Introduction
Childhood work sectors are commonly non-profit making organizations that aim at promoting and working towards meeting the satisfaction of children and their early childhood education and care sector. The main objective of early upbringing is to advocate and influence several critical issues that are relevant to the care and well-being as well as the education of young children. Notably, there exist different types of settings for the parents and caregivers within the early childhood sector that establish a learning environment for the young children as well as familiarizing them with opportunities that are available within the sector. The main focus of this paper is to highlight on the various settings for parents and caregivers in early childhood by illustrating the structure and organization of the children and young people’s workforce as well as the role these settings provide in promoting learning in the early childhood.
Types of Childhood Settings
According to McCrea (2013), there exists different types of early childhood care settings including private and community-based settings. The most important thing to do when establishing a business is to determine the type of setting; whether a community or private. In a community-based child care setting, management is through a voluntary committee that operates by giving back to the society. A community childcare allows families with lower levels of income generation and those parents with job commitments to have access to the services of education based on the ability to pay. On the other hand, a private childhood care setting can be managed by the sole proprietor where the main source of funding is the parent’s fee pay out (McCrea, 2013).
Early childhood care settings are seen as a professional landscape that is governed by government policies regarding management as well as any particular philosophical stances that the staff members may take (McCrea, 2013). McCrea (2013) argues that these settings may also be influenced by affiliations that they have with other organizations such as the parent committee or community board of directors. As such, the structure and organization of each type of childhood setting are influenced by the type of management it applies. Accordingly, the author outlines some early childhood settings including the kindergartens, hospital-based, or home-based services child care centers.
Framework
In Ireland, the Department of Education and Skills formulated a framework for the development of the young children’s sector in 2010 with the intention of acknowledging the fact that the expertise and credentials of the elderly are significant attributes to the growth and development of young children since it provides them with experiences that are important as they grow and develop (Moloney and Pope, 2015). The main objective of the Workforce Development plan is to make certain that all the employees engage fully in providing early care and education to the young children and that they are appropriate for the roles and responsibilities they are mandated to handle.
Besides, there are other two childhood practice frameworks including the Early Childhood Curriculum Framework and the National Quality Framework, which aim at supporting teachers in their endeavor to impact knowledge to the young children in their development path. Remarkably, the two frameworks are tailored on a competitive adult with skills and knowledge for educating the young children (Moloney and Pope, 2015). According to the regulatory authority in Ireland, the Early Childhood Care and Education teachers are required to have a certain level of skills that are highly competitive for efficient facilitation of knowledge to the kids. As such, these teachers must be practical examples in making sure that suitable measure is taken to address the needs of every each child in cooperation with the parents and following consultations where necessary. Outstandingly, amid the high complexity of working in the primary level of teaching where the teachers must give an approval of their attainment of at least a Bachelor’s degree in their respective fields, the indication is that there are no minimum statutory requirements that are necessarily important for the early childhood care and education teachers.
Most of the teachers attending to the young children have a minimum qualification at level 5 on the National Framework Qualifications. Outstandingly, there is an increase in the number of teachers enrolling for Bachelor’s degree to cope with the ever-changing competitive environment (Moloney and Pope, 2015). In the recent past, the government did introduce free pre-school year in the early childhood care and education scheme with the aim of ensuring that children have accessibility to the learning experience before joining the primary level of education.
Additionally, the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) framework that Rodgers and Wilmot provide is important on how it highlights critical themes upon the development of the young children. There are four main themes relating to Early Years Foundation Stage including uniqueness of the child, an establishment of positive relationships and enabling environments, as well as enhancing learning and development of the children. The key theme of all the four is the uniqueness of the child; it recognizes that every youngster is a knowledgeable learner from the time of birth and that, the child can be resilient with special capabilities, and high level of self-esteem (Rodgers and Wilmot 2010). Besides, this theme also recognizes that every family background is unique and should, therefore, be treated equally without biasness in the form of skin color, ethnic background, denomination, or social status (Rodgers and Wilmot 2010).
Individual Value
According to Sheridan et al. (2009), the global economy requires early childhood educators to have an in-depth understanding of the development of a child and issues relating early education and as a result, provide them with appropriate educational materials to beef up their experiences. Remarkably, Sheridan et al. note that the expertise of the early childhood educators are very meaningful in the determination of how the young children acquaint themselves with knowledge and how such children get prepared for entry into school. As such, early educators have been requested to familiarize themselves with the development process of the children and try to have a mastery of their learning problems. Afterward, these teachers and parents are supposed to provide quality experiences to the children inclusive of the most vulnerable and disadvantaged ones (Sheridan et al., 2009). Further, early childhood educators should strive to keep the young children in the early childhood settings feeling part and parcel of the society including those with varying abilities and origins and enhance equality through connecting them with each other. The provision for No Child Left Behind Act that was passed in 2001 helps to keep early childhood educators on their toes to ensure that every child is learning and developing optimally (Sheridan et al., 2009).
