The Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework: Managing Change in a Complex Environment
Bibliographic record
Abstract
THIS ARTICLE REPORTS ON an Educational Change Model originally developed for the middle years of schooling (Pendergast et al., 2005) and applied here to an Australian early childhood education reform initiative. The Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework (VEYLDF) was released in 2009 (DEECD & VCAA, 2009). Implementation of the VEYLDF was accompanied by a three-stage independent evaluation on early childhood professionals perceptions of implementation. According to the Educational Change Model, three distinct phases can be identified as individuals and groups move towards full implementation of reforms. The phases are: Initiation, Development, and Consolidation. Evaluation of initiatives delivered in the implementation of the VEYLDF against key elements of the Educational Change Model revealed that: critical model elements of visioning, policy development, stakeholder engagement and information dissemination were achieved at a high level; resources were developed for early childhood professionals to implement in a range of formats and mediums; the importance of leadership in educational change was recognised in the VEYLDF implementation; inhibitors and enablers to the implementation of the VEYLDF were identified in anticipation of the Development phase of the Educational Change Model. • The staged implementation of the VEYLDF provided opportunities for progressive feedback on implementation successes and challenges.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".