Privilege or tragedy? Educators’ accounts of flexibly scheduled early childhood education and care

Abstract

This article explores accounts given by Finnish educators (n = 31) on the topic of flexibly scheduled early childhood education and care (i.e. childcare provided during non-standard as well as standard hours). Previous research has shown this to be a sensitive topic because of the contradiction between what is deemed in the interests of children and the fact of providing childcare during non-standard hours. The research follows the principles of discursive psychology. Educators’ accounts were labelled as excusing, compensating, normalising and justifying. Accounts categorised as excusing and compensating shared concern over the effects of childcare during non-standard hours on children’s well-being. Similar risks were not expressed in the normalising and the justifying accounts. Accounts differed as to who was held responsible for providing this type of childcare. When the responsibility was attributed to society, the educators’ position was weaker than when they constructed themselves as active participants. Both educators and children were uniquely positioned in each type of account. As accounts have consequences for actions, it is important to make them visible both to understand and to develop practices in flexibly scheduled early childhood education and care.