When a crisis undermines quality public service provision: Romanian early childhood education and care through the SARS-Cov-2 epidemic

2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 508-528
Author(s):  
Borbála Kovács
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Service Provision ◽  
Family Policy ◽  
General Pattern ◽  
Early Years ◽  
High Price ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Education And Care ◽  
The Impact

What appeared to be the success of many Eastern European states in managing the toll of the SARS-Cov-2 pandemic in its first round has been attributed to the early introduction of strict lockdown. However, erring on the side of caution came at a high price, with mixed economies of welfare shifting sometimes radically towards families, with the related costs unevenly distributed. Using the case of early childhood education and care (ECEC), the article explores the specifics of what has been a more general pattern in epidemic-induced social policy adaptation in the Romanian context: the overnight, radical and prolonged individualisation of service provision without the corresponding remaking of the cash nexus. It expands on the timeline of government decisions on family policy adaptations, including ECEC service provision. The article also reviews fragmented evidence about the impact of ECEC service suspension on the mixed economy of early years care. The article explains how and why the Romanian government was able to effectively suspend ECEC service delivery between March and September 2020 while keeping related financial arrangements practically unaltered, and do so without open protest. The Romanian case reveals how and why a family policy environment historically characterised by fragmented, selective and partially adequate provision, directly and indirectly maintaining the familialisation of young children’s care, acts as a catalyst for more of the same in hard times: fragmented, selective and only partially adequate intervention. In conceptual terms, the article suggests that familialist family policy is particularly sticky, more so in times of crisis than in ‘good’ times.

scholarly journals Is infant belonging observable? A path through the maze

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 404-416
Author(s):  
Jane M Selby ◽  
Benjamin S Bradley ◽  
Jennifer Sumsion ◽  
Matthew Stapleton ◽  
Linda J Harrison
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Sense Of Belonging ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Infants And Toddlers ◽  
Quality Outcomes ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Learning Framework ◽  
Video Recordings ◽  
Education And Care

This article evaluates the concept of infant ‘belonging’, central to several national curricula for early childhood education and care. Here, the authors focus on Australia’s Early Years Learning Framework. Four different meanings attach to ‘belonging’ in the Early Years Learning Framework, the primary being sociopolitical. However, ‘a sense of belonging’ is also proposed as something that should be observable and demonstrable in infants and toddlers – such demonstration being held up as one of the keys to quality outcomes in early childhood education and care. The Early Years Learning Framework endows belonging with two contrasting meanings when applied to infants. The first, the authors call ‘marked belonging’, and it refers to the infant’s exclusion from or inclusion in defined groups of others. The second, the authors provisionally call ‘unmarked’ belonging. Differences between these two meanings of infant belonging are explored by describing two contrasting observational vignettes from video recordings of infants in early childhood education and care. The authors conclude that ‘belonging’ is not a helpful way to refer to, or empirically demonstrate, an infant’s mundane comfort or ‘unmarked’ agentive ease in shared early childhood education and care settings. A better way to conceptualise and research this would be through the prism of infants’ proven capacity to participate in groups.

scholarly journals Leadership in early childhood education: The case for pedagogical praxis

2018 ◽  
Vol 20 (1) ◽  
pp. 23-34 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ioanna Palaiologou ◽  
Trevor Male
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Ideological Struggle ◽  
Education And Care ◽  
Curriculum Reforms ◽  
Predominately Female ◽  
Teacher Status

In this conceptual article, the authors examine the context of early childhood education and care in England and the underpinning predominant ideologies to explore how these impact on the framing of leadership. The English context entails several contradictions (antinomies) at ontological, epistemological and axiological levels, and is heavily influenced by an ideological struggle concerning the value of play within the sector as opposed to a climate of child performativity. Moreover, the predominately female workforce (a factor itself) has faced relentless changes in terms of qualifications and curriculum reforms in recent years. With the introduction of the graduate leader qualification (Early Years Teacher Status), a vast body of research has been seeking to conceptualise what leadership means for early childhood education and care. In this article, the authors argue that these attempts are helpful and contribute to this discourse of leadership, but it needs to be thought of not only abstractly, but also practically. Thus, the authors conclude, the (re)conceptualisation of leadership should locate it as pedagogical praxis after evaluating the inherent deep dispositions of leaders in conjunction with their history, surrounding culture and subjective perspectives/realities.

