以作者查詢圖書館館藏

、以作者查詢臺灣博碩士

、以作者查詢全國書目

、勘誤回報

、線上人數：77

、訪客IP：3.145.85.74

姓名	蔣美霞(JIANG MEIXIA)  查詢紙本館藏	畢業系所	學習與教學研究所
論文名稱	「以幼兒為中心」的課程如何實踐： 一個行動者網絡理論的視角 (Child-Centered Curriculum enactment in a Kindergarten Context：A View from Actor-Network Theory)
相關論文	★ 網路學習社群中的潛水現象：一種被忽略的充分參與 ★ 網路學習社群中的共構面貌：以迷思概念為探針 ★ 敘說一位研究型大學教師之自我座落 ★ 敘說實習教師之教師認同 ★ 情意鷹架者的實踐知識－以 LAIN 網路學習社群為例 ★ 全控機構的學習－ 從實踐社群的觀點看海軍義務役男 ★ 工科研究生的學習樣貌—一個情境學習的觀點 ★ 從學習者成為鷹架者──社群觀點探看身分轉變的學習 ★ 網路科學探究的合作學習：小組認同與共同作者的決定歷程 ★ 應用搭配字學習工具於網路瀏覽以提升英語學習者對搭配字之察覺能力 ★ 節能減碳實踐中教師和行政的矛盾－活動理論觀點 ★ 線上小組推進探究的關鍵時刻 ★ 以行動者網絡理論探討國小教師在數位閱讀寫作推動初期的困境 ★ 數學擬題活動的合作效果─五年級學童之經驗 ★ 看見機動教師-國小校園內的新角色 ★ 一對一數位教室的另類學習:設計與湧現的觀點
檔案	[Endnote RIS 格式]    [Bibtex 格式]    [相關文章]   [文章引用]   [完整記錄]   [館藏目錄]   [檢視]  [下載] 本電子論文使用權限為同意立即開放。 已達開放權限電子全文僅授權使用者為學術研究之目的，進行個人非營利性質之檢索、閱讀、列印。 請遵守中華民國著作權法之相關規定，切勿任意重製、散佈、改作、轉貼、播送，以免觸法。
摘要(中)	本研究旨在探討台湾一間私立幼兒園「以幼兒為中心」的課程實踐，了解其如何作為網絡效果而發生。「以幼兒為中心」的議題迄今都是幼教研究领域的重點，主流文獻將其作爲評估幼兒園課程成效的標準，來評量幼兒園課程是否達到了以幼兒的興趣、幼兒的主動學習為目標的教育訴求。本文與此相區隔，不是評量田野個案是否符合標準要求，而是认为需要揭示「以幼兒為中心」的課程在特定的實踐情境所促成的特定樣態，以及其發生的具體過程。 本研究藉鑒行動者網絡理論（actor-network theory）的研究框架，其理論優勢能夠捕捉尋常物質如何與幼兒、教師連結在一起，從而對「以幼兒為中心」的課程進行社會物質性的理解。因而，該理論研究框架有助於筆者注意田野個案所促成的「以幼兒為中心」的課程如何在實踐層面展開，特別是在關注我們認為重要的幼兒、教師等人類實體之餘，還能注意到物質實體也是關鍵，它不能夠被排除在理解課程的行列之外。 通過對參與觀察、訪談、文件等田野資料的分析，揭示如下研究發現：第一，該個案幼兒園為了促成《幼兒園教保活動課程大綱》中「以幼兒為中心」的課程實踐，連結了一些關鍵行動體，如幼兒的「學業」、自編的物質教材教具。第二，具體活動中的課程素材，如鋸子、木條以及它們被切割時所發出的「滋啦」聲，或是白紙與地板，或是經驗圖表、白板/窗戶，這些物質行動者與幼兒有所連結之後而湧現幼幼互動的「以幼兒為中心」的課程效果。第三，也有活動雖未湧現上述課程效果，但促成了師幼互動與學習的課程效果。 因此，本文的研究貢獻，在於從認知建構主義、社會建構主義理論視角之外來重新認識「以幼兒為中心」的課程，這種重新認識主要是從社會物質視角來推進，由此揭示了某些不太顯眼的物質素材所促成的「以幼兒為中心」的課程實踐。
摘要(英)	The purpose of the present study is to explore the enactment of child-centered curriculum in a private kindergarten in Taiwan and to understand how it occurs as a network effect. The issue of child-centeredness has been the key point of early childhood education research so far, and the mainstream literature have used it as a principle or criterion to assess the effectiveness of the kindergarten curriculum ,and to evaluate whether the kindergarten program has achieved the educational aspiration of targeting children′s interests and active learning. Rather than assessing whether the special case meet the criteria, this doctoral thesis argues that it is necessary to reveal the specific processes of child-centered curriculum in the kindergarten everyday work. This study draws on the research framework of actor-network theory, which has the theoretical advantage of capturing the ways in which mundane materials are linked to children or teachers in order to develop a socio-material understanding of child-centered curriculum. Thus, the theoretical research framework helps to pay attention to how the child-centered curriculum enacted by the field case ,and further unfolds that what has happened, especially not only focusing on human entities such as children and teachers that we considered important, but also focusing on these material entities that are also crucial and cannot be excluded when we understand the kindergarten curriculum. Through the analysis of field data such as participant observations, interviews, and documents, the following studies were revealed: Firstly, in order to promote the "child-centered" curriculum practice, the kindergarten in this case connected some key actors, such as young children′s " academic achievement " , parents and self-designed teaching materials.. Secondly, the curriculum materials for specific activities, such as saws, wooden strips and the "sizzling" sounds they make when young children cutting, or white paper and floors, or experience charts with whiteboards or windows, these material actors connect with young children and emerge the child-centered curriculum effect of young children′s interaction. Third, there are also some activities that do not show the above-mentioned curriculum effects, but promote the curriculum effect of teacher-child interaction and learning. Therefore, the research contribution of this doctoral dissertation is to re-understand the child-centered curriculum not from the perspective of cognitive constructivism or social constructivist theory, but also from the perspective of socio-material to reveal the child-centered curriculum enactment promoted by some less conspicuous materials.
