Privilege or tragedy? : Educators’ accounts of flexibly scheduled early childhood education and care

Abstract

This article explores accounts given by Finnish educators (n=31) on flexibly scheduled early childhood education and care (ECEC) (e.g. childcare provided also during non-standard hours). Previous research has shown this to be a sensitive topic because of the contradiction between prerequisites (what is good for children) and actions (provision of childcare during non-standard hours). The research is following the principles of discursive psychology. Educators’ accounts were labelled as excusing, compensating, normalising and justifying. The excusing and compensating accounts shared a concern about the effects of non-standard hour’s childcare on children’s wellbeing. Similar risks were not expressed in the normalising and the justifying accounts. Accounts differed as to who was held responsible for providing this type of childcare. When responsibility was attributed to society, the educators’ position was weaker than when educators constructed themselves as active participants. Both educators and children were positioned uniquely in each type of account. As accounts have consequences on action it is important to make them visible in order to both understand and to develop practices in flexibly scheduled ECEC.