One Size doesn't Fit All: Patterns of Pre-Primary Teacher Policy Engagement

Abstract

In Western Australia the non-compulsory early years of school are administered by the compulsory schooling sector. Consequently, the ways in which pre-primary teachers are asked to account for their work have changed. Pre-primary teachers are asked to implement a school development plan and provide evidence of accomplishment of the school priorities. Such requirements have unsettled teachers, as they believe the ‘one size fits all’ application of school policies does not capture the essence of early childhood pedagogy and practice. This paper draws on qualitative and quantitative data collected during a study that investigated pre-primary teacher accountability from the policy level to the practicalities of classroom life. The study suggests that policies pertaining to the early years need to be written in such a way that meets the needs of the system, but also fits with the cultures of pre-primary teachers' classrooms.

Get full access to this article

View all access options for this article.

References

Barblett

(2000). What counts as accountability? Towards an accountability framework for the pre-primary. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Perth: Edith Cowan University.

Bronfenbrenner

(1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Darling-Hammond

(1990). Teacher professionalism. Why and how? In Lieberman

, (Ed.), Schools as collaborative cultures: Creating the future now (pp. 25–50). New York: Falmer Press.

Datta

L. E.

(1997). A pragmatic basis for mixed-method designs. In Greene

J. C.

& Caracelli

V. J.

(Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms (pp. 33–46). San Francisco: Jossey-Blass Publishers.

Education Department of Western Australia (1994). Draft. Guidelines for appropriate assessment and accountability in the early years. Perth: Author.

Education Department of Western Australia (1996). Policy framework for performance management. Perth: Author.

Education Department of Western Australia (1997). School performance. A framework for improving and reporting. Perth: Author.

Greene

J. C.

, & Caracelli

V. J.

(1997). Defining and describing the paradigm issue in mixed-method evaluation. In Greene

J. C.

& Caracelli

V. J.

(Eds.), Advances in mixed-method evaluation: The challenges and benefits of integrating diverse paradigms. (pp. 5–32). San Francisco: Jossey-Blass Publishers.

Macpherson

R. J. S.

(1998). Contractual or responsive accountability? Neo-centralist ‘self-management’ or systemic subsiditary? Tasmanian parents' and other stakeholders' policy preferences. Australian Journal of Education, 42(1), 66–89.

10.

Maloney

& Barblett

(2002). Improving quality or improving quality. Who's minding the shop! Australian Journal of Early Childhood, 27(1), 14–17

11.

Martin

(2001). Competency framework for teachers. Perth: Education Department of Western Australia (Draft).

12.

Stamopoulos

(1995). The professional background and perceptions of principals on their leadership role in the pre-primary. Unpublished M.Ed. thesis, Edith Cowan University, Perth.

13.

Stamopoulos

(2002). School staff positions on P1 composite classes. Unpublished doctoral dissertation. Perth: Edith Cowan University.

14.

Wildy

, & Wallace

(1996). Improving performance through accountability relationships. The Practising Administrator, 18(4), 36–39.

15.

Woodrow

& Brennan

(1999) Marketised positioning in early childhood: New contexts for curriculum and professional development in Queensland, Australia. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood Education, 1(1), 78–94.