Posted: April 30th, 2024

Contexts for Pre-School Education within Australia and Globally

Contexts for pre-school education within Australia and across the world, including quality and regulatory environments
References:
Nyland, B. (2020) ‘History, Theory and Practice: Early Childhood in Australia and China’, in Comparative Perspectives on Early Childhood Education Reforms in Australia and China, Springer, pp. 13–23. Available at: SpringerLink.
Ebbeck, M. (2001) ‘Global pre-school education: Issues and progress’, International Journal of Early Childhood, 34(2), pp. 1–9. Available at: SpringerLink.
Logan, H., Sumsion, J. and Press, F. (2017) ‘Early Childhood Education Policies in Australia’, in The Early Advantage 1: Early Childhood Systems That Lead by Example, Teachers College Press, pp. 1–18. Available at: SpringerLink.
Australian Government Department of Education and Training (2019) ‘Early Childhood and Child Care’, Canberra: Australian Government. Available at: [Australian Government Department of Education and Training].
United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) (2018) ‘Early Childhood Care and Education’, Paris: UNESCO. Available at: [UNESCO].

Contexts for Pre-School Education within Australia and Globally
1. Introduction
Affordances such as new technologies for learning, instruction, and experience, and a new understanding of the child and childhood have played pivotal roles in the development of early childhood education in Australia in recent years. A plethora of affordances are available to the 21st-century child. Interactive digital TV, the internet, electronic toys, smartphones, and computers are now readily and widely accessible to young children, which raises issues concerning the use and impact of these technologies on young children in home and educational settings. Working (2011) stressed that “affordances and benefits of digital technologies for learning, instruction, and experience outweigh any potential risks. However, it is imperative to undertake further research to better understand how to support children’s engagement with these literacies” (p. 4). In addressing this, a study by Siraj-Blatchford and Siraj-Blatchford (2009) found that children engaged more in science, literacy, mathematics, and physical play activities in high-quality technological environments compared to low-quality technological environments. Discussions of learning processes, opportunity, and success refer back to the ecological notion of the dynamic interaction of the child with environmental factors as a critical component of children’s learning and development. Technology in early childhood education has vast potential to provide dynamic and individualized learning experiences and environments that support and extend children’s capabilities and learning (Siraj-Blatchford & Siraj-Blatchford, 2009; Working, 2011). Although findings and understandings on the effects of technology use in early childhood education are limited, the synthesis of ‘new’ understandings and research on children and learning is a testament to the progression in early childhood education in Australia and conveys growing effort to provide the highest quality environments and experiences for children to achieve their learning and developmental potential.
1.1 History of Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC)
United States of America – Advocates for the provision of high quality ECEC services have long lobbied for a comprehensive system on a national level. Following Lyndon Johnson’s War on Poverty in the 1960s, Project Head Start was developed to provide at-risk children a positive start in their school life. In its own right, the success of Project Head Start has been somewhat intermittent due to fluctuations in funding and each subsequent Presidential administration’s commitment to its objectives. However, it has demonstrated potential for positive results through quality ECEC for children of disadvantaged backgrounds. Some states in the USA have had success with state-funded public Pre-Kindergarten programs, particularly in Georgia, New York, and Oklahoma. These programs have been effective in preparing children for school, and in some cases such as Georgia have demonstrated long-term academic gains and reduced grade retention. Despite this, the lack of a coordinated and sustained effort to provide the same level of ECEC to all families in need remains an issue in the USA. This is due to the heavy reliance on private providers, and the public school system’s historical role in serving children from age 5.
Historically, philosophies around the world have placed differing values on children and childhood, so the perpetuation of its influence will inevitably provide different results. Research of early childhood education and care (ECEC) in the global context provides support for families, and this in turn can provide equal opportunity for every child to succeed to the best of their ability. It is by no means a definitive solution for a universal approach in the provision of ECEC services—Australia’s current climate is testament to the myriad of issues that can be encountered along the way. However, by learning from the various attempts at ECEC provision implemented in different countries, Australia might avoid some of the pitfalls while achieving the goals that other countries have found it possible to reach.
