I believe that the yearly years are critical years for establishing sound foundations and positive life pathways, to enable this we must have highly qualified staff caring, nurturing and educating children prior entering into formal schooling. To also integrate health, care, child care and education as universal services offered pre-birth. Schools in WA are now evolving and engaging community services however the child care industry have not been funded to also offer these services. Many children attend child care prior entering the school system and to provide early intervention child care needs to be responsive to family needs and offer additional programs.
WA
I chose to work as a child care educator because I believe in the importance of educating children from infancy for a sustainable future. As an educator with 8i years expereince and a psycholiogy student i strongly believe in the importance of education and care in the early years.Good staff child ratios with highy trained staff, particularly for our most vulnerable children - those under 3 - are vital. Education is not just about reading and writing. It is about holistic development of the child. It does not commence at three, but begins at birth. Maslow, Bandura and Vygostsky's theories all support the importance of responsive social contact, qualified educators with knowledge and training to enhance role modeling and in creating environments for cognitive learning that will assist in future learning. Due to the factors I mentioned I strongly believe in the importance of quality and the value of educators and that children learn and develop from an early age. Children are our future. Cutting expenses such as educator qualifications to assist in budgeting is not appropriate, and will in the short term and longer term prove harmful. I note the Commission believes that there are insufficient studies to support the need of tertiary level training for under 3's, however you do not seem to hold information that it is not beneficial. I find it dehumanising that children's education is being viewed primarily in terms of how it aids the return of women to the workforce, and that yo would suggest children under 3 need minimal education and care when research shows this is the most beneficial time for learning, with maximum brain development. The recommendations of care with no education componenet and trained staff for infants and toddlers should be reversed.
NSW
I feel the most affected service in this whole change is Family Day Care Educators. Perhaps a model to keep them in a paid situation before announcing the funding loss would benefit everyone including the coordination units. Currently there are hundreds women out there who don't know what their future income situation is going to be because there are no clear guidelines as to whether they will be abe to continue to work from home without a service or whether they will have to be in home carers which many of them don't understand this system. Come on how would you like to left in limbo for the next 9 months wondering whether you have a job or not. This same situation applies to service staff.
NSW
I fell that the govenment does not put enough credit as to what early childhood educators job actually is. It seems the Abbott government believes we are just baby sitters and should be paid accordingly. This concerns me considering the countless research done all over the wold that clearly states how important a child's first five years is. I do not see how taking away regulations for educators to have to be qualified is benifiting the children or the families. I know I personally wouldn't leave my child in the care of an unqualified educator especially as the government continues to change the educator to child ratios!
We all know Abbott wants mother's returning to work yet He refuses to support the one facility that is able to help them do so!
TAS
I have been working the industry now for over 20years and in the last few years I have seen and implemented changes for the better. Once recognised as only a ‘baby sitter’ or just ‘childcare minder’, now through the introduction and support of the Early years learning Framework and the National Quality Framework I can now proudly call myself an Early years Educator. This is a standard I proudly stand up for, not only for myself but for all dedicated educators. We all deserve to be recognised for the hard work we do and the quality care that is provided for our children, our families and our community.
I strongly recommend the assessment and rating service to stay in place. Every child and family deserve the respect that they will be educated in a quality rated centre. I believe it has the capacity to improve the quality of service provision across the board and it will help to create more uniformity in practice. I have seen some poor programming and practice in ECE settings over time and some really require a good wake up call.
NSW
I have concerns with the increase of family separations, resulting in only one parent requiring childcare. CCMS does allow absences to assist however, at present our service cannot accommodate week on week off bookings. Parents requiring this service are unable to afford the full booking fee and are left with few options.
Another concern is the increase in the number of children with diagnosed behaviour issues, our services are struggling to accommodate this issue as it increasingly demands more supervision
QLD
I have read other submissions, parts of the Commission's draft and listened to presenters on Monday 18 August in Melbourne. I have a degree in education and became a grandmother in 2012 and have already made a submission to the Productivity Commission.
Several ideas have emerged after the hearing. Quality early learning experiences are a first priority. Access and affordable places are seen to be a close second. Monitoring quality early learning experiences appears essential.
The activity test needs to be equitable as does the sliding scale for benefits.
The market based service providers seem to be concerned about the new nanny initiative. Their ability to work flexible hours and have the appropriate safety checks and qualifications will help families working outside the nine to five routine.
My preferred approach is that children under three require plenty of reassurance to help build confidence and resilience. Talking to children, reading stories and providing appropriate feedback is essential as they play and make sense of their world. The part time working Mum can provide this feedback with support from a childcare service and grandparents. These Mum's save the government money as do the grandparents. The child under three gets the emotional support required to develop language. This is vital.
While staying in Bath UK, there was a village green nearby the school with play equipment where families stopped to chat and some of the children played.
This sense of community after a school day seemed a lovely way for the children to unwind with their school friends. This is after school care with a difference. The parents are valuing being social and taking an interest in their children, after school.
There's still plenty of time for everyone to be productive. Stress levels may be kept at a reasonable level, as well.
