The role of digital technologies in supporting quality improvement in Australian early childhood education and care settings – International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy

The keywords found (Table 2) in the 120 documents were separately reviewed following a thematic analysis approach (Braun & Clarke, 2012). The first phase was about familiarising oneself with the data. Our data were very rich and required careful reading and reviewing. After reading is complete, coding, segmenting and searching for themes began. The final phase was about reviewing, defining and organising themes. After analysis was complete, findings were substantiated with relevant quotations. Coding was first completed by two researchers. Each jurisdiction was examined separately at the start. A final list of themes was comprised after the examination of all jurisdictions. Themes were then presented, discussed and finalised with the whole team of 10 researchers.

The highest number of references to digital technology made by educators, educational leaders, directors or assessors emerged in three Quality Areas (Appendix A): QA1 (n = 74), QA6 (n = 111) and QA7 (n = 107). The themes for these three Quality Areas, including direct quotes derived from the QIPs, are presented next. Assessors’ comments are included where necessary.

Validity

This study is based only on secondary, descriptive, qualitative data collected by a highly credible source, ACECQA, and not by individuals. ACECQA double checked the provision, anonymity and credibility of documents before sending them to researchers. Validity of this study is examined according to Maxwell’s (1992) five kinds of validity for qualitative research. Descriptive validity was ensured as documents (QIPs and A&R reports) were completed by ECEC settings or trained Assessors directly and not by the researchers. To further warrant accuracy, keywords around technology were explored electronically with the word search tool and not manually. Interpretive validity is high as the exact quotes and examples provided in the documents were counted and were not changed in any way. The present study did not suggest any theory or explanation of theory, so theoretical validity is not applicable to this study. Generalizability cannot be assumed for ECEC settings in Australia or elsewhere as the number of documents was small. Evaluative validity is also not applicable to this study as the researchers attempted to explore, describe and explain the data under investigation and not to make evaluations.

Reliability

Two researchers examined the data and discussed coding, themes and findings to enhance reliability. Final findings were then scrutinised by a team of 10 researchers. As this was an exploratory study, frequencies were used to facilitate descriptive comparisons (e.g. between ECEC settings with different ratings; between the seven quality areas) and to help identify which digital tools are the most common in ECEC settings. However, frequencies were not enough to answer the research questions and thematic analysis was also utilised.

QA1: Educational programme and practice

Quality Area 1 is focused on teaching, planning and assessing. Four main themes were generated in relation to technology, as presented below.

Digital documentation

Participating centres used new technologies such as commercial digital platforms in their planning; observations/assessments of learning and in developing children’s portfolios. Critical reflections completed by educators were also added in these platforms.

Communication with families and sharing of information

Technology was used to encourage feedback from families and incorporate their views in curriculum plans. In many centres, policies/philosophies were displayed in the foyer via screens/tablets, etc. As reported by a centre in the ACT, “Families have the opportunity to review and comment on policies that affect them. This process can be completed via email, displays at the centre or a conversation and later documented”. Another example is provided by a QLD setting: “Information about the service’s operation, activities and experiences, upcoming events, and the kindergarten programme is provided to families on the service face book page, in notices at the office, through electronic correspondence and through brochures and information displayed at the service”.

Educators’ training and collaboration

Educators attended various webinars depending on their needs and interests and collaborated to form a holistic view on children’s development. Educators also used technology to document: ‘spontaneous learning and reflections on their teaching…mind maps to show their progression of projects and learning for children of all age groups’.

Children’s learning

Examples of how to use technology for enhancing learning were provided in the QIPs, such as ‘to implement STEM in EC’, ‘…child appropriate websites are accessed under direct supervision by educators’ and ‘the educator provided an iPad to support the children to research about insects. One quote summarises educators’ views on technology: ‘The future requires innovative thinkers and as early childhood educators it is our duty to assist the development of children’s innovative thinking. We do this through embedding problem solving, technology and scaffolding children’s ideas and supporting them into fruition’.

Overall, in this QA1, sharing information with families and on the assessment and planning cycle was emphasised, with less emphasis on educators’ critical reflection. The assessors most often summarised what was already described by the educators, positively commented on the use of digital tools for planning, learning and assessments (e.g. online platforms found in the setting or social media used). For example, “documentation within individual child portfolios, communication books, photos and digital photo screens, displays of children engaged in activities and experiences, and the service’s Facebook page were available and easily accessed by families”; or “educators record individual and group observations to analyse learning and development”. The service’s digital programme allows for individual files to be set up for each child. Photographs are saved in individual files and work samples are collected to support observations’.

