A Playcentre learning story: Te Whāriki as a framework for reflecting on emergent leadership

Research into leadership in early childhood education in Aotearoa New Zealand is in its infancy and is proving challenging due to the complexity and diversity of the early childhood education (ECE) sector and that there is no single approach to ECE leadership that is all-encompassing (Klevering & McNae, 2019; Nicholson et al., 2018; Notman & Jacobson, 2019; Thornton et al., 2009). Aotearoa New Zealand’s diverse early childhood education landscape has two types of early childhood education services: teacher-led services (e.g. kindergarten, education and care services) and parent-led services (e.g. Playcentre, Ngā Kōhanga Reo). Teacher-led services have registered early childhood teachers, while parent-led services have parents who have upskilled through the organisation as they have volunteered alongside their children.

The diversity of early childhood education and the differences in leadership practice is not only between teacher-led services and the parent-led service of Playcentre but is also between the different sectors within education. Early childhood education, as a collective, is still being grouped with primary and secondary education when it comes to strategic frameworks. For example, the Education Council of Aotearoa New Zealand has developed an Educational Leadership Capability Framework (Wylie & McKinley, 2018) as part of the Leadership Strategy for the teaching profession. The leadership capabilities are intended to provide early childhood education services and schools with guidelines for leadership development. However, Playcentre does not have registered teachers and many researchers caution the use of leadership frameworks designed for schools being used in early childhood due to the lack of research into leadership in the diverse (teacher-led and parent-led) early childhood education sector (Denee & Thornton, 2018; Klevering & McNae, 2019; Notman & Jacobson, 2019; Thornton, 2010; Thornton et al., 2009).

Notman and Jacobson’s (2019) recent research into leadership practice in Aotearoa New Zealand ECE services found that there is a lack of studies on leadership practices in early childhood education. A notable exception is research undertaken by Kate Thornton and associates (Denee & Thornton, 2017, 2018; Thornton, 2005a, 2005b, 2010, 2015; Thornton & Cherrington, 2014), which is beginning to address this gap in the literature (Denee & Thornton, 2018). Thornton et al. (2009) suggest that, because of the diversity of ECE contexts in Aotearoa New Zealand, it would be inappropriate to apply one leadership model across the entire early childhood sector.

Traditional business concepts of leadership are problematic when applied to the early childhood education context. Lockie (2010) cautions that the business-originated roles within early childhood education, such as administration and management, are seen by some as leadership roles. There is also the risk that managers who incorrectly identify themselves as leaders also believe they hold power (Bishop, 2003). Education leadership concepts need to address these power relationships and recognise the social construct of leadership, particularly in early childhood education (Bishop, 2003; Nicholson et al., 2018). One such approach has been for ECE leadership around the world to shift from hierarchical leadership to distributed leadership (Nicholson et al., 2018) and this has also been identified in Aotearoa New Zealand ECE (Denee & Thornton, 2017; Klevering & McNae, 2019; Lockie, 2010; Roder & Jovanovic, 2008).

Currently, distributed leadership is seen as an effective model of leadership in ECE (Clarkin-Phillips, 2009, 2011; Denee & Thornton, 2017, 2018; Nicholson et al., 2018; Notman & Jacobson, 2019; Rodd, 2012; Scrivens et al., 2007; Thornton, 2005a, 2005b, 2010, 2015; Thornton et al., 2009). The common characteristics of distributed leadership include: the group sharing responsibility, valuing individual strengths, autonomy, collaborative decision making, professional growth, relinquishing control, and shifting the balance of power to the whole group (Clarkin-Phillips, 2009). In this approach positional leadership (e.g. head teacher) still plays a role, by way of co-ordinating and developing leadership within the team (Denee & Thornton, 2018). Playcentre has no “head teacher” role as it is a parent-led service. Some Playcentres have a session facilitator who could be seen as a positional leader, however, a session facilitator does not distribute leadership roles. A session facilitator may encourage or mentor someone to step into a leadership role but does not distribute the leadership role to that person. Instead Playcentre uses “emergent leadership” to describe its approach (Manning, 2012).

Emergent leadership, where there is no one leader (Lockie, 2010) is about people moving out of leadership roles for others to become leaders (Manning et al., 2011). Manning (2012) identified two aspects to emergent leadership in Playcentre: one passive and the other active. Passive emergent leadership is where someone steps aside to allow others to fill the role, while a more active approach sees emergent leadership developed by active mentoring or sharing of leadership roles alongside existing leaders. As such, experienced parents support and mentor less experienced parents around pedagogical and management practices so that they take a more active role in supporting children’s learning and the operation of the centre.

While leadership in early childhood education is diverse there remains one constant throughout all early childhood education services, the bicultural curriculum Te Whāriki: He whāriki mātauranga mō ngā mokopuna o Aotearoa Early childhood curriculum (Te Whāriki), (New Zealand & Ministry of Education, 2017). The following section discusses the bicultural context in which all early childhood education services operate and the application of Te Whāriki as more than a curriculum framework for young children but also a framework for leadership in early childhood education (Clarkin-Phillips, 2009; Clarkin-Phillips & Morrison, 2018: Core Education, 2018; Roder & Jovanovic, 2008).

