MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4415120360 · doi:10.15409/riece.2025.27.3.3

An exploration of pedagogical discourses and conceptions of young children in national early childhood curricula: Focusing on British Columbia, Australia, New Zealand, and Korea

2025· article· en· W4415120360 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Woojung Jang

Bibliographic record

Venuekorean Jouranl of Early Childhood Education · 2025
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldComputer Science
TopicEducational Systems and Policies
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsCurriculumNational curriculumPerformative utteranceEarly childhoodMeaning (existential)Early childhood educationExploratory researchQualitative research

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

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 distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.078
Threshold uncertainty score0.937

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.001
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.032
GPT teacher head0.320
Teacher spread0.288 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venuekorean Jouranl of Early Childhood EducationSame topicEducational Systems and PoliciesFrench-language works237,207