An exploration of pedagogical discourses and conceptions of young children in national early childhood curricula: Focusing on British Columbia, Australia, New Zealand, and Korea
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This exploratory study investigates the educational philosophies, pedagogical concepts, and teaching practices embedded in the national early childhood curricula of British Columbia (Canada), Australia, New Zealand, and Korea. Focusing on recently revised curriculum documents, the study examines perspectives on young children, the curriculum-environment relationship, and the nature of teachers’ pedagogical practices. To address these aims, the study employed a qualitative inquiry based on posthumanist perspectives, analyzing national curriculum documents through rhizomatic text collection, diffractive reading, and performative recording of “becoming.” Findings show that all four curricula view young children as active and relational beings and redefine teachers as co-constructors of meaning and facilitators of learning. BC’s ELF emphasizes rhizomatic learning and pedagogical narration; Australia’s EYLF centers on children’s rights and intentional teaching through Belonging, Being, Becoming; Te Whāriki highlights cultural responsiveness through Māori traditions and communal ties; and Korea’s 2019 Nuri Curriculum promotes a play- and child-centered approach, positioning teachers as supporters of children's inquiry. The study reveals a pedagogical shift across contexts—from fixed instruction to ethical, contextual practice—and emphasizes the importance of practical discourse grounded in diverse curricular philosophies.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.003 | 0.003 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.004 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.012 | 0.010 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.007 | 0.003 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".