Sei sulla pagina 1di 11

The Rise and Rise of Early Childhood

Education in New Zealand


Carol Mutch
School of Professional Development Christchurch College of Education, New
Zealand

In 1996, the early childhood curriculum for New Zealand was released. Until
the education reforms of the 1980s, education for the 'under-fives' and for
children of compulsory school aged children (5-16+ year olds) followed separate
paths. In the 1980s, the reforms of educational and social services provided an
opportunity for the development of a coherent and distinctive statement of
the aims and practices of the early childhood movement. This paper outlines
the process of development of this statement, describes the final outcome -Te
whariki: He whariki matauranga mo nga mokopuna o Aotearoa. Early childhood
curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1996) - and discusses the impact that it was
to have on both early childhood and compulsory education. The author argues
that this statement gave credibility to an already vibrant early childhood
movement and provided a model of an integrated curriculum that was to stand
tall against the trend towards more structured and prescriptive curriculum
documents.

Introduction
Curriculum development is seen as a weaving; the guidelines provide a
framework; each programme weaves its own pattern, each child his or her
own curriculum. (Carr & May, 1994: 25)
The arrival of Te whariki: He whariki matauranga mo nga mokopuna o Aotearoa. Early
Childhood Curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1996) heralded an important step in the
recognition of education for the'under-fives'in New Zealand. Until this time, anything
that happened in early childhood centres was often seen as simply'care'or'play'and not
as serious education.The mandating of an official curriculum was to raise the status of
both institutions and workers in this field. The writing of the new curriculum was also to
bring together a very diverse sector and give all early childhood groups a common sense
of purpose and identity, yet preserve the unique contributions each group made to the
whole movement.
This paper sets the development of early childhood education in New Zealand in its
historical context, before outlining the development of this particular curriculum
document. A description of the main features of this curriculum for infants, toddlers and
young children is given and compared to the policy document that underpins the
compulsory schooling curriculum (the New Zealand Curriculum Framework, Ministry
of Education, 1993a). The author argues that the early childhood curriculum provides a
model of an integrated curriculum, whose developers were able to withstand the political
pressures of the time towards more stratified and prescriptive curricula. This has provided

1357-4019/04/01 0001-11 $10.00/0 ©2004 C. Mutch


CITIZENSHIP, SOCIAL AND ECONOMICS EDUCATION Vol. 6, No. 1, 2004

1
2 Citizenship, Social and Economics Education

an enduring platform for strengthening the quality of early childhood education in New
Zealand and a curriculum document that is gaining international acclaim.

A brief history of early childhood education in New Zealand


The history of early childhood education in New Zealand followed a separate course
to that of education for children of compulsory schooling age until it became caught up
in the reforms of the 1980s (May, 1991). It was more tied to society's views on the role
of women in the home and workforce. Two main strands appear in the development of
early childhood services. One focused on the care of young children and came from the
traditions of foundling homes in Britain. The other focused on education and was
influenced by the philosophies of Rousseau, Pestalozzi, Froebel and later Montessori
(May, 1997). The first kindergarten was established in 1889, to be followed by other
services such as creches (1903), playcentres (1941) and Kohanga Reo (Maori language
immersion centres, 1982), so that by the time of the consultation period, which laid the
groundwork for Te whariki, there were 20 different early childhood services (Carr &
May, 1993).

The reforms of the 1980s


In New Zealand, as elsewhere, the 1980s heralded the rise of new right'ideologies in
response to economic downturn (McGee, 1997; Roberts, 1998; Statistics New Zealand,
1995; Thrupp, 1999). Two of the tenets of new right thinking were that there should be
minimal state support and that competition would lead to more efficient production
(Jesson, 1999; Lauder, 1990). In New Zealand, health, education and welfare services
were seen as a major drain on government funds and reform of such systems would
make them more cost effective. Education was also seen as an important key to improving
work place skills and entrepreneurship to increase New Zealand's economic
competitiveness (Ministry of Education, 1993a). The new right was not alone in calling
for reform. Research publications were showing that the system, as it was, disadvantaged
girls, Maori, and Pacific Island students (for example, Benton, 1986; Alton-Lee et al,
1987).
In order to promote their views, business and other conservative groups had been
working behind the scenes to get their members into key positions where their interests
could be served (Jesson, 1999). Before both the 1984 and 1987 elections, the New
Zealand Treasury issued briefing papers to the incoming governments advising them
how expenditure could be decreased and the economy strengthened. In 1987, in
particular, this advice included a 275-page document on reforming education in which
it was concluded that the'costs of intervention had come to dominate the benefits' (The
Treasury, 1987: 274). This advice was accepted by Finance Minister Roger Douglas. He
rejected the Keynesian approach of the previous decades and set about restructuring the
economy.
According to Dale (1989) and Trowler (1998), the new right contained two forces -
the neo-liberals and the neo-conservatives. The neo-liberals wanted freedom for the
market to dictate direction and had no particular views on moral issues, as they believed
market forces would lead the way. The neo-conservatives wanted to prescribe and
regulate, preferring carefully monitored accountability and old-fashioned values. The
tensions between the two views and the way they both attempted to shape curriculum
Early Childhood Education In New Zealand 3

