Various early
childhood education and care (ECEC) models have been developed based on the
constructivist’s theory. Several of these models are outlined here in an effort
to draw conclusions regarding the most appropriate model for use within
Adventist early childhood programs. A review of the models and their
philosophies will help to firmly establish the need for an Adventist model that
will glean from, and yet surpass, the current ECEC models in use around the world.
Model
|
Johann Pestalozzi and
Friedrich Froebel
|
Basic Concepts
|
In
the early 1800’s, Johann Pestalozzi taught that children learn through their
play. His theory of early childhood education was one of permissiveness, emphasizing
pleasant surroundings, self-activity, and physical training for children.
Interestingly enough, he saw the value of natural settings with their
inherent object lessons (von Marenholtz-Bülow, 1887).
Pestalozzi’s most
renowned student, Friedrich Froebel, had similar views, though he took them
to a more serious, loftier level. Once called a prophet, Friedrich Froebel
created a kindergarten in 1837 as “a garden of children” for early schooling.
Froebel's theory of early childhood education was based on four basic ideas:
free self expression, creativity, social participation, and motor expression
(von Marenholtz-Bülow, 1887). His idealistic view of education was closely
related to religion.
|
Strengths
|
Pestalozzi’s aim was
to educate the whole child and to maintain equilibrium between the hands,
heart and head (Smith, 1997).
The missing component
in Pestalozzi’s theory, Froebel believed, was the "spiritual
mechanism", the foundation of early learning (von Marenholtz-Bülow,
1887).
|
Weaknesses
|
|
Model
|
Montessori, Maria
|
Basic Concepts
|
“Individual
activity is the one factor that stimulates and produces development” (Montessori,
1995, p. 8, ¶3). Around this one observation, Dr. Montessori developed her
theory and practice, using observation and experimentation as cornerstones
for her developing Method (Seldin & Epstein, 2003).
Contrary
to popular belief, the colorful manipulative materials found in a Montessori
classroom are not the Method; they are tools (St. Giermaine, 2008). The
Method is one of independent learning – independent doing. “Competence,
independence, willingness to embrace the challenges of change… are the most
important building blocks of the Montessori Method” (Montessori Foundation,
2008, p. 29, ¶3). In a Montessori classroom, skill refinement, increasing
levels of responsibility, maintaining or restoring order and caring for the
classroom environment are all part of the Method and taught through
activities relating to “Practical Life” (Montessori Foundation, 2008).
The
key to the activities lies in their practicality to real daily life. They are
meaningful and purposeful activities that teach real skills and develop
independent individuals (Schmidt & Schmidt, 2008a). They are simple
activities such as learning how to use a spoon to transfer a set of items
from one dish to another; learning how to pour liquid from one container to
another; learning to properly wash a table or rinse out a sponge; learning
how to polish a shoe or sweep up a spill on the classroom floor; becoming
aware of, and learning how to listen to the body’s signals regarding personal
needs whether it be a biological break, snack or need for rest; learning to
be observant of, and caring for the environment and learning how to care for
the other community members through helpful and courteous actions, empathy
and altruistic behaviors (Montessori Foundation, 2008).
Practical
Life is not the only learning center within a Montessori classroom. Academics
are always present and offer opportunities for deeper investigative learning.
Beginning with sensorial exercises, the children learn to increase their
ability to attend, focus, observe and become aware of their environment and
to “consider what comes into their experience” (Montessori Foundation, 2008).
Montessorian philosophy strongly emphasizes touch and manipulation of objects
for learning, hence there are such materials in each learning center: math
and geometry, science, geography, language arts, cultural studies, physical
education and the arts (Montessori Foundation, 2008).
|
Strengths
|
Montessori has the
only curriculum that has materials for every subject in every main topic from
infancy through middle school. The strengths within the Montessori Method are
the practical life and sensorial learning strategies. In many ways
idealistic, they still provide the organizational skills and work habits
necessary for individual and shared success. Because each child creates their
own “cycle of work based on” their “individual interests,” the “cycle of
self-directed activity” naturally lengthens the child’s attention span and
concentration skills (Montessori Foundation, 2008, p. 15, ¶1). Such
strategies easily accommodate various learning modalities, personalities and
ability levels. Assessment is based on the individual’s ability to master a
work project which then leads naturally into a more complex work project.
