Hey, educator! Imagine you are a child in a space where every corner quietly whispers to you, “Try me.” That’s affordance theory in action—letting environments extend invitations that children can see, sense, and act upon.
James J. Gibson wasn’t an early childhood expert. He was a perceptual psychologist who posed a deceptively simple question: What does an environment offer a child to do?
He called those offerings “affordances.” A low wall might afford sitting for an adult, but balancing for a toddler. A puddle might invite stepping or splashing—or even measuring depth with a stick. Crucially, affordances are relational. Whether an environment offers an action depends on both the environment itself and the child’s body, ability, and intention in that moment.
A Shift in Thinking About Space
This lens reframes planning from “What activity should I set up” to “What actions does this space already invite and how might I make them more obvious?”
For example, placing a plank between two milk crates doesn’t just create a balance beam. It offers a spectrum of challenges: balancing, crouching, carrying, and even turn-taking. Raise one plank slightly higher, and children begin to compare, calibrate, and talk about “easy” and “hard.” That’s affordance thinking at work.
James Gibson
Perception and Action as One
Gibson showed that perception and action are not separate, as they’re a continuous loop. Children don’t learn balance through talking; they learn by stepping, wobbling, adjusting and sensing. Smooth timber feels different from rubber tiles under your feet. A slope suggests experiments in rolling, sliding, and speed. Loose parts prompt discovery as children merge material with sand, water, or wind. Children fine-tune what the environment affords them today and, as skills evolve, those boundaries shift.
This space affords throwing, hiding behind, rolling the barrel
The Power of Direct Perception
Gibson argued that we rarely calculate our environment; instead, we see it. The layout of surfaces, textures, and edges is enough to guide action. So in a classroom, clarity is always better than clutter. When paths are clear, tools are visible, and materials are intuitively placed, like clipboards near the block area or a pulley rope near the sandpit, the environment itself communicates what to do. As a teacher, you don’t need to explain much.
What Educators Can Do Right Now
Offer “nested” affordances, which are spaces that invite many actions. Think of a sand-and-water table with gutters, funnels, pots, and a ramp: it asks for building, measuring, transporting, exploring cause and effect, and working together. Outdoors, keep natural variations: small slopes, logs, uneven edges support real-world coordination and risk assessment. Indoors, choose sizes and heights for children’s bodies, so they lift, pour, carry safely. Use open storage and clear display to make choices obvious and clean-up seamless. Rotate one or two elements to refresh engagement without overwhelming.
A Simple Example
I placed a low ramp in the block area alongside toy cars. Children start rolling the cars. One notices the car stops midway. You introduce a strip of fabric and ask if it might help, and they test “bumpy” and “fast.” Later, they prop the ramp higher and add a bucket to catch the cars. In an hour, the space invited measuring, predicting, revising, and talking. I didn’t lead the learning, I created the space, watched, and responded.
EYLF 2.0: Affordance theory and the framework
The Early Years Learning Framework Version 2.0 (EYLF 2.0) explicitly positions affordance theory as a practice theory. It is a lens for educators to see what environments make possible for children. It encourages us to design spaces that invite action rather than demand directions (Australian Government Department of Education [AGDE], 2022)
EYLF 2.0’s Learning Environments section describes how spaces and materials should “invite active and quiet play, respond to children’s strengths and interests, and allow reasonable adjustments”. And it highlights that educators need to support “play‑based learning and intentionality,” meaning they should thoughtfully create spaces that promote problem-solving, curiosity, and when needed, join in—not override—child-led action (ACECQA, 2018).
In early childhood education, what if the activities, toys, and even the classroom colours we choose aren’t as neutral as they seem? What if they’re subtly shaping children’s minds, sending hidden messages, and reinforcing societal norms? According to critical theorists like Paulo Freire and Jurgen Habermas, educators need to stay critical to all these hidden influences, including their own biases. In the context of critical theory early childhood education, examining and challenging these implicit assumptions, educators have the power to create truly inclusive and democratic learning environments, which are aligned with the EYLF.
