RESULTADOS Y DISCUSIÓN

An increase in awareness and significance of early childhood care and education, including the nature of its provision and quality assurance, has brought about much attention on professionalism in ECCE. As in the case of quality itself, the concept of professionalism is subject to academic and political contestation. Arguments relating to how context-specific elements (Osgood, 2010) shape understanding of ECCE and the roles of teachers and institutions contribute in no small measure to debates about the notion of professionalism of ECCE. Yet, there are written scenarios in literature that undermine the field of ECCE as a professional path.

Earlier studies on ECCE highlight models of professionalism and how they relate to childcare and education (Katz, 1985, Becker, 1962, Caulfield, 1997). While Becker (1962) describes the models of ECCE profession in terms of high social and income status, public commendation and approval of commitment to moral character development, Katz (1985) insisted that these features are not realistic enough to defend professionalism in ECCE and required a set of scientific and result-oriented criteria. Saracho and Spodek (1993) advocate a need for reform in the form of educational training and the establishment of certification system in order to improve the level of professionalism among early childhood practitioners. Invariably, this might suggest that the inclusive nature of the models serves as the basis for understanding professionalism in caring and teaching of children. As these professionalism discourses dominate empirical research in ECCE, they also feature in public policy documents. For instance, in Nigeria, a general certification of teachers at colleges of Education and universities is still perceived to be sufficient for a professional career path in ECCE.

In both the general and the scientific conception of a profession, there are criteria which emphasise these conditions: social necessity and public recognition, acquisition of pre-requisite training and knowledge, altruism, autonomy, codes of ethics, distance from client, standards of practice and rewards or remuneration (Hayes, 2007, Osgood, 2006, OECD, 2006, Dalli, 2008). Indeed, Tucker (2004) and Urban (2008) relate professional identity to broader societal discourses using four quadrants that explain the link between values, personal qualities, ideology, relationships, status, training and qualifications. Acquisition of professional training and specialised knowledge is

one of the pre-requisite activities that makes for ECCE professionalism. Oberhuemer's (2011) study on “divergencies” and “emergencies” of the ECCE workforce across and beyond Europe in the dynamic context of early childhood research in Munich, reveals considerable divergences in terms of formal education, training and the desired professional identity in working with young children. These findings are reported to be orchestrated from lack of flexible and inclusive pathways linked to formal professional recognition, status for all practitioners in the field and non-inclusion of men in the task of caring and educating children in some areas.

Lack of consensus in the policy framework on specific educational requirements for young children’s care and education practitioners across various countries constitutes one of the reasons for the dilemma in the professionalism of ECCE (Oberhuemer, 2005). It is important to note that ECCE policies and practices vary across different countries but there is a general consensus that indicates that the care and education of children demands some level of specialised skills and the understanding of important concepts of upbringing as embedded in professional epistemologies (Urban, 2008). Studies by Oberhuemer (2005), Mahony and Hayes (2006) and Urban (2008) posit that professionalism in ECCE is still weak considering different approaches in different countries, the problematic nature of the term ‘training’, ambiguity in split model of care, education, and system integration, and the lack of mandatory development programmes.

Recognition of the societal benefits derivable from a service underscore the feature of social necessity possessed by the ECCE profession (Katz, 1985).

Public recognition and societal mind-set are of paramount importance to ascertain the professionalism of ECCE. With growing trends in the indispensability of children’s care and education internationally, the OECD (2001), has not only advocated proper staffing and impressive remuneration for workers, but also affirmed, similar to Forde et al.’s (2006) position, the imperative need for ensuring improved dignity, motivation and self-esteem for ECCE practitioners. As stated by Forde et al. (2006), personal and public orientation and perception of the professional status of ECCE play a major role in the professionalism of ECCE. Moloney and Pope's (2015) study on the experiences of graduates, with particular reference to the relationship between graduate qualifications and professional identity within the ECCE sector, revealed that ECCE professional status is undervalued with low wages and the demeaning impression of ending as a nursery teacher. One of the basic reasons for the downgrading of status is the low perception and respect accorded to teachers in the infant class as akin to their counterparts in primary classes at different school settings.

