Learning in early childhood begins long before formal education. Through play, exploration and relationships, children develop the curiosity, persistence and confidence that shape how they learn throughout life. This chapter examines how families, educators and communities create environments that nurture these dispositions, and how policy design can enable them through coherent frameworks, inclusion and sustained professional support. Drawing on international evidence, OECD data and policy approaches from 29 education systems, this chapter analyses the strategic design choices that support learners at this critical life moment and offers practical insights for policymakers. It then explores how education systems can nurture children’s will, skills and means for lifelong learning.
Education Policy Outlook 2025
Abstract
Supporting learners in early childhood
Early childhood is where lifelong learning begins. During these formative years, children’s curiosity, persistence and ability to self-regulate start to take shape through play and interaction. The quality of their experiences at home, in early-learning settings and within communities profoundly influences how they approach learning, relationships and challenges later in life.
Learning at this stage demands from children the freedom to explore, from families the time and confidence to engage, and from educators the capability to translate play into purposeful learning. Policies are most effective when they empower these actors, creating equitable, high-quality environments that strengthen daily interactions between children, families and educators. Across 29 education systems, common trends emerge in how countries support the will, skills and means for lifelong learning:
Will: Nurturing dispositions and skills that underpin lifelong learning (such as curiosity, persistence and motivation) through inclusive, play-based environments (e.g. Costa Rica, New Zealand).
Skills: Fostering early cognitive and socio-emotional development (e.g. Flemish Community (Belgium), Slovenia); enhancing quality for all (e.g. Austria, Norway); harnessing digital tools and delivery (e.g. Estonia, Iceland, Lithuania).
Means: Ensuring equitable access (e.g. Bulgaria, Luxembourg, England (United Kingdom)); strengthening the home-learning environment (e.g. New Zealand, Northern Ireland (United Kingdom)); supporting cross-sectoral collaboration (e.g. Bulgaria, Iceland).
Recent policies reflect growing recognition that learning quality depends on relationships. Many systems now align curriculum frameworks, workforce development and inclusion measures to ensure every child benefits from stimulating and supportive environments. Fee abolition, subsidies and outreach programmes have expanded participation, while professional learning, mentoring and coaching help educators strengthen the quality of daily interactions with children and families. Family engagement initiatives increasingly position parents as active co-educators, and digital tools are increasingly used to complement, rather than replace, play, exploration and connection.
Despite these advances, challenges remain. Access to high-quality early childhood education and care (ECEC) remains uneven, particularly for disadvantaged families. While many curricula often prioritise cognitive development, socio-emotional, metacognitive and self-regulation skills appear to be less explicitly defined or supported through guidance for educators and families. Workforce capacity and professional support remain stretched, and co-ordination across education, health and social services can be fragmented.
Looking ahead, the priority is to empower the people who make learning happen: children, families and educators. Sustained investment in professional capability, inclusive pedagogy, and strong family partnerships can help every child enter school confident and motivated to learn. Cross-sector co-ordination and responsible, age-appropriate digitalisation should serve these human connections, not replace them. Monitoring and evaluation frameworks can then help track how early childhood interventions contribute to a range of short, medium and long-term development outcomes.
Early childhood is where learning dispositions take root. It is during this period that children begin to explore, persist and make sense of the world around them, developing curiosity, persistence and motivation, as well as early cognitive, social and emotional skills that enable them to keep learning throughout life (Cvijanović and Mojić, 2021[1]; Shonkoff and Phillips, 2000[2]). Evidence shows that these capabilities compound over time: early gains in self-regulation, language and numeracy increase the returns to education across life (Cunha et al., 2006[3]; Heckman, Pinto and Savelyev, 2013[4]).
OECD data support these findings. PISA 2022 shows that attending at least two years of pre-primary education is associated with higher mathematics performance and greater self-efficacy in mathematics on average across the OECD (see Figure 2.1). The relationship is particularly strong in countries such as Czechia and Spain. These findings point to the lasting effects of high-quality early learning on confidence and competence in mathematical reasoning. Such outcomes are not only academic: they help learners develop the flexibility, problem-solving and self-direction required to participate responsibly in an evolving digital and social landscape.
Change in mean mathematics performance score and in the index of mathematics self-efficacy associated with attending at least two but less than three years of pre-primary education (2012-22)
Note: Results are controlled for student and school socioeconomic characteristics. Mathematics self-efficacy indicates students’ self-reported confidence in performing a range of formal and applied mathematics tasks. Dashed columns represent statistically non-significant changes. Diamond markers in darker shades represent statistically significant changes.
Source: OECD (2023[5]), PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, PISA, https://doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en.
This chapter examines how, during this critical window for lifelong learning, children can benefit from policies that enable the conditions for curiosity, exploration, and belonging, and through supportive environments that connect families, educators and communities. Building on OECD evidence, literature and policy questionnaire responses collected by the Education Policy Outlook from 29 education systems and over 56 policy approaches analysed (see Annex 2.A), the chapter identifies practical strategies that link early investment to long-term social and economic benefits. It reviews approaches that seek to expand access to quality early childhood and care (ECEC), enhance learner agency, deepen family engagement and promote responsible digitalisation. By identifying emerging trends, differences and blind spots, the chapter provides policy insights into how policy can support early childhood as the first step of a coherent lifelong learning continuum.
Early childhood education and care provides the environments where children begin developing the curiosity, motivation, persistence, and other attributes that sustain learning throughout life. Investment in these experiences can help close equity gaps early and generate long-term returns for individuals and societies. Yet, recent OECD evidence shows that access to high-quality ECEC remains uneven, with children from disadvantaged backgrounds still facing barriers of affordability, availability and quality (OECD, 2025[6]).
A review of international evidence points to two complementary areas of priority for action: supporting learners and their home environments, and building coherent, inclusive, and future-oriented system conditions. Together, these can support children’s early experiences to better transform into dispositions for lifelong learning.
Focusing on learners and the home
From the earliest years, children begin to exercise agency developing autonomy, confidence and social belonging as they explore and learn (OECD, 2017[7]; Shonkoff and Phillips, 2000[2]). Socio-emotional capacities formed in early childhood contribute to this agency, as they can support positive learning and development and ability to maintain a positive learning trajectories and resilience throughout life (Cunha et al., 2006[3]). Early skills in language, literacy, and numeracy, are also part of this agency and are important predictors of later school success, resilience and employability (Heckman, Pinto and Savelyev, 2013[4]; Huffman, Mehlinger and Kerivan, 2001[8]).
The home-learning environment plays a decisive role in this process. Positive parent–child interactions, stimulating activities, and access to learning materials, have lasting effects well into adolescence (Lehrl, Evangelou and Sammons, 2020[9]). Strengthening parental engagement and capacity extend the reach of ECEC and reinforces children’s motivation to learn. The OECD has recommended helping parents through clear and accessible information, simplified enrolment, and strong parent–staff partnerships. Flexible schedules and supportive services can also help ensure that families with fewer resources also benefit fully from ECEC (OECD, 2025[6]).
Focusing on the system
At the same time, high-quality ECEC depends on both structure and relationships. Research identifies that curriculum frameworks should balance foundational skills with play-based and inclusive approaches and reflect diverse backgrounds. While structural factors, such as class size and staff-to-child ratios, can help set the stage, it is the quality of daily interactions between educators and children that drives outcomes (von Suchodoletz et al., 2023[10]; OECD, 2021[11]; OECD, 2017[12]). Sustained professional learning is therefore key to strengthen practice and ensure that every interaction builds children’s curiosity, confidence and well-being (Muir, Howard and Kervin, 2024[13]; OECD, 2021[11]).
Coherence across sectors is also important. Co-ordination between ECEC, health, and social services can help ensure continuous support for children and families, as well as smoother transitions to school. OECD evidence identifies integrated hubs, shared quality frameworks, whole-of-government strategies, and local networks as effective strategies to reduce service fragmentation (OECD, 2025[6]).
Equitable and efficient funding models are another priority. Increasing public investment and regulating private provision can also help enhance quality while reducing family costs. Funding mechanisms should reward quality improvements and target resources to disadvantaged areas (OECD, 2025[6]).
Finally, digitalisation offers both opportunities and responsibilities. Age-appropriate, creative and exploratory activities can help children to build the dispositions and skills required to navigate future learning and work environments (OECD, 2025[6]). At the same time, technology must be used responsibly and equitably, complementing rather than replacing the relational dimension of early learning (OECD, 2023[14]).
