Exploring Career Trajectories of Men in the Early Childhood Education and Care Workforce: Why They Leave and Why They Stay 0367500019, 9780367500016

Citation preview

EXPLORING CAREER TRAJECTORIES OF MEN IN THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND CARE WORKFORCE

The role of men in early childhood education and care is crucial for the future of all children growing up in a gender sensitive world. Achieving greater diversity and gender balance in the workforce has proved a challenging goal, despite concerted efforts on the part of individuals, institutions, and governments around the world. Many men remain reluctant to enter the profession, and once they choose this work many leave. This book explores how men in the field make their career decisions to remain in or leave the profession. Taking a broad international perspective and exploring the role of gender in these career decisions, contributors from around the globe unpack how gender concepts influence men’s career trajectories. Through their collaborative research, the team of 17 gender and early childhood researchers investigate various critical and relevant factors such as professionalisation, workplace environment, leadership, day to day interactions in the workplace, societal considerations, internal motivations, agency, masculinities, and critical moments in career decision making. Using cultural, racial, ethnic, and social class lenses to examine men’s career decisions over their professional lives, the contributors’ unique approach uncovers the complexity of the issue and offers evidence-based recommendations for policy both on national and local levels. These include practical suggestions to directors and managers who care about achieving a gender-mixed workforce. Accessible and enlightening, this is a unique resource for scholars, policymakers, and any others in the education community who support boosting the inclusion of men in early childhood education. David L. Brody is Associate Professor of Education, Efrata College of Education in Jerusalem, Israel. Kari Emilsen is Professor in Social Science at Queen Maud University College of Early Childhood Education, Norway. Tim Rohrmann is Professor and Coordinator of Early Childhood Education at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Hildesheim, Germany. Jo Warin is Professor in Gender and Social Relationships in Education at Lancaster University, United Kingdom.

Towards an Ethical Praxis in Early Childhood

Written in association with the European Early Childhood Education Research Association (EECERA), titles in this series will reflect the latest developments and most current research and practice in early childhood education on a global level. Feeding into and supporting the further development of the discipline as an exciting and urgent field of research and high academic endeavour, the series carries a particular focus on knowledge and reflection, which has huge relevance and topicality for those at the front line of decision making and professional practice. Rather than following a linear approach of research to practice, this series offers a unique fusion of research, theoretical, conceptual and philosophical perspectives, values and ethics, and professional practice, which has been termed ‘Ethical Praxis’. Other titles published in association with the EECERA: A Vygotskian Analysis of Children’s Play Behaviours Beyond the Home Corner Edited by Zenna Kingdon Mathematics in Early Childhood Research, Reflexive Practice and Innovative Pedagogy Edited by Oliver Thiel, Elena Severina, and Bob Perry Exploring Career Trajectories of Men in the Early Childhood Education and Care Workforce Why They Leave and Why They Stay Edited by David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann and Jo Warin For more information about this series, please visit: www.routledge.com/education/ series/EECERA

EXPLORING CAREER TRAJECTORIES OF MEN IN THE EARLY CHILDHOOD EDUCATION AND CARE WORKFORCE Why They Leave and Why They Stay

Edited by David L. Brody with Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann and Jo Warin

First edition published 2021 by Routledge 2 Park Square, Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon, OX14 4RN and by Routledge 52 Vanderbilt Avenue, New York, NY 10017 Routledge is an imprint of the Taylor & Francis Group, an informa business © 2021 selection and editorial matter, David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann, and Jo Warin; individual chapters, the contributors The right of David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann and Jo Warin to be identified as the authors of the editorial material, and of the authors for their individual chapters, has been asserted in accordance with sections 77 and 78 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988. All rights reserved. No part of this book may be reprinted or reproduced or utilised in any form or by any electronic, mechanical, or other means, now known or hereafter invented, including photocopying and recording, or in any information storage or retrieval system, without permission in writing from the publishers. Trademark notice: Product or corporate names may be trademarks or registered trademarks, and are used only for identification and explanation without intent to infringe. British Library Cataloguing-in-Publication Data A catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data Names: Brody, David L. (Teacher educator), editor. | Emilsen, Kari, editor. | Rohrmann, Tim, 1963– editor. | Warin, Jo, editor. Title: Exploring career trajectories of men in the early childhood education and care workforce : why they leave and why they stay / edited by David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann and Jo Warin. Description: Abingdon, Oxon ; New York, NY : Routledge, 2021. | Series: Towards an ethical praxis in early childhood | Includes bibliographical references and index. Identifiers: LCCN 2020043333 (print) | LCCN 2020043334 (ebook) | ISBN 9780367499990 (hardback) | ISBN 9780367500016 (paperback) | ISBN 9781003048473 (ebook) Subjects: LCSH: Male early childhood teachers—Job satisfaction. | Male early childhood teachers—Professional relationships. | Male child care workers—Job satisfaction. | Male child care workers—Professional relationships. | Sex differences in education. Classification: LCC LB1775.6 .E87 2021 (print) | LCC LB1775.6 (ebook) | DDC 372.21—dc23 LC record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020043333 LC ebook record available at https://lccn.loc.gov/2020043334 ISBN: 978-0-367-49999-0 (hbk) ISBN: 978-0-367-50001-6 (pbk) ISBN: 978-1-003-04847-3 (ebk) Typeset in Bembo by Apex CoVantage, LLC

To the spirit of international collaboration which guided the positive and co-operative experience of creating this book and which has opened up new possibilities for international and intercultural insight.

CONTENTS

List of contributors ix Forewordxii Tony Bertram and Chris Pascal PART 1

Background: men, gender, and culture in ECEC

1

 1 Introduction David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann, and Jo Warin

3

  2 Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices to remain and to leave Jo Warin, Birgitte Ljunggren and Markus Andrä   3 A diversity of cultural and institutional contexts Tim Rohrmann, David L. Brody, and Jean-Yves Plaisir PART 2

16 28

Factors that influence men’s career decisions

41

  4 Researching men’s career trajectories in ECEC: a crosscultural inter-researcher approach Yuwei Xu, Jo Warin, Karen Thorpe, and Tim Rohrmann

43

  5 Professionalization and gender balance Christian Eidevald, Birgitte Ljunggren, and Thordis Thordardottir

57

viii Contents

  6 Workplace environment: leadership and governance Birgitte Ljunggren, Joanne McHale, and Victoria Sullivan   7 Experiences of workplace relationships as factors precipitating or preventing dropout of male educators in ECEC Victoria Sullivan, Ramazan Sak, and Karen Thorpe   8 Societal factors impacting male turnover in ECEC Jean-Yves Plaisir, Thordis Thordardottir, and Yuwei Xu   9 Intrinsic motivations as a factor in men’s career decisions in ECEC Yarden Kedar, Markus Andrä, and Victoria Sullivan

70

83 98

111

10 Agency as a determinant of men’s decisions to leave or stay David L. Brody, Markus Andrä, and Yarden Kedar

124

11 Masculinity, sexuality, and resistance Deevia Bhana, Yuwei Xu, and Kari Emilsen

138

PART 3

Overview of findings and the way ahead

151

12 Why men stay Kari Emilsen, Jean-Yves Plaisir, Ramazan Sak, and Christian Eidevald

153

13 Critical moments in men’s career trajectories İkbal Tuba Şahin-Sak, Ramazan Sak, Christian Eidevald, and Joanne McHale

165

14 More men in ECEC: towards a gender-sensitive workforce – summary and conclusions David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann, and Jo Warin

178

Appendix A Data collection protocol 198 Appendix B Coding scheme for researchers 203 Appendix C Thumbnail profiles of participants 207 Index217

CONTRIBUTORS

Markus Andrä is Professor for Social Work at the University of Applied Sciences in Dresden, Germany, with extensive experience as researcher, preschool teacher, social worker, and teacher in the vocational training of ECEC practitioners. His main research interest is identity as a result of micro-social discourses. Deevia Bhana is the South African Research Chair in Gender and Childhood

Sexuality at the University of KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa. Her research interests include gender, childhood sexuality, young masculinity, gender and sexual diversity, male teachers in the early years, and teenage pregnancy. David L. Brody is former Chair of the Early Childhood Department and Academic Dean of Efrata College in Jerusalem. He taught preschool for many years. His research interests and publications include gender balance in ECEC, professional development of teacher educators in community, and early childhood teachers coping with emotionally laden topics. Christian Eidevald is Associate Professor at the University of Gothenburg. He was

Chair of the Early Childhood Teacher Education program at Stockholm University and is presently Director of Development for the city of Gothenburg’s approximately 400 preschools. His research focuses on gender, documentation, and organization within ECEC. Kari Emilsen is Professor in Social Science at Queen Maud University College

of Early Childhood Education in Norway. Her research interests are gender and equality, recruitment of male workers, gender sensitivity, outdoor ECECs, and male dropout from bachelor’s studies. She is a co-convenor of the European Early

x Contributors

Childhood Education Research Association (EECERA) Special Interest Group Gender Balance. Yarden Kedar is Chair of the Early Childhood Education Department and the

Language and Cognition Developmental Lab at Beit Berl College in Israel. He studies the interaction between language and cognitive development with socioemotional aspects such as immigration, gender, and various ECEC environments. Birgitte Ljunggren is Associate Professor at Queen Maud University College of

Early Childhood Education in Norway. Her research interests are network governance of the ECEC sector, ECEC leadership including curriculum implementation, competence raising, and didactical work. As gender researcher, she has published on family policy, innovation, and men in ECEC. Joanne McHale is Lecturer and Placement Coordinator in Early Childhood at

Technological University of Dublin, Blanchardstown. Her research interests include gender in early childhood,  professional practice, and inclusion. She is currently completing her doctoral thesis on gender in the Irish early childhood workforce at UCL Institute of Education. Jean-Yves Plaisir is Professor in the Teacher Education Department at Borough of Manhattan Community College of the City University of New York. His research focuses on men in the early childhood education workforce as well as the academic achievements of “minority children” in the United States. Tim Rohrmann, psychologist and educational scientist, is Professor and Coordina-

tor of Early Childhood Education at the University of Applied Sciences and Arts, Hildesheim, Germany. He has worked on gender and men in ECEC since 1995 and published widely on related issues. He is co-convenor of the European Early Childhood Education Research Association (EECERA) Special Interest Group Gender Balance. Ramazan Sak is Associate Professor of Early Childhood Education in the School

of Education at Van Yüzüncü Yıl University, Turkey. He worked as a preschool teacher for four years. His research areas are men in early childhood education, child-centred education, early childhood curriculums, and anti-bias education. Victoria Sullivan was awarded a competitive scholarship from The University of Queensland, in Brisbane, Australia, to work on her PhD which focused on the low representation of male educators in the ECEC workforce. She has presented her research internationally at academic conferences, workshops, and to industry by invitation.

Contributors  xi

Thordis Thordardottir is Associate Professor at the University of Iceland, School

of Education, Faculty of Education and Diversity. Her research focuses on gender, education, culture, knowledge construction, and meaning making in ECEC. She is former Chairperson of the Centre for Research in Equality, Education and Gender at University of Iceland. Karen Thorpe is Professor of Developmental Science, Institute for Social Science

Research, University of Queensland. Her work focuses on provision of the highest quality early education and care experiences and recognises the central role of a diverse and well-supported workforce in promoting children’s learning, wellbeing, and social inclusion. İkbal Tuba Şahin-Sak is Associate Professor of Early Childhood Education in School of Education at Van Yüzüncü Yıl University, Turkey. She worked as a preschool teacher for two years. Her research areas are school readiness, men in early childhood education, classroom management, developmentally appropriate practice, and anti-bias education. Jo Warin is Professor in Gender and Social Relationships in Education at Lancaster University’s Educational Research Department and Director of the Doctoral Programme in Education and Social Justice, currently supervising 16 PhD students. Her research specialism concerns men’s participation in ECE with several publications on this topic. Yuwei Xu is a Research Fellow at the UCL Institute of Education in London. His

research centres around the sociology of education, gender, and childhood. He has researched topics such as gender balance and men in ECEC, child agency, childcentred diversity and quality ECEC, and women in STEM.

FOREWORD

This scholarly, ref lective and deeply dialogic book entitled Exploring Career Trajectories of Men in the Early Childhood Education and Care Workforce: Why They Leave and Why They Stay edited by David L. Brody working with Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann, and Jo Warin provides the ninth book in the EECERA Ethical Praxis book series. The role of men in early childhood education and care is crucial for the future of all children growing up in a gender sensitive world, and achieving a gender balanced work force in ECEC (early childhood education and care) is a major concern to scholars and educational policymakers around the world. While the number of men in the workforce is slowly increasing, there continues to be a high dropout rate among men who choose the profession despite concerted efforts on the part of individuals, institutions, and governments around the world. While some of these efforts have resulted in improvement, for the most part men remain reluctant to enter the profession, and once they choose this work, many leave. This book addresses this issue with its presentation of original international research into men’s career trajectories in ECEC, and as such it provides important information to scholars, policymakers, and others who support achieving a gender balanced ECEC workforce. The book highlights the relevance of cultural differences regarding gender and gender equality, as well as different institutional contexts and structures in educational systems. Based on their results, the authors call for transformative leadership, support structures for gender-mixed teams and for male workers, and gender-sensitive approaches to ECEC practice and policy. Thus the book opens new perspectives beyond traditional notions of gender in ECEC as well as in the wider society. It has also secured a place in the EECERA Ethical Praxis series because of its deeply ethical and dialogic approach and its potential to stimulate reflection and action which can and should transform early childhood practice which currently remains extremely gendered in nature and execution.

Foreword  xiii

The book sets out to explore how men in the field make their career decisions to remain in or leave the profession and is based on an original international study of 37 men in 12 culturally diverse countries around the world, two thirds of whom are dropouts of practice and one third are persisters in practice. The chapters provide first hand evidence from a variety of cultural contexts and under different perspectives about this important issue and ties with the evolution of political and social issues. In each context the priority in the research has been to carefully listen to the narratives of men in the profession in order to better understand the motivations, forces, and circumstances related to their career decisions. The research approach in each case has been to use a process methodology (using the language of some theories of complexity) which allows us to access the process of construction of situated knowledge and highly relevant information for equity praxis at the level of gender inclusion. This methodology can be inspirational for the creation of groups in other areas of the social science of the social. The pathway to achieve this new understanding of men’s career trajectories can also be viewed as truly dialogical, and this dialogic road amongst the authors is, without exception, one of the key assets of the book. The contributors are a very capable and respected group of scholars and the mix of countries and authors is impressive. The disciplinary perspectives on this team include gender studies, early childhood education, sociology, psychology, and psycho-linguistics. This team worked collaboratively over three years to jointly formulate the research aims, methodology, and data collection and analysis. They undertook a process of co-constructed reflexivity and dialogue to reveal strengths and biases. Particularly, they engage in a deep dialogue with the research evidence, the wider literature and each other to create a rich transformative and ethically robust account of the men’s narratives. The fruit of this dialogic collaboration is reflected in the deep connectivity of the chapters that have been co-authored by teams of experts characterised by gender, cultural, and academic diversity and have drawn on this rich tradition and complexity of perspective as they explore the men’s career trajectories. In this way the authored chapters themselves are highly innovative, rigorous and co-operative in form and content, deserving to be studied by researchers of other topics such as praxeological research, teacher education, organizational cultures, equity development research, multi/intercultural education, pedagogic development and also those who wish to research daily praxis in classrooms.

Underpinning aspirations The EECERA book series entitled Towards an Ethical Praxis in Early Childhood, offers an innovative and exemplary vehicle for the international early childhood sector to develop transformative pedagogy which demonstrates effective integrated praxis. The EECERA book series is designed to complement and link with the European Early Childhood Education Research Journal (EECERJ), which is primarily a worldwide academic platform for publishing research according to the

xiv Foreword

highest international standards of scholarship. The EECERA Ethical Praxis book series aims to highlight pedagogic praxis in order to demonstrate how this knowledge can be used to develop and improve the quality of early education and care services to young children and their families.

Pedagogic approach The approach taken in the book series is not a linear one, but rather a praxeological one focused on praxis, meaning a focus on pedagogic action impregnated in theory and supported by a belief system. It is this fusion of practice, theoretical perspectives, ethics and research which we term ‘Ethical Praxis’. This fusion is embodied in all EECERA research and development activity, but we anticipate the book series will have a stronger focus on the development of pedagogic praxis and policy. In addition to offering a forum for plural, integrated pedagogic praxis, the series will offer a strong model of praxeological processes that will secure deep improvements in the educational experience of children and families, of professionals and researchers across international early childhood services. The book series acknowledges pedagogy as a branch of professional/practical knowledge which is constructed in situated action in dialogue with theories and research and with beliefs (values and principles). Pedagogy is seen as an ‘ambiguous’ space, not of one-between-two (theory and practice) but as onebetween-three (actions, theories, and beliefs) in an interactive, constantly renewed triangulation. Convening beliefs, values and principles, analysing practises, and dialoguing with several branches of knowledge (philosophy, history, anthropology, psychology, sociology, amongst others) constitutes the triangular movement of the creation of pedagogy. Pedagogy is thus based on praxis, in other words, action based on theory and sustained by belief systems. Contrary to other branches of knowledge which are identified by the definition of areas with well-defined frontiers, the pedagogical branch of knowledge is created in the ambiguity of a space which is aware of the frontiers but does not delimit them because its essence is in integration.

Praxeological intentions There is a growing body of practitioner and practice-focused research that is reflected in the push at national and international levels to integrate research and analysis skills into the professional skill set of all early childhood practitioners. This is a reflection of the growing professionalism of the early childhood sector and its increased status internationally. The development of higher order professional standards and increased accountability are reflective of these international trends as the status and importance of early education in the success of educational systems is acknowledged.

Foreword  xv

Each book in the series is designed to have the following praxeological features: • strongly and transparently positioned in the socio-cultural context of the authors • practice or policy in dialogue with research, ethics and with conceptual/theoretical perspectives • topical and timely, focusing on key issues and new knowledge • provocative, groundbreaking, innovative • critical, dialogic, reflexive • Euro-centric, giving voice to Europe’s traditions and innovations but open to global contributions • open, polyphonic, prismatic • plural, multi-disciplinary, multi-method • praxeological, with a concern for power, values and ethics, praxis and a focus on action research, the learning community and reflexive practitioners • views early childhood pedagogy as a field in itself, not as applied psychology • concerned with social justice, equity, diversity and transformation • concerned with professionalism and quality improvement • working for a social science of the social • NOT designed as a textbook for practice but as a text for professional and practice/policy development This ninth book in the series exemplifies these underpinning philosophies, pedagogical ethics, and scholarly intentions beautifully. We believe it is topical and timely, focusing on key issues and new knowledge, and also provocative and critical, encouraging and opening polyphonic dialogue about our thinking and actions in developing high-quality early childhood services internationally. Tony Bertram and Chris Pascal

PART 1

Background Men, gender, and culture in ECEC

1 INTRODUCTION David L. Brody, Kari Emilsen, Tim Rohrmann, and Jo Warin

Actually, there have always been two hearts beating in my chest.  .  .  . Working as an educator seemed to be a better decision, compared to working with computers. (Bernd, Germany, dropout from qualification studies)

Recruiting and retaining men in the early childhood workforce has captured the attention of both gender balance researchers and policymakers around the world. A global awareness of the need to achieve equity in a democratic society points to the critical need for men’s participation in early childhood education and care (ECEC). Their inclusion in the workforce is recognised as a central issue in meeting the policy goals of providing excellent care and education for the youngest members of society. While recruiting men has been the focus of many national programs, less attention has been paid to retaining those who choose to study and work in the profession. In the opening quotation, Bernd, a dropout from Germany, acknowledges his personal dilemma of choosing between a career in ECEC and computers, illustrating the difficulties that men face in deciding to stay or leave the profession. Our team of researchers examines the multiple perspectives of men who have entered the profession either with or without academic preparation, who then rethought their decision and decided to leave whether during study or once in the workforce. We also look at men already in the workforce who deliberate about whether to continue in the field working directly with young children, to move into a position with administrative responsibilities, or to drop out altogether. By carefully listening to the voices of these men we aim to better understand the motivations, forces, and circumstances related to their career decisions. Viewed longitudinally, these decisions make up what we call the career trajectory. This book is the outgrowth of a collaborative international study of experts from many academic

4  David L. Brody et al.

disciplines, providing multiple lenses on the rich data gathered by our research team. The resulting insights offer new tools for unpacking and understanding the question of why many men leave and others remain in the ECEC workforce.

Problematizing men’s career trajectories in ECEC Ever since Cameron, Moss, & Owen (1999) published their groundbreaking study Men in the Nursery 20  years ago, researchers interested in including men in the ECEC workforce have largely focused their efforts on examining why men are attracted to the profession (Wohlgemuth, 2015), what they experience in training (Heikkilä & Hellman, 2017) and then upon entering the workforce (Wright, 2018; Cameron, 2011), and how they deal with stigmatization, bias, and suspicion as part of their daily professional existence (Sargent, 2004). The sources mentioned here are but a sampling of the rich body of literature on men in ECEC. However, when it comes to the phenomenon of men dropping out, there has yet to appear a systematic study, nor has the question of why men stay in the profession been dealt with in a comprehensive fashion. This book addresses the gap in scholarship on these two topics. Worldwide, there is a growing need for workers in ECEC institutions, especially for qualified workers (OECD, 2019). Although retention of workers is a common issue in many fields, dropout from academic qualification studies as well as from the workplace is a persistent problem in ECEC. Totenhagen et al. (2016) remark that high turnover rates have negative effects not only on children but also on the remaining staff and centres. Against this background, dropout from qualification studies and worker turnover has been an issue of debate not only in research but also in ECEC policy making for some time. The dropout rate among childcare workers in general is known to be quite high. While in the US there is no national database of the ECEC workforce, a large survey conducted in 2012 National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE, 2013) indicated an annual staff/teacher departure rate ranging from 10% to 27% depending on the type of program, with non-profit centres showing a lower staff turnover rate than for-profit institutions (Whitebook, Phillips, & Howes, 2014). Totenhagen et al. (2016) found even higher turnover rates, ranging from 26% to 40%. However, this evidence derives mostly from older studies. Following a recent US report on teacher fluctuation from 2014, turnover rates are highest in ECEC, with about 15 percent overall, and half of all centres report turnovers every year (Whitebook, 2014). A  UK survey reports turnover rates between 8% and 15%, depending on the type of provider (Department of Education, 2017). A nationwide Australian survey of childcare workers found that 20% intended to leave their job in the next 12 months (Irvine et al., 2016). In a small-scale Australian study, over half (56%) the childcare workers reported plans to remain for one to five years, while 21% planned to leave within the year (Jones et al., 2017). In Germany, Müller et al. (2018) found that 25% of qualified workers had left ECEC after five years. Academically trained workers (a minority in Germany) tend to shift to

Introduction  5

other employment involving social and pedagogical work, or totally leave the field. Even higher rates of early childhood teachers who intended to change their career choice are reported from China (Liu & Boyd, 2018). Such alarming turnover rates have led to discussions about workplace sustainability (Cumming, Sumsion, & Wong, 2015) as an urgent goal on the macro policymaking level as well as on the meso level of the single childcare centre. While no data is available comparing men’s and women’s dropout rates from the field, anecdotal reports from around the world indicate that men as well as women choose to leave the profession at very high rates. Norway provides a case in point. This country enjoys the highest rate of male participation in the ECEC workforce in the world (9% in 2019). Furthermore, Norway has a very high rate of men enrolled in university ECEC departments, 19% in 2018 (Samordna opptak, 2018); however, dropout rates from qualification training is remarkably high (Emilsen et al., 2020). Dropouts from ECEC bachelor education between 2012–2017 show more than twice as many men interrupting their studies than women (20% male student dropout rate during first year of study compared to 9% females). Similar statistics are found for male and female students at the graduate level (Statistics Norway, 2019).