I first learned about critical theories at Moscow University, back in the ’90s, as we had to study Jurgen Habermas’s philosophy. The second chance to familiarise myself with critical theory emerged at Monash Uni, as I was getting my second – early childhood teaching – degree. The lectures and this book by Glenda McNaughton changed not only the way I teach and plan curriculum but how I think.
Drawing from influential works such as Pedagogy of the Oppressed by Freire, Programming and Planning in Early Childhood Settings by Arthur et al., and Shaping Early Childhood Curriculum by Glenda MacNaughton, I will explore how these theories empower teachers and early childhood educators to break free from traditional practices and transform early childhood education into a space where every child’s voice is heard. You will discover how you can disrupt the status quo, question taken-for-granted practices, and create a more just and engaging classroom for children.
Understanding Critical Theory in Early Childhood Education
So, what is critical theory, and how does it relate to early childhood education? Critical theory challenges ingrained societal norms and questions how these assumptions affect learning. In the context of early childhood, critical theory empowers educators to examine and reshape educational practices to be more equitable and inclusive. This approach recognises children as active participants in their learning, rather than passive recipients of information, and it encourages teachers to question how everyday practices and structures affect children’s experiences.
Arthur et al. (2017), in Programming and Planning in Early Childhood Settings, discuss the need for educators to consider the hidden values embedded within their curriculum. Through the lens of learning theories in education, particularly critical theory, educators can better understand how classroom decisions, like room setup or choice of materials, implicitly communicate societal norms. By examining these hidden elements, educators can begin to create environments that honour children’s agency and celebrate diversity, aligning with the EYLF’s goal of recognising children as competent, involved learners.
The concept of the “hidden curriculum” underscores how unspoken assumptions in teaching frameworks influence children’s learning experiences. The hidden curriculum reflects broader social values, subtly shaping children’s perceptions and understandings of the world. In Programming and Planning in Early Childhood Settings, Arthur et al. (2017) describe how aspects like classroom décor, the arrangement of furniture, and even toy selection can carry implicit messages about power, gender roles, and socio-economic status.
I will give you an example of it.
A common example of the hidden curriculum in early childhood settings, as discussed by MacNaughton, involves classroom displays and activity setups that reinforce gender roles. For instance, many classrooms may have distinct play areas like a kitchen set typically stocked with “domestic” toys (dolls, dishes, play food) and an engineering or construction corner filled with blocks and toy tools. Teachers might unintentionally encourage girls to play in the kitchen area and boys in the construction area, subtly reinforcing traditional gender roles.
Though this setup may seem innocent or even typical in early childhood classrooms, it can communicate messages about what kinds of activities are “appropriate” for each gender. This scenario exemplifies the hidden curriculum, as it unconsciously shapes children’s ideas about gender-specific skills, interests, and identities, potentially limiting their sense of what they can explore and achieve.
Educators can work to create more inclusive learning environments. For example , add more diverse toys in each area and encourage children to explore all stations, regardless of gender, challenging stereotypes and promoting a more equitable classroom dynamic.
Critical theorists, including early childhood theorists like Glenda MacNaughton, stress the importance of understanding these hidden influences. By acknowledging and addressing these aspects of the curriculum, educators can take the first step towards creating more equitable learning environments. MacNaughton (2003) in Shaping Early Childhood Curriculum highlights how recognising these underlying influences allows educators to make choices that promote more inclusive, child-centred values. This approach ensures that education serves as a tool for liberation rather than oppression.
Paulo Freire’s Philosophy of Education and Critical Theory
The philosophy of education championed by Paulo Freire plays a central role in critical pedagogy. Freire’s critical pedagogy—his approach to critical theory in education—argues that education is never neutral. In Pedagogy of the Oppressed, Freire (1970) critiques the traditional “banking model” of education, where teachers deposit information into passive students, reinforcing systems of oppression. He advocates for a dialogical approach, where students and teachers co-construct knowledge through open, democratic dialogue.
