‘Time for Being’: Why the Australian Early Years Learning Framework opens up new possibilities

Abstract

Many Western countries around the world have been reviewing policy and practice aimed at enhancing the quality and professional practice of early childhood education. The response has been to establish government-sanctioned curriculum frameworks based on current research and the dominant discourses of educational provision. The successful implementation of a curriculum framework relies not simply on the policy or regulatory practice, but on educators; their interpretation, knowledge and understanding of the framework; and their ability to apply it to their pedagogical practices. Australia too has introduced a new national learning framework, the Early Years Learning Framework, titled Belonging, Being and Becoming. ‘Being’ is central to the framework but what does it really mean? Our Being is part of who we are and yet is difficult to describe. This article aims to provide insights into the meaning and importance of Being in the context of early childhood education and care settings. It draws on Heidegger’s ontological explanation of the concept of Being and offers clarification on what it means to Be and why it is significant for early childhood educators and children.

Keywords

Being children curriculum educators outcomes philosophy

Introduction

The Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) is Australia’s first early childhood national curriculum framework and is regarded as a turning point in early childhood education (Elliot, 2009). The purpose of the EYLF is to guide curriculum and pedagogy in all early childhood settings and is part of the Government’s reform agenda to raise industry standards through policy and practice (Ellis, 2009; Sumsion et al., 2009). The EYLF has been a positive development for Australian early childhood educators inviting much discussion and professional reflection.

There has been an international tendency for Governments to consider a wider vision and investment in early childhood care and education (Cochran, 2011; Fleer et al., 2009). This has been informed by various studies, including brain research, that confirm children’s early life experiences have a major impact on their health, well-being and ability to learn in later life (Shonkoff, 2011). The Effective Provision of Preschool Education (EPPE) research programme in England has also informed Australian Government policy. The EPPE revealed investment in good quality care and education provides a means for reducing the cycle of disadvantage, and a better start to school (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2008). Governments globally are reconsidering early childhood policy and practice, as they realise that the early years are the most effective and cost efficient time in which to invest, to ensure all children develop to their full potential. Many countries have implemented national curriculum frameworks in the last two decades. These frameworks, however, differ according to their particular context and influences from political, historical and economic circumstances. Of the different models and approaches to curricula, Bennett (2005) outlines two categories: the pre-primary approach and the social pedagogic approach.

The pre-primary approach is underpinned by goals and outcomes relating to preparation for school, with subject areas such as literacy and mathematics. According to Cochran (2011), Belgium, the Netherlands, France and the United Kingdom (UK) fall into this category. The social pedagogic approach values open frameworks with an emphasis on children’s interests, quality interactions, and the broad areas of emotional well-being, communication and general knowledge (Bennett, 2005; Blaiklock, 2010; Dalli, 2011). In this category are the Nordic countries, New Zealand and Australia. The EYLF is an open curriculum, play based rather than subject based.

Reggio Emilia, according to Soler and Miller (2003), represents an alternative approach as it does not have a National Curriculum framework or formalised policy for curriculum. The Reggio Emilia approach has a learner-centred emphasis and offers more flexibility without centralised prescriptive goals. The pedagogy centres on well-being and the notion of the active, constructive and competent child (Cochran, 2011). Developing a collaborative partnership between the child and the adult is central in the teaching and learning process (Soler and Miller, 2003). The US approach to early childhood education also varies from Bennett’s (2005) two categories. In the United States, some funding is provided by the federal government, but early childhood education is primarily run by each of the states rather than a national system (Cochran, 2011). A variety of approaches are used in the United States including High Scope, Head Start, The Creative Curriculum, Bank Street and Project Approach.

In England, the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) outcomes based approach was recently revised with a reduction in early learning goals from 69 to 17. The 2012 EYFS places a stronger emphasis on children’s health, personal, emotional and social development (Department for Education, 2012). Even with these changes of focus to children’s healthy development and social/emotional well-being, tensions arise. On one hand, the EYFS espouses the principle of the ‘unique child’; on the other hand, this is contradicted by nationally imposed assessment standards through numerical outcomes (Roberts-Holmes, 2012, p. 36).

The New Zealand early childhood curriculum, Te Whariki (Ministry of Education, 1996), has been highly praised internationally for its innovative approaches to curriculum and the values it upholds (Cullen, 1996; Farquhar and Fleer, 2007; Nuttall JG and New Zealand Council for Educational Research, 2003). While the Te Whariki has had a major impact influencing curriculum decisions in many countries and is known for its good quality practice in early childhood pedagogy, there are also some criticisms. Blaiklock (2010) reports that the limited detail in curriculum subject content areas and the lack of direction for educators on how to facilitate children’s learning is of concern. A study undertaken by Hedges and Jones (2012) found that educators have difficulty in articulating and understanding the concept of ‘working theories’, which is one of the two learning outcomes. Te Whariki provides little guidance on working theories and Hedges and Jones (2012) are currently aiming towards presenting a deeper understanding to inform educators in their practice. The Te Whariki has been referred to as an open curriculum, one that requires critical reflection to bridge the gap between curriculum ideals and intentional practice (Dalli, 2011). An open curriculum can be a disadvantage if educators are inexperienced and lack theoretical knowledge and understanding to implement its principles (Farquhar and Fleer, 2007).

