This chapter explores participation in early childhood education and care (ECEC) and early schooling among children in IELS 2025, and its associations with their early learning and development outcomes by age 5. It also describes the provision of additional supports for children, particularly those experiencing early challenges.
Building Strong Foundations for Life
Results from the 2025 Early Learning and Child Well-being Study
Abstract
On average across jurisdictions, 55% of the children in IELS 2025 started attending ECEC before age 3, including 24% of children at age 2, 15% at age 1, and 17% in their first year of life. Among those who started ECEC/school later, 18% of children started at age 3, 17% at age 4, and 9% at age 5. By the time of assessment, children had an average experience of over 2.5 years in ECEC/school, ranging from over 4 years in the Flemish Community (Belgium) to 1.5 years in the United Arab Emirates.
Before age 5, socio-economically advantaged children had attended ECEC/school for about 5 months longer than disadvantaged children, on average across jurisdictions. In England (United Kingdom), the Flemish Community (Belgium) and the United Arab Emirates this difference was of 6 months or longer. Only in the Netherlands had disadvantaged five-year-olds attended ECEC longer than advantaged peers.
Across early learning and development domains, the association between the number of years children attended ECEC/school and their outcomes at age 5 is generally positive but weak in statistical significance. A stronger positive association exists when outcomes are compared between children in categories of starting age of attendance, which more accurately reflect the structure of ECEC programmes.
In jurisdictions where a majority of children start ECEC/school before age 4, children who started attending at ages 0 or 1 have higher scores in some domains than children who first enrolled at ages 2 or 3. In jurisdictions where most children started after age 1, children who started attending at ages 2 or 3 do better in several domains than children who first enrolled at ages 4 or 5.
The positive relationship between length of participation in ECEC/school and children’s outcomes at age 5 tends to be stronger with the foundational learning domains of emergent literacy and emergent numeracy than with executive function and social and emotional development domains. A negative association exists in some cases with disruptive behaviour.
IELS 2025 finds no evidence that the association between length of participation in ECEC/school and children’s outcomes varies by socio-economic background. Given the general positive association between attendance and children’s outcomes and the more limited participation of disadvantaged children, on average, this suggests that ECEC and early schooling may not, overall, have the opportunity to reduce socio-economic gaps in those outcomes. Policies can address gaps in early participation in ECEC and promote consistent levels of quality in provision.
On average across jurisdictions, about one in ten children in IELS 2025 are reported by their parents to have experienced early learning or early social, emotional or behavioural difficulties. Socio-economically disadvantaged children are more likely to experience these risk factors, which compound their overall level of disadvantage.
Targeted learning support is the most frequent form of additional support services for children in IELS 2025, as received by around one in six children overall. Children exposed to a greater number of risk factors are more likely to receive this and other special supports, suggesting an adequate targeting of such supports in most jurisdictions.
High-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) – from birth to entry into primary school – can be a major driver of children’s early learning and development and a policy lever to promote equal opportunities in society from the early years. Many countries have strengthened their ECEC policies in recent decades, resulting in higher enrolment rates, a more balanced dual focus on care and education, and tighter regulations to improve quality. However, extending participation in ECEC does not, on its own, guarantee a strong start for every child, given variation in the quality of provision within ECEC systems (OECD, 2021[1]). Meanwhile, increases in the share of children attending high-quality ECEC services can translate into higher overall levels of school readiness by means of positive peer spillovers and improved conditions to implement more advanced curricula, thereby enhancing the durability of early learning and development gains (List and Uchida, 2024[2]).
In the context of increasing diversity in child populations, early learning policies are also paying growing attention to targeted, additional supports for young children who experience particular challenges, for instance, difficulties in their developmental trajectories. Special supports and services embedded in or coordinated with ECEC provision to address early developmental challenges can improve children’s outcomes and reduce the need for remedial or special education later on (Molloy et al., 2019[3]) (Murano, Sawyer and Lipnevich, 2020[4]) (Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center, 2024[5]).
This chapter first explores patterns of participation in ECEC among children in IELS 2025, focusing on variation by age and socio-economic background1. It then examines associations between the number of years children participate in ECEC or the early years of primary education prior to age 5 and their early learning and development outcomes, as well as whether these associations differ for children from socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged backgrounds.
The chapter focuses on formal and regulated ECEC, defined as services meeting the criteria to be classified as International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) level 0 educational programmes2. Compared with informal care arrangements (e.g. unregulated childminders or babysitters), formal and regulated ECEC, regardless of whether centre‑ or home‑based, generally requires licensing, operates under authority‑defined frameworks (e.g. curriculum guidelines), employs trained or accredited staff, and provides more intensive services (e.g. longer hours). However, regulatory requirements for formal ECEC represent a necessary but not sufficient condition to ensure consistent quality (OECD, 2018[6]). In some jurisdictions in IELS 2025, participation in early education programmes includes also the early years primary schooling at ages 4 or 5. The term “ECEC centre/school” is therefore used as shorthand to refer to the educational setting where children are enrolled at age 5; the characteristics of these settings are different across jurisdictions (see Box 6.1).
The chapter concludes by describing the prevalence of various types of early challenges among the children in the study, and the frequency with which they receive special supports (e.g. psychological or learning support, second language support) in the context of their early education and care experiences.
Ensuring ECEC is available, accessible, and affordable for all social groups is a prerequisite for ECEC provision to translate into durable benefits for children and society. Despite sizeable increases in ECEC enrolment in many OECD and partner countries in recent decades, participation gaps persist between age groups and children of different backgrounds. Socio‑economically disadvantaged children tend to participate less in ECEC, particularly in regulated services where structural conditions are often more conducive to high-quality provision. In most countries, socio-economic gaps in participation are larger among children under age 3 but exist also among children aged 3-5. When enrolled, disadvantaged children also tend to attend ECEC settings fewer hours (OECD, 2025[7]).
Barriers to participation in ECEC stem from a mix of personal and environmental factors and can be grouped into two broad categories: direct, which refer to immediate constraints (e.g. cost, location, operating hours) and indirect, which concern more subtle influences (e.g. social norms, parental perceptions, institutional bias). Together, direct and indirect barriers shape whether families, especially disadvantaged ones, can and do participate in ECEC (OECD, 2025[7]).