關鍵字(中)	★ 以幼兒為中心 ★ 幼兒園課程 ★ 社會物質性 ★ 行動者網絡理論	關鍵字(英)	★ hild-centered ★ kindergarten curriculum ★ socio-material ★ actor-network theory
論文目次	摘 要 i Abstract iii 誌 謝 v 目 錄 vii 圖目錄 ix 表目錄 x 第一章、緒論 1 第一節、研究緣起與動機 1 第二節、研究背景與重要性 3 第三節、名詞釋義 7 一、以幼兒為中心 7 第二章、文獻探討 9 第一節、「以幼兒為中心」的課程的研究現況 9 一、「以幼兒為中心」的課程的定義與常見理解 9 二、「以幼兒為中心」的課程之理論背景與潛在優勢 12 三、「以幼兒為中心」的課程難以實現的各方言論 17 四、「以幼兒為中心」的課程實施有成的相關研究 20 五、幼教研究中有關環境、物質的主張與關切 26 第二節、探究「如何促成」的理論工具——行動者網絡理論 30 一、ANT的發展脈絡以及基本概念 30 二、教育領域的ANT研究 36 三、ANT研究的分析方法 47 第三章、研究方法 49 第一節、ANT研究所借用之民族誌研究法 49 第二節、本研究之場域 51 一、幼兒園概況 51 二、幼兒園課程模式轉變及課程主題 52 （一） 科學小玩家 52 （二） 歡樂屋 52 （三）客家美食 53 （四）大家來紮營 53 三、研究對象 54 第三節、研究者身份 54 第四節、資料蒐集 55 一、參與觀察 56 （一） 團體教學活動 56 （二） 學習區活動 57 （三） 例行性活動 57 （四） 教師會議 57 二、訪談 58 三、課程相關文件文本 59 第五節、資料分析 59 第四章、研究結果 63 第一節、連結與轉譯：「以幼兒為中心」的在地課程實踐網絡 64 一、「以幼兒為中心」從課程理念走向課程實踐的轉譯軌跡 64 二、異質行動者中介「以幼兒為中心」的課程網絡 75 第二節、幼兒與物緊密連結的課程網絡效果：促成幼幼的互動與學習 86 一、幼兒製作板凳：鋸子、木條連結的課程網絡 87 二、幼兒學習「等比放大」：白紙、地板連結的課程網絡 95 三、幼兒探究「排列組合」：經驗圖表連結的課程網絡 105 第三節、幼兒與物非緊密連結的課程網絡效果：促成師幼的互動與學習 114 一、幼兒「組裝」帳篷的課程網絡 115 二、幼兒「觀察」帳篷活動的課程網絡 125 三、幼兒「聽懂」如何搭帳篷的課程網絡 128 第五章、結論與討論 132 第一節、結論 132 第二節、研究貢獻與對話 135 一、以「轉譯」取代「再現」探討幼兒園課程實踐的促成方式 135 二、以「連結關係」取代「因果關係」探討幼兒園課程實踐效果 137 三、以「網絡效果」取代「先驗本質」探討師幼生的行動力 139 四、以「網絡效果」取代「工具功能」探討物質教具 144 第三節、研究限制、未來研究與實務建議 147 一、研究限制與未來研究方向 147 二、實務建議 148 參考書目 150
參考文獻	中國教育部（2012）。3-6歲兒童學習與發展指南。北京市：作者。 王小英、朱慧慧（2017）。基於兒童視角下的師幼互動中幼兒施動行為及其影響因素研究。四川師範大學學報（社會科學版），44 （6），114-121。 王海英（2018）。 回歸兒童立場的幼稚園環境創設。 幼兒教育（教育教學）， 11， 4-7。 王琇姿、許文震（2021）。從行動者網絡理論觀點探究實驗小學課程的發展與轉譯歷程-以合橫實小珊瑚復育為例。臺灣教育評論月刊， 10 （9）， 73-77。 台灣教育部（2012）。幼兒園教保活動課程暫行大綱。臺北市：作者。 台灣教育部（2016）。幼兒園教保活動課程大綱。臺北市：作者。 台灣教育部國民及學前教育署（2021）。幼兒園課程與教學品質評估表：提升教學品質與專業成長。取自： 左璜、黃甫全（2012）。行動者網絡理論: 教育研究的新視界。教育發展研究，4， 15-19。 白亦方（譯）（2001）。 校長辦公室裡的那個人： 一種民族誌　（原作者: H. F. Wolcott）。台北：師大書苑。（ 原著出版年：1973 ） 石建偉、王萍（2020）。園本課程開發中的兒童經驗斷裂與整合——杜威「經驗哲學」的視角。早期教育（教育科研），5，41-47。 伍啟鴻、陳榮泰（譯）（2016）。巴斯德的實驗室：細菌的戰爭與和平 （原作者: B. Latour）。新北市：群學。（ 原著出版年：1993 ） 朱家雄（2008）。 西方學前教育思潮在中國大陸的實踐和反思。基礎教育學報，17 （1），3-16。 吳嘉苓、陳嘉新、黃于玲、謝新誼、蕭昭君（譯）（2018）。照護的邏輯：比賦予病患選擇更重要的事 （原作者：A. Mol）。臺北: 左岸文化。（原著出版年：2008） 吳福元（譯）（1987）。兒童心理學（原作者：J. Piaget）。臺北: 唐山。（原著出版年：1969） 吳樎椒、張宇樑（2009）。幼稚園教師對主題統整課程的知覺研究。臺南大學教育研究學報，43 （2），81-105。 李季湄（譯）（1994）。蒙特梭利兒童教育手冊 （原作者：M. Montessori ）。 臺北市: 桂冠。（ 原著出版年：1914 ） 李政賢（譯）（2014）。質性研究：從開始到完成（原作者：R.K.Yin）。臺北市：五南。（原著出版年：2010） 李昭明、陳欣希（譯）（2008）。人類發展的文化本質 （原作者：B. Rogoff）。 臺北市：心理。（原著出版年：2003） 李輝（2005）。幼兒園課程改革：在「兒童主導」與「教師主導」之間尋找平衡。幼兒教育，Z2，4-6。 谷瑞勉（譯）（1999）。鷹架兒童的學習：維高斯基與幼兒教育 （原作者: L. E. Berk, A.Winsler）。臺北市：心理。（原著出版年：1995） 周淑惠（2004）。 Reggio 建構教學及其對幼兒自然科學教育之啟示。幼兒保育學刊，2，19-36。 周淑惠（2013）。遊戲 VS. 課程：幼兒遊戲定位與實施。臺北市：心理。 周淑惠（2017）。面向21世紀的幼兒教育：探究取向主題課程。新北市：心理。 幸曼玲、周于佩（2017）。幼兒園教保活動課程大綱的實踐──一位輔導訪視人員的觀察。教科書研究，10 （3），101-131。 林文源 （2007）。 論行動者網絡理論的行動本體論。 科技醫療與社會， 4， 65-108。 林文源（2014）。看不見的行動能力：從行動者網絡到位移理論。中央研究院社會所。 林佳巧、謝瑩慧（2021）。促進幼兒於積木區遊戲之教師行動研究。幼兒教保研究，24，47-72。 林佳芬、李子建（2014）。私立幼兒園課程領導困境及其解決策略之探究：質性研究分析取徑。課程與教學，17（2），67-92。 林宗德 （譯） （2004）。 給我一個實驗室，我將舉起全世界 （原作者：B. Latour）。載於吳嘉苓、傅大為、雷祥麟（主編），科技渴望社會（頁219-264）。臺北：群學。（原文出版年：1983） 林怡君、陳佩英（2020）。一所高中的校訂必修發展歷程研究: 行動者網絡理論取徑。中等教育， 71（3），17-29。 洪秋芸（2016）。以杜威的經驗課程觀反思再探究幼稚園課程—以新加坡新意元大班方案活動「種蘿蔔」為例。幼兒教育研究，1，40-43. 胡美智、鄭雅莉 （2017）。鄉立幼兒園太魯閣在地文化課程融入學習區的歷程。教育學報，45（1），157-179。 香港教育局（2006）。香港學前教育課程指引。香港：作者。 倪鳴香、徐德成、張斯寧、陳娟娟、陳淑琦、廖鳳瑞、潘世尊、鄭青青、鄭舒丹（2021）。學習區的自主遊戲與探究學習：台灣台中愛彌兒幼兒園課程發展與實踐。新北市：心理。 凌曉俊（2020）。試論幼兒園探究主題課程的理論及實踐要點。臺灣教育評論月刊，9（1），122-126。 張玉敏、許卓婭（2015）。 行動者理論視角下的學前教育。學前教育研究， 8， 41-46。 符裕、何瑉（譯）（2012）。如何做田野筆記 （原作者: R. M. Emerson, R. Fretz, & L.Shaw）。上海：上海譯文出版社。（原著出版年：1995） 郭文華（2012）。旅館鑰匙、瓶中船、象牙球與奉茶小童：在技術物中體會STS。科學發展，469，84-88。 陳美如（2007）。兒童與課程。教育研究月刊，163（11），137-141。 陳海倫、林珮伃（2009）。從團討出發走向師生共同建構的課程。幼兒教育年刊，20， 125-147。 陳淑琦、羅文喬、林玉珠、郭李宗文、鄭瑞菁、谷瑞勉、許碧勳、詹文娟（2016）。幼教課程模式。臺北市：華騰文化。 陳淑琴（2007）。幼兒教師主題教學信念與教學行爲之研究。臺中教育大學學報: 教育類，21（1），27-51。 陳斐卿（2021）。「生生用平板」的網絡效果: 以國小數位寫作學習平臺為例。教育研究與發展期刊，17 （4），33-67。 陳韻如、簡淑真（2011）。實施方案教學資深個案幼教師之課程詮釋。幼兒教育，304，28-42。 麥肖玲（2003）。「以兒童為中心」的理念在中, 港的變奏與矛盾. 課程與教學，6（2），31-48。 單文經（2014a）。杜威《經驗與教育》 一書所呈顯的教育願景。國立政治大學「教育與心理研究」，37（3）， 33-57。 單文經（2014b）。杜威對課程與教學問題的提示。教育研究月刊，10，127-143。 華樺（譯）（2014）。童年的未來：對兒童的跨學科研究 （原作者：A. Prout）。上海：上海社會科學院出版社。（原著出版年：2005） 馮潔皓（2014）。二十一世紀的香港幼兒教育課程改革: 回顧與前瞻。教育學報，42（2），95-112。 楊川、周蕾、鄢超雲（2022）。行動者網絡理論視域下鄉村學前教育發展的內生路徑。學前教育研究，325 （1），70-82。 楊偉鵬、霍力岩（2013）。生態學視野下的幼稚園環境創設—對三種課程模式環境創設的比較及借鑒。幼兒教育（教育科學），4，12-16。 楊淑雅、李崗（2022）。 蒙特梭利的美育方法:二個實例。課程與教學， 25（1）， 173-191。 葉郁菁、何祥如（2015）。幼兒園主題教學課程活動的發展與創新：教育部教學卓越獎方案分析。中正教育研究，14（1），119-149。 虞永平（2006）。物質材料與幼兒園課程。幼兒教育（教育教學），1，10-13。 廖鳳瑞、李昭瑩（2004）。當孩子與老師運作的課程相遇-幼兒經驗課程的個案研究。師大學報: 教育類， 49（2）， 89-112。 劉文旋、鄭開（譯）（2005）。科學在行動：怎樣在社會中跟隨科學家和工程師（原作者：B. Latour）。北京：東方出版社。（原著出版年：1987） 劉晶波（1999）。師幼互動行為研究—我在幼稚園裏看到了什麼。南京：南京師範大學出版社。 劉豫鳳（2009）。建構一個方案教學的理想園-義大利瑞吉歐幼兒學習環境要素之探討。幼兒教育，295，32-46。 蔡其蓁(2005)。幼兒遊戲課程研究的另一取徑-課程知識社會學。課程與教學，8（1），81-96。 蔡敏玲、陳正乾 （譯）（2005）。社會中的心智：高層次心理過程的發展 （原作者：L.S. Vygotsky）。臺北市：心理。（原著出版年：1978） 蔣美霞、陳斐卿（2022）。幼兒主導課程的實踐：行動者網絡理論視角。幼兒教保研究，26， 67-90。 蔣雅俊（2013）。論杜威的經驗哲學與經驗課程哲學。 南京師大學報（社會科學版），4，88-96。 蔣雅俊（2018）。杜威《兒童與課程》中的教育哲學問題探析。南京師大學報（社會科學版），1，67-74。 戴文青（1999）。學習環境的規劃與運用。臺北市：心理。 簡淑真（1998）。建構論及其在幼兒教育上的應用。課程與教學，1（3），61-80。 簡楚瑛（2005）。從課室言談與課程結構看教育改革的契機。國立政治大學「教育與心理研究」，28（1），49-74。 簡楚瑛（2010）。 從師幼對話與課程結構看「以幼兒為中心」。幼兒教育 （教育科學），7，10-20。 簡楚瑛（2019）。幼兒園課程發展：理論與實務。新北市：心裡。 簡楚瑛（2022）。蒙台梭利教育法的課程發展。幼兒教育（教育科學），3，3-9。 Agbenyega, J. (2009). The Australian Early Development Index, who does it measure: Piaget or Vygotsky′s child?. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 34(2), 31-38. Ang, L. (2016). “Rethinking Child-Centred Education.” In D. Wyse, L. Hayward, and J. Pandya(Ed.), The Sage Handbook of Curriculum Pedagogy and Assessment (pp.141-152). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage. Ansari, A., & Purtell, K. M. (2018). Commentary: What happens next? Delivering on the promise of preschool. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 45, 177-182. Baiocchi, G., Graizbord, D., & Rodríguez-Muñiz, M. (2013). Actor-Network Theory and the ethnographic imagination: An exercise in translation. Qualitative Sociology, 36(4), 323-341. Barbarin, O. A., & Miller, K. (2009). Developmental science and early education: An introduction. In O. A. Barbarin & B. H. Wasik (Eds.), Handbook of child development and early education: Research to practice (pp.3-13). New York: The Guilford Press. Bautista, A., Bull, R., Ng, E. L., & Lee, K. (2020). “That’s just impossible in my kindergarten.” Advocating for ‘glocal′early childhood curriculum frameworks. Policy Futures in Education, 19(2), 155-174. Bautista, A., Moreno-Núñez, A., Bull, R., Amsah, F., & Koh, S. F. (2018). Arts-related pedagogies in preschool education: An Asian perspective. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 45, 277-288. Birbili, M. (2019). Children′s interests in the early years classroom: Views, practices and challenges. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 23, doi:10.1016/j.lcsi.2018.11.006. Bodrova E, Leong D J. International handbook of early childhood education[M]. Springer:Dordrecht, 2018:1095-1111. Bone, J. (2019). Maria Montessori as domestic goddess: Iconic early childhood educator and material girl. Gender and Education, 31(6), 673-687. Booth, R. G., Andrusyszyn, M. A., Iwasiw, C., Donelle, L., & Compeau, D. (2016). Actor‐Network Theory as a sociotechnical lens to explore the relationship of nurses and technology in practice: methodological considerations for nursing research. Nursing inquiry, 23(2), 109-120. Bronfenbrenner, U. (1979). The Ecology of Human Development: Experiments by Nature and Design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press. Bueger, C., & Stockbruegger, J. (2017). Actor-network theory: Objects and actants, networks and narratives. In D. R. McCarthy (Ed.), Technology and world politics: An introduction (pp. 42-59). Abingdon, UK: Routledge. Buldu, E., & Olgan, R. (2021). Changes in Early Childhood Teachers’ Assessment Practices: Positioning Pedagogical Documentation. Education & Science/Egitim ve Bilim, 46, 55-77. Burman, E. (2008) Deconstructing Developmental Psychology. Abingdon: Routledge. Burnett, C. (2010). Technology and literacy in early childhood educational settings: A review of research. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy, 10(3), 247-270. Callon, M. (1984). Some elements of a sociology of translation: domestication of the scallops and the fishermen of St Brieuc Bay. The sociological review, 32(1_suppl), 196-233. Callon, M., & Latour, B. (1992). Don’t throw the baby out with the bath school! A reply to Collins and Yearley. In A. Pickering(Ed.), Science as Practice and Culture(pp. 343-368). Chicago: Chicago University Press. Campbell-Barr, V. (2019). Interpretations of child centred practice in early childhood education and care. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 49(2), 249-265. Carroll, M. (2018). Understanding curriculum: an actor network theory approach. Stud. Self Access Learn. J. 9, 247–261 Chambers, B., Cheung, A. C., & Slavin, R. E. (2016). Literacy and language outcomes of comprehensive and developmental-constructivist approaches to early childhood education: A systematic review. Educational Research Review, 18, 88-111. Chen, J. J., Li, H., & Wang, J. Y. (2017). Implementing the project approach: A case study of hybrid pedagogy in a Hong Kong kindergarten. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 31(3), 324-341. Chen, Y. T. (2020). An investigation of young children’s science and aesthetic learning through a science aesthetic thematic curriculum: A mixed-methods study. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 45(2), 127-141. Cherrington, S. (2018). Early childhood teachers’ thinking and reflection: A model of current practice in New Zealand. Early Years, 38(3), 316-332. Chesworth, L. (2016). A funds of knowledge approach to examining play interests: listening to children’s and parents’ perspectives. International Journal of Early Years Education, 24(3), 294-308. Chesworth, L. (2019). Theorising young children′s interests: making connections and in-the-moment happenings. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 23. Cheung, R. H. P. (2017). Teacher-directed versus child-centred: the challenge of promoting creativity in Chinese preschool classrooms. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25(1), 73-86. Christensen, P. H. (2004). Children′s participation in ethnographic research: Issues of power and representation. Children & society, 18(2), 165-176. Chung, S., & Walsh, D. J. (2000). Unpacking child-centredness: A history of meanings. Journal of curriculum studies, 32(2), 215-234. Conway, S., & Trevillian, A. (2015). “Blackout!” unpacking the black box of the game event. Transactions of the Digital Games Research Association, 2(1). Danish, J. A., & Enyedy, N. (2015). Latour goes to kindergarten: Children marshaling allies in a spontaneous argument about what counts as science. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 5, 5-19. Decuypere, M. (2019a). STS in/as education: where do we stand and what is there (still) to gain? Some outlines for a future research agenda. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 40(1), 136-145. Decuypere, M. (2019b). Visual Network Analysis: a qualitative method for researching sociomaterial practice. Qualitative research, 20(1), 73-90. Dewey, J. (1938). Experience and education. New York: Acmillan. Dewey, J. (1990). The school and society and The children and the curriculum. Chicago: The Universty of Chicago. Duhn I. (2015). Making agency matter: Rethinking infant and toddler agency in educational discourse[J]. Discourse: Studies in the cultural politics of education, 2015: 920-931. Edwards, S. (2003). New directions: Charting the paths for the role of sociocultural theory in early childhood education and curriculum. Contemporary issues in early childhood, 4(3), 251-266. Edwards, S. (2007). From developmental-constructivism to socio-cultural theory and practice: An expansive analysis of teachers′ professional learning in early childhood education. Journal of early childhood research, 5(1), 83-106. Edwards, S., & Cutter-Mackenzie, A. (2011). Environmentalising early childhood education curriculum through pedagogies of play. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(1), 51-59. Fallace, T. (2015). The savage origins of child-centered pedagogy, 1871–1913. American Educational Research Journal, 52(1), 73-103. Fenwick, T. & Nimmo, G. (2015). Making visible what matters: Sociomaterial approaches for research and practice in healthcare education. In J. Cleland and S. Durning (Eds.), Researching Medical Education (pp. 67-80). Oxford: Wiley. Fenwick, T. J. (2010). (un) Doing standards in education with actor‐network theory. Journal of Education Policy, 25(2), 117-133. Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2010). Actor-network theory in education. London: Routledge. Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (2018). How is actor-network theory contributing to educational research? A critical revisitation. In Fenwick, T., & Edwards, R. (Eds.), Revisiting Actor-Network Theory in Education(pp.1-18), London:Routledge. Fenwick, T., Doyle, S., Michael, M., & Scoles, J. (2014). Matters of learning and education: Socio-material approaches in ethnographic research. In S. Bollig, M. Honig, S. Neumann, & C. Seele (Eds.), MultiPluriTrans in educational ethnography. Approaching the multimodality, plurality and translocality of educational realities (pp.141-162). Bielefeld, Germany: Transcript Verlag/Columbia University Press. Fenwick, T., Edwards, R., & Sawchuk, P. (2011) . Emerging Approaches to Educational Research. Oxon: Routledge. Ferguson, D. E. (2021). “WE LOST THE PLADO”: Tracing privileged school literacies in one kindergarten classroom. Journal of Early Childhood Literacy. File, N. (2012). The relationship between child development and early childhood curriculum. In N. File, J. Mueller, & D. Wisneski (Eds.), Curriculum in early childhood education: Re-examined, rediscovered, renewed (pp. 29–41). New York, NY: Routledge. Fleer, M. (2008). Using digital video observations and computer technologies in a cultural–historical approach. In M. Hedegaard & M. Fleer (Eds.), Studying children: A cultural–historical approach. McGraw Hill: Open University Press. Fleer, M., & Veresov, N. (2018). Cultural-historical and activity theories informing early childhood education. In Fleer M., van Oers B. (Eds.) ,International handbook of early childhood education (pp. 47-76). Springer: Dordrecht. Fowler, R. C. (2017). Reframing the debate about the relationship between learning and development: An effort to resolve dilemmas and reestablish dialogue in a fractured field. Early Childhood Education Journal, 45(2), 155-162. Fung, C. K. H. (2015). “Active child” and “active teacher”: Complementary roles in sustaining child-centered curriculum. Childhood Education, 91(6), 420-431. Fung, C. K. H., & Pui-Wah, D. C. (2012). Consensus or dissensus? Stakeholders’ views on the role of play in learning. Early Years, 32(1), 17-33. Georgeson, J., Campbell-Barr, V., Bakosi, É., Nemes, M., Pálfi, S., & Sorzio, P. (2015). Can we have an international approach to child-centred early childhood practice?. Early Child Development and Care, 185(11-12), 1862-1879. Goodhall, N., & Atkinson, C. (2017). How do children distinguish between‘play’and ‘work’? Conclusions from the literature. Early Child Development and Care, 1-14. 10.1080/03004430.2017.1406484 Graue, E., Clements, M. A., Reynolds, A. J., & Niles, M. D. (2004). More than teacher directed or child initiated: Preschool curriculum type, parent involvement, and children′s outcomes in the child-parent centers. Education Policy Analysis Archives, 12, 72-72. Greaves, M., & Bahous, R. (2020). Adapting to Change; Exploring Early Childhood Educators’ Perceptions of a Child-Centered Curriculum. Early Childhood Education Journal, 49(4), 581-592. Grieshaber, S. (2006). Yesterday, today, tomorrow: Globalization and early childhood education in Hong Kong. Hong Kong Journal of Early Childhood, 5(2), 14-22. Grieshaber, S. (2008). Interrupting stereotypes: Teaching and the education of young children. Early Education and Development, 19(3), 505-518. Ha, Y. L. (2010). A Valuable Experience for Children: The Dim Sum and Chinese Restaurant Project. Early Childhood Research & Practice, 12(1), 1-12. Ha, Y. L. (2014). Who′s the teacher? Who′s the learner? Professional growth and development of a novice teacher in Hong Kong. Childhood Education, 90(1), 43-53. Hamilton, M. (2011). Unruly practices: What a sociology of translations can offer to educational policy analysis. Educational Philosophy and Theory, 43, 55-75. Hammersley, M. (2018). What is ethnography? Can it survive? Should it?. Ethnography and Education, 13(1), 1-17. Hanson, L., Holligan, C., & Adams, M. (2016). ‘Looked-after’ young people′s voices an actor-network theory analysis. Children′s geographies, 14(5), 603-616. Harrison, J., MacGibbon, L., & Morton, M. (2001). Regimes of trustworthiness in qualitative research: The rigors of reciprocity. Qualitative Inquiry, 7(3), 323–345. Hatch, A. (2010). Rethinking the relationship between learning and development: Teaching for learning in early childhood classrooms. The Educational Forum, 74(2), 58-68. Hatch, J. A. (2020). From theory to curriculum: Developmental theory and its relationship to curriculum and instruction in early childhood education. In J. J. Mueller & N. File (Eds.), Curriculum in Early Childhood Education: Re-examined, rediscovered, and renewed (2nd ed., pp. 51-63). New York, NY: Routledge. Hedges, H. (2012). Vygotsky′s phases of everyday concept development and the notion of children′s “working theories”. Learning, Culture and Social Interaction, 1(2), 143-152. Hedges, H.