Even though the EYFS and Te Whariki represent opposite ends of Bennett’s (2005) continuum of models, the pre-primary approach and the social pedagogic approach, critics have recommended the same suggestion. That is, that the quality of the educator is critical to the successful implementation of any learning framework. Cullen (1996) states that the theoretical bases of a curriculum may be beyond the understanding of many educators; therefore, they will need time and assistance to conceptualise new practices. Nuttall and Edwards (2007, p. 13) argue that just being able to use the language of a curriculum ‘does not guarantee that educators are equipped to interpret curriculum frameworks’. It is important that research is translated into practical actions and is focused on teaching examples to create improved practices (Siraj-Blatchford, 2009). To improve pedagogical practices, advocates suggest that educators develop clearer theoretical understandings through publications, professional development courses and inclusion of research findings in training course materials for pre-service teacher training (Hedges and Jones, 2012; Roberts-Holmes, 2012; Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2008). Similarly, this applies to the Australian context and the newly implemented learning framework, the EYLF. According to Fenech et al. (2012), high-quality practices in Australia will be driven by a learning community led by individual educators and not just by a regulatory reform. However, for educators to successfully follow through curriculum frameworks, they need a sound understanding and grounding of the theory behind the practice. The next section of this article aims to do this and provides insights into the pedagogical practices of one particular notion of the Australian early years learning framework.

Belonging, Being and Becoming are the underpinning elements that make up the structure of the EYLF, and provide a vision for principles, practices and pedagogy in everyday curriculum decision-making (Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR), 2009). However, Being is a relatively new term in the early childhood field and one that many educators may struggle to understand, interpret and apply in their everyday work. Parents and educators tend to be more attuned to the concepts of Belonging and Becoming and thus tend to overlook the importance of Being as the means by which Belonging and Becoming are achieved. Defining our Being is what philosophers have been trying to determine for centuries, and throughout his work Martin Heidegger (1924, 1927, 1929) was challenged by the question of the meaning of Being. This article focuses on the concept of Being and aims to provide both philosophical and practical insights into its significance in early childhood and care (ECEC) settings.

Philosophical notions of Being

Our existence and what it means to Be is often taken for granted. Our Being transcends all things and yet it is one of the most difficult to describe. Being has been the central concern of thinkers and writers from the branch of philosophy known as metaphysics and, more particularly, the sub-branch of ontology. Despite this, as Heidegger (1927 [1962]) pointed out, ‘the meaning of Being is still veiled in darkness’ (p. 23). To understand the significance of Being in the context of the EYLF, it is helpful to briefly trace some of the history of thinking about Being.

In the 4th century bc, Aristotle (cited in Miller, 1999) referred to Being as souls having substance that are made of matter. He made the distinction between the substances of plants, animals and humans. Furthermore, Aristotle claimed that human beings have knowledge and that they act on the basis of thought and choice (Miller, 1999). Thomas Aquinas (Wippel, 2000) in the 13th century ad disagreed with Aristotle’s definition of Being as substance because substance is made of matter relating to science and chemistry. Instead he referred to Being as existing, a source given by God (Wippel, 2000). Likewise, Hegel (quoted in Haas, 2007) from the 18th century applied theology referring to Being as absolute spirit, and God as the Being of Beings. Looking back at this historical overview, one can see how the views about Being have changed over time. By the 20th century, Heidegger was still asking the same question, what does it mean to Be?

The German existentialist Heidegger used philosophy to open up the question of Being to provide meaning to one’s everyday existence. Heidegger (1924, 1927, 1929) believed that philosophers were asking the wrong kind of questions (Stokes, 2004) – centring their investigations on our Being as an entity or a substance with properties, rather than asking about Being itself: how one exists and encounters things. Heidegger argued that we are not simply a physical property, but exist with others in our active engagement with the world. This perspective views Being not in terms of physics, chemistry or biology, but rather in our everyday dealings with the world. This is what Heidegger called ontic knowledge: knowledge pertaining to the distinctive nature of particular types of entity as they are (Van Manen, 1990). Hence, understanding experience is situated in a world and in ways of Being.

Heidegger (1927[1962]:22) stated ‘that “Being” is the “most universal” concept’. If we recognise that every person has their own Being and that each person is unique then the realisation for Being has many possibilities. Heidegger (1927 [1962]) described a person as ‘coming into Being’; in other words, one is continually changing and has many possibilities of who one may become. In his writing, Heidegger constantly referred to the German word Dasein meaning ‘Being in the world’ or ‘our existence’. According to Merleau-Ponty (1942 [1965]), Dasein was the definition of man according to contemporary philosophical doctrines. It means our Being is thrown into the world amidst other things and Beings. Heidegger saw Dasein as a happening or a life story unfolding from birth to death (Guignon, 1993). Hence, as part of Being in the world – ‘belonging to the world’ or ‘within-the-world’ (Heidegger, 1927 [1962], p. 65), others will influence our Being: who one is, and who one becomes within the world.

Being and childhood

Childhood is seen as a vital period of our unfolding human existence. The life experiences of children are part of their Being, or part of their Dasein. Children begin to understand about their own Being from an early age. Consequently, Being is a prominent inclusion in the EYLF and a very important one. According to Heidegger, the comprehension of our Being is influenced by the interactions of others in the world around us (Mulhall, 2000). Children as they grow up are individuals. They acquire particular cultural traits from those who are most influential in their lives, and for some children, a considerable amount of time is spent in early childhood settings. Within the social framework of existing with others, we inhabit a specific culture adopting the concepts, roles and functions as we interact in the environment (Mulhall, 2000).

The environment and the people one comes into contact with influence the prospect of ‘who’ one becomes. It is the engagement with one another and the circumstances of living that define a person. Hence, our Being is a process that begins in early childhood and continues throughout our lives. Who a person is relates to one’s existence in the present sense of time, but will, of course, change according to life’s unfolding events. These environments will impact on a child’s Being and who a child becomes. Therefore, how we arrange the environment and the relationships within these settings will strongly influence the possibilities of Being. In the EYLF document (DEEWR, 2009), one of the principles that underpins practice is secure, respectful and reciprocal relationships. Our day-to-day interactions with children are therefore extremely relevant as everyone’s Being is different and shaped by what happens in our daily living. Providing secure, respectful and reciprocal relationships enhances children’s emotional and spiritual well-being, which is the basis of their Being and Becoming.