The early education systems of the jurisdictions represented in IELS 2025 differ in many respects (see Box 6.1 and Annex A). In terms of governance, some of these jurisdictions have split systems in which ECEC services for different age groups are governed by different authorities, while others have or are in the process of adopting an integrated system with one leading authority being responsible for all ECEC services. Average enrolment rates for children aged 3-5 also vary markedly, ranging from around 50% in Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan) to more than 90% in the Flemish Community (Belgium), England (United Kingdom), Korea and the Netherlands. Enrolment in ECEC is generally not mandatory, with the exceptions of Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil) and the Flemish Community (Belgium), where it is compulsory from ages 4 and 5, respectively. Jurisdictions have also different models for the transition to primary schooling: in England (United Kingdom), Malta and the Netherlands, this occurs from age 4 or 5 through a change in cycle or a relocation to school-based settings, while in the rest of the jurisdictions most 5-year-olds continue to attend pre-primary ECEC settings and programmes classified as ISCED 02.
To characterise participation in ECEC among children in IELS 2025, this chapter relies on the rich information collected through Parent questionnaires about children’s attendance of different types or early care and education arrangements starting from birth up to the time of assessment at age 5. This information is used to identify the starting age and the number of years children attended ECEC programmes (either ISCED 01 or ISCED 02, or Reception in the case of England) prior to the school year in which they took part in IELS 20253. The chapter also draws on data about the number of hours that children attended ISCED 02 settings in the two school years prior to the assessment4.
Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan)
Azerbaijan has an integrated ECEC governance system, with preschool education services for children aged 1-6 overseen by the Ministry of Science and Education which is responsible for curriculum, financing, monitoring and standard setting. ECEC participation in Azerbaijan is not mandatory. In 2024, the enrolment rate among children aged 3-5 was 50%.
Azerbaijan applies a unified Preschool Education Curriculum and State Standard for Preschool Education across all ECEC institutions for ages children aged 1 to 6 years. Content is structured by age groups with distinct standards for ages 1-2 and 2-3), the middle group (ages 3-4), the older group (ages 4-5), and the school preparation group (ages 5-6). Progression is sequential, moving from simpler to more complex learning: heightened expectations arise through the age-group progression within the unified framework. Literacy and numeracy are integrated as core components: literacy through language/communication development and pre-reading behaviours; numeracy through early number sense, measurement, sequencing and classification, aligned with school readiness expectations at ages 5-6.
The placement of children with special educational needs (SEN) is determined by a commission that reviews each child’s individual situation. Where inclusive settings exist, children with SEN attend the same educational environment as their peers. Where inclusive groups are not available, they attend specialised preschool institutions.
Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil)
The Brazilian ECEC system is integrated, with governance and responsibilities decentralised. The federal government sets national guidelines and provides technical and financial support, while states establish complementary rules and support municipalities, which are the main implementers and providers of ECEC services. ECEC is organised in two stages: creche/daycare (for children aged 0-3) and preschool (for children aged 4-5). While only the second stage is compulsory, since 2024 federal laws guarantee access to public ECEC for children aged 0-3 whose families apply for enrolment, with priority to children in vulnerable situations.
The National Common Core Curriculum (BNCC), approved in 2017, defines learning rights and goals across basic education, including ECEC. At the ECEC level, BNCC is organised around three age groups: infants (0-18 months), toddlers (19 months to 3 years) and preschoolers (4-5 years). Rather than adopting a subject-based structure, BNCC organises learning around five “fields of experience”, promoting transdisciplinary learning through play and interactions. States, municipalities and schools can adapt local curricula and pedagogical projects using BNCC as a reference. Literacy and numeracy are addressed through learning objectives embedded within these fields, with examples provided for each domain.
Brazil’s education policy emphasises inclusion of children with SEN in mainstream ECEC programmes.
England (United Kingdom)
England’s early years education system operates under an integrated governance model, with overall responsibilities held by the Department for Education. Across provider types (school-based and group-based childcare), early years provision is unified through a single statutory framework that all providers must follow.
ECEC is not compulsory in England. In practice, though, virtually all children start Reception (the first year of primary school) on a full-time basis in September after their fourth birthday (e.g. a child turning 4 in June typically start Reception that September). This means that the majority of children experience an early transition into the school system through the Reception year.
England has a single statutory framework covering the whole early years phase: the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS). This sets the standards that providers must meet in relation to learning, development and care from birth to age 5. EYFS is structured around seven areas of learning and development. Three “prime” areas - communication and language, physical development, and personal, social and emotional development - form the foundation, while four “specific” areas - literacy, mathematics, understanding the world, and expressive arts and design - extend and deepen learning. The EYFS applies until the end of Reception, that is, the school year in which children turn 5.
Children with SEN typically attend mainstream early years settings. When SEN is identified, providers must work in partnership with parents to agree on appropriate forms and modalities of support.
Flemish Community (Belgium)
ECEC in the Flemish Community (Belgium) is governed through a split governance system. Provision for younger children (typically from birth to 2.5 years) falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Welfare, Public Health and Family, while provision for older children (typically from 2.5 years) is overseen by the Ministry of Education and Training. This division results in distinct structures for childcare (within the welfare domain) and pre-primary (within the education domain), each operating under its own regulatory conditions and pedagogical expectations.
In Belgium (including the Flemish Community), compulsory education starts on 1 September of the calendar year in which a child turns 5. For five-year-olds, attendance typically requires at least 290 half-days per school year. This requirement has been applied since the 2020-2021 school year when the minimum compulsory school age was lowered from 6 to 5.
All childcare settings are required, as part of their licensing conditions, to have a pedagogical policy that promotes children’s development across multiple domains and safeguarding their well-being and engagement. Childcare settings are also expected, under a best-efforts obligation, to implement a pedagogical framework that provides guidance on methods and processes. Pre-primary settings must follow a detailed set of standardised developmental goals describing minimum objectives by the end of pre-primary stage. These goals apply across all pre-primary education years, so age 4 and age 5 are not formal curricular transition points.
Many children aged 0-5 with SEN attend mainstream ECEC settings, supported through measures such as individualised arrangements and collaboration with external support services.
Korea
Korea’s ECEC system is in a transitional phase, shifting from a split governance model towards an integrated system under the Ministry of Education as single responsible authority. The integration of institutions, regulatory frameworks and teacher qualifications is an ongoing process.
Participation in ECEC is not mandatory. However, over 90% of children aged 3-5 are enrolled in either kindergartens or childcare centres, with basic tuition fees covered by the central government.