QA6: Collaborative partnerships with families and communities

This Quality Area is focused on partnerships and relationships with families and communities. The main themes arising from the analysis included the following:

Communication

A variety of digital media (e.g. social media, online tools/platforms, emails, websites, etc.) were employed to enhance and strengthen relationships and collaborations between the ECEC settings and families.

Access and sharing of information

Digital media were used for distributing enriching information (e.g. around Indigenous practices; cultural awareness; etc.) and ECEC setting events (e.g. excursions, incursions, open day). Technology was also used to facilitate the induction of new families (e.g. “Our orientation process is adapted to suit the individual needs of all families as some families simply want to begin care and in which case the child has their orientation and first day combined. In the case of this happening we ensure that we are supporting them through this transition as well as reporting to their families during their first day through our first day Kindy Hub report”).

Constructive feedback and input

Different digital media offered opportunities to families to provide their feedback on children’s learning (e.g. contributing to their e-portfolios) or on the ECEC setting’s decision making/policies/QIPs.

Improvement of the ECEC setting’s advertising of events and strengthening of community relationships

A number of settings (n = 11) commented on how they used new technologies to enhance their presence within the community and also enable community involvement.

Overall, it was evident in the analysis that the majority of these LDC centres (78%) used some form of digital tools, with emails, websites and social media being among their top preferences. LDC centres underlined the importance of embracing a range of digital and face-to-face strategies to efficiently communicate with parents and to “not alienate any families”. These 60 settings had invested in digital technologies, and educators provided strong evidence of their familiarity with the use of new forms of communication. They have also recognised its supplementary role and that the physical, more traditional way of communicating with families is irreplaceable. In line with these views, the assessors’ comments also supported the use of technology, e.g. “Current information about the service was provided to families in a variety of accessible formats through the parent handbook, service newsletters, displays at the service and through informal discussions with families at arrival and departure times. Correspondence was relayed via email or hard copy to suit the needs of individual families”.

QA7: Governance and leadership

In this Quality Area, the focus was on effective leadership and management to improve the quality of the ECEC setting. References to QA7 were 107 in all documents (third most frequent references). The five themes emerging in this area were as follows:

Governance and management systems

ECEC settings provided ample information on how they displayed information; protected privacy; stored and secured documents and data. A range of technologies were available to support service operations including computers, printers, copiers and telephones, for example, “The service stored confidential information in locked filing cabinets located at the service, and information stored on computers was password protected”. A subtheme here was the ‘Information technology (IT) support’ provided by Exceeding ECEC settings and commented on very positively by the assessors (no negative comments were reported). Educators and/or directors viewed the existence of technical IT support helpful and reassuring for their everyday practice.

Communication with families and educators

Documents described which technological media and processes were adopted to facilitate the sharing of information with families, updating them on changes in policies/regulations and processes. Services also explained the way families provide feedback (e.g. through online surveys; USBs; digital platforms; tablets; etc.). Technology also helped educators communicate with each other and collaborate.

Online professional development for educators

The LDC staff used technology (e.g. digital platforms/ learning portals) to attend professional development (n = 40). With the help of technology, LDC services also organised successful online inductions for newly appointed educators (for example, a centre in SA reported: “The induction is for one day and includes online training in areas such as child protection and health and safety topics. All educators have their own email account and access to the intranet where relevant information is provided as well as online training and policy updates”).

This provision was also positively commented on by assessors. Assessors commented on the usefulness of digital tools for induction and professional development, for example, ‘The organisation has developed a comprehensive induction package, xxx, which is delivered across all services. This includes staff completing four hours of online training and a xxx workbook’ (xxx = identification name or similar which was removed by ACECQA to ensure anonymity and confidentiality); or ‘Management promote educators to stay up to date with current industry changes and educators regularly use ECA Learning hub and ECA blog posts and follow Multiverse Facebook page contributions by Dr … as part of this process’.

Improvement and the role of the educational leader:

The LDC documents referred to how technology can assist the centre with improving their practices and philosophy. For example, two centres in the ACT and TAS explained how the educators used their iPads to contribute to the writing of the QIP. The role of technology in assisting the work of the educational leader was also underlined. For example, in a centre in NSW, the aim for the educational leader was to ‘transfer the service to a paper free/digital programme’; other services offered suggestions on how technology was used by the educational leader to provide regular support and feedback to all educators (via emails/digital platforms/digital forums, etc.). Another service in QLD wrote: “The Educational Leader has developed a Professional Development room on Storypark, where professional development/training information is provided (to inspire and encourage attendance by the team), professional readings are provided. This can act as a provocation for professional conversation between colleagues and with the Ed[ucational] Leader. Storypark has also been adapted to include a First Australians”.

Sustainability

A small number (n = 7) of LDC services also referred to the need for becoming “paper free” to enhance sustainable practices through the adoption of digital practices.