Skip to main content

Advertisement

Log in

Are We There Yet? Early Years Reform in Queensland: Stakeholder Perspectives on the Introduction of Funded Preschool Programs in Long Day Care Services

  • Original Article
  • Published:
International Journal of Early Childhood Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Australian educators are currently engaging with wide-ranging, national early childhood reform that is reshaping Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC). The Australian reform agenda reflects many of the early childhood policy directions championed by bodies, such as the Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development and the United Nations Children’s Education Fund, and is based on the dual discourse of (i) starting strong and (ii) investing in the early years. However, despite its traction in policy rhetoric and policy there is little empirical evidence of how reform is being played out. This paper reports on research undertaken in collaboration with the Queensland Office for Early Childhood Education and Care designed to generate sector feedback on one element of the reform agenda, the implementation of universal preschool in Queensland. The study aimed to determine the efficacy of the new policy in supporting the provision of ‘approved preschool programs’ within long day care services. Drawing together the views and experiences of a range of stakeholders, including peak organisations, service providers, directors, preschool teachers and government policy officers, the paper provides a situated case study of the implementation of universal preschool, and offers empirical evidence of how this policy is being played out at the local level. The paper identifies the opportunities and challenges in implementing universal preschool in Queensland that may have bearing on early childhood reform in Australia as well as other countries. Discussion of key findings is set within an overview of the ECEC policy agenda in Australia, with a particular focus on the commitment to universal preschool.

Résumé

Les éducateurs australiens s’engagent présentement dans une vaste réforme nationale de la petite enfance qui remodèle l’éducation et l’accueil de la petite enfance. Le programme de la réforme australienne reflète plusieurs des orientations en politique de la petite enfance soutenues par des organismes comme l’Organisation de coopération et de développement économiques (OCDE) et le Fonds des Nations Unies pour les enfants (UNICEF). Il s’appuie sur le double discours de (i) un bon départ et de (ii) l’investissement dans les premières années. Cependant, en dépit de son attrait en rhétorique de politique et en politique il y a peu de données empiriques sur la façon dont la réforme se déroule. Cet article rend compte de la recherche entreprise en collaboration avec le bureau de l’éducation et l’accueil à la petite enfance du Queensland afin d’obtenir une rétroaction du secteur sur un élément de la réforme, la mise sur pied du préscolaire universel dans le Queensland. L’étude visait à déterminer l’efficacité de la nouvelle politique pour soutenir la disposition «programmes préscolaires approuvés» dans les services de garde à temps plein. En regroupant les perspectives et les expériences d’une gamme d’intervenants, y compris d’importantes organisations, des prestataires de service, des directeurs, des enseignants du préscolaire et des fonctionnaires de politique gouvernementale, elle constitue une étude de cas localisée de l’exécution la mise sur pied du préscolaire universel, et fournit des données empiriques sur la façon dont cette politique se met en place au niveau local. L’article identifie les opportunités et les défis liés à l’implantation du préscolaire universel au Queensland, qui pourraient avoir une portée sur la réforme de petite enfance en Australie ainsi que dans d’autres pays. La discussion des principaux résultats est faite en lien avec un aperçu global de la politique d’éducation et d’accueil de la petite enfance en Australie, avec un accent particulier sur l’engagement envers le préscolaire universel.

Resumen

Los educadores australianos actualmente están involucrados en una amplia reforma de la educación temprana nacional que está revolucionando la educación preescolar y los servicios de cuidado. El programa de reforma Australiana refleja muchas de las direcciones políticas relacionadas con la infancia temprana incitadas por organismos como la Organización de Cooperación y Desarrollo Económicos y el Fondo Educacional Infantil de las Naciones Unidas, y se basa en el doble discurso de (i) empezando fuertemente e (ii) invertir en los primeros años. Sin embargo, a pesar de su política de tracción en retórica y política, hay pocos datos empíricos de cómo la reforma se está llevando a cabo. Este documento informa sobre las investigaciones llevadas a cabo en colaboración con la Oficina de Queensland de Educación tempana y cuidados, para generar comentarios del sector, sobre uno de los elementos de la agenda de reforma, la aplicación del preescolar universal en Queensland. El estudio tiene como objetivo determinar la eficacia de la nueva política para apoyar la prestación de “programas preescolares aprovados” dentro se los servicios de guardería y cuidado. Reuniendo los puntos de vista y las experiencias de una serie de interesados, entre ellos algunas organizaciones cumbre, proveedores de servicios, los directores, los maestros preescolares y oficiales de política y gobierno, se logra un estudio simulado de la implementación del preescolar universal, y ofrece evidencia empírica de cómo esta política se está llevando a cabo en el plano local. El documento identifica las oportunidades y desafíos en la implementación del preescolar universal en Queensland, que puede repercutir en la reforma de la indancia temprana en Australia, así como en otros países. La discusión de los resultados claves se encuentra en el interior de una visión de la agenda política de ECEC en Australia, con un enfoque particular en el compromiso con el preescolar universal.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

Notes

  1. Preschool is a service that provides an early childhood education program for children 3½–4½ years, delivered by a qualified teacher, often but not necessarily on a sessional basis in a dedicated service. Alternative terms currently used for preschool in some jurisdictions include ‘kindergarten’, ‘pre-preparatory’ and ‘reception’ (adapted from COAG 2008).

