writing a philosophy statement for early childhood education

ChatGPT for Teachers

Trauma-informed practices in schools, teacher well-being, cultivating diversity, equity, & inclusion, integrating technology in the classroom, social-emotional development, covid-19 resources, invest in resilience: summer toolkit, civics & resilience, all toolkits, degree programs, trauma-informed professional development, teacher licensure & certification, how to become - career information, classroom management, instructional design, lifestyle & self-care, online higher ed teaching, current events, how to develop a philosophy of teaching for early childhood education.

Today, many educational institutions require a philosophy of teaching from early childhood education instructors. In addition to needing one when applying for a job, articulating their approach to education is an excellent idea for teachers for many other reasons.

First and foremost, a philosophy of teaching can help an educator clearly define what sort of teacher they want to be and this will help them move forward more easily in their career path. In essence, a philosophy of teaching is a one- or two-page document that expresses an educator’s preferred teaching style, strengths and overall teaching orientation.

The document should be clearly written and should showcase the teacher’s knowledge about the NAEYC requirements (National Association for the Education of Young Children). It should also present the underlying philosophy that will guide the teacher’s curriculum choices and classroom management style.

6 steps to create a personal philosophy of early childhood education

Creating and composing a personal philosophy of early childhood education document does not need to be daunting. In fact, it can be accomplished in these basic steps:

1. Define a preschool teacher’s role

Take some time to clearly explain your ideas about a preschool teacher’s role in the classroom. Include your beliefs about child-led activities vs. teacher-led activities, your philosophy on the teacher’s role in playtime, and the presentation of brand new ideas vs. discoveries the child makes on their own. Consider also including a statement describing your sincere hopes and expectations for the children in your classroom.

2. Discuss the child’s role as a learner

What is your philosophy regarding how children learn best? What types of activities and opportunities do you believe should be included in the classroom setting in order to facilitate the highest levels of learning for all students, regardless of preferred learning style? How might the child’s role as the recipient of knowledge vary depending upon their preferred learning style? Be sure to include both structured learning activities and open-ended ideas, discussing what you believe is the ideal ratio of both types in the classroom.

3. Address special needs, different learning styles and diversity in the classroom

Discuss how specifically you will handle different personalities, learning styles, special needs and cultural diversity as you teach different children all in one classroom. Include a statement about how children with special learning needs will be welcomed in your classroom, and your specific strategies for meeting both those needs and the needs of the other students. Embracing diversity is pivotal to creating a warm and welcoming learning environment in today’s classroom. When composing your philosophy of teaching document, you’ll want to be sure you clearly define how you’ll meet a variety of needs.

4. Define your curricular orientation

Map out your curricular orientation, including information about what has led you to form your specific beliefs. However, when you address this step, be careful to not criticize other approaches. Instead, consider connecting the information you provide about your curricular orientation with your previous statements about the role of the teacher in the early childhood education setting (in step 1).

5. Describe classroom and conflict management

In this section, describe how you approach any behavioral issues that may occur, and why you believe your chosen approach will work. Be very specific; for instance, will you use time-outs or withdrawal of playtime privileges?

6. Address family inclusion in the classroom

Finally, define how you plan to incorporate parents and other primary caregivers into your classroom. Outline your strategy for keeping parents involved and establishing and maintaining open lines of communication with family members.

Creating a personal philosophy of early childhood education should not be intimidating; in fact, it is an excellent opportunity to clarify your teaching philosophies and commit them to paper. Putting these philosophies in writing can serve as an impetus to clarify the type of educator you’d like to be, and this will benefit both your teaching career and your students.

You may also like to read

• Teaching Strategies in Early Childhood Education and Pre-K
• Benefits of Early Childhood Education
• Diverse Learning Styles in Early Childhood Education
• Five Reasons to Study Early Childhood Education
• What Every Early Childhood Education Major Should Know
• Early Childhood Education: Striving to Balance Play with Academics

Categorized as: Tips for Teachers and Classroom Resources

Tagged as: Early Childhood and Elementary (Grades: PreK-5) ,  Leadership and Administration ,  Professional Development

• Master's in Social Studies Education & Teachi...
• Online & Campus Bachelor's in Elementary Educ...
• How to Teach Reading Comprehension: Resources...

Examples of Teaching Philosophy for Early Childhood

Teaching philosophy is an important part of any early childhood educator’s toolkit. It provides a framework and set of principles on which to base their teaching, and helps to ensure that their pupils are receiving the best possible education.

We will provide examples of teaching philosophies that can be used in early childhood classrooms. These philosophies can help to guide teachers in the development and implementation of curriculum, as well as help to create a positive learning environment for children.

By understanding the different teaching philosophies available, educators can create a classroom environment that is tailored specifically to the needs of their students.

Philosophy Concept of Early Childhood Education

The philosophy of early childhood education is based on the belief that young children are best able to learn when they are allowed to experience the world around them. This means that early childhood educators should provide opportunities for children to explore their environment, make mistakes, and try new things.

Philosophy will change and grow as you gain more experience working with young children. There are many different ways to approach early childhood education . Some philosophies focus on developmental stages, while others emphasize play-based learning.

The philosophy of early childhood education also emphasizes the importance of play. Play is essential for young children’s development, as it allows them to practice new skills and ideas.

Early childhood educators should create a rich environment that includes a variety of materials and activities for children to explore.

Finally, the philosophy of early childhood education recognizes the importance of relationships. Positive relationships with adults and other children are critical for young children’s development.

It is important to keep in mind that there are some general principles that all effective philosophies share. These principles include a focus on the whole child, a respect for individual differences, and a commitment to fostering positive relationships.

What is Your Philosophy on Early Childhood Education?

In recent years, the focus of early childhood education has shifted away from simply providing care and basic academic instruction to a more holistic approach that takes into account the individual needs and interests of each child.

Some key points that could be included in such a philosophy might be the importance of providing a safe and nurturing environment for children to learn and grow in, the importance of fostering a love of learning from an early age, and the importance of individualized care and attention to each child’s needs.

This new philosophy is known as constructivism , and it has been shown to be an effective way to promote learning and development in young children. In a constructivist classroom, teachers provide opportunities for children to explore, experiment, and discover on their own.

For example, rather than teaching a lesson on shapes, the teacher might set up an activity in which the children can play with different shaped blocks and discover how they fit together. Through these types of experiences, children learn how to think critically and solve problems independently.

The constructivist approach is based on the belief that all children are unique individuals with their own strengths, weaknesses, and preferences. Therefore, it is important for educators to create an environment that meets the needs of each individual child. This can be accomplished by using a variety of instructional methods and materials that allow children to learn in different ways.

While some people may argue that the constructivist approach is too time-consuming or chaotic for busy classrooms, research has shown that this method of instruction actually saves time in the long run by preventing behavior problems and promoting academic success. Moreover, when implemented correctly, the constructivist approach can foster a love of learning in all students – something that is essential for future success in school and beyond.

What is the Examples of a Teaching Philosophy?

There are some common themes that often crop up in teaching philosophies. For example, many teachers believe that all students have the ability to learn and succeed if they are given the right tools and support. They may also place an emphasis on creating a safe and supportive learning environment where every student feels valued. Other key elements of a teaching philosophy could include promoting critical thinking, encouraging creativity, or using technology in the classroom.

One popular philosophy among early childhood educators is Montessori. This approach focuses on allowing children to learn through hands-on experiences and giving them the freedom to explore their interests at their own pace.

Another well-known philosophy is Reggio Emilia. This approach puts the child at the center of their learning and emphasizes collaboration between teachers and students. Classrooms are often designed as inviting spaces where students can feel comfortable expressing themselves.

Waldorf education is another option for those looking for an alternative to traditional schooling. This philosophy stresses the importance of imagination, creativity, and emotional development. classrooms are usually decorated with natural materials and there is a strong focus on arts and music education.

No matter what your personal beliefs may be, there is a teaching philosophy out there that aligns with them! The most important thing is that you find an approach that works best for you and your students.

What are the Core Philosophies of Education Examples?

The term “philosophy of education” can refer to the philosophy of a particular teacher or educational institution, or it can be used more broadly to refer to the study of the goals, methods, and meaning of education. The followings are common philosophies of education.

1. Idealism . Idealism is the belief that reality is ultimately based on ideas, and that we access these ideas through our minds. For idealists, education is about learning these underlying ideas and concepts so that we can better understand the world around us. This understanding can then be used to improve both ourselves and society as a whole. Prominent idealist philosophers include Plato and Immanuel Kant.

2. Realism : Realism is based on the idea that there is a physical, objective reality out there that exists independent of our minds. This reality is knowable and predictable, and we can learn about it through observation and experimentation.

In education, realism emphasizes the need to teach students facts and truths about the world around them so that they can develop their own understanding of it. Key figures in philosophical realism include Aristotle and John Locke. 3. Pragmatism : Pragmatism is an approach that takes a practical view of things – it focuses on what works rather than what might be true in theory. In pragmatism, knowledge is seen as something that develops through experience; educational experiences should be designed in such a way that they provide opportunities for students to actively engage with their surroundings and learn from trial-and-error exploration. William James was one of the first pragmatist philosophers, but this approach has also been later developed by John Dewey.

My Teaching Philosophy

Sample Statement of Teaching Philosophy

As a teacher, my goal is to create an environment in which students feel comfortable taking risks, exploring new ideas, and engaging in lively discussions. I believe that all students have the ability to learn and succeed if they are given the opportunity and motivation to do so. My job as a teacher is to provide both of these things. I believe that education should be enjoyable as well as informative. In my classroom, I incorporate games, puzzles, and other hands-on activities to make learning fun. At the same time, I challenge my students to think critically about the material we are covering. I want them to leave my class not only with a better understanding of the subject matter but also with the skills they need to continue learning on their own. I am always looking for ways to improve my teaching methods and keep up with new developments in my field.

I am open to feedback from colleagues and welcome suggestions from students on how I can make improvements. My ultimate goal is to foster a love of learning in all of my students so that they will continue pursuing knowledge long after they leave my classroom.

Teaching philosophy for early childhood is a critical aspect of effective teaching. By adopting a philosophy that reflects your beliefs and values, you can create a positive environment in which children can learn and grow. There are many examples of teaching philosophies that are suitable for early childhood classrooms, and the ones that work best for you may vary depending on your personal beliefs and preferences. However, by exploring some of these philosophies and considering how they might apply to your classroom, you can develop a foundation on which to build your own teaching style.

Dwight Hughes Sr

I am Dwight Hughes Sr., your specialist in Special Education and Preschooler topics at EduEdify.com. Holding a PhD in Early Childhood Education, I bring a depth of knowledge and experience to guide parents and educators in nurturing the younger minds. My mission is to share evidence-based insights, cultivated from years of academic and field research, to help every child flourish during their formative years.

Leave a Comment Cancel reply

Save my name, email, and website in this browser for the next time I comment.

4 Teaching Philosophy Statement Examples

Develop Your Own Teaching Philosophy

ThoughtCo / J.R. Bee

• Becoming A Teacher
• Assessments & Tests
• Elementary Education
• Secondary Education
• Special Education
• Homeschooling
• M.S., Education, Buffalo State College
• B.S., Education, Buffalo State College

An educational philosophy statement or teaching philosophy statement is a brief essay that all nearly prospective teachers are required to write. Vanderbilt University explains:

"A teaching (philosophy) statement is a purposeful and reflective essay about the author’s teaching beliefs and practices. It is an individual narrative that includes not only one’s beliefs about the teaching and learning process but also concrete examples of the ways in which he or she enacts these beliefs in the classroom."

A well-crafted teaching statement gives a clear and unique portrait of the author as a teacher. Ohio State University's Center for the Advancement of Teaching further explains that a teaching philosophy statement is important because a clear philosophy of teaching can lead to a change in teaching behavior and foster professional and personal growth.

Examples of Teaching Philosophy Statements

This passage is an example of a strong statement of teaching philosophy because it puts students where they belong in education: at the front and center of a teacher's focus. An author who writes such as a statement is likely to continuously examine and verify this philosophy by always ensuring that student needs are the primary focus of all lessons and schoolwork.

"My philosophy of education is that all children are unique and must have a stimulating educational environment where they can grow physically, mentally, emotionally, and socially. It is my desire to create this type of atmosphere where students can meet their full potential. I will provide a safe environment where students are invited to share their ideas and take risks.

"I believe that there are five essential elements that are conducive to learning. (1) The teacher's role is to act as a guide. (2) Students must have access to hands-on activities. (3) Students should be able to have choices and let their curiosity direct their learning. (4) Students need the opportunity to practice skills in a safe environment. (5) Technology must be incorporated into the school day."

The following statement is a good example of a teaching philosophy because the author emphasizes that all classrooms, and indeed all students, are unique and have specific learning needs and styles. A teacher with such a philosophy is likely to ensure that she spends time helping each student achieve her highest potential.

"I believe that all children are unique and have something special that they can bring to their own education. I will assist my students to express themselves and accept themselves for who they are, as well embrace the differences of others.

"Every classroom has its own unique community; my role as the teacher will be to assist each child in developing their own potential and learning styles. I will present a curriculum that will incorporate each different learning style, as well as make the content relevant to the students' lives. I will incorporate hands-on learning, cooperative learning, projects, themes, and individual work that engage and activate students learning." 

This statement provides a solid example because the author emphasizes the moral objective of teaching: that she will hold each student to the highest expectations and ensure that each one is diligent in her studies. Implied in this statement is that the teacher will not give up on even a single recalcitrant student.

"I believe that a teacher is morally obligated to enter the classroom with only the highest of expectations for each and every one of her students. Thus, the teacher maximizes the positive benefits that naturally come along with any self-fulfilling prophecy. With dedication, perseverance, and hard work, her students will rise to the occasion."

"I aim to bring an open mind, a positive attitude, and high expectations to the classroom each day. I believe that I owe it to my students, as well as the community, to bring consistency, diligence, and warmth to my job in the hope that I can ultimately inspire and encourage such traits in the children as well."

The following statement takes a slightly different tack: Classrooms should be warm and caring communities. Unlike the previous statements, this one minimizes the individuality of students and emphasizes that, essentially, it take a village to foster truly community-based learning. All teaching strategies then, such as morning meetings and community problem solving, follow this philosophy.

