The need for such applicability was highlighted in a recent working paper on public-private partnerships in early childhood development in Mozambique and South Africa. Though such partnerships have the potential to facilitate progress for the industry, it also noted that a poorly designed and implemented initiative could have an equally negative impact on services. A key enabling factor would be to match the mechanisms to suit its context and environment.

The Challenge of Context
As a mentor to pre-school leaders, context matching has emerged as a concern in group conversations related to challenges in translating policy to practice. The extent of the diversity in cultures of practice as well as quality may also be far wider in reality. For one, early childhood centres vary greatly in size, environment and support. This can subsequently affect their ability to deliver quality programmes, especially when access to resources may be unevenly distributed across the sector. Levelling the playing field with regard to quality is a more complex endeavour when mixed delivery systems are the norm.

Addressing “Quality”
In the last five years Singapore has invested heavily in the early childhood sector and efforts to uplift the field have focused on three main thrusts of improvement: affordability, accessibility and quality. Arguably, the implementation of well-funded policy initiatives and sound planning will enable the first two objectives to be achieved fairly easily. However, the same cannot be said for the attainment of quality objectives. Defining and achieving quality practice across the sector will prove to be a more challenging endeavour as it will require not just top-down support but also the commitment of the entire sector for sustainability.

Early childhood education in Singapore is provided by a mixed system of public and private providers, often dominated by the latter. This is also characteristic of the situation across the region. This distinction is significant as such partnerships in the early years sector prove to be inherently complex and can pose a challenge to the implementation process. Consequently, policy levers that have been successfully used to manage a centralised public education system need to be adapted to suit the unique workings of the early childhood field.

The need for such applicability was highlighted in a recent working paper on public-private partnerships in early childhood development in Mozambique and South Africa. Though such partnerships have the potential to facilitate progress for the industry, it also noted that a poorly designed and implemented initiative could have an equally negative impact on services. A key enabling factor would be to match the mechanisms to suit its context and environment.

The Challenge of Context

As a mentor to pre-school leaders, context matching has emerged as a concern in group conversations related to challenges in translating policy to practice. The extent of the diversity in cultures of practice as well as quality may also be far wider in reality. For one, early childhood centres vary greatly in size, environment and support. This can subsequently affect their ability to deliver quality programmes, especially when access to resources may be unevenly distributed across the sector. Levelling the playing field with regard to quality is a more complex endeavour when mixed delivery systems are the norm.

Nevertheless, the presence of strong policy levers may help mitigate some of the challenges in implementation. In Singapore, the Early Childhood Development Agency (ECDA) has adopted a clear structured approach to address quality by encouraging pre-schools to attain the Singapore Pre-school Accreditation Quality Framework certification or SPARK. This has enabled schools to focus their efforts to address different aspects of quality in operations. Nevertheless, such committed investments and policy initiatives may not be common across the region. State control and local variations can easily challenge any blanket initiative for improvement. To address gaps in implementation, policy design in the early years needs to address diversity as a principle of approach.

Developing a New Way of Working
Drawing from these experiences, I have tried to bridge my own understanding as a practitioner and researcher to discover “new ways of working” in an industry that is fast growing up. In my effort to encourage principals to apply strategic management practices for quality improvement, I have realised that there is a need to be “modality-sensitive”, in particular to the “language” and “method” of achieving quality practice in a setting that is largely non-corporate.

The diverse and highly dynamic work environment may also pose challenges for sustained quality improvement efforts. At present, manpower supply and quality is a common challenge in the field. Even though early childhood training may be more established in Singapore than in most places within the region, attaining sufficient qualified manpower is a more fundamental issue than quality.

As this shift may take time, this gap presents an opportunity to experiment and learn new ways of managing quality in the sector amidst the current landscape. Presently, quality is driven in a top-down approach through the SPARK certification. Although this has been successful in driving change, it is also worthwhile to adopt other complementary strategies.

Small changes woven into current operations can create new habits of practice that will be beneficial for quality improvement in the long run. It may also facilitate a common ground for “languaging” and the articulation of ideas that can often be lost in the translation of policy to practice.

Some work approaches to consider in quality improvement:

1. Use a Data-Driven Approach to Understand Quality
The data-driven approach for educational improvement appears to be more commonly used in the public school system than in the early childhood field. Although the usual challenges of time and resources may deter its use, the benefits of using an evidence-based approach outweigh such difficulties. A data-driven approach allows for objective decision-making based on information in practice.

Using data to inform practice need not take complex forms and can be done as simple surveys or pictorial documentation. For example, it can be as simple as teachers noting play preferences among children by making a record of the frequency of use of different play equipment in the class. This can then lead to informing the choice of future play material to be purchased or how it can be organised. Teachers can subsequently use this information to create more quality play experiences for the children. Such data offer valuable information, which can inform practice directly and meaningfully. This presents a valuable source of information, particularly where local research data is often absent.

2. View Quality From a Holistic Lens
A common paradox in early childhood education is that children’s holistic development is often upheld as a primary concern but the actual measures used to address quality gaps are often narrowed to academic indicators. The struggle seems to lie in the challenging task of articulating non-academic learning outcomes as equally important, if not more, critical development goals.

Quality indicators also need to give fair consideration to the less visible forms of quality practice, such as emotional support, quality interaction and learning motivation. For quality to improve, the quality assessment process needs to be authentic, child-focused and flexible. The process of managing quality gaps necessitates greater conversation on expectations of quality as seen through the eyes of the community. Most importantly, to be a true process of improvement, the community as a whole, involving practitioners and parents, would need to be part of that conversation for it to be sustainable.

3. Understand Quality Through Network Sharing
One of the least utilised resources for quality improvement in the early childhood field is the engagement of professional networks, which is still uncommon in this region. Such networks may be formal or informal but can serve as a resource of support for the sector. Those with a focus of interest can provide invaluable ground knowledge to address gaps in practice where research is lacking. Although such networks are more common in Western countries where advocacy and civic participation are well established, encouraging practitioners to be part of such networks is beneficial as there is interaction with professionals outside organisational lines. Participation in professional networks provides a safe platform for lifelong learning and for professionals to engage in constructive yet casual conversations, which can be an important source of moral and professional support. The sustainability and quality of practice are in the participation of all levels of community, and the intelligent expertise of such networks should be harnessed for its shared learning potential.

Looking Beyond the Gap
Ever the eternal optimist, I believe there is value in gaps as opportunities for the early childhood sector to innovate and move their practice forward. It is important that such efforts to bridge gaps adopt approaches that respect and build upon current structures. The early childhood environment is an exciting field of change and shares many of the issues faced by schools within the main education continuum. However, making small improvements with a recognition of the unique context of the early years will potentially help efforts to “mine the gaps” more effectively.