Varhaiskasvatuksen  Tiedelehti   Journal  of  Early  Childhood  Education  Research     Vol.3,  No.1,  2014,  65−81  

  ©  2014  Suomen  Varhaiskasvatus  ry.  –  Early  Childhood  Education  Association  Finland.     Peer-­‐review   under  responsibility  of  the  editorial  board  of  the  journal     ISSN  2323-­‐7414;     ISSN-­‐L  2323-­‐7414     online  

65  

  Being  and  Becoming  Early  Childhood  

Leaders:  Reflections  on  Leadership  Studies   in  Early  Childhood  Education  and  the   Future  Leadership  Research  Agenda  

Manjula  Waniganayake    

Institute  of  Early  Childhood,  Macquarie  University,  Sydney,  Australia   e-­‐mail:  [email protected]  

ABSTRACT:   In  Australia,  educational  leadership  studies  emerged  as  a  core  area  of   study   within   early   childhood   bachelor   degree   courses   during   the   1990s.   This   inclusion  was  supported  by  findings  from  newly  emerging  research  on  leadership   involving  early  childhood  educators.  A  handful  of  Australian  and  Finnish  scholars   joined  researchers  based  in  the  USA  to  actively  research  leadership  focusing  on  the   early  childhood  sector.  In  this  paper,  reflections  on  what  has  been  achieved  over  the   past  two  decades  in  promoting  leadership  studies  in  the  early  childhood  sector  is   analysed  as  a  starting  point  to  evaluate  learning  and  stimulate  further  discussion  on   additional  work  necessary  in  preparing  future  leaders.  This  analysis  will  be  based  on   exploring  key  assumptions  about  distributed  leadership  models  being  favoured  by   policy   planners   and   practitioners.   In   identifying   gaps   in   our   knowledge   base,   possibilities   for   further   research   are   presented   by   drawing   on   developments   in   Australia  and  elsewhere  as  appropriate.  

  Keywords:  early  childhood  leadership,  leadership  research,  leadership  preparation.    

Theorising  leadership  in  early  childhood  

Leadership  is  a  word  used  all  around  the  world.  Its  abstract  nature  has  however  meant   that  there  is  no  single  universal  definition  or  agreement  on  what  leadership  is  and  how   it  can  be  assessed  and  understood.  Researching  leadership  is  also  challenging  because  it   is  difficult   to   identify,  quantify  or  observe,  and  as  Rodd  (2013)  declares,   sometimes,  

66  

Waniganayake     —     Varhaiskasvatuksen  Tiedelehti     —     JECER     3(1)  2014,  65–81.   http://jecer.org/fi      

“effective   leadership   is  enacted  by  standing  back,   saying  or  doing  nothing.”   (p.  233).   Nevertheless,  leadership  is  often  identified  as  a  key  element  in  delivering  high  quality   early   childhood   programs   (Hujala,   Waniganayake   &   Rodd,   2013).     In   effect,   conceptualisations  of   leadership  are  best  understood  when  nuanced  within   the   local   contexts  of  enactment.  

Writing  about   leadership  within  early  childhood  settings   in  Australia,  Waniganayake,   Cheeseman,   Fennech,   Hadley   and   Shepherd   (2012,   p.11)   have   suggested   that   when   exploring  leadership  one  must  take  into  account  the  person  (the  leader),  the  position   (authority  to  make  decisions)  and  the  place  (the  organisational  setting).  Which  of  these   three  elements  are  emphasised  or  prioritised  within  the  daily  practice  of  early  childhood   leadership  is  however,  highly  variable  and  context  specific.  This  view  is  encapsulated  in   the  definition  of  early  childhood  leadership  presented  by  Nivala  (1999  cited  in  Hujala,   2013,  p.  53)  as  “a  socially  constructed,  situational  and  interpretive  phenomenon.”  These   Finnish   early   childhood   scholars   are   pioneer   researchers   who   recognised   the   importance   of   context   in   researching   leadership.   Their   contextual   leadership   model   integrates   the   structural   components   of   early   childhood   organisations   by   drawing   attention   to   the   vision,   mission,   core   tasks   and   responsibilities   of   early   childhood   leaders.  

This  article  aims  to  present  critical  reflections  about  the  importance  of  preparing  early   childhood   educators   for   leadership   enactment.     Given   the   increasing   complexity   of   challenges  encountered  by  today’s  early  childhood  educators  in  the  frontline  of  service   delivery,   it   is   imperative  that  those   in   leadership  roles  are  well  prepared  in  order  to   respond  effectively  to  support  the  education  and  wellbeing  of  children  and  families  in   their  communities.     Adopting  a  contextual  approach,  pathways  to  being  and  becoming   leaders   in   Early   Childhood   Education   (ECE)   are   examined   against   a   backdrop   of   developments  in  Australia  and  other  countries  as  appropriate.    