What is known about teachers’ career trajectories? Research on teachers’ career trajectories over the past two decades points to the complexity of why teachers leave and why they stay in the profession. Teacher turnover is lower in the primary and secondary school system than in ECEC, although it is also a problem there. While no research has been found focusing on career trajectories of men in ECEC, several relevant studies on elementary grade teachers shed light on the broader question, each in its own manner. Firstly, the configuration of career trajectories is important in and of itself. In a Swedish study of 87 teachers, Lindqvist, Nordänger, & Carlsson (2014) found trajectories to be nonlinear, as teachers often leave and then return to the workforce after acquiring enhanced abilities outside the school framework. While one would hope for clear-cut answers that identify factors related to staying and leaving the teaching profession, the reader of these studies quickly realises that there are no easy solutions. Studies from the US and Australia concur that poor working conditions, low salaries, and a lack of career opportunities are major reasons for high fluctuation in ECEC (Cassidy, Lower, Kintner-Duffy, Hegde, & Shim, 2011; McDonald et al., 2018; Irvine, Thorpe, McDonald, Lunn, & Sumsion, 2016, Whitebook, 2014). In a longitudinal study of US teachers’ career paths, Barnatt et al. (2017) found no single teacher attribute or workplace condition that determined career  decisions. Rather, the authors conclude that ‘the manner in which they are able to figure and refigure themselves into the ever-evolving teaching world  .  .  . were closely connected to teachers’ career trajectories’ (p.  1021). Their research revealed a configuration of key factors including the ability to address equilibrium, teacher identity, agency, and collaborative capacity. A seven-year study

6  David L. Brody et al.

focusing on one female Australian ECEC teacher’s career showed the interplay between personal, relational, and contextual influences on teacher attrition (Sumsion, 2002). Another longitudinal study of three teachers over a ten-year period revealed a layered process of socialization that became a continuous reconstruction of personal and professional knowledge over the years that influenced retention. Four themes emerged: teacher collaboration, belonging to the profession, engaging in leadership, and creating supportive school cultures (Clayton & Schoonmaker, 2007). Rinke and Mawhinney’s (2017) study of 24 American teacher leavers found that career pathways were shaped by ongoing negotiation between intrinsic and extrinsic factors. They conceptualised these dynamics as pushing and pulling individuals into and out of the classroom. Finally, in their study of 15 American teachers’ career decisions over a five-year period, Cochran-Smith et al. (2012) identified multiple patterns of teaching practice linked to early career decisions, showing variation in the quality of teaching and career decisions. They argue that stayers and leavers are not homogeneous groups, rather they represent multiple variations in practice coupled with career decisions. Research specifically on ECEC workers also points to a variety of factors related to retention. Totenhagen et al. (2016) summarise that retention rates are related to ‘wages and benefits, job satisfaction, organizational characteristics, alternative employment opportunities, demographic characteristics, job characteristics, and education and training’ (p.  585). Educators point out that working in ECEC is much more demanding nowadays, because the recognition of early education as important for children’s development has led to increased expectations towards the work of practitioners (Grant, Comber, Danby, Theobald, & Thorpe, 2018). In today’s ECEC institutions, educational goals as well as documentation and evaluation tasks are basic parts of the workday at the expense of direct work with children. This becomes problematic because ECEC practitioners view their interactions with children at the heart of their professional work commitment (Viernickel, NentwigGesemann, Nicolai, Schwarz, & Zenker, 2013; Grant et al., 2018). It is agreed that to become a qualified practitioner, it is not enough simply to ‘like children’ (Irvine et  al., 2016, p.  4). At the same time, status and salaries in childcare professions remain low in many countries, notably when compared to school teachers. However, in some countries, wages of school-based preschool and kindergarten teachers are higher and sometimes comparable to primary school teachers, as for example in Turkey and Israel. When salaries are considered as a reason for dropout, national contexts and relative salary value must be taken into account. It is not surprising to find job retention connected to job satisfaction. However, research results on this issue are remarkably varied. Several studies state that job satisfaction amongst ECEC workers is high. Intrinsic rewards of the work, for example the variety of activities during the workday and the positive relations with children are reported as high (Aigner & Rohrmann, 2012; Cole, Reich-Shapiro, Siganporia, Bibiana, & Plaisir, 2019; Rolfe, 2005). Studies from Germany state that good collaboration, team cohesion, and support by leaders are positive factors influencing job satisfaction, whereas structural workplace conditions and salaries

Introduction  7

are rated less positive (Viernickel et al., 2013; Züchner & Fuchs-Rechlin, 2018). Totenhagen et al. (2016) summarise several studies indicating that workers committed to a career in childcare and to the organization are more satisfied with both intrinsic and extrinsic work dimensions (cf. Irvine et al., 2016 with similar results). On the other hand, international research problematises the low status of ECEC. Fenech, Waniganayake, & Fleet (2009) see ECEC as ‘a profession on the margins’ (p.  199) which is an obstacle for developing and retaining a professional ECEC workforce. The lack of acknowledgement of ECEC workers’ professionalism and the persistent portrayal of ECEC workers as ‘substitute mothers’ or ‘babysitters’, negatively impact on career identity (Irvine et al., 2016; Koch & Farquhar, 2015). This corpus of research on teachers’ career trajectories in elementary education and ECEC suggests that the issue is enormously complex. These studies represent teachers in different roles, from early childhood to high school. They were conducted in different countries, primarily Australia and the US. Methodologies vary from long-term monitoring of individual teachers to short term self-reported data. Some of the studies conclude by identifying key factors such as intrinsic and external motivations, agency, collegial collaboration, professionalization, and school cultures. Others look at processes such as refiguring professional identity, layered socialization, and the push and pull of various forces. While this body of research provides a cogent backdrop for our study, it also points to the need for a focus on ECEC teachers and on men in particular. Furthermore, this gap in the research calls for an international perspective on the problem, maintaining a respectful appreciation of culture’s role on men’s career decisions. The primary aim of the book is to understand why men leave and why men remain in ECEC. The influence of globalization on careers in education also calls for an international lens. This will be accomplished by identifying and exploring in depth those critical factors relevant to men’s career decisions in ECEC. Furthermore, the book seeks to unpack how gender concepts influence men’s career trajectory decisions. A final aim is to suggest policy formulations that promote retention of men in the workforce. Because of the rich collaborative and international nature of our research, we suggest a further aim – to highlight the importance of international research collaboration in ECEC. This final aim will be accomplished through self-examination of how we worked as a research community, and how this collaboration benefited the entire research endeavour (see next and Chapters 4 and 14).

Our study – an international collaborative adventure An unfunded large scale international collaborative research endeavour is somewhat of an anomaly in the world of academic research today. This project is all of what has just been discussed. Its success can be explained by these factors: a highly motivated team of researchers, intellectual and social collegiality, and strong leadership. We will unpack this triad of conditions that provided fertile ground for the project to flourish.

8  David L. Brody et al.

First, each researcher came to the project with a background of scholarly activity on gender balance. Many had already joined the Gender Balance Special Interest Group (SIG) of EECERA (European Early Childhood Education Research Association) and had participated in an annual Gender Balance Conference which preceded the EECERA annual conference. At the SIG event, they shared their research and networked with colleagues from around the world. The idea of the men’s career trajectory (MCT) project was incubated within this hothouse, and it was promoted through researchers’ motivation to deeply explore the topic of male dropouts from their multiple disciplines. Secondly, collegiality was based on social compatibility, intellectual curiosity, and a mission to increase male participation in ECEC in their own countries and globally. Individual researchers regularly obtained institutional funding for attendance at the annual EECERA conference. Thus, we were able to add an MCT research workday to the larger conference at little additional cost. Furthermore, virtual meetings every three months kept the group on track and strengthened commitment to the project as well as conformance to the many necessary deadlines. The third factor was leadership. The shared vision of the MCT research project grew out of the research’s conceptualization by four SIG’s leaders. These key researchers presented their idea to the SIG members, found a receptive audience, and ignited enthusiasm among group members. They formed an editorial team lead by a highly energetic and responsive leader, and then recruited additional researchers to achieve a more geographically and culturally diverse research group. Over two years, the project was carried forward by the editorial team with the project leader as the driving force. These three factors mentioned combined to create a collaborative work environment across cultures and continents, disciplines and conceptual frameworks. The current study is the result of this process, which continues to produce new innovative research, new collaborations, and strengthened friendships internationally. While our methodology will be fully described in Chapter 4, we will sketch its broad outlines here in order to frame the focus of this book. We gathered data from two categories of men who chose to work in ECEC. The first group is called dropouts and consists of those who had worked in ECEC and then chose to leave the workplace. While some researchers define dropouts as those who leave the workplace, others prefer a broader definition of leaving the early childhood sector altogether. Thus, the concept of dropping out was considered on three levels: leaving the workplace setting and direct daily involvement with young children, leaving the ECEC sector but continuing in the education field in a different capacity, and leaving the education profession altogether. In our research we use this threefold interpretation to encompass the term dropouts. We are aware that the term ‘dropout’ is often pejorative, especially in public discourses. Our intention is neither judgmental nor disrespectful. We chose this term because it concisely describes the many ways that men leave either their ECEC studies or the workplace setting. Furthermore, the term is widely used in the research literature that addresses teachers leaving the profession. We feel that our respectful use of the

Introduction  9

term dropout in this book will contribute to a more nuanced understanding of the phenomenon. Specifically, the men in this study have ‘dropped out’ of one phase of their career trajectories by moving to another endeavour that has personal significance and also contributes to society. The second group is called persisters and consists of those who have remained in the setting to work directly with children for at least five years. Men in both groups were interviewed in depth and asked to draw a graphic storyline to represent their career over the years (see Chapter 4 and Appendix A, Data Collection Protocol). A large bank of raw data was created from the interviews, storylines, and thumbnail profiles of each of the 37 participants, of whom two thirds are dropouts, and one third persisters. In line with our collaborative research style, we jointly developed a method of data analysis based on factors related to men’s career decisions found in the data. These factors became the basis of a finegrained coding scheme with nine major themes and 33 subthemes, as developed collaboratively by the group (see Appendix B, Coding Scheme for Researchers). The coding process resulted in a database of approximately 3000 coded quotations from the transcripts, and this database was used by the researchers to craft their findings for their particular research focus. Together, we created a book outline and divided the chapters among ourselves, assigning each chapter to a team of experts on the topic. Online synchronous meetings enabled the entire group to discuss relevant issues and reach consensus decisions throughout the process. As the research unfolded, we conducted two face-to-face workdays. This process yielded rich understandings, several conference presentations, the current book, future articles, and many international friendships. A reflective treatment of the collaboration can be found in Chapter 14.

Gender as a primary focus This study examines men who have chosen to work in a female-dominated profession. Regardless of their level of awareness and openness to gender discourses, these men have all encountered the nexus of gender roles, gender expectations, and gendered behaviours as they negotiate their way through the ECEC world of training and work. While individuals in every society experience gender issues in their everyday lives, men in ECEC are thrust acutely into a world of gender binaries, which varies from culture to culture. Our team of researchers felt it crucial to deal head on with this issue by using the gender lens as part of our examination of each factor effecting men’s career trajectories. For some researchers, the gender lens became a major focus, while for others it was less central, albeit a component worthy of attention. This emphasis on gender in our research may have implications for understanding the career trajectories of gender minorities in other professions as well. We recognise that our choice to use a gender perspective may lead to prejudice and reinforce stereotyping. The differentiation between sex and gender must also be addressed, both biologically and socially. Biological sex is linked to the body

10  David L. Brody et al.

and its functions, while gender is attributed to the biological sex and is a social construction (Bratterud, Emilsen, & Lillemyr, 2006). Our understanding of gender changes over time in different cultures and societies, thus emphasising the contextual nature of its expression (Butler, 1990). Diversity of gender positions exists not only between men and women, but also within the same gender (Koch & Emilsen, 2017). Furthermore, limiting the concept of sex and gender to binary constructions is subject to much debate (Warin & Price, 2019).

How the book is organised In addition to the unifying strand of gender, we agreed on other features to consolidate our writing. Each chapter opens with a quotation from one of the participants that brings to the fore the issue under consideration. This is followed by a discussion of the theoretical background related to the topic, a description of specific methodologies used, a delineation of the code categories from which the data was drawn, and a discussion of the importance of this issue for understanding why men stay and leave ECEC. The main body of each chapter explores, elaborates, and clarifies how this particular theme informs our understandings of men’s career trajectories based on the data analysis. The chapters close with an illuminating storyline to further illustrate the findings presented therein, followed by specific recommendations that emerge from the findings. The book is divided into three sections. The first section, Chapters 1–4, lays the groundwork for the findings. Following Chapter 1 that provides essential background to the research, Chapter 2 presents the theoretical basis of the study. As an international endeavour, this research is situated in the socio-cultural discourse, thus Chapter 3 focuses on the cultural context and framing of the research questions. This includes a comparison of ECEC systems and data on men’s participation in the ECEC workforce by country. Chapter 4 addresses our methodology, expanding on the collaborative, international nature of the research, and focusing specifically on the research questions, data collection methods, population, and methods of analysis. The methodology chapter highlights the uniqueness of our groundbreaking collaboration, which we feel is of equal importance to the findings regarding men’s career trajectories, and thus worthy of scholarly attention itself. The second section of the book, Chapters 5–11, presents our findings. Each of these chapters focuses on one particular aspect of the research questions, thus isolating those variables relevant to career trajectory decisions and affording a thorough examination of each factor in its own right. These factors include: professionalization, leadership, workplace environment, societal issues, intrinsic motivation, agency, and masculinities. Giving credence to the complexity of the phenomenon of men’s career decision making in ECEC, we fully understand that such decisions are the result of an interaction between different salient factors. In order to fully understand each component, we spotlight each of these seven factors in its own chapter.

Introduction  11

The third section offers concluding considerations. Although the book focuses on dropouts, we have dedicated Chapter 12 to the question of why men stay in ECEC. This is followed by a study of critical moments in men’s career trajectories in Chapter 13, which is based on the storyline methodology. Finally, Chapter 14 offers a synthesis of the findings and the conclusions the grew out of our findings. Where possible, explanations of the interaction of the seven factors are suggested. Recommendations are offered that emerged from our data analysis, experience as practitioners, and insight as gender balance experts. The appendices include the data collection protocol (Appendix A), a coding scheme for researchers (­Appendix B), and a compendium of thumbnail profiles of our 37 participants (Appendix C). This compendium will be useful to the reader for reference throughout the book in order to gain a better understanding of the participants in the study.

An overview of terminology used in the book Writing about international research on career trajectories in ECEC is a challenging endeavour also in regard to language. The German concept of kindergarten, introduced by Froebel in the 19th century, was taken up in many countries around the world. Other institutions include care for infants, early learning in school, and even after-school care. We use the term Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) throughout this book, which comprises significant international diversity of concepts, institutions, and professions within the field. This diversity is mirrored by a wide array of occupations and professions within the field. Often translations of terms from other languages to English lead to confusion. Professionals with academic qualification are often referred to as teachers, whereas less qualified workers are frequently subsumed under the expression assistants. However, both terms include a range of qualifications, vocational paths, and occupations. Moreover, different terms and expressions are connected to controversies about the underlying concepts, e.g. the relations between ECEC and the school system. For example, the Norwegian profession barnehagelærer translates to kindergarten teacher. The Icelandic counterpart to kindergarten is leikskole  – playschool, and to be called a teacher in this institution is an important aspect of raising the status of workers after the profession was academised. However, a German kindergarten practitioner would never want to be called a teacher, because that term implies scholastic learning which is viewed in opposition to current concepts of learning in the early years. Most German practitioners are Erzieherinnen, or educators. Our sample includes men with different qualifications and experiences in a wide range of institutional settings. Against the backdrop of the diversity described earlier, we found it impossible to identify a general term including all people working in care and education of young children. Generally, we refer to them as ECEC workers, practitioners, or educators, but other terms have also been used depending on the context.

12  David L. Brody et al.

We use career trajectories in ECEC as an umbrella term for vocational paths, including different steps of training and formal qualification, and different occupations within the field. Chapter 3 discusses the relevance of institutional diversities for cross-cultural research on career trajectories, retention and turnover of workers, and gender differences in these issues. Finally, the research team held many discussions about the use of the terms dropout and persisters, which were defined during the development of the methodology (see earlier and Chapter 4). As we learned during the research process, the definitions of both terms are not only less distinctive than we had thought in the beginning; they also connote slightly different meanings and ‘undertones’ which are sometimes difficult to catch. We will discuss these aspects in Chapter  3 and Chapter 14.

Conclusion This book systematically examines the issue of why men leave and stay in ECEC by listening carefully to the stories of both dropouts and persisters around the world, analysing what we heard, and examining the data through various theoretical lenses. As such, this book has its own story to tell, a story which is important for all who are interested in including men in ECEC. Our methodology is grounded in the qualitative-narrative tradition and proposes a model for international collaborative research that brings multiple cultures and academic fields to the task of understanding a complex issue. The importance of this book lies not only in the subject we investigate, in the questions we ask, and in our findings. Beyond addressing these immediate and critical issues, the book represents a model of scholarly collaboration that can serve as a beacon for others interested in international collaborative research. Thus, we suggest that the reader pay attention both to the content and process which drove the success of this project.

References Aigner, J. C., & Rohrmann, T. (Eds.). (2012). Elementar: Männer in der pädagogischen Arbeit mit Kindern [Elementary: Men in educational work with children]. Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Barnatt, J., Gahlsdorf Terrell, D., D’Souza, L. A., Jong, C., Cochran-Smith, M., Viesca, K. M., Gleeson, A. M., McQuillan, P., & Shakman, K. (2017). Interpreting early career trajectories. Educational Policy, 31(7), 992–1032. https://doi.org/10.1177/0895904815625286 Bratterud, Å., Emilsen, K., & Lillemyr, O. F. (2006). Menn og omsorg: i familie og profesjon [Men and care in family and profession]. Bergen: Fagbokforlaget. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. New York: Routledge. Cameron, C. (2011). Male workers in ECEC services: Changes in the debate ? He Kupu, 3(3), 33–44. Cameron, C., Moss, P., & Owen, C. (1999). Men in the nursery: Gender and caring work. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Cassidy, D. J., Lower, J. K., Kintner-Duffy, V. L., Hegde, A. V.,  & Shim, J. (2011). The day-to-day reality of teacher turnover in preschool classrooms: An analysis of classroom

Introduction  13

context and teacher, director, and parent perspectives. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 25(1), 1–23. https://doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2011.533118 Clayton, C. D. G.,  & Schoonmaker, F. (2007). What holds academically able teachers in the profession? A study of three teachers. Teachers & Teaching, Theory and Practice, 13(3), 247–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600701299775 Cochran-Smith, M., McQuillan, P., Mitchell, K., Terrell, D. G., Barnatt, J., D’Souza, L., Jong, C., Shakman, K., Lam, K.,  & Gleeson, A. M. (2012). A  longitudinal study of teaching practice and early career decisions: A  cautionary tale.  American Educational Research Journal, 49(5), 844–880. https://doi.org/10.3102/0002831211431006 Cole, K., Reich-Shapiro, M., Siganporia, T., Bibiana, J. T., & Plaisir, J. Y. (2019). “Why not become a police officer?” Challenges in the recruitment and retention of men in early childhood education. In C. R. Rinke & L. Mawhinney (Eds.), Opportunities and challenges in teacher recruitment and retention: Teacher voices across the pipeline (pp. 199–228). Charlotte, NC: Information Age Publishing Inc. Cumming, T., Sumsion, J., & Wong, S. (2015). Rethinking early childhood workforce sustainability in the context of Australia’s early childhood education and care reforms. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 9(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40723-015-0005-z Department for Education. (2017). Childcare and early years providers survey: 2016. London. Retrieved from www.gov.uk/government/statistics/childcare-and-early-years-providerssurvey-2016 Emilsen, K., Lysklett, O. B.,  & Nordli, A. (2020). Gutter (menn) som slutter  – om frafall i barnehagelærerutdanningen [Boys (men) who leave  – dropout from ECEC  – teacher Bachelor education]. Nordisk tidsskrift for utdanning og praksis, 14(1). https://doi. org/10.23865/up.v14.2066 Fenech, M., Waniganayake, M., & Fleet, A. (2009). More than a shortage of early childhood teachers: Looking beyond the recruitment of university qualified teachers to promote quality early childhood education and care. Asia-Pacific Journal of Teacher Education, 37(2), 199–213. https://doi.org/10.1080/13598660902804022 Grant, S., Comber, B., Danby, S., Theobald, M., & Thorpe, K. (2018). The quality agenda: Governance and regulation of preschool teachers’ work. Cambridge Journal of Education, 48(4), 515–532. https://doi.org/10.1080/0305764X.2017.1364699 Heikkilä, M., & Hellman, A. (2017). Male preschool teacher students negotiating masculinities: A qualitative study with men who are studying to become preschool teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 187(7), 1208–1220. https://doi.org/10.1080/030044 30.2016.1161614 Irvine, S., Thorpe, K., McDonald, P., Lunn, J., & Sumsion, J. (2016). Money, love and identity: Initial findings from the national ECEC workforce study. Summary report from the National ECEC Workforce Development Policy Workshop. Brisbane: QUT. Jones, C., Hadley, F., & Johnstone, M. (2017). Retaining early childhood teachers: What factors contribute to high job satisfaction in early childhood settings in Australia? New Zealand International Research in Early Childhood Education, 20(2), 1. Koch, B., & Emilsen, K. (2017). Men and women in outdoor play – the gender perspective. In T. Waller, E. Ärlemalm-Hagsér, E. B. Hansen Sandseter, L. Lee-Hammond, K. Lekies, & S. Wyver (Eds.), Sage handbook of outdoor play and learning (pp. 413–428). London: Sage. Koch, B., & Farquhar, S. (2015). Breaking through the glass doors: Men working in early childhood education and care with particular reference to research and experience in Austria and New Zealand. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043812

14  David L. Brody et al.

Lindqvist, P., Nordänger, U. K.,  & Carlsson, R. (2014). Teacher attrition the first five years  – a multifaceted image.  Teaching and Teacher Education,  40, 94–103. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.02.005 Liu, Y., & Boyd, W. (2018). Comparing career identities and choices of pre-service early childhood teachers between Australia and China. International Journal of Early Years Education, 17(1), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1080/09669760.2018.1444585 McDonald, P., Thorpe, K., & Irvine, S. (2018). Low pay but still we stay: Retention in early childhood education and care. Journal of Industrial Relations, 60(5), 647–668. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022185618800351 Müller, S., Theisen, C.,  & Fuchs-Rechlin, K. (2018). Kontinuität und Diskontinuität in den ersten Berufsjahren [Continuity and discontinuity in the first years of work]. In K. Fuchs-Rechlin  & I. Züchner (Eds.), Weiterbildungsinitiative Frühpädagogische Fachkräfte, WiFF Studien, band 27: Was kommt nach dem Berufsstart? Mittelfristige berufliche Platzierung von Erzieherinnen und Erziehern sowie Kindheitspädagoginnen und Kindheitspädagogen [What comes after career start? Mid-term vocational placement of academic and non-academic ECEC practitioners] (pp. 34–41). München: Weiterbildungsinitiative Frühpädagogische Fachkräfte. National Survey of Early Care and Education Project Team. (2013). Number and characteristics of early care and education (ECE) teachers and caregivers: Initial findings from the National Survey of Early Care and Education (NSECE). OPRE Report #2-13-38. Washington, DC: Office of Planning, Research and Evaluation, Administration for Children and Families, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services. OECD. (2019). Good practice for good jobs in early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/education/good-practice-for-good-jobs-in-early-child hood-education-and-care-64562be6-en.htm Rinke, C. R.,  & Mawhinney, L. (2017). Insights from teacher leavers: Push and pull in career development. Teaching Education, 28(4), 360–376. https://doi.org/10.1080/1047 6210.2017.1306047 Rolfe, H. (2005). Men in childcare. EOC Report No. 35. Manchester: Equal Opportunities Commission. Samordna opptak. (2018). Søker- og opptaksstatistikk 2018  – sluttrapport: Samordna opptak [Search and recording statistics 2018 – final report coordinated admission]. UNIT – Direktoratet for IKT og fellestjenester i høyere utdanning og forskning. Retrieved from www. samordnaopptak.no/info/om/sokertall/sluttstatistikker/so_sokerstatistikk_2018-sluttrap port.pdf Sargent, P. (2004). Between a rock and a hard place: Men caught in the gender bind of early childhood education. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 12(3), 173–192. https://doi. org/10.3149/jms.1203.173 Statistics Norway. (2019). Gjennomføring for studenter som er nye på sykepleie-, ingeniør- og barnehagelærerutdanninger, etter kjønn [Graduates in programmes for nursing sciences, engineering and ECEC, by gender]. Retrieved from www.ssb.no/statbank/table/09045/ #tablequerycontrol Sumsion, J. (2002). Becoming, being and unbecoming an early childhood educator: A phenomenological case study of teacher attrition. Teaching and Teacher Education, 18(7), 869– 885. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0742-051X(02)00048-3 Totenhagen, C. J., Hawkins, S. A., Casper, D. M., Bosch, L. A., Hawkey, K. R., & Borden, L. M. (2016). Retaining early childhood education workers: A review of the empirical literature. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(4), 585–599. https://doi.org/10. 1080/02568543.2016.1214652 Viernickel, S., Nentwig-Gesemann, I., Nicolai, K., Schwarz, S.,  & Zenker, L. (2013). Schlüssel zu guter Bildung, Erziehung und Betreuung. Bildungsaufgaben, Zeitkontingente und strukturelle Rahmenbedingungen in Kindertageseinrichtungen. Forschungsbericht [Key factors of

Introduction  15

good education and care: Educational tasks, time allotments, and structural conditions of ECEC centers]. Berlin: Alice-Salomon-Hochschule. Warin, J., & Price, D. (2019). Transgender awareness in early years education (EYE): “We haven’t got any of those here”. Early Years, 40(1), 140–154. https://doi.org/10.1080/09 575146.2019.1703174 Whitebook, M., Phillips, D., & Howes, C. (2014). Worthy work, STILL unlivable wages: The early childhood workforce 25  years after the national child care staffing study. Center for the Study of Child Care Employment, 124. Retrieved from http://ffyf.org/wp-content/ uploads/2014/11/Child-Care-Employment-Report-11.18.14.pdf Wohlgemuth, U. G. (2015). Why do men choose to become pedagogues? A  profession continuously in pursuit of male colleagues. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 392–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043813 Wright, D. (2018). Reasons for the 2% years. In Men in early years settings: Building a mixed gender workforce (pp. 48–73). London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Züchner, I., & Fuchs-Rechlin, K. (2018). Arbeitszufriedenheit und Arbeitsbelastung [Job satisfaction and workload]. In I. Fuchs-Rechlin & K. Züchner (Eds.), Was kommt nach dem Berufsstart? Mittelfristige berufliche Platzierung von Erzieherinnen und Erziehern sowie Kindheitspädagoginnen und Kindheitspädagogen [What comes after career start? Mid-term vocational placement of academic and non-academic ECEC practitioners] (pp. 41–49). München: Weiterbildungsinitiative Frühpädagogische Fachkräfte.

