Curriculum guidelines for early literacy: A comparison of New Zealand and England

Author(s): Blaiklock, Ken
Date Issued: September, 2011
Description: A comparison of literacy-related learning outcomes as well as both formative and summative assessment issues in New Zealand's Te Wha-riki and in England's Early Years Foundation Stage curricula
show entire record ↓
Journal Title: Australasian Journal of Early Childhood
Volume Number: 36
Issue Number: 3
Page Range:
Topics: Children & Child Development > Child Development & School Readiness > Early Literacy

International Child Care & Early Education > Cross-National Comparisons

Programs, Interventions & Curricula > Interventions/Curricula > Early Literacy
ISSN: 1836-9391 Paper
1836-9391 Online
Peer Reviewed: yes
hide record ↑


More Like This

what is this? These resources were found by comparing the title, description, and topics of the currently selected resource to the rest of the Research Connections holdings.

''The value is enormous: It's priceless I think!'': New Zealand preschool teachers' understandings of the early childhood curriculum in New Zealand: A comparative perspective Reports & Papers
The struggle for early childhood curricula: A comparison of the English Foundation Stage Curriculum, Te Whariki and Reggio Emilia Reports & Papers
Te Whariki, the New Zealand early childhood curriculum: Is it effective? Other
Starting strong: Curricula and pedagogies in early childhood education and care: Five curriculum outlines Other
Literacy in early childhood settings in New Zealand: An examination of teachers' beliefs and practices Reports & Papers

Disclaimer: Use of the above resource is governed by Research Connections' Terms of Use.

Research Connections is supported by grant #90YE0104 from the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. The contents are solely the responsibility of the National Center for Children in Poverty and the Inter-university Consortium for Political and Social Research and do not necessarily represent the official views of the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, the Administration for Children and Families, or the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.

Google Translate