KASVATUSTIETEIDEN TIEDEKUNTA

Kasvatustieteiden tiedekunta Tiivistelmä opinnäytetyöstä

Varhaiskasvatuksen koulutus

Tekijä Nortunen Terhi

Työn nimi The Teacher Effect in Quality ECEC. A review into the concept of quality in four research journals in 2010-2016.

Pääaine Kasvatustiede

Työn laji KK

Aika marraskuu 2016

Sivumäärä 24

Tiivistelmä

Varhaiskasvatuslain uudistus vaikuttaa erityisesti varhaiskasvatuksen opettajien vastuuseen,

osaamistarpeisiin ja työhyvinvointiin. Uudistuksen aikaan vallinneen laatu-käsityksen

hahmottamiseksi, tarkastellaan tutkielmassa laadun määritelmää viime aikaisessa kansainvälisessä

tutkimuksessa erityisesti opettajan osaamisen merkityksen näkökulmasta. Tutkielma on kirjoitettu

artikkelimuotoon. Tutkimukseen sovellettiin systemaattisen kirjallisuuskatsauksen menetelmää ja

kuvattiin dokumentoidun prosessin vaiheet. Tuloksissa esiteltiin laadun määritelmät neljään

näkökulmaan jaettuna, joista jokaisessa opettajalla on keskeinen rooli: 1. Opetuksen järjestämisen

näkökulma: minkälainen opetusohjelma ja opetuksen järjestäjä on? 2. Oppimistulosten näkökulma:

minkälaisia taitoja lapset oppivat? 3. Lasten elämänlaadun näkökulma: miten lapset kokevat

varhaiskasvatuksen? 4. Merkityksen antamisen näkökulma: millaisia merkityksiä lapset saavat

varhaiskasvatuksen tilanteissa? Tulokset osoittivat, että opettajien pedagoginen osaaminen vaikuttaa

varhaiskasvatuksen laatuun laatu-käsitteen näkökulmasta riippumatta.

Asiasanat Varhaiskasvatus, varhaiskasvatuslaki, laatu

Sisällysluettelo

Johdanto ................................................................................................................................. 1

Tutkimusmenetelmä ........................................................................................................... 1

Systemaattisen kirjallisuuskatsauksen seitsemän vaihetta. ............................................. 2

Kirjallisuuden valinta ...................................................................................................... 2

Kirjallisuuskatsauksen tekeminen................................................................................... 3

Johtopäätöksiä ................................................................................................................. 4

The teacher effect in quality ECEC. A review into the concept of quality in research journals

in 2010-2016. ......................................................................................................................... 6

Abstract .................................................................................................................................. 6

Key words ........................................................................................................................... 6

Introduction: The Finnish ECEC legislation reform .............................................................. 7

Quality in early childhood education and care ................................................................... 8

Aim of the Article and the Research Questions ................................................................... 11

Methodology ........................................................................................................................ 12

The seven stages of the systematic review ....................................................................... 12

Selection of literature ....................................................................................................... 12

Literature review .............................................................................................................. 13

Synthesis of the results ..................................................................................................... 14

1. Organisational perspective: what is the provider and the programme like? ............. 14

2. Achieving the targets: what skills and competences will the children gain? ............ 15

3. Children’s wellbeing and quality of life: how do children experience their education

and care? ....................................................................................................................... 15

4. Meaning is made moment by moment: what meaning do children gain in ECEC? . 16

Reliability and Limitations ................................................................................................... 17

Conclusion and Discussion .................................................................................................. 19

References ............................................................................................................................ 20

Johdanto

Varhaiskasvatuslain uudistustyön valmistuttua varhaiskasvatuksen laadun tarkastelu on

ajankohtaista osana lain kokonaisvaikutusten arviointia. Lakireformin vaikuttimena on ollut

taloudellisen säästön tarve, mutta sen sisältö vaikuttaa erityisesti varhaiskasvatuksen opetta-

jien vastuuseen, osaamistarpeisiin ja työhyvinvointiin. Opettajan rooli laadun osatekijänä on

Suomessa pätevyysvaatimusten kautta osoitettu ja laissakin lähdetään pyrkimyksestä ohjata

varhaiskasvatuksen laadun kehittämistä. Uudistuksen aikaan vallinneen laatu-käsityksen

hahmottamiseksi tutkin kandidaatin tutkielmassani laadun määritelmää viime aikaisessa

kansainvälisessä tutkimuksessa erityisesti opettajan osaamisen merkityksen näkökulmasta.

Valitsin kandidaatin tutkielman suorittamisen artikkelin muodossa kiinnostuttuani Oulun

yliopiston tutkijoiden aloittamasta tutkimustyöstä varhaiskasvatuslain vaikutuksiin liittyen

ja haastaakseni itseäni kirjoittamaan monisyisestä aiheesta tiiviisti ja ymmärrettävästi. Va-

kaVai. Selvitys varhaiskasvatuslain kokonaisvaikutuksista -hankkeen (Puroila & Kinnunen

2015) tutkija Susanna Kinnunen on toiminut ohjaajan ja menetelmän varmistajan roolissa

artikkelin sisällön näkökulmasta.

Artikkelin muodossa toteutettua kandidaatin tutkielmaani tarjotaan Early Child Develop-

ment and Care -lehdelle julkaistavaksi ja sen rakenne on lehden julkaisuohjeiden mukainen.

Early Child Development on moniammatillinen julkaisu, joka palvelee oman ilmaisunsa mu-

kaisesti kaikkia niitä ammattilaisia, jotka työskentelevät lapsiin liittyvän tutkimuksen, suun-

nittelun, opetuksen ja hoidon parissa. Lehdessä julkaistavat artikkelit käyvät läpi vertaisar-

vioinnin, johon liitetään vähintään kahden nimeämättömän arvioitsijan sokkoarviointi.