VIC
I have worked in a variety of roles in the early childhood profession for over 20 years. Throughout this time we have been affected by many changes, most often politically based. Some have had a positive influence on our sector however I feel that the suggested changes in the draft productivity commission, specifically those watering down staff/child ratios and qualifications of educators will have a profoundly detrimental effect the children we educate and care for, their families and our profession.
I urge you to consider the reams of supporting evidence that details the importance of highly qualified educators for children under the age of three years.
It is appalling to think that there is a possibility that these recommendations will come into effect.
NSW
I have worked in Early Childhood Education for 23 years and believe it is essential for educators of all age groups to hold a Diploma Level qualification or higher. Excellent progress has been made in recent years to ensure that all children have access to high quality education and care through the vital early years. Current research upholds the importance of informed educational practice to the mental growth and development of 0 to 5 year olds. Early childhood educators need to gain the knowledge and skills through tertiary qualifications in order to provide the best education and care of our children. Australia should be a leader in Early Childhood Learning and not be taking a backward step.
TAS
I have worked in the childcare industry for over thirty years. Over those years there have been may changes. The NQF is another change that is there to bring about best outcomes for children in childcare which I agree with. The problem for most Out of School Hours services is that the facilities are usually below standard for the children and the educators. Changes need to be put in place for centres using school buildings making children and educators have a feeling of belonging where they can be and become what the NQF and regulations promotes which is the best outcomes for children. It is a struggle for Services using space in schools that don't have enough storage,no adequate office facilities, and having to constantly negotiate for space making sure children are always safe and we are following regulations.. The government must think of adequate spaces to be designated to oshc services within schools to help with the growing numbers of children attending these centres. These children children whose parents need to work for whatever reason need to be looked after in the best possible way by the whole community.
NSW
I have worked in the industry for over 15 years, over the years I have seen massive improvements with education and program and practice. What really concerns me is the proposal to reduce qualifications requirements for educators of children aged zero to three years.The first three years of life are a vital part of a child’s development, having educators who understand and contribute to each child’s development is important. Its amazing the amount of learning that is captured from babies to preschool children. This should not be compromised moving forward.
VIC
I have worked in this field for 10years and the last 6yrs as a director. I am so disapointed with the idea that educaotors qualifications would be reduced for children under 3.
The children i have watched grow and develop from young children under 3 at our centre are so well adjusted they are creative, caring and respectfull children due to the care & eduaction our educators provided. i see the learning and skills that our children are capable of when given the chance! So much happens in the first 3 years of life.
However know this doesnt just happen it is the room and program that the educators provided that makes this happen and it does at my centre and it does because we have qualified eduacted people running our rooms. If this changes so will the quality of education for young people.
VIC
I own and operate a 37 place centre and we strive to provide high quality ecec. We have embraced the NQF and the EYLF and love how it fully guides our practice and our Philosophy. We are proud of our achievements and find no elements of it burdensome at all. We value all the children and especially feel our children under 3 deserve qualified educators. If we do not provide high quality care at this level, then we are not supporting them to grow into confident individuals with high self esteem ready to venture into their next room and then school. We have to provide the best for them at this earlier age. It is even more crucial we get this right before they turn 3. We all feel very strongly about the NQF being retained as it is. I DO NOT SUPPORT REDUCED RATIO'S - UNQUALIFIED EDUCATORS - RATIO'S AVERAGED OVER THE WEEK OR THE ASSUMPTION THAT BABIES JUST NEED CARING FOR. THEY ARE EDUCATED AND CARED FOR AS ONE - Education and care cannot be separated. It is a whole, as the child is a whole being and so deserves the respect of its country to provide the best opportunities for it to succeed. You have this power to continue to honour our children with the fantastic NQF as it stands.
TAS
I support the productivity commission’s commitment to the provision of quality, affordable early childhood education and care for all children in Australia. We support the combination of current subsidy schemes into a single child based scheme, however named. It is important that all services approved as eligible for this scheme be regulated and monitored under the National Quality Framework (NQF) as a minimum standard. Eligibility should be based on quality standards not service type. What is the perceived benefit of providing up to 100 hours of care for a family that meets the 24 hour activity test. This removes accessibility to hours for other areas and this money could then benefit other areas of community needs.