It is, therefore, important for educators to fully grasp the meaning of Being, not only to understand their own Being but to be responsive to the unfolding of children as they are becoming. As educators, we need to be sensitive and mindful of the Heideggerian notion of Being and its importance to children’s development, health and well-being. Being is the core of our existence, and thus fundamental to early childhood. The purpose of this article is to address Being and for Being to be considered as an equal player to Belonging and Becoming. This article draws on examples and vignettes from an in-depth qualitative study of young children’s conceptions of time, as well as from my own experiences as a practising educator, to highlight the significance of Being in ECEC settings. Pseudonyms have been used throughout.

Research methods

The methodology used for the study from which the examples are drawn was phenomenological research, a mode of enquiry through description, reflection and interpretation that explains the meaning of phenomena from the perspective of the individual (Morse and Richards, 2002). Interpretive phenomenology was chosen to gain a multifaceted view and to ‘understand the subjective world of human experience’ (Cohen et al., 2007, p. 21). In this method, the enquiry is focused on seeing things as they appear to be, from the inside, understanding the essence and unpacking the meaning. Using a descriptive method such as phenomenology exposes everyday experiences that have been taken for granted. The existential approach to phenomenology used was similar to that of Heidegger: examining the lived experience in human existence and ways of ‘being in the world’ (Van Manen, 1990, p. 184).

Site and participants

Examples are drawn from my observations of two families living in a rural township in New South Wales, Australia. The observations took place in the families homes and wider community to gain a meaningful perspective of their everyday lives. An important aspect of this research was to consider and to reflect the views of children as competent and active participants in their world. Christensen and James (2000) point to a paradigm shift in research work with children – repositioning them as the subjects rather than the objects of research. The life world of a child includes his/her social and cultural context within the family and community. Therefore, the children were observed in family contexts to gain a more holistic view of their lived experiences. The experiences of adults differ from those of children and Van Manen (1990) suggests that ‘the lifeworld of the child has different experiential qualities from the lifeworld of the adult’ (p. 84). When researching children, it is necessary to understand childhood and to give account of children’s everyday lives (Christensen and James, 2000). Part of my rationale also involved listening to the children to really hear what they were saying. To do this effectively, I was a participant observer engaging in their conversation, games and daily practices.

With regard to the selection of the participants, local Family Day Care staff recommended several families who had at least one child less than 5 years of age. Two families were chosen for the study and while it was not one of the selection criteria, it was discovered later that one family led a particularly busy lifestyle, whereas the other was more relaxed. In the relaxed family, neither parent was regularly employed. The father, Colin, chose to stay at home to care for the three children. The mother, Kathy, studied and worked part time. They had three children: Kristy was 7 years old, Mia 4 and Jay 1. The second family consisted of Linda and Charlie and their two girls: Alyssa was 7 years of age at the time of the observations and Sophie 4 years old. The parents owned and managed a restaurant while the mother worked part time as a nurse. Information from the two families was collected through close observation combined with written notes. Perl (1996) suggested that in a phenomenological study, the raw data are personal experiences, which can be gathered through observing, reading, writing and living. Observation notes were taken at each visit, with this raw data being written up immediately after I returned home. I reviewed, reflected on and interpreted these notes after each visit.

Analytical approaches

A hermeneutic phenomenological approach allowed me to make sense of the human experiences I was observing. These observations of the everyday events were written in a narrative way and then recontextualized. As the observations proceeded, more questions arose. Through recursive writing, an iterative process was implemented using a forward and backward arc. Interpretation, using existing preconceptions, pre-understandings or prejudices, made sense of the data in a forward arc (Ellis, 1998). Using a backward arc, the information was then evaluated, offering different understandings to raise other possibilities. A backward arc can be used to look for confirmation, contradictions and inconsistencies and to try out other conceptual frameworks (Ellis, 1998). I reflected, wrote and read other studies that related to the observations to get an essence of the material. It also enabled me to set up an argument against other views. Throughout the process, I was writing, reading and revisiting the experiences in a backward and forward journey, using theoretical perspectives from Heidegger (1927), Levinas (1974), Foucault (1977) and Van Manen (1990). Interpretations are continuously revised as more of the text is grasped by the interpreter and reflected upon. Ellis (1998) refers to interpretive inquiry as an ‘unfolding spiral’ where each loop resembles data collection and interpretation (p. 20).

Through recursive narrative writing, everyday experiences come to life and new knowledge emerges from interpretations of these texts of life (Van Manen, 1990). Articulating interpretations in this way is referred to as hermeneutic phenomenology, as it is both descriptive and interpretive of the meaningful lived experience (Van Manen, 1990: 180). Hermeneutic enquiry has the potential to uncover meanings and intentions that may go unrecognised and gains a deeper understanding of the text (Crotty, 1998: 91).

With phenomenological enquiry, questions of reliability have been posed about analysis that is subjective, as meanings are not fixed and can be interpreted in many ways. In particular, listening to and documenting children’s accounts rely on the researchers’ interpretations. Alldred and Burman (2005) state that both the ‘hearing’ and the ‘analysis’ of what children say raise complex questions about epistemology and asks who is the ‘knower’? (p. 187). The analysis can be tainted with the view of the researchers’ personal judgements, and therefore, risk the validity of the interpretation. Recognising these limitations, I have acknowledged my role in the analysis and used a variety of sources to demonstrate similar perspectives. Also, I have sought the clarification of a wide range of theorists to substantiate the views expressed. What I have attempted in this research is to describe phenomena to generate further questioning for discussion, rather than provide definitive answers. Phenomenology is different from other methodologies where results are obtained; rather, it seeks to provide a deeper understanding or awakening (Van Manen, 1990).

