11.4: Selecting or Designing a Curriculum Approach

After clarifying the program’s philosophy, standards, and goals, administrators must decide what curriculum approach the program will use. Some programs adopt a published curriculum, while others design their own curriculum framework or use a combination of published resources, teacher planning, and emergent child-centered work. The best choice depends on the program’s values, staff capacity, funding requirements, age groups served, and the needs of children and families. A curriculum approach should not be selected simply because it is popular or convenient. Administrators should evaluate whether the approach is developmentally appropriate, inclusive, feasible to implement, and consistent with the program’s goals. They should also consider whether teachers will receive the training, planning time, materials, and supervision needed to use the curriculum effectively.

Published Curriculum and Teacher-Designed Curriculum

A published curriculum can provide structure, planning tools, assessment connections, and guidance for teachers. This may be especially helpful for programs that need consistency across classrooms or that employ teachers with varying levels of experience. However, a published curriculum is only useful if it is implemented thoughtfully. If teachers follow it mechanically without considering children’s interests, cultures, languages, or developmental needs, the curriculum may become rigid and disconnected from the children in the classroom.

Teacher-designed curriculum can allow for flexibility and responsiveness. Teachers may plan based on children’s observed interests, developmental goals, family experiences, and community context. However, teacher-designed curriculum also requires strong teacher knowledge, planning time, documentation systems, and administrative support. Without these supports, curriculum can become inconsistent or overly dependent on individual teacher preferences. Many strong programs use a blended approach. They may adopt a curriculum framework or set of standards while still allowing teachers to adapt experiences based on observation, family input, and children’s interests.

Considering Common Curriculum Models

Early childhood programs may draw from a variety of curriculum models and approaches. For example, Creative Curriculum emphasizes interest areas, intentional teaching, and ongoing assessment. HighScope emphasizes active participatory learning and the Plan-Do-Review process. Montessori emphasizes prepared environments, independence, and self-correcting materials. Reggio Emilia-inspired approaches often emphasize emergent curriculum, documentation, relationships, and the environment as a “third teacher.” Emergent curriculum and project-based approaches build learning experiences from children’s questions, interests, and investigations.

Administrators do not need to treat these approaches as interchangeable. Each model reflects different assumptions about children, teachers, environments, and learning. A program should evaluate whether a curriculum approach fits its philosophy, staffing structure, family population, and practical conditions. For example, an emergent curriculum approach may require teachers who are skilled in observation, documentation, and responsive planning. A Montessori approach requires specific materials, prepared environments, and often specialized training. A published curriculum may require fidelity expectations, training, and ongoing monitoring. The question is not simply which curriculum sounds best. The question is which approach the program can implement well and sustain over time.

Curriculum Fidelity and Teacher Responsiveness

When a program adopts a curriculum, administrators often need to consider fidelity. Fidelity means implementing a curriculum as intended. This can be important because a curriculum may be designed around specific sequences, materials, routines, or teaching strategies. If teachers ignore these essential features, the program may not be implementing the curriculum it claims to use. At the same time, fidelity should not eliminate teacher responsiveness. Early childhood teachers must respond to children’s developmental needs, interests, cultures, languages, and lived experiences. A curriculum that is followed exactly but does not fit the children in the room is not high-quality practice. The challenge is to identify which parts of the curriculum are essential and which parts may be adapted. Administrators can support this balance by helping teachers understand the purpose behind the curriculum rather than focusing only on surface-level compliance.

Curriculum Kits Versus Meaningful Curriculum

Some programs purchase curriculum kits or activity packages because they appear easy to use and provide ready-made materials. These resources can sometimes be helpful, especially when they offer quality materials or reduce teacher preparation burden. However, curriculum kits can also create problems when they are treated as the curriculum itself. A kit may provide activities, but it cannot replace teacher observation, intentional planning, and responsive interaction. If teachers simply complete one activity after another because it is included in a kit, children’s learning may become disconnected from their interests and developmental needs. Administrators should evaluate curriculum products carefully. Useful materials should support meaningful learning, not reduce teaching to following directions from a box.

Feasibility and Program Capacity

A curriculum approach must be realistic for the program. Even a strong curriculum can fail if the program does not have the conditions needed to implement it. Administrators should consider staff qualifications, training needs, planning time, materials, budget, classroom space, assessment systems, and supervision capacity before adopting a curriculum. For example, a curriculum that requires extensive documentation may be difficult to sustain if teachers have no planning time. A curriculum that depends on specialized materials may not be feasible if the program cannot purchase or maintain them. A curriculum that requires frequent small-group instruction may be difficult if staffing patterns do not support it.

Before adopting or designing a curriculum, administrators should ask practical questions:

• Do staff understand this approach?
• What training will be required?
• What materials and spaces are needed?
• How much planning time will teachers need?
• How will implementation be supported and evaluated?
• Is the approach sustainable within the program’s budget and staffing structure?

These questions help prevent programs from adopting curriculum approaches that look strong on paper but are difficult to implement in practice.

Vignette \(\PageIndex{1}\)

The Curriculum Box

A preschool program purchased a well-known boxed curriculum because it promised ready-to-use lessons, materials, and assessment connections. The director hoped the curriculum would bring consistency across classrooms and reduce planning time for teachers. At first, teachers appreciated having prepared activities. However, after several months, the curriculum began to feel mechanical. Teachers moved through the weekly lessons even when children were not interested or when the activities did not match the group’s developmental needs. One classroom was fascinated by insects after discovering caterpillars outside, but the teacher felt pressured to continue the scheduled theme instead. Another teacher noticed that several children needed more support with peer interaction, but the curriculum schedule left little room to slow down and focus on social problem-solving.

During classroom observations, the director realized that the program had adopted curriculum materials but had not developed a shared understanding of curriculum decision-making. The staff began discussing which parts of the curriculum needed to be followed consistently and where teachers could adapt based on observation and children’s interests. Over time, the curriculum became less of a script and more of a framework for intentional planning. This example illustrates that curriculum materials do not guarantee curriculum quality. Programs must support teachers in using curriculum thoughtfully and responsively.

Conclusion

Selecting or designing a curriculum approach is a major administrative decision. A strong curriculum should align with the program’s philosophy, support developmental goals, and be feasible to implement. Whether a program uses a published curriculum, teacher-designed curriculum, or a blended approach, administrators must ensure that teachers understand the curriculum’s purpose and have the support needed to use it well. High-quality curriculum depends not only on what is selected, but on how it is interpreted, adapted, and implemented.