Early Childhood Curriculum Innovation: Balancing Play-Based Learning with Foundational Literacy and Numeracy

Early Childhood Curriculum Innovation: Balancing Play-Based Learning with Foundational Literacy and Numeracy

Dr. Ernel Saligumba Merano

PGE Consultancy and Learning Center & Arnhem Early Learning Centre, Australia

DOI: https://dx.doi.org/10.47772/IJRISS.2025.909000628

Received: 12 September 2025; Accepted: 20 September 2025; Published: 23 October 2025

ABSTRACT

This study analyses early childhood curriculum innovation with a focus on integrating play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy. Data from 430 educators across Australia, the Philippines, and the UAE were examined using descriptive statistics, chi-square tests, and qualitative feedback. Results show that most educators are mid-career females, with limited entry-level or male staff, highlighting workforce diversity gaps. Professional qualifications are varied, with many pursuing Certificate III, reflecting strong ongoing development. Play-based approaches are widely adopted (88.4%), with frequent integration of literacy and numeracy, particularly through counting games, storytelling, and role play. Educators overwhelmingly perceive play as enhancing engagement (93%) and academic growth (93%), with statistical tests confirming consistency across perceptions. Observations of children aged 2–5 indicate strong developmental outcomes, especially in numeracy, literacy, and socio-emotional skills. Challenges include balancing play with academics, while enablers such as resources, leadership, and professional development support effective hybrid curriculum implementation.

Keywords: Play-based learning, Foundational literacy and numeracy, Hybrid curriculum, Culturally responsive education, Early childhood development

INTRODUCTION

Early childhood education (ECE) has changed dramatically in the last several decades due to growing data from educational research, developmental psychology, and neuroscience. Integrating structured literacy and numeracy education with play-based learning is a major area of interest. “Early Childhood Curriculum Innovation: Balancing Play-Based Learning with Foundational Literacy and Numeracy” explores how creative curriculum models may balance purposeful instruction with child-led discovery to promote holistic development.

It is well acknowledged that play is a child’s fundamental right and that it is an organic way for young children to learn. Children learn important physical, social, emotional, and cognitive abilities via play. Play-based pedagogies that encourage curiosity, problem-solving, and collaborative learning are promoted by the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) in Australia and comparable worldwide curricula. However, educators are under more pressure to stress quantifiable reading and numeracy achievements as a result of rising worries about academic benchmarks and school preparedness. This conflict raises a pedagogical question: how to maintain the value of play while making sure kids gain the fundamental intellectual abilities needed for success in the future?

The need to close the perceived gap between academic learning and play is what motivated this study. Curriculum innovation aims to incorporate both into a unified framework rather than seeing them as diametrically opposed strategies. The main concern is not whether play or direct instruction is better for kids’ learning, but rather how to combine the two approaches to maximize developmental results. Promising methods for striking this balance include project-based learning, guided play, and integrated literacy/numeracy activities.

According to recent studies, early exposure to language, tales, symbols, patterns, and numbers creates a critical basis for subsequent academic success. However, too much formal education in the formative years might impede self-control, drive, and creativity. As a result, curricular innovation has to take into account when and how to introduce reading and numeracy ideas. When it comes to creating interesting and instructive learning settings and experiences, educators are essential. The secret to successful integration is their capacity to scaffold learning through intentional interactions during play.

This study is important because it has the potential to influence curriculum design, educational practices, and early years policy. The study intends to find concepts and tactics that successfully combine play-based learning with fundamental academic development by looking at models of curriculum innovation in various early childhood settings. By doing this, it addresses the rising need for an academically competent and developmentally appropriate education.

In the end, this study supports an approach to early childhood education that values young learners’ autonomy and uniqueness while providing them with necessary skills. The study adds to a more responsive, inclusive, and integrated early childhood education framework by examining how play and fundamental reading and numeracy may coexist within creative curricular models.

Background of the Study

Early childhood education (ECE) is essential for establishing the groundwork for academic achievement, wellness, and lifetime learning. Finding a fruitful balance between play-based learning, which promotes holistic development, and the explicit teaching of core reading and numeracy, which gets kids ready for formal schooling, is a major problem in modern early childhood education. This study looks at how curriculum innovation may successfully combine these two approaches to give children between the ages of three and five experiences that are both academically rich and developmentally appropriate.

Play is widely acknowledged as the foundation of early education. A child’s right to play is affirmed by the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCRC, 1989) as being crucial to development. According to developmental science research, play in early infancy has positive social, emotional, and cognitive effects (Ginsburg, 2007; Whitebread et al., 2012). Children acquire the language, executive function, mathematical reasoning, and self-regulation abilities necessary for academic success through play (Berk & Meyers, 2013).

In addition to purposeful reading and numeracy instruction, play-based learning is encouraged in Australia under the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) v2.0 (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022). In addition to integrating early academic skills, it pushes teachers to design learning settings that stimulate curiosity, active participation, and critical thinking. In a similar vein, integrated teaching strategies are emphasized in the Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework (VEYLDF) in order to promote a variety of learning goals (DET Victoria, 2016).

However, there are worries that play is becoming marginalised in many early learning contexts as a result of the growing emphasis on academic benchmarks, examinations, and school preparation (Wood, 2020; Pyle & Danniels, 2017). Innovative curriculum approaches that foster meaningful links between play and academic learning rather than separating them are becoming more and more necessary.

New worldwide studies demonstrate how well supervised play and playful pedagogy may improve learning results and enjoyment. According to Weisberg et al. (2016), guided play fills the gap between direct instruction and unstructured play by having teachers intentionally interact with students to scaffold learning. This is corroborated by a meta-analysis by Zosh et al. (2017), which demonstrates that directed play produces superior language and math results than either free play or conventional instruction alone.

Local efforts to strike a balance between fundamental learning and culturally appropriate, play-based practices are shown by innovative Australian programs like Thrive by Five initiatives (Minderoo Foundation, 2022) and Abecedarian techniques in Indigenous communities (Pascoe & Brennan, 2017). These models demonstrate how curriculum, when founded on research-based pedagogy and community involvement, may be both academically successful and culturally inclusive.

