Abstract
It is an urgent and significant matter to build a Chinese pre-primary education indicator system. This system is expected to have both Chinese standpoints and international perspectives, and to be used to systematically guide and scientifically evaluate pre-primary education in China. This study, based on the internationally popular CIPP evaluation model, describes, explains, juxtaposes, and compares the pre-primary education indicator systems from the OECD, the UNESCO, the US, the UK, and other major international organizations and countries. The authors propose the theoretical framework of a Chinese pre-primary education indicator system, which includes factors such as background, input, process and output, the 10 first-level indicators (demographic characteristics, social welfare, the management system, resource allocation, curricular activities, kindergarten management, the teaching force, family support, the popularization of education, and child development), and 63 second-level indicators. In conclusion, the theoretical framework offers a value-oriented instrument for establishing the development goal of pre-primary education development in China, a structural instrument for a complete understanding of the current situation of China’s pre-primary education, a methodological instrument for the scientific supervision and evaluation of China’s pre-primary education, and a universal instrument for China’s international exchanges and cooperation in the field of pre-primary education.
This research is part of the outcome of the National Social Science Fund Project “Medium and Long-Term Development Goals and Implementation Strategy Research for Pre-primary Education” approved in 2016 (Project No.: AHA160008).
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Similar content being viewed by others
Notes
- 1.
(1) Education at Glance, published by OECD in 2015, coded O1; (2) Starting Strong II: Early Childhood Education and Care published by OECD, coded O2; (3) Starting Strong IV: Monitoring Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care, published by OECD, coded O3; (4) Holistic Early Childhood Development Index, published by UNESCO, coded U; (5) Proposal for Key Principles of a Quality Framework for Early Childhood Education and Care, published by EU, coded EU; (6) Starting Well: Benchmarking Early Education across the World, published by Economist Intelligence Unit, coded I; (7) The State of Preschool—Preschool Yearbook 2015, coded Al; (8) Using the Early Years Evaluation Schedule, coded E; (9) International Comparison of Education Indicators, published in Japan in 2013, coded J; (10) National Plan of Action for Children, published in India by Department of Women and Child Development, coded D; (11) Education and Training Indicators, published in Australia, coded AU; (12) Development Report of Education from Pre-primary to College 2015 (Coûts, activités, résultats. Synthèses statistiques), published in France, coded F.
References
Copple, C., & Bredekamp, S. (2009). Developmentally appropriate practice in early childhood programs serving children from birth through age 8 (Vol. 1313). Washington, DC, (22205-4101): National Association for the Education of Young Children.
Department of Development Planning of Ministry of Education. (2006). Educational statistics yearbook of China (2014). Bei**g: People’s Education Press (in Chinese).
Desforges, C., & Abouchaar, A. (2003). The impact of parental involvement, parental support and family education on pupil achievement and adjustment: A literature review (Vol. 433). London: DfES.
General Office of CPC Central Committee. (2010). Several Opinions on the Current Development of Pre-school Education by the State Council. Retrieved April 29, 2016, from http://www.gov.cn/home/201604/29/content_506931.htm?from=groupmessage&isappinstalled=0.
Huo, L. (2000). Preschool education evaluation. Bei**g: Bei**g Normal University Press (in Chinese).
Nuttall, D. L. (1990). The functions and limitations of international educational indicators.
Pang, L., & **ong, C. (2013). Study on the indicators of early childhood education in China: Current status and suggestions. Studies in Early Childhood Education, 2 (in Chinese).
Pang, L. J., & Fan, M. L. (2012). Problems and challenges in the management system of early childhood education in current China. Research in Educational Development, 4, 39–43.
Poliandri, D., et al. (2010). Dynamic Database for Quality Indicators Comparison in Education. Istituto. Poliandri, D., Cardone, M., Muzzioli, P., & Romiti, S. (2010). Dynamic Database for Quality Indicators Comparison in Education. Working Paper N. 04/2010. Online Submission.
Scheerens, J. (1990). School effectiveness research and the development of process indicators of school functioning. School effectiveness and School Improvement, 1(1), 61–80.
Stufflebeam, D. L., & Kellaghan, T. (2003). International handbook of educational evaluation. Great Britain: Kluwer Academic.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Editor information
Editors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 2021 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Huo, L., Sun, Q., Hu, H. (2021). Theory and Practice of a Chinese Pre-primary Education Indicator System. In: Deng, Y., Gao, B. (eds) Educational Research in China. Springer, Singapore. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1520-7_8
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-16-1520-7_8
Published:
Publisher Name: Springer, Singapore
Print ISBN: 978-981-16-1519-1
Online ISBN: 978-981-16-1520-7
eBook Packages: EducationEducation (R0)