Appendix 2 – Summary of Submissions

Appendix 2: Summary of Submissions

1. Background
2. Introduction
3. Methodology
4. Findings

Background

The Taskforce on Early Childhood Education (ECE Taskforce) is an independent body, established to undertake a full review of this service sector including the development of new ideas for innovative, cost effective and evidence-based ways to support children’s learning in early childhood and the first years of compulsory schooling. To facilitate public engagement, submissions have been requested to assist the ECE Taskforce in making their recommendations.

This document provides a summary of submissions, forwarded to the ECE Taskforce. The deadline for submissions was 31 January 2011. While submissions range from informal to formal documents and have been forwarded by a range of agencies, organisations and individuals, they predominantly address four key questions:

What configuration of public investments in early childhood education is likely to yield the best returns over the coming years?
What policy changes could ensure all children benefit from at least some engagement with early childhood education services?
What changes in the early childhood education sector would promote greater responsiveness to the diverse and changing needs of stakeholders?
What funding and regulatory models would encourage local innovation and
system-wide learning to enhance overall service quality?

Answers to the following three questions posed by the ECE Taskforce are also summarised:

What is the most important issue facing early childhood education at the moment?
What do you value most about early childhood education?
What are the key barriers to access?

Introduction

Submitter profiles

There were 439 submissions in total; of those 423 were unique submitters. 72% (314) of the submissions were in standard form, the content of which appeared to originate from the New Zealand Educational Institute (NZEI).

Submitters were classified into nine different categories, with over half of all submissions from teachers, 18% (77) from parents (of which 61 were in standard form and 16 were individual submissions). Submissions were received from 10 government agencies. The following breakdown shows the categories and their submission frequency:

Figure 1: ECE Taskforce – Submitter classification

Source Data

Submission content identified singular issues which allowed for a quantitative analysis. The following graph illustrates issue frequency from standard form and individual submissions.

Figure 2: ECE Taskforce – Submission issue breakdown (Count)

Source Data

Of note, the suggestion to develop early childhood education under an umbrella organisation, or ‘one-stop shop’, although mentioned frequently, was not singularly identified as an issue as it was often articulated through reference to more specific matters of streamlining licensing or procedures; establishing links with the community; or creating a national plan encompassing all early childhood services. A qualitative summary will discuss the early childhood education framework further.
The questions raised by the ECE Taskforce on its website also framed the feedback from submissions. While it is not suggested that standard form responses should not carry a similar weight as individual responses, the large number of standard form responses (72%) may, indeed, skew analysis. Subsequently, the following graph displays individual submission issues and their numerical count for consideration. Note that a total of 125 individual submissions were received.

Figure 3: ECE Taskforce – Individual submission numerical count

Source Data

Standard form responses

The following chart gives a breakdown of the 314 standard form submissions:

Figure 4: ECE Taskforce – Standard form submitter classification

Source Data

Standard form submissions were dominated by teachers; however, 61 parents, 18 community members and 13 owners, academics and managers also chose to submit by standard form.
Although standard form responses were mostly the same due to the repetition of preformatted paragraph wording, there was some variation due to paragraph selection and, in some cases, the addition of individually written points.
Pre-formatted paragraphs within standard forms covered the following issues:

increase qualified staff
100% qualified staff
parental education including pilot programme
support Centres of Innovation
increase funding
national plan
universal funding
need for community-based early childhood education
raise service funding accountability
implement ERO 2010 professional development recommendations
mentoring and grants for new teachers.

The graph below shows numerical issue counts from standard form submissions.

Figure 5: ECE Taskforce – Standard form submission numerical count

Source Data

Because standard form submissions total 72%, the aggregate totals from individual and standard form responses provide little more information than the relative weighting of one standard form paragraph over another. For instance, if we look closely at the renewed support for funding Centres of Innovation, the aggregate percentage support is 70% – the third highest scoring option; however, a breakdown of submission types reveals that support for Centres of Innovation over other initiatives was supported by far fewer individual respondents at 12% (or 15 submissions).
Therefore, the summary will show issue breakdown between standard form and individual submissions.

Findings

In answer to key questions, and in response to a request for general contributions from within the early childhood education sector, the following seven key themes emerged from standard form and individual submissions:

the importance of the early childhood education sector
the damage funding cuts have caused
funding options
developing the early childhood education service centre framework
early childhood education service centre performance measures and how to increase service quality
Ministry of Education management framework, policy and processes
early childhood education centre policy and curriculum.

The overwhelming consensus between standard form and individual responses was that services need to be of a quality standard to ensure delivery of the best outcomes for children and families. That is, increased attendance of itself is not the aim, but rather attendance at quality early childhood education. Secondly, funding needs to support services so they can accommodate the needs of families to ensure access to early childhood education is a right for all children and not a privilege.
When reading the following data it must be noted that almost every submission raised multiple issues of concern.
Importance of the ECE sector
A majority of submissions to the ECE Taskforce reinforced the importance the sector plays in society, viewing ‘early childhood education provision, quality staffing and strategic planning as the foundation for all other sectors within education’. Common themes focused on these three areas of importance. Statistics were frequently provided that highlighted infant developmental benefits of quality early childhood education and the long-term economic benefits that investment in the sector will bring. Centres that followed the 2002 ‘Pathways to the Future’ strategic plan voiced concern at recent policies that conflicted with current practices. Many standard form and individual responses expressed the desire for a clearer strategic direction from Government to include all early childhood education services. This was noted in several submissions from early childhood education organisations. Teachers say that they are at the coalface of many of society’s issues and they are at the juncture where meaningful interventions can be implemented. Therefore, there was common support across both individual and standard form submissions for the financial investment in early childhood education for its potential to reduce long-term crime rates, identify and combat child abuse or neglect, link families to social support, and increase the general education of the nation. This would create corresponding social and financial savings in the justice, health, education and welfare sectors.

