Early Childhood Education Models

Various early childhood education and care (ECEC) models have

been developed based on the constructivist’s theory. Several of
these models are outlined here in an effort to draw conclusions
regarding the most appropriate model for use within Adventist early
childhood programs. A review of the models and their philosophies
will help to firmly establish the need for an Adventist model that will
glean from, and yet surpass, the current ECEC models in use around
the world.

Model Johann Pestalozzi and Friedrich Froebel

Basic In the early 1800’s, Johann Pestalozzi taught that children
Concepts learn through their play. His theory of early childhood
education was one of permissiveness, emphasizing
pleasant surroundings, self-activity, and physical training
for children. Interestingly enough, he saw the value of
natural settings with their inherent object lessons (von
Marenholtz-Bü low, 1887).
Pestalozzi’s most renowned student, Friedrich Froebel,
had similar views, though he took them to a more serious,
loftier level. Once called a prophet, Friedrich Froebel
created a kindergarten in 1837 as “a garden of children”
for early schooling. Froebel's theory of early childhood
education was based on four basic ideas: free self
expression, creativity, social participation, and motor
expression (von Marenholtz-Bü low, 1887). His idealistic
view of education was closely related to religion.
Strengths Pestalozzi’s aim was to educate the whole child and to
maintain equilibrium between the hands, heart and head
(Smith, 1997).
 The missing component in Pestalozzi’s theory, Froebel
believed, was the "spiritual mechanism", the foundation
of early learning (von Marenholtz-Bü low, 1887).
Weaknesses  
Model Montessori, Maria
Basic “Individual activity is the one factor that stimulates and
Concepts produces development” (Montessori, 1995, p. 8, ¶3).
Around this one observation, Dr. Montessori developed
her theory and practice, using observation and
experimentation as cornerstones for her developing
Method (Seldin & Epstein, 2003).
Contrary to popular belief, the colorful manipulative
materials found in a Montessori classroom are not the
Method; they are tools (St. Giermaine, 2008). The Method
is one of independent learning – independent doing.
“Competence, independence, willingness to embrace the
challenges of change… are the most important building
blocks of the Montessori Method” (Montessori
Foundation, 2008, p. 29, ¶3). In a Montessori classroom,
skill refinement, increasing levels of responsibility,
maintaining or restoring order and caring for the
classroom environment are all part of the Method and
taught through activities relating to “Practical Life”
(Montessori Foundation, 2008).
The key to the activities lies in their practicality to real
daily life. They are meaningful and purposeful activities
that teach real skills and develop independent individuals
(Schmidt & Schmidt, 2008a). They are simple activities
such as learning how to use a spoon to transfer a set of
items from one dish to another; learning how to pour
liquid from one container to another; learning to properly
wash a table or rinse out a sponge; learning how to polish
a shoe or sweep up a spill on the classroom floor;
becoming aware of, and learning how to listen to the
body’s signals regarding personal needs whether it be a
biological break, snack or need for rest; learning to be
observant of, and caring for the environment and learning
how to care for the other community members through
helpful and courteous actions, empathy and altruistic
behaviors (Montessori Foundation, 2008).
Practical Life is not the only learning center within a
Montessori classroom. Academics are always present and
offer opportunities for deeper investigative learning.
Beginning with sensorial exercises, the children learn to
increase their ability to attend, focus, observe and
become aware of their environment and to “consider
what comes into their experience” (Montessori
Foundation, 2008). Montessorian philosophy strongly
emphasizes touch and manipulation of objects for
learning, hence there are such materials in each learning
center: math and geometry, science, geography, language
arts, cultural studies, physical education and the arts
 (Montessori Foundation, 2008).
Strengths Montessori has the only curriculum that has materials for
every subject in every main topic from infancy through
middle school. The strengths within the Montessori
Method are the practical life and sensorial learning
strategies. In many ways idealistic, they still provide the
organizational skills and work habits necessary for
individual and shared success. Because each child creates
their own “cycle of work based on” their “individual
interests,” the “cycle of self-directed activity” naturally
lengthens the child’s attention span and concentration
skills (Montessori Foundation, 2008, p. 15, ¶1). Such
strategies easily accommodate various learning
modalities, personalities and ability levels. Assessment is
based on the individual’s ability to master a work project
which then leads naturally into a more complex work
project.
