Evidence boundaries in the evaluation of early childhood care and education

The 2007 Education for All monitoring focus on early childhood provides the immediate context for early childhood care and education. The central issue is the meaning of the expectation in practice, including its scope, the evidence needed to demonstrate it and the circumstances in which it may not apply. A proportionate arrangement should protect learners and decision integrity without controls unrelated to the identified risk.

Scope and application

The reference point is the 2007 Education for All monitoring focus on early childhood. Its wider significance does not replace evidence of how early childhood care and education operates in the affected setting. Authorities and providers should distinguish established fact, policy expectation and matters left to institutional judgement.

The 2007 Education for All Global Monitoring Report, Strong Foundations, focuses on the applicable expectation. It treats early childhood provision as extending beyond access to pre-primary places and considers health, nutrition, care, protection and learning together. The report’s framing requires quality analysis to examine who participates, the suitability of provision for young children, workforce capacity and unequal access.

In the context of early childhood care and education, the applicable expectation should be capable of consistent application. Conformity should not be inferred from a policy document alone; operating records and outcomes should show that the stated arrangements are in use. Terms governing eligibility, support, assessment, reporting or review should prevent materially different treatment without recorded justification.

The principal risks in relation to the matter are weak transition between home and school, unsafe ratios or environments, measurement that narrows developmental aims, and inappropriate formalisation of learning. In work concerning early childhood care and education, the relationship between the risks is material: one failed safeguard may remove the evidence needed to activate another. Review should follow the sequence of decisions and records rather than assess documents in isolation.

For the applicable requirement, the subject should be examined as a connected system of policy, people, resources, decisions and evidence. For decisions concerning early childhood care and education, transfer points should be tested because responsibility and information may be lost between otherwise sound functions. Within the scope under review, any condition preventing complete assurance should appear with the evidence on which the judgement relies.

Relevant evidence for the applicable requirement will normally include transition and referral arrangements, safe environment and safeguarding records, observation-based learning records, family communication and participation, and programme aims appropriate to child development. For early childhood care and education, currency, provenance and representativeness should be established before evidence is used for assurance. An unresolved contradiction is a limitation on the conclusion and should be reported as such.

Evidence required

Proportionality in relation to early childhood care and education does not mean reduced protection for learners exposed to greater risk. Participation rates do not establish the quality of early learning, and narrow academic measures do not provide a complete account of development or wellbeing. An isolated example cannot establish consistent operation, and an isolated failure should be evaluated for materiality, recurrence and systemic effect. The record for early childhood care and education should identify the reason, approving authority, period of operation and date for reconsideration.

The assurance record for early childhood care and education should retain the date of the evidence, the source responsible for it, the scope examined and the version of any instrument or definition applied. Traceable source and version information allow genuine improvement to be distinguished from administrative revision. Revision should not remove an earlier conclusion from the record where reliance has occurred.

• Assure safe staffing and environments.
• Review quality as access expands.
• Coordinate transitions and referrals, with responsibility, scope and timing recorded.
• Identify barriers to participation before it is relied on for a decision with material effect.
• Support play and responsive interaction before using it to determine a learner or provider outcome.

Decision criteria and exceptions

The method for the applicable requirement is to map the complete process, identify the intended result and responsible authority at each stage, and test normal cases together with exceptions. Where evidence indicates a shared cause or broader reach, the response should extend beyond the initial case. Within the scope under review, adverse cases and unresolved contradictions should be retained because they may reveal limitations concealed by an average result.

For early childhood care and education, the final record on the assurance conclusion should identify the applicable expectation, the relevant scope, the evidence examined, the sampling basis, material exceptions and the reason for the conclusion. If an alternative method is accepted, the record should demonstrate that it achieves the same required outcome. No complete conclusion should be recorded while a material evidential limitation remains.

• Which evidence establishes operation?
• What outcome is intended?
• Where do exceptions occur?
• What action is required by the finding?
• Who controls each stage?

Continuing assurance

Accountability for early childhood care and education should follow decision-making authority.

Provision for young children should integrate learning, wellbeing, protection and development, with expectations appropriate to age and context.

For early childhood care and education, progress should not be assessed by the amount of policy or documentation produced.