International Journal of the Whole Child

2019, VOL. 4, NO. 2

International Teacher Perspectives on Quality in ECE: A Case Study

Julie Chappella, Judit Szenteb

aUniversity of South Florida, bUniversity of Central Florida

Julie Chappell, M.A. is a graduate teaching assistant in the College of Education at the

University of South Florida, Tampa. Her former experiences include teaching in elementary,

high school, voluntary prekindergarten and programs supporting children with special needs. Her

research interests include global and comparative education and program evaluation. She is

currently pursuing her doctorate in Early Childhood Education.

Dr. Judit Szente is Professor of Early Childhood Development and Education at the University of

Central Florida. She is passionate about global issues in early childhood and early childhood

teacher education. She participated in international teaching/learning programs in Bulgaria,

Denmark, England, Ethiopia, Finland, Hungary, Italy, Japan, the United States, and Co-Directs

Study Abroad Programs for undergraduate and graduate students.

Abstract

The goal of early childhood programming is to provide children with high-quality early care and

to support educators’ understanding and ability to implement high-quality practices on behalf of

children and their families. Quality in early childhood care is an ambiguous concept, relative to

various social and context-specific factors, making it difficult to define in standardized terms. A

classroom teacher’s proximity to decisions in the early childhood classroom validates the need

for teacher perceptions to be considered in practices regarding high-quality care. This paper

presents a comparative case study that sought to explore teacher perspectives of high-quality care

from two nations, Finland and the United States, and examined how these perspectives differed

or aligned across the influences of culture. Using an interpretivist design for qualitative research

methods, preschool and early year teacher participants completed pre-surveys in which they

rated various indicators of quality. Survey responses guided semi-structured interviews.

Additionally, participants discussed photographs of classroom and school activities that they felt

exhibited quality. In vivo and values coding were used to analyze the interview data and generate

themes in which teachers described high quality. Generating from both participant groups, the

analysis resulted in various themes, such as child-centered classrooms, physical environment,

and highly educated teachers. While language and terminology differed, teachers in Finland and

the United States valued similar indicators of high-quality early programs.

Keywords: comparative, high-quality, early years, early childhood

Introduction

High quality early childhood education is recognized as leading to positive outcomes for children

as well as economic benefits to society (Nores, Belfield, Barnett, & Schweinhart, 2005).

However, scholars warn against a universal definition of high-quality early care. Nearly two

decades ago, Dahlberg, Moss and Pence (1999) recognized the importance of understanding

early childhood education as more than predictable and controlled, as implied by the language of

quality. Quality continues to be an ambiguous term, including both objective and subjective

factors that are relative to values, beliefs, and needs of various stakeholders (Cryer, Tietze, &

Wessels, 2002; Barros & Leal, 2015). As a socially constructed concept (Dahlberg et al., 1999),

the term quality lacks a definitive conceptualization.

By assuming a cross national investigation of teachers’ perceptions, this study aims to situate

quality as a culturally and socially interpreted term while exploring possible associations or

similarities among teachers’ views of high-quality early care. Since measures of quality continue

to be used to determine what is important in the early childhood classroom, teachers’ perceptions

of quality remain essential.

Specifically, the focus of this paper, referred to in Finland as early childhood education and care

(ECEC), occurs before children enter primary education, between the ages of one and six. A

distinction is made between preschool teachers (teachers of pre-primary children at the age of

six) and kindergarten or ECEC teachers (teachers of children between the ages of one and five)

(Finnish National Agency for Education, 2018). In the United States, early childhood education

(ECE), most often referred to as preschool, occurs between birth and age five, after which

children enter their compulsory education as kindergarteners in primary schools. The vast

majority of states offer free voluntary prekindergarten for four-year-old children.

The purpose of this study is to investigate components of high-quality care from the perspectives

of teachers representing Finland and the United States. In focusing on teachers’ perceptions,

teachers become the knowledgeable experts in providing high-quality care. This study begins to

describe how cultural and social factors affect and shape perceptions of high-quality care by

exploring differences and similarities of teachers’ beliefs. The findings of this study begin to

provide a valuable understanding of the global construction of quality from the viewpoint of

educators as important stakeholders in the early childhood classroom setting.

Research Questions

The following research question guided this study:

(1) How do teacher perceptions of quality compare between early childhood teachers in the

United States and Finland?

Within the guiding research question, two sub-questions emerged as:

(2) Which aspects of quality do teachers in the United States and Finland place the most

value? and

(3) What role, if any, does culture and society have in teacher perceptions of quality in the

United States and Finland?