Damage caused by funding cuts
An overwhelming majority of submissions, both standard form and individual, voiced dissatisfaction at funding cuts and the reduction in targets from 100% to 80% qualified staff, seeing both as having the potential to reduce the quality of service and contribute to the demoralisation and stress of existing qualified early childhood education staff. The funding consideration most frequently requested, within both standard form and individual submissions, was to increase the number of qualified teachers at early childhood education services. 93% (292) of standard form responses and 44% (55) of individual responses thought teacher numbers should be increased. 89% of individual submissions and 96% of standard form submissions calling for increased qualified staff numbers thought teacher numbers should revert to 100%. 68% (297) of submissions proposed an early childhood education funding increase. 252 of these responses were standard form submissions which set the Government a target of 1% of GDP to invest.

Funding options
A funding increase for the early childhood education sector was the second most frequently supported idea, with individual respondents who suggested various options, predominantly involving diverse, affordable supply. 26% (33) of individual and 93% (292) of standard form submissions supported the reinstatement of funding for parental education programmes. Standard form submissions also gave 93% support for reinstating the funding for Centres of Innovation.
Developing the ECE service centre framework
A national funding and strategic plan targeting under resourced regions with lower attendance rates was popular with 65% of respondents, of which 83% (261) were standard form and 18% (23) individual submissions. A national funding and strategic plan was seen to ‘ensure provision of early childhood education services within walking distance of poor neighbourhoods’, the lack of transport being viewed as an impediment to attendance by many. The need for strategic planning to ensure the availability, suitability and quality of services was expressed, mainly in the form of funding and structural change linking private and not-for-profit early childhood education services under an umbrella framework that would streamline procedures, licensing and operations, and co-ordinate appropriate government ministries, communities, hospitals, home services, whānau and primary schools. Affordability was seen as the biggest barrier to the development of the early childhood education sector leading to poor attendance in some regions:

For our low decile communities, the accessibility to affordable early childhood education is imperative for continued participation of our Māori and Polynesian children.

ECE service centres: performance and quality measures
Tied in with national planning was the imperative to develop community-based services, which was popular with 71% (223) of standard form responses, and the sixth most commonly voiced proposal within individual responses at 30% (38). Inextricably linked to the need for community services was the desire to maintain diversity in service delivery – the fifth most commonly supported issue – 32% (40) of individual submissions. Ascertaining the suitability of community services would come from consultation within local communities. 9% of submissions reiterated the need for an integrated, holistic view of early childhood education, specifically mentioning options such as home-based care. Support for this was from individual responses in all but one case. There was strong support for integrated monitoring and flexible policy and funding options in order to increase service quality and deliver a viable service responsive to the diverse requirements of children and families. Generally Te Whāriki was supported. However, many individual submissions urged the Government to provide a stronger focus on cultural and language requirements in curriculum, policy and teacher training. Statistics and research in a number of submissions showed an increased health risk for very young infants in early childhood education centres. Inter-agency collaboration would be able to consider options such as extension of paid parental leave for parents wanting to keep babies at home, while attention to policy for infants under two, including lower ratios and staff qualifications, would improve infant outcomes within early childhood education services.
Submitters suggested specific ways to deliver a more affordable service. However, these were not always consistent. While some submissions expressed the need to increase funding for decile areas 1-3, others acknowledged waiting lists were still a factor in many higher decile areas, for those ‘whose parents could not afford private childcare fees.’ Other anomalies lay with the type of funding, funding recipients and methods of funding delivery. Universal funding was supported by 83% (261) of standard form submissions and 13% (16) of individual submissions. Standard form submissions did not address equity funding; however, this was seen as an effective method of funding by many academic respondents and organisations. Another popular suggestion in standard form responses was to decrease funding to private institutions and increase funds for community centres, which were viewed as contributing back to the community as opposed to ‘siphoning off profits’. The need for accountability within all early childhood education centres was seen as important in standard form responses, receiving 73% support; several of these submissions mentioned that kindergartens already have stringent accountability processes. Eight individual submissions expressed a need for increased accountability.
Many respondents believe that rigorous evaluation of existing early childhood education services and a needs-based assessment for the opening of new centres should be undertaken before Government funds are dispersed. A paragraph appeared in standard form submissions asking for increased financial and performance accountability of service centres. Some submissions recommended penalties for noncompliance and an extension of powers for the Education Review Office (ERO). A few submissions revealed existing unethical, non-compliant or fraudulent practices, which they say would have been discovered if auditing processes were more stringent.
71% of standard form submissions wanted funding to support newly qualified staff mentoring programmes and grants.

As a student we learn so much about… effective teaching techniques, pedagogies, research and ethics, child abuse and what to do when it is suspected. Yet we get little support from the current Government, leaving us to defend our roles as educators and not just babysitters… what we do is provide a lifelong love of learning – we set up children with the confidence to try new things, speak their minds and develop the inquisitiveness to find out more. We give them opportunities they might otherwise miss. We can link these activities to theories and can explain to parents expected behavioural patterns.

2% (3) of individual submissions wanted funding to support newly qualified staff mentoring programmes and grants.

Methodology

Consultation process and methods

The ECE Taskforce requested submissions from the public to identify areas within the early childhood education sector which could be further investigated for improvement, and to suggest ideas that will increase attendance at early childhood education centres. The ECE Taskforce will make recommendations in a report to the Minister of Education in June 2011.

