论英国与澳大利亚早期教育培养模型方案

论英国与澳大利亚早期教育培养模型方案
导读：这篇文章主要以英国和澳大利亚为例，对早期教育进行探析，强调早期教育对教育发展的重要性同时指出某些模型的不足以及提出观点。本文由英国dissertation网出国留学中心留学生essay代写频道整理提供。
It begins with auditory stimulation in the womb and progresses to similar nourishment in early education; yet regardless of the path taken throughout development, reliance on creativity and individual realization is a fundamental theme in most national educational programs. Recognized in recent decades as an essential step towards educational success and social acclimation, the early years of a child's life are often characterized by limited comprehension and vague levels of social acumen. Methodologies which nurture the development of these skills in stages according the fundamental philosophies of Piaget and Dewey are often recognized for the remarkable youth that they support and mold. The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) represents a departure from the mainframe National Daycare Standards, the Birth to Three Matters guidance, and the Foundation Stage curriculum, culminating in a well planned, highly structured system for educating children until age five. Proponents claim that this departure from the early confines of the other systems will enable both educators and students to excel within the British school system. However, there are many critics who decry the new standardization of the system, citing unrealistic expectations and an immovable framework where there is limited support of creative or interactive scholarly function. There are other nations, however, such as Italy and Australia who have chosen to adopt differing methodologies when it comes to early education in an attempt to nourish and support their children from infancy through adolescence. It is harmonizing a necessary balance between both the British structure and the creative opportunism of the foreign programs that will continue to define the course of child development. Recognizing that stage based assumptions often support higher educational ideologies can serve to assist British educators in implementing a scheme which sustains growth and achieves positive cognitive development.

Within the scope of developmental education, there are varied foundations and theories from which to base a national educational program. For England and Australia, establishing a standardized framework from which no child is left out of structured and traditionally founded systemization produces a continuity and general expectations from which to frame testing and future policies. Yet in recent decades, Australia has adopted a radical approach to its national early education, integrating the Steiner method, a more nurturing framework into its principles. Along this same vein, Italy also professes “a national commitment to the period of early childhood that builds upon a widespread cultural value of shared responsibility for young children.” (New 2000, p. 1) Characterized by a firmly rooted curriculum, founded on similar principles to its foreign counterparts, Italy has continued to rely on the rich artistic legacy for revolutionary processes. Along these lines, the '60's and '70's brought forth the prevalence of a new and revolutionary ideology, and while other nations assumed a rigid and unwavering educational approach, parts of Italy were just waking up to unrealized potential in preschool aged children. Named after the township that developed it, Reggio Emilia represents a collective and collaborative educational system from which the idea of nurture takes on a new definition. Parents “wanted schools where children could acquire skills of critical thinking and collaboration essential to rebuilding and ensuring a democratic society,” and in this vein, developed a program that sustained these objectives (New 2000, p. 1). The Steiner method in Australia also offers many adjustments to more rigid expectations, instead focusing on a nurturing program which sustains exodus from more mainstream approaches. In the end, all three governments are currently evaluating their educational standards, manipulating curriculum and expectations to fit a rapidly changing globalized environment of adolescents. The need for continued evaluation of standardized techniques, however, is evident in the blanketed framework from which achievement is determined. Where a government may purport that all children will be held to the same standards, accomplishing these goals is entirely unrealistic and limited in developmental perspective.#p#分页标题#e#