Weaknesses The main weakness within the Montessori Method lies in
its flexible application. Each school and teacher is able to
blend the Montessori Method with their own unique
personality and interpretation (Montessori Foundation,
2008). As a result, the Montessori philosophical base is
also applied flexibly and no two Montessori schools are
alike. Even though the Montessori Foundation provides
an accreditation process, each school varies in the level of
quality which is offered. There is also a certification
 process for Montessori teachers, but many teachers at the
early childhood level lack certification.
Model Reggio Emilia
Basic The Reggio Emilia approach to teaching young children
Concepts places great value on experiential learning, problem
solving and relationships (Reggio Emilia Approach, 2008;
Edwards, 2002). Unlike traditional preschool programs,
the Reggio concept of project-based learning is not pre-
planned, thematic, or trans-disciplinary.  The teacher is a
facilitator of learning, providing support and materials for
the projects which are directed by the understanding and
learning of the children, a concept recently termed
“emergent curriculum” because the curriculum emerges
based on the interests of the children (Baxter & Petty,
2008).
One of the most important components of the Reggio
approach is the teacher’s ability to listen to the children,
deduct wherein their interests lie, provide for the
emerging learning possibilities and document the entire
process (Walsh & Petty, 2007). This documentation, in
the form of portfolios, memory books and products
resulting from projects, provides descriptive information
about the development of the children both individually
and as a peer group (Walsh & Petty, 2007; Edwards,
2002).
Strengths The signal strength of the Reggio approach is in the ability
 to use the environment as a teacher, using both long-term
and short-term projects for group as well as
individualized learning opportunities (Edwards, 2002).
Reggio was also the originator of the child’s portfolio for
assessment purposes. Coupled with extensive
documentation, such an environment offers abundant
opportunities for further research into child development
and group navigational behaviors.
Weaknesses Reggio Emilia is an approach to early childhood education
rather than a formal model such as the Waldorf and
Montessori which have defined methods, teacher
certification standards and accreditation protocols
(Edwards, 2002). Formal teacher education is not
required and pre-service training is meager, but staff
development through trainings and conferences are
promoted (Reggio Emilia Approach, 2008). In addition,
the emergent style of learning has often produced chaotic
classrooms for many schools with many not
understanding how to implement this style of learning.
These tend to be weaknesses in the approach as its
acceptance has grown. Still, hundreds of early childhood
programs around the world have been based on or
inspired by the Reggio approach (Edwards, 2002).
Model Waldorf
Basic Waldorf schools were started by Rudolf Steiner, the
Concepts founder of anthroposophy, which is the philosophical
 foundation of Waldorf schools and teacher training sites
(Anthroposophy, 2008). Anthroposophy asserts that
spiritual worlds can be intellectually contacted through a
series of unfolding, developmental stages
(Anthroposophy, 2008). Consistent with the tenets of
anthroposophy, Waldorf schools view children as in a
continuous process of becoming, evolving in freedom
toward increased self-knowledge (Ward, 2001).
The child’s spiritual development is greatly valued and
encouraged through the use of storytelling, fairytales,
myths, legends, fantasy and imagination as a means of
stimulating the children’s play (Walsh & Petty, 2007;
Lenart, 2003; Shell, N.D.).
Strengths At the preschool level, Waldorf schools use simple toys
made of natural materials rather than commercial
characters or plastic toys (Lenart, 2003). Waldorf schools
attempt to develop the child’s physical body and will (also
called freedom) through the various arts and creative,
hands-on activities rather than academics (Baxter &
Petty, 2008).
Weaknesses Waldorf is not a true early childhood philosophy or
educational model but rather a spiritual philosophy that
has been utilized as a “visible… application” of Steiner’s
anthroposophical vision (Anthroposophy, 2008). What
makes the Waldorf philosophy and model untenable for
Christian early childhood educators and parents is the
 spiritual teachings of the “evolution of consciousness”,
mixing rational thought with intuition and clairvoyance
and requiring a series of reincarnations  (Anthroposophy,
2008). The most disturbing is the belief in Lucifer as a
spirit of light who “motivates creativity and imagination”
and Ahriman as a “dark spirit” who “stimulates
intellectuality and technology” with “the Christ being” as
“a spiritual entity who stands between and harmonizes
the two extremes” (Anthroposophy, 2008).