Tutkimusmenetelmä

Tutkielmassa sovellettiin systemaattisen kirjallisuuskatsauksen menetelmää (Salminen

2011.) Petticrewin (kuten viitattu Salminen 2011, 9) mukaan systemaattinen kirjallisuus-

katsaus tuottaa yhteenvedon aihealueen relevanteista tutkimustuloksista. Kasvatustieteelli-

sessä tutkimuksessa menetelmästä on useita ristiriitaisiakin näkemyksiä (Andrews 2005,

399), mutta sitä pidetään myös mahdollisuutena lisätä tietoa ja löytää samankaltaisten tutki-

musten eroja. (Davies 2010, 365.) Daviesin mukaan amerikkalainen ‘The Campbell Collab-

2

oration’ on suosinut systemaattisen kirjallisuuskatsaukseen menetelmää koulutuksen hallin-

toon ja käytäntöön. Viime vuosina katsaustyypit ovat lisääntyneet todisteperustaisen

käytännön levitessä eri aloille. (Grant & Booth 2009, 91.)

Systemaattisen kirjallisuuskatsauksen seitsemän vaihetta.

Tässä tutkielmassa käytetään Salmisen (2011, 10-11) prosessimallia, joka pohjautuu Finkin

(2005, 3-5) luomaan seitsemän vaiheen malliin katsauksen tekemisestä. Tutkielman teon

edetessä VakaVai-tutkimusryhmän tutkijoiden kanssa on käyty keskustelua katsauksen

tavoitteista ja sisällöstä. Seitsemän vaihetta on jaettu selkeyden vuoksi kolmeen osioon: kir-

jallisuuden valintaan (prosessin vaiheet 1-5), katsauksen tekemiseen (vaihe 6) ja synteesiin

(vaihe 7).

Kirjallisuuden valinta

Ensimmäisessä vaiheessa muodostettiin kaksi tutkimuskysymystä. Tutkimuskysymykset

muotoiltiin seuraavasti:

1. Miten määritellään laatu (‘quality’) Early Childhood Research Quarterly-, Early Child

Development and Care-, Australasian Journal of Early Childhood- ja Contemporary Issues

in Early Childhood -lehdissä tammikuun 2010 ja kesäkuun 2016 välisenä aikana (molemmat

mukaanlukien) julkaistuissa artikkeleissa?

2. Miten opettajan rooli vaikuttaa varhaiskasvatuksen laatuun (‘quality’) edellä mainittujen

artikkelien määritelmissä?

Menetelmän toisessa vaiheessa valittiin tietokannaksi EBSCO Academic Search Premier da-

tabase johtuen sen soveltuvuudesta, käytettävyydestä ja kattavuudesta kansainvälisen var-

haiskasvatuksen tutkimusartikkelien osalta. Kolmannessa vaiheessa valittiin hakutekijöiksi

seuraavat: artikkelin otsikossa on sana ‘quality’ ja asiasanoissa joko ‘early childhood educa-

tion’, ‘preschool’ tai ‘kindergarten’. Tässä kriittisessä vaiheessa varmistettiin tutkimusryh-

mältä hakusanojen relevanttius. Haku tuotti kaksisataa artikkelia ja sitä rajattiin neljännessä

vaiheessa artikkeleihin, jotka on vertaisarvioitu ja jotka on julkaistu tammikuun 2010 ja

kesäkuun 2016 (nämä mukaanlukien) välisenä aikana englannin kielellä. Aikarajaus pe-

rustuu pyrkimykseen saada yleiskuva viimeaikaisesta tutkimuksesta varhaiskasvatuslain

valmistelun aikaan. Näillä rajauksilla saatin tulokseksi 138 artikkelin lista. Kirjallisuuden

3

valinnan viides ja viimeinen vaihe oli rajata hakua edelleen niihin akateemisiin lehtiin, jotka

ovat julkaisseet vähintään kymmenen artikkelia kyseisenä ajanjaksona. Yhteensä neljä

lehteä ja 67 artikkelia sisältyivät tähän hakuun. Lehtien kansainvälinen kattavuus tarkistet-

tiin ennen analyysin aloittamista. Eniten hakutekijöillä julkaisseista lehdistä oli kaksi eu-

rooppalaista, yksi amerikkalainen ja yksi australialainen lehti: Early Childhood Research

Quarterly, Early Child Development and Care, Australasian Journal of Early Childhood ja

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood.

Kirjallisuuskatsauksen tekeminen

Tutkimusprosessin kuudennessa vaiheessa taulukoitiin artikkeleita kuvaavia tietoja.

Jokaisesta artikkelista kirjattiin taulukkoon seuraavat asiat:

1. Oliko tutkimus empiirinen vai teoreettinen?

2. Käytettiinkö tutkimuksessa kvalitatiivista vai kvantitatiivista tutkimusmenetelmää?

3. Määriteltiinkö artikkelissa varhaiskasvatuksen laadun (‘quality’) käsite?

4. Liittyikö laadun käsitteeseen opettajan rooli laadun osatekijänä?

5. Missä maassa tutkimus oli tehty?

Artikkelit (n=67) sisälsivät tutkimuksia kahdestakymmenestä eri maasta. Valtaosa artik-

keleista oli Yhdysvalloista (n=18) ja Australiasta (n=14). Lisäksi aineistossa oli artikkeleita

Isosta-Britanniasta (n=5), Kiinasta (n=4), Kreikasta (n=4), Saksasta (n=2), Uudesta-See-

lannista (n=2) sekä yksi seuraavista maista: Bangladesh, Tanska, Egypti, Suomi, Israel, Ita-

lia, Japani, Jordania, Norja, Hollanti, Portugali, Etelä-Afrikka ja Ruotsi. Kolme artikkelia oli

useamman maan välisten yhteisprojektien tuloksia.

