Peggy Riehl. Curriculum Is What Happens: My Curriculum Philosophy

Facing the criticisms
Current criticism of the early childhood field suggest that preschool curriculum is "content-less." In part, this is a misunderstanding of young children. Just because the day or the room isn't organized into subject matter disciplines doesn't mean that children aren't learning content. In addition, children's lives are not as divided as adult's lives; learning and recreation, work and play are seamless for young children.

However, as early childhood professionals, we are weak in understanding and explaining how play relates to later academic knowledge. We recite "children learn through play" and can even point out that children "learn math by playing with blocks." But teachers usually can't explain exactly what math is being learned and in fact they hardly know the names of the more complex block shapes. Instead of facilitating children's scientific learning, we merely support children's magical thinking — we love to play with magnets but we can't explain how a magnet works. And worse, we discipline children who discover that a magnet creates beautiful colors when held against a computer monitor screen. We teach categorizing of foods into the food guide pyramid but we forget that a tomato is a fruit by function and that the protein group has amino acids, not just animal flesh. We force categorization of animals into "zoo" or "jungle" groups in urban settings where children have more experience with roaches and rats than either the zoo or the jungle - missing the point of the social construction of knowledge and confusing it with Truth.

When the adults don't have understanding, they can not help children construct knowledge. And, because adults too often view their role as managers of children's behavior, they don't actively engage in discovery with children. However, if adults see themselves as facilitators of children's play, they won't have to know everything and can learn along with the children. Early childhood professionals must become much more articulate in explaining how children are in fact learning concepts related to subject matter disciplines through their play. They must become more engaged in learning about children, about themselves, and about the world around them.

Constructivism reconsidered
Eleanor Duckworth has said "either we're too early, and they can't learn it or we're too late and they know it already." It is this dilemma of what to do about children's "ego-centric" thinking that gets us into trouble. Unfortunately, while many early childhood practitioners are aware of the "wrong" thinking of children, they seek only to correct it. They try to teach by telling and expect the authority of their adult voice to be enough to change the child's mind. But it isn't. On the other hand, we slip into a maturationist view that leaves no role for the teacher and everything to development. If we believe that children merely "mature" or "develop," and that concepts and knowledge will change automatically as they age, we are downplaying the construction of knowledge. Development is more than the mere "unfolding of the petals of a flower;" it is construction. Piaget's early studies of mollusks gave him the opportunity to observe growth as adaptation. Unless children's thinking is challenged, it will not change and adapt. Piaget's major contribution to our understanding of knowledge is this process of "the equilibration of cognitive structures" (and not the stages).

But as we applaud the child's active construction of knowledge, adults often still don't know their role. After all, what can I do if the child must construct the knowledge? Lev Vygotsky has helped us to see the adult's or peer's role in challenging the child's thinking. We can bridge along the zone of proximal development. Teaching isn't telling but it is doing and reflecting.

Teachers often have difficulty knowing what to do or how to plan in play-based programs. High/Scope's recent publication, Planning Around Children's Interests uses "themes" or "projects" to explore how the curriculum is put into practice. We can look to the Reggio Emilia approach for further evidence of how projects engage children and how adults can use children's interests to enhance their knowledge and understand what the child knows. Other writers such as Sylvia Chard or Lilian G. Katz have moved curriculum from the traditional themes of Me, Myself, and I and the seemingly endless litany of holidays to purposeful engagement with ideas in a project. Elizabeth Jones' writing about "emergent" curriculum also helps the early childhood practitioner find ways to effectively use the children's play themes in knowledge construction that is acknowledged by a society interested in achievement at every age. Margie Carter's an d Deb Curtis' recent work, Reflecting Children's Lives, takes teachers from a less sophisticated approach to one that more clearly integrates knowledge of child development, careful observation of children, and meaningful activities for both children and adults. No matter where we end, however, every curriculum starts with an understanding of Piaget and constructivism. The nuances of his thinking and the challenges for interpreting it and finding ways to apply it to working with young children are not for the light hearted.

Making it plain: Children do learn through play and adults are there to help
As a developmentally appropriate program based on a constructivist model, we believe that young children learn through play, rather than through reading books (as school children may be able to do) or discussing abstract ideas (as adults may be able to do). Children are active in the construction of knowledge, and must have experience — concrete experience with the transformation of materials — to make an impact on their thinking. Of course, we provide many opportunities for children to build their pre-reading skills (so books and writing tools play a big part in classrooms), and we talk with children all day long (as we build on the formation of abstract ideas in their minds).

We do more than just "let the children play all day." The adults plan an environment rich with materials and experiences that children can get their hands, minds, and feelings into. It isn't enough to provide toys and activities unless children's thinking is challenged. Adults have a role in listening to and responding to children. The adult's role is vital throughout the day as a co-discoverer (not merely dispenser) of knowledge and facilitator (not merely manager) of play.

We use Creative Curriculum for Early Childhood, 4th Edition, a play-based model, to help us organize our classroom, select activities, and guide our interactions with children. Creative Curriculum is especially helpful in explaining developmentally appropriate practice to families and staff. It cites the research of Jean Piaget, a Swiss epistemologist who was interested in the origins of knowledge. Piaget's work is often referred to as "constructivism" because he believed that children (and adults) construct knowledge through interaction with concrete materials, ideas, and other people. Constance Kamii and Eleanor Duckworth have contributed the most to our thinking about constructivism and what it means for how children learn and how adults teach.

We believe that teachers must have access to many tools for teaching and have no qualms about keeping the tool box full of compatible ideas. Therefore, we use additional resources to help us provide and extend experiences for children, such as projects and emergent curriculum as described in the Reggio Emilia approach and by Sylvia Chard, Judith Helms, and Lilian Katz. We find the writings and videos of Margie Carter and Deb Curtis (Reflecting Children's Lives, Art of Awareness, Visionary Director) to be the among the most creative and inspiring works for teachers and directors. We believe that children do learn important subject-matter concepts through a play-based curriculum, and find Creative Curriculum, 4th Edition (or Connecting Content, Teaching, and Learning: A Supplement to the Creative Curriculum ) to be helpful in explaining this to others.

Of course, cognitive development is not the only aspect of learning that we focus on. Without healthy emotional and social development, cognitive development will not be possible. We support children in understanding themselves and others. Our approach to guidance is to help the child develop self-control. We help children learn to solve problems; we don't just enforce rules.

Our curriculum approach is based on developmentally appropriate practice guidelines and quality standards as described by the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) ( Developmentally Appropriate Practice - Revised Edition and Accreditation Criteria ). These resources help us to reflect on our work with children and help us make on-going decisions related to appropriate practice with the particular children we serve.

But most importantly, we start and end with knowledge of child development in the context of family, community, and culture, and therefore also bring culturally relevant anti-bias concepts to our work.


© 2001 by Peggy Riehl
If you use this, it would be polite to send a message.
Please e-mail: peggyriehl@sprintmail.com
Return to Peggy Riehl's Homepage