Abstract
This is a refreshing and timely book that uses multiple perspectives on the state of early childhood education and care (ECEC) in the UK. The words ‘hit’, ‘nail’ and ‘head’ come to mind when reading the analysis of the state of ECEC since the post-war period. The book paints a vivid picture of efforts to develop and professionalise ECEC against a backdrop of indifference and indecision from successive governments and reverses of any progress that has been made.
Transforming Early Childhood in England starts with mention of the COVID-19 pandemic and the effect this may have on ECEC, and there is almost a juxtaposition between this and ‘unfettered neo-liberalism’. It may be, as the book states, that the COVID-19 pandemic offers opportunities to rethink and start again, but whether such opportunities will overcome neo-liberal dogma as well is open to question. The book makes a good case for the ‘tinkering’ that ECEC has undergone. Without any unified or serious endeavour, ECEC has become a fragmented consumer product left to the invisible hand of the market. ECEC is, as the book states more than once, based on political decisions, and decisions supporting ECEC have not been forthcoming.
The book uses a quote that promotes a collective approach to ECEC to benefit all, and this is something that governments should heed. The cult of the individual can affect different aspects of society, such as crime, environmental issues and housing, but arguably effective care and education for children overarches all of these social issues, and that message comes through loud and clear here. Many books have included material on poverty and homelessness, but it is interesting that, in this book, comparisons are made between Peter Townsend’s classic work on poverty in the 1970s and the present, and it raises vital issues around stigma and poverty. Stigma can undermine the individual’s ability to compete in the market – with ECEC or otherwise; this is made clear in this book. Issues around homelessness are presented with a clear indication of the social and psychosocial problems that homelessness can bring. As the book states, the first 1000 days of a child’s life are crucial, but it also emphasises the need to clear up the consequences of homelessness and, by definition, the costs of this as well. These costs could be avoided if housing issues were addressed in the first instance.
The need for integrated children’s services is put forward and evidence is given that, with political will, this can be achieved. The book points out that, during the Second World War, children’s services were developed extensively because the nation needed them, with so many females in the workplace. More comparisons are made with the 1970s to show how little things have changed. It is depressing that the nation does not see the need for unified and unifying ECEC in the 21st century; this is especially the case as the book points out the success of countries like Sweden.
The issue of the ECEC workforce is covered with reference to pay, conditions and qualifications, but also problems such as stress and the depletion of the workforce. Interesting recommendations are made based on international comparisons; these demonstrate that, with the right will, the ECEC workforce can be professionalised and sustained. The vagaries of funding models are held up to scrutiny and a pure market solution to ECEC is rejected. The complexity of ECEC provision in the UK is outlined and disconnections explained; some of the failings of the mixed economy of ECEC are analysed, but the book does not argue for a necessarily total public model. Again, international examples are used to show that, with effective regulation, state and private provision can be effective when working together.
Children’s learning is held up to scrutiny and the shortcomings of the Early Years Foundation Stage are pointed out. These centre around evaluation and the need for ECEC practitioners to recognise children’s interests and capacities; cooperation and participatory learning are promoted as alternatives to bureaucratic models. Child-centredness is endorsed through a chapter on ‘listening’. The need for speed and visibility in a testing environment is lamented and recognition of ‘other kinds of knowledge’ is made. An interesting section on democracy promotes a version of Dewey’s concept of liberal education and the advantages this can bring to education and society. The book shows how ECEC is controlled through managerialism and inspections, and school readiness is described as a ‘reduction’ of ECEC. The emphasis on school readiness is explained as mistrust of the ECEC workforce by neo-liberal ideology.
Looking to the future, the book acknowledges the failings of ECEC in the UK and asks fundamental questions, such as what we want our children to be like and what our vision of childhood is. It attributes many of the failings to neo-liberal governments, as they view children as ‘bottles to be filled’ rather than agents who are active in their own education. Children’s participation is seen as contributing to the building of society and citizenship. ECEC is promoted as a multifaceted and combined effort – including health, nutrition and recreational activities, for example.
Transforming Early Childhood in England outlines many issues with ECEC in the UK. It places the current situation squarely in the political arena. It makes numerous references to the 1970s and evaluations and efforts to improve ECEC; it sees the state of ECEC as the result of neo-liberal policies. However, at each stage, the book presents ideas of what ECEC could be like. To this end, numerous international comparisons are made to show how more democratic and child-centred models can be successful. The book is incisive and gets to the heart of the matter, therefore anyone who is interested in the state of ECEC and the possibilities, given the political will, should read Transforming Early Childhood in England.