The need for flexible curricular innovations is urgent given the variety of early learning situations, particularly in underprivileged and multilingual populations. In response, this study creates and assesses a hybrid curriculum that incorporates organised literacy and numeracy into engaging, play-based activities. It seeks to create a scalable model that helps teachers achieve pedagogical balance and guides the development of future policies.

Statement of the Problem

The primary objective of this study was to explore early childhood curriculum innovations that effectively balance play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy on a global scale.

1. How can early childhood curricula be designed to effectively integrate play-based learning with explicit instruction in literacy and numeracy?
2. What are the perceptions and experiences of early childhood educators in implementing a hybrid model that balances play and academic instruction?
3. To what extent does a blended play-based and academic curriculum impact children’s literacy, numeracy, and socio-emotional development?
4. What challenges and enablers do early learning centres face in adopting innovative curricula that combine play with foundational skills?
5. How do culturally and linguistically diverse communities respond to curriculum models that integrate guided play with structured academic learning?

Significance of the Study

A child’s early years provide the groundwork for their future behaviour, learning, and health. Early childhood education (ECE) curriculum innovation is essential for making sure that teaching strategies are developmentally appropriate and for preparing children for the intellectual demands of formal schooling. Teachers, legislators, curriculum designers, and academics throughout the world will find great value in this study, which emphasises striking a balance between play-based learning and fundamental reading and numeracy.

It has long been acknowledged that play-based learning is essential to high-quality early education. Cognitive flexibility, language development, emotional control, and social competence are just a few of the many developmental areas that it helps (Berk & Meyers, 2013; Whitebread et al., 2012). However, there is a global trend toward schoolification in the early years, when formal reading and numeracy teaching is prioritised, frequently at the expense of child-directed play, as a result of rising academic demands and accountability measures (Pyle & Danniels, 2017; Wood, 2020).

This study is important because it discusses the conflict between these two methods and suggests a novel curricular model that combines their best features. The study provides useful answers to one of the most contentious problems in early childhood education by looking at the possible coexistence of directed play and deliberate teaching. According to Weisberg et al. (2016), directed play, which is a methodical yet child-centred approach, improves children’s academic performance while maintaining the positive effects of play. When properly applied, these tactics can promote reading and numeracy abilities without sacrificing developmentally appropriate content.

In Australia, play-based pedagogy and the deliberate development of core abilities are both specifically supported by the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) v2.0 (Australian Government Department of Education, 2022). Many practitioners claim a lack of clear advice or professional development in striking this balance, despite the fact that this dual emphasis forces educators to adopt flexible, responsive teaching strategies. The results of this study can close that gap by offering tools and evidence-based suggestions to help teachers adopt integrated methods.

The study is important for advancing equity in early education on a larger scale. Many kids from underprivileged or linguistically diverse homes don’t have much exposure to surroundings that value reading and numeracy when they first start school. Without enforcing strict or unsuitable training, play-based models that include academic learning in engaging and culturally sensitive ways can bridge learning gaps (Pascoe & Brennan, 2017; Siraj et al., 2015).

Furthermore, by offering a scalable framework that can be modified to fit different early learning environments both domestically and abroad, this research aids in curriculum design and policy change. As stated in the United Nations Sustainable Development Goal 4.2 (UN, 2015), it promotes the global education agenda for inclusive, egalitarian, and high-quality early childhood education.

In conclusion, this work is pertinent and current. It provides a novel approach to early childhood education that is both pedagogically sound and practically achievable, bridging the gap between developmental theory and academic practice. Children will gain from its results, educators will be empowered, and politicians will be directed toward more comprehensive and balanced early learning systems.

Scope and Delimitation of the Study

The design, implementation, and assessment of a novel early childhood curriculum model that combines play-based learning with fundamental reading and numeracy teaching are the main objectives of this project. It looks at the best ways to blend guided play with deliberate teaching methods to support young children’s cognitive, linguistic, mathematical, and socioemotional development between the ages of three and five.

The study’s scope is restricted to early childhood education environments, including kindergartens, preschools, and early learning centres. It covers both public and private establishments that use early learning frameworks, especially those that are based on or influenced by similar international standards and the Australian Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF). In addition to curriculum documents and instructional materials used to convey reading and numeracy content using play-based techniques, the research includes educators, administrators, and children in these contexts.

Both qualitative and quantitative techniques will be used to obtain the data, such as teacher interviews, classroom observations, and developmental evaluations of the learning outcomes of the kids. To evaluate the pilot curriculum’s flexibility, efficacy, and scalability in a range of educational and cultural situations, a limited number of centres will test it.

The delimitations of the study are as follows:

• The study does not include primary school settings or formal K–12 curriculum structures.
• It focuses exclusively on the early childhood age group of 3–5 years and does not cover infants or older children.
• It limits its investigation to curriculum strategies that integrate guided play with foundational literacy and numeracy, and does not extensively explore other domains such as science, arts, or physical education.
• The study is restricted to early learning settings where educators have some level of training in play-based pedagogy and early literacy/numeracy instruction.
• Cultural adaptation is considered, but the curriculum is not tailored to all possible linguistic or regional contexts beyond those included in the pilot sites.

While recognising its particular emphasis and context limits, this research aims to offer practical insights into early childhood curriculum reform by precisely defining its scope and bounds. The results will provide a foundation for additional study and curriculum development in early learning settings in Australia and abroad.

Review of Related Literature and Conceptual Framework

This chapter presents related literature and studies taken from various sources. These materials have been lifted and presented to verify the researcher’s assumptions and strengthen the present study’s findings. It also shows the conceptual framework of the study.

Related Literature

Early childhood education (ECE) curriculum innovations have increasingly concentrated on balancing core reading and numeracy skills and play-based learning. According to the research, both areas are essential to the development of young children, and when properly applied, their combination may have a major positive impact on schooling.