2 THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVES ON MEN’S CHOICES TO REMAIN AND TO LEAVE Jo Warin, Birgitte Ljunggren and Markus Andrä

Introduction Alongside [my job in ECEC], I was doing my other job in the restaurant where I work and things kind of changed there over the year as well. . . . I became supervisor and then the assistant manager left, and you know there were talks of opening a new restaurant and now I’m just training to be manager of this restaurant. . . . So yeah, I guess for now a line is definitely drawn under early years [ECEC], but for me, I mean that’s where my heart lies, definitely. Whenever any small child walks in [to the restaurant where I work], I’m always like down on my knees talking to them, and you know that part of me definitely comes back. (Ollie, dropout, England)

Our study of men’s career trajectories concerns their choices to enter, remain in, and leave ECEC, requiring theories that will enable us to understand their stories. The men’s decisions implicate both structural influences and personal agency, and are mediated by gender. So we need theoretical lenses that enable us to look simultaneously at a broad contextual picture that reveals socio-cultural and political structural influences and also to observe, in minute detail, the micro-sociological detail of everyday practices. This multi-level approach is also a strategy for mining the combined theoretical experiences that are represented in our large authorial collaboration derived from our varying subject disciplines: developmental psychology, sociology of education, masculinity studies, sexualities, linguistics, and early childhood education. In a collaborative book such as this, formulating an overarching theoretical approach is quite demanding. In this chapter we suggest an overall approach that frames the issues dealt with in each chapter. Nonetheless, each authorial team delineated in their chapter how the common theoretical approach illuminates their work.

Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices  17

However, our combined purpose to understand influences on men’s career trajectories into and out of ECEC is underscored by a shared hope that this will provide the basis for a positive gender transformation of the ECEC workforce. Our futurefacing, shared emphasis on the possibility of change leads us away from essentialist approaches such as biologically based theories that have the effect of regendering society (Martino & Rezai Rashti, 2012). Instead we subscribe to the broad aims of degendering society, moving away from a rigid enforcement of the gender binary. As a group of socially involved researchers we optimistically believe that such is both possible and desirable. Taken together, our theoretical mix, drawn from our different disciplinary backgrounds, enables us to understand the interdependency of internal and external pushes and pulls that influence men’s career trajectories in ECEC. Our collaboration provides us with the capacity to understand influences in global, governmental, institutional, familial, and individual contexts. We have chosen to structure this chapter through a consideration of different levels of theoretical analysis: micro, meso, and macro. This framework is also used to map an indicative range of the existing research literature on men’s experiences in ECEC. Traditionally, career has been a concept used to define the employment pathway that a person chooses, usually on completing compulsory education, and that may implicate a sequence of changing positions that typically include: training/apprenticeship; initial employment; gradual promotion with increasing pay, responsibility, and status. Examples of this traditional usage still apply within most professional jobs such as teaching. The ‘career trajectory’ concept rests on the assumption that there will be a pathway of betterment, a positive sequence of choices, opportunities, and influences. Many have suggested that the term portrays an illusion of pattern and order and does not adequately describe the vagaries and quirks of fortune that actually determine the employment patterns of most people today. For example, Barnatt et al. (2017) conclude their discussion of teachers’ early career trajectories by stating that teachers are ‘complex and learning actors on a complex and evolving stage’ (p34) emphasising that a ‘confluence of factors’ impact on careers and that career choices are not simply produced through private, individual decisions. Whilst Cumming et al. (2015, p. 3) describe ‘flows of micro – and macro politics’ to discuss the sustainability of the early childhood education workforce in an Australian context, a portrayal that mirrors the multi-level theoretical approach we adopt here. Our discussion of multi-level influences on men’s decisions, mediated by gender, is inspired by Lakoff and Johnson (1999) who acknowledge metaphor as part of our embodied experiences. In this chapter we deliberately utilise metaphors drawn from photography and the visual arts to emphasise how a variety of perspectives is possible and how theoretical levels can be represented as: close-up or miniaturist; medium range; panoramic or broad-brush, and indeed, on occasions concepts such as the ‘career’ can be recognised as illusory, as we pointed out earlier. Our discussion begins with a sketch of one of the men in our study, Ollie, as a way of illustrating theoretical possibilities.

18  Jo Warin et al.

Ollie’s story When he left school, in England, Ollie’s plan was to pursue his passion for work with animals. However, after a year in college doing animal care he was bored and decided to pursue his fall-back plan of becoming a teacher. He undertook a level 2 qualification, worked on a placement in a nursery school and ‘loved every single second of it’. He was then employed in a private nursery, where he was a lone male, but began to dislike the ambience of the private sector. He then moved into a state funded Children’s Centre where he was able to work at the same time as completing a level 3 qualification in childcare. He also gained experience as a family support worker and began to run family groups in this setting. He was at the Children’s Centre for six years. Then he moved to a different city to attend university. However, he dropped this plan, moved back to his original city, and then juggled a portfolio of part time jobs in childcare and educational support. Then a job came up at a local Children’s Centre, state funded, which had an excellent reputation in the city. He worked there for seven years where he developed and ‘flourished’, eventually running the preschool and after-school clubs. A  governmental change involved cuts in the nursery’s services, so he was moved to work entirely with the preschool age group, losing the family support part of his work. He was also under pressure to work a full-time permanent contract and lose some of his work-life balance and flexibility, supplementing his income as a waiter. He left this setting, spent more time as a waiter and quickly moved to the role of assistant manager at the restaurant, followed by managerial training at a second restaurant in this developing restaurant chain.

Close-up, miniaturist work: theoretical analysis at the micro level In trying to understand the first part of Ollie’s story we are likely to focus on the idea that he articulated career plans: a first-choice career and a ‘fall-back’ plan. He assumes that he has a choice and the capacity to pursue an individual preference for a line of work that matches his interests. We could understand his feelings and thoughts about his career through a psychological lens that emphasises personal agency and that sees such choices as a product of a person’s capacity to reflect on self, create an identity, and make decisions bolstering that identity. Classic motivational theories such as Ryan and Deci’s self-determination theory (2000) or Maslow’s self-actualisation theory (1999) could be brought to bear. These micro level approaches could be characterised as an individualistic, agentic, and psychological approach to understanding Ollie’s decisions. For example, one of the most popular theoretical lenses to get close-up insights on this level of personal agency is offered by the psychologist Bandura, whose

Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices  19

theorisation of agency includes four core properties: intentionality, forethought, self-reactiveness, self-reflectiveness (see Chapter  10). He claims that ‘to be an agent is to influence intentionally one’s functioning and life circumstances’. In this view, personal influence is part of the causal structure. ‘.  .  .  [people] are contributors to their life circumstances, not just products of them’ (Bandura, 2006, p. 164). However, Bandura’s emphasis does not adequately account for the translation of agency into ‘doing’ and everyday practices. In order to understand how agency turns into actions we need to gain a little more distance. In Ollie’s case, and indeed in all the trajectories of the men we interviewed, we need to view the wider landscape including the influential and dominant backdrop of the gender order. Moving back from the individual’s psychological influences, we can view Ollie’s actions with sociological lenses such as ‘doing gender’, coloured by the approach of West and Zimmerman (1987, p. 130) who coined this much used conceptual term. They see ‘doing gender’ less as an agentic ability of individuals, but more as an enduring feature of any social situation, an unavoidable mutual routine between people to emphasise and acknowledge their membership in one of two gender categories. As a man in ECEC, Ollie’s agency, choices, interactions, and everyday practices entail a fundamental questioning of the given gender order, which does not usually accept a caring identity as a core masculine trait. We require a set of theoretical lenses that clearly posit the person within a gendered social structure. The reflections of sociologist Bourdieu (1990, 2001) are illuminating, drawing on his comprehensive cultural-theoretical analysis of society which includes a gender dimension, around the central concept of habitus where the individual and the individual’s actions are considered to be the result of social conditions. From Bourdieu’s perspective, the gendered habitus emerges against the background of a ‘phallo-centric’ worldview that can be related to a biology that is itself the result of this view. The relationship of women and men is on the one hand habitually anchored in individuals and, on the other, in the social order (as we elaborate later). Bourdieu also draws attention to the way our language reinforces the antagonistic dualism of male and female as a pair of opposites, a gender binary, assigned to all practices and objects, making it almost impossible to conceive of an alternative. Looked at through these lenses it might be expected that men would rarely be found in ECEC. Research into men’s employment in ECEC over the past decade or so has been conducted, typically, at the micro level with a tendency to work with very small samples. Qualitative micro-level research, usually based on interviewing, includes contributions by Murray (1996), Sumsion (1999), Skelton (2001), Sargent (2004), Bagilhole and Cross (2006), Warin (2006), Smedley (2007), Martino (2008), Francis (2008), Nentwich, Poppen, Schälin, & Vogt (2013), Brody (2014), Brody and Gor Ziv (2019). These ‘close-up’ studies emphasise the shifting nature and intrapersonal struggles of ECEC male practitioners as they negotiate legitimate subject positions within the female dominated world (numerically speaking) of ECEC. The underlying aim has been to draw out men’s own constructions of

20  Jo Warin et al.

identity conflicts, the intrapersonal issues, and everyday choices confronting them in their professional roles. Viewed from Bourdieu’s perspective, the man in the nursery has not only to struggle unavoidably with a surrounding structure but with his own habitus as well, because the structure of the social field is interdependent with the internal structure of his own expectations. As the dominant culture of an implicit and often explicit male superiority in the society leaves its traces in the habitus of men (and women), it is likely that many men will try to construct versions of a male superiority, even as childcare workers. For example, drawing on Warin (2006), Nentwich et al. (2013) explore the occurrence of ‘identity dissonance’ for ECEC men where their fragile position within the field creates identity strategies that often fall back on traditional hegemonic forms of masculinity such as: the protector of women and children (Sumsion, 1999); the ‘brave’ pioneer (Brownhill, 2015); the provider of ‘rough and tumble’ (Fletcher, St. George, & Freeman, 2013); or the disciplinarian father figure (Burn & Pratt-Adams, 2015). Indeed, the everyday practices of the male ECEC worker may sometimes exemplify types of a ‘recuperative masculinity’ (Martino & Kehler, 2006) that has the potential to entrench rather than destabilise gender stereotypes in ECEC. Some of the studies listed earlier have adopted the theoretical approach of Connell (1987, 1997, 2000) especially to emphasise the enduring dominance of hegemonic masculinity and its tendency to reproduce itself despite individual intentions to develop alternative forms of masculinity. The body of ‘close up’ studies also includes feminist poststructuralist theoretical approaches. These allow us to magnify the complexities of everyday practices and enable the fluidity of identities and of gender to come under the microscope. A  good starting place to understand and engage with these theories is MacNaughton (2000), who presents and applies a feminist poststructuralist lens to early childhood. Some feminist poststructural researchers are influenced by the work of Butler (1990) who emphasises the performance of gender and describes it as a ‘free floating’ artifice rather than as an essential quality. A closely related theoretical approach is queer theory (e.g. Thurer, 2005) that emphasises the dominance of gender binary thinking and sets out to destabilise it. For example, Francis’ (2008) study with three male primary school teachers supports the poststructuralist assumption that gender is fluid and also reveals the embodied dimensions of the gender order. Warin (2018) shows the ‘gender flexible’ performances of male ECE practitioners. Brody and Gor Ziv (2019) demonstrate the possibility of hybridised identities in a blend or ‘mestiza’ that is created in the borderland between binary gender concepts. A challenging question is posed by Dillabough et al. (2008, p. 301) about the turn to an ‘interest in the processes of gender, subjectivity’ and the ‘constitution of identity’. They ask where ‘all this construction of subjectivity’ has got us, recognising the limitations of an intrapersonal focus as a source for understanding the possibility of changes to current constructions of masculinity. The necessarily focused field of vision required for the ‘close-up’ work presented earlier threatens to blind us to socio-political contexts and processes, obscuring institutional influences and wider societal power dimensions.

Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices  21

The ECEC as an organisation: meso level push and pull influences Our view now adopts a medium-range, meso level perspective as we examine Ollie’s account of his decision to drop out of ECEC. His experience of ‘flourishing’ in the Children’s Centre was a result of harmonious interplay between organisational decisions and his personal agency. There was a positive match between Ollie’s perceptions about his abilities and the setting’s expectations of him and consequent deployment to specific tasks. When we focus on the management approaches demonstrated in Ollie’s account, we are theorising at the meso level, focusing on the setting as an organisation. Meso level studies highlight organizational aspects of the ECEC as frames for men’s career choices. As in social science in general, there is a wide spectrum of theoretical perspectives on organizations rooted in different traditions, ontologies, and epistemologies. Hatch and Cunliffe (2006, p. 19) sum up the concept of the organization into six core interconnected concepts: social structure, culture, physical structure, technology, organizational environment, and power. These concepts provide lenses for viewing the central arena for the unfolding career trajectories of men – the ECEC itself. Since the classic work of Acker (1992), organisational cultures have been analysed through the lenses of gender (Cameron, 2006). An obvious question to pose is whether organizational aspects affect men’s career trajectories differently than women. The organisational traits of ECECs are represented in studies of turnover and retention for both men and women. For example, McDonald, Thorpe, & Irvine (2018) discuss ECEC retention and turnover in general and sum up previous research linking low pay, low status, and poor working conditions to high turnover rate. These are the organizational push factors influencing men’s decisions to reject this work, and they correspond with findings from other sectors about ‘bad jobs’ in general, such as findings from Bullough’s (2016) life-history study revealing that the childcare pay in the US is so low it cannot support a family on one salary. However, the study by McDonald et al. (2018) also finds evidence of mitigating pull factors preventing turnover despite low pay. In addition to micro factors such as passionate feelings for the job, these authors highlight meso factors such as flexible working conditions permitting paid time to study, paid non-contract time, and a democratic leadership style. Hard and Jónsdóttir (2013) describe ECEC organizations as marked by a discourse of niceness and a value for team equality within a horizontal management structure. Similarly, Peeters et al. (2015) show how gender regimes in the ECECs are marked by resentment of hierarchy, the dominance of women, a value for harmony, and an ambivalence towards male colleagues. These organisational features become embedded in team culture, ECEC artefacts, pedagogical content, and practice. Meso level perspectives allow us to see how the ECEC organisational profile influences the dynamic interplay between push and pull factors for men. For example, a strong organisational emphasis on outdoor pedagogy may act as a pull factor

22  Jo Warin et al.

(Emilsen & Koch, 2010). Sataøen (2008) describes this kind of organisational culture as a masculine island in a feminised sector since these are workplaces that do not challenge a masculine identity but may offer a recuperative masculinity that reinforces gender stereotypes. However, it is unhelpful to homogenise complex institutions as feminine or masculine. Instead, as we look at meso influences on pushes and pulls for male ECEC practitioners, we need to move beyond gender binary thinking, addressing deeper ECEC focused organisational ideologies about professionalization (Thorpe et  al., 2018), and pedagogy and care (Van Laere, Vandenbroeck, Roets, & Peeters, 2014). For example, we can begin by unpacking the meaning of care within ECEC (Peeters, Rohrmann, & Emilsen, 2015) disentangling it from its ‘traditional interweaving with women and femininity and its traditional exclusion of men and masculinity’ (Warin & Gannerud, 2014, p. 196). Whilst this meso level perspective offers a hopeful way forward, we should be mindful of a counter meso level theory that stresses the inevitability of reproducing an ‘androcentric’ gender regime in schools and educational settings (one that is focused on men and masculine interests). A number of theorists argue that androcentric gender regimes are produced by institutional forces of schools-asorganisations. For example, Connell (1997, p.  608) points out that ‘masculinity is an aspect of institutions, and is produced in institutional life’. Similarly, others argue that educational institutions have been seen as ‘masculinity-making devices’ (Skelton, 2001; Haywood & Mac an Ghaill, 1996), where dominant definitions of masculinity prevail over others. Institutional and institutionalised practices ‘reinforce the larger societal division of labour and hence the prevailing gender order’ (Sargent, 2004, p. 189). The family is an institution characterised by the same kinds of organisational institutional forces that influence ECEC. Heteronormative assumptions within the family that create a gendered division of labour may also be carried over into the ECEC institution, with men’s presence argued as necessary to complement women’s presence, as fathering is assumed to complement and ‘balance’ mothering. Burn and Pratt-Adams (2015) show how a familial discourse of maternal and paternal gender roles has constructed teaching practises and behaviours in the ECEC during the twentieth century. Developing this further, Warin (2019) emphasises that in both the institution of family and ECEC, fathering and mothering are, heteronormatively, constructed in relation to each other due to the deeply assumed gender binary governing relationships within institutions. This discourse creates another pull factor as it drives the popular public discourse regarding ‘dangers’ of absent fathers. This brief glimpse of research relating men’s career trajectories to meso level organizational dimensions reveals the vital role that these dimensions play as push and pull factors for men’s career decisions. The gendered structures described here are closely related to societal gendered structures reproduced by individuals in an organizational setting. We suggest that a better understanding of men’s career trajectories might be found in organizational theory surveyed here.

Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices  23

A panoramic view: Theoretical analysis at the macro level Returning to our portrait of Ollie, a critical element of his story is his awareness of governmental policy that influences his choices. Early in his interview he states his preference to work in a state funded rather than private ECEC setting. The loss of his family support work, due to government cuts, was a negative experience as he ‘flourished’ when engaging in outreach work with children’s families. Thus, we pan out further from Ollie’s narrative to view the impact of governmental influences. The English government’s austerity agenda cut funding that enabled ECECs and Children’s Centres to undertake work focusing on children and families. At the start of the millennium under the ‘New Labour’ government a holistic view of children’s care and education harnessed the concept of the ‘child within the family’, the approach enjoyed by Ollie prior to government cuts. Recent educational policy favours measurable ‘academic’ achievement, a neoliberal ‘schoolification’ agenda that is experienced in everyday institutional practices including ECEC settings. Some have suggested that ‘schoolification’ is a ‘remasculinisation’ of schooling (Warin & Gannerud, 2014). Therefore, Ollie’s negative experience is linked to an undervaluing of ECEC in England, its low status, and a policy shift to increasingly academic pedagogy. Adopting an even more distanced set of lenses, panning out from national to international influences, our landscape now includes the additional feature of global academic competition that underlies ‘schoolification’ of the early years in England as in many other countries. The Programme for International Student Assessment (PISA) comparisons can be understood as a remote but significant pushing force on Ollie’s decision to leave the ECEC world. Reflections during his narrative account show his awareness of wider structural influences on his career trajectory. Prevented from undertaking a part of his job he considers worthwhile, he must operationalise a set of expectations about educational purposes shaped by global competition. Adopting our Bourdieuian lenses again, we can discern how the macro structure influences agency and habitus on the micro level. The macro forces of neoliberalism, undervaluing ECEC work, and lack of funding, combine to influence Ollie’s decision to leave. Coupled with growing personal gratification he experiences within his restaurant work, with its potential management role, status, and pay, it is not surprising that he ‘opts in’ to this alternative employment and ‘drops out’ of ECEC.

Conclusion: multi-level perspectives Following our photographic/visual arts metaphor we can explain the range of theoretical perspectives that are variously adopted by the many different contributors to this book, identifying some as miniaturist work (e.g. Chapter 9) in contrast with others who take a long view (e.g. Chapter  7) and still others who switch between focus and distance (e.g. Chapter  5). Our authorial collaboration draws on theoretical breadth that offers capacity to understand motivations, forces, and

24  Jo Warin et al.

circumstances of men’s career decisions relating to ECEC. Our portrait of Ollie’s career trajectory has implicated a zooming in and panning out from Ollie’s figure through a series of different theoretical frames and lenses. Indeed, we can discern lenses within lenses and frames within frames, for understanding how the individual male practitioner negotiates intrapersonal conflicts within his own psyche, which are in turn influenced within his ECEC organisation, which is itself influenced by national policy which is further influenced by global forces. The most adequate theories for understanding men’s career trajectories recognise the interaction of micro, meso, and macro levels, following the lead of sociological theorists who have worked across the boundaries of structure and agency (for example Bourdieu, 2001; Giddens, 1991; Archer, 2003; Connell, 2000) and psychological theorists such as Brofenbrenner with his ecological systems theory (1979). These approaches acknowledge and understand interacting influences at global, governmental, institutional, familial, and individual levels. For example, Wernersson’s (2016) analysis of ‘missing men’ in Swedish ECEC, reminds us that we need to hold in mind ‘the mutual and complex influence over time between the individual subject, social relations, and multiple layers of social structures’ where ‘the individual internalises and is formed by social structures, but is also an agent and an actor in the reproduction and transformation of such structures’ (p. 14). Our understandings of the men’s career trajectories can be seen from different perspectives as a bricolage of intersecting micro, meso, and macro factors, coloured by gender.

