Comments from people who work in education and care services

The required documented evidence is also such a waste of time – why should Educators have to do all of this paperwork (observations, learning stories, reflections, programs, critical reflection, etc. with everything demonstrating links to the EYLF) for Assessors – this is not why Educators chose to work in this industry. We want to work with children for exactly that reason – working with children, not completing pages and pages of documents so that we can use them as evidence during assessment visits. There must be an easier way to ensure Services are operating at high standards and the children are being well cared for???

NSW
Don't change the NQS, we need it to support quality care. Don't change the ratios, we need them to support every child in our setting. Don't change the qualifications, again, we need them for quality care. For every dollar invested now into early childhood education the government saves five time later.	VIC
I am strongly opposed to take the Diploma qualification requirement from Under three year olds. We KNOW brain development is extreme in the first FIVE years, let us lead the way in supporting the best outcomes for our babies by educated professionals working with these youngest children. I am strongly opposed to taking the SCCB from vulnerable families. This is often the only way we can engage families and children in education and care, so that modelling and support may go towards better outcomes for children.	VIC
I am surprised, concerned and overwhelmed by the idea of watering down qualification requirements for educators working with children under 3 years old. The first years of life are critical to a child's brain development and the interactions and experiences that children are exposed to shape the person that they will become. It is for this reason that it is imperative that passionate, educated and high quality people remain working with young children. Without qualifications staff will have limited to no knowledge around brain development, theory regarding positive behaviour guidance and techniques to support developing skills which in turn will lead to poor outcomes for children as well as many serious incidents that could be prevented if the right people are employeed. I am concerned for the amount of educators who will turn to this profession as a last option job because there is no requirement for study. Our profession has worked hard to be recognised and respected and watering down qualifications is going to reset all the hard work we as a sector have done. The children of Australia need the chance to be surrounded by high quality, caring educators and parents need the comfort of knowing that the people looking after their children know what they are doing. If the country wants to continue to encourage mothers to return to the work force, watering down qulaifications is not the answer as Mothers will not be inclined to use ECEC as they wont trust that their children are in good hands, afterall ANYONE will be able to work within the centre. Children are the most important component of Australian families, please treat them with the respect they deserve and do not water down qualification requirements.	VIC
By having affordable, child care fees whilst still providing high quality child care allows parents to get back into the work force and be given a peice of mind that their child is being cared for in a stimulating, safe and educational environment. Increasing fees and taking away benefits will force our parents to stop work to stay home with their children which will make a negative impact on the Australian economy and the child will miss out on vital learning and school readiness. AUSTRALIA'S ECONOMY, AUSTRALIAN FAMILIES AND AUSTRALIAN CHILDREN NEEDS CHILDCARE SO IT CAN RUN EACH DAY!!	VIC
Restricting the CCR by means testing could result in many families to re-think working. Child care costs play a significant part in the family budget and the impact of the CCR is a major factor. Children in particular would not have the benefits that are provided through early socialisation.	NSW
I am and have been the Director of a large community based service for the past 12 years and worked and studied in the ECE field for the past 27 years. I welcome the Productivity Commission report into ECE and agree with some of the preliminary findings in the draft report. I would like to add my support for the reduction of red tape and unnecessary workload that accompanies the NQF process. I agree that although founded on good intentions, it has become an industry unto itself and has had little or no impact on the level of quality for the children in care. It is also right that people should be able to choose the type of care that suits their needs be it family / long day-care or grandparents, and that all should attract some funding from the Federal Government. The certificate 3 that so many purport to be desirable within the industry is irrelevant and costly and does nothing to filter the standard of candidates to the industry. It is also insulting to demand that people who have worked in the industry for 10 + years, should need to undertake such a qualification without any financial incentive to do so. I agree that licencing and standards should be handed back to the states. I have devised a simple and cost-effective strategy that could replace the NQF process AND ensure that parents have a direct method for raising concerns about the quality of care their children receive which would then allow the targeting of funds towards ensuring compliance within the CC industry. It would also provide the Govt. with a tool to ensure that operators were not frauding funds. Please feel free to contact me anytime.	SA
I am a University student studying Primary Education. I am also employed at an Outside School Hours Care facility. The experience for me has put me in front of my classmates, The social learning is far greater than of a school yard because at School they can play with their friends of their same year/age/class level whereas at O.S.H.C they need to learn to interact with different ages, show empathy, respect for others. These early lessons help children to be confident in themselves and in socializing. We are required to document some of these learning outcomes on a daily basis however this should only be used internally for the director and it's employees. OSHC should be a time for children to play, explore and develop friendships in a playground environment and not have expectations and outcomes measured. My last point is that we should be supporting our families and workers by having a flexible opening and closing times dictated by the needs of the parents-supported by the Government.	QLD