Questions were published on the Taskforce website to generate responses. However, respondents could discuss any issue relevant to the sector. Submissions closed on 31 January 2011. 439 submissions were received. Submissions were forwarded to the secretariat: a group of Ministry of Education policy analysts assisting the taskforce. Whilst the secretariat is funded by the Ministry of Education, members are to deliver advice and assistance in a neutral capacity. Respondents could remain anonymous if they chose.

Methods used for analysing and reporting responses

The summary of submissions appears in a qualitative format, utilising quantitative data obtained from collating and codifying submissions in two different ways. Most responses addressed widespread issues and involved various ideas for improvement. For ease of summary, each issue was addressed within an overriding theme. Secondly, according to the structure of the submission as well as a thematic evaluation, responses were collated according to the specific questions they addressed. Summarising issues in both formats enables a sense of direction in addressing singular issues while viewing them within the broader context as the responses to the four main questions outlined by the taskforce often crossed thematic boundaries.

Findings

The four questions:

Q.1. What configurations of public investments in early childhood education are likely to yield the best returns over the coming years?

This question provoked the greatest support for a single notion. 79% of submissions believed the best investment for Government should include an increase of qualified staff at early childhood education centres. 93% (292) of standard form responses and 44% (55) of individual responses thought teacher numbers should be increased. 89% of individual submissions and 96% of standard form submissions, wanting increased qualified staff numbers, thought teacher numbers should revert to 100%.

…effective teachers are the main factor in raising the achievement and fostering the ongoing engagement of students…effective teaching is recognised as the most important…lever for improving educational outcomes for students.

(Kindergarten Association quoting ERO 2010)

71% of standard form submissions and 2% (3) of individual submissions wanted funding to support newly qualified staff mentoring programmes and grants.

Figure 6: ECE Taskforce – Question 1 Breakdown

Source Data

Figure 6 shows the most common funding issues and their relative numerical support from both standard form and individual submissions. 68% (297) of submissions proposed an early childhood education funding increase. 252 of these responses were standard form submissions which set the Government a target of 1% of GDP to invest. The second most frequently supported idea in individual submissions was a funding increase for the early childhood education sector (36% support: 45 submissions). 18% (23) of individual submissions specifically mentioned the need for streamlining funding within the sector. A total of 65% (261 standard form submissions and 23 individual submissions) called for a national funding plan for early childhood education provision targeted at providing funding on a regional basis according to need, ensuring the provision of early childhood education services for all children; making this the fourth most frequently supported funding recommendation. 24 individual submissions and 224 standard form submissions mentioned how their services were suffering from funding cuts. 56% of submissions that expressed the general negative impacts funding cuts had already had, or could impose, on their services. Seven submissions pointed to the withdrawal of bulk funding and the negative impact this had on the development of new centres.

38 submissions highlighted the sharp up-take of home-based childcare, intensifying the need to review this service type with regard to funding increases, which, according to submissions, may raise service quality and profile. It was argued that funding increases for early childhood education such as home-based, Kōhanga Reo, and Playcentre, should provide for training and pay parity; streamlining of quality indicators; recognition of costs, policies and processes particular to these types of early childhood education
services; and increased ERO inspections. Integration would include collaboration with government agencies such as Child, Youth and Family (CYF). Some services were said to provide community spirit, family support, access to social services and resources and flexible options for families. However, two submissions warned against redirecting funds away from ‘quality, resourced, educational environments.’

Q.2. What policy changes could ensure all children benefit from at least some engagement with early childhood education services?

The most popular response to this question repeats the idea of a national plan ensuring suitable, quality early childhood education services are available to all children and families wishing to access them. It is suggested that community consultation should be undertaken to establish what services are required.

Figure 7: ECE Taskforce – Question 2 Breakdown

Source Data

A major concern reflected in many standard form submissions was the tension between private and not-for-profit centres.

Decrease competition and market model approaches as these undermine professional relationships and collegiality across settings. Further, competitive models frequently emphasise programmes that are inappropriate in the New Zealand setting…inconsistent with the principles and strands of Te Whāriki…Investment in community non-profit [early childhood education] is best as 100% of the funds go to supporting teachers and children rather than being siphoned off as profits.

This tension was also highlighted in some individual submissions (including academic submissions), which acknowledged the need for community-based early childhood education and the stability that brings to the community and child. Provision of a national plan was predicted to ensure the availability of services in every community, including rural regions.

The imperative to develop community-based services was popular with 71% (223) of standard form responses, and was the sixth most commonly voiced proposal among individual responses at 30% (38). Inextricably linked to the need for community services was the desire to maintain diversity in service delivery – the fifth most prevalent issue noted in individual submissions at 32% (40). Ascertaining the suitability of community services would come from consultation with local communities. Two submissions suggested a mobile service could make use of community buildings or visit remote locations; another submitter had such a service in operation.

The common belief among respondents was that community-based services designed to suit local needs were responsive to the particular cultural or language requirements of some Māori, Pasifika or migrant families; the lack of which was perceived as contributing to low attendance rates. 11% (47) of submissions (including 30 individual submissions) specifically articulated the importance of language, culture, emotional and social content in early childhood education policy provision. Maintenance of the 20 Hours ECE policy was also supported by 30 individual submissions. Therefore, both 20 Hours ECE and provision of language, culture, emotional and social content in policy achieved third equal support within individual submissions. 22 individual and 6 standard form submissions supported locating early childhood education centres at school sites, saying it not only provided a smooth transition into schooling but also increased attendance rates at early childhood education centres. Linking early childhood education with schools did not appear as a preformatted paragraph within standard forms.

