final

Learning in the Preschool Years

Traditional education typically divides content into specific segments, or subjects, such as reading, language, and mathematics. In fact, when children enter preschool, they may encounter this single-subject approach to learning for the first time, as teachers talk about getting ready for science, music, and art. For the most part, however, experiences in these subjects are not constrained by strict time schedules. Instead, in a preschool classroom with a developmentally appropriate program, in-depth explorations are valued in an environment that has been carefully prepared. For example, it is better to have children explore just a few topics "repeatedly in many different ways" rather than just touching on a wide variety. In this way, "they are able to organize what they know into deeper and more powerful theories or ideas" (Tomlinson & Hyson, 2009, p. 141).

Learning in the Primary Grades

By the time children enter kindergarten or primary grade classrooms, adult-defined academic subjects may take on an even greater role, as periods of time are devoted to reading or literacy, language arts, writing, math, science, social studies, music, art, and physical education (kindergartens may refer to movement). While each of these subjects is important in its own right, young children—even in the primary grades—do not think about their learning in such structured ways. Rather, left to their own devices, they engage in learning experiences that "follow data trails that crisscross disciplines naturally and take the problem solver along paths that meander into unexpected, unanticipated, thought-provoking, and often uncharted domains of learning" (Audet, 2005, p. 138). In fact, curriculum integration is an approach to learning based on a child's natural impulses; it disregards subject boundaries in favor of a more holistic view of learning, allowing children to follow their natural lines of inquiry.

Curriculum Creation as a Balancing Act

Recognizing that curriculum integration may be one ideal but that traditional subjects must also be adhered to, Sue Bredekamp (1997) suggests, "The best strategy . . . is to begin with the discipline frameworks and identify the connections, the ways that curriculum can be integrated and made more meaningful for learners" (p. xvi). Furthermore, curriculum designers must always keep in mind the importance and integrity of the individual subjects.

As they create curricula at each developmental level, curriculum planners should keep the following points in mind:

Infants and toddlers are provided their own natural curriculum by their physical environment, family, and society. The role of the curriculum planner is to make the environment and experiences welcoming and positive.

Preschoolers continue to learn much from all aspects of their environments. They are also ready for expanding their learning in ways that will lead them to more formal learning later on. Curriculum planners can identify children's current and potential interests and build from there, crossing disciplines informally. Time for in-depth study is important.

Children in the primary grades, like the younger preschoolers, learn most naturally and meaningfully when formal subjects are not separated; however, it is often important and even necessary to focus for a time on a single subject.

Integrating curricula for preschool and the primary grades is one way to make learning most meaningful and enjoyable to children.

The integrity and importance of individual subjects should not be lost or treated superficially in the process of creating an integrated curriculum.

From all of these points, we may conclude that curriculum creation is a balancing act, one that requires thoughtful planning whatever the age of the child. However, one more consideration is worth mentioning here. The following case study presents a scenario in which a teacher carefully considers much of what has just been discussed when making plans but neglected to inform the children. At the end of the case study, you will be asked to consider whether this was a problem or not.

3.2 Curriculum Integration and Single-Subject Teaching: Some Important History

The roots of these two approaches to curriculum development can be found in the works of the 17th-century Englishman John Locke (1632–1704) and the 18th-century Swiss man Jean-Jacques Rousseau (1712–1778). Both were highly influential in education, with Locke intent on providing interesting ways to learn single subjects and Rousseau focused on a "natural" education that allowed room for play and incidental learning.

Pestalozzi's Approach to Subject Integration

The Swiss educational reformer Johann Pestalozzi (1746–1827), inspired by the humaneness of Rousseau's philosophy, created a curriculum that provided an informal integration across subjects. In addition, however, there were focused lessons for skills learning or memorization of essential facts and, at these times, the curriculum reverted to single subjects. In the history of Western education, no one before Pestalozzi had taken this balanced approach. His combination of philosophy and practical application found its home in a series of schools he founded over his lifetime. One important component of Pestalozzi education was to begin with concrete experiences and to move toward the abstract as children were ready, a concept well understood in modern education. To this end, he created what he called "object lessons," known today as manipulatives, that were used to teach the early stages of form, language, and numbers. With such revolutionary approaches to teaching and learning, Pestalozzi's schools' fame and influence spread internationally, with educators coming to observe and study with him.