policy, yet give concessions to each other in order to keep a strong alliance, led to some
of the contradictory directions curriculum policy was to take.
In a move that highlighted the importance of education to the country's economic
future, Prime Minister David Lange took over the Education portfolio. He set up a
taskforce to review educational administration. Named the 'Picot Report' after its
chairperson, it was to have a major impact on all that followed. Lange subsequently
released his policy document, Tomorrow's Schools (1988). Tomorrow's Schools devolved
to schools and their Boards of Trustees the power to make decisions on resources,
staffing and administration but control of the curriculum still belonged to central bodies
such as the Ministry of Education and the Education Review Office.
The forces opposing the new right, which the author (Mutch, 2000) calls the'liberal
left', were a fusion of earlier liberal progressive and more recent socially critical
perspectives. Education in the preceding decades had been under the influence of
humanist and liberal ideals which were exemplified by the following statement made in
1939 by Prime Minister Peter Fraser but written by his Director General of Education,
Clarence Beeby,
The Governments objective, broadly expressed, is that every person whatever
his level of academic ability, whether he be rich or poor, whether he live in
town or country, has a right as a citizen, to a free education for which he is
best fitted and to the fullest extent of his powers. (cited in Alcorn, 1999: 99)
The curriculum review of 1985 was still strongly in this mould. After wide consultation,
it proposed a curriculum which was presented in draft form in 1988 and stated:
Schools, parents, and other groups in a school's community can use the
curriculum framework to work together to develop policies and programmes
which focus on the learner, promote a sense of cultural identity, work towards
a fair share for all, provide a broad and balanced education, and encourage
openness and accountability. (Department of Education, 1988: 5)
This curriculum was never to be implemented. As new right ideology became
entrenched through the administrative reforms, the focus shifted to bringing the
curriculum in line with these views as can be seen in this statement in the next curriculum
discussion document:
It (the draft national curriculum) sets national directions for schooling which, I believe,
will assist young New Zealanders to achieve success and acquire the essential knowledge,
understanding and skills which will enable them to compete in the modern international
economy. (Ministry of Education, 1991: foreword)
Other related government policies were to further overpower the voices of the liberal
left, for example, the strength of the teaching unions was diminished as collective
bargaining was discouraged through the Employment Contracts Act. Policy Advisory
Groups were set up to provide advice to the government on curricular matters. The
policy advisory groups contained ministry officials and educators but also had strong
representation from business interests and new right political lobby groups. The
polarisation of political views was to dominate the 1990s. The government, Treasury,
business interests such as the Business Roundtable and conservative educational groups
(for example, the Independent Schools Council, the Principals Federation and the School
4 Citizenship, Social and Economics Education

Trustees Association) tended towards to the political right and most teachers and their
unions, and liberal educationalists towards the left.
In 1993, the New Zealand Curriculum Framework: Te anga marautanga o Aotearoa
(NZCF) was released. As discussed earlier, the first draft (Department of Education,
1988) showed the strong influence of earlier liberal-progressive views. In fact, it
reorganised the compulsory schooling curriculum into more integrated curriculum
areas as follows: culture and heritage; language; creative and aesthetic abilities;
mathematics; practical abilities; living in society; science, technology and the environment;
and health and wellbeing. The second draft (Ministry of Education, 1991) was more
strongly aligned to new right ideology with its emphasis on education for economic
growth and international competitiveness and, instead, organised the curriculum around
the four core areas of English, mathematics, science and technology. The final version
(Ministry of Education, 1993a) reached a compromise by acknowledging the recent
changes in society and the economy but making strong statements about equal
opportunities and success for all. The curriculum areas in the final version are outlined in
Figure 1.

