models of education and transitional perspectives. While research was developing the vitalityof the Early Years in Ireland, virtual recognition of the importance appeared to be somewhatneglected
prior to the 1900‟s –
the epoch of Swedish development (MES, 1999). The ChildCare Act (1991) and Ratification on the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child (1992)were the first fundamentals to give rise to recognition in early care for children in Ireland(Walsh, 2003, p. 29; DOH, 1991). Similar to Swedish development within society, as female
participation plummeted during the 1990‟s,
the demand to supply was branded (DJELR,1999; Walsh, 2003). In spite of this, developments in 1999 by the National Forum for EarlyChildhood Education promoted the first mutual comprehension of the importance of the earlyyears
a factor that was present in the Education Act of Sweden yet absent in the EducationAct of Ireland (DES, 1998). Following this recognition of the early years, the novel view of the young child as a citizen with a right to education from the moment of birth wentunnoticed until the White Paper on Early Childhood Education (DES, 1999) sprung into life.This development gave rise to the curricular the curricular framework that practitioners nowvoluntarily address to guide curricular ideologies, planning and development (NCCA, 2006).In spite of heightened development within the Irish Early Years sector, we have still failed tomandate comparable Swedish national curriculums for pre-school education. Perchance, indoing so, we have failed to foster the transitional perspective integrating preschool educationwith primary school education within the early years. Similarly, while we competently acceptthe importance of the early years mirroring the principals of Reggio Emilia preschools, wehave somewhat failed to neglect an imperative role in the childcare and education unit
ordination‟ (OECD, 2004, p.26; DES, 1999, p. 133). OECD Reports (2004)
testifies that disintegration of ministerial responsibility in Ireland shared by 3 departmentalagencies is part and parcel of our failure to keep up with Swedish development (OECD, 2004,p. 23).
In spite of this possibility, do Swedish models of provision or Ireland‟s early year‟s
developments correspond to Reggio Emilia in any way?
Grundy (1987) avows that beneath the „surface‟ of curricular practise, one will
bedrock of „beliefs‟ and „values‟ (Horgan, 2010; Hall, Horgan,
Ridgeway, Murphy, Cunneen, & Cunningham, 2010, ch. 4, p. 3; Grundy, 1987, p.7). Built onthe ideology of Dewey (1913), Reggio Emilia pre-schools recognise child citizenship and the
urgency for children to have „power‟
within their development and learning (Dewey, 1913, p.95-96). Somewhat similar to Swedish democratic ideologies, what gave rise to thispedagogical ideology within Reggio Emilia? The specifics of this child centred ideology canbe somewhat correlated with process models of curriculum formulated on the premise that