Literature Review

Conceptual Framework

This study seeks to understand teacher perceptions through comparative and socio-cultural

perspectives. Comparative education involves utilizing a critical lens to explore educational

practices and policies from different countries and cultures (Clarkson, 2009). The increasingly

global society in which we live provides impetus for educators, researchers, and practitioners to

examine not only relationships with the wider society, but as well to critically reflect on our own

educational systems and practices by increasing our knowledge and understanding of systems

and practices that differ. Epstein (2017) explains while the field is influenced by many

disciplines, the key indicator of comparative education is the desire for an understanding of

global education. For this reason, the current study seeks to view comparative education through

a socio-cultural lens. Socio-cultural theory is grounded in the work of Lev Vygotsky and

suggests that our interactions and experiences become largely influenced by the culture in which

we live and interact with others. Specifically, Vygotsky’s (1980) sociocultural theory proposes it

is the signs and tools in our environment that initiate social contact with others. Thus, learning or

internalizing, is initially an external, cultural and social activity that becomes part of the

individual. It is through this lens of socio-cultural influences that the current study intends to

explore teachers’ perceptions of quality care.

Quality in Early Childhood

In a generally defined way, quality is considered from structural and process indicators.

Structural indicators include the characteristics of a classroom that can be regulated, such as staff

qualifications and ratios, licensing policies, and facility and maintenance requirements. Process

indicators represent the everyday interactions, experiences, and relationships occurring in an

early childhood environment. While structural and process indicators remain distinct, structural

indicators do effect certain process indicators; for example, wages and teacher education

evidence as structural indicators to influence process indicators (Cassidy et al., 2005).

Quality as a broad concept poses difficulties in providing a universal measure of quality. Quality

measurement tools such as the Classroom Assessment Scoring System (CLASS), Early

Childhood Environment Rating Scale – Revision (ECERS-R), Caregiver Interaction Scale (CIS),

and the Association for Childhood Educational International’s Global Guidelines Assessment

evaluate different facets of quality indicators. After reviewing 11 quality measurement tools with

the intention of analyzing the strengths and weaknesses of each, along with the sustainability of

the tools in an international context, Ishmine and Tayler (2014) conclude that among the tools

evaluated, many lacked some of the core elements of quality to be considered important. More

relevantly, the researchers note that the purpose of quality assessment measures remains critical

to support and provide feedback to teachers in developing and planning curriculum and

interactions (Cottle & Alexander, 2012; Ishmine & Tayler, 2014). Harrist, Thompson and Norris

(2007) evaluated parent and caregiver perspectives on the quality of childcare using formal

rating methods, much like Rentzou (2012) demonstrated in comparing researcher and

practitioner ratings of quality. Evaluations of quality, as previously mentioned, continue to be

subjectively based upon the purposes and priorities of the stakeholder. Woodhead (1998) called

for a contextually based approach to examining quality, as “there are many different potential

criteria of quality which are closely linked to beliefs about the goals and functions of

programmes” (p. 11). A teacher’s obvious proximity to decisions regarding the early childhood

environment underscores the critical importance of teachers’ perceptions of quality in the

classroom.

National Contexts

Finland. The early childhood educational systems in Finland and the United States continue to

be influenced by the various structures, policies, social and cultural contexts unique to each

nation. Education in Finland is viewed as a basic human right for all and is reflected by the

nature of a free schooling, even through both vocational and university levels (Kangaslahti,

2013; Havu-Nuutinen & Niikko, 2014; Finnish National Agency for Education, 2018). Although

the Ministry of Education and Culture, oversees Finish education, educational system decisions

are made collaboratively between all stakeholders, including policy makers, professionals in the

field of education, teachers, parents, and sometimes even students (Kangaslahti, 2013).

Municipalities themselves remain responsible for the operating of schools; principals at each

school are given the authority to manage individual schools, typically in collaboration with

teachers (National Center on Education and the Economy [NCEE], 2015). At the classroom

level, teachers demonstrate the freedom to construct the learning environment, choose learning

materials, and set the curriculum (Kangaslahti, 2013).

Turunen, Määttä, and Uusiautti (2012) discuss how curriculum is “always part of cultural and

political zeitgeist of the society in which it is written; the curricula in early childhood are also

tightly connected to national societal goals” (p. 586). At the time of the current study, the

National Curriculum Guidelines on Early Childhood Education and Care served as the relevant
curriculum document for ECEC in Finland (in Finland published in Finnish in 2003 and English
in 2005). The purposes of the National Curriculum Guidelines on Early Childhood Education
and Care in Finland include: to provide equal opportunities for education across the country, to
evidence developmental activities, and to introduce uniform principles. Emphasis is placed on

the child’s well-being, care and health, play, exploration, physical activities, and language

(National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health, 2005; Havu-Nuutinen &

Niikko, 2014). The new National Core Curriculum for ECEC was released after study
completion. While the new curriculum is considered a standard rather than a guideline, local

municipalities continue to maintain authority to develop their own curricula based from the new

core curriculum. Kangaslahti (2013) cautions that the Finnish educational system (or any other

national system) cannot merely be copied into another cultural context, though it does provide an

important example. The Finnish ECEC system is highly dependent on the cultural factors of

equality, trust, and responsibility, the high quality of teachers, and the research-based pedagogy

of child-centeredness and care.