The development of Te whariki


As the Labour Government (1984-1991) began its reform of social and educational
services the time was ripe for early childhood workers and supporters to lay the
groundwork for a coherent and distinctive statement of the aims and practices of the
early childhood community. 'The bonus for early childhood was, however, to be swept
on board a new upheaval of restructuring that it did not have to drive, just steer in the
right direction' (May, 1991: 7). In 1988, a series of national in-service courses took place,
an outcome of which was an affirmation of fifteen basic principles for an early childhood
curriculum. Carr and May (1994: 26) state, 'it was perhaps the first time that the word
"curriculum" was applied nationally to all early childhood, to all services and to all ages
from birth to school age'. This document defined curriculum as'the sum total of all
children's direct and indirect learning experiences in early childhood services'(cited in
Carr & May, 1994: 26).
This document was followed by the Meade Report, Education to be More (Early
Childhood Education Care and Education Working Group, 1988), which, with some
amendments became the government policy document Before Five (Lange, 1989). May
was to comment that, 'despite the dictates of wider political and administrative agendas,
the early childhood concepts of diversity and the integration of care and education
(were) not only intact but (had) been incorporated into a system which (was) more
equitable to all' (1991: 10). For a time, the focus was on more administrative matters but,
in 1991, a curriculum development contract was awarded to a team based at the University
of Waikato. The project leaders setup an extensive network of consultation. They outlined
the principles for development as those that would provide experiences that were humanly
appropriate, nationally appropriate, culturally appropriate, developmentally appropriate,
individually appropriate, and educationally appropriate (Carr & May, 1994). Te whariki:
Draft Guidelines for Developmentally Appropriate Programmes in Early Childhood
services was released in 1993. Professional development contracts, research trials and
further consultation followed. The final version, Te whariki. He whariki matauranga mo
nga mokopuna o Aotearoa. Early Childhood Curriculum, was released in 1996 and the
Early Childhood Education in New Zealand 5

administrative guidelines for early childhood centres were amended to take account of
this new curriculum.

A document ahead of its time


In a climate of strong neo-liberal and neo-conservative intervention in education
how did the early childhood curriculum maintain its liberal progressive/socially critical
discourse? The answers can be found in the way children, early childhood care and
education, and the role of women fitted with the ideologies and election platforms of the
major political parties.
In New Zealand there have been traditionally two major political parties - the National
Party representing business and more conservative views and the Labour Party
representing workers and more liberal views. May (1991: 5) outlines the respective
positions. National, she states, has a more'conservative stance towards preserving the
status quo and upholding the mythical ideal of a society of nuclear families'. Labour, she
claims, still wishes to uphold that ideal but moves more quickly towards accommodating
changing realities and needs. May also discusses the history of the gains made in early
childhood policy as relating to a pattern of activity in each government's term in office.
The Labour Government's term is exemplified by their ideologically driven social and
economic upheavals.This is then followed by a period of more cautious consolidation
from the National Government.
It was in such a context that Te whariki was developed. The Labour Government
'came to power with a strong agenda of reform for early childhood, particularly in
relation to supporting equity policies for women and education' (op. cit., p. 7). During
their first term (1984-1987) economic restructuring adversely affected early childhood
centres but the government promised to deliver on their policies during the second
term. Constant lobbying from early childhood and women's groups kept this promise to
the fore. The Meade Report (Early Childhood Care and Education Working Group,
1988) brought together many of the dreams and visions that had previously been
abandoned. May (ibid.) uses the metaphor of a whirlwind to describe how the early
childhood sector was swept along with Labour's bigger agenda of social and economic
reforms. With careful adaptation of the early childhood vision to fit the rhetoric of the
times they were kept in the whirlwind's path. The National Government took office in
1991 with a promise to continue the education reforms but to shift direction and focus
more on curriculum and assessment. New agendas of'Parents as FirstTeachers' and the
'Seamless Education System' meant that a comprehensive early childhood curriculum
was now a necessity. The neo-liberal interests continued to be felt in the funding and
accountability measures that were introduced, but on matters of curriculum in the early
childhood sector, the new right lobby was remarkably silent. As each of the documents
to flesh out the seven essential learning areas of the NZCF was developed, debates raged
in the media, in education circles and through public submissions.The Business Roundtable
employed analysts to critique each draft in a highly visible campaign. Their critiques
emanated from both neo-liberal and neo-conservative ideologies and were to have a
marked effect on the progress of some documents. The social studies document, for
example, was rewritten three times to meet the demands of the conflicting perspectives.
Meanwhile the project team developing Te whariki set up a consultative, consensual
model which placed particular importance on a partnership with the Maori community.
6 Citizenship, Social and Economics Education