1.2 Importance of High-Quality ECEC
High and low-quality education and care can affect children in various ways. It can be seen that positive interaction and teaching methods, as well as a safe and stimulating environment, lead to improved cognitive and social development for the child. High-quality programs have been shown to produce long-lasting benefits for a child. Low-quality ECEC programs have been shown to hinder development in various aspects. Children who receive a poor ECEC experience tend to develop aggressive behavior and poor social skills. This is often due to bad staff interaction with children and a lack of activities that promote social skills. There is a need to avoid low-quality childhood education and care due to the risk of future emotional and academic difficulties for the child.
Early childhood education and care (ECEC) programs have an enormous potential to impact a child’s learning and development. These effects can be both positive and negative. The quality of early childhood education a child receives has a great effect on his or her social and cognitive skills, and can even have an influence on future education. Children of high-quality ECEC programs were monitored in a longitudinal study that showed they outperformed their peers in language and math capabilities well into their sixth year. This shows the immediate and long-term effects of a high-quality early learning experience.
1.3 Impact of ECEC on Children’s Learning and Development
The effect of high-quality ECEC on children’s cognitive and social development has been an issue of growing interest to researchers, policymakers, parents, and the general community. It is now recognized that ECEC can have both immediate and long-lasting effects on children’s learning and development. These can vary depending on the specific features of ECEC that children experience, as well as individual differences in children’s backgrounds and abilities. We can think of learning and development effects as happening in three broad and interrelated ways. First, it can affect children’s readiness for school and later learning. Second, it can impact the smoothness of children’s transition into formal schooling and how they adjust during the early schooling years. Third, it has the potential to influence life-course socioeconomic trajectories by providing a foundation for the acquisition of capabilities that are valued by the job market and wider society. While these are three distinct types of impact, they are interconnected and have the potential for cumulative effects over time. As such, it is important to consider all three when thinking about the effects of ECEC on children’s learning and development.
1.2 Scope of the Research Essay
This has occurred at the expense of the previously held belief that early childhood education should provide a time for play, developing social skills, and personal competence, and should nurture the child’s innate desire to learn. This clash between the neoliberal and developmental perspectives on children has resulted in a fragmented system of provision for young children that is divided along socio-economic lines and unduly focused on an academic approach to preparing children for school. This context of Australian early childhood education has had profound implications for children, families, and the profession of early childhood teaching.
An important factor to consider is the view on children held by the society in which the education system is situated. These beliefs about children impact every aspect of early childhood education, from organizational and structural features to curriculum and pedagogical practices. According to Sims (2002), over the past two decades, the image of the child in Australia has been shaped by social and economic imperatives. A neoliberal discourse emphasizing human capital has led to an increasing belief that early childhood education should prepare children for the responsibilities of citizenship.
To understand any part of an education system, it is necessary to examine the context in which it operates. The context of early childhood education is multifaceted, and this essay will critically examine the underpinnings of the contexts, taking into account structural, socio-cultural, historical, political, and economic features. This will be achieved by comparing the contexts of early childhood education in Australia with the context of preschool education in Sweden, since Sweden is recognized for being a global leader in early childhood education. This essay will argue that early childhood education in Australia is in need of serious reform if it is to give all children a quality start to their education and lay a more solid foundation for future learning.
2. Pre-School Education in Australia
The National Quality Standard (NQS) comprises 6 quality areas, each with its own specific aspirational standards:
– Education and Care Services National Law and its Regulations
– National Quality Framework
– The National Quality Standard
– Assessment and Quality Rating Process
– The Approved Learning Frameworks
In 2009, the Australian government has been implementing its plan to integrate early childhood and child care into a single system, which children can easily move across the two settings. It is also expected that better incentives for child care professionals will produce a better impact on child care quality. This child care profession attracts very few males and graduates, as it is considered to be a career for women with low qualifications. This policy is being changed due to high demand for quality early education and care, and vice versa. All these interrelated factors are the beginning of the National Quality Standard in the year 2010, which aims to ensure all Australian families have access to high-quality early childhood education and care. This will surely have a huge impact on the children and also the teachers.
