This paper explores an encounter between public and private worlds in a family day care network (home-based early childhood education) network, as carers and coordinators participated in a process of quality review based on The Quality Journey/He Haeranga whai hua (Ministry of Education) , 2000b). The description 'home-based early childhood education' has replaced 'family day care' in government documents to reflect this changed perspective. As a professional development advisor, I was concerned to facilitate an experience of quality assessment that emphasized the uniqueness of family day care and considered the complexities of the service.
In Aotearoa/New Zealand, the majority of family care networks are positioned within a national welfare organization. No homeschooling/homeschooling hands-on experiences are offered as part of this. Much of the previous research on family care has been based on quality indicators derived from centre-based criteria (for example, the Harms-Clifford rating scale) that focus on activities and environments that are not typically indicative of the context of family care. (Stonehouse, 2001; see also Wright, 2003).
Kyle (1997) suggests that this traditional view of childcare divides the private and public worlds of childcare. This professionalization process is accentuated by the integration of childcare into other forms of early childhood education under the umbrella of regulation2 and curriculum (Ministry of Education, 1998a; 1996a; 1996b), as described by Everiss and Dalli (2003). Everiss and Dalli (2003) point out that this inconsistency poses a dilemma for childcare in Aotearoa/New Zealand.
3 At the time of the study, this tax-free reimbursement was limited to family day care providers working in the organization.
DISCUSSION AND IMPLICATIONS
The focus group interviews had several key questions, but were fluid and responsive to the direction of the conversation within the group. This private element of their work, together with their ability to access public resources (such as income support benefits, tax avoidance) and their enjoyment of the work itself, was more important than public recognition. Orchid: Doesn't a lot of it come down to the quality of caregivers - you have a lot of these rules because the quality of care is so bad with some caregivers that they have to have rules to cover themselves while.
Coordinator/management focus groups were often concerned with the quality of the carer and with associated processes and systems used to select and support carers. However, the coordinators also spoke about the conflicts in this regard, referring to difficulties such as caregivers wanting more children in their homes. For coordinators, national requirements were often difficult to interpret in relation to family day care, rather than in relation to centre-based early childhood education, a scene with which they were more familiar.
One area of consensus among caregiver and coordinator participants in this research was the importance of the way in which relationships with parents were facilitated within the network. One of the caregiver anecdotes collected as part of a review examining the nature of caregiver–parent relationships highlights the reciprocal nature of parent–caregiver communication. We had a chat about what the children were doing at the kindy and how X had given one of the mothers there a cuddle.
We talked about some of the new things X is doing at home and the new words he is learning. Many of the caregivers were able to maintain their autonomy in determining the care they provided, the way it would be delivered, and the nature of the relationships they developed. During the last focus group, several coordinators indicated that they were not able to monitor the caregivers on a daily basis and that there was therefore a lot of trust in the relationship between caregiver and coordinator.
One of the greatest fears of carers discussed at the last focus group was that the findings of this quality review would be 'swept under the carpet'. While the existence of critical culture and other elements was not immediately apparent to all participants, the quality review process served the purpose of developing the necessary foundations through respectful and reciprocal relationships. Not only did the participants gain more knowledge about their practices, but they also gained a greater awareness of their public responsibilities in the private world at home.
Participants not only gained greater knowledge about their practices, but they also gained a greater awareness of their public accountability in the private world of the home. The results of the study suggest that isolating public and private worlds either literally (by limiting caregiver access to professional knowledge) or figuratively (where one is considered more important than another) is not helpful in advancing our understanding of family day care not.
-based working group meeting: The quality journey/He shanghai whai hua, Report and recommendations to Ministry of Education, Wellington, New Zealand. Eds Family day care: international perspectives on policy, practice and quality, England: Jessica Kingsley, pp 59-77. Paper presented at the Pacific Early Childhood Education Research Association Conference: Growing Together, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Aspects of quality in family day care in Europe and carers' and children's perspectives. Paper presented at the International Conference on Family Day Care, Choices, Challenges and Collaboration, 2003, Wellington, New Zealand. The Quality Journey: A Preliminary Analysis of Implementation in 72 Early Childhood Centres, Paper presented at the NZARE Conference, Christchurch, New Zealand.
Paper presented at the 5th Annual New Zealand Early Childhood Research Network Symposium, Christchurch, New Zealand. Keynote address at the International Family Day Care Conference, Choices, Challenges and Collaboration, 19-23 February, Wellington, New Zealand. He said matauranga nga mokopuna o Aotearoa: Draft Guidelines for developmentally appropriate programs in early childhood services, Wellington, New Zealand:.
He Whariki Matauranga mo nga Tamariki o Aoteoroa: Te Marautanga Kohungahunga, Te Whanganui-a-Tara, Aotearoa: Learning Media. Ko te haerenga kounga:. te whakaputanga o te kainga, Wellington, New Zealand: learning media. Nga huarahi mo nga ra kei mua: Nga ara, he mahere rautaki tekau tau mo te matauranga mo nga tamariki kōhungahunga, Te Whanganui-a-Tara, Aotearoa:.
To set standards for child care with respect for cultural differences. 2003), Family Day Care: International Perspectives on Policy, Practice and Quality, England: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 215-233. Family day care: international perspectives on policy, practice and quality, England: Jessica Kingsley Publishers, pp. 234-244. An early response to Te Whaariki for family day care, in The ideals and realities of the implementation of the New Zealand National early childhood curriculum, May, H. Eds), Wellington, New Zealand: Institute for Early Childhood Studies.