Moloney (2010) explored practitioners’ insights into the professionalism status of ECCE in the Republic of Ireland on personal perspectives with children aged four to six in pre-school and primary school settings using qualitative methodology. The study revealed that practitioners’ formation of professional identity is contentious and problematic. While at the pre-school level less attention to professionalism of ECCE workers is attributed to a lack of mandatory training requirements, there is compelling evidence that highly trained ECCE graduates are being lost to other education sub-sectors.

The critical debates on ECCE as a profession, split between a minority of teachers and a growing majority of childcare workers with lower qualifications, poorer work conditions, orchestrated by the diversity of policy directives spurred Moss (2006) and Urban (ibid) to conclude that there is an increasing recognition that the field is highly problematic, complex and requires enhancement through an advanced education. According to Moss (2006), there is a need for restructuring, rethinking, and re-envisioning of the ECCE workforce in order to enhance the concept of professionalism, away from the dualistic ‘non-professional/professional’ divide that characterises the discourse on professionalism in early childhood settings.

Altruism as a feature of professionalism, which involves a situation where a service is rendered for a sole purpose of social and moral promotion (Brock, 2014a) is a valuable concept that leads to the creation of an environment of trust and mutual respect inherent in the professional role (Brock, ibid). This is essential in ECCE and supports the rationale for government involvement in ECCE in a particular setting. However, for a service to be a profession, it is expected to be autonomous in the sense that the service should be to some extent free from client’s dictation or choice. Brock (2014) argues that ECCE is expected to possess a recognised professional body, authority and voice. Expertise relating to ECCE are expected from the vocation. The foregoing attributes are reinforced by an established code of ethics that prescribes standards, modes of practice, and pre-requisite training and skills (Caulfield, 1997).

In the recent and current literature, the notion of professionalism in ECCE has taken different dimensions. For instance, the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2005) in the UK describes the steps towards professionalization of ECCE as a workforce reform strategy necessary to create a world-class workforce for children care and education, and that complexity in the process arises when there is no uniform standard to ensure this goal. Evidently, the specific roles of professionals are itemised in different regulatory frameworks, highlighting the ethics of operation for best practices. However, Lloyd and Hallet (2010) suggest that such expectations might not necessarily meet professional criteria and may even be in contrast to other professions working with young children of different age groups, such as qualified teachers and social workers. This implies that there are different ways of understanding how the field of ECCE is perceived as a professional organisation. As stated by Urban (2008):

“These concepts are often limited, and derive from a structural- functionalist paradigm that is by no means appropriate for relational, dialogic and complex practices in early childhood. They are, quite often, a highly efficient means of control and normalisation of diverse individual practices, which, in turn, provokes resistance and non-compliance from practitioners”.

ECCE is also viewed as a profession situated within democratic processes. Moss (ibid.) suggests that ECCE is tending towards both market and political practices as a result of rising advocacy for policy at various levels of government, and expansion in ECCE services which incorporates many interest groups including children. Because of paradigmatic shifts in the language of assessing ECCE towards post-modern thinking, the

professionalism of the care and education of young children is determined by the nature and context of the society in the past, present and the future. The implication is that the education and care of children are shaped by the socio- cultural outlook of practitioners of childrearing and traditional identities of the community, which requires adequate knowledge of the system (Woodhead, 1996a). According to Woodhead, contextual exploration of the care and education of children within a particular societal culture and tradition, though influenced by global ideas and innovations, will to an extent describe ECCE profession. In other words, as ECCE rests heavily on the cultural context of the specific community, there is a need to understand the context within which care and education surfaces. Presumably, this is achievable through the exploration of stakeholders’ mutual construction of what ECCE professionalism entails, which is what this study pursues.

In a broad description which involves multilevel definitions, Karila (2008) emphasises the influence of professional, socio-cultural and knowledge-based perspectives to the understanding of professionalization of activities and individuals in ECCE. This shows that the description of ECCE as a profession is a subject determined by the activity itself, its environment and the characteristic meanings constructed by the stakeholders involved. Karila (2008) premised his study on the same multi-level perspective using analytical tools that embraced the perspective of culture in Finland. It is found that Finnish day-care working culture and context, communal (field-specific knowledge), organisational (the employees’ working environment), and individual phenomenon (the perspective of the professionals) determine the construction given to the notion of ECCE as a profession. It is also reported that the

interaction between the different elements of professionalism takes place in the culture of the society and is significant to what can be described as a profession.

2.7. Sociocultural meaning making of quality ECCE in Nigeria: A