United States. Current United States ECE policy evidences historical roots beginning in the

1960s. Many early childhood programs originated as a response to the War on Poverty initiatives

in the mid-1960s and the economic Opportunity Act of 1964 (Winter & Kelley, 2008), initially

developed to target high-risk, impoverished, and economically and socially disadvantaged

children. In 1989, the National Educational Goals 2000 introduced the goal of education as

producing an improved workforce, thus highlighting the top-down need for children to be better

prepared for school (Winter & Kelley, 2008). Neuman (2015) writes about the current policy

goals, including a focus on improving the quality of early childhood programs and providing

equitable access to quality programs for supporting children from lower socio-economic areas.

An emerging focus of early childhood programs in the United States is the idea of school

readiness, preparing children for formal schooling in kindergarten, resulting in policy makers

becoming more fixated on the long-term investment of early care (Brooks & Murray, 2018).

DeBruin and Slutzky (2016) explored the early learning standards across the different states in

the U.S., noting the variance in standards alignment to age and grade level ranges. Evans (2013)

acknowledged the pre-primary approach to school readiness, commonly found in the United

States, primarily focuses on child outcomes, standards-based models, and basic academic skills

required for school.

Methodology

Design

The study used a comparative case study approach to data collection and analysis. Case studies

become useful when a researcher seeks to investigate a particular group of individuals, program

or techniques (Lichtman, 2013). This study most aligns with the case study views illustrated by

Sharan Merriam and Robert Stake, which assume the constructivist lens of epistemology (Yazan,

2015). Yazan (2015) explains both Merriam and Stake understand reality is constructed,

multiple viewpoints exist, and researchers remain interpreters of information; researchers

construct their own meaning from the findings, although Merriam also acknowledges the

influences of researchers views on the interpretations. Following an interpretivist paradigm in

design, the aim is to develop deep, comprehensive understanding of topics through multiple

perspectives (Mackenzie & Knipe, 2006). Thanh and Thanh (2015) explain the interpretivist as

one that values subjectivity and dismisses universal standards of human behavior and research.

In this study, a rich understanding of quality from two varying cultures and various individuals

supports the interpretivist design.

Sample

The inclusion criteria for teacher participants was solely limited to current classroom teachers

working in an early childhood setting that taught in Finland. This included kindergarten (ages

birth to five) and pre-primary (age six) teachers, and in the United States this included infant,

toddler and preschool teachers (ages birth to five). The three teacher participants in Finland

represent three different centers, each with varying local contexts, school specific goals and

structures. One Finnish teacher participant was from a pre-primary class within a primary school,

and the other two teachers interacted with children in kindergartens with children through the age

of five years of age. In the United States, both teacher participants were in preschool classrooms

with children ages three and four. The two teacher participants from the U.S. were also at the

same school. Demographic data on the teachers were not deemed pertinent to the current study

and thus not collected from participants; however, each participant was a qualified teacher with a

bachelor or master’s degree in teaching the specific age group with which they worked.

Procedures

The total number of participants in the study was five: three early years teachers residing in

Finland and two preschool teachers in the United States. An exemplary sampling method was

used to request participation from individuals at schools and early care centers in Finland

connected with a partnering university through a study abroad program during the spring

semester of 2016. Before the program began, directors or principals were emailed study

permission requests. The final sample of Finnish participants included three early childhood

teachers from three different centers, with two of the interviews approved for audio-recording.

Exemplary sampling was again used in the United States during the spring semester of 2018 as

participants were also sought from a child-care center connected to the university. The center

director was contacted and emailed study permission requests, along with the pre-surveys for

teachers to complete ahead of time. The two interviews conducted were audio recorded.