Helen May, one of the writers, explains that the early childhood community had learned
to work together as a political unit (personal communication, April 6, 2000). An example
of this was the way that they combined forces and presented the Ministry with a single
proposal for the curriculum development contract. This proposal provided a full coverage
of all early childhood interest groups and on that basis was accepted. Although at an
early stage in the process there was some pressure from the Minister of Education to
align the early childhood curriculum to the school curriculum, this was resisted and the
development was able to proceed without outside interference. In retrospect, May
wonders if some critique from outside sources along the way might have sharpened
their thinking but she is justifiably proud of a curriculum that is now receiving international
acclaim.
That Te whariki is receiving international acclaim is supported by the Australian
academic, Marilyn Fleer (2003: 243) who states, 'Te Whariki has had an enormous
impact on curriculum development in many countries, including Australia'. Heer goes
on to cite Germany, Norway and Denmark as countries that have examined Te whariki
in depth when considering the development of their own early childhood curricula. It
has been translated into Danish and Danish academic, Stig Brostrom (2003: 238) says of
Te whariki, 'The document opens up new discussions and new ways to formulate
curriculum. Wherever existing curricula have researched and evaluated from the
perspective of Te Whariki new and fruitful discussions have been established.'
What is it about Te whariki that excites such interest? The next section outlines the
contents of the document before analysing how it differs from standard curricula, using
the New Zealand Curriculum Framework as a comparison.

The contents of Te whariki


The title Te whariki was chosen with care. Literally translated it means a woven flax
mat.This metaphor works at several levels. Firstly, at a national level, it represents all the
early childhood services as a coherent whole and, in particular, acknowledges the place
of Maori culture and language in New Zealand society. Secondly, in relation to the
curriculum itself, it is an interlocking of the four underpinning principles (empowerment
whakamana; holistic development kotahitanga; family and community development
whanau tangata; and relationships nga hononga) and the five strands and goals (well-
being mana atua; belonging mana whenua; contribution mana tangata; communication
mana reo; and exploration mana aotmod). Thirdly, it represents the curriculum (or course
of learning) that each child will undertake - not as a linear and structured progression
but as a complex interweaving of experiences and developments.
The document defines curriculum as'the sum total of the experiences, activities, and
events, whether direct or indirect, which occur within a learning environment designed
to foster children's learning and development' (Ministry of Education, 1996: 10). It uses
flexible age-related categories for suggested learning experiences to meet the five goals.
These categories are: infant (birth to around 18 months); toddler (one to three years);
and young child (two and half years to school entry age).
Figure 1 summarises key aspects of both Te whariki and the New Zealand Curriculum
Framework. This is followed by a discussion of similarities and differences between the
two documents.
Early Childhood Education in New Zealand 7

NZCF Te whariki

Definition o f c u r r i c u l u m
• "The term curriculum has several meanings, • 'The term curriculum is used in this
depending on the context in which it is used. document to describe the sum total of the
• The New Zealand Curriculum experiences, activities, and events, whether
comprises a set of national curriculum direct or indirect, which occur within an
statements which define the learning environment designed to foster children's
principles and achievement aims and learning and development.'
objectives which all schools are required to • ' The curriculum is provided by people,
follow. places and things, in the child's
• The school curriculum consists of ways in environment: the adults, the other children,
which a school puts into practice the policy the physical environment and the
set out in the national curriculum statements. resources.'
It takes account of local needs, priorities, and
resources, and is designed in consultation
with the school's community.'

P u r p o s e s , aims and i n t e n t i o n s
'If we wish to progress as a nation, and to enjoy '... to grow up as confident learners and
a healthy prosperity in today's and tomorrow's communicators, healthy in mind, body and
competitive world economy, our education spirit, secure in their sense of belonging and in
system must adapt to meet these challenges ... the knowledge that they make a valued
It (the curriculum) provides a balance between contribution to society.'
the interests of individual students and the
requirements of society and the economy.'

