1.

The Australian context

Australia has an interesting divide in early childhood care & education. On one hand is child care and on the other is pre-school education. People who work in child care, caring and educating preschool children in development and life skills are called 'childcare workers' or' carers'. People who work in preschools or pre primary centres, caring and educating preschool children are called 'teachers'. Why does the care/education dichotomy exist as both interact with young children. The debate, in its simplist form, is presented as follows. First, the child care workers have traditionally undertaken a course of study consisting of two years from a TAFE institution, whereas the teachers have traditionally undertaken a three year - now four year - course of study from a Teachers College or now university. Second, it is suggested that child care workers are taught more applied skills in play and nurturing behaviours whereas teachers are taught curriculum approaches in a range of subject areas that facilitate future academic learning. The latter appears to be given more recognition than the first. Third, the accreditation/recognition of child care workers (in Western Australia) resides with the Department of Community Development whereas for teachers it resides with the Department of Education. Fourth, relates to definitions - of curriculum and of education. Both words are weighted by contextualisation and it has been these particular issues in the debate that appears to has kept alive the care/education dichotomy. The debate still continues in Australia so a course, that ideologically sat somewhere inbetween seemed a way forward. It was within this context that the degree in children studies was created.

The theoretical framework for the degree is grounded in an ecological systems model of human development and service provision ( Bronfenbrenner, 1979). The degree was designed not only to understand the developmental needs of children and their families but also to understand the importance of the environment on the development of children and their families. The content, teaching strategies, and learning environment drew on the knowledge and understandings provided by sociology, anthropology, biology, psychology, and history as outlined in Table 1.

Table 1 Theoretical framework and approaches underlying the Children Studies programme

THEORETICAL FRAMEWORK

The Children Studies programme is based within an ecological framework. Within this framework five approaches have been identified providing direction

DEVELOPMENT OF KNOWLEDGE

for the programme. These approaches are outlined below.

APPROACH

EXPLANATION

RELATIONSHIP TO THE PROGRAMME

YEAR 1 YEAR 2 YEAR 3

Sociological

examines societies, the interaction between people, how social change occurs within societies

how this relates to the children & family services society

provide an introduction to the children & family services society

analyse relationships - - intra and inter,

to further analyse the children & family services society

utilise this knowledge to understand and create social change in the children & family services society

Anthropological

examines how people create an understanding and meaning of their world

approach this from:

- cross cultural

- developmental

perspective

explore students’ understanding of their personal value systems

analyse how children and others develop an understanding and meaning for their world

Explore curriculum concepts

utilise this knowledge to critically analyse how people within society create an understanding/meaning of their world.

Biological examines nutritional & health needs of people

use this perspective to create environments that meet people's nutritional & health needs

introduction to nutrition and health needs

develop a further understanding of nutritional & health needs, & the provision of environments that

utilise knowledge in the analysis of policies & procedures related to children & family services

meet these needs

Psychological

examines the underlying theoretical approaches that explain people's behaviour and development

use this perspective to enable students to identify personal meanings & framework.

examine theoretical approaches

develop their own framework from these approaches

*critically analyse their framework from the perspective of the macro system

*place their framework within a macro context

Historical examines the historical context & evolution of systems

use this perspective to place children & family services issues in context

understand the importance of an historical perspective to the content

understand the importance of an historical perspective to the content

Use a historical perspective in the analysis of policy, social systems, & change processes.

However, with the movement towards competencies in training of children's services workers, this broad approach to learning appeared not to fit the direction of children's services as it contained theoretical studies in issues like curriculum and play that did not fit a competency approach. On the other hand it did not fit teacher education as there was too much focus on ecological issues, development and little on subject curriculum.

One possible home for such an approach to childhood care and education was in Singapore where there was beginning a expressed need to include childhood and family issues in teacher education training. Unlike Australia, the two Ministries responsible for early childhood teacher training created an approach wherein the training for all preschool teachers - be it in child care centres or pre-school/preprimary centres - is the same, by taking the best from both previous independent approaches to training.