In the following sections, I will present some of the data findings from my in-depth study to illustrate the importance of Being in ECEC settings. Selected vignettes have been used to show how young children see the world and build an understanding of their own Being. I will then discuss these implications and the effect they may have on educators, and finally, how we can move forward with the EYLF using this knowledge.

Recognising Being to promote a sense of agency

Our Being becomes the unique set of characteristics that makes up our individuality. Knowledge of the self is ongoing and is a preoccupation of life (Fox, 2009). Our Being is a basis of self-awareness. The sense of self and establishment of an identity becomes as a child grows. This relates to the EYLF learning outcome that ‘Children have a strong sense of identity’ (DEEWR, 2009: 21). As educators, we can encourage children to make choices and decisions and to value their growing sense of identity and agency. The construct of agency includes taking initiative, rising to challenges and trying to influence events, all necessary elements that impact one’s well-being (Roberts, 2011). Individuals are often able to make active choices in the construction of their lives; however, some institutional practices are more powerful than others.

On one of my family visits I was able to see how school life was already impacting on Kristy. The two girls, Kristy and Mia, were drawing and in Kristy’s picture of herself she was smiling. I asked about her hair as it was very pronounced and stood out in the context of her drawing. Kristy said, ‘It is very frizzy because I haven’t brushed it yet. Today I slept in and was late for school’. I asked her how that made her feel and she replied: ‘I felt really rushed, but I felt excited to go to school’. Mia was drawing a picture of a mermaid and I asked her if she ever had to hurry? Mia did not get a chance to talk as Kristy answered for her. Kristy said,

She doesn’t have to hurry, not much. It doesn’t matter if she is late or not. But for me it does matter. I have to go to places like school. I need a note if I am away from school. If you are good and don’t get detention you get to go to a movie. This time we went to Charlie and the Chocolate Factory.

This example demonstrated the influence and power of institutions in determining how the notion of time is conceived for young children.

For Kristy, going to school and being on time has become an important priority in her life, and has been instilled through the belief systems and discourses that regulate her. Discourse can influence how we act in the world: the way we speak, think, feel, act and be (MacNaughton, 2005: 8). Children’s lives are embedded within social and cultural structures of a given society, and, therefore, are subject to influences from their environment. Kristy has adopted the rules conforming to cultural practices. One particular constraint for Kristy was the school starting time. Mia is 4 years old and does not go to school so, according to Kristy, has no reason to rush in the mornings. It is suggested by Mulhall (2000) ‘that Heidegger conceives of the human way of being as essentially conditioned’ (p. 61). Foucault referred to institutional practices as normalising behaviour and that life processes are shaped by the implementation of this power (Foucault, 1977). It is important to recognise these normalising behaviours that impede our everyday relations with young children.

As part of our being in the world, our dealings or concerns absorb us as we become preoccupied in the tasks that take us away from our true self. However, we can resist becoming conditioned through awareness of our own individuality, our own Being. Children, as they become more self-aware, can choose not to conform to the expectations of others but to seek out their own pathway. Educators have the responsibility to provide children with the ability to make choices and develop autonomy. They can become active agents in the construction of their own lives. By recognising children as having agency, as individuals who construct and determine their lives, an equitable balance of power can be maintained and used to support children in positive ways.

Having an understanding of Being to support reciprocity

Developing positive relationships is a central principle of the EYLF document. It states,

Educators who give priority to nurturing relationships and providing children with consistent emotional support can assist children to develop the skills and understandings they need to interact positively with others. (DEEWR, 2009: 12)

However, it is essential for our Being that our relationships are both respectful and reciprocal.

Levinas (1974 [1981]) recognised Being, as does Heidegger; however, he stated, ‘but being must be understood on the basis of beings other’ (p. 16). ‘Other’ is a significant word in this quote. What Levinas was proposing here was a link between Being to ‘the proximity of one to the other’ and that our Being is in the presence of another person (p. 15). In this relationship occurs a responsibility to the other person. Levinas (1974 [1981]) refers to ‘the-one-for-the-other’ where the responsibility for the other is the, for, in the relationship (p. 100). To be respectful of a child is when we are aware of not conforming them into the same as another individual. Van Manen (2002) referred to this as being discerning and using tact through pedagogical thoughtfulness.

An example of having responsibility for the other was observed in the interaction between father and daughter. Charlie had brought home an old hockey stick and cut it down to a size to suit 4-year-old Sophie. They were out in the back yard hitting the ball to each other, with Charlie giving hints on how to hold the stick and how to stop the ball first, then hitting it. They did this only a few times and Sophie was just starting to grasp this skill when she stopped and said to her father: ‘Can I ride my scooter now?’ Charlie was taken aback and perhaps a little let down at this response. He had thought she would have at least played for a little longer. Charlie gave a surprised laugh and said, ‘Okay’. Charlie did not insist that she continue playing hockey and went along with her request to change the game, even though he had gone to a lot of trouble to get the hockey stick and cut it to size for Sophie. Charlie continued to play, being led by Sophie. Together they both rode scooters and Charlie offered assistance and encouragement whenever Sophie struggled to balance.