While these priorities are well established in international evidence, their impact depends on how they are translated into practice. The next sections explore how different countries and economies are implementing these approaches. They can offer inspiration to policymakers seeking to create environments where every child can develop the will, skills and means to keep learning.
The examples collected for this report show how participating countries and economies are creating conditions that help children, families and educators bring learning to life. These approaches align with international evidence on supporting children as lifelong learners from the earliest years. Emerging patterns show how these strategies strive to connect individual learners with wider system supports through a range of mechanisms and actions. For example, measures to expand access and participation often combine universal and targeted supports, while strategies to improve process and structural quality rely on curriculum frameworks, standards and professional guidance that help educators create rich learning environments.
To support policymakers in strengthening their approaches, this chapter explores how strategic design choices (e.g. mechanisms, scope, actors, resources and tools) can help shape the environments where children learn and educators work. It then provides a system-level view of how design and delivery influence implementation capacity. Initiatives are organised by policy aims under will, skills and means, showing how different strategies can motivate learners, strengthen foundational competencies and expand equitable opportunities. This can help policymakers identify where improved co-ordination across these dimensions can make lifelong learning more coherent and effective. These elements are summarised in Infographic 2.1.
Most common approaches identified according to policy aim (selected categories)
Note: See Annex 2.A for a more complete view on the policies included in this chapter.
Source: Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation.
Strategic design choices in lifelong-learning policies in early childhood education and care
This section analyses how countries design ECEC policies to enable the relationships and experiences that build the foundations for lifelong learning. It examines how policy aims, mechanisms, scope and actors shape quality, access and equity, and how these choices can nurture the dispositions, skills and environments that sustain learning from the earliest years. Most initiatives collected for this analysis pursue immediate objectives, such as improving access, quality or equity. However, many also show potential to nurture the will, skills and means that sustain learning throughout life.
Aims
Aims describe what systems seek to achieve for learners in their early years. Most policies focus on strengthening quality and access for all, but an important evolution is under way: growing attention to children’s agency, responsible digitalisation that enriches practice, and stronger home-learning environments that connect school and family life. However, few strategies define how early dispositions and competencies connect to later learning or outcomes later in life.
Mechanisms and actions
Education systems employ a diverse set of mechanisms, often combined, to translate early childhood policy aims into practice. These mechanisms matter when they help educators and families create emotionally secure, stimulating and inclusive environments for children.
Curriculum frameworks and quality standards. The cornerstones of ECEC, these set shared expectations for learning, inclusion and pedagogy. These specify the goals for nurturing curiosity, language, socio-emotional development and quality interactions. For example, Sweden’s curriculum positions the child’s interests, experiences and agency at the centre of pedagogical work. Such frameworks are also used to align structure and practice, as in Austria’s 15a Agreement, which couples federal transfers with workforce training and language support, and Norway’s Framework Plan, which integrates digital literacy and play-based learning.
Professional development and workforce supports. Continuous, practice-based professional learning (e.g. through coaching, mentoring and peer networks) helps educators translate curriculum goals into meaningful daily practice. Examples include Estonia’s ProgeTiger, embedding digital competence in teacher training; Sweden and Iceland’s pedagogical coaching and career incentives; and the U.S. Educare model, which uses master teachers to mentor colleagues. Evidence suggests that designs combining breadth (broad training access) with depth (context-specific support) strengthen educators’ ability to connect curriculum aims with daily practice (Hamre, Partee and Mulcahy, 2017[15]; Deding and Minnaert, 2024[16]).
Digitalisation. Countries combine device provision, training and professional networks to enrich pedagogy and extend access. Estonia’s ProgeTiger and Lithuania’s Innovations in Kindergarten link digital content with teacher development; Thailand and Lithuania pair digital tools with peer networks; and Norway and Iceland emphasise safe, interactive use of technology. These mechanisms seek to balance innovation with responsible, age-appropriate digital practices, while addressing divides and safeguarding concerns.
Targeted financial and outreach measures. To ensure equitable access, countries combine universal and targeted financial supports, including fee abolition, subsidies and integrated services. Entitlement models also layer universal and targeted offers, seeking both broad coverage and focus on disadvantaged groups. Bulgaria’s removal of preschool fees eliminated direct financial barriers to enrolment, while England and Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) provide direct entitlements to low-income families. Brazil’s intersectoral programmes link education, health and social protection to reach children in poverty. This reflects a need for high levels of quality for all children, alongside targeted, additional support for some children to compensate for the uneven distribution of resources and experiences by family background (OECD, 2025[6]).
Cross-sectoral co-ordination and integration. Cooperation across education, health and social services helps provide continuous, holistic support for children and families. Examples include Iceland’s Act on the Integration of Services, which mandates co-ordination across sectors through formal structures linking national and local authorities. Bulgaria’s Integrated Early Childhood Development Services use EU co-funding to promote municipal cooperation across health, education and social sectors, while Brazil aligns early learning with health and social protection through intersectoral programming. These mechanisms are key to providing holistic, continuous support for children and families.
Education systems can deepen efforts by investing in the time, support and professional capacity that help educators and families turn policy aims into high-quality interactions in daily practice. Continuous, job-embedded professional learning, including pedagogical guidance, coaching and mentoring – appropriate and aligned to context – is among the most effective ways to connect curriculum goals with children’s experiences and improve quality over time.
Scope and timeline
The reach and duration of initiatives determine who benefits and for how long. The policy initiatives analysed reveal how scope and timelines are closely connected design choices for policies aimed at this age range.
Universal frameworks, often formalised through curricula, guidelines, standards or legislative acts, tend to provide broad entitlements across age groups. They offer stability, continuity and shared rights, embedding consistent expectations for quality and participation.
Alongside these, targeted or time-bound initiatives provide more adaptable layers of support. These are often designed as renewable, multi-year programmes or pilot phases to allow systems to test and refine approaches before scaling. This design may also facilitate greater responsiveness to changing needs but can also create uncertainty for providers and families. Examples include Croatia’s ECEC reform pilot (2017–27), Austria’s federal–state agreements (2022–27), and England (United Kingdom)’s targeted entitlement for disadvantaged two-year-olds. Embedded monitoring, data use and evaluation within these models can allow policymakers to understand the impact of changes to curriculum frameworks and pedagogical approaches on ECEC quality and impact on learning, and adapt as needs evolve (OECD, 2023[14]).
Scope and timeline decisions matter in early childhood because many desired outcomes, such as resilience, self-regulation, or digital readiness, may only materialise later in schooling or adulthood. Choices made today establish enabling conditions for sustained learning and adaptability across life.
Countries are combining a universal foundation of rights and quality with targeted and adaptive measures to increase effectiveness and better support children and families at risk of exclusion. Achieving this balance is essential for ensuring that policy reforms not only expand participation and quality today, but also build secure relationships, curiosity and early-learning dispositions that sustain lifelong learning.
Main actors
Strengthening lifelong learning from the early years begins with the people closest to children – families, communities and educators – supported by local authorities and cross-government structures. Their interactions reflect the multi-level governance of ECEC, where responsibilities are often shared across national, regional and local levels, and often across sectors. Actor configurations in ECEC do more than enable service delivery: they shape the governance culture and relational foundations that can help to sustain outcomes and equitable lifelong-learning pathways (Burns and Köster, 2016[17]; OECD, 2021[11]). Effectiveness also depends less on who is involved than on how roles are coordinated, resourced and held to account (Burns and Köster, 2016[17]; OECD, 2021[11]).
National governments and ministries provide leadership, regulation and funding. They set curricula, quality standards and entitlements, and lead inter-ministerial co-ordination. Examples include Iceland’s Act on the Integration of Services in the Interest of Children’s Prosperity, which legislates cooperation duties across ministries to improve service coherence.
Municipal and local authorities play a prominent role, organising and delivering services within national frameworks. National governments set entitlements, quality standards and funding rules, while municipalities organise and deliver services within those frameworks, as in Sweden’s municipal outreach mandate, Luxembourg’s Subsidy Funding Scheme (Chèque-Service Accueil), and Poland’s Integrated Skills Strategy Decentralisation can enhance responsiveness to local contexts, but OECD work on multi-level governance shows that it also risks widening inequalities where fiscal capacity or administrative expertise differ. Clear steering, funding equalisation and professional support mechanisms are therefore essential to mitigate local disparities (OECD, 2017[18]).