Changing  profile  of  the  early  childhood  educator  

Globally,  there  is  no  consensus  or  clarity  on  what  is  expected  of  ECE  graduates  at  the   time  of  graduation  from  a  three  or  four  year  bachelor  degree.  The  Australian  Children’s   Education  and  Care  Quality  Authority  (ACECQA)  is  responsible  for  the  accreditation  of   course  content  in  this  country.  The  pay  and  conditions  of  employing  ECE  graduates  are   linked  to  industrial  awards  but  this  system  is  fragmented  due  to  the  involvement  of  a   mix  of  trade  unions  with  inadequate  national  coordination.  The  limited  recognition  of   masters  degrees  within  the  current  awards  is  a  particular  concern  as  there  is  no  formal   approval  of  the  value  of  undertaking  postgraduate  studies  reflected  in  the  pay  scales,   leaving  it  to  employers  to  validate  staff  achievements  through  advanced  studies.  Overall,   the  absence  of  a  national  professional  registration  system  for  ECE  graduates  has  also   meant   that   there   is   no   systematic   way   of   assessing   the   employment   expectations   of   these   graduates.   In   effect,   there   has   been   limited   movement   in   addressing   issues   of   public   visibility   and   validation,   career   pathways   linked   to   formal   studies,   as   well   as  

67  

Waniganayake     —     Varhaiskasvatuksen  Tiedelehti     —     JECER     3(1)  2014,  65–81.   http://jecer.org/fi      

professional  registration  and  licensure,  as  identified  particularly  in  terms  of  leadership   development  nearly  two  decades  ago  (Waniganayake,  1998).  

The  roles  and  responsibilities  of  ECE  graduates  working  in  childcare  centres  have  varied   overtime.  About  thirty  years  ago,  being  a  teacher  of  young  children  was  clearly  defined   as   an   autonomous   role   carried   out   by   an   ECE   graduate   who   was   responsible   for   designing   and   delivering   an   education   program   for   pre-­‐schoolers.   In   contrast,   the   contemporary  profiles  of  ECE  graduates  incorporate  education  and  care  responsibilities   more  explicitly  and  cover  a  wider  age  range  of  children  birth  to  five  years.  Government   policy,  through  the  National  Quality  Standard  (ACECQA,  2012)  and  its  predecessor,  the   Quality  Improvement  and  Accreditation  System  (QIAS)  in  1993,  has  reinforced  this  open   profile  since  the  1990s.  The  emphasis  on  working  in  partnership  with  families  and  the   wider   community   and   the   inclusion   of   service   management   and   leadership   responsibilities  (ACECQA,  2012)  reflects  the  expanding  roles  of  ECE  graduates,  requiring   engagement   with   a   wide   range   of   stakeholders.   The   once   clearly   defined   teacher   responsibilities  focusing  exclusively  on  the  education  of  young  children,  has  therefore   widened   in   scope   with   increasing   demands   from   parents,   government   and   other   professionals  working  in  different  ways  with  children  in  early  childhood  settings.  

As   reflected   in   Figure   1,   traditionally,   in   Australia,   those   graduating   with   an   ECE   Diploma  or  Degree,   found  employment   in  a  preschool  or  kindergarten  working  with   children  between  three  to  five  years  age.  Since  the  1980s  however,  with  the  large  scale   expansion  of  childcare  centres  employment  opportunities  for  early  childhood  graduates   emerged   in   settings   catering   for   children   from   birth   to   five   years.     Traditional   preschools   or   kindergartens   offered   half-­‐day   educational   programs,   and   are   closed   during  school  holidays.  In  contrast,  childcare  centres  are  open  for  longer  hours,  often   from  7am  to  6pm  and  remain  open  for  at  least  48  weeks  of  the  year  in  order  to  obtain   government  funding.    

68  

Waniganayake     —     Varhaiskasvatuksen  Tiedelehti     —     JECER     3(1)  2014,  65–81.   http://jecer.org/fi      