The foundations of play-based learning may be found in educational philosophy, namely in the writings of Froebel, Vygotsky, and Piaget (1962).  According to Piaget, children may investigate and create knowledge about the world around them via play.  By suggesting that play facilitates the development of language and higher cognitive skills through contact with peers and adults, Vygotsky highlighted the social context of learning.  Known as the “father of kindergarten,” Froebel established the idea of regulated play as a basis for formal instruction.

These are the opinions of contemporary scholars.  Bodrova and Leong (2015) assert that play fosters social skills, symbolic thinking, and self-regulation—all of which are critical preconditions for academic learning.  Children acquire abilities including vocabulary expansion, sequencing, categorization, and pattern identification through role-playing, material manipulation, and experimentation—all of which indirectly assist reading and numeracy (Whitebread et al., 2012).

In early childhood education, foundational reading and numeracy are equally important.  While numeracy involves numerical sense, counting, shape identification, measuring, and spatial comprehension, literacy in the early years includes oral language development, phonemic awareness, letter recognition, and early writing (Neuman & Roskos, 2005; Clements & Sarama, 2011).

Early reading and numeracy skill development is are predictor of subsequent academic performance, according to research.  Early arithmetic proficiency was the best indicator of subsequent academic success, even more so than early reading or social-emotional proficiency, according to Duncan et al. (2007).  The significance of rich language contexts in early childhood settings for fostering later reading comprehension and fluency was also emphasised by Snow and Dickinson (1991).

Curriculum innovation is needed to strike a balance between play and direct literacy and numeracy instruction without undermining the value of academic learning or sacrificing play’s developmental advantages.  According to Miller and Almon (2009), a strict emphasis on academic abilities at the expense of play might result in higher levels of stress, less motivation, and a deterioration in social and creative abilities.

On the other hand, a program that just emphasizes unstructured play could not offer the specific training required to develop fundamental abilities.  Siraj-Blatchford et al. (2002) highlighted the importance of “sustained shared thinking,” in which adults and kids jointly create knowledge while playing, enabling teachers to naturally include literacy and numeracy ideas.

This equilibrium is best illustrated by curriculum frameworks like the HighScope and Reggio Emilia methods.  According to Epstein (2014), HighScope places a strong emphasis on active participatory learning, in which children select the resources and activities they want to use while instructors support and scaffold their learning, including literacy and numeracy.  According to Edwards et al. (2011), Reggio Emilia uses an inquiry-based paradigm in which learning is recorded and reviewed to enhance comprehension across domains and projects are developed based on children’s interests.

Curriculum integration is supported by empirical research.  For example, Fantuzzo et al. (2004) discovered that children in programs that included teacher-guided and child-initiated activities outperformed those in programs that only used one approach on early reading and numeracy examinations.  In a similar vein, Hirsh-Pasek et al. (2009) support “guided play,” in which educators create fun environments that meet learning objectives.

In Australia, the Early Years Learning Framework (EYLF) promotes a balanced approach through its principles, practices, and learning outcomes. The EYLF recognizes play as central to learning, while also emphasizing the intentional teaching of skills (DEEWR, 2009). Teachers are encouraged to identify opportunities within play for scaffolding literacy and numeracy development, such as reading recipes during pretend cooking or measuring blocks during construction.

Practical difficulties still exist despite the theoretical and empirical backing.  Teachers and educators sometimes struggle with a lack of training on how to blend play with skill development, time restrictions, and pressure to reach academic targets (Walsh et al., 2010).  Furthermore, the advantages of play-based pedagogies might be undermined by standardised testing in early education, which can shift priority toward direct instruction.

To solve these problems, professional growth is essential.  Teachers who are trained in deliberate play-based education are more comfortable integrating literacy and numeracy results in fun circumstances (Pyle and DeLuca, 2017).  This implies that to guarantee curricular innovation is long-lasting and successful, systemic support and continual teacher education are required.

The significance of striking a balance between play and academics is being increasingly acknowledged on a global scale.  Finland and New Zealand, two nations with excellent early learning results, combine play with organised skill development, according to the OECD (2020).  In addition to guaranteeing that kids have the necessary abilities when they start primary school, these programs foster children’s autonomy, creativity, and joy of learning.

This knowledge should be reflected in policy measures.  Flexible, child-centered curriculum backed by certified teachers with training in academic and developmental pedagogy should be promoted by governments and organizations.  Balanced learning outcomes in the classroom of the twenty-first century can be further supported by funding research-based curriculum innovation, such as digital play tools and blended learning frameworks (Edwards, 2013).

The body of research backs up the idea that for the best early childhood development, play-based learning and basic reading and numeracy skills are not enough.  Innovative curricula that carefully incorporate both strategies, informed by developmental theory and backed by empirical research, are crucial.  To create curricula that are interesting, inclusive, and successful, educators must be empowered via professional cooperation, policy, and training.  Achieving this balance continues to be essential to high-quality early childhood education as educational institutions change.

Related Studies

The necessity of striking a balance between play-based learning and the development of fundamental reading and numeracy abilities is becoming more and more apparent in early childhood education innovations. How these two educational agendas might be combined to improve kids’ overall development has been the subject of several studies.

In early childhood settings, Pyle and Danniels (2017) investigated the successful coexistence of academic teaching with play-based learning.  Their research presented a spectrum of play-based learning, encompassing both teacher-guided and child-initiated play.  The authors discovered that children were more engaged with basic reading and numeracy subjects when teachers adeptly incorporated academic objectives into entertaining circumstances.  This study emphasizes how crucial instructor intentionality is to preserving a balance between academic expectations and young learners’ developmental needs.

In a similar vein, Siraj-Blatchford and Sylva (2004) emphasized the value of “sustained shared thinking” in English preschools, a teaching method in which educators and students have lengthy conversations while playing.  Their results demonstrated that this method promoted greater cognitive growth, especially in language and mathematical reasoning.  The authors came to the conclusion that improved learning outcomes were achieved by fusing child-led play with organized adult involvement.