References Acker, S. (1992). Gendering organisational theory. In A. Mills & P. Tancred (Eds.), Gendering organisational analysis (pp. 420–427). London: Sage. Archer, M. (2003). Structure, agency and the internal conversation. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. Bagilhole, B., & Cross, S. (2006). “It never struck me as female”: Investigating men’s entry into female-dominated occupations. Journal of Gender Studies, 15(1), 35–48. https://doi. org/10.1080/09589230500486900 Bandura, A. (2006). Toward a psychology of human agency. Perspectives on Psychological Science, 1(2), 164–180. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1745-6916.2006.00011.x Barnatt, J., Gahlsdorf Terrell, D., Adries D’Souza, L., Jong, C., Cochran-Smith, M., Mitchell Viesca, K., Gleeson, A., McQuillan, P., & Shakman, K. (2017). Interpreting early career trajectories. Educational Policy, 31(7), 992–1032. https://doi.org/10.1177/ 0895904815625286 Bourdieu, P. (1990). The logic of practice. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Bourdieu, P. (2001). Masculine domination. Stanford: Stanford University Press. Brody, D. (2014). Men who teach young children: An international perspective. London: IOE Press. Brody, D., & Gor Ziv, H. (2019). Hybridized agency among male early childhood workers as a factor in their career decisions. Early Years, 40(1), 20–36. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09575146.2019.160535 Brofenbrenner, U. (1979). The ecology of human development: Experiments by nature and design. Cambridge, MA: Harvard University Press.

Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices  25

Brownhill, S. (2015). The “brave” man in the early years (0–8): Defining the role. European Early Childhood Research Journal, 23(3), 370–379. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502 93X.2015.1043811 Bullough, R. V. (2016). Status and quality of teacher education in the US: Neoliberal and professional tensions. In J. C. K. Lee & C. Day (Eds.), Quality and change in teacher education: Professional learning and development in schools and higher education (vol. 13, pp. 59–75). Cham: Springer. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-24139-5_4 Burn, E., & Pratt-Adams, S. (2015). Men teaching children 3–11. London: Bloomsbury. Butler, J. (1990). Gender trouble: Feminism and the subversion of identity. London and New York: Routledge. Cameron, C. (2006). Men in the nursery revisited: Issues of male workers and professionalism. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.2304/ ciec.2006.7.1.68 Connell, R. W. (1987). Gender and power. Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R. W. (1997). The big picture: Masculinities in recent world history. In A. H. Halsey, H. Lauder, P. Brown, & A. Stuart Wells (Eds.), Education: Culture, economy and society (pp. 636–651). Oxford: Oxford University Press. Connell, R. W. (2000). The men and the boys. Cambridge: Polity Press. Cumming, T., Sumsion, J.,  & Wong, S. (2015). Rethinking early childhood workforce sustainability in the context of Australia’s early childhood and care reforms. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 9(2), 1–15. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40723015-0005-z Dillabough, J., Mcleod, J., & Mills, M. (2008). In search of allies and others: “Troubling” gender and education. Discourse: Studies in the Cultural Politics of Education, 29(3), 301–310. https://doi.org/10.1080/01596300802259087 Emilsen, K., & Koch, B. (2010). Men and women in outdoor play – Changing the concepts of caring. Findings from Norwegian and Austrian research projects. European Early Childhood Educational Research Journal, 18(4), 543–553. Fletcher, R., St. George, J., & Freeman, E. (2013). Rough and tumble play quality: Theoretical foundations for a new measure of father-child interaction. Early Child Development and Care, 183(6), 746–759. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2012.723439 Francis, B. (2008). Teaching manfully? Exploring gendered subjectivities and power via analysis of men teachers’ gender performance. Gender and Education, 20(2), 109–122. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250701797226 Giddens, A. (1991). Modernity and self-identity: Self and society in the late modern age. Cambridge: Polity Press. Hard, L., & Jónsdóttir, A. H. (2013). Leadership is not a dirty word: Exploring and embracing leadership in ECEC. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(3), 311– 325. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2013.814355 Hatch, M. J., & Cunliffe, A. L. (2006). Organization theory- modern, symbolic and postmodern perspectives. Oxford: Oxford University Press. Haywood, C., & Mac an Ghaill, M. (1996). Schooling masculinities. In M. Mac an Ghaill (Ed.), Understanding masculinities (pp. 50–60). Buckingham: Open University Press. Lakoff, G., & Johnson, M. (1999). Philosophy in the flesh. New York: Basic Books. MacNaughton, G. (2000). Rethinking gender in early childhood. St. Leonards: Paul Chapman Publishing. Martino, W. (2008). The lure of hegemonic masculinity: Investigating the dynamics of gender relations in two male elementary teachers’ lives. International Journal of Qualitative Studies in Education, 21(6), 575–603. https://doi.org/10.1080/09518390701546732

26  Jo Warin et al.

Martino, W., & Kehler, M. (2006). Male teachers and the boy problem: An issue of recuperative masculinity politics. McGill Journal of Education, 41(2), 113–131. Martino, W., & Rezai Rashti, G. (2012). Gender, race and the politics of role modeling: The influence of male teachers. New York: Routledge. Maslow, A. H. (1999). Toward a psychology of being (3rd ed.). New York: Wiley. McDonald, P., Thorpe, K., & Irvine, S. (2018). Low pay but still we stay; retention in early childhood education and care. Journal of Industrial Relations, 60(5), 647–668. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022185618800351 Murray, S. (1996). We all love Charles: Men in child care and the social construction of gender. Gender and Society, 10(4), 368–385. https://doi.org/10.1177/089124396010004002 Nentwich, J. C., Poppen, W., Schälin, S., & Vogt, F. (2013). The same and the other: Male childcare workers managing identity dissonance. International Review of Sociology, 23(2), 326–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.804295 Peeters, J., Rohrmann, T., & Emilsen, K. (2015). Gender balance in ECEC: Why is there so little progress? European Early Childhood Research Journal, 23(3), 302–314. https://doi. org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043805 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. Sargent, P. (2004). Between a rock and hard place: Men caught in the gender bind of early childhood education. The Journal of Men’s Studies, 12(3), 173–192. https://doi. org/10.3149/jms.1203.173 Sataøen, S. O. (2008). Mannlege førskulelærarar gjennom fire tiår 1977–2007 [Male preschool teachers through four decades 1977–2007]. Report No. 1. Sogndal: University College of Sogndal. Skelton, C. (2001). Schooling the boys: Masculinities and primary education. Buckingham: Open University Press. Smedley, S. (2007). Learning to be a primary school teacher: Reading one man’s story. Gender and Education, 19(3), 369–85. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540250701295510 Sumsion, J. (1999). Critical reflections on the experiences of a male childhood worker. Gender and Education, 11(4), 455–468. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540259920519 Thorpe, K., Sullivan, V., Jansen, E., McDonald, P., Sumsion, J., & Irvine, S. (2018). A man in the centre: Inclusion and contribution of male educators in early childhood education and care teaching teams. Early Child Development and Care, 190(6), 921–934. https:// doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2018.150156 Thurer, S. L. (2005). The end of gender. New York and Abingdon: Routledge. Van Laere, K., Vandenbroeck, M., Roets, G., & Peeters, J. (2014). Challenging the feminisation of the workforce: Rethinking the mind-body dualism in Early childhood education and care. Gender and Education, 26(3), 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.20 14.901721 Warin, J. (2006). Heavy-metal humpty dumpty: Dissonant masculinities within the context of the nursery. Gender and Education, 18(5), 523–539. https://doi.org/10.1080/ 09540250600881683 Warin, J. (2018). Conceptualising the value of male practitioners in early childhood care and education: Gender balance or gender flexibility. Gender and Education, 31(3), 293–308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2017.1380172 Warin, J. (2019). Men in early childhood education and care: Gender balance and flexibility. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Warin, J., & Gannerud, E. (2014). Gender, teaching and care: A comparative conversation. Editorial. Gender and Education, 26(3), 193–200. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.20 14.928023

Theoretical perspectives on men’s choices  27

Wernersson, I. (2016). More men? Swedish arguments over four decades about “missing men” in ECE and care. In S. Brownhill, J. Warin, & I. Wernersson (Eds.), Men, masculinities and teaching in early childhood education: International perspectives on gender and care (pp. 13–26). London: Routledge. West, C., & Zimmerman, D. H. (1987). Doing gender. Gender & Society, 1(2), 125–151. https://doi.org/10.1177/0891243287001002002

3 A DIVERSITY OF CULTURAL AND INSTITUTIONAL CONTEXTS Tim Rohrmann, David L. Brody, and Jean-Yves Plaisir

Introduction An anecdote on cross-cultural research. In a research meeting, a discussion on the expressions dropout and persister popped up. We had talked about these terms in the project group for two years, and it had come time to look closely at these expressions’ significance in different cultures. We asked for translations of these words in the languages of the research team members and found a wide variety of connotations ranging from positive to negative and from passive to active. We’d like to share some of these perspectives. The Hebrew translation of dropout, nosher, means to fall off, such as a leaf falling off a tree, implying that this happens naturally, and no one is at fault. The Icelandic equivalent, brottfall, describes students quitting school, but it also means that people leave a profession altogether to work in another country. The phenomenon is seen as a problem that has to be solved. By contrast, the term dropout has a more or less negative connotation in its Turkish translation, bırakan/ayrılan, or its German interpretation, Abbrecher, suggesting that somebody was not successful in completing his education. Similarly, the Swedish avhoppare may describe people quitting their training, or it may refer to a turncoat – a high ranked spy who flips sides. Some languages have different expressions for those who quit school and those who leave a profession. Similarly, we found a variety of understandings regarding persisters. The Icelandic endast í starfi is simply used for people who remain in the same job for a very long time, whereas the Chinese 坚持 (jian chi) means to keep doing things even with difficulties, or to insist on one’s own opinions/decisions, which can be positive or negative depending on the context. In several

Cultural and institutional contexts  29

languages it was difficult to identify a corresponding expression. Traditionally, Germans stay in their first profession their entire life. Because it seems ‘normal’ to stay in a job, there is no specific word for it. Thus, the significance of our central terminology, dropout and persister, varies remarkably in international and multi-lingual contexts.

This chapter aims at framing the research on men’s career trajectories in and out of ECEC by describing the cultural and national contexts from a gender perspective, and by providing quantitative data on men’s remaining in and dropping out of the ECEC workforce. Cross-cultural research on men in ECEC must account for major cultural and social structural differences amongst countries that shape the roles of men and women in society, the general attitudes towards the role of ECEC for children’s and parent’s lives, the institutional contexts of training and work contexts, and the degree of professionalization in the field. In cross-cultural research on diversity in the field of ECEC, three levels have to be taken into account: • • •

macro level: diversity between countries and national systems and structures meso level: diversity within countries and within national systems and structures micro level: diversity among individuals studying or working in ECEC

Focusing on macro and meso levels, this chapter contextualises the analyses of various factors related to men’s career trajectories and individual biographical cases that comprise the core of the research presented in this book.

Overview of institutional contexts of ECEC International comparison shows wide diversity of institutional ECEC contexts. Services across countries vary according to several parameters. Some systems are ‘split’ according to age, with separate care provisions for younger children and school related educational settings for the older. ‘Unitary’ settings cater to the entire age range (European Commission, 2019). A second parameter is state regulation, which ranges from strong political regulation in Nordic countries to diversity in the UK that includes both public and private provisions, marked by concomitant disparities (Department for Education, 2017). A third parameter is an assortment of qualification paths that widely vary by country. In general, the early childhood workforce is comprised of different qualification tracks and professionals who bring a broad array of qualifications, experience, training, and education. Licensure requirements vary based on settings and national or federal-state regulations. Even the expressions for types of qualifications vary and are often difficult to translate. Required qualifications for infant care are

30  Tim Rohrmann et al.

usually lower than preschool. Countries with early education connected to the school system usually employ preschool teachers who undergo academic training, whereas infant care is provided by workers with mostly non-academic qualification. In most countries, assistants with little or no qualification are a significant part of the ECEC workforce (Urban, Vandenbroeck, Peeters, Lazzari, & van Laere, 2011), sometimes making up more than half of the workers. Several countries have employed strategies to increase the proportion of academically trained staff, but due to worker shortages, these attempts often fall short. In Sweden, for example, the proportion of qualified teachers has decreased, while the proportion of unqualified staff has significantly increased during the past two decades (Eidevald & Engdahl, 2018). In contrast, the numbers of academically trained ECEC teachers have increased sharply with the expansion of ECE provision in Turkey (Sak, Şahin Sak, & Yerlikaya, 2015), and in Israel since the implementation of mandatory enrolment from age 3 in public preschools (Al-Yagon, Aram, & Margalit, 2016). These institutional parameters have implications for men working in ECEC. In the Nordic countries, men in ECEC are males working with children ages 1–6. In Germany, day care institutions can include after-school care in the same centre. Male staff tend to work with older children but often switch between ages within the centre. In the UK and Ireland, research on men in ECEC focuses on childcare for younger children, whereas teachers working with preschool children are referred to as primary school teachers. In contrast, men in Turkish preschools teach children ages 3–5½ and are called preschool teachers. Keeping these differences in mind is crucial for understanding individual men’s career trajectories, as well as cross-country comparisons. For example, men’s close physical contact with children is often connected to fear of paedophilia and general distrust of male childcare workers. This is less of an issue in preschool for older children. Thus, the fear of paedophilia is perceived as a major obstacle for men especially in countries where debates on men in ECEC are directed towards the field of childcare. Another example is the issue of inadequate salaries, thought to be a major problem in infant care in many countries, whereas preschool salaries are relatively high in others, albeit still lower than pay in primary and secondary school. The structural aspects of ECEC addressed here are also closely linked to gender issues, which will be discussed next.

Attitudes and policies regarding gender equality and diversity The question of gender equality and cultural diversity has been a major line of inquiry in research on men in ECEC. Several indexes were developed to compare the state of gender equality on a global scale. The UN Gender Inequality Index (GII) includes 189 countries combining data on health, empowerment, and participation in the labour market (United Nations, 2018). The Global Gender Gap report compares 149 countries using four subscales, including economic and political participation, education, and health (World Economic Forum, 2018). The Equal Measure 2030 (2019) global report uses 14 of the 17 UN sustainable

Cultural and institutional contexts  31

developmental goals. The Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) summarises aspects of discrimination, including family, social violence, access to resources, and civil liberties (OECD, 2019). Figure 3.1 shows the rankings of the countries participating in this study according to these four indexes. These data provide an impression of gender equality internationally. Most countries in our study rank considerably above global means. The Nordic countries rank highest in all scales, followed by Ireland, Germany, the UK, and Australia. Israel and the US rank slightly lower but are still well above average. China, Turkey, and South Africa perform poorest around and below global averages, though it is important to recognise that China ranks higher than most other countries on the Global Gender Gap subscale for educational attainment, and Turkey ranks relatively high on health and survival issues. Rankings for South Africa are mixed, illustrating that indexes reveal partially different results, depending on the indicators combined. Gender equality is a complex issue and not consistently achieved in different domains. Moreover, regional factors play an important role, including disparities between urban and rural areas. In most Western countries, notably in the US and European Union, gender equality is enshrined in national law, yielding striking similarities between the two regarding policies on gender equality, diversity, and inclusion in employment practices within public and private sectors. Other countries pay less attention to gender equality issues, and traditional gendered patterns are still widely accepted. Nevertheless, these rankings should be viewed with caution. Although Iceland receives

FIGURE 3.1  Participating

countries in international rankings on gender equality

(2017/2018) Sources: United Nations (2018), World Economic Forum (2018), Equal Measures 2030 (2019), OECD (2019). UN Gender Inequality Index (GII) and Social Institutions and Gender Index (SIGI) rankings are inverse to the other two rankings. Not all indexes were available for all countries.

32  Tim Rohrmann et al.

top rankings regarding gender equality, Thórdardottír and Lárusdottír (2016) found persisting gender stereotypes and low consciousness regarding gender equality among student teachers. Although Turkey receives low rankings in gender equality, it is known for high female participation in higher education compared to many European countries (Sağlamer et al., 2018). Strategies for more men in ECEC have been connected to gender equality goals (Brownhill, Warin, & Wernersson, 2015; Burn & Pratt-Adams, 2015; Rohrmann, 2020), and these factors are thought to yield significant benefits for young children. Accordingly, inclusion of more men in ECEC contributes to gender equality policies while challenging cultural stereotypes in favour of a more equitable society. However, countries with high investment in gender equality might differ substantially on gender issues in ECEC. Norway and Sweden, though similar in many aspects, have developed opposite approaches. In Norway, measures for more men were included in four subsequent action plans, and men in ECEC are now widely accepted (Peeters, Rohrmann, & Emilsen, 2015). In Sweden, strategies for gender equality downgraded the relevance of biological sex and thus the importance of male teachers. Suspicions of sexual abuse have become a prominent issue for Swedish preschool teachers (Bergström, Eidevald, & Westberg-Broström, 2016). Such problems have occurred elsewhere in differing magnitudes. In the US, the UK, and Australia fear of paedophilia is perceived as a major obstacle to increased male participation, whereas in Norway and Germany the phenomenon is less predominant (Rohrmann, 2014). In contrast, prevailing traditional gendered patterns in many non-Western countries influence male workers’ behaviour in the workplace, collegial and parental attitudes, and career trajectories. However, differences in gender norms and structural aspects of ECEC systems lead to varying outcomes. In Turkey men entering the ECE workforce are widely accepted, resulting in a relatively high share of male teachers compared to many Western countries (Sak et al., 2019). In China, some programs for more men in ECEC are connected to a discourse on ‘rebuilding Chinese men’s masculinities’ (Xu & Waniganayake, 2018, p. 518). On the other hand, it is assumed that male teachers can challenge gender stereotypes and may ‘facilitate changes in public understanding of ECEC and its gendered characteristics’ (p. 531). Moosa and Bhana (2017) report that in the context of hegemonic and often violent masculinities in South Africa, prevailing attitudes preclude men from caring roles with young children, and men trained in ECEC are often promoted to management positions. To summarise, a cross-cultural lens is necessary to understand gender stereotyped patterns, which may contribute to different ratios of male involvement in the ECEC workforce, as presented in the next section.

Few and not so few men in ECEC In most countries, male workers in ECEC are a small minority of not more than 3% of the workforce (OECD, 2018, p. 399). In some countries the number of men in the workforce has increased significantly in past decades. However, the proportions of male workers remain low because of the entire ECEC system expansion.

Cultural and institutional contexts  33

Figure  3.2 shows timelines of the proportion of male workers from the countries participating in this study. There is a definite increase in the proportion of male workers in the Nordic countries, Germany, Australia, and Turkey. This is more noticeable in totals, as in these countries the ECEC workforce increased rapidly during the past two decades. On the other hand, small fluctuations or even decreases of male workers are recorded in the UK, Ireland, and the US. In China, the proportion of male workers has remained more or less unchanged, although the absolute numbers of male workers have increased significantly due to the expansion of ECEC in general. The ECEC workforce comprises a diversity of professions and qualification levels, which is also relevant for workforce gender composition. For example, several countries report significantly more males in untrained positions. Institutional contexts also play an important role for men’s inclusion in the ECEC workforce. Primary schools and after-school care usually have a higher share of male workers compared to preschool education, whereas in infant care men are rare. Statistics from countries with ‘split’ systems reveal higher proportions of males with older

10% 9% 8% 7% 6% 5% 4% 3% 2% 1% 0%

China

Germany

Iceland

Ireland

Norway

Sweden

Turkey

United Kingdom

United States

FIGURE 3.2 Proportion

of male workers in ECEC staff in the participating countries over 20 years

Sources: National statistics of the participating countries, author’s analyses. The timelines do not represent similar ECEC professions and occupational fields for all countries due to different systems. For example, German statistics include after-school care, but not childminders; and UK data only comprise childcare. For Australia, Israel and South Africa, comparable timelines were unavailable.

34  Tim Rohrmann et al.

children in school-like contexts, whereas care for younger children remains femaledominated. Explanations include lower salaries in infant care and more societal acceptance of men working with older children (Aigner  & Rohrmann, 2012; Sak et al., 2019). In Australia, nearly 20% of after-school care workers are men, whereas day care centres for younger children are staffed primarily by women (The Social Research Centre, 2017). ‘Integrated’ systems as in Germany allow workers to switch between different age groups within the same institution, which might facilitate men entering the profession. Nonetheless, the effects of institutional systems on men’s participation has not yet been researched systematically in crosscountry comparisons. Another factor explaining different proportions of men in the workforce within countries is regional and centre based demographics (Rohrmann & Brody, 2015). In some regions the goal of 20% male workers has been accomplished, while others remain at less than 3%. In addition, men seem to be more attracted to centres where other men are already working. This results in centres with high proportions of male staff, while others in the same region lack male workers altogether. For example, in Germany, despite increases of male workers, more than two thirds of centres still have all-female teams (Koordinationsstelle, 2017). Analyses of diversity of vocational paths and professions in different countries are needed to draw conclusions about the relation between gender and qualification profiles. In a comparison of Turkey and Austria, Sak et  al. (2019) argue that the higher status of the academic preschool teacher training in Turkey could explain increased proportion of males, compared to the low status of secondary school training for ECEC workers in Austria. Such aspects are crucial for debates on policies to promote gender balance. Finally, there are huge differences between countries regarding governmental strategies and programmes for more involvement of men in ECEC. Three decades ago, the European Commission (1996) set a goal of 20% men in the ECEC workforce. But although European institutions continuously supported this goal, few countries developed national strategies, with Norway, Denmark, Germany, and Scotland implementing the most widespread and successful measures (Peeters et al., 2015; Warin, 2018). In the US, a wide variety of local programs were conducted (Nelson, Carlson, & West Sr, 2006; Cole, Plaisir, Reich-Shapiro, & Freitas, 2019), but no overarching strategy has been developed. In other countries, projects were conducted on regional levels, often with engaged individuals and/or grassroot initiatives as the driving force. On the other hand, in some countries represented in our research, male participation in ECEC has not been an issue of public debate, and grassroot initiatives do not exist or are not supported by relevant stakeholders.