(2022). Children’s Interests, Inquiries and Identities: Curriculum, Pedagogy, Learning and Outcomes in the Early Years. Routledge. Hedges, H., & Cooper, M. (2018). Relational play-based pedagogy: Theorising a core practice in early childhood education. Teachers and Teaching, 24(4), 369-383. Hedges, H., & Cullen, J. (2012). Participatory learning theories: A framework for early childhood pedagogy. Early Child Development and Care, 182(7), 921-940. Hedges, H., Cullen, J., & Jordan, B. (2011). Early years curriculum: Funds of knowledge as a conceptual framework for children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 43(2), 185-205. Helavaara Robertson, L., Kinos, J., Barbour, N., Pukk, M., & Rosqvist, L. (2015). Child-initiated pedagogies in Finland, Estonia and England: exploring young children′s views on decisions. Early child development and care, 185(11-12), 1815-1827. Helm, J. (2012). From theory to curriculum. In N. File, J. Mueller, & D. Wisneski (Eds.), Curriculum in early childhood education. New York: Routledge. Heydon, R. (2013). Learning opportunities: The production and practice of kindergarten literacy curricula in an era of change. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 45(4), 481-510. Heydon, R., Crocker, W., & Zhang, Z. (2014). Novels, nests and other provocations: Emergent literacy curriculum production in a childcare centre. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 46(1), 1-32. Heydon, R., Moffatt, L., & Iannacci, L. (2015). ‘Every day he has a dream to tell’: classroom literacy curriculum in a full-day kindergarten. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 47(2), 171-202. Horton, J., & Kraftl, P. (2006). What else? Some more ways of thinking and doing ‘Children′s Geographies’. Children′s geographies, 4(01), 69-95. Hu, B. Y., Fan, X., Sao Leng Ieong, S., & Li, K. (2015). Why is group teaching so important to Chinese children′s development?. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 40(1), 4-12. Keung, C. P. C., & Fung, C. K. H. (2021). Pursuing quality learning experiences for young children through learning in play: how do children perceive play?. Early Child Development and Care, 191(4), 583-597. Koyama, J. (2013). Resettling notions of social mobility: locating refugees as ‘educable’ and ‘employable’. British Journal of Sociology of education, 34(5-6), 947-965. Koyama, J. (2015). When things come undone: The promise of dissembling education policy. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 36(4), 548–559. Krogh, S. L., & Morehouse, P. (2020). The early childhood curriculum: Inquiry learning through integration. New York, NY: Routledge. Landri, P. (2015). The sociomateriality of education policy. Discourse: studies in the cultural politics of education, 36(4), 596-609. Landri, P. (2020). Educational leadership, management, and administration through actor-network theory.New York: Routledge. Langford, R. (2010). Critiquing child-centred pedagogy to bring children and early childhood educators into the centre of a democratic pedagogy. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 11(1), 113-127. Latour, B. (1990). Technology is society made durable. The sociological review, 38(1_suppl), 103-131. Latour, B. (1996). On actor-network theory: A few clarifications. Soziale Welt, 4, 369–381. Latour, B. (2005). Reassembling the social: An introduction to Actor-Network Theory. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Latour, B., & Johnson, J. (1988). Mixing humans with non-humans: Sociology of a door-closer. Social Problems, 35(3), 298-310. Lave, J., & Wenger, E. (1991). Situated learning: Legitimate peripheral participation. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press. Law, J. (1984). On the methods of long-distance control: vessels, navigation and the Portuguese route to India. The Sociological Review, 32(1_suppl), 234-263. Law, J. (1992). Notes on the theory of the actor-network: Ordering, strategy, and heterogeneity. Systems practice, 5(4), 379-393. Law, J. (2009). Actor network theory and material semiotics. In B. S. Turner (Ed.), The Blackwell companion to social theory (pp. 141-158). Oxford: Blackwell. Lee, I. F., & Tseng, C. L. (2008). Cultural conflicts of the child‐centered approach to early childhood education in Taiwan. Early Years, 28(2), 183-196. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010a). Going beyond the theory/practice divide in early childhood education:Introducing an intra-active pedagogy. London/New York: Routledge. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2010b) .Rethinking pedagogical practices in early childhood education: A multidimensional approach to learning and inclusion. In Yelland N (Ed.) ,Contemporary Perspectives on Early Childhood Education(pp. 14–32). Maidenhead: Open University Press. Lenz Taguchi, H. (2011). Investigating learning, participation and becoming in early childhood practices with a relational materialist approach. Global studies of childhood, 1(1), 36-50. Lerkkanen, M. K., Kiuru, N., Pakarinen, E., Poikkeus, A. M., Rasku-Puttonen, H., Siekkinen, M., & Nurmi, J. E. (2016). Child-centered versus teacher-directed teaching practices: Associations with the development of academic skills in the first grade at school. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 145-156. Leu, K. H. (2021). Children′s Agency Within Emergent Curriculum: A Case of Networked Interests. Doctoral thesis, Teachers College, Columbia University. Lewis, R., Fleer, M., & Hammer, M. (2019). Intentional teaching: Can early-childhood educators create the conditions for children’s conceptual development when following a child-centred programme?. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 44(1), 6-18. Li, H., & Chen, J. J. (2023). The glocalization of early childhood curriculum: Global childhoods, local curricula. Taylor & Francis. Li, H., & Rao, N. (2005). Curricular and instructional influences on early literacy attainment: Evidence from Beijing, Hong Kong and Singapore. International Journal of Early Years Education, 13(3), 235-253. Li, H., Rao, N., & Tse, S. K. (2011). Bridging the gap: A longitudinal study of the relationship between pedagogical continuity and early Chinese literacy acquisition. Early Years, 31(1), 57-70. Li, H., Rao, N., & Tse, S. K. (2012). Adapting Western pedagogies for Chinese literacy instruction: Case studies of Hong Kong, Shenzhen, and Singapore preschools. Early Education & Development, 23(4), 603-621. Ling, L. Y. (2003). Roadblocks to Educational Reform Investigating Knowledge and Practice of Hong Kong Kindergarten Teachers. International Journal of Educational Reform, 12(3), 217-229. MacLeod, A., Cameron, P., Ajjawi, R., Kits, O., & Tummons, J. (2019). Actor-network theory and ethnography: Sociomaterial approaches to researching medical education. Perspectives on medical education, 8(3), 177-186. MacLure, M. (2013). Researching without representation? Language and materiality in post-qualitative methodology. International journal of qualitative studies in education, 26(6), 658-667. MacRae, C. (2008). Representing space: Katie′s horse and the recalcitrant object. Contemporary issues in early childhood, 9(4), 275-286. Marcus, G. E. (2008). The end (s) of ethnography: Social/cultural anthropology′s signature form of producing knowledge in transition. Cultural Anthropology, 23(1), 1-14. Martín-Bylund, A. (2017). Playing the game and speaking the right language: Language policy and materiality in a bilingual preschool activity. Multilingua, 36(4), 477-499. McLachlan, C., Fleer, M., & Edwards, S. (2018). Early childhood curriculum: Planning, assessment and implementation.London, UK: Cambridge University Press. Melacarne, C., & Fabbri, L. (2022). Transformative Learning and Sociomateriality. In A. Nicolaides (Ed.), The Palgrave Handbook of Learning for Transformation (pp. 165-180). Palgrave Macmillan:Cham. Merewether, J. (2017). Environment: The third teacher. In B. Gobby & R. Walker (Eds.), Powers of curriculum: Sociological perspectives on education (pp. 395-420). Melbourne: Oxford University Press. Michael, M. (2017). Actor-network theory: Trials, trails and translations. London：Sage. Michael-Luna, S., Heimer, L. G., & Grey, L. (2019). Unpacking the tensions in open-ended preschool curriculum: Teacher agency, standardization, and English learners in creative curriculum and high/scope. In Mueller, J. J. & File, N. (Eds.), Curriculum in Early Childhood Education (pp. 114-128). New York, NY: Routledge. Mifsud, D. (2020). A Critical Review of Actor-Network Theory (ANT) and Its Use in Education Research. In E. C. Idemudia (Eds.), Handbook of Research on Social and Organizational Dynamics in the Digital Era (pp. 135-156).USA: IGI Global. Miller Marsh, M. (2002). Examining the discourses that shape our teacher identities. Curriculum inquiry, 32(4), 453-469. Mitchell, B. (2020). Student-Led Improvement Science Projects: a praxiographic, actor-network theory study. Studies in Continuing Education, 42(1), 133-146. Moberg, E. (2018). Exploring the relational efforts making up a curriculum concept—an Actor-network theory analysis of the curriculum concept of children’s interests. Journal of Curriculum Studies, 50(1), 113-125. Mol, A. (1999). Ontological politics. A word and some questions. The sociological review, 47(1_suppl), 74-89. Mol, A. (2010). Actor-network theory: Sensitive terms and enduring tensions. Kölner Zeitschrift für Soziologie und Sozialpsychologie, 50(1), 253-269. Mol, A., & Mesman, J. (1996). Neonatal food and the politics of theory: Some questions of method. Social studies of science, 26(2), 419-444. Murdoch, J., (2005). Post-structuralism Geography. Sage Publications, London, UK. Myagmar, A. (2010). Child-centered approach: How is it perceived by preschool educators in Mongolia? US-China Education Review, 7(6), 63–77. Myers, C. Y. (2019). Children and materialities: The force of the more-than-human in children’s classroom lives. Singapore: Springer. Nasiopoulou, P., Williams, P., & Lantz-Andersson, A. (2022). Preschool teachers’ work with curriculum content areas in relation to their professional competence and group size in preschool: A mixed-methods analysis. Scandinavian Journal of Educational Research, 66(3), 533-548. New, R. S. (2007). Reggio Emilia as cultural activity theory in practice. Theory into practice, 46(1), 5-13. Nichols, S., & Rainbird, S. (2013). The mall, the library and the church: Inquiring into the resourcing of early learning through new spaces and networks. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 26(2), 198-215. Nimmo, R. (2011). Actor-network theory and methodology: Social research in a more-than-human world. Methodological Innovations Online, 6(3), 108-119. Osgood, J., & Mohandas, S. (2020). Reconfiguring the ‘Male Montessorian’: the mattering of gender through pink towering practices. Early Years, 40(1), 67-81. Pacini-Ketchabaw, V., Kind, S., & Kocher, L. L. (2016). Encounters with materials in early childhood education. New York: Routledge. Packer, M. (2001). The problem of transfer, and the sociocultural critique of schooling. The Journal of the learning sciences, 10(4), 493-514. Packer, M. J., & Goicoechea, J. (2000). Sociocultural and constructivist theories of learning: Ontology, not just epistemology. Educational psychologist, 35(4), 227-241. Plum, M. (2017). Making ‘what works’ work: enacting evidence-based pedagogies in early childhood education and care. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 25(3), 375-388. Plum, M. (2018). Signing in: knowledge and action in nursery teaching. Ethnography and Education, 13(2), 204-217. Power, S., Rhys, M., Taylor, C., & Waldron, S. (2019). How child‐centred education favours some learners more than others. Review of Education, 7(3), 570-592. Prochner, L. (2011). “Their little wooden bricks”: a history of the material culture of kindergarten in the United States. Paedagogica Historica, 47(3), 355-375. Prout, A. (2011). Taking a step away from modernity: Reconsidering the new sociology of childhood. Global studies of childhood, 1(1), 4-14. Pui-Wah, D. C. (2006). The translation of Western teaching approaches in the Hong Kong early childhood curriculum: A promise for effective teaching?. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7(3), 228-237. Pui-Wah, D. C., & Stimpson, P. (2004). Articulating contrasts in kindergarten teachers’ implicit knowledge on play-based learning. International Journal of Educational Research, 41(4-5), 339-352. Pyle, A., & Luce-Kapler, R. (2014). Looking beyond the academic and developmental logics in kindergarten education: The role of Schwab′s commonplaces in classroom-based research. Early Child Development and Care, 184(12), 1960-1977. Qvortrup, J. (2009). Childhood as a structural form. In The Palgrave handbook of childhood studies (pp.21-33). London, Palgrave Macmillan. Rao, N., Ng, S. S., & Pearson, E. (2009). Preschool pedagogy: A fusion of traditional Chinese beliefs and contemporary notions of appropriate practice. In Revisiting the Chinese learner (pp. 255-279). Springer, Dordrecht. Rautio, P. (2013). Children who carry stones in their pockets: On autotelic material practices in everyday life. Children′s Geographies, 11(4), 394-408. Rautio, P. (2014). Mingling and imitating in producing spaces for knowing and being: Insights from a Finnish study of child–matter intra-action. Childhood, 21(4), 461-474. Rodríguez, E. (2013). Child-centered pedagogies, curriculum reforms and neoliberalism: Many causes for concern, some reasons for hope. Journal of Pedagogy, 4(1), 59-78. Roehl, T. (2012). From witnessing to recording–material objects and the epistemic configuration of science classes. Pedagogy, culture & society, 20(1), 49-70. Rogoff, B. (2003). The cultural nature of human development. New York: Oxford University Press. Roth, W. M. (1996). Knowledge diffusion in a grade 4-5 classroom during a unit on civil engineering: An analysis of a classroom community in terms of its changing resources and practices. Cognition and instruction, 14(2), 179-220. Roth, W. M., & McGinn, M. K. (1998). > unDELETE science education:/lives/work/voices. Journal of Research in Science Teaching: The Official Journal of the National Association for Research in Science Teaching, 35(4), 399-421. Rubin, J. C., Land, C. L., & Long, S. L. (2021). Mobilising new understandings: an actor-network analysis of learning and change in a self-directed professional development community. Professional Development in Education, 47(2-3), 315-330. Ryan, S. (2004). Message in a model: Teachers’ responses to a court-ordered mandate for curriculum reform. Educational Policy, 18, 661–685 Ryan, S. (2005). “Freedom to Choose: Examining Children’s Experiences in Choice Time.” In N. Yelland (Ed.), Critical Issues in Early Childhood（pp.99-114）. Maidenhead: Open University Press. Ryan, S., & Grieshaber, S. (2005). Shifting from developmental to postmodern practices in early childhood teacher education. Journal of Teacher Education, 56(1), 34-45. Sak, R., Erden, F. T., & Morrison, G. S. (2016). Child-centred education: Preschool teachers’ beliefs and self-reported practices. Early Child Development and Care, 186(8), 1185-1202. Senent, I. G., Kelley, K., & Abo-Zena, M. M. (2021). Sustaining curiosity: Reggio-Emilia inspired learning. Early Child Development and Care, 191(7-8), 1247-1258. Shimpi, P. M., Paik, J. H., Wanerman, T., Johnson, R., Li, H., & Duh, S. (2015). Using parent and teacher voices in the creation of a Western-based early childhood English-language program in China. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 29(1), 73-89. Shvarts, A., & Bakker, A. (2019). The early history of the scaffolding metaphor: Bernstein, Luria, Vygotsky, and before. Mind, Culture, and Activity, 26(1), 4-23. Smith, A. B. (1996). The early childhood curriculum from a sociocultural perspective. Early Child Development and Care, 115(1), 51-64. Sofou, E., & Tsafos, V. (2010). Preschool teachers’ understandings of the national preschool curriculum in Greece. Early Childhood Education Journal, 37(5), 411-420. Song, S. (2015). Cambodian teachers′ responses to child-centered instructional policies: A mismatch between beliefs and practices. Teaching and Teacher Education, 50, 36-45. Sørensen, E. (2009). The materiality of learning: Technology and knowledge in educational practice. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Sørenssen, I. K. (2022). Exploring enactments of the big screen and the small screen in a Norwegian early childhood education and care setting. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood. Strathern, M. (2018). Infrastructures in and of ethnography. Anuac, 7(2), 49-69. Strong-Wilson, T., & Ellis, J. (2007). Children and place: Reggio Emilia′s environment as third teacher. Theory into practice, 46(1), 40-47. Surtees, N. (2008). Teachers following children? Heteronormative responses within a discourse of child-centredness and the emergent curriculum. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 33(3), 10-17. Tan, C. T., & Rao, N. (2017). How Do Children Learn? Beliefs and Practices Reported by Kindergarten Teachers in Singapore. Asia-Pacific Journal of Research in Early Childhood Education, 11(3), 81-112. Thornton, L., & Brunton, P. (2015). Bringing the Reggio approach to your early years practice. London：Routledge. Tummons, J., Fournier, C., Kits, O., & MacLeod, A. (2018). Using technology to accomplish comparability of provision in distributed medical education in Canada: an actor–network theory ethnography. Studies in Higher Education, 43(11), 1912-1922. Tzuo, P. W. (2007). The tension between teacher control and children’s freedom in a child-centered classroom: Resolving the practical dilemma through a closer look at the related theories. Early Childhood Education Journal, 35(1), 33-39. Tzuo, P. W., Yang, C. H., & Wright, S. K. (2011). Child-centered education: Incorporating reconceptualism and poststructuralism. Educational Research and Reviews, 6(8), 554-559. Valasmo, V., Paakkari, A., & Sahlström, F. (2022). The device on the desk–a sociomaterial analysis of how Snapchat adapts to and participates in the classroom. Learning, Media and Technology, 1-15. Veraksa, N., Sheridan, S., & Colliver, Y. (2021). Balancing child-centred with teacher-directed approaches to early education: incorporating young children’s perspectives. Pedagogy, Culture & Society, 1-18. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in society: Development of higher psychological processes. Cambridge, MA: Harvard university press. Walkerdine, V. (1984). Developmental psychology and the child-centred pedagogy: The insertion of Piaget into early education. In J. Henriques,W. Hollway, C. Urwin, C. Venn, and V. Walkerdine (Eds.), Changing the Subject: Psychology, Social Regulation and Subjectivity (pp.153-202). London: Routledge. Wen, X., Elicker, J. G., & McMullen, M. B. (2011). Early childhood teachers′ curriculum beliefs: are they consistent with observed classroom practices?. Early Education & Development, 22(6), 945-969. Westerberg, L., & Vandermaas-Peeler, M. (2021). How teachers, peers, and classroom materials support children’s inquiry in a Reggio Emilia-inspired preschool. Early Child Development and Care, 191(7-8), 1259-1276. Widger, S., & Schofield, A. (2012). Interaction or interruption? Five child-centred philosophical perspectives. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 37(4), 29-33. Winthereik, B. R. (2019). Is ANT’s radical empiricism ethnographic?. In Blok, A., Farías, I., & Roberts, C. (Eds.), The Routledge Companion to Actor-Network Theory (pp. 24-33). Routledge. Wisneski, D. B., & Reifel, S. (2012). The place of play in early childhood curriculum. In N. File, J. J., Mueller, & D. B. Wisneski (Eds.), Curriculum in early childhood education: Reexamined, rediscovered, renewed (pp.175-188). New York, NY: Routledge. Wood, E. (2007a). New directions in play: consensus or collision?. Education 3–13, 35(4), 309-320. Wood, E. (2007b) Re-conceptualising child-centred education, Forum, 49(1), 121–136. Wood, E. (2014). The play-pedagogy interface in contemporary debates. In L. Brooker, M. Blaise, & S. Edwards (Eds.), The Sage handbook of play and learning in early childhood (pp. 145-156). Los Angeles, CA: Sage. Wood, E., & Hedges, H. (2016). Curriculum in early childhood education: Critical questions about content, coherence, and control. The curriculum journal, 27(3), 387-405. Woods, A., Mannion, A., & Garrity, S. (2021). Implementing Aistear–the Early Childhood Curriculum Framework Across Varied Settings: Experiences of Early Years Educators and Infant Primary School Teachers in the Irish Context. Child Care in Practice. doi.org/10.1080/13575279.2021.1920367 Woolgar, S., & Lezaun, J. (2013). The wrong bin bag: A turn to ontology in science and technology studies?. Social studies of science, 43(3), 321-340. Wu, B., & Goff, W. (2021). Learning intentions: a missing link to intentional teaching? Towards an integrated pedagogical framework. Early Years, doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2021.1965099 Yang, W., & Li, H. (2019). Changing culture, changing curriculum: a case study of early childhood curriculum innovations in two Chinese kindergartens. The Curriculum Journal, 30(3), 279-297. Yang, W., & Li, H. (2020). The role of culture in early childhood curriculum development: A case study of curriculum innovations in Hong Kong kindergartens. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 23(1), 48-67. Yelland, N. & Kilderry, A. (2005). Against the tide: New ways in early childhood education. In N. Yealland (Ed.), Critical Issues in Early Childhood Education (pp.40-49). Berkingshire: Open University Press. Zin, D. M. M., Mohamed, S., Kashim, M. I. A. M., Jamsari, E. A., Kamaruzaman, A. F., & Rahman, Z. A. (2019). Teachers’ knowledge and practice in implementing the thematic approach in pre-school. International Journal of Civil Engineering and Technology,10(1), 1870-1881.
指導教授	陳斐卿(FEI-CHING CHEN)	審核日期	2023-3-20
推文	facebook   plurk   twitter   funp   google   live   udn   HD   myshare   reddit   netvibes   friend   youpush   delicious   baidu
網路書籤	Google bookmarks   del.icio.us   hemidemi   myshare