TFIEY Overview of ECEC Provisions in Italy: Diversity and New Challenges - Susanna Mantovani Università degli studi di Milano-Bicocca, Torino ...
←
→
Page content transcription
If your browser does not render page correctly, please read the page content below
TFIEY
Overview of ECEC Provisions in Italy:
Diversity and New Challenges
Susanna Mantovani
Università degli studi di Milano-Bicocca,
Torino, Gennaio 2016Presentation Overview 1. The National Context 2. New Perspectives (Law 107/2015) ‘an integrated 0-6 system’ 3. Challenges 4. What do teachers and parents think: first data from the CARE Project
1. The National Context
1.1 Children in Italy: some data
► Children 0-5: 3.300.874
► Children birth rate decreasing since 2008
► Today: - 1,42%
► Less children in each family, born later (average age of first child: 30,6 years)
(Data Source: ISTAT, 2014)Italy faces major changes and ECEC reflects them with lights and shadows: ►in recent years we can observe in Italy a growing engagement in promoting the rights of children: Italy has since 5 years a National Independent Authority for children (“Garante dell’Infanzia”) and Regional Authorities; ► the National Observatory on Childhood and Adolescence and the Childhood Parliament Commissions are networking with a large and significant groups of non profit organizations (e.g.C.R.C.) and initiatives like TFIEY;
► Health and inclusion have strong points:
- all resident children have a right to a pediatrician chosen by their family;
- children with disabilities and socially disadvantaged children have priority in ECEC.
► On the other hand economic crisis, political instability, diversity in local administrations’
efficiency have caused an unbalanced distribution of resources emphasizing difficulties.►ECEC reflects the tension between local and national policies: an example is PAC (Piano Azione Coesione) ,a program directed to four Southern Regions (Puglia, Campania, Sicilia, Calabria) earmarking structural funds (400 millions for ECEC): to the present time, only part of these funds has been used, while many other Regions and Cities in other part of the country are struggling for resources.
►The first challenge is to generalize the provisions for children 3-6; ►the second is to extend 0-3 services to fulfill Lisbon goals; ►the third is to implement an integrated 0-6 system, keeping as compass the rights of all children, shared ideas on quality and sustainability and within a regular and predictable financing policy; ►the fourth challenge is to find a balance between local traditions and a common national policy.
► The system is at present split and the process of integration – both in the sense of governance and of continuity within services is in motion but the diversity of ECEC creates obstacles in reaching integration which require strong efforts in a short time as required by the new bill 107/2015. ►There is diversity in distribution of services, in hours offered, in professional development, in costs, in fees families have to deal with the 0-3 services. ► Data are fragmented and collected with different criteria from the reliable sources (ISTAT, Istituto degli Innocenti, MIUR, Municipal Statistical Sources. etc.).
This presentation deals mainly with Nidi (0-3, Infant Toddler Centres) which are by and large the most extended and requested services. ► A number of other ECEC services have developed since the Mid Eighties and are at present attended by 4-5% of children between 0-3: - part-time or Home Based Centres for Children and Families (CBF) (Mantovani, 2001; Bove & Di Giandomenico, 2015) financed locally through the Bill 285/1997; - Sezioni Primavera (children 2-3), bridging to Scuola dell’Infanzia, located in Nidi or Scuole dell’Infanzia and supported by the Ministry of Education (MIUR). ►The integrated 0-6 system will need to encompass these services, finding a balance between local flexibility and national regulations.
