No abstract

Although we do not yet know how high, and for how long, cortisol levels need to be elevated for risk of undesirable outcomes to increase, this research signals the importance of emphasizing the need for high-quality care for young children.

No abstract

No abstract

In this article, we propose to critique the way in which a hegemonic understanding of quality in early childhood settings is imposed upon practitioners, families and children through legislated quality assurance processes. The reality of neoliberalism is played out in the establishment and maintenance of the Australian early childhood quality assurance processes as they operate up to 2015, and the definition of approved qualifications for those working in early childhood. In both cases a tightly defined, top-down approach is used to assure quality. This has the effect of limiting flexibility and de-professionalising the work of early childhood professionals. It is our contention that in this neoliberal climate, early childhood practitioners have failed to construct their arguments in ways that could be better understood by outsiders to the profession; instead they are focusing on how best to be compliant. Challenging these hegemonic positions may even be perceived as being 'anti-quality' and not in the best interests of the early childhood sector. We analyse the current context in Australia (which reflects international trends) and explore possible strategies to re-empower the early childhood profession.

In the Australian early childhood sector the role of educational leader emerged as part of a very large process of policy reform that began in 2009. The position of educational leader was established to drive the quality improvement requirements of the reform, but many organizations did not establish these positions until several years after the reforms were introduced. Lack of clear role descriptions and authority make it difficult for educational leaders to fulfil the expectations held of them. This study examines the sense leaders make of the policy reforms and the street-level bureaucracy they perform to translate the policy into action. This sense-making and street-level bureaucracy is taking place in a neoliberal context where, we argue, the demands for professional discretionary decision-making are in conflict with the top-down standardization inherent in neoliberalism. Educational leaders have the potential to challenge neoliberalism through their professional decision-making but, in the Australian context, many are currently focusing on compliance with their street-level bureaucracy.

ACCoMMoDATInG ThE DIvErSE ChIlDCArE needs of Australia's Indigenous communities, both within mainstream and Indigenous-operated services, is a major concern for all Indigenous families and communities. Of particular concern in relation to formal child care is the need for programs to be culturally strong. Culturally strong programs incorporate the culturally based beliefs, values and practices, including child-rearing practices, of individuals, families and communities using that service. This paper, drawing upon a broad-based consultation funded by the Australian Government and conducted throughout 2005-06, addresses the key elements of what constitutes culturally strong childcare programs for Indigenous children, families and communities. In recognition of the heterogeneous nature of Indigenous Australians, the research methods included focus groups, community consultations, and interviews with key stakeholders in the childcare sector nationally in order to identify their positions. The research findings highlighted that those involved with childcare programs for Indigenous children, whether they are living in a remote community in the Northern Territory or in Redfern in Sydney, New South Wales, share a similar desire: that programs reflect the cultural knowledge and practices of their respective communities.

No abstract