Freire’s philosophy of education can profoundly influence early childhood education. His ideas encourage a shift from adult-centric models to approaches that honour children as capable, active learners. This shift aligns with the EYLF theories, which stress the importance of recognising children as confident, involved learners. Here is how to use Freire’s framework in your daily practice.
Invite children to share their thoughts, make choices, and contribute to discussions, helping them develop a sense of agency.
Rather than teaching children facts in isolation, educators can ask open-ended questions like, “Why do you think seasons change?” This approach encourages exploration, helping children develop their understanding of the world.
Provide children with choices about their play, this helps to build their confidence and sense of ownership over their learning.
Freire’s critical theory explained is especially relevant in Australian ECE settings, where educators work with children from diverse cultural backgrounds. By engaging children in critical discussions about their surroundings, educators can help them become agents of change from an early age.
Reflective Practice and Jurgen Habermas Critical Theory
Jurgen Habermas’s critical theory highlights the role of reflection in teaching. He argues that educators should continuously question their assumptions and practices, recognising that society is dynamic and ever-changing. This perspective underscores the importance of reflective practice as a means for educators to examine their biases and remain open to change.
In Programming and Planning in Early Childhood Settings, Arthur et al. (2017) describe reflective practice as a process of “thinking critically about one’s work and questioning underlying assumptions” (p. 89).
For instance, educators might consider whether daily routines like calendar time genuinely engage children or merely represent a part of the hidden curriculum. Are the children interested in these routines? Do they feel included in them? By asking these questions, educators can reflect on whether their practices align with the five learning theories that shape modern education—including behaviourism, constructivism, humanism, connectivism, and, of course, critical theory.
Cultural Reproduction and Glenda MacNaughton’s Curriculum Theory
The concept of cultural reproduction, another key aspect of critical theory in early childhood education, examines how educational settings replicate societal values. Glenda MacNaughton inShaping Early Childhood Curriculum explains that ECE settings may unintentionally reinforce inequalities through unexamined practices. We may make children feel excluded, without being aware of it. In her view, educational environments can often reflect dominant cultural narratives, which may limit children’s exposure to diverse perspectives.
A cultural narrative is about the stories, values, and beliefs that are commonly shared within a society or group. These narratives shape how individuals view the world, understand their place in it, and interact with others. In an educational context, cultural narratives can be reinforced through classroom practices, materials, and interactions, often subtly conveying certain messages about society and identity.
In many early childhood settings, the stories read aloud, the holidays celebrated, and the classroom decorations might centre predominantly around Western cultural traditions and holidays such as Christmas, Easter, and Halloween. This focus on Western holidays can create a cultural narrative that subtly suggests these are the “important” or “normal” holidays, thereby marginalising other cultural traditions.
For instance, if a classroom decorates exclusively for Christmas, with activities like crafting ornaments and reading stories about Santa Claus, it reinforces a cultural narrative that assumes all children participate in or celebrate Christmas. This can unintentionally exclude children from non-Christian backgrounds, like those who celebrate Hanukkah, Diwali, or Lunar New Year. It does not welcome Indigenous Seasons and cultural celebrations. The cultural narrative at times overshadows the rich diversity that other cultural celebrations bring. Things are changing now is most centres in Australia, which is a good news for critical theorists 🙂
MacNaughton argues for a curriculum that includes varied narratives, family structures, and cultural practices. For example, instead of only including traditional family models, educators can feature a range of family dynamics, including single-parent families, blended families, and LGBTQ+ families. This curriculum approach reflects the diversity of children’s experiences and helps to broaden their worldview, challenging the narrow cultural views often reinforced in mainstream society.