In this case, Charlie responded to the interests of his daughter, leaving aside his own aspirations. His motives were based on his love and care for Sophie, acting on behalf of her well-being. Roberts (2011, p. 202) refers to Charlie and Sophie’s example as ‘companionable learning’, the mutual state of intersubjectivity where they were both learning together ‘in an equal, reciprocal dialogue’. Charlie put aside his authority in this situation for the well-being of his child and demonstrated pedagogical responsibility. Having pedagogical influence over a child, according to Van Manen (2002, p. 70), is when ‘the authority is based not on power, but on love, affection and internalised sanction on the part of the child’. Charlie recognised Sophie’s needs and desires and such actions assisted in developing effective relations with his children.

In our role as early childhood educators, thoughtfulness and pedagogical reflection is a means of counteracting power relations between competing and compliant subjects. Educators who think carefully about their practices will show respect and genuine feeling for the children in their care. If we are to draw out the true potential of children, we are thoughtful of the feelings and position of the other. This is what Levinas (1974 [1981]) proposed as having alterity for the other. It can be achieved by setting aside self-interest so as to devote full attention to the care and education of the children. When we are attuned to children, it demonstrates openness to their unique Being and a respect for the rights of that Being. The EYLF document (DEEWR, 2009) discusses being attuned to children’s thoughts and feelings but Levinas (1974 [1981]) provides a way of how we can be attuned so as to ensure the healthy development of one’s Being.

A child’s perspective of Being

Young children too can begin to understand the possibilities of life and what it is to exist. Using phenomenological descriptions I will explore the notion of Being from a child’s perspective. One afternoon when I visited Kristy at her home she was keen to show me her Tamagochi – a small electronic toy that simulates an animal or pets and its owner needs to keep it alive by feeding it and keeping it happy by playing games with it and cleaning up after it. I became aware that she was discovering about how, as a Being, we can live or die. Kristy explained to me how the various functions operated and that she had just learned how to get it to roll over. Kristy realised that she held the responsibility for the existence of the Tamagochi. If she did not care for it by feeding it regularly, it would die. Likewise she knew that even though it was a toy, for survival it needed her support and that she also had to entertain it to keep it happy.

Kristy was reflecting on her own life experiences as a basis for operating the Tamagochi. Perhaps she had associated the idea of the toy learning to roll over with her play experiences and that this is what would make the Tamagochi happy. Keeping the toy happy was just as important to the toys survival as was feeding and cleaning up after it. Arguably, Kristy was making connections about her own Being and the artificial Being of the toy. When considering the lived experiences of young children, one is reminded that they too are humans coming into Being. To consider the meaning of Being, one needs to understand that we are more than just objects.

Existence and the potential for Being according to Heidegger (1927 [1962]) begin as a happening unfolding from birth that is stretched out between life and death. Kristy has identified with temporality in the life of the Tamagochi, which Heidegger (1927 [1962], p. 375) sees as the ontological clarification of the ‘connectedness of life’. It is through awareness of our Being that we can become connected to our world. When we understand the notion of Being, we can then implement the EYLF learning outcome ‘Children are connected and contribute to their world’ (DEEWR, 2009: 25). It is through experiences of Being that we can develop our identity and become active contributors to our world.

Being in the moment

Heidegger (1927 [1962]) explained that in our lives there should be time for being in the moment as it is an essential part of our Being. Very young children do not know how to tell the time, or read a clock, nor are they concerned with how much or how long. Time is basically stretches of moments and it is the ‘now’ time that is the most important. An example of how children easily slip into this ‘now’ time was when I observed Kristy and Mia involved in imaginative play at their magic tree. It was a beautiful old tree that had fallen over and yet was still living, with new branches reaching upwards, and hence the name magic tree, as the girls realised that it was out of the ordinary. It was a large tree that was suitable for climbing with many lower branches just the right height for the girls to access. The tree, when it had fallen down, created lots of areas that were like spaces for rooms and provided an atmosphere that was almost ethereal. The girls spent a lot of their time making up all sorts of imaginary games. The tree was a fascination for them. It was a place where they could play uninterrupted amidst a backdrop of fantasy and make believe. It was a place where time stood still. The girls were not aware of the time: They were fixed on being in the moment.

The emphasis on how young children use their time in enjoying the now or present experience is more important than the why or the where. Heidegger (1924 [1992]: 22E) referred to this as ‘time is the “how”’. It is what one does in those now moments that are so much more meaningful than the measuring of that time. To rush ahead and be always thinking of what happens next denies one the possibility of true engagement in the now time. Nothing else mattered to the girls when playing in the magic tree; they were focused on the purpose.

Heidegger (1927 [1962]) has emphasised the importance of Dasein’s existence to have time to simply Be. There are moments when adults like to have some time alone, just to Be without the feeling of being watched or regulated. Children too benefit from such opportunities. However, most of a child’s day in early childhood programmes is highly regulated and watched over by adults, allowing few opportunities for children to have their own time and space. Early childhood educators play a pivotal role in how a child’s day is orchestrated. Educators would benefit from tuning in with a child’s understanding of time to fully respect the remarkable Beings they are now, and to put less emphasis on what they are becoming.

Routines that are constructed around adult time do not necessarily consider a child’s sense of time. The daily schedule in young children’s programmes is primarily designed to suit the needs of the adults. One example is when the educator makes the decision to stop the play that is happening to have morning tea. With careful and mindful planning that has a deep understanding of young children’s notion of time, it is possible to offer programmes that respond to children’s use of time. Thoughtfully observing children, and listening to them, provides cues as to when morning tea would be appropriate. Sharing decisions about use of time with children would redress the imbalance of power that currently does a disservice to children’s ways of Being. Heidegger (1927 [1962]) warns that Dasein, our Being, is vulnerable to becoming lost in the world of the other. He encourages one to be true to one’s own Dasein. Levinas (1974 [1981]) suggests having responsibility for the other in an ethics of care approach would bring a new meaning to how routines operate. Routines and schedules can be adjusted to allow children the opportunity to develop their play themes without the sense of hurrying to quickly move on to the next part of the programme. Children need time to become fully immersed in the flow of their play so that multiple complex roles and themes can evolve. Extended periods of time to elaborate on play also support children to Be in the moment, in the now of time (Heidegger, 1927 [1962]).