Traditional  Profile             Contemporary  Profile  

Pre-­‐1980s                 Since  the  1990s                                                                                                                                                                                  

FIGURE  1     Changing  profile  of  ECE  graduates  

Research  conducted  during  the  1990s  on  exploring  workplace  responsibilities  of  early   childhood  educators   is   limited.   Initial   leadership  studies  conducted  by   those  such  as   Hayden   (1997),   Rodd   (1998),   and   Waniganayake,   Morda   and   Kapsalakis   (2000)   suggested  that  soon  after  graduation  with  little  or  no  work  experience  in  the  sector,  but   as  the  highest  qualified  person,  ECE  graduates  were  frequently  expected  to  jump  into   the   role   of   a   centre   director/manager.   Reflecting   on   these   studies   now   it   becomes   apparent  that  unenviable  demands  were  placed  on  new  and  inexperienced  graduates  in   managing  and   leading  as  a   childcare   centre  director.  This   situation  was  exacerbated   further   for   teaching   directors   of   small   centres   where   the   director’s   responsibilities   included   regular   classroom  work  with   children.   Importantly,   research  by  Rosier  and   Lloyd-­‐Smith  (1996,  p.  i)  revealed  that  "low  pay  and  low  status  relative  to  high  level  of   responsibility  inherent  in  the  job"  contributed  significantly  to  staff  dissatisfaction  and   high   turnover   rates   (cited   in   Waniganayake,   1998,   p.111).   This   pattern   was   also   reflected   in  other  countries  such  as  the  USA,  where  Jorde-­‐Bloom  (1994)  reported  on   concerns  on  expecting  teacher  education  graduates  to  take  on  broader  responsibilities   without  adequate  preparation  for  leading  and  managing  centres.  

Almost   two  decades   later,   the  assessment  of  workplace  demands  on  early  childhood   graduates  I  made  in  1998  still  stands:  

For   many   child   care   centre   directors   in   Australia,   the   responsibilities   they   shoulder  as   the   'chief  executive  officer'  of  a  small  business  enterprise  are  not   reflected   in   their   job   descriptions,   wages   nor   conditions   of   employment.   Observing  similar  trends  in  Europe,  those  such  as  Oberhuemer  and  Ulich  (1997)   as  well  as  Abbott  and  Pugh  (1998)  call  for  a  review  of  early  childhood  training   which  takes  into  account  contemporary  realities  of  wider  societal,  economic  and   political  contexts  which  require  early  childhood  professionals  to  have  skills  far  

AUTONOMOUS  

• Well  defined  as  a   teacher  of  young   children  

• Self  contained  to   the  setting    

OPEN/UNBOUNDED  

• Ill-­‐defined  as  a  teacher/   manager/leader/other?  

• Multiple  roles  involving   children,  families,  staff,  

and  community    

69  

Waniganayake     —     Varhaiskasvatuksen  Tiedelehti     —     JECER     3(1)  2014,  65–81.   http://jecer.org/fi      

beyond  working  with  young  children  in  small  isolated  settings.    

        (Waniganayake,  1998,  p.  117)  

The  nationalization  of  early  childhood  policy  reforms  in  Australia  during  2007-­‐2013,  has  also   placed  increasing  demands  on  centre  directors  (Productivity  Commission,  2011).  Their   role   today   includes   not   only   providing   pedagogical   leadership   in   supporting   the   implementation   of   the   national   curriculum   known   as   the   Early   Years   Learning   Framework  (DEEWR,  2009),  but  also  satisfying  compliance  with   legal  responsibilities   and   managing   the   centre   as   a   viable   business.   Whilst   in   school   education   it   is   well   understood  that  small  schools  “are  not  miniature  versions  of  large  schools”  (Mohr,  2000   cited  in  Dinham  et  al,  2011,  p.  149)  this  is  not  yet  fully  appreciated  in  the  early  childhood   sector.   Accordingly,   it   is   not   surprising   that   a   pattern   of   accidental   managers   in   leadership   positions   which   emerged   in   the   1990s,   continues   in   practice   today.   The   challenge  remains,  how  to  grow  early  childhood  leaders  who  can  perform  diverse  and   complex  functions  and  do  it  well,  and  how  to  produce  sufficient  numbers  of  leadership   capable   graduates,   quickly.   The   sense   of   urgency   was   captured   in   the   Productivity   Commission’s  Report  (2011)  which  was  cognizant  of  the  flow  on  effects  of  the  national   reforms   requiring   both   a   review   of   existing   qualifications   and   the   need   for     “a   substantial  volume  of  training  to  be  delivered  in  a  short  time  frame”  (p.  xxxiv).  

School   leadership   research   shows   that   effectiveness   of   leadership   can   be   assessed   against  student  learning  outcomes  and  indeed,  high  stakes  testing  of  school  performance   highlights   the   key   role   school   principals   play   in   student   achievement   (Dinham   et   al,   2011;  Marsh,  Waniganayake,  &  De  Nobile,  2013).  Within  ECE,  there  is  no  longitudinal   research  on  measuring  the  impact  of  leadership  on  children’s  learning  other  than  linking   it  with  broader  service  quality  as  reflected  in  research  by  Siraj-­&#x2010