The principles, strands, and goals for Te Whäriki, the early childhood curriculum, were consistent with the goals of these families for their children, suggesting that there was already a common value base from which teachers and parents could work.
The parents all had goals for their children’s education that included a broad curriculum and encouraged learning dispositions, for example:
y “an insatiable thirst/quest for knowledge”;
y “to show what is possible”; and
y “to encourage her… No experience is beyond her. She is in the top echelon of intelligence and common sense and capable of making her own decisions. I want what she wants.”
Three of the five families also emphasised that the child’s happiness and sense of security, and socialising with others, were important in the kindergarten setting.
While parents’ goals for children’s learning were broad, they all thought the main value of kindergarten was in the social interactions with other children, learning to share, and the range of activities that were available for the children. Involvement in a broader community was seen as a positive feature of kindergarten, although one father would have liked this to be more ethnically mixed. The values of kindergarten were appreciated by parents, for example treating others with respect, not bullying others, not throwing things. One parent commented positively on her child’s English language learning through the kindergarten experience (his first language was German). Teacher attributes were described positively by four families: their “positiveness” and encouragement; being “switched on”; and the quality of their interactions with children (two parents).
There were differing views about the structure of the kindergarten programme: one wanted “a bit more mat time” and another wanted her child “to learn her ABC”, while a father appreciated the free play and did not want his child forced into anything. Three of the five families thought more intense and in-depth learning occurred in the home environment. Comments included:
y the specific interests of the child are fostered at home through one-on-one activities, while kindergarten is “more surface” and “fun”;
y kindergarten is more of a social hub for the child, while at home the fundamentals of education are catered for; and
y the home is more controlled and not a “free rein mess”.
Home was seen by parents as a place where family values and manners were taught and relationships with wider family members were developed. Loving relationships were part of home life. Two families identified differences in discipline between home and kindergarten (one had a more controlled environment at home and in the other, the child could “be naughty and walk away” at home).
All the parents had high goals for their children’s education, wanting their children to “go as far as possible” in gaining formal qualifications. Three parents commented on the importance of qualifications for getting into satisfying paid employment, contrasting opportunities today with opportunities when they were young, where formal qualifications were less necessary. Parents all thought that the only barriers to the children going far in their formal education were their children’s interests and wishes.
Views of communication and relationships
There were commonalities between teachers’ and parents’ views about what was important in parent/teacher relationships: good communication skills; and teachers being available and approachable.
Parents emphasised the importance to them of teachers knowing their child well. They wanted opportunities to find out about their own child’s experiences during the day, to obtain feedback from the teacher about their child’s learning, relationships with others, feelings, and behaviour, and to form a relationship with the “people who the child is being left with”. Parents wanted to find out teachers’ views of their own child, including to be told if their child was upset or having difficulties.
Two fathers who were the main caregivers talked about some discomfort in being male in a kindergarten environment:
The mothers are predominantly friendly. I have had the odd strange attitude regarding being a ‘househusband’ quote, unquote … But you can’t do anything about that. That’s just the way it is. There are a lot of househusbands in [this community]. Occasionally you encounter more negative reactions to that. They’re not founded on anything other than antiquated morals … It’s only a tiny pocket. Nothing sinister, just not wanting to involve me or being warm. (Father)
I sometimes feel like a square peg in a round hole. I get frustrated that I can’t get anything done... That cabin fever kind of thing. But I’m not so paranoid now. [What were you paranoid about?] Being a male in a totally female dominated thing. You also are doing something that a lot of males don’t do. And I feel I have started to regress a little bit ...
because I feel I should be out there doing something. Don’t get me wrong, because it’s not at the forefront of my life. But I feel any male would feel the same. And I think a lot of females would feel like this too. Being with young children is a very difficult time. (Father) This second father thought it was important in New Zealand society for fathers to be more involved in the care and upbringing of their children:
If I was to be quite blunt, coming from Britain seven years ago what is blatantly obvious is that the blokes out here have to drop the rugby ball and start giving their children a bit more love and attention, because they’re going to suffer from lack of attention later… Here it’s very like Britain was 40–50 years ago. It’s very much mother in the kitchen and the father on the outside. New Zealand is a fantastic country in all sorts of ways but the only thing it is lacking is that social issue. I’m not knocking New Zealand, it’s got an awful lot right. (Father)
All families regarded informal talk with teachers as the main way in which they communicated with teachers about their child’s experiences, learning, and development. Three families thought this way of communicating was valuable in helping them form a good picture of their child’s skills and experiences from the teacher’s point of view, and reinforcing what they as parents did. They also appreciated the profile books and wall charts with programme planning.
However, two families wanted regular formal occasions to talk with teachers about their child. One mother wanted to know how the child was getting on in relation to others her age, and thought the kindergarten needed a stronger formal focus on literacy and numeracy. She felt that when communication was largely informal, “the loud children get the attention”. Another mother compared the New Zealand kindergarten’s informality with her home country, where “you could put your name down and get a formal interview”. She thought evening meeting times would enable working parents to come too.
Teachers were aware that some parents wanted a stronger emphasis on learning the alphabet and ABC. They had put out a questionnaire for families 4½ years before and consequently established displays on literacy and invited in guest speakers, while putting more emphasis on literacy in mat times. After that, they were more careful to identify early literacy in children’s profiles. A year before, a further questionnaire had indicated that parents were more aware of play, and perceptions were changing.
Both teachers thought they could do some things better. These were:
y having a parents’ voice in Learning Stories and profile books, getting parent perspectives of children’s learning as it transfers from kindergarten to home and vice versa, showing skills in the two settings and cross referencing these;
y raising awareness of fathers and men in the community and the importance of their role in learning and the kindergarten; and
Parents placed less emphasis on the linkage between home and kindergarten. A possible reason is that parents were unsure of what this linkage could contribute to the child’s learning at kindergarten.