Comparing the kindergarten curriculum framework of the Philippines and Malaysia

Authors

  • Leticia N. Aquino Philippine Normal University, North Luzon, Philippines
  • Nordin Mamat Sultan Idris Education University
  • Mazlina Che Mustafa Sultan Idris Education University

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.37134/saecj.vol6.4.2017

Keywords:

Early childhood education, Kindergarten Curriculum, Learning domains, Teaching approaches, Teaching-learning process

Abstract

The Philippines and Malaysia are members of ASEAN who respond to the challenge of EFA goals and Work Plan on Education 2016-2020, particularly on Sustainable Development Goal (SDG) target 4.2: “By 2030 ensure that all girls and boys have access to quality early childhood development, care and pre-primary education so that they are ready for primary education.” In response to this, the Philippines Department of Education (DepEd) through its K-12 Program, has made Kindergarten Education mandatory in the Basic Education Curriculum which paves way to the formulation of the new Kindergarten Curriculum Framework. On the other hand, the Ministry of Education (MOE) in Malaysia has also come up with its revised Kurikulum Standard Prasekolah Kebangsaan or National Preschool Standard Curriculum (NPSC) to meet new policy demands under the 2013-2025 Malaysia Education Development Plan (PPPM) and current needs. This paper takes cognizance on the role of curriculum as one of the significant components of the Kinder program as it compares the National Curriculum Standards of the two countries for the Kindergarten program with the aim to look into its developmentally appropriate curriculum features for better child growth, learning and development. Using Documentary analysis and NVivo, themes are identified and categorized from the interview and FGD of the kindergarten teachers, parents and principals from the selected government kindergarten school-respondents. Consequently, this study reveals some points of similarity and difference on kindergarten learning domains, teaching-learning processes, and issues in the current implementation of the Kindergarten program. The paper recommends that action be taken by the different program stakeholders in order to address quality delivery of the Kindergarten program.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Abu Taleb, T.F. (2013). “NAEYC’s Key Attributes of Quality Preschool Programs” Applied to the Jordanian Kindergarten Context. Early Childhood Education Journal, 41: 307.
doi:10.1007/s10643-012-0550-9

CDC (2007). Early Childhood Care and Education Policy Implementation Review 2007.Curriculum Development Centre, Ministry of Education Malaysia.
DepEd Order 32 s. 2012 “Implementing Rules and Regulation of the Republic Act 10157” Education Act 1996 (Act 550)

Fees, B.S., Hoover, L., & Zheng, F. (2014). Chinese Kindergarten Teachers’ Perceived Changes in Their Teaching Philosophies and Practices: A Case Study in a University-Affiliated Program .IJEC .46: 231.
doi:10.1007/s13158-014-0109-6)

Haug, K.H. & Storø, J. ICEP .(2013). Kindergarten — a Universal Right for Children in Norway7: 1. doi:10.1007/2288-6729-7-2-1.
International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy,7(2), 1–13.

Preliminary Report Malaysia Development Plan (2013-2025), 2012. Ministry of Education Malaysia.

Republic Act No. 10157 “The Kindergarten Education Act”

Republic Act No. 10533- “Enhanced Basic Education Act of 2013”

SEAMEO INNOTECH. (2012). K to 12 in Southeast Asia: Regional Comparison of the Structure, Content, Organization and Adequacy of Basic Education. Quezon City: Philippines.

Downloads

Published

2017-10-09

How to Cite

Aquino, L. N., Mamat, N., & Che Mustafa, M. (2017). Comparing the kindergarten curriculum framework of the Philippines and Malaysia. Southeast Asia Early Childhood Journal, 6, 27–40. https://doi.org/10.37134/saecj.vol6.4.2017

Most read articles by the same author(s)