1.2 The Italian ECEC System
92% + coverage
& 2% ca Sezioni
3-6 Primavera
SCUOLA DELL’INFANZIA
Pre-primary schools & Sezioni
Primavera
Ministry of Education
ECEC
19% coverage
SYSTEM 0-3
NIDI (from 1% to 40%) &
Creche, Infant-Toddler 2% ca. Sezioni
Centers Primavera
0-3
OTHER SERVICES
(parent-child) & Sezioni Regions and
Primavera Municipalities0-3 NIDO AND OTHER 3-6 SCUOLA
SERVICES DELL’INFANZIA &
Sezioni Primavera
Infant Toddler Centre
(Nido): a full-time service Pre-primary education
on ‘individual service as a right
on demand’
Part-time or Home- A ‘public service’ for all,
based Services but not yet compulsory
No Guidelines or Local
Guidelines National Guidelines3-6 SCUOLA
0-3 NIDO AND OTHER DELL’INFANZIA &
SERVICES Sezioni Primavera
State, Recognized and
State supported
Municipal, Cooperative (Municipal, FISM,
Associations, others Method-based, Others),
Private
Scuola dell’infanzia: National
Nidi: National 19% of 95 % + of attendance
attendance
Sezioni-primavera
Other 0-3 services
(including Sezioni and «anticipo»
Primavera): 4-5% ca. (mainly South)
2-3% of attendance Children attending Scuola dell’Infanzia (3-6): 92% ca +
Children attending Nido (0-3): 19%
Children with Immigrant background attending S.I (3-6): 9 % +
Children with certified disabilities in State S.I (3-6): 1,5% ca
(Data sources: MIUR, Fondazione ISMU 2015, CRC 2015)1.3 Teachers/Caregivers Qualification
► Scuola dell’infanzia (3-6) : University: 5 years qualifying for primary and preprimary
schools (obligatory since 2012, 4 years since 1999)
► Nido d’infanzia (0-3) : secondary school with socio-educational curriulum
(compulsory); Bachelor in Education (increasing but not compulsory)
►In service Professional Development: 40-50 hours per year + team work (in municipal
services)1.4 Adult-child ratio
Nido (0-3): Regional criteria – Average 1:7
Scuola dell’infanzia (3-6) 1:25
Sezioni Primavera (2-3) 1:151.5 National distribution 0-3 services
Trento:
20,1
Valle d’Aosta: 20,6 %
Lombardia: 16,9 %
Emilia Romagna: 27%
Toscana: 21,9%
Lazio
(Roma): 17,2
Calabria: 2,1 %
Campania:
2,7%Distribution by Region
(Fonte: ISTAT 2014)Children attending Nido and other Municipal services (0-3) in
some Italian cities
Trento: 20,1%
Milano: 26%
Torino:
30,9%
Reggio Emilia: 40,34%
Roma:
27,8%1.6 Scuola dell’infanzia (3-6)
A split system: State, Municipal and Others
Children attending Scuola dell’infanzia: 92 % distribuited as follows:
► Children attending State Scuole dell’Infanzia: 56,8 %
(of which 10% c.a – mainly distribuited in the South - attending only in the morning)
► Children attending Municipal Scuole dell’Infanzia: 8,3 %
►Children attending other official recognized, Non-Municipal Schools (FISM Federation
of catholic Schools): 26,4 %Children attending Municipal Scuole dell’infanzia (3-6)
Torino: Milano:
Municipal: 40% Municipal: 70% +
Roma:
Reggio Emilia:
Municipal: 40%
Municipal: 43% +Children attending Scuole dell’infanzia (3-6)
FISM (Federation of Catholic Schools)
Padova: 67%
Verona: 42%
Torino: 45%
Ferrara: 53%+
Reggio Emilia: 40%
Milano: 22%The slides show that the big average cities Scuola dell’Infanzia (3-6) is mainly provided by Cities (Municipal Schools) or FISM. Municipal and FISM Schools offer more weekly hours and more opening weeks per year. Considering that Nidi (0-3) are to a very large extent provided by the Municipal System it is clear that the perspective of an integrated system focussed on continuity cannot overlook this variety of deeply rooted and often high quality experiences. Cities of the North and Centre , with a strong Municipal tradition or cities with a strong tradition of Catholic schools are major providers of 0-6 ECEC services and have in many cases experience of 0-6 continuity and good integration among providers as foreseen by the new law. Once again the distribution ( or concentration) of ECEC dpes not allow to average the data of ECEC
2. Perspectives and challenges for the future
2.1 Perspectives ►Italian ECEC has contributed to the development of ideas and experiences in ECEC, which have influenced the conceptualization and the lexicon, the metaphors of the ECEC in-language. ► In recent years Italian ECEC has mainly tried to resist to difficulties and financial cuts rather than expand in extension and in new perspectives. ► From these difficulties and from a stronger contact with other systems – to learn from them rather than being looked at as a model – new ideas and “generative” solutions are emerging and we are facing a great opportunity. ►The superdiversity Italy is facing with all other countries which have developed an ECEC system urges a deep refocusing of organizational ad pedagogical priorities for all our children.
►Inclusion of all children, and priority access for more vulnerable children, is sustained by the national and local legislation, but ECEC services and professionals have not yet developed effective practices shared at National level. ► In the lack of research on outcomes some recent and original research clearly indicates the positive effect of ECEC services attendance to prevent marginalization and school failure (Del Boca, 2014) but children with new vulnerabilities and in particular children with an immigration background are exposed to high risks. ► The irregular distribution of services, the erratic funding and the unequal capacity of central and local authorities to implement quality and quantity are major problems.