The p r i n c i p l e s
NZCF establishes directions for learning and • empowerment- whakamana;
assessment; defines achievement objectives; • holistic development-kotahitanga;
provides flexibility; ensures coherent progress, • family and community-whanau tangata;
encourages independent and lifelong learners; • relationships-ttga hononga;
provides equal opportunities; recognises the
Treaty of Waitangi; reflects the multicultural
nature of NZ society; relates learning to the
wider world

Content areas (seven essential


learning areas) (strands)

• Language and languages Te Korcro me Nga • well-being-memo atua;


Reo; • belonging- mana whenua;
• Mathematics Pangaru; • contribution- mana tangata;
• Science Putaiao; • communication-mana reo;
• Technology Hangarau; • exploration- mana aoturoa.
• Social Sciences Tiknnga-a-iwi;
• The Arts Nga Toi;
• Health and Physical Well-being Hauora.

Skills (eight e s s e n t i a l skills)


• communication; Skills are integrated throughout the goals of each
• numeracy; of the strands in the following manner: 'In early
• information; childhood, holistic, active learning and the total
• problem-solving; process of learning are emphasised. Knowledge,
• self management and competitive; skills, and attitudes are closely linked. These
• social and cooperative; three aspects combine together to form a child's
• physical; "working theory" and help the child develop
• work and study. dispositions that encourage learning.'

Figure 1 Summary of the comparison of the New Zealand Curriculum


Framework (NZCF) and Te whariki
8 Citizenship, Social and Economics Education

Comparison with the New Zealand Curriculum Framework


A close examination of the language employed in NZCF reveals the tensions between
the new right (both neo-liberal and neo-conservative) and the liberal left perspectives
and again placement of these ideas shows the government's priorities. The language of
the foreword (written by the Secretary for Education) puts the competitive world
economy, high standards, rapid technological change, a highly skilled workforce, business,
enterprise, and international perspectives several paragraphs ahead of the recognition
of the Treaty of Waitangi, bi-cultural identity, a growing multicultural society and gender
inclusiveness. The principles underpinning the document show a similar pattern, national
directions for learning, assessment and measuring student progress appear ahead of
student needs, equal opportunities, and cultural issues. In contrast, the aims of Te whariki
stress that positive self-esteem and a sense of belonging are needed before children can
contribute fully to society - more akin to earlier liberal progressive views of the purposes
of education.
The definitions of curriculum also differ. NZCF talks of national curriculum statements,
achievement aims and objectives, all part of the neo-conservative drive for accountability
and excellence. The Te whariki definition again highlights the place of the child, his/her
experiences, and the environment, physical and social, in which learning occurs -
reflecting a more child-centred and experiential pedagogy. The area of skills is approached
differently. NZCF outlines eight essential skills with sub-skills ascribed to each category
whereas Te whariki approaches skill development in a constructivist and integrated
manner.
The symbols employed to encapsulate the principles behind the documents are also
worth viewing more closely. NZCF delineates each essential learning area (ELA) as a
separate entity each with its own identifiable colour, and, indeed, the subsequent individual
subject documents adhered to this colour scheme. The layout supports this notion of
subject traditions by allowing each ELA a page to explain its contribution to the curriculum
as a whole. This traditional subject-based structure is somewhat at odds with the Maori
design in which it is placed which would tend to indicate a more bi-cultural and integrated
flavour to the contents and an holistic approach to learning. The symbol for Te whariki,
(a woven flax mat), as has already been stated, was selected with care (and this is explained
in the document) to represent the bi-lingual and bi-cultural nature of the curriculum
and the genuine attention to the nature of diversity within, and between, early childhood
services. The metaphor is also reinforced by the integrated nature of the principles and
content strands.
Another interesting difference between the two documents is that Te whariki has
many more references, directly and indirectly, to learning theory. One page is, in fact,
devoted to an explanation of Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological theory of human
development. This observation is supported by the document writers who talk of the
four' guides' they used in their initial planning - Piaget, Erikson,Vygotsky and Bruner
(Carr & May, 1993). This leads to an eclectic mix of developmental and socio-cultural
learning theories within the document which some commentators (for example, Cullen,
1996) see as a concern unless sound educational theory is taught in teacher pre-service
and in-service education programmes to enable early childhood teachers to make the
best use of such theories in their planning.
In conclusion, NZCF appears to be pulled in differing directions by the conflicting
messages it contains. Te whariki's message is more consistent with the views it expresses
Early Childhood Education in New Zealand 9

at the liberal progressive/socially critical end of the continuum.