The Nuri curriculum is Korea’s unified curriculum framework for children aged 3-5 attending kindergartens, while a standard care framework applies for children aged 0-2 in childcare centres. Since 2019, Korea has moved away from rigid, age‑specific task divisions. Instead, the Nuri curriculum provides a transversal, play-centred framework for learning and development. Literacy is primarily addressed within the communication domain, emphasising listening and speaking skills, developing an interest in reading and writing, and enjoyment of books and stories.
There is less of an explicit emphasis on numeracy; however, early mathematical ideas are introduced across the several domains, such as exploration in everyday life.
SEN participation is shaped by both the availability of specialist provision and a strong non-discrimination principle. Many parents of children with SEN choose to enrol their children in mainstream kindergartens or childcare centres.
Malta
Malta has an integrated ECEC system under the Ministry for Education, Youth, Sport, Research and Innovation. Policy and guidance cover the entire ECEC phase across childcare and early education, with national standards and a policy framework providing system-wide direction across ages 0-7.
ECEC in Malta is not compulsory but participation rates are high, with over 85% of children aged 3 and 5, the start of compulsory primary education, enrolled in ECEC.
Integrated curriculum guidelines and standards apply across ECEC stages. The National Standards for Early Childhood Education and Care Services apply to ages 0-3 (childcare), while the Early Childhood Education and Care National Policy Framework for Malta and Gozo apply to ages 0-7. Both frameworks are grounded in the Learning Outcomes Framework. A key transition occurs at age 5 when children enter compulsory schooling: while the ECEC curricular frameworks continue to apply, children also begin to follow subject guidelines delivered within a child-centred approach. Literacy and numeracy are taught across the curriculum, and schools attended by five-year-olds can benefit from additional support from national literacy programmes and mathematics support teachers.
Children with SEN generally attend mainstream ECEC settings. Parents may apply for an Early Intervention Service, which can be delivered either at home or within the childcare setting.
Netherlands
The Netherlands has a split ECEC system. For children aged 0-4, childcare falls under the responsibility of the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment and is primarily framed as a social provision with a focus on care and supervision. No formal educational goals are defined for this phase, even though educational elements may be present in practice. As a result, childcare for this age group is not formally classified as ISCED. For ages 4-6, early education takes place in primary school kindergarten years governed by the Ministry of Education, Culture and Science. Further, targeted pre-primary education programmes classified as ISCED 02 are available for children approximately aged 2.5 to 4 who are considered at risk of language or developmental delays. These programmes are provided to by regular daycare centres.
Most children start primary school at age 4, but compulsory education begins at age 5, on the first school day of the month following the child’s fifth birthday. Before age 5, there is no compulsory enrolment in ECEC.
There is no unified national curriculum for ages 0-4 (childcare and pre-primary). Providers follow general pedagogical frameworks and, in pre-primary education, implement approved early education programmes, but without statutory learning goals. From age 4, children come under the national framework for primary education (ages 4-12), which establishes broad national learning objectives rather than a detailed curriculum for young children. The curriculum for age 4 and 5 is essentially the same (both are kindergarten years within primary school), while the main structural transition is between age 3 (pre-primary provision) and age 4 (entry into primary school). Literacy and numeracy at age 5 are framed as emergent literacy and early mathematical development, including oral language development, phonological awareness, number sense and pattern recognition.
Children with SEN generally attend mainstream settings where feasible, with expected adaptations such as additional pedagogical support and collaboration with specialist services.
United Arab Emirates
ECEC in the United Arab Emirates operates under a split governance model, with responsibilities distributed across several national ministries and, in some cases, emirate-level authorities. Kindergarten provision (typically covering ages 3-6) is overseen by the Ministry of Education, which is responsible for curriculum, standards and licensing. Nurseries/childcare (covering roughly ages 0-4) are licensed under the Ministry of Community Development. In addition, emirate-level entities may play a role in quality assurance and regulation, for example the Knowledge and Human Development Authority in Dubai or the Abu Dhabi Department of Education and Knowledge, contributing to local variation in oversight.
While enrolment in ECEC is not mandatory, participation rates are high, especially for children around age 5.
A national curriculum framework guides ECEC provision, particularly in kindergartens serving children aged 4-6. The kindergarten curriculum emphases holistic development, including early literacy, early numeracy and social and emotional skills, while promoting developmental continuity across ages 3-6. Expectations regarding literacy and numeracy increase modestly in the second year of kindergarten (around age 5) without any fundamental shift away from the holistic, play-based orientation of previous years. ECEC settings may adapt nationally standardised learning goals within approved frameworks.
National policies promote the inclusion of children with SEN wherever possible, including attendance of mainstream ECEC settings with special supports.
Note: ECEC refers to early childhood education and care and encompass ISCED levels 01 and 02. SEN refers to special education needs.
Source: Contextual questionnaire to IELS 2025 participating jurisdictions; see also Annex A.
Starting age and number of years of participation in ECEC/school
On average across jurisdictions, 55% of the children in IELS 2025 – who, by design, are all enrolled in either a pre-primary (ISCED 02) or school setting at age 55 – started attending formal and regulated ECEC services before age 3 (Table B.6.1). This group includes 24% of children first enrolled at age 2 – the most common starting age, on average – as well as 15% of children first enrolled at age 1 and 17% of children enrolled during their first year of life.
Among the large minority of children in the study who started attending ECEC/school later, 18% of children started at age 3, 17% started at age 4, and 9% started at age 5. This translates into an average experience in ECEC/school of more than 2.5 years by the time of assessment (Table B.6.2). Cumulatively, and on average across jurisdictions, almost a third of all the children in IELS 2025 (31%) were attending ECEC/school by age 1, more than half (55%) were attending by age 2, over seven in ten (71%) were attending by age 3, and over eight in ten (84%) were attending by age 4. Conversely, about one in six (16%) children first enrolled in formal and regulated early education services the same school year in which they took part in the study (Tables B.6.1 and B.6.2).