|
Weaknesses
|
The main weakness
within the Montessori Method lies in its flexible application. Each school
and teacher is able to blend the Montessori Method with their own unique
personality and interpretation (Montessori Foundation, 2008). As a result,
the Montessori philosophical base is also applied flexibly and no two
Montessori schools are alike. Even though the Montessori Foundation provides
an accreditation process, each school varies in the level of quality which is
offered. There is also a certification process for Montessori teachers, but
many teachers at the early childhood level lack certification.
|
Model
|
Reggio
Emilia
|
Basic Concepts
|
The
Reggio Emilia approach to teaching young children places great value on
experiential learning, problem solving and relationships (Reggio Emilia
Approach, 2008; Edwards, 2002). Unlike traditional preschool programs, the
Reggio concept of project-based learning is not pre-planned, thematic, or
trans-disciplinary. The teacher is a
facilitator of learning, providing support and materials for the projects
which are directed by the understanding and learning of the children, a
concept recently termed “emergent curriculum” because the curriculum emerges
based on the interests of the children (Baxter & Petty, 2008).
One
of the most important components of the Reggio approach is the teacher’s
ability to listen to the children, deduct wherein their interests lie,
provide for the emerging learning possibilities and document the entire
process (Walsh & Petty, 2007). This documentation, in the form of
portfolios, memory books and products resulting from projects, provides
descriptive information about the development of the children both individually
and as a peer group (Walsh & Petty, 2007; Edwards, 2002).
|
Strengths
|
The signal strength of
the Reggio approach is in the ability to use the environment as a teacher,
using both long-term and short-term projects for group as well as individualized
learning opportunities (Edwards, 2002). Reggio was also the originator of the
child’s portfolio for assessment purposes. Coupled with extensive
documentation, such an environment offers abundant opportunities for further
research into child development and group navigational behaviors.
|
Weaknesses
|
Reggio Emilia is an
approach to early childhood education rather than a formal model such as the
Waldorf and Montessori which have defined methods, teacher certification
standards and accreditation protocols (Edwards, 2002). Formal teacher
education is not required and pre-service training is meager, but staff
development through trainings and conferences are promoted (Reggio Emilia
Approach, 2008). In addition, the emergent style of learning has often
produced chaotic classrooms for many schools with many not understanding how
to implement this style of learning. These tend to be weaknesses in the
approach as its acceptance has grown. Still, hundreds of early childhood
programs around the world have been based on or inspired by the Reggio
approach (Edwards, 2002).
|
Model
|
Waldorf
|
Basic Concepts
|
Waldorf
schools were started by Rudolf Steiner, the founder of anthroposophy, which
is the philosophical foundation of Waldorf schools and teacher training sites
(Anthroposophy, 2008). Anthroposophy asserts that spiritual worlds can be
intellectually contacted through a series of unfolding, developmental stages
(Anthroposophy, 2008). Consistent with the tenets of anthroposophy, Waldorf
schools view children as in a continuous process of becoming, evolving in
freedom toward increased self-knowledge (Ward, 2001).
The
child’s spiritual development is greatly valued and encouraged through the
use of storytelling, fairytales, myths, legends, fantasy and imagination as a
means of stimulating the children’s play (Walsh & Petty, 2007; Lenart,
2003; Shell, N.D.).
|
Strengths
|
At the preschool
level, Waldorf schools use simple toys made of natural materials rather than
commercial characters or plastic toys (Lenart, 2003). Waldorf schools attempt
to develop the child’s physical body and will (also called freedom) through
the various arts and creative, hands-on activities rather than academics
(Baxter & Petty, 2008).
|
Weaknesses
|
Waldorf is not a true early childhood
philosophy or educational model but rather a spiritual philosophy that has
been utilized as a “visible… application” of Steiner’s anthroposophical
vision (Anthroposophy, 2008). What makes the Waldorf philosophy and model
untenable for Christian early childhood educators and parents is the
spiritual teachings of the “evolution of consciousness”, mixing rational
thought with intuition and clairvoyance and requiring a series of
reincarnations (Anthroposophy, 2008).
