Uppeldi og menntun - 01.07.2006, Page 111

111
PEnttI HakkaraInEn
What Makes­ Quality in Early Education?
The latest follow-up study of the Head Start project was published last year in the
USa forty years after the programme was introduced to compensate for unfavoura-
ble educational family background (Schweinhart, Montie, X­iang, Barnett, Belfield,
& Nores, 2005). The focus of this study was mainly on the economic effects of the
program. The conclusion of the report was that each dollar invested in early education
has yielded seventeen dollars worth of socio-economic benefits. at the same time the
World Bank made the claim that on the basis of worldwide research data investment
in early childhood development is the most profitable investment of any form of ed-
ucation (World Bank, 2005).
a common feature in these conclusions is that the high quality of early education
programmes is the key factor. The Head Start programme emphasised the importance
of cognitive and intellectual development and tried to compensate for poor family
environment. The idea of quality has changed during the forty years since Head
Start’s beginning. Now, when Head Start has been ex­ported to minority cultures, we
can see its problems. attaining the goal of restoring a minority culture is attempted
by integrating children to western cognitive thinking and learning styles. If cultural
diversity and the development of local culture are among the quality criteria, Head
Start does not meet them. How can the quality of early education be developed today
and what are the obstacles?
a general tendency seems to be that early education is a necessary preparatory
stage of school learning and adult life. The focus of public policy is made ex­plicit
in the formulation “No Child Left Behind” in the USa emphasising literacy as the
core of cognitive development (No Child Left Behind act, 2001). a heavy testing
programme and academic skills training starts often at the age of four in the United
States, systematic evaluation of early education in the United kingdom is carried out
in subject matter domains, and academic skills are emphasised in Japanese early ed-
ucation. These tendencies are in contradiction with developmental psychology theory
and practice concerning the nature of early learning. Early learning happens in a differ-
ent psychological mode (narrative mode). Like John Dewey (1933), Jerome Bruner
(1996), Margaret Donaldson (1993) and kieran Egan (1987, 2005), we wonder why
the narrative mode of learning is not used more in early childhood education. Bruner
(1986, 1990, 1996) viewed a narrative as a condensation of life and endowed special
status upon the story as the unit of analysis for psychological development. For him,
the narrative was a symbolic schema through which a child interprets the world.
Large companies such as LEGO and developers of educational toys like MIT have
understood the difference and potential of children’s narrative learning compared to
Uppeldi og menntun
1. árgangur 2. hefti, 2006