Many educators tell me they feel extremely stressed by the early years planning cycle. I understand why. But I have a little secret to share with you: it isn't the planning cycle that is stressing you out. It's how we've come to interpret what is expected of us when we use it.
The Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework (Version 2) highlights some important points about the cycle that are worth considering, regardless of which state or territory you work in. The cycle is not meant to be rushed. It is not linear. And it should be used in ways that help us understand children's learning and development.
Where the stress creeps in
One of the biggest challenges is that we often treat the cycle as something with a clear beginning and end. We set it to a timeline: a weekly cycle, a fortnightly cycle, a monthly or termly cycle. Then we feel pressure to "close the loop" before the next one begins, often with a completed form as proof that we have done so.
The reality is that this is not how children learn. Children's learning is messy. We can never predict how long it will take, and, perhaps more interestingly, we can never fully predict what children will learn along the way.
What "not linear" really looks like
When we say the cycle is not linear, we mean that we can move back and forth between its parts. We might observe, then reflect, then observe again before we plan anything at all. We might put a plan in place and realise within an hour that children have taken the idea somewhere completely different. That isn't a failure of planning. That is the cycle doing exactly what it is designed to do.
Imagine a small group of children who become fascinated by shadows on the playground one morning. In a weekly cycle, we might feel we need to observe it on Monday, plan for it on Tuesday, offer an experience by Thursday and evaluate it by Friday. But what if the children's thinking about light and shadow continues for six weeks? What if it fades and then returns a month later when the afternoon sun shifts? A rigid timeline would have us wrap it up long before the children were finished.
What this means in practice
If we release ourselves from the timelines we've attached to the planning cycle, we may begin to feel less stressed. More importantly, we free ourselves to focus on what matters most: children's thinking. We can follow an idea for as long as it holds children's interest, return to it later, or let it lead somewhere none of us expected. Our documentation can then tell the story of learning over time, rather than a series of disconnected weekly snapshots.
When we stop asking "Have I finished the cycle this week?" and start asking "What are children thinking about, and how can I support that?", the planning cycle starts working for us, not against us.
Reflective questions
- Where did your current planning timeframe (weekly, fortnightly, termly) come from? Is it a requirement, or a habit?
- What would change in your practice if the planning cycle had no fixed end point?
- Think of a recent experience where children's learning took longer, or went somewhere different, than you expected. How did you respond, and how did you document it?
- In what ways might your current approach to planning be shaped by your own expectations, or those of others, rather than by children's learning?
- How could your team talk together about planning in ways that value children's thinking over completed paperwork?
- What is one small step you could take this week to slow the cycle down?
