Policy Effects on New York City Early Childhood Centers: Ecological Case Studies

• In Event: Early Childhood Education Spaces: (Un)Truths Revealed, Future Directions Imagined

Abstract

Objectives
This study questions policymakers' conceptualization of policy, and its implementation in practice. Specifically, this paper investigates the impact of compensation policies on the experiences of directors, teachers, and parents affiliated with New York City (NYC) early education centers (NYCEECs) and how they compare with the policymakers’ discourse around those policies. In NYC, these centers include Community Based Organizations, Head Starts, and independent child-care centers, which are subject to different work and compensation conditions than their public school counterparts.
Theoretical Framing
Through Critical Policy Analysis (CPA), this paper utilized Bronfenbrenner's (1979) ecological systems theory and Schneider and Ingram's (1993) social construction and policy design theory to understand how policies privilege some groups over others. This multi-theoretical approach recognizes the complexities of how policy is designed (Young & Diem, 2017) and its impact on different stakeholders.
Methods
As the researcher examined the participants’ lived experiences, a qualitative case study approach was the primary form of analysis. Document discourse analysis, focus groups, and interviews were selected as data collection methods. Directors (n=10), teachers (n=20), and parents (n=10) were recruited to provide an ecological perspective on the effect of work and compensation policies on educators, children, and their parents. Thirty-six documents and six years of Twitter posts were collected. Data analysis occurred in three stages: (a) content analysis of documents, (b) thematic analysis of interviews and focus group data, and (c) compilation of findings from these analyses to draw comprehensive conclusions. These different stages of analysis informed one another.
Findings
The impact of the compensation and work policies fluctuated based on the stakeholder describing the experience. This corroborated the idea that policy is conceptualized and experienced by each individual in different ways (Schneider & Ingram, 1993). These divergent perspectives have led to two opposing narratives belonging to policymakers and practitioners/advocates, respectively: one viewing the expansion and its implementation as an outstanding success, and the other showing an unsustainable system where teachers have been underpaid and disrespected, resulting in teacher and director turnover. Furthermore, the study revealed that, despite being deeply affected by teacher turnover and instability in the system, families were not involved in policy discussions. Understanding how these parallel narratives have collaborated to promote inequities and sustain bias is essential for effective advocacy.
While there were common challenges, participants described a variety of experiences/problems depending on the communities they worked in and the types of organizations they worked for. This multiplicity of experiences may symbolize deep geographical (including geography being used as a proxy for neighborhood resource/income) and racial biases in how leadership and resources were distributed in the system.
Scholarly Significance
Findings support literature signaling structural and equity challenges of scaling up Universal Pre-Kindergarten implementations. This is particularly important when implementations are done using mixed delivery systems with built-in historically negative/biased conceptions of child-care. Ultimately, policy needs to be crafted with special care to include those most affected by these policies, the early education workforce, children, and their families.

Author

• Maria Mavrides Calderon, Hunter College - CUNY
  Presenting Author