Reflecting their diverse institutional and social contexts, jurisdictions vary markedly in the typical age at which children started attending formal and regulated ECEC or early schooling (Figure 6.1). For instance, 70% of children in the Flemish Community (Belgium) and close to 20% of children in both England (United Kingdom) and Malta started attending ECEC before turning 1, while in other jurisdictions less than 5% of children participated in ECEC at that age. Meanwhile, close to 30% of children in Korea started attending ECEC at age 1, making it one of the two jurisdictions (with the Flemish Community (Belgium)) where more than half of children in IELS 2025 were attending ECEC by that age. At the other end, the share of children who enrolled in ECEC for the first time at ages 4 or 5 is highest in the United Arab Emirates (more than 50%) and in Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan) and Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil) (more than 28%, in both cases). The Netherlands represents a special case: analyses based on the ISCED classification suggest the majority of children in IELS 2025 started their formal early education at age 4; however, large shares of children of younger ages are enrolled in programmes not formally classified as ISCED6.
As a result of these varied participation patterns, the average duration of attendance of formal and regulated ECEC or initial years of primary schooling by the time of assessment in IELS 2025 differed substantially across jurisdictions. The longest attendance, at over 4 years, was observed among children in the Flemish Community (Belgium); intermediate durations, between 3 and 4 years were observed in England (United Kingdom), Korea and Malta; and the shortest average durations, below 2.5 years, were observed among children in Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan), Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil), the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates (Table B.6.2).
Percentage of children by starting age of attendance of an ISCED 01 or ISCED 02 programme, or the initial years of primary education at ages 4 or 5
Note: *Estimates for Brazil correspond to the average across the three participating states. ECEC refers to formal and regulated services meeting the criteria for ISCED level 0 educational programmes. By design, by the time of assessment at age 5, all children in IELS 2025 are enrolled in either a pre-primary (ISCED 02) programme or in the initial years of primary school, depending on the jurisdiction.
Source: OECD, IELS 2025 Database, Table B.6.2.
Socio-economic gaps in length and intensity of participation in ECEC/school
Aggregate patterns of participation in ECEC/school mask substantial variation between children from different socio-economic groups. On average across jurisdictions, by age 5, children from socio-economically advantaged backgrounds had attended formal and regulated ECEC for between 4 and 5 months longer than their disadvantaged peers. In the Flemish Community (Belgium), this difference amounted to more than one year, while in England (United Kingdom) and the United Arab Emirates it was of 6 months or longer. By contrast, in Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan), Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil) and Korea, there were no statistically significant differences in the average length of ECEC/school attendance between the two groups. The Netherlands stands out as the only jurisdiction where disadvantaged five-year-olds had attended ISCED-classified programmes for longer than their advantaged peers, by about 3 months (Table B.6.2). Overall, though, socio-economic gaps in length of participation in ECEC may be underestimated in some jurisdictions, particularly in contexts where overall enrolment rates at age 5 remain relatively low7.
Importantly, these socio-economic gaps emerge at different ages across jurisdictions, reflecting differences in typical starting ages of participation in ECEC/school. Socio-economic differences in enrolment rates are already pronounced by age 1 in England (United Kingdom), the Flemish Community (Belgium) and Malta, where the percentage of children who started to attend ECEC by that age is between 10 and 30 points higher among socio-economically advantaged than among disadvantaged children. Meanwhile, in jurisdictions with a typical later starting age, such as the United Arab Emirates, these differences become visible only by ages 2 and 3. By contrast, in the Netherlands, a higher proportion of disadvantaged children (49%) than advantaged children (38%) had enrolled in ECEC by age 3, in line with targeted policies that make children identified as being at risk eligible for additional (subsidised) hours of early childhood provision (Table B.6.2).
Moreover, among children participating in ECEC, socio-economic gaps are evident in several jurisdictions regarding the intensity of participation, measured by the number of hours that children attended pre-primary (ISCED 02) settings at ages 3 and 4. For instance, in the Flemish Community (Belgium), England (United Kingdom) and Korea, the percentage of both three- and four-year-olds attending pre-primary education for more than 30 hours a week is at least seven points higher among socio-economically advantaged children than among disadvantaged children. Inversely, in Malta and the United Arab Emirates, socio-economically disadvantaged children, attend pre-primary settings for more hours per week, at both ages. Overall, however, average differences in the intensity of participation are relatively small (Table B.6.3).
Taken together, the patterns of participation in ECEC among children in IELS 2025 align with evidence from many European OECD countries showing socio-economic differentials in access to, and intensity of participation in regulated ECEC services (OECD, 2025[7]). Results therefore show that, by the time of the IELS 2025 assessment, in most jurisdictions, exposure to ECEC had been greater for children from socio-economically advantaged families than for peers from less advantaged backgrounds.
IELS provides a unique opportunity to examine, from a comparative perspective, how five-year-old children’s participation in ECEC and the initial year of primary schooling is associated with early skills development. In this chapter, this relationship is illustrated through associations between their scores in the early learning and development domains assessed in IELS 2025 i) the number of years that they attended ECEC or primary school (Figure 6.2) and ii) different categories of starting age of enrolment (Figure 6.3).
Score-point difference in foundational learning, executive function, and social and emotional development domains associated with an additional year of ECEC/school, before and after accounting for socio-economic status
Note: *Estimates for Brazil correspond to the average across the three participating states. ECEC refers to formal and regulated services meeting the criteria for ISCED level 0 educational programmes. By design, by the time of assessment at age 5, all children in IELS 2025 are enrolled in either a pre-primary (ISCED 02) programme or in the initial years of primary school, depending on the jurisdiction. Socio-economic background as measured by the IELS index of socio-economic status (SES). Solid triangles indicate statistically significant differences. For more information, see the IELS 2025 Technical Report (OECD, 2026[8]). Jurisdictions ranked in ascending order of the score-point difference associated with an additional year of ECEC/school in each domain.
Source: OECD, IELS 2025 Database, Tables B.6.4, B.6.5 and B.6.6.
The association between children’s length of attendance in ECEC/school – as captured by a linear measure of years of attendance – and their early learning and development outcomes at age 5 is generally positive but weak in terms of statistical significance, particularly after accounting for socio-economic background (Figure 6.2). The estimated association can be interpreted as the effect of an additional year of attendance in ECEC/school relative to the average duration of attendance in each jurisdiction, providing a conservative yet context-tailored estimate of such impact. This approach reflects that an additional year of ECEC may have different implications depending on the typical experience of children within a jurisdiction.