The most disturbing is the belief in Lucifer as a spirit of light who
“motivates creativity and imagination” and Ahriman as a “dark spirit” who
“stimulates intellectuality and technology” with “the Christ being” as “a
spiritual entity who stands between and harmonizes the two extremes”
(Anthroposophy, 2008).
Young children are
considered to be a combination of earthly and cosmic beings that are still
“united with angelic and other spiritual beings” (Trostli, 1998). These
cosmic beings, as developing human beings, fulfill the “impulses” and “work
of the angels, the archangels and even higher spiritual beings,” hence, the
heavy emphasis on fantasy and imaginative teaching and play (Trostli, 1998).
|
Model
|
High
Scope
|
Basic Concepts
|
The
mission of the HighScope Educational Research Foundation is “to lift lives
through education” (Epstein, 2010). Consistent with this mission, HighScope
has developed an early childhood educational approach that is firmly based in
research and experiential practices. Adhering to the guidelines of
developmentally appropriate-based early childhood programs, HighScope moves
beyond these best practices to incorporate a unique feature which
differentiates them from all other early learning methods.
The
unique feature of HighScope is the daily practice of the “plan-do-review
sequence” (Epstein, 2010). This very important, and intensely researched
aspect, includes a small-group meeting during which several children will sit
with the teacher to discuss plans for their work time. Work time plans
typically consist of an articulated desire to engage in a specific activity
including the materials and friends with whom the children will interact.
Once each child has decided upon a plan, the actual work time commences and
continues for up to an hour. At the conclusion of work time, the children
again meet with their teacher to discuss, or review, their work time
activities.
The
benefits to the process of “plan-do-review” are found in the children’s
learned ability to plan ahead and then to reflect, two very important
lifelong skills. Learning these skills has also been shown to significantly
improve developmental progress and problem solving as the children initiate
the learning process by making choices, follow through with those choices and
make decisions to redirect efforts and plans as necessary (Epstein, 1993
& 2003).
Since
its inception in 1970, HighScope has launched itself into the national and
international early childhood educational realm through its highly
controversial longitudinal study, the Perry Preschool Project. The HighScope
Perry Preschool Project longitudinal study results have created a plethora of
debate regarding early childhood programs, academics for young children and
the role of the government in the education and care of young children. In
this study, the authors outlined the benefits of a high quality preschool
program for African-American, low-income children who were at risk “retarded
intellectual functioning and eventual school failure” (Olsen, 1999; Preschool
California and Children Now, 2004).
Despite
controversy over the generalization of the Perry Preschool Project results
(Olsen, 1999; Elkind, 1987), this detailed study has impacted state, federal
and international educational expectations for young children. For HighScope,
the study results have initiated the adoption and refinement of several
effective teaching and learning practices within the HighScope approach,
targeting all young learners, not just low-income children at risk for
academic failure.
|
Strengths
|
The
teaching and learning practices are the strength of the HighScope educational
approach. The curriculum is defined, emergent with child interests and
developmentally based. Parent-teacher conferences and annual home visits are
a requirement for effective curriculum implementation. Child-based outcomes
are assessed through comprehensive observations that take place over several
weeks or months rather than during one-time sessions (Epstein, 2010). In
addition, the curriculum standards and assessment protocol have been aligned
with national standards, and appear to be compatible with the early learning
standards of local school districts and state departments of education
(Epstein, 2010).
The HighScope approach
has two final strengths not seen in other early childhood educational models.
First, the teachers are highly trained and certified. Training is
administered in a variety of methods in order to accommodate the diverse
needs of early childhood professionals currently working in early childhood
programs. Second, HighScope firmly believes that when their research-proven
model is implemented in an early childhood program, its reliability must be
validated through an accreditation process known as the Preschool Program
Quality Assessment (Epstein, 2010). These two aspects are intended to control
the quality and integrity of the HighScope approach; a combined mechanism
which other methods have yet to replicate.