"I believe that a classroom should be a safe, caring community where children are free to speak their mind and blossom and grow. I will use strategies to ensure our classroom community will flourish, like the morning meeting, positive vs. negative discipline, classroom jobs, and problem-solving skills.

"Teaching is a process of learning from your students, colleagues, parents, and the community. This is a lifelong process where you learn new strategies, new ideas, and new philosophies. Over time, my educational philosophy may change, and that's okay. That just means that I have grown and learned new things."

Components of a Teaching Philosophy Statement

A teaching philosophy statement should include an introduction, body, and conclusion—just as you would expect of your students if they were writing a paper. But there are specific components that you need to include in any such statement:

Introduction: This should be your thesis statement where you discuss your general belief about education (such as: "I believe all students have a right to learn") as well as your ideals in relation to teaching. You should "begin with the end," says James M. Lang in an Aug. 29, 2010, article titled, " 4 Steps to a Memorable Teaching Philosophy " published in "The Chronicle of Higher Education." Lang says you should consider what the students will have learned once they depart your class, after having been guided by your teaching philosophy and strategies.

Body: ​In this part of the statement, discuss what you see as the ideal classroom environment and how it makes you a better teacher, addresses student needs, and facilitates parent/child interactions. Discuss how you would facilitate age-appropriate learning , and how you involve students in the assessment process . Explain how you would put your educational ​​ideals into practice.

Lang says that you should clearly state your goals and objectives for students. Layout specifically what you hope your teaching will help students to accomplish. Be specific by telling a story or offering "a detailed description of an innovative or interesting teaching strategy you have used," says Lang. Doing so, helps your reader understand how your teaching philosophy would play out in the classroom.

Conclusion : In this section, talk about your goals as a teacher, how you have been able to meet them in the past, and how you can build on these to meet future challenges. Focus on your personal approach to pedagogy and classroom management, as well as what makes you unique as an educator, and how you wish to advance your career to further support education.

Lang notes that, while you don't need to use official citation style, you should cite your sources. Explain where your teaching philosophy originated—for example, from your experiences as an undergraduate, from a faculty mentor you worked with during your teacher-training program, or perhaps from books or articles on teaching that had a particular influence on you.

Formatting Your Statement

In addition to considering the type of teaching philosophy to write, Ohio State University offers some general formatting suggestions. The Ohio State University Center for the Advancement of Teaching states:

Statement Format

"There is no required content or set format. There is no right or wrong way to write a philosophy statement, which is why it is so challenging for most people to write one. You may decide to write in prose, use famous quotes, create visuals, use a question/answer format, etc."

There are, however, some general rules to follow when writing a teaching philosophy statement, says the university's teacher-training department:

Keep it brief. The statement should be no more than one to two pages, according to the Ohio State University Center for the Advancement of Teaching.

Use present tense , and write the statement in the first person, as the previous examples illustrate.

Avoid jargon. Use common, everyday language, not "technical terms," the university advises.

Create a "vivid portrait" that includes "strategies and methods ... (to help) your reader take a mental 'peek' into your classroom," adds the Ohio State University Center for the Advancement of Teaching.

Additionally, make sure you talk about " your  experiences and  your  beliefs" and ensure your statement is original and truly describes the methods and philosophy you would employ in teaching, the university adds.

• How to Write a Philosophy of Education for Elementary Teachers
• 10 Questions to Ask Yourself to Design Your Educational Philosophy
• Educational Philosophy Basics
• Top Tips for Acing a Teacher Interview
• How to Write a Homeschooling Philosophy Statement
• Teacher Interview Questions and Suggested Answers
• Strategies for Teachers: The Power of Preparation and Planning
• 5 Keys to Being a Successful Teacher
• The Inclusive Classroom as the Best Placement
• 4 Tips for Effective Classroom Management
• Sample Weak Supplemental Essay for Duke University
• The ABCs of Teaching: Affirmations for Teachers
• Topics for a Lesson Plan Template
• How to Set up Your Classroom for the First Day of School
• Why Teaching is Fun
• How Does Montessori Compare With Waldorf?

Vision, Mission and Philosophy Statements

Vision Statement

UCLA Early Care and Education inspires the next generation of life-long learners by providing:

• High-quality, developmentally-appropriate education and care for young children;
• A program focused on diversity, equity, and inclusion for families and staff;
• A work environment that nurtures, values and inspires our professional staff;
• Service to families and the University community;
• Research-focused sites of learning for the field of education.

UCLA ECE provides care and education for children and an essential service to families by focusing on research and quality.

Mission Statement

The UCLA Early Care and Education programs provide quality child care, support families and share information and resources with the community to make a positive difference in the lives of children, in support of the teaching, research and community service mission of the University.

Philosophy Statement

We believe that early learning is relationship-based. Our fundamental goal is to establish trusting relationships among children, teachers and parents. Carefully constructed early education experiences promote exploration, critical thinking, cooperative play and the development of mutual respect.

Central Administrative Offices

[email protected]

(310) 825-2822

© 2024 Regents of the University of California

• Accessibility
• Report Misconduct
• Privacy & Terms of Use

Skip to Content

Other ways to search:

• Events Calendar

How to write your philosophy of education statement

The Philosophy of Education Statement is an important piece in your educator portfolio. It may be requested by hiring personnel at schools to be included with a cover letter and resume. Your teaching philosophy should be thoughtful, organized and well-written. The summary should be between 1-2 pages and should document and support your core educational principles.

• First, state your objectives as a teacher. These need to be achievable through some form of assessment.
• Second, you will want to outline the methods by which you will achieve your teaching objectives.
• Third, you will need to have demonstrated evidence of your achievements. This may take the form of standardized assessments or evaluations.
• Forth, allude to the factors that motivate you to be in the teaching profession. This is where you can be cerebral. State what motivates you to be in the teaching profession. 

Some Important Considerations

Your core values and beliefs.

The statement should reflect your core values and beliefs in terms of teaching. Consider your thoughts regarding the nature of students, the purpose of education and how people learn, and the role of teacher. As you develop your educational philosophy, think about completing the following statements: 

• I believe the purposes of education are ... 
• I believe that students learn best when... 
• I believe that the following curriculum basics will contribute to the social, emotional, intellectual and physical development of my students ... 
• I believe that a good learning environment is one in which ... 
• I believe that all students have the following basic needs ... 
• In order to further the growth and learning of my students, these basic needs will be met in my classroom through ... 
• I believe that teachers should have the following qualities ... 

Why You Teach

• What is the purpose of education? 
• What is your role as an educator?

Whom You Teach

• How will you reach the diverse students in your classroom? 
• How do you define your community of learners?

How and What You Teach

• What are your beliefs about how students learn?
• How will your beliefs affect your teaching? Think about management, instructional strategies, curriculum design and assessment.
• How do you balance the needs of the individual learner with the needs of the classroom community?
• What are your goals for students? 

Where You Teach

• How will you bring a global awareness to your classroom? 
• What will be your relationship with the community, parents, teaching colleagues and administration? 

Completing the Application 

Don't cut corners! As you are completing your applications, keep in mind that they are as important to your job search as your resume, letter of interest and other documents in your application packet. You are encouraged not to rush through completing your applications. Regional applications may be required instead of or in addition to the employer’s individual application.

• Be consistent with the information you provide on the application and on your resume. Make sure there are no contradictions of dates and places of employment and education.
• Do not make up an answer. Be honest. If you embellish, it will eventually catch up with you and you will leave a negative impression on the employer.
• Extra-curricular activities, which you may be willing to sponsor or coach, may be listed on most applications. Your willingness to sponsor activities can sometimes enhance your consideration for positions.
• Follow the application directions exactly. The directions may be different for each application you complete, so read all the directions carefully. Enter the correct information in the correct fields.
• Grammatical rules should be followed at all times. Teachers are held to high standards. Errors are unacceptable.
• Humor in your responses on an application can come across as sarcastic or flippant.
• Remember, an application may be a prospective employer’s first introduction to you; make it a professional one.
• Incomplete applications give the appearance of poor attention to detail. It is always best to respond to each question posed on an application whenever possible. An employer would not ask it if s/he did not want an answer.
• Never answer a question with “See my resume.”

Professional Philosophy Statement

Developing a professional philosophy statement helps to communicate your professional views and values toward early education, teaching, and learning. During your professional career this can be valuable, such as when applying for a position of work, applying for the CDA Credential or other academic positions. A professional philosophy statement can also serve as a tool in reaffirming what important professional roles and responsibilities you want to embrace in your teaching. (1 hour)

Lesson objectives

• Identify what a professional philosophy statement is and why one may be needed.
• Review ways to identify professional and personal values and beliefs regarding teaching and learning.
• Identify strategies for writing a professional philosophy statement.

Social Media

• X (Twitter)
• Degrees & Programs
• College Directory

Information for

• Faculty & Staff
• Visitors & Public

How to Develop a Personal Philosophy of Early Childhood Education

• Posted by Ron Spreeuwenberg
• January 15, 2019
• in Posted in Leadership & administration

To be a professional, you have to have an opinion on important topics related to your field and create a brand or philosophy on your approach.

Read on to discover why a personal early child care philosophy is important and how to develop your own!

Why a Personal Early Childhood Philosophy is Important

When you apply for ECE jobs, many prospective employers will ask you to explain your own personal philosophy and approach to education so they can begin to get a picture of who you are as a teacher.

However, developing your philosophy should go beyond a simple requirement for finding employment.

A personal philosophy of early childhood education should be used as a tool that not only guides your own teaching, but also helps your staff and parents understand your individual approach to early learning.

Developing Your Personal Philosophy

Going through the process of creating your own philosophy of early childhood education can help you more clearly define what kind of teacher you want to be and what sort of career path you want to take. Your ECE philosophy will become a document that explains your preferred style of teaching and outlines your strengths and areas of particular interest.

The following are some of the most important areas you may want to address in your personal philosophy document, but it is truly up to you to create a philosophy that accurately expresses your unique teaching style, values and beliefs when it comes to early childhood education.

Outline what you believe the role of a teacher is in an early childhood classroom.

What role should the educator take in the presentation of new ideas to children vs. the discoveries that children make on their own?

Explain how you will address the different learning styles of children in your care.

What types of opportunities and activities will you include in your early learning curriculum to encourage the best possible learning among all students?

Describe how you will handle conflict in the classroom and handle behavioral issues among students.

Detail how and why this approach will work.

Discuss how you will handle a variety of personalities, special needs and cultural diversity within your child care center to create a welcoming environment.

Detail your strategies for balancing the needs of these children with the rest of the children in your care.

Include details about how you will consult ECE colleagues and involve parents in your early childhood education curriculum.

Explain how you will maintain open lines of communication between parents and your staff in order to continually improve your center.

Communicating Your Philosophy of Early Childhood Education to Staff & Parents

Once it is complete, ensure that both your staff members and parents have access to your personal philosophy statement. Explaining the values that guide your teaching and the teachings of your child care center overall will help your staff ensure that their own teaching styles are in line with the type of atmosphere you want to create.

Additionally, sharing your personal philosophy of early childhood education will also benefit parents. Consider providing them with a copy of your statement when they begin to show interest in your child care facility. This may help parents decide if your approach to education is in line with their own values, and if your center would be a good fit for their child.

To ensure your child care center has the best communications possible with parents and staff, learn how HiMama can help your preschool or daycare! 

• Closing the Gap Between Your Philosophy and Your Communications

Never miss another important moment by improving your observation techniques!

Ron Spreeuwenberg

Ron is the Co-Founder & CEO of HiMama, where he leads all aspects of a social purpose business that helps early childhood educators improve learning outcomes for children.

Learn how HiMama can transform your center

HiMama brings parents, teachers and directors closer together and saves everyone time.

In 15 minutes you could be on your way with HiMama - it doesn't take longer than that!

HiMama help you foster a stronger and happier community at your child care center.

• Daily reports and messaging
• Staff management and billing
• Lesson planning

One comment

This is wonderful! I am an aspiring ECE and eager to learn MORE:) Thank you very much!

Leave a Reply Cancel reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Related Posts

5 strategies for building positive relationships with children in early childhood education

• Posted by Maddie Hutchison
• March 19, 2024

Following children’s lead: How to implement play-based learning in preschool

• March 14, 2024

Prioritizing mental health in early childhood education

• March 13, 2024

Navigating childcare in 2024: Insights from childcare directors [Webinar Recording]

• March 7, 2024

Virtual Lab School

Installation staff login.

• Reset your password

CDA Professional Philosophy Statement

Early Childhood Education (ECE) Philosophies and Services

• Living reference work entry
• First Online: 29 October 2019
• Cite this living reference work entry

• Valerie Margrain 2  

69 Accesses

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Institutional subscriptions

Brooker, L., Blaise, M., & Edwards, S. (Eds.). (2014). The SAGE handbook of play and learning in early childhood . Los Angeles: Sage.

Google Scholar  

Farrell, A., Kagan, S. L., & Tisdall, E. K. M. (2016). The SAGE handbook of early childhood research . London: Sage.

Fleer, M., & van Oers, B. (2018). International handbook of early childhood education (Springer International Handbooks of Education). Dordrecht: Springer Netherlands. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-94-024-0927-7 .

Book   Google Scholar  

May, H. (2009). Politics in the playground: The world of early childhood in New Zealand . Dunedin: Otago University Press.

Nutbrown, C., & Clough, P. (2014). Early childhood education: History, philosophy and experience (2nd ed.). London: Sage. https://doi.org/10.4135/9781446288863 .

Pearson, E., & Degotardi, E. (2016). Innovative pedagogical approaches in early childhood care and education (ECCE) in the Asia-Pacific region: A resource pack . Singapore: UNESCO.

Download references

Author information

Authors and affiliations.

Institute for Educational Work, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden

Valerie Margrain

You can also search for this author in PubMed   Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Valerie Margrain .

Editor information

Editors and affiliations.

WMIER, The University of Waikato WMIER, Hamilton, Waikato, New Zealand

Michael A. Peters

Section Editor information

Auckland University of Technology, Auckland, New Zealand

Faculty of Humanities and Social Sciences, Karlstad University, Karlstad, Sweden

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2019 Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.

