Search

This paper draws from a cross-cultural study of young children's arts curricula. The initial phase of the original study consisted of a comparison of the intended arts curriculum for 5–6 year old children in China and Australia. This was followed by a survey in Beijing exploring 88 contemporary early childhood educators' beliefs about children's arts education. A case study of the enacted curriculum took place across three kindergartens in Beijing. The data was coded and analysed using grounded theory methodology. The research presented in this paper reported a diverse understanding of children's creativity among the participant EC educators; it revealed that a pedagogical dilemma of demonstration remains as a challenge to early childhood arts educators. This study provided qualitative descriptions and examples of Chinese Beijing children's arts education in this era of globalisation. Utilising Foucault's (1991. "Governmentality." In The Foucault Effect: Studies in Governmentality, edited by G. Burchell, C. Gordon, and P. Miller, translated by R. Braidotti, 87–104. London: Harvester Wheatsheaf) theory of governmentality as a critical lens to view the issues in this field, the study broadened perspectives regarding the education philosophy and practices of early childhood arts curriculum, in particular, for the cultivation of young children's creativity. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

• Children in China and Australia learn English in distinct sociolinguistic contexts. • China forbids early childhood English education, despite great parental demand. • Australia has no curriculum framework for early childhood English education. • Both countries are similarly inactive in guiding early childhood English education. Although English is taught to students worldwide at different educational levels, the actual implementation of early childhood English language education (ECELE) may vary from country to country. This study aims to comprehensively compare how ECELE is being put into practice in China and Australia, where young children learn English as a foreign language and as an additional language or dialect, respectively. Based on a critical analysis of relevant policy documents and the empirical studies found in the literature, this paper provides a detailed account and comparison of how ECELE is delivered in China and Australia. It is found that despite their different sociolinguistic contexts, the educational authorities in both countries share the same ostrich policy and inactive involvement in overseeing and directing ECELE. The implications for policymaking are also addressed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]