Submissions repeatedly articulated the need for government policy to be more flexible for families who find it difficult to attend early childhood education regularly during specified hours. In two submissions the reliance on the Frequent Absence Rule was evidenced to place cost on the service and was seen as a means of dis-incentivising attendance for some families.

Four submissions observed that ‘discrimination against children with disabilities occurs within early childhood services’, which contributed to low attendance rates for these children. One of the submissions presented by an organisation was written on behalf of many who had encountered adverse treatment. Discrimination was not seen simply as a result of funding shortfalls, but as an issue of intolerance, workforce incapability and incapacity and of the lack of recognition of the right of all children to quality early childhood education. As well as mandatory professional development for all early childhood education staff, remedial recommendations included an integrated, whole of- government approach to address systemic issues such as parental support, physical locations of centres and transport provision.

Financial considerations were seen as one of the biggest barriers to attendance at early childhood education.

For our low decile communities, the accessibility to affordable early childhood education is imperative for continued participation of our Māori and Polynesian children.

The most popular solution was to provide a universal funding policy (83% of standard form responses). Although supported by 13% of individual submissions, the universal funding policy was not supported by individual responses as much as policy that was driven by a national plan and a community focus. The merits of both universal funding and equity funding were noted in some individual submissions. Among individual submissions, targeted funding was generally observed as having negative consequences, including diversion of funds from mainstream services, creating disadvantages for children at the margins and preventing middle income, skilled women entering the workforce.

18% (23) of individual responses drew attention to the policy needs of under two year olds. Modifications to early childhood education licensing and subsidy distribution from Work and Income New Zealand (WINZ) gained similar levels of support in individual submissions at 12% and 11% respectively. These three policy initiatives did not appear as preformatted paragraphs within standard forms but were mentioned in seven standard form submissions.

Q3. What changes in the early childhood education sector would promote greater responsiveness to the diverse and changing needs of stakeholders?

73% of standard form respondents suggested that there was a need to increase service accountability.

Make services more accountable for the funding they receive…there should be robust accountability to government, parents, whānau and communities linked to indicators of high achievement.

There were suggestions for penalties of closure for non-compliant, underperforming centres or a return of funding. Similarly, underperforming or non-compliant centres should require yearly ERO reviews which move to terms of five years for performing centres. Furthermore, it was proposed that all early childhood education government funding information should be made publicly available. ERO procedural change was referred to in six individual submissions.

The second most popular solution to this question – 72% (277) of standard form responses – was to implement the ERO May 2010 recommendation.

Fund professional development and support for educators to work in partnership with Māori whānau to ensure services are more responsive to Māori tamariki.

Implementation of the May 2010 ERO recommendations on professional development was suggested in four individual submissions. The maintenance and expansion of diverse service delivery was by far the most popular notion in individual submissions, recommended by 40 submitters. The second most frequently supported idea (proposed by 18 individual submissions) was to streamline procedures.

Figure 8: ECE Taskforce – Question 3 Breakdown

Source Data

Additional to the hundreds of submissions that called for a community-based type of national plan, 29% of submissions specifically outlined suggestions for ‘conformity and equality across the education sector’. As well as ERO procedural change and streamlining government policy, this includes licensing modifications (15 individual and two standard form submissions); streamlining government agency funding (23 individual and three standard form submissions); linking early childhood education with schools and teaching institutions (22 individual and six standard form submissions); and providing access to quality early childhood education exemplars (10 individual and seven standard form submissions). Four submissions made particular reference to inconsistencies with the quality of new teachers, requesting increased papers in early childhood education and ‘practicums’ at education facilities, as well as quality standardisation between education providers to be monitored by the Ministry of Education.

There was support for the view that early childhood education centres should operate as hubs or ‘one-stop-shops’, which could potentially link communities, whānau, schools, hospitals and government agencies. Responses supporting an integrated early childhood education structure suggested emulating an existing British model; developing an ‘integrated provision of services under Children and Family Services model’; or working with ‘Centre-Based Parent Support and Development’, an initiative jointly funded by the Ministry of Education and Ministry of Social Development. It was reiterated that the most effective integrated approach would have to be led by the Ministry of Education.

The Promoting Early Childhood Education Participation Project (PPP) was similarly recommended as a model which had successfully increased participation rates by getting ‘the Government working with iwi, Pasifika groups and community organisations.’ Some agency and organisation (early childhood education and other) submissions showed evidence of successful collaborations and recommended the benefits of such an approach within early childhood education, suggesting it would ‘bring agencies together to develop shared goals for social and community outcomes and encourage services to identify opportunities to support each other’s efforts as well as seeing where they are working counter to each other.’ Yet another suggestion was to use the ‘Auckland Social Policy Forum as a platform to inspire and coordinate action to increase early childhood education participation’. Submissions specifically mentioning linking early childhood education centres to school grounds said they were an important component for encouraging future connections in communities with low uptake in early childhood education. Two submissions suggested attention should be drawn to health early childhood education facilities to reach some lower socio-economic families, whose children may spend extended periods of time visiting at hospitals.

Q4. What funding and regulatory models would encourage local innovation and systemwide learning to enhance overall service quality?

