Advertisement

Early Childhood Education Journal

, Volume 35, Issue 1, pp 33–39 | Cite as

The Tension between Teacher Control and Children’s Freedom in a Child-centered Classroom: Resolving the Practical Dilemma through a Closer Look at the Related Theories

  • Pei Wen Tzuo
Article

Abstract

This article explores the meaning of child-centeredness in Early Childhood Education (ECE), by shedding light on the nuanced tensions between teacher control and children’s freedom. While ECE professionals advocate the importance of children’s individual interests and needs in education, they diverge somewhat in their perspectives about the teacher’s role in education. This article manifests and tries to resolve this teaching dilemma through incorporating the related theories (Piaget, Vygotsky, Dewey, and Montessori) upholding and encompassing child-centeredness. The author contends that high teacher control and high children’s freedom are not exclusive of one another: children’s freedom is defined in an active way, as freedom to participate, rather than in a passive way, as freedom from any constrains. The paper concludes with a metaphor of “impressionist painting”, which may offer some insights helpful to those who have struggled with the tension between teacher control and children’s freedom in the context of progressive and critical pedagogy.

Keywords

child-centeredness Early Childhood Education theories and practices Piaget Vygotsky Montessori Dewey teacher control teacher authority children’s freedom teacher–children interaction progressive education critical pedagogy reconceptualization dilemma of teaching teacher’s belief and practice 

References

  1. Backer B. (1998). Child-centered teaching, redemption, and educational identities: A history of the present. Educational Theory, 48(2), 155–175CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Berk L. E., Winsler A. (1995). Scaffolding children’s learning: Vygotsky and early childhood education (Rev. ed). Washington, DC: NAEYCGoogle Scholar
  3. Buzzelli C.A., Johnston B. (2002). The moral dimensions of teaching: Language, power and culture in classroom interactions. New York: Routledge/Falmer PressGoogle Scholar
  4. Chung, S., & Walsh, D. J. (2000). Unpacking a child-centeredness: A history of meanings. Curriculum Studies, 32(3), 215–234. Research strategies. Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage PressGoogle Scholar
  5. Dewey J. (1998). Experience and education—the 60th anniversary edition. West Lafayette, IN: Kappa Delta PiGoogle Scholar
  6. Dockett S., Perry B. (1996). Young children’s construction of knowledge. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 21(4), 6–11Google Scholar
  7. Dunn L., Kontos S. (1997). What have we learned about developmentally appropriate practice? Young Children, 52(5), 4–13Google Scholar
  8. Elkind D. (1989). Developmentally appropriate practice: Philosophical and practical implications. Phi Delta Kappan, 71(2), 113–118Google Scholar
  9. Fowell N., Lawton J. (1992). An alternative view of appropriate practice in early childhood education. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 7(3), 53–73CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Frede E., Barnett S. W. (1992). Developmentally appropriate public school preschool: A study of implementation of the High/Scope curriculum and its effects on disadvantaged children’s skills at first grade. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 74(4), 483–499CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Hirsh-Pasek K., Hyson M., Rescorla L. (1990). Academic environments in preschool: Do they pressure or challenge young children? Early Education and Development, 1(6), 401–423CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Kitchener R. F. (1996). The nature of the social for Piaget and Vygotsky. Human Development, 39(5), 243–249CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Kliebard H. M. (1995). The struggle for the American curriculum. New York: RoutledgeGoogle Scholar
  14. Kostelnik M. (1992). Myths associated with developmentally appropriate programs. Young Children, 47(4), 17–23Google Scholar
  15. Meade A. (2000). If you say it three times, is it three? Critical use of research in early childhood education. International Journal of Early Years Education, 8(1), 15–27CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Montessori M. (1995). The absorbent mind (Rev. ed.). New York: Owl BooksGoogle Scholar
  17. Wadsworth B. J. (1995). Piaget’s theory of cognitive and affective development. (Rev. ed.). New York: LongmanGoogle Scholar
  18. Weber E. (1984). Ideas influencing early childhood education—a theoretical analysis. New York: Teachers College PressGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2007

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Early Childhood and Special Needs EducationNational Institute of EducationSingaporeSingapore

Personalised recommendations