scholarly journals The Impact of COVID-19 on Eating Environments and Activity in Early Childhood Education and Care in Alberta, Canada: A Cross-Sectional Study

Nutrients ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 13 (12) ◽  
pp. 4247
Author(s):  
Lynne M. Z. Lafave ◽  
Alexis D. Webster ◽  
Ceilidh McConnell ◽  
Nadine Van Wyk ◽  
Mark R. Lafave
Keyword(s):  
Physical Activity ◽  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Healthy Eating ◽  
Cross Sectional Study ◽  
Sectional Study ◽  
Cross Sectional ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Education And Care ◽  
The Impact

Early childhood education and care (ECEC) environments influence children’s early development and habits that track across a lifespan. The purpose of this study was to explore the impact of COVID-19 government-mandated guidelines on physical activity (PA) and eating environments in ECEC settings. This cross-sectional study involved the recruitment of 19 ECEC centers pre-COVID (2019) and 15 ECEC centers during COVID (2020) in Alberta, Canada (n = 34 ECEC centers; n = 83 educators; n = 361 preschoolers). Educators completed the CHEERS (Creating Healthy Eating and activity Environments Survey) and MEQ (Mindful Eating Questionnaire) self-audit tools while GT3X+ ActiGraph accelerometers measured preschooler PA. The CHEERS healthy eating environment subscale was greater during COVID-19 (5.97 ± 0.52; 5.80 ± 0.62; p = 0.02) and the overall score positively correlated with the MEQ score (r = 0.20; p = 0.002). Preschoolers exhibited greater hourly step counts (800 ± 189; 649 ± 185), moderate-to-vigorous PA (MVPA) (9.3 ± 3.0 min/h; 7.9 ± 3.2 min/h) and lower sedentary times (42.4 ± 3.9 min/h; 44.1 ± 4.9 min/h) during COVID-19 compared to pre-COVID, respectively (p < 0.05). These findings suggest the eating environment and indices of child physical activity were better in 2020, which could possibly be attributed to a change in government-mandated COVID-19 guideline policy.

scholarly journals Partnerships in Early Childhood Education and Care: Empowering Parents or Empowering Practitioners

2012 ◽  
Vol 2 (1) ◽  
pp. 14-25 ◽  
Author(s):  
Elizabeth Rouse
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Decision Makers ◽  
Professional Status ◽  
Small Scale ◽  
Practice Model ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Learning Framework ◽  
Education And Care

Research acknowledges that outcomes for young children are enhanced when effective partnerships are developed between educators and families. The Australian Early Years Learning Framework provides direction for the professional practice of early childhood educators by acknowledging the importance of educators working in partnership with families. In the Victorian state-based early years framework, family-centred practice has been included as the practice model. Family-centred practice has as its core a philosophy of professionals supporting the empowerment of parents as active decision makers for their child. The early childhood education and care sector in Australia, however, is made up of a workforce which is largely perceived as being undervalued as a profession. This raises questions as to the capacity of these educators to support the empowerment of parents when they themselves are coming from a position of disempowerment due to their professional status. This article reports on findings from a small-scale study of childhood educators working in a long day-care setting which aimed to identify perceptions of the partnerships that exist between themselves and parents. In the course of the investigation, it became evident that some of educators felt disempowered in the relationships that exist with some families.

