More? Great? Childcare? A discourse analysis of two recent social policy documents relating to the care and education of young children in England

Abstract

This paper considers the overt and covert discourses in two contemporary policy documents in England and Wales, The Nutbrown Review: Foundations for Quality ([DfE] Department for Education Department for Education. 2012. ‘The Nutbrown Review: Foundations for Quality: The Independent Review of Early Education and Childcare Qualifications.' DFE-00068 2012. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/175463/Nutbrown-Review.pdf.) and More Great Childcare (MGC) ([DfE] Department for Education. 2013. ‘More Great Childcare: Raising Quality and Giving Parents More Choice.' DFE-00002-2013. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/219660/More_20Great_20Childcare_20v2.pdf.), which advocated a number of significant changes to Early Years provision. It employs Critical Discourse Analysis (CDA) to ask questions about relationships between language and society, specifically how these are managed in policy documents. Drawing on Foucauldian analysis on the power behind the words and utilising [Fairclough, N. 2010. Critical Discourse Analysis: The Critical Study of Language. Harlow: Pearson Education Ltd.] CDA, indications of underlying values and assumptions, overt and covert agendas were explored. Findings suggest a significant shift in concepts of quality, professionalism and childcare that positions the child as an investment in the future as a strong feature of the discourse within MGC as well as an increase in top-down frameworks. Both documents assert that quality and professionalism will only occur with top-down regulation and inspection. They propose a consumer market based model of practice that has implications for professionalism of the workforce and quality of children's experiences.

Keywords:

• early years
• quality
• provision
• workforce
• policy

Acknowledgements

This article is based on a paper presented to the EECERA Conference (Tallinn, August 2013), with grateful acknowledgement of contributions from Pamela Calder, Caroline Leeson and Martin Needham of the Early Childhood Studies Degree Network in the UK.

Disclosure statement

No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.