► There is a wide diversity in calendar and timing, costs, fees for families for the 0-3 services in regular professional development. ► EEC for the very young (0-3) poses affordability questions for providers and families. ► As consequence for the first time in many years, we observe a decrease in attending ECEC in certain areas of the Country, while elsewhere there are still with waiting lists in or a total absence of provisions. ►It is time for a national ECEC policy which can mediate between common rules and goals and local good practices, values and traditions.
►The well known Italian experiences are also those where organization and costs are better monitored to maximize quality and sustainability: in contradiction with current beliefs the most valued experience– Reggio Emilia – is one of the best instances of careful cost control, active fundraising, integration between municipal, state and private non profit providers and sustainability: children in ECEC services in Reggio Emilia cost considerably less than in much weaker services elsewhere. ► It is urgent and difficult to share criteria for determining costs, in particular for the services for the earliest years.
2.2 Law 107/2015
Towards an Integrated ECEC System
The new law 107/2015 known as La buona scuola ( The good school) reforms the entire
school system and introduces major changes in ECEC .
At the present time (January 2016) the articles of the law regarding ECEC are a general
framework to be developed by the Government in an enabling act within December
2016.
For ECEC as for other open themes the Ministry of Education has activated working
tablesThe text approved in July 2015 sets some basic principles: 1. It defines 0-6 ECEC as an integrated educational system , conceived as a right of all children and inspired by continuity, promotion of quality and inclusion 2. It foresees the full coverage of Scuola dell’Infanzia (3-6) 3. It establishes a compulsory University degree for 0-3 professionals and regular professional development for all 4. It establishes that Nido is no longer a service at individual demand but a right to be guaranteed to children and families
5. It sets the obligation to define ( within December 2016 ) the structural and organizational standards of 0-3 services which will include the pedagogista coordinating and promoting ECEC services and the definition of Curriculum Guidelines in harmony and continuity with the 3-6 Guidelines 6. It foresees “Poli dell’ infanzia” for children 0-6 7. It foresees a revision of the governance of the ECEC system, i.e the specific responsibilities of State, Regional and Municipal authorities 8. It draws the framework for the definition of the sources of regular financing
3. Challenges European ECEC shares common theoretical sources
Many of these key-words emerged in Italian ECEC in the Seventies and Eighties and are
now common in the EU and international documents:
Pedagogia del benessere (well-being pedagogy)
Pedagogia del buon gusto (aesthetics)
Participation (rather than parental involvment)
Formation (rather than training)
Documentation
Space as third educator
Pedagogista
and many others3.1 Heritage ► Strong networking traditions ► Cared environments ( the «piazze») ► Group / peer) work at all levels (the «discussions») ► Documentation experience ► Bottom up evaluation experiments ► Continuty experiences at local level ► Researcb based PD and Innovation : parnership with Universities and research centres ► We have learned endurance.
3.2 Challenges for the future ►We need to dig deeper in our tradition and to open up to Europe and the world looking for new sources to reinterpret our heritage , to give voice to new actors and to find new and lasting energies. ► We need to a broader, deeper anthropological and linguistic formation to deal with cultural diversity as a challenge and an opportunity. ►We need to define quality and ways to assess and measure it in forms which are universally understable and acceptable but also consistent with local values and interpretation. ► We need to define shared developmental goals and to reconceptualize the curriculum for 0-6.
4. What do teachers and parents think about the most important
educational objectives in ECEC and Quality 0-64.1 First (provisional) data on Ideas of Italian Parents and
Teachers
Stakeholder questionnaire CARE project
► CARE - Curriculum and Quality Analysis and Impact Review of European Early Childhood Education
and Care. (http://ecec-care.org)
First results from the interview and survey study of parents, practitioners and policy representatives in 9 European countries(England, Finland, Germany, Greece,
Italy, Netherland, Norway, Poland, Portugal).
The Questionnaire has been distributed both on-line https://survey.fss.uu.nl/index.php/868165/lang-en
or on-paper (vis a vis), according to the characteristics of the respondents.
(Stakeholder questionnaire is part of the WorkPackage 6: European Indicators of Quality and Wellbeing in ECEC)►Main areas of the Questionnaire 1) Expectations to institutions, expressing beliefs and values (General Evaluation and Ideas about Quality) 2) Expectations to child outcome, expressing beliefs and values (what children should learn). ► Subjects: parents, policymakers, professionals. ► The Italian response to the questionnaire has widely out-numbered the response of all other Countries, indicating a strong interest in ECEC today.