Above all, the role played by the parents has been observed to have a crucial role in the development of the child in the years of early learning. According to Rodgers and Wilmot (2011), the performance of the children seems to be better when families, early years’ settings, and the school work as a team. Further, sharing of information about the child with all the stake holders that work for the successful development of the child also bears fruits towards better performance by the young children. Again, when parents display a keen interest in the welfare and education of their children and make learning to be a daily routine, the young children end up improving significantly. Above all, when the young children are allowed to play a part in decision-making concerning their learning activities, they may improve since they work out of their will (Rodgers and Wilmot 2011). As such, as much as parents may have a significant role in the performance of their young ones, children should also be allowed to have a place in the decision making about their learning.
Involvement of the parents in children’s education from a tender age has an exponential potential effect on the educational achievement of the children and manifests itself even in the adulthood (Oberhuemer, Schreyer and Neuman 2010). The most remarkable aspect in this view is that the amount and quality of time spent by the parents with their children greatly contributes to the success of the children at each stage of life. As such, parents and caregivers must ensure that they create positive attitudes and aspirations amongst the children by way of encouraging them to emulate the examples of the successful people within the society who have achieved in life through education (Rodgers and Wilmot 2010).
The setting of the learning environment is critical to the young children as they settle and study. These learning institutions offer a serene environment within which young children cope up with as they familiarize themselves with their educators. These settings offer a home away from home for the young children as they orient them to the learning program. Usually, there are settling in policies that show to the parents how their kids will be handled in the child care settings so that they may feel comfortable (Goffin, 2015). Moreover, these early childhood settings have a key worker who is given the mandate to modify the behavior patterns of the kids. As such, such settings help to prepare the children’s psychology ones their parents are not around them. Consequently, after settling in, the children slowly learn about the new environment and become aware of the rules of the preschool institution and learn how to interact with others.
Provisions
The future foundation for the development of children is laid during their younger years of schooling. However, in many instances, the development of children’s skills and knowledge is still questionable in many countries (Goffin, 2015). Remarkably, it goes without saying that the beginning determines the end in the sense that, the establishment for future development amongst the children is not only a manifestation of short-term goals in their younger years but also, a foundation that will reflect throughout their entire life. As such, with the knowledge of the importance of the early childhood years, then one would worry about why the early childhood sector is so disguised in many of the countries.
Outstandingly, it is at the top of this debate that Alison Elliott tries to bring into light some reflective metaphor of the early childhood years through various provisions (Elliott 2006). Accordingly, Elliott divides his metaphor into two different categories one of which is the patchwork metaphor, and the other one is crossword metaphor. According to Elliot, the patchwork metaphor touches on the confusing categories of the various provisions in which there are the regulatory scheme and policy contexts that beckon on the history of the early childhood sector and the current actualities of education provision for the young children in the Australian federation (Elliott 2006). The hodgepodge metaphor is torn between education care that relates to the kindergarten movement for early learning and preparation for school and day nurseries focusing on providing charitable and welfare benefits to the kids.
The complexity of managing and regulating the provisions of early childhood care are worsened by further incorporation of other sub-sectors of the economy such as the public and private organizations, charitable organizations, as well as church and community players into the practice. Remarkably, the establishment of pre-school institutions has provided a clinical avenue for teachers that meet the qualifications and regulations of the Early Childhood Care and Education (Elliott 2006). Out-rightly, the provision within the private and public mix has increasingly become complex with numerous private schools establishing early learning institutions that provide preschool programs comprising of extensive learning hours. On the contrary, the public and community educational sectors provide limited provisions of learning that always results in conflicting issues between the parents and the teachers as well as the mushrooming amount of women in the paid employment.
The kindergarten setting is by itself a mélange that varies wide and large around nations and territories regarding the distribution, justness and accessibility. The preschool learning institutions are a foundation for the national endeavor to tackle the imperatives of the policy making that are associated with the early years of experience (Elliot, 2006). For instance, there is an emphasis hailed on the preschool education in the Council of Australia Governments human capital initiative. Besides, the provision child care is another type of related efforts in promoting education for the younger generation in their early years (Elliott 2006). Elliott asserts that there are diverse types of child care provisions in Australia that are run and managed by varying service providers operating in a complex setting of an administrative and regulatory environment. As such, integration of care and education remains a great challenge, and administrative and regulatory bodies should strive to synthesize such problems.
However, Elliott argues that the preschool set up is usually a problem rather than a solution. In his view, it seems that the preschool institutions present more risks than it does benefits. The status of the early childhood institutions has resulted in ideological differences amongst the radical views of researchers, advocates, practitioners and policy makers (Elliot 2006). As such critics’ views emphasize on the single fact that, mother-based care outruns all other forms of early childhood care (Elliott 2006). According to Elliott, the critics of early childhood care education do not take into account the fact that these children originate from complex families where learning environment is not conducive at all.
On the other hand, investing in early childhood education has an indelible mark not only on the young children but to the entire economy at large. Based on a cost-benefit analysis, early childhood education has economic significance as opposed to other forms of investment. The emphasis is on the fact that education is the key to success (Shonkoff 2010). Shonkoff adds that, if nations can learn to embrace early childhood education as an important investment, they would go miles away in reaping the benefits that accrue in future out of investing in education. Further, as Elliot (2006) argues, a good social network between the families and the systems of early education is an important ingredient to the success of the various initiatives that are set during the early childhood education.
