Early childhood educators’ well-being, work environments and ‘quality’: Possibilities for changing policy and practice

Abstract

A child’s right to high quality education not only relies on a competent and skilled workforce, but one in which educators are well. Supporting a well workforce requires governments, organisations and educators to attend to work environment quality. This attention needs be based on sound, relevant evidence. In this paper we contribute evidence of educators’ well-being from the survey component of an Australian study with 73 participants. We map results against international guidelines, and policy openings in Australia’s National Quality Standard to understand how educators’ work environments are affecting their well-being. We conclude that existing policies on quality in early childhood education in Australia attend to only some features of work environments, with a notable absence of attention to supporting educators in the relational complexities of their work. To enable educators to provide high quality education and care, greater attention is needed by organisations and governments to what quality work environments might look like.

Cultural diversity in the Australian early childhood education workforce: What do we know, what don’t we know and why is it important?

“…Similarly to DCA reports, Golebiowska et al (2018) state that overseas-born educators tend to stay in their jobs longer than their Australian-born counterparts. (Gibbs, 2020;Gide, 2017), the wellbeing of the educators (Cumming et al, 2021;Cumming & Wong, 2018), and workforce issues (Irvine et al, 2016;.…”

“…Additionally, in the most recent study on educator well-being, 24 of the 73 participants were from CALD backgrounds (people who spoke English as well as another language in their daily lives); three participants indicated that their religious background, and two that their cultural background, was not welcomed in their centre. A further 31.5% and 20.5% were ambiguous about the degree to which their religious and cultural identity was welcomed in their centre – respectively (Cumming et al, 2021). Golebiowska et al (2018) used the ABS 2011 census data to explore the impact of overseas-born workers in the Northern Territory ECE workforce.…”

“…b) Advocacy organisations: The Ethnic Community Services Co-operative (ECSC), Federation of Ethnic Communities Councils of Australia (FECCA), Community Early Learning Australia (CELA) and Early Childhood Australia (ECA) are only a few of the well-known advocacy organisations who support ECE in various areas and advocate for improving the provision of high-quality ECE.c) Educational institutions and researchers: Government policies and workforce strategies report the importance of supporting professional development and further education to attain and retain quality educators. Recent projects focused on very important ECE issues such as leadership in ECE (Gibbs, 2020; Gide, 2017), the well-being of the educators (Cumming et al, 2021; Cumming & Wong, 2018), and workforce issues (Irvine et al, 2016; Thorpe et al, 2020). …”

“…c) Educational institutions and researchers: Government policies and workforce strategies report the importance of supporting professional development and further education to attain and retain quality educators. Recent projects focused on very important ECE issues such as leadership in ECE (Gibbs, 2020; Gide, 2017), the well-being of the educators (Cumming et al, 2021; Cumming & Wong, 2018), and workforce issues (Irvine et al, 2016; Thorpe et al, 2020).…”

“…Their findings show that overseas-born educators are critically important to the provision of ECE; however, they are sadly excluded from many important government reports and publications, such as national workforce censuses and productivity commission reports (Golebiowska et al, 2018). Similarly to DCA reports, Golebiowska et al (2018) (Gibbs, 2020;Gide, 2017), the well-being of the educators (Cumming et al, 2021;Cumming & Wong, 2018), and workforce issues (Irvine et al, 2016;.…”