Jokaisesta taulukointiin tarvittavasta 67 artikkelista hankittiin elektroninen kopio yliopiston

kirjaston tietokannan kautta. Yksi artikkeleista osoittautui hakukuulutukseksi, ja yhtä ei ollut

saatavana, joten taulukkoon päätyi lopulta 65 artikkelia. Valtaosa artikkeleista (n=45) edusti

empiiristä tutkimusta ja laadullinen tutkimus oli tavanomaisempaa (n=40) kuin määrällinen

(n=25). Yhteensä 54 artikkelissa määriteltiin laatu ja niistä 42 valikoitui analyysiin, koska

4

ne sisälsivät myös opettajan roolin laadussa. Lopulliseen analyysiin valittiin edellämaini-

tuista 67 artikkelista ne, joiden osalta taulukkoon tuli kyllä-vastaukset sekä kysymyksiin 3

että 4. Näitä laadun määritelmän ja opettajuuden osallisuuden laadun osatekijänä sisältäviä

artikkeleita oli yhteensä 42 kappaletta. Näiden 42 artikkelin perusteella pyrittiin vastaamaan

tutkimuskysymyksiin.

Synteesin tekeminen tuloksista

Tuloksissa esiteltiin laadun määritelmät neljään näkökulmaan jaettuna, joista jokaisessa

opettajalla on keskeinen rooli:

1. Opetuksen järjestämisen näkökulma: minkälainen opetusohjelma ja opetuksen järjestäjä

on?

2. Oppimistulosten näkökulma: minkälaisia taitoja lapset oppivat?

3. Lasten elämänlaadun näkökulma: miten lapset kokevat varhaiskasvatuksen?

4. Merkityksen antamisen näkökulma: millaisia merkityksiä lapset saavat var-

haiskasvatuksen tilanteissa?

Joidenkin tutkimusten laatumääritelmä koskettaa useampaakin näkökulmaa ja niiden välille

voidaan luoda yhteyksiä. Esimerkkinä mainittakoon Choin ja Dobbs-Oatesin (2014)

päiväkoti-ikäisillä lapsilla havaittu yhteys lapsen kokeman läheisyyden ja matemaattisen ke-

hittymisen välillä.

Johtopäätöksiä

Opettajan roolia pidettiin kaikista näkökulmista katsoen keskeisenä varhaiskasvatuksen laa-

dulle. Tämä osoittaa sen, että opettajat ovat edelleen päiväkodin arvokkain resurssi. Tätä

näkökulmaa ei myöskään Suomen hallitus (Hallituksen esitys 80/2015 vp.) ole kiistänyt,

mutta toimii ideaalin vastaisesti taloudellisista syistä. Palkkakustannukset ovat varhaiskas-

vatuksen suurin menoerä ja säästötilanteessa niihin on väistämättä tehtävä leikkauksia. Suo-

men varhaiskasvatuslain uudistus vaikuttaa ryhmäkoon suurentamisen ja osa-aikaisten hoi-

topaikkojen laskentatavan kautta opettajien vastuuseen, työmäärään ja tarvittavaan pedago-

giseen osaamiseen. Ala on suoranaisessa palkkakuopassa muihin vastaavaa osaamista ja

koulutusta edellyttäviin töihin verrattuna, eikä varhaiskasvatuksen opettajien työoloihin ole

5

ehdotettu parannuksia esimerkiksi työajan tai täydennyskoulutuksen muodossa. Reformin

myötä päiväkotien johtajilla on edessään entistä vaikeampi tehtävä rekrytoida päteviä osaa-

jia. OAJ on jo vuonna 2009 todennut, että yli kolmannes johtajista ei saa edes hakemuksia

päteviltä lastentarhanopettajilta. Näin ollen varhaiskasvatusala tulee tekemään tärkeäksi ar-

votettua työtä ilman riittävää henkilöstöä ja pedagogista osaamista.

Artikkelin tutkimusaineisto raotti ikkunaa varhaiskasvatuksen laadun määrittelyyn ja poh-

dintaan. Laadun määrittelyä tulisi jatkaa ja pohtia erityisesti lasten kokemusta laadusta. Lap-

set ovat palvelun keskiössä ja heidän kokonaisvaltaiseen kasvunsa ja kehityksensä tukemi-

seen ja edistämiseen alan ammattilaiset tähtäävät varhaiskasvatuslainkin (580, 2 a §) näkö-

kulmasta.

6

The teacher effect in quality ECEC. A review into the concept of quality

in four research journals in 2010-2016.

Abstract

The recent policy shift in the Finnish early childhood education and care (ECEC) services

creates a need to reflect the reform’s effect on quality. The economically driven legislation

reform impacts the key assett of the service, the teaching staff. As quality ECEC provision

continues to be the government’s priority, it is time to revise on our view of the constructs

of quality. This article highlights the concept of ‘quality' with a special focus on the early

years teachers' role. It summarizes the recent research findings through a literature review of

four international academic journals: Australasian Jounal of Early Childhood, Contemporary

Issues in Early Childhood, Early Child Development and Care and Early Childhood Re-

search Quarterly. The review provides an overview of the variety of quality indicators across

the international research network. The results indicated that regardless of the perspective

into quality, its provision is dependable upon pedagogically competent teachers, who at best

offer children everything they need to develop into their best selves and make meaning of

the world moment by moment. This task requires specific skills and competences from

teachers and hence the results highlight a gap between research and the ECEC policy shift

in Finland.