Inclusion in Early Childhood: Difference, Disability, and Social Justice

Education ◽  
2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kathryn Underwood ◽  
Gillian Parekh
Keyword(s):  
Social Justice ◽  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Intervention ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Inclusive Education ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Childhood Studies ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
School Settings ◽  
Education And Care

Inclusive education as a model of service delivery arose out of disability activism and critiques of special education. To understand inclusive education in early childhood, however, one must also engage with broader questions of difference, diversity, and social justice as they intersect with childhood studies. To that end, this article contains references that include other critical discourses on childhood and inclusivity as well as critiques of inclusive education. Inclusive education has a much deeper body of research in formal school settings than in the early years. School-based research, however, often examines social relationships and academic achievement as outcome measures. This research has established that education situated in a child’s community and home school is generally more effective than special education settings, particularly when classroom educators have access to appropriate training, resources, policies, and leadership. Schools, of course, are part of the education landscape of the early years, but they are not inclusive of the full spectrum or early years settings. The early years literature on inclusion is different in focusing more attention on development, family, and community (as described in the General Overview of Early Childhood Inclusion). A critique of early childhood education research has focused on school readiness and rehabilitation and the efficacy of early identification and early intervention. This research is largely informed by Western medical research, but this approach has led global institutions to set out priorities for early intervention without recognizing how our worldview shapes our understanding of childhood and difference. The dominant research domain, however, has also identified that family and community contexts are important. This recognition creates a fundamental difference between inclusion research in school settings and such research in early childhood education and care. Early childhood education and care has always focused on the child and their family as the recipients of services, while educational interest in the family has been viewed as a setting in which the conditions for learning are established. Support for families is at the center of early childhood inclusive practice, both because families are largely responsible for seeking out early childhood disability services and because families are critical in children’s identity. Inclusion in schools and early childhood education and care can both be understood through theories of disability, ability, and capability. In both settings, education and care have social justice aims linked not only to developmental and academic outcomes for individual children, but also to the ways that these programs reproduce inequality. Disability as a social phenomenon has its historical roots in racist and colonial practices, understood through critical race theory, that are evident today in both early childhood and school settings. Understanding the links between disableism and other forms of discrimination and oppression is critical both for teaching for social justice broadly and for better understanding of how ability, capability, and critical disability theory and childhood studies are established through practices that begin in the early years.

scholarly journals Constructing deficit data doppelgängers: The impact of datafication on children with English as an additional language

2019 ◽  
Vol 21 (3) ◽  
pp. 253-265 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mandy Pierlejewski
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
School Readiness ◽  
Communication Skills ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Number Of Children ◽  
Starting Point ◽  
Education And Care ◽  
The Impact ◽  
British Culture

In this article, an evaluation of the English early childhood education context reveals children constructed as data. The complex, chaotic and unpredictable nature of the child is reconstituted in numerical form – a form which can be measured, compared and manipulated. Children are reconceptualised as data doppelgängers, ghostly apparitions which emulate the actual embodied child. The focus of early childhood education and care thus moves from child-centred to data-centred education. The author specifically focuses on the impact of this aspect of the performative regime on children who have English as an additional language – an under-researched area in the field. Foucault’s work on governmentality is used as a theoretical lens through which to understand the process of datafication. The author uses a composite child, generated from a number of children from her experience as a teacher, as a starting point for discussion. This reveals children as disadvantaged, as their home languages are no longer used to assess communication skills. Their data doppelgängers are not useful to the teacher as they are unable to demonstrate a Good Level of Development – a key measure of school readiness in English policy. The author argues that in post-Brexit-vote Britain, subtle changes to early childhood education increase disadvantage, promoting white, British culture and thus marginalising those from other cultures.

‘Belonging’ in Australian early childhood education and care curriculum and quality assurance: Opportunities and risks

2018 ◽  
Vol 19 (4) ◽  
pp. 340-355 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jennifer Sumsion ◽  
Linda Harrison ◽  
Karen Letsch ◽  
Benjamin Sylvester Bradley ◽  
Matthew Stapleton
Keyword(s):  
Early Childhood ◽  
Early Childhood Education ◽  
Quality Standard ◽  
Study Data ◽  
Early Years ◽  
Childhood Education ◽  
Learning Framework ◽  
Care Services ◽  
National Quality ◽  
Education And Care

This article considers opportunities and risks arising from the prominence of the belonging motif in Australia’s Early Years Learning Framework and, more implicitly, in the National Quality Standard, against which the quality of the early childhood education and care services is assessed. A vignette constructed from case study data generated in the babies’ room in an early childhood centre in an Aboriginal community in rural Queensland is used to illuminate some of these opportunities and risks.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document