This relationship is marginally stronger in the foundational learning domains of emergent literacy and emergent numeracy, where an additional year of ECEC is associated, on average, with an increase of about 5 points in scores, before considering children’s socio-economic status. Similar results apply to a subset of executive function and social and emotional development domains, including working memory, mental flexibility, trust and pro-social behaviour. By contrast, the association is negative for scores in non-disruptive behaviour.
Across many domains of assessment, the magnitude of the association tends to be stronger in jurisdictions where children have, on average, attended ECEC/school for longer periods (i.e. over three years) by the time of assessment. This pattern is most evident in the Flemish Community (Belgium) and Malta. Inversely, associations with child outcomes are more often negative, albeit only occasionally statistically significant, in jurisdictions where children’s average experience in ECEC is shorter (less than two and a half years). Yet, there are notable exceptions to this pattern such as the United Arab Emirates, where associations are often relatively strong despite a comparatively short average length of attendance in ECEC (Tables B.6.2, B.6.4, B.6.5 and B.6.6). Overall, across domains and jurisdictions, low levels of statistical significance characterise associations between children’s scores and this measure of participation in ECEC/school.
Analyses based on the number of years children attended ECEC/school are, however, subject to some limitations. One key shortcoming is the implicit assumption of linearity, where each additional year of attendance is assumed to have the same marginal impact on children’s outcomes. This assumption may not align with the structure of ECEC programmes, particularly at the pre-primary level, which often consist of multi-year cycles with distinct organisational and curricular features (see Box 6.1) which can contribute to quality differences. In this context, associations between participation in ECEC/school and child outcomes may become more visible after children attend these programmes for a certain period of time that corresponds to more meaningful transitions within ECEC systems.
To examine this hypothesis, Figure 6.3 shows differences in foundational learning outcomes between children in different categories defined by the age of entry into ECEC/school prior to age 5. This analysis looks at two different transitions which arguably capture important differentiation points in ECEC participation patterns. In jurisdictions where children’s average duration of attendance in ECEC/school is longer – namely the Flemish Community (Belgium), England (United Kingdom), Korea and Malta – the outcomes of children who started attending ECEC at ages 0 or 1 are compared to those of children who started attending at ages 2 or 3. In these four jurisdictions, children in these two categories represent over 85% of the children in IELS 2025. Meanwhile, in jurisdictions where average attendance of ECEC/school is shorter – namely Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan), Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil), the Netherlands and the United Arab Emirates – the comparison is made between the scores of children who started attending ECEC at ages 2-3 and those who started attending at ages 4 or 5. In these four jurisdictions, these two groups account for over 75% of the children in the study.
Results from these comparisons provide further insights into the association between length of participation in ECEC/school and children’s early learning and development outcomes by age 5. Among jurisdictions where children’s average attendance of ECEC/school is longer (Figure 6.3: left panels), children who first enrolled at ages 0 or 1 have higher scores in emergent literacy and emergent numeracy than children who first enrolled at ages 2 or 3 in both the Flemish Community (Belgium) and England (United Kingdom), and in emergent literacy in Malta as well. These differences range from 10 to 25 score points and remain statistically significant after accounting for children’s socio-economic backgrounds. In Korea, by contrast, no differences exist between these two groups of children (Table B.6.7).
Score-point difference in emergent literacy (top panels) and emergent numeracy (bottom panels) associated with starting ECEC at ages 0 or 1, compared to ages 2 or 3 (left panels), and associated with starting ECEC/school at ages 2 or 3, compared to ages 4 or 5 (right panels), before and after accounting for socio-economic status
Note: *Estimates for Brazil correspond to the average across the three participating states. ECEC refers to formal and regulated services meeting the criteria for ISCED level 0 educational programmes. By the time of assessment at age 5, all children in IELS 2025 are enrolled in either a pre-primary (ISCED 02) programme or in the initial years of primary school, depending on the jurisdiction. Specific transitions (starting ages “0 or 1” compared to “2 or 3”; and “2 or 3” compared to “4 or 5”) are analysed depending on children’s average length of participation in ECEC/school in each jurisdiction. Socio-economic background as measured by the IELS index of socio-economic status (SES). Solid triangles indicate statistically significant differences. For more information, see the IELS 2025 Technical Report (OECD, 2026[8]). Jurisdictions ranked in ascending order of the score-point difference associated with an earlier starting age of ECEC/school.
Source: OECD, IELS 2025 Database, Table B.6.7.
Among jurisdictions where children tend to participate in ECEC/school for a shorter time before age 5 (Figure 6.3: right panels), earlier enrolment at ages 2-3 is also positively associated with children scores in emergent literacy and emergent numeracy compared to a later start at ages 4 or 5 in three jurisdictions, although statistically significant in the United Arab Emirates only, with a magnitude of between 12 and 16 score points after accounting for socio-economic status. Meanwhile, this relationship has the opposite sign in the Netherlands, where children who started attending ECEC at younger ages appear to have lower scores in both domains than children who first enrolled for age 4; this result may reflect an overrepresentation of vulnerable children in ECEC programmes at younger ages8 (Table B.6.7).
Differences in children’s outcomes associated with the timing of entry into ECEC or school are generally smaller in the domains of executive function and social and emotional development than in foundational learning. However, in several jurisdictions, patterns are broadly consistent with those observed for emergent literacy and numeracy. For instance, in the Flemish Community (Belgium), earlier participation in ECEC from ages 0 or 1, compared with starting at ages 2 or 3, is statistically significantly associated with higher children’s scores in working memory, mental flexibility, emotion identification, trust and pro-social behaviour, and with lower scores in non-disruptive behaviour. Similar patterns are observed in Malta, where earlier entry into ECEC is associated with higher children’s scores in inhibition, working memory, trust and pro-social behaviour. In turn, regarding differences between children who first enrolled in ECEC/school at ages 2 or 3, compared to ages 4 or 5, children in the earlier enrolment group show higher scores in the domains of inhibition, trust and pro-social behaviour in Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil). By contrast, in the Netherlands they have lower scores in mental flexibility, emotion identification, emotional attribution, trust and pro-social behaviour (Tables B.6.8 and B.6.9).
Socio-economic variation in the association between ECEC/school and children’s outcomes
An important consideration for early education policies is whether participation in ECEC and early schooling contributes to reducing early inequalities in children’s learning and development outcomes, particularly between children from different socio-economic backgrounds. Analyses in this report find no evidence that the association between the number of years of ECEC/school attendance and children’s outcomes by age 5 is different for socio-economically advantaged and disadvantaged children, based on a comparison of the strength of this association between the two groups of children in the emergent literacy and emergent numeracy domains (Figure 6.4).
