Introduction
Education and care among children has proved to be a big challenge for curriculum developers. From one perspective, there is a need to guide the personnel in early childhood centers, especially if they have low qualification or insufficient training.
A curriculum aids in ascertaining that staffs cover crucial learning areas, espouse a pedagogical approach, and accomplish a certain measure of quality in various groups across a country or region.
A curriculum is, too, a center for further training. On another perspective, it is broadly accepted that the aims of early childhood education and care curriculum ought to be diverse, as well as contribute to the child’s overall development and later success in school (Mac Naughton, 2003 p. 12).
These aims include health and physical development; emotional welfare and social capability; constructive paradigms to learning; communication skills; cognition and general knowledge. In addition, owing to learning patterns of young children, social-emotional and cognitive progress is learnt at the child’s own speed.
They take place through play and active methods, controlled by the child’s self-determination. All these considerations point out that caution should be taken while coming up with a comprehensive cognitive curriculum, which staff should deliver to acquiescent young children (Whitebread, 2006 p. 23).
Given the significance of this growth stage in children (pre-birth to five); many countries around the world have opted to issuing of brief guidelines on early childhood programming instead of offering a comprehensive curriculum. These guidelines are directed towards parents, educators and local administrators.
Fundamentally, these guidelines or curricular frameworks set up the value base and program principles on which this education is to be grounded. The goal is to encourage a collective sense of purpose between parents and early childhood centers; to endorse social and cultural values vital for society; to ascertain a considerable amount of unity of standards; and to inform and ease communication between staff, parents and children.
Although, many countries are still lagging behind in implementing early childhood education and care curriculums, some have already taken the big step and endorsed detailed programs. Such nations include England and Scotland. This essay compares and contrasts the curriculum approaches in both countries with close attention to children aged 0-5 years (Saracho, 2006 p. 42).
Comparing and contrasting curriculum approaches in England and Scotland
The United Kingdom comprises of four different countries, each with a command over education: England, Northern Ireland, Scotland, and Wales. The fact that the four countries were part of the Britain does not imply that they share a common curriculum in their schools although English remains the dominantly spoken language in amongst these nations.
England has its own curriculum known as National Curriculum while Scotland’s is referred to as National Guidance (Pinar, 2003 p. 27). The first part of this essay offers an overview of the two curriculums before describing their similarities and differences.
The national Curriculum in England: Key Stages
The National Curriculum offers an entitlement to a number of areas for all children in maintained schools, in spite of their background and ability. Although there is not an exact match between ages and Key Stages, children may complete Key Stages at an earlier or later age based on their progress. In addition, private schools do not a need to adhere to the National Curriculum or deliver Key Stage tests.
The National Curriculum has four Key Stages with eight levels (Cox, 2004 p. 8). The first stage is meant for children between 5 and 7 years. The National Curriculum identifies learning across a number of subjects such as history, art and information technology, though the three core subjects are English, mathematics and science.
Children are tested in reading, writing and mathematics, but these are used only to inform overall teacher assessments. The test results are not reported or collected centrally (Anning, 2001 p. 21).
The next Key Stage of the National Curriculum is meant for children aged 7-11. This is usually the end of primary education after which pupils in maintained schools proceed to secondary schools. Pupils study ten subjects assessed by teachers. They take tests in English, mathematics and science.
Key Stage 3 covers the first three years of secondary schooling. Students take twelve subjects, with teacher assessments and tests in English, mathematics and science. The fourth and last Key Stage of the National Curriculum prepares pupils towards various academic and vocational qualifications (DCSF, 2008 p. 23).
These are partly assessed through coursework. Every young person has to study English, mathematics, science, ICT, citizenship and Physical Education. Pupils must also study religious education, careers education, sex education and work-related learning. They also have access to four entitlement areas covering the arts, design and technology, languages and humanities.
The above four Key Stages point out that the Early Years Foundation Stage is deliberately not part of the National Curriculum. It, however, creates a distinct, coherent phase for all children aged 0-5.
It places an expectation on practitioners to support children’s learning and development through creative development, as well as physical development. Practitioners are expected to assess children’s progress through observation. The EYFS Profile is a tool to summarize children’s achievements at the completion of the Foundation Stage (Geva & Kelly, 2002 p. 16).
Overview of the curriculum used in Scotland
The current education curriculum in Scotland is known as Curriculum for Excellence: National Guidance on the pre-birth to three. It is a replacement of Curriculum Framework for Children aged 3-5 and the 5-14 Curriculum. The current curriculum is grounded on the solid foundations established in the critical years of pre-birth to three, which is supported by the new National Pre-Birth to Three Guidance.