Families and communities are formal actors in just under one-third of analysed policies, reflecting the centrality of the home-learning environment as a key driver of early learning and later outcomes (OECD, 2017[12]; OECD, 2018[19]). Structured family partnerships, such as those developed in New Zealand, Mexico and Norway, can help sustain learning continuity between home and early education settings. These approaches align with efforts to move towards embedding families as co-constructors of learning, an approach aligned with research syntheses on process quality and early dispositions relevant to lifelong learning (OECD, 2018[19]).
Cross-sectoral collaboration (i.e. education working with health, social protection and other ministries) appear in about one-quarter of policies collected for this report. This reflects the multi-dimensional nature of child development and the need to reduce service fragmentation. Iceland’s Act on the Integration of Services in the Interest of Children’s Prosperity (Prosperity Act) is a concrete example: it legislates cooperation duties and shared responsibilities to ensure integrated services, thereby seeking to address fragmentation risks (OECD, 2025[6]; Iceland Ministry of Education and Children, 2021[20]).
By contrast, children’s agency and participation are named explicitly in a minority of cases. While developmental considerations partly explain this, international rights frameworks stress that children capable of forming views should be heard in matters affecting them, with approaches calibrated to age and maturity (UN CRC, 2009[21]). OECD analyses of transitions and pedagogy underline the value of child-centred, agency-rich practices for motivation and self-regulation. These are dispositions linked to later adaptability (OECD, 2017[12]; OECD, 2018[19]).
Effective ECEC systems start with strong relationships and depend on clear co-ordination among national, local, and institutional actors. Aligning national guidance with local delivery through shared accountability, funding balance, and quality assurance helps maintain flexibility while ensuring equity and coherence across settings.
Digital and blended approaches
Digital environments in early childhood can expand opportunities for exploration when they are purposeful and age-appropriate. Interactive e-books and educational apps can foster language, literacy, and creative problem-solving, nurturing curiosity and self-reflection. These dispositions are essential for lifelong learning (OECD, 2025[22]). Yet excessive or passive screen time can displace social and physical experiences, delay language development and reduce attention spans. The challenge, therefore, is not whether to use digital tools, but how to integrate them within play-based, relational learning frameworks. Equally, guidance and support for parents are essential to manage screen time, promote shared activities and connect digital experiences to children’s well-being and learning at home (OECD, 2023[14]).
Digital technologies should reinforce, not substitute, the relational and experiential foundations of learning. Educators play a critical role in mediating these experiences and in selecting tools that align with pedagogical aims. Effective practice depends on guided use, intentional design and continuous feedback. Strengthening data collection on how children engage with digital tools can also enrich understanding of their impact on learning, development and well-being (OECD, 2025[22]).
Policies increasingly include integrated digital components, most often as platforms for access, coaching, or resilience. Examples include Estonia’s Opiq platform, and Portugal’s Digital Transition Plan, which seek to expand professional support and learning resources at scale. These initiatives have potential for reach and innovation but, as international evidence shows, their success depends on key policy levers including curriculum and pedagogy, workforce development, underpinned by inclusion and equity (Burns and Gottschalk, 2020[23]; OECD, 2021[11]). Blended approaches, by contrast, tend to focus on workforce strengthening, engaging families and the quality of daily interactions, which are process factors that research consistently links to learning outcomes.
Equity remains a cross-cutting challenge across all critical moments analysed in this report. While digital tools can widen access and enrich learning environments, they can also exacerbate divides where connectivity, affordability or digital literacy are limited, deepening early learning gaps that can grow over time (OECD, 2025[6]).
The central challenge for early childhood systems is to integrate digital tools in ways that complement, rather than replace, high-quality and play-based interactions between children and educators. Purposeful use can foster pedagogical innovation, flexibility and inclusion but requires attention to digital and geographic divides, and ongoing monitoring of children’s experiences and well-being.
Resources required
Countries mobilise a mix of resources to sustain quality early-learning environments – particularly funding, infrastructure and human resources. This section examines these enabling conditions, while the next considers the resources and tools generated through the policies themselves.
Funding arrangements in early childhood policies generally come from public budget allocations. These are complemented by targeted subsidies to lower family costs as well as grants to enhance quality improvements and workforce development, such as in Luxembourg and Northern Ireland (United Kingdom). In some systems, subnational allocations play a key role in ensuring equitable access by supporting municipal delivery, while others diversify sources, combining tax incentives, EU Recovery funds, loan financing, or philanthropic contributions alongside national budgets. Only a minority of policies report multiple funding streams, and in several cases, funding details remain unspecified.
Infrastructure investments typically focus on optimising existing facilities and strengthening established networks, complemented by targeted expansion in underserved areas. Digital infrastructure is mentioned in only a few cases, in connection with innovation strategies, such as in Estonia. Integration between digital and physical infrastructure, such as preschools complemented by Information and communication technology (ICT) platforms, appears limited, though likely more common in practice. Examples include policy efforts in Norway and Ireland, which combine physical expansion with digital connectivity to reduce regional disparities, and Bulgaria, where fee abolition is tied to municipal delivery capacity.
Human resources are central to the effective implementation of early childhood reforms, depending not only on the role of educators but also on how systems define and resource complementary roles. Most policies place teachers at the centre of delivery, supported increasingly by pedagogical coaches, ICT specialists, family outreach workers, and evaluators. Where these roles are explicitly defined, resourced and supported through training and time allocation, reforms are more likely to be sustained and aligned with broader policy objectives; where they remain implicit or absorbed into existing teaching workloads, systems risk uneven uptake of reforms.
Overall, resource strategies are central to sustaining the quality interactions that drive early development and form the foundations for lifelong learning. Evidence shows that children from disadvantaged backgrounds gain the most from high-quality ECEC but face the greatest cost-related barriers (Cunha and Heckman, 2007[24]; OECD, 2017[7]). Under-investment in public ECEC can shift costs to families and weaken inclusion, particularly where affordability measures are weak.
Sustained investment in funding, infrastructure and human resources is essential to deliver high-quality early learning. Targeted expansion in underserved areas, combined with workforce development and digital connectivity, can help close geographic and digital divides and ensure equitable access for all children.
Resources generated
To translate policy aims into practice, countries are creating a wide range of tools and resources that support educators, families and communities. Several patterns stand out:
Curricula and standards are structural resources noted by most education systems, and fewer note process-oriented supports (e.g. coaching templates, reflective practice guides), despite links between process quality and child outcomes (von Suchodoletz et al., 2023[10]). Frameworks and standards could be further complemented by job-embedded tools that guide everyday practice.
Digital platforms are increasingly integral to national education ecosystems, serving not only assessment and management functions but also enabling new forms of peer exchange, feedback, and co-design of learning resources (OECD, 2023[25]). For example, Estonia’s ProgeTiger not only provides materials but also seek to connect educators through professional networks, showing how digital resources can strive to evolve from static repositories into collaborative ecosystems.
Family and community-facing resources can amplify programme impact of ECEC, especially where staff are supported in their roles and provided with resources for early learning experiences (Lehrl, Evangelou and Sammons, 2020[9]; OECD, 2025[6])..
Taken together, these examples show that the main challenge is not producing new tools but ensuring existing ones are coherent, accessible and used effectively by educators and families. Across critical moments, success depends on whether resources improve the quality of interactions and learning experiences.
In Lithuania, the Innovations in Kindergarten (2018-22) project aimed to improve practices in ECEC settings, specifically the use of digital tools, as part of efforts to respond to identified challenges that highlighted that uptake and application of digital tools are uneven. To maximise limited resources, Lithuania built specialised competencies among 89 lecturers, who then mentored and trained other educators across Lithuania. Training sessions for ECEC staff were delivered in blended in-person and online formats, allowing staff to freely explore digital tools (e.g. applications and recommended software) while also having access to all materials and rapid feedback through an open-source digital learning management system.
The resources generated include curated digital resources, training content, instructional guides, classroom toolkits, and a digital platform for open access learning. Digital tools include recommended educational apps, software for classroom use, and a learning management system for professional development and practice sharing.
Source: Lithuania’s response to the Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation, Nacionalinė švietimo agentūra [National Education Agency], https://www.nsa.smsm.lt/projektai/vykdomi-projektai/projektas-inovacijos-vaiku-darzelyje, accessed 15 September 2025.