Young children are considered to be a combination of
earthly and cosmic beings that are still “united with
angelic and other spiritual beings” (Trostli, 1998). These
cosmic beings, as developing human beings, fulfill the
“impulses” and “work of the angels, the archangels and
even higher spiritual beings,” hence, the heavy emphasis
on fantasy and imaginative teaching and play (Trostli,
1998).
Model High Scope
Basic The mission of the HighScope Educational Research
Concepts Foundation is “to lift lives through education” (Epstein,
2010). Consistent with this mission, HighScope has
developed an early childhood educational approach that
is firmly based in research and experiential practices.
Adhering to the guidelines of developmentally
appropriate-based early childhood programs, HighScope
moves beyond these best practices to incorporate a
unique feature which differentiates them from all other
early learning methods.
The unique feature of HighScope is the daily practice of
the “plan-do-review sequence” (Epstein, 2010). This very
important, and intensely researched aspect, includes a
small-group meeting during which several children will
sit with the teacher to discuss plans for their work time.
Work time plans typically consist of an articulated desire
to engage in a specific activity including the materials and
friends with whom the children will interact. Once each
child has decided upon a plan, the actual work time
commences and continues for up to an hour. At the
conclusion of work time, the children again meet with
their teacher to discuss, or review, their work time
activities.
The benefits to the process of “plan-do-review” are found
in the children’s learned ability to plan ahead and then to
reflect, two very important lifelong skills. Learning these
skills has also been shown to significantly improve
developmental progress and problem solving as the
children initiate the learning process by making choices,
follow through with those choices and make decisions to
redirect efforts and plans as necessary (Epstein, 1993 &
2003).
Since its inception in 1970, HighScope has launched itself
into the national and international early childhood
 educational realm through its highly controversial
longitudinal study, the Perry Preschool Project. The
HighScope Perry Preschool Project longitudinal study
results have created a plethora of debate regarding early
childhood programs, academics for young children and
the role of the government in the education and care of
young children. In this study, the authors outlined the
benefits of a high quality preschool program for African-
American, low-income children who were at risk
“retarded intellectual functioning and eventual school
failure” (Olsen, 1999; Preschool California and Children
Now, 2004).
Despite controversy over the generalization of the Perry
Preschool Project results (Olsen, 1999; Elkind, 1987), this
detailed study has impacted state, federal and
international educational expectations for young
children. For HighScope, the study results have initiated
the adoption and refinement of several effective teaching
and learning practices within the HighScope approach,
targeting all young learners, not just low-income children
at risk for academic failure.
Strengths The teaching and learning practices are the strength of
the HighScope educational approach. The curriculum is
defined, emergent with child interests and
developmentally based. Parent-teacher conferences and
annual home visits are a requirement for effective
 curriculum implementation. Child-based outcomes are
assessed through comprehensive observations that take
place over several weeks or months rather than during
one-time sessions (Epstein, 2010). In addition, the
curriculum standards and assessment protocol have been
aligned with national standards, and appear to be
compatible with the early learning standards of local
school districts and state departments of education
(Epstein, 2010).
The HighScope approach has two final strengths not seen
in other early childhood educational models. First, the
teachers are highly trained and certified. Training is
administered in a variety of methods in order to
accommodate the diverse needs of early childhood
professionals currently working in early childhood
programs. Second, HighScope firmly believes that when
their research-proven model is implemented in an early
childhood program, its reliability must be validated
through an accreditation process known as the Preschool
Program Quality Assessment (Epstein, 2010). These two
aspects are intended to control the quality and integrity
of the HighScope approach; a combined mechanism
which other methods have yet to replicate.