Froebel and the First Kindergarten

Friedrich Froebel (1782–1852), a one-time student of Pestalozzi, applied much of what he learned from his mentor to the creation of the German kindergarten, but with a difference. To Froebel, Pestalozzi's schools lacked an all-important "spiritual mechanism." As the son and nephew of Lutheran pastors, Froebel always regarded education and life in terms of their relation to God. "Pestalozzi takes man existing only in his appearance on earth," he said, "but I take man in his eternal being, in his eternal existence" (Shapiro, 1983, p. 20). Further aspects of Froebel's philosophy included the concepts of harmony, unity, and reconciling opposites, and the activities he developed for children often reflected these concepts (Brosterman, 1997). An example of this focus on harmony and reconciling opposites was circle games, in which the children would break briefly into individual activity, followed by a return to the circle as a demonstration of group unity. Kindergarten teachers were trained to point out the symbolism of such acts, and the children were believed capable of understanding such abstract concepts.

Like Rousseau and Pestalozzi before him, Froebel loved nature and wished to instill a similar love in young children. Inventing a school for 3- to 5-year-olds, he decided to call it a kindergarten, the German word for children's garden. There was, indeed, gardening as a part of the curriculum, complete with a focus on the harmonious design of the plots and the unity required as everyone worked together. Although Froebel's ideas about circle games and gardening have lived on through a century and a half, it is the materials he designed that gained the most fame. Called gifts and occupations, these materials were greatly influenced by Froebel's earlier studies in geometry and in the crystals found in nature. As children interacted with the materials, their teachers provided lessons in harmony and unity as appropriate. This rather structured approach to early childhood curriculum was a force to be dealt with when the next important educator appeared on the historical scene in the United States.

Dewey's Lab School

John Dewey (1859–1952) arrived at the University of Chicago at a time when university laboratory schools were in development. The primary purpose of lab schools—which were created primarily on college campuses—was to train teachers while providing high-quality, research-based, and cutting-edge education to children. A major focus of Dewey's years at the university was the creation of such a school, which included a two-year kindergarten. For the youngest children as well as those who were older, Dewey envisioned a curriculum that reflected real life, including excursions into the neighborhood and projects that were inspired by children's interests. Because kindergartens at the time were devoted to the philosophy and methodology of Froebel, and Dewey had something quite different in mind, he had to proceed carefully in order to bring early childhood educators over to his way of thinking. One approach was to use Froebelian terminology and "rebrand" it. For example, Dewey (1902) took Froebel's spiritual concept of unity and used the term when unifying his own ideas such as learning and doing or school and society. A second approach was to use Froebel materials but in a much freer fashion. Froebel blocks, for example, came with specific instructions for their use, but in the Dewey kindergarten, they were played with freely and creatively. There were no teacher-led lessons about the spiritual foundations of the activities in which children were engaged. So that he would have well-trained teachers for his lab kindergarten, Dewey needed to convince the area's kindergarten teachers that his views of learning and curricula were more advanced than those of Froebel. To a great extent, he succeeded (Brosterman, 1997).

Basic to the Dewey School's approach to teaching and learning was the idea that a function of education is to prepare children for living in a democracy by creating a democratic society within the school. In Dewey's words, "I believe that . . . the school is primarily a social institution. Education, therefore, is a process of living and not a preparation for future living" (1964, p. 429). Another basic idea included a curriculum dedicated to learning by engaging in projects. Projects were an important part of learning from kindergarten and through the elementary grades. These projects should be based on children's real-life interests and their "own instincts and powers furnish the material and give the starting-point for all education" (Dewey, 1964, p. 428). Such projects, which grew from children's own interests, inevitably crossed curricular lines, incorporating within them whatever subjects were pertinent to the research to be done. It is the Dewey projects that have given rise to today's approaches to curriculum integration.

The historic line from then until now, however, was not a straight one. Although Dewey's ideas gained wide acceptance for a while, those adopting them often focused on catch phrases such as learning by doing (in other words, engaging in hands-on activities) without ensuring that children were actually engaged in deep acquisition of knowledge. Concerns about Dewey's so-called progressive education were already emerging when, in the 1950s, the Soviet Union beat all other countries in achieving space flight. Suddenly, American money for education was focused on developing single-subject materials and curricula for children of every age. According to Laurel Tanner, "The nature of the learner was recast in the form of a budding scholar-specialist, while the relevance of the curriculum to the life of the learner and the life of a free society was shunted aside" (1989, p. 9). Further, she said, "The result is either curriculum congestion or the removal of important studies in favor of the subject matter that fits the latest educational crisis or fashion" (p. 10). It was the mid-1980s before Dewey's ideas could be rediscovered and the integrated curriculum re-explored, at least in the United States. In the interim, other developments had more influence, as we shall see.