A key priority is to ensure that tools and resources – including curricula, guidance materials and digital platforms – strengthen the daily interactions between children, educators and families, the processes that most directly shape curiosity, motivation and early learning (OECD, 2021[11]).
The following sections show how policy components align under the aims of will, skills and means. Policies nurture the will to learn by strengthening dispositions and socio-emotional skills; develop skills through quality-focused reforms and digital innovation; and expand means by enhancing equity, family engagement and cross-sector co-ordination, including transitions to primary education.
Overall, ECEC systems tend to be strongest in providing structural supports and developing children’s skills. However, motivational dimensions, such as fostering the will to learn, remain less systematically embedded in curricula and quality frameworks. Building lifelong-learning foundations requires balancing all three pillars: will, skills and means. It is also important to note that these findings are based on how the education systems responded to specific questionnaire items related to the fields of will, skills and means. As a result, they may not capture all relevant dimensions of each policy.
Fostering will for lifelong learning
Developing the will to learn begins in early childhood. Many encourage curiosity, exploration, and self-expression through child-centred or play-based approaches, for example in New Zealand’s Te Whāriki, and Japan’s pre-primary framework (see Box 2.2). Only a few, however, make persistence, resilience, or growth mindset an explicit objective. Few policies also specify how these aims should be, or are, operationalised in practice.
This gap is notable given that PISA 2022 data show that students who attended ECEC for two years or more are more likely to report a growth mindset, with particularly strong associations in Iceland and Estonia (see Figure 2.2). Evidence shows that students with a growth mindset are also more likely to persevere, adopt positive learning behaviours, and achieve higher performance, including in mathematics.
Change in the probability of having a growth mindset when attending two or more years of ECEC
Note: Having a growth mindset is defined as disagreeing or strongly disagreeing with the statement “Your intelligence is something about you that you cannot change very much”. Results control for student and school socioeconomic characteristics. Dashed columns represent statistically non-significant changes.
Source: OECD (2024), PISA 2022 Results (Volume V): Learning Strategies and Attitudes for Life, PISA, , https://doi.org/10.1787/c2e44201-en.
Japan's curriculum framework for pre-primary education emphasises education during early childhood is extremely important cultivating a foundation for lifelong character building. In its design, the curriculum encourages will by fostering children’s sense of agency, engagement, and curiosity through proactive interaction with their environment. It supports the development of attitudes necessary for lifelong learning, including responsibility, creativity, and care for sustainability. The curriculum also seeks to strengthen foundational competencies such as communication, inquiry, physical co-ordination, and problem-solving. It places emphasis on experiential learning, helping children develop metacognitive awareness and early critical thinking. Means are also addressed in this policy design by encouraging settings to create supportive daily routines and environments. While not heavily reliant on digital tools, it provides guidance on using them to enhance, not replace, real-world experiences. Local settings adapt implementation to fit their context and capacities.
Source: Japan’s response to the Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation, Ministry of Education, Culture, Sports, Science and Technology (2017), https://www.mext.go.jp/component/a_menu/education/detail/__icsFiles/afieldfile/2019/10/11/1401777_002.pdf, accessed 02 September 2025
The following analysis focuses on how systems nurture the dispositions that underpin lifelong learning. Another important aim is to ensure co-ordination with, and smooth transitions into primary school, fewer policies with these aims were included in responses to the Education Policy Outlook questionnaire, so analysis for this aim is not included in this chapter. However, this chapter acknowledges that it remains essential for supporting skill development, as a bridge into schooling, and for learning and development across life.
Nurturing the dispositions that underpin lifelong learning
An increasing number of reforms explicitly promote learner agency from the early years, to encourage active participation, autonomy and curiosity as foundations for lifelong learning. Agency is seen as both a learning goal and a learning process, and reflects alignment with broader child-centred approaches to curriculum frameworks that build on children’s experiences, needs, strengths and interests, that values exploration and self-expression (OECD, 2021[11]). When learners can play an active role in deciding how and what they will learn, this can positively influence their motivation to learn (Gottschalk and Borhan, 2023[26]).
For example, Sweden’s curriculum framework sets broad objectives for ECEC, such as encouraging children to express their thoughts and ideas and creating the conditions for this to happen. It states that the starting point should be the interests of children, as well as the knowledge and experiences that children have already acquired. Educators are asked to challenge children’s curiosity and understanding of language, communication, mathematics, science and technology, and to create conditions for expression through multiple forms - both with and without digital tools.
Mechanisms and actions: Countries nurture dispositions for lifelong learning primarily through curriculum frameworks that set national learning goals focused on agency, curiosity and self-expression; providing pedagogical frameworks and exemplars to help educators translate these into practice; and supporting reflective teaching through professional learning. For instance, Sweden’s curriculum links broad learning goals to local pedagogical planning, while Türkiye’s Preschool Education Curriculum integrates child agency and exploration into structured daily activities, supported by professional training and monitoring tools.
Scope and timeline: These aims are usually embedded in national curricula for continuous application. New Zealand’s Te Whāriki (1996; revised 2016/17) applies to all early childhood education settings, combining long-term stability with local cultural flexibility, while Türkiye’s Preschool Education Curriculum launched nationwide for ages 3–6, pairs broad dissemination with accelerated professional learning.
Main actors involved: Learner agency depends on collaboration among families, educators and communities, supported by national and local authorities. For example, New Zealand’s Te Whāriki invites parents and Māori and Pacific communities to co-design culturally responsive curricula, Norway integrates care, play and learning through partnerships with parents, and Türkiye’s revised preschool curriculum connects multiple developmental areas under a unified vision for early learning.
Digital and blended approaches: Blended approaches are generally utilised for promoting learner agency, typically emphasising creating safe and supportive learning environments for children, while digital approaches, with guidance, is used to enrich activities and extend access. For instance, Thailand’s Happy Learning combines well-being-oriented school reforms with online learning games and a digital hub for teachers to integrate well-being and life skills into daily classroom practice. Costa Rica’s I Learn the Good Life digital platform gives access to learning content on topics for different ages, including green skills, digital literacy, digital security, or learning about emotions for ECEC children.
Nurturing curiosity, confidence and agency from the earliest years requires more than broad curriculum goals: it depends on how educators, families and systems create daily opportunities for children to make choices, express ideas and see their voices valued. Embedding these dispositions explicitly in curriculum frameworks and professional learning can ensure that motivation and agency are developed as intentionally as cognitive skills, laying firm foundations for lifelong learning.
Developing skills for lifelong learning
Policies prioritise foundational skills in the early years because they underpin children’s development and reinforce both the means and the will to learn. Reviewed initiatives commonly seek to strengthen language, literacy and numeracy through curricula, teaching standards and integrated services (e.g. Mexico’s National ECE Strategy, Türkiye’s Preschool Curriculum and Bulgaria’s Integrated Services). Some also emphasise problem-solving and socio-emotional skills, such as Boston’s Educare programme in the United States. On the other hand, metacognitive abilities such as planning, monitoring and reflecting on learning are less commonly referenced.
This section explores three key dimensions of these efforts: how systems are fostering early cognitive development, how they are enhancing quality and inclusion at the system level, and how digital tools and delivery models are being leveraged to expand access and strengthen learning experiences.
Fostering early cognitive development
Across education systems, reviewed policies commonly seek to foster early cognitive development. These are often targeted through play, interaction and responsive teaching, as play-based activities often support skills such as early literacy, communication, problem-solving and digital competence.
Norway’s Framework Plan for Kindergartens, which promotes skill development across social, emotional, linguistic and cognitive domains is one example. Finland’s National Core Curriculum for ECEC also guides skills development through personalised pedagogical strategies crafted collaboratively by educators and ECSETs, strengthening early language, socio-emotional learning and cognitive development in both inclusive and targeted formats. Frameworks also emphasise holistic development, for example focusing on communication, inquiry, metacognitive abilities as core competencies that nurture children’s skill development. These policies highlight the close relationship between will and skill development in the early years.
Mechanisms and actions: These include curriculum dissemination, local pedagogical planning, educator professional development, structured family participation and digital guidance, as features of Norway’s implementation. Sweden’s curriculum positions the child’s interests, experiences and agency at the centre of pedagogical work, and multi-professional teams, including early childhood special-education teachers (ECSETs), plan and evaluate child support strategies together specialist roles in team-based structures work alongside educators in Finland to plan, evaluate and deliver child support strategies, while also providing peer coaching across teams.
