Conceptualizing Planning in Kindergarten and Preprimary Settings: An Exploratory Study with Preservice Teachers

INTRODUCTION A concerted effort is currently underway in Australia to bring more of a national flavor to the country's compulsory education sector. At the forefront of endeavors is the creation of Australia's first ever national curriculum (Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority [ACARA], 2009). Concomitantly, as part of the National Early Childhood Development Strategy, an Early Years Learning Framework (2009) for children from birth to 8 years of age has been created. The framework sets out the broad parameters, principles and outcomes for supporting and enhancing children's learning and assisting with the transition from kindergarten to primary school. From such broad guidelines, educators are required to construct appropriate, authentic and enjoyable learning experiences for young children. The creation of robust planning documentation is perhaps the first step in facilitating successful delivery of these desired outcomes. In Western Australia both the School Education Act (1999) and the Curriculum Council Act (1997) mandate that all teachers engage in developmentally appropriate planning; as does the Australian Curriculum, Assessment and Reporting Authority Act (2008). On the basis of such documentation, it would not be difficult to defend the notion that thorough planning is a precursor of effective teaching. It has been shown that planning plays a key role in managing aspects such as curriculum organization; content delivery; resource preparation and assessment justification (Barry & King, 1998; Hattie, 2009; Marsh, 2008; Woolfolk & Margetts, 2010). In Australia, the years 0-8 are generally differentiated along the lines of the following developmental phases: phase one: birth to approximately 3--classified as the child care years; phase two: approximately 3 to 5--regarded as the kindergarten and preprimary (K-PP) years; phase three: approximately 6 to 8--termed early childhood education (ECE). This article focuses on documentation associated with phase two development--the K-PP years--and does so for two key reasons. First, this phase tends to represent the child's initial foray into the world of formal education and as such, necessitates pedagogical skills on the part of the teacher associated with planning, sequencing, assessment and so on. Second, it is easy for ECE training institutions to place greater emphasis on the planning associated with the school years (age 5/6 to about 8) as these years may (erroneously) be seen as representing the higher order skills required for teaching. Accordingly, the planning documentation being proposed here was created with the express purpose of being used by preservice teachers involved with planning an educational experience for K-PP children. The hope is of course that once the planning protocols have been embedded in practice, they will prove useful beyond graduation. An important role of the teacher educator is to impress upon preservice teachers that knowing their children, planning for learning, and evaluating performance are not to be envisaged as discrete functions but as components of an integrated process. The Early Years Learning Framework (2009) endorses these three functions under the general rubric of "belonging, being, becoming" (p. 7) and sees them as being essential for "the integration of learning across the outcomes" (p. 19). The outcomes themselves have been identified as: * Children have a strong sense of identity * Children are connected with and contribute to their world * Children have a strong sense of well-being * Children are confident and involved learners * Children are effective communicators. (p. 19) Although the documentation proposed here was generated prior to the advent of the Early Years Learning Framework (2009), it nevertheless anticipated this document and its outcomes on the basis of precursor documentation (e. …