Data Collection

In order to answer the research questions, data were collected in the form of pre-surveys,

interviews, researcher notes and audio-transcriptions, and photo elicitations when available. The

setting for each interview varied depending on the availability of space. In Finland, two of the

interviews were conducted in a space used by children during the interview (a hallway and a

dining and play area). The last interview in Finland was conducted in a classroom kitchen area

that children were not using at the time. In the United States, both interviews were conducted in

teacher workspaces. The interview lengths also varied depending on time availability and ranged

from eight to 45 minutes. Each teacher (representing Finland and U.S.) used their teacher

preparation and/or break time to complete the interview. Prior to the interview, teachers

completed a pre-survey in which they rated indicators of quality based on the Association for

Childhood Education International (ACEI) Global Guidelines Assessment (GGA). The results of

the survey guided the interview questions. The pre-survey also provided space for teachers to

input their own indicators of high quality they felt were not included in the GGA. Semi-

structured interviews focused on the indicators rated as most important as well as any additional

indicators provided by the participant. In addition, teachers in Finland were given a camera and

asked to walk through the center and take pictures of ideas they thought illustrated high-quality.

Teachers in the United States had pictures prepared for the interview session.

During the interviews, the first author also jotted down notes to highlight salient points made by

interviewees. These notes were added to the transcripts, but were not coded if directly redundant

with other codes found in the interviewee’s transcription. It is also pertinent to note that only two

of the three Finnish interviews were audio recorded. The third interview was documented by

note taking. For this reason, the coding of this interview only included values coding, as

verbatim quotes cannot be verified. Both interviews conducted with U.S. teachers were audio

recorded and research notes were limited to clarifying questions.

Data Analysis

In order to answer the research questions, inductive, open coding was used to eliminate

researcher preconceptions and focus on emergent concepts generated within the data (Lin, 2013).

To satisfy the purposes of the research, two different coding methods were used in the first cycle

coding analysis. Since the primary focus of the research was to understand the teacher

perceptions of high-quality early childcare, in vivo coding was utilized to honor each

participant’s voice and ideas (Miles, Huberman, & Saldaña, 2014). This was particularly vital in

this study as the researcher only speaks English and participants from Finland spoke English as a

second language. The second first cycle coding method applied was a variation of values coding,

which is appropriate in studies that wish to convey a participant’s values, attitudes and beliefs.

(Miles et al., 2014; Saldaña, 2009). However, during the values coding process, the decision was

made to replace the code of ‘belief’ to ‘practice.’ This change was made during a peer and

mentor evaluation session, and documented in the auditable decision trail, to provide a more

accurate description and richer analysis of the photo elicitation piece of the interview that

focused on aspects of the interviewee’s current practices that they perceived to display high-

quality. Values coding in this study included attitudes (defined as participants’ thoughts or

feelings about aspects of quality), values (defined as aspects of quality that participants place

value), and practices (defined as activities the participants do to promote or show high-quality).

After transcribing and coding the interviews (in vivo and values coding), each code was

summarized into a short concept and then labeled with one of the emerging themes.

Results

Emergent Themes

Category and theme names from each set of interviews were chosen independent of each other,

and then similar categories and themes were merged. Figure 1 below displays the emergent

themes generated from the data analysis. Eight themes, as shown in the double-sided arrow, were

common between both Finnish and U. S. teachers, while other themes were specific to each

country.

Figure 1. Emergent themes. This figure illustrates the common and country-specific themes
developed through data analysis.

Common Emergent Themes

Environment. The environment theme was the largest with multiple sub-categories. Each of the

Finnish teachers commented on the importance of a flexible and adaptable environment based on

children’s interests. Teachers described the physical environment and materials as needing to be

“inspiring,” “clean,” “secure,” and “interesting,” as well as to “motivate” and have “space.” As

co-constructors of the environment, the children’s needs and interests drive the room

arrangement and materials presented. As it will be discussed later, part of a teacher’s role is

actively listening to children, which includes creating spaces with and for children that will

engage them, lead to social interactions, and promote their well-being. The teachers from the

United States highlighted predictable expectations and routines as important to the environment,

and further described the physical environment itself as promoting independence. Critically, the

physical environment promotes children’s ability to flexibly move items about the classroom;

children access resources without asking for a teacher’s assistance.

Interactions. Child-child and teacher-child interactions were included in the final interviews.

One interviewee noted that teacher-child interactions are the “basis for everything.” This is

supported by other statements that teachers should “not be absent” but rather be present in their

interactions with young children. One-on-one time with children is valued, despite difficulties of

large classes. Child-child interactions are supported by teachers that facilitate problem solving

when needed. One U.S. teacher emphasized the value of nurturing teacher-child interactions in

creating a foundation for later learning.

Pedagogy and experience. During the final interviews, participants were asked about what

influenced their decision-making regarding high quality care; respondents identified education

and experience. The teachers described their multiple education degrees and years of experience

working with children, including the years to achieve their degrees. The term pedagogy was

chosen as an emerging theme rather than education or studies, because it better captures the

essence of how the teachers described their educational experiences. One interviewee elaborated

that teachers should continually research, update their knowledge and apply new pedagogical

knowledge to their teaching. Part of this included communicating with colleagues and sharing

ideas, which was included in this emergent theme.

