Understanding the nature and significance of early childhood: new evidence and its implications

INTRODUCTION This paper is based on a presentation at a Centre for Community Child Health seminar devoted to a consideration of the Productivity Commission’s Draft Report on Child Care and Early Childhood Learning. The aim of the paper was to present a succinct summary of relevant evidence to inform discussions. Rather than reviewing the evidence regarding existing forms of service, the presentation focused more broadly on what we know about child development – how children learn and what children need. The paper is not so much about challenging existing models of early childhood education and care in Australia as challenging our understanding of the nature and significance of the early years. NEW RESEARCH EVIDENCE AND WHAT IT TELLS US Over the past few decades, there has been a growing acceptance among scholars, professionals and policy makers of the importance of the early years. However, as we learn more about the way in which experiences in the early years shape health, development and wellbeing, and the extent of these influences over the life-course, the true importance of these years becomes more and more apparent. There are nine sources of evidence to be considered. Evidence about the nature and significance of prenatal development and experiences, and their effects over the life course Evidence about the nature and significance of postnatal learning and development, and the impact of proximal environments Evidence regarding the impact of early childhood experiences on long term development, health and wellbeing Evidence regarding neurological development and plasticity Evidence regarding the neurobiology of interpersonal relationships Evidence regarding ‘social climate change’ and its effects Evidence from economic analyses of child development and the benefits of investments in the early years Evidence regarding social inequalities and their effects Evidence from repeated measurement of key indicators of child development and functioning.• Presentation at Centre for Community Child Health seminar Investing in Early Childhood—the future of early childhood education and care in Australia The Royal Children’s Hospital, Melbourne, 25 July 201

Acting early, changing lives: how prevention and early action saves money and improves wellbeing

Evidence indicates worsening or unacceptably high levels of problems amongst Australia’s children and young people. These problems will not improve – and could get worse – unless we are able to effectively intervene to prevent these problems from occurring in the first place or address the problems early before they become entrenched. This report investigates the potential of early intervention to improve the outcomes of Australian children, especially those children experiencing significant levels of disadvantage, and especially for the long-term (i.e. into adolescence and adulthood). Early intervention is defined in this report as interventions that occur during the early years of an individual’s life (0-5 years of age) in order to prevent a negative outcome or to address an existing problem. The justification for early intervention (i.e. intervention during the early years) rests with the nature of human development and the way in which children develop and learn. The basic foundations for development are laid down during the early childhood years. The prenatal period also plays an important role in an individual’s longterm outcomes.&nbsp

Place-based approaches to child and family services

This paper synthesizes the conceptual and empirical literature on place-based approaches to meeting the needs of young children and their families. A specific focus of the paper is on the potential contribution of place-based approaches to service reconfiguration and coordination. Outline The paper begins by outlining the sweeping social changes that have occurred in developed nations over the past few decades and their impact on children, families and communities. It explores the ‘joined up’ problems faced by families and communities in the contemporary world, and highlights the need to reconfigure services to support families more effectively. The paper then focuses on ‘joined up’ solutions, on what we know about how to meet the challenges posed by the complex problems that characterise our society. Next, the paper explores what a place-based approach involves, and what role it can play in supporting families with young children. The rationale underpinning place-based approaches is outlined and the evidence for the effectiveness of the approach is summarised. The paper then looks at what can be learned from efforts to implement place-based initiatives in Australia and overseas, and explores the issues that need to be addressed in implementing this strategy. The ways in which the early childhood service system might be reconfigured are also considered, and the paper ends with a consideration of the policy and implementation implications.&nbsp

Primary schools as community hubs: a review of the literature

Considerable work has been undertaken over several years to establish primary schools as community hubs in the City of Hume through the Hubs Strategy Group for the Hume Communities for Children Initiative and, more recently, the Supporting Parents Developing Children project. This work has highlighted the need for a primary school community hub toolkit. The purpose of this review is to inform the development of a resource (e.g. a toolkit) that can be used by other schools so that they can also establish themselves as community hubs. An agreed definition of schools as community hubs within the literature has not been reached. Rather, the notion of schools as community hubs seems to be understood in a variety of ways. For the purposes of this review we will draw on the definitions provided by Black (2008) and the Hubs Strategy Group for the Broadmeadows Communities for Children Initiative (2009). Black (2008) describes hubs as involving \u27collaboration between school education systems and the other sectors (community, business, local government and philanthropy) to support the learning and wellbeing of young people, especially those facing disadvantage\u27 (p. 6). These collaborations can range from sharing, co-locating or joint use of physical facilities, through to schools as the centre of a hub or precinct that offers multiple services for the whole community. In the City of Hume, the Hubs Strategy Group have conceptualised a hub as, a welcoming place for families that engages key service providers to work collaboratively. A hub can be a single location or a network of places working together to provide services, such as schools, kindergartens, maternal and child health, and other relevant agencies. Hubs facilitate connections between key services and professionals and represent a paradigm shift in the planning and practice of service provision. Services and their staff are required to rethink existing practice to move to an inclusive practices framework at a professional and community level. &nbsp

