No abstract

No abstract

The early years of childhood are receiving increased public policy attention in many countries around the world. Debates on providing quality services and ensuring a good foundation for lifelong learning are generating a new interest in curriculum issues. What understandings do we have of young children? How do they access and construct knowledge about the world around them? What can adults do to effectively enhance children's learning opportunities? According to prevailing values, traditions and priorities, countries differ in their approaches towards answering and regulating curriculum issues such as these. A recent research study based at the State Institute of Early Childhood Education and Research in Bavaria/Germany draws together innovative theoretical and empirical work on the curriculum by 30 scholars from 12 different countries worldwide. Curriculum models in 5 European countries (Denmark, France, Poland, Scotland, Sweden) and 5 non-European countries (Australia, Chile, China, New Zealand, Nigeria) are analysed with regard to their aims and theoretical orientation, key learning areas, approaches to evaluation, and links with primary school. The presentation outlines selected findings of this crossnational study, identifies similarities and differences between countries, and raises questions regarding research and policy approaches. RÉSUMÉOn accorde dans de nombreux pays une attention accrue aux premières années de l'enfance sur le plan des politiques nationales. Des débats portant sur le fait de fournir des services de qualité et d'assurer un bon fondement à une formation devant durer tout au long de la vie suscitent un nouvel intérêt pour toutes les questions relatives aux programmes scolaires. Que comprenons-nous des jeunes enfants? Comment apprennent-ils à connaître le monde qui les entoure et organisent-ils ce qu'ils en savent? Que peuvent faire les adultes pour améliorer de manière efficace les chances d'apprentissage offertes aux enfants? Selon les valeurs, les traditions et les priorités courantes dans un pays ou un autre, les pays diffèrent par leur manière d'appréhender les réponses possibles et de réglementer de telles questions quant aux programmes scolaires. Une étude récemment réalisée par l'Institut de l'Education et de la Recherche pour la petite enfance de l'Etat de Bavière en Allemagne rassemble des travaux théoriques et empiriques innovants sur les programmes scolaires avec les efforts conjoints de 30 spécialistes de 12 pays. On a analysé les modèles de programmes scolaires de 5 pays européens (Danemark, Ecosse, France, Pologne, Suède) et de 5 pays non-européens (Australie, Chili, Chine, Nigeria, Nouvelle-Zélande) par rapport à leurs objectifs et leur orientation théorique, aux principaux domaines d'apprentissage, à leurs approches d'évaluation et aux liens avec l'école primaire. La présentation expose les grandes lignes de conclusions choisies dans cette étude internationale, identifie les similitudes et les différences entre les différents pays et soulève des questions sur la manière ...

Across and beyond Europe, demographic, social and economic pressures both at the macro and the micro level are impacting on the work contexts of early childhood educators. Alongside heightened drives towards expansion and increasing regulation of the field, expectations are intensifying. Additionally, goals and targets for higher education and vocational education at the European policy level are generating restructurings of the national qualification systems for work in the early childhood field. In this dynamic context of change the SEEPRO (Early Education/care and Professionalisation in Europe) study, based at the State Institute of Early Childhood Research in Munich and funded by the German Federal Ministry of Family and Youth Affairs, set out to map the qualification requirements and workplace settings of early years practitioners in their country-specific context. Similarities and differences across the 27 countries of the European Union were documented and analysed. The findings of the study show considerable divergencies across Europe in terms of formal education and training requirements and the desired professional profiles for working with young children. Against this background of diversity, similarities in terms of workforce emergencies and challenges have also emerged: one is a common lack of truly flexible and inclusive pathways linked to formal professional recognition and status for all practitioners in the field; another is the continuing need to seek more effective ways of including men in the early childhood workforce.

No abstract