Good Practice for Good Jobs in Early Childhood Education and Care

1. Introduction and overview

Recruiting and retaining highly skilled staff is a long-standing challenge for the early childhood education and care (ECEC) sector. Motivated by a large and growing body of research linking staff skills and competencies with process quality1 and child development, learning and well-being (OECD, 2012[1]; OECD, 2018[2]), OECD countries are increasingly demanding that ECEC staff be highly skilled and highly qualified. Several OECD countries have revised and/or raised minimum qualification requirements in ECEC in recent decades. Many are also placing increasing emphasis on in-service training and professional development for ECEC workers.

However, recruiting (and retaining) skilled ECEC staff is not straightforward. Many potential workers do not see ECEC as an attractive career choice, and efforts to bring skilled staff into the sector are often hampered by the low status of the profession and low pay on offer. Staff turnover rates are frequently high in ECEC, and it is common to find workers leaving the sector for better pay, conditions, and career prospects elsewhere. As a result, many OECD countries are facing staff shortages in ECEC, either now or in the near future (Litjens and Taguma, 2017[3]; Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]).

This report, developed with support from the German Federal Ministry of Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth (BMFSFJ), reviews policies and strategies to improve ECEC staff recruitment and retention. Building on existing OECD work on ECEC – including, for instance, the OECD Starting Strong series, the OECD Babies and Bosses series, and previous OECD Early Childhood Education and Care Policy Reviews – the Seepro-r Project (Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]) and the wider research literature, the report explores what countries can do to build a high-quality ECEC workforce. It examines measures and initiatives aimed at attracting and recruiting talented workers, discusses options for promoting pre-service training and “job-readiness”, and explores strategies for improving working conditions, staff satisfaction, and worker retention. It draws in particular on selected policy examples from Denmark, England, New Zealand, Norway, Sweden, and the United States.

The report starts with a brief overview of the workforce challenge facing OECD countries and a summary of the main findings emerging from the report. Section 2 focuses on recruitment. It reviews policies and initiatives to bring skilled staff into the ECEC sector, including strategies improve the attractiveness of ECEC as a career option, initiatives to recruit highly qualified staff, and options for encouraging men to enter ECEC. Section 3 turns to staff retention and development. It covers policies and initiatives to promote retention through improved pay, as well as strategies to improve working conditions and promote opportunities for in-service training, professional development, and career progression

1.1. The ECEC workforce challenge

Many OECD countries are facing a shortage of skilled staff in ECEC. Participation in ECEC is growing in almost all OECD countries (OECD, 2017[5]; 2018[6]), but the supply of highly skilled and highly qualified workers is often struggling to keep up. Germany provides one of the clearest examples (Box 1.1). There, the expansion of the ECEC guarantee in 2013 to all children aged one and over, combined with demographic developments, means that the number of children in ECEC is expected to rise substantially over the next decade or so and, with it, the need for more staff (Prognos, 2018[7]). One estimate suggests that Germany may need close to half a million new ECEC staff by 2030 (Box 1.1).

Box 1.1. ECEC staff shortages in Germany

Germany, as much as any other OECD country, is facing significant challenges in ECEC workforce recruitment and retention. In 2013, Germany widened its legal entitlement to a place in ECEC to all children age one and over. Together with steady increases in the birth rate (OECD, 2018[6]) and sustained growth in the share of mothers in paid work (OECD, 2018[6]), the expansion of the entitlement has led to a sharp increase in the use of ECEC. Between 2008 and 2018, the number of children using registered ECEC services in Germany increased by over 25%, from 1 565 000 to 2 024 000 (Destatis, 2018[8]). Estimates suggest this growth is likely to continue over the next decade or so (Prognos, 2018[7]).

The expansion of ECEC participation, alongside other changes like the gradual shift to full-day provision, is putting huge pressure on ECEC staffing in Germany. Total staff numbers have risen in recent years, from 365 000 educational professionals in 2008 to 596 000 in 2018 (Destatis, 2018[8]). However, expected further growth in ECEC participation, combined with large numbers of staff due to retire in the coming years, mean that many more new workers will be needed over the next decade or so (Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]). Estimates by the Swiss consultancy firm Prognos suggest that Germany may need as many as 372 000 additional ECEC staff by 2025, and a further 112 000 by 2030 (Prognos, 2018[7]). This far exceeds the number of new entrants expected to graduate from pre-service training programmes in ECEC over the same period (181 000 by 2025, and a further 104 000 by 2030), potentially leading to a shortfall of approximately 191 000 by 2025 and 200 000 by 2030 (Prognos, 2018[7]).

