Advertisement

Educational Research for Policy and Practice

, Volume 18, Issue 1, pp 1–16 | Cite as

The ‘Universal Access to early childhood education’ agenda in Australia: rationales and instruments

  • Tebeje MollaEmail author
  • Andrea Nolan
Original Article

Abstract

This paper explores the Australian Government’s ‘Universal Access’ policy in the early childhood education sector. Using data from selected policy texts, and drawing on interpretive policy analysis, the paper specifically examines rationales underlying the Universal Access agenda and instruments put in place to operationalize it and problematizes the framing of the equity agenda. The findings show that economic, educational and social goals inform the policy initiative; and targeted funding, teacher professionalization and performance monitoring serve as instruments in the enactment of the initiatives. A closer analysis of the texts also reveals that the Universal Access agenda is characterized by discursive shifts in the framing of equity goals, issue-omissions, contradictions of agendas, and inconsistencies of categories of disadvantage.

Keywords

Early childhood education Education policy Universal Access Policy instruments Policy rationales Policy framing Equity policy 

References

  1. ACECQA. (2014). Guide to developing a quality improvement plan. Canberra: ACECQA.Google Scholar
  2. ACECQA (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority). (2017a). Guide to the national quality standard. Canberra: ACECQA.Google Scholar
  3. ACECQA (Australian Children’s Education and Care Quality Authority). (2017b). NQF snapshot Q4 2016. Canberra: ACECQA.Google Scholar
  4. AEDC (Australian Early Development Census). (2016). Australian Early Development Census national report 2015: A snapshot of early childhood development in Australia. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  5. Australian Government. (2017). Closing the gap: Prime Minister’s report 2017. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  6. Bacchi, C. (2009). Analysing policy: What’s the problem represented to be?. Melbourne: Pearson.Google Scholar
  7. Ball, S. (2003). The teacher’s soul and the terrors of performativity. Journal of Education Policy, 18(2), 215–28.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Ball, S. (2013). The education debate (2nd ed.). Bristol: The Policy Press.Google Scholar
  9. Barnett, T., Roost, F. D., & McEachran, J. (2012). Evaluating the effectiveness of the Home Interaction Program for Parents and Youngsters (HIPPY). Family Matters, 91, 27–37.Google Scholar
  10. Baxter, J., & Hand, K. (2013). Access to early childhood education in Australia. Retrieved December 8, 2016, from https://aifs.gov.au/sites/default/files/publication-documents/rr24.pdf.
  11. Borraz, O. (2007). Governing standards: The rise of standardization processes in France and in the EU. Governance, 20(1), 57–84.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Brennan, D. (1998). The politics of Australian child care: Philanthropy to feminism and beyond (Revised ed.). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Brennan, D., & Fenech, M. (2014). Early education and care in Australia: Equity in a mixed market-based system? In L. Gambaro, K. Stewart, & J. Waldfogel (Eds.), An equal start?: Providing quality early education and care for disadvantaged children (pp. 171–192). Bristol: Policy Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2008). National partnership agreement on early childhood education. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  15. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2009a). Closing the gap: National partnership agreement on indigenous early childhood. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  16. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2009b). Investing in the early years: A national early childhood development strategy. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  17. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2009c). The national quality standard for early childhood education and care and school age care. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  18. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2012). National quality framework for early childhood education and care. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  19. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2013). National partnership agreement on universal access to early childhood education (phase I). Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  20. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2015). The national partnership agreement on universal access to early childhood education (phase II). Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  21. CoAG (Council of Australian Governments). (2016). The national partnership agreement on universal access to early childhood education (phase III). Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  22. Cook, K., Corr, L., & Breitkreuz, R. (2016). The framing of Australian childcare policy problems and their solutions. Critical Social Policy, 36(4), 1–22.Google Scholar
  23. DEEWR (Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations). (2009). Belonging, being & becoming: The early years learning framework for Australia. Canberra: DEEWR.Google Scholar
  24. DEEWR (Department of Education Employment and Workplace Relations). (2013). Early years quality fund: Program guidelines. Canberra: Australian Government.Google Scholar
  25. Deloitte Access Economics. (2015). Review of the National Early Childhood Education and Care collection. Canberra: Australian Government, Department of Education.Google Scholar
  26. Department of Education. (2014). Long day care professional development program: Funding guidelines. Canberra: Department of Education.Google Scholar
  27. Elliott, A. (2006). Early childhood education: Pathways to quality and equity for all children. Australian Education Review, Vol. 50, Australian Council for Educational Research.Google Scholar
  28. European Commission. (2011). Communication from the European Commission: Early childhood education and care: Providing all our children with the best start for the world of tomorrow. Retrieved February 20, 2017, from http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=COM:2011:0066:FIN:EN:PDF.
  29. Fenech, M. (2013). Quality early childhood education for my child or for all children? Parents as activists for equitable, high-quality early childhood education in Australia. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 38(4), 92–98.Google Scholar