About this entry

Cite this entry.

Margrain, V. (2019). Early Childhood Education (ECE) Philosophies and Services. In: Peters, M. (eds) Encyclopedia of Teacher Education. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1179-6_90-1

Download citation

DOI : https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-13-1179-6_90-1

Received : 02 August 2019

Accepted : 03 August 2019

Published : 29 October 2019

Publisher Name : Springer, Singapore

Print ISBN : 978-981-13-1179-6

Online ISBN : 978-981-13-1179-6

eBook Packages : Springer Reference Education Reference Module Humanities and Social Sciences Reference Module Education

• Publish with us

Policies and ethics

• Find a journal
• Track your research

About The Education Hub

• Course info
• Your courses
• ____________________________
• Using our resources
• Login / Account

The importance of an ECE centre’s philosophy

By Nikki Gardyne (Tumuaki,  Oma Rāpeti Early Learning Centre )  

Philosophy statements are used by ECE centres to share the values and beliefs that frame their programme. A  philosophy statement  draws together everything that the ECE centre believes about education and connects the concepts of teaching and learning together – it describes and justifies the way teaching happens as it does and the context around what’s happening. A philosophy also influences every aspect of the child’s day, from the way the environment is set up to the role that teachers have in guiding children’s play. It even influences the way conversations and relationships are formed between kaiako and children. If the centre has an underlying value like respect, then the teachers should always involve the children in respectful, reciprocal conversations about the day and activities they’d like to explore.  

There are many differences in the way a philosophy can influence how children are cared for in a centre. A lot of centres will be guided by these theories and add their own nuances and beliefs into their philosophy, weaving the two together. For example, a Reggio Emilia-inspired centre may have a large inside atelier with lots of natural light, while another centre inspired by the same philosophy will focus more on the outdoor environment and nature. Both are inspired by Reggio Emilia, but the outcome will be slightly different because the personal philosophy of the centre has different influences. 

Oma  Rāpeti ’s   philosophy: T he relationship is at the heart of everything  

At  Oma Rāpeti  we’re guided by the work of Pikler, RIE and  Te   Whāriki  – children always come first.  The key aspects of our approach are: 

• A main carer system : Each child has two main carers who act as a first point of contact for children and their whānau, and foster connection between the child and the wider centre environment. This respects a child’s inherent need for a stable, predictable person to attach to and provides them with a stable base from which to explore. 
• Care:  Every moment of the day is an opportunity for learning, and care moments (such as nappy changes, meal times, and sleep times) are opportunities for us to communicate, reconnect, and encourage participation from our children. These moments emotionally ‘refuel’ children so they feel satisfied to return to independent play and learning. 
• Sensitive observation : Taking the time to know each child individually, see what they are capable of, and provide them with an environment that will foster their ongoing exploration of their world. 
• Trust : We trust that our children are competent and capable, and ensure that they are given opportunities to do things for themselves. We intervene as little as possible so that they may experience the sense of accomplishment from doing something on their own. 
• Social and emotional support : We acknowledge children’s emotions and support them to work through these emotions in an authentic way. We see conflict as an opportunity for learning, and we support children to develop the communication skills needed to resolve conflict in a safe way. 
• A safe, challenging, and predictable environment : Children are given freedom to explore and choose their own play, which empowers them to investigate what is important to them and fosters a lifelong love of learning. 

What does this mean for a child’s day?  

We have a bonded and connected team, who speak respectfully to one another. This role-models great relationships for our children and allows our team to enjoy being together. We encourage our children to learn and feel their emotions. This can be as simple as the language we use, like ‘I can see you are feeling angry’, or allowing them to sit with that emotion with our support. In moments of conflict we offer support, allowing the children to resolve the conflict. 

Children at Oma Rāpeti are empowered and involved in processes and decisions and they take ownership of their spaces within the centre. They are an integral part of the routines, rituals and events in our Oma Rāpeti home. We aim to nourish the soul by providing slow and enjoyable dining and resting experiences where children aren’t rushed and feel respected and comfortable. Children often partake in the preparation of their meals, such as cutting food and preparing the table. Together, children and adults prepare special rituals such as foot spas, massage, yoga, and tea ceremonies to promote relaxation, self-care, and nourishment of the spirit.  

We pride ourselves on creating a ‘home away from home’ environment at Oma Rāpeti, where children can engage in self-chosen and self-initiated play. An outdoor environment and open-air play are essential for a healthy body, mind and spirit. Children are free to play outside in all weather as long as they are suitably dressed, and we go on adventures and explore our neighbourhood and community to further connect children to their natural world.  

You can read our full Oma Rāpeti philosophy  here .  

Did you find this article useful?

If you enjoyed this content, please consider making a charitable donation.

Become a supporter for as little as $1 a week – it only takes a minute and enables us to continue to provide research-informed content for teachers that is free, high-quality and independent.

Become a supporter

Get unlimited access to all our webinars

Buy a webinar subscription for your school or centre and enjoy savings of up to 25%, the education hub has changed the way it provides webinar content, to enable us to continue creating our high-quality content for teachers., an annual subscription of just nz$60 per person gives you access to all our live webinars for a whole year, plus the ability to watch any of the recordings in our archive. alternatively, you can buy access to individual webinars for just $9.95 each., we welcome group enrolments, and offer discounts of up to 25%. simply follow the instructions to indicate the size of your group, and we'll calculate the price for you. , unlimited annual subscription.

• All live webinars for 12 months
• Access to our archive of over 80 webinars
• Personalised certificates
• Group savings of up to 25%

The Education Hub’s mission is to bridge the gap between research and practice in education. We want to empower educators to find, use and share research to improve their teaching practice, and then share their innovations. We are building the online and offline infrastructure to support this to improve opportunities and outcomes for students. New Zealand registered charity number: CC54471

We’ll keep you updated

Click here to receive updates on new resources.

Interested in * —Please choose an option— Early childhood education (ECE) Schools Both ECE and schools

Follow us on social media

Like what we do please support us.

© The Education Hub 2024 All rights reserved | Site design: KOPARA

• Terms of use
• Privacy policy

Privacy Overview

Thanks for visiting our site. To show your support for the provision of high-quality research-informed resources for school teachers and early childhood educators, please take a moment to register.

Thanks, Nina

Spark Early Learning  

Home based child care, mission & vision.

Spark Early Learning aspires to provide care and early learning opportunities that are rooted in early childhood education pedagogy and other relevant areas of knowledge; including attachment, social and emotional development, and children's mental health. 

Values  ​ Several important values influence the care that Spark Early Learning provides to children and their families. 

Calm, Caring & Loving Environment 

Free Play  & Child Directed Learning 

Fostering Emotional Development 

Program Statement 

The goals of Spark Early Learning are rooted in the four foundations for learning and development outlined in  How Does Learning Happen.   These goals are also influenced by:

Think, Feel, Act: Lessons from Research about Young Children

Excerpts from Early Learning for Every Child Today 

Belonging   Cultivating Authentic Relationships & Connections 

Spark Early Leaning strives to provide safe relationships for children, to prepare them for future learning opportunities and relationships, and to cultivate and maintain meaningful relationships with families.  

At Spark Early Learning, you will see:

- Efforts to ease the child's transition to a new caregiver, peers, and setting. 

- Connect with children as individuals; accept and encourage each child as the individual they are. 

- Attuning and responding to physical and emotional states and cues. 

- Promotion of positive relationships between peers and opportunities to develop social competence. 

- Assisting children in finding new ways to achieve their goals when responding to difficult behaviors. 

Ontario Ministry of Education, 2014 

Well-Being Nurturing Healthy Development & Well-Being

Spark Early Leaning strives to care for children in a way that promotes their physical well-being, their self-care capabilities, and their mental health and well-being. 

At Spark Early Learning, you will see: 

- Opportunities to develop and practice making healthy choices in regards to food, sleep, and physical activity. 

- Opportunities to be physically active outdoors in a way that uses children's bodies, minds, and senses. 

- Gentle encouragement of self-regulation, including the ability to cope with and recover from  stressors and frustrations. 

- Holistic support towards families and their unique strengths. 

Engagement Creating Contexts for Learning through Exploration, Play, & Inquiry 

Spark Early Leaning strives to involve the ideas and interests of children to create meaningful and engaging experiences, provide ample time for exploration and thoughtfully treat the environment as a valuable educator.

- An educator that is a co-learner, who is actively engaged in understanding how children learn. 

- An organized space with ample room and open-ended materials to encourage exploration and complex play. 

- Exposure to the natural environment and thoughtful opportunities for risk-taking.  

- Opportunities for children to focus attention, manipulate, investigate, observe, question, test theories, solve problems, create, and represent ideas ( HDLD , p.37). 

Expression Fostering Communication & Expression in All Forms 

Spark Early Leaning strives to provide children with meaningful opportunities to initiate and respond to communication, opportunities for creative expression of ideas, and representation of children's ideas, experiences, and skills through documentation. 

At Spark Early Learning, you will see 

- Opportunities for serve and return interactions that respect children's subtle verbal and non-verbal cues. 

- Genuine interest in children's communication and the opportunity that this provides for connection. 

- Encouragement of successful communication between peers through supporting language and social skills. 

- Creative and engaging representations of the learning by individual children and the group. 

ISSN 1179 - 6812

Wednesday 16 August

• ABOUT HE KUPU
• CALL FOR PAPERS
• EDITORIAL REVIEW BOARD

What’s in a philosophy statement? A critical discourse analysis of early childhood centre philosophy statements in Aotearoa/New Zealand

Kiri gould unitec jacoba matapo university of auckland, special edition: volume 4, number 3 - april 2016.

Early childhood centres use philosophy statements to share the underpinning values and beliefs that frame their programmes. It could also be argued that, in an increasingly privatised and corporatised sector, philosophy statements are also used to market early childhood services to potential and existing users of the service. This research project used critical discourse analysis to examine the philosophy statements of 50 early childhood centres across Aotearoa New Zealand, arguing that a collective analysis of these statements would reveal which discourses operating in the sector are privileged and those which are marginalised. This research project sought to understand how dominant discourses in the sector reflect or resist current prevailing (and, at times, contradictory) ideologies in the broader early childhood political landscape – both nationally and globally. The research revealed that Western notions of play and play-based pedagogies were strong discourses across the philosophy statements examined. Also, neo-liberal and neo-colonial discourses pertaining to the child as an individual consumer of education, a capable, confident and flexible future worker, were also prevalent. Two discourses directly related to equity and social justice goals for the sector were less prevalent – these were discourses about inclusion and notions of indigenous rights and bicultural practices. This finding presents a challenge to the sector in which centres must find ways to re-engage with the inclusive, bicultural and locally relevant foundations of Te Whāriki (Ministry of Education, 1996).

Introduction

The aim of this small research project was to seek the political in the philosophy statements of early childhood centres in Aotearoa New Zealand. This research comes at a time when multiple and even contradictory ideologies are operating in the sector (Tesar, 2015). Farquar and Gibbons (2010) point out that childcare has become a complex site of politics. The rise of neo-liberal policy that leaves the provision of early childhood to the marketplace and privileges parental choice has occurred alongside other early childhood education (ECE) policies that champion equity and social inclusion. This project seeks to examine how these competing ideologies have shaped (or are contested by) the ECE sector by undertaking a collective analysis of philosophy statements from a variety of centre types across Aotearoa New Zealand. Since philosophy statements outline the values and beliefs of teaching and learning that guide centre practice, examined collectively, they can also provide a snapshot of what is stated to be fundamental and valuable to the sector. They might also uncover what is silenced and/or marginalised. Centre philosophy statements allow a glimpse of how discourses operating at global, national and local levels struggle for domination and, therefore, which discourses the sector privileges.

Gibbons (2010, p. 138) explains that a philosophy of education (such as that expressed in a centre philosophy statement) draws together the "ideals, values, practices and beliefs, into a statement of what we think about education." The purpose of centre philosophy statements is to point the reader to the explicit and underlying values and beliefs that guide the practices at that centre. Peters (2009) suggests a philosophy of teaching statement is a narrative of teaching and learning that includes a conception of teaching and learning. The philosophy statement describes and justifies the way teaching happens in a particular context, and communicates the goals and purpose of teaching practices.

Political landscape

In ECE, a number of competing ideologies are present. The global rise of neo-liberal reform has had a significant impact on ECE policy since the 1980s, and sits in contradiction to other important early childhood policy developments, such as the development of Te Whāriki – He whariki matauranga a nga mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early Childhood Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1996). Early childhood policy initiatives intersect with other state agendas. These include a focus on increasing the participation of women in the workforce, targeting ‘at-risk' children and families, and preparing children for school, and for their future roles as participants in the global economy (Ball & Vincent, 2005; Mitchell, 2005, Farquar & Gibbons, 2010). The neo-liberal tenets of capitalism, free markets, choice, competition, individual freedom and the emphasis on economically productive citizens, alongside generous government subsidies in the sector have resulted in a rapid expansion of the sector. In particular, the rise of for-profit providers and the entrance of corporate providers that have ‘reshaped the political landscape of early childhood politics' (May, 2009, p. 276).

Adding to this political landscape are other voices that offer alternative realities and points of resistance. May (2002) points out that many early childhood movements in this country have grown out of desire for social and political change. In particular, Te Whāriki , which offers a bicultural and non-prescriptive curriculum framework that "invites teachers to weave themselves, all children, their cultures and settings into the curriculum, and it urges dialogue and reflection" (Tesar, 2015, p. 106). Therefore, Te Whāriki offers teachers, centres and communities a point of resistance to the neo-liberal discourses that have become increasingly dominant in ECE in Aotearoa (Tesar, 2015). These national discourses themselves reflect, are shaped by and resist global discourses about children's learning and development, their economic worth, and their potential contributions to their country’s wellbeing. At each level, there is contestation about the values and purpose of ECE that is shaped by particular competing ideologies. How, then, do these competing discourses make their way into the philosophy statements that make explicit the values and beliefs of individual centres?