The following section gives a brief overview of the cultural context of early childhood education in Aotearoa New Zealand by discussing the impact of Te Tiriti o Waitangi on the writing of the early childhood curriculum Te Whāriki. The bicultural framework of Te Whāriki is then introduced, and the section concludes with a discussion on the connection between ECE leadership and Te Whāriki.

The cultural context of Aotearoa New Zealand is reflected in Te Tiriti o Waitangi and as such has impacted the writing of Te Whāriki. The original version of Te Whāriki was written in 1996 as a partnership between both partners to Te Tiriti o Waitangi (Māori and non-Māori) and its contents emphasise participation of Māori and protection of Māori language and culture (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2017). Te Whāriki is underpinned by four principles (Empowerment, Holistic Development, Family and Community, Relationships) and five strands (Wellbeing, Belonging, Contribution, Communication, Exploration) which were conceptualised from traditional Māori thinking and sociocultural theory. The principles provide the framework for the two distinct curriculum pathways, one indigenous and the other bicultural. Te Whāriki, therefore, unites all early childhood education services regardless of the service type (teacher-led and parent-led) or philosophy (Playcentre, Montessori, Rudolf Steiner).

As a Tiriti-based curriculum, the principles and strands of Te Whāriki have dual Māori and English names and dual definitions. These dual names and definitions are “not, however, synonyms as they had their origins in different world views” (New Zealand Ministry of Education, 2017, p. 69). Many early childhood researchers believe Te Whāriki, as a sociocultural framework, has application beyond that of an early childhood curriculum (Clarkin-Phillips, 2009; Core Education, 2018; Jovanovic & Roder, 2008; Rodd, 2012; Roder & Jovanovic, 2008; Shearsby, 2015).

The bicultural context of early childhood education in Aotearoa New Zealand supports the use of distributed and emergent leadership (Hawkins, 2017; Manning et al., 2011; New Zealand Playcentre Federation. Working Party on Cultural Issues, 1990). This is reinforced by Hawkins (2017), who believes that distributed leadership aligns well with the Māori concept of rangatiratanga. The use of emergent leadership in Playcentres is in agreement with Māori culture as a familiar way of learning to lead (Manning et al., 2011; New Zealand Playcentre Federation, 1990). Thus, Te Whāriki is suggested as a framework for leading as well as the teaching and learning of young children (Roder & Jovanovic, 2008). Te Whāriki is rooted in sociocultural theory—learning through relationships and collaboration—likewise distributed and emergent leadership, as collaborative models of leadership, can be viewed as sociocultural ways of leading (Jovanovic & Roder, 2008). The suggestion that sociocultural theory can be used as a leadership development framework is supported by Rodd (2012) who believes it is a useful way for teachers to analyse their leadership.

More recently a Te Whāriki webinar on leadership (Core Education, 2018) goes one step further and suggests that those working in early childhood education use Te Whāriki as a framework for leadership for learning and proposes a reflective question for each of the four principles. Similarly, Shearsby (2015) used Te Whāriki to develop a framework for the mentoring of early childhood teachers, which consists of the four principles and five strands with a mentoring statement for each and reflective questions for the mentor to use with the mentee (Shearsby, 2015). As there remains a lack of leadership professional development available to early childhood educators (Klevering & McNae, 2019), and this includes Playcentre leaders, Shearsby’s (2015) mentoring framework and the webinar on leadership (Core Education, 2018) provide useful starting points for using Te Whāriki as a professional development tool for leadership specifically for Playcentre.

The purpose of the following professional practice enquiry was to investigate Te Whāriki as a leadership framework and analyse how it could be used to reflect on leadership experience and leadership practice in Playcentre. The resulting matrix was developed from my own experience both as an (informal) emergent leader and as a (formal) positional leader within Playcentre and, as such, it has relevance for emergent and positional leaders. The enquiry is retrospective (reflecting on a 16–year career), introspective (making sense of where I am now), and prospective (positing a matrix that is useful for myself and other Playcentre leaders in the future). Finally, the development of the leadership matrix is based on my experience at Playcentre, and the application of the matrix by others lay outside the scope of the enquiry.

The nature of the enquiry was one of professional practice, where I undertook a critical reflection of my practice to inform my future practice. The critical reflection process I used in the enquiry was taken from the assessment for learning framework of notice, recognise and respond (Ministry of Education, 2004), used in early childhood education as part of all educators’ work with young children. This familiarity means ECE educators will be very comfortable working within this reflective framework. Educators notice a lot when observing and working with children; they will recognise some learning and then educators will respond to some of the learning they recognise to further support and extend the child’s learning (Dreaver et al., 2004). In the context of examining Te Whāriki as a leadership framework using the assessment for learning framework, Notice, Recognise, and Respond became the questions for each principle and strand.