Weaknesses  
Model Traditional, American Preschool
Basic In 2003, Larry Prochner from the University of Alberta,
Concepts Canada described American early childhood preschool
programs as a “fragmented… patchwork… and a non-
system” (p. 267, ¶2). The traditional American preschool
program is repeatedly referred to as low in quality when
compared to preschool programs in other countries
(Cleveland & Colley, 2003). The reasons are
multitudinous ranging from lack of government funding
and under-educated teachers to diverse regulatory
policies (Cleveland & Colley, 2003; Prochner, 2003). In an
effort to accommodate their demographic clientele, early
childhood providers have been offering educational
philosophies ranging from play-based programs to
academically-focused programs with many trying to find
a balance by offering a combination of the two. As a
result, publishers and curriculum companies have
responded by providing a myriad of curriculum
philosophies and resources.
The average, traditional American preschool teacher
adheres to the child development theories of Piaget and
Erikson and follows a rather simplistic, teacher-directed
daily routine. The curriculum is typically developed into
monthly, thematic units based on esoteric topics
presumably of interest to the majority of young children,
designed to be presented in a developmentally
appropriate manner but often lacking depth and real
educational value (Katz & Chard, 1989 as cited in
Edwards, Gandini & Forman, 1998, p. 28 ¶2).
Montessorian influences are apparent in that traditional
preschools have incorporated child sized furniture,
learning centers and miniaturized tools and equipment
(Seldin & Epstein, 2003). “Play is a child’s work” and “play
as learning” are constant buzz words meant to instill
confidence in the clientele as they observe the program’s
daily rituals. 
In the past ten years, traditional American preschool
programs have been challenged to prove the merit of
their play-based programs. One result has been an
overemphasis on the teaching of academics to younger
and younger children. At the federal level, in 1998,
Congress required all Head Start grantees to start
collecting data on child outcomes. Consequently, the Head
Start Bureau developed the Head Start Outcomes
Framework. In 2002, President Bush announced Good
Start, Grow Smart, a national early childhood initiative
that encouraged states to develop voluntary early
learning guidelines on literacy, language, and pre-reading
skills. The Early Childhood Educator Professional
Development program is the only teaching quality
provision of the No Child Left Behind act that applies
explicitly to early learning educators. This grant money is
for partnerships that provide high-quality professional
development to early childhood educators working with
children from birth through kindergarten entry who
come from low-income families in high-need
communities. In addition, the Early Reading First
program provides grant money awarded directly to early
learning programs and targeted for children from low-
income families, professional development and research-
based curriculum and assessments.
At both the federal and state level, early learning
standards are now a part of the national standards-based
educational climate (Kauerz & McMaken, 2004). Many
states have developed quality rating systems in an effort
to identify programs with teachers and child learning
outcomes that meet state standards. As of 2004, forty-
three states had a universal pre-kindergarten law of some
kind, but funding has hindered implementation.
Fortunately for young children, educational and brain
research does not support the practice of early
academics. From all these research studies, Dr. Rebecca
Marcon, a developmental psychologist and a professor of
psychology at the University of North Florida, has
concluded: “Children's later school success appears to be
enhanced by more active, child-initiated learning
experiences. Their long-term progress may be slowed by
overly academic preschool experiences that introduce
formalized learning experiences too early for most
children's developmental status. Pushing children too
 soon may actually backfire when children move into the
later elementary school grades and are required to think
more independently and take on greater responsibility
for their own learning process” (Marcon, 2002, p.
Discussion, ¶Final paragraph).
Strengths The main strength of the traditional, American preschool
program is in its adaptability. With new research
constantly available, American early childhood
professionals are slowly adopting new ways of working
with and teaching young children. Philosophical
approaches are broadening, partly as a result of
governmental requirements to accommodate ability and
cultural diversity; partly because of conservative
ideologies integrating the child’s spiritual learning
domain.
Weaknesses Regardless of the educational philosophy, the weakness
of the traditional, American preschool program lies in the
corporate care mentality which dominates the classroom
environment: all are simultaneously taught the same
concepts, follow the same routines, given individualized
help if needed and measured in comparison to each other
– behaviorally as well as academically. Success is
measured in the child’s ability to sit still, follow
directions, recite, write and often read required material
(NCREL, 2004).
Model Seventh-day Adventist Early Childhood Education and
 Care Programs
Basic Higher than the highest human thought can reach
Concepts is God’s ideal for His children. Godliness--
godlikeness--is the goal to be reached. Before the
student there is opened a path of continual
progress. He has an object to achieve, a standard
to attain, that includes everything good, and pure,
and noble. He will advance as fast and as far as
possible in every branch of true knowledge…
(White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 18, ¶4).