Disparities in job retention: gender and culture Dropout from academic qualification as well as teacher turnover is a persistent problem in ECEC. This has been an issue of debate not only in research but also in policy making for some time. Retention rates have been related to ‘wages and

Cultural and institutional contexts  35

benefits, job satisfaction, organizational characteristics, alternative employment opportunities, demographic characteristics, job characteristics, and education and training’ (Totenhagen et al., 2016, p. 585; see also Grgic, 2019, Chapter 1). Failure to acknowledge ECEC workers’ professionalism and the persistent portrayal of ECEC workers as ‘substitute mothers’ or ‘babysitters’ negatively impacts on career identity. Many of these gender related factors have been discussed in research on men in ECEC (cf. Aigner & Rohrmann, 2012; Koch & Farquhar, 2015); however, sparse data is available on gender disparities in turnover and dropout rates. An informal query of researchers in this study revealed higher dropout rates of male students over females from teacher training programmes in some countries. In Norway and Sweden, rates of ‘early dropouts’ among males in teacher preparation programmes are about twice as high as those for females (Statistics Norway, 2019; Eidevald  & Engdahl, 2018). In Germany, Fuchs-Rechlin and Züchner (2018) report from a multi-variate longitudinal study that men more often leave the field compared to women. However, such results are often anecdotal, as there are no disaggregated statistical data available on worker’s sex/gender in related research. A high proportion of workplace turnover relates to life circumstances, including birth of children and family care (Thorpe et al., 2020; Whitebook et al., 2014). While relevant for many female workers, especially those with partners earning higher salaries (Aigner & Rohrmann, 2012), little empirical evidence on this topic relates to men. A common explanation for the relatively small proportion of male ECEC workers is low salary. A Chinese report indicates that many male ECEC teachers left the field soon after graduation, citing low salaries as a reason (Global Times, 2016). However, no empirical evidence has clearly verified salary as a major factor for dropout of men; on the contrary, Aigner and Rohrmann (2012) claim that not all men see low salaries as a critical problem. Regarding gender differences in job satisfaction, research evidence is varied. Some studies report high job satisfaction for men and women, and even higher in gender-mixed teams (Aigner  & Rohrmann, 2012; Rohrmann, 2015; Rolfe, 2005). But this could result from a selection process, as only men who are willing to adapt to the ‘feminised’ workplace environment might stay in the field. Sobiraj et al. (2011) found heightened depressive moods and lower job satisfaction among men with female colleagues who held traditional attitudes towards the male role. A Turkish study reports more organizational cynicism and lower job satisfaction among male teachers compared to their female counterparts (Sak, 2018). This dissatisfaction may lead to men’s decision to leave ECEC as they become aware of job possibilities in other sectors. Parental non-acceptance of men in ECEC has been attributed to high dropout rates among men. Sak, Rohrmann, Şahin Sak, & Schauer (2019) address parental attitudes in Turkey and Austria. An overwhelming majority of Austrian parents appreciated men taking care of their children, whereas nearly a quarter of Turkish parents expressed scepticism. Furthermore, Austrian parents agreed that men and women should be equally responsible for all tasks in kindergarten. In contrast, a majority of Turkish parents agreed that men ‘should especially focus on

36  Tim Rohrmann et al.

handicrafts, physical education, and sports’ and ‘should be responsible for financial issues and administrative tasks’ (p. 76). Religious beliefs can strongly influence attitudes towards gender roles in ECEC. In some Islamic countries, assignment of childcare to women relates to traditional religious beliefs. In Indonesia the system of kodrat defines what is ‘natural’ for each gender, and men’s task involves keeping children on track regarding distinct gender roles (Warin, Hellman, & Adriany, 2016; Yulindrasari, 2016). An extreme example is the closed Jewish Ultra-Orthodox society in Israel and other countries, in which children are gender segregated in ECEC from age 3, with the boys taught only by men and girls by women. Men’s roles include care and educational responsibilities; however, the male melamdim (teachers) understand their task primarily to teach reading skills (Manzura, 2010). These men typically have no training and acquire skills from mentors and in-service work. The relevance of an intersectional approach to gender, race, and cultural identities is also highlighted in several projects in the US. As gender and racially based disparities are the most visible social markers among ECEC workers, research has focused on the intersection between these two aspects. According to a U.S. Department of Education report (2016), 80% of public-school educators were White, while Black and other ethnicities account for the remaining 20%. This disparate representation leads some researchers to recommend proactive recruitment of a diversified workforce as necessary to achieve significant change (Hermann, 2018; Plaisir, Cole, & Reich-Shapiro, 2019). In the context of very high dropout rates from school among boys from ethnic minorities, some authors call for the need of male teachers representing culturally relevant backgrounds (Bryan  & Milton Williams, 2017; Dancy, 2014). Put simply, children from minority communities in general and Black and Latinx males in particular are in dire need of seeing themselves reflected in the ECEC professionals with whom they spend much of their time as young children (Cole et al., 2019).

Conclusion Some evidence exists for higher dropout rates among males in qualification, and some cues indicate a similar phenomenon for workplace turnover as well. However, more research is needed to examine these claims, which often derive from insider knowledge and personal communication. Giving consideration to persistent gendered patterns, reasons for dropout vary and these explanations need to be understood in the context of individual as well as societal factors, including specific conditions of ECEC work in different cultural contexts. Research on men in ECEC tends to generalise assumptions about the role of gender on men’s experiences in the workplace, highlighting for example low salaries or the minority status of men. In contrast, Wohlgemuth (2015) has shown that men’s motives for studying social and educational professions are highly individual and often related to specific life experiences.

Cultural and institutional contexts  37

A cultural perspective on diversity between and within countries and a look at specific national and regional factors is crucial for understanding the processes of men leaving or persisting in ECEC. This contextualization is pertinent for countering the tendency to attribute behaviour of men and women to seemingly ‘natural’ gender differences, which is quite common in public discourses on men in ECEC. The current research provides an in-depth analysis to understand the connections between men’s career trajectories in ECEC and the specifics of ECEC systems worldwide and cultures that surround them.

References Aigner, J. C., & Rohrmann, T. (Eds.). (2012). Elementar: Männer in der pädagogischen Arbeit mit Kindern [Elementary: Men in educational work with children]. Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Al-Yagon, M., Aram, D., & Margalit, M. (2016). Early childhood inclusion in Israel. Infants & Young Children, 29(3), 205–213. https://doi.org/10.1097/IYC.0000000000000063 Bergström,  H., Eidevald,  C.,  & Westberg-Broström,  A. (2016). Child sexual abuse at preschools – a research review of a complex issue for preschool professionals. Early Child Development and Care, 186(9), 1520–1528. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2015.1121253 Brownhill, S., Warin, J., & Wernersson, I. (Eds.). (2015). Men, masculinities and teaching in early childhood education: International perspectives on gender and care. London: Routledge. Bryan, N., & Milton Williams, T. (2017). We need more than just male bodies in classrooms: Recruiting and retaining culturally relevant Black male teachers in early childhood education. Journal of Early Childhood Teacher Education, 38(3), 209–222. https://doi.org/10.1 080/10901027.2017.1346529 Burn, E., & Pratt-Adams, S. (2015). Men teaching children 3–11: Dismantling gender barriers. London: Bloomsbury. Cole, K., Plaisir, J. Y., Reich-Shapiro, M., & Freitas, A. (2019). Building a gender-balanced workforce: Supporting male teachers. Young Children, 74(4), 39–45. Dancy II,  T. E. (2014). Theorizing manhood: Theorizing manhood Black male identity constructions in the education pipeline. In F. A. Bonner (Ed.), Building on resilience: Models and frameworks of Black males’ success across the P-20 pipeline (pp. 140–158). Sterling, VA: Stylus. Department for Education. (2017). Childcare and early years providers survey: 2016. London. Retrieved from www.gov.uk/government/statistics/childcare-and-early-years-providerssurvey-2016 Eidevald, C., & Engdahl, I. (2018). Utbildning och undervisning i förskolan – omsorgsfullt och lekfullt stöd för lärande och utveckling [Education and teaching in preschool – Careful and playful support for learning and development]. Stockholm: Liber. Equal Measures 2030. (2019). Harnessing the power of data for gender equality: Introducing the 2019 EM2030 SDG gender index. Woking. Retrieved from www.equalmeasures2030. org/products/global-report-2019/ European Commission/EACEA/Eurydice/Eurostat. (2019). Key data on early childhood education and care in Europe, 2019 edition: Eurydice and Eurostat report. Luxembourg. Retrieved from https://eacea.ec.europa.eu/erasmus-plus/news/key_data_on_early_childhood_edu cation_and_care_in_europe_2019_en European Commission Network on Childcare. (1996). Quality targets in services for young children. Retrieved from www.childcarecanada.org/sites/default/files/Qualitypaperthree.pdf

38  Tim Rohrmann et al.

Fuchs-Rechlin,  K.,  & Züchner,  I. (Eds.). (2018). Was kommt nach dem Berufsstart? [What comes after career start?] WiFF Studien, Band 27. München. Retrieved from www.weiter bildungsinitiative.de/uploads/media/WEB_St_27_Fuchs-Rechlin.pdf Global Times. (2016). Free teacher training program for men labeled gender discrimination. Retrieved from www.globaltimes.cn/content/1008547.shtml Grgic, M. (2019). Gekommen, um (nicht) zu bleiben: Viele Kita-Fachkräfte verlassen ihr Arbeitsfeld in den ersten zehn Jahren nach dem Berufseinstieg wieder [Came (not) to stay. Many ECEC practitioners leave the field within the first ten years]. DJI Impulse, 1(121), 30–33. Retrieved from www.dji.de/fileadmin/user_upload/bulletin/d_bull_d/ bull121_d/DJI_1_19_Web.pdf Hermann, Z. (2018). Rethinking teacher recruitment. Educational Leadership, 75(8), 18–23. Koch, B., & Farquhar, S. (2015). Breaking through the glass doors: Men working in early childhood education and care with particular reference to research and experience in Austria and New Zealand. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 380–391. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043812 Koordinationsstelle “Männer in Kitas”. (2017). Neue Erkenntnisse zum Männeranteil auf Einrichtungsebene  – Männliche Erzieher in jeder vierten Kita [New findings about the proportion of men on centre level – male educators in one of four centres]. Retrieved from https://mika. koordination-maennerinkitas.de/forschung/maenneranteil-einrichtungen/ Manzura, S. (2010). Ritual and text in the context of holiness: Ways of establishing gender identity of boys and girls ages two to five in ultra-orthodox preschools (Unpublished doctoral dissertation), Hebrew University, Jerusalem. Moosa, S., & Bhana, D. (2017). Men managing, not teaching foundation phase: Teachers, masculinity and the early years of primary schooling. Educational Review, 69(3), 366–387. https://doi.org/10.1080/00131911.2016.1223607 Nelson, B. G., Carlson, F. M., & West Sr, R. (2006). Men in early childhood: An update. YC Young Children, 61(5), 34. Nelson, B. G., & Sheppard, B. (Eds.). (1992). Men in child care and education: A handbook for administrators and educators. Minneapolis: Men in Childcare Project. OECD. (2018). Education at a glance 2018: OECD indicators. Paris: OECD Publishing. https://doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en OECD. (2019). SIGI 2019 global report: Transforming challenges into opportunities. Paris: OECD Publishing, Social Institutions and Gender Index. https://doi.org/10.1787/bc56d212-en Peeters, J., Rohrmann, T., & Emilsen, K. (2015). Gender balance in ECEC: Why is there so little progress? European Early Childhood Research Journal, 23(3), 302–314. https://doi. org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043805 Plaisir, J., Cole, K.,  & Reich-Shapiro, M. (2019). Examining intrinsic and extrinsic factors impacting men’s decisions to teach young children: Executive summary. New York. Retrieved from www.bmcc.cuny.edu/wp-content/uploads/2019/10/BMCCPlaisiretalExecutive Summary2019.pdf Rohrmann, T. (2014). Männer in Kitas: Zwischen Idealisierung und Verdächtigung. [Men in ECEC: Between idealisation and suspicion]. In J. Budde, C. Thon, & K. Walgenbach (Eds.), Jahrbuch Frauen- und Geschlechterforschung in der Erziehungswissenschaft: Vol. 10. Männlichkeiten: Geschlechterkonstruktionen in pädagogischen Institutionen [Yearbook for research on women and gender in the educational sciences, vol. 10. Masculinities: Gender constructions in educational institutions] (pp. 67–84). Opladen: Barbara Budrich. Rohrmann, T. (2015). Männer in der Elementarpädagogik: Ein internationales Thema [Men in early education: An international issue]. In J. C. Aigner & G. Poscheschnik (Eds.), Kinder brauchen Männer: Psychoanalytische, sozialpädagogische und erziehungswissenschaftliche

Cultural and institutional contexts  39

Perspektiven [Children need men: Perspectives from psychoanalysis, social pedagogy, and educational sciences] (pp. 37–59). Gießen: Psychosozial-Verlag. Rohrmann, T. (2020). Men as promoters of change in ECEC? An international overview. Early Years, 40(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2019.1626807 Rohrmann,  T.,  & Brody,  D. (2015). Questioning methodologies in research on men in ECEC. European Early Childhood Research Journal, 23(3), 405–416. https://doi.org/10.1 080/1350293X.2015.1043814 Rolfe, H. (2005). Men in childcare. EOC Report No. 35. Manchester: Equal Opportunities Commission. Retrieved from www.eoc.org.uk/cseng/research/meninchildcarewp35 fullreport.pdf Sağlamer, G., Tan, M. G., Çebi, P. D., Çağlayan, H., Gümüşoğlu, N. K., Poyraz, B., & Kahraman, S. Ö. (2018). Gendered patterns of higher education in Turkey: Advances and challenges. Women’s Studies International Forum, 66, 33–47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j. wsif.2017.11.002 Sak, R. (2018). Gender differences in Turkish early childhood teachers’ job satisfaction, job burnout and organizational cynicism. Early Childhood Education Journal, 46(6), 643–653. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10643-018-0895-9 Sak,  R., Rohrmann,  T., Şahin Sak,  İ. T.,  & Schauer,  G. (2019). Parents’ views on male ECEC workers: A cross-country comparison. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 1, 1–13. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2018.1556535 Sak, R., Şahin Sak, İ. T., & Yerlikaya, İ. (2015). Behavior management strategies: Beliefs and practices of male and female early childhood teachers. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 328–339. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043807 Sobiraj, S., Korek, S., Weseler, D., & Mohr, G. (2011). When male norms don’t fit: Do traditional attitudes of female colleagues challenge men in non-traditional occupations? Sex Roles, 65(11), 798–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0057-7 The Social Research Centre. (2017). 2016 early childhood education and care national workforce census. Melbourne. Retrieved from https://docs.education.gov.au/system/files/doc/ other/2016_ecec_nwc_national_report_sep_2017_0.docx Statistics Norway. (2019). Retrieved from www.ssb.no/statbank/table/09045/#tablequery control Thórdardottír, T., & Lárusdottír, S. H. (2016). “The day the gender system collapses will be a good day”: Students’ memories of being girls or boys. Icelandic Journal of Education, 25(1), 129–147. Thorpe, K., K., Jansen, E., Sullivan, V., Irvine, S.,  & Macdonald, P. (2020). Identifying predictors of retention and professional wellbeing of the early childhood education workforce in a time of change. Journal of Educational Change, https://doi.org/10.1007/ S10833-020-09382-3 Totenhagen,  C. J., Hawkins,  S. A., Casper,  D. M., Bosch,  L. A., Hawkey,  K. R.,  & Borden,  L. M. (2016). Retaining early childhood education workers: A  Review of the empirical literature. Journal of Research in Childhood Education, 30(4), 585–599. https:// doi.org/10.1080/02568543.2016.1214652 United Nations Development Programme. (2018). Gender inequality index 2017. Human Development Reports. Retrieved from http://hdr.undp.org/en/content/gender-inequalityindex-gii Urban, M., Vandenbroeck, M., Peeters, J., Lazzari, A., & van Laere, K. (2011). Competence requirements in early childhood education and care: CoRe research documents. Brussels: NESSE. U.S. Department of Education, Office of Planning, Evaluation and Policy Development, & Policy and Program Studies Service. (2016). The state of racial diversity in the educator

40  Tim Rohrmann et al.

workforce. Retrieved from https://www2.ed.gov/rschstat/eval/highered/racial-diversity/ state-racial-diversity-workforce.pdf Warin, J. (2018). Men in early childhood education and care: Gender balance and flexibility. Cham: Palgrave Macmillan. Warin, J., Hellman, A., & Adriany, V. (2016, September). Conversation with male teacher trainees in ECE: A case study from Indonesia. Paper presented at EECERA Annual Conference, Dublin, Ireland. Retrieved from http://www.siggender.eu/forschung/2016_annualconf/ Warin_Hellman_Adriany_EECERA_2016.pdf Whitebook, M., Phillips, D., & Howes, C. (2014). Worthy work, STILL unlivable wages: The early childhood workforce 25  years after the national child care staffing study. Berkeley, CA.: Center for the Study of Child Care Employment. Retrieved from http://cscce.berkeley. edu/files/2014/ReportFINAL.pdf Wohlgemuth, U. G. (2015). Why do men choose to become social educators? A profession continuously in pursuit of male colleagues. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 392–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043813 World Economic Forum. (2018). The global gender gap report 2018. Retrieved from http:// www3.weforum.org/docs/WEF_GGGR_2018.pdf Xu, Y., & Waniganayake, M. (2018). An exploratory study of gender and male teachers in early childhood education and care centres in China. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education, 48(4), 518–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1 318355 Yulindrasari, H. (2016). Male teachers in Indonesian ECE. Retrieved from www.childresearch. net/projects/ecec/2016_01.html

PART 2

Factors that influence men’s career decisions

4 RESEARCHING MEN’S CAREER TRAJECTORIES IN ECEC A cross-cultural inter-researcher approach Yuwei Xu, Jo Warin, Karen Thorpe, and Tim Rohrmann

Introduction As discussed in previous chapters, men’s participation in ECEC has attracted international debates around whether more men are needed to work in the field (Warin, 2019; Rohrmann, 2020). On the one hand, we challenge arguments restricting men’s contributions to ECEC as ‘different’ and ‘complementary’ to the work of women, and we seek to disrupt essentialist conceptions of gender that perpetuate (Warin, 2019; Xu, 2018). On the other hand, we agree that men (together with women and others) who contribute to gender-mixed teams promote gender diversity and equality in ECEC and the wider society (Rohrmann). In the global context of the shortage of men working in ECEC (see Chapter  3), the current cross-cultural study explores strategies that will attract and retain men. Our study addresses three questions: • • •

Why do some men drop out from working in ECEC in the 12 researched countries? Why do other men in the countries persist in their ECEC careers? How does gender inform and shape men’s career decisions in ECEC?

As an interdisciplinary research team, we investigated the career trajectories of men in and out of ECEC in cross-cultural collaboration. Developing and sustaining such collaboration is a challenging process. Examples for collaborative cross-cultural research in the field of ECEC are scarce, and few studies ‘actually illustrate methodological details and challenges faced by early childhood researchers’ (Akpovo, Moran, & Brookshire, 2018, p. 19). In this chapter, we focus on descriptions and analyses of our methodological approaches, including research methods, sampling and participants, data collection and analysis, and ethical considerations. Subsequently, we

44  Yuwei Xu et al.

reflect upon the challenge of balancing analytic rigour with an inclusive collaborative approach across this unusually large research team. Drawing on the concept of researcher reflexivity, we examine and ‘compare’ the intersections between the researchers’ self-positionings and reflections from the researched participants in a global discourse on men’s scarcity in ECEC. We conclude by arguing that the methodological approaches employed in this study can inform potential approaches to a ‘globalised’ agenda in attracting and retaining more men in ECEC.

Methodological framework Informed by the theoretical positionings of this study that situate individuals’ experiences in the dynamic interactions of gender discourses at micro, meso, and macro levels (see Chapter 2), we adopted an interpretivist approach to understand men’s career trajectories and decisions from their own perspectives, which are also interpreted and reported by the researchers. We acknowledge the fluidity and multiplicity of interpretations from both the researchers and the researched (O’Connor, 2001). Therefore, the interpretivist subjectivities of the participants and researchers in this study are regarded as culturally and socially constructed, shaped, and constrained by different contexts and purposes (Xu, 2018). We have already depicted relevant cultural and societal contexts in the researched countries in Chapter  3. We are aware that ‘the participants’ interpretations were constructed in the specific contexts during the research process, subject to possible changes if for example, conducted at a different time, by a different researcher, or in a different environment’ (Xu, p. 75). We further reflect on how the researchers’ own personal identities and subjectivities, professional career trajectories, and positions within the cultural and socio-political contexts of their own countries, influence the data collection and analysis (see later: CCRC: process, rationale, and outcomes). On the whole, our interpretivist approach aimed to produce insights about the coconstructed nature of the research process in this study. A qualitative, narrative approach was adopted in response to interpretivism, for the purpose of cultural understandings, perceptions, and constructions of men’s subjective positionings in ECEC (Berg & Lune, 2012). There is a further comparative dimension when researchers from 12 countries collaborate to gain reflexive insights into similarities and differences between national contexts. Rohrmann and Brody (2015) point out that cross-cultural understandings of gender issues in ECEC are promising in addressing intellectual gaps, and Phillips and Schweisfurth (2014) suggest that comparative study provides alternative and/or various practices and possibilities of an education phenomenon – which, in this context, is retaining men in ECEC. However, as we only conducted three case studies in each country, we are aware that they are not ‘representative’ of the cultures or the issues of gender imbalance in ECEC. Our intention is to understand how those men situate themselves in the wider social and cultural context regarding their career trajectories in ECEC, with the aim of shedding light on why men drop out from working in ECEC globally, as well as understanding how men can be encouraged and supported when working in ECEC.

Men’s career trajectories in ECEC  45

Mutua and Swadener (2018) problematise the dominance of English language and of Western academy in educational research and call for creative ways of using cross-cultural collaboration. We are aware that there is a potential ‘dominance’ of Western discourses among our 12 researched countries/contexts, with only two countries located in the Global South (China and South Africa). Whilst the balance of those who are native English speakers and those for whom English is not their first language are roughly even within the team, the use of English as our universal working language also implies such dominance. We acknowledge that our interpretations may be limited by this dominance (Andrew et al., 2018), and our claims of being an ‘international’ study are compromised. However, we endeavoured to complement the limitation through our culturally sensitive and reflexive approaches.

Research methods A three-part data collection protocol including narrative interview, semi-structured interview, and a graphic storyline procedure was followed to achieve our aims (see Appendix A). The narrative interview documents the man’s understanding of his career, as he chose to tell it. This allows participants to combine their life stories with sociohistorical contexts and to express changes in their beliefs and values that motivate and justify their career decisions (Muylaert, Sarubbi, Gallo, Neto, & Reis, 2014). The semi-structured interview allows researchers to ask for clarifications, explanations, and elaborations on aspects of the narrative that were unclear (Traha & Yu, 2015). It also involves a flexible protocol for researchers to ask the interviewees about their work experiences in ECEC, including aspects like work conditions, relationships with colleagues and children, training and support, and understandings of gender. The interview questions were adapted by each researcher according to participants’ profiles. Finally, the participants drew a storyline to represent critical moments in their career path, on horizontal and vertical axes (Brody & Hadar, 2017). On the horizontal axis, participants indicated self-evaluations of significant experiences and events in their professional development. The vertical axis highlighted positive and negative emotional feelings when participants lived through their career trajectories, with higher points representing positive events. Critical moments in the career path are noted at nodes, where the line might change direction. The storyline complements the narratives and interviews as we gain a thorough picture of those men’s journeys (Rounsevell & Metzger, 2010). Figure 4.1 is a sample storyline by a German participant who dropped out of the ECEC workforce. His career trajectory in ECEC is represented by a nonlinear pathway with several ups and downs.

Sampling and participants Using these three tools, we collected data from three participants in each country: a persister – a man who chose to remain working in ECEC for at least five years, and two dropouts from the profession: one from qualification studies and one from the workplace (see Chapter 1 for a detailed explanation of these terms). Snowball

Positive and negative feelings about those events

46  Yuwei Xu et al.

Began ECEC studies Engineering studies

Gymnasium

Cancelled studies

Cancelled studies

Began breeding fish

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 4.1

Example storyline (Andreas, Germany, dropout from qualification studies)

sampling was used to recruit participants through the researchers’ networks in the twelve countries. In total, there are 37 participants: 13 persisters and 24 dropouts. Table  4.1 summarises the participants’ demographic profiles. The group of participants represents broad diversity of age, ethnicity, educational background, and working experiences across countries. The majority of our participants worked in private or public ECEC institutions, with a few exceptions who dropped out from their studies and never entered the field. At the time of the interviews, occupations of the dropouts ranged from house painting, drum teacher, hardware store clerk, restaurant manager, truck driver, fish breeder to musician, bartender, broadcaster, and carpenter. Although not listed in Table  4.1, some of those occupations are discussed in the ensuing chapters where relevant.