|
Weaknesses
|
|
Model
|
Traditional, American
Preschool
|
Basic Concepts
|
In 2003, Larry Prochner from the University of
Alberta, Canada described American early childhood preschool programs as a
“fragmented… patchwork… and a non-system” (p. 267, ¶2). The traditional
American preschool program is repeatedly referred to as low in quality when
compared to preschool programs in other countries (Cleveland & Colley,
2003). The reasons are multitudinous ranging from lack of government funding
and under-educated teachers to diverse regulatory policies (Cleveland &
Colley, 2003; Prochner, 2003). In an effort to accommodate their demographic
clientele, early childhood providers have been offering educational
philosophies ranging from play-based programs to academically-focused
programs with many trying to find a balance by offering a combination of the
two. As a result, publishers and curriculum companies have responded by providing
a myriad of curriculum philosophies and resources.
The average, traditional American preschool teacher
adheres to the child development theories of Piaget and Erikson and follows a
rather simplistic, teacher-directed daily routine. The curriculum is
typically developed into monthly, thematic units based on esoteric topics
presumably of interest to the majority of young children, designed to be
presented in a developmentally appropriate manner but often lacking depth and
real educational value (Katz & Chard, 1989 as cited in Edwards, Gandini
& Forman, 1998, p. 28 ¶2). Montessorian influences are apparent in that
traditional preschools have incorporated child sized furniture, learning
centers and miniaturized tools and equipment (Seldin & Epstein, 2003).
“Play is a child’s work” and “play as learning” are constant buzz words meant
to instill confidence in the clientele as they observe the program’s daily
rituals.
In the past ten years, traditional American
preschool programs have been challenged to prove the merit of their
play-based programs. One result has been an overemphasis on the teaching of
academics to younger and younger children. At the federal level, in 1998,
Congress required all Head Start grantees to start collecting data on child
outcomes. Consequently, the Head Start Bureau developed the Head Start
Outcomes Framework. In 2002, President Bush announced Good Start, Grow
Smart, a national early childhood initiative that encouraged states to
develop voluntary early learning guidelines on literacy, language, and
pre-reading skills. The Early Childhood Educator Professional Development
program is the only teaching quality provision of the No Child Left Behind
act that applies explicitly to early learning educators. This grant money is
for partnerships that provide high-quality professional development to early
childhood educators working with children from birth through kindergarten
entry who come from low-income families in high-need communities. In
addition, the Early Reading First program
provides grant money awarded directly to early learning programs and
targeted for children from low-income families, professional development and
research-based curriculum and assessments.
At both the federal and state level, early learning
standards are now a part of the national standards-based educational climate (Kauerz
& McMaken, 2004). Many states have developed quality rating systems in an
effort to identify programs with teachers and child learning outcomes that
meet state standards. As of 2004, forty-three states had a universal
pre-kindergarten law of some kind, but funding has hindered implementation.
Fortunately for young children, educational and
brain research does not support the practice of early academics. From all
these research studies, Dr. Rebecca Marcon, a developmental psychologist and
a professor of psychology at the University of North Florida, has concluded:
“Children's later school success appears to be enhanced by more active,
child-initiated learning experiences. Their long-term progress may be slowed
by overly academic preschool experiences that introduce formalized learning
experiences too early for most children's developmental status. Pushing
children too soon may actually backfire when children move into the later
elementary school grades and are required to think more independently and
take on greater responsibility for their own learning process” (Marcon, 2002,
p. Discussion, ¶Final paragraph).
|
Strengths
|
The main strength of
the traditional, American preschool program is in its adaptability. With new
research constantly available, American early childhood professionals are
slowly adopting new ways of working with and teaching young children.
Philosophical approaches are broadening, partly as a result of governmental
requirements to accommodate ability and cultural diversity; partly because of
conservative ideologies integrating the child’s spiritual learning domain.
|
Weaknesses
|
Regardless of the
educational philosophy, the weakness of the traditional, American preschool
program lies in the corporate care mentality which dominates the classroom
environment: all are simultaneously taught the same concepts, follow the same
routines, given individualized help if needed and measured in comparison to
each other – behaviorally as well as academically. Success is measured in the
child’s ability to sit still, follow directions, recite, write and often read
required material (NCREL, 2004).
|
Model
|
Seventh-day Adventist Early Childhood Education and Care
Programs
|
Basic Concepts
|
Higher than the highest human thought can
reach is God’s ideal for His children. Godliness--godlikeness--is the goal to
be reached. Before the student there is opened a path of continual progress.
