Excursions in Early Childhood: a reality check

A few months ago, I was asked for my views on excursions in Early Childhood Education, as Rattler Magazine was preparing an article and wanted some input from practitioners about excursions and the Early Years Learning Framework (that's our new national curriculum, for my overseas readers).  Here's my response.

'Engaging with the wider community' v 'what actually happens in childcare'

I think it's important that both the people who created the new curriculum (and so understand their intent intimately) and the people who write about it, but who are not daily practitioners, understand the huge gulf that exists between aspiration and reality.

At this stage, what I see is not practitioners being pushed to rethink their practice on engaging with the larger community- I don't think it even occurs to them that they should. Practitioners are mostly struggling with what the EYLF means in terms of what they need to do that's different from before, and what will affect their accreditation if they don't do it. It's very basic. It's 'how do I record something flexible? Will I fail if I do this the way I've always done it?'

The aspirational intent has not reached ground zero, except in terms of more play-based learning and fewer designed and highly structured activities, and the aspirational challenge is more about some practitioners throwing out intentional teaching and calling a lack of structure 'play-based learning'- and some refusing to change at all or keeping their heads in the sand- so there's a bit of a tug-of-war going on. That's not statistically based, but just what I see in some of the centres I visit.

Perhaps in the long term, when we are more comfortable with what the EYLF means in terms of our documentation, daily practice and pedagogy, we might come around to seeing a need for change in the negative attitude to excursions and interaction with the community, but I doubt that this will happen for the sake of fulfilling an imposed outcome. If you took an Early Childhood practitioner off the street and asked how the children should engage in civic living while in childcare, she'd probably look at you as though you had dual craniums- because in the whole scheme of daily survival, that's the least of our concerns. Many practitioners would question whether that's actually what the outcome means. It's just so far from our day-to-day world to consider the role of very young children in the wider community.

Anyway, my view is that until the issues I mention in the following writings are addressed, excursions will continue to be avoided by most centres.

Sexualising our children isn't funny

Recently on Facebook, someone from the US posted an outraged reaction to a children's clothing store that was selling g-strings and crotchless undies in children's sizes.  Today in Australia, we have K Mart pulling a range of children's undies with sexualised messages ("Call me!"  "I love rich boys!") off their shelves, after similar outrage from responsible parents.

WHAT are people THINKING when they design and make this garbage and then try to sell it to children?

The US incident was rationalised (if, indeed, you CAN rationalise something that tacky and poorly judged) as an attempt by pedophiles to infiltrate the children's clothing market- something of an extreme view without evidence.  I thought that was drawing a little bit of a long bow.

I think it's bigger, more worrying and less overtly criminal than that.  I think that this is a creeping malaise that's got under our radar, through

(1) our failure to deal with our own personal insecurity, and

(2) our acceptance of other people's 'expert' bad decisions about what's appropriate for children.

Let me explain that.

The parent as cab driver: after-school activity overload

Once upon a time there was a world where children spent their out-of-school hours making up their own games, playing on the street with the other kids from their area, entertaining themselves with their siblings and playing board games and card games with mum and dad in the evenings. If they were lucky and their parents were rich enough, they might be offered some sort of music lessons when they were in middle childhood; if they had trouble with Maths or reading, too bad- either mum and dad helped them, or they struggled.

Educational opportunity has improved for children. But there is also such a thing as going too far the other way. James Thurber once wrote a hilarious mock-fable ('The Bear who Let it Alone') about a drunken bear who caused fear and chaos while falling down in a drunken stupor; seeing his error, he reformed his ways and caused fear and chaos while showing off his new exercise regime (the moral of the story being, 'You might as well fall flat on your face as lean over too far backward').

So here we are in the C21st leaning over too far backwards, with parents  spending half their lives driving the kids to out-of-school activities- soccer, maths coaching, early music classes, swimming training, reading tutoring, ballet, drama, speech therapy, netball... the list goes on... all supposedly in the name of giving their children vital opportunities, while those same children are starved of time for unstructured fun with their peer group and family.

What does this whirlwind world look like to a child?  And which of these activities are really valuable?  How much is too much?