Putting Relationships First: Reconceptualizing QRIS to be More Inclusive of Family Child Care Educators’ Strengths

• In Event: Reconceptualizing a More Culturally and Contextually Responsive QRIS for Family Childcare Professionals

Abstract

Introduction
Some research suggests that quality in family child care (FCC) programs is lower than in centers on average (Porter et al., 2010), yet definitions and measurements of quality tend to privilege white, Euro-centric norms and classroom settings (Paredes et al., 2018; Souto-Manning & Rabadi-Raol, 2018), ignoring many of the strengths and benefits of home-based settings (Blasberg et al., 2019; Bromer, Porter, Jones et al., 2021; Hooper et al., 2019; Turner, 2020). Many FCC providers are reluctant to engage in policy initiatives like Quality Rating and Improvement Systems (QRIS; Hallam et al., 2017; Tonyan et al., 2017) and are ineligible to deliver public pre-k (NIEER & Home Grown, 2021).

Methods
This paper uses an exploratory mixed method design to analyze focus group and interview data from a sample of 169 current and former FCC educators in four states. Inductive coding was conducted using NVivo software to generate a set of eight overarching quality components (program characteristics, provider characteristics, care routines, environment, pedagogical approach, peer interactions, family interactions, child interactions). Relevant sections of every fourth transcript were coded for reliability (kappa = .84). These quality component codes allowed for exploration of both professional-normative (PN) and personal-alternative (PA) aspects of quality and of perceived misalignment with other state policy systems in each area. This work expands on smaller-scale qualitative studies that have found that close and lasting relationships with children and families, particularly those that share similar cultural values, are central to FCC educators’ visions of quality (Doherty, 2015; Hooper et al., 2019), and extends it to explicitly consider how educators see (or don’t see) these visions reflected in state quality standards.

Results
FCC educators blended PN and PA aspects across all eight quality components. In addition to responses about continuous, culturally responsive, and family-like relationships with children and families, educators shared examples of how personal relationships and cultural knowledge shaped more structural and pedagogical aspects of their work. Exploratory t-tests indicated that educators of Color mentioned more PA aspects of quality than white educators (M=1.62, SD=1.32 and M=1.10, SD=0.88, respectively; p=.003). Conversely, educators who delivered public pre-kindergarten mentioned fewer PA aspects than those who did not (M=0.75, SD=1.06 and M=1.51, SD=1.22, respectively; p=.038). In addition, many educators noted that state standards were too focused on more bureaucratic components rather than on their relationships with children and families.

Implications
The findings indicate that normative ideas about “high quality” ECE are insufficient to describe many FCC educators’ strengths. It may be difficult for some educators, especially educators of Color, to reach the highest tiers of QRIS when rating criteria do not honor their strengths. Educators who currently deliver public pre-k may be those whose priorities are more aligned with prevailing norms, although causality cannot be inferred. To expand access to ECE for families who prefer FCC settings, including in UPK, states should revise QRIS criteria to be more inclusive of FCC educators who prioritize personal and culturally aligned relationships.

Author

• Samantha Melvin, Erikson Institute
  Presenting Author