Figure 9: ECE Taskforce – Question 4 Breakdown

Source Data

74% of submissions wanted a reinstatement of the Parent Support and Development Programme: that is, 93% (292) support from standard form submissions and 26% (33) support from individual submissions. Submissions repeatedly enforced the need for parental education regarding parenting and linking with early childhood education service providers. Attention was also drawn to the need for increased parental awareness regarding the benefits of early childhood education. Families in areas of high deprivation access formal early childhood education less frequently; and so, as well as making early childhood education facilities more suitable and responsive for these families, equipping parents with the tools to provide quality care at home was said to act as a complementary service for improved child outcomes. The value of the Parent Support and Development Programme was frequently reiterated amongst individual and standard form submissions and received the greatest numerical support from both submission types in response to this question. Of the submissions that supported funding Parent Support and Development Programmes, 16 individual submissions specifically highlighted the benefits of the Home Interaction Programme for Parents and Youngsters (HIPPY), introduced and established in 1992 and now operating in 26 centres. Both individual and standard form responses saw Centres of Innovation as the second most popular innovation for the sector, attracting 12% and 93% support respectively.

We could see our colleagues doing exemplary work. They inspired the rest of us to strive for higher quality through using the action research model in our own centres.

We need the COI [Centres of Innovation] projects to inspire and encourage us to self improve; to constantly be searching our practice to find new strategies and ideas.

The desire of many to increase levels of qualified staff was often accompanied by an equally intense call for the Government to raise levels of personal development programme funding.

Three additional questions

These questions also appeared on the taskforce website and were answered in individual submissions as opposed to standard form responses. While numbers were low, these responses correlate with other responses.

What is the most important issue facing ECE at the moment?

Most popular responses in order of frequency:

negative effects of funding cuts: hitting smaller community and rural centres, resulting in imposed fees leading to affordability and participation issues, placing pressure on qualified staff, lowering quality, undervaluing early childhood education teachers and the sector, creating job insecurity
lack of choice: children need to attend for too long, inflexible hours
lack of recognition for at-home care
support of sector to maintain role as social support for families in low socioeconomic areas: must connect parents to services as well as linking to community resources
identifying ‘a desired future state for early childhood education in New Zealand over the next three to five years…’
lack of parental involvement
no commitment to 100% fully trained staff
funding of the private sector.

What do you value most about early childhood education?

Most popular responses in order of frequency:

learning and development opportunities: Te Whāriki, learning stories, skills attained to transition to school and child interaction, play-based programmes
supports parents and whānau: supports parental studies and adult learning, promotes community interaction
integration of education and care
quality of care and systems: professionalism of staff
diversity: language and culture, bicultural practices
parental involvement
supports child’s right to early childhood education.

What are the key barriers to access?

Most popular responses in order of frequency:

increased cost: affordability, families need more financial support
transport
lack of facilities: ‘In some low socio-economic areas, lack of government-subsidised facilities is the key barrier to access
needs community approach: no connection to school community, lack of community centres in some regions
‘lack of responsiveness to language and culture of non-English families’: service not reflecting culture/ethnicity
need more options: funding of home programmes cut
separation: feelings of inadequacy.

The seven major themesThe importance of the ECE sector

The majority of submissions repeated the need to recognise the importance of ECE in the early years of ages one to three.

Current research on children’s brain development shows that 85% of the brain’s core structures are organised by the age of three… If infants do not receive [one-to-one interaction]… physical long term or permanent damage to the developing brain may result. early childhood education provision during this crucial period… must be high quality, conducive to optimal development and be provided by trained, qualified people…

Some academic submissions highlighted studies from a range of countries, which showed financial returns ranging from three to 17 dollars for every dollar government invested into quality early childhood education. Reduced expenditure on welfare assistance, the criminal justice system and special education intervention, reduced child abuse rates, improved nutrition and taxation gains all contributed to long-term financial, social and economic gains for governments.

Often the early childhood education professional is the only person in a position of trust and knowledge to come to the aid of a family in crisis because of alcoholism, abuse, neglect…

Realising the significance early childhood education plays in facilitating child, parent and family access to social services, and offering participation and protection rights for children, the 2005 Children’s Issues Centre study research concluded that ‘early childhood education services can have significant impact on family resilience.’ While it was commonly voiced that ‘early childhood education provision, quality staffing and strategic planning should be viewed as the foundation for all other sectors in education,’ the Ministry of Women’s Affairs’ submission added ‘early childhood education must form a central plank in any strategy aimed at improving productivity and economic growth.’

The Minister of Education has upset a large majority of submitters (particularly teachers) by referring to the early childhood education sector as responsible for caring for children rather than for providing an educational service. Many submissions believe early childhood education should receive greater visibility through Government support, one submission suggesting early childhood education should become compulsory.

Damage funding cuts have caused

‘The funding cuts are the most immediate threat to the provisions of quality education for the children in our care.’

The repeated message in submissions was that funding cuts undermine the sector as a quality education provider, creating low morale and increased stress on the qualified workforce as teachers have to assume more responsibilities. As one submission from a kindergarten noted:

Because our Association is not willing to have untrained teachers or pass on costs to families, it is the teachers who suffer. We now have extra sessions, less professional development and we already feel the strain as we try to maintain quality.

As well as reducing revenue, funding cuts are said to:

reduce service quality
increase staff turnover, which will impact on infant attachment
reduce the proportion of qualified staff
reduce the potential for constant improvements gained from professional
development and Centres of Innovation
cut teacher-to-child ratios to a minimum
curtail innovative environmental programmes and trips
stop bilingual or other optional training currently funded by centres.

Including incentivising the employment of non-qualified staff at early childhood education centres, 224 standard form and three individual submissions explicitly expressed concern that funding cuts would reduce mentoring for new teachers, resulting in a reduction in the quality of qualified staff.

