According to Pence (1998) while there is need to study and consider minority world approaches to ECCD, they should not be understood as ‘the best’ or the only way to implement these programs. Rather he argues that they should be considered as approaches to ECCD with particular roots and context in the west. My understanding of this argument is that contextualization of programs is important to achieve if success and sustainability is to be reached in interventions such as ECCD. Therefore, programs that serve young children throughout the world should have clearly articulated goals that value children, families, cultures and communities (Jalongo et al., 2004)
As indicated in my study, parents are aware of the challenges of raising children in conditions of poverty and deprivation and note their failure to cope with increasing social and economic demands. Noting the high poverty levels in Makululu due to unemployment, they cite their inability to provide adequate resources for their children and families as the main challenge they face every day.
My findings indicate that young children growing up in this context of high poverty rates are aware of the socio-economic challenges that their families face. I note through the empirical data that, children understand the particular challenges of their households in comparison to others around them as illustrated in the following;
I live with both my parents. My father is a fisherman and spends most of his time away from home. My mother sells vegetables at the market but they both don’t make a lot of money. In the morning before I come to school, my mother warms left over food for me to eat and carry to school. I cannot bring biscuits and crisps to school because my parents don’t have money. [Pointing at another girl] we are not like them. They are rich (Niba chinondo). They have a shop at their house where they sell different stuff that’s why she can bring biscuits and juice to school (Mpatwa F/6 years old)
My research shows young children as social actors. Young children are ‘doers’ and ‘thinkers’ who take action in their everyday lives. They are vulnerable but not victims of the circumstances in their context but rather they make meaning of the world in which they live. According to the
children in my study, the family is viewed as the primary decision maker with regard to when and where one begins their education. In light of the economic challenges, with some families surviving on one meal a day, the decision to take a child to school is a matter of consideration for most families. Amidst changing views of childhood and children’s rights, EFA and UPE, families in contexts like Makululu face challenges of reconciling the reality of their lives and the demands of today’s society. Vargas-Barón (2005), notes that research shows that children who live in poverty are far less ready for school than others from middle class and upper income homes whose mothers have more formal education hence the need for parent education and support.
8.4.1 Families as ‘enablers’ of continued education
According to the children, ECCD is viewed as the beginning of their education journey and how far they go is often in light of the changing economic situation of the family. Makululu is noted as having a high rate of school dropouts due mainly to the fact that some families cannot afford school fees and school materials for children. This situation is exacerbated by high levels of unemployment, poverty, limited economic prospects and an increase in the number of orphans and change in family structure due to HIV/AIDS. The views of the children and their understanding of the context in which they are growing up reveal a mutually dependent society in which adults and children, children and siblings, neighbors are interdependent. Kjørholt (2013), cautions that there is a danger that global rights will detach the individual from the social cultural group they belong to, risking the particular subsistence and livelihood strategies that are developed in the particular local cultural context.
In a cultural and economic context such as Makululu, I agree with Jalongo et al. (2004) when they say that the responsibility to strengthen the family-child bond, keeping families informed about programs and inviting families to participate in a variety of ways that improve children’s lives falls on the nation. Preschool programs need to be aware of the realities faced by parents, families and communities who are working long hours and struggling to meet the basic needs of the children (ibid). The American Bureau of Census, American Community survey (2004-2007), notes that children in low income communities are more likely to attend schools that lack resources, less likely to be enrolled in pre-school and have fewer opportunities for extracurricular
activities. In my interview with the District Planning Officer, she notes the following with regard to community response to the integration of ECCD into government primary schools;
They are happy. Others have even withdrawn their children from private pre-schools to government because of the lower fees. They consider private pre-schools to be on the expensive side so looking at the economic status, they would rather take their children to a government early childhood education centre. They have welcomed it actually, because a lot of children were playing around in the neighbourhood until they are 7 years old but now they can start going to school before that (DPO)
In view of the above, governments should implement programs in such contexts with this in consideration. The children in my study identify the family and its changing socio-economic situation as an enabler and determinant of their education journey. Suffice it to say that a country is only as strong as its families and as successful as its citizens. The onus therefore falls on the government of Zambia and partner organizations to make interventions such as ECCD available and accessible to its citizens.