1

FORUM ON EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND CARE

Aiming to build consensus on strategies for early childhood education and care delivery

(Written by Fran Locke, Program Associate, Community Services Council)

On September 18, 2002, the Community Services Council Newfoundland and Labrador (CSC) and the Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada (CCAAC) co-sponsored a Forum on Early Childhood Education and Care.

The Forum was part of a national project organized by Campaign 2000, a cross-Canada coalition of national and community organizations working on child and family issues from diverse perspectives. The project, Community Indicators – Early Childhood Education and Care, is intended to raise public awareness and strengthen the links between the early childhood educationand care sector and the broader community, and is initially being undertaken in four provinces.

Speaking at the Forum were Mab Oloman, representing Campaign 2000, giving national and international perspectives; Joan Dawe, Chair, Strategic Social Plan (SSP) Steering Committee Northeast Avalon Region, discussing early childhood development as a cross-sectoral priority; and Christine McLean, CCAAC Chairperson, giving provincial perspectives. This was followed by round table discussion of priorities and directions for early childhood education and care, especially in Newfoundland and Labrador. Penelope Rowe, CEO of the Community Services Council, moderated the event.

Campaign 2000

Campaign 2000 is committed to promoting the well-being of Canada’s children and securing the implementation of the 1989 House of Commons resolution to end child poverty (by the year 2000). In May 2002 the Government of Canada signed a UN Declaration, “A World Fit for Children”, which recognizes that “children must get the best possible start in life. Their survival, protection, growth and development … is the essential foundation of human development.”

As a signatory, Canada is obliged to develop a National Action Plan for Children. Campaign 2000 is calling on the government to establish, as part of this initiative, a foundation for early childhood education and care services that are available to all families in every Canadian community. Mab Oloman emphasized the importance of public education and advocacy to create and maintain the political will to act on the issues.

Newfoundland and Labrador’s Strategic Social Plan and Early Childhood Development

Newfoundland and Labrador is the only province with a Strategic Social Plan (SSP). The SSP is currently in the implementation phase in all regions of the province and the Steering Committees have started a process of linking within and across sectors. The Northeast Avalon Regional Committee, which includes St. John’s, Mount Pearl and 17 other communities, is focusing on population health and has identified early childhood development (ECD) as a key factor in social and economic development. ECD is their issue of first priority for Year I.

Joan Dawe, Chair of the Northeast Avalon Regional Steering Committee, reported that there is a unanimous recognition of the importance of ECD among the Committee members. “If we invest and get things right in early childhood, we will offset many problems in health care, education systems, the social system and the economy. There will be positive impacts all the way down the line which will contribute to the overall health and well-being of families, individuals, communities and the province as a whole.”

However, it is difficult to get political buy-in to prevention and early intervention initiatives, as the impact is felt in the long term. Ms. Dawe talked about the importance of thorough research to make informed decisions on where to focus action. She also felt that the cross-sectoral commitment will serve as a lever to influence government. Some other SSP Regional Steering Committees have also acknowledged that ECEC is a priority issue.

National Indicators

There is little consistent, regularly collected data upon which to base indicators for ECEC in Canada, and the related social policy is regionally diverse. However, indicators of availability, affordability and quality of ECEC have been developed. Using these, Mab Oloman provided a snapshot of ECEC in Canada with a focus on the four provinces involved in the Campaign 2000 ECEC project: Newfoundland, Ontario, Saskatchewan and British Columbia. Her conclusions were:

  • There are not enough ECEC spaces across the country;
  • Cost is a barrier to many middle and low-income families.
  • The quality of ECEC, although not terrible, is not good enough; and
  • Those who work in the sector are underpaid.

Ms. Oloman argued for continuing public education to garner public support to influence decision makers about the importance of ECEC. She pointed out that B.C. which was progressive on ECEC through the 90’s, is now dismantling parts of its system. Advocates for accessible high quality ECEC must not rest.

Provincial Indicators

Christine MacLean presented information on the benefits of quality ECEC, both to the child and to the community as a whole. Quality childcare supports families and forms the foundation of a healthy society, contributing to school readiness, equality, employment, economic self-reliance, reduction of poverty, social cohesion, crime prevention and competent citizenry of the future, among other things. “In the first 6 years of life, a child goes through the most critical periods for brain development. These periods help determine future capacity.”

