Quality Early Education for All

Recommendation 1: Universal Access
Establish affordable access to preschool as a legislated entitlement, make a permanent commitment to
funding Universal Access for 4 year olds, and commence work on extending Universal Access to 3 year olds
Establishing preschool education as a legislated entitlement, equivalent in status and importance to primary and
secondary schooling, both brings Australia into line with OECD peer nations (Brennan and Adamson, 2014) and
consolidates and extends the significant achievements of the National Partnership on Universal Access to Early
Childhood Education. Establishing preschool access as a legislated entitlement has the two-fold impact of:
Shifting the discourse around early education to emphasise that preschool holds equivalent importance
to primary and secondary school and is an entitlement that each 4 year old child holds in their own right
(regardless of workforce participation status of their parents); and
Establishing a requirement for governments to provide ongoing and sustainable funding for preschool.
Framing preschool education as an entitlement held by all Australian children and a firm commitment to ongoing
and sustainable funding would address two of the key issues currently inhibiting access and quality.
This does not necessarily require signfiicant new funding, as funding for universal access to preschool is already
provided under the National Partnership Agreement on Universal Access (currently only agreed until 2017). A
more permanent commitment is needed.
Commencing work on planning the extension of Universal Access to 3 year olds would bring Australia into line
with international norms. A pathway that follows the successful approach of the current National Partnership
Agreement would be appropriate – beginning with a range of jurisdiction-specific strategies to increase the total
number of places available, measures to address workforce issues, setting nationally consistent minimum hours
requirements, and developing funding approaches that prioritise free access for disadvantaged 3 year olds.
Additionally, it will be necessary to develop resources and support for a developmentally-appropriate play-based
learning program for 3 year olds and consider optimum models for delivery.
Recommendation 2: The highest quality for the children with the greatest need
Invest in scaling up evidence-based, high-intensity programs for the childen most at risk of developmental
vulnerability, targeting the communities scoring in the bottom 10% in the AEDC in each state and territory
The NQS is an extremely valuable and appropriate approach to establishing a common standard of quality,
sufficient to meet the needs of most children, as the basis of a system-wide regulatory framework. However, it
was not designed to provide the level of intensity and quality that research shows most developmentally
vulnerable children need to reach their potential:
“In the typical programs and in the absence of no specific additional supports or interventions, our analyses
support the finding that children with low baseline scores tend to remain below the level of ability expected for
their age two years later” (Tayler, Cloney and Niklas, 2015, p. 58).
Current policy settings are not adequate for reducing the socio-economic gradient evident in AEDC data, or for
reaping the potential benefits of public investments in ECEC for children experiencing developmental
vulnerability.
The Mitchell Institute recommends the roll-out of an appropriate suite of evidence-based, high-intensity
pedagogical and engagement practices, with the aim of lifting the quality of the learning environment and
educative program across all existing early education settings in priority communities. Communities currently
scoring in the lowest 10 per cent in the AEDC in each state and territory should be the initial priority.
Quality Early Education for All 47