Final Version May 5 07

297
and remain with the status quo. They can choose to erect the wall that Malaguzzi (2001a)
calls the wall of the “finite” (p. 6). When responses to curriculum become habituated and
when they are left unquestioned, the result is the continuation of dubious practice and a
limited view of what is beyond the wall. For some it takes direction from above to
encourage change. However, a top-down directive can produce resistance (Wai-Yum,
2003). If the impetus for change comes from within, early childhood educators can have a
“sense of the infinite” (Malaguzzi, 2001a, p. 6).
To recognize their working contexts as living organisms is to understand that
curriculum and relationships evolve. It is a dynamic force with shared power. It is ironic
that in a field which has long been disempowered, the key is to let go of power. By doing
so others will be empowered and, in turn, will transform the field of early childhood
education. By uniting as “one voice” and assuming a more assertive stance in education,
“there is no limit to the transformation that can take place” (Rust, 1993, p. 107). If early
childhood educators come together with one voice that supports the benefits of a social
constructivist Reggio-inspired curriculum, the impact could be exponentially greater. To
do so means being ready to absorb the impact of a new world view that collides with the
way of the past.
Teacher as theory-builder.
Without a theoretical base in an individual teacher’s curriculum practice it is
unlikely that there can be an engagement of colliding worldviews. A worldview is a
philosophy of education, a pedagogy representing a particular view of teaching and
learning. It requires an articulation of theory. If the field of early childhood education is
seen as lacking a theoretical base then it is imperative that a grass roots acceptance of