28
| Date post: | 18-Dec-2015 |
| Category: |
Documents |
| View: | 217 times |
| Download: | 0 times |
John Bennett, M.Ed. Ph.D.John Bennett, M.Ed. [email protected]
www.unesco.org education and then publicationseducation and then publications
Caring and Learning togetherCaring and Learning together
A cross-national study sponsored by UNESCOA cross-national study sponsored by UNESCOon the integration of early childhood care and education on the integration of early childhood care and education
within educationwithin education
Launceston, Tasmania, 8 June 2010 Launceston, Tasmania, 8 June 2010
b
An overview of the presentationAn overview of the presentation
Part I – An overview of the study The complexity of the early childhood field
Centre-based care and centre-based education - two different histories
The disadvantages of split systems
Responses to split system inefficiencies
Part II – A closer look at the countries under review When and how did the transfer take place
The extent of integration
Consequences & lessons from countries that have integrated within education
Part III - Conclusions The process of integration presents several opportunities
But there are several caveats …
The complexity of the early childhood fieldThe complexity of the early childhood field
Early childhood services (ECS) are complex. They are concerned not only with childcare and early education, but also with child health and nutrition, social welfare and protection. Also, they are closely linked to maternal protection, parental leave, female employment and equal opportunities, family poverty issues – different tasks, different ministries
To simplify, we chose in this study to focus on the largest educational service for young children, namely centre-based early care and centre-based early education services
Our task was to explore the movement to conceptualise early care as education, why this was taking place and what were the advantages and disadvantages of integrating the early care sector into education
The part falling to education ministries alone is again far more complex The part falling to education ministries alone is again far more complex than traditional education policiesthan traditional education policies
Early Learning
Health, Mental Health & Nutrition
Family Support
Special Needs/ Early Intervention
Early care and education in
nurturing environments where
children can learn what they need to succeed in school
and life
Economic and parenting
supports to ensure children have nurturing and stable relationships
with caring adults
Early identification, assessment and appropriate services for children with special health care needs, disabilities, or developmental delays
Comprehensive health services
that meet children’s
vision, hearing, nutrition,
behavioural and oral health as
well as medical health needs
Centre-based care and education – two different historiesCentre-based care and education – two different histories
Early care – emerging in the 19th century as a charitable movement toward abandoned children and then to the children of the poor.. A health and hygiene focus because of the terrible infant mortality of the time
Early education emerging around the same time to provide EE for middle-class children. Strongly influenced by empire and nation building (national language ... junior school), but also influence of Froebel, Pestalozzi (German-speaking countries and Nordics) and later Maria Montessori...
Care services migrate into the ambit either of health or social services; early education is taken over by MoEs and primary education...
Split or integrated servicesSplit or integrated services
Unitary: government responsibility covers access, funding, regulation and workforce integrated across all ECEC services; Pt (part) Unitary indicates that government responsibility is integrated, but not all the other dimensions. Split: split systems occur when government responsibility for ECEC is divided between two ministries, generally based on the age of children, with Ministries of Social Welfare (Health, or Family Affairs) given responsibility for young children 0-3 years and to Ministries of Education for 3-6s. Ministerial responsibility can be more or less great depending on the degree of decentralisation practised in this field, e.g. in Italy, most dimensions are devolved to municipalities.
Selected countries Unitary or split ECEC system
Ministry responsible for services for: 0-3 years 3-6 years
Services age-integrated or age-separated
DK Denmark Unitary Welfare Both
FR France Split Welfare Education Separated
IT Italy Split Family Affairs (municipal) Education Separated
HU Hungary Split Welfare Education Separated
NO Norway Unitary Education Integrated
PL Poland Split Welfare Education Separated
PT Portugal Split Welfare Education Separated
SI Slovenia Unitary Education Integrated
SE Sweden Unitary Education Integrated
UK United Kingdom Pt Unitary Education Both
The rationale for split systemsThe rationale for split systems Respect for tradition – we’ve inherited a split system... Mustn’t
upset other ministries ... Reflex of incrementalism... Inertia (ECEC – and social affairs in general – considered unimportant)
Because early childhood policy is complex, it may be necessary – in particular country circumstances - to involve more than one ministry: MoH - Pre- and post-natal care, followed in many countries by parental care
supported by health services, home visiting… MoSW - Social protection and targeted programmes for poor families in the
domain of social welfare MoE - Social and cognitive development under education (beginning at 2, 3,
4, or 5 years)
To avoid inter-ministerial conflict, some countries appoint a dedicated child agency to take care of the age group (0-3s) in an integrated way
The disadvantages of split systemsThe disadvantages of split systems However, analysis of the sector suggests that ministries find it hard to
work together. Comprehensive, integrated services are rare...
Wasteful duplication of resources ...