Ms. MacLean stated that there are two reasons why we have any regulated childcare programs at all in Newfoundland and Labrador: (1) parents pay a lot; and (2) Early Childhood Educators earn very little. She stressed the importance of choice and the need for a continuum of childcare services, such as Family Resource programs, family home childcare, unregulated care, regulated care, preschool care centres and school age childcare centres.

Ms. MacLean gave an overview of the good news and bad news in Newfoundland and Labrador.

The good news:

  • ECE’s are required to be certified;
  • ECE’s are required to participate in 30 hours of professional upgrading every 3 years;
  • The Province has put a large percentage of its Early Childhood Development Initiative (ECDI) allocation from the federal government directly into ECEC;
  • There is now licensed infant care and licensed family home care;
  • There is subsidized upgrading and training;
  • There are child care services consultants;
  • A supplement for child care providers in licensed centres will in effect mean a raise in pay; and
  • Grants are available for ECE students to pay back the provincial portion of student loans.

The bad news:

  • There are 86,000 children ages 0-12 in the province. 49,000 of those need care, while only 4,226 spaces are available (3,126 full time spaces), not counting family home child care spaces;
  • ECE’s start at the minimum wage and most staff currently earn less than $7.00 per hour;
  • Fewer people are choosing child care as a career; and
  • Retention and recruitment are major issues.

The Child Care Advocacy Association of Canada advocates a fully accessible, regulated, publicly funded system of childcare.

International Indicators

Mab Oloman spoke briefly about the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development.[1] The OECD has outlined 8 key elements of successful ECEC policy:

  • A systematic and integrated approach to policy development and implementation;
  • A strong and equal partnership with the education system;
  • A universal approach to access, with particular attention to children in need of special support;
  • Substantial public investment in services and infrastructure;
  • A participatory approach to quality improvement and assurance;
  • Appropriate training and working conditions for staff in all forms of provision;
  • Systematic attention to monitoring and data collection; and
  • A stable framework and long-term agenda for research and evaluation.

ECEC has experienced a “surge of policy attention” in Europe in recent years. A number of European countries now provide universal full day ECEC for ages 3-5. Canada is far behind. Campaign 2000 believes in universal, equitable, inclusive access to quality ECEC services nation-wide.

Round Table Discussion

About 45 participants were grouped around five tables. A recorder was assigned to each table. They were: Melanie Thomas, Charmaine Davidge, Louise Woodfine, Carla Wheaton and Fran Locke from the CSC.

Three questions were presented to the groups for consideration:

  • What are the three key issues that need to be addressed to advance early childhood education and care?
  • What are the barriers to further development of early childhood education and care in Newfoundland and Labrador?
  • How can we work collectively to influence policy makers to ensure that early childhood education and care is a priority?

Main ThemesThe points outlined by the various groups in answer to the three questions can be summarized under the following headings and they seem to follow in logical sequence, with one leading naturally into the next:

  • Linkages
  • Research / Information / Knowledge Building
  • Value Recognition
  • Political Will
  • Action / Results

Linkages To begin, better linkages are required among and within the different sectors. This includes linkages among the various stages of the educational system (ECE, K-12, and post-secondary), health, other government departments, the private sector, socio-economic development groups, parents, and the voluntary-community-based sector. These key stakeholders must share a basic vision and goal of a healthy society and recognize the importance of ECEC to the development of productive, responsible citizens. Together, they can identify some basic factors, problems and gaps which would then form the foundation for a systematic approach to research and data analysis.

Research/ Building Knowledge It wasagreed that there is a paucity of statistical information. As advocates and as a society, we must understand the nature of the issues, identify needs and institute programs based on need. With more directed research and clear, consistent statistical information, we will have a better understanding of our current situation and of the pervasive and long term impacts of early childhood development. It was suggested by a statistician that it is important to work from two approaches:

  • The macro level, wherein one can establish causality, demonstrate the long term pay-offs, cost benefits and trade-offs; show that early childhood development (ECD) affects the whole spectrum of society; and provide information on the long term costs of not investing in ECEC; and
  • The regional level, looking at what is happening in different communities and districts and the more immediate impact on individuals, families and socio-economic development.

A cost benefit analysis will lend a quantitative edge to any discussion with policy makers.

