Final Version May 5 07

140
In the Forward to Developmentally Appropriate Practice in Real Life by Wien
(1995), Jones describes the causes of a static curriculum that resists change:
Child-care teachers bring to their work . . . a healthy instinct for survival
on the job. Survival always implies, when one is a newcomer in the
setting, a conservative response of adapting to things as they are. Once
habituated, relatively few teachers initiate significant changes in their
practice. (p. vii)
By adapting to things as they are, teachers resist embedding theory in practice and
thus resist change. Why is there a resistance to change? Change is fraught with turmoil
and uncertainty (Fullan & Miles, 1992). Katz (2004) suggests that to bring about lasting
changes, teachers need to accept the uncertainty involved in unfolding a curriculum one
step at a time instead of depending on detailed advance planning. In order to advance the
professionalization of the field, early childhood educators must change the image they
have of themselves. Inspired by the theories of Dewey, Piaget, Vygotsky, and Malaguzzi,
they can build their own.
Change is a journey not a blueprint, and as Rinaldi (1998) points out, a plan is like
a compass not a train schedule. Change must come from within each early childhood
educator and uncertainty of direction must be accepted. Fullan and Miles (1992) suggest
that all real change must be implemented locally. Katz (2004) challenges the early
childhood educator as “responsibility for changes” is “right in our own doorsteps” (p.
67). Emergent curriculum is a micro-level opportunity for change. When presented with
new information that is difficult to accommodate it may be that in the moment of
confusion real opportunities exist to accept new challenges and create new possibilities
for ourselves (Swick et al., 1998).