Child-centered. Child-centeredness was a theme for both teachers from the U.S. and Finland.

Although the term was not specifically used when discussing children, the theme was woven into

aspects of the teacher’s role and the environment. For example, interviewees in Finland

described that teachers should “look after the child’s benefit” and that the “child is in the center”

of the environment. In Finland, the teachers viewed child-centeredness as the ability of children

to make their own choices and make decisions about the classroom and their own learning. One

interviewee stated that children “are to be the adults” in planning and creating an environment

for themselves. Furthermore, the furniture and materials should be child sized and appropriate

for the children’s age and development. In the teacher interviews (U.S.), child-centeredness

focused on the importance of listening to children’s interests in order to guide activities and

support learning topics. Using a project approach, one class in the U.S. chose to explore

airplanes by testing paper airplanes, dramatizing plane rides, and learning about the various roles

of airline employees. Moreover, one of the teachers representing the U.S. explained “quality

education doesn’t necessarily mean that…teachers have to own every moment.” The teacher

goes on to explain that unstructured movement, play or outside time is important for children to

experience.

Respect. While following the codes for child-centered, the word respect was repeated time and

again. It became evident that a distinction would need to be made between statements that

focused on applications of child-centeredness (a teacher following children’s interests in

planning activities, or children’s abilities to make choices about what they want to do, as

described above) and statements about valuing children’s input and their contributions to the

classroom. For example, one of the teachers in the U.S. explains that children’s attempts at

learning, prior knowledge and feelings should be respected. The teacher discussed how children

are competent enough to make choices about who they do and do not want to hug, or how they

want to be greeted in the morning. In the same sense, the Finnish interviewees valued children’s

agency, and commented that children should be trusted.

The whole child. The emergence of the whole child was developed particularly as a subset of

many of the other themes such as the teacher’s role, child-centered and the environment. As the

interviewees representing Finland discussed aspects of quality that were easily coded into the

theme of environment, the participants also explored the ideas of supporting the child’s entire

well-being with areas for rest and food, cleanliness and safety. The terms “nurture” and “well-

being” and “emotion” were mentioned in discussing the teacher’s interactions with children, and

that “the care has always been more important than the education of the teaching aspect of early

childhood education.” The child’s emotional development and holistic well-being were discussed

as being more important than academic knowledge and teaching. The interviewees from the U.S.

discussed supporting the whole child in ways such as role-playing conflict resolution, using job

charts to help children feel ownership, and making sure children have moments that are just pure

and happy.

Teacher’s role. Both the Finnish and U.S. interviewees shared a variety of roles that are vital for

educators. The teacher’s role was described by a Finnish interviewee as “the very heart of this

work comes from…the ethic and values that we have as being the…adults that raise the children

here;” the role encompasses the teacher’s attitude, interactions, education and knowledge,

listening skills and flexibility. The teachers from Finland discussed practices such as setting up

the environment with the children, focusing on the “care and the nurture,” facilitating problem

solving and social skills with children, listening actively and being present with them, and

applying knowledge of pedagogy to the selection of classroom materials and adapting to the

needs of children. The Finnish participants believed teachers do not merely attain knowledge of

early childhood education; rather, they possess the years of experience and understanding of how

to use the E.C. knowledge in the classroom. Teachers should be able to provide engaging

materials and spend time with children in one-on-one sessions. Another role of the teacher

involves planning and incorporating cross-curricular activities that meet the needs and interests

of all children. The interviewees from the U.S. mentioned roles such as modeling positive

language, helping children to feel good about coming to school, guiding social and emotional

learning, multitasking, using teachable moments effectively, and, “always being proactive,” to

ensure that children know the expectations and can begin to self-regulate.

Society. The theme of society, not initially seen as a direct indicator of quality, emerged as the

participants spoke about how society views teaching. In terms of providing high-quality care, it

is inferred that the teachers valued their autonomy in the classroom, even though society may

not. While asking about cultural influences, one of the interviewees in Finland responded by

describing the contrast between what teachers experience of the complexities of teaching and

how she perceived society to view teaching. This participant mentioned that teachers are

underappreciated and people outside of education do not know what it is like, stating, “they don’t

actually know what we do here.” Similarly, interviewees in the United States recognized teachers

do not often receive credit for the work they do, but believe teachers remain critical to the lives

and development of children. A participant from the U.S. said, “We’re trying to squeeze

childhood into everything else we’re doing today.” In order to promote high-quality care, it is

critical for educators to be valued and respected to demonstrate the freedom and autonomy to

make decisions on behalf of the children in their classrooms.