Recognising the importance of play as a way of Being

Play traditionally underpins the foundations of an early childhood curriculum (Hedges, 2000; Piscitelli, 1992). The importance of play is well documented in the EYLF as a way a child learns, tests out ideas, solves problems and builds new understandings (DEEWR, 2009). However, what needs to be discussed is how play is a necessary way for children to enjoy Being. This changes the focus from play as a way of learning to play to a way of Being that it is essential for emotional and spiritual well-being. What should be considered is how young children learn about everyday life through play. Everyday events in a child’s life, coupled with the playful interactions between children and children and adults, can be a source for learning (Anning, 2004). We cannot underestimate the value of such experience because it is ‘through play children make sense of the world around them and work through new experiences, ideas and feelings’ (Carlsson-Paige, 2008, p. 44). Heidegger (1927 [1962]) also emphasised the importance of everyday experiences, in particular as a way of learning about oneself, in the primordial understanding of one’s existence. We understand our Being through our everydayness. When a child is fully immersed in the present, he or she is in the centre of everydayness.

Heidegger (1927 [1962]) proposed an authentic way of living where we consider the quality of our existence. In this way, children are valued for who they are now and not who they will become. Many believe that early academic learning will give children a head start and equip them for a better future. A too early focus on early academic learning can become an inauthentic way of living that focuses on a means-to-an-end existence for the child. The child is denied many of the authentic experiences of early childhood. What is also missing is time for a child to simply Be, and spend time in the here and now. An example of such a situation is shown in the following observation of Ben.

An educator was sitting at the table and calling the children over one by one to complete the worksheet. When Ben was called, he objected saying that he wanted to keep playing doctors. Several children were involved in this dramatic play based around a doctor’s surgery and Ben was the current patient. After much persistence from the educator, Ben went to the table to complete the task, all the while watching the happenings of the other children. Calling Ben away from his dramatic play interrupted the flow of the play. Ben’s objection demonstrated his sense of agency and the resistance to submit to the educator’s request. The encouragement from the educator was that the worksheet be completed so Ben could take it home to show his mother. This was an expectation of every child in the room that morning. This type of situation may have happened to many children at some point in time where the rich learning potential of the play event was not supported. Reflecting on the circumstances, this educator may have chosen to do things differently. She perhaps could have allowed the child to be present in the moment and be fully involved in a meaningful and motivating experience of his own choosing. When the agenda is future oriented and evidence driven, opportunities for being fully present in the here and now are lost.

Unfortunately, the educator was grappling with a number of issues. There are a lot of demands placed on educators to transition children quickly from one activity to another. Also, there is added pressure from an ‘outcomes’ focus within education and making sure every child has achieved a certain benchmark in a required timeframe. As well, there is the expectation from parents in producing tangible artefacts that could be taken home as evidence of what was learned that day. Bodrova and Leong (2007) suggest that the skills children need for success in reading and mathematics can be gained through an effective early childhood programme with a play-based curriculum and that ‘preacademic skills should not be the main focus of preschool curriculum’ (p. 138).

Play that is self-initiated allows the child to become completely absorbed in the experience and provides satisfaction in this involvement. Motivation and intense involvement bring about deep level learning as the child is urged from within to explore through persistent mental activity where they are operating at the limits of their capabilities (Laevers, 2005). Ben’s dramatic play, driven by his own interest, was an avenue for growth and development, whether it be in science or maths concepts, language and literacy or social, emotional or physical development. Perhaps if the dramatic play event that Ben was engaged in had been supported through authentic and sensitive engagement by the educator and then photographed and documented, it could have highlighted to the parents the specific value of what he was learning. Having a document like the EYLF that has an emphasis placed on Being enables educators to build flexibility into their planning and to be able to make the shift in allowing children time for play and for being in the here-and-now.

Replacing outcomes with possibilities for authentic ways of Being

The existence of human life, according to Heidegger (1927 [1962]), can be either authentic or inauthentic. When we live authentically, we take charge of ourselves by making time for what the situation demands. We are not always looking to the future. When we live authentically, we take control of our lives and are true to ourselves. Authenticity is referred to as ‘a way of conducting our lives rather than a doctrine concerning what we should aim at becoming’ (Fox, 2009: 154). Heidegger (1927 [1962]) was concerned about constantly considering future perspectives. Australia is not unlike other countries where education has a focus on outcomes and is driven by pressure from National Testing. These demands produce a trickle-down effect from government, to schools, and onto educators. Outcomes are a way of looking to the future rather than letting a child enjoy the pleasures of the moment and the possibilities that may occur in the everyday experiences of living. Maybe we could refer to the learning outcomes in the EYLF document as ‘possibilities’ rather than outcomes.

Metcalfe and Game (2008) challenged the widespread view that education is a preparation for life. Such a view suggests that adulthood, when we are no longer dependent on education and knowledge, is the ultimate achievement. It undermines our ability to live mindfully and wholly in our present state. It is through our ability to acknowledge and appreciate the here and now and be fully present that we can truly fulfil ourselves (Metcalfe and Game, 2008). In Nordic ECEC settings, Kristjansson (2006) emphasises that children are not rushed through childhood and the focus is on the here and now perspective. Play is considered as very important within the education system, particularly free play (Kristjansson, 2006). In many of the Nordic countries, children do not start formal school till age 7, and yet perform very well compared with other nations. Childhood is a special time of life and it is important to value each stage of life rather than become focused on the future, enjoy the time that is here and now.

