Advocacy and early childhood preservice teachers

Globally and within Australia, there is heightened emphasis on early childhood education and care (ECEC) reform, Amanda McFadden, Chrystal Whiteford and Laurien Beane write.

Within Australia, a focus on the preparation of the early childhood workforce has received significant attention. Early childhood preservice teachers enact the policies that government and institutional discourses circulate around them, in effect positioning them as street level bureaucrats (Lipsky, 2010).

Even before graduation, significant attention is levelled at preservice teachers to contribute to complex policy agendas that require them to be both qualified and quality teachers. Research has shown that the policy and advocacy content of educational institutions has been lacking explicit teaching about advocacy to early childhood preservice teachers (Stegelin & Hartle, 2008) despite the inherent nature of advocacy in early childhood professionals’ work. Our research highlights there is a critical need for engaging preservice teachers in discussions about advocacy in initial teacher education and opens new possibilities for engaging in advocacy as they transition to the workforce.

The early childhood education and care sector comprises many services including long day care, family day care and occasional care. Around one million children aged birth to five years of age are using ECEC services each year (Australian Government, 2013). Twenty-eight percent of infants in non parental care, and 58% of two year olds in non parental care attend formal child care arrangements (Harrison et al 2009).

In 2017, there were 339,243 children aged four or five were enrolled in a preschool program (Australian Bureau of Statistics, 2018), with 11,366 service providers delivering a preschool program. These programs were either in a stand-alone or part of a school (37%) or in long day care centres (63%). With increasing numbers of children attending prior to school contexts, early childhood preservice teachers are crucial in sustaining a quality ECEC workforce.

Advocacy requirements

Early childhood teachers have a history of being strong advocates and are well positioned to be advocates. Advocacy can be defined as actions that intentionally seek to influence outcomes that are in the best interests of children, families and educators, and promote children’s rights and social justice (Waniganayake et al 2017).

Advocacy and activism are an assumed and inherent part of the work of early childhood educators (Kieff, 2009). Advocacy has been associated with negating social inequities (Cheeseman, 2007) and engaging with advocacy can be done on several levels including personal, centre and community-wide strategies (Fenech, 2014).

The intent of the key policy documents guiding accreditation in ECEC initial teacher education programs are divergent, adding to the complexity of the initial teacher education landscape for early childhood teachers. There appears, within the suite of accreditation documents, to be a binary that, on one hand, pushes advocacy forward as an important part of early childhood professional practice in birth to five settings, and, on the other hand, shows apparent silences of advocacy in initial teacher education teaching programs in the early years of schooling.

Advocacy is currently positioned as the work of teachers in the lead career stage in school settings (Australian Institute of Teaching and School Leadership), and an element of Quality Area 7 in the National Quality Standard – Management and Leadership in prior to school settings (ACECQA, 2017). This raises questions about the place of advocacy for preservice teachers working towards graduate career stages.

Data suggested that final year preservice teachers felt ill equipped to be advocates at this stage of their career.

What are teachers saying?

The analysis in this research began with multiple readings of the data and coding narrative data by discourses that were located in the data. These readings of the data provided an opportunity to consider advocacy discourses which might both enable and constrain preservice teachers’ perceptions of advocacy. The first reading of the narrative data highlighted multiple dominant discourses in the preservice teachers’ perceptions of advocacy in early childhood. Professionalism, relational and power/knowledge appeared to be three key discourses the preservice teachers were drawing on in relation to advocacy.

Interestingly, data suggested that final year preservice teachers felt ill equipped to be advocates at this stage of their career. This raises the possibility that advocacy has been discursively constructed through national policy to apply to those in positions of leadership and not graduate teachers.

There was a real sense that graduate teachers felt they needed to have more experience, have more professionally articulate ways of speaking, and a need for more knowledge to back up their advocacy positions. Another interesting thread in the data was the idea of not being able to speak up and playing it safe, rather than speaking about your views which can be seen as risky.

Preservice teachers felt that ‘others’ were able to be advocates for children and families and that they would, later on in their career, and with more experience be able to be advocates. This is interesting as advocacy is an inherent part of early childhood teachers’ work.

We know from the data that maximising relational opportunities and points of connection within initial teacher education programs is useful in supporting preservice teachers to navigate advocacy. Engagement with peak organisations and course content around advocacy is crucial for preservice teachers to engage in advocacy for, and with, children, families and colleagues. This research opens a space to consider ways in which leadership might influence preservice teachers’ perceptions of advocacy, and ways initial teacher education courses prepare preservice teachers to engage in leadership expectations such as advocacy.


References

Australian Bureau of Statistics. (2018). Preschool Education, 4240.0, http://www.abs.gov.au/AUSSTATS/abs@.nsf/Lookup/4240.0Main+Features1002017?OpenDocument

Australian Children’s Education & Care Quality Authority (ACECQA). (2017). Guidelines for approving early childhood education and care qualifications. Retrieved from http://files.acecqa.gov.au/files/Quals/Qualification_guidelines_for_organisation_applicants.pdf

Australian Government. (2013). Child care in Australia. Retrieved from https://www.mychild.gov.au/sites/mychild/files/documents/04-2015/child_care_in_australia.pdf

Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2016). Guidelines for the accreditation of initial teacher education programs in Australia. Retrieved from www.aitsl.edu.au/docs/default-source/initial-teacher-education-resources/guidance-for-the-accreditation-of-initial-teacher-education-in-australia.pdf

Cheeseman, S. (2007). Pedagogical silences in Australian early childhood social policy. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(3), 244–254.

Fenech, M. (2014). Systems advocacy in the professional practice of early childhood teachers: How do we get there? Paper presented at the Political Advocacy by Early Childhood Educators conference, University of Newcastle, ECA Hunter, SJiEC, NSW.

Harrison, L., Ungerer, J., Smith, G., Zubrick, S., Wise, S., Waniganayake, M., & the LSAC Research Consortium. (2009). Number 40: Child care and early education in Australia – The Longitudinal Study of Australian Children. Canberra: Commonwealth of Australia.

Kieff, J. (2009). Informed advocacy in early childhood care and education: Making a difference for young children and families. Hoboken, NJ: Pearson Education.

Lipsky, M. (2010). Street level bureaucracy: Dilemmas of the individual in public services—30th Anniversary Expanded Edition. New York, NY: The Russell Sage Foundation.

Stegelin, D., & Hartle, L. (2008). Policy and advocacy content in early childhood teacher education: Results of a national survey. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 24(2), 127–134.

Waniganayake, M., Cheeseman, S., Fenech, M., Hadley, F., & Shepherd, W. (2017). Leadership: Contexts and complexities in early childhood education (2nd ed.). Melbourne, Vic.: Oxford University Press.

Dr Amanda McFadden (Queensland University of Technology), Laurien Beane (Australian Catholic University), and Dr Chrystal Whiteford (Queensland University of Technology) are lecturers in early childhood education. Amanda and Laurien are on the executive committee of the Early Childhood Australia Queensland Branch. They all share a common interest in researching in the area of advocacy and pre-service teachers in early childhood.