Critical discourse analysis

In this research project, we used critical discourse analysis [CDA] to examine the philosophy statements of 50 early childhood centres that were freely available on centre websites. These were randomly chosen and split evenly between the North and South Islands. The centres selected covered a range of types of centres, including kindergartens, community-based day care centres, small privately owned centres, and centres belonging to corporate providers. Not all the websites accessed included philosophy statements, however, most did. Therefore, we can assume that having a philosophy statement is seen as useful for centres in allowing them to share something about themselves as a provider of early childhood care and education to both the existing and potential members of their centre community. Most philosophy statements examined for this project were succinct (less than a page long). Some were as short as a few sentences. Some philosophy statements included graphics that helped to express the intent or meaning of their words. For example, one kindergarten used the concept of river stones inside which a key underpinning statement was placed.

In this research, we argue that philosophy statements reflect the favoured discourses of the sector. These shared ideas and language of the sector are not neutral, but are socially and historically located. Gee (2005, p. 7) explains that "A discourse is a representation of a particular conceptualisation of reality, shaped by historical, ideological, cultural and socially constructed ways of making sense communicated through language and other signs, symbols, and practices". Therefore, any examination of discourses needs to account for "both the social processes and structures, which give rise to the production of a text, and of the social structures and processes within which individuals or groups as social-historical subjects, create meanings in their interaction with texts" (Wodak, 2001, p. 12). In the case of this research, centre philosophies are created at a local level by teachers or teams who are operating in a wider social and political sphere.

Our values and beliefs have provided a lens through which this analysis has occurred. We acknowledge that our analysis of centre philosophy statements has not been neutral. Rather, we have taken the explicit position that early childhood teachers (and the organisations they work in) should seek to understand and resist inequity in society. We believe that early childhood teachers should be interested in how their practices, the embedded practices of the sector and the contexts in which those practices exist contribute to, or transform inequity. This aligns with Codd's (2005, p. 15) perspective that teachers should “embody within their practices the values of democratic citizenship” and acknowledges that government policy (social and educational) can create a smoke screen that draws teachers away from this purpose.

In line with our commitment to social justice, we chose CDA as a method for considering the centre philosophy statements. CDA is the systematic analysis and interpretation of discourse in order to explore how those discourses have arisen out of but are also shaped by struggles of power (Fairclough, 2003). CDA aims to investigate and reveal social inequity as it is expressed, legitimised and even contested by language. In the case of this research, the discourses we refer to are in text form. They are the stated values and beliefs about early childhood education made explicit by centres through their publically shared philosophy statements. In its simplest sense, a discourse can be understood as a "…shared language for talking about a topic, shared concepts for understanding it, and shared methods for understanding it" (MacNaughton, 2005, p. 20). Discourses are powerful in that they "make assumptions and values invisible, turn subjective perspectives and understandings into apparently objective truths and determine that some things are self-evident and realistic while others are dubious and impractical" (Dahlberg & Moss, 2005, p. 17). Therefore, discourses do not just reflect the reality they describe; they work to create them as normal ways of thinking about things (Bird, 2003). CDA seeks to uncover and disrupt these taken-for-granted discourses by asking how they have come to be, what/who they privilege, and what/who they exclude.

This leads to another important aspect of CDA that is particularly relevant to this research. This is because discourse is about the contestation of power, and is socially (and politically) constituted, and critical discourse analysis of centre philosophies includes the way in which competing ideologies within a text struggle for domination. Teacher's personal values and beliefs must be negotiated with the team of people contributing to the philosophy, but will also include the dominant discourses of the sector that are, themselves, at times competing. They must make decisions about what to include, and what is important. These inclusions (and exclusions) reflect dominant discourses, even if this is a largely an unconscious act on behalf of the writers.

Discussion on findings

This research identified several tensions concerning the purpose and place of philosophy statements for early childhood centres. Dahlberg and Moss (2005) mention the significance of philosophy in education that problematises taken for granted truths and the complexity of issues in education. Using this perspective, we might expect that, during the construction of a philosophy of education, a centre dialogue occurs about education theory, the purposes and methods of education, and the particular normative positions that are being expressed, in other words, discussion and questioning about teaching theories and practices and the relevance of these to the context of the centre. The processes for how centre philosophy statements were arrived at were not usually revealed on centre websites. It was not possible to know, in this small project, who was involved and what discussions took place.

The contexts in which philosophy statements were produced also caused us to question the purpose of philosophy statements, particularly where centres were part of a group of centres with shared ownership. For example, individual centres might have had unique philosophy statements but shared policies and procedures that were uniform across sites and communities. In these cases, we questioned the purpose, place and power of philosophy statements to lead practices. In addition, it could be argued that philosophy statements are also used by centres to position themselves in the marketplace because they allow centres to express to potential users of their service what kind of service they are and what their commitments to care and education are. Given this potential purpose, constructing philosophy statements involves the navigation of pedagogy, philosophy, education, as well as systematically sustaining the services’ economic viability, including ever-increasing profit margins. Philosophy statements might be seen to be risky to future business if they challenge the current popular discourses around the care and education of young children.

Several discourses emerged across the 50 philosophy statements examined for this research. These both exemplified and resisted current dominant neo-liberal ideologies dominating the current political landscape in ECE. We have chosen four of these to explore for the purpose of this article. The first two were dominant discourses – spoken in the majority of philosophy statements analysed. These were discourses about child-centred pedagogies and play, and discourses about competent and capable learners. The other two discourses discussed here are chosen because, despite the fact that policy supports their messages about equity and social justice, they were not strongly expressed across the statements. Although some ECE services showed resistance to neo-liberal and neo-colonial ideologies concerning children, teaching and learning, the significant lack of inclusion and biculturalism indicates marginalised discourses.

Child-centred and play-based pedagogies

Play as the main vehicle for learning was a dominant discourse across the philosophy statements, reflecting an entrenched and privileged discourse in the sector (Thomas, Warren & Deveries, 2011). Learning and teaching were mostly positioned within a framework that privileged the child's experiences and interests as the central focus from which a negotiated curriculum unfolded. Seventy percent of the philosophies analysed referenced play and child-centred pedagogies. Statements such as, "We believe in fostering an enjoyment of learning, through active exploration, child-initiated play and experiences and interactions with others," and, "We believe that children establish the foundational skills for learning through play," and, "We believe that play is the best tool for learning," were typical. Play was usually further defined as child-led or child-initiated. Following children's interests, supporting children to explore, discover, make their own choices and be independent were all common ideas. For example: "Our teaching programme is based upon extending each individual child's interests."

It is unsurprising that play and child-centered approaches to learning have such a strong voice in the statements. Aotearoa New Zealand's early childhood services are still influenced by theorists such as Rousseau and Froebel, who construct the idea of a ‘natural child' and play as a natural vehicle for learning. In addition, theories such as Piaget's stages of development, which positions children's development as unfolding through play, and Vygotsky's socio-cultural development theory, which emphasises the importance of children learning through play alongside a skilled guide, continue to influence the sector. All of these (as well as Māori philosophical and pedagogical ideas) contribute to the foundations of Te Whāriki , which outlines the importance of teachers and children weaving their own curricula that are personally, locally, and culturally meaningful. Therefore, child-centred and play-based pedagogies have deep roots in the Aotearoa New Zealand early childhood experience.

The idea that play continues to be a privileged discourse in the sector possibly stands in resistance to concerns about a creeping schoolification of ECE (Alcock, 2013; Stover, 2013). For example, Alcock (2013) worries that the future of ECE in Aoteroa New Zealand is playless, noting that the Ministry of Education's website makes almost no reference to play (but plenty to education, learning and development). Moreover, Alcock (2013) expresses concern that the introduction of National Standards to the school sector will have a downward push, meaning preparation for school becomes a central concern for early childhood centres. Increasingly, the neo-liberal child is positioned in their ability to contribute to future national and global economies – the neo-liberal child is individualist, consumerist and competitive (Farquhar, 2012). It might be that continuing to position play as an organising principle in early childhood services provides a kind of protective shield in which children and their learning is able to be collaborative, collective, shared and locally meaningful.

However, it is worth questioning further how we understand play, whose experiences are privileged through the notion of play, and who might be silenced or marginalized by this dominant discourse. Several authors seek to trouble the discourse of play in ECE. Canella and Viruru (2004) argue that play represents the biases and values of the West and that "the acceptance of play as a universal construct applicable to all creates a corporate structure of normalisation, and consequently, labels for those considered abnormal because they can not or choose not to play" (p. 108). Chan (2011) points out that not all families in New Zealand, and, in particular, some immigrant families, value play as the primary vehicle for learning in the same way. Therefore, the discourse of play can serve to isolate and disconnect families from further involvement in the ECE environment. Understanding that play is a discourse that privileges those who understand and value play in services also invites teachers to hear other ways of understanding children's learning that might be more inclusive of different world views.

The child as a capable and competent individual

Out of the 50 centre philosophy statements analysed, 78% percent identified each of the following terms; the child as ‘capable', ‘competent' and ‘individual'. These concepts have become increasingly embedded in the lexicon of early childhood education discourse within Aotearoa New Zealand. We also see these concepts recorded throughout curriculum documents, such as Te Whāriki (Ministry of Education, 1996), Kei Tua o te Pae/Assessment for Learning: Early Childhood Exemplars (Ministry of Education, 2004), and further Education Review publications targeting notions of quality practice (Education Review Office, 2015). Such documents attempt to provide early childhood teachers with an ideology for pedagogy, ethics in teacher relations and sociological constructs of childhood. The following statements, although varied, primarily expressed an image of the child as a developing, capable and competent individual. "We believe children are capable, and we aim to focus on developing their full potential", "Our aim is for all children to be competent and confident learners," and, "We believe children are unique individuals and we aspire to build their confidence as capable and competent learners."

In the analysis of early childhood statement texts, it is imperative to ask how these current statements evident in discourse are not neutral and how these constructs may turn subjective perspectives into objective realities. Foucault (1980) describes how the human subject is governed by the state and centralised state apparatus. The state constructs an image for the human subject, one that is culturally and biologically defined, in accordance to race, sex and class. However, ongoing changes in contemporary society have troubled how the human subject is governed through the state. The increase in global information technologies, new modes of communication, and network systems proliferate boundaries, where money and goods are exchanged, where people traverse social and economic terrains globally. In an ever-increasing global market, the privatisation of society's institutions offer services of choice and, with that, governing that takes place locally. "We are no longer governed by centralized state apparatuses; we are individual, autonomous and flexible subjects that on account of our border-crossing and liberty of choice of lifestyles take on multiple, fractioned and hybrid identities" (Osberg, 2009, p. 35). The privatisation of ECE in Aotearoa New Zealand offers services in the guise of choice; parents may choose according to their individual tastes and preferences. We ask, does this rhetoric of individual choice and freedom influence the image of the ‘individual', ‘competent’ child represented in philosophy statements?

In a poststructural deconstruction of childhood, Dahlberg and Moss (2005) observed an emerging subjectivity for the child that relates directly to the philosophy statements analysed within this study. The ‘competent, autonomous and flexible child' is prevalent in new forms of constructivism. This subjectivity of the empowered child that problem solves, analyses and reflects is created to fit the neo-liberal workforce, as well as fostering liberalists’ ideals of citizenship. "This subject is an entrepreneurial self, a flexible actor ready to respond to new eventualities and empowered through self-reflections and self analysis…prepared to be a global citizen, worker, flexible, adaptable, ready for uncertainties in work as well as in [the] family" (Dahlberg & Moss, 2005, p. 38). According to Dahlberg (2003), within contemporary society, conceptions of competent and autonomous behaviour have become another way of governing subjects.

We acknowledge that, while these concepts have benefits for many children, it is also problematic, as it may be seen as new modes of self-government. Children's participation as competent and capable individuals is not neutral and decontextualized, as alluded to in some centre philosophy statements. Hartung (2011) explains that participation, offered as a technology of power, produces a type of individuality that can potentially homogenise and universalise children in a constant binary with adults. Consequently, there appears to be little room for those who do not conform to these discursive labels.

The exclusion of inclusion

In the analysis of centre philosophy statements, only 16% of early childhood centres were explicit about inclusion. Inclusion, as specified within the philosophy statements, varied from broad and general claims of provision to more specific commitments of accessibility for all children and inclusion within holistic, socio-cultural perspectives. For example, "We believe in supporting children holistically, in a socio-cultural and inclusive environment", "We believe that the ideal environment for children is one that is accessible for all children", and, "We respect children as individuals and believe in providing an environment that is inclusive and welcoming."

With the under-representation of inclusion, we question how inclusion may be marginalised and what tensions are present in the current political climate. Lyons (2012) warns how privatisation has changed stakeholders' view of early childhood education. With the commercial view, effectiveness, efficiency and performance become key imperatives that lead to the marginalisation of the sector’s efforts in equity and social justice policies (Lyons, 2012). The resurgence of deficit views of disability has been exasperated by the market model of delivery, where concerns about funding and resourcing influence decisions about inclusive provision. This is particularly problematic regarding legitimising specialist assistance and funding, where the focus is on deficit views of the child. "The child is identified as dis/abled by a complex funding regime, their needs rather than rights are the focus, and their deficits rather than their competencies underlined" (Lyons, 2012, p. 39). This reality becomes a social justice issue, as research conducted within Aotearoa New Zealand have described practices of exclusion, involving conditional enrollment agreements. Extreme cases reported parents having been required to meet additional costs and given limited access for their child in hours of attendance (MacArthur, Purdue & Ballard, 2003; Macartney, 2008; Purdue, Gordon-Burns, Rarere-Briggs, Stark & Turnock, 2011).

We ask; if it is a right for children to have access to quality ECE, how do rights discourses (dis)serve us? Skeptical of rights discourse, Dahlberg and Moss (2005) provide a critique of liberalist views of rights and highlight the paradoxical positions posed in ECE discourse. The concept of rights is always contextual and is neither neutral or value free. The key concerns are when rights are discussed in a decontextualised way, as if a universal minimum condition suffices a good life (if any). Particular liberal and legal discourses have generated a greater prevalence of rights discourse, which coincides with an understanding of the subject as an individual, autonomous, and rational. Rights involve a contractual exchange between calculating individuals, and are of tactical politcal value. The concept of rights is always present in a power-relation, providing agency to those with less power. Extending our reach outside of a liberalist view of rights, Dahlberg and Moss (2005) have suggested an ‘ethic of the encounter' and ‘ethics of care' in a re-imaging of education that foregrounds inter-dependence. If we consider this in connection with inclusion, perhaps a dialogical space for ethical choices concerning particular conditions and contexts may emerge (Dahlberg & Moss, 2005).  It is not to say that we resist rights discourse, it is rather an opening for dialogue about rights as universal codes entrenched in individual liberalism.