Perhaps most importantly, as funding cuts may mean increased fees, some submissions stated that centres have already encountered parents withdrawing children from early childhood education. Many submissions noted that this effect is likely to increase and is forecast to impact most significantly on Māori, Pasifika and low income families’ attendance levels. Increased fees due to funding cuts may also prevent parents from undertaking paid employment or training.

Funding options

Thematic evaluation enables the summary of all funding suggestions, including those not detailed in the specific questions.

Although addressed as matters of innovation and improved early childhood education service quality, the resumption of funding for parental education (including pilot programmes) and Centres of Innovation fall within the auspices of funding. Viewed overall, the request to resume these programmes drew the third and fourth greatest numbers of support. However, it must be noted that although 93% of standard form submissions supported both programmes, 26% of individual submissions supported parental education programmes and 12% of individual submissions supported resumption of funding for Centres of Innovation. Of the submissions suggesting a national funding plan, there was repeated mention that funds are currently wasted by the over-provision or under-utilisation of centres in some regions. More specific suggestions pertaining to universal funding, equity funding and targeted funding mention these funding streams could be supplemented by discretionary grants to augment the existing 20 Hours ECE funding.

Continued funding of 20 Hours ECE in its current form was supported by 24% (30) of individual and 4% (11) of standard form responses (all of which wrote original statements as there was not a preformatted paragraph showing support for this programme). Some respondents suggested funds from existing subsidies could be redirected to 20 Hours ECE to allow for an extension to two year olds, others suggested the scheme should be targeted to lower income families or have the amount of hours reduced to fit with sessions at kindergartens allowing for an hourly rate increase. Two submissions suggested the ECE Taskforce investigate the potential savings of limiting access to 20 Hours ECE to New Zealand residents only, offering simple ways to administer this. Support for 20 Hours ECE was not unanimous however. Three submissions noted that the scheme has had a perverse effect, as some families extend existing hours to fill the allocation, which means other children and families miss out. Some Playcentre respondents explained that 20 Hours ECE was not suitable for them as claims were difficult to process and calculate through lack of computers and appropriate skills. Treasury noted in their submission that 20 Hours ECE was the biggest financial cost to Government for early childhood education, and that because it only returned an increased attendance by one percentage point, a more targeted approach was called for.

Work and Income New Zealand (WINZ) funding issues were raised in 18 submissions (14 individual and 4 standard form). There were suggestions for WINZ to work closer with the Ministry of Education on funding issues including ‘the Ministry grants to services and the targeted WINZ subsidies that reduce childcare fees for eligible families’. It was also proposed that WINZ provide support for teen parents wanting to go back to school; continue subsidies over holiday periods for studying parents; increase their funded hours; maintain a basic level of hours; and keep funding in line with costs for full-time working parents. Alternatively, it was suggested that WINZ remove the 9 hours funding for lower income children and give the money directly to parents or that the funding for 20 Hours ECE should be removed and given to WINZ to be distributed as a childcare subsidy.

The majority of submissions (both individual and standard form) wanted the current funding and operational model to be more flexible in response to the difficulty some families have in ensuring their children regularly attend their prescribed hours and days. Although 297 (252 standard form and 45 individual) submissions requested an increase in funding, many thought money could be saved through increased service centre accountability and rationalising procedural, licensing, management and funding models within the early childhood education sector and relevant agencies. Other submissions thought money could be saved through ideas such as the removal of top tier funding, removal of the support grant for professionally registered teachers, or by limiting training funds to early childhood education applicants within New Zealand. Concerns were voiced regarding the allocation, distribution or misuse of funds within early childhood education centres and organisations. Tax incentives were both supported and criticised. Some submissions supported increased funding for ECE immersion services and the alteration of funding bands according to a child’s age.

A strong resentment towards private centres was reflected, particularly in standard form submissions. Reference to a thesis raising the issue was also tabled. The most commonly repeated message in these submissions was that ‘early childhood education should be a public good not a private enterprise’; therefore, funding for public centres should be prioritised over private ones. There were calls for transparency of funding and funding audits of private centres and reward for community-based, not-for-profit centres that reinvest in the community and try to encourage attendance by keeping fees low.

Remuneration is not as attractive at not for profit centres and jobs are harder to come by…adjusting the funding for community based centres and having a system that supports growth on the amount of community based centres as opposed to private centres may have a positive effect on the quality of education and care provided.

20 submissions (19 individual and 1 standard form) wanted home-based services to be considered in a national funding plan, including qualification parity, investment in training for the sector and provision of appropriate cost compensation. Three submissions asked for funding to be given to services not parents. 18 submissions wanted equal recognition for Playcentres, explaining they were currently operating under a redundant funding system and (like home-based services) were being overlooked in funding reviews. It was suggested that a higher trust funding model or bulk funding would suit some services.

Developing the ECE service centre framework: as an integrated provider

There was resounding support for the development of an integrated, collaborative framework for the early childhood education sector in the form of an ‘umbrella framework’ or ‘one-stop-shop’ model. Many submissions specifically outlined successful programmes or quality exemplars that could be applied to the New Zealand context. For example, one submission said “the 2008 Quality Public ECE Project report recognised the need for more government intervention to foster collaboration”. The Ministry of Pacific Island Affairs supports an umbrella organisation for better governance and support of Pasifika early childhood education services, and to provide a centralised approach to coordinate and monitor services. Some early childhood education networks are successfully working with local councils; however, they fear that, with the development of the Auckland Super City, this may change. 325 submissions supported parent development programmes that have already operated successfully within a collaborative framework.