Much of the debate surrounding early childhood development stems from two revolutionary thinkers, Dewey and Vygotsky and their underlying ideologies. Similar in recognition of the import of early childhood education, these two theorists differed greatly in the methodology which was required to integrate potential and social functioning into the daily curriculum. From his progressive perpective, John Dewey responded to a mechanized educational system by combining “the Hegelian idea that activity and thought were both part of a single experience with the pragmatist's notion that activity must be understood within the moment for its specific purposes, and not as a means to an ideological end” (Glassman 2001, p. 4). In direct conflict with this interpretation of development, under Vygotsky's ideology, “the parameters of all inquiry are set by the culture as it is manifested through its tools and symbols” (Glassman 2001, p. 7). So essentially, one theorist believed that method and content were reciprocal in importance, while the other determined that method was a direct determinant of the content, and therefore should be standardized. It is from a collaborative perspective surrounding these ideologies that the new British The Early Years Foundation Stage EYFS, is determined to integrate both standardized expectations, but aligned with a commitment to supportive and nurturing lessons. A staunch proponent of the child as a participative instructor, Malaguzzi, the founder of the Reggio method was determined to change the culture of childhood through supportive mechanisms in which children were nurtured in both learning and creative capacities, attempting to discern their symbolic form of communication. (New 2000) Similarly, the Australian method is a divergence from standardization, emphasizing nurturing environments and creative growth within its students.

In the context of the modern early educational school systems, there are similar variations which offer differing perspectives between cultures and nations. The Reggio Emilia approach frames its lessons around techniques that are both child-centered and emergent, and although curriculum establishes the framework, the inclusive nature of Reggio schooling encourages children to explore deeper into the ideas of interest, experience, and communication. (Schiller 1995) From the British perspective, curriculum is standardized in a nurturing format from which to develop both social and cultural appreciation. The ability to function in a proper social format is determined by the application of specific formulae during the developmental process and mentoring the stimulated responses. In the Waldorf schools in Australia, there remains a need for demonstrative social behavior on the part of the instructor, and a part of the process is sustained in partnering one instructor with a group of children for seven years of development. (Prescott 1990) The Reggio framework differs in this regard as they activate response and context through the experiences that a child encounters on a daily basis. Should the direction of the class be taken towards a new awareness, the teacher is charged with nurturing this passage and assisting with interpretation, only as a mediator and limited respondent. Australian instructors are charged with an interactive environment from which develops a creative and healthy childhood response to variations on stimuli. Teachers follow a two hour lesson plan yet activate understanding through kinetic representation and activity. (Prescott 1990) The British framework, in contrast, places extreme significance on goal achievement and targeted junctures along the path to development. Highly controversial within the new confines of the EYFS program, expectations of reading and writing fluency by age 7 are in direct conflict with the Waldorf and Reggio methods. While Reggio school systems may identify similar developmental crossroads, their perception is that achievement is not necessarily indicative of skill maturation or retention and requites further experiential practice. It is through these hands on activities that children develop the necessary social functions, as characterized by Dewey and fully understand how to balance their interactions.#p#分页标题#e#

Standardized school systems are an important part of the developmental process in adolescence, if only for establishing a benchmark to identify areas of developmental deficiency. However, when it comes to early education, there are many questions which surround the necessity of such rigid framework. First and foremost, recognizing that within the evaluation system, children are judged on the basis of their adherence to prescribed standards, not on their individual achievement, undermines the idea of cognitive development in which experiential learning shapes ability and skill. Dewey challenged the establishment of structured education during the stages of early development, noting that “if it is impossible to separate physical activity from its consequences, then it is useless, and possibly detrimental to plan the physical activity of others in order to achieve a specific set of goals” (Glassman 2001, p. 8) Australian instructors understand this concept, placing emphasis on integrated learning that frames fundamental ideology through the nature of environmental interaction. (Shell 1992) It is from this perspective that modern systems of education, such as Britain's EYFS, are departing from the once prevalent idea of irrelevant but necessary curriculum, and instead focusing on the more socially and culturally definitive aspects of education (“Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage” 2007). Within these revisions, British children will now find standardized lesson plans but supplemental development tools, including hands on activity and nurturing teacher relationships as foundations for their growth and experience. Hansen and Zambo (2007) note that “too many preschool children are being exposed to adult-like stressors at a young age, with little nurturance, comfort, or support.” (p. 274) Supplementing their at-home caregivers in relationship development will assist in properly framing the emotional undertones that carry children into adolescence.

