Comparison Of Early Childhood Study Frameworks Of Two Countries – UK And Singapore

Early Childhood study framework of the UK

The following study is going to critically analyse and compare two models of early years education in individuals. Early childhood studies are an important learning tool which enables children to get exposed to the very aspect of education (Britto et al. 2017). In this study, the education models of early childhood studies in Singapore will be compared to that of the European countries, especially the United Kingdom or UK.  Deeply understanding the various aspects of learning models associated with young children is important to weigh valuable insights it offers to the children. This study will mainly throw light on both German and Singapore models associated with early stage learning in children. Furthermore, the distinct features of each model will be extensively studied and analysed to draw a comparison between the two models followed in two different countries.

The well being of young children is the heart of imparting knowledge using the UK framework of early childhood studies. Teachers being trained in this regard undergo an extensive learning and teaching methodologies that proactively helps them to cater to the needs of the children (Davis & Eliott 2014). Imparting efficient learning models for children from birth to about 5 to 8 years comprises of other learning methods apart from focusing on specific aspects like cognition, pattern recognition etc. since this age group is sensitive towards learning all about the world, special attention needs to be undertaken for the children in the above- mentioned age group.

The UK framework comprises of learning and teaching methodologies that helps teachers understand the young children’s needs. Special attention is given to the way the children develop learning and exposes the importance of early experiences in young learners. Furthermore, other social concepts are taught to the teacher that help them understand the concepts of social justice, social mobility and social responsibility which subconsciously affects the teacher’s teaching experience. Learning these concepts answer all the questions of a learning teacher which puts them in a position of utmost responsibility and commitment towards catering to the young children’s needs. Along with professional skills, personal skills are also looked after for the teachers to develop influential teaching methods ideal for children. Professional skills include understanding of provision and policy along with subject knowledge and implementations methodologies. Personal skills include development of resilience and self-assurance among teachers to have an ideal teaching environment for the teachers (Pennington & Richards 2016).

The frameworks used in the United Kingdom also focus on both neoliberal aspects of childhood policy making along with educating them using the stories of democracy where early childhood centres are public areas and public resources which develop fundamental values in children (Moss 2014)

There are several distinctive features of the UK framework that help us understand the advantages of the framework helping young children during their time in learning. To start with, the framework has a strong commitment to social and economic justice (Miletzki & Broten 2017). The learning framework is designed in such a way that teachers have a high employability rate compared to that of other countries (Bradshaw 2016). Since, the United Kingdom counts as one of the most developed countries in the world, it is understandable that teachers in this very segment of teaching have secure jobs. Furthermore, it provides the teachers with options to gain experiences in areas that teachers find most suitable.

Distinctive features of the UK Framework

Learning teaching in the United Kingdom also offers teachers a flexible learning environment where teachers can have a strong foundation of various learning theories that cater to children. Using an integrated approach, the framework plans to nurture the children’s holistic development. This is very necessary as apart of a children’s early learning capabilities. It is important to make the children understand the various aspects of learning so that the child can suit the best adaptable learning experience which is embedded in their memory. This memory is then used by the children to assess every new learning activity which promotes a healthy and holistic development of the child’s mind.

United Kingdom is considered as a good choice for comparing the early childhood studies framework because the concept of early childhood education started in the European countries. Due to the high literacy rates in Europe, this emerged as a field of study during the Enlightenment and had started in the late eighteenth century. It continued to grow in the nineteenth century as a field of extensive study as a universal primary education and became a norm in the Western world (Edwards & Gandini 2018). It was emerged as a need in several countries apart from Europe and grew in countries like North America, China, Brasil, India, Jamaica, Mexico etc. Furthermore, teaching as a role and occupation slowly increased the rate of employment of both men and women in the UK and the neighbouring countries. This led to the formalization of these arrangements and resulted in the establishments of kindergartens and nurseries for educational purposes.

The basic need of these establishments was to identify and assess the psychology of learning in children (Penn 2007). Through time, the United Kingdom has reshaped its role in the development of early childhood education through various aspects. Literature supports the development of these establishments during the power of the Labour Government in 1997. It states that the government in power has been able to promote development of the private sector especially the corporate sector for childcare and education. Both by intention and by default, the government policies had not been anticipated well by the people because it observed high number of women in the workforce. This resulted in an oversupply of childhood provision which later created an imbalance among the supply of workforce and the children present in the learning environments.   