Finland Generated Theme

Family. Emerging solely from the Finnish interviews were discussions of families and parents.

The emergent theme remains simply as “Family” because the more specific topics of

involvement, engagement, and parental role did not align with all the statements and codes

regarding families. Teachers spoke slightly of the teacher’s role in meeting with families and

valuing their input, but the focus was more on the child’s needs and not the family’s. Two of the

Finnish interviewees alluded to the fact that parents are sometimes “not interested in all those

things” such as the day-to-day activities and goals, or that parents are busy and don’t need to be

bothered about all the details and specifics. Communication with families about their child’s

main goals and planning for learning is a sign of quality mentioned in the interviews.

U. S. Generated Themes

Education. Regarding teacher qualifications, the interviewees from the U.S. primarily focused

on the need to develop highly educated individuals working with children. For the participants

representing the U.S., highly educated also meant teachers were life-long learners participating

in continuing education and professional growth opportunities. Both interviewees mentioned an

article they recently read in order to keep themselves abreast of relevant research and current

ideas in early childhood education. Some continuing education opportunities teachers mentioned

included webinars, classes, and conferences.

Classroom climate. One of the sub-categories of the Environment evolved as a unique theme:

Classroom Climate. This theme generated from statements reported by teachers from the United

States. In quality programs, it is critical for children to feel a sense of belonging. Employing

teacher encouragement, identifying clear and consistent expectations, implementing activities

promoting classroom families, and assigning class tasks supporting children’s empowerment and

group membership frames classroom climate to develop children’s positive self-images.

Feelings of safety, in the sense of risk-taking, were grouped with this theme because the teachers

explained that if children, “do not feel safe, they are not willing to take chances and learning is a

lot of taking chances.” On the contrary, when “a child feels belonging and feels calm and safe,

they are able to grow from there.”

Curriculum. Another theme that emerged from the interviewees in the United States included

the need for teachers in high-quality programs to provide children with a variety of activities to

support learning. While the children’s interests may guide the activities, it is the responsibility of

the teacher to plan a variety of experiences that support a child across all learning domains. As

one of the U.S. interviewees explained, “children need to be given a variety of

experiences…’cause there are all different type learners. They learn in different ways, so we

need to give them opportunities to experience things differently.” The teachers from the U.S.

stressed that not one single approach works best for all children. Thus, the theme of curriculum is

not an indicator of using a pre-packaged curriculum model, but rather, facilitating a variety of

daily learning experiences across all domains, not forgetting the gross motor domain,

experiences that are meaningful to children and their different learning styles. Moreover, one

interviewee emphasized play as the essential avenue for children’s learning. The teacher stated,

“they have to have the building blocks before they can learn to read. And that’s all,

running, jumping, playing, talking, singing. It’s got nothing to do with worksheets…”

Conclusions

This study focuses on comparing teachers’ perceptions of high-quality early care among teachers

in Finland and the United States, seeking to gain insight to the cultural or societal distinctions.

As a comparative case study, this research did not aim to generalize teacher perceptions across

all of Finland or the United States, but rather to provide a voice to the teachers who are often

rigidly judged according to the high-quality standards that they provide. In a statement

combining perspectives of six experienced early educators from Africa, India, Europe and the

United States, Jalongo et al. (2004) explore an earlier version of ACEI’s Global Guidelines for

the Education and Care of Young Children and provide insight that supports the notion of

similarities existing in our global view of high-quality early care. In much the same way, this

study purports that evaluations of high-quality are not systematic across societies and nations,

but this study also values the multiple perspectives that comparative education research can

highlight.

In addressing the first research question, the analysis of interview data suggests that there are

similarities between how Finnish and U. S. teachers view high quality care. The attitude of each

interviewee was that of excitement, passion, and respect for providing children with the best

possible care. Common emergent themes included child-centeredness, interactions (focused on

teacher-child interactions), the teacher’s role in the classroom, pedagogy and experience of the

teacher, respect for children, societal influences, respecting the child, and supporting the whole

child. The second research question is addressed in highlighting the differences that existed in

terminology used and emphasis on which indicators may be more important to quality. For

example, in the Finnish data, two teachers spoke of the need for a flexible environment, one that

responds to the needs and the interests of the children. In the interviews with teachers from the

U.S., the theme of environment focuses on the physical set up and promotion of independence.

Both the teachers from the U.S. and Finland stressed the importance of putting the children first,

whether that means supporting their interests in the curriculum or trusting that they can make

competent choices.