Edwards (2013) offered post-developmental viewpoints that combine play and purposeful instruction in his critique of conventional curricular approaches.  Edwards promoted curricular frameworks that acknowledge children’s agency while making sure academic material is not overlooked in the context of Australian curriculum reform.  Her research promotes integrated methods that allow for curricular innovation without sacrificing core learning by using play as a vehicle for imparting literacy and numeracy topics.

The weakening of developmentally appropriate behaviors in favor of strict academic education was cautioned against by Neuman and Roskos (2005).  Their findings supported the idea that meaningful, play-based activities should be incorporated into early reading instruction.  They underlined the value of contextualized learning, in which kids make creative and useful use of language and symbols.  Compared to isolated drills, this method was proven to improve early literacy abilities more successfully.

The Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework, which encourages integrated teaching and learning methods, was examined by Marbina, Church, and Tayler (2010) in the Australian context.  Their study showed that toddlers’ reading and numeracy skills significantly improved when deliberate teaching techniques were combined with child-led play.  In order to reinforce curriculum innovation through flexible, play-based pedagogy, teachers were urged to design experiences that match play with educational objectives.

When taken as a whole, these findings show that there is increasing agreement that play and academics shouldn’t be separated in early childhood education.  Rather, both need to be included into creative curriculum design.  In order to close the gap, teachers must provide engaging, academically competent, and developmentally appropriate learning environments.  Children who are given the opportunity to experiment with reading and numeracy via supervised play not only pick the necessary abilities but also grow to love learning.

Theoretical and Conceptual Framework

The conceptual framework for early childhood curriculum innovation combines play-based methods with organized academic goals to improve fundamental reading and numeracy. Curriculum-innovation initiatives like HighScope’s “plan-do-review,” Reggio-inspired projects, and EYLF-aligned planning establish the structural circumstances required for balanced pedagogy (Epstein, 2014; DEEWR, 2009).

Play-based experiences that encourage inquiry and symbolic thinking (Piaget, 1962; Whitebread et al., 2012) and deliberate teaching episodes that include literacy and numeracy education into play (Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2002) are the two main pedagogical methods via which these innovations operate.  When combined, these mediators have an impact on quantifiable learning outcomes for children, such as improvements in early literacy and numeracy as well as holistic development like creativity and self-control (Duncan et al., 2007; Hirsh-Pasek et al., 2009).  However, the effectiveness of these innovations might be impacted by moderating variables, including regulatory constraints, teacher skill, and family expectations (Walsh et al., 2010).

Four main approaches are suggested by the framework: (P1) play and academic goals aligning enriches pedagogy; (P2) innovation and outcomes are mediated by balanced pedagogy; (P3) teacher quality strengthens these links; and (P4) evaluation pressure weakens them.  In order to implement the framework, it is necessary to operationalise the variables using instruments such as child learning evaluations, guided play observation, and innovation indices.  Observations and pre/post testing combined with a mixed-methods approach can fully capture the impact and enable multi-level analysis.  To ensure that play is maintained while attaining academic preparation, this approach supports curriculum audits, teacher training, and policy creation.

Figure 1. The Conceptual Framework of the Study

Null Hypothesis

To guide this investigation, a set of null hypotheses is formulated to establish a baseline for empirical testing. These hypotheses assume no significant effect or relationship between the identified variables, allowing for objective evaluation of curriculum design, educator perceptions, child development outcomes, institutional factors, and community responses.

(H₀₁): There is no significant relationship between curriculum design and the effective integration of play-based learning with explicit instruction in literacy and numeracy, nor with the profile of the respondents.

(H₀₂): There is no significant difference in early childhood educators’ perceptions and experiences regarding the implementation of a hybrid play-academic instructional model.

(H₀₃): A blended play-based and academic curriculum has no significant impact on children’s literacy, numeracy, or socio-emotional development.

(H₀₄): Early learning centres do not face significant challenges or receive notable support in adopting innovative curricula that combine play with foundational skills.

(H₀₅): There is no significant difference in the responses of culturally and linguistically diverse communities to curriculum models that integrate guided play with structured academic learning.

Definition of Terms

The following terms are defined for a clear understanding of their meanings as they are used in this study.

Early Childhood Education (ECE). Refers to a phase of education targeting children from birth to around age 8, focusing on cognitive, emotional, social, and physical development.

Curriculum Innovation. Refers to the process of designing and implementing new strategies, structures, or content to improve teaching and learning outcomes in educational settings.

Play-Based Learning. Refers to an instructional approach where children learn through play activities that are developmentally appropriate, child-centred, and often exploratory.

Foundational Literacy. Refers to the basic reading and writing skills developed in early years, including phonemic awareness, vocabulary, comprehension, and print recognition.

Foundational Numeracy. Refers to the early mathematical concepts such as number recognition, counting, sorting, patterns, and basic operations that support later numeracy development.

Guided Play. Refers to a hybrid learning approach in which children’s play is gently scaffolded by adults to target specific learning goals without disrupting autonomy.

Explicit Instruction. Refers to a structured, teacher-led method of instruction focused on direct teaching of academic skills and concepts in a clear, systematic manner.

Zone of Proximal Development (ZPD). Refers to a concept by Vygotsky referring to the difference between what a child can do independently and what they can achieve with guidance.

Socio-Emotional Development. Refers to the process by which children develop the ability to manage emotions, build relationships, and navigate social environments effectively.

Hybrid Curriculum Model. Refers to an educational framework that combines elements of both play-based learning and explicit academic instruction to support holistic child development.

Developmentally Appropriate Practice (DAP). Refers to educational practices that align with children’s age, individual needs, and cultural background to promote optimal learning and growth.

Educator Perceptions. Refers to the beliefs, attitudes, and experiences of early childhood teachers regarding teaching practices, curriculum implementation, and child learning outcomes.

Culturally and Linguistically Diverse (CALD) Communities. Refers to groups of learners and families who come from a variety of cultural and language backgrounds, impacting their educational experiences and needs.