Framed around creativity and artistic participation, both Waldorf and Reggio programs activate higher thought process through kinetic and participative instruction. Reggio instructors understand that “young children do indeed understand the concept of graphic symbolic representation and can be expected to use it in a more sophisticated manner.” (Schiller 1995, p. 47) It is from this baseline that the first realization of merit within the Reggio program was identified, as students began to develop their creative functions at a much quicker rate than their standardized counterparts. “The Reggio approach does not teach art as a subject, but as a language for children to express understanding of their environment” (Davilla and Koenig, 1998, p. 19). It is recognizing that children are endeavoring to communicate through their creativity and evolving analysis of these insights to frame future lessons and interactions that sets the Reggio program apart from more rigid formats. An even further departure, the Waldorf methodology fully encourages both creative and imaginative play and has been often criticized for founding its principles around such intangible ideologies. At the core of this methodology, “imaginary play is considered the most important ‘work' of the young child and the activity through which the child grows physically, intellectually, and emotionally.” (Edwards 2002) Yet the more rigid framework of the British EYFS system is far removed from the idea of play and creativity as a means of education; it instead places these as supplements to a more prevalent need for rigid integration of curriculum that both challenges and sustains the developmental process of young children. (“Blueprint for Early Childhood Development and School Reform” 2007) Yet when placed in context with the developmental stages as outlined by Piaget, there remain doubts which could undermine the British program, as nourishment of imaginative play and interaction will continue to sustain positive development in students. (Shell 1992)#p#分页标题#e#

One of the most dynamic yet often under emphasized areas of education is the relationship between the child and their daily environment. Researchers note that “a rich environment in which the children can interact is an essential component,” to the preschool setting (Schiller 1995, p. 50)Framing a child's education around the nurturing characteristics within the classroom may seem like a foreign concept to British educators, however, both the Reggio and Waldorf schools have demonstrated that treating the room as a supplement rather than a blank slate will assist children in interacting more comfortably in their daily activities. Gandini (1993) recognized that from the perspective of the Reggio school system, but more importantly, in global preschool systems, the environment in which children interact can be considered a “third educator” (p. 177). It is from this perspective that instructors encourage students to move throughout the space and interact in a socially and culturally unifying fashion. Offering limited guidance except during mediation of conflict, Reggio instructors are simply an observer and researcher in this format, framing the lessons instead around a child's realization of their environmental influences and the internal meanings of these representations. Similarly, “the Waldorf classroom enhances the child's world of fantasy and imagination using natural materials: crystals, shells, logs, etc., as well as hand-made toys, gnomes, soft dolls and carved wooden animals, to stimulate the child's play.” (Shell 1992, p. 15) One major difference however, lies with the level of interactivity that is generated by the Waldorf instructors. Perceived as an essential part of the learning process, most specifically due to social development and childhood mimicry, the need for a high level of teacher participation is a fundamental approach to the Waldorf scheme. Edwards (2002) notes that the child's interaction with his fellow students and instructor becomes an experiential dialogue, further sustaining Dewey's representation of development through interactive comprehension. Attaching import to Vygotsky's methodology and approach to standardized curriculum, the British school system has taken a much less dynamic approach and instead focused on an environment framed by consistency and proven method.（英国dissertation网http://www.ukthesis.org/）