It is imperative that the qualification and ratio requirements within Early Childhood services are maintained or increased. International research is clear that quality learning environments in programs facilitated by well trained professionals has positive impacts on learning and development of children. Universal Access to 15 hours of Early Childhood Education (kindergarten) must continue across Australia. It is essential that funding is maintained while the federal and state governments negotiate an ongoing funding formula. Additional costs cannot be passed on to families. Delivery of funding through the school system without the maintenance of the NQF will erode the requirement to maintain standards of safety, education and care that meet the needs of children below school age. Every child should have access to fully funded education programs, regardless of service type (kindergarten, Long Day Care, Occasional Care, Family Day Care) which needs to be balanced across all age groups to support their individual development, education and care. This could be funded as follows; 15 hours for 4 year olds, 10 hours for 3’s, 5 hours for 2’s and 3 hours for 0-2. Appropriately qualified educators must facilitate all programs. Kindergartens coming in under school regulations rather than early years regulations need to have appropriate consideration of the impact that the change will have on current requirements such as; toilets, ratio, supervision, fencing, school age framework / early years outcomes. These are currently suited to the developmental level and requirement of the child and include the holistic approach of the National Quality Framework. To remove kindergartens from the NQF would deny children and families the assurance of quality and consistency that this provides. School age entry needs to be reviewed to be in line with international research into child development ages and stages and school readiness. If the kindergartens move to the school system will this then negate this debate or will it assist with changing the whole school level age system from entry at Primary school to exit at end of high school. Lifting school entry age is a must, particularly in relation to evidence coming for the Netherlands and Germanic states. Kindergarten could be made compulsory to highlight the importance of this year in a child’s development in learning the importance of self, communication, social and community skills required for preparation for the school community .Flexibility requirements and cost impacts are very different in regional and rural communities to those in the cities and metro areas. Travel distances, access to qualified staff, specialist services and income levels of families need to be taken into account when allocating funding. There needs to be the promotion of positive attitudes towards shared family friendly arrangements, particularly expanding to fathers and the role they now play in the care of children. A realistic costing for quality education and care should be carried out and supported by the Commonwealth government. Quality of training needs to be maintained for all age levels of education and care in all service types. To deem a child less than three years less worthy of a fully trained educator at minimum diploma level displays a lack of understanding of current research that promotes the values of education of children in the first 5 years of their life and its future benefits that come from this as they journey into adulthood. Children in any type of care environment should have the benefit of the NQF. Any service that receives funding from any government should be required to meet these requirements to ensure that all services are providing quality, measurable and consistent education and care standards. Opportunities for Family Day Care models should be extended to support the supervision of people providing ‘funded’ in home care arrangements eg nannies, grandparent carers. The NQF offers consistent quality education and practice across the service sector rather than individual services dependant on individual management and staffing. There is also the need to improve the design of the assessment and ratings system in particular in improving the timeliness of responses to services and agencies in all matters relating to findings, notifications, compliances and training queries. This would entail an immediate review of application and enforcement of the NQF and the funding and staffing to suit. Under the current guidelines, there is no value in the supervisor’s certificates. The qualifications, recruitment, and ongoing professional development maintained by the approved provider are adequate to ensure that the service meet all requirements under the NQF. Further information on the productivity commission’s view on zoning needs clarification. We support the elimination of building requirements in Childrens regulations where the building code meets or exceeds the children’s regulations.
The expansion of options for the provision of services on a variety of sites should rest solely on the adherence to quality standards – the NQF. The increase or decrease, of education and care places should be related to quality first, needs second and site as a final consideration point. While the inclusion of Early Childhood Education and Care within the school system has benefits in the recognition of the educational value of the services it does not recognise the developmental differences of children below school age and has the risk of creating a ‘poor cousin’ early years structure within the school. While funding is directly tied to specific age groups or needs – kindergarten and working parents there is no possibility of ‘siphoning’ off funds for other functions. The Victorian Department of Education and Early Childhood Development is currently understaffed to meet the needs of early childhood education and car environments. The Draft Report from the Productivity Commission Inquiry into Childcare and Early Learning provides a starting point for discussion on the future of services for children below school age. I would, in closing, like to point out the use of the currently accepted terminology Early Childhood Education and care rather than the archaic use of the term Childcare and Early Learning – which erroneously separates the two functions – would continue the progressive move to supporting quality outcomes for all children.
VIC
I understand that there should be no compromised to educational and care services.However, Australia is a diverse Nation, and with that comes varying degrees of challenges.
As a service provider in the FDC sector, these challenges faces us every single day. Ranging from financial difficulties in the side of the parents to language difficulties in those working as educators.
Despite all these challenges and the already scarce resources to meet these demands,we as service providers are working extra hard day and night to make sure we meet and possibly exceeds standards of the education and care regulations, yet our work seem to go unnoticed, instead, met with even greater challenges.
The reform is digging a close pit to the bottom minorities, both the service providers and the those using the services.
I wish the government to consider all the factors involves in this complex yet extremely important industry prior to introducing radical changes.
NSW
I would like to see the Government pay for two days per week for child care for ALL parents and to bring back the 1:5 ratio for under 2year olds. However, stipulate that it is 2 children under 1 yr and 3 children over 1. Also not changing the ratios for 2 - 3 year olds. Also it would be nice to see long day care centres recognised as doing the same valuable job in educating and caring for children as preschools. The 50% rebate needs to stay as this is essentially a big help to working parents. I believe that if the Government paid for 2 days per week for all children it would offer all children the opportunity to attend a centre. I would also love to see all children entering formal schooling the year they turn 6 so there is a maximum 12 month gap from oldest to youngest. In NSW it is up to 18 months and I think this is really unfair to these young children put into these situations.
NSW
I would like to strongly disagree with the commission's recommendation to cut the qualifications of educators working with children under 3 years of age to a certificate lll qualification. All the recent research into early childhood development including brain development, shows the importance of providing quality experiences to children in the first 3 years of life. Our service provides a teacher for the 0-3 year age group in the belief that this is providing the children with greater experiences in language, all areas of communication and importantly, self regulation.