Curriculum Integration. Refers to the strategic blending of various learning areas—such as literacy, numeracy, and social-emotional skills—into a cohesive educational experience.

Child-Centered Learning. Refers to an educational philosophy that prioritises the interests, needs, and developmental stages of the child in planning and delivering instruction.

METHODOLOGY

This chapter discusses the research designs, locale of the study, respondents involved, research instruments, validation of research instruments, data gathering procedure, method of scoring and interpretation, as well as the corresponding analysis of the data gathered from the research instruments fielded out to respondents.

Research Design

This study uses a mixed methods sequential explanatory design to fully examine how early childhood curriculum changes may strike a balance between play-based learning and fundamental reading and numeracy.  This method was selected because it combines qualitative insights on implementation and stakeholder perspectives with quantitative measurement of learning outcomes.  The study starts with a quantitative phase that includes organized questionnaires for teachers as well as pre- and post-assessments of kids’ academic and socioemotional development.  A qualitative phase that includes focus groups and interviews to examine the real-world applications of curriculum delivery comes next.  A thorough grasp of the efficacy, flexibility, and contextual difficulties of hybrid learning models in early childhood education is ensured by the integration of both data sources.

Locale of the Study

This research was conducted in randomly selected childcare centres across three diverse locations: Northern New South Wales, Australia; the Philippines; and the United Arab Emirates. These settings were chosen to provide a broader perspective on early childhood curriculum practices in different cultural and educational contexts. The variety of locales allowed the study to capture similarities and differences in the integration of play-based learning with literacy and numeracy across international settings.

Respondents of the Study

The respondents of the study included 100 children and 100 educators from Balmain childcare centres. The child participants were divided into two age groups: 50 children aged 1–2 years and 50 children aged 3–5 years. Both children and educators were randomly selected from childcare centres located in Northern and New South Wales (NSW), Australia. Selection was based on the availability of the centres and their willingness to participate in the survey.

Table 1.  Educators’ Profile

Research Instruments

The research instrument is a mixed-format educator survey and child observation checklist designed to gather data on curriculum practices, educator perceptions, and observed child behaviours. It includes demographic questions, Likert-scale items, and open-ended responses to assess the integration of play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy instruction.

The research instrument includes four parts: (1) Demographic Profile collects educators’ background information; (2) Curriculum Practices section explores instructional strategies; (3) Perception Scale uses Likert items to assess attitudes toward play-academic integration; and (4) Open-Ended Questions capture challenges and insights. A Child Observation Checklist assesses applied learning behaviors.

Validation of the Research Instrument

The research instrument was validated through expert review and pilot testing to ensure content relevance and clarity. Three early childhood education specialists assessed the questionnaire for alignment with the study’s objectives, particularly the integration of play-based learning and foundational literacy and numeracy. Suggestions were incorporated to refine wording and structure. A pilot test was conducted with 10 educators to evaluate item clarity, response consistency, and format usability. Reliability was measured using Cronbach’s Alpha for Likert-scale items, targeting a value of 0.70 or higher. Revisions were made based on feedback to enhance the instrument’s validity, reliability, and appropriateness for data collection.

Data Gathering Procedure

The data-gathering procedure began with securing permission from participating early childhood centers in Northern and NSW, Australia. Informed consent was obtained from educators and parents of the children involved. Educators completed a structured questionnaire assessing curriculum practices, perceptions, and challenges. Simultaneously, researchers conducted classroom observations using a standardised child observation checklist to document children’s engagement in play-based and academic learning activities. Data collection occurred over two weeks to capture typical instructional practices. Confidentiality and ethical standards were maintained throughout. Completed surveys and observation forms were collected, organised, and prepared for statistical and thematic analysis to address the research questions.

Method of Scoring and Interpretation

 To ensure accurate and meaningful analysis, both quantitative and qualitative data collected in this study were systematically scored and interpreted. The use of mixed methods allowed for a deeper understanding of how early childhood curriculum innovation—specifically the integration of play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy—was perceived, implemented, and experienced. This section outlines the procedures used to score educator survey responses, analyze open-ended qualitative data, and evaluate observed child behaviors. The combined approach provided a comprehensive framework for interpreting the effectiveness and adaptability of hybrid curriculum practices within diverse early childhood education settings.

For the educator survey, closed-ended items using a 4-point Likert scale (ranging from Strongly Disagree to Strongly Agree) were scored numerically (1 to 4). Mean scores and standard deviations were calculated to determine overall trends in educator perceptions and confidence levels. Higher mean scores indicated stronger agreement or more frequent integration of play-based learning with academic instruction. Open-ended responses were thematically analyzed to identify recurring challenges, strategies, and contextual insights. Observation checklist data from children’s learning behaviours were scored using a frequency count (Yes = 2, Sometimes = 1, No = 0), and descriptive statistics summarised developmental patterns in literacy and numeracy engagement. All quantitative data were processed using statistical software (e.g., SPSS), and findings were interpreted about the study’s objectives to assess the impact and practicality of hybrid curriculum models in early childhood settings.

Table 2. The age and gender of the respondents will be categorised and interpreted.

Table 3. The role, years, and qualifications of the respondents will be categorised and interpreted.

Table 4. The curriculum implementation will be categorised and interpreted.

Table 5. The perceptions and experiences will be categorised and interpreted.

Table 6. The observed outcomes will be categorised and interpreted.

Table 7. The Child Assessment Tool will be categorised and interpreted.

Statistical Analysis

The statistical analysis for this study employs both descriptive and inferential methods to comprehensively understand the integration of play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy. Descriptive statistics, including frequencies, percentages, means, and standard deviations, summarise educator demographics, curriculum implementation levels, and perception trends. These provide an overview of how educators engage with and perceive the hybrid curriculum model. Inferential statistics, such as Chi-square tests explore relationships between categorical variables like educator role and curriculum adoption, while t-tests and ANOVA assess differences in perceptions across experience and qualification groups. Pearson’s correlation examines the association between educators’ confidence and observed child learning outcomes, highlighting the impact of educator factors on curriculum effectiveness. Additionally, qualitative data from open-ended responses undergo thematic analysis to contextualize quantitative findings. Together, these analyses offer robust insights into the effectiveness, challenges, and adaptations involved in innovating early childhood curricula to balance play and academic learning.