It is the responsibility of educators to establish an authentic environment that allows children more time for being in the now. Designated spaces that are familiar and secure provide for a child’s authentic way of learning and the possibility to be in the moment as they themselves can determine the choice of area and the time they decide to stay there. Children are able to self-select what they want to play, according to their own preferences, so as the play itself becomes the central importance and not the schedule (Jones et al., 2001). Giving children choices within the day allows them to regulate time for themselves and not through time-measuring devices. Slowing down and becoming involved in authentic activities with the children, as well as engaging in meaningful dialogue around things of interest to them, creates a feeling of calm and connectedness that sustains an appreciation of just Being in the moment. Allowing children time and space is also essential for children’s well-being, and Roberts (2011) suggests providing ‘down time’ for children to reflect and process what has been happening (p. 202). Many of these strategies are not new ideas, but nevertheless could be rekindled in an effort to recognise a child’s Being. Outside pressures can sidetrack best practice and the introduction of the EYLF provides the impetus to adjust our thinking. Considering how we plan for children from a Heideggerian perspective will help us develop opportunities for children to Be in the moment and to enjoy an authentic way of living.

Conclusion

In this article, I have outlined the notion of Being, drawing on Heidegger’s theoretical framework. To recognise that every person has their own Being and that each person is unique affirms that Being has many possibilities. Who one becomes as a Being occurs through the choices made and the pathways followed in life. Therefore, the role of the educator is crucial in facilitating a child’s ability to Be. This can happen by being in tune with the personal rhythms of individual children, being flexible and allowing time for the children to be in the moment. The introduction of the EYLF now explicitly enables educators to make the shift to reframe their understanding and to advocate the notion of Being. When educators value an authentic existence, they will strive to assist children to engage with the events of life in an authentic way. Children can be provided with opportunities that allow for time: time to be in the moment, time to play, time to be with others, time to simply Be.

Footnotes

Declaration of Conflicting Interests

The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

Funding

The author(s) received no financial support for the research, authorship, and/or publication of this article.

References

Alldred

Burman

(2005) Analysing children’s accounts using discourse analysis. In: Green

Hogan

(eds) Researching Children’s Experience: Approaches and Methods. London: SAGE, pp. 175–198.

Anning

(2004) The co-construction of an early childhood curriculum. In: Anning

Cullen

Fleer

(eds) Early Childhood Education: Society and Culture. London: SAGE, pp. 57–68.

Bennett

(2005) Curriculum issues in national policy-making. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 13(2): 5–23.

Blaiklock

(2010) Te Whariki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum: is it effective? International Journal of Early Years Education 18(3): 201–212.

Bodrova

Leong

(2007) Tools of the Mind: The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education. Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Education.

Carlsson-Paige

(2008) Reclaiming play: helping children learn and thrive in school. Exchange 180: 44–48.

Christensen

James

(2000) Researching children and childhood: cultures of communication. In: Christensen

James

(eds) Research with Children: Perspectives and Practices. London: Falmer Press, pp. 1–9.

Cochran

(2011) International perspectives on early childhood education. Educational Policy 25(1): 65–91.

Cohen

Manion

Morrison

(2007) Research Methods in Education. London: Routledge.

10.

Crotty

(1998) Foundations of Social Research. Crows Nest, NSW, Australia: Allen & Unwin.

11.

Cullen

(1996) The challenge of Te Whariki for future developments in early childhood education. Delta 48(1): 113–126.

12.

Dalli

(2011) A curriculum of open possibilities: a New Zealand kindergarten teacher’s view of professional practice. Early Years: An International Research Journal 31(3): 229–243.

13.

Department for Education (2012) Statutory framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage: setting the standards for learning, development and care for children from birth to five. Available at: http://www.foundationyears.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2012/07/EYFS-Statutory-Framework-2012.pdf (accessed 21 January 2013).

14.

Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations (DEEWR) (2009) Belonging, Being and Becoming: the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Available at: www.deewr.gov.au/EarlyChildhood/Policy_Agenda/Quality/Pages/EarlyYearsLearningFramework.aspx (accessed 30 July 2009).

15.

Elliot

(2009) Moving forward with the Early Years Learning Framework. Every Child 15(4): 2.

16.

Ellis

(1998) Interpretive enquiry as a formal research process. In: Ellis

(ed.) Teaching from Understanding: Educator as Interpretive Enquirer. New York: Garland Publishing, pp. 15–33.

17.

Ellis

(2009) Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Every Child 15(4): 3.

18.

Farquhar

Fleer

(2007) Developmental colonisation of early childhood education in Aotearoa/New Zealand and Australia. In: Keesing-Styles

Hedges

(eds) Theorising Early Childhood Practice: Emerging Dialogues. Castle Hill, NSW, Australia: Pademelon Press, pp. 27–51.

19.

Fenech

Giugini

Bown

(2012) A critical analysis of the National Quality Framework: mobilising for a vision for children beyond minimum standards. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood 37(4): 5–14.

20.

Fleer

Anning

Cullen

(2009) A framework for conceptualising early childhood education. In: Anning

Cullen

Fleer

(eds) Early Childhood Education: Society and Culture. 2nd ed. London: SAGE, pp. 175–190.

21.

Foucault

(1977) Discipline and Punish: The Birth of the Prison (trans. Sheridan

). London: Penguin Books.