  2. Long day care services provide longer hours education and care programs for children aged birth to 6 years. Long day care centres generally operate between 7:30 a.m. and 6:00 p.m. for 48 weeks per year, enabling parents to participate in the workforce (OECEC 2010).

  3. This paper is based on an evaluation study commissioned and funded by the Queensland Department of Education, Training and Employment. Permission to share research findings in this paper has been provided by the Queensland Office for Early Childhood Education and Care and ethical approval to conduct the research was provided by the University Human Research Ethics Committee and the Department of Education, Training and Employment. The contents of this paper are the views of the authors and do not necessarily represent those of the Queensland Department of Education, Training and Employment.

  4. For historical reasons, ‘preschool’ is known as ‘kindergarten’ in Queensland.

  5. A peak organisation is defined as a representative, non-government organisation that provides information dissemination services, membership support, coordination, advocacy and representation, and research and policy development services for its members and other interested parties (adapted from the Industry Commission Report 1995, p. 181)

  6. A centre operator is a person (company or association) who has been approved by the State to provide an ECEC service (e.g. long day care service, preschool service) and has legal responsibility for the management and control of the service.

  7. A centre director provides leadership and management of the centre on a day-to-day basis

  8. PO denotes ‘peak organisation’; T denotes ‘teacher’, D denotes ‘director’ and O denotes ‘operator’.

References

  • Camilli, G., Vargas, S., Ryan, S., & Barnett, S. W. (2010). Meta-analysis of the effects of early education interventions on cognitive and social development. Teachers College Record, 112(3), 579–620.

    Google Scholar 

  • Council of Australian Governments (COAG). (2007, December). Council of Australian Governments’ Meeting, Melbourne Communiqué. Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved October 9, 2012 from http://www.coag.gov.au/sites/default/files/Communique%2020%20December%202007.pdf.

  • Council of Australian Governments (COAG). (2008). National Partnership Agreement on Early Childhood Education. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved October 9, 2012 from http://rti.cabinet.qld.gov.au/documents/2009/nov/national%20quality%20agenda%20for%20early%20childhood%20ed%20and%20care/Attachments/national_partnership_on_early_childhood_education.pdf.

  • Council of Australian Governments (COAG). (2009). National early childhood development strategy: Investing in the early years. Canberra, ACT: COAG.

    Google Scholar 

  • Cunha, F., Heckman, J. J., Lochner, L. J., & Masterov, D. V. (2006). Interpreting the evidence on life cycle skill formation. In E. Hanushek & F. Welch (Eds.), Handbook of the economics of education (pp. 697–812). Amsterdam: Elsevier.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education, Employment and Workplace Relations. (2009). Belonging, being and becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Canberra, ACT: Commonwealth of Australia.

    Google Scholar 

  • Department of Education and Training. (2011). Early Childhood Education and Care Workforce Action Plan. Brisbane: DET. Retrieved January 11, 2013 from http://deta.qld.gov.au/earlychildhood/pdfs/workforce-action-plan.pdf.

  • DeVaus, D. (2002). Surveys in social research (5th ed.). London: Routledge.

    Google Scholar 

  • Dillman, D. A., Smyth, J. D., & Christian, L. M. (2008). Internet, mail and mixed-mode surveys: The tailored design method (3rd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: Wiley.

    Google Scholar 

  • Early Childhood Australia. (2011). Early Childhood Education and Care: A discussion paper for European UnionAustralia policy dialogue, 1115 April 2011. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia. Retrieved January 11, 2013 from http://www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/pdf/eca_papers/eca_early_childhood_education_and_care_policypaper.pdf.

  • Guest, G., McQueen, K., & Namey, E. (2012). Applied thematic analysis. Thousand Oaks, CA: SAGE.

    Google Scholar 

  • Heckman, J. (2011). The economics of inequality. The value of early childhood education. American Educator, 35(Spring), 31–47.

    Google Scholar 

  • Industry Commission. (1995).Charitable Organisations in Australia. Melbourne: Australian Government Publishing Service. Retrieved January 14, 2013 from http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0007/6991/45charit.pdf.