The last research question regarded the influences of teacher perceptions. When asked about

possible influences regarding their ideas, both groups of participating teachers described

education and experience as influencing their beliefs associated with high quality care and,

similarly, both groups recognized and made statements describing the value of childhood.

According to one teacher, “we’re trying to squeeze childhood into everything else we’re doing.”

Society and our way of life seem to be pushing childhood away, primarily by individuals outside

the field and decision makers that “don’t actually know what we do.” The teachers felt that the

early childhood profession warrants respect and appreciation adequate to justify their making

decisions about their classrooms and the children they nurture.

Limitations

Qualitatively, a small-scale case study as demonstrated here, has its limitations. Teachers were

purposively selected as exemplar teachers and because of their connections to university

programs. Both nations represented are developed, White-European nations and may already

represent quality standards that are similar. Language was another limitation, as the researcher

did not know Finnish. Although the Finnish teachers spoke English well, it is probable that some

concepts and ideas were made ambiguous in translation. It is important to also note the role of

the researcher in data coding. While in vivo and values coding were selected to enhance the

participant’s ideas and values, the researcher ultimately made the final decisions about the

emerging themes, and as such, themes are regarded in terms of the researchers’ own vocabulary.

Furthermore, the emergent themes do not contain an exhaustive list of participant values of high-

quality. A lack of an emergent theme, for example, the theme of Families discussed only by

Finnish teachers, is not meant to implied as devalued by teachers from the United States.

Future Research

This study provides a vital initial step in honoring teacher knowledge and expertise of high-

quality program standards. Teachers from Finland and the U.S. recognized their own education,

experiences and ideas about pedagogy influence what they valued in the classroom. An

important feature of future research would be an analysis of the content of teacher preparation

programs in both nations. This would aim to enhance knowledge of cultural and societal

influences mentioned by both groups of teachers. Since experience was also stated as an

influence, it is recommended that future studies on high-quality early care in education employ a

sampling method to include a variety of teacher experience levels.

Acknowledgements

Special thanks are given to Dr. David Boote at the University of Central Florida, College of

Community Innovation and Education, for his practice and advice regarding decoding of the

interview data and Dr. Jennifer Wolgemuth at the University of South Florida, College of

Education, for her initial feedback and refinement in reporting aspects of the research design.

References

Barros, S., & Leal, T.B. (2015). Parents’ and teachers’ perceptions of quality in Portuguese

childcare classrooms. European Journal Of Psychology Of Education, 30(2), 209-226.
Brooks, E., & Murray, J. (2018). Ready, steady, learn: School readiness and children’s voices in

English early childhood settings, Education 3-13, 46(2), 143-156.
doi:10.1080/03004279.2016.1204335

Cassidy, D., Hestenes, L., Hansen, J., Hegde, A., Shim, J., & Hestenes, S. (2005). Revisiting the

two faces of child care quality: Structure and process. Early Education & Development,
16(4), 505-520.

Clarkson, J. (2009). What is comparative education. In W. Bignold & L. Gayton (Eds.), Global
issues and comparative education, (pp. 4-17). Exeter, England: Learning Matters.

Cottle, M., & Alexander, E. (2012). Quality in early years settings: Government, research and

practitioners’ perspectives. British Educational Research Journal, 38(4), 635-654.
doi:10.1080/01411926.2011.571661

Cryer, D., Tietze, W., & Wessels, H. (2002). Parents’ perceptions of their children’s child care:

A cross-national comparison. Early Childhood Research Quarterly, 17, 259-277.
doi:10.1016/S0885-2006(02)00148-5

Dahlberg, G., Moss, P., & Pence, A. (1999). Beyond quality in early childhood education and
care: Postmodern perspectives. London, England: Routledge Falmer.

DeBruin, P.A., & Slutzky, C. (2016). Exploring pre-K age 4 learning standards and their role in

early childhood education: Research and policy implications. ETS Research Reports
Series, 2016(1), 1-52.

Epstein, E. H. (2017). Is Marc-Antoine Jullien de Paris the ‘father’ of comparative education?

Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 47(3), 317–331.
https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2016.1254542

Evans, K. (2013). “School readiness”: The struggle for complexity. LEARNing Landscapes, 7(1),
171-186.

Finnish National Agency for Education. (2018). Finnish education in a nutshell. Retrieved from

https://www.oph.fi/en/statistics-and-publications/publications/finnish-education-nutshell

Harrist, A. W., Thompson, S. D., & Norris, D. J. (2007). Defining quality childcare: Multiple

stakeholder perspectives. Early Education & Development, 18(2), 305–336.
doi:10.1080/10409280701283106

Havu-Nuutinen, S., & Niikko, A. (2014). Finnish primary school as a learning environment for

six-year-old preschool children. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal,
22(5), 621-636.

