Nannies, Migration and Early Childhood Education and Care by Adamson Elizabeth

Author:Adamson, Elizabeth [Adamson, Elizabeth]
Language: eng
Format: epub
Tags: Social Science, Children's Studies
ISBN: 9781447330158
Google: dQZpDwAAQBAJ
Publisher: Policy Press
Published: 2016-11-16T05:30:42+00:00

A new agenda for ECEC ... but what about In Home Care?

The Labor government’s Investing in the Early Years Strategy (2007) was the first explicit use of a social investment discourse in ECEC in Australia. Stakeholders interviewed as part of this research identified that since the implementation of the National Early Childhood Agenda, the “rhetoric … [is] more cohesive ... and there’s a general agreement that early education is important” (peak organisation, Australia). This increased focus on quality early education is driven by a social investment rhetoric, which exposes further contradictions to the purpose of In Home Care. It is not clear whether the In Home Care programme is expected to provide ongoing ‘educational’ programming, or to provide temporary solutions to meet families’ needs as laid out under initial objectives of the programme in 2001. While the National Early Childhood Agenda appears to take a holistic approach to children and family services for children aged 0 to five years, the details of the policy reveal a distinction between the purposes of different types of ECEC services. Regulations and rhetoric confirm the ‘educational’ focus of preschool and kindergarten and, as discussed in Chapter Three, the National Quality Framework applies to long day care, family day care and outside school hours care, but not In Home Care. This further complicates the sector’s understanding of the purpose of In Home Care.

For some stakeholders, In Home Care is viewed as a ‘vital’ service to meet children’s educational needs, particularly those in rural and remote areas “where the educators might live on the property” (peak organisation, Australia). A government representative agreed that IHC should “provide quality care that includes some element of early learning [because] that’s the government’s child care agenda” (government representative, Australia). Stakeholders also identified that parents’ perceptions have changed; for families living in remote areas the purpose of In Home Care has shifted from “just going out and babysitting” to an understanding the “carers going out there are doing educational activities and their children are learning, etc. and actually getting them prepared for kindy and school” (provider organisation, Australia). These different perspectives expressed by ECEC stakeholders reflect the influence of a social investment approach to ECEC, particularly through the National Early Childhood Agenda and the emphasis on quality learning. However, for many stakeholders, In Home Care retains its original intention, that is to relieve families from non-standard working schedules and additional needs associated with having illness or disability in the family.

Pressures for flexible, after-hours ECEC resurfaced in a 2009 inquiry into childcare. Submissions proposed more flexible care in the name of parental choice and workforce participation (Education Employment and Workplace Relations References Committee, 2009), which was also raised in the 2006 inquiry into work and family balance. The ‘nanny debate’ was brought to the policy agenda in 2012 by the opposition Liberal National party at the time, which announced its intention to explore options for the subsidisation of nannies and in-home childcare if elected. The current Coalition government discourse focuses on parents’

Download

Copyright Disclaimer:
This site does not store any files on its server. We only index and link to content provided by other sites. Please contact the content providers to delete copyright contents if any and email us, we'll remove relevant links or contents immediately.