  • Mildon, R., & Shlonsky, A. (2011). Bridge over troubled water: Using implementation science to facilitate effective services in child welfare. Child Abuse and Neglect, 35(9), 753–756.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Moss, P. (2007). Starting Strong: An exercise in international learning. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 1(1), 11–21.

    Google Scholar 

  • Mustard, F. (2008). Investing in the early years: Closing the gap between what we know and what we do. Paper prepared for the South Australian Government. Adelaide, SA: Department of the Premier and Cabinet.

    Google Scholar 

  • O’Flynn, J. (2009). The cult of collaboration in public policy. Australian Journal of Public Administration, 68(1), 112–116.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Office for Early Childhood Education and Care. (2010). Queensland kindergarten funding scheme: Guidelines for long day care services. Brisbane, QLD: OECEC.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2001). Starting strong. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2006). Starting Strong II. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Organisation for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). (2012). Starting Strong III. A quality toolbox for ECEC. Paris: OECD.

    Google Scholar 

  • Penn, H. (2009). Early childhood education and care: Key lessons from research for policy makers. Brussels: European Commission Directorate-General for Education and Culture.

    Google Scholar 

  • Pocock, B., & Hill, E. (2007). The childcare policy challenge in Australia. In E. Hill, B. Pocock, & A. Elliott (Eds.), Kids count: Better early childhood education and care in Australia (pp. 15–37). Sydney, NSW: Sydney University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Press, F. (2006). What about the kids? Policy directions for improving the experiences of infants and young children in a changing world. NSW Commission for Children and Young People, Commission for Children, Young People and Child Guardian, NIFTeY. Retrieved January 9, 2013 from http://www.kids.nsw.gov.au/uploads/documents/What_about_the_kids_full.pdf.

  • Press, F. (2007). Public investment, fragmentation and quality early education and care—existing challenges and future options. In E. Hill, B. Pocock, & A. Elliott (Eds.), Kids count: Better early childhood education and care in Australia (pp. 181–198). Sydney, NSW: Sydney University Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Ramey, C. T., & Campbell, F. A. (1984). Preventive education for high-risk children: Cognitive consequences of the Carolina Abecedarian Project. American Journal of Mental Deficiency, 88, 515–523.

    Google Scholar 

  • Schweinhart, L. J., Barnes, H. V., & Weikart, D. P. (1993). Significant benefits: The HighScope Perry Preschool study through age 27 (Monographs of the HighScope Educational Research Foundation, 10). Ypsilanti, MI: HighScope Press.

    Google Scholar 

  • Standing Council of School Education and Early Childhood. (2012). The Early Childhood Education and Care Workforce Strategy for Australia 20122016. Canberra, Australia: Department of Education, Employment and Workforce Relations. Retrieved October 1, 2012 from www.deewr.gov.au/Earlychildhood/Policy_Agenda/EarlyChildhoodWorkforce/Documents/EarlyYearsWorkforceStrategy.pdf.

  • Steering Committee for the Report on Government Service Provision. (2010). Report on Government Services 2010. The Productivity Commission: Melbourne, Retrieved September 8, 2012 from http://www.pc.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0004/93910/07-chapter3.pdf.

  • Sumsion, J. (2007). Sustaining the employment of early childhood teachers in long day care: A case for robust hope, critical imagination and critical action. Asia Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 35(3), 311–327.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sylva, K., Melhuish, E. C., Sammons, P., Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Taggart, B. (2004). The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: Technical Paper 12—The Final Report: Effective Pre-School Education. London: DfES/Institute of Education, University of London.

    Google Scholar 

  • Taylor, C., & Thorpe, K. (2012, January). Assessing the quality of Australian child care and kindergartens. E4Kids: Effective Early Educational Experiences Research Bulletin, 2, 1–6. Retrieved on January 25, 2013 from http://web.education.unimelb.edu.au/E4Kids/news/pdfs/E4Kids_Research_Bulletin_Issue2.pdf.

  • Tobin, K., & Kincheloe, J. (2006). Doing educational research. A handbook. Rotterdam: Sense Publishers.

    Google Scholar 

  • United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF). (2008). Innocenti Report Card. The child care transition. A league table of early childhood education and care in economically advanced countries. Florence: UNICEF Innocenti Research Centre.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Ann Farrell.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Irvine, S., Farrell, A. Are We There Yet? Early Years Reform in Queensland: Stakeholder Perspectives on the Introduction of Funded Preschool Programs in Long Day Care Services. IJEC 45, 221–236 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-013-0087-0

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13158-013-0087-0

Keywords

Navigation