Key words

Early childhood education and care, quality, competence, kindergarten teacher, preschool

teacher, Finland

7

Introduction: The Finnish ECEC legislation reform

This article aims to review recent research articles looking into quality issues in early child-

hood education and care. The purpose for this study is to give an overview of the current

research, coincinding at the time of the Finnish legislation reform concerning ECEC ser-

vices. The reform in 2014-2016 has amended the Act on Children’s Day Care (367/1973),

which ‘stipulates the entitlement of children to day care and the responsibility of municipal-

ities to arrange day care’ and the Decree on Children’s Day Care (239/1973), ‘covering its

practical arrangement’ (Ministry of Education and Culture, 2016.) The main changes impact

matters such as the adult-child ratio, group size and the child’s right to early childhood edu-

cation services. In short, the full time right to ECEC has been reduced to 20 hours per week

for those children whose parents are not in full time work or education and simultaneously

the 1:7 adult-child ratio has changed to 1:8 (3-6-year-old children in full time care, note that

the ratio is unchanged at 1:13 regarding children in part time care). The group size has gone

up from 21 to 24 children. In the OECD (2015, 23) comparison on the 35 member countries'

ECEC enrolment rates for three-year-olds, Finland positioned itself below the OECD ave-

rage, leaving behind only Chile, Ireland, Mexico and Australia.

The legal reform can be seen as a deterioration of the abandoned system where all children

under 7 had equal opportunity to full time access to early childhood education and care ser-

vices. The driving force for the policy shift is purely economical. The aim of the Finnish

government is to save an estimated 62 million euros annually mainly in labour costs.

(Hallituksen esitys 80/2015 vp.) Municipalities continue to have the right to offer full time

early childhood education and the biggest cities in southern Finland have opted for this. It

may be due to the fact that there are more disadvantaged families in the larger cities and

hence more need for full time education for the younger children.

In the Finnish case, the demands on the teachers rise with the bigger groups and changed

adult-child ratios. The assumption is, that pedagogical expertise will have even more value

than before. In a quest to establish how teachers can be seen as part of quality assurance, this

paper is focussing on the role of teachers’ professional competence in quality ECEC provi-

sion. The study is a systematic literature review into the most recent international journal

writing. It starts by looking at different views researchers have provided into the concept of

8

quality and analyses further the studies, which include teachers in the structure of the con-

cept.

The policy shift has introduced an inequality in access to services to children depending on

where in Finland they live and at the same time worsened working conditions for teachers.

At EU level, however, the aim has been in the opposite direction. According to the Europe

2020 Strategy (2010), improving the quality and securing investments of education systems

at all levels is essential to ’securing smart, sustainable and inclusive economic growth’. This

view has driven member states to ensure all children have an equal opportunity to enter

ECEC services. According to the European Commision’s working group report (2014),

ECEC has a substantial impact on student retention and social participation in later life.

Hence, EU urges member states to invest in ECEC to boost the economy in the long run.

Brodin et al. (2015) researched the Swedish preschool teachers’ view on quality provision.

The results showed that teachers themselved regarded teachers’ attitudes, the number of chil-

dren in the group and the teacher-to-child ratio the three most important factors in quality

preschool.

Quality in early childhood education and care

Quality in early childhood education and care has been a popular research topic in the last

decades, however unanimity on the definition of the term is yet to be reached (Rentzou &

Sakellariou 2011, 367). Notions of quality in ECEC have changed with time. (e.g. Logan,

Press & Sumsion 2012, 5-6) and any definition is ‘anchored in the researchers’ and practi-

tioners’ philosophical and theoretical perspectives’ (Zaslow et al. 2011.)

Katz (1993) argues that there are four perspectives on ECEC quality: research, parents, chil-

dren and staff. Some researchers, particularly in the North American context, include two

elements constituting quality structural (e.g. group size or teacher qualifications) and process

elements (e.g. adult-child communication or programme quality). Parents, children and pro-

fessionals, however, may have a very different view on quality when compared to that of

researchers. For instance, teachers may value working conditions and good communication

with the manager. (Ishimine & Tayler 2014, 273; Gambaro et al. 2013; Brodin & Renblad,

2014). The teachers' perspective is underrepresented in research (Fenech et al. 2009) re-

gardless of their central role in quality ECEC (Logan and Sumsion 2010, 42).

9

Researchers agree on the importance of quality when assessing the long term impact on

children’s development and wellbeing, especially in deprived areas (Ruhm and Waldfogel

2012; Gambaro et al. 2014). Furthermore, it has been broadly acknowledged, that early years

educators are key to quality ECEC services (Karila 2016, 25). OECD (2015) considers work-

force quality as one of five key areas of EHEC quality enabling good child development.

The Starting Strong III report concluded that a balance of factors including interactions with

teachers in teacher-led and a selection of free choice activities and pedagogical expertise on

material selection are associated with good learning outcomes.

Some researchers have questioned the existence of the notion of ‘quality’. The post structur-

alist paradigm is concerned about what they refer to as the ‘gravitational pull’ that they are

willing to consider a new concept replacing it. (Moss 2016; Dahlberg et al. 2007, 6). This

view is supported by Ishimine and Tayler (2014, 272) who have also argued that different

contexts challenge measuring ECEC quality. The post structuralists offer a shift from a ‘logic

of quality’ to a ‘space of meaning-making’ (Evans 2016, 65). Duhn (2016, 54) explains that

the prevailing idea of all stakeholders supporting the idea of high quality has led to the in-

crease in measurement and control. Duhn has offered a solution in the form of new analysis

to data gathered by familiar tools, such as observation. She offers a ‘thick description’ of a

case as a method to provide a story highlighting the opportunities for children to create an

individual path to development. (Duhn 2016, 54).