It endeavors to aid every learner develop knowledge, skills and attributes for learning, life, and work, all entrenched in the four capacities. The four capacities include a successful leaner, a confident individual, a responsible citizen and an effective contributor (Bryce & Humes, 2003 p. 13).
The Curriculum for Excellence endeavors to produce successful learners with keenness and inspiration for learning, zeal to achieve, and candidness to new ideas and thinking. The successful learner should be able to use technology for learning, make logical evaluations, and use technology for learning.
The curriculum is also meant to produce responsible citizens with reverence to others, as well as a loyalty to participate dutifully in political, economic, social and cultural life. The responsible citizen should be able to make knowledgeable choices and decisions, comprehend different beliefs, and develop informed, ethical views of multifaceted issues. The Curriculum of Excellence covers eight major areas.
These include technologies, social studies, sciences, languages, health and wellbeing, expressive arts, mathematics, and religious and moral education (Clark, 2002 p. 53).
The curriculum adopts different ways of assessment, which entail gathering, reflecting on, and evaluating evidence of learning to enable staff to check on the learner’s progress and support further learning. The approaches to learning adopted by the curriculum include active learning, peer education, outdoor learning, co-operative and collaborative learning, and Reggio Emilia.
Differences
There are a number of distinctions between the early childhood education curriculum in England and Scotland. The first one is that in Scotland, unlike in England, there is no national curriculum. In England, there is a countrywide curriculum called the National Curriculum. The current curriculum in Scotland is called the Curriculum for Excellence.
Another defining difference between the curriculums in the two countries is that two countries have different policies for children below five years, usually called the Early Years Foundation Stage in England. In Scotland, the period covers children before birth to age of three.
In England, the National Curriculum covers children from birth to age of five. This implies that age for reception in primary schools is also different in the two countries, three for Scotland and Five for England (New & Cochran, 2007 p. 76).
The Birth to Five curriculum in England is also different from the Pre-birth to Three curriculum in Scotland, in their principles. The Birth to Five curriculum in England is based on the four principles of EYFS while the Pre-birth principles are based on the Early Years Framework. The first principle of the EYFS is a unique child.
This principle recognizes that every child is a skilled learner from birth, able to be flexible, capable, self-assured. Learning is focused on development, wellbeing, and health. The second principle for EYFS is positive relationships.
This principle describes how children learn to be well built and free from a foundation of friendly and safe relationships with parents or key persons. Learning is centered on respect, and co-operation with parent or key persons (Glazzard et al., 2010 p. 37).
The third principle on which the EYFS is based on is enabling environments. This principle holds that the environment plays a pivotal role in supporting and extending children’s development and learning. The commitments in learning are teaching centered on observation, evaluation and forecast, sustenance for every child, learning setting, and the wider milieu.
The latter includes transitions, continuity, and multi-agency working. The last principle of the EYFS is learning and development. This principle recognizes that children develop and learn in diverse speeds. It also posits that all areas of learning and development are equally significant and interrelated.
These principles reflect the commitment of the government to viewing Early Years education as a crucial part of the community. It recognizes the individuality of each child and the diversity of Early Years learning, and the importance of partnerships with parents and other services for better Early Years provision (Ioanna, 2009 p. 13).
The fundamentality under which the Pre-birth to three curriculum in Scotland is based is different from that of EYFS. The Pre-birth curriculum is based on four key principles. The first principle is rights of the Child. This principle is based on the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child. This principle states that children should be appreciated and respected at all stages.
In addition, they have the right to have their opinions heard and implemented (DCSF, 2008 p. 34). This implies that all adults and agencies should ascertain that children’s views are given prominence in harmony with age and maturity of the child. Children’s rights are defined in various ways. These include civil, cultural, economic, social and political rights.
All staffs have a crucial role of ascertaining that children’s rights are protected and aggressively endorsed. Children’s rights and respect ought not to be sidelined simply because they cannot essentially defend their own interests.
The second principle on which the Pre-birth to Three curriculum for Scotland is based is relationships. This principle holds that children are genetically bound to form relationships. This crucial important process starts even before the baby is born. Relationships begin with the care and attention that babies experiences while in the womb.
This principle is one of the defining characteristic that distinguishes the EYFS from the Pre-Birth to Three. This is because the former starts from birth to five while the latter encompasses the period before birth. The relationships principle further adds that newborn babies are skillful not only in responding to others but also in initiating interactions.
The ability to set up and uphold relationships is a lifetime process, but one that can be seen even in initial stages of life. As such, it is important that all staffs working with children are conscious of their responsibilities in ensuring and promoting optimistic relationships and the result this has in children’s future outcomes and life chances (Clark, 2002 p. 41).