He has an object to achieve, a standard to attain, that includes everything
good, and pure, and noble. He will advance as fast and as far as possible in
every branch of true knowledge… (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p.
18, ¶4).
Through such words of inspiration and
encouragement Ellen G. White dealt keenly with both the temporal and spiritual
development of the young child. Author, speaker and mother of four boys, two
of whom died in childhood, she motivated parents and teachers to strive for
excellence in character, learning and daily habits (Noorbergen, 1972).
In- an era where children were to be seen
and not heard, Mrs. White showed an experiential and intuitive understanding
for their developmental needs. “As soon as a child is capable of forming an
idea, his education should begin” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p.
26, ¶2), she wrote.
“[F]or then the mind is the most impressible, and the lessons given
are remembered (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 26, ¶3).”
She believed that young children should be neither pampered and indulged nor
ignored and deprived. She advocated for a balance in the careful instruction
of young children by loving and attentive adults (White, 1877).
Solomon
wrote, “Train up a child in the way he should go, and when he is old, he will
not depart from it” (Proverbs 22:6; White, 1954/2002, CG, p.
38, ¶2). Mrs. White understood these words to
mean “it is by degrees that the character is formed, and that the soul is
trained to put forth effort and energy proportionate to the task which is to
be accomplished” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 37, ¶2).
In
writing to parents and teachers, she said: “No work ever undertaken by man
requires greater care and skill than the proper training and education of
youth and children” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 39, ¶1). “True education is not the
forcing of instruction on an unready and unreceptive mind” (White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 41, ¶2).
“True education… has to do with the whole being, and with the whole period of
existence possible to man. It is the harmonious development of the physical,
the mental, and the spiritual powers” (White, 1903/2002,
Ed., p. 13, ¶1). Such
harmonious development is found in the study of God’s law, the Bible, nature,
service to others and “useful occupation” (White, 1903/2002,
Ed., p. 21, ¶3). Hence, the “first object of education is to
direct our minds” and those of our children to God’s revelation of Himself
(Matthew 6:22; Psalms
111:10; Proverbs 9:10; White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 16, ¶4).
In
dozens of books and hundreds of letters, Mrs. White detailed how parents and
teachers were to accomplish their high calling. She wrote instructions
dealing with the home life, classroom environment, discipline, training and
teaching methods.
In
the years since her death, the counsel from Mrs. White has repeatedly been
validated through research. The techniques she recommended over a hundred
years ago have become known as “best practices” within the early childhood
community.
For
instance, when teaching young children, Mrs. White (1903/2002, Ed.; 1954/2002, CG), recommended the use of methods such as:
·
Attention to
individual development and personal interests (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 232,
¶2)
·
Memory work and
independent thought (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 511, ¶4;
White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 230, ¶2)
·
Physical,
practical work and hands-on activities (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 220, ¶2
& pp. 207-209 & 212-213)
·
Thorough,
multi-disciplinary, well-rounded training (White, 1903/2002, Ed. p. 232, ¶4)
·
Hymns and
Scripture songs (White, 1954/2002, CG, pp. 523-524)
·
Bible and
mission stories (White, 1954/2002, CG, pp. 514-515)
·
Prayer and
reflection (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 254)
·
Nature object
lessons and studies in the various aspects of nature (White, 1954/2002, CG, pp. 46-59 & pp. 534-536)
·
Solid, valuable
knowledge (White, 1954/2002, CG, p 193)
·
Simplicity and
effectiveness (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 107, ¶2 and p. 233, ¶1)
·
Illustration
(White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 514, ¶3; (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 233, ¶1)
·
Enthusiasm and
dignity (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 233, ¶2 & 279, ¶1)
·
Well-planned
lessons with a distinct goal (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 233, ¶4)
·
Mastery learning
(White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 234, ¶1)
·
Parental
involvement (White, 1903/2002, Ed., pp. 283-286).