There are large scale efforts to provide high-quality ECEC all over the world. In Australia,

the National Quality Framework took place in 2012 and a national body was established to

oversee its implementation. Fenech, Giugni and Bown (2012) believe the Australian re-

form’s aim to affect the quality of service to children and their families was genuine, but

question its ability to rise to the challenge. They claimed that whilst the NQF aimed to

increase the number of qualified staff, it failed to support its aim by not ensuring pay parity

for ECEC teachers or funding for a qualified teacher for every group.

The Finnish legislation reform is due to increase challenges facing practitioners. Karila

(2016, 43) argues, that in particular, practitioners need pedagogical leadership skills to man-

age the demands of the job. The Finnish policy documents emphasise structural factors such

as qualifications. A university teaching-degree is needed to qualify as a kindergarten teacher

in Finland, however according to the country’s Trade Union for Education (OAJ, 2009),

10

more than a third of kindergarten managers have been unable to recruit qualified teachers

due to lack of qualified applicants. The government’s answer to this has been to enrol more

students onto early years teaching programmes.

11

Aim of the Article and the Research Questions

The aim or the article is to map out how researchers have constructed the concept of ‘quality’

in ECEC and how teachers are seen to impact the quality. The end result is an overview of

international research in the first part of the 2010s through a practitioner’s looking glass. The

time period from 2010 to 2016 was chosen to represent the most recent academic writing in

the current context where the policy shift in Finland has taken place.

The research questions were as follows:

1. What constitutes ’quality’ within early childhood education in Early Childhood Research

Quarterly, Early Child Development & Care, Australasian Journal of Early Childhood and

Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood between January 2010 and June 2016 (inclusive)?

2. What is the teacher’s role in ’quality’ ECEC in the beforementioned articles’ definitions?

12

Methodology

The methodology of this study is a systematic literature review. Petticrew (2001, see

Salminen 2011, 9) argues that a systematic literature review provides a synopsis of relevant

research findings in a particular subject. In educational research, the method has been viewed

controversial (Andrews, 2005, 399) but also an opportunity to accumulate knowledge and

discover variability in seemingly similar studies (Davies 2010, 365.) According to Davies

(2010, 365) the Campbell Collaboration has promoted the method in educational policy and

practice. (Davies 2010, 365). In recent years, the expansion of evidence-based practice

across sectors has led to an increasing variety of review types. (Grant & Booth 2009, 91.)

The seven stages of the systematic review

In this study Salminen’s (2011, 11) remodel of Fink’s (2005, 3-5) seven staged model of the

practical steps of a systematic review has been used to describe the research process. There

has been ongoing debate with the reseach team on the aims and themes of the review. The

seven stages have been divided into three sections for clarity: selection of literature (process

stages 1-5), literature review (stage 6) and synthesis of the results (stage 7).

Selection of literature

In stage 1, the two research questions were formed. In stage 2, the EBSCO Academic Search

Premier database was chosen form the literature search due to its suitability, usability and

the vast mass of international ECEC journal articles. In stage 3, articles were searched using

the following criteria: the title of the article included the term ‘quality’ and the subject terms

included either ‘early childhood education’ or ‘preschool’ or ‘kindergarten’. Approval from

the research team was gained at this crucial stage in the data selection process. The search

provided two hundred articles and it was further limited in stage 4 to articles, which had

undergone peer review and had been published between January 2010 and June 2016 (inclu-

sive) and in English language. The time span was selected to ensure the most recent research

findings in the field to gain an overview of the current thinking, which may have affected

the policy makers responsible for the Finnish ECEC legislation reform. At this stage there

were 138 articles on the list. Stage 5 finalised the selection process by including those jour-

nals, which each had published at least 10 articles in the time span. In total, four journals

13

containing 67 articles were included in this category. The location of the selected publica-

tions was verified to ensure wide international coverage. There were European (2), Austral-

ian (1) and American (1) journals in the top four most published journals meeting the search

criteria.

Literature review

In the sixth stage of the selection process, the initial data describing the articles was recorded

in a table form. The following features were documented for each study:

1. Was the study empirical or theoretical?

2. Was the research methodology qualitative or quantitative?

3. Did the study describe the concept of ‘quality’ in early childhood education and care?

4. Did the teachers have a role in the concept of ‘quality’?

5. Where was the study carried out?

In the pool of 67 articles there were studies from 20 different countries, of which 18 from

the USA and 14 from Australia. The rest were from Great Britain (5), China (4), Greece (4),

Germany (2), New Zealand (2), Bangladesh (1), Denmark (1), Egypt (1), Finland (1), Israel

(1), Italy (1), Japan (1), Jordan (1), Norway (1), Netherlands (1), Portugal (1), South Africa

(1) and Sweden (1). Three articles were international collaborations.

Hard copies of each article were obtained electronically to facilitate the analysis of how

‘quality’ had been conceptualised and how that concept accommodates the teacher’s role.

Two articles were not available and one was a call for papers. Hence, there were 65 articles

in the pool for final selection. All those articles, which received a ‘yes’ in questions 3 and 4

were chosen for the analysis. As table 1 illustrates, most of the articles on ECEC quality

were empirical research studies (n=45) and quantitative research methods were more com-

mon (n=40) than qualitative methods. 54 studies described ‘quality’ and of those, 42 articles

included the teacher’s role as a quality factor in ECEC. These 42 articles were analysed

further to answer the research questions.