Scope and timeline: Typically, these are implemented nationally in scope, with local implementation and adaptation. In Norway, the framework covers all public and private kindergartens for children aged one to school entry, combining a national mandate with locally adapted training and guidance. In Finland, it applies to all licensed ECEC institutions.
Main actors involved: A broad range of actors are involved in delivery and multi-level governance structures that support implementation. In Japan, national and local governments, families, civil society and children and youth are important actors within its Basic Act for Children’s Policy. In Finland, ECSETs strengthen inclusive pedagogy and workforce capacity (see Box 2.3). In Norway, the Directorate for Education and Training oversees policy, while kindergarten staff are responsible for planning and delivery, local authorities are responsible for implementation and oversight, children are recognised as active learners, and parents are legal participants.
Digital and blended approaches: Digital and blended learning approaches feature across countries, with a shared focus on purposeful use rather than replacement of other pedagogical methods. Digital tools are viewed as means to enhance access, or for creativity and exploration, not as ends in themselves. In Norway, for example, digital media is used for expression and shared learning with adults rather than for passive consumption, reinforcing play and social interaction as the core of early learning.
Tools and resources generated: Resources, such as pedagogical documentation, individual learning plans, and structured reflection protocols are used collaboratively in Finland. Other approaches are rights-based and institutional in nature, with a focus on legal principles rather than programmatic tools.
In Finland, multi-professional teamwork is considered a key component of contemporary ECEC professionalism. ECEC policy states the right of children to receive support from regular ECEC staff teams as well as from early childhood special-education teachers (ECSETs), who are experts in individualised child supports and hold specific qualifications (e.g. a master’s degree in special education) in addition to teacher training. While ECSETs may act as special-education teachers within a team, they often also participate in the planning, implementation, and assessment of support in a consulting role across multiple teams (Ranta et al., 2023[27]; Karila and Kupila, 2023[28])]. The policy assumes that collaborative planning among diverse professionals leads to more responsive, inclusive practices that enhance child outcomes. The role of ECSETs typically involve working in team-based structures, integrating special education into everyday pedagogical practice, co-planning and evaluating child support strategies, and serving as peer coaches to colleagues across teams.
Source: Finland’s response to the Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation
Strengthening both cognitive and socio-emotional development in early childhood requires translating broad curriculum aims into daily, high-quality interactions between children and adults. Sustained investment in educator capability, multi-professional teamwork and family engagement can help ensure that play, communication and inclusion reinforce curiosity, confidence and self-regulation.
Enhancing quality for all through system-level measures
High-quality ECEC is increasingly recognised as a decisive factor in developing the skills that underpin lifelong learning. Policies encompass coherent curriculum frameworks, clear professional standards and sustained workforce development to ensure that children experience stimulating, play-based and responsive learning, with a focus on supporting rich daily interactions between children, educators and their environments.
In the Flemish Community of Belgium, for example, the Pedagogical Framework for Childcare of Babies and Toddlers links developmental domains with system- and institution-level monitoring to support continuous improvement in ECEC settings. This is one example of how quality frameworks are bringing together structural conditions and professional to strengthen skills for lifelong learning.
Mechanisms and actions: Curriculum frameworks and standards are increasingly aligned with professional supports to strengthen both structures and practice. Examples include Austria’s 15a Agreement, which couples federal transfers with workforce training and language support, and Norway’s Framework Plan, which guides the use of digital technologies to enrich ECEC. Luxembourg’s Subsidy Funding Scheme (Chèque-Service Accueil) ties fee subsidies to quality standards, while Mexico’s Early Childhood Strategy sets minimum thresholds across providers. Structural levers such as ratios and standards are also combined with pedagogies that promote play, curiosity and exploration in Norway and Japan. Countries further invest directly in the profession: Estonia’s ProgeTiger embeds digital competence in teacher training; Sweden and Iceland pair pedagogical coaching with career incentives; and the United States’ Educare model uses master teachers to mentor colleagues.
Scope and timeline: Typically implemented nationally, these frameworks are often piloted regionally before full adoption. Examples include the Flemish Community of Belgium’s Measuring and Monitoring of Quality, which introduced quality monitoring after a coordinated launch, and Bulgaria’s National Framework for Quality ECEC, piloted in ten centres before national rollout.
Main actors involved: Ministries, inspectorates, research institutions and professional development organisations play important roles. Examples include cross-sectoral actions in Thailand (see Box 2.4), and in the Flemish Community of Belgium, the Measuring and Monitoring of Quality system links research, inspection and pedagogical coaching to maintain continuous improvement. Bulgaria’s National Quality Framework unites education, health and social ministries with the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF) and municipal inspectorates to build a shared reference, while the French Community of Belgium mandates regular professional learning as a condition of quality assurance.
Digital and blended approaches: Education systems employ a blended range of approaches for quality-related aims: these can vary from digital capacity-building with traditional modes of training. For example, Austria’s curriculum reform uses Massive Open Online Courses (MOOCs), resource websites and virtual meetings alongside in-person workshops and mentoring to embed competency-based teaching.
Resources required: Stable public allocations and quality-linked grants fund pedagogy and workforce investment. Austria’s 15a agreement ties federal transfers to quality conditions, while the French Community of Belgium’s Quality Code embeds expectations in annual budgets. Workforce resources range from professional development, coaching and ratio improvements, supported by facility upgrades to sustain quality environments.
Tools and resources generated: Outputs typically include curricula, pedagogical frameworks, training manuals and inspection tools, as in German-speaking Community of Belgium, Bulgaria and Slovenia. The French Community of Belgium provides support documents to help childcare settings reflect on, adapt, and update their practices.
Thailand’s Early Childhood Development Promotion Plan aims to improve school readiness and reduce developmental inequalities among children aged 0–3 by providing structured, high-quality learning environments in the home and community. Its policy objectives include accelerating the provision of knowledge and understanding to parents, teachers, caregivers, communities and society as the most important factor for the all-round development of children, and to accelerate the development of the potential of local administrative organisations, communities, and local mechanisms close to children, such as district hospitals, sub-district health promotion hospitals, and early childhood development centres. The National Early Childhood Development Policy Committee is the main mechanism to set the policy direction. It leads the co-ordination with ministries including the Ministry of Education, Ministry of Public Health Ministry of Social Development and Human Security and Ministry of Home Affairs.
Source: Thailand’s response to the Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation, Thailand Ministry of Education, https://moe360.blog/2025/03/28/27368, accessed 04 September 2025
Sustaining quality across early childhood systems requires aligning structures and standards with the daily practices that shape children’s learning. Workforce strength is central to this goal: competitive salaries, sustained professional learning, and ongoing coaching and mentoring are vital to attract, retain and empower staff to deliver high-quality, responsive learning experiences.
Harnessing digital tools and delivery
Education systems increasingly use digital tools to enrich pedagogy, build age-appropriate digital literacy, and strengthen the professional practice of educators. When used purposefully and safely, digital tools can enhance ECEC by supporting creativity, inclusion, and access. Current approaches emphasise responsible digitalisation (e.g. with regards to safety and privacy), integrating technology in developmentally appropriate ways, while building digital literacy among educators and families. This reflects a growing recognition of digital literacy as a core competency from the earliest years and a driver of pedagogical improvement.
Effective policies combine investments in skills and access: ensuring that children learn in safe, digitally enabled environments and that educators are equipped and confident to use these tools. For example, Estonia’s ProgeTiger programme provides digital devices, teacher training and learning materials to support both teaching quality and children’s digital competence.
Mechanisms and actions: Most policies combine device provision with professional training, digital resources and practitioner networks to promote innovative pedagogy. Examples include Estonia’s ProgeTiger and Lithuania’s Innovations in Kindergarten, which integrate digital content with teacher development. Thailand and Lithuania pair digital tools with peer networks, while Norway and Iceland emphasise safe, age-appropriate and interactive use of technology. These mechanisms expand access and flexibility while addressing persistent challenges, including digital divides, safeguarding and the risk of displacing the relational aspects of ECEC.
Scope and timeline: Narrower or phased approaches to enable systems to learn and adjust in fast-changing contexts are common. Estonia’s ProgeTiger spans all education levels, with milestones for teacher training and AI integration. Finland’s Framework for Digitalisation in Education and Austria’s Digital Media Education Handbook use shorter implementation cycles linked to regular review points to encourage reflection and agility.