In an Australian context, integrating Indigenous perspectives, stories, and cultural practices is another essential component of a curriculum that resists cultural reproduction. Such inclusion affirms the value of Australia’s First Nations cultures, helping to break down stereotypes and enrich children’s understanding of Australia’s rich cultural heritage. Thanks to the update, the EYLF 2.0 now embeds Aboriginal Perspectives and practices throughout its practices, principles and outcomes.
Practical Applications for Australian Educators
You can ask yourself whether routine activities align with educational goals and the core principles of learning theories in education. Reflecting on these activities can help educators identify practices that may limit children’s learning experiences. EYLF has a lot of reflective questions, you can also use Glenda McNauthon’s book if you want to delve deeper.
Document teaching experiences and reflect on the impact of different practices on children. This reflective process can help me to refine their approaches and align them with EYLF theories.
Actively involve children in decision-making processes, whether it’s selecting books, setting classroom rules, or choosing themes for projects. This engagement reinforces children’s rights and helps them feel valued as participants in their learning.
Celebrate diversity by creating a classroom environment that respects and values all children’s cultural backgrounds. Such inclusivity is vital to fostering a sense of belonging for every child, affirming their unique identities.
Recommended books📔📕📚
Arthur, L., Beecher, B., Death, E., Dockett, S., & Farmer, S. (2017). Programming and planning in early childhood settings. Cengage Learning Australia.
Freire, P. (1970). Pedagogy of the oppressed. Continuum.
MacNaughton, G. (2003). Shaping early childhood curriculum: Exploring the possibilities. Open University Press.
I’ve been in Early Childhood Education for 15 years, and I’ve found that the socio-behaviourist approach aligns well with how I see children and their learning. I’ve seen firsthand how effective it is. When children observe respectful and positive behaviour, they’re more likely to join in and display respectful interactions too. I reckon this approach supports all children in behaving appropriately.
I draw inspiration from the work of psychologist Albert Bandura. His Social Learning Theory has big implications for early childhood education. Bandura says children learn by watching others and seeing what happens next, and that fits right into the socio-behaviourist way of thinking.
Humans learn socially, not just intellectually. This means we learn from our peers, parents, teachers, coaches, etc., rather than solely from books.
I strongly believe that children need clear teaching and strategies to boost their learning, sense of belonging, and identity in their learning spaces (DET, 2010). This could include using positive praise, talking to them, and showing the right way to behave – all things Bandura talks about in his theory.
One good thing about the socio-behaviourist approach is that it works for all students, even those with intellectual disabilities, neurodiversity and problems with self-regulation(Autism Speaks, 2008). This theory is all about behaviours – how they’re learned and unlearned. It’s a practical framework that can be used everywhere in different classrooms.
In the next sections, we’ll dive into Albert Bandura’s Social Learning Theory, looking at the main ideas and showing how it can work in real-life early childhood education. By looking through this lens, we can get a better grip on how learning and behaviour connect, and how teachers play a big part in guiding young minds.
Albert Bandura is a Canadian psychologist who is best known for his work in social learning theory and social cognitive theory. His theories have had a significant impact on the fields of psychology, education, and communication. Bandura’s work emphasizes the importance of observational learning, imitation, and modelling in the acquisition of new behaviours.
Here are the key components of Bandura’s social learning theory:
Observational Learning: Bandura argued that much of human learning occurs through observation and imitation of others. Individuals learn by watching the behaviour of others, observing the consequences of those behaviours, and then adjusting their behaviour accordingly.
Example: In a preschool setting, a group of children is observed imitating their teacher as she demonstrates how to properly hold a marker and write their names. The children learn by watching the teacher’s movements and then attempting to mimic her actions. That’s why I love to write in front of preschoolers.
Modelling: Bandura introduced the concept of modelling, which involves individuals imitating the behaviours of role models. Role models can be real people, characters in the media, or even symbolic figures. The more similar the observer perceives themselves to be to the model, and the more positive the consequences of the model’s behaviour, the more likely the observer is to imitate that behaviour.
