This article reports the findings of a qualitative case study of two preschool teachers and their responses to a court-ordered mandate to use the High/Scope curriculum model. Analysis of the data record, which included interviews, observations, and documents, reveal that despite a framework for action, both teachers remained confused about their role and the content of the curriculum. This article suggests that the current policy strategy of using curriculum models to compensate for the lack of qualified teachers in preschool settings is operating on false and outdated logic that may also contribute to teachers implementing less than desirable practices.
Abbott v. Burke, 153 N.J. 480 (1998). Retrieved April 2, 2003, from www.edlawcenter.org/ELCPublic/AbbottvBurke/AbbotDecisions.htm
2.
Barnett, W. S. (1996). Lives in the balance: Age-27 benefit-cost analysis of the High/Scope Perry preschool program. Ypsilanti, MI: High/Scope.
3.
Barnett, W. S. (1998). Long-term effects on cognitive development and school success. In W. S. Barnett& S. S. Boocock (Eds.), Early care and education for children in poverty: Promises, practices, and long term results(pp. 11-44). Albany: State University of New York Press.
4.
Bredekamp, S., & Copple, C. (1997). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs(Rev. ed.). Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.
5.
Campbell, F. A., Pungello, E. P., Miller-Johnson, S., Burchinal, M., & Ramey, C. T. (2001). The development of cognitive and academic abilities: Growth curves from an early childhood educational experiment. Developmental Psychology, 37, 231-242.
6.
Charlesworth, R., Hart, C. H., Burts, D. C., & DeWolf, M. (1993). The LSU studies: Building a research base for developmentally appropriate practice. In S. Reifel (Ed.), Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practice(Vol. 5, pp. 3-28). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
7.
Cochran-Smith, M., & Lytle, S. L. (2001). Beyond certainty: Taking an inquiry stance on practice. In A. Lieberman,& L. Miller (Eds.), Teachers caught in the action: Professional development that matters(pp. 45-58). New York: Teachers College.
8.
Cohen, D. K.,& Barnes, C. A. (1993). Pedagogy and policy. In D. K. Cohen, M. W. McLaughlin, & J. E. Talbert (Eds.), Teaching for understanding: Challenges for policy and practice(pp. 207-239). San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
9.
The Consortium for Longitudinal Studies. (1983). As the twig is bent: lasting effects of preschool programs. Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
10.
Datnow, A.,& Castellano, M. (2000). Teachers’responses to success for all: Howbeliefs, experiences, and adaptations shape implementation. American Educational Research Journal, 37, 775-799.
11.
Espinosa, L. M. (2002). Policy brief—High quality preschool: Why we need it and what it looks like. New Brunswick, NJ: National Institute of Early Education Research.
12.
Gallagher, J. J., Rooney, R., & Campbell, S. (1999). Child care licensing regulations and child care quality in four states. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 14, 313-333.
13.
Genishi, C., Ryan, S., Ochsner, M.,& Yarnall, M. (2001). Teaching in early childhood education: Understanding practices through research and theory. In V. Richardson (Ed.), Handbook of research on teaching(4th ed., pp. 1175-1210). Washington, DC: American Educational Research Association.
14.
Goffin, S. G. (1994). Curriculum models: Reappraising the relationship. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice Hall.
15.
Helburn, S. W. (Ed.). (1995). Cost, quality, and child outcomes in child care centers. Denver: Center for Research in Economic and Social Policy, University of Colorado.
16.
Marcon, R. A. (1999). Differential impact of preschool models on development and learning of inner-city children: A three-cohort study. Developmental Psychology, 35, 358-375.
17.
Marcon, R. A. (2002). Moving up the grades: Relationship between preschool model and later school success. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 4, 1-20. Retrieved May 2, 2003, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu
18.
Masse. L. (2002). A benefit-cost analysis of the Carolina Abercedarian preschool program. Unpublished doctoral dissertation, Rutgers University, New Jersey.
19.
Miller, L. B., & Bizzell, R. P. (1983). The Louisville experiment: A comparison of four programs. In As the twig is bent: Lasting effects of preschool programs(pp. 171-200). Hillsdale, NJ: Lawrence Erlbaum.
20.
O’Brien, L. M. (1993). Teacher values and classroom culture: Teaching and learning in a rural, Appalachian Head Start program. Early Education and Development, 4, 5-19.
21.
Ryan, S., & Frede, E. (2001, April). Multi-facetted evaluation: Using quantitative and qualitative methods to inform preschool practice and policy. Paper presented at the annual meeting of the American Educational Research Association, Seattle, Washington.
22.
Saluja, G., Early, D., & Clifford, R. (2002). Demographic characteristics of early childhood teachers and structural elements of early care and education in the United States [Electronic version]. Early Childhood Research and Practice, 4(1). Retrieved October 1, 2003, from http://ecrp.uiuc.edu
23.
Schweinhart, L. (2002). Making validated educational models central in preschool standards. Retrieved from http://nieer.org/resources/research/schweinhart.pdf
24.
Schweinhart, L.,& Weikart, D. (1997). The High/Scope preschool curriculumcomparison study through age 23. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 12, 117-143.
25.
Schweinhart, L., Weikart, D.,& Larner, M. (1986). Consequences of three preschool curriculum models through age 15. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 1, 15-45.
26.
Snyder, J., Bolin, F.,& Zumwalt, K. (1992). Curriculum implementation. In P. W. Jackson (Ed.), Handbook of research on curriculum(pp. 402-435). New York: Macmillan.
27.
Stake, R. (1995). The art of case study research. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
28.
Stipek, D. J. (1993). Is child centered early childhood education really better? In S. Reifel (Ed.), Advances in early education and day care: Perspectives on developmentally appropriate practice(Vol. 5, pp. 29-52). Greenwich, CT: JAI.
29.
Stipek, D. J., Feiler, R., Byler, P., Ryan, R., Milburn, S., & Salmon, J. (1998). Good beginnings: What difference does the program make in preparing young children for school?Journal of Applied Developmental Psychology, 19, 41-66.
30.
U. S. Department of Education. (2003). Good start, grow smart: The Bush administration’s early childhood initiative. Retrieved March 21, 2003, from http://www.whitehouse.gov/infocus/earlychildhood/toc.html
31.
Walsh, D. J., Smith, M. E., Alexander, M.,& Ellwein, M. C. (1993). The curriculum as mysterious and constraining: teachers’ negotiations of the first year of a pilot program for at-risk 4year-olds. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 25, 317-332.
32.
Weikart, D. P., & Schweinhart, L. (1993) The High/Scope curriculum for early childhood care and education. In J. L. Roopnarine & J. E. Johnson (Eds.), Approaches to early childhood education(2nd ed., pp. 195-208). New York: Macmillan.
33.
Wien, C. A. (1995). Developmentally appropriate practice in real life: Stories of teacher practical knowledge. New York: Teachers College.
34.
Yin, R. (2002). Case study research: Design and methods (3rd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage.
35.
Zimiles, H. (2000). On reassessing the relevance of the child development knowledge base to education. Human Development, 43, 235-245.