Through such words of inspiration and encouragement

Ellen G. White dealt keenly with both the temporal and
spiritual development of the young child. Author, speaker
and mother of four boys, two of whom died in childhood,
she motivated parents and teachers to strive for
excellence in character, learning and daily habits
(Noorbergen, 1972).
In- an era where children were to be seen and not heard,
Mrs. White showed an experiential and intuitive
understanding for their developmental needs. “As soon as
a child is capable of forming an idea, his education should
begin” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 26, ¶2), she wrote. 
“[F]or then the mind is the most impressible, and the
lessons given are remembered (White, 1954/2002, CG, p.
26, ¶3).” She believed that young children should be
neither pampered and indulged nor ignored and
deprived. She advocated for a balance in the careful
instruction of young children by loving and attentive
adults (White, 1877).
Solomon wrote, “Train up a child in the way he should go,
and when he is old, he will not depart from it” (Proverbs
22:6; White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 38, ¶2). Mrs. White
understood these words to mean “it is by degrees that the
character is formed, and that the soul is trained to put
forth effort and energy proportionate to the task which is
to be accomplished” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 37, ¶2).
In writing to parents and teachers, she said: “No work
ever undertaken by man requires greater care and skill
than the proper training and education of youth and
children” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 39, ¶1). “True
education is not the forcing of instruction on an unready
and unreceptive mind” (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 41, ¶2).
“True education… has to do with the whole being, and
with the whole period of existence possible to man. It is
the harmonious development of the physical, the mental,
and the spiritual powers” (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 13,
¶1). Such harmonious development is found in the study
of God’s law, the Bible, nature, service to others and
“useful occupation” (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 21, ¶3). 
Hence, the “first object of education is to direct our
minds” and those of our children to God’s revelation of
Himself (Matthew 6:22; Psalms 111:10; Proverbs 9:10;
White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 16, ¶4). 
In dozens of books and hundreds of letters, Mrs. White
detailed how parents and teachers were to accomplish
their high calling. She wrote instructions dealing with the
home life, classroom environment, discipline, training and
teaching methods.
In the years since her death, the counsel from Mrs. White
has repeatedly been validated through research. The
techniques she recommended over a hundred years ago
have become known as “best practices” within the early
childhood community.
For instance, when teaching young children, Mrs. White
(1903/2002, Ed.; 1954/2002, CG), recommended the use
of methods such as:
·         Attention to individual development and personal
interests (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 232, ¶2)
·         Memory work and independent thought (White,
1954/2002, CG, p. 511, ¶4; White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 230,
¶2)
·         Physical, practical work and hands-on activities
(White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 220, ¶2 & pp. 207-209 & 212-
213)
·         Thorough, multi-disciplinary, well-rounded training
(White, 1903/2002, Ed. p. 232, ¶4)
·         Hymns and Scripture songs (White, 1954/2002, CG,
pp. 523-524)
·         Bible and mission stories (White, 1954/2002, CG,
pp. 514-515)
·         Prayer and reflection (White, 1954/2002, CG, p.
254)
·         Nature object lessons and studies in the various
aspects of nature (White, 1954/2002, CG, pp. 46-59 & pp.
534-536)
·         Solid, valuable knowledge (White, 1954/2002, CG, p
193)
·         Simplicity and effectiveness (White, 1903/2002, Ed.,
p. 107, ¶2 and p. 233, ¶1)
·         Illustration (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 514, ¶3;
(White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 233, ¶1)
·         Enthusiasm and dignity (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p.
233, ¶2 & 279, ¶1)
·         Well-planned lessons with a distinct goal (White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 233, ¶4)
·         Mastery learning (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 234,
¶1)
·         Parental involvement (White, 1903/2002, Ed., pp.
283-286).