In contrast to NZCF, Te whariki does not align itself to traditional subject boundaries.
The whariki (woven mat) symbolises its integrated nature. The parts are seen as
contributing to the whole. If any one of the parts were not included the whole learning
experience would be seen as incomplete. The integrated nature of the curriculum has a
marked effect on the pedagogy. Specialists do not control particular areas. All early
childhood teachers need to be generalists. The curriculum cannot be transmitted; it can
only be experienced. Teachers and learners co-construct these experiences. Assessment
is also holistic, viewing the child's learning as complex and contextual.

Lessons to be learned
At a time when new right elements were taking a strong interest in educational
developments the early childhood community was able to come together with a united
vision and coherent voice and use their strength to lobby for recognition and the autonomy
to develop a curriculum to meet their needs. They were able to gain recognition as a
credible educational force to the point where 95% of New Zealand children now receive
some kind of early childhood education before entering compulsory schooling.
The integrated approach to education, as exemplified in Te whariki, once the norm in
New Zealand primary schools but which lost favour with the tightening of curriculum
requirements, has provided a model of how to stand tall against political trends. There is
now more cross-fertilisation of curriculum ideas between junior primary schools and
early childhood centres. In particular, the approach to assessment - children's learning
stories (Carr, 2001) - has challenged teachers' thinking in regular school settings by
offering a successful model of the holistic appraisal of children's achievements and next
learning steps. Research and curriculum development projects are currently evaluating
assessment practices and gathering exemplars for teacher development. It is a time of
excitement as the possibilities of alternative curriculum and assessment opportunities
are explored. It is a time of consolidation as the curriculum becomes embedded in
teachers' ways of working. It is also a time for reflection and evaluation as researchers
probe more deeply into teachers' negotiation of curriculum understanding and enactment
(see, for example, Carr et al., 2003; Nuttall, 2002,2003; and Ruth, 2003). Whatever the
critiques, the place of early childhood education as a quality educational experience, as
an area for academic debate and study, and as a recognised profession have been
strengthened by the development of Te whariki. All credit must be given to the early
childhood community, and, in particular, advocates such as Anne Meade, Helen May,
Margaret Carr, Tilly Reedy and Tamati Reedy for producing this alternative voice in
curriculum policy and implementation. As Heer (2003: 244) concludes:

Te Whariki has gained international prominence as an early childhood


curriculum of great substance and importance. Within the international early
childhood community, there is a growing awareness of the uniqueness of Te
Whariki and the contribution it has made to curriculum development in
Aotearoa New Zealand. Increasingly, the international community has wanted
to know more about this unique document and the way it has evolved.
This article is one small step in providing part of the story of Te whariki and its
evolution.
10 Citizenship, Social and Economics Education

Correspondence
Any c o r r e s p o n d e n c e should be directed to Carol Mutch (E-mail:
carol.mutch@cce.ac.nz), Associate Director, School of Professional Development,
Christchurch College of Education, PO Box 31-065, Christchurch 8030, New Zealand.

