1. Serendipity Early Learning Centre Policy Review Policy review By Holly O’Brien

2. Hello and welcome everyone my name is Holly O’Brien.  I am the educational leader of Serendipity Early Learning Centre (ELC). Earlier this year I began reviewing our centres current philosophy, policies and procedures.  Whilst reading through the policies and comparing them to our centre philosophy I discovered that several of our policies and procedures no longer align with our establishments current centre philosophy which we updated earlier this year. I have asked all of you here tonight to bring this issue to your attention and by using the Outdoor Environment Policy to provide examples I will highlight what key points I see are conflicting with our centres Philosophy.  A centre’s provision of quality is best seen when their policies and philosophy reflects and takes into account the rights and best interests of the child, the early childhood setting as community and focuses on developing strong relationships with families (Waniganayake et al, 2012). This is how we show our practice.  It is important that our practices reflect our philosophy. Educators base their practice on the centres policies as they outline what correct practice is. If our policies are encouraging restrictive practices then educators will act accordingly.

3. Serendipity’s Centre Philosophy  Philosophy: First paragraph.  Competent and capable learner.  To make decisions about and have input.  Know their personal capabilities.  Support.  The first paragraph also outlines how children are capable of controlling their own learning and we as educators are there to support their learning not to tell children what they are and are not capable of doing. It is the child’s job to ask when they need help not to be told when they do and our philosophy highlights this beautifully.  Philosophy: Second paragraph.  Highlights the importance of providing natural and sensory experiences in children’s experiences and foster creative thinking skills.  This suggests that children be free in their exploration during playing without providing restrictions or limitations.  The centre Philosophy through the use of human resources, aims to reflect the centre’s policies and procedures and provide a consistency that assists educators to feel valued as professionals (Waniganayake et al, 2012)..

4. Outdoor Environment Policy  Keeping the centre philosophy in mind lets now look at the outdoor environment policy.  The first thing I noticed with the policy was in the introduction. The opening lines states ‘the physical environment’ and further in the introduction it states ‘children’s physical and cognitive wellbeing are supported by the outdoor environment Although yes the outdoor area consist of a lot of physical play who said that the outdoor environment had to be a physical based environment. When viewing the entire policy nowhere does it encourage a flexible or versatile environment.  If this is a guideline for educator to follow then it is encouraging educators to focus on minimal learning opportunities whilst outside. It can also introduce the concept that physical experiences are for outdoors only  This is the beginning of a restrictive environment. The introduction has introduced a theme of physical and cognitive experiences. Educators could see this as what is expected in the outdoor environment and neglect to include other experiences such as a quite area, gardening area, water play, drawing, painting, group experiences etc.  Strategies section is reasonably straight forward and logical.

5. Outdoor Environment Policy  The Nominated superior section introduces further problems with this policy.  The first dot point highlights important points of having non-poisonous or dangerous plants but what is wrong with children climbing a tree in their environment. Obviously age appropriate and safety to be taken into account but if the tree has safe low branches for the children to explore what is wrong with that.  The last dot point also provides further restrictions on the children. Yes height must be taken into account but if the area is made to be secure, safe, protected and the required soft fall mats installed there is no reason why at an age appropriate level children cannot explore equipment higher than one meter.  The professional knowledge section of the Australian Professional Standards for Teachers has a sub section called: 1.2 Understand how students learn. This sub section outlines how teachers should be aware of how children learn but if we are restricting a child’s environment how are we meant to understand how children learn (AITSL, 2014).

6. Outdoor Environment Policy  Finally the Educators section.  This area is a restrictive section. When reflecting back on the Education Leader section and the first point ‘promote the outdoor environment as a space for play and learning’, how is the educators section allowing for thing to occur by stating  Cover the sandpit when not in use  Remind the children to wear shoes at all times  Control the use of water play  These points stop educators from providing a variety of rich and meaningful sensory, measuring, tactile and decision making experiences for children. They limit educators options and restrict children's learning opportunities. This is in conflict with our philosophy as our philosophy highlights the importance of providing natural and sensory experiences in children’s experiences to foster creative thinking and decision making skills allowing children to be free in their exploration during playing without providing restrictions or limitations.  The following values and processes are considered central to the Code of Ethics: respect, democracy, honesty, integrity, justice, courage, inclusivity, social responsiveness, cultural responsiveness and education (ECA, 2006). When reading these points I do not feel that this policy is in line with the code of ethics as it shows no respects for a child’s individual skills, does not allow for children to develop courage, does not allow for the education of particular activities and does not honestly allow children to explore their play environments or themselves.  When Summing up Serendipity’s Outdoor Environment Policy and comparing it to our updated Centre Philosophy is it clear that our Outdoor policy also needs to be updated. This policy conflicts with many of our philosophy’s core concepts and is limiting us from providing the best quality care and learning environment for our families and their children.  Well written policy interprets legislation and acts as a guide for practice. Our policies are developed as a result and a reflection of our centre philosophy and the needs of our settings. Our policies reflect our centre and as Gibbs (2008) states they are "a statement on how the centre will run and the way that decisions will be made" (Gibbs, 2008, p.13). This shows why our policy needs to change as it no longer reflects how our world is developing but neither our beliefs nor our philosophy.

7. Suggested Changes  Some changes to our Outdoor Environment Policy could be  Introducing sustainable practices during water play experiences.  Allowing the use of bare feet in the sandpit and possibly other play areas as well.  Encouraging a variety of outdoor experiences other thank just physical and cognitive.  Changing the introduction phrasing from physical environment to maybe open and flexible environment that includes physical experiences, art experiences, quiet areas, cognitive areas, sensory play etc. This could provide insirpation for educators when setting their environment.  Including planting experiences with the children that are long and short term and can then be included into their meal, play and learning environments.  Encouraging the use of more challenging age appropriate climbing areas for the children whilst also keeping safety in mind.