Data collection and analysis The data was collected from the 12 countries by 17 researchers (Table 4.2) either in a shared capacity (if there was more than one researcher in that country) or individually (if he/she was the only one from his/her country). All interviews were recorded and transcribed with participants’ permissions. Where data was collected in a language other than English, it was translated/checked by either the researchers or professional services. We believe that the researchers’ familiarity with their mother tongues and their professional and academic experiences in ECEC contributed to the reduction of the cross-language impact on this research (Twinn, 1997). Rigorous attention was paid to capture cultural sensitivity in the languages used. To illustrate, specific notes and explanations were given to words and sentences that

Men’s career trajectories in ECEC  47 TABLE 4.1 Participants’ demographic information Country

Participant (pseudonym)

Age

Category1

Ethnicity/Race

Years of working experiences/ studies in ECEC

Australia

Andrew Josh Herbert Anakin

31 49 25 42

DW1 DW3 P DW3

White White White White

China

Yu Jun Liang

23 42 34

DW1 DQMA P

Chinese Chinese Chinese

England

Ollie Alex

34 n/a

DW2 P

White White

12 5

Germany

Bernd Andreas Matthias

32 29 38

DW3 DQBA P

White White White

3 1 7

Iceland

Kevin Paul Albert

39 50 42

DQBA DQBA P

White White White

6 5 18

Ireland

Ross Patrick Dylan

27 36 31

DW4 DQ P

White White White

4 4 8

Israel

Assaf Tzvika Amos

44 65 47

DW1 DW4 P

Iraqi origins White American Ashkenazi origins

6 22 12

Norway

Nils Norbert Nicolai

38 45 26

DW3 P DQBA

White White White

8 19 0

South Africa

Senzo Thabo Riaan

28 25 29

DQBA DW3 P

Black African Black African South African Indian

Sweden

Tom Sven Anders

37 28 n/a

DW1 DQBA P

Chilian origin White White

10 0 38

Turkey

Mehmet Orhan Cem Ali

42 38 42 30

P DW3 DW3 DQ

White White White White

19 14 8 0

USA

Joel Marcos Ted

23 47 30

DQ P P

Black/Haitian-American Latinx/Puerto Rican White/Anglo American

3 10 8

1 2 5 13 10

6 months 4 years study2 5

1 The following categories are used: DQ course: dropout of paraprofessional course; DQBA: dropout during or after BA or B.Ed program; DQMA: dropout during or after MA or M.Ed program; DW1: dropout from work as assistant with no qualifications; DW2: dropout from work as an assistant or teacher after basic course; DW3: dropout from work as a teacher or leader after BA or B.Ed; DW4: dropout from work as a teacher or leader after MA or M.Ed; P: persister. 2 Completed four-year degree in ECEC and began working in grade 7.

Australia

Karen Thor pe

1

Early Childhood Education

M

İkbal Tuba Şahin Sak Ramazan Sak

F

M

Ger many

3

Turkey

F

Iceland

Thordis Thordardottir Markus Andrä

Tim Rohr mann

Sociology of Gender and Early Childhood Education and care Early Childhood Education and Education Studies Social Work Sciences, Early Childhood Education Psychology, Educational Sciences Early Childhood Education

M

China

Yuwei Xu

2

Developmental and Educational Psychology, Education Politics, Philosophy, Developmental and Educational Psychology Sociology and Psychology of Education, Gender Studies

F

UK

Discipline

Gender

Jo War in

Victor ia Sullivan

Country

Researcher

Subgroup

TABLE 4.2 List of researchers by sub-g roups

Associate Professor in ECE, Head of ECE Department

Professor for Social Work Sciences at a University of Applied Sciences Professor of Early Childhood Education and Care Associate Professor in ECE

Associate Professor Education Studies

Reader in Gender and Social Relations, Director of Doctoral Programme in Social Justice in Education University Researcher in Early Childhood Education and Care

PhD Candidate

Deputy Director (Research), The Institute for Social Science Research

Professional Background

No

No

No

No

No

No

Yes

Yes

Yes

English as first Language

48 Yuwei Xu et al.

6

5

4

Jean-Yves Plaisir Birg itte Ljunggren Kar i Emilsen

Yarden Kedar

USA Norway

South Afr ica Israel

Sweden

Chr istian Eidevald

Deevia Bhana David Brody

Ireland

Joanne McHale

M F

F M

M

F

Developmental Psychology, ECE Teacher Education Sociology and Gender Studies Early Childhood Education and Care

Early Childhood Education and Care Early Childhood Education and Care Gender and Education Early Childhood Education

Professor ECE Associate Professor of Social Science Professor of Social Science

Lecturer in Early Childhood Education and Care, TU Dublin Associate Professor in ECEC, Director of Development for ECEC in municipality Research Chair and Professor For mer ECEC Department Chair, Academic Dean Head of ECE Department Yes No No

No

Yes Yes

No

Yes

Men’s career trajectories in ECEC  49

50  Yuwei Xu et al.

are deemed to be context-specific and may possibly impact on the analysis and presentation of findings (Xu, 2018). The data produced was analysed using a distinctive cross-cultural inter-researcher approach, following four stages: Stage 1: Researchers were organised in groups of two or three and mixed by country forming six researcher groups to develop initial coding lists (Table 4.2). A hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development was used to identify key themes (Braun & Clarke, 2006; Fereday & Muir-Cochrane, 2006) from data in both the researchers’ own country and the paired-up country. Stage 2: An agreed coding list from each group was forwarded to a coding committee with representatives from each group. The committee worked to synthesise all coding lists into one, which was sent to all team members for review. Stage 3: A  final coding list was produced after discussions and negotiations among all team members (see Appendix B). This process involved particularly difficult ‘letting go’ of codes with the amount of cross-cultural data and the number of international researchers involved. Stage 4: Researchers used the agreed coding list to analyse their data. ATLAS. ti software was used to conduct the analysis and to manage the large amount of data. Most of the researchers were experienced in qualitative analysis but we also adopted a checklist of guidance points based on Huberman and Miles (1994). This final data analysis stage was also accompanied by a co-constructed researcher check (CCRC) process through which interpretations of data and productions of codes were ‘validated’, adding to the trustworthiness of our findings. A CCRC report was produced from each CCRC group and the implications of the process will be discussed in the section CCRC: process, rationale, and outcomes of this chapter. Cross-cultural comparisons and analyses were conducted throughout the coding and analysis processes, noting different or similar discourses that shape men’s career trajectories in ECEC. The comparisons and analyses are particularly guided by theories of gender, in order to understand how gender discourses at micro, meso, and macro levels influence different men’s experiences. Through the crosscultural inter-researcher approach of data analysis, we confidently argue that our study achieves a high level of cultural sensitivity when reporting findings from the twelve countries.

Ethical considerations Our study follows universal ethical standards with references to the EECERA Ethical Code for Early Childhood Researchers (2015). The study gained its primary ethical approval from the Efrata College of Education, Jerusalem, Israel, where our

Men’s career trajectories in ECEC  51

principal investigator is based. Additional ethical approval policies were followed in other collaborative countries, and ethical approval letters were granted by the UK and South African affiliated institutions. Informed consent was gained from all participants prior to data collection, and confidentiality is assured throughout the research. All participants’ names are anonymised and replaced by pseudonyms, and all identifying features such as name of city and institution are suppressed in both the data manuscripts and all publications. Having provided an overall picture of our cross-cultural inter-researcher approach to investigating men’s career trajectories in ECEC, the following section offers an in-depth discussion and reflections on our large international collaboration and the role of subjectivity for cross-cultural research on gender issues in ECEC.

Researcher reflexivity A reflective approach to the research process is widely accepted in qualitative research. Rohrmann and Brody (2015) discussed the role of researcher bias in gender balance research. This is especially relevant in an international research project, regarding the wide diversity of legal frameworks, societal conditions, and individual attitudes related to gender issues. Although our research focused on the topic of male ECEC workers and dropouts, it was at the same time a fascinating opportunity to examine collaboration of men and women researchers with a variety of cultural backgrounds and different approaches to ‘gender’. Our reflections were conducted at three levels, including individual (through reflective journals), smallgroup (through CCRC and collaborative writing of the chapters), and wholeproject-team (through team meetings).

Reflective journals Personal narratives facilitate introspection and make researchers’ reflexivity visible in the research process. We used individual reflexive journals for documenting personal reflections. Each researcher created a personal document that included impressions, thoughts, and reflections at each stage of the project: data collection, transcription/translation, data analysis, and especially teamwork. The journals captured issues arising in the course of the project, including critical thoughts and feelings regarding work with colleagues. Researchers then selected sections of their journals for analysis, with anonymity assured. Sometimes confiding personal notes to another member of the research team was challenging. As one researcher put it: ‘Maybe I’m feeling a little out of my comfort zone and exposed! I actually enjoyed doing the reflection, but I’m struggling to let it go and hand it over!’ This quote indicates the importance of building trust among members of the team. The reflections clearly show the relevance of cultural and institutional diversity between countries. One researcher notes the problem of understanding data from so many countries by stating: ‘It is difficult to analyse the material as a whole’. The

52  Yuwei Xu et al.

reflective journals also noted the relevance of different languages in the research project. Non-English-speaking researchers indicated frustration that English speakers were spared the difficult process of translating their interviews. However, even English-speaking colleagues struggled with local dialects, and foreign colleagues found it difficult to understand ‘English slang words’ that were not translated. Some of the reflections highlight the personal involvement of researchers when working together on gender issues. For example, while discussing ideas for the final chapter, suddenly two of our colleagues start to talk about their own childhood experiences with playful ECEC teachers who impressed them. As gender is so much connected to ourselves as men and women, personal experiences come in when we are talking about research results, methodologies, writing. Researchers also report being touched by the stories of their interviewees: ‘When I transcribed and translated the interviews, I realised how vulnerable you are as a man in preschool, in some situations’. On the other hand, socio-economic developments in ECEC became more prominent for some researchers, which was related to personal engagement in such debates. As the analysis of contributions shows, many researchers were very conscious of how their personal attitudes and experiences and their position in the group might contribute to ‘contamination’ or ‘co-construction’ of their data. Subsequently, written individual reflections were important stepping stones for further reflections on relevant issues both in small groups and in the whole team.

CCRC: process, rationale, and outcomes The term ‘co-constructed researcher check’, quite a mouthful and referred to by its acronym CCRC, was devised to provide an extra dimension of validation and trustworthiness for our interpretations of the data and production of codes. The ‘co-constructed’ element of this term is significant because it underlines our collaborative relationship as a team and also affirms our methodological ontological approach as interpretive researchers. This was not a process of checking for ‘interrater reliability’, a concept that is familiar in positivist research where it suggests the possibility of a neatly bounded and finite outcome. On the contrary, it provided an accurate representation of the messy process of a negotiated interpretation. The end result provided a richer and more ‘adequate’ interpretation (Fay, 1996) of the data than one produced by a sole researcher. We articulate the purpose of the CCRC as follows: We are interested in uncovering and identifying different perspectives on the data. The strength of our collaborative process lies in gaining understanding of co-researchers’ perspectives. We are interested in bringing to the fore differences in interpretation in the coding process among researchers because this helps us to identify our own biases and blind spots. By revealing those factors that limit our understandings, we can become more creative and open to see and appreciate others’ perspectives.

Men’s career trajectories in ECEC  53

Each researcher identified approximately 25% of a transcript for the CCRC process. The CCRC teams were the same as those used for developing the initial coding, and we again used ATLAS.ti software and the same set of coding themes. We viewed the selected chunk of the transcript ‘blind’ to the allocation of codes produced by our CCRC partners. For example, within the Australian/UK CCRC team (Sullivan, Thorpe, & Warin) the Australian partners (Sullivan and Thorpe) coded a chunk of the transcript from Alex, a UK participant. Meanwhile, the UK partner (Warin) coded a chunk of transcript from the interview with Anakin, an Australian participant. Our respective coding work was then swapped and discussed in an online meeting resulting in completion of the team CCRC report form here: TABLE 4.3 Co-constructed researcher check (CCRC) report form

Differences/similarities in interpretation Types of differences/similarities

Improved/enriched interpretations

Give 1 or 2 examples

Whilst CCRC reports noted some inevitable differences in coding behaviours such as variation in the size of excerpts selected for a code, our discussions focused on the all-important business of variation in interpretation revealed by the allocation of different coding themes. Interestingly and surprisingly, teams noted more consistency in coding choices than they were expecting. This may mean that our teamwork on code definitions had developed a solid shared understanding. Coding consistency proved to be quite strong at the main level of each code although there was greater variation for sub-codes. For example, in the Irish/Swedish team both coders used C4 ‘Workplace Environment: Institutional Culture’ for the following excerpt from Swedish participant Tom: It was tough to watch. It hurt, because they were such good people. They were my idols. It was the same with the salary; they were treated so poorly. But even though they were underpaid and treated poorly by the decision makers in society, they were still so happy. They were strong and did incredibly good work. However, the Swedish partner (Eidevald) used the sub code C6 ‘work compensation’ and the Irish partner (McHale) assigned C5 ‘distribution of work’. Following negotiation, this team believed that the Swedish partner’s richer understanding of the Swedish context gave greater reliability to his selection of the sub-code. Indeed, there was recognition in many of the teams that the interviewer had a more

54  Yuwei Xu et al.

adequate and informed insight into contextual influences on the data compared with the partial knowledge of the coding partner and that their interpretation might therefore be considered more trustworthy. In some teams however, the fresh ‘outsider’ insights of the coding partner brought about a richer understanding as the partners reached a synthesis of their interpretation. For example, in the Israel/ South Africa team (Brody and Bhana) one party allocated the code ‘self-reflection’ whilst the other used ‘professional development’ for the same excerpt from Riaan’s (persister, South Africa) interview. Following a re-reading and discussion Bhana believed she had missed the ‘self-reflection’ aspect and Brody recognised a greater emphasis on external support than he had originally noticed. So, the consequent co-constructed understanding of the relevant excerpt was a fuller, and more adequate one. Elsewhere the process produced a recognition that cultural and political contexts influenced a disparity in interpretations. For example, in the Norwegian/ American team (Emilsen, Lundgren, & Plaisir) the researchers developed an awareness of different cultural understandings and policies about ‘safeguarding’ children. A similar debate about the relative values of insider and outsider knowledge of national contexts can be found in Andrew et al. (2018). A by-product of the CCRC was that each researcher enhanced their awareness of their own biases and subjectivities and gained insights into the wider cultural and political influences within their national ECEC context. Clearly this form of checking could have been developed further. Team membership could have been swapped around, and further comparisons of coding, with a greater number of extracts, could have been undertaken. Indeed, we became aware of endless possibilities that might enrich our own learning and improve the adequacy of interpretations, but we had to draw a line in the sand after discussion of our CCRC reports.

Team meetings The third level of reflections took place in meetings of the whole research team. Annual workshops during an international conference and regular online meetings provided space for mutual exchange and discussions for issues brought up in individual reflections and small group exchanges. Notes were taken during meetings and workshops to ensure that the research process remained transparent for all team members. As personal reflections revealed, online meetings were more difficult for non-native English speaking colleagues because of language difficulties, thus it was crucial to convene face-to-face meetings where it was easier to talk together. In the course of the project, meetings not only deepened our mutual understanding of project issues, but also led to closer personal and professional relations. Akpovo et al. (2018) discuss that ‘culturally relevant, non-normative, and fluid cross-cultural research findings, in addition to rigorous methodology, also require rigorous emotional and intellectual commitments from the research teams’ (p. 2). Supporting this statement, we show how intense cross-cultural collaboration can open up broader perspectives on the relevance of gender for processes of professionalization in ECEC.

Men’s career trajectories in ECEC  55

Conclusion It is difficult to draw conclusions from this presentation of our methodology since our aim has been to clarify what we actually did to make this complex collaboration work. However, we conclude that our interpretivist, cross-cultural methodologies could inform potential approaches to a ‘globalised’ agenda in attracting and retaining more men into ECEC, keeping in mind the limitations of a byand-large ‘Western-dominated’ discourse within the research team. This aim is achieved through understanding how men’s career trajectories in and out of ECEC are shaped by gendered discourses in various countries, as interpreted by participant men themselves and the researchers who are ‘insiders’ and ‘outsiders’ of the contexts concerned. Although we have chosen to focus on men in ECEC for the study, the issues discussed are reflective of some wider discourses perpetuated in the sector (such as educator dropout, gendered professionalism, and low social status of ECEC). In addition, we end with two insights about our methodological process that we believe will be helpful to other researchers in the world of ECEC and indeed well beyond to other areas of the social sciences. Firstly, we hope that our description inspires others to undertake collaborative research on a large scale and broad scope and offers some replicable ideas about how this may be achieved. Secondly, we see researcher collaboration across national boundaries as a radical enterprise that is challenging to conventional ways of undertaking research within the academe. Our shared commitment to the project has been surprising given that we had no funding, the outcomes would not significantly ‘count’ towards promotion, and the work had to be undertaken alongside our pressing and pressurised ‘day jobs’ as full-time academics. Perhaps it was the emotional experience of contributing to a shared version of a gender-balanced ECEC workforce that created an extraordinary level of commitment to this innovative project.

References Akpovo, S. M., Moran, M. J.,  & Brookshire, R. (Eds.). (2018). Collaborative cross-cultural research methodologies in early care and education contexts. New York: Routledge. Andrew, Y., Corr, L., Lent, C., O’Brien, M., Osgood, J., & Boyd, M. (2018). Worthwhile work? Childcare, feminist ethics and cooperative research practices. Gender and Education, 30(5), 553–568. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2016.1247948 Berg, B. L.,  & Lune, H. (2012). Qualitative research methods for the social sciences (8th ed.). Boston: Pearson. Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77–101. https://doi.org/10.1191/1478088706qp063oa Brody, D., & Hadar, L. L. (2017). Critical moments in the process of educational change: Understanding the dynamics of change among teacher educators. European Journal of Teacher Education, 41(4), 351–368. https://doi.org/10.1080/02619768.2017.1372741 EECERA. (2015). EECERA ethical code for early childhood researchers. Retrieved from www. eecera.org/wp-content/uploads/2016/07/EECERA-Ethical-Code.pdf Fay, B. (1996). Contemporary philosophy of social science: A  multicultural approach. Oxford: Blackwell.

56  Yuwei Xu et al.

Fereday, J.,  & Muir-Cochrane, E. (2006). Demonstrating rigor using thematic analysis: A  hybrid approach of inductive and deductive coding and theme development. International Journal of Qualitative Methods, 5(1), 80–92. https://doi.org/10.1177%2 F160940690600500107 Huberman, A. M., & Miles, A. B. (1994). Data management and analysis methods. In N. K. Denzin & Y. S. Lincoln (Eds.), Handbook of qualitative research (pp. 428–444). London: Sage. Mutua, K., & Swadener, B. B. (2018). Two decades of collaboration: Decolonizing crosscultural research. In S. M. Akpovo, M. J. Moran, & R. Brookshire (Eds.), Collaborative cross-cultural research methodologies in early care and education contexts (pp. 33–45). New York: Routledge. Muylaert, C. T., Sarubbi, V., Gallo, P. R., Neto, M. L. R., & Reis, A. O. A. (2014). Narrative interviews: An important resource in qualitative research. Revista da Escola de Enfermagem da USP, 48(2), 184–189. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0080-623420140000800027 O’Connor, D. (2001). Journeying the quagmire: Exploring the discourses that shape the qualitative research process. Affilia: Journal of Women and Social Work, 16(2), 138–158. https://doi.org/10.1177/08861090122094190 Phillips, D., & Schweisfurth, M. (2014). Comparative and international education. An introduction to theory, method and practice. London: Bloomsbury. Rohrmann, T. (2020). Men as promoters of change in ECEC? An international overview. Early Years, 40(1), 5–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575146.2019.1626807 Rohrmann, T.,  & Brody, D. (2015). Questioning methodologies in research on men in ECEC. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 405–416. https://doi. org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043814 Rounsevell, M.,  & Metzger, M. (2010). Developing qualitative scenario storylines for environmental change assessment. WIREs Climate Change, 1(4), 606–619. https://doi. org/10.1002/wcc.63 Trahar, S., & Yu, W. M. (Eds.). (2015). Using narrative inquiry for educational research in the Asia Pacific. London: Routledge. Twinn, S. (1997). An exploratory study examining the influence of translation on the validity and reliability of qualitative data in nursing research. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26(2), 418–423. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2648.1997.1997026418.x Warin, J. (2019). Conceptualising the value of male practitioners in early childhood education and care: Gender balance or gender flexibility. Gender and Education, 31(3), 293– 308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2017.1380172 Xu, Y. (2018). A cross-cultural analysis of gender and practitioner-child interactions in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings in Scotland, Hong Kong, and Mainland China (PhD Thesis), University of Glasgow, Scotland. Retrieved from https://theses.gla. ac.uk/30595/

5 PROFESSIONALIZATION AND GENDER BALANCE Christian Eidevald, Birgitte Ljunggren, and Thordis Thordardottir

Introduction For them [female colleagues] responsibility is eight hours of keeping the kids from getting into scrapes. That’s the talk I hear all the time: ‘Watch out, he’ll fall, it’s dangerous, be careful, look what happens, look’. It’s also the atmosphere in the kindergarten. . . . Not where I am, because I won’t let it work. But when I worked as a teacher-assistant, and I didn’t have a say in things, then you come to the kindergarten and you hear ‘Are you insane? Do you know what his mom will do to him if he falls?’. That’s the responsibility, you know how they used to say, like when you take a car in the morning without scratches, return it without scratches. Because, for me responsibility is much, much more . . . much bigger than this responsibility. (Amos, Israel, persister)

In many countries there is a call for higher quality and professionalization within ECEC. Quality and professionalization are regarded as two sides of the same coin and there is a strong idea that quality is an investment in children’s future life chances (Esping-Andersen, 1999). Due to major recruitment problems, and the fact that men are harder to recruit and more likely to leave ECEC work and training than women (Eurostat, 2019), it is argued that professionalization might solve the very low recruitment of men to the sector by raising both status and salary. A more gender-balanced workforce is pointed to as part of the professionalization process (OECD, 2019; Tennhoff, Nentwich, & Vogt, 2015). On the other hand, some, for example Cameron (2006), argue that professionalization can only partly explain men’s entry into and retention within ECEC. ECEC work has been regarded as caregiving, a female connoted activity of low status and something ‘everybody can do’, rather than as an expertise (Jónsdóttir & Coleman, 2014). A low level of formal training marks the workforce, and unskilled

58  Christian Eidevald et al.

assistants constitute a large part of the staff (Peeters, Sharmahd, & Budginaite, 2017). In many countries, unskilled assistants have the same responsibilities as professional teachers with academic qualifications (Oberhuemer, 2011). Moreover, Peeters, Rohrmann, & Emilsen (2015) argue that systems of ECEC training are similarly characterised by traditional gender stereotypes and a dominance of women, in ways that risk alienating men who are interested in formal qualification. In this chapter, we analyse men’s experiences of professional development in early childhood centres and in formal education. The relationship between gender, professionalization, and men’s career trajectories in ECEC will be further explored. In examining the relationship between men’s career trajectories and professionalism, we build on current debates about the nature of professionalization in ECEC. Finally, we argue for a gender-conscious professionalization of the ECEC sector that might foster a better gender balance.

Democratic professionalism and gender Professionalization is an issue much debated in ECEC during the last decade (Vandenbroeck, Urban, & Peeters, 2016). Traditional perspectives on professionalization are preoccupied with formal education. Higher education is expected to provide the ability to handle complex problems, conflicting interests, and ethical dilemmas (Abbott, 1988). This includes the use of research-based knowledge and empirically derived and profession specific concepts (abstractions). As such, professionals define quality standards. They hold the power to define quality and exert a strong autonomy. In the debate about professionalization in ECEC, critical voices are raised against this traditional perspective. Havnes (2018) argues that striving for professionalization ‘from above’ relates to governing discourses of new public management on the one hand, and the developing of formal education systems on the other. This is described as problematic since formal education rests on academic knowledge that is regarded as having a weak emphasis on practical skills and personal experiences. Some, like Smeby (2011), argue that the ECEC workers will never become professionalised this way. Instead, there is a call for a professionalization process ‘from within’ the ECEC setting. Havnes (2018) and Jónsdóttir and Coleman (2014) discuss Oberhuemer’s (2005) notion of democratic professionalization, which departs from an open professionalization process. This process includes the participants in ECEC and comprises four aspects: interaction with and participation of children, partnership with parents, democratic and distributed management practices, and a perspective of knowledge as ‘an awareness of “multiple ways of knowing” ’ (Oberhuemer, p. 14). Based on this, professionalism becomes a product of co-construction, created by the participants in the early childhood centre and the ECEC workers together. Professionalization then becomes a community based, reflective, democratic, and critical process, embedded in different kinds of communities. Such a perspective highlights the early childhood centre as an organizational arena for professional development, which is also related to gender.

Professionalization and gender balance  59

For men in ECEC, professional performativity is connected to their embodied performance. Men state that they, unlike their female colleagues, must actively handle the risk of being suspected for child sexual abuse and thereby have to perform the profession in ways signalling that nothing ‘inappropriate’ is going on. This sometimes hinders them from being professional, according to children’s needs for care (Eidevald, Bergström, & Westberg Broström, 2018). The risk of suspicion is sometimes used to explain why men often choose traditional masculine positions (Nentwich, Poppen, Schälin, & Vogt, 2013; Munk, Larsen, & Leander, 2013), such as practical tasks and rough play (Cameron, 2006), or show more aggression and disciplining (Mills, Haase, & Charlton, 2008), which actually have a potential to hinder men from professional modes of practice. Engaging in professional modes of practice deals with meeting children on the basis of their need for care as well as their need for intellectual learning and development. Brody (2015) shows that men who have worked for a long time in ECEC often take a position in which proximity to children is a central element of the profession, despite a concern that it can also pose risks in the form of suspicion. This indicates that experience and time in the profession are important for the possibility of professionalization for men in ECEC. In this chapter professionalization is seen as an open and socially embedded process, with sensitivity for gendered power relations that enables a critical view on both gender and professionalization. This becomes even more important when taking into account the conclusion of Jónsdóttir and Coleman (2014) that female colleagues and parents sometimes reproduce stereotypes concerning caring as gendered and of low status. It is reasonable to believe that such reproduction will also apply to men in ECEC and becomes interwoven into the professionalization process. In the next section, we present our findings within these gendered fields where we analyse men’s career trajectories based on the question: What kind of stories are found connecting professionalism to education systems and organizational learning communities? In what ways are they gendered? We focus on the male interviewees’ descriptions of their opportunities, as men, to develop and to be professional in work with young children.

Findings and analysis To describe how men stand out and how their presence makes a difference, we analyse professional development within learning communities. This includes human interactions, structures, networks, and cultural factors within a gendered organization and the gendered experiences of the education system.

Professional development in the learning communities of a gendered organization Several of the men interviewed in this study describe how they started working within ECEC by coincidence, which means they were not recruited through

60  Christian Eidevald et al.

formal education systems. Tom, a Swedish musician, answered the question about what formal support he received during his career by saying: ‘Nothing really. I was just thrown in after a phone call. It was yes or no, and then I was there’. Tom, and several others, describe the informal nature of the support they received, often from female colleagues. In Tom’s case, this support, although unstructured, was the reason why he worked for ten years in the ECEC before dropping out. The most common description among men without formal education was that they learned the profession by observing how colleagues acted and then tried to imitate them, with only infrequent sporadic guidance. Several of them who were young when they entered, with no work experience and little knowledge of ECEC, stated that they were not taken care of particularly well. This underscores the impression of ECEC as a low-professionalised sector, where sporadic non-formal on-the-job-training plays a vital role in competence building – based on the notion that caregiving is something ‘everybody can do’, rather than an activity that requires expertise (Jónsdóttir & Coleman, 2014). In such settings, the organizational culture plays a vital role, and the informal on-the-job-training will depend on how well the ECEC is functioning as a learning arena  – depending on colleagues’ benevolence and knowledge, rather than on organised and proven methods of induction and guidance. The absence of induction and guidance may relate to non-professional organizations in the sense that they lack formal structures to take care of the workforce and systematically elevate staff competence (Oberhuemer, 2011). There are examples of men describing how they learned the work by observing, which indicates an absence of co-construction and an inefficient way of learning a profession. Sven, a Swedish dropout, expressed the wish that someone would have taken him ‘under their wings’ instead of the ‘sink or swim’ situation he was thrust into by not receiving any introduction to the work. Men within the same countries report different experiences of support, suggesting the significance of personal involvement of leaders and colleagues over and above country-specific routines of country-specific systems of vocational ­training. Our data reveals examples of workplaces with adequate introduction to the profession. Common to these instances, we found supervision, support from the management, and organised dialogues with colleagues, which can be understood as what Havnes (2018) and Jónsdóttir and Coleman (2014) claim to be democratic management practices, and an example of co-constructed professionalism. Supportive guidance from the management seems to be a key factor for the development of the profession. Some of the men describe how they received support through an introductory year, others indicated that this support included theoretical in-depth study. The importance of supervision that allows room for making mistakes, is explained by Riaan, who has five years’ experience: Let’s say, you [are] teaching something, and you make a mistake. . . , no one will call you to crucify you, it’s all about learning. They’ll give you advice and tell you “Okay you know what, you did make a mistake in this area but there’s a way you can rectify it”. (Riaan, persister, South Africa)

Professionalization and gender balance  61

This quotation highlights the importance of receiving the support, time, and space to try things out, and being allowed to make mistakes. Tutoring was also found to be an important part of the process of increased professionalization. This can be related to Oberhuemer’s (2005, p. 14) notion of democratic professionalization and knowledge as an awareness of ‘multiple ways of knowing’. In this regard, leadership becomes central in integrating professionalism into the organizational design. These examples of a supervised professionalization process from the management relate to performativity and freedom in the job situation where both assistants and teachers are seen as capable of handling the work, depending on their responsibility. This approach is not about being instructed exactly on how the work is to be carried out as a form of micromanagement, but rather it allows experimentation for oneself through co-construction and accessing other people’s experiences and evaluation of the practice through organised dialogues. This support is described as bolstering self-confidence and courage to dare to express thoughts and try different working methods. Some of the men said that they especially appreciated this support from a more experienced male colleague. Norbert, a Norwegian preschool teacher (persister) with a bachelor’s degree gives an example of how professionalization and gender meet: There were a number of male role models that I had during teacher training. . . . In my first job, when I worked in the preschool, there was a man who took care of me and had a little more experience than I had. He gave me guidance. (Norbert, persister, Norway) This is an example of a professionalization process ‘from within’ (Smeby, 2011), rather than a striving for professionalization ‘from above’ (Havnes, 2018). Support from other men is described as a remedy to the challenges of constant surveillance. Such support would involve a veteran male worker showing the novice how to provide care with closeness in such a manner as to avoid suspicion. This support could counteract unwanted hegemonic stereotypes (Mills et  al., 2008). Another example of this reasoning is found in Nils (Norwegian dropout) description of his collaboration with another man: ‘If we were going on a field trip or something, we could just look at each other and nod. It was easy to cooperate’. A common complaint among participants in this study was that a lack of other men as colleagues and male role models hinders their professional development. A  Chinese dropout describes the teacher education, gendered expectations, and gendered divided workforce as a problem, based on gender structures in education in the absence of other men as role models: Having started university, I found out that I was the only man in my class, five altogether in the four classes of our programme. Indeed, I felt that the lectures weren’t attractive to us men, and it was particularly boring when there was only one man. (Yu, dropout, China)

62  Christian Eidevald et al.

In men’s descriptions of a lack of male role models, introduction and guidance, there was, however, a recurring description of what makes ECEC work meaningful: contact with and appreciation by the children. These were stressed as important motivations for the participants to remain in the profession. The loss of children’s support and enthusiasm was also often mentioned by dropouts, as Andrew stated: I do miss it now occasionally. There’s no other job I’ve ever had where you walk into a place and 30 people scream your name and you feel like a rock star. (Andrew, dropout, Australia) The feedback from the children operates as a counterweight to poor working conditions and as something that makes the work in ECEC extremely positive: I had gotten like ten hugs and kisses and everybody just being wonderful and you’re just like “wow”! This has filled the batteries almost instantly and the day would be amazing, and it rarely happened that I left work feeling frustrated, due to work, and if that was the case it wouldn’t be because of the children. (Kevin, dropout, Iceland) This feedback seems to be an important motivational factor when facing a professionalization process.

Experiences during teacher training – formal professionalization Formal teacher training is regarded as vital to the professionalization process (Abbot, 1988). In a few countries, such as Iceland, a license as ECEC teacher requires a MEd degree. However, our data suggests that a demand for higher qualifications does not automatically attract men to embark on formal ECEC education. One important arena for professional training that emerged in the interviews was the relation between theory and practical knowledge. Both were described as necessary, but several of the men stated that education does not sufficiently weave these parts together. Jun was one of those expressing a dissatisfaction: Teacher training misses its target and it is general. It doesn’t touch practical issues we encounter in our daily teaching. The theories introduced by the experts are too far from what we encounter every day. So, the impact of guidance is limited. (Jun, dropout, China) This gives support to Havnes (2018) critique of a traditional perspective on professionalization, where formal education is supposed to provide the ability to

Professionalization and gender balance  63

handle complex problems with theoretical research-based knowledge. Several men expressed the view that academic knowledge does not provide them with the practical skills they call for or need, and they, like Smeby (2011), argue that the professionalization process has to be conducted ‘from within’. Some of the men who started working in ECEC without formal training continued with formal education at the university because they wanted to deepen their knowledge of the profession, theory, and research. Others sought academic qualification because they needed a diploma to get permanent employment. Several of them described how formal education helped them gain legitimacy in the field, which strengthened their opportunities to develop professionally. Many of them maintained that they were the first in the family to study for a higher degree. Issues of qualification levels and professionalization of ECEC are also mediated by gender. There are examples of good support for men during their qualification studies. However, a lack of support from other men is often given as an explanation for difficulties in developing professionalism. This is relevant not only for men who lack formal education, but also for men entering the formal educational system, as well as entering the profession after earning a university degree for work in ECEC. The importance of having good role models during teacher training was repeatedly mentioned; likewise, the presence of other male students helped to counteract the stigma that male trainees are sometimes exposed to. For example, Senzo, a South African dropout, liked to be with male colleagues during the training because the female students did not understand his problems. He expressed a desire for male colleagues: ‘I would have had someone to speak to, who is a male rather than speaking to females who are not facing the stigma that I was facing back then’. This is an example of a relational aspect of professionalization connected to gender and embodied in social relations in work organizations (Oberhuemer, 2005). An assumption that “the” ECEC worker is female means that men’s divergent experience is often invisible.

Standing out as a man in ECEC – a presence that can make a difference The participants in this study described their presence within ECEC as something that draws both positive attention and suspicion towards them as men. Some described how they are fully accepted as competent co-workers. On the other hand, parents often react negatively to care situations, for example diaper changing, hugging, and lap sitting, rendering these acts as difficult to handle for a young and inexperienced man. Marcos states: Women don’t have those challenges. So, when talking about professional development, I  would probably give instruction, maybe a little bit. But I think for really [learning] how to deal, how to provide, and be emotionally responsive to children, men will probably need something different. (Marcos, persister, US)

64  Christian Eidevald et al.

Since the profession is associated with femininity, some of the men expressed a lack of confidence in their own ECEC work, even those who hold a degree. They described how they need to handle the risk that their masculinity is questioned, that they are vulnerable, and that this vulnerability is reinforced by the lack of other men in the profession. Professionalization in ECEC is also related to other norms that are intertwined with gender. This becomes visible in Senzo’s experience, since he is a Black man from South Africa, demonstrating the intersection of race and gender as important factors. Senzo dropped out, though he had a university degree for teaching in ECEC. He reported in his narrative that female teachers at the university expressed the view that they did not like male students and this was exacerbated because of his race. He claimed that white men cannot fully understand his challenges in the same way women cannot fully understand what men in ECEC have to handle: ‘Even if white males were there, they would not have understood the pressure that I had’. At the same time, many participants in this study remarked on particular societal norms that all men, regardless of race, had to relate to. Recurring in the stories was concern about suspicion of sexual interest in children. Sven, who dropped out of the preschool teacher programme from fear, described how his girlfriend, also an ECEC worker, expressed a similar concern about his future: She was worried about the same thing as me, that . . . things have happened to men who have worked in preschool . . . are you sure you’re prepared for it? Of course, she also supported me; so, we decided that I would start [the teacher education program]. She has gone through education and understood that it is very women-dominated and that there are risks for men. (Sven, dropout, Sweden) This fear of being suspected of child sexual abuse means that men’s bodily performance needs to signal they are ‘safe’ (Eidevald et al., 2018; Nentwich et al., 2013; Munk et al., 2013). As in Brody (2015), most men described how the difficulties they met were hardest at the beginning of the professional training and at the first meetings with the children’s parents. Later in their career, the issue became less relevant. This indicates that the fear of paedophilia is a problem especially in training and the transition to the workplace, whereas a longer process of professionalization enables men to deal with such situations and connected assumptions and feelings. Knowing this, Marcos’ conclusion is that men need extra support regarding touch and emotionality with children. He claimed that women and men have similar needs for work induction, but that men need specific tutorial dialogues on professionality when it comes to being affectionate with children: Children come to me. For example, I’d come into class and they hug me, but over the years, I learned how to hug and touch children [in a way] that doesn’t seem inappropriate, you know, but you still give the children what they need, which is physical contact. (Marcos, persister, US)

Professionalization and gender balance  65

This shows that men are not trusted to develop professionalism in partnership with parents, to the same extent as their female colleagues, which is important according to Oberhuemer (2005). As female colleagues and parents reproduce gender stereotypes regarding caring, men are subordinated within gendered power relations (Jónsdóttir & Coleman, 2014). This has the potential to become a problem, based on the assumption that professionalization is an open and socially embedded process. At the same time, this relates to Brody’s (2015) finding that duration of service is a central aspect of professionalism, since men who have worked for a long time in ECEC more often expressed their focus on children’s need for care than on personal risks in the form of suspicion. Statements from men in this study also provide other important insights that enhance an understanding of professionalism. Amos, who works in ECEC in Israel, describes how his presence causes suspicions, but at the same time adds something specific to professional practices. He says that a man’s responsibility is different than that of women. In the quotation that opens this chapter, he explains that he has another interpretation of the professional tasks compared to his female colleagues. For him, working in ECEC is more than making sure the children are safe. Another example is Riaan, a Black South African who describes his impact on the career choices of the children he worked with previously by challenging gender stereotypes: I had a child that came back and said, “Sir, remember when you told us that there’s no specific jobs for boys and there’s no specific jobs for girls”? I want to do hospitality at school, I want to do chefing . . . and you told us that not only girls must cook at home. I went home and told my parents that this is what you taught us now. I’m gonna pick up chefing. At first, they were against it, but they’re okay with it now. (Riaan, persister, South Africa) The examples in this chapter show that the relationship between gender, professionalization, and men’s career trajectories in ECEC are complex and not only related to norms about masculinities and tokenism. They also show that it is not possible to talk about professionalization in ECEC without considering men’s specific challenges and possibilities. A gender-conscious professionalization of the ECEC sector challenges gender stereotype performances and offers possibilities for children later in life.

An illustrative storyline We present the storyline of Tom to illustrate some central aspects of this chapter. Tom lives in Sweden and was employed as a musician when he started working in ECEC as a supplemental job. He was thrown in at the deep end in an early childhood centre to work as an assistant after just one phone call (point 1 in Figure 5.1). He enjoyed very positive relationships with his colleagues and the first two years were encouraging (2). Tom took on responsibility with assistance from colleagues

Positive and negative feelings about those events

66  Christian Eidevald et al.

Responsible for developmental discussions 2

3

Increased enrollment in the centre 4 Budget constraints 5

Further stress, quits job 6

1

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 5.1

Storyline of Tom, dropout from work, Sweden

(3). After five years the groups of children became larger and the demand for documentation was time-consuming (4). Budget constraints meant that there were no substitute teachers available for absent colleagues, for example, when Tom was away with his music band (5). After 10 years at the centre Tom began to worry about being accused of paedophilia and he chose to quit (6). Tom’s perceived deterioration of working conditions affected him as greatly as female colleagues, but his isolation as a man, with specific challenges, made it impossible for him to continue working in ECEC. He described how his work with colleagues and the children brought him much satisfaction, but high stress made it difficult to interact with each child with the intimacy they required. In the end, it was the risk of being accused of paedophilia that precipitated his decision to quit his job. Tom’s story illustrates that formal education is not the only aspect of a professionalization process. Professionalization, seen as an open and socially embedded process, highlights the need for gender sensitivity, male role models, and tutorial dialogues on how act professionally. In Tom’s case, the absence of male role models meant a missed opportunity to develop strategies to handle the fear of paedophilia suspicion. A gender sensitive professionalization process would, in Tom’s case, include tutorial dialogs with someone who understood his situation and his concerns as a man.

Conclusion and discussion The analyses in this chapter highlights the importance of learning and development with emphasis on the concept of democratic professionalism (Oberhuemer, 2005),

Professionalization and gender balance  67

which includes ECEC workers, formal educational establishments, and ECEC research (Havnes, 2018; Jónsdóttir & Coleman, 2014). As long as a binary approach to gender is prevalent among ECEC workers, professional ECEC practices may continue to be gendered, and in many ways limiting for both women and men. Not all women are attracted to a ‘feminised’ profession, just as not all men appreciate ‘masculine’ work. An issue that becomes relevant is who and what defines gendered practices and norms related to a superior and a submissive status, and which should be challenged so that both women and men have equal opportunities to develop professionalism. The presence of more men will enrich diversity in ECEC. We therefore conclude that an essentialist understanding of gender must be continuously scrutinised and challenged, since it affects the professionalization process and men’s likelihood to enter and remain in the field of ECEC. Professionalism implicates theory. It was interesting that some men said that they were not interested in theory but claimed that practical learning in the ECEC settings was the most important factor in their professional development. Defying researched-based knowledge is not a particularly good starting point for developing professionalism (Abbott, 1988), since the ECEC profession requires theoretical, ethical, and practical knowledge. We wonder if the preference for practicality above theory might represent a gendered pattern. Some participants described privileges related to their gender and said they felt welcome, whilst others complained of gender stereotypical expectations, for example an expectation to be the ‘handyman’. Many described how their subordination as men in ECEC as women’s sphere implicated for them a double subordination. Their capability to care for children was doubted from inside as well from outside the setting, whilst they were also expected to fulfil stereotypical ideas of masculinity (Cameron, 2006). We also found that many of the men claimed confronted the risk of suspicion of having a sexual interest in the children. Participants expressed that they sometimes adjusted their everyday practice in response to parental suspicions, and that this behaviour is a barrier to professionalism. On the whole the dropouts related their decision to leave ECEC to a lack of collaboration, a feminised culture in ECEC, low salary, and feelings of alienation. Simultaneously, they asserted their presence as expanding the professional role within ECEC, by allowing children to examine elements of risks and to be role models for practices beyond gender stereotyped expectations. The persisters explained their work satisfaction and professional development by positive collaboration, support from the management, and male role models. They appreciated possibilities of initiatives, male networks, and supervision through workshops and other forms of collegial learning. The clearest difference between the dropouts and persisters is the dropout’s sense of marginalization and the persisters’ feeling of ‘fitting in’. Both marginalization and ‘fitting in’ is strongly related to how gender is perceived by both women and men. Settings combining professionalism with gender sensitivity seem more likely to include male ECEC workers than settings that are still stuck in gender stereotypes.

68  Christian Eidevald et al.

Implications The call for higher professional education amongst staff and more research-based practice has not created gender-balanced ECEC settings. Since preschool workers are still mostly women, the profession suffers from gender-biased attitudes about the nature of women’s work, rather than from a lack of requirements of academic training for ECEC workers. Without a gender-conscious professionalization, males will be mistrusted because of their sex/gender, while women are expected to be natural carers without professionalism. Therefore, it is necessary to challenge gender barriers. As long as participants (parents, colleagues, and the wider society) reproduce gender stereotypes concerning caring, men will continue to be marginalised. A gender-conscious professionalization of the ECEC sector might foster better gender balance.

References Abbott, A. (1988). The system of professions. Chicago: University of Chicago Press. Retrieved from www.press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/S/bo5965590.html Brody, D. (2015). The construction of masculine identity among men who work with young children, an international perspective. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 351–361. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043809 Cameron, C. (2006). Men in the nursery revisited: Issues of male workers and professionalism. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood,7(1), 68–79. https://doi.org/10.2304/ ciec.2006.7.1.68 Eidevald, C., Bergström, H., & Westberg Broström, A. (2018). Maneuvering suspicions of being a potential pedophile: Experiences of male ECEC-workers in Sweden. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 25(3), 407–417. https://doi.org/10.1080/13 50293X.2018.1463907 Esping-Andersen, G. (1999). Social foundations of postindustrial economies. Oxford: Oxford University Press. https://doi.org/10.1093/0198742002.001.0001 Eurostat. (2019). Early leavers from education and training statistics explained, statistics explained. Research in Early Childhood Education, 10. Retrieved from https://ec.europa. eu/eurostat/statistics-explained/pdfscache/1150.pdf Havnes, A. (2018). ECEC professionalization – challenges of developing professional standards. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 26(5), 657–567. https://doi.org /10.1080/1350293X.2018.1522734 Jónsdóttir, A., & Colema, M. (2014). Professional role and identity of Icelandic preschool teachers: Effects of stakeholders’ views. Early Years, 34(3), 210–225. https://doi.org/10. 1080/09575146.2014.919574 Mills, M., Haase, M.,  & Charlton, E. (2008). Being the “right” kind of male teacher: The disciplining of John. Pedagogy, Culture  & Society, 16(1), 71–84. https://doi. org/10.1080/14681360701877792 Munk, K., Larsen, P. L., & Leander, E. M. B. (2013). Fear of child sex abuse: Consequences for childcare personnel in Denmark. Nordic Psychology, 65(1), 19–32. https://doi.org/10 .1080/19012276.2013.796081 Nentwich, J., Poppen, W., Schälin, S., & Vogt, F. (2013). The same and the other: Male childcare workers managing identity dissonance. International Review of Sociology, 23(2), 326–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.804295

Professionalization and gender balance  69

Oberhuemer, P. (2005). Conceptualising the early childhood pedagogue: Policy approaches and issues of professionalism. European Early Childhood Education Journal, 13(1), 5–16. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502930585209521 Oberhuemer, P. (2011). The early childhood education workforce in Europe between divergencies and emergencies. International Journal of Child Care and Education Policy, 5(1), 55–63. https://doi.org/10.1007/2288-6729-5-1-55 OECD. (2019). Good practice for good jobs in early childhood education and care. Paris: Eurostat. Retrieved from www.oecd.org/education/good-practice-for-good-jobs-in-early-child hood-education-and-care-64562be6-en.htm Peeters, J., Rohrmann, T., & Emilsen, K. (2015). Gender balance in ECEC: Why is there so little progress? European Early Childhood Research Journal, 23(3), 302–314. https://doi. org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043805 Peeters, J., Sharmahd, N.,  & Budginaite, I. (2017). Early childhood education and care (ECEC) assistants in Europe: Pathways towards continuous professional development (CPD) and qualification. European Journal of Education, Research, Development and Policy. 53(1), 46–57. https://doi.org/10.1111/ejed.12254 Smeby, J. C. (2011). Profesjonalisering av førskolelæreryrket? [Professionalizering of Preschool teachers work]. Arbetsmarknad  & Arbetsliv [Workforce and Working Life], 1(4), 43–58. Retrieved from https://journals.lub.lu.se/aoa/article/view/17850/16192 Tennhoff, W., Nentwich, J. C.,  & Vogt, F. (2015). Doing gender and professionalism: Exploring the intersectionalities of gender and professionalization in early childhood education. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 340–350. https:// doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043808 Vandenbroeck, M., Urban, M., & Peeters, J. (Eds.). (2016). Pathways to professionalism in early childhood education and care. London: Routledge. https://doi.org/10.4324/9781315688190

6 WORKPLACE ENVIRONMENT Leadership and governance Birgitte Ljunggren, Joanne McHale, and Victoria Sullivan

Introduction I was pretty fresh, but I felt I had something to give, that follow up by my leader was good enough any way. I think it was very decisive for [my decision] that I stayed in the profession. (Norbert, persister, Norway)

Management and leadership practices and strategies play a central role for retention and employee turnover in ECEC (McDonald et al., 2018; Hale-Jinks et al., 2006). This corresponds with findings on occupational turnover in general (Long & Thean, 2011) and in adjacent sectors such as primary school. Principal support and leadership are the most influential predictors of teacher sustainability and turnover (Ingersoll, 2001; Allensworth et al., 2009; Torres, 2016). Transformational leadership that aims at developing a collaborative work culture, taking individual concerns as well as fostering professional growth and interest (Bass, 2015; Sun & Wang, 2017; Long & Thean, 2011), prevents risk of turnover. Female domination in the ECEC sector affects leadership in the sector (Hard & Jónsdóttir, 2013; Peeters, Rohrmann & Emilsen, 2015). However, there is little research on how leadership practices or styles are seen through the eyes of male educators in ECEC and in what manner it affects their career decisions. This chapter’s research questions are: • • •

What kind of organisational leadership practices are described and experienced by male ECEC educators? How does leadership work as a pull or push factor in their career decisions in the sector? What role, if any, does gender play in the leadership-worker nexus?