Main actors involved: Implementation requires co-ordination across national authorities, training institutions and educators. In Finland, central and local actors jointly guide digital adoption across education sectors, while Austria supports educators in using technology to enrich play-based learning.
Digital and blended approaches: Digital-led approaches are supported by professional development and frameworks that help to ensure responsible implementation. Lithuania’s EdTech initiative connects educators with digital tool creators and offers hybrid professional learning to help enable digital innovation. Similarly, Costa Rica’s Tecnoideas platform encourages exchanges of actors’ pedagogically guided digital practices. Norway’s early childhood curriculum framework states that digital practices should help enhance creativity and learning, rather than for passive consumption (see Box 2.5).
Resources required: Funding typically combines national budgets with EU or loan funding. Investments often pair digital infrastructure and connectivity with teacher professional development and technical support, although the specific capacity requirements are not always detailed. Estonia’s ProgeTiger combines state budgets and EU resources with teacher training for digital pedagogy, while Lithuania’s Innovations in Kindergarten programme, supported by the European Social Fund, trained 89 expert lecturers to cascade digital practices nationwide.
Tools and resources generated: Education systems have generated a range of digital toolkits, learning platforms, and digital repositories. For instance, Finland’s Framework for Digitalisation in Education develop digital resources to strengthen educator capacity and pedagogical innovation, while Lithuania curates digital materials to build educators’ competencies.
Norway’s Regulations on a Framework Plan for the Content and Tasks of Kindergartens (the Framework Plan) sets out supplementary provisions on the content and tasks of kindergartens.
Norway’s curriculum framework in early childhood states that digital practices in ECEC settings shall encourage children to play, be creative and learn. Digital tools are used sparingly to enhance creativity and learning. Digital media is used for expression, exploration, and co-use with adults, rather than passive consumption. The use of digital tools must support children’s learning processes and help create a rich and varied learning environment for all children. Staff are expected to be actively involved with children when using digital tools, which should be used with care and not become a dominant practice. The Plan also gives a number of broad directions for staff, such as: enabling the children to explore, play, learn and create using digital forms of expression; evaluating the relevance and suitability and participating in the children’s media usage; exploring the creative and inventive use of digital tools together with the children.
Source: Norway’s response to the Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation; Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2017[29]), Framework Plan for the content and tasks of kindergartens, https://www.udir.no/contentassets/5d0f4d947b244cfe90be8e6d475ba1b4/framework-plan-for-kindergartens--rammeplan-engelsk-pdf.pdf, accessed 04 September 2025.
Embedding digitalisation responsibly and strengthening digital literacy among children and educators can enrich pedagogy and build foundations for lifelong learning. The priority ahead is to ensure that digital environments are age-appropriate, safe and inclusive, supported by monitoring and evaluation that deepen understanding of how digital experiences shape learning and well-being.
Creating the means for lifelong learning
The “means” of lifelong learning are the conditions that allow children and families participate fully and confidently. Policies typically expand access, improve workforce quality and integrate services, which are all important components of learners’ learning environments and beyond. Efforts to professionalise and connect the education workforce include Slovenia’s counselling services and France’s initiatives to strengthen teacher training in ECEC and foster partnerships with families and local communities. Similarly, parental engagement programmes, such as New Zealand’s whānau-led services and Northern Ireland (United Kingdom)’s Getting Ready to Learn, help reinforce collaboration between schools, families, and communities to support children’s learning and well-being.
The Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) (2024[30]) shows that frequent home-based learning activities before primary school – reading, storytelling, playing with number and alphabet toys – are associated with higher Grade 4 mathematics achievement (see Figure 2.3). This relationship is especially pronounced in Bulgaria, Hungary, the Slovak Republic and Türkiye, where students whose parents reported more frequent engagement scored significantly higher in mathematics.
This section explores three key dimensions of these efforts: how systems are ensuring equitable access, how they are strengthening the home-learning environment, and how cross-sectoral collaboration can help create the means for lifelong learning.
Average achievement scores in mathematics (grade 4), by frequency of home early literacy and numeracy activities before primary school
Note: Results are based on parents’ reports of how often they engaged their child in eight literacy and eight numeracy activities prior to starting primary school. Students were classified as engaging in these types of activities “very often,” “often,” or “sometimes” before beginning primary school.
Source: International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement (IEA)'s Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study - TIMSS 2023, https://timss2023.org/results, accessed 13 October 2025.
Ensuring equitable access
Equitable access starts with removing financial, structural and informational barriers. While all children benefit from quality ECEC, the gains are greatest for those from less advantaged backgrounds (OECD, 2025[6]). For instance, in Spain, reforms in ECEC have focused on expanding access alongside improving quality of education for children aged 0-3, strengthening the curriculum framework and embedding inclusive education objectives.
Systems combine universal entitlements with targeted measures: universal frameworks guarantee access, while targeted supports direct additional resources to families most in need. Universal frameworks guarantee access for all, while targeted supports direct additional resources to families most in need. For instance, Czechia is implementing the Child Guarantee, which aims to create 7 500 additional places by 2030, focusing on children aged 0-3 and those at risk of poverty or social exclusion. Similarly, Luxembourg’s Subsidy Funding Scheme (Chèque-Service Accueil) links fee subsidies to household income and childcare usage, to help affordability go hand in hand with quality regulation. Through such measures, education systems aim to give every child the opportunity to develop the skills and confidence that form the foundation for lifelong learning.
Mechanisms and actions: Fee abolition, targeted subsidies and integrated services are some of the financial and outreach mechanisms that seek to expand access. Bulgaria’s removal of preschool fees eliminated direct financial barriers to enrolment, while England and Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) direct entitlements and funding to low-income families. Brazil’s intersectoral programmes align education with health and social protection to reach children in poverty. These mechanisms aim to improve affordability, availability and visibility of provision for disadvantaged families.
Scope and timeline: Broad national frameworks are usually combined with targeted overlays for disadvantaged groups, typically implemented as multi-year or continuous commitments. Bulgaria’s preschool fee abolition and England (United Kingdom)’s entitlement for disadvantaged two-year-olds use financial support to eliminate access barriers. Estonia’s Preschool Law and the Slovak Republic’s compulsory pre-primary provision establish universal participation rights. Phased eligibility extensions are also common: Luxembourg’s Subsidy Funding Scheme (Chèque-Service Accueil) links affordability with quality regulation, and the United Kingdom’s Targeted Entitlements in Early Childhood (see Box 2.5) and Working Parent Entitlement expand eligibility from age three to nine months to balance capacity and demand.
Main actors involved: Implementation relies on co-ordination between national and local authorities. National ministries set entitlements and funding rules, while municipalities expand provision through public, private and non-profit providers. In Luxembourg, it is not only municipalities that deliver services – these can also be provided by private for-profit organisations or not-for-profit providers, while fiscal authorities administer subsidies in a mixed-provider market, while in England (United Kingdom), co-ordination between national and local authorities ensures that targeted funding reaches eligible children.
Resources required: Equitable access depends on stable and predictable financing, often through means-tested subsidies, earmarked grants or blended schemes. The Subsidy Funding Scheme (Chèque-Service Accueil) in Luxembourg links subsidies to household income, while Northern Ireland’s Sure Start channels funding to disadvantaged areas. China combines subsidy and tax incentive schemes to expand infant-toddler provision. Infrastructure investments focus on underserved or rural areas, complemented by specialised human resources such as psychologists, speech therapists and mediators in Bulgaria’s Strong Start, community educators in Peru’s non-school programmes for early education (Programas No Escolarizados de Educación Inicial) (PRONOEI), and early childhood special-education teachers in Finland.
Tools and resources generated: Governments develop guidelines, communication materials and co-ordination tools to support equitable enrolment and collaboration across sectors. The Slovak Republic publishes national guidelines online, Sweden’s Preschool for More Children provides municipalities with outreach materials to contact non-enrolled families, and Romania and Northern Ireland (United Kingdom) use referral templates and pathways that link education, health and social services.
The United Kingdom offers 15 hours of free early education to families of disadvantaged 2-year-olds, with the aim of improving educational outcomes for children facing disadvantage. This entitlement has developed gradually, evolving from a small-scale pilot in 2006 into a national policy with wider eligibility. Alongside this, the United Kingdom also has universal entitlement for 3- and 4-year-olds.
Among the expansions to eligibility criteria are:
2013: Entitlements aligned with free school meal entitlement and extended to include children looked after by a local authority in England or Wales;
2018: Families receiving Universal Credit with a net household income of GBP 15 400 or less became eligible;
2022: Covering families with no recourse to public funds, subject to specific income thresholds.