The social context in nurturing and developing early childhood education has been fundamental in most economies such as the United Kingdom and the United States of America (Oberhuemer, Schreyer and Neuman 2010). The Effective Provision of Pre-school Education (EPPE) project in the United Kingdom and The National Institute of Child Health and Human Development (NICHD) in the United States of America are some of the examples where social context has been fruitful (Shonkoff 2010). Together, they have contributed to the development of cognitive and language skills in the young children. The various features of the family settings are, nonetheless, influential factors than the early babyhood care programs. Nevertheless, the joint effort of both the family and the community produces better results than when each of the settings is operating solely. However, despite the fact that the joint effort produces good fruits to the young children, they are particularly vital to overcoming the effects of disadvantages.
Crossroads metaphor, on the other hand, looks at the implications of early childhood experiences on the young children in Australia and argues that educational and developmental requirements of young children must be looked at in the right manner only if the institutions desire to achieve positive results (Elliott 2006). Ultimately, this requires effective placement of learning and development strategies at the core of the policy making program pertaining early childhood development, health, and well-being. Remarkably, the National Agenda for Early Childhood creates the pledge of mounting a consistent and all-inclusive approach to early childhood policies and practices.
Current Legislation
The current legislation on the Child Care Act 2016 is an advancement of the 2004 Care of Children Act. The implementation of the 2016 Childcare Act is as a result of the failure of the 2004 Childcare Act to handle effectively the issues that predominated in the child care learning and development path. As such, this Act provides a package of reforms including the value of parent involvement in the life of the child. Further, it incorporates the idea of sharing responsibility between the biological or residential parent and the early educators which involve equal division of child’s time (Bainham and Gilmore 2015). Notably, after politicization of the childcare Act in 2000 henceforth, England and Wales got to examine it through the lens of Family Justice Review which became widely accepted by the majority. However, it did not change the legislative framework through which the governments make critical decisions relating to the arrangement patterns of post-separation of responsibilities between the parents and early childhood practitioners. The main emphasis of this 2014 Act is to ensure that young children can be able to derive meaningful relationships from both parents and have a sense of security even in the face of ongoing concerns regarding violence and child abuse (Bainham and Gilmore 2015). The view of this provision is that there should be no law that should be established to contravene the sovereignty of the child’s welfare. Explicitly, the idea behind the implementation of the Child Care Act 2014 was to pass a legislative statement on the significance of children developing and maintaining a good relationship with their parents after family separation, in which, they are safe and in their best interest (Bainham and Gilmore 2015). It does so by discouraging divorce and encouraging adoption in circumstances that the child is abandoned by the parents (Bainham and Gilmore 2015). As such, the Child Care Act 2014 has proved to be very critical in strengthening relationships between the child and the parents while enhancing their education in the early childhood through the creation of a favorable environment.
Conclusion
The idea behind this paper was to highlight on the various settings for parents and caregivers in early childhood by illustrating the structure and organization of the children’s and young people’s workforce as well as the role these settings provide in promoting learning in the early childhood sector. The paper has identified various types of childcare settings comprising of the kindergartens, hospital-based or home-based services, child care centers among others. As such, the structure of the childhood education has been seen to revolve around the pillars of the parents, early childhood educators as well as and other bodies such as the private, public, and community players. The roles of the parents have been noted to impact greatly on the performance of the young children in their early education. However, it is also evident that, when the families collaborate with other players such as the community and the public, the overall significance is great on the children’s performance. Based on the cost-benefit analysis, pre-schooling children have more advantages when they are well managed, and the educators available have distinct qualifications. However, there are overarching disadvantages for early childhood education especially when the children are oriented in the wrong way. Policy makers are thereby called upon to develop policies that target at reaching out to the most disadvantaged young children in the society.
Bibliography
Bainham, a. and gilmore, S., 2015. The English children and families act 2014. New Zealand: Victoria University Press.
Elliott, A. (2006). Early childhood education: pathways to quality and equity for all children. Melbourne: ACER Press.
Goffin, S. G. (2015). Professionalizing early childhood education as a field of practice: a guide to the next era. St. Paul, MN: Redleaf Press.
McCrea, N. L. 2013. Leading and managing early childhood settings. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
Moloney, M., and Pope, J. (2015). Where to now for early childhood care and education (ECCE) graduates? A study of the experiences of Irish BA ECCE degree graduates. Abingdon, UK: Routledge, Taylor and Francis.
Oberhuemer, P., Schreyer, I., and Neuman, M. J. (2010). Professionals in early childhood education and care systems: European profiles and perspectives. Opladen, Farmington Hills, MI: Barbara Budrich.
Rodgers, A., and Wilmot, E. (2011). Inclusion and Diversity in the Early Years. UK: Andrews.
Sheridan, S. M., Edwards, C. P., Marvin, C. A., and Knoche, L. L. (2009). Professional Development in Early Childhood Programs: Process Issues and Research Needs. Nebranska, Lincoln: Taylor and Francis.
Shonkoff JP. (2010). Building a new biodevelopmental framework to guide the future of early childhood policy. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.