Results suggests that gains in emergent literacy and emergent numeracy from an additional year of ECEC/school could be marginally smaller (i.e. a negative score-point difference in Figure 6.4) for socio-economically disadvantaged children than for advantaged peers in jurisdictions such as England (United Kingdom), the Flemish Community (Belgium), Korea and the United Arab Emirates, while gains could be larger (i.e. a positive score-point difference in Figure 6.4) in jurisdictions such as Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan) and Malta. However, none of these differences reach conventional levels of statistical significance, precluding any clear interpretations about the potential differential impacts of the length of participation in ECEC for diverse groups of children based on IELS 2025 data.
Score-point difference in the association between an additional year of ECEC/school and foundational learning domains for socio-economically disadvantaged children, relative to the association for advantaged children
Note: *Estimates for Brazil correspond to the average across the three participating states. ECEC refers to formal and regulated services meeting the criteria for ISCED level 0 educational programmes. By the time of assessment at age 5, all children in IELS 2025 are enrolled in either a pre-primary (ISCED 02) programme or in the initial years of primary school, depending on the jurisdiction. Socio-economically disadvantaged children are those in the bottom quartile of the distribution of the IELS Index of socio-economic status within their jurisdictions; advantaged children are those in the top quartile of the distribution. Socio-economic background as measured by the IELS index of socio-economic status (SES). Solid triangles indicate statistically significant differences; hollow triangles indicate differences are not statistically significant. For more information, see the IELS 2025 Technical Report (OECD, 2026[8]).
Source: OECD, IELS 2025 Database, Table B.6.10.
Overall, results in this section, looking both at the number of years that children attended ECEC/school (Figure 6.2) and at specific starting age categories (Figure 6.3), indicate that longer experiences in early care and education programmes tend to be positively associated with early learning and development outcomes by age 5. This association holds in many but not all of the jurisdictions in IELS 2025 and is more consistent with foundational learning outcomes than with executive function and social and emotional development outcomes, while being often negative with disruptive behaviour.
These results can be seen as broadly consistent with the generally small average effects of ECEC on child early learning and development outcomes reported in the research literature, particularly in the absence of good indicators of the quality of ECEC or early schooling (e.g. (Camilli et al., 2010[9]) (Melhuish et al., 2015[10]) (Duncan et al., 2023[11]) (von Suchodoletz et al., 2023[12])). This literature also documents a stronger relationship of ECEC experiences with emergent literacy and emergent numeracy than with other development domains, which may reflect the deliberate intent to develop these more academic skills in the ECEC curriculum frameworks of participating jurisdictions (see Box 6.1).
Findings from IELS 2025 are less closely aligned with external evidence suggesting that high-quality ECEC can be particularly beneficial for disadvantaged children (e.g. (Melhuish et al., 2015[10]) (Duncan et al., 2023[11])). However, the absence of a statistically significant differential impact of ECEC by children’s socio-economic status in IELS 2025 (Figure 6.4), when combined with other results, can provide insights about whether ECEC and early schooling are helping to mitigate or reinforce inequalities in early learning and development in participating jurisdictions. Children from socio-economically advantaged backgrounds tend, on average, to have longer experiences in ECEC/school than disadvantaged peers. Given the general positive association between participation and children’s outcomes, the fact that gains appear independent of children’s socio-economic backgrounds suggests that ECEC and early schooling may not, overall, have the opportunity to reduce socio-economic gaps in those outcomes. In several jurisdictions, a larger proportion of children from low socio-economic status families did not attend ECEC prior to age 5 or started attending later compared to their advantaged peers, thereby limiting the opportunities for ECEC to mitigate early gaps during those years. These results, therefore, suggest that disadvantaged children may not be able to catch up with peers from advantaged backgrounds through their attendance in ECEC/school, in part because they participate less in these programmes.
Divergences from findings of previous studies of universal pre-primary education may partly be due to greater access to ECEC and early schooling in many of the jurisdictions in IELS 2025, compared to past cohorts of children in similar or other contexts. Contemporary early education systems have become more inclusive of children with more diverse backgrounds, which may affect the observed associations between participation in ECEC/school and the early learning and development outcomes measured in IELS. Further, the generally greater emphasis placed on quality in today’s early education systems may mean that all children – and not only disadvantaged children with less favourable home learning environments – are now benefiting more from ECEC and early schooling participation than in the past.
Meanwhile, the positive associations observed for very early starting ages (0 or 1) and the absence of negative associations in several jurisdictions in IELS 2025 can also be interpreted positively. These results may reflect system-level investments and regulations in England (United Kingdom), the Flemish Community (Belgium), Korea and Malta that may be ensuring adequate quality services for very young children. Further analysis incorporating more detailed information on the quality of different types of ECEC/school services and on the experiences of children who do not attend ECEC would be instrumental in evaluating these findings.
Across countries, growing diversity among young children participating in ECEC has become a defining feature of these systems. This trend is shaped by the expansion and improved accessibility of ECEC services, as well as rising global migration and forced displacement (OECD, 2025[7]). Increasing social and cultural diversity requires inclusive ECEC systems that respond to a broader range of needs from children and families. Inclusion focuses on adapting education systems to meet each child’s needs, rather than expecting children, and particularly those experiencing challenges, to conform to existing structures and practices (OECD, 2023[13]). Inclusive practices to promote children’s early learning and development can take the form of tiered models of support, tailoring the intensity and type of support measures according to the level of need of individual children or early education settings (OECD, 2025[7]).
ECEC policies can beneficially combine general education and care services with the provision of targeted supports for some young children. In 12 out the 15 ECEC systems participating in the TALIS Starting Strong 2024 survey at the pre-primary level, and in 5 out of 8 systems at the level of settings for children under age 3, over 66% of setting leaders reported that children with special learning needs were enrolled in their settings (OECD, 2025[14]). In all the jurisdictions participating in IELS 2025, policies determine that young children with special education needs should generally attend regular ECEC settings, which are in turn expected to adapt provision with extra pedagogical support, targeted programmes, and work with specialist services (see Box 6.1).