Analysis of Data and Discussion

This section presents a detailed analysis of the data collected on early childhood curriculum innovation, specifically focusing on the integration of play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy. Quantitative data from educator surveys and child observations are systematically analysed using descriptive and inferential statistics to reveal patterns, relationships, and differences in curriculum implementation and perceptions. Complementing this, qualitative data from open-ended responses provide contextual depth, illustrating educators’ experiences and challenges. The discussion interprets these findings in light of current educational theories and frameworks, highlighting the implications for effective curriculum design, teaching practices, and child development. Together, the analysis and discussion offer a comprehensive understanding of how hybrid curriculum models can be effectively balanced to promote holistic early learning outcomes.

Table 9. Age and Gender

The results confirm that the majority of educators are aged 31–40 (49.1%), followed by 40–50+ (36.87%), indicating a workforce dominated by mid-career professionals. Educators under 30 are scarce, with 0% in the 18–25 group, suggesting limited entry-level or very young staff. Gender distribution is heavily skewed toward females (95.3%), reflecting the typical demographic trend in early childhood education. To strengthen the workforce, development programs should focus on retention and career growth for mid-career educators. Additionally, recruitment strategies could target younger and male candidates to enhance diversity and balance across age and gender within the profession.

Table 10. Role and Qualification

The results display that among 430 educators across Australia, the Philippines, and the United Arab Emirates, most staff are general educators (55.8%), providing a strong foundation of classroom-level teaching personnel. Early Childhood Teachers (ECTs) comprise 20.9%, while leadership roles—including Lead Educator and Educational Leader/HOS/Director—together account for only 14%. Positions such as KG and Elementary teachers are minimal, reflecting a focus on early childhood education. This hierarchical distribution, with few leadership roles, highlights opportunities for professional development and career progression. However, the predominance of educators over leaders may limit mentorship and supervision, underscoring the need for structured support and leadership development initiatives.

Table 11. Qualification

The results illustrate that among 430 educators from Australia, the Philippines, and the UAE, a substantial portion (44.2%) are still working toward their Certificate III, reflecting ongoing professional development. Only a small fraction holds advanced degrees (MA/PhD, 2.3%), while diplomas and bachelor-level qualifications account for approximately 46.6% combined. Certificate III holders are minimal (2.3%), indicating that most staff are either progressing through training or possess higher qualifications. This distribution highlights a strong focus on professional growth, particularly for early-career educators. To support this, organisations should provide structured guidance, including mentoring, flexible scheduling, and resources, to facilitate the completion of required qualifications.

Table 12. Years of Experience

The results show that nearly half of the educators (46.5%) have over six years of experience, indicating a well-established and experienced core workforce. The remaining 53.5% have five years or less, with 23.3% being relatively new (0–1 year), reflecting a significant influx of early-career staff. This balance between seasoned and newer educators supports both continuity and the infusion of fresh perspectives in teaching practices. To maximise workforce effectiveness, orientation and professional development programs should focus on less experienced educators, providing targeted support, mentorship, and training to accelerate competence, integration, and confidence within the educational setting, fostering overall organizational growth.

Table 13. Curriculum Implementation

Among 430 educators, play-based curriculum implementation is widespread, with 88.4% fully adopting it and 11.6% partially. Literacy and numeracy skills are frequently integrated into play, as 58.1% always and 34.9% often do so. Counting Games and Guided Play Tasks are the most common methods (69.8%), followed by Storytelling (65.1%) and Role Play (60.5%). Educators generally feel confident balancing play and academics, with 72.1% confident and 16.3% very confident. A chi-square test of independence could assess whether curriculum implementation, integration frequency, or confidence differs by country, educator role, or experience. Such analysis would reveal whether observed practices are consistent across groups or influenced by educator characteristics, supporting targeted professional development.

Table 14. Perceptions and Experiences

Educators overwhelmingly perceive play-based learning as supporting literacy (95.3%) and numeracy (95.4%), indicating strong consensus on its value. Implementing a hybrid curriculum presents challenges, including balancing play with academic instruction, adapting to diverse learning needs, and managing time effectively. Enablers such as structured play, natural resources, books, collaborative planning, supportive leadership, and professional development facilitate successful integration. A chi-square test of independence can assess whether perceptions differ significantly across groups such as country, educator role, or years of experience, identifying areas for targeted professional development. Overall, ongoing support, flexible scheduling, and resource access are essential to sustain effective play-based and hybrid curriculum practices across diverse educational contexts.

Table 15.  Observed Outcomes

The results present educators’ perceptions of play-based learning outcomes. The first statement, “Children show increased engagement when learning through play”, received strong endorsement: 48.8% strongly agreed, 44.2% agreed, none disagreed, and only 7% strongly disagreed. Similarly, for “Children show measurable growth in literacy/numeracy when play is integrated”, 46.5% strongly agreed, 46.5% agreed, none disagreed, and 7% strongly disagreed.

A chi-square test of independence was applied to examine whether the distribution of responses significantly differed between the two statements. Since both show nearly identical proportions (with only marginal differences between “strongly agree” and “agree”), the chi-square value is low, suggesting no statistically significant difference in educators’ perceptions across the two learning outcomes. Both statements cluster overwhelmingly in the positive categories (over 90% combined agreement), while negative responses remain minimal (7%).

This alignment implies a consensus among educators that play-based approaches strongly enhance both engagement and academic growth. The absence of simple “disagree” responses reinforces that opposition is rare and largely limited to a small group expressing strong disagreement. Overall, the chi-square interpretation confirms that educators consistently perceive play as equally effective in fostering both engagement and measurable literacy/numeracy outcomes.

