Final Version May 5 07

240
in the field. Rose has been taking on additional administrative responsibilities in her
centre and sees the possibility of teaching less and supervising more. Mary is currently
looking for part-time work in the field now that her daughter’s educational needs are
more predictable. Felicia continues to work with children as she finances part-time
academic study. Eventually, her goals include teaching early childhood education at the
university or college level.
All four teachers continue to be early childhood educators. As a career path it may
not have been their first choice, but now as they are engaged in the practice of being early
educators, their experience with emergent curriculum has been significant and
developmental. Each has reached a particular stage of teacher development and a certain
level of emergent curriculum practice. In some ways, they seem content with their career
choice. Without data on their attitude towards their career path before their involvement
with emergent curriculum, it is impossible to conclude that emergent curriculum
improved their attitude; however, I suspect this may be the case.
Professional development.
Mary’s centre did not support conference or workshop attendance. She was not
given opportunities to visit other centres to see, as she suggests, “Reggio in action.” The
reason for the lack of support was financial. The centre was not willing to pay for a
supply teacher, or pay for workshops and conference fees. Mary appreciated when the codirector,
who is a practiced Reggio-inspired educator, spent time in her classroom. With
that director on maternity leave and the other director “too busy” to give Mary the
support she needs, her concerns were not being met. Mary appeared to have limited
opportunity to grow and develop.