Example: During a show-and-tell activity, a child brings in a puppet and performs a story. Other children in the group are excited and decide to create their own puppet shows, modelling their performances after the one they observed during show-and-tell. After my puppet shows, children often imitate my actions too.
Reciprocal Determinism: Bandura proposed the concept of reciprocal determinism, which refers to the dynamic interaction between an individual, their behaviour, and their environment. This model suggests that individuals not only influence their environment but are also influenced by it, and these factors continuously interact.
Example: A child who is praised and rewarded for sharing toys with peers is more likely to continue sharing in the future. The positive reinforcement from teachers and peers, as well as the supportive environment that encourages sharing, influences the child’s behaviour, creating a cycle of reciprocal determinism. This is really universal strategy.
Self-Efficacy: Bandura introduced the concept of self-efficacy, which is an individual’s belief in their ability to succeed in a particular situation. According to Bandura, self-efficacy plays a crucial role in determining whether individuals will engage in certain behaviours and how much effort they will put into those behaviours. High self-efficacy is associated with greater persistence and resilience in the face of challenges.
Example: Imagine a child who completes a challenging puzzle with the help of a teacher’s encouragement develops a sense of self-efficacy in problem-solving. This child is more likely to tackle similar puzzles independently in the future, believing in their ability to overcome challenges. Self-efficacy is still highly valid concept, which makes Bandura more contemporary than, let’s say B.F. Skinner or John Watson.
Vicarious Reinforcement: Bandura emphasised the role of vicarious reinforcement, where individuals learn from the consequences of others’ actions. Observing others being rewarded or punished for their behaviour can influence the observer’s likelihood of engaging in similar behaviours. Children are very observant when it comes to this kind of scenarios.
In a classroom, one child receives praise and a small reward for cleaning up after a painting activity. Other children observe this and, seeing the positive consequences, are more motivated to clean up after their own activities, anticipating similar positive reinforcement.
OBSERVATIONS AND MODELLING
It is not possible to talk about Albert Bandura without discussing Bobo Doll Experiment
Albert Bandura’s Bobo Doll Experiment is a famous study that provided empirical support for his social learning theory. Conducted in 1961, the experiment aimed to investigate the role of observational learning and modelling in aggressive behaviour.
Bandura and his colleagues divided children into three groups. In each group, children were exposed to different models demonstrating aggressive behaviour toward a Bobo doll—a large, inflatable, and weighted doll designed to return to an upright position after being knocked down.
They had three experiment conditions:
Aggressive Model: Children in this group observed an adult model displaying aggressive behaviour toward the Bobo doll, such as hitting, kicking, and using aggressive language.
Non-aggressive Model: Children in this group observed an adult model engaging in non-aggressive play with other toys in the room.
Control Group: Children in this group had no exposure to a model interacting with the Bobo doll.
After exposure to the models, the children were placed in a room with the Bobo doll and other toys. The researchers observed and recorded the children’s behaviour to assess whether they imitated the aggressive or non-aggressive behaviours they had witnessed.
Findings:
The Bobo Doll experiment demonstrated that children learn behaviours through observation and imitation of models.
It highlighted the importance of modelling and the role of environmental factors in shaping behaviour, particularly in the context of aggression.
The Bobo Doll Experiment had a profound impact on the understanding of social learning and aggression in children. Bandura’s findings emphasised the significance of modelling and observational learning in the development of behaviours, reinforcing the idea that children learn not only from direct experiences but also from observing and imitating others in their environment.
According to the EYLF (AGDE, 2022), educators are informed by the range of theories and approaches when plan for and support children’s learning. Some theories you already know from the previous version of the EYLF (developmental, socio-cultural, feminist, critical), yet there are few new ones to unpack.
Developmental Theories
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Attachment Theory
Key theorist – John Bowbly. Focuses on children forming trusting relationships with significant adults. Example: A child forming a strong bond with a primary caregiver.