As the Educational Leader at my service, I fully support the retention of Qualified staff for under threes. Qualified staff fulfil a very important purpose within a long day care service of ensuring high quality programs that will support learning and development to its optimum for all children in their care.Under threes particularly must have best quality programs to ensure maximum development possible. This can only be supported by qualified staff and there is any amount of research that supports qualified staff =high quality program= best outcomes for children. Our future leaders must have access to high quality staffing for their learning and development	VIC
Research tells us that the first three years of a childs life are critical for optimum development thus the most qualified should be directing services for the youngest members of our community. Those working with children need to understand development from 0 to 8 years as a minimum to be able to adequately support childrens leanring and development and experience across these years must be maintained in training courses. I have first hand experience of struggling secondry students being made to obtain Cert 3 to enter the work force who should not be in this industry. The work of early childhood is becoming increasingly complex and the field needs highly qualified practitioners working with the young that will ensure benefits in the long term to our community. Any changes should be in the interests of children, , If the chief focus is getting women into work this inhibits mothers participation in their childs learning, it would be better to ensure jobs are waiting for women when they return to work. families need choices.	VIC
I would suggest increasing government expenditure towards the NQF and national assessment as that ensures that children are learning in services that are more than adequate and assists centre to meet standards. Continue to implement the EYLF curriculum definitely. I think early childhood education qualifications need to be looked at as from what I gather certificate III in children’s services doesn’t provide enough experience in quality education. It’s these lower positions including diplomas that spend a lot of time with children and programming, and it’s there you lose quality in a service – they aren’t getting paid enough for what they do so they provide lacklustre care. In saying that bachelor degrees in early childhood need to be recognised pay wise for what they are – a four year teaching degree. Provide an enriching, child orientated, indoor/outdoor curriculum that is flexible, affordable, open 24/7, with early childhood education bachelor qualified only teachers staff that are appropriately paid, with a 1:6 teacher child ratio at all centres (I wish!).	VIC
Oh My goodness, to even consider dropping the need for higher qualified educators for younger children is ridiculous. So many children are in care from the early hours to late in the day. They often go home to busy households and then it's time for bed. The need for well qualified educators in the early years should be mandatory. And then to even think about increasing the number of children to educator ratio - I say work in a service that follows "under the roof line" rules. 20 children to 1 educator, throw in a few children with high support needs who are not eligible for funding and then see what happens. No wonder there is such a high turn over of staff. But then perhaps there wont be much of an issue because children from vulnerable families wont be able to access child care anyway. Early education will only be available to the more affluent. What is the government thinking - dont they know it costs less to get it right now or perhaps it doesnt matter because they wont be around to see the effects! Unbelievable.	VIC
I would like to make a comment about unqualified people caring and educating 0-3 year olds. Research tells us that the crucial time for Brain development is from 0-3 years of age. Research also tells us Highly skilled and qualified staff provide the best outcomes for children. So why would we be allowing unqualified people educate children in the prime of their brain development. Shouldn't we have the most qualified and experienced educators teaching this age group?	VIC
I have read the Draft report and am concerned about some of the recommendations which would not support the best outcomes for young children. The youngest children in care need the most empathetic and qualified staff to work with them. Reducing qualification requirements to a Cert. 3 is not acceptable. Granting nannies with Cert. 3 qualifications will be impossible to regulate unless there is a major increase in licensing staff, so I do not support this recommendation. The ECLS is an excellent innovation particularly as it is to be paid to the service. I also support the notion of a deemed cost of service delivery. This will need to be indexed as CPI increases. Occasional care is not a financially viable service model (hence little provision by the private sector) so removing the cap on approved places may not provide more access for families. Removing allowable absence limit is a good idea. Care for under 2s should not cost more than other care as this will further diminish the availability and access for families. Grandparent funding (GCCB) should be continued as an increasing number of grandparents are in the primary care role due to family breakdowns.	ACT
At Natural Choice Nannies we believe extended financial support for nannies makes perfect sense. It would make all the difference to our clients and staff, if this were available. Not only do families experience financial pressure when hiring staff, but it is also hard for staff to find a decent amount of hours and have a good standard of living. The quality of care, and flexibility of having a Nanny at home is priceless. Many more families would consider employing a nanny if a rebate were available. Nannies are preferred by many families, but they people simply feel put off by the fact that the price is so high. Nannies the same experience and qualifications as a childcare professional, it seems only fair to offer them and families a choice in the matter. '	QLD
Child Development: Children develop for under three years of age is a critical period in a child's learning and development. I feel the draft report under values this time of a child's development as unimportant and in significant time of a child's development. Birth to three years of age is a critical time in a child's development and a time when 80% of a child's brain is developed. An early learning focus based of a play based concept is vital for the growth and development of all children. The proposal for an only care based and not learning experience is in vast contrast to research and expert advice for this age group. I would like to see the commission re consider their position on this proposal. Birth need nurturing, support and guidance through these important learning years. New parents look at child care services as a vital partnership for raising their children, offering advice and support based on life skills, professional learning's and current research. Nannies: I would like to see Nannies become qualified and work towards meeting the National Quality Framework. I hope Nannies are connected with a service for ongoing support while working with families. I agree families should be able to employed Nannies to work with families who work outside the normal nine to five hours. Ratios: Averaging out over a week I believe it will have a big impact and contribute to educator over load and burn out. Stay at home parents: Parents need respite and support for their children. I feel the report disadvantaging the most vulnerable children in our community, I would like to see 15 hours of respite offered to stay at home parent's for on going support and transition for children into early learning kindergarten programs. This will help the children be better prepared for life at school.	TAS