Figure 10: ECE Taskforce – Service Centre Framework – Umbrella Concept

Source Data

One submitter believed that ‘collaboration between Ministry of Education, local councils, communities and early childhood education providers would ensure a good match between provisions and need.’ Furthermore, an integration of government departments, services, and agencies (such as Plunket and WINZ) could look at family circumstances that may be preventing attendance in early childhood education. Four submissions suggested LIFEWISE (a not-for-profit community agency) as a good example of a model that links early childhood education centres with parents and whānau. Two submissions suggested provision of a mobile Work and Income service centre or social worker to assist with children who require extra assistance, particularly for children with higher needs. Some studies showed evidence that the model of a ‘one stop shop’ creates a community base of learning and support. Three submissions referred to the need for links between early childhood education, the community and tertiary education providers to deliver a more consistent and practical qualification outcome.

ECE service centre performance measures and how to increase service quality

Service centre performance was linked to licensing reforms. 17 submissions (15individual and two standard form) forwarded suggestions ranging from compliance standardisation and the provision of a single licence to broadening of licensing criteria to include proven programmes, the needs of certain services, and centres which cater for irregular attendance. One suggestion here was to:

adjust funding and licensing requirements to promote a more balanced spread of centres, making it more accessible to those needing them… A new plan similar to the strategic plan will ensure that centres focus on promoting the professional skills and qualifications their staff have therefore promoting quality.

Another submission suggested Ministry of Education funding checks should come in line with kōhanga reo guidelines. Others reiterated the need for non-compliance measures, strengthening of ERO powers and funding transparency.

Centres could improve and could do with tougher measures and requirements for improvements being imposed.

Various proposals for changes to ERO included: more robust auditing, including budget guidelines and funding reviews; regular checks to be linked with ongoing licensing; a review of the high level of supplementary ERO reviews in Kōhanga Reo; ERO investigations into bullying at centres; and checking of Occupational Safety and Health (OSH) standards during building renovations. Alternatively, one submission suggested that ERO should be replaced by peer review. Others said Pasifika centres should be required to meet specified standards, and at-risk centres should be supported to improve and maintain services.

Many submissions reinforced the strong reputation New Zealand early childhood education has worldwide; one submission highlighted how Japan uses New Zealand as a quality exemplar. Submissions frequently advocated the need for maintenance of quality indicators (training, professional development, resources, teacher salaries and teacher registration) over a focus on attendance. The support of mentoring programmes, professional development and Centres of Innovation was linked to the provision of quality exemplars. A paragraph in the standard form submissions supported implementation of the ERO May 2010 recommendation:

To fund professional development and support for educators to work in partnership with Māori whānau to ensure services are more responsive to Māori tamariki. Similar professional development for Pasifika and migrant communities should be funded.

Further suggestions to improve service quality included making ongoing personal development a criteria for licensing; support funding of monthly visits for qualified staff at centres to share experiences; ‘removal of the cap from teacher education courses’; and include a ‘practicum for student teachers prior to qualification’. Comments were made that the ‘market model’ lowers quality standards through a lack of benchmark standards and encourages fraudulent claiming practices by focusing on profit.

Specific programmes and resources that were recommended as quality examples included Ka Hikitia, Kei Tua o te Pae, Te Whaatu Pokeka, the 2009 ELP Project, and ULearn 2008 and 2009. Typically, standard form respondents believed that without financial support for Centres of Innovation and professional development, the early childhood education sector will lose quality benchmarks.

Service quality was also linked to ratio numbers and discussions from 24 submitters were all on the side of lowering or maintaining ratio levels and thus increasing qualified staff. Lowering child ratios was viewed as a particularly important factor in improving the quality of service for under twos. Most submissions supported a teacher-to-child ratio reduction for under twos to 1:4; however, some suggested 1:3.

Reducing the levels of qualified staff is believed to be in conflict with the aims of the 2002 strategic plan, Pathways to the Future: Ngā Huarahi Arataki. Many centres said they would not reduce from 100% qualified staff, even though legislation does not require it, believing a reduction to under 100% qualified staff would compromise quality service delivery. By prioritising the right of all children to quality early childhood education, submissions agreed that the provision of qualified teachers better acknowledged the rights of children with special needs. The desire for a requirement of 100% qualified staff was not unanimous, however; as some individual submissions noted, there is a lack of evidence supporting the extra costs (of 80% to 100%) and that 80% qualified staff allowed for absences and breaks. There were no submissions that supported qualified teacher levels below 80%.

Ministry of Education management framework, policy and processThe main points from the Ministry of Education management framework, policy and process are as follows:

creation of a single statutory organisation
conformity and equality across the education sector
support the 2002 strategic plan, Pathways to the Future: Ngā Huarahi Arataki
review of the strategic plan including integration of home-based providers and with rural centre input: stopping the 10 year strategic plan contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC)
different results from new teachers due to different training institute standards: need monitoring for quality.

The notion of streamlining the organisation includes ideas of aligning ERO and the Ministry of Education to a single set of rules and reviewing the Teachers Council role in early childhood education. One submission stated that it is expensive and unnecessary; another suggested its role should be broadened to focus on the wider cultural, social and emotional benefits of early childhood education. Streamlining would enable centres involved in research to share their findings; facilitate the extension of successful programmes to other geographical areas; and would also make it easier to resolve Health and Safety regulation compliance and licensing issues.

Conformity and equality across the education sector includes the equal treatment of the early childhood education, primary and secondary sectors; however, many submissions also ask for equal treatment within early childhood education. Many academic submissions, organisations and standard form responses supported the 2002 strategic plan and asked for its reinstatement and review to include input from services such as home-based and rural centres. Some respondents fear a slide in service delivery, as they
see policy moving away from the plan, and a denigration of early childhood education as it is separated from the rest of the education sector. One example highlighted the omission of early childhood education in A Vision for the Teaching Profession .