22.

Fox

(2009) The Remarkable Existentialists. New York: Humanity Books.

23.

Guignon

(1993) Introduction. In: Guignon

(ed.) The Cambridge Companion to Heidegger. New York: Cambridge University Press, pp. 1–41.

24.

Haas

(2007) Being and implication: on Hegel and the Greeks. Cosmos and History: The Journal of Natural and Social Philosophy 3(2–3): 192–210.

25.

Hedges

(2000) Teaching in early childhood: time to merge constructivist views so learning through play equal teaching through play. Australian Journal of Early Childhood 25: 16–21.

26.

Hedges

Jones

(2012) Children’s working theories: the neglected sibling of Te Whariki’s learning outcomes. Early Childhood Folio 16(1): 34–44.

27.

Heidegger

(1924 [1992]) The Concept of Time (trans. McNeill

). Oxford: Blackwood.

28.

Heidegger

(1927 [1962]) Being and Time (trans. Macquarie

Robinson

). London: SCM Press.

29.

Heidegger

(1929 [1995]) The Fundamental Concepts of Metaphysics: World, Finitude, Solitude (trans. McNeill

Walker

). Bloomington, IN: Indiana University Press.

30.

Jones

Evans

Rencken

(2001) The Lively Kindergarten: Emergent Curriculum in Action. Washington, DC: National Association for the Education of Young Children.

31.

Kristjansson

(2006) The making of Nordic childhoods. In: Einarsdottir

Wagner

(eds) Nordic Childhoods and Early Education: Philosophy, Research, Policy, and Practice in Denmark, Finland, Iceland, Norway and Sweden. Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing, pp. 13–42.

32.

Laevers

(2005) What is involvement? In: Laevers

(ed.) SICs: A Process-Orientated Self- Evaluation Instrument for Care Settings. Research Centre for Experiential Education, Leuven University. Available at: http://www.cego.be (accessed 20 August 2007).

33.

Levinas

(1974 [1981]) Otherwise than Being or Beyond Essence (trans. Lingis

). The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff Publishers.

34.

MacNaughton

(2005) Doing Foucault in Early Childhood Studies: Applying Post Structural Ideas. London: Routledge.

35.

Merleau-Ponty

(1942 [1965]) The Structure of Behaviour (trans. Fisher

). London: Methuen.

36.

Metcalfe

Game

(2008) Significance and dialogue in learning and teaching. Educational Theory 58(3): 343–356.

37.

Miller

(1999) Aristotle’s philosophy of soul. The Review of Metaphysics 53(2): 309–337.

38.

Ministry of Education (1996) Te Whariki: He Whariki matauranga mo nga mokopuna o Aotearoa: Early childhood curriculum. Wellington: Learning Media.

39.

Morse

Richards

(2002) Readme First for a User’s Guide to Qualitative Methods. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

40.

Mulhall

(2000) Heidegger and Being and Time. London: Routledge.

41.

Nuttall

Edwards

(2007) Theory, policy and practice: three contexts for the development of Australasia’s early childhood curriculum documents. In: Keesing-Styles

Hedges

(eds) Theorising Early Childhood Practice: Emerging Dialogues. Castle Hill, NSW, Australia: Pademelon Press, pp. 3–22.

42.

Nuttall

New Zealand Council for Educational Research (2003) Weaving Te Whaāriki : Aotearoa New Zealand’s early childhood curriculum document in theory and practice. Wellington, NZ: New Zealand Council for Educational Research.

43.

Perl

E J

(1996) Phenomenology: transforming research and practice. Journal of Clinical and Child Psychology 21(3): 202–209.

44.

Piscitelli

(1992) Reflections on play: why is it necessary? Australian Journal of Early Childhood 17: 24–31.

45.

Roberts-Holmes

(2012) ‘It’s the bread and butter of our practice’: experiencing the Early Years Foundation Stage. International Journal of Early Years Education 20(1): 30–42.

46.

Roberts

(2011) Companionable learning: a mechanism for holistic well-being development from birth. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 19(2): 195–205.

47.

Shonkoff

(2011) Investing early in education: protecting brains, not simply stimulating minds. Science 333: 982–983. Available at: http://www.sciencemag.org

48.

Siraj-Blatchford

(2009) Quality teaching in the early years. In: Anning

Cullen

Fleer

(eds) Early Childhood Education: Society and Culture. 2nd ed. London: SAGE, pp. 137–148.

49.

Siraj-Blatchford

Taggart

Sylva

. (2008) Towards the transformation of practice in early childhood education: the effective provision of pre-school education (EPPE) project. Cambridge Journal of Education 38(1): 23–36.

50.

Soler

Miller

(2003) The struggle for early childhood curricula: a comparison of the English Foundation Stage Curriculum, Te Whariki and Reggio Emilia. International Journal of Early Years Education 11(1): 57–68.

51.

Stokes

(2004) Philosophy: 100 Essential Thinkers. London: Arcturus.

52.

Sumsion

Cheeseman

Kennedy

. (2009) Insider perspectives on developing Belonging, Being and Becoming: the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood 34(4): 4–13.

53.

Van Manen

(1990) Researching Lived Experience: Human Science for and Action Sensitive pedagogy. London, ON, Canada: The Althouse Press.

54.

Van Manen

(2002) The Tact of Teaching: The Meaning of Pedagogical Thoughtfulness. London, ON, Canada: The Althouse Press.

55.

Wippel

(2000) The Metaphysical Thought of Thomas Aquinas: From Finite Being to Uncreated Being (Monographs of the Society for Medieval and Renaissance Philosophy, No. 1). Washington, DC: The Catholic University of America Press.