The marginalisation of bicultural pedagogies

Despite the sector’s bicultural curriculum framework, Te Whāriki , and the strong statements in this document outlining Te Tiriti based obligations in practice, only 54% of the philosophy statements analysed indicated a commitment to bicultural development or practices as underpinning their centres’ programmes. A commitment to bicultural practices was mostly in the form of recognition of Te Tiriti o Waitangi. For example, "As an organisation we acknowledge the dual heritage of Aotearoa/New Zealand and work to uphold the spirit and intent of the Te Tiriti" and "We acknowledge the bicultural partnership inherent in Te Tiriti o Waitangi and seek to ensure that the curriculum offered reflects this partnership." These centre philosophy statements did not usually elaborate on how Te Tiriti partnerships would be upheld in the programme, although this was sometimes implicit in other statements, such as statements about parent partnerships. Only one of 50 centre philosophy statements in this research elaborated on their commitment to the weaving of Māori epistemology beyond reference to Te Tiriti o Waitangi. This centre, a kindergarten, also outlined that its processes for constructing their philosophy included working with their families and wider community. The kindergarten organised its philosophy statements around notions of tikanga agreed upon by the centre community.

The silencing of Māori ways of being, knowing and doing in early childhood practice is a concern expressed by Rau and Ritchie (2011), who mourned the lack of confidence and capacity of early childhood educators to practice in ways that affirm and uphold indigenous rights, despite the support from policy developments to do so. Te Whāriki is a bicultural framework, weaving indigenous and Western epistemologies. Tesar (2015) argues that this bicultural nature should "give it the strength to resist the dominant neo-liberal and neo-colonial gaze" (p. 106). More recently, the Ministry of Education's Māori education strategy, Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success (2008-2012) , and phase two of that policy, Accelerating Success (2013-2017), set out to purposely challenge colonial and racist discourse in relation to Māori education. The intention of these documents was to embrace identity, culture and language as essential ingredients to success (Ministry of Education, 2008, 2013). These policy developments, however, contradict other neo-liberal policy that is increasingly felt in the sector, such as the increased privatisation of the sector and the lowering of qualification and professional development requirements.

The colonising effects of neo-liberalism can be seen not only in the marginalising of Māori bicultural and counter colonial pedagogies in the centres analysed, but also in the elevation of the neo-liberal view of the child as a capable and confident individual mentioned earlier. These two ideologies struggle for domination and are counter to each other. The neo-liberal focus on individual achievement and competition expressed in philosophy statements referencing capable and confident individual learners is at odds with collectivist and non-materialistic world-view of Māori (Ritchie, 2011; Tesar, 2015). Given the contradictions and tensions that appear within philosophy statements outlined above, we question whether cursory mention of Te Tiriti o Waitangi in some philosophy statements was not merely a performance of compliance. We agree with Ritchie (2011, p. 796) that upholding indigenous rights requires more "than just a commitment" but rather that the teachers find ways to create spaces "for indigenous tamariki and their whānau to access their tikanga" (p. 813).

At the beginning of this paper, we positioned early childhood services in New Zealand at the intersection of neo-liberal policy, which emphasises individualism, competition and the future capacity of children to contribute to the global workforce, and other kinds of policies that have, as their focus, equity and inclusion, such as the national early childhood curriculum, Te Whāriki . We questioned how services might resist or elevate these and how these might be examined through an analysis of centre philosophy statements. The 50 centre philosophy statements examined reveal that the neo-liberal and neo-colonial discourses operating at national and global levels (Farquhar, 2012; Tesar, 2015; Rau & Ritchie, 2011) are also embedded in the discourses of the sector. Play and child-centred learning appear as an entrenched discourse about how children learn. We have suggested that there might be multiple readings to this. In the first reading, teachers resisted the constant neo-liberal gaze on children using the elevation of play to ward off the schoolification of ECE. In the second, teachers are asked to consider how making play an objective truth might marginalise and silence the families for which play is not a learning tradition. Centre philosophy statements were likely to promote a vision of children as capable and confident individuals and learners, reflecting the neo-liberal discourses of flexible future consumers and workers. These discourses, which place children within the economic rationality and individualism of the marketplace, potentially squeeze out other more relational and socially just ways of understanding early childhood education, as was evidenced through the marginalisation of discourses pertaining to inclusion and indigenous rights through bicultural practice. Although there is plenty of support for these within policy and curriculum, they were not common or entrenched discourses for the philosophy statements analysed. The silencing of these discourses presents a challenge to the sector, which must find ways to resist the neo-liberal turn and reinvent practices that are inclusive, dialogical and socially just.

• Ball, S., & Vincent, C. (2005). The 'childcare champion'? New Labour, social justice and the childcare market. British Educational Research Journal, 31 (5), 557-570.
• Bird, L. (2003). Seen and heard? Moving beyond discourses about children's needs and rights in educational policies. New Zealand Journal of Educational Studies, 38 (1), 37-48.
• Bloch, M., Popkewitz, T., Holmlund, K., Moqvist, I. (Eds). (2003). Governing children, families and education: Restructuring the welfare state. New York, NY: Palgrave McMillan.
• Burchell, G., Gordon, C., Miller, P. M., & Foucault, M. (1991). The Foucault effect: Studies in governmentality: With two lectures by and an interview with Michel Foucault. London, UK: Harvester Wheatsheaf.
• Canella, G. S., & Viruru, R. (2003). Childhood and postcolonisation. Power, education and contemporary practice. New York, NY: Routledge.
• Chan, A. (2011). Critical multicultralsim. Supporting early childhood teachers to work with diverse immigrant families. International Research in Early Childhood, 2 (1), 63-75.
• Codd, J. (2005). Education policy and the challenges of globalisation: Commercialisation or citizenship? In J. Codd, & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Education policy directions in Aotearoa New Zealand (pp. 3-17). South Bank, Victoria, Australia: Thompson Dunmore Press.
• Dahlberg, G. (2003). Pedagogy as a loci of an ethics of an encounter. In M. Bloch, K. Holmund, I. Moqvist, & T. Popkewitz (Eds.), Governing children, families and education. Restructuring the welfare state (pp. 261-286). New York, NY: Palgrave MacMillan.
• Education Review Office. (2015). Infants and toddlers as competent and confident communicators and explorers . Wellington, New Zealand: New Zealand Government.
• Farquhar, S., & Gibbons, A. (2010). Early childhood education. In M. Thrupp, & R. Irwin (Eds.), Another decade of New Zealand education policy: Where to now? (pp. 83-98). Hamilton, New Zealand:Wilf Malcom Institute of Educational Research.
• Fairclough, N. (2003). Analysing discourse: Textual analysis for social research. London, UK: Routledge.
• Farquhar, S. (2013). Narrative and identity in early childhood education. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 44 (3), 289-301.
• Foucault, M. (1980). Two lectures. In C. Gordon (Ed.), Power/knowledge: Selected interviews and other writings, 1972-1977. New York, NY: Pantheon Books.
• Gee, J. (2005). An introduction to discourse analysis: Theory and method (2nd ed.). London, UK: Routledge.
• Gibbons, A. (2010). The philosophy of education. In B. Clarke, & A. Grey (Eds.), Perspectives on early childhood education. Ãta kite ate pae – scanning the horizon (pp. 136-148). Auckland, New Zealand: Pearson.  
• Hartung, C. (2011). Governing the 'agentic' child citizen: A poststructural analysis of children's participation (Doctoral thesis, Universiy of Wollongong, Australia). Retrieved from p://ro.uow.edu.au/theses/3504   
• Lyons, L. (2012). “Same, same, but different”: The dangers of binary definitions of dis/ability in the neoliberal market place of early childhood education and care. Curriculum matters, 8 , 33-47.
• MacArthur, J., Purdue, K., & Ballard, K. (2003). Competent and confident children? Te Whāriki and the inclusion of children with disabilities in early childhood education. In J. Nuttall (Ed.), Weaving Te Whāriki: Aotearoa New Zealand's early childhood curriculum document in theory and practice. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
• Macartney, B. (2008). Disabled by the discourse: Some impacts of normalising mechanisms in education and society on the lives of disabled children and the families . New Zealand research in early childhood education, 1 (11), 33-50.
• MacNaugton, G. (2005). Doing Foucault in early childhood studies. Applying poststructural ideas. Oxon, UK: Routledge.
• May, H. (2002). "Blue skies" talk in the playground. Delta, 54 (1&2), 9-28.
• May, H. (2009). Politics in the playground. The world of early childhood in New Zealand (2nd ed.). Dunedin, New Zealand: Otago Press.
• Ministry of Education. (1996). Te Whāriki – He Whariki matauranga a nga mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early Childhood Curriculum. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Ministry of Education. (1998). Quality in action. Te mahi whai hua. Implementing the revised statement of desirable objectives and practices in New Zealand early childhood services . Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Ministry of Education. (2004). Kei tua o te pae. Assessment for learning early childhood exemplars. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Ministry of Education. (2006a). Kei tua o te pae. Assessment for learning early childhood exemplars. Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Ministry of Education. (2006b ). Nga arohaehae whai hua. Self review guidelines for early childhood education . Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Ministry of Education. (2008). Ka Hikitia: Managing for Success . Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Ministry of Eudcation. (2013). Ka Hikitia: Accelerating Success . Wellington, New Zealand: Learning Media.
• Mitchell, L. (2005). Policy shifts in early childhood education: Past lessons, new directions. In J. Codd, & K. Sullivan (Eds.), Education policy directions in Aotearoa/New Zealand (pp. 175-198). South Bank, Victoria, New Zealand: Thomson Dunmore Press.
• Noddings, N. (2012). Philosophy of education (3rd ed.). Boulder, CO: Westview Press.
• Osberg, D., & Biesta, G. (2008). The emergent curriculum: Navigating a complex course between unguided learning and planned enculturation. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 40 (3), 313–328.
• Osberg, L. M. (2009). Movement and experimentation in young children’s learning: Deleuze and Gautarri in early childhood education . London, UK: Routledge
• Peters, A. M. (2009). Editorial: A teaching philosophy or philosophy of teaching? Educational philosophy and theory, 41 (1), 111 -113.
• Purdue, K., Gordon-Burns, D., Rarere-Briggs, B., Stark, R., & Turnock, K. (2011). The exclusion of children with disabilities in early childhood education in New Zealand: Issues and implications for inclusion. Australasian Journal Of Early Childhood, 36 (2), 95-103.
• Rau, C., & Ritchie, J. (2011). Aha koa he iti: Early childhood pedagogies affirming of Māori children’s rights to their culture. Early Education and Development, 22 (5), 795-847.
• Stover, S. (2013). Odd Alliances. Working theories on ‘unintended consequences’ of early childhood education in Aotearoa/ New Zealand. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38 (3), 4-7.
• Tesar. M. (2015). Te Whāriki in Aotearoa/New Zealand. Witnessing and resisting neo-liberal and neo-colonial discourses in early childhood education. In V. Pacini Ketchabaw, & A. Taylor. (Eds.), Unsettling colonial places and spaces (pp. 145-170). London, UK: Routledge.
• Thomas, L., Warren, E., & Devries, E. (2011). Play-based learning and intentional teaching in early childhood contexts . Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36 (4), 69-75.
• Wodak, R. (2001). What CDA is about. A summary of its history, important concepts and its development. In R. Wodak, & M. Meyers. (Eds.), Methods of critical discourse analysis (pp. 1-13). London, UK: Sage.

Subscribe today and never miss an issue!

I have already subscribed   |   No thanks

• NAEYC Login
• Member Profile
• Hello Community
• Accreditation Portal
• Online Learning
• Online Store

Popular Searches:   DAP ;  Coping with COVID-19 ;  E-books ;  Anti-Bias Education ;  Online Store

The Power of Playful Learning in the Early Childhood Setting

You are here

Play versus learning represents a false dichotomy in education (e.g., Hirsh-Pasek & Golinkoff 2008). In part, the persistent belief that learning must be rigid and teacher directed—the opposite of play—is motivated by the lack of a clear definition of what constitutes playful learning (Zosh et al. 2018). And, in part, it is motivated by older perceptions of play and learning. Newer research, however, allows us to reframe the debate as learning via play—as playful learning.

This piece, which is an excerpt from Chapter 5 in  Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth Through Age 8, Fourth Edition (NAEYC 2022), suggests that defining play on a spectrum (Zosh et al. 2018, an idea first introduced by Bergen 1988) helps to resolve old divisions and provides a powerful framework that puts  playful learning —rich curriculum coupled with a playful pedagogy—front and center as a model for all early childhood educators. ( See below for a discussion of play on a spectrum.)

This excerpt also illustrates the ways in which play and learning mutually support one another and how teachers connect learning goals to children’s play. Whether solitary, dramatic, parallel, social, cooperative, onlooker, object, fantasy, physical, constructive, or games with rules, play, in all of its forms, is a teaching practice that optimally facilitates young children’s development and learning. By maximizing children’s choice, promoting wonder and enthusiasm for learning, and leveraging joy, playful learning pedagogies support development across domains and content areas and increase learning relative to more didactic methods (Alfieri et al. 2011; Bonawitz et al. 2011; Sim & Xu 2015).