The Montessori Approach

On the other side of the Atlantic, but contemporaneous with Dewey, the Italian educator Maria Montessori (introduced in Chapter 2) also saw the wisdom and opportunity in paying respect to and then moving on from Froebel's model of kindergarten. After being trained as a physician, Montessori was assigned to work within an institution for insane adults. Because there seemed to be no place else to put them, the institution also included children with learning disabilities. There, the children were largely ignored and left to entertain themselves without materials for play or education. Concerned about the inhumane treatment of the children, Montessori began to seek ways to inspire and educate them. With no background in educating children, she turned to the writings of Rousseau, Pestalozzi, and Froebel, as well as special educators. At one point, she advocated creating Froebel kindergartens throughout Italy (Kramer, 1988). In the long run, however, Montessori went her own way, moving from her successful work with the children in the adult asylum to the creation of her own schools.

Montessori's curricular materials sometimes resemble those of Froebel with their origins in geometry, and others are similar to those promoted by progressive special educators of the time. The hands-on nature of virtually every experience in the classroom can be traced back to Pestalozzi. Methods of curriculum delivery call to mind Froebel's preference for a structured introduction with some creativity permitted only later. Rousseau's influence can be observed in the freedom children experience to create their own society as they make their own choices and learn to work and play together. In this respect, some of Montessori's ideas resemble those of Dewey that were in development at the same time.

Curriculum knowledge in an early childhood Montessori classroom was, and continues to be, focused on language, mathematics, education of all the senses, and activities that can be used in everyday practical life. Additional experiences are provided in other subject areas as well, but materials of the prepared environment come from the first four areas. For more on Montessori education, refer back to Chapter 2.

Reggio Emilia and Curriculum Integration in the 1990s

During World War II, the Italian government shut down the Montessori schools, and by war's end, something new seemed to be called for. The municipal preschools of Reggio Emilia began to draw inspiration from Dewey's ideas for research projects for young children, but their programs were discovered by Americans only in the 1980s. At the time, British infant schools were also engaged in Dewey-inspired projects, and Americans were learning much from them, too (Katz, 1999). Once the Reggio Emilia model became widely known in this country, many early childhood programs developed a similar approach that integrated curricula through research projects.

The 1990s were a time when curriculum integration was introduced into the advanced grades, all the way through university. Perhaps most enthusiastic were those involved in middle school teaching, with one book arguing, "If learners and teachers in the middle grades are to realize their fullest potential, we must remove lots of 'walls'—the mental barriers that derive from . . . the submission to vague pressures to 'cover' one curriculum or another; . . . incongruities between child-development theory and prevalent instructional practices" (Stevenson & Carr, 1993, p. 2). Enthusiasm, but also occasional skepticism, at all levels led to conferences with titles such as "What's All This about Curriculum Integration?" (1995). From such conferences, opinion writing, and research came some definitions of what integration might mean for curriculum planners. Table 3.1 presents a collection of these definitions, as well as examples of their application to early childhood education. You may find them useful as you do your own curriculum designs;

Table 3.1: Models of  Single-Subject and Integrated Curriculum
Method	Description	Early Childhood Examples
Fragmented or Dispersed	Focus is on a single subject.	Children listen to a musical recording. Children recite the alphabet.
Nested	Skills are inserted into a single academic subject.	To promote social skills, children are divided into groups to solve math problems.
Themed	A collection of learningexperiences relate to a singletheme. This may or may notinclude integration of more thanone academic subject.	A preschool class engages in a week of activities  focused on fall leaves.
Webbed	A single theme or topic is integrated across two or more subjects.	A teacher expands a science study of a nearby creek to include experiences in art and music.
Immersed	The class (or a single child)focuses on a topic of inquiry thatoften integrates more than asingle subject.	Two or three children choose to delve more deeply into a topic the rest of the class has completed. The teacher helps them findresources, but they research primarily on theirown.

Today's early childhood programs make use of all the models represented in Table 3.1, although of course you will not see them all in one place. Upcoming sections will explain more about when, where, and why different approaches might be observed.

The Common Core Standards Initiative

The most recent development in curriculum models is provided by the Common Core Standards Initiative (CCSI), although the standards apply only to English Language Arts and Mathematics for kindergarten and primary grades. Since 2009, the CCSI has been a nationwide attempt at coordinating curriculum expectations across all states and all grades from kindergarten through grade 12. At the time of this writing, 45 states and three territories had agreed to restructure curricula according to these standards. The sponsoring agencies and authors have been the National Governors Association Center for Best Practices and the Council of Chief State School Officers (2010).

To provide an idea of what the language arts expectations are for kindergarten, here are a few (of many) examples of what children should be able to do:

Informational text: With prompting and support, ask and answer questions about key details in a text.

Literature: Recognize common types of texts (e.g., storybooks and poems).

Writing: Use a combination of drawing, dictating, and writing to compose opinion pieces in which they tell a reader the topic or the name of the book they are writing about and state an opinion or preference about the topic or book (e.g., "My favorite book is . . .").

The following are examples of mathematics expectations for kindergartners:

Measurement & data: Describe measurable attributes of objects, such as length or weight.

Geometry: Describe objects in the environment using the names of shapes.

Counting & cardinality: Count to 100 by ones and by tens.

Operations & algebraic thinking: Represent addition and subtraction with objects, fingers, mental images, drawings, sounds (e.g., claps), acting out situations, verbal explanations, expressions, or equations.

Although these standards are meant to be national, each state has the freedom to institute them in its own way. In addition, there are no requirements as to how curriculum will be taught, although special consideration must be paid to English language learners and children with disabilities. It is quite possible to use any of the teaching methodologies and curriculum-planning approaches discussed in this textbook and still meet the standards. For example, look back at the Project Learning case study in Chapter 2 in which children learned about the real world of a pizza restaurant. In the restaurant, the children measured the length and width of the dining room (see Measurement & data); identified the shape of the room as a rectangle (see Geometry); and, with their teacher's help, created lists of questions to ask the owners, then either wrote down the answers or drew pictures (see Informational text and Writing.)

States that are involved in the CCSI have created websites with parent and teacher information. There you can find further details about the programs in your own state. For the national overview, go to www.corestandards.org. Whether influenced by the CCSI, NAEYC Standards, a center's or school's philosophy, or any combination of these, curriculum development can take any number of approaches. In addition, sources for the creation of any one model might be the classroom teacher, a school district, ideas from online sources, or a published curriculum. We will now consider some of these approaches and provide examples of what they might look like.

3.3 Approaches to Curriculum Development

Perhaps you have observed most or all of the approaches to early education that follow. Here, we focus on how their curricula are created. Teaching methodologies in any one of these curriculum designs might include those we have looked at previously in Chapter 1: direction instruction, group or individual work, and play.

Learning through Single Subjects (Sometimes Connected)

Despite the enthusiasm for integrating curricula in recent years, there are inherent dangers in doing so. First, it is often possible to move ahead with planning while neglecting to ensure that state and local standards have been met. Second, teachers may want to incorporate subjects for which they have little or no training; this is especially true regarding subjects such as music, movement, and art. Third, enthusiasm for integration often leads to loss of the depth of knowledge that develops when attention is paid to individual subjects. Systematic planning of a single subject ensures specific knowledge and skills will not be lost.

There are two basic ways in which single subjects retain their own identity while being connected to others. First, a single subject might be inserted when specific knowledge or skills are needed within a larger integrated curriculum. For example, a group of 3-year-olds might be sorting various materials collected from across the classroom into like colors. At some point, the teacher notices that several children do not know the names of all the colors. After the objects are sorted, she gathers the children together and, through questions, answers, and direct instruction, teaches the colors' names.

Second, focus on a single subject might be emphasized initially, with integration taking place later. This is often the philosophy of national curriculum organizations that are devoted to determining what makes effective teaching and learning in their area of expertise. These organizations typically combine a preference for focus on their own subject along with an understanding that young children are most drawn to experiences that cross disciplines. For example, the positions of science education organizations "are based on the idea that active, hands-on, conceptual learning that leads to understanding, along with the acquisition of basic skills, provides meaningful and relevant [science] learning experiences" (Lind, 1997, p. 76). As another example, the Music Educators National Conference has determined that the music curriculum should first be a "well-planned sequence of learning experiences leading to clearly defined skills and knowledge." As one music educator explains, "[I]nfants experience high and low sounds through vocal play and listening to others sing, while 6-year-olds can describe high and low melodic directions and components without being involved in the musical skills and vice versa" (Kenney, 1997, pp. 108, 110). Consider including music in the broader curriculum "as a discrete way of thinking and experiencing provides the learner with one more way to construct knowledge. It gives the brain more data from which it will integrate internally" (p. 130).

Across the rest of the curriculum can be found viewpoints like those of the science and music organizations and of the educational experts associated with them. When preparing activities of high interest for young children, curriculum planners should keep in mind the importance and integrity of the individual subjects incorporated in them.

Learning through Units, Themes, Projects, and Emergent Curriculum

The first three methods of teaching and learning—units, themes, and projects—have much in common with one another and many of the same advantages. (We will discuss the emergent curriculum separately.) Because the subject matter is chosen based largely on student needs and interests, children are provided with knowledge and skills they can use in the real world. All three methods can be designed to build on children's current knowledge. If units, themes, or projects are incorporated into the standard curriculum, they give it more relevance. There can be flexibility of teaching and learning based on children's evolving interests and the need to shorten or extend the time. Because of the variety of experiences provided by units, themes, and projects, the needs of individual children can be met. For example, some may wish to study on their own in more depth, while others prefer to move on to other activities, and still others who may need help with skills can stop and focus for a time (Seefeldt, Castle, & Falconer, 2010). There are some differences to consider between these methods of curriculum design, and although they may seem slight, they can lead to quite different experiences and outcomes.

Units

In a school curriculum, a unit is a study that typically incorporates two or more subjects over a predetermined period while focusing on a central topic. A unit is designed by the teacher. Of the four curriculum designs, units offer the most formal structure, both for teachers and for children. Although they can be flexible enough to add or subtract experiences based on children's interests and needs, units are fully planned in advance by the teacher. An advantage of units is that, with careful advance planning, teachers can be sure that they have incorporated content that meets school or district guidelines and activities that might be needed for skills attainment, while still providing learning that makes connections between subjects as well as to the real world. The following case study provides an example of the way one kindergarten teacher created a formal structure but also provided experiences based on children's interests and needs.

Units can be highly practical for a group of teachers whose classes contain children at similar levels. Each teacher can be responsible for developing a unit, creating and sharing all the plans with the other teachers, and collecting the pertinent materials for everyone. Furthermore, the combination of preplanning, structure, and cross-curricular possibilities makes units especially attractive for kindergarten and the primary grades, where there are often mandated goals for the curriculum. That same structured approach may make units less useful for younger children whose interests, needs, and requirements are less predictable.

Themes

In a center or school curriculum, themes are groups of activities that cross subject boundaries to achieve a focus on an overarching or umbrella topic. Typically, themes delve into a topic of interest with activities that continue throughout the day. Examples might include food groups, types of transportation, or insects. Themes are often found in preschools as a way to provide interest and make a particular topic highly visible. Usually, theme learning includes much attention to the physical environment, with décor demonstrating the learning being undertaken; when outsiders walk into a themed classroom, they can generally observe theme learning going on without needing to be told about it. In a classroom where the theme is insects, for example, posters of honeybees and praying mantises may adorn the walls, and cages may contain chrysalises that are being observed by the students. A food group theme might have cooking centers, tables with fruits and vegetables to touch and identify, and picture books about the topic.

Like units, themes are preplanned by teachers, and the entire class is expected to participate or at least feel surrounded by the theme at hand. One popular preschool theme is colors, often with one color as the focus each week. Perhaps during the green week, green paint of different shades is provided at the painting easel. Green plants of various sorts could be studied. Music might include movement activities to mimic green plants moving in the wind. Frogs, toads, and snakes could be studied through storybooks or, if available, by observation.

One caution related to thematic learning is that although adults might believe a theme to be obvious, children may not always make the expected connections. Just because many things that happen in a classroom pertain to green does not necessarily mean that they have much to do with each other in other ways. Instead, some children might thoroughly enjoy, and learn much from, activities with plants, animals, and music and never particularly notice or care that there is a lot of green around. John Dewey had concerns about this happening, stating, "Experiences may be so disconnected from one another that, while each is agreeable or even exciting in itself, they are not linked cumulatively to one another. Energy is then dissipated and a person becomes scatter-brained" (1938, p. 26).

Projects

Perhaps the most child-centered of the first three models of curriculum design, project learning emerges from children's stated interests, or interests the teacher observes but that may be unconscious or undeveloped in the children. An advantage of projects is that they provide opportunities for in-depth study; in fact, there is little danger that a project will lead to basic, surface learning. Another advantage of projects is the very natural way that they make differentiation possible. Differentiated instruction is the way in which teachers adjust curricula and learning experiences based on individual needs and interests. Project learning allows for individual and group work, team planning and collaboration, and in-depth study according to children's interests. The most well-known models of project learning come from the Reggio Emilia schools of Italy and the Project Approach of Katz and Chard (see Chapter 2).

demonstrate real-world concepts?

Sometimes, projects grow naturally from units and themes. During the social studies shelter unit described earlier, children became fascinated on their walk with their own shelters. Perhaps if they had walked further, they would have noticed a new apartment building going up. From this might follow a project in which they could study construction techniques, safety requirements, and time frames required for completion. From the study of the green theme, children might wish to focus more learning on the animals. Perhaps they would just study frogs. Perhaps it would be more generally reptiles. Such an outgrowth from units and themes is often an interest shared by only a few children. In a flexible classroom, such learning is possible and supported.

A special interest for a project may well emerge from ideas totally unrelated to a class theme or unit. The following case study explains how this happened in one kindergarten.

For child-centered educators, projects are often thought of as the ideal way for children to learn, but they are also sometimes considered idealistic or impractical. One reason is that required standards might be ignored or are believed not to fit. Indeed, Tony's teacher chose not to consider any particular standards for this project. It occurred close to the end of the school year, and she was able to take a relaxed approach to curriculum development. However, as we have seen in Peggy's pizza study from Chapter 2, attention to standards can certainly be accomplished through project learning. A second reason that project learning may seem idealistic or impractical is that curriculum planning requires content knowledge, creativity, and at least some experience on the part of the teacher. Projects may not be ideal for the beginning educator until some level of comfort is reached concerning curriculum planning.

Emergent Curriculum

Although units, themes, and projects all contain child-centered elements, they also have an adult-designed structure. Attention is often paid to meeting whatever standards are in place. In contrast, an almost entirely learner-centered approach is emergent curriculum. In this case, the curriculum comes from children's interests, either stated by them or observed by their teachers. It is typically seen in classrooms of children who are young enough that standards are not part of the educational concern, or in private or home schools dedicated to child-centered learning. Emergent curriculum tends to contain more play than do the other approaches just discussed and may incorporate more outdoor activities as well.

Here is how a play-based curriculum emerged in one class of 2-year-olds: The children were just beginning to learn to sing, and their teachers used a big book of classic children's songs with colorful pictures as their main instructional aid. One of their favorite songs was "I'm a Little Teapot."

As the children sang, they used their arms and hands as handle and spout, while enjoying tipping over and pouring out. It became clear, however, that they did not know what tea was and had never seen a real teapot. So one of the teachers brought one in and used it to illustrate the song. The next day, the children wanted to know where the teapot was. In addition, during their playtime they began pretending to serve tea to the teachers. The teachers then brought more teapots and cups from home. A little food coloring added to a bit of water in each pot created "tea." The children were taught proper and efficient ways to pour from pot to cup and from cup back to pot, as well as helpful techniques for cleaning up the inevitable spills.

Interest in learning to pour, pretending to drink, and serving each other lasted about one week. The children continued to love singing the song, however, and would make knowledgeable comments about what they were doing and what they observed in the illustrations. Play-based learning that emerges from children's interests is deemed by many to be the most authentic way for young children to learn (Leong & Bodrova, 2012).

3.4 Thinking Ahead

The purpose of this chapter has been to provide the basis for curriculum construction, which will be presented on a practical level in Chapter 4. There are many things to think about before, during, and after designing learning experiences for young children. Chapter 4 will discuss many of these. To help you get started, here is an excerpt from a checklist that Head Start (2001) provides. It is based on positions from NAEYC:

Does the curriculum

promote interactive learning and encourage the child's construction of knowledge?

build and elaborate on children's current knowledge and abilities?

facilitate concept learning and skills development in an integrated and natural way?

permit flexibility for children and teachers?

encourage active learning and frequently allow children to make meaningful choices?

foster children's exploration and inquiry?

promote the development of higher-order abilities, such as thinking, reasoning, problem solving, and decision making?

promote feelings of safety, security, and belonging?

Is the curriculum

meaningful for these children?

relevant to the children's lives?

Note the ways in which these questions apply to the discussions in this chapter. There will be other such ideas to think about in Chapter 4.

Krogh, S. (2013).  A Bridge to the Classroom and Early Care: ECE Capstone  [Electronic version]. Retrieved from https://content.ashford.edu/