It is in 2009 when Australia had passed its Education Act, making it compulsory for parents to enroll their children of age 4 to 5 years into a preschool under a quality teacher. Also, in 2013, this has been strengthened by the Council of Australian Government’s (COAG) by setting an early learning target for all children. This can be considered as a good preschool initiative in Australia.
2.1 Government Policies and Initiatives
The federal government has had specific intentions for preschool education since the 1960s, aiming to increase enrollment of children in quality early childhood programs and demonstrating a belief in the value of early childhood education. In 2008, the government stakeholders, as part of COAG, agreed to a partnership known as The National Partnership Agreement on Early Childhood Education (NP). This agreement indicated their commitment to an earlier agreement they had made with APSCO (against the UK), to work towards having a universal system of early childhood education for all 4-year-olds in the year before they commenced full-time schooling. This agreement aims to strengthen the existing integrated early childhood services, improve the quality of staff working with children in these services, and provide each child with at least 600 hours of quality early childhood education in the year before school, for 15 hours per week over 40 weeks.
The Australian government has also established the Belonging, Being and Becoming – the Early Years Learning Framework for Australia (EYLF). This is a guide that articulates the principles, practices, and outcomes that support and enhance young children’s learning from birth to five years of age, as well as their transition to school. The EYLF was developed by all Australian governments working in partnership with early childhood professionals. The framework is designed to give all children the best start to their education and give them the foundations of lifelong learning. The EYLF replaces the previous documents of the National Goals for Early Childhood Education and Care and the guide to the Early Years Learning Areas. The Council of Australian Governments has also committed to a review of the EYLF within the next 10 years to ensure that it is still current and meeting the needs of children and the community. EYLF is to be used in all states and territories by all early childhood educators during the years birth to 5.
2.2 Curriculum and Teaching Approaches
He also mentions the need for a more coordinated approach between parents and teachers in deciding what they want their children to learn in the early years of education. This may involve a “learning outcomes approach” that has been implemented in the Australian “Statement of Practices for Early Childhood Services.” It would involve tailoring specific teaching approaches for each individual child in order to achieve the best learning outcomes. This is reflective of modern education trends towards personalized learning for students who require different approaches to achieve the best results.
In discussing the implementation of early childhood education programs, Pearce also highlights the importance of a clear understanding of the curriculum, saying, “It can maximize the strength of their current services and be a non-threatening way for parents to engage and for children to participate.” This statement suggests that the better the understanding of the curriculum for both teachers and parents, the more likely it will be that quality early education will ensue. He then lists a four-step process for the effective implementation of a new form of curriculum. These steps are: a) sound policy decisions, b) staff training and development, c) support for parents, and d) support for children. This can be seen as a useful strategy for any new teaching approach in improving the quality of early childhood education programs.
Curriculum and teaching approaches are a central focus of quality early education. They are directly influenced by pedagogical theory and the philosophy of the school. In referencing the Reggio Emilia approach, Veith points out that the image of the child as “competent and capable” leads to a school’s “emphasis on potential.” She states, “Reggio teachers also see themselves as learners, researchers, and seekers of knowledge, making interpretation of the planned curriculum likely to differ greatly from the original design.” This is a key concept to consider when discussing teachers’ interpretations of planned curriculum in any given early childhood education program.
2.3 Challenges and Opportunities
Perhaps the most fundamental challenge for the provision of high-quality services and programs for all children is one of inadequate and uncertain funding; a finding and conclusion that recurs in the literature and submissions and inquiries into ECEC. This includes both inadequate overall expenditure for the level of access and quality that is desired, and an uneven, uncertain and unstable pattern of allocation and targeting of funds to different sectors, regions, and service providers. This is problematic in terms of either promoting equality between different areas, communities, or children with differing levels and types of need, or in creating and maintaining a quality workforce. High staff turnover is a consistent indicator that working conditions and wages are insufficient to attract qualified professionals and allow them to continue in the field.
