Morgan, Julia ORCID: https://orcid.org/0000-0001-6218-7593 and Sengedorj, Tumendelger (2023) Practitioner perspectives on the challenges of implementing ‘alternative’ early childhood education (ECE) provision for nomadic children in Mongolia. Children and Youth Services Review, 147:106848. ISSN 0190-7409 (doi:10.1016/j.childyouth.2023.106848)

Preview	PDF (Open Access Article) 38494_MORGAN_Practitioner_perspectives_on_the_challenges_of_implementing_alternative_early_childhood_education_ECE_(OA)_2023.pdf - Published Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (455kB) | Preview
Preview	PDF (AAM) 38494_MORGAN_Practitioner_perspectives_on_the_challenges_of_implementing_alternative_early_childhood_education_ECE.pdf - Accepted Version Available under License Creative Commons Attribution. Download (379kB) | Preview

Abstract

Investment in early childhood education (ECE) is seen as key to improving life chances for children from economically disadvantaged backgrounds. Children from nomadic backgrounds often face difficulties in accessing ECE services because of geography, lack of services and the mobility of families. However, the provision of these services is seen as important in reducing educational inequalities between nomadic and non-nomadic children as well as in improving school readiness. Mongolia’s alternative provision policy for nomadic children is often presented as a case study of how ECE services can be provided for nomadic peoples. However, there is little to no literature on how this alternative provision policy is experienced on the ground by practitioners and the subsequent impact on front line staff and children. This research explored the perspectives of ECE practitioners in Mongolia, who are engaged in providing services to nomadic children, to understand their views on how the policy on alternative provision was experienced. Semi-structured interviews with 24 key informants were undertaken in 4 areas of Mongolia over the period 2019–2020. Practitioners highlighted issues around the funding of ECE alternative provision which impacted not only on sustainability of the programs but also impacted on access to programs, the resources available, the duration of programs and the quality of programs. Moreover, factors such as the qualifications of staff and a lack of teachers were highlighted. We conclude that appropriate funding is key in ensuring effective implementation of provision and identify areas of need in relation to ECE practitioner training as well as factors related to practitioner terms and conditions that require attention. Furthermore, some rethinking of the policy of ‘one child one type of provision’ needs to be undertaken as it leads to a lack of equity in relation to access and quality of provision between nomadic and non-nomadic children.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	nomadic children; Mongolia; early childhood education; alternative provision; implementing policy; qualitative
Subjects:	G Geography. Anthropology. Recreation > GN Anthropology L Education > L Education (General) L Education > LB Theory and practice of education > LB1501 Primary Education
Faculty / School / Research Centre / Research Group:	Faculty of Education, Health & Human Sciences Faculty of Education, Health & Human Sciences > Institute for Lifecourse Development Faculty of Education, Health & Human Sciences > Institute for Lifecourse Development > Centre for Inequalities Faculty of Education, Health & Human Sciences > School of Human Sciences (HUM)
Last Modified:	06 Mar 2023 11:17
URI:	http://gala.gre.ac.uk/id/eprint/38494

Actions (login required)

View Item

Downloads