Ishmine, K., & Tayler, C. (2014). Assessing quality in early childhood education and care.

European Journal of Education, 49(2), 272-290. doi:10.1111/ejed.12043
Jalongo, M., Fennimore, B., Pattnaik, J., Laverick, D., Brewster, J., & Mutuku, M. (2004).

Blended perspectives: A global vision for high-quality early childhood education. Early
Childhood Education Journal, 32(3), 143–155.
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ECEJ.0000048966.13626.be

Kangaslahti, J.K. (2013). A public education system can excel. Euromentor, 4(1), 7-13.
Lichtman, M. (2013). Qualitative research in education: A user’s guide (3rd ed.). Los Angeles,

CA: Sage.

https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2016.1254542
https://doi.org/10.1023/B:ECEJ.0000048966.13626.be

Lin, C.S. (2013). Revealing the ‘essence’ of things: Using phenomenology in LIS research.

Qualitative and Quantitative Methods in Libraries, 4, 468-478. Retrieved on April 26,
2018 from

http://www.qqml.net/papers/December_2013_Issue/2413QQML_Journal_2013_ChiShio

uLIn_4_469_478.pdf

Mackenzie, N., & Knipe, S. (2006). Research dilemmas: Paradigms, methods and methodology.

Issues In Educational Research, 16, 193-205.
Miles, M. B., Huberman, A. M., & Saldaña, J. (2014). Qualitative data analysis: A methods

sourcebook (3rd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: SAGE.
National Center on Education and the Economy (NCEE) (2015). Finland: System and school

organization. Retrieved from http://www.ncee.org/programs-affiliates/center-on-

international-education-benchmarking/top-performing-countries/finland-

overview/finland-ssytem-and-school-organization/

National Research and Development Center for Welfare and Health (2005). National curriculum

guidelines on early childhood education and care in Finland. Retrieved from

http://www.julkari.fi/bitstream/handle/10024/75535/267671cb-0ec0-4039-b97b-

7ac6ce6b9c10.pdf?sequence=1

Nores, M., Belfield, C.R., Barnett, W.A., & Schweinhart, L. (2005). Updating the economic

impacts of the High/Scope Perry Preschool Program. Educational Evaluation and Policy
Analysis, (3), 245.

Neuman, S.B. (2015). Describing the early childhood policy landscape in the USA. In L. Huo,

S.B. Neuman & A. Nanakida (Eds.), Early childhood education in three cultures: China,
Japan and the United States (pp. 53-60). Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer.

Rentzou, K. (2012). Quality of care and educational provided by Greek day-care centres: An

approach from researcher’s and early childhood educators’ perspective. Early Child
Development & Care, 182(10), 1335.

Saldaña, J. (2009). The coding manual for qualitative researchers. London, England: Sage
Publications. Retrieved from

http://stevescollection.weebly.com/uploads/1/3/8/6/13866629/saldana_2009_the-coding-

manual-for-qualitative-researchers.pdf

Thanh, N.C., & Thanh, T.T. (2015). The interconnection between interpretivist paradigm and

qualitative methods in education. American Journal of Education Science, 1(2), 24-27.
Retrieved from

https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/79e6/888e672cf2acf8afe2ec21fd42a29b2cbd90.pdf

Turunen, T.T., Määttä, K., & Uusiautti, S. (2012). Experts of good educators- or both? The

development of early childhood educators’ expertise in Finland. Early Child
Development & Care, 182(3/4), 487-504.

Vygotsky, L. S. (1980). Mind in society: The development of higher psychological processes.
Harvard University Press. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Winter, S. M., & Kelley, M. F. (2008). Forty years of school readiness research. Childhood
Education, 84(5), 260-266.

Woodhead, M. (1998). “Quality” in early childhood programmes- a contextually appropriate

approach. International Journal of Early Years Education, 6(1), 5-17.

http://www.qqml.net/papers/December_2013_Issue/2413QQML_Journal_2013_ChiShiouLIn_4_469_478.pdf
http://www.qqml.net/papers/December_2013_Issue/2413QQML_Journal_2013_ChiShiouLIn_4_469_478.pdf
https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/79e6/888e672cf2acf8afe2ec21fd42a29b2cbd90.pdf
https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/

Yazan, B. (2015). Three approaches to case study methods in education; Yin, Merriam, and

Stake. The Qualitative Report, 20(2), 134-152.

IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 27
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 28
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 29
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 30
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 31
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 32
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 33
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 34
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 35
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 36
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 37
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 38
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 39
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 40
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 41
IJWC Fall 2019-Full Issue 42