14

Table 1 Features of the articles included in analysis of the review (n=65)

Synthesis of the results

Four ways of constructing the concept of quality with links to early years teachers were

identified from the data. At the analysis stage each article’s concept of quality was reduced

into as simple a text form as possible. These captions could be seen to form clusters, which

illustrate the perspectives from which ‘quality’ has been defined. The clusters were kept

simple and some definitions include more perspectives than one. The following four catego-

ries of perspectives into ‘quality’ were drawn:

1. Organisational perspective: what is the provider and the programme like?

The organisational perspective focusses mainly on the measurable, structural factors: the

facilities, the programme, the management and the teachers. In terms of the teaching staff

the important factors bringing quality to the service are the teachers’ qualifications and their

skills and competences. It also recognises the staff stability, the adult-child ratio, the propor-

tion of male and female staff and the proportion of ethnic minority staff.

The Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale, Revised Edition (ECERS-R; Cryer, Harms,

& Riley 2003) was the most often used measuring tool amongst the studies. It aims to assess

the overall quality of the kindergarten learning environment. Al-Hassan et al. (2010, 1206)

42

54

25

40

20

45

0 10 20 30 40 50 60

DESCRIPTION OF QUALITY INCLUDING TEACHER'S ROLE

DEFINITION OF QUALITY

QUALITATIVE RESEARCH

QUANTITATIVE RESEARCH

THEORETICAL RESEARCH

EMPIRICAL RESEARCH

15

defend the method by explaining that the ECERS has been widely used in different cultures

and in several languages.

2. Achieving the targets: what skills and competences will the children gain?

Another perspective into ECEC quality is in the achievement of the set targets. The service

is considered high quality when research shows improvement in children’s learning and links

pre-school attendance with later academic success. The teacher’s role is particulary in the

pedagogical competence and leadership.

Choi and Dobbs-Oates (2014) proved a positive link to preschool children’s math develop-

ment with teacher–child closeness and teacher experience. The Gialamas et al. (2013) study

showed that warm and affectionalte adult-child interaction resulted in higher vocabulary,

literacy and maths scores and lower internalising and externalising behaviour scores in kin-

dergarten children.

According to Domitrovich et al. (2010, 284) research suggests that for example teachers’

enthusiasm and their sensitivity to children’s needs results in a positive reaction in children

and hence a high quality implementation, which in turn can affect the teachers’ ability to

replicate positive learning results.

3. Children’s wellbeing and quality of life: how do children experience their education and

care?

Many elements, such as warm, frequent and responsive interactions between adults and chil-

dren are seen to enchance children’s experience. Children’s experience in turn is a marker

for social and emotional quality. A non-authoritarian teacher with a nurturing and warm

interaction can make a difference to children and their families. Quality can be seen from

the children’s perspective: they feel valued, safe and a part of the group. The children’s

wellbeing is particularly appreciated by their parents.

The children’s voice is rarely heard in research (Harcourt and Mazzoni 2012) and measuring

happiness, wellbeing and warmth is a challenge. The children’s experience is however an

important perspective into quality. Fenech (2011, 99) found that most parents cited process

elements and staff characteristics as main factors contributing to the quality of their child’s

care centre. Harcourt and Mazzoni (2012) made an empirical investigation into children's

16

competences in communicating their view and made an effort into establishing ways of using

these skills in a meaningful way.

From an adult perspective, Broekhuizen et al, (2016) concluded that teacher emotional sup-

port and classroom management in kindergarten promoted children’s social and behavioral

skills. One of the frequently analysis tools for measuring these is CLASS (Pianta et al.,

2008), which was designed to measure the quality of teacher-child interactions from various

perspectives.

4. Meaning is made moment by moment: what meaning do children gain in ECEC?

In the daily situations of children playing, learning and interacting with others the observing

teacher can help a child development by interpreting events and making meaning of what

has been said and done. It necessitates the teacher an ability to identify the child’s learning

and articulating teaching strategies to support further learning. The teacher will see various

opportunities in each event and keeps a curious mind. This method requires pedagogical

competence.

The post structuralist paradigm represented in the articles of the Contemporary Issues in

Early Childhood are offering a shift from a ‘logic of quality’ to a ‘space of meaning-making’

(Evans 2016, 65). Duhn (2016, 54) explains that the prevailing idea of all stakeholders sup-

porting high quality has led to the increase in measurement and control. Duhn has offered a

new analysis to data gathered by familiar tools, such as observation. She offers a thick de-

scription of a case as a method to provide a story highlighting the opportunities for children

to create an individual path to development.

17

Reliability and Limitations

According to Abalos et al. (2001), it is essential to describe the review process of a system-

atic review in such detail, that another researcher could repeat the process. They argue that

the process description must include clear objectives, comprehensively documented litera-

ture search, an explicit quality evaluation and clear definitions of the evidence, which has

been combined from individual studies. In the purest form of the systematic review it is a

recommendation to have a research team in order to avoid bias (Johansson et al. 2007, 46).

In this study there was a research team available for support and advice to improve reliability

of the study. (Puroila & Kinnunen 2015.)

In qualitative research, terms such as validity, reliability and generalizability are only appro-

priate in the broadest context, argue Noble & Smith (2015, 34) and suggest the replacing

terms consistency, neutrality, truth value and applicability. These can be translated into strat-

egies for enhancing the credibility of qualitative research. Consistency or neutrality can be

achieved via auditability, for example providing a transparent, clear and well documented

description of the whole research process and discussing emerging themes within the re-

search team until consensus is reached. Truth value includes reflection (i.e. maintaining a

reflecting journal of decisions and peer evaluation) and representativeness of the findings

(i.e. repeating data analysis and using rich and verbatim extracts to give the reader an oppor-

tunity to check the data against the findings and inviting participants to comment on find-

ings). Applicability refers to the application of findings in different contexts, i.e. ensuring

there is a lot of rich detail to enable the study conclusions’ transferability somewhere else.

(Noble & Smith 2015, 34).