As another example, one area of constant struggle for
early childhood teachers is that of discipline. Mrs. White
wrote that parents and teachers should reflect the
character of Christ by:
·         Encouraging confidence and strengthen a sense of
honor (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 289, ¶3)
·         Blending authority and affection (White,
1952/1980, AH, p. 198, ¶1)
·         Acting from firm rules, never from impulse or
passion (White, 1952/2002, AH, p. 198, ¶1)
·         Erring on the side of mercy (White, 1903/2002, Ed.,
p. 293, ¶2)
·         Dedicating time and attention to individual children
(White, 1990, 7 MR, p. 11, ¶1 & 2)
·         Teaching habits of carefulness and respect (White,
1993, 7 MR, p. 11, ¶1)
·         Avoiding coldness or harshness, faultfinding or
censure (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 291, 4)
·         Not indulging self-indulgence or petting praise
(White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 37, ¶1 and p. 178, ¶1 & 2)
·         Not excusing or tolerating tantrums (White, 1990, 7
MR, p. 11, ¶3)
·         Being just and reasonable (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p.
287, ¶2)
·         Protecting children from harm (White, 1954/2002,
CG, p. 460, ¶2; p. 272, ¶3)
·         Lovingly denying children those things that are
harmful or would cause injury (White, 1948, 4T, p. 140,
¶3; p. 141, ¶1)
·         Never raising the voice or hand before prayer
(White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 254)
·         Asking for God’s blessing on the seeds sown in each
child’s heart (White, 1954/2002, CG, pp. 200-203; pp.
204-208).
The goal, of course, is to raise godly children who are
independent “thinkers, and not mere reflectors of other
men’s thought” (White, 1990, 7 MR, p. 12, ¶2; White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 17, ¶3); children who are “strong to
think and to act;” “masters and not slaves of
circumstances;” “who possess breadth of mind, clearness
of thought, and the courage of their convictions” (White,
1903/2002, Ed., p. 18, ¶1). At the heart of Mrs. White’s
philosophy is the idea of lovingly caring for another’s
child. Thus, the Seventh-day Adventist Church has
established and operated schools based on council
received from Mrs. White in the book Education
(1903/2002). In a chapter describing the training of the
children of Israel upon their deliverance from slavery in
Egypt, she outlines the recipe for true education. In
abbreviated form, their education consisted of labor,
study and meditation (p. 34, ¶1). They were given the
oracles of God in order to study His character (p. 34, ¶3;
p. 35, ¶1 & 4) and learn obedience (p. 36, ¶1). Through
the Divinely appointed economy, they were to learn the
value of united labor, service (p. 37, ¶3 & 4) and worship
 (p. 38, ¶4). Daily activities and habits of health all
centered on their willing followership and discipline (p.
38, ¶1 & 2; p. 37, ¶5). The organized manner in which
they lived, traveled and worshiped infiltrated every
aspect of their lives (p. 39, ¶3). Through songs and
routines they affixed lessons within their minds and those
of their children (p. 39, ¶2).
“If, in their early childhood, children are perseveringly
and patiently trained in the right way, they will not form
wrong habits” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 200, ¶4). “The
parents or teachers who give no attention to the small
actions that are not right establish those habits in the
youth” (White, 1954/2002, CG, p. 201, ¶3); habits that
will be carried with them throughout life (White,
1954/2002, CG, p. 200, ¶4 ).
Strengths The development of the Seventh-day Adventist
educational model for early childhood education has its
foundation in a Biblical context with counsel provided by
Ellen White concerning the upbringing and purposeful
training of the young child. Three scriptural verses on
which this philosophy leans upon gives instruction to
“Seek ye first the kingdom of God and His righteousness”
(Matthew 6:33, King James Version), teach the words of
Holy Script “diligently unto thy children” (Deuteronomy
6:7), and to “train up a child in the way he should go”
(Proverbs 22:6). To these admonitions, White adds that
 “True education… has to do with the whole being… It is
the harmonious development of the physical, the mental,
and the spiritual powers” (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 13,
¶1). Such harmonious development is found in the study
of God’s law, the Bible, nature, service to others and
“useful occupation” (White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 21, ¶3). 
Hence, the “first object of education is to direct our
minds” and those of our children to God’s revelation of
Himself (Matthew 6:22; Psalms 111:10; Proverbs 9:10;
White, 1903/2002, Ed., p. 16, ¶4).
The Adventist church has a well developed educational
system that is highly respected around the world. The
well developed philosophy of education is found in the
book Education, by Ellen G. White. This provides guidance
and purpose in developing policies, procedures,
guidelines, curriculum, teacher preparation programs,
professional development and certification, program
standards and accreditation – all the standardized
expectations for ECEC programs and ECEC teachers.