Other countries are also facing shortages of qualified ECEC workers. In France, for instance, a combination of cuts to staffing during the late-2000s and a high birth rate has led to a shortage of staff in both the care-oriented day care sector aimed at children under 3, and the pre-primary sector aimed at children over 3 (Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]). In England, the recent expansion of the free ECEC entitlement for 3- and 4-year-olds with working parents from 15 to 30 hours per week is increasing demand for the number of ECEC workers (Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]). Countries like Finland and Sweden too, are expecting staff shortages in the coming years (Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]), despite the long history and well-established nature of their ECEC systems.

A number of factors contribute to the general shortage of skilled staff in ECEC. First, in many OECD countries, the ECEC workforce is ageing. On average across OECD countries, 28% of pre-primary teachers are now aged 50 or over, rising to over 50% in Italy (Figure 1.1). Less than 20% are aged less than 30, on average. Older workers bring knowledge and experience to the sector, but also signal a looming issue – an ageing workforce means large numbers of staff will soon need to be replaced following retirement (Litjens and Taguma, 2017[3]).

Second, and related to the above, in many countries the ECEC industry is struggling to attract sufficient numbers of skilled and qualified new entrants (Litjens and Taguma, 2017[3]) (Section 2). Several countries (e.g. England, Finland and Norway) are finding it difficult to encourage enough talented students to enrol on pre-service ECEC training schemes (Oberhuemer and Schreyer, 2018[4]; Engel et al., 2015[9]), and even once qualified, not all graduates go on to have long-term careers in the sector. Indeed, several studies find that many ECEC students intend to stay in the industry for only a limited time before moving on to other areas, such as primary teaching (Press, Wong and Gibson, 2015[10]; Moloney, 2015[11]).

Figure 1.1. On average across the OECD, more than one in four pre-primary teachers is aged 50 or over

Distribution of pre-primary education teachers by age group, 2016

Note: 'Pre-primary education teachers' refers to teachers in pre-primary education (ISCED2011 level 0 programme 2). Data for Italy refer to 2012, for Estonia to 2014, and for New Zealand to 2015.

Source: OECD Education Database, http://www.oecd.org/education/database.htm, and OECD Employment Database, http://www.oecd.org/employment/emp/onlineoecdemploymentdatabase.htm.

Third, the ECEC sector often suffers from high staff turnover and poor worker retention (Section 3). There are few internationally comparable statistics on turnover in ECEC, but what data do exist tend to point to a common challenge in staff retention. Numbers from New Zealand, for example, show an ECEC teacher turnover rate of 19%, higher than the national average (MoE, 2014[12]). Estimates from the United States suggest the staff turnover rate in pre-primary education is 30%, and in the day-care sector as high as 35% (OECD, 2012[1]).

Fourth, across countries, the ECEC workforce is also overwhelmingly female (Section 2.4). On average across OECD countries, just 3% of pre-primary education teachers are men, and even in the best performing countries (e.g. France, the Netherlands and Norway) rates reach only around 7.5 to 12.5% (see Figure 2.4). The share of male staff is equally poor in services aimed at children under age 3. From a process quality and child outcome perspective, the limited number of men in ECEC has implications for child development, particularly in relation to the development of attitudes towards gender roles. On a staffing level, it also reduces the pool of available workers.

1.1.1. ECEC careers are too often seen as unappealing

Underlying all these issues is the fact that many potential and existing ECEC workers do not see a career in ECEC as appealing. Importantly, available evidence suggests the idea of working in ECEC is not necessarily unattractive in and of itself. Survey results from Germany, for example, show that as many as 5% of people aged 16 and over have at least once seriously considered a job in ECEC (IfD-Allensbach, 2018[13]). Data from OECD PISA 2015 suggest that 15-year-olds are actually more likely to say they expect a job in ECEC than in primary education, secondary education, or nursing (see Figure 2.1). However, various factors combine to make the reality of ECEC work often less attractive than in many competing occupations.