The Asian Education context:

Many Asian nations especially Singapore leap-frog from mere agricultural commodity producing economies to become industrial powers, and evolve into service and knowledge societies, achieving in thirty years, what their more nature counterparts have taken over a hundred years to accomplish. Until the recent economic setback in Asia, each country especially Singapore has been pouring their vast resources into educational reform, and even in difficult financial times, the momentum has held on tenaciously. Until recent times, higher education remained the domain of the privileged few highly intelligent who could meritoriously enter the local universities. Only the rich who could afford to go abroad to by pass the system. University education remained the franchise of the top one percent of the

population. Most Southeast Asian countries had only one to two national universities staffed and controlled by colonial academics-and dominated by the 'standards' of the colonial academic powerhouses thousands of miles away.

During the last twenty years, under the reforming encouragement of United Nations initiatives, and demands from the commercial world for advanced technological training, additional national and state universities have been chartered. Schools of every shape and form have sprung up, extending advanced educational opportunities to all who have the time, brains, and money. In fact, higher education is now available to most who desire a degree. As expectations rise, the paper chase gets more intense and the danger of a diploma mill mentality may be evolving through the more liberal access to higher education.

Even early childhood education is re-examining itself, its purposes and objectives, and its delivery systems. Teacher education at every level is undergoing close review and rediscovering its purpose (Wong, 2001). Systematic training of preschool teachers began in 1969 when the Ministry of Education and the adult Education Board conducted basic training for those working in settings such as those run by private organizations, crèches, community groups and schools for the handicapped. The teachers Training College and, thereafter, the Institute of Education took over the training in 1977 and 1981 respectively. With increasing demand for trained staff following the Education Act of 1985 and the corresponding Childcare Legislation Act of 1988, there was a marked increase in the number and the level of training courses available as well as training facilities (Sharpe, 2000). Currently, besides the National Institute of Education, established in 1991, a number of training agencies also provide training, including the Singapore Institute of Management (now established as an Open University), Kinder land Learning Center, Advent Links-SAUC, Ngee Ann Polytechnic and Regional Training and Resource Center

(Lim, Gan and Sharpe, 1997).

Each of the Ministries has its own standards and criteria for staff qualification, training, and performance according to the objectives of the programs. Nationally accredited courses are now available for both kindergarten and child care teachers. There are three levels, including the advanced course or Certificate in preschool management and administration of 120 hour’s duration; the intermediate course or Certificate in Pres-school teaching (210 hours in duration); and the basic course (120 hours in duration). The content of these three levels is geared to providing teachers/principals /supervisors with knowledge, skills and strategies in sequential order. Aspects of child development and management and the teaching of language, mathematics and creative activities are covered in the basic course. At the second or intermediate level, the emphasis is on the provision of developmentally appropriate experiences for children from eighteen months to six years of age. Aspects such as observation, planning, presentation and evaluation are covered. Intermediate course participants design, prepare and present teaching materials and resources across the curriculum areas. Management and supervision of staff, children and their parents, administration of the programs following the guidelines provided by both the ministries and based on each center’s philosophy and goals. Kindergartens require a fixed ratio of qualified staff based on its operating capacity. The Childcare Legislative Act also stipulates trained staff based on this criterion (Sharpe, 2000). It is hoped that the introduction of a pre-service Early Childhood Education certificate level course by the Ngee Ann Polytechnic in 1999 will meet the demands of the field for trained staff in response to the stipulated requirements.

In November 2000 the two ministries jointly put together a document on accreditation guidelines for preschool teacher training/education courses. This is based on the research rationale that quality of preschool provision depends greatly on the quality of training received by preschool teachers. Teachers with specialized training in child development

contribute to positive classroom climate, and are able to promote more sociable and co-operative behavior in children. These teachers are also able to encourage children to persist in their tasks and develop their thinking and problem solving skills. Studies (Arnett, 1989; Berk, 1997) have also revealed that teachers with specialized training in children development understand children's behavior better, are more positive in their interaction with children, less punitive in behavior management, and more willing to spend quality time with them. They are also found to be more likely to encourage and motivate children to learn, to provide more indirect guidance, to encourage initiative and verbal expression and are less restrictive (Honig & Hirallal, 1998).