Educational methods are also outlined in the writings of
Mrs. White as well as in the Holy Bible. How those
methods are practiced, of course, can be more eclectic
and incorporate aspects of other ECE models; but being
eclectic in our practical application of Adventist methods
does not change our foundational philosophy.
Weaknesses The Adventist church is currently in the process of
 formalizing an organizational structure as it relates to
Adventist ECEC programs. A firm business and
community service foundation is being developed
through the drafting of policies, guidelines, curriculum
standards and employee standards, professional
development, professional certification and program
accreditation.

References
Anthroposophy. (2008, December 20). In Wikipedia, The free encyclopedia. Retrieved
December 26, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Anthroposophy&oldid=259172813
Baxter, V. & Petty, K. (2008, Fall). Preschool curricula: Finding one that fits. Texas Child
Care, 32(2), 34-39.
California Department of Education. (1999). First Class: A Guide for Early Primary
Education. Sacramento, CA: CDE Press.
Cleveland, G. & Colley, S. (2003, June 4). The future role of government in supporting
early childhood education and care in Ontario: A report to the Panel on the Role
of Government in Ontario. Commission on the Future Role of Government in
Ontario, Canada.
Edwards, C. P. (2002, Spring). Three approaches from Europe: Waldorf, Montessori, and
Reggio Emilia. Early Childhood Research and Practice 4(1). Retrieved from
http://ecrp.uluc.edu/v4n1/edwards.html
Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (1998). The hundred languages of children: The
Reggio Emilia approach – advanced reflections. Westport, CT: Greenwood
Publishing Group. ISBN 1567503101, 9781567503104.
Epstein, A. S. (1993). Training for quality: Improving early childhood programs through
systematic inservice training. Ypsilanti, MI: HighScope Press.
Epstein, A. S. (2003, September). How planning and reflection develop young children's
thinking skills. Young Children, 58(5) 28-36.
Epstein, A. S. (2010). All about HighScope – FAQs. Retrieved from
http://www.highscope.org/Content.asp?ContentId=291
Gerhart Mooney, C. (2000). Theories of childhood. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
Kauerz, Kristie & McMaken, Jessica. (June, 2004). No Child Left Behind policy brief:
Implications for the early learning field. Education Commission of the States.
www.ecs.org.
Kindergarten in France. (2008, juillet 26). Wikipédia, l'encyclopédie libre . (2008, July
26). Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. Page consultée le 17:18, aoû t 28, 2008 à
partir de http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=
%C3%89cole_maternelle_en_France&oldid=31928939 . Retrieved 17:18,
August 28, 2008 from  http://fr.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title =% C3%
89cole_maternelle_en_France & oldid = 31928939.
Lenart, C. M. (2003, June). Steiner’s Chicago legacy shines brightly. Conscious Choice.
Retrieved from
http://www.consciouschoice.com/2003/cc1606/steinerchicago1606.ht
ml
Marcon, R. (2002). Moving up the grades: Relationship between model and later school
success. Early Childhood Research and Practice, (4) 1. Retrieved from
http://ecrp.uiuc.edu/v4n1/marcon.html
Montessori Foundation, The. (2008a). Lessons in grace, courtesy and community
service, In Special issue, Tomorrow’s Child: 38-39.
Montessori Foundation, The. (2008b). Practical life. In Special issue, Tomorrow’s Child:
29-37.
Montessori, M. (1995). The absorbent mind. New York, NY: Henry Holt and Company.
ISBN: 0-8050-4156-7.
 Noorbergen, R. (1972). Ellen G White Prophet of Destiny. Connecticut: Keats Publishing,
Inc.
North Central Regional Educational Laboratory [NCREL]. (2004) Theories of child
development and learning. Retrieved from
http://www.ncrel.org/sdrs/areas/issues/students/earlycld/ea7lk18.ht
m
Olsen, D. (1999, February 9). Universal preschool is no golden ticket (no. 333) Retrieved
from Cato Institute: http://www.cato.org
Preschool California and Children Now. (2004). Kids can’t wait to learn. Retrieved from
http://www.preschoolcalifornia.org/docs/pdf/pc-advocacy-report-
04.pdf
Prochner, Larry. (2003). The American Crèche: ‘Let’s do what the French do, but do it
our way’. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, Vol. 4 (3): pp. 267-285.