As a director of a community based preschool I have found the NQS a great tool. We received exceeding in every quality area and urge the PC to keep preschool in scope. I would also like to advocate on behalf of the working parents who use preschool services to have access to a rebate or subsidy. Working parents who use preschool are very confused about the rebates. Please continue to have high expectations of early childood and education on behalf of our children. Parents, educators and children do not want cheap baby sitting. High quality preschool changes the lives of children and families. This is only possible when quality is put before profit!	NSW
I have worked and studied in the early childhood sector for 24 years. I started as a volunteer, then completed an associate diploma at tafe, a degree in EC teaching, and now completing a masters in educational leadership. The comment I would like to make is in regard to recognising EC teachers as teachers. I currently work in an RTO, teaching cert 111 and diploma students on a casual part time basis. I would like to work in a service but the remuneration does not, I believe fairly compensate me for my years of experience and education. It is also difficult to find a service that can afford an experienced and qualified teacher due to the lack of funding to assist services in the high cost of qualified staff. I am dedicated to the EC sector, I have made it my career, but I strongly believe there is no other profession or sector where the wages of the qualified are kept deliberately low to enable businesses to make profit. Education should not be for profit, and teachers should be paid as teachers no matter where they work.	NSW
The research shows that children who attend quality early childhood services have better outcomes for education and work. Early childhood programs are about children and the future and not about workforce participation, although it does support it. We have, collectively,worked so hard for many years and have improved childrens learning opportunities.. I find it both distressing and ttotally inappropriate that the Government is totally disregarding years of botth Australian and International research.	VIC
I would like to see the focus on gaining childcare spaces not keep focussing on costs. I have been an educator for 40 years and cannot see what good reason there was to have us go to four children in care, this has caused fees to rise more than they would have if we had five children. Of course you need to have qualified educators to offer quality care. We need to look at ways to keep Family Day Care in this country as it is a necessary part of childcare in this country, not take spaces away and funding away. I do not want to see a high quality service such as Family Day Care eroded away, to nothing and parents having to turn to back yard services; again.	NSW
Subsidising the cost of private in home care (nannies) by the government is a good idea if it is adequately monitored for quality. I suggest that Family Day Care providers be subcontracted to do this. They already have the staff and mechanisms in place for assessing 'in home care'. They are currently feeling vulnerable due to proposed changes to their operational funding. They would be eager to scource another income stream to protect jobs and potentially grow their operation. We should develop initiatives within the child care industry to make it a more attractive option for the thousands of ECT graduates each year who choose not to work in childcare. Regulations and frameworks are not making a difference. Teachers have free choice and childcare is their last option. We need to make it their first choice. Why are we losing these talented graduates to other areas of education? We have to identify the reasons for these choices and work quickly to address them. Services are only as good as the people who work there. Let's do all we can to attract the smartest and most talented educators into the classrooms. Less administrative demands around programming and record keeping would make a big difference, EC services are trying to solve these issues individually. More direct support to each centre and a mentoring framework would make a huge difference and help grow confidence and job satisfaction. A more structured, positive and professional practicum experience would go a long way to making Early Childhood a career of choice. The sector is in desperate need of some confident, clear leadership. We are operating in silos. A well directed, government funded initiative might be a good catalyst for significant change. ACECQA are working on a National level. The industry needs more local or regional support and guidance. The Early Childhood industry has been through significant change over the past few years. We need to consolidate the significant gains by nurturing our educators and building their self confidence. There is a general feeling of being overwhelmed with legal responsibilities and administrative tasks. We need to get the fun back into Early Childhood. We need to spread the good news about what services are doing and celebrate the privelidge it is to work with young children and their families.	NSW
options - within existing funding parameters - for improving the accessibility, flexibility and affordability of childcare for families with diverse circumstances I wish to point out to the productivity commission that not enough resources are directed to rural and remote children’s services and our experience with inequities in the Family Day Care sector. It is already well established that the Family Day Care Model is of great benefit to rural communities where often no other form of recognised childcare and education services are viable. Our service has provided family day care to the rural sector for 20 years and has first-hand experience of the additional challenges involved in meeting the education and care needs of children in rural communities. As a service who began in a rural shire but had to adapt and extend into regional centers to remain viable we have first-hand knowledge of the additional challenges to meeting the needs of rural families. Our service is consistently challenged to recruit educators in rural areas and have significant waiting lists for quality, flexible, education and care in our rural communities.