Source: United Kingdom’s response to the Education Policy Outlook (2025): National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation, UK Government, https://www.gov.uk/help-with-childcare-costs/free-childcare-2-year-olds-claim-benefits?step-by-step-nav=f237ec8e-e82c-4ffa-8fba-2a88a739783b, accessed 15 September 2025
Ensuring equitable access to early learning depends on how universal and targeted measures are designed and sustained. Universal frameworks build stability and trust, while targeted approaches address the specific needs of disadvantaged children and families. Systems that balance both, supported by sustainable funding and local partnerships across education, health and social services, are best placed to make high-quality early learning accessible to every child.
Strengthening the home-learning environment
The home-learning environment is central to early development and the “means” for lifelong learning. Policies in this area aim to help families create nurturing, stimulating environments and strengthen continuity between home and ECEC settings. These approaches recognise parents and caregivers as key partners in learning, as well as their influence on children’s motivation, curiosity and confidence. For example, England (United Kingdom)’s Family Hubs model brings together services across education, health and social care to help parents foster positive home-learning environments while accessing childcare, health and employment support. Such policies highlight that family engagement and cross-sector co-ordination are vital for developing children’s early skills and the relational conditions that sustain lifelong learning. Evidence shows that family engagement can be a powerful driver of children’s participation, motivation and persistence in learning (Sylva et al., 2010[31]; OECD, 2025[6]).
Mechanisms and actions: Relationship-centred mechanisms build trust and capability: England (United Kingdom)’s Family Hubs consolidate local services, from parenting support to childcare advice; New Zealand’s Engaging Priority Families delivers home visits and tailored guidance for families not enrolled in ECEC; Türkiye’s Family Education Programmes combine digital and face-to-face delivery; and the United States. Educare model embeds home visits and parent–teacher conferences to build consistent engagement. These mechanisms and actions underline that family engagement is not just about providing information, but are relational and based in trust.
Scope and timeline: Typically local networks operate within national frameworks, using time-bound investments or continuous-improvement cycles. England’s Family Hubs promote inter-agency co-ordination under a fixed funding period, while the U.S. Educare Network applies rolling, data-driven learning cycles to support long-term improvement across its partner cities.
Main actors involved: Parents are seen as co-educators alongside partnerships across education, health and community sectors. In England (United Kingdom), Family Hubs coordinate local delivery through collaboration between local authorities, educators and health visitors. Türkiye mobilises teachers and facilitators to support parents’ digital and socio-emotional skills, and the U.S. Educare centres extend family engagement through home visits, parent conferences and representation in governance.
Digital and blended approaches: Digital tools increasingly used to support communication and parental involvement, complemented by in-person guidance. In Northern Ireland (United Kingdom), A Fair Start combines online learning modules, devices and data dashboards with direct outreach to disadvantaged families, while Türkiye’s Family Education Programmes and New Zealand’s Engaging Priority Families use hybrid delivery to increase flexibility and reach.
Resources required: Resources generally support integrated local networks and outreach teams. England (United Kingdom)’s Family Hubs link early childhood practitioners with health visitors; Thailand’s Early Childhood Development Promotion Plan funds home-learning coaches; and New Zealand’s Te Whāriki uses bicultural advisors and community facilitators to promote inclusion. Budget allocations are typically embedded within broader ECEC or social policy frameworks rather than separated.
Tools and resources generated: Parent-facing materials, home-learning kits and communication resources are some examples. Thailand’s Early Childhood Development Promotion Plan includes developmental monitoring tools; Slovenia and China publish parent guides and online modules; and New Zealand’s Te Whāriki integrates participation resources directly into its curriculum framework.
Strengthening the home-learning environment is vital for sustaining motivation and confidence beyond early learning settings. When families can act as empowered co-educators through structured outreach, guidance and trust-based partnerships, learning can become continuous across home, school and community. Embedding these supports within wider education, health and social frameworks can help ensure that every family, regardless of background, has the capacity and confidence to support children’s learning and development.
Supporting cross-sectoral collaboration
Cross-sector co-ordination aligns services around children’s needs rather than institutional boundaries. Where in place, it provides holistic, continuous support and smoother transitions into school - helping sustain relationships and learning. For example, Iceland’s Act on the Integration of Services in the Interest of Children’s Prosperity establishes a national framework for cooperation between education, health and social authorities to help children and parents access integrated services without impediment. Smooth transitions from ECEC to primary school are also a key function of co-ordination across learning settings and are important for ensuring continuity of learning and relationships.
Mechanisms and actions: Where they exist, inter-ministerial or multi-agency frameworks seek to overcome fragmentation and promote smoother transitions between ECEC, primary education and related services. Iceland’s Act on the Integration of Services mandates co-ordination across education, social and health sectors, supported by formal collaboration structures between national and local levels. Bulgaria’s Integrated Early Childhood Development Services use EU co-funding to promote municipal cooperation between health, education and social sectors, giving children access to health checks and early education. Brazil links ECEC with health and social protection through intersectoral programming.
Scope and timeline: Where co-ordination frameworks have been established, they are typically embedded within national legislation or implemented through multi-year, locally adaptable projects. Iceland’s Integration of Services Act applies nationally, requiring cooperation between all municipalities and relevant ministries. Bulgaria’s integrated early childhood policy extends across municipalities through the Social Inclusion Project (SIP), using EU structural funds and municipal co-financing to scale integrated service delivery through multi-year cycles.
Main actors involved: Cross-sectoral co-ordination relies on multi-level and inter-agency collaboration. In Bulgaria, the Ministry of Health and Ministry of Education jointly lead implementation, with the Ministry of Labour and Social Policy (MLSP) regulating integrated social and health services. Municipalities and civil-society organisations deliver local services, while the SIP was managed by the MLSP in partnership with local providers. In Iceland, both national and municipal authorities share responsibility for implementation alongside social and health agencies. These arrangements highlight that where co-ordination exists, success depends on shared governance and accountability across levels of government.
Tools and resources generated: Bulgaria’s Social Inclusion Project created 113 community centres to provide integrated education, health and social services under one roof. These investments included infrastructure rehabilitation and new childcare centres in underserved areas. However, across education systems, it is not yet known what additional tools and resources – such as shared guidelines, co-ordination procedures, inter-agency protocols or digital platforms – are available to facilitate and sustain this cross-sectoral collaboration across participating ministries and municipalities.
Where co-ordination mechanisms exist, they are key to ensuring smooth transitions and coherent support across ECEC, health and social services. Yet such policies remain fragmented across the reviewed systems. Strengthening shared governance, data exchange and sustainable funding can help make integrated services a consistent feature of early childhood systems rather than isolated initiatives. By improving continuity and responsiveness across sectors, these approaches can reinforce the means for lifelong learning.
Early childhood lays the foundations for lifelong learning. It is in these early years that curiosity, persistence and self-regulation take shape through daily interactions between children, educators and their environments. As participation in ECEC expands, systems are focusing on how policies can nurture the will, skills and means that sustain learning throughout life.
Evidence from the policies reviewed for this chapter shows strong commitment to enhancing quality, expanding equitable access and strengthening family engagement. Systems are increasingly aligning ECEC frameworks, workforce development and inclusion measures to improve access and quality of provision. However, implementation remains uneven: motivational dimensions are rarely made explicit in policy design, workforce capacity is stretched, and cross-sector co-ordination remains fragmented or project-based. The challenge ahead is not only to broaden access but to ensure that early experiences consistently foster the dispositions, skills and enabling conditions that underpin lifelong learning.
Fostering will for lifelong learning: Nurturing curiosity, confidence and a will to learn is a common goal of early education, though it is less often defined in practical terms. Many curricula promote play, exploration and self-expression, yet guidance on how educators and families can support these dispositions remains limited. Embedding agency, curiosity and persistence explicitly within curriculum frameworks – supported by pedagogical guidance and professional learning – can strengthen motivation from the start. Family engagement initiatives can extend these dispositions beyond ECEC settings, empowering parents to create nurturing and stimulating home environments.