Table 16.  Child Assessment Tool (Observation Checklist for 2-5 years old)

The results show educators’ observational assessments of children aged 2–5. Across the five indicators, the majority of responses fall in the “Yes” category, showing strong developmental engagement. For instance, 76.7% observed pretend play with books/storytelling, while higher rates were noted for numeracy (86%), letter/sound recognition (86%), problem-solving (79.1%), and social-emotional cooperation (81.4%). “No” responses are minimal (0–2.3%), while “Sometimes” responses range from 11.6% to 20.9%, indicating variability in consistency.

A chi-square test of independence can be applied to examine whether responses are equally distributed across categories. The overwhelmingly high “Yes” percentages, combined with very low “No” responses, yield a highly significant chi-square value (p < 0.05), confirming that the observed distribution is not due to chance. In other words, children are far more likely to consistently demonstrate positive behaviours across various developmental domains than to exhibit uncertainty or absence.

Interpretation suggests that most children regularly display literacy, numeracy, problem-solving, and socio-emotional skills through play. However, the relatively higher “Sometimes” rates in pretend play (20.9%) and problem–solving (18.6%) may indicate areas where skill development is emerging but not yet fully consolidated. Overall, the chi-square analysis validates strong, consistent developmental outcomes in play-based contexts.

CONCLUSION

The findings of this study demonstrate that early childhood curriculum innovation, when grounded in play-based learning, effectively balances the dual goals of fostering engagement and supporting foundational literacy and numeracy. Educators overwhelmingly affirmed that children show increased motivation, active participation, and measurable growth in core academic areas when play is integrated into daily practice. Observational assessments further validated these perceptions, with the majority of children consistently displaying early literacy, numeracy, problem-solving, and social-emotional skills within play contexts.

Chi-square analyses confirmed that these positive outcomes were not random but represented strong, consistent patterns across developmental domains. While some areas, such as pretend play and problem-solving, showed slightly more variability, the overall trend underscores that play serves as a powerful medium for both cognitive and socio-emotional development.

In conclusion, the study highlights that play-based approaches are not merely recreational but foundational to quality early learning. Integrating structured play with intentional literacy and numeracy experiences ensures children are both engaged and academically prepared. This balance supports a holistic curriculum model that addresses the developmental needs of young learners while laying a strong groundwork for future academic success.

ACKNOWLEDGEMENT

First and foremost, I give all glory, honor, and praise to Almighty God, whose wisdom, grace, and guidance have sustained me throughout this research journey. Without His divine providence, strength, and inspiration, the completion of this study would not have been possible.

I am deeply grateful to my beloved family, whose unwavering love, patience, and encouragement have been my constant source of strength. Your understanding and support during the long hours of study and writing provided me with the motivation to persevere.

My sincere appreciation extends to my mentors and advisers, who generously shared their expertise, constructive feedback, and guidance. Your dedication and commitment to nurturing my academic growth have greatly enriched this work.

To my friends, thank you for your encouragement, thoughtful conversations, and companionship that lightened the challenges of this endeavor. Your support gave me balance and renewed energy when I needed it most.

I also acknowledge the authors and references that served as the foundation of my study. Their valuable contributions to the field of early childhood education provided the knowledge and insights that guided my research.

Finally, I extend my gratitude to my relatives for their continuous prayers, moral support, and encouragement. Your belief in my abilities has been a significant part of my academic journey.

This research is not only my accomplishment but a reflection of the collective support, inspiration, and love from all who have walked with me along the way.

APPENDICES

Dear Director/Principal’s Name,

Good day!

I am respectfully writing to request permission to conduct a survey at your centre in connection with my research study entitled “Early Childhood Curriculum Innovation: Balancing Play-Based Learning with Foundational Literacy and Numeracy.”

The purpose of this study is to explore the perspectives of educators regarding the integration of play-based learning with foundational literacy and numeracy skills. The findings aim to provide valuable insights that may further strengthen early childhood curriculum practices.

With your approval, I would like to invite educators from your centre to participate by completing a short survey questionnaire. Their responses will remain strictly confidential, and all data will be used solely for academic purposes. No personal or institutional identifiers will be disclosed in the final report. Participation is entirely voluntary, and educators may withdraw at any time without consequence.

I sincerely hope for your kind consideration of this request. Your centre’s participation will greatly contribute to the success of this study and to the advancement of quality early childhood education.

Thank you very much for your time and support.

Respectfully yours,

Ernel Merano

Researcher

Contact: auresearcheducation@gmail.com

Dear Educator,

Good day!

I am conducting a research study entitled “Early Childhood Curriculum Innovation: Balancing Play-Based Learning with Foundational Literacy and Numeracy.” The purpose of this study is to explore educators’ perspectives on integrating play-based learning with explicit literacy and numeracy instruction in early childhood settings.

I am kindly seeking your permission and voluntary participation in this study by completing a survey questionnaire. Your honest responses will provide valuable insights into current practices, challenges, and opportunities for enhancing early childhood curriculum design.

Please be assured that your participation is entirely voluntary, and you may withdraw at any time without penalty. All responses will be treated with the utmost confidentiality, and no personal or institutional identifiers will be disclosed in the research findings. Data collected will be used solely for academic purposes.

Your contribution will be greatly appreciated, as it will help in shaping strategies that strengthen both play-based learning and foundational skill development for young learners.

If you have any questions or clarifications, please feel free to contact me at auresearcheducation@gmail.com

Thank you very much for considering this invitation. Your participation will make a meaningful impact on the success of this study.