References
Alcorn, N. (1999) To the Fullest Extent of His Powers. C.E. Beeby's Life in Education. Wellington:
Victoria University Press.
Alton Lee, A., Nuthall, G. and Patrick, J. (1987) Take your brown hand off my book. SET 1
Item 8.
Benton, R. (1986) Now fades the glimmering Research in classrooms in New Zealand.
SET 2 Item 12.
Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979) The Ecology of Hitman Development. Cambridge, Mass: Harvard
University Press.
Brostrom, S. (2003) Understanding Te whariki from a Danish perspective. In J. Nuttall, (ed.)
Weaving Te whariki. Aotearoa New Zealand's Early Childhood Curriculum Document in
Theory and Practice. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Carpenter, V. (2001) Curriculum and the (re)production of education. In V. Carpenter, H.
Dixon and C. Rawlinson (eds.) Theory in Practice for Educators. Palmerston North:
Dunmore Press.
Carr, M., Hatherly, A., Lee, W. and Ramsey, K. (2003) Te whariki and assessment: a case
study of teacher change. In J. Nuttall, (ed.) Weaving Te whariki. Aotearoa New Zealand's
Early Childhood Curriculum Document in Theory and Practice. Wellington: New Zealand
Council for Educational Research.
Carr, M. and May, H. (1993) Choosing a model. Reflecting on the development process of Te
whariki: National early childhood guidelines in New Zealand. International journal of
Early Years Education 1 (3), Winter.
— (1994) Weaving patterns: Developing national early childhood guidelines in Aotearoa-
New Zealand. Australian Journal of Early Childhood 19 (1).
Committee to Review Curriculum for Schools (1987) The Curriculum Review. Wellington:
Department of Education.
Cullen, J. (1996) The challenge of Te whariki for future development in early childhood
education. Delta 48 (1).
Dale, R. (1989) The State and Educational Policy. Buckingham: Open University Press.
Department of Education (NZ) (1988) National Curriculum Statement (Draft). Wellington:
Author.
Early Childhood Care and Education Working Group (1988) Education To Be More (The
Meade Report). Wellington: Learning Media.
Fleer, M. (2003) The many voices of Te whariki: kaupapa Maori, socio- cultural, developmental,
constructivist, and ...? Australians listen carefully. In J. Nuttall, (ed.) Weaving Te whariki.
Aotearoa New Zealand's Early Childhood Curricxdum Document in Theory and Practice.
Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.
Jesson, B. (1999) Only Their Purpose is Mad. The Money Men Take Over New Zealand. Falmerston
North: Dunmore Press.
Kelsey, J. (1993) Rolling Back the State. Wellington: Bridget William Books.
— (1995) The New Zealand Experiment. Auckland: Auckland University Press/Bridget William
Books.
Lange, D. (1988) Tomorrow's Schools: The Reform of Education Administration in New Zealand.
Wellington: Government Printer.
— (1989) Before Five: Early Childhood Care and Education in New Zealand. Wellington:
Department of Education.
Lauder, H. (1990) The new right revolution and education in New Zealand. In S. Middleton,
Early Childhood Education in New Zealand 11

J. Codd, and A. Jones (eds.) New Zealand Education Policy Today. Wellington: Allen and
Unwin.
May, H. (1991) 'From a floor to a drawer"- A story of administrative upheaval. A post-Meade
reflection on early childhood policy. Te Timitanga 9 (2).
— (1997) The Discovery of Early Childhood. Wellington: NZCER.
Ministry of Education (NZ) (1993a) New Zealand Curricidum Framework. Wellington: Learning
Media.
— (1993b) Te whariki: Draft Guidelines for Developmentally Appropriate Programmes In Early
Childhood Services. Wellington: Learning Media.
— (1996) Te whariki. He whariki matauranga mo nga mokopuna o Aotearoa. Early Childhood
Curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.
— (1991) The National Curricidum of New Zealand. A Discussion Document. Wellington:
Learning Media.
Mutch, C. (2000) Values education in New Zealand: Old ideas in new garb. Children's Social
and Economics Education 4 (1).
Nuttall, J. (2002) Negotiating the meaning of 'curriculum': Can we awaken the 'sleeping
beauty'? Early Education 28.
— (2003) Exploring the role of the teacher within Te whariki: Some possibilities and constraints.
In J. Nuttall (ed.), Weaving Te whariki. Aotearoa New Zealand's Early Childhood Curricidum
Document in Theory and Practice. Wellington: New Zealand Council for Educational
Research.
Roberts, R (1998) The politics of curriculum reform in New Zealand. Curricidum Studies 6
(1).
Ruth, V. (2002) Planning in early childhood centres - The beliefs and practices that drive the
process. Unpublished manuscript. University of Canterbury, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Statistics New Zealand (1995) New Zealand Official Year Book '95. Auckland: Author.
Task Force to Review Education Administration (1988). Administering for Excellence, Effective
Administration and Education (The Picot Report). Wellington: Government Printer.
The Treasury (NZ) (1987) Government Management. Brief to the Incoming Government.
Wellington: Author.
Thrupp, M. (ed.) (1999) A Decade of Educational Reform in New Zealand education: Where To
Now? Hamilton: University of Waikato.
Trowler, P. (1998) Education Policy: A Policy Sociology Approach. Eastbourne: Gildredge Press.

Potrebbero piacerti anche