Value Recognition Repeatedly, the groups at the forum expressed the opinion that ECEC was undervalued and seen as a woman’s issue and women’s work. There are pockets of understanding but what is required is general public recognition and support. People wondered at the fact that we are willing to pay people in the IT industry or automobile mechanics, for example, wages many times more than those paid to early childhood educators (ECE’s). In Newfoundland and Labrador, ECE’s usually receive little more than the minimum wage ($6.00 / hour).

Several tables questioned the existing definition of education. The population expects a publicly funded school system from K-12. Why not a publicly funded and universally accessible system of ECEC? Two interesting examples were given of existing inequities. (1) Children attending the Kindergarten orientation sessions are not covered by the schools’ insurance policies because they are not yet 5 years old. (2) The School for the Deaf no longer accepts children under 5. Age 5 is when the education system kicks in.

It was generally agreed that in order to gain support and influence government policy, public education is essential and champions for the cause are needed, male as well as female. The various stakeholders must come together and set aside their own agendas to have a unified voice. One problem is that the results of quality ECEC are not measurable in the short term. The pay off comes over time, so there must be an instituted philosophy of strategic investment.

With solid research, strong linkages and a good public relations plan, it should be possible to “market the service” and gain broad recognition (among the general public, the private sector and government) of the value of quality ECEC to the overall long-term development of individuals, families, communities and nations. As one participant put it, “We need to embrace the idea that it takes a community to raise a child.” Perhaps we could also say that it takes children to raise a community.

Political Will The shortness of political mandates, jurisdictional conflicts and gaps, competition for funding, discriminatory attitudes, demographics (weighted towards seniors, for example, due to aging baby boomers, low birth rate and out migration of young families) and a lack of understanding of existing issues and long term effects were cited as barriers to ECEC receiving priority attention from policy makers. However, if we can achieve broad public recognition of the importance of early childhood development and the value of quality ECEC, then cross-sectoral public pressure backed by the research and supporting the champions may instigate the political will to invest significantly more in early childhood education and care. Indeed, in a broader sense, it would be advisable to apply a children’s lens to every bit of discussion and formulation of policy. Putting children at the top of every agenda will encourage wise, long-term policy decisions in every sector. A participant remarked, “Investing in children is the best security we could possibly have.”

Action / Results Action means investment – a commitment to long-term sustained funding and directed resources – for more childcare spaces, greater subsidies, better infrastructure, recruitment and training of educators, higher wages, equitable access, and different types of quality programs to suit the different needs of children, parents, guardians and expectant parents. One table emphasized flexibility as crucial to success. For example, pre-natal care and care from 0-3 was mentioned as very important to development. It was suggested that pregnant moms at risk and new moms at risk could be identified and mentorship programs instituted which might be quite effective. Another table talked about the creation of more “silos” – e.g., Family Resource Centres, regulated care centres, unregulated centres, family home care, etc. – so that there would be a continuum of care choices.

Some said that it was important to look at what could be done both in the short-term and the long-term, and to work in bite-size pieces. A national, publicly funded program with universal access will take a long time to implement. One person expressed concern that, although universality removes stigma, national implementation across provinces could interfere with flexibility. It was also stated that there is a discrepancy between the ideal and reality; nevertheless, it is important not to compromise on the ideal, but to constantly push towards it.

Conclusion

The September 18 Forum was the first of two to be held in St. John’s. Participants will be invited to return to a second forum early in 2003 to develop a follow up action plan. In her closing remarks, Penelope Rowe of the CSC spoke of the need to maintain and build momentum.

Evaluation

Participants completed an evaluation form including comments on what focus they would like to see the second forum take. It was clear that people want to make plans for action based on Forum I - to determine how to collaborate and develop non-traditional partnerships, how to estimate the long term costs of not investing in ECEC, how to stop preaching to the converted and get the general public behind the issue. There is some research available; the stakeholders are onside. Forum II, to be held in 2003, should emphasize moving the agenda forward.

[1] The OECD is comprised of 30 member countries sharing a commitment to democratic government and the market economy. With active relationships with some 70 other countries, NGOs and civil society, it has a global reach. Best known for its publications and its statistics, its work covers economic and social issues from macroeconomics, to trade, education, development and science and innovation. (From OECD website: