The Connecticut childcare industry is often saddled with regulations that drive up the cost of operation and are unevenly applied across childcare settings. One such regulation is the toddler ratio and group size.
Center-based providers are required to care for toddlers (children between the ages of two and three) in classrooms of eight children (group size) with an adult-child ratio of four to one.
Connecticut has the strictest group size mandate for center-based programs nationwide and the strictest ratio, alongside Michigan and the District of Columbia. These ratios and group sizes exceed even the National Association for the Education of Young Children (NAEYC) accreditation standards, which recommend a 6:1 ratio and a group size of 12 for children 21 months to three years old.
In September, the Legislative Regulation Review Committee (LRRC) will meet to determine if Connecticut will raise its toddler ratio to 5:1 with a group size of 10, a move broadly supported by the childcare industry. These proposed changes would still exceed the NAEYC standards while giving center-based programs more flexibility and making the financial model required for caring for toddlers more appealing.
Opponents of these changes worry about the impact on health and safety. Their concerns ignore that toddlers are currently being cared for in settings that exceed the proposed ratios and group size. Currently, center-based providers can care for toddlers 2.9 in a preschool setting where the group size is 20 with a 10:1 ratio. Moreover, family childcare (FCC) providers can care for children six weeks to five years old in a group size of six by themselves.
This highlights the inherent flaw in this argument, i.e., if a toddler is safe in an family childcare setting with a 6:1 ratio, then how can a 5:1 ratio in a center-based classroom create a significant safety risk for the same toddler? Additionally, if a 2.9-year-old is safe in a group size of 20, how can a group size of ten be unsafe for a 2.8-year-old? This argument suggests that Connecticut’s center-based providers are less equipped than any other providers nationwide to deliver high-quality learning environments for toddlers. This cannot be further from the truth.
Connecticut has the highest number of NAEYC-accredited centers nationwide, with 31% of center-based programs attaining this distinction. It is irrational to believe that these providers, who have invested extraordinary time, effort, and resources to meet these high-quality standards, would not demonstrate the same level of commitment to quality because the ratios and group sizes have increased.
One cannot dismiss the argument that this change will lead to teacher burnout. However, this argument ignores how these strict regulations burden teachers and providers alike. Due to the failing economic model for toddler care created by these strict ratios and group sizes, low wages force early childhood education teachers to work multiple jobs to make ends meet. Additionally, strict ratios and group sizes force teachers to work beyond their scheduled time if a parent runs late, constrain employers from providing time off to teachers, or simply the time outside the classrooms to have lunch.
At Hope, these changes would allow us to enroll four additional children in our two toddler rooms. This revenue increase would also allow us to hire an extra full-time teacher as a floater who would support both toddler rooms and reduce the strain on the center when more than one teacher calls out.
While this is Hope’s plan, these regulatory changes do not compel any provider to adopt them. Some may argue that “bad actors” will not pursue similar goals. I contend that “bad actors” will make bad decisions regardless of the regulations. These strict restrictions only restrain “good” providers, forcing them and parents to make bad decisions.
Two-year-old Corneliuz Shand Williams fell to his death when his mother left him home alone with other minor children to go to work. Vulnerable families are using unlicensed providers who are operating outside of the oversight of the Office of Early Childhood or, more tragically, leaving children alone at home. Similarly, “good” providers often decide whether to reject a child for the day or operate illegally for 30 minutes if a teacher or parent runs late.
In the face of these stark realities, the Legislative Regulation Review Committee is ultimately deciding whether it is preferable for these vulnerable toddlers to be cared for in a licensed, high-quality childcare center with a higher ratio or in an illegal childcare setting that does not consider ratio and group size or worse still, to be left home alone.
Connecticut’s early care and education system needs significant investments. Increasing access and reducing costs should not be a race to the bottom through deregulation. However, we must confront how state regulations drive up costs on center-based businesses and families.
Connecticut’s toddlers must be cared for and educated in high-quality early childhood education classrooms with well-trained teachers. This is not achieved, however, by holding only center-based providers to a standard not borne by any other provider in the state or nation. Easing this regulation is a necessary step to strengthen Connecticut’s childcare industry without sacrificing safety.
Georgia Goldburn is Co-Founder of CERCLE.
Source link : http://www.bing.com/news/apiclick.aspx?ref=FexRss&aid=&tid=66ed0b7a403a45b297b5fb166e827334&url=https%3A%2F%2Fctmirror.org%2F2024%2F09%2F20%2Fct-childcare-industry-needs-regulatory-relief%2F&c=1075262574762187644&mkt=en-us
Author :
Publish date : 2024-09-19 17:01:00
Copyright for syndicated content belongs to the linked Source.