Developing skills for lifelong learning: Policies consistently prioritise developing early cognitive and socio-emotional skills as foundations for learning and well-being. Frameworks in Finland, Norway and Slovenia, among others, show how play-based, inclusive pedagogies can strengthen early literacy, communication, problem-solving and digital competence. However, metacognitive and self-regulation skills are less often addressed, and socio-emotional learning remains under-emphasised relative to cognitive development. Sustained, practice-based professional learning and multi-professional teamwork can help educators integrate these dimensions holistically into everyday pedagogy, ensuring that ECEC nurtures both will and skill.
Creating the means for lifelong learning: The means for learning are advanced through policies that expand access, strengthen workforce quality, and improve governance and co-ordination. Universal and targeted mechanisms - such as fee abolition, subsidies and outreach - help remove financial and structural barriers, but their success depends on sustained funding and local delivery capacity. Ensuring quality for all requires not only coherent frameworks and standards, but also investment in educators’ time, conditions and competence. Integrating education, health and social services can further strengthen the continuity of support for children and families, particularly at key transition points into primary school. Digitalisation also features across reforms as a means to enrich pedagogy and support professional practice, though responsible and age-appropriate use remains essential. Systems that treat digital tools as instruments for creativity and expression – rather than as replacements for play or interaction – are best positioned to use technology to enhance ECEC quality.
Next steps for policymakers. To translate these ambitions into sustained lifelong-learning outcomes, education systems could focus on the following directions:
Embed the will, skills and means for lifelong learning more explicitly within curriculum frameworks – clarifying how dispositions, competencies and enabling conditions can be supported, alongside clear guidance.
Elevate process quality through sustained workforce development, ensuring that educators have time, mentoring and professional learning opportunities to foster curiosity, creativity and socio-emotional growth through play and interaction.
Strengthen family engagement and the home-learning environment, using structured outreach, guidance and partnerships across education, health and social services to empower parents as active co-educators.
Ensure responsible and developmentally appropriate digitalisation, providing clear guidance, professional learning and safeguards so that digital tools complement - not replace - rich, play-based and relational learning.
Balance universal and targeted measures so that all children can access high-quality ECEC while additional support reaches those facing disadvantage, ensuring affordability, continuity and inclusion.
Institutionalise cross-sectoral co-ordination, moving from project-based integration to governance arrangements that align education, health and social policies around shared early development goals and smoother transitions to school.
These directions can help governments to strengthen the connections between will, skills and means, so that children can build the foundations for learning and development throughout life. Looking ahead, it will also be essential to deepen understanding of the long-term value of ECEC. Monitoring and evaluation frameworks, guided by a clear theory of change, should be designed to explicitly measure how early childhood interventions contribute to children’s immediate learning and development outcomes, their successful transitions into school, and their broader cognitive, socio-emotional and lifelong-learning outcomes. Strengthening this evidence base can help policymakers sustain investment and continuously improve the interventions that give all children the best start in life.
References
[23] Burns, T. and F. Gottschalk (eds.) (2020), Education in the Digital Age: Healthy and Happy Children, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/1209166a-en.
[17] Burns, T. and F. Köster (eds.) (2016), Governing Education in a Complex World, Educational Research and Innovation, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264255364-en.
[24] Cunha, F. and J. Heckman (2007), “The Technology of Skill Formation”, American Economic Review, Vol. 97/2, pp. 31-47, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.97.2.31.
[3] Cunha, F. et al. (2006), “Chapter 12 Interpreting the Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation”, in Handbook of the Economics of Education, Handbook of the Economics of Education Volume 1, Elsevier, https://doi.org/10.1016/s1574-0692(06)01012-9.
[1] Cvijanović, N. and D. Mojić (2021), “Institutional Pedagogical Intervention in Early Years of Life on the Path of Lifelong Learning / Institucionalna pedagoška intervencija u ranim godinama života na putu cjeloživotnog učenja”, Croatian Journal of Education - Hrvatski časopis za odgoj i obrazovanje, Vol. 22, https://doi.org/10.15516/cje.v22i0.3909.
[16] Deding, J. and A. Minnaert (2024), “Improving Child Outcomes and Quality in Early Childhood Education and Care Through Implementation of Professional Development: A Meta-Systematic Literature Review of Pre- and In-Service Approaches”, Advances in Social Sciences Research Journal, Vol. 11/12, pp. 33-65, https://doi.org/10.14738/assrj.1112.17997.
[26] Gottschalk, F. and H. Borhan (2023), Child participation in decision making: Implications for education and beyond, OECD Education Working Papers, No. 301, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a37eba6c-en.
[15] Hamre, B., A. Partee and C. Mulcahy (2017), “Enhancing the Impact of Professional Development in the Context of Preschool Expansion”, AERA Open, Vol. 3/4, https://doi.org/10.1177/2332858417733686.
[4] Heckman, J., R. Pinto and P. Savelyev (2013), “Understanding the Mechanisms Through Which an Influential Early Childhood Program Boosted Adult Outcomes”, American Economic Review, Vol. 103/6, pp. 2052-2086, https://doi.org/10.1257/aer.103.6.2052.
[8] Huffman, L., S. Mehlinger and A. Kerivan (2001), Risk factors for academic and behavioral problems in the beginning of school.
[20] Iceland Ministry of Education and Children (2021), Act No 86/2021 on the Integration of Services in the Interest of Children’s Prosperity, https://www.government.is/library/04-Legislation/Act-Integration-Child-Services-Children-Prosperity-86-2021.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2025).
[28] Karila, K. and P. Kupila (2023), “Multi-professional teamwork in Finnish early childhood education and care”, International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, Vol. 17/1, https://doi.org/10.1186/s40723-023-00124-5.
[9] Lehrl, S., M. Evangelou and P. Sammons (2020), “The home learning environment and its role in shaping children’s educational development”, School Effectiveness and School Improvement, Vol. 31/1, pp. 1-6, https://doi.org/10.1080/09243453.2020.1693487.
[10] 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.
[13] Muir, R., S. Howard and L. Kervin (2024), “Supporting early childhood educators to foster children’s self-regulation and executive functioning through professional learning”, Early Childhood Research Quarterly, Vol. 67, pp. 170-181, https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ecresq.2023.12.001.
[29] Norwegian Ministry of Education and Research (2017), Framework Plan for the content and tasks of Kindergartens, https://www.udir.no/contentassets/5d0f4d947b244cfe90be8e6d475ba1b4/framework-plan-for-kindergartens--rammeplan-engelsk-pdf.pdf (accessed on 4 September 2025).
[22] OECD (ed.) (2025), How’s Life for Children in the Digital Age?, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/0854b900-en.
[6] 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 (2023), Empowering Young Children in the Digital Age, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/50967622-en.
[25] OECD (2023), OECD Digital Education Outlook 2023: Towards an Effective Digital Education Ecosystem, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/c74f03de-en.
[5] OECD (2023), PISA 2022 Results (Volume II): Learning During – and From – Disruption, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/a97db61c-en.
[11] 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.
[19] 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.
[7] OECD (2017), Financial Incentives for Steering Education and Training, Getting Skills Right, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264272415-en.
[12] OECD (2017), Starting Strong V: Transitions from Early Childhood Education and Care to Primary Education, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276253-en.
[18] OECD (2017), The Funding of School Education: Connecting Resources and Learning, OECD Reviews of School Resources, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264276147-en.
[27] Ranta, S. et al. (2023), “Teamwork as a cornerstone of a child’s educational support in early childhood education and care in Finland”, Journal of Early Childhood Education Research, Vol. 12/2, pp. 158-178, https://doi.org/10.58955/jecer.121462.
[2] Shonkoff, J. and D. Phillips (2000), From Neurons to Neighborhoods: The Science of Early Childhood Development, National Academies Press, Washington, D.C., https://doi.org/10.17226/9824.
[31] Sylva, K. et al. (2010), Early childhood matters: Evidence for the effective pre-school and primary education project., Routledge.
[21] UN CRC (2009), UN Committee on the Rights of the Child (CRC), General comment No. 12 (2009): The right of the child to be heard, CRC/C/GC/12, https://www.refworld.org/legal/general/crc/2009/en/70207 (accessed on 22 September 2025).
[30] von Davier, M. et al. (2024), TIMSS 2023 International Results in Mathematics and Science, TIMSS & PIRLS International Study Center, Boston College, https://doi.org/10.6017/lse.tpisc.timss.rs6460.
A list of policies reviewed for early childhood can be found below.
Source: Education Policy Outlook (2025), National Pre-Filled Questionnaire for Comparative Policy Analysis: Nurturing Engaged and Resilient Lifelong Learners in a World of Digital Transformation