In addition, their vision (conceptualisation) of services differ greatly. These different understandings result in different programme goals, different contents and approaches to young children
Centre-based services are likewise structured in different ways with respect to service types, workforce, access criteria, funding and regulation (including curriculum), e.g. Differences in entitlement policies, opening hours, regulatory frameworks,
staff training and qualification requirements; failure to take a holistic approach to children’s needs; and discontinuities experienced by children transiting from one service to another.
Responses to split system inefficienciesResponses to split system inefficiencies
Inter-ministerial co-ordination mechanisms... But generally unsuccessful in promoting a coherent overall policy and administrative framework across sectors.
Municipal integration – but as the case of Ghent shows, such initiatives are limited by the centralised structures.
Integration under social welfare aiming at the social development of the child, parents and community. The Nordic countries pioneered this policy approach in the 1960s and 70s.
Since the late 1980s, the trend has been toward integration of ECCE within education: e.g. Iceland, New Zealand (1986), Vietnam (1986), Spain (1990), Botswana (1994), Brazil (1996), Slovenia (1996), Sweden (1996), England (1998), Jamaica (1998), Scotland (1998), Zambia (2004), Norway (2005) and Romania (2008)... (Russia 1917).
Reasons for the choice of educationReasons for the choice of education Public education highlights free access or at least affordability,
entitlement, a concern for a (relatively) well trained workforce, and curriculum as a basic tool for practice.
Education stresses the importance of lifelong learning and a recognition that children are learners from birth. Education ministries have a greater concern for laying a strong foundation for successful schooling and learning to live together.
Parents find the education infrastructure more transparent, compared to the social sector. Education provides an easily recognisable network of services for young children that links into schooling.
The risks associated with integration within education are: turning ECCE services more “school-like” in terms of opening hours, staffing, adult-child ratios, pedagogy and physical settings; and dissociation of ECCE from welfare, health and other related areas.
The CLT study - research objectivityThe CLT study - research objectivity The CLT project recognises and appreciates other policy options
for achieving more coordinated approaches, e.g. through integration within social affairs. For this reason, the study includes a country (Finland) that has integrated childcare and early education very successfully within social welfare.
The study offers a critical perspective on how education has handled the pre-school education of young children in some countries and seeks to provide a better understanding of the perspectives of countries that have not adopted the option.
The study includes three countries or regions that have chosen to continue with split systems (Belgium Flanders, France, Hungary), in order to provide a better understanding of the case for not adopting integration-within-education.
Limitations of the studyLimitations of the study The country reports on which this study is based include very
different countries. The evidence presented needs careful interpretation in light of these different contexts
Several country reports are partial, due especially to the absence of ongoing, long-term evaluations of system change
The UNESCO team did not have the opportunity to combine national reports with site visits
The difficulty (impossibility?) of knowing what would have happened if reform had not taken place.
Despite these limitations, the study provides valuable information on why integration within education was undertaken and how it was implemented.
Part II Part II
A closer look at the countries under reviewA closer look at the countries under review
What countries were studied // methodologyWhat countries were studied // methodology 5 countries integrating ECS within education: Brazil, Jamaica, New
Zealand, Slovenia and Sweden. A further study of an integrated municipality, Ghent, was also included...
1 country integrating ECS within social affairs, viz. Finland
3 countries that continue with split systems, namely Belgium Flanders, France and Hungary
Methodology: Experts in each country were contracted to prepare structured country reports on the question. The UNESCO authors designed a report structure and questions to elicit detailed information on all aspects of integration: history, rationales, acceptance/refusal, processes, and results.
Several interviews with selected authors were undertaken, including one with East Germany...
When and why did transfer to education take place?When and why did transfer to education take place?
The transfer of responsibility of ECCE to education has varied considerably among the five case countries studied. Slovenia and Sweden already had experienced a wholly or partially
integrated system before the transfer to education in 1992 and 1996 respectively.
In New Zealand, Brazil and Jamaica, integration and transfer to education took place in 1986, 1996 and 1998 respectively
In all cases, the transfer was based on a consensus that care and education are inseparable; in two cases the process involved a wider campaign involving diverse groups in civil society
The rationale for change varies between countries but in all cases it has been strong and principled, rather than a purely pragmatic concern, for example, to cut costs or boost school readiness
The extent of integrationThe extent of integration The extent of integration – how far the process has gone beyond
transferring government responsibility for ECCE into education – varies considerably across the countries: Integration has gone further and deeper in Slovenia and Sweden, which share a
concept of pedagogy that integrates care and education. In Sweden, integration has gone furthest to include the integration of the
workforce, of financing, of regulation, of organisation and structuring at local level, of national and municipal inspection (but with inspection teams fit-for-purpose). In addition, curricula are linked and a broad consensus has formed around ‘Norms and Values’, which emphasise – at all levels of education – democracy, care and consideration towards others, solidarity, gender equality and tolerance.