4.2 Number of Respondents
4.3 ECEC Contexts
Participants by Region
%
Lazio 4.5
Piemonte-Liguria 9.0
Lombardia 28.8
Friuli-Trentino-Veneto 21.9
Emilia Romagna 10.1
Toscana 5.7
Marche-Abruzzo-Molise 4.8
Puglia 9.1
Campania-Basilicata-Calabria 3.9
Sicilia-Sardegna 2.24.4 Areas of Inquiry, Measures and Findings
4.4.1. Importance attributed to Quality Indicators
Measures (1=less important, 5= most important):
Physical Environment
Organizational Aspects
Staff Characteristic
Diversity
Parental involvement
Educational Principles
Socio-emotional climateFindings Teachers
(0=less important; 5= most important)
Setting
0-3 3-6
Socio-emotional climate 4,72 4,77
Physical Environment 4,68 4,71
Educational Principles 4,42 4,54 **
Organizational Aspects 4,37 4,36
Staff Characteristic 3,80 3,95 **
Diversity 3,53 3,57
3,76 3,36
Parental involvement **
**p < .001Findings Parents
(0=less important; 5= most important)
Setting
0-3 3-6
Socio-emotional climate 4,57 4,53
Physical Environment 4,61 4,59
Educational Principles 4,29 4,29
Organizational Aspects 4,31 4.25
Staff Characteristic 3,97 3,95
Diversity 3,07 3,15
3,69 3,72
Parental involvement
**p < .001Parents-Teachers Comparison
(0=less important; 5= most important)
Genitori Insegnanti
Physical Environment 4,60 4,69 **
Socio-emotional climate 4,54 4,76 **
Educational Principles 4,29 4,50 **
Organizational Aspects 4,26 4,35 **
Staff Characteristic 3,96 3,91
Parental involvement 3,71 3,49 **
3,14 3,56
Diversity **
**p < .001Summing Up ► Parents’ and teachers’ evaluations converge has most important Quality Indicators on: Physical Enviroment Socio-Emotional Climate Educational Principles ► Teachers – compared to parents – attribute, in general, a significant greater importance to all indicators ► Parental Involvement is the only indicator which obtains lower scores among the teachers’ group
4.4.2 Importance attributed to educational and developmental goals Measures (1=less important, 5= most important): Interpersonal skills Interest in diversity Pre-academic skills Learning related skills Physical activity Emotional Regulation Learning attitude
Findings Parents
(0=less important; 5= most important)
da 0 a 3 anni da 3 a 6 anni
Interpersonal skill 3,85 4,63
Interest in diversity 3,59 4,36
Pre-academic skill 2,44 4,08
Learning related skill 3,35 4,46
Physical activity 3,24 3,99
Emotional development 3,92 4,60
Learning attitude 4,00 4,51Findings Teachers
da 0 a 3 anni da 3 a 6 anni
Interpersonal skill 3,84 4,65
Interest in diversity 3,54 4,47
Pre-academic skill 1,99 3,88
Learning related skill 3,23 4,49
Physical activity 3,19 3,94
Emotional development 3,97 4,66
Learning attitude 4,04 4,56Parents-Teachers Comparison
da 0 a 3 anni da 3 a 6 anni
Insegnanti Genitori Insegnanti Genitori
Interpersonal skill 3,85 3,84 4,63 4,65
Interest in diversity 3,59 3,54 4,36 4,47
Pre-academic skill 2,44 1,99 4,08 3,88
Learning related skill 3,35 3,23 4,46 4,49
Physical activity 3,24 3,19 3,99 3,94
Emotional development 3,92 3,97 4,6 4,66
Learning attitude 4 4,04 4,51 4,56Summing Up Parents’ and teachers’ evaluations converge. All educational and developmental goals are considered significantly more important for children 3-6. The goals considered most important are: emotional development, learning attitude and interpersonal skills.
More extensive Italian data and data analysis of the CARE Stakeholders’ questionnaire will be presented at the XX National Conference of the Gruppo Nazionale Nidi Infanzia «Curricolo è responsabilità» - Milano, 26-28 February 2016.
References
Bove C. & Di Giandomenico I. (eds) (2015). Special issue. Rivista Italiana Educazione Familiare, RIEF, n.2, pp. 5-178.