Figure 1: the Principle matrix, demonstrates how the Te Whāriki principles and assessment for learning framework (Notice, Recognise and Respond) were brought together in a matrix form. With the principles down the left-hand side and Notice, Recognise and Respond along the top, this allowed for the documentation of answers to each question. Thus, a leader takes an example of their leadership practice that relates to the principle and records what they notice about their leadership practice. Next, the leader asks: What learning, in the form of leadership knowledge, skills, or attitude do I see in these examples? Finally, the leader responds with where to next, by asking: How can I extend my leadership learning in relation to the leadership principle? This matrix is essentially an individual learning plan which leaders and aspiring leaders can use as a professional development tool.

Figure 1

A similar matrix was created with the Te Whāriki strands; unlike the principles each strand has a statement, goals around the environment that children experience, and learning outcomes which a child becomes capable of. However, as Figure 2 demonstrates, the strand matrix differs in that the noticing became the goals from Te Whāriki, so the leader was noticing the goal experience. The recognise part of the matrix uses the strand learning outcome so leaders could recognise what to look for that would indicate the environment was meeting the goal. Leaders then respond to the centre’s current leadership practice with ideas for where to next that could either enhance the current leadership culture or indicate where and how improvements could be made. Thus, the strand matrix creates an assessment framework that assesses the leadership culture and environment, highlighting if the environment for leaders is as positive and supportive as it could be.

Figure 2:

The evaluation of the matrix was relatively easy due to the familiarity of Te Whāriki and the assessment for learning frameworks used as part of my everyday role as a Playcentre educator. Autoethnography was used as it allows for the analyses of personal experience to understand the cultural experience (Ellis, Adams & Bochner, 2011). My lived experience as a Playcentre leader was recorded in the form of vignettes to describe my experience as a Playcentre leader. Vignettes for each principle and the strands were used to evaluate Te Whāriki as a leadership framework, thus uncovering my leadership practices. The vignettes illustrated instances of my leadership practice that were relevant to the principle and became the noticing part of the matrix from which I was able to recognise the leadership learning and respond. Therefore, the case studies had a dual role, one to evaluate the matrix and Te Whāriki as a Leadership Framework for Playcentre Professional Development, and the other to examine mine and the centre’s leadership practice to identify strengths and weaknesses to inform my leadership practice and the leadership environment of the centre.

The case studies for each principle and the one case study for the five strands, were used to examine in detail my own experience as a leader in Playcentre, the leadership environment of the centre and to explore the matrix as a professional development tool for Playcentre. To do this I used vignettes of my own experience that related to each of the four principles at Playcentre. Firstly, I reflected on what I Notice about each principle and what I Recognise about my leadership in Playcentre. Finally, I discussed how I could Respond to what I recognised to enhance my professional practice further. The final case study was of the strand matrix and my response to Noticing the goals and Recognising the outcomes to assess the environment in which I lead. For the purposes of this paper, I will include in detail one of the principle case studies, Relationships, and one example from the Strand case study.

While I consider myself an experienced Playcentre leader who engages in ongoing critical reflection, there were times when I would have found it valuable to discuss my interpretation of each principle with a mentor or critical friend. This would have provided additional insight into what I consider strengths and limitations in my practice, thereby adding rigour to autoethnography. The process of examining my leadership using Te Whāriki as a leadership framework has nonetheless generated valuable insight into my leadership. In determining my understanding of each principle, then recognising aspects of my leadership and responding to the principles and strand matrix, I gained several insights into myself, not just as a leader but as a person, including a realisation that I was becoming increasingly culturally competent. I now have an awareness of my own world view, a positive attitude towards cultural diversity, and understand cultural practices with the ability to interact and communicate (Rodd, 2012).

Insights from case studies on my leadership practice made me aware of the position of power that I am in. I need to be aware of this when communicating with others, even though I don’t see myself as having power over them. The case studies also highlight compassion and empathy demonstrated within my leadership roles. These insights have contributed to my self-awareness of how I lead and, therefore, my ability to make changes to my practice to be a better leader. I have developed a strong sense of emotional intelligence and see the world differently, no longer through the eyes of a parent but through the lens of a leader.

This exploratory study has provided the following insights into the the value of utilising two frameworks which are already deeply embedded in Playcentre’s core practices as an ECE provider. The enquiry explored the use of the Aotearoa New Zealand early childhood curriculum Te Whāriki as a leadership framework by using the Assessment for Learning framework (Notice, Recognise and Respond) used in ECE. In bringing the two frameworks together into a simple matrix layout and with the familiarity of the two frameworks to Playcentre, leaders are easily able to reflect on their individual leadership practice and the emergent leadership practice of the centre. Thus, the outcome of the enquiry was twofold, the viability of the leadership matrix for use by Playcentre leaders and aspiring leaders, and the examination of my leadership capability using the framework. The insights into my own leadership practice and the emergent leadership environment of the centre demonstrated the matrix provides a simple, easy to use professional development tool in which to reflect on and highlight current leadership practice of the individual and centre. Therefore, the leadership matrix provides a reflective practice framework for reflecting on the action of being a leader in Playcentre and other ECE services.