Final Version May 5 07

97
challenge and active engagement. Taking the colour red as an example of a narrow
theme, Fleet (2002) asks “why focus on a primary colour and does it matter?” (p. 21).
When themes are tightly scripted and dependent on teacher direction they provide a
predictable sequence for the teacher. However, children’s curricular needs are not so
clear cut or predictable.
The fundamental difference between projects and themes rests within the image
of the child held by those who educate the child. The young child, when seen as an empty
vessel or tabula rasa by its educational institutions, is viewed as needing to reproduce
pre-determined knowledge. When adults and children engage together, the child is seen
as a citizen and co-constructor of knowledge (Moss, 2000). Pence (1999) suggests when
educators see the child and the child’s work as a miniature and possibly passive culture
producer their view is that the child is an empty vessel. Early childhood educators
inspired by Reggio see the child as having surprising and extraordinary strengths and
capabilities in their co-constructing role rather than a reproducer of the teacher’s
knowledge.
When children and teachers co-construct the curriculum, reciprocity is established
and transparency embedded as children represent their thinking with materials and
activities. When teachers alone construct the curriculum, the work produced by children
is uniform and commonplace. The curriculum lacks authenticity; there may be a
disconnection between what materials are provided to the children and who the children
are. Themes limit potential, projects provide unlimited possibilities. Themes may involve
patronizing practices that assume the child is without his or her own theories. Projects