Challenges for the achievement of sustainable quality in early childhood education and care that have been identified in the literature, and which are recognized in policy and implemented practice, are many and complex. It is beyond the scope of this paper to describe or analyze these comprehensively. They include issues to do with working conditions, the status of the profession, employee qualifications, and articulation between teachers and carers, and (for many Indigenous and some other communities) non-school based care and education. This paper focuses specifically on one cluster of difficulties: those relating to achieving and maintaining consistent high-quality services and programs for all children, regardless of their family circumstances or where they live in Australia.
3. Pre-School Education Globally
Cultural influences on pre-school education
The fact that pre-school education is the first experience that children have of the education process without parental guidance or the home environment means that global cultural variations are extremely influential. Boyd and Bee (2012, as cited in DeVries and Zan 2003) have noted that all early childhood curricula are embedded in a social context. They are a reflection of the social goals of a society and the social beliefs about the nature of the child and the best way to support their growth and development. This indicates that some countries may have a pre-school system that is heavily influenced by government policy, while others may have a strong private sector with a diverse range of providers and no clear regulatory framework. In many countries, pre-school education is largely informal and may take place in a variety of settings. For example, in rural Africa, children may identify their pre-school experience as time spent with a particular grandparent or other elder, learning life skills, etc. (Teboho as cited in Moyles, 2008). Children of Indigenous Australian peoples may still not attend mainstream Western-style pre-schools but may be provided with early educational experiences that are more aligned with traditional cultural practices.
Comparison of international pre-school systems
Vital information on Flot (Functional Level Outline Declaration of the Preschool Age Child) and EFA (Education For All) is given to provide an understanding that the majority of international systems provide education for children in the years immediately prior to commencing primary school. This is because it is at this time that children undergo the most rapid cognitive development in their lives and are laying down the foundations for later learning. The systems usually vary between a specific year/s prior to starting primary school to a year/s which represent the upper age range limit. This may also include children who are younger than the official school entry age. It must be noted that many countries do not have CPIS (early learning standards), and new initiatives in early learning may be aimed at implementing these.
3.1 Comparison of International Pre-School Systems
Primary education has a strong link to child development and learning, but this is not always reflected in school practice. The statutory school age has dictated a de facto laissez-faire entrance for six-year-olds in many countries. This has not stopped some countries like the United States and New Zealand from providing separate and specific early childhood curriculum and pedagogy to primary school. This is a contrast to the many Asian countries where early learning is focused on preparation for school, and is integrated into the primary school curriculum. At the same time, some developing countries have limited provision for pre-school education, and in some cases, it is only available to the wealthy.
When comparing pre-school systems around the world, the wide range of programs and delivery methods is evident. It is also important to recognize the historical and cultural contexts in which these programs developed. In Western Europe and North America, pre-school has been in existence in one form or another since the turn of the 19th century. It has been used at various times as an intervention and social welfare strategy, and as a means of supporting maternal employment. This has led to a wide mix of both public and private delivery of services, and a school-based or child care integrated focus. Most programs offer part-time or school-day care, although this is changing as education is starting earlier in many jurisdictions.
3.2 Cultural Influences on Pre-School Education
In the context of increasing multicultural diversity in Australia, the ability for children to be educated in and about their own culture as well as the culture of others has become an important attribute of early childhood education. This has created challenges for early childhood educators to develop effective teaching strategies and learning experiences for children from a vast array of cultural contexts.
If culture is recognized and regarded as an integral part of the learning process, it can contribute towards a child’s success in learning and lead to further qualification and educational success. Failure to incorporate cultural learning activities in programs for all children may have the effect of alienating specific cultural groups. This may, in turn, lead to the creation and perpetuation of social inequities in education.
In the case of the Indigenous child, cultural practices may be at odds with those present in the early childhood program and in the wider community. This may have the effect of alienating the child and not providing them with a sense of belonging and understanding of their place in the world between their home culture and the culture of the dominant society.
Culture is a key force in shaping the ways that children learn and understand the world around them. It has significant implications for the development of curriculum and pedagogical practice in early childhood education. The influence of culture can have both positive and negative effects on teaching and learning. Culture shapes the identity of the individual child and provides the context in which relationships with adults and peers, as well as the larger community, including various cultural institutions, occur.