As far as the models of the framework are concerned, the effort in pioneering the concept of early education and care for young children in the United Kingdom is commendable. It is important to witness the pros of the study methodologies used by the country’s model makers that help in identifying the needs of the children in a proactive fashion (Bennett & Tayler 2016). Proactive learning is a need for addressing the children at this age. This is because there is minimal active learning happening when the brains of the children are still at their developmental changes. There is a great need to learn how learning must be done in young children. Unlike grown beings, there is learning needed to be done on the way children learn. The framework adopted by the United Kingdom and other neighbouring countries talk about the proactive aspects of learning through robust activities and life-changing experiences.

Inception of the framework

They key philosophy behind early childhood education and care is to provide a stimulating environment both for teachers and children to derive the most value out of learning experiences (Nutbrown & Clough 2014). Understanding children and their thought patterns are a critical for designing such environments. The belief systems associated with the makers of the framework are reflected on the model they create for the process of learning. Introduction to learning cycles and understanding the pace of learning in children are also the factors responsible for an ideal learning model. Other factors include the use of activities which promote holistic development in children using appropriate routines of a wide range of activities that stimulate specific parts of the brain to be developed.

There are several advantages of the framework which help us to strongly believe in the learning framework that the country’s model is based on. Firstly, the framework supports the concept of knowing the children before the process of imparting knowledge comes into play (Bloch 2018). This gives teachers an important insight for designing appropriate environments for children that harness learning among them. Furthermore, constructing an environment in itself is a commendable approach for facilitating learning in children. The use of colourful surroundings and stimulating classroom essentials result in a proactive and conducive environment for children to practice learning. The process of nurturing holistic development in children also result in giving the students an edge over other learning capabilities and specialities.

Furthermore, intensive care undertaken by teachers for the learning methodologies are another commendable aspect of the framework being followed in the European countries. Teachers conduct extensive educational research that help them understand and explore new methodologies for research and implementation. This is an important aspect of a child’s learning since there are niches that are still unexplored which can make the process of learning more streamlined (McKenney & Reeves 2018). The research goals and practicalities of the research methods are thoroughly assessed in order to implement the best suited methodology for facilitating leaning. The research methods being assessed serve as indicators whether the specific implementation will result in a major impact in the child’s learning outcomes. Rigor is another critical part of the research methodologies that teachers tend to overlook when it comes to the implementation of new design methodologies. Having considered the above mentioned factors demonstrates how relevant investigation can result in theoretical understanding to urgent educational challenges.

Both the models are committed towards the upliftment of children in their early years of development. However, the approaches used by both the countries are similar in terms of the output generated. Both the models reflect a high degree of sensitivity towards the various aspects of learning models to be facilitated. The models undertaken by Singapore reveal the importance of observing study patterns in children so as to regulate pace of learning outcomes (Entwistle & Ramsden 2015). Furthermore, the teachers in Singapore employ reflective practices instead of researching on optimizing design for optimizing the learning outcomes in children, as mentioned before, both the approaches are different but the overall outcome of these two approaches remain the same. Both the countries are driven to optimize and streamline the learning process so as to bring about the most valuable learning outcome for children.

How does this framework underpin the philosophy of Early childhood education and Care?

Teachers in Singapore employ tactical techniques for observing and assessing learning and development in children. On the other hand, the UK teaching force also employs similar methods for the analysis of learning outcomes conceived by a child in their developmental stages. Both the countries employ practices like care-giving routines so that each child gets individual attention as far as providing a safe and stimulating environment is concerned (Black et al. 2017). Singapore educational guidelines also specialize in  practices which are developmentally appropriate and culturally responsive educational frameworks. On the other hand, the UK framework focusses more on the formal outlook of education where culturally responsive educational frameworks are absent. Furthermore, the use of Christian missionaries as educational facilitators gives the English an edge over the religious aspects of the learning environment compared to the Singaporean learning frameworks (Tulasiewicz & Brock 2018).

The two frameworks reflect excellent learning models to understand the importance of early childhood education and care in all spheres of a child’s development. Both the countries are sensitive towards the theoretical underpinning of a child’s development and understanding belief system of children in the prescribed age group (0 to 8 years). How children develop and learn are critical for both country’s educational frameworks to understand how children learn on a daily basis. The involvement of the learning cycles which includes routine care and assessment of children exposes children to a friendly and stimulating environment for learning. The contribution of teachers to facilitate learning in children are present in both the countries. Using strategies like purposeful play and authentic learning contexts and strategies and use of cooperative learning strategies are used by both countries to optimize the learning experiences in children.