Playful Learning: A Powerful Teaching Tool

This narrowing of the curriculum and high-stakes assessment practices (such as paper-and-pencil tests for kindergartners) increased stress on educators, children, and families but failed to deliver on the promise of narrowing—let alone closing—the gap.  All  children need well-thought-out curricula, including reading and STEM experiences and an emphasis on executive function skills such as attention, impulse control, and memory (Duncan et al. 2007). But to promote happy, successful, lifelong learners, children must be immersed in developmentally appropriate practice and rich curricular learning that is culturally relevant (NAEYC 2020). Playful learning is a vehicle for achieving this. Schools must also address the inequitable access to play afforded to children (see “Both/And: Early Childhood Education Needs Both Play and Equity,” by Ijumaa Jordan.) All children should be afforded opportunities to play, regardless of their racial group, socioeconomic class, and disability if they have been diagnosed with one. We second the call of Maria Souto-Manning (2017): “Although play has traditionally been positioned as a privilege, it must be (re)positioned as a right, as outlined by the  United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child, Article 31” (785).

What Is Playful Learning?

Playful learning describes a learning context in which children learn content while playing freely (free play or self-directed play), with teacher guidance (guided play), or in a structured game. By harnessing children’s natural curiosity and their proclivities to experiment, explore, problem solve, and stay engaged in meaningful activities—especially when doing so with others—teachers maximize learning while individualizing learning goals. Central to this concept is the idea that teachers act more as the Socratic “guide at the side” than a “sage on the stage” (e.g., King 1993, 30; Smith 1993, 35). Rather than view children as empty vessels receiving information, teachers see children as active explorers and discoverers who bring their prior knowledge into the learning experience and construct an understanding of, for example, words such as  forecast  and  low pressure  as they explore weather patterns and the science behind them. In other words, teachers support children as active learners.

Importantly, playful learning pedagogies naturally align with the characteristics that research in the science of learning suggests help humans learn. Playful learning leverages the power of active (minds-on), engaging (not distracting), meaningful, socially interactive, and iterative thinking and learning (Zosh et al. 2018) in powerful ways that lead to increased learning.

Free play lets children explore and express themselves—to be the captains of their own ship. While free play is important, if a teacher has a learning goal, guided play and games are the road to successful outcomes for children (see Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2013 for a review). Playful learning in the form of guided play, in which the teacher builds in the learning as part of a fun context such as a weather report, keeps the child’s agency but adds an intentional component to the play that helps children learn more from the experience. In fact, when researchers compared children’s skill development during free play in comparison to guided play, they found that children learned more vocabulary (Toub et al. 2018) and spatial skills (Fisher et al. 2013) in guided play than in free play.

Self-Directed Play, Free Play

NAEYC’s 2020 position statement on developmentally appropriate practice uses the term  self-directed play  to refer to play that is initiated and directed by children. Such play is termed  free play  in the larger works of the authors of this excerpt; therefore, free play is the primary term used in this article, with occasional references to self-directed play, the term used in the rest of the DAP book.

Imagine an everyday block corner. The children are immersed in play with each other—some trying to build high towers and others creating a tunnel for the small toy cars on the nearby shelves. But what if there were a few model pictures on the wall of what children could strive to make as they collaborated in that block corner? Might they rotate certain pieces purposely? Might they communicate with one another that the rectangle needs to go on top of the square? Again, a simple insertion of a design that children can try to copy turns a play situation into one ripe with spatial learning. Play is a particularly effective way to engage children with specific content learning when there is a learning goal.

Why Playful Learning Is Critical

Teachers play a crucial role in creating places and spaces where they can introduce playful learning to help all children master not only content but also the skills they will need for future success. The science of learning literature (e.g., Fisher et al. 2013; Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2013; Zosh et al. 2018) suggests that playful learning can change the “old equation” for learning, which posited that direct, teacher-led instruction, such as lectures and worksheets, was the way to achieve rich content learning. This “new equation” moves beyond a sole focus on content and instead views playful learning as a way to support a breadth of skills while embracing developmentally appropriate practice guidelines (see Hirsh-Pasek et al. 2020).

Using a playful learning pedagogical approach leverages the skill sets of today’s educators and enhances their ability to help children attain curricular goals. It engages what has been termed active learning that is also developmentally appropriate and offers a more equitable way of engaging children by increasing access to participation. When topics are important and culturally relevant to children, they can better identify with the subject and the learning becomes more seamless.

While educators of younger children are already well versed in creating playful and joyful experiences to support social goals (e.g., taking turns and resolving conflicts), they can use this same skill set to support more content-focused curricular goals (e.g., mathematics and literacy). Similarly, while teachers of older children have plenty of experience determining concrete content-based learning goals (e.g., attaining Common Core Standards), they can build upon this set of skills and use playful learning as a pedagogy to meet those goals.

Learning Through Play: A Play Spectrum

As noted previously, play can be thought of as lying on a spectrum that includes free play (or self-directed play), guided play, games, playful instruction, and direct instruction (Bergen 1988; Zosh et al. 2018). For the purposes of this piece, we use a spectrum that includes the first three of these aspects of playful learning, as illustrated in “Play Spectrum Showing Three Types of Playful Learning Situations” below.

The following variables determine the degree to which an activity can be considered playful learning:

• level of adult involvement
• extent to which the child is directing the learning
• presence of a learning goal

Toward the left end of the spectrum are activities with more child agency, less adult involvement, and loosely defined or no particular learning goals. Further to the right, adults are more involved, but children still direct the activity or interaction.

Developmentally appropriate practice does not mean primarily that children play without a planned learning environment or learn mostly through direct instruction (NAEYC 2020). Educators in high-quality early childhood programs offer a range of learning experiences that fall all along this spectrum. By thinking of play as a spectrum, educators can more easily assess where their learning activities and lessons fall on this spectrum by considering the components and intentions of the lesson. Using their professional knowledge of how children develop and learn, their knowledge of individual children, and their understanding of social and cultural contexts, educators can then begin to think strategically about how to target playful learning (especially guided play and games) to leverage how children naturally learn. This more nuanced view of play and playful learning can be used to both meet age-appropriate learning objectives and support engaged, meaningful learning.   

In the kindergarten classroom in the following vignette, children have ample time for play and exploration in centers, where they decide what to play with and what they want to create. These play centers are the focus of the room and the main tool for developing social and emotional as well as academic skills; they reflect and support what the children are learning through whole-group discussions, lessons, and skills-focused stations. In the vignette, the teacher embeds guided play opportunities within the children’s free play.

Studying Bears: Self-Directed Play that Extends What Kindergartners Are Learning

While studying the habits of animals in winter, the class is taking a deeper dive into the lives of American black bears, animals that make their homes in their region. In the block center, one small group of children uses short lengths and cross-sections of real tree branches as blocks along with construction paper to create a forest habitat for black bear figurines. They enlist their friends in the art center to assist in making trees and bushes. Two children are in the writing center. Hearing that their friends are looking for help to create a habitat, they look around and decide a hole punch and blue paper are the perfect tools for making blueberries—a snack black bears love to eat! Now multiple centers and groups of children are involved in making the block center become a black bear habitat.

In the dramatic play center, some of the children pretend to be bear biologists, using stethoscopes, scales, and magnifying glasses to study the health of a couple of plush black bears. When these checkups are complete, the teacher suggests the children could describe the bears’ health in a written “report,” thus embedding guided play within their free play. A few children at the easels in the art center are painting pictures of black bears.

Contributed by Amy Blessing

Free play, or self-directed play, is often heralded as the gold standard of play. It encourages children’s initiative, independence, and problem solving and has been linked to benefits in social and emotional development (e.g., Singer & Singer 1990; Pagani et al. 2010; Romano et al. 2010; Gray 2013) and language and literacy (e.g., Neuman & Roskos 1992). Through play, children explore and make sense of their world, develop imaginative and symbolic thinking, and develop physical competence. The kindergarten children in the example above were developing their fine motor and collaboration skills, displaying their understanding of science concepts (such as the needs of animals and living things), and exercising their literacy and writing skills. Such benefits are precisely why free play has an important role in developmentally appropriate practice. To maximize learning, teachers also provide guided play experiences.

Guided Play

While free play has great value for children, empirical evidence suggests that it is not always sufficient  when there is a pedagogical goal at stake  (Smith & Pellegrini 2008; Alfieri et al. 2011; Fisher et al. 2013; Lillard 2013; Weisberg, Hirsh-Pasek, & Golinkoff 2013; Toub et al. 2018). This is where guided play comes in.

Guided play allows teachers to focus children’s play around specific learning goals (e.g., standards-based goals), which can be applied to a variety of topics, from learning place value in math to identifying rhyming words in literacy activities. Note, however, that the teacher does not take over the play activity or even direct it. Instead, she asks probing questions that guide the next level of child-directed exploration. This is a perfect example of how a teacher can initiate a context for learning while still leaving the child in charge. In the previous kindergarten vignette, the teacher guided the children in developing their literacy skills as she embedded writing activities within the free play at the centers.

Facilitating Guided Play

Skilled teachers set up environments and facilitate development and learning throughout the early childhood years, such as in the following:

• Ms. Taglieri notices what 4-month-old Anthony looks at and shows interest in. Following his interest and attention, she plays Peekaboo, adjusting her actions (where she places the blanket and peeks out at him) to maintain engagement.
• Ms. Eberhard notices that 22-month-old Abe knows the color yellow. She prepares her environment based on this observation, placing a few yellow objects along with a few red ones on a small table. Abe immediately goes to the table, picking up each yellow item and verbally labeling them (“Lellow!”).
• Mr. Gorga creates intrigue and participation by inviting his preschool class to “be shape detectives” and to “discover the secret of shapes.” As the children explore the shapes, Mr. Gorga offers questions and prompts to guide children to answer the question “What makes them the same kind of shapes?”

An analogy for facilitating guided play is bumper bowling. If bumpers are in place, most children are more likely than not to knock down some pins when they throw the ball down the lane. That is different than teaching children exactly how to throw it (although some children, such as those who have disabilities or who become frustrated if they feel a challenge is too great, may require that level of support or instruction). Guided play is not a one-size-fits-all prescriptive pedagogical technique. Instead, teachers match the level of support they give in guided play to the children in front of them.

Critically, many teachers already implement these kinds of playful activities. When the children are excited by the birds they have seen outside of their window for the past couple of days, the teachers may capitalize on this interest and provide children with materials for a set of playful activities about bird names, diets, habitats, and songs. Asking children to use their hands to mimic an elephant’s trunk when learning vocabulary can promote learning through playful instruction that involves movement. Similarly, embedding vocabulary in stories that are culturally relevant promotes language and early literacy development (García-Alvarado, Arreguín, & Ruiz-Escalante 2020). For example, a teacher who has several children in his class with Mexican heritage decides to read aloud  Too Many Tamales  (by Gary Soto, illus. Ed Martinez) and have the children reenact scenes from it, learning about different literary themes and concepts through play. The children learn more vocabulary, have a better comprehension of the text, and see themselves and their experiences reflected. The teacher also adds some of the ingredients and props for making tamales into the sociodramatic play center (Salinas-González, Arreguín-Anderson, & Alanís 2018) and invites families to share stories about family  tamaladas  (tamale-making parties).

Evidence Supporting Guided Play as a Powerful Pedagogical Tool

Evidence from the science of learning suggests that discovery-based guided play actually results in increased learning for all children relative to both free play and direct instruction (see Alferi et al. 2011). These effects hold across content areas including spatial learning (Fisher et al. 2013), literacy (Han et al. 2010; Nicolopoulou et al. 2015; Hassinger-Das et al. 2016; Cavanaugh et al. 2017; Toub et al. 2018; Moedt & Holmes 2020), and mathematics (Zosh et al. 2016).

There are several possible reasons for guided play’s effectiveness. First, it harnesses the joy that is critical to creativity and learning (e.g., Isen, Daubman, & Nowicki 1987; Resnick 2007). Second, during guided play, the adults help “set the stage for thought and action” by essentially limiting the number of possible outcomes for the children so that the learning goal is discoverable, but children still direct the activity (Weisberg et al. 2014, 276). Teachers work to provide high-quality materials, eliminate distractions, and prepare the space, but then, critically, they let the child play the active role of construction. Third, in guided play, the teacher points the way toward a positive outcome and hence lessens the ambiguity (the degrees of freedom) without directing children to an answer or limiting children to a single discovery (e.g., Bonawitz et al. 2011). And finally, guided play provides the opportunity for new information to be integrated with existing knowledge and updated as children explore.

Reinforcing Numeracy with a Game

The children in Mr. Cohen’s preschool class are at varying levels of understanding in early numeracy skills (e.g., cardinality, one-to-one correspondence, order irrelevance). He knows that his children need some practice with these skills but wants to make the experience joyful while also building these foundational skills. One day, he brings out a new game for them to play—The Great Race. Carla and Michael look up expectantly, and their faces light up when they realize they will be playing a game instead of completing a worksheet. The two quickly pull out the box, setting up the board and choosing their game pieces. Michael begins by flicking the spinner with his finger, landing on 2. “Nice!” Carla exclaims, as Michael moves his game piece, counting “One, two.” Carla takes a turn next, spinning a 1 and promptly counting “one” as she moves her piece one space ahead. “My turn!” Michael says, eager to win the race. As he spins a 2, he pauses. “One . . . two,” he says, hesitating, as he moves his piece to space 4 on the board. Carla corrects him, “I think you mean ‘three, four,’ right? You have to count up from where you are on the board.” Michael nods, remembering the rules Mr. Cohen taught him earlier that day. “Right,” he says, “three, four.”

Similar to guided play, games can be designed in ways that help support learning goals (Hassinger-Das et al. 2017). In this case, instead of adults playing the role of curating the activity, the games themselves provide this type of external scaffolding. The example with Michael and Carla shows how children can learn through games, which is supported by research. In one well-known study, playing a board game (i.e., The Great Race) in which children navigated through a linear, numerical-based game board (i.e., the game board had equally spaced game spaces that go from left to right) resulted in increased numerical development as compared to playing the same game where the numbers were replaced by colors (Siegler & Ramani 2008) or with numbers organized in a circular fashion (Siegler & Ramani 2009). Structuring experiences so that the learning goal is intertwined naturally with children’s play supports their learning. A critical point with both guided play and games is that children are provided with support but still lead their own learning.

