Confronting the realities - What next for the Quality Improvement and Accreditation System?
Contribution by AECA's National President, Judith Radich, to the Environmental Scan undertaken by the National Childcare Accreditation Council (NCAC) to support its future strategic planning - September 2002
I have thought a great deal about my contribution to this forum. I have made a decision that it is best to confront the reality of the context in which childcare is being provided and having done that to think through what a Quality Improvement and Accreditation System (QIAS) will look like that acknowledges this reality.
What influenced my decision to take this route was some material I have been reading about the outcomes of the United Nations Special Session on Children in May 2002. That Special Session captured the growing sense, world wide, that it is time to "Put Children First". This is apparent, in the Australian Community, in the increasing will to, at least, talk about the need to bring children closer to centre stage in Government and other decision-making arenas.
The Global Movement for Children (GMC), the program of action that resulted from UN Special Session on Children, is a force for change. It called for people throughout the world to take action and protect the rights of children. The language of the GMC is the inclusive "we and our" thereby anointing the world's citizens with a responsibility to take action on behalf of children.
AECA's mandate is to advocate for children and pursue their best interests in whatever forum possible. Our membership reflects the broad range of people and services that work, care for and care about young children. Our contribution to this environmental scan will reflect our mandate to advocate for young children.
In the beginning, when AECA and others first began to think about Accreditation, we made some assumptions about what was necessary if an Accreditation system was to guarantee a high quality experience for children.
These assumption were:
- That state and territory regulations would be the solid base on which to build a quality improvement and accreditation program.
- That the resources - Staff (qualified and unqualified), Release time for planning, Equipment and professional resources and Training and other supports necessary to implement the Accreditation would be there.
- That the quality indicators would be a true statement of quality practice and that these would have been developed with and endorsed by the sector.
- That if we were explicit about quality and involved parents in the process that they would demand the highest quality in the services their children went to.
We knew that there would need to be some fine-tuning but we believed that we had made a system that would deliver for children.
When we think about these assumptions and put them alongside the current picture of childcare in this country real concerns must be raised.
What does it mean for the development of young children and the capacity to implement a QIAS program when:
- Staff turnover is high,
- Staff are hard to find
- Qualified early childhood professionals are choosing not to work in long day care, and
- Unqualified people are being deemed by Departments as qualified enough to do the task.
Where does this leave children when we know that the quality of the relationship with adults is central to a quality childcare experience and good outcomes for children? Trusting caring relationships with familiar adults are recognised as fundamental to all aspects of a child's early childhood experience. The early brain development that we know is so important is dependent on such relationships.
What does it mean for children and the capacity of services to implement a QIAS program when:
- Staff child ratios average 1:4 or 1:5 for infants and toddlers i.e children under two
- Staff child ratios are 1:7 or 1:8 for two to three year olds - just imagine it for a moment, and
- Staff child ratios are 1 10 or 1:11 for three to five year olds
Even if other staffing issues were resolved one staff member, no matter how committed, good or qualified can possibly meet the constant needs of four or five babies let alone develop a trusting caring relationship with each one of them.
What are we doing?
When many staff are paid only for the time they are working with children and have no release time and we know that quality programs are dependent on staff having release time so that they can reflect, evaluate, and plan programs that meet the needs of the children in their care.
Parents of young children are under pressure at every point so it is not surprising that it is the few not the hoped for majority who have the time and energy to engage in their child's early childhood service.
This is not a comment on their commitment to their child or their interest in its wellbeing. It is simply the reality of lives lived under pressure.
In terms of the system supports we identified in the beginning where do we stand now?
The quality criteria in the new QIAS system reflect what this profession still believes to be the parameters of a quality experience for children - we should be proud of this.
However,
Our state and territory regulations do not provide a solid base for a quality QIAS system and there are fears that they will be further watered down;The conditions and wages for staff in child care are insufficient to attract and keep people in the profession;
Many services do not have the resources to provide staff release time for planning or do not give this priority;
Parents are not always the watchdogs for quality that we had assumed.