The key differences in the learning models of both countries comprise of the approach of reiterating the teaching methodologies. On one hand, the United Kingdom uses research to design new models for learning that employ both impact and rigor as factors for implementing newly researched learning methods. On the other hand, Singapore uses reflective learning at the teacher’s end to discover the educational drawbacks of existing processes and implement more efficient learning models by optimizing the existing models based on experience. Anther difference being observed is the use of culture/religion as tools for making a conducive and responsive environment for children to learn in. Singapore uses culturally responsive methods which are native to their country as environments which help the children in recognizing their culture and understand via cultural learning experiences. On the other hand, the United Kingdom has a more religiously stimulating environment since a significant number of educational facilitators in the country are Christian missionaries.

The learning methods employed in both the countries have been fruitful for all children, teachers and the country in the longer run. In the UK, the pre-primary participation and the gross enrolment of children to kindergartens and nurseries are more than 81%.  Furthermore, the primary school participation of the children in the UK for the years 208-2012 is more than 87%. This signifies the extent of educational development in the country. Along with statistics, the acceptance of the children’s parents is a good indication of the happiness index of the children towards primary education. Most of the parents in the UK and other neighbouring countries are happy with the educational exposure that their children get in the early ages of childhood.

Likewise, in Singapore, the literacy rates of both girls and boys are over 97% due to the established educational frameworks. The expansion of teaching in other parts of the country has been fruitful for both teachers and children simultaneously. It is commendable to observe such high literacy rates in a country which stands at power with the rest of the developed countries worldwide. As mentioned earlier, the role of parents in imparting learning is a critical aspect of a child’s learning experiences. Involvement of parents catalyze the learning experiences in children and help the parent to have an edge over their child’s education. They empathize with the learning culture being followed in the country to derive the most value for learning in young children.

Conclusion:

To summarise the comparison of the educational systems in both the countries as far as early education is concerned, both countries have shown an intensive commitment towards facilitating healthy and holistic learning in young children. It has been observed via relevant literature the importance of understanding the basic philosophy behind designing educational frameworks. The role of teachers, parents, children and policy makers all have an interconnected joining towards building a bright future for children. Even though there are few differences in the methodology of certain parts of the educational framework, both countries attain a similar result which is uplifting the learning standards in young children.

References

Bennett, J. and Tayler, C.P., 2016. Starting strong II: Early childhood education and care. OECD.

Black, M.M., Walker, S.P., Fernald, L.C., Andersen, C.T., DiGirolamo, A.M., Lu, C., McCoy, D.C., Fink, G., Shawar, Y.R., Shiffman, J. and Devercelli, A.E., 2017. Early childhood development coming of age: science through the life course. The Lancet, 389(10064), pp.77-90.

Bloc, M.N., 2018. Becoming Scientific and Professional: An Historical Perspective on the Aims and Effects of Early Education 1. In The formation of school subjects (pp. 25-62). Routledge.

Bradshaw, J. ed., 2016. The Well-being of Children in the UK. Policy Press.

Britto, P.R., Lye, S.J., Proulx, K., Yousafzai, A.K., Matthews, S.G., Vaivada, T., Perez-Escamilla, R., Rao, N., Ip, P., Fernald, L.C. and MacMillan, H., 2017. Nurturing care: promoting early childhood development. The Lancet, 389(10064), pp.91-102.

Davis, J. and Elliott, S. eds., 2014. Research in early childhood education for sustainability: International perspectives and provocations. Routledge.

Edwards, C.P. and Gandini, L., 2018. The Reggio Emilia approach to early childhood education. In Handbook of international perspectives on early childhood education (pp. 365-378). Routledge.

Entwistle, N. and Ramsden, P., 2015. Understanding student learning (Routledge revivals). Routledge.

McKenney, S. and Reeves, T.C., 2018. Conducting educational design research. Routledge.

Miletzki, J. and Broten, N., 2017. Development as freedom. Macat Library.

Moss, P., 2014. Transformative change and real utopias in early childhood education: A story of democracy, experimentation and potentiality. Routledge.

Nutbrown, C. and Clough, P., 2014. Early childhood education: History, philosophy and experience. Sage.

Penn, H., 2007. Childcare market management: How the United Kingdom government has reshaped its role in developing early childhood education and care. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(3), pp.192-207.

Pennington, M.C. and Richards, J.C., 2016. Teacher identity in language teaching: Integrating personal, contextual, and professional factors. RELC journal, 47(1), pp.5-23.

Tulasiewicz, W. and Brock, C., 2018. Christianity and educational provision in international perspective. Routledge.