A small number of submissions reported inferior standards of newly qualified teachers. Different results from new teachers were believed to be due to different training institute standards. It was said the Ministry of Education needs to monitor for quality and students should be screened prior to qualifying from training facilities.

ECE centre policy and curriculum

Submitters were concerned that early childhood education policy should not undermine parental involvement or care and education by the family. Early childhood education policy, while aiming to enforce quality standards, needs to be flexible and practical enough to meet the diverse requirements of early childhood education service recipients and providers. For example, early childhood education policies must recognise the needs of permanent caregivers for children in the care of Child, Youth and Family to assist with enduring trauma or developmental delays. The current licensing system is viewed as inflexible for families with high needs and does not recognise cultural, age, language or financial barriers. It was suggested that a funding pool for families not fitting with the licensing criteria should be established. Examples were given where Occupational and Safety Standards for playgrounds and fencing were too stringent and generally ‘rules were too bureaucratic’.

creation of a single statutory organisation
conformity and equality across the education sector
support the 2002 strategic plan, Pathways to the Future: Ngā Huarahi Arataki
review of the strategic plan including integration of home-based providers and with rural centre input: stopping the 10 year strategic plan contravenes the United Nations Convention on the Rights of the Child (UNCROC)
different results from new teachers due to different training institute standards: need monitoring for quality.

Conformity and equality across the education sector includes the equal treatment of the early childhood education, primary and secondary sectors; however, many submissions also ask for equal treatment within early childhood education. Many academic submissions, organisations and standard form responses supported the 2002 strategic plan and asked for its reinstatement and review to include input from services such as home-based and rural centres. Some respondents fear a slide in service delivery, as they see policy moving away from the plan, and a denigration of early childhood education as it is separated from the rest of the education sector. One example highlighted the omission of early childhood education in A Vision for the Teaching Profession .

ECE centre policy and curriculum

immersion programmes and cultural considerations
transition to school programmes
environmental programmes
policy for under two-year-olds
Te Whāriki

Submissions were mixed as to whether immersion services should be bilingual or total immersion.

Pasifika services provided in their own languages are vital for Pacific communities to be valued and acknowledged.

However, there was a call for literature and mandatory documents to be standardised and made available for immersion services. One submission suggested that the Tupu series be reinstated . Increased policy emphasis on cultural and language requirements was believed to increase the quality and suitability of service, and early childhood education attendance of Māori, Pasifika and migrant children, a priority for the Government. SAASIA (an umbrella organisation for Samoan early childhood education services) suggested Samoan families will only attend early childhood education when they get language, cultural and religious benefits, and it recommended making Le Taiala o le Gagana Samoa a mandatory document for all aoga amata.

The main thinking regarding cultural and language requirements were that teachers need stronger awareness of te ao Māori; more funding should be allocated to training more Pasifika and Māori educated teachers; and both the Ka Hikitia (the Ministry of Education 2008–2012 Māori Education Strategy) and the 2009-2012 Pasifika Education Plan should be implemented as part of the early childhood education plan in services. It was also suggested that Pasifika providers should be given more support to become licensed and Pasifika families should be provided with more information about early childhood education services. Several submissions supported whānau spaces as they ‘provide informal and formal opportunities for parent education, including ‘Polywhenua’ [bridging programmes with Bay of Plenty Polytechnic] and te reo classes.’

There was support for transition to school programmes in centres that operated them and other submissions requested they be implemented at their centres. One submission suggested a Finnish model to establish pre-literacy and numeracy skills at early childhood education services to prevent a continuance of existing disadvantages for children from lower socio-economic families. A submission from a staff member at the University of Waikato presented evidence to support the ‘Raising Expectations Programme’, said to be targeted and intensive, utilising the ‘learning stories’ approach to transition into schooling.

Three submissions proposed the inclusion of environmental programmes, focusing on ‘Education for Sustainability’ or using the environment as a base, in the curriculum. Often these programmes involved taking children and teachers out of the centre, providing engagement with community and a wider diversity of experiences for children. One submission noted the success of such programmes and the inability to continue them because of inflexible licensing criteria.

23 individual submissions and one standard form submission expressed an urgent need for stringent policy for under two year olds, providing ‘regulation and funding for improved ratios and qualified teachers’. Academic research was cited to support teacher-to-child ratio levels of 1:4 or at best 1:3 and qualified teacher levels at centres to exceed 80%.

The majority of submissions, including academic submissions, supported Te Whāriki in its entirety, and NZEI highlighted a 2010 sector-wide forum in which attendees showed unanimous support for it. Many submissions appreciated the model for its innovative, bicultural, holistic and contextual nature and bipartisan support. However, one submission, from an academic, was quite critical of Te Whāriki, saying it contained little in the way of activity planning guidelines and it lacked performance measures, including assessment of learning outcomes. Other submissions suggested that fundamental principles of Te Whāriki should be retained but that a review should be undertaken to look at inclusion and human rights. Kei Tua o Te Pa was largely supported but was also criticised ‘as not meeting basic standards.’

References

1. Education Workforce Advisory Croup. (2010). A Vision for the Teaching Profession. Wellington: New Zealand Government.

2. Tupu is a series of books (published annually by the Ministry of Education in five Pasifika languages) that supports the learning of a Pasifika language. Publication was paused for review in June 2010.

Back to the Home Page

Posted by Zainab on 30/05/2011 in

« Home