Low wages are one of the most frequently cited reasons for poor recruitment and retention (Sections 2.22.2.2 and 3.2). Many OECD countries have introduced measures aimed at boosting ECEC pay in recent years, especially in the pre-primary sector, but ECEC workers often still earn much less than they could elsewhere (see Figure 2.2). A lack of recognition and the perceived lack of status in ECEC work is another driver (Section2.2). ECEC staff often report finding their work valuable and rewarding (McDonald, Thorpe and Irvine, 2018[14]; Moloney, 2015[11]; Irvine et al., 2016[15]). At the same time, however, they also feel under-valued and under-rewarded for their efforts (Ackerman, 2006[16]; Irvine et al., 2016[15]). One study in Germany found that many staff (74%) are suffering from a “gratification crisis”, whereby they believe the work they do greatly exceeds the recognition and rewards received (Schreyer et al., 2014[17]). Only 2% of respondents believe their work is fully appreciated in society (Schreyer et al., 2014[17]).

Working conditions also play a role (Section 3.3). Numerous studies highlight the importance of aspects of the work environment like organisational climate and child-to-staff ratios for process quality and child learning and development (OECD, 2018[2]), but these factors are also important for staff job satisfaction and worker retention. ECEC workers considering leaving their job often point to stress, exhaustion, and poor support as key drivers (Totenhagen et al., 2016[18]). Promoting better working conditions by, for example, reducing class size and improving support structures can help increase staff performance, satisfaction, and retention (OECD, 2012[1]; OECD, 2018[2]).

Staff education and training systems are important too (see sections 2.3 and 3.4). Comprehensive education and training – both pre-service and in-service – is crucial for the construction of a high-quality workforce, but may also hamper recruitment if systems are not flexible and responsive to the needs of potential new staff with different backgrounds. For example, pre-service training systems that demand staff attain a specific university-level qualification in ECEC before entry may deter skilled graduates with a degree in an unrelated subject, or older workers seeking a career change. Those that refuse to recognise relevant skills and knowledge gained outside of ECEC may exclude many talented workers with experience from elsewhere.

1.2. Good policies for good jobs in early childhood education and care

The following sections of this report cover policies and strategies to improve ECEC staff recruitment and retention. Cross-country differences in governance structures, modes of provision (e.g. public- or market-based), the political and economic climate, and the existing state of the ECEC workforce mean that certain measures may be more relevant to some countries than to others. Nonetheless, the main general policy messages emerging from the report include:

• As a first step, countries must engage in efforts to improve the attractiveness of ECEC as a career (Section2.2). This includes measures to improve the status of the profession through, for example, increased qualification requirements for staff in at least some roles, as well as initiatives to improve wages. Where constrained by limited resources, countries may want to consider targeting wage increases at staff with particular characteristics and/or using wage increases to help achieve other strategic objectives. New Zealand’s cost-based supply-side funding system, which has helped increase the number of qualified and registered staff in ECEC, provides one example.

• In tandem with measures to improve status and pay, countries looking to build a high-quality workforce also need to engage in efforts to boost staff qualifications (Section 2.3). Raising minimum qualification requirements is one route to a highly qualified workforce, but does have drawbacks. To avoid short-term bottlenecks in the supply of qualified new entrants, countries may want to consider staggering the introduction of new minimum requirements or targeting requirement increases at staff in certain roles (e.g. centre leaders).

• Pre-service education and training systems should be accessible. Standard pre-service training programmes often last three, four or even five years in OECD countries, which may deter many new entrants. Countries should ensure alternative entry pathways are put in place for talented potential workers unwilling or unable to undergo lengthy pre-service training. This includes, for example, university graduates with a degree in an unrelated field, or older workers with relevant professional experience from outside of ECEC (e.g. nurses, care workers). England’s Early Years Professional Programme, which helped bring many university graduates into the ECEC workforce, provides one such example. Countries may also want to consider providing students with financial support during pre-service training in ECEC.

• Practice as well as theory is important in pre-service education and training. Different countries place different emphasis on the role of practical experience in pre-service training, but evidence suggests it can be hugely beneficial for process quality and staff ‘job‑readiness’. Countries without extensive practical placement schemes should consider expanding the role of practical experience and workplace-based learning in their pre-service training programmes. In Denmark, for example, student ECEC teachers spend the equivalent of more than one year on practical placements.