Del Boca D., Prozato C. & Sorrentini G. (2015). When rationing plays a role: selection criteria in the Italian early child care
system. Carlo Alberto Notebooks 399 (http://www.carloalberto.org/assets/working-papers/no.399.pdf)
Del Boca D., Pasqua S. & Suardi S. (2015). Child care, maternal employment, and children’s school outcomes. An analysis of
Italian data. Department of Economics and Statistics Cognetti de Martiis. Working Papers 201549, University of Turin.
Del Boca D., Pasqua S. & Suardi S. (2015). Child care, maternal employment, and children's school outcomes. An analysis of
Italian data. Carlo Alberto Notebooks 441.
Mantovani S. (2015). Bambine e bambini, tutti. In “Bambini”, n.9.
Mantovani S. (2014). I nidi e le scuole dell'infanzia in Italia. Patrimonio antico, parole nuove. In “Bambini”, 3, pp. 21-29.
Mantovani S. (2014). ECE Models. European Perspectives. “International Conference on ECEC & ELL”, Reggio Emilia, 16
Dicembre.
Mantovani S. (1991). Milan: Meeting New Kinds of Family Needs. In Gandini L. & Edwards C.P. Bambini. The Italian Approach to
Infant/Toddler Care (pp. 67-77). Teacher College Press. Columbia University.
Law for a 0-6 Integrated System
Law 107/2015 – Riforma del sistema nazionale di istruzione e formazione e delega per il riordino delle disposizioni normative
vigenti (http://www.gazzettaufficiale.it/eli/id/2015/07/30/15A05606/sg)CARE Reports: Jensen B., Iannone R.L., Mantovani S., Bove C., Struczyk M.K. & Wyslowsk O. (2015) D 3.1 Comparative Review o f Professional Development Approaches http://ecec-care.org/fileadmin/careproject/Publications/reports/report_- _Comparative_review_of_professional_development_approaches.pdf Broekhuizen M., Leseman P., Moser T. & van Trijp K. (2015) D 6.2 Stakeholders study: Values, beliefs and concerns of parents, staff and policy representatives regarding ECEC services in nine European countries: First report on parents http://ecec- care.org/fileadmin/careproject/Publications/reports/CARE_WP6_D6_2_European_ECEC__Stakeholder_study_FI NAL.pdf Sylva K., Ereky-Stevens K. & Aricescu A.M. (2015) D 2.1 Overview of European ECEC Curricula and curriculum Template http://ecec- care.org/fileadmin/careproject/Publications/reports/CARE_WP2_D2_1_European_ECEC_Curricula_and_Curriculu m_Template.pdf Slot P., Lerkkanen M.K. & Leseman P. (2015) D 2.2 The relations between structural quality and process quality in European early childhood education and care provisions: Secondary analyses of large scale studies in five countries http://ecec-care.org/fileadmin/careproject/Publications/reports/CARE_WP2_D2__2_Secondary_data_analyses.pdf
Statistical Data Sources CRC 2015 – I diritti dell’infanzia e dell’adolescenza in Italia, 8° Rapporto di aggiornamento sul monitoraggio della convenzione sui diritti dell’infanzia e dell’adolescenza in Italia (http://www.gruppocrc.net/IMG/pdf/VIIIrapportoCRC.pdf) MIUR, Fondazione ISMU 2015 – Alunni con cittadinanza non italiana. Tra difficoltà e successi (http://www.ismu.org/wp-content/uploads/2015/03/Rapporto_CNI_Miur_Ismu_2013-14.pdf) ISTAT 2014 - L’offerta comunale di asili nido e altri servizi socio-educativi per la prima infanzia (http://www.istat.it/it/files/2014/07/Statistica-report-asili- nido_rev.pdf ?title=Offerta+comunale+di+asili+nido+-+29%2Flug%2F2014+-+Testo+integrale.pdf) ISTAT 2015 – Natalità e fecondità della popolazione residente (http://www.istat.it/it/files/2015/11/Natalit%C3%A0_fecondita_2014.pdf ?title=Natalit%C3%A0+e+fe condit%C3%A0+-+27%2Fnov%2F2015+-+Testo+integrale.pdf) Istituto degli Innocenti, Centro Nazionale di Documentazione e Analisi per l’Infanzia e l’Adolescenza (2014) – Monitoraggio del piano di sviluppo dei servizi socio-educativi per la prima infanzia (http://www.minori.it/it/minori/rapporto-di-monitoraggio-del-piano-nidi-al-31-dicembre-2014)
This presentation has been prepared in collaboration with Silvia Cescato (PhD Università di Milano-Bicocca. Member of the Italian Unit of the CARE project).
You can also read