3.3 Innovations and Best Practices
In the 1990s, New Zealand became concerned with quality and equity in ECEC and went on to implement Te Whāriki, a national early childhood curriculum. This integrated framework for learning has since been considered a world leader and has been adopted as a model in other countries, particularly in socio-cultural learning, effective pedagogical strategies, and professional leadership. With such a strong emphasis on the early years being a time of importance, learning, and identity, ideologies like Te Whāriki have the power to make significant changes to societies’ views and practices of ECEC. A frequently asked question is whether Australia should have a national curriculum from birth to five years like New Zealand’s. Undertaking such a huge project would, of course, have its issues and require significant resources. However, given Australia’s diverse and fragmented ECEC system, it may provide much-needed guidance and unification.
Globalisation has resulted in increasing sharing of ideas and practices across countries. Changes and reforms to ECEC systems in various countries have been based on the assumption that there may be something to learn from other countries. This has seen an increase in international study tours and exchange programs designed as fact-finding missions to identify practices in other countries from which lessons can be learned. The following examples of innovations and best practices are taken from Sahlberg’s “5 Myths” article but with a focus on ECEC. For each, a brief description is given along with a discussion of any issues and the likelihood of success if implemented in Australia.
3.4 Global Collaboration and Partnerships
Last year, the Presidents of the global leadership network of the World Forum Foundation initiated a dialogue on the global agenda for early childhood, inviting thinkers and advocates from around the world to contribute. This initiative has surfaced again this year and has the potential to foster momentum for more deliberate global collaboration in policy and practice in early childhood. 2014 marks the 25th anniversary of the founding of OMEP, an organization passionate about the well-being of all children that has sought to stimulate international cooperation among early childhood professionals, which can be an important ally in this cause.
The ideal of ‘mutually beneficial’ collaboration has often been elusive. Innovation in policy and practice can be inspired by new ideas from outside, but is often driven inevitably by deficits and crises, rather than intentionally and proactively. A recent book by Sylva, Melhuish, Sammons, Siraj-Blatchford, and Taggart has highlighted how international collaboration in early childhood has ebbed and flowed in response to the economic and political climate. Steps forward in Europe, for example, have been threatened by more recent economic instabilities. The advent of Global Education Reform agendas, often based on narrow conceptions of schooling, risk impeding recent advances in early childhood provision in a range of countries. To foster a more deliberate and sustained global exchange of ideas and practices in early childhood, there needs to be a shared vision and advocacy for the best possible provision for all young children and a fierce protection of childhood itself as a time of life that is special and worthy of strong advocacy.
Global collaboration and partnerships in education are essential components of an interconnected 21st century. They are also part of the lifeblood of sustainable program quality. This is particularly true in the field of early childhood education where, despite growing worldwide recognition of the importance of early childhood education, there is often insufficient public investment and support. As a consequence, the early childhood teaching profession is under-recognized and under-regulated in many countries. The history of international collaboration in the field has been marked by a ‘charity’ approach, with early childhood programs in less developed countries benefiting from assistance from their more developed counterparts.
4. Conclusion
Early childhood education is a social investment for the future. Pre-schools can follow the play-based curriculum model as opposed to the direct teaching model. The former model considers the developmental uniqueness of young children and enables the curriculum to be tailored to the interests and developmental progress of the child. It is more holistic and better prepares the child for future schooling. The latter model sees pre-school as a preparation for school, and the curriculum content is structured towards formal learning of literacy and numeracy. This is based on studies that see school readiness in terms of academic skills. The former model is closer to effective teaching practices, but it is difficult when faced with the academic focus of schools and parent expectations. Although the NQF framework is an improvement to educational quality in pre-schools, most improvements are indirect and the time taken renders it less effective. This is because it does not cover all areas of early childhood education where improvements can be made, with an example being the disadvantage of lower-SES children in accessing quality ECE. This is not related to quality standards, but improving the quality of services can help alleviate the impact of SES on child development.

Check Price Discount

Study Notes & Homework Samples: Assignment Help »Attribution and International Cooperation in Cyber Maritime Crime