The Real Challenges and Management Support for Kindergarten Teachers' Curriculum Autonomy-Analysis from the perspective of generative curriculum design

Man Zhang

doi:10.70088/6j1f8x71

Authors

Man Zhang Guangxi Normal University, Guilin, China Author

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.70088/6j1f8x71

Keywords:

generative curriculum, teacher agency, curriculum development, management support, early childhood education

Abstract

The widespread adoption of the generative curriculum concept has fundamentally transformed the role of kindergarten teachers in curriculum development, shifting their professional agency from a theoretical discussion of instructional rights into a practical endeavor requiring active curriculum design and implementation. In contemporary early childhood education settings, teachers encounter a range of systemic obstacles when exercising their professional discretion in curriculum matters. These obstacles include weakened institutional empowerment, rigid administrative structures, gaps in professional competencies, and excessive bureaucratic workloads that divert attention from pedagogical innovation. Rather than attributing these difficulties to individual shortcomings, this study argues that they originate from the overarching architecture of educational management systems. Grounded in generative curriculum theory, this research critically examines the conceptual essence and pedagogical value of teacher-led curriculum development in early childhood contexts. It systematically identifies the key manifestations and root causes of the challenges teachers face, emphasizing that meaningful progress depends on a paradigm shift from control-oriented administration to support-oriented management. To address these issues, the study proposes a multi-level framework of management support strategies encompassing three dimensions: transforming institutional management philosophies, designing adaptable and flexible curriculum frameworks, and establishing comprehensive professional development systems for educators. These recommendations aim to offer actionable institutional insights for advancing curriculum innovation and enhancing the quality of preschool education.

References

T. Halle, J. E. Vick Whittaker, and R. Anderson, Quality in Early Childhood Care and Education Settings: A Compendium of Measures. Washington, DC: Child Trends, 2010, prepared for the Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. Accessed: Sep. 4, 2012.

J. Weng and H. Li, “Early technology education in China: A case study of Shanghai,” Early Child Development and Care, 2020.

H. Li, “A school-based fusion of East and West: A case study of modern curriculum innovations in a Chinese kindergarten,” J. Curriculum Stud., vol. 50, no. 1, pp. 17–37, 2017.

K. I. P. Vong and M. Y. Li, “Challenges in establishing kindergarten education system in villages of Guizhou, China: A preliminary study,” South African J. Childhood Educ., vol. 6, no. 2, pp. 1–10, 2016.

P. Thomson, “Headteacher autonomy: A sketch of a Bourdieuian field analysis of position and practice,” Crit. Stud. Educ., vol. 51, no. 1, pp. 5–20, 2010.

X. Zeng, “Understanding the complicated process of early childhood curriculum innovation from the lens of actor–network theory: a case study in a Chinese kindergarten,” Early Years, vol. 46, no. 1, pp. 17–33, 2026.

G. Halldén, “Children’s sense of place: Aspects of individualization, flexibility and free choice within the preschool context,” in *The Modern Child and the Flexible Labour Market: Early Childhood Education and Care*. London, UK: Palgrave Macmillan UK, 2012, pp. 186–202.

W. Yang and H. Li, “Changing culture, changing curriculum: A case study of early childhood curriculum innovations in two Chinese kindergartens,” Curriculum J., vol. 30, no. 3, pp. 279–297, 2019.

A. Nolan and T. Molla, “Building teacher professional capabilities through transformative learning,” Asia-Pacific J. Teacher Educ., vol. 49, no. 4, pp. 450–465, 2021.

L. Sha, Z. Liang, L. Zhao, Y. Li, G. M. Fernández-Nieto, Y. S. Tsai, et al., “How Do Critical Evaluations of Generative AI Outputs Shape Teacher Agency? A Mixed-Methods Comparative Analysis,” Int. J. Hum.–Comput. Interact., pp. 1–19, 2026.

X. Zhai, “Transforming teachers’ roles and agencies in the era of generative AI: Perceptions, acceptance, knowledge, and practices,” J. Sci. Educ. Technol., 2024.

M. Priestley, G. Biesta, and S. Robinson, “Teachers as agents of change: Teacher agency and emerging models of curriculum,” in Reinventing the Curriculum: New Trends in Curriculum Policy and Practice, 2013, pp. 187–206.

J. Roe and M. Perkins, “Generative AI and agency in education: A critical scoping review and thematic analysis,” arXiv preprint arXiv:2411.00631, 2024.

H. Sun, “Teacher Agency in Response to the Emergence of Generative AI: A Scaffolded Writing Project within the Multiliteracies Framework,” in Generative AI Technologies, Multiliteracies, and Language Education. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, 2025, pp. 78–101.

J. Roe and M. Perkins, “Agency in the age of generative AI: a critical review of educational implications,” Academia AI Appl., vol. 2, no. 3, 2026.

Y. S. Liao and M. J. Chen, “Constructing and reinterpreting the meaning of curriculum evaluation: an exploratory study using Generative Learning Theory,” Prof. Dev. Educ., pp. 1–23, 2026.