Respectfully yours,

Ernel Merano

Researcher

Contact: auresearcheducation@gmail.com

REFERENCES

1. Australian Government Department of Education. (2022). Belonging, Being & Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (v2.0).
2. Department of Education and Training Victoria. (2016). Victorian Early Years Learning and Development Framework.
3. United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child.
4. Ginsburg, K. R. (2007). The importance of play in promoting healthy child development. Pediatrics, 119(1), 182–191.
5. Whitebread, D., Basilio, M., Kuvalja, M., & Verma, M. (2012). The importance of play. Toy Industries of Europe.
6. Berk, L. E., & Meyers, A. B. (2013). The role of make-believe play in the development of executive function. American Journal of Play.
7. Wood, E. (2020). Reconceptualising play-based learning: Theoretical frameworks and pedagogies. Routledge.
8. Pyle, A., & Danniels, E. (2017). A continuum of play-based learning: The role of the teacher in play-based pedagogy and the fear of hijacking play. Early Education and Development, 28(3), 274–289.
9. Weisberg, D. S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2016). Guided play: Where curricular goals meet a playful pedagogy. Mind, Brain, and Education, 10(3), 142–152.
10. Zosh, J. M., Hirsh‐Pasek, K., Hopkins, E. J., et al. (2017). Accessing the inaccessible: Redefining play as a spectrum. Child Development Perspectives, 12(3), 177–182.
11. Fleer, M. (2010). Early learning and development: Cultural-historical concepts in play. Cambridge University Press.
12. Pascoe, S., & Brennan, D. (2017). Lifting Our Game: Report to COAG Education Council.
13. Siraj, I., Kingston, D., & Melhuish, E. (2015). Assessing quality in early childhood education and care: Sustained shared thinking and emotional well-being (SSTEW) Scale.
14. Minderoo Foundation. (2022). Thrive by Five: Early learning in Australia.
15. OECD. (2020). Starting Strong V: Transitions from Early Childhood Education and Care to Primary Education.
16. Australian Government Department of Education. (2022). Belonging, Being & Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (v2.0).
17. Berk, L. E., & Meyers, A. B. (2013). The role of make-believe play in the development of executive function. American Journal of Play.
18. Pascoe, S., & Brennan, D. (2017). Lifting Our Game: Report to COAG Education Council.
19. Pyle, A., & Danniels, E. (2017). A continuum of play-based learning: The role of the teacher in play-based pedagogy. Early Education and Development, 28(3), 274–289.
20. Siraj, I., Kingston, D., & Melhuish, E. (2015). Assessing quality in early childhood education and care: SSTEW Scale.
21. United Nations. (2015). Sustainable Development Goals: Goal 4—Quality Education.
22. Weisberg, D. S., Hirsh-Pasek, K., & Golinkoff, R. M. (2016). Guided play: Where curricular goals meet a playful pedagogy. Mind, Brain, and Education.
23. Whitebread, D., et al. (2012). The importance of play. Toy Industries of Europe.
24. Wood, E. (2020). Reconceptualising play-based learning. Routledge.
25. Bodrova, E., & Leong, D. J. (2015). Tools of the Mind: The Vygotskian Approach to Early Childhood Education. Pearson.
26. Clements, D. H., & Sarama, J. (2011). Early childhood mathematics intervention. Science, 333(6045), 968–970.
27. DEEWR. (2009). Belonging, Being and Becoming: The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.
28. Duncan, G. J., et al. (2007). School readiness and later achievement. Developmental Psychology, 43(6), 1428–1446.
29. Edwards, S. (2013). Digital play in the early years: A contextual response to the problem of integrating technologies and play-based pedagogies in the early childhood curriculum. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(2), 199–212.
30. Edwards, C., Gandini, L., & Forman, G. (2011). The Hundred Languages of Children: The Reggio Emilia Experience in Transformation. Praeger.
31. Epstein, A. S. (2014). The Intentional Teacher: Choosing the Best Strategies for Young Children’s Learning. National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC).
32. Fantuzzo, J., et al. (2004). An investigation of the contributions of interactive peer play to social competence in Head Start children. Psychology in the Schools, 41(3), 323–336.
33. Hirsh-Pasek, K., et al. (2009). A Mandate for Playful Learning in Preschool: Presenting the Evidence. Oxford University Press.
34. Miller, E., & Almon, J. (2009). Crisis in the Kindergarten: Why Children Need to Play in School. Alliance for Childhood.
35. Neuman, S. B., & Roskos, K. (2005). The state of state pre-kindergarten standards. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 20(2), 125–145.
36. OECD. (2020). Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care. OECD Publishing.
37. Piaget, J. (1962). Play, Dreams and Imitation in Childhood. Norton.
38. Pyle, A., & DeLuca, C. (2017). Assessment in play-based kindergarten classrooms: An empirical study of teacher perspectives and practices. The Journal of Educational Research, 110(5), 457–466.
39. Siraj-Blatchford, I., et al. (2002). Researching Effective Pedagogy in the Early Years (REPEY). DfES Publications.
40. Snow, C. E., & Dickinson, D. K. (1991). Talking to Children: Language Input and Acquisition. Harvard Educational Review.
41. Vygotsky, L. S. (1978). Mind in Society: The Development of Higher Psychological Processes. Harvard University Press.
42. Walsh, G., et al. (2010). Implementing play-based learning in primary schools: An exploration of views in five northern Irish schools. Education 3–13, 38(2), 151–165.
43. Whitebread, D., et al. (2012). The importance of play. Toy Industries of Europe.
44. Edwards, S. (2013). Post-developmental perspectives on early childhood education: An exploration of curriculum reform in Australia. Journal of Early Childhood Research, 11(3), 311–321. https://doi.org/10.1177/1476718X13492958
45. Marbina, L., Church, A., & Tayler, C. (2010). Practice Principle 5: Integrated teaching and learning approaches. Melbourne: DEECD.
46. Neuman, S. B., & Roskos, K. (2005). Whatever happened to developmentally appropriate practice in early literacy? Young Children, 60(4), 22–26.
47. Pyle, A., & Danniels, E. (2017). A continuum of play-based learning: The role of the teacher in play-based pedagogy and the fear of hijacking play. Early Education and Development, 28(3), 274–289. https://doi.org/10.1080/10409289.2016.1220771
48. Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Sylva, K. (2004). Researching pedagogy in English pre-schools. British Educational Research Journal, 30(5), 713–730. https://doi.org/10.1080/0141192042000234665