A public school system is an essential cultural commitment to the development of youth into successful and participative adults. Educators must understand that variations of each model will identify particular spheres of cognitive development and in turn emphasis proficiency in each spectrum. The ability to express and interact in a natural and holistic setting is not often afforded within more strict and standardized ideologies. Essential, instead, the curriculum defines the child's development, placing emphasis on identification of skills necessary to achieve in adolescence and adult society. Yet from the Reggio perspective, their “schools are part of a public system that strives to serve both the child's welfare and the social needs of families, while supporting the child's fundamental right to grow and learn in a favorable environment with peers and with caring professional adults” (Gandini 1993, p. 3) Scholastic ideology that is founded entirely on examination and standard oftentimes does not represent favorability, nor does it offer any form of nurturing to sustain the emotional development of youth. Wolf and Garnder (1980) note that one of the most crucial developments in a child's life is the point at which expression of experience is framed by symbolic form. It is through the ability to communicate this interpretation that children begin to develop higher forms of cognitive thought, including understanding what is socially acceptable and what is not. Vygotsky claimed that it was essential to “use the educational processes to teach new members of the social community how to use important, culturally developed tools in an effective manner” (Glassman 2001, p. 6). Yet the rigidity of this process often negates opportunity to integrate these interactions into a normative daily framework. One departure in the modern incarnation of the British educational system is the integration of the nurture framework into the underlying expectations. “Providers must ensure that practitioners are observing children and responding appropriately to help them make progress from birth towards the early learning goals” (“Statutory Framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage” 2007, p. 16). Instructors are now charged with sustaining children's desire for interactivity and deeper understanding, providing support mechanisms for positive social development. Yet, even within this explanation of objective, it can be seen that all aspects of the EYFS methodology has a single purpose and that is achievement of a nation-defined set of developmental parameters.#p#分页标题#e#

In the initial integration of the EYFS system, there have been minimal positive results that demonstrate the new sphere of thinking has yet to take hold. Recent results of the policy implementation have shown that around 58 % of five-year-olds have reached a ‘good' level of development in writing which is considered a 1% increase over 2006. Similarly, there was a 1% increase in overall skill preparedness as expected by the Ministry and the aims of the EYFS, however, only 45% of British children meet these standards, and this number is much lower when taken from underprivileged communities. (“Five-Year-Olds Short on Skills” 2007) In consideration for integrating both the Reggio and Waldorf methodologies into this framework, educators may find that achieving the goals of the state is nearly impossible. Evaluation tools in the Reggio method are framed around observation and analysis, oftentimes requiting significant study outside of the classroom environment for the teacher to fully comprehend the child's development. It is from this framework that instructors further define their lesson plan, evolving to the needs of the children, not a government expectation of achievement. Similarly, Waldorf scholars are taught to explore their imagination and creativity, evolving the direction of classroom activity during and throughout the interactions. There is a distinct relationship between educational belief systems and cultural values in societies where diverse cultural values are integrated, such as within the diverse makeup of Australian society. (Gunew and Rizvi 1994) Perhaps conducive to the globalized format of the modern world, the nurturing of spirit and development of internally generated social skills through kinetic opportunities both support and frame the Waldorf children and their integration into external society. Translated into the EYFS program, however, critics challenge that these children may not be able to meet the rigid expectations and standards, as the undercurrents of their daily curriculum is not geared in this particular fashion.

There is no room for anarchy in the early education classroom; nor is there a need for unwavering authoritative instruction. The diverse methods of childhood development continue to actualize the psychological needs through out a child's stages of growth. Yet much debate surrounds which tactic produces a more socially adaptable and educationally attuned child. From the perspective of the British educator, the need for a standardized curriculum will ensure that all educational facilities are held to the same high standards. Yet this expectation is also actualized in the Reggio and Waldorf environments, occupying similar ideology, but achieved in a diverse format. While each method has its benefits and obvious challenges, there is no standard format of education that has been proven to develop a superior child. While creative nourishment may sustain a child's desire for interactivity, the potential for chaotic classrooms and a disabled learning regimen could detract from the support mechanisms which are in place to sustain development. From the alternate sphere of thought, however, the rigid format of the British school system can severely undermine the social development and emotional and creative support mechanisms that are so essential during the early years of cognitive evolution. Ultimately, what educators need to realize is that early education should be an amalgamation of all three of these ideologies, nurturing and educating children through a framework of integrated creativity and curricular thought. Having expectations for achievement is not a negative ideology, nor is the support of a child's creative aspirations; establishing a foundation for future social integration and a diverse cognitive foundation, on the other hand, are essential development and cannot be ignored within the structure of an educational system.#p#分页标题#e#
如果你对留学生essay感兴趣，请查看http://www.ukthesis.org/Thesis_Writing/。