8. Procedure for Change  ‘Wise moral decisions will always acknowledge our interdependency; our moral choices are ours alone, but they bind us all to those who will be affected by them. So deciding for yourself what’s right or wrong does not mean deciding in isolation’ (Mackay, 2004, pg. 242 cited from the Early Childhood code of ethics).  Management, directors, staff, families and children and anyone else who is affected by a policy change will be a part of its development. This then incurs a problem as it would almost be impossible to bring every child, family, staff member, future service user and the community together at the same time to work collaboratively to develop a new policy (Gibbs, 2008, pg. 23).  This means that other measures must be used to be able to include everyone’s voice in the policy change. Some examples could be  Questionnaires  Staff meetings  Large or small group parent information nights  Newsletters  Emails for input  Suggestion box  Developing personal philosophy's  Once all of this information has been gathered, grouped, reviewed and a list is developed an approach can then be created to be able to make a new outdoor environment policy that reflects the centre’s community views and beliefs (DEECD, 2014).

9. Procedure for Change  When creating a new policy “knowledge of legislation is essential for constructing accurate, quality enhancing policy and for satisfying the regulating and funding bodies” (Gibbs, 2008, pg. 24). This means that legal requirements must be viewed and abided by when developing policy.  Victorian children's services must meet the requirements of:  Children's Services Act 1996 (doc 130 (docx - 135.49kb) Children's Services Act 1996 (doc 130 (docx - 135.49kb)  Children's Services Regulations 2009 (doc 210 (docx - 212.9kb) Children's Services Regulations 2009 (doc 210 (docx - 212.9kb)  (retrieved from http://www.education.vic.gov.au/childhood/providers/regulation/pages/vcs.aspx)http://www.education.vic.gov.au/childhood/providers/regulation/pages/vcs.aspx  So when creating the new policy these legal documents requirements must be met but that does not mean that flexible environments cannot be used nor does that mean that the environments must be restricted. Of course age appropriate activities must be used as well as legal height and fall mat areas but spaces can be created that are challenging if the right resources are available (DEECD, n.d.).  Legal documents set guidelines for us to follow but they do not tell us to restrict the environments we are creating. They provide a safe basis for us to follow and then create in that given area. They do not tell us to cover their feet and count the amount of water that they are using.

10. Procedure for Change: Farmer (1995, p. 30) six stage approach (retrieved from Gibbs, 2008, pg. 36)  Farmer’s approach t o develop policy is an approach that I would choose to develop a new policy as well. It is simple, easy to follow and has a clear outline of what is required.  Stage 1: Examine the area: state reasons why policy must be developed and what is to be achieved.  (This was discussed earlier as I raised my concerns with our outdoor environment policy)  Stage 2: Collect information: investigate existing policy and information relating to the policy.  (This was done when comparing this policy to our centre philosophy)  Stage 3: Brainstorm: within a sub-committee to gather and analyse ideas. Draft policy  (By discussing this with my management team, floor team, organising information nights, staff meetings etc. it will be possible to brain storm to develop a draft policy)  Stage 4: Draft policy: formulate a recommended policy that is again taken through Stages 1, 2 and 3  (sending emails to all the policy effects)  Stage 5: Ratify policy: incorporate modifications and seek formal approval.  (sending emails to all the policy effects)  Stage 6: Implementation and access to policy: promote a thorough understanding and integration of policy within the service community.  (sending emails to all involved, displaying new policy in the rooms/on doors)

11. References  Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA). (n.d.). National Quality Framework Assessment and Rating process. Retrieved from http://files.acecqa.gov.au/files/Information%20sheets/Assessment%20and%20rating%20process_121108Approved.pdf  Australian Children's Education and Care Quality Authority (ACECQA). (2014). National Quality Framework and The National Quality standard. Retreived from http://www.acecqa.gov.au/national-quality-framework  Australian Institute for Teaching and School Leadership (AITSL). (2014). Australian Professional Standards for Teachers. Retrieved from http://www.aitsl.edu.au/australian-professional-standards-for-teachers/standards/list  Conceptualisation of the requirements of leaders and educators [adapted image]. (2012). In Waniganayake, M., Cheeseman, S., Fenech, M., Hadley, F. & Shepherd, W. Leadership; contexts and complexities in early childhood education (p. 44). South Melbourne, VIC: Oxford.  Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD). (2014). Policy development and review. Retrieved from http://www.education.vic.gov.au/school/principals/management/Pages/schoolcouncilpolicy.aspx  Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD). (n.d.). Policy and review: Improving school governance. Retrieved from https://www.eduweb.vic.gov.au/edulibrary/public/schacc/Policy_Participant_Handbook.pdf  Early Childhood Australia (ECA). (2006). Early Childhood Australia Code of Ethics. Retrieved from http://www.earlychildhoodaustralia.org.au/wp-content/uploads/2014/07/code_of_ethics_-brochure_screenweb_2010.pdf  Gibbs, L. (2008). Policy development in early childhood settings: From idea to evaluation. Pademelon Press, NSW  Victorian Institute of Teaching (VIT). (2008). Victorian Teaching Profession Code of Conduct. Retrieved from http://www.vit.vic.edu.au/SiteCollectionDocuments/PDF/1543_Code-of-Conduct-June-2008.pdf  Victoria Children’s Service Act retrieved from www.education.vic.gov.au/childhood/providers/regulations/pages/vcs.aspx