  30. Friendly, M., & Lero, D. S. (2002). Social inclusion through early childhood education and care. Laidlaw Foundation working paper series. Retrieved January 24, 2017, from http://laidlawfdn.org/wp-content/uploads/2014/08/wpsosi_2002_june_social-inclusion-for-canadian-children.pdf.
  31. Gamson, W. A., & Modigliani, A. (1989). Media discourse and public opinion on nuclear power: A constructionist approach. American Journal of Sociology, 95(1), 1–37.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Gibson, M., McArdle, F., & Hatcher, C. (2015). Governing child care in neoliberal times: Discursive constructions of children as economic units and early childhood educators as investment brokers. Global Studies of Childhood, 5(3), 322–332.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Hanushek, E. A., & Woessmann, L. (2015). The knowledge capital of nations: Education and the economics of growth. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. HIPPY Australia. (2017). History. Retrieved February 20, 2017, from http://hippyaustralia.bsl.org.au.
  35. Hunkin, E. M. (2016). Problematising quality reform policy in Australian early childhood education and care (Unpublished Ph.D. thesis, Deakin University, Melbourne).Google Scholar
  36. Kilderry, A. (2014). Teachers in early childhood policy. Journal of Education Policy, 29(2), 242–262.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Kooiman, J. (2003). Governing as governance. London: Sage.Google Scholar
  38. Lamb, S., Jackson, J., Walstab, A., & Huo, S. (2015). Educational opportunity in Australia 2015: Who succeeds and who misses out. Centre for International Research on Education Systems, Victoria University, for the Mitchell Institute. Melbourne: Mitchell Institute.Google Scholar
  39. Lascoumes, P., & Le Galès, P. (2007). From the nature of instruments to the sociology of public policy instrumentation. Governance, 20(1), 1–21.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Le Galès, P. (2011). Policy instruments and governance. In M. Bevir (Ed.), The SAGE handbook of governance (pp. 142–159). Los Angeles: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Majone, G. (1997). From the positive to the regulatory state: Causes and consequences of changes in the mode of governance. Journal of Public Policy, 17(2), 139–167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. O’Connell, M., Fox, S., Hinz, B., & Cole, H. (2016). Quality early education for all. Fostering creative, entrepreneurial, resilient and capable learners. Mitchell report 01/2016. Melbourne: The Mitchell Institute, Victoria University.Google Scholar
  43. OECD. (2001). Starting strong: Early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. OECD. (2006). Starting strong II: Early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publishing.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. OECD. (2012). Starting strong III: A quality toolbox for early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  46. OECD. (2015). Starting strong IV: Monitoring quality in early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publishing.Google Scholar
  47. Palonen, K. (2003). Four times politics: Policy, polity, politicking, and politicization. Alternatives: Global, Local, Political, 28(2), 171–186.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Press, F., & Hayes, A. (2001). OECD thematic review of early childhood education and care policy: Australian background report. Canberra: Department of Education, Training and Youth Affairs.Google Scholar
  49. Productivity Commission. (2011). Early childhood development workforce. Melbourne: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  50. Productivity Commission. (2014a). Childcare and early childhood learning (Vol. 1, No. 73). Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  51. Productivity Commission. (2014b). Childcare and early childhood learning (Vol. 2, No. 73). Canberra: The Commonwealth of Australia.Google Scholar
  52. Raban, B., & Kilderry, A. (2017). Early childhood education policies in Australia. In H. Li, E. Park, & J. J. Chen (Eds.), Early childhood education policies in Asia Pacific: Advances in theory and practice (pp. 1–30). Berlin: Springer.Google Scholar
  53. Riddell, R. (2013). Changing policy levers under the neoliberal state: Realising coalition policy on education and social mobility. Journal of Education Policy, 28(6), 847–863.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. Rizvi, F. (2013). Equity and marketisation: A brief commentary. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 34(2), 274–278.Google Scholar
  55. Salamon, L. M. (2000). The new governance and the tools of public action: An Introduction. Fordham Urban Law Journal, 28(5), 1611–1674.Google Scholar
  56. Schwartz-Shea, P., & Yanow, D. (2012). Interpretive research design: Concepts and processes. New York: Routledge.Google Scholar
  57. SCSEEC (Standing Council on School Education and Early Childhood). (2002). Early years workforce strategy, 2012–2016. Melbourne: SESEEC.Google Scholar
  58. Spours, K., Coffield, F., & Gregson, M. (2007). Mediation, translation and local ecologies: understanding the impact of policy levers on FE colleges. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 59(2), 193–211.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. Steer, R., Spours, K., Hodgson, A., Finlay, I., Coffield, F., Edward, S., et al. (2007). Modernisation’ and the role of policy levers in the learning and skills Sector. Journal of Vocational Education and Training, 59(2), 175–192.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. Tayler, C. (2016). Reforming Australian early childhood education and care provision (2009–2015). Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 41(2), 27–31.Google Scholar
  61. Wagenaar, H. (2015). Meaning in action: Interpretation and dialogue in policy analysis. London: Routledge.Google Scholar
  62. Warren, D., & Haisken-DeNew, J. (2014). Early bird catches the worm: The causal impact of pre-school participation and teacher qualification on Year 3 national NAPLAN cognitive test. Working paper, Melbourne Institute, Melbourne University.Google Scholar
  63. Weston, K., & Tayler, C. (2016). A policy frame on early learning and teaching. In J. Page & C. Tayler (Eds.), Learning and teaching in the early years (pp. 26–46). Cambridge: Cambridge University Press.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  64. Yanow, D. (2000). Conducting interpretive policy analysis. Qualitative research methods (Vol. 47). Thousand Oaks: Sage.CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media B.V. 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of EducationDeakin UniversityGeelongAustralia

Personalised recommendations