Assessing the quality of early childhood education and care in Australia: Challenges and opportunities

IF 1.9 Q2 EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH
Caroline Cohrssen, M. de Rosnay, S. Garvis, C. Neilsen-Hewett
{"title":"Assessing the quality of early childhood education and care in Australia: Challenges and opportunities","authors":"Caroline Cohrssen, M. de Rosnay, S. Garvis, C. Neilsen-Hewett","doi":"10.3389/feduc.2023.1147669","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"While access to quality education in early childhood is an international priority, the characteristics of quality continue to be debated. In the Australian context, differing views on the characteristics of quality may be a result of differing stakeholder priorities. Divergent notions of quality may lead to initiatives that emphasize educator practice and frame a dominant discourse that situates responsibility for enactment of quality at Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) service room level. Challenges arising from initiatives driving increased access to ECEC coinciding with workforce shortages are addressed. National longitudinal research is needed to determine the impact of participation in ECEC on child outcomes, as is ECEC quality assessment across regions and jurisdictions over time. Prior to this, stakeholder conversations are needed to achieve consensus on the characteristics of quality. This could lead to the development of an instrument for assessing quality that is systemically relevant and could inform evidence-based decision making by ECEC teachers and educators, primary caregivers, regulators, researchers and policy makers to distribute accountability for quality across the ECEC system.","PeriodicalId":52290,"journal":{"name":"Frontiers in Education","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":1.9000,"publicationDate":"2023-03-13","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"2","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Frontiers in Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2023.1147669","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"EDUCATION & EDUCATIONAL RESEARCH","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 2

Abstract

While access to quality education in early childhood is an international priority, the characteristics of quality continue to be debated. In the Australian context, differing views on the characteristics of quality may be a result of differing stakeholder priorities. Divergent notions of quality may lead to initiatives that emphasize educator practice and frame a dominant discourse that situates responsibility for enactment of quality at Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) service room level. Challenges arising from initiatives driving increased access to ECEC coinciding with workforce shortages are addressed. National longitudinal research is needed to determine the impact of participation in ECEC on child outcomes, as is ECEC quality assessment across regions and jurisdictions over time. Prior to this, stakeholder conversations are needed to achieve consensus on the characteristics of quality. This could lead to the development of an instrument for assessing quality that is systemically relevant and could inform evidence-based decision making by ECEC teachers and educators, primary caregivers, regulators, researchers and policy makers to distribute accountability for quality across the ECEC system.
评估澳大利亚早期儿童教育和护理的质量:挑战和机遇
虽然在幼儿期获得优质教育是一项国际优先事项,但关于优质教育的特点仍在辩论中。在澳大利亚的情况下,对质量特征的不同看法可能是不同利益相关者优先考虑的结果。不同的质量概念可能会导致强调教育者实践的倡议,并形成一种主导话语,即在幼儿教育和护理(ECEC)服务室层面制定质量的责任。解决了在劳动力短缺的情况下,推动增加ECEC准入的举措所带来的挑战。需要进行国家纵向研究,以确定参与ECEC对儿童结局的影响,以及跨区域和司法管辖区的ECEC质量评估。在此之前,需要进行涉众对话以达成关于质量特征的共识。这可能导致开发一种评估质量的工具,这种工具具有系统相关性,可以为ECEC教师和教育工作者、初级护理人员、监管机构、研究人员和政策制定者提供基于证据的决策,从而在整个ECEC系统中分配质量问责制。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Frontiers in Education
Frontiers in Education Social Sciences-Education
CiteScore
2.90
自引率
8.70%
发文量
887
审稿时长
14 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信