A qualification accreditation committee was set up to monitor and approve proposed training courses by different training agencies. It was designed to provide a structure to assess and maintain quality, and to delineate the steps in the appraisal of the minimum standards expected from any agency concerned with the training of quality preschool teachers. There are two training programs being the Certificate in Preschool Teaching and the Diploma in Preschool Education . The Diploma in Preschool Education comprises two levels being the Diploma in Pre-school Education (Teaching) for the teachers and the Diploma in Pre-School Education (Leadership) for principals. Candidates can choose to complete the Diploma in two stages, by completing the teaching first and continue with the leadership at a later stage. (MOE-MCDS, November 2000)

Process to solve Dilemma 2:

To solve this dilemma the architects:

• Revisited the thinking undertaken in Dilemma 1 • Reflected on the needs of both cultural contexts • Focussed on the common threads • Took action and created a curriculum

The outcome created a collaborative curriculum for preschool teachers in childcare and kindergarten/preschool settings. The University program amended its course name to reflect the curriculum direction and content of the course to Associate Degree/Bachelor of Arts (Childhood & Family Education. The Singapore embedded ECU modules in its program to meet the ECU program ecological focus on families and the community. The two levels were maintained for those students seeking to undertake a slower progression in their studies. The outcomes for the student are positive as they receive two awards for each level - one from ECU and one from Advent Links-SAUC.

Through examination of the outcomes of this collaboration (Tables 2) the borders are indeed commencing to appeared blurred.

Table 2: Collaboration across borders

Australian Qualification Singapore Qualification

Conclusion

The process to collaboratively create a curriculum that met the socio-cultural and determinants of both cultural contexts was a challenging one. The many masters it needed to satisfy provided dilemmas which were systematically resolved to deliver a program that withstood academic rigor and scrutiny. The framework that directed the thinking was based on two important questions being, is this meaningful to both cultural contexts and does this provide direction to the action? Through a four step process the framework for thinking was created. By understanding the needs of each cultural context a intercultural curriculum that has both meaning and direction was created and is being jointly delivered in Singapore. This is not the end of the journey but only the beginning of a continuous process that moves early childhood education into the global village. As Brameld's (1961: 22) suggests:

The greatest error educators can make is to assume that education is an isolated or cloistered institution to be interpreted by itself without regard to the cyclonic forces sweeping the earth.

References:

Arnett, J. (1989). Caregivers in day care centres. Does training matter? Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 10, 541-552.

Banham, V. (1999). Balancing the community's and children's needs in curriculum development. In H.K Chiam (Ed.). Excellence in Early Childhood Education. (pp167-175). Selangor, Malaysia: Pelanduk Publications.

Berk, L. (1997). Child Development. (4th Edition). Boston: Allyn & Bacon.

Brameld, T. (1961). Education for the emerging age. New York: Harper & Row

Emy, H.V. (1993). Remaking Australia: The state, the market and Australia’s future. St. Leonards, NSW: Allen & Unwin.

Honig, A. & Hirallal, A. (1998). Which counts for excellence in childcare staff - years in service, educational level or ECE coursework? Early Child Development and Care, 145, 31-46.

Lim, Gan & Sharpe, (1997). Immersion in Singapore preschool. In R.K. Johnson and M.Swain (Eds.). Immersion education: International perspectives (pp190-260) Cambridge U.K.: Cambridge University Press.

McLeod, J. (1987). Curriculum as an anthropology. Curriculum Perspective, 7,1.

Nuorot, P. (1993). Historical perspectives on early childhood education. In J. Roopnarine & J. Roopnarine. Approaches to early childhood education. New York: Merrill Publishing. (1-32)

Sharpe, P. (2000). Features of preschool education in Singapore. In C. Tan-Niam and M.L. Quah (Eds.). Investing in our future: The early years. (pp 123-128). Singapore: McGraw Hill.

Wong, L. (2001). Go and make a difference. Presentation of Keynote addresses at Edith Cowan University Graduation Ceremony Perth, Western Australia

Wood, R. (1987). Seeing the world as others see it. Liberal Education, 73, 2-5.