In this study, Noble & Smith’s (2015) views on reliability issues have been partly taken into

consideration. Namely, to add consistency to the study, the process has followed Salminen’s

(2011) remodel of Fink’s (2005) seven staged review process. All decisions in all the stages

have been documented and the themes and process have been discussed with a research team.

In terms of true value, it is intended that the data analysis can be easily reviewed and redone

following documented stages of the study.

There are certain limitations to the review. Firstly, this study is restricted to review scholarly

articles sought from one rather than several databases. EBSCO Academic Search Premier

18

was chosen for its expansive database of articles in early childhood education and care. It is

however a possibility, that it excludes some relevant studies which are more difficult to find.

Secondly, the selected pool of scholarly journals includes four journals with the ambitious

intention of representing the ECEC academic community. Thirdly, out of the four journals,

two are European based, one is Australian and two from the United States of America. Re-

search is always culturally bound (Karila, 2016, 13) and hence, the fourth limitation of this

study is the English language selection criteria. Considering the need for this review stems

from the shift in ECEC policy in Finland, it is also notable that apart from one article the

research evidence is international and only three studies were conducted in the neighbouring

Scandinavian countries. It should be noted, however, that the academic community is inter-

national. In terms of ECEC provision it is also likely that for example the Australian system

resembles more the Finnish one than the southern European countries’ counterparts. Further,

the analysed articles regarded research from 20 different countries in the world and there is

some representation from the non-English speaking countries.

19

Conclusion and Discussion

The four perspectives into ‘quality’; 1. the organisational perspective, 2. achieving the tar-

gets, 3. children’s wellbeing and quality of life and 4. meaning is made moment by moment,

are clusters of data drawn from the research findings. Some studies combine several of these

views and there are links between them. For example, Choi and Dobbs-Oates (2014) proved

a positive link to preschool children’s math development with teacher–child closeness and

teacher experience.

Most of the recent studies utilise the old definitions of quality and there seems to be little

attempt to create new tools. Even the post constructivists who have questioned the concept

of quality for several decades offer a disappointing few solutions to the problem they prove.

The teacher’s role seems central to all the perspectives into ECEC quality. This suggests that

the teaching staff is the most valuable assett to any kindergarten or preschool. The Finnish

government has not disputed this, but unfortunately, the salary costs remain to be the main

expense and money is spare. The legislation reform in Finland implies more responsibility

and work load for teaching professionals. The early years teachers’ receive low pay when

compared to other professionals with similar university degrees and work responsibilities.

The reform will make the climate even more challenging for head to recruit qualified

teachers and as the end result, the service will have to deal with both fewer and less compe-

tent staff.

This review is a humble scratch in the surface. In my view, we need to further investigate

our own view of quality and seek ways to improve the key areas. Recent research shows that

despite of cultural variation, the skills, competences, attitudes and commitment of early years

teachers are worth investing in. It would be particularly compelling to research children’s

experiences of what they consider to constitute quality. They are the consumers of the ECEC

services and their voice should be heard.

20

References

Abalos, E., Carroli, G., Mackey, M.E. & Bergel, E. (2001). Critical appraisal of systematic

reviews. The WHO Reproductive Health Library, No 4, Geneva. The World Health Or-

ganization (WHO/RHR701.6).

Act on Children’s Day Care 367/1973.

Al-Hassan, S., Obeidat, O. M., & Lansford, J. E. (2010). Education reform and the quality

of kindergartens in Jordan. Early Child Development & Care, 180(9), 1203-1213.

doi:10.1080/03004430902907640

Andrews, R. (2005). The place of systematic reviews in education research. British Journal

of Educational Studies, 53(4), 399-416. doi:10.1111/j.1467-8527.2005.00303.x

Brodin, J., Hollerer, L., Renblad, K., & Stancheva-Popkostadinova, V. (2015). Preschool

teachers' understanding of quality in preschool: A comparative study in three European

countries. Early Child Development & Care, 185(6), 968-981.

doi:10.1080/03004430.2014.974035

Brodin, J. & Renblad, K. (2014). Reflections on the Revised National Curriculum for

Preschool in Sweden – interviews with the heads. Early Child Development & Care, 184(2),

306-321.

Broekhuizen, M. L., Mokrova, I. L., Burchinal, M. R., & Garrett-Peters, P. (2016). Class-

room quality at pre-kindergarten and kindergarten and children’s social skills and behavior

problems. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 36, 212-222. doi:10.1016/j.ec-

resq.2016.01.005

Choi, J. Y., & Dobbs-Oates, J. (2014). Childcare quality and preschoolers' math develop-

ment. Early Child Development & Care, 184(6), 915-932.

doi:10.1080/03004430.2013.829822

Cryer, D., Harms, T. & Riley, C. (2003). All about the ECERS-R. Kaplan Early Learning

Company.

21

Dahlberg, G., Moss, P., & Pence, A. (2007). Beyond quality in early childhood education

and care: Languages of evaluation (2nd Ed.). London: Falmer Press.

Davies, P. (2010). The relevance of systematic reviews to educational policy and practice.

Oxford Review of Education, 26(3), 365-378. doi:10.1080/3054980020001882

Decree on Children’s Day Care 239/1973.

Domitrovich, C. E., Gest, S. D., Jones, D., Gill, S., & DeRousie, R. M. S. (2010). Imple-

mentation quality: Lessons learned in the context of the head start REDI trial. Early Child-

hood Research Quarterly, 25(3), 284-298. doi:10.1016/j.ecresq.2010.04.001

Duhn, I., & Grieshaber, S. (2016). Imagining otherwise: A (brief) darwinian encounter with

quality standards. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 17(1), 54-64.

doi:10.1177/1463949115627901

Evans, K. (2016). Beyond a logic of quality: Opening space for material-discursive practices

of ‘readiness’ in early years education. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 17(1), 65-

77. doi:10.1177/1463949115627904

European Commission (2010). Europe 2020 A strategy for smart, sustainable and inclusive

growth. Communication from the commission. Brussels.