• To promote process quality and improve the supply of potential workers, countries should engage in stronger efforts to bring men into ECEC (Section 2.4). Measures to improve the status of ECEC will help, but countries should also consider engaging in information and recruitment campaigns. Norway has found some success in using affirmative action in the hiring process, though such policies should serve only as a temporary measure in the transition to a more gender-balanced workforce.

• Policies to attract and recruit ECEC staff need to be matched by strategies to keep skilled staff inside the sector. Low pay is one factor often cited by workers considering leaving the sector, and efforts to boost wages in general are likely to help improve staff retention. In addition, however, countries should consider revising wage structures and/or engaging in measures that reward performance and development through improved pay (Section 3.2). Wage boost initiatives from the United States demonstrate how providing salary supplements based on education and professional development activities can help promote retention.

• Countries should also engage in strategies to enhance working conditions (Section 3.3). Improving regulatory standards, including by reducing minimum child-to-staff ratios, is one option open to countries, even though such a move places an additional burden on public budget. Smaller class sizes are important for service quality and can help improve worker retention by, for instance, reducing stress among staff.

• Countries should also consider engaging in activities to promote in-service training and professional development opportunities (Section 3.4). This is vital for process quality, and may help boost sector-wide retention (through e.g. enhancing professional identity and improving career satisfaction), even though there is some evidence to suggest in-service training might increases the likelihood of staff changing specific jobs. Importantly, just providing the option of training is not enough; countries should also use strategies to promote and encourage staff participation. Mandating in-service training is one option. Introducing measures that incentivise training – such as the offer of wage boosts for participating staff, as used in programmes the U.S. states of Wisconsin and California – is another.

Box 1.2. Types of ECEC service and types of ECEC staff

Types of ECEC services

The types of ECEC services available to children and parents vary considerable across countries. However, most ECEC settings typically fall into one of the following categories:

• Regular centre-based ECEC: More formalised ECEC centres typically belong to one of these three sub-categories:

  • Centre-based ECEC for children from the age of 3: Often called pre-primary education, kindergarten or pre-school, these settings tend to be more formalised and are often linked to the education system.

  • Centre-based ECEC for children under the age of 3: Often called day care, crèche, or nursery school, these settings may have an educational function, but are typically attached to the social or welfare sector and often put greater emphasis on care. These services are sometimes provided in schools or alongside services for older children, but are also often provided in designated day care centres.

  • Age-integrated centre-based ECEC for children from birth or age 1 up to the beginning of primary school: Called kindergarten, pre-school, or pre-primary, these settings offer a holistic pedagogical provision of education and care. They are often offered on a full-day basis.

• Family child care: Licensed home-based ECEC, which is most prevalent for children under age 3. These settings may or may not have an educational function and be part of the regular ECEC system. These services are traditionally provided in a home setting. This can be at the provider’s home or at the child’s own home.

• Licensed or formalised drop-in ECEC centres: Often receiving children across the entire ECEC age bracket and even beyond, these drop-in centres allow parents to complement home-based care by family members or family childcare with more institutionalised services on an ad-hoc basis.

Types of ECEC staff

There are also a variety of categories of professionals working in ECEC systems, and job titles are diverse across countries. Broadly, most staff fall into one of the following categories:

• Teachers and comparable practitioners: Most often found in pre-primary education services and age-integrated centre based services. Pre-primary education teachers have the most responsibility for a group of children at the class or playroom level. They may also be called pedagogue, educator, childcare practitioner or pedagogical staff in pre-primary education.

• Child care workers: Most often found in the care-oriented day care sector aimed at children under age 3. They also often called day care workers.

• Family and domestic care workers: Family and domestic care workers are caregivers working in family child care or home-based care settings. Often also known as childminders or nannies.

• Assistants and support staff: Assistants support the teacher in a group of children or class. Assistants are more common in ECEC than in e.g. primary education. They usually have lower qualification requirements than teachers, which may range from no formal requirements to, for instance, vocational education and training.

Sources: (OECD, 2017[5]; 2018[19]; 2018[6]).

Note

← 1.  “Process quality” refers to the proximal processes that affect children’s everyday experiences in ECEC, such as the quality of teacher-child interactions and development activities and the quality of child-to-child (peer) interactions (OECD, 2018[2]). It is distinct from structural quality – the other main determinant of overall quality – which refers to factors such as infrastructure and physical setting (OECD, 2018[2]). For me detail on the importance of process quality for child development, learning and well-being, see OECD (2018[2]).