Social Learning Theory
Highlights how children observe and imitate others’ behavior. Example: A child learning to tie shoelaces by watching an older sibling. A negative example: A child learns to swear because they have heard their family language.
Cognitive Theory
Piaget theory is a tipical example of cognitive theory here. Describes thought processes influencing how children engage with their world. Example: A child using problem-solving skills to complete a puzzle. Stages of cognitive development can be used to decide whether the environment is appropriate for this age group.
EYLF THEORIES
Socio-Cultural Theories
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Socio-Cultural Theories
Theorists that you probably know are: Vygotsky, Rogoff, Bronfenbrenner and Fleer. Emphasise the role of families and cultural groups in children’s learning. Example: A child learning cultural traditions and values from family members; a child has learned how to use a fishing rod , as they went fishing with their granpa.
Practice Theories
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Affordance Theory
The theorist is Gibson. Affordance theory encourages educators to consider the possibilities the environment offers. Example: Providing a variety of materials to stimulate different types of play.
Practice Architectures
Examines educators’ understandings, practices, and relationships. Example: Reflecting on how educators communicate and collaborate in a learning environment.
Learn more about affordances theory
The term “affordance” is explained in this video
Ancestral Knowledges
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Ancestral Knowledges
Ways of knowing shared through history and culture in Aboriginal and Torres Strait Islander traditions. For example, Possum Skin Pedagogy and 8 ways framework. Example: Passing down cultural stories orally from generation to generation.
Place-Based Sciences
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Place-Based Sciences
Related to Affordances and Ancestral knowledge theory. Fosters community connections based on local funds of knowledge. Example: Incorporating local cultural practices into the curriculum.
Critical Theories
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Critical Theories
Paulo Freire, Jurgen Habermas. Critical theory challenges assumptions about curriculum and considers how decisions may impact children differently. Example: Questioning the inclusion of certain narratives or perspectives in educational materials.
Feminist/Post-structuralist Theories
Theory
Key Concepts and Examples
Feminist/Post-structuralist
Offers insights into power, equity, and social justice in early childhood settings. Example: Examining gender biases in teaching materials and promoting inclusive practices.
Which of these theories are you most familiar with?
Have you heard about the tools of the mind approach based on Lev Vygotsky’s theory?
Listen up – you may like it !!!
Tools of the Mind” is a curriculum developed by Elena Bodrova and Deborah J. Leong. When I studied at Monash University, we watched videos created by the researchers and analysed ZPD and scaffolding with relevant examples.
I think that’s why I have a strong understanding of sociocultural theory.
The tools of the mind approach focuses on promoting self-regulation and cognitive development in early childhood through play and intentional teaching.
Here are some key features:
Vygotskian Principles: The curriculum is heavily influenced by Vygotsky’s ideas, particularly the Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD) and the role of social interactions in learning. As Bodrovq quotes Vygotsky, in play child is always ahead of his current abilities.
Play-Based Learning: It places a strong emphasis on play as a vehicle for learning. Play activities are carefully designed to support children’s cognitive and social-emotional development. For example, imaginative play of superheroes is encouraged, so as home corner play etc.
Scaffolding: Teachers play a crucial role in providing “scaffolding” to support children in their ZPD. This involves tailoring support to the individual needs of each child, helping them move toward more complex tasks. As an early childhood professional, I support that!
Cultural and Symbolic Tools: The curriculum incorporates cultural and symbolic tools, such as literacy and numeracy activities, to enhance children’s understanding of their environment and promote cognitive growth. I will talk more about cultural tools in my next post.
Integrated Curriculum: Tools of the Mind integrates various subjects into the curriculum, recognising the interconnectedness of different domains of development. Holistic learning in other words.
Focus on Executive Functions: The program places a specific emphasis on developing executive functions like working memory, inhibitory control, and cognitive flexibility, which are crucial for learning and life success. In the video I am attaching, Deborah Leong is talking a lot about Executive Function in depth.
What do you think about the Tools of mind approach?