As another example,
one area of constant struggle for early childhood teachers is that of
discipline. Mrs. White wrote that parents and teachers should reflect the
character of Christ by:
·
Encouraging
confidence and strengthen a sense of honor (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 289,
¶3)
·
Blending
authority and affection (White, 1952/1980, AH, p. 198, ¶1)
·
Acting from
firm rules, never from impulse or passion (White, 1952/2002, AH, p. 198, ¶1)
·
Erring on the
side of mercy (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 293, ¶2)
·
Dedicating time
and attention to individual children (White, 1990, 7 MR, p. 11, ¶1 & 2)
·
Teaching habits
of carefulness and respect (White, 1993, 7 MR, p. 11, ¶1)
·
Avoiding
coldness or harshness, faultfinding or censure (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p.
291,
4)
·
Not indulging
self-indulgence or petting praise (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 37, ¶1 and p.
178, ¶1 & 2)
·
Not excusing or
tolerating tantrums (White, 1990, 7 MR, p. 11, ¶3)
·
Being just and
reasonable (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 287, ¶2)
·
Protecting
children from harm (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 460, ¶2; p. 272, ¶3)
·
Lovingly
denying children those things that are harmful or would cause injury (White,
1948, 4T, p. 140, ¶3; p. 141, ¶1)
·
Never raising the voice or hand before prayer
(White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 254)
·
Asking for
God’s blessing on the seeds sown in each child’s heart (White, 1954/2002, CG,
pp. 200-203; pp. 204-208).
The goal, of course,
is to raise godly children who are independent “thinkers, and not mere
reflectors of other men’s thought” (White, 1990, 7 MR, p. 12, ¶2; White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 17, ¶3); children who are “strong to think and to act;” “masters
and not slaves of circumstances;” “who possess breadth of mind, clearness of
thought, and the courage of their convictions” (White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 18, ¶1).
At the heart of Mrs. White’s philosophy is the idea of lovingly caring for
another’s child. Thus, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has established and
operated schools based on council received from Mrs. White in the book Education (1903/2002). In a chapter describing the training
of the children of Israel upon their deliverance from slavery in Egypt, she
outlines the recipe for true education. In abbreviated form, their education
consisted of labor, study and meditation (p. 34, ¶1). They were given the
oracles of God in order to study His character (p. 34, ¶3; p. 35, ¶1 & 4)
and learn obedience (p. 36, ¶1). Through the Divinely appointed economy, they
were to learn the value of united labor, service (p. 37, ¶3 & 4) and
worship (p. 38, ¶4). Daily activities and habits of health all centered on
their willing followership and discipline (p. 38, ¶1 & 2; p. 37, ¶5). The
organized manner in which they lived, traveled and worshiped infiltrated
every aspect of their lives (p. 39, ¶3). Through songs and routines they
affixed lessons within their minds and those of their children (p. 39, ¶2).
“If, in
their early childhood, children are perseveringly and
patiently trained in the right way, they will not form wrong habits” (White,
1954/2002, CG, p. 200, ¶4). “The
parents or teachers who give no attention to the small actions that are not
right establish those habits in the youth” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 201, ¶3); habits
that will be carried with them throughout life (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 200,
¶4 ).
|
Strengths
|
The
development of the Seventh-day Adventist educational model for early
childhood education has its foundation in a Biblical context with counsel
provided by Ellen White concerning the upbringing and purposeful training of
the young child. Three scriptural verses on which this philosophy leans upon
gives instruction to “Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness”
(Matthew 6:33, King James Version), teach the words of Holy Script
“diligently unto thy children” (Deuteronomy 6:7), and to “train up a child in
the way he should go” (Proverbs 22:6). To these admonitions, White adds that
“True education… has to do with the whole being… It is the harmonious development
of the physical, the mental, and the spiritual powers” (White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 13, ¶1).
Such harmonious development is found in the study of God’s law, the Bible,
nature, service to others and “useful occupation” (White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 21, ¶3). Hence, the “first object of education is to
direct our minds” and those of our children to God’s revelation of Himself
(Matthew 6:22; Psalms 111:10;
Proverbs 9:10; White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 16, ¶4).
The Adventist church has a
well developed educational system that is highly respected around the world.
The well developed philosophy of education is found in the book Education, by Ellen G. White. This provides
guidance and purpose in developing policies, procedures, guidelines,
curriculum, teacher preparation programs, professional development and
certification, program standards and accreditation – all the standardized
expectations for ECEC programs and ECEC teachers.
Educational
methods are also outlined in the writings of Mrs. White as well as in the
Holy Bible. How those methods are practiced, of course, can be more eclectic
and incorporate aspects of other ECE models; but being eclectic in our
practical application of Adventist methods does not change our foundational
philosophy.
|
Weaknesses
|
The Adventist church is currently in the process of formalizing
an organizational structure as it relates to Adventist ECEC programs. A firm
business and community service foundation is being developed through the drafting
of policies, guidelines, curriculum standards and employee standards,
professional development, professional certification and program
accreditation.
|
Speaking appointments are typically scheduled 12 months in
advance. To schedule a speaking appointment with Dr. Gillan
Byrne, please use the email link or call (479) 216-9771.
References
Anthroposophy. (2008, December 20). In Wikipedia,
The free encyclopedia. Retrieved December 26, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Anthroposophy&oldid=259172813
Baxter, V. & Petty, K. (2008, Fall). Preschool curricula:
Finding one that fits. Texas Child Care,
32(2), 34-39.
California
Department of Education. (1999). First Class: A Guide for Early Primary
Education.
Sacramento, CA: CDE Press.
Cleveland,
G. & Colley, S. (2003, June 4). The
future role of government in supporting early childhood education and care in
Ontario: A report to the Panel on the Role of Government in Ontario.
Commission on the Future Role of Government in Ontario, Canada.
Edwards,
C. P. (2002, Spring). Three approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and
Reggio Emilia. Early Childhood Research
and Practice 4(1). Retrieved from http://ecrp.uluc.edu/v4n1/edwards.html
Edwards,
C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (1998). The hundred languages of children:
The Reggio Emilia approach – advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Greenwood
Publishing Group. ISBN 1567503101,
9781567503104.
Epstein,
A. S. (1993). Training for quality: Improving early childhood programs
through systematic inservice training. Ypsilanti, MI: HighScope
Press.
Epstein,
A. S. (2003, September). How planning and reflection develop young children's
thinking skills. Young Children, 58(5) 28-36.
Epstein,
A. S. (2010). All about HighScope – FAQs.
Retrieved from http://www.highscope.org/Content.asp?ContentId=291
Gerhart
Mooney, C. (2000). Theories of childhood. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
Kauerz,
Kristie & McMaken, Jessica. (June, 2004). No Child Left Behind policy
brief: Implications for the early learning field. Education Commission of
the States. www.ecs.org.
Kindergarten in France. (2008, juillet 26). Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre
. (2008, July 26). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Page consultée le 17:18, août 28, 2008 à partir de http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=%C3%89cole_maternelle_en_France&oldid=31928939 . Retrieved 17:18, August 28, 2008 from http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title
=% C3% 89cole_maternelle_en_France & oldid = 31928939.
Lenart,
C. M. (2003, June). Steiner’s Chicago legacy shines brightly. Conscious Choice. Retrieved from http://www.consciouschoice.com/2003/cc1606/steinerchicago1606.html
Marcon,
R. (2002). Moving up the grades: Relationship between model and later school
success. Early Childhood Research and
Practice, (4) 1. Retrieved from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n1/marcon.html
Montessori
Foundation, The. (2008a). Lessons in grace, courtesy and community service, In
Special issue, Tomorrow’s Child:
38-39.
Montessori
Foundation, The. (2008b). Practical life. In Special issue, Tomorrow’s Child: 29-37.
Montessori,
M. (1995). The absorbent mind. New
York, NY: Henry Holt and Company. ISBN: 0-8050-4156-7.
Noorbergen, R. (1972). Ellen G White Prophet of Destiny. Connecticut: Keats Publishing,
Inc.
North
Central Regional Educational Laboratory [NCREL]. (2004) Theories of child
development and learning. Retrieved from http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/earlycld/ea7lk18.htm
Olsen,
D. (1999, February 9). Universal preschool is no golden ticket (no. 333)
Retrieved from Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org
Preschool
California and Children Now. (2004). Kids can’t wait to learn. Retrieved
from http://www.preschoolcalifornia.org/docs/pdf/pc-advocacy-report-04.pdf
Prochner,
Larry. (2003). The American Crèche: ‘Let’s do what the French do, but do it our way’. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, Vol.