The third principle on which the Pre-Birth to Three curriculum is responsive care. This refers to knowing and accepting children and recognizing that they are unique individuals. The principle entails building close relationships with children, being observant of them and meaningfully involved with them.
Establishing responsive care is important in ensuring effective and high quality provision for young children and their families. The last principle is respect. One of the most efficient means of showing respect for children and families is a case where the staffs demonstrate a real interest in them.
All staffs should ascertain that children and young people, parents and colleagues are treated with respect, fairly and justly (Saracho, 2006 p. 94).
In addition to differences in terms of principles, the curriculums in England and Scotland differ in terms of the bodies that regulate inspect the Early Years education. In the case of Scotland, two bodies do the exercise. The first one is His Majesty Inspectorate of Education (HMIE).
The second body is Social Care and Social Work Improvement Scotland (SCSWIS). HMIE inspects and reports on the quality of education in pre-school centers, schools, and other educational establishments. The body conducts regular joint inspections of pre-school centers with the Care Commission (Bryce & Humes, 2003 p. 15).
The inspection reports are published on HMIE website. In the case of England, the Office for Standards in Education (Ofsted) does the inspection. The core duties of Ofsted is to visit care centers regularly to ensure that each provider is an effective Early Years self –evaluation form that ascertains that the local standards are met.
Similarities
Although the early years curriculums in England have profound differences as evident from the preceding discussions, this does not imply that they have nothing in common. In deed, they have a number of similarities given that the two countries are part of the broader United Kingdom community.
The first and already discussed phenomenon that makes the two curriculums similar is the fact that they have defining principles on which they are based. The curriculums in the two countries are based on four principles as mentioned earlier, though the wording and the philosophy of each may be different.
These principles provide guidance that is sensitive to respectful ways of interacting with children in ways that are helpful to them and their families (Pinar, 2003 p. 34).
Another similarity is that the two curriculums lay emphasis on the assessment processes. Substantial attention is paid to the ongoing assessment of children. This is perceived as an integral part of learning and development process. In both curriculums, providers ought to ascertain that practitioners are observing children and responding appropriately (Follari, 2006 p. 78).
This aids them make progress from birth towards the early learning objectives. In addition, the two curriculums consider parental involvement in learning process as very essential. Further, the curriculums hold that all adults who mingle with the child should contribute to learning process.
The role of play and active learning is also emphasized in the two curriculums. Lastly, the two curriculums require the care providers to keep a profile for each child assessment and progress purposes (Geva & Kelly, 2002 p.48).
In conclusion, this essay has explored the curriculums that exist for children in the Early Years, in both Scotland and England. In particular, the essay provided an overview of the National Curriculum in England and the Curriculum for Excellence in Scotland. The other part, which makes the bulk of the essay, is the comparison of the curriculums that cater for children in the early years, in the two countries.
Concisely, the essay found out that although the two countries are part of the United Kingdom, the curriculums offering early childhood education and care in the two countries are explicitly different.
This was particularly evident in the differences section of the essay where major distinctions concerning principles, inspection and regulation bodies, and reception age were explored. Although the two curriculums are evidently distinct, the essay also unearthed some major similarities that exist in the two. These included the existence of guiding principles, assessment and the emphasis of the role of play.
References
Anning, A., 2001. A national curriculum for the early years. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Bryce, T. K., & Humes, W. M., 2003. Scottish education: post-devolution. Edinburgh: Edinburgh University Press.
Clark, M. M., 2002. Education in Scotland: policy and practice from pre-school to secondary. London: Routledge.
Cox, T., 2004. The National Curriculum and the early years: challenges and opportunities. London: Routledge, 1999
Department for Children, Schools and Families (DCSF), 2008. Statutory framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage. Nottingham: DCSF.
Follari, L., 2006. Foundation and best practices in early childhood education: history, theories and approaches to learning. London: Prentice Hall
Geva, M.B., & Kelly A. V., 2002. Assessment in early childhood education. London: SAGE.
Glazzard et al., 2010. Assessment for learning in the Early Years Foundation Stage. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Ioanna, P., 2009.The Early Years Foundation Stage: theory and practice. London: SAGE Publications Ltd.
Mac Naughton, G., 2003. Shaping early childhood: learners, curriculum and contexts. Maidenhead: OUP.
New, R.S., & Cochran, M., 2007. Early childhood education: an International Encyclopedia, Vol.1. Harcourt: Greenwood Publishing Group.
Pinar, W., 2003. International handbook of curriculum research. London: Taylor & Francis.
Saracho, O. N., 2006. Handbook of research on the education of young children. London: Routledge.
Whitebread, D., 2006. Teaching and learning in the early years. London: Routledge.