IELS 2025 asked parents whether their child had ever experienced a number of issues or difficulties, which are conceptualised as risk factors negatively associated with children’s early learning and development9 (OECD, 2022[15]). These include whether their child was premature or had a low birthweight (i.e. lower than 2 500 gr); hearing or vision difficulties that cannot he corrected by a hearing aid or glasses); mobility difficulties; learning difficulties (e.g. speech or language delay, intellectual disability); or social, emotional or behavioural difficulties.
In addition, IELS 2025 asked the ECEC staff who knew the child best in the ECEC centres/school to provide information about different types of additional supports or services that the child had received. These included speech therapy; physiotherapy or occupational therapy; psychological or behavioural management support; learning support (e.g. as provided by assistant staff); and support with the language of assessment as the child’s second language. Since reported by ECEC teachers aware of them, these supports are likely to be provided through or at least in co-ordination with the ECEC centre/school attended by the child.
This section combines information from parental and ECEC teacher reports to describe the prevalence of different types of early difficulties and the provision of special supports among children in IELS 2025. Additionally, it examines support with the language of assessment among children who primarily speak another language at home. This perspective aligns with a shift from disability‑focused special education to inclusive early education approaches that no longer require clinical labels or a formal diagnosis to provide targeted support to young children.
Children experiencing early difficulties
On average across jurisdictions, about one in ten children in IELS 2025 are reported by their parents to have been born prematurely or with low birth weight, and similar proportions are reported to have experienced learning difficulties or social, emotional or behavioural difficulties by the time of assessment. By contrast, less than 2% of children in the study are reported to have experienced sensory (hearing or vision) or mobility difficulties, on average (Table B.6.11).
While the prevalence of premature and low-weight births is remarkably similar across jurisdictions, there are large differences in the reported prevalence of early learning and early social, emotional or behavioural difficulties. For instance, about three times as many children are reported to have experienced early learning difficulties in Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil) and in Malta compared to Korea, the Netherlands or the United Arab Emirates (Table B.6.11). This may reflect variation in how parents understand and define these situations across jurisdictions, but also associations with socio-economic conditions. Parents can have accurate perceptions of children’s learning challenges, which tend to be more frequent among children from disadvantaged backgrounds (Han et al., 2024[16]). Among the jurisdictions in IELS 2025, child poverty rates were at least twice as high in Ceará, Pará and São Paulo (Brazil) and Malta as they were in Korea or the Netherlands (see Annex A).
In the same vein, the within-jurisdiction prevalence of these difficulties, as reported by parents, varies significantly by socio-economic background (Table B.6.12). On average, the percentage of children from disadvantaged families reported to have experienced early learning or social, emotional and/or behavioural difficulties is twice as large as among children from advantaged backgrounds, with these differences being more pronounced in England (United Kingdom) and in the Flemish Community (Belgium). Moreover, in many jurisdictions, the percentage of children speaking a different language at home is also higher among socio-economically disadvantaged children, although in Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan) or the United Arab Emirates the reverse pattern holds.
Overall, results indicate that five-year-olds from low socio-economic backgrounds are also more likely to experience other risk factors that compound their level of disadvantage towards achieving strong early learning and development outcomes. The accumulation of socio-economic deprivation with other early challenges may play a role in explaining why the impact of ECEC on children’s outcomes is attenuated when population-level analyses take into account children’s socio-economic backgrounds.
Additional supports for young children
Different types of additional supports to sustain early learning and development were provided to the children in IELS 2025. Across jurisdictions, the most frequent of these is targeted learning support, which 19% of children, on average, and between 29% and 46% of children in Baku and Sumgait (Azerbaijan), England (United Kingdom) and the Flemish Community (Belgium). On average, about 28% of the children in the study received some type of special support other than support with the language of assessment (Table B.6.13).
Figure 6.5 shows that, in most jurisdictions, children who are reported to have experienced early learning or early social, emotional or behavioural difficulties are more likely to also have received additional supports to address those difficulties. On average, across four types of supports, this percentage is 35 percentage points higher among children having experienced early challenges. Similarly, children primarily speaking a different language at home are generally more likely to have received additional support with the language of instruction in their ECEC centres than children speaking the same language at home; on average, this difference is of 22 percentage points. Results, therefore, suggest that, across jurisdictions in IELS 2025, additional supports provided in the context of ECEC services are adequately targeting children exposed to these risk factors.
Association between additional supports and early learning and development outcomes
In virtually all cases and jurisdictions, children having received additional supports have significantly lower average scores in the ten domains of early learning and development assessed in IELS 2025 as compared to children having not received such supports (Tables B.6.14, B.6.15 and B.6.16). This is expected in contexts in which supports effectively target children who more often experience early learning and social, emotional or behavioural difficulties, and who more often come from disadvantaged backgrounds.
Importantly, when the comparison is restricted to children reported to have experienced early difficulties, the scores of children having received additional supports are also lower than those of children who did not receive those supports (Tables B.6.14, B.6.15 and B.6.16). The same result applies to the provision of special support with the language of assessment among children with a different home language with regard to scores in the early literacy and numeracy domains (Table B.6.17). Albeit IELS 2025 data does not allow to distinguish the severity of different types of early difficulties or challenges with the language of assessment, these findings likely reflect selection effects by which these additional supports are provided to the children experiencing the greater challenges.
Percentage of children receiving additional supports by experience of early learning and behavioural difficulties, and by language spoken at home
Note: *Estimates for Brazil correspond to the average across the three participating states. Results in the left panel refer to learning support and psychological or behavioural management support, comparing children who have and have not experienced learning or social, emotional and behavioural difficulties. Results in the right panel refer to support with the language of assessment, comparing children who primarily speak the same or a different language at home. For more information, see the IELS 2025 Technical Report (OECD, 2026[8]).
Source: OECD, IELS 2025 Database, Table B.6.13.
References
[9] Camilli, G. et al. (2010), “Meta-Analysis of the Effects of Early Education Interventions on Cognitive and Social Development”, Teachers College Record: The Voice of Scholarship in Education, Vol. 112/3, pp. 579-620, https://doi.org/10.1177/016146811011200303.
[11] Duncan, G. et al. (2023), “Investing in early childhood development in preschool and at home”, in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.hesedu.2022.11.005.
[16] Han, T. et al. (2024), “Early onset and increasing disparities in neurodevelopmental delays from birth to age 6 in children from low socioeconomic backgrounds”, Journal of Neurodevelopmental Disorders, Vol. 16/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s11689-024-09577-2.