European Commission (2014). Proposal for key principles of a Quality Framework for Early

Childhood Education and Care . Report of the Working Group on Early Childhood Educa-

tion and Care under the auspices of the European Commission. http://ec.europa.eu/dgs/edu-

cation_culture/repository/education/policy/strategic-framework/archive/documents/ecec-

quality-framework_en.pdf (10.11.2016)

Fenech, M., Waniganayake, M., Fleet, A. (2009). More than a shortage of early childhood

teachers: Looking beyond the recruitment of university qualified teachers to promote quality

early childhood education and care. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 199-

213.

22

Fenech, M., Giugni, M., & Bown, K. (2012). A critical analysis of the national quality fra-

mework: Mobilising for a vision for children beyond minimum standards. Australasian

Journal of Early Childhood, 37(4), 5-14.

Fenech, M., Harrison, L., & Sumsion, J. (2011). Parent users of high-quality long day care:

Informed consumers of child care? Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 36(1), 95-103.

Fink, Arlene (2005). Conducting Research Literature Reviews: From the Internet to the Pa-

per. Thousand Oaks: Sage Publications, Inc.

Gambaro, L., Stewart, K. & Waldfogel, J. (2013) A question of quality: do children from

disadvantaged backgrounds receive lower quality early years education and care in Eng-

land? CASEpapers, CASE/171. Centre for the Analysis of Social Exclusion, London School

of Economics and Political Science, London, UK.

Gambaro, L., Stewart, K. & Waldfogel, J. eds. (2014). An Equal Start? Providing quality

early education and care for disadvantaged children. Bristol: The Policy Press in association

with the University of Chicago Press.

Gialamas, A., Mittinty, M. N., Sawyer, M. G., Zubrick, S. R., & Lynch, J. (2014). Child care

quality and children's cognitive and socio-emotional development: An australian longitu-

dinal study. Early Child Development & Care, 184(7), 977-997.

doi:10.1080/03004430.2013.847835

Grant, M.J. & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review types and

associated methodologies. Health Information and Libraries Journal, 26(2), 91-108.

Hallituksen esitys 80/2015 vp.

Harcourt, D., & Mazzoni, V. (2012). Standpoints on quality: Listening to children in Verona.

Italy. Australasian Journal of Early Childhood, 37(2), 19-26.

Ishimine, K., & Tayler, C. (2014). Assessing quality in early childhood education and care.

European Journal of Education, 49(2), 272-290.

Johansson, K., Axelin, A., Stolt, M. & Ääri, R-L. toim. (2007). Systemaattinen kirjallisuus-

katsaus ja sen tekeminen. Turun yliopiston hoitotieteen laitoksen julkaisuja A:51.

23

Karila, K. (2016). Vaikuttava varhaiskasvatus. Tilannekatsaus toukokuu 2016. Raportit ja

selvitykset 6. Opetushallitus.

Katz, L. (1993). Multiple perspectives on the quality of early childhood programs.

Logan, H., Press, F., & Sumsion, J. (2012). The quality imperative: Tracing the rise of 'qua-

lity' in australian early childhood education and care policy. Australasian Journal of Early

Childhood, 37(3), 4-13.

Logan, H. & Sumsion, J. (2010). Early childhood teachers’ understandings of and provision

for quality. Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 35(3), 42-50.

Ministry of education and culture (2016). Finnish acts and decrees concerning education.

http://www.minedu.fi/OPM/Koulutus/koulutuspolitiikka/lait_ja_ohjeet/?lang=en

(9.11.2016)

Moss, P. (2016). Why can’t we get beyond quality? Contemporary Issues in Early Child-

hood, 17(1), 8-15. doi:10.1177/1463949115627895

Noble, H. & Smith, J. (2015). Issues of validity and reliability in qualitative research. Evi-

dence Based Nursing,18, 34-35.

OECD (2015), Starting Strong IV: Monitoring Quality in Early Childhood Education and

Care, OECD Publishing, Paris. DOI: http://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264233515-en

Opetusalan Ammattijärjestö OAJ (2009). Pula lastentarhanopettajista vähenee – Varhaiskas-

vatuksen erityisopettajia hälyttävän vähän. Selvitys lastentarhanopettajien ja erityislasten-

tarhanopettajien saatavuudesta ja riittävyydestä. www.oaj.fi (29.10.2016)

Pianta, R.C., LaParo, K.M., & Hamre, B. K. (2008). Classroom Assessment Scoring System

Manual: Pre- K. Baltimore: Brookes.

Puroila, A-M. & Kinnunen, S. (2015). Selvitys Varhaiskasvatuslain kokonaisvaikutuksista

(VakaVai). Julkaisematon hankesuunnitelma.

Rentzou, K., & Sakellariou, M. (2011). The quality of early childhood educators: Children's

interaction in greek child care centres. Early Childhood Education Journal, (38), 367-376.

24

Ruhm, C. & Waldfogel, J. (2012). Long-term effects of early childhood care and education.

The Nordic Economic Policy Review, 1, 23-52.

Salminen, A. (2011). Mikä kirjallisuuskatsaus? Johdatus kirjallisuuskatsauksen tyyppeihin

ja hallintotieteellisiin sovelluksiin. Vaasan yliopiston julkaisuja 62: 4.

Zaslow, M. & Tout, K. (2011). Measuring the Quality of Early Care and Education Prog-

rams at the intersection of Research, Policy, and Practice. Research-to-Policy, Research-to-

Practice Brief OPRE 2011-10a.