Given this do we still believe that:
- Strong regulations are an essential base for an effective QIAS program - AECA does
- The availability, retention, and qualifications of staff and how they are resourced are essential to the delivery of a quality QIAS program - AECA does.
- It is realistic to believe that parents will play a major role as the watchdogs of quality in child care - AECA does not believe this.
I need to be clear here that this assessment does not absolve services of their responsibility to engage parents in the work they are doing with their children - it is simply being realistic about how much time and energy the average family has leftover for participation.
Neither does this analysis signal any withdrawal or lessening of AECA's commitment to a quality improvement and accreditation system that will make a difference for children.The new QIAS system enables services to be accredited at a range of levels. Nevertheless we still have to ask the question what does accreditation mean if the fundamentals that we have described are so much under challenge.
More and more the research is telling us the significance of the early years and the importance early intervention. Can we still say that being just satisfactory is OK. History tells us that in these circumstances the most likely group of children to be in services that are in the "satisfactory" group are our most vulnerable children.
AECA believes that the challenge for the National Childcare Accreditation Council (NCAC) and the sector is to find a way that the QIAS can, in the context I have described, make a difference for children?
This is a very difficult, public place for AECA to be in. We do not want to undermine the confidence of parents in the services they are using and we certainly to do not want to further undermine the confidence and optimism of those working this sector.
But if we are to go forward we cannot continue to mask over the realities and ignore what is happening.
We know what quality is - we are agreed about that - but we can't just make it happen by implementing a process that is based on things that we know do not exist.
Acknowledging that problems exist is the very first step to solving them.
So what are some ways to think about in going forward?
In moving forward AECA acknowledges that some services are able to operate in ways that mediate some of effects of the conditions I have described. Some of this is about choices in terms of how resources are allocated and some is about leadership and knowledge of children and their needs.
What follows is a series of suggestions for consideration rather than a position statement by AECA.
In this spirit AECA suggests that:
- If we are to make gains in the current context QIAS may have to give the highest reward to services who demonstrate planned and sustained improvement. - This does not mean that they are accredited but rather they are designated somehow as participating successfully in a quality improvement program.
- We support the concept of an ongoing improvement plan. If it is to be effective it must be planned, systematic, active and supported with a focus on improvement, measured against the quality criteria.
- The improvement goals for a service, timelines and their progress toward them should be documented and displayed for service users.
- If we are serious then spot checks will be necessary to ensure that services remain focussed on improvement. This is not a cynical reflection on the people who work in this sector - it simply acknowledges the reality of a sector that works under pressure. For the sake of children we have to be hard headed.
- the system has to give greater weight to the role of staff, staff qualifications and ratio's in generating and sustaining quality improvement. A QIAS system should not try to sit outside of these known quality parameters.
Because the system is compulsory it has to be fair. That is, it should not create an environment will put pressure on services to be dishonest just to get their accredited status.
Neither should it set the bar so low that being accredited has no real status.
This has not been easy to say and I would like to acknowledge here the value of this process which allows organisations such as the one I represent to simply put ideas on the table in a frank and open way.
We have to step out of our own comfort zones in just the same way as I have suggested that we will need to support services to do. We cannot solve the problem while ever it remains undercover.
The NCAC has a challenging leadership role in assisting the sector to find real ways to deliver for children.
As Nelson Mandela said in launching the Global Movement for Children:
"We all have a role to play - leaders and citizens, public and private organisations, children and young people. What we demand of our leaders, we also demand of ourselves. The GMC calls on everyone, everywhere, to do as much as possible, in their own time and their own way, for and with children."
If you liked this article, you can 'social bookmark' it with others who might be searching for good content on early childhood. This means you can share your favourite webpages with others, or just keep an online list of your bookmarks so you can access them on any computer.
Read more about social bookmarks
|
|
