There is an expectation in both Singapore and Australia that early childhood educators will align their programmes with national learning and quality frameworks. For the Australian sites in Melbourne, the most relevant
framework is the state-based Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework (VEYLDF) (State of Victoria 2011b).
The VEYLDF in turn is aligned with, and derives from, the national Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) (Australian Government, 2009). In Singapore the national framework is called Nurturing Early Learners: A Framework for a Kindergarten Curriculum in Singapore (NEL) (Republic of Singapore, 2012).
12.1 The Australian sites and the VELDF
The VEYLDF provides a common framework and a common language to guide early childhood educational practice in Victoria. It is strongly influenced by sociocultural and ecological perspectives on children’s development and learning, emphasising the importance of family and community contexts. It identifies five Learning and Development Outcomes for children:
• Children have a strong sense of identity
• Children are connected with and contribute to their world
• Children have a strong sense of wellbeing
• Children are confident and involved learners
• Children are effective communicators
The VEYLDF identifies pedagogy as integrated within the following eight Practice Principles:
1. Family-centred practice
2. Partnerships with professionals 3. High expectations for every child 4. Equity and diversity
5. Respectful relationships and responsive engagement 6. Integrated teaching and learning approaches
7. Assessment for learning and development
Researcher observations and interview transcripts indicated that the Early Years programmes A1 and A2 were working effectively to meet the
requirements of the VEYLDF. Those Australian educators who discussed the local frameworks in interviews reported being able to meet the VEYLDF requirements while working within the PYP. Evidence for children’s achievement of the five Learning and Development Outcomes were
documented in the researcher observations, and indicated in the results of the literacy, school readiness and learning skills assessments.
The Early Years programmes at A1 and A2 demonstrated alignment with the Practice Principles of the VEYLDF. There was evidence of strong relationships with famiies, and opportunities provided for their active involvement in the programmes. Early Years staff in both programmes worked together as a team, collaborating effectively with primary level staff in their schools and assisting children’s smooth transition into Prep. The play-based and inquiry-led
pedagogy of the Early Years programmes reflected curricula that challenged and supported children. They aligned with both PYP principles and those of the VEYLDF, including Practice Principles 3, 4, 5, 6 and 7. Educators in these programmes also demonstrated reflective practice (Practice Principle 8), evident in programme documentation, and in their interviews with researchers.
12.2 The Singapore sites and the NEL
The Ministry of Education has recently introduced the NEL as a national curriculum framework for guiding early childhood programmes (Republic of Singapore, 2012). The framework draws on the Developmentally Appropriate Practice model as practised in the Untied States (Ng, 2014), with an emphasis on the unique charactersitics and opportunities for learning found in the early childhood period. One of the goals of the framework is the introduction of a more play-based pedagogy in Singapore preschools: ’…a broadening
endorsement of play as an optimum learning instrument to develop creativity, thinking, language, independence, social interactions and problem-solving skills’ (Ng, 2014, p. 11). The NEL states clearly that early years education is important in itself, not just as a preparation for formal academic learning:
Early years education has been perceived by some as a preparation for primary school. However, it is not just a preparation for the next stage. It is vitally important in itself. It should not be confused with trying to
accelerate learning in the kindergarten years by providing children with a simplified primary school curriculum. (Republic of Singapore, 2012, p.
11)
The Singapore framework is based on six principles for quality practice, identified as critical features of a quality kindergarten programme (p. 14). They are:
• A holistic approach to development and learning
• Integrated learning
• Children as active learners
• Adults as interested supporters in learning
• Interactive learning
• Play as a medium for learning
Based on these priniciples, the NEL also provides guidance for practice in Practices 1-6, which include guidelines on basing the curriculum on children’s observed learning and interests, organising the learning envrionment, and creating a positive climate for learning.
One of the Singapore preschools (S1) appeared to be implementing its Early Years programme in a way that aligned with the principles of the NEL. The researcher observations all yielded evidence of what would be regarded as quality practice under the national framework. However, while the second Singapore preschool (S2) appeared to be effective as a school-type academic programme, it is not clear to the researchers whether the S2 programme was aligned with all guidelines of the Singapore framework, such as in areas relating to Principle 6 Learning through play, or Practice 3 Preparing the learning environment. For example, having children sitting on benches with the teacher out the front conducting lessons appeared to be a regular practice at S2. Under Practice 3, the Singapore framework document states that:
The physical layout determines the type of learning that is going to take place. For example, the arrangement of tables and chairs with a teacher seated at the front of the room will probably result in teacher-directed and table-bound activities where children are passive and wait to be told what to do (Republic of Singapore, 2012, p. 30).
In at least some respects therefore, the programme at S2 did not appear to be completely aligned with all the principles and practices outlined in the
Singapore framework. In this respect, it may be symptomatic of a wider issue in the Singapore context. Ng (2014) describes how early years teachers in Singapore experience tensions between following the guidelines of the new framework, and their own views and those of parents on the purpose of early years education. She notes how research has shown that both teachers and parents in Singapore see the purpose of early years education as preparation for formal schooling, with parents requesting structured academic work for their children, such as work sheets.
Many Singapore parents also see play as about relaxation and pleasure, and as separate from work and learning (Fung & Cheng, 2012; Ng, 2014). Ng’s own study of Singapore early years classrooms showed similar pedagogical practices and classroom timetabling and organisation to that observed in S2.
Despite the training of educators, traditional Singaporean cultural attitudes towards academic learning appear to be still a dominant countervailing influence in the implementation of the NEL.
It needs to be remembered that researchers spent only two days at observing the Early Years programme in S2, in what they were told was a ‘revision’
period. Nevertheless, the researchers recommend that S2 confirms that their Early Years programme is meeting local framework requirements.