4 (3): pp. 267-285.
Reggio
Emilia Approach. (2008, July 5). In Wikipedia, The free encyclopedia.
Retrieved August 29, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Reggio_Emilia_approach&oldid=223769044
Schmidt,
M. S. & Schmidt, D. C. (2008a). Montessori myths. In Special issue, Tomorrow’s Child: 11-17.
Schmidt,
M. S. and Schmidt, D. C. (2008b). Montessori vocabulary made clear. In Special
issue, Tomorrow’s Child: 18-24.
Seldin,
T. & and Epstein, P. (2003). The
Montessori way: An education for life. Sarasota, FL: The Montessori
Foundation Press. ISBN 0-9746387-0-6.
Shell,
B. (N.D.). A look at Waldorf
and Montessori education in the early childhood programs. Why Waldorf Works. Retrieved from http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/02_W_Education/documents/ALookatWaldorfandMontessori.pdf
Silber,
K. (1965) Pestalozzi: The man and his
work. (2nd ed.). London: Routledge and Kegan Paul. Retrieved
June, 2002 from: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-pest.htm
Smith,
M. (May 8, 1997). Johann Heinrich
Pestalozzi. Infed Encyclopedia. Retrieved June, 2002 from: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-pest.htm.
St.
Giermaine, J. (2008). The materials are not the ‘Method’. In Special issue, Tomorrow’s Child: 27-28.
Trostli, R. (1998). Rhythms of learning. Anthroposophical Press. Retrieved
December 28, 2008 from http://www.waldorfearlychildhood.org/articles.asp?id=3.
von
Marenholtz-Bülow, Baroness B. (1887). Erinnerungen an Fröbel (M. Mann,
Trans.) [Reminiscences of Froebel]. Boston: Lee and Shephard. Retrieved from http://www.froebelweb.org/web3000.html
Walsh,
B. A. & Petty, K. (April, 2007). Frequency of six early childhood
approaches: A 10-year content analysis of Early Childhood Education Journal. Early Childhood Education Journal, 34(5),
301-305.
Ward, William. (2001, Spring/Summer). Is
Waldorf education Christian? Why Waldorf
Works. Retrieved from http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/02_W_Education/documents/2_Is_W_Christian.pdf
White, E.G. (1877, September 6). Proper Education. The Signs of the Times. Retrieved January
21, 2009, from: http://egwdatabase.whiteestate.org/nxt/gateway.dll?f=templates$fn=default.htm$vid=default.
White,
E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 13). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 16). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 18). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 21). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 41). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1948). Missionaries in the home. In Ellen G. White Publications (Vol.
Ed.), Testimonies for the church
(Vol. 4), (pp. 140-141). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1952/1980).Reasonable desires to be gratified.
In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Adventist
Home (p. 198). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1952/1980). The family a missionary center. In
E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Adventist
Home (p. 490). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). Advantage of the early years. In E.
G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (p. 197). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White,
E. G. (1954/2002). Methods of teaching. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (Page 37). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White,
E. G. (1954/2002). Methods of teaching. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (Page 38). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1954/2002). Methods of teaching. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (Pages 38-39). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). The power of habit. In E. G. White
Publications (Eds.), Child Guidance
(p. 200). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). The power of habit. In E. G. White
Publications (Eds.), Child Guidance (p.
201). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1954/2002). Personal
Experiences in Discipline. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Child Guidance (p. 254). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1954/2002). When to begin the child’s training. In E.
G. White Publications (Eds.), Child Guidance (Page 26). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White,
E. G. (1954/2002). When to begin the child’s training. In E.
G. White Publications (Eds.), Child Guidance (Page 26). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1993). Children can learn to respect
right of others; to be molded from babyhood. In Ellen G. White Publications
(Vol. Ed.), Manuscript Releases (Vol.
7), (p. 11). Silver Spring, MD: Ellen G. White Estate. Retrieved March
3, 2009 from http://www.ellenwhite.com/.
|