[2] List, J. and H. Uchida (2024), Here Today, Gone Tomorrow? Toward an Understanding of Fade-out in Early Childhood Education Programs, National Bureau of Economic Research, Cambridge, MA, https://doi.org/10.3386/w33027.
[12] Liu, S. (ed.) (2023), “Early childhood education and care quality and associations with child outcomes: A meta-analysis”, PLOS ONE, Vol. 18/5, p. e0285985, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0285985.
[10] Melhuish, E. et al. (2015), A review of research on the effects of Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) upon child development, https://ecec-care.org/fileadmin/careproject/Publications/reports/new_version_CARE_WP4_D4_1_Review_on_the_effects_of_ECEC.pdf (accessed on 4 February 2026).
[3] Molloy, C. et al. (2019), “Potential of ‘stacking’ early childhood interventions to reduce inequities in learning outcomes”, Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health, Vol. 73/12, pp. 1078-1086, https://doi.org/10.1136/jech-2019-212282.
[4] Murano, D., J. Sawyer and A. Lipnevich (2020), “A Meta-Analytic Review of Preschool Social and Emotional Learning Interventions”, Review of Educational Research, Vol. 90/2, pp. 227-263, https://doi.org/10.3102/0034654320914743.
[8] OECD (2026), IELS 2025 Technical Report, http://oecd.org/en/about/projects/international-early-learning-and-child-well-being-study.
[7] OECD (2025), Reducing Inequalities by Investing in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/b78f8b25-en.
[14] OECD (2025), Results from TALIS Starting Strong 2024: Strengthening Early Childhood Education and Care, TALIS, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/20af08c0-en.
[13] OECD (2023), Equity and Inclusion in Education: Finding Strength through Diversity, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/e9072e21-en.
[15] OECD (2022), Improving Early Equity: From Evidence to Action, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/6eff314c-en.
[1] OECD (2021), Starting Strong VI: Supporting Meaningful Interactions in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/f47a06ae-en.
[6] OECD (2018), Engaging Young Children: Lessons from Research about Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264085145-en.
[5] Prenatal-to-3 Policy Impact Center (2024), Prenatal-to-3 policy clearinghouse evidence review: Early Intervention Services, https://pn3policy.org/policyclearinghouse/early-intervention-services/ (accessed on 18 February 2026).
← 1. The analysis presented in this chapter rely strongly on information from Parent questionnaires. Given low response rates in some jurisdictions, readers are advised to interpret results with caution. See Annex B and the IELS 2025 Technical Report (OECD, 2026[8]) for more information.
← 2. The International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED) is the reference classification for organising education programmes and related qualifications by education levels and fields (UNESCO-UIS/ OECD/European Union). In ISCED 2011, level 0 covers early childhood education for all ages, including very young children. As the educational properties of ISCED 0 programmes can be difficult to assess directly, several criteria are used to come up with a technical definition. For a programme to be reported as ISCED level 0 it must have: adequate intentional educational properties; be delivered by qualified staff members; take place in an institutionalised setting; meet a minimum intensity/duration; and be targeted at children from age 0 until entry into ISCED level 1. Programmes classified at ISCED level 0 may be referred to in many ways nationally, for example: early childhood education and development, play school, reception, pre-primary, preschool, Kindergarten, Kita, Krippe or Educación inicial. For programmes provided in crèches, day-care centres, private homes, nurseries, Tagespflege or Guarderías, it is important to ensure that they meet the ISCED level 0 classification criteria. ISCED level 0 programmes are sub-classified into two categories depending on age and the level of complexity of the educational content: early childhood educational development (ISCED 01), typically aimed at very young children, aged 0‑2; and pre-primary education (ISCED 02), aimed at children in the years immediately prior to starting compulsory schooling, typically aged 3‑5.
← 3. Each child’s number of years in formal ECEC prior to the school year of the IELS 2025 assessment was calculated based on parental reports about whether the child attended a national ECEC option classified as ISCED 01 or ISCED 02 at ages 0, 1 and 2, and national ECEC options classified as ISCED 02 at ages 3 and 4. In line with the design of the study, all participating children are assumed to be enrolled in either a pre-primary (ISCED 02) or school setting by age 5, at the time of assessment. The starting age of participation in formal ECEC refers to the earliest age at which the child’s parent reports his or her enrolment in an ISCED Level 0 programme.
← 4. Analyses in this chapter omit information about the current school year due to a high number of missing responses in several jurisdictions and comparability problems. Intensity of participation is therefore measured prior to the school year of the IELS 2025 assessment.
← 5. A share of five-year-olds may not yet be enrolled education services (ISCED 02 or school settings); therefore, caution is needed when extrapolating to the overall population of five-year-olds in each jurisdiction. However, enrolment rates in ECEC/school for children aged 3-5 are high in most participating jurisdictions; see Annex A.
← 6. Analyses in this report, based on ISCED-classified programmes, likely underestimate actual participation rates in formal and regulated ECEC in the Netherlands. The ISCED 01 category (early childhood educational development) is considered not applicable in the Dutch education system. In turn, in the Netherlands the ISCED 02 category (pre-primary education) includes early childhood education for three-year-olds in playgroups and childcare centres, as well as the kindergarten years in primary education (Dutch Groep 1 and Groep 2). Childcare for children aged 0-4 in the Netherlands is primarily conceptualised as a social provision, where care and supervision are central; childcare settings (supervision and care centres) are not formally part of the education system and fall under the Ministry of Social Affairs and Employment. By contrast, the kindergarten years of primary education are governed by the Ministry of Education. It is also difficult to clearly distinguish between ISCED 02 and non-ISCED 02 participation for children aged 2-4. For this age group, participation in early childhood educational development programmes (Dutch VVE, often referred to as toddler provision) is possible. These programmes were originally developed to support children at risk of language or developmental delays and to facilitate a smooth transition into primary education at age 4 and were offered in targeted groups within ECEC centres. Increasingly, however, VVE programmes have been integrated into regular childcare provision. In practice, this means that from age 2 onwards, children in childcare often receive a combination of care and educational activities. By distinguishing between these two types of programmes, analysis presented in the report are also likely to underestimate participation in ISCED 02 in the Netherlands.
← 7. See Note 5 above.
← 8. See Note 6 above.
← 9. Parental reports may differ from official records about children being formally identified with special education needs (SEN). The background questionnaires did not collect this information.