Evidence-based service modules for a sustained home visiting program

The Centre for Community Child Health (CCCH) at the Murdoch Childrens Research Institute and the Royal Children’s Hospital has undertaken two literature reviews to inform the design of a sustained home visiting program for vulnerable families with young children; the program is now known as \u27right@home\u27. This project is being led by a collaboration between three organisations: The Australian Research Alliance for Children and Youth (ARACY), CCCH, and the University of New South Wales. The first literature review undertaken by CCCH (Sustained home visiting for vulnerable families and children: A review of effective programs (McDonald et al., 2012) (hereon in referred to as the Home visiting review of effective programs) sought to answer the question ‘what works in home visiting programs?’ The conclusion reached was that it was not possible to answer the question definitively, either because the evidence regarding the ‘components’ of home visiting programs is contradictory or contested, or the evidence is not available. As the home visiting review of effective programs focused on what was delivered (ie. the efficacy of different manualised programs), rather than how services were delivered (ie. the effect of the manner in which services were delivered and the nature of the relationships established between service providers and parents), a second literature review was undertaken: Sustained home visiting for vulnerable families and children: A literature review of effective processes and strategies (Moore et al., 2012) (hereon in referred to as the Home visiting review of effective processes and strategies). The home visiting review of effective processes and strategies identified converging evidence from a number of sources to support the idea that the process aspects of service delivery matter for outcomes – how services are provided is as important as what is provided. A number of key elements of effective service delivery processes have been repeatedly identified in the research literature and these represent the threshold features or bedrock on which all services should be based: if services are not delivered in accordance with these process features, then efforts to change people’s behaviour will be less effective (Moore et al., 2012). The evidence also indicated that the identification of goals, and of strategies to achieve these goals, needs to be done in partnership with parents. However, while the ultimate choice of strategies should be made by parents, the strategies on offer used must be evidence-based. Therefore, service providers should be able to draw on a suite of evidence-based strategies to address the range of challenges that parents face in caring for their children (Moore et al., 2012). In the light of the findings of this second literature review, it was decided that the right@home home visiting program would not involve the delivery of a manualised program. Rather, service delivery would be based on the processes of effective engagement and partnership, while the content of the program would take two forms: standard modules that are delivered to all participants, and e.g. information on the stages of child development), and evidence-based ‘service modules’ (i.e. specific strategies) that could be deployed to address issues that are of particular concern to individual parents.  Related identifer: ISSN 2204-340

Sustained home visiting for vulnerable families and children: a review of effective processes and strategies

Parenting young children has become a more complex and stressful business, especially for those families in our community with the least resources (Grose, 2006; Hayes et al, 2010; Poole, 2004; Richardson & Prior, 2005; Trask, 2010). A widening gap exists between families that function well and those that are vulnerable. The paradox of service delivery for children and families is that vulnerable families – that is, those families with the greatest needs – are also the least likely to be able to access those services (Ghate & Hazel, 2002; Fram, 2003). A range of barriers exist for vulnerable and at risk families in making use of services (Carbone et al, 2004). One of the key barriers to vulnerable families accessing services is that many find it difficult to relate to the formal service system and are easily alienated by practices others find acceptable. Research regarding parents’ experiences of support services suggests that parents want services where they are simultaneously cared for and enabled in their role as parents, and to receive services characterised by empathy, competence, functionality, respect, flexibility and honesty (Attride-Stirling et al, 2001; Winkworth et al, 2009). Vulnerable parents fear a loss of autonomy in their interactions with support services and want services that are non-judgemental and that provide continuity of care (Ghate & Hazel, 2002; von Bultzingslowen, 2006). In addition to the barriers faced by vulnerable and marginalised families in accessing services, the system does not work in an integrated or coherent fashion to ensure that all children and families needing support receive it. Furthermore, the vast majority of services for children and families in Australia do not have an outreach function, that is, a means of engaging these vulnerable and at risk families who are in need of support but use services inconsistently or not at all. In short, the service system was not designed to meet the needs of vulnerable families within the context of a rapidly changing social and economic climate. Therefore, many families requiring support are not receiving it. Related identifier: ISSN 2204-340

Review of the evidence base in relation to early childhood approaches to support children in highly disadvantaged communities for the Children’s Ground Project

