Education is a critical societal system that aims to equip students with tools necessary for their development and various transitions through society. Discourse surrounding education generally steers away from what should be taught, and instead considers the question of how and why it should be taught.
Traditional pedagogies encompass passive learning, where assessment is reliant on repetition and recitation of homogenous skill sets. This system naturally creates a hierarchy that affirms the teacher as the authority, and the student as the ‘immature’ and ‘superficial’. Implicating traditional pedagogies operate on the philosophy that education is a rigid and structured process, that is intrinsically void of student insight and contribution. This lack of flexibility undermines the value and social virtue of integrating inclusive learning environments in practice (Sanger, 2020). Neoliberal perspectives possess similarities. Relational changes between private enterprise and government, have shifted public institutions, such as schools, to alternatively be reconstituted as part of the market. Instead, neoliberal education implicates an educational climate where students are encouraged to contribute to the improvement of ‘human capital’ (Davies & Bansel, 2007). In the context of early childhood education and care (ECEC), neoliberalism poses significant threats to students’ autonomy. Imposing standardised skills that align with market-values discourages students from exercising their freedom to pursue and practice activities that interest them. This is diametrically opposed to contemporary educational perspectives that position the student as possessing agency and creative freedom. Neoliberal perspectives discourage creative arts due to the argument that artistic endeavours lack market value. This perpetuates the ideology that these skills are dispensable and futile. Contemporary methods of ECEC rely heavily on creative means due to their ability to stimulate children’s curiosity and imagination. The Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) explicates this in Outcome 5, where “children express ideas and make meanings using a range of media” (Department of Education [DoE], 2022). Educators are encouraged to provide resources that encourage children to experiment with the creative arts as a way of enhancing self-expression and communication. The implications for ECEC are the imposition of structural methods that deter children from exercising their full autonomy, self-expression, and creativity (Sims, 2016).
I am not in a position to simply state contentment with neoliberal education. Educational reforms in a neoliberal society are presented with the façade of ‘benefiting’ the student or preparing them for their future. Little accountability is placed on those who have interjected capitalistic values into education. ECEC naturally suffers as a result. With greater precedence being placed on skills that possess higher market-value, children are restricted in their potential for developing a range of skills that are critical to self-expression and identity. Imposing a standardised curriculum for such a transitory age, only hinders a child’s self- discovery.
My personal pedagogy alternatively aligns with active, or progressive perspectives. Often relying on holistic approaches that value the entirety of the learning experience. Individuality and expressionism are cultivated, providing students with the opportunity to experience diverse ways of learning that are expansive and dynamic. They advocate for the equalisation of power between teacher and student. Interdisciplinary relationships are integral, where students are comfortable contributing to decision-making and educators remain responsive and supportive of children’s voices (Nweke & Owoh, 2020). This is fundamentally opposed to reductionist and neoliberal perspectives, that value conformity, rote-learning, and inherent hierarchies.
Experiential education, often attributed to John Dewey’s Experience and Education (1938), is the philosophy that student experience should be regarded as central in educational processes. This ‘hands-on’ approach is encouraged in several Australian ECEC pedagogical framework, such as the EYLF (DoE, 2022). Learning through play is a quintessential example of experiential education. Children are provided with opportunities to learn through discovery, creative endeavours, improvisation, and imagination. They engage in experiences that facilitate critical thought and problem solving, as they attempt to navigate and respond to the world. It relies on their innate curiosity, and explorative nature as they encounter new and engaging experiences. It is also a beneficial way of strengthening children’s’ sensory-motor skills by providing resources and activities that lead them to improve upon their physical wellbeing and development (Parker et al., 2022). Further examples of experiential education are outlined in the Possum Skin Pedagogy, which emphasises the importance of embedding nature into ECEC (Atkinson, 2017). Children are encouraged to engage in nature as a way of fostering connectedness with country. Such connection is an integral aspect of Indigenous culture. The embedment of this into ECEC curricula is reflective of inclusive practices that can strengthen Indigenous, and culturally diverse representations.
I am a strong proponent of progressive pedagogies. I believe that ECEC should offer an environment for children to feel secure and supported, whilst simultaneously strengthening their skills and abilities. Offering inclusive methods of teaching to provide students with the ability to learn advantageously is at the forefront of my personal pedagogy. I believe that neoliberalism leads people to pursue specific skills in the pursuit of value in a society, that ultimately operates at their detriment. When this extends to ECEC, children who innately turn to adults for learning and support, are instead met with disheartening restrictions on their creative freedom and self-expression. Perhaps this is why my support of progressive and experiential learning, expands, to additionally emphasise the role of teachers in society.
Critical pedagogy, often attributed to Paulo Freire’s Pedagogy of the Oppressed (1970), is the educational perspective that teaching is an inherently political act. Freire discusses banking-education, which establishes students as passive receptacles for whatever the teacher deposits. Thus, students must be able to critically analyse the educational landscape that shape their reality. This is reliant on teachers recognising the political role of their occupation, and the influence they have on their students. This is particularly relevant as the formative years of ECEC are quintessential to children’s development of identity and social navigation. Critical pedagogy view curriculums as representing dominant values that legitimise advantages or disadvantages for students. Educators are placed in powerful positions of engaging in the complex role of critically challenging their curricular-decisions or subscribing to passivity. Critically aware educators work to recognise how systems of education can privilege specific people, and subsequently mitigate these social and cultural injustices by engaging in reform and critique of current conditions (Freire, 1970; Kilderry, 2004).
Respect for diversity is a key principle within the EYLF (DoE, 2022). Educators are expected to make curricular decisions that acknowledge the complexity of children’s culture, identities, abilities, and strengths. Educators who reconceptualise are able to reflect on their pedagogical practices and widen their critical thinking skills to engage in discourse surrounding curricula that depreciate the value of diverse practice. Educators upholding inclusivity are fundamental to ensuring children remain in societies that are receptive and value their strengths and culture. An example of critical pedagogy in practice is the presentation of alternative views, and beliefs. The Possum Skin Pedagogy does this by encouraging ECE to embed Indigenous culture into educational practices (Atkinson, 2017). The criticality of this is further emphasised by “children develop(ing) knowledgeable and confident self-identities” in Outcome 1 of the EYLF (DoE, 2022). Historically, ECEC, and curriculums in general, would fail to recognise Indigenous cultures and histories. This has led to educational settings operating in contexts where Indigenous needs were ignored, consequently leading to a disproportional number of Indigenous student absentees (Shay & Heck, 2015).
I believe that teachers are instrumental in social reformation. Traditional and neoliberal perspectives position teachers as compliant, almost reflective of Freire’s (1970) banking-education, where teachers are the oppressed, and the private or governing body are the oppressors. Teachers require autonomy to implement learning environments that are appropriate and relevant to each child. This facilitates a positive educational climate for teaching, and holistic care. Valuing the heterogenous nature of children is integral for facilitating positive-identity, self-expression, creative freedom, and learning. Recognising that children’s social and cultural perceptions are shaped partly by educators, places them in a valuable position for embedding pedagogies that strive for the alleviation of prejudice (Freire, 1970). Reinforcing reciprocal relationships between educators and students, allows for a dialogic approach where the two can learn from one another. Integrating students into decision-making and fostering relationships of comfort allows for effective communication whilst simultaneously ascribing value to children’s perspectives (Dewey, 1938).
The concepts of ‘self-determination’ and ‘child’ have remained distinct from one another. However, I believe that teachers have the capacity to bridge this gap and nurture a relationship that is based on cooperation and value.