Digital educational games have become enormously popular, with tens of thousands of apps marketed as “educational,” although there is no independent review of these apps. Apps and digital games may have educational value when they inspire active, engaged, meaningful, and socially interactive experiences (Hirsh-Pasek et al. 2015), but recent research suggests that many of the most downloaded educational apps do not actually align with these characteristics that lead to learning (Meyer et al. 2021). Teachers should exercise caution and evaluate any activity—digital or not—to see how well it harnesses the power of playful learning.

Next Steps for Educators

Educators are uniquely positioned to prepare today’s children for achievement today and success tomorrow. Further, the evidence is mounting that playful pedagogies appear to be an accessible, powerful tool that harnesses the pillars of learning. This approach can be used across ages and is effective in learning across domains.

By leveraging children’s own interests and mindfully creating activities that let children play their way to new understanding and skills, educators can start using this powerful approach today. By harnessing the children’s interests at different ages and engaging them in playful learning activities, educators can help children learn while having fun. And, importantly, educators will have more fun too when they see children happy and engaged.

As the tide begins to change in individual classrooms, educators need to acknowledge that vast inequalities (e.g., socioeconomic achievement gaps) continue to exist (Kearney & Levine 2016). The larger challenge remains in propelling a cultural shift so that administrators, families, and policymakers understand the way in which educators can support the success of all children through high-quality, playful learning experiences.

Consider the following reflection questions as you reflect how to support equitable playful learning experiences for each and every child:

• One of the best places to start is by thinking about your teaching strengths. Perhaps you are great at sparking joy and engagement. Or maybe you are able to frequently leverage children’s home lives in your lessons. How can you expand practices you already use as an educator or are learning about in your courses to incorporate the playful learning described in this article?
• How can you share the information in this chapter with families, administrators, and other educators? How can you help them understand how play can engage children in deep, joyful learning?

This piece is excerpted from NAEYC’s recently published book  Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Early Childhood Programs Serving Children from Birth Through Age 8,  Fourth Edition. For more information about the book, visit  NAEYC.org/resources/pubs/books/dap-fourth-edition .

Teaching Play Skills

Pamela Brillante

While many young children with autism spectrum disorder enjoy playing, they can have difficulty engaging in traditional play activities. They may engage in activities that do not look like ordinary play, including playing with only a few specific toys or playing in a specific, repetitive way.

Even though most children learn play skills naturally, sometimes families and teachers have to teach children how to play. Learning how to play will help develop many other skills young children need for the future, including

• social skills:  taking turns, sharing, and working cooperatively
• cognitive skills:  problem-solving skills, early academic skills
• communication skills:  responding to others, asking questions
• physical skills:  body awareness, fine and gross motor coordination

Several evidence-based therapeutic approaches to teaching young children with autism focus on teaching play skills, including

• The Play Project:  https://playproject.org
• The Greenspan Floortime approach: https://stanleygreenspan.com
• Integrated Play Group (IPG) Model: www.wolfberg.com

While many children with autism have professionals and therapists working with them, teachers and families should work collaboratively and provide multiple opportunities for children to practice new skills and engage in play at their own level. For example, focus on simple activities that promote engagement between the adult and the child as well as the child and their peers without disabilities, including playing with things such as bubbles, cause-and-effect toys, and interactive books. You can also use the child’s preferred toy in the play, like having the Spider-Man figure be the one popping the bubbles.

Pamela Brillante , EdD, has spent 30 years working as a special education teacher, administrator, consultant, and professor. In addition to her full-time faculty position in the Department of Special Education, Professional Counseling and Disability Studies at William Paterson University of New Jersey, Dr. Brillante continues to consult with school districts and present to teachers and families on the topic of high-quality, inclusive early childhood practices.  

Photographs: © Getty Images Copyright © 2022 by the National Association for the Education of Young Children. See Permissions and Reprints online at  NAEYC.org/resources/permissions .

Alfieri, L., P.J. Brooks, N.J. Aldrich, & H.R. Tenenbaum. 2011. “Does Discovery-Based Instruction Enhance Learning?” Journal of Educational Psychology 103 (1): 1–18.  

Bassok, D., S. Latham, & A. Rorem. 2016. “Is Kindergarten the New First Grade?” AERA Open 2 (1): 1–31. doi.10.1177/2332858415616358. 

Bergen, D., ed. 1988. Play as a Medium for Learning and Development: A Handbook of Theory and Practice . Portsmouth, NH: Heinemann Educational Books. 

Bonawitz, E.B., P. Shafto, H. Gweon, N.D. Goodman, E.S. Spelke, & L. Schulz. 2011. “The Double-Edged Sword of Pedagogy: Instruction Limits Spontaneous Exploration and Discovery.” Cognition 120 (3): 322–30. 

Cavanaugh, D.M., K.J. Clemence, M.M. Teale, A.C. Rule, & S.E. Montgomery. 2017. “Kindergarten Scores, Storytelling, Executive Function, and Motivation Improved Through Literacy-Rich Guided Play.” Journal of Early Childhood Education 45 (6): 1–13. 

Christakis, E. 2016. The Importance of Being Little: What Preschoolers Really Need from Grownups . New York: Penguin Books.  

Duncan, G. J., A. Claessens, A.C. Huston, L.S. Pagani, M. Engel, H. Sexton, C.J. Dowsett, K. Magnuson, P. Klebanov, L. Feinstein, J. Brooks-Gunn, K. Duckworth, & C. Japel. 2007. “School Readiness and Later Achievement.” Developmental Psychology 43 (6): 1428–46. https://doi.apa.org/doi/10.1037/0012-1649.43.6.1428 .  

Fisher, K.R., K. Hirsh-Pasek, N. Newcombe, & R.M. Golinkoff. 2013. “Taking Shape: Supporting Preschoolers’ Acquisition of Geometric Knowledge Through Guided Play.” Child Development 84 (6): 1872–78. 

García-Alvarado, S., M.G. Arreguín, & J.A. Ruiz-Escalante. 2020. “Mexican-American Preschoolers as Co-Creators of Zones of Proximal Development During Retellings of Culturally Relevant Stories: A Participatory Study.” Journal of Early Childhood Literacy : 1–22. https://doi.org/10.1177%2F1468798420930339 . 

Gray, P. 2013. Free to Learn: Why Unleashing the Instinct to Play Will Make Our Children Happier, More Self-Reliant, and Better Students for Life . New York: Basic Books.  

Han, M., N. Moore, C. Vukelich, & M. Buell. 2010. “Does Play Make a Difference? How Play Intervention Affects the Vocabulary Learning of At-Risk Preschoolers.” American Journal of Play 3 (1): 82–105. 

Hannaway, J., & L. Hamilton. 2008. Accountability Policies: Implications for School and Classroom Practices . Washington, DC: Urban Institute. http://webarchive.urban.org/publications/411779.html . 

Hassinger-Das, B., K. Ridge, A. Parker, R.M. Golinkoff, K. Hirsh-Pasek, & D.K. Dickinson. 2016. “Building Vocabulary Knowledge in Preschoolers Through Shared Book Reading and Gameplay.” Mind, Brain, and Education 10 (2): 71–80. https://doi.org/10.1111/mbe.12103 . 

Hassinger-Das, B., T.S. Toub, J.M. Zosh, J. Michnick, R. Golinkoff, & K. Hirsh-Pasek. 2017. “More Than Just Fun: A Place for Games in Playful Learning.” Infancia y aprendizaje: Journal for the Study of Education and Development 40 (2): 191–218. https://doi.org/10.1080/02103702.2017.1292684 . 

Hirsh-Pasek, K., & R.M. Golinkoff. 2008. “Why Play = Learning.” In Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development [online], eds. R.E. Tremblay, M. Boivin, & R.D. Peters, topic ed. P.K. Smith, 1–6. Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development and Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development. www.child-encyclopedia.com/play/according-experts/why-play-learning . 

Hirsh-Pasek, K., H. S. Hadani, E. Blinkoff, & R. M. Golinkoff. 2020. A new path to education reform: Playful learning promotes 21st-century skills in schools and beyond . The Brookings Institution: Big Ideas Policy Report. www.brookings.edu/policy2020/bigideas/a-new-path-to-education-reform-playful-learning-promotes-21st-century-skills-in-schools-and-beyond . 

Hirsh-Pasek, K., J.M. Zosh, R.M. Golinkoff, J.H. Gray, M.B. Robb, & J. Kaufman. 2015. “Putting Education in ‘Educational’ Apps: Lessons from the Science of Learning.” Psychological Science in the Public Interest 16 (1): 3–34. 

Isen, A.M., K.A. Daubman, & G.P. Nowicki. 1987. “Positive Affect Facilitates Creative Problem Solving.” Journal of Personality and Social Psychology 52 (6): 1122–31. 

Kearney, M.S., & P.B. Levine. (2016, Spring). Income, Inequality, Social Mobility, and the Decision to Drop Out of High School . Washington, DC: Brookings. www.brookings.edu/bpea-articles/income-inequality-social-mobility-and-the-decision-to-drop-out-of-high-school . 

King, A. 1993. “From Sage on the Stage to Guide on the Side.” College Teaching 41 (1): 30–35.  

Lillard, A.S. 2013. “Playful Learning and Montessori Education.” American Journal of Play 5 (2): 157–86. 

Meyer, M., J.M. Zosh, C. McLaren, M. Robb, R.M. Golinkoff, K. Hirsh-Pasek, & J. Radesky. 2021. “How Educational Are ‘Educational’ Apps for Young Children? App Store Content Analysis Using the Four Pillars of Learning Framework.” Journal of Children and Media . Published online February 23. 

Miller, E., & J. Almon. 2009. Crisis in the Kindergarten: Why Children Need to Play in School . College Park, MD: Alliance for Childhood. https:// files.eric.ed.gov/fulltext/ED504839.pdf . 

Moedt, K., & R.M. Holmes. 2020. “The Effects of Purposeful Play After Shared Storybook Readings on Kindergarten Children’s Reading Comprehension, Creativity, and Language Skills and Abilities.” Early Child Development and Care 190 (6): 839–54. 

NAEYC. 2020. “Developmentally Appropriate Practice.” Position statement. Washington, DC: NAEYC. www.naeyc.org/resources/position-statements/dap .  

Neuman, S.B., & K. Roskos. 1992. “Literacy Objects as Cultural Tools: Effects on Children’s Literacy Behaviors in Play.” Reading Research Quarterly 27 (3): 202–25.  

Nicolopoulou, A., K.S. Cortina, H. Ilgaz, C.B. Cates, & A.B. de Sá. 2015. “Using a Narrative- and Play-Based Activity to Promote Low-Income Preschoolers’ Oral Language, Emergent Literacy, and Social Competence.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 31 (2): 147–62. 

Pagani, L.S., C. Fitzpatrick, I. Archambault, & M. Janosz. 2010. “School Readiness and Later Achievement: A French Canadian Replication and Extension.” Developmental Psychology 46 (5): 984–94.  

Pedulla, J.J., L.M. Abrams, G.F. Madaus, M.K. Russell, M.A. Ramos, & J. Miao. 2003. “Perceived Effect of State-Mandated Testing Programs on Teaching and Learning: Findings from a National Survey of Teachers” (ED481836). ERIC. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=ED481836 . 

Ravitch, D. 2010. “Why Public Schools Need Democratic Governance.” Phi Delta Kappan 91 (6): 24–27. 

Resnick, M. 2007. “All I Really Need to Know (About Creative Thinking) I Learned (by Studying How Children Learn) in Kindergarten.” In Proceedings of the 6th ACM SIGCHI Conference on Creativity & Cognition , 1–6. New York: Association for Computing Machinery. 

Romano, E., L. Babchishin, L.S. Pagani, & D. Kohen. 2010. “School Readiness and Later Achievement: Replication and Extension Using a Nationwide Canadian Survey.” Developmental Psychology 46 (5): 995–1007.  

Salinas-González, I., M.G. Arreguín-Anderson, & I. Alanís. 2018. “Supporting Language: Culturally Rich Dramatic Play.” Teaching Young Children 11 (2): 4–6. 

Siegler, R.S., & G.B. Ramani. 2008. “Playing Linear Numerical Board Games Promotes Low-Income Children’s Numerical Development.” Developmental Science 11 (5): 655–61. 

Siegler, R.S., & G.B. Ramani. 2009. “Playing Linear Number Board Games—but Not Circular Ones—Improves Low-Income Preschoolers’ Numerical Understanding. Journal of Educational Psychology 101 (3): 545–60. 

Sim, Z., & F. Xu. 2015. “Toddlers Learn from Facilitated Play, Not Free Play.” In Proceedings of the 34th Annual Conference of the Cognitive Science Society , Berkeley, CA. https://cognitivesciencesociety.org/past-conferences . 

Singer, D.G., & J.L. Singer. 1990. The House of Make-Believe: Children’s Play and the Developing Imagination . Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.  

Smith, K. 1993. “Becoming the ‘Guide on the Side.’” Educational Leadership 51 (2): 35–37.  

Smith P.K., & A. Pellegrini. 2008. “Learning Through Play.” In Encyclopedia on Early Childhood Development [online], eds. R.E. Tremblay, M. Boivin, & R.D. Peters, 1–6. Centre of Excellence for Early Childhood Development and Strategic Knowledge Cluster on Early Child Development. https://www.child-encyclopedia.com/pdf/expert/play/according-experts/learning-through-play . 

Souto-Manning, M. 2017. “Is Play a Privilege or a Right? And What’s Our Responsibility? On the Role of Play for Equity in Early Childhood Education.” Foreword. Early Child Development and Care 187 (5–6): 785–87. www.tandfonline.com/doi/full/10.1080/03004430.2016.1266588 . 

Toub, T.S., B. Hassinger-Das, K.T. Nesbitt, H. Ilgaz, D.S. Weisberg, K. Hirsh-Pasek, R.M. Golinkoff, A. Nicolopoulou, & D.K. Dickinson. 2018. “The Language of Play: Developing Preschool Vocabulary Through Play Following Shared Book-Reading.” Early Childhood Research Quarterly 45 (4): 1–17.  

Weisberg, D.S., K. Hirsh-Pasek, & R.M. Golinkoff. 2013. “Guided Play: Where Curricular Goals Meet a Playful Pedagogy.” Mind, Brain, and Education 7 (2): 104–12. 