The Children’s Ground project aims to develop a place-based approach to support children and their families in highly disadvantaged communities. The project approach is informed by research and evidence, recognising the multiple and multi-level influences on children’s development and the need to support the role of communities in improving outcomes for children. The review of the evidence base, undertaken by the Centre for Community Child Health in collaboration with the Royal Children’s Hospital Education Institute, begins by outlining the changing social and environmental conditions and the influence of these changes on vulnerable children and families. The report then discusses actions undertaken to address these challenges and the reasons why these actions have failed. Next, key factors enabling optimal outcomes for children and contemporary Australian and international evidence-based interventions and approaches that support vulnerable children are examined. The review concludes by summarising the research on the financial and social costs of doing nothing to intervene and improve outcomes for children. In summary, the review endorses the development of a place-based approach with a number of key strategies that simultaneously address families’ immediate needs for support (the foreground factors) and the broader conditions under which families are raising young children (the background factors). The approach needs to promote wrap around, integrated services that are responsive to and driven by the community. Focus must also be given to how services are delivered rather than what is delivered. In order to implement the approach, it is critical that a robust governance structure or entity capable of coordinating and supporting the many stakeholders and services involved is established and a long-term financial and policy commitment is made. Key messages encapsulating broad themes from the literature, supported by concluding statements, have been developed to enable clear communication to a variety of audiences.&nbsp

DEECD Early Childhood Intervention Reform Project

This literature review was commissioned by the Office for Children and Early Childhood Development, Department of Education and Early Childhood Development (DEECD), as part of its Early Childhood Intervention Services (ECIS) Reform Project (Stage 2): Developing Options and Next Steps. This Project aims to significantly enhance the efficiency, effectiveness and sustainability of Victoria’s ECIS system and improve outcomes for children with a disability or developmental delay and their families. Early childhood intervention services (ECIS) support children with a disability or developmental delay from birth to school entry and their families. ECIS provides special education, therapy, counselling, service planning and coordination, assistance and support to access services such as kindergarten and child care. The services funded through DEECD are provided by government Specialist Children\u27s Services teams and non-government Early Childhood Intervention agencies. In addition to the services provided by ECIS teams and agencies, the state and federal governments fund a range of complementary programs to support young children with developmental disabilities and their families. These include initiatives to support families (My Time parent groups, Family Support Packages), services to support inclusion (Preschool Field Officers, Inclusion Support Facilitators), and funding to support particular disability groups (Helping Children with Autism packages). These additional services and supports, together with the ECIS teams and agencies, make up the totality of early childhood intervention provision for young children with disabilities. The focus of the literature review is research on contemporary Australian and international evidence-based service delivery models for children with a disability, developmental delay or additional needs aged 0-8 years

Continuity properties of measurable group cohomology

A version of group cohomology for locally compact groups and Polish modules has previously been developed using a bar resolution restricted to measurable cochains. That theory was shown to enjoy analogs of most of the standard algebraic properties of group cohomology, but various analytic features of those cohomology groups were only partially understood. This paper re-examines some of those issues. At its heart is a simple dimension-shifting argument which enables one to `regularize' measurable cocycles, leading to some simplifications in the description of the cohomology groups. A range of consequences are then derived from this argument. First, we prove that for target modules that are Fr\'echet spaces, the cohomology groups agree with those defined using continuous cocycles, and hence they vanish in positive degrees when the acting group is compact. Using this, we then show that for Fr\'echet, discrete or toral modules the cohomology groups are continuous under forming inverse limits of compact base groups, and also under forming direct limits of discrete target modules. Lastly, these results together enable us to establish various circumstances under which the measurable-cochains cohomology groups coincide with others defined using sheaves on a semi-simplicial space associated to the underlying group, or sheaves on a classifying space for that group. We also prove in some cases that the natural quotient topologies on the measurable-cochains cohomology groups are Hausdorff.Comment: 52 pages. [Nov 22, 2011:] Major re-write with Calvin C. Moore as new co-author. Results from previous version strengthened and several new results added. [Nov 25, 2012:] Final version now available at springerlink.co

Esperance land resource survey

The climate, geology, landforms, soils, native vegetation and land uses of the Esperance agricultural district of Western Australia are described, while the soil landscapes of the survey area of about 336,000 ha, covered by the Esperance and Merivale 1:100,000 topographic map sheets, are described in detail. The survey area represents most of the features and problems of the district, especially those of the Esperance sandplain for more resource information. An appropriate mapping scale was chosen from a preliminary survey of five farms on the Esperance sandplain. The study identifies five major land systems which are divided into map units on the basis of soils and landforms. Other landscape features such as swamps, drainage lines and salt-affected areas are also mapped. The land uses; improved annual pastures (clover and medics), perennial grasses, cereal crops, lupins, perennial legume pastures (lucerne, tagasaste) and pine trees for wind-breaks and/or agroforestry are common or proposed for appropriate situations in the Esperance district. Land qualities important for plant growth, farm management and for soil conservation requirements are identified for each of seven land uses. Data on rainfall zones and climatic hazards were added to the resource information to more closely align the capability ratings with production potential. All the map units identified are classified for the above five-class capability classification. We believe results of the survey will be of value to landholders and agricultural advisers in farm and regional planning