In their integration efforts, Brazil and Jamaica face the biggest challenges, as they have begun their reform only within the last few years, with deeply split systems and significantly fewer resources than the other richer countries; nevertheless they have made progress by undertaking curricular and regulatory integration and by upgrading the workforce...
The experience of Ghent (Belgium Flanders) shows the possibilities and limitations of reform at local level, when a strong national system is also in place (compare Italy).
Lessons from the 5 countries that have integrated ECS within educationLessons from the 5 countries that have integrated ECS within education
Mostly, integration within education has been very positive, esp. for children under 3 years and for services and staff that cater for this younger group. These children are enjoy both care and education.
Integration has greatly improved curriculum development & pedagogical work, e.g. NZ...
The link with education inspired the creation of the Te Whariki curriculum and a specific learning evaluation instrument: ‘Learning Stories’ (Carr, 2001).
Even more striking have been workforce changes: higher qualifications for ECEC staff and improvements in pay supported by the creation in 1994 of a combined union for early childhood and primary school teachers.
“A continued growth in the number of students in, and graduates from, early childhood teacher education colleges’ (Ministry of Education (2007a, p.40).
Four of the five countries now have a recognised early years professional , a graduate level worker educated to work with both under and over 3 years olds... except Jamaica and Ghent (much improvement).
in Sweden and Slovenia, a universal entitlement to services, at least from 12 months, has resulted, with clear evidence in Sweden of a significant narrowing of inequalities in access. Likewise, in Ghent...
Lessons from countries that have not integrated ECCELessons from countries that have not integrated ECCE
The study examined the cases of Belgium Flanders, France and Hungary and carried out extensive interviews, particularly in Flanders
Why do these countries not integrate their services? In the first two countries, the care system has been systematised for many
years; it is predominantly public and heavily subsidised for modest-income families. There is little or no demand for integration.
A second reason is the fear that the childcare sector – and its traditions - may be overwhelmed by, and lost in, a strong school-like early education system.
Another barrier in Belgium Flanders and France is the separate political traditions of the childcare and early education sectors...
Integration has also economic implications, in particular, the costs of upgrading the childcare workforce
In Hungary, the childcare sector has been greatly weakened since transition. As there is growing demand and spaces exist within the kindergarten system, the question of integration within education has been discussed . In addition, the term ‘nevelés’ has a central role in all early childhood work in Hungary...
It is useful to think of integration as having two aspects: conceptual integration (i.e. how do we think about integration), and structural integration (i.e. how do we organise ECCE).
Conceptual integration : all actors share an understanding of what ECEC is for and what it is doing, and how far integration is expressed in a common language.
Structural integration: six areas of structural integration: (1) policy making and administration, (2) access to services, (3) funding, (4) regulation, including curriculum or similar guidelines, (5) workforce, including structure, education and pay, and (6) type of provision.
A clearer understanding of integrationA clearer understanding of integration
A few words from A few words from the father of child psychologythe father of child psychology
Jean Piaget 1896-1980
Integration within education presents several opportunitiesIntegration within education presents several opportunities
ECCE services can be integrated successfully within a number of policy domains, as long as young children are an important focus of the ministry in charge.
Overall, integration within education is more likely to achieve: Universal entitlement, Affordable access, A unified and well educated workforce, Enhanced learning for all ages, and Smoother transitions for young children
Finland, an exception, but it is structured as a typical Nordic, social democratic welfare state with strong entitlements to services... Welfare systems in other countries make them a less suitable location for integrating ECCE.
But there are several caveats …But there are several caveats … The concepts and processes of integration are complex
Some contexts need primarily infant health (pre- and post-natal care) and parenting support
Integration is not an inevitability but a possibility. Much depends on the interplay of barriers to change and drivers for change.
Deep integration requires careful thought about the conditions needed... There are risks involved...
A major question: can education think broadly enough?
The language and cognitive development of 0-3s is often underestimatedThe language and cognitive development of 0-3s is often underestimated
0 1 4 8 12 16
AGE
Human Brain Development – Synapse FormationThe years from birth – to – three are an optimal time
to support language and cognitive growth.
SensingPathways
(vision, hearing)
LanguageHigherCognitive Function
3 6 9-3-6
Months Years
Source: Chuck Nelson, in From Neurons to Neighborhoods,2000.
Lessons on how to integrate within educationLessons on how to integrate within education
At national level, there is a need for: Leadership, alliances with the major stakeholders and
advocacy based on strong arguments, are needed to get reform moving…
A resolve not to create other divisions in the sector, e.g. splitting services into public and for-profit private (UK...). For-profit interests will by necessity impede progress
Action at all levels of government and the formulation of strong and integrative concepts on which to build substantive reform (a primary education approach is not enough).
To get change into actual practice a strategy is necessary – including resources and materials, support to workers and training, and time - not least to analyze and reflect on practice.