Weisberg, D.S., K. Hirsh-Pasek, R.M. Golinkoff, & B.D. McCandliss. 2014. “Mise en place: Setting the Stage for Thought and Action.” Trends in Cognitive Science 18 (6): 276–78. 

Zosh, J.M., B. Hassinger-Das, T.S. Toub, K. Hirsh-Pasek, & R. Golinkoff. 2016. “Playing with Mathematics: How Play Supports Learning and the Common Core State Standards.” Journal of Mathematics Education at Teachers College 7 (1): 45–49. https://doi.org/10.7916/jmetc.v7i1.787 . 

Zosh, J.M., K. Hirsh-Pasek, E.J. Hopkins, H. Jensen, C. Liu, D. Neale, S.L. Solis, & D. Whitebread. 2018. “Accessing the Inaccessible: Redefining Play as a Spectrum.” Frontiers in Psychology 9: 1–12. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2018.01124 . 

Jennifer M. Zosh, PhD, is professor of human development and family studies at Penn State Brandywine. Most recently, her work has focused on technology and its impact on children as well as playful learning as a powerful pedagogy. She publishes journal articles, book chapters, blogs, and white papers and focuses on the dissemination of developmental research.

Caroline Gaudreau, PhD, is a research professional at the TMW Center for Early Learning + Public Health at the University of Chicago. She received her PhD from the University of Delaware, where she studied how children learn to ask questions and interact with screen media. She is passionate about disseminating research and interventions to families across the country.

Roberta Michnick Golinkoff, PhD, conducts research on language development, the benefits of play, spatial learning, and the effects of media on children. A member of the National Academy of Education, she is a cofounder of Playful Learning Landscapes, Learning Science Exchange, and the Ultimate Playbook for Reimagining Education. Her last book, Becoming Brilliant: What Science Tells Us About Raising Successful Children (American Psychological Association, 2016), reached the New York Times bestseller list.

Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, PhD, is the Lefkowitz Faculty Fellow in the Psychology and Neuroscience department at Temple University in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania.  She is also a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution. Her research examines the development of early language and literacy, the role of play in learning, and learning and technology. [email protected]

Vol. 77, No. 2

Print this article

Starting a centre-based ECE service

Click on the links below for information on starting a centre-based licensed early learning service.

• Administration records
• Annual plan
• Applying for network approval
• Applying for a licence
• Checklist for renovating an existing building or building a new service
• Designing and building your new ECE service premises
• Designing and building – step-by-step guide
• Designing your early childhood service to comply with the licensing criteria
• Early childhood education and care regulations
• Fees and funding
• Furniture, fittings and equipment
• Governance and management roles and responsibilities
• Health and safety standards and emergencies
• Managing your service

Philosophy statement

• Playgrounds
• Preparing for staff employment
• Preparing policies, procedures and processes
• The Early Learning Information (ELI) System
• Roles and responsibilities in a centre-based education and care service
• Suggested equipment for licensed ECE services
• What is an early childhood education and care centre?
• DOWNLOAD/PRINT

The statement of philosophy tells everyone who works or comes into your premises what is special about your service and what you want to achieve.

The 2008 regulations require you to develop and display a statement of philosophy. It needs to be easy to understand by everyone involved in your service and clearly displayed.

What would you put in a statement of philosophy?

Every statement of philosophy will be different but you might want to include:

• why you set up the service
• what you want to achieve day by day
• what values are really important for your service and community.

Here are some examples:

• “Our educators will be well trained and have regular professional development.”
• “At our service the values of our culture are taught.”
• “Parents will be encouraged and given opportunities to share in the life of the service.”

Who is responsible for the statement of philosophy?

Everyone involved at the service should have the opportunity to contribute to preparing and reviewing the statement, including:

• parents/whānau
• coordinators
• the service provider.

Preparing or reviewing the statement of philosophy

The management group or governing board is responsible for writing a draft statement of philosophy. This should be circulated to as many stakeholders as possible to get their opinion. This can be done through a meeting or by doing a survey; whatever method is best for your stakeholders.

Their ideas and comments should be included in the final statement before it is circulated again. It may be necessary to go back to each of the groups to make sure that everyone is happy with the final statement of philosophy. Statements of philosophy do not have to be long but they do need to be clear about why the service exists and what it stands for.

The statement of philosophy should be reviewed each year and the annual general meeting is a good time to do this. It’s a good idea to give a copy to those involved a week or 2 before the meeting so they can think about whether changes are needed.

Giving a ‘close-off’ date for suggested changes keeps the review on track and means the refreshed statement can be presented at the annual general meeting.

Writing A Personal Philosophy For Childcare

• Written by  Lorina
• January 5, 2024

From: Aussie Childcare Network

Writing a personal philosophy is a great way for others to read what your values and beliefs are in regard to early childhood education. The following article provides information on how to write a personal philosophy including details of what can be included, questions to think about and examples of personal philosophies.

As an educator, your own philosophical concept of early childhood education distinguishes you as an Educator. It's a declaration of your values, which in turn guides your actions. 

What Is A Personal Philosophy

A personal philosophy clearly defines you as an Educator. It is a statement of reflection about your beliefs that influence your actions. It's the process of continuously examining, testifying and verifying your personal beliefs.  It is a tool that not only guides your own teaching and beliefs but also helps other Educators and Parents understand your individual approach to early learning.

How To Write A Personal Philosophy

The personal philosophy of early childhood education should be used as a tool that not only guides your own teaching but also helps your staff and parents understand your individual approach to early learning.

If someone asked you to explain your personal philosophy in early childhood education, what would you say? How would you begin to formulate a statement that captures the essence of your beliefs about teaching and learning? It can include -

• How children learn,
• Your role as the educator,
• the Role of the community,
• Your understanding of early childhood education,
• Your commitment to further professional development,
• Role of families

The following are some of the most important areas you may want to address in your personal philosophy. 

• Take some time to express your thoughts about the job of an educator. Include your thoughts on child-led vs. teacher-led activities, the educator's involvement in playtime and the presenting of brand new ideas vs. discoveries made by the children on their own. Include a statement that expresses your true hopes and expectations for the children.
• What are your thoughts on how youngsters learn best? What kinds of activities and opportunities do you think should be included in the environment to help all children learn to their full potential, regardless of their preferred learning style? What impact might the child's preferred learning style have on the child's position as a knowledge receiver? Include both planned and open-ended learning activities, and discuss what you believe is the appropriate ratio of each in the room.
• As you educate diverse children, talk about how you'll handle varied personalities, learning styles, special needs, and cultural diversity. Include a statement on how children with unique learning needs will be welcomed in your classroom, as well as your specific tactics for fulfilling their needs as well as the requirements of others children. Embracing diversity is critical to creating a warm and welcoming learning environment. You'll want to make sure you clearly outline how you'll address a variety of demands when writing your philosophy.
• Plan out your curricular orientation, including details on how you came to hold the values you do. However, be careful not to disparage alternative ways when discussing this stage. Instead, consider tying your curricular orientation information to your prior assertions regarding the educator's role in early childhood education.
• Describe how you handle any behavioural difficulties that arise in this part, as well as why you think your method will succeed. Provide examples. 
• Finally, decide how parents and other primary caregivers will be included. Outline your plan for involving parents and keeping lines of communication open with family members.
• Clear statements about what you believe and how you intend to implement and support your beliefs.
• Explain the values that guide your teaching beliefs.
• Including specific examples of teaching theories and approaches
• Include child development theorists that you like and provide examples
• Relate your philosophy to current trends and theories, as this philosophy should guide your actions as an early childhood educator.
• Links to the EYLF (or approved learning framework), Code of Ethics

It is truly up to you to create a philosophy that accurately expresses your unique teaching style, values and beliefs when it comes to early childhood education. A good way to think of it is by writing down some of your beliefs regarding children's development and learning.

Questions To Think About

Use the following questions to help you think about your beliefs regarding teaching young children. It is not necessary to respond to each of these questions in your written philosophy. You may also decide to comment on additional issues as well. Take some time to think about each one in some depth.

• How do you view young children?
• What is the child’s role in their development and learning?
• What do you believe about how young children learn?
• How do you view your role as an Educator?
• How will your views influence your teaching?
• What kind of environment do you hope to create? How does this relate to your basic beliefs about young children and learning?
• What do you hope young children will become?
• What do you want them to achieve, accomplish, learn, feel, etc.?
• What kind of assessment in childcare  will you use to be sure that children have met objectives?
• Looking back at the history of early childhood education, who or what approaches have the greatest impression on you, and why?

Examples Of Personal Philosophies

Here are some examples of personal philosophies:

• I believe that each child is an individual and as an educator, I will value and develop each child's strengths, interests, skills, abilities and knowledge to extend their learning.
• I believe that children learn through play. I will provide opportunities for children to explore, discover, create and imagine.
• I believe in cultural diversity. I will celebrate the benefits of diversity with each individual child and enable them to understand and acknowledge differences.
• I believe young children are very concerned about themselves and the small world they live in: family and home. However, each child is unique with different interests, backgrounds, and developmental stages.
• I believe the environment plays a major role in the success of an early childhood program. It should enhance the children’s interests in all developmental domains. I believe learning in an early childhood environment is done most successfully through stations that can be visited, explored, and revisited again and again. The environment should take into consideration the social skills, communication skills, physical abilities or challenges, and learning styles of the children being served.
• I consider families a vital aspect of my program. Parents who are able to spend time in the classroom occasionally are more aware of the details of their child’s day. Observing what goes on first-hand helps a parent know what to ask the child at the end of the school day.”
• The early years of a child’s life are busy. I believe learning is happening all the time and is interwoven through all developmental domains. These include: physical, social/emotional, cognitive and communication. Therefore, the goal of my program is to make this ongoing learning experience safe, positive, and fun, nurturing the whole child as I strive to guide them into the next stage of development with confidence in themselves and an excitement for continued learning.
• Children need the assurance of being loved and cared for while they are enjoying an educational environment. Teaching children is my passion. Security and trust are very important components as well, of my relationship with each child.
• In planning my program I would strive for a developmentally appropriate, child-centred atmosphere where children have the opportunity to master new challenges through activities and topics that are meaningful to them, thus building their self-esteem as they develop and learn.
• Children should be given choices, responsibilities, and opportunities to initiate their own learning. I believe observations and assessments are excellent tools to use when planning a curriculum. Observations, not only aid in creating the curriculum but also give insight into the development, knowledge and skill levels of each individual child.

I believe that as an early childhood educator I am responsible for providing infants, toddlers and young children with positive learning experiences. I strive to model respect, patience, and care for children and adults I come in contact with. Children have the right to have their needs met and receive the proper education while in the care of their caregivers.

My philosophy is based on theorists, Jean Piaget, and Lev Vygotsky, and the early childhood movement from Reggio Emilia, Italy. I believe that children benefit from practices that are grounded in research.

Children are motivated to learn when they have opportunities to make choices in an environment that is enriching and stimulating. Children are curious from infancy and have a desire to learn from their environment and those around them. When children are encouraged to interact with their peers and adults in positive ways, they feel safe to explore their surroundings.

As a teacher, I seek to guide children from needing assistance with a task to accomplishing a task independently by providing experiences that are challenging yet attainable for every child. I facilitate learning through the in-depth study of a subject that is of interest to children. Children can be highly motivated, feel actively involved in their own learning and produce work of high quality when they have the time to engage in short and long term projects.

My role as a teacher is to be a facilitator and provide enriching activities so that children are supported as they learn about their strengths and work on their weaknesses. As a facilitator, I support children as they embark on a journey to make discoveries about themselves and learn to recognize and name their feelings.

My goal as a teacher is to provide children with a rich environment where they feel safe to explore, initiate learning, and feel free to express themselves.

As a teacher, I seek to form a close relationship with each child under my care, and their families. I make use of our communities' resources and incorporate the child’s community into the program. I see each child as a unique individual with a great capacity to learn and able to make positive contributions to those around him or her. I strive to provide an environment where children and families from different cultural backgrounds feel welcomed and accepted. 

As a teacher, I seek to form close relationships with each child under my care, and their families. I make use of our communities' resources and incorporate the child’s community into the program. I see each child as a unique individual with a great capacity to learn and able to make positive contributions to those around him or her. I strive to provide an environment where children and families from different cultural backgrounds feel welcomed and accepted.

Personal Philosophy Template

The Personal Philosophy template enables Educators to write and display their personal philosophy within their centre.  To download:  Personal Philosophy Template

When writing your personal philosophy remember:

• Use present tense, in most cases. Write the paper in first-person (which is the most common and easiest for your audience to read).
• Write in language and concepts that can be broadly appreciated. A general rule is that the statement should be written with the audience in mind. It may help to consider a school administrator (e.g., school principal) as your audience.
• Write a paper that will let your audience know where you stand in regard to important educational theories and practices. By including specific examples of teaching theories and approaches, you are able to let your reader take a mental “peek” of your classroom.
• Make the paper memorable and unique. Think of this teaching philosophy as part of a job application where your readers are seeing many of these statements. What is going to set you apart from others? What about you are they going to remember? Create a vivid portrait of yourself as someone who is intentional about teaching and committed to his/her career.

Once you've finished, make sure your personal philosophy statement is accessible to Educators and families within the service. Explaining the principles that influence your teaching and the overall teachings of service will assist other Educators in ensuring that their own teaching techniques are in keeping with the type of environment you wish to create.

Families will also benefit from hearing about your personal philosophy on early childhood education. During orientation, consider giving them a copy of your statement. This may assist parents in determining whether your approach to education aligns with their own values and whether the service is a good fit for their child.

Creating a personal philosophy should not be intimidating, in fact, it is an excellent opportunity to clarify your teaching philosophies and beliefs and commit them to paper. Reference: Foundations Of Early Childhood Developing A Personal Philosophy Of Teaching Developing A Personal Philosophy Of Early Childhood Education How to Develop a Personal Philosophy of Early Childhood Education, Early Childhood Education Blog Jones, M., Shelton, M. (2011). Developing Your Portfolio--Enhancing Your Learning and Showing Your Stuff: A Guide for the Early Childhood Student or Professional, Second Edition. Routledge. 

Printed from AussieChildcareNetwork.com.au