Reggio Emilia Approach. (2008, July 5). In Wikipedia, The free encyclopedia. Retrieved
August 29, 2008, from http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?
title=Reggio_Emilia_approach&oldid=223769044
Schmidt, M. S. & Schmidt, D. C. (2008a). Montessori myths. In Special issue, Tomorrow’s
Child: 11-17.
Schmidt, M. S. and Schmidt, D. C. (2008b). Montessori vocabulary made clear. In Special
issue, Tomorrow’s Child: 18-24.
Seldin, T. & and Epstein, P. (2003). The Montessori way: An education for life. Sarasota,
FL: The Montessori Foundation Press. ISBN 0-9746387-0-6.
Shell, B. (N.D.). A look at Waldorf and Montessori education in the early childhood
programs. Why Waldorf Works. Retrieved from
http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/02_W_Education/documents/ALook
atWaldorfandMontessori.pdf
Silber, K. (1965) Pestalozzi: The man and his work. (2nd ed.). London: Routledge and
Kegan Paul. Retrieved June, 2002 from: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-
pest.htm
Smith, M. (May 8, 1997). Johann Heinrich Pestalozzi. Infed Encyclopedia. Retrieved June,
2002 from: http://www.infed.org/thinkers/et-pest.htm.
St. Giermaine, J. (2008). The materials are not the ‘Method’. In Special issue, Tomorrow’s
Child: 27-28.
Trostli, R. (1998). Rhythms of learning. Anthroposophical Press. Retrieved December 28,
2008 from http://www.waldorfearlychildhood.org/articles.asp?id=3.
von Marenholtz-Bü low, Baroness B. (1887). Erinnerungen an Fröbel (M. Mann, Trans.)
[Reminiscences of Froebel]. Boston: Lee and Shephard. Retrieved from
 http://www.froebelweb.org/web3000.html
Walsh, B. A. & Petty, K. (April, 2007). Frequency of six early childhood approaches: A 10-
year content analysis of Early Childhood Education Journal. Early Childhood
Education Journal, 34(5), 301-305.
Ward, William. (2001, Spring/Summer). Is Waldorf education Christian? Why Waldorf
Works. Retrieved from
http://www.whywaldorfworks.org/02_W_Education/documents/2_Is_W
_Christian.pdf
White, E.G. (1877, September 6). Proper Education. The Signs of the Times. Retrieved
January 21, 2009, from:
http://egwdatabase.whiteestate.org/nxt/gateway.dll?
f=templates$fn=default.htm$vid=default.
White, E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 13). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 16). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 18). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 21). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1903/2002). Education (Page 41). Mountain View, CA: Pacific Press
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1948). Missionaries in the home. In Ellen G. White Publications (Vol. Ed.),
Testimonies for the church (Vol. 4), (pp. 140-141). Mountain View, CA: Pacific
Press Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1952/1980).Reasonable desires to be gratified. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Adventist Home (p. 198). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1952/1980). The family a missionary center. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Adventist Home (p. 490). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). Advantage of the early years. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Child Guidance (p. 197). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). Methods of teaching. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (Page 37). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). Methods of teaching. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (Page 38). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). Methods of teaching. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (Pages 38-39). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing
Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). The power of habit. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (p. 200). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). The power of habit. In E. G. White Publications (Eds.), Child
Guidance (p. 201). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). Personal Experiences in Discipline. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Child Guidance (p. 254). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). When to begin the child’s training. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Child Guidance (Page 26). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1954/2002). When to begin the child’s training. In E. G. White Publications
(Eds.), Child Guidance (Page 26). Hagerstown, MD: Review and Herald
Publishing Association.
White, E. G. (1993). Children can learn to respect right of others; to be molded from
babyhood. In Ellen G. White Publications (Vol. Ed.), Manuscript Releases (Vol. 7), (p. 11).
Silver Spring, MD: Ellen G. White Estate. Retrieved March 3, 2009 from
http://www.ellenwhite.com/.