Using leadership theory as a guide, we explore these questions by analysing interview data from men across 12 countries, many of whom have dropped out. Our

Workplace environment  71

analysis is situated in the relationship between the micro and the meso levels, as discussed in Chapter 2.

Organisational leadership and turnover The chapter links push and pull factors with leadership. Hard and O’Gorman (2007) coined these terms in relation to conflicting positions when at a ‘crossroads’. Here, a leadership pull factor will draw the worker to the job, including practices that encourage the men to consider starting and staying in the ECEC sector. A leadership push factor will discourage them (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007, p. 50), and cause them to consider leaving the ECEC sector. Leadership is an equivocal and context dependent concept (Hard & O’Gorman, 2007; Waniganayake, 2014; Yukl, 2010). It is the attempted exercise of power in organisational relations, also in face-to-face meetings (Yukl, 2010). There is a dualism in leadership. First, it has an organisational component referring to decisions on organisational structure and efforts to build organisational culture and common understandings as well as the construction of rules and strategies. An example is the way professionalism or profit-making is emphasised by leaders. This indirect leadership is organisational governance. Second, leadership refers to the direct relationship between leaders and staff taking place in everyday meetings and organisational practices. Grisoni and Beeby (2007) highlight the sensemaking component of leadership in decision-making processes, which is inherently relational. Hard and Jónsdóttir (2013) argue that leadership in the ECEC field has been regarded as a problematic area, possibly due to its association with masculinist models in non-caring sectors. This points to leadership as a gendered notion, particularly relevant in the female dominated ECEC, and portrayed by some as a ‘pink ghetto’ which is often undervalued and with limited progression opportunities (Ebbeck & Waniganayake, 2003, p. 5).

Different styles of leadership as push and pull factors The literature on employee turnover highlights the role of transformational leadership as a central pull factor in career decisions (Sun & Wang, 2017). The transformational leader is an ideal type who creates a common understanding, pride, respect, and trust in their staff relationships. Bass (2015) argues for their ability to inspire and facilitate thorough problem solving, which in this context refers to ECEC staff’s professional practice and judgment. Finally, transformational leadership provides attention, acknowledgement, and guidance to the individual worker (Bass, 2015). Although Aldoory and Toth (2009) claim that women are more prone to these kind of leadership practices, Wolfram and Mohr (2010) suggest that transformational leadership behaviours tend to be regarded more positively by followers only when the leader is a man. This tension indicates how gender stereotyping of leadership behaviour could lead to unfavourable outcomes (Stempel et al., 2015).

72  Birgitte Ljunggren et al.

Distributed leadership overlaps with transformational leadership. It rejects the idea of one key individual leader and highlights the responsibility, participation, and collaboration of multiple sources in the organization. Distributed leadership is suggested as suitable for ECEC (Siraj-Blatchford & Manni, 2006), but Torrance (2013) questions its potential in a sector that is still developing as a profession because it might produce a mismatch between capacity and responsibility. According to theories of flow (Nakamura & Csikszentmihalyi, 2002), a balance between staff capacity and distributed responsibility can be considered a pull factor to organizations. Bass (2015) supplements the concept of transformational leadership with transactional leadership and laissez-faire leadership to better describe the range of possible leadership styles. Transactional leadership ideally represents performance-linked pay, micromanagement, and a search for errors and rule violation. Laissez-faire leadership behaviours simply describe absence of leadership responsibility and decision making (Bass, 2015). Transactional leadership is not as effective as transformational leadership in raising job satisfaction because it only allows for the satisfaction of ‘lower order needs’ (Aldoory & Toth, 2009, p. 159), and can therefore be understood as a potential push factor.

Organisational governance and leadership Transformational leadership affects the organisation as a collective, and not just interpersonal relations between leaders and educators. It fosters a collaborative organisational culture that prevents educators from forming intentions to leave the organisation in the first place (Sun & Wang, 2017). Hence, turnover, retention, and gender must be discussed related to governance, which involves indirect leadership of the workplace. The ECEC setting is a gendered organisation (Nentwich, Poppen, Schalin, Vogt, 2013), and gendered assumptions are embedded in the organisation structure (Acker, 1990). For example, in the ECEC setting a stereotypical educator is a woman. Gendered assumptions affect the distribution of tasks and responsibilities in the organisation. Hard and Jónsdóttir (2013) suggest a feminised discourse of niceness that fosters compliance, but challenges professionalism. This relates the discourse of horizontal violence, that describes collegial hostility in caring professions, and micro-politics. Both of these potentially undermine leadership. They argue that the equality structure in ECEC organisations may foster a culture ‘averse to difference, debate, and discussion’ (Hard & Jónsdóttir, 2013, p. 321). With this background, it is imperative to explore further the leadership of men and by men, in a culture that can be marked by a scepticism towards diversity. Being men, they represent such diversity. Governance points to the structural aspects that frame leadership such as economic funding. Lloyd and Penn (2014) argue that austerity policies frame European early childhood markets. These policies might have legislative consequences making ECEC organisations focus on efficacy. In Norway, public sector restructuring of ECEC settings into larger organisational units is used to improve efficiency (Moen & Granrusten, 2013). The ECEC sector is characterised by low pay

Workplace environment  73

(McDonald, Thorpe, & Irvine, 2018), which might explain high turnover (HaleJinks, Knopf, & Knopf, 2006). This chapter explores the leadership and governance demonstrated and the possible gendered effects on men’s considerations to persist or drop out.

Method and analytical strategy Utilising the coding framework developed by the entire research team (see Chapter  4), we analysed all data coded to the C2 theme: Workplace Environment, Leadership, and Management styles. The C2 theme coded management style and behaviour, such as leadership support. We analysed the data inductively (Thomas, 2006). The emerging themes were informed by our knowledge and literature review on the topic. To ensure a high level of quality, all data analysis underwent a co-constructed researcher check (CCRC, see Chapter 4). Each author analysed the full data set and then met together to discuss themes, codes differences, similarities, and the role of cultural context. The storyline of Nils, highlighting leadership issues in our data, will be presented as part of our analysis.

Efficiency demands as a push factor Leadership as governance describes the overarching organisational management practices, strategies, and systems. It refers to structure, strategic choices, and the overall focus of leadership of the organisation, which we find relates to men’s career choices. In the data, the negative push-factors are most salient, and they reflect pressure the men face from the governance of the ECEC settings. A predominant theme is the working conditions produced by ECEC settings related to organisational efficiency. Many of the participants describe their work setting as having too narrow a focus on profit or saving money through efficiency measures. This becomes a push factor when it collides with the men’s professional standards or identity and reduces their job satisfaction. Orhan (dropout, Turkey), commented that early childhood educators in his centre were evaluated for the money they collected and by other measurable standards: Actually, my major concern was principals. We could not get on with them. I still think that they thought of ECEC classrooms as financial sources, and they were not aware of the pedagogical importance of this period. . . . the best ECE teacher was the person who collected all payments on time, organised teacher-parent conferences regularly, and prepared effective end-of-year shows. A strong economic organisational rationality that is mediated by the principals seems to undermine the ECEC pedagogy that Orhan values. Several stories tell about organisational decisions that challenge professional autonomy. Tzvika, a dropout from Israel, described organisational requirements for him to use certain teaching devices (workbooks) and pressure to focus more on teaching and less on

74  Birgitte Ljunggren et al.

play. He resisted this directive strongly. The organisational response was to legitimise the decision by referring to the formal hierarchy and power structure: [B]ut one of the things that happened at R [name of school], it was a highpressured place, so they introduced that they wanted kids to learn how to read in kindergarten. And I  was one of the most defiant sons of bitches around, you know. And they brought in workbooks, and I said, “You are not putting a workbook in my kindergarten”. And then they kind of said: “It’s not really your kindergarten”. Participants also discuss the organisational governance as it is registered on the ‘department floor’ as rising work pressure. Tom, a dropout from Sweden, described the middle manager squeeze of his closest leaders related to efficiency demands: They have always been very nice. But they are also extremely vulnerable. They are like some sort of intermediary between all decisions . . . bad decisions, which they must pass on. They accept more children, and they cannot raise the wages so much. The employees become sad and disappointed, and then it comes back to the manager. Tom’s quote indicates that leaders may wish to practice transformational leadership, but they must execute orders more in terms of transactional leadership that negatively affects job satisfaction. This highlights the tight relationship between organisational frames and leadership practices. We also found descriptions of organisational restructuring, often understood negatively as a push factor. Settings changed ownership or were merged with other units. Two of the Norwegian participants described working in public ECEC settings that merged into larger organisational units. Consequently, they saw a stronger emphasis on detailed planning and regulations which challenged their freedom as professionals. They had considered leaving because they did not receive the leadership support they needed due to more distant leaders. Organisational restructuring affected career trajectories directly, as the case of Anakin (dropout, Australia) shows. Restructuring pushed him and colleagues out of old positions and into new ones: It was a bit of a rollercoaster because there was a restructure and other people came in. So, then I  sort of lost that position [that was given to] someone else, but then I went back up again and then I went back down again. And sometimes it just depended on the dynamics or the politics of head office, because it had grown so big. We also find positive experiences linked to organisational governance pulling men into ECEC. Even though Jun from China had left the sector, he still emphasised the training offered him at the centre. He saw this as a very attractive feature of the

Workplace environment  75

organisation that made him want to choose this employer. He regarded the attractive collaborative work culture and professionalism to be the result of the principal’s work, which can be interpreted as a transformational leadership outcome: The reasons why I  choose primary rather than high school are multiple. Firstly, I know this primary before I came to work, so I got familiar with the school; secondly, the headmaster has his own ideas to run the school and lays emphasis on school culture; thirdly, the school runs the teacher training, and I appreciate the atmosphere of this school, which is positive and collaborative. These glimpses of organisational governance connect organisational strategies and decisions with men’s career trajectories. Governance indirectly affects career decisions by producing working conditions and different levels of job satisfaction. It becomes a push factor when organisational governance collides with the men’s professional standards.

The pull effect of gender sensitive transformational leadership Direct leadership support is central to transformational leadership behaviour or lack thereof. Support appears as a major theme in the data and connects to job satisfaction and the male educators’ reflections on staying or leaving. Supportive leaders are regarded as a major pull factor for the men in our study, and it takes different forms. Leaders are gatekeepers to the sector by hiring men in the first place and then introducing them to the ECEC work. Several participants entered the sector through temporary, often unskilled, work in an ECEC setting. Leaders who function as positive gatekeepers bear favourable opinions towards men in ECEC. By introducing men to the ECEC setting, they break with expectations of the female educator norm (Acker, 1990; Nentwich et al., 2013). Inclusive leadership practices making men feel welcome were highlighted as very important for men in an introductory phase in their careers, resulting in their staying in the profession. Mathias, a persister from Germany, said: ‘The leaders offered me their trust and would count on me. They showed me that I’m part of the team, I’m accepted in this place, and I’m appreciated. And I have a voice, I can contribute’. Inclusive leadership practices encompass appreciation for the male educator as contributor and team member, and trust that he will do the job well. A decisive factor for some men’s decision to stay is their being met as an employee who fulfils some kind of professional norm. This confirms previous research on transformational leadership practices which has been shown to prevent turnover (Sun & Wang, 2017). However, the issue of trust and transformational leadership must be seen through a gendered lens, since men are often objects of scrutiny and suspicion related to sexual abuse, ordeals rarely experienced by women in the ECEC workplace.

76  Birgitte Ljunggren et al.

Leaders that offered mentoring and guidance were vital to men’s retention in the ECEC setting. Such transformative aspects of leadership practices raised men’s ability to handle everyday challenges also related to gender. Some describe meeting parents’ scepticism towards males. When Alex (persister, England) encountered allegations of sexual abuse, he appreciated the leadership support he received: [They were] very influential with the allegations. I  felt very supported, as much as they [the leaders] were legally able to support me through the process. I didn’t feel like I was being questioned by the management. As far as the allegations, they never had any doubt in their minds, so there was 100% support there, which was probably why I didn’t take it personally because I didn’t feel I was having to defend myself against my peers or whatever. So that was incredible. We interpret this quote as evidence of gender sensitive transformational leadership practice. Gender sensitivity was also described by some of the men, regarding the practice of clustering them together in the organisation to avoid ‘gender loneliness’. Still, Norbert (persister, Norway) problematised this clustering as gender essentialising: ‘It is expected that “you are two men, right, so you must necessarily be comfortable together” but that’s not how it is, of course’. Still, participants had negative experiences with leadership making them question a career in ECEC. Many reported encountering a ‘sink or swim’ mentality when addressing difficulties at work. There were several stories about such laissezfaire leadership behaviour across countries, where men had been given tasks and responsibilities that they felt they did not master. A reoccurring example was about assignment of responsibility for groups that are experienced as too large. The men problematised leaders who met employees in such situations with an attitude of ‘get used to it, this is the name of the game’ – particularly as newcomers. This was understood as a negative distribution of leadership, as an abdication of leadership responsibility, and negative use of power. The experience of laissez-faire leadership and a gap between the given responsibilities and the capacity to handle them impede a sense of flow and worked as a push factor. The data show evidence for leadership power abuse related to men’s gender. They Several men described discriminating leadership practices. For example, one of the Turkish participants, Cem, told of leader’s mockery of his desire to work with the youngest children. This was not regarded as a man’s job. By choosing such work, Cem thereby challenged the organization’s gendered norms, and leaders rebuffed his challenge. One of the US interviewees, Marcos, had been positioned as a token male by his manager and used in profiling the ECEC setting to politicians and stakeholders. Anakin, a dropout from Australia, was sanctioned for expressing his intentions: Anyone that might speak up or say even anything that is different to a couple of other people’s point of view, you can get quite easily, I wouldn’t say

Workplace environment  77

blacklisted, but a lot of talk later on, and before you know it you’re not invited to this and you’re not doing this and now you have to go and do this. It’s no coincidence that from this incident it’s had a bit of a domino effect on me. Sanctions can be interpreted as aspects of a gendered ECEC culture that values conformity and the exclusion from opportunities as horizontal violence (Hard & Jónsdóttir, 2013). The men problematised leaders unable to act and facilitate change in what they understood as a female dominated culture. They perceived this as contributing to a professionally stagnant ECEC setting. Not taking responsibility for developing the organisational culture is a marker of laissez-faire leadership, which works as a push factor.

Professional freedom and leadership Many of the participants were passionate about the ECEC profession. Therefore, leadership practices supporting their professional practice and development were perceived as positive and thereby a pull factor for them. This found expression in experiencing professional leaders with strong competence in and passion for ECEC work. Herbert (persister, Australia) had a positive experience with his first leader: ‘She was so encouraging. Never had anything negative to say but was always constructive in a positive way. . . . I would consider her probably the person who really fuelled the fire’. Effective pedagogical and professional leadership included valuing the care and teaching work of the staff. Anders (persister, Sweden) positively highlighted the strong pedagogical profile of his ECEC setting and the structured work to develop competence on a collective level. He valued working in a professional and well organised ECEC setting: ‘Where I  work now, there is a clear focus on quality work, and so there are good discussions on education. It is very good. Like getting good continuing education. Then it’s fun and things happen’. A professional organisation is also about having leaders to learn from, and who systematically work to raise competence among staff. Men highly valued freedom to carve out a personal professional practice. Norbert (persister, Norway) explains his sense of flow: I’m closely followed up by my leader, at the same time, my leader gives me a lot of freedom to do whatever I want, really. I am recognised for the person I am, but at the same time she gives me enough challenges, so I have to struggle a bit, which I appreciate a lot. Conversely, efforts to micromanage the men and failure to convey trust were cited as negative push factors. A lack of professional leadership was similarly understood. For example, Mehmet (persister, Turkey) struggled with low valuation of ECEC work. His setting was led by the same principle as the upper grades in the school.

78  Birgitte Ljunggren et al.

This reflects a lack of understanding of the ECEC profession on a leadership level: ‘Most of school principals I worked with did not have a positive perception of ECE ((pause)). ((laughs)) Maybe, they did not have any perceptions of ECE. Of course, this generally affected my motivation and my projects negatively’. In summary, the analysis shows that experiencing the leadership of others has both push and pull effects for the participants. Gender sensitive, transformational leadership behaviours motivate men to stay in the ECEC setting. Being guided by a competent leader and being encouraged to exercise pedagogical judgment has a strong pull effect. Facing demands that affect the pedagogical practices negatively, working in poorly led ECEC cultures, and direct power abuse have a strong push effect on these men. For others, leadership practices are secondary to their career decisions and play a less important role in their career trajectory.

Practicing leadership For some of the participants, leadership is also about their leading others in the ECEC setting. Working as an early childhood educator often implies leading and guiding unskilled colleagues. Indeed, men are often disproportionately found in leadership roles in ECEC and other female dominated occupations, known as the glass escalator effect (Williams, 1992; Wright & Brownhill, 2019). We shall now take a closer look at the push and pull effects that this phenomenon has on career trajectories. Nils described his hardship in leading a department with unskilled staff, most of them women older than himself. He found it difficult to motivate and lead them to follow his ideas of sound pedagogical practice. He was challenged by what he perceived to be non-professional attitudes amongst his assistants. Nils emphasised outdoor play and learning and invested much effort into his work. He doubted if the unskilled staff were able to handle children alone due to previous accidents with the children that he had to explain to the parents. This can be interpreted as his difficulties handling distributed leadership and leading others in an environment marked by horizontal violence and demand for equality. This made his work situation untenable, triggering illness and his eventual exit from the profession, at which time he became a lorry driver. His story line will be described in Figure 6.1. On the other hand, Tzvika (dropout, Israel) and Norbert (persister, Norway) described their leadership positions at different ECEC settings as very positive aspects of the job. Tzvika had long experience with leadership positions. He valued the possibility of hiring and firing staff and influencing and deciding upon the pedagogical practices of the ECEC setting. He described the freedom a leadership position gave him for framing and structuring the organisation his way: I’m a character. And I think you have to be a character to be a male and an ECEC educator. I  had stuff with workers here, you know, where I  really strongly believe in my philosophies, and I had two workers, who really didn’t

Workplace environment  79

support my ideas exactly, and there was conflict, but I was the boss and didn’t rehire them the following year. So, I had that kind of power.

ECEC teacher education

8

5

11

12

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 6.1 

10

Storyline of Nils, dropout, Norway

t ou

EC EC an ies g Be stud

1

9

ps

6

ro

4

,d

2

3

Ki nd te erg ac a hi rte ng n

7

k or w at ss re St

Positive and negative feelings about these events

This quote shows the weight placed on professional freedom and the possibility to shape the ECEC setting’s pedagogical content as vital to thrive as an ECEC leader. Norbert valued the relational aspects of leading the staff in his department. He appreciated working with people, and he felt he was contributing positively to others, making a difference and personally encouraging others’ performance. He also felt that he mastered the leadership tasks, providing him with feelings of satisfaction: ‘I have become a pretty good judge of human character; I know when to interfere and when not to’. In sum, leadership of others also enables a possible push or pull effect. The positive effect seems linked to the feeling of mastering the leadership tasks and the possibilities leadership gives to influence pedagogical content but also the practice and wellbeing of others. Transformational leadership practices therefore seem to be meaningful and motivational also for those who lead. The storyline of Nils exemplifies how leadership affects critical moments in a career pathway. It also illustrates the importance of leadership both as being led and leading others on a career trajectory. Nils’ ECEC career pathway starts at point (1) where he began his ECEC education with mixed feelings (2–6) not specifically related to leadership. He then entered teaching (7) and described the positive feelings working as an early childhood educator in a Norwegian ECEC setting with an outdoor play program and

80  Birgitte Ljunggren et al.

learning profile together with a male colleague. He described a leader who gave him wide professional freedom and encouraged a good social working environment. He received positive feedback from parents, the colleagues he led, and his own leader (8). However, his male colleague quit, and the ECEC setting was restructured due to organisational governance. He then described a downward trajectory with more negative feelings (9). He drew a very thick line between points 9 and 10. This emphasised his level of deep distress related to his difficulties as a leader and a high rate of sick leave in his department, which often put him in a situation of being alone with all the children (10). This affected his ability to perform professionally. He tried to make ends meet at work. He was also given the task from the manager of the ECEC setting to guide the unmotivated staff, a role he felt was the manager’s (11). He finally ended up ill and left the ECEC setting and the sector altogether (12).

Discussion and implications The chapter explores leadership and governance as relevant to career decisions for men in ECEC. Some cross-national patterns appear. Findings suggest that organisational governance is mainly perceived in negative terms and works as a push factor because it challenges the men’s professional practice and autonomy. This includes demands for more efficiency in running the ECEC workplace. There is an indirect link between governance issues and gender since ECEC work is perceived as undesirable, feminised, and low status in a changing care market under pressure due to austerity policies and public restructuring. If men react more than women by leaving the sector due to such working conditions, such restructuring could reinforce the gendered composition of the ECEC workforce. In general, austerity measures affect women more negatively than men (Perrons, 2017). This phenomenon could be the object of further investigation. Organisational governance frames leadership practices, and challenges transformational leadership. Such leadership practices include building a common culture, fostering professionalism, individual guidance, and freedom. They are perceived as positive factors that enable male educators to continue working in the ECEC settings. This corresponds with previous research on the effect of transformational leadership practices on teacher’s retention (Sun & Wang, 2017). Our findings do not confirm previous research indicating that men in particular value the transformational leadership of male leaders more than that of female leaders (Wolfram & Mohr, 2010). Leadership practices have the potential to challenge the female model worker of the sector by acting as gender sensitive gatekeepers to the ECEC profession. Therefore, leaders can play a central role in altering the gender balance of the sector. We also find gender sensitive transformative leadership practices where leaders take into consideration the general vulnerability of men in the sector in their individual support. For example, facing accusations of sexual abuse or more general scepticism, these leaders provide support and solutions. This gender sensitivity of

Workplace environment  81

transformative leadership might be relevant for other fields facing a lack of gender balance. We conclude by highlighting the preventive impact of transformational leadership on the men’s decision to leave the ECEC settings. To be effective, transformational leadership must be accompanied by organisational governance enabling these kinds of leadership practices in terms of economic frames and leadership competence.

References Acker, J. (1990). Hierarchies, jobs, bodies: A theory of gendered organizations. Gender & Society, 4(2), 139–158. Aldoory, L., & Toth, E. (2009). Leadership and gender in public relations: Perceived effectiveness of transformational and transactional leadership styles. Journal of Public Relations Research, 16(2), 157–183. https://doi.org/10.1207/s1532754xjprr1602_2 Allensworth, E., Ponisciak, S.,  & Mazzaeo, C. (2009). The schools teachers leave: Teacher mobility in Chicago public schools. Chicago: Consortium on Chicago School Research. Retrieved from https://consortium.uchicago.edu/sites/default/files/2018-10/CCSR_ Teacher_Mobility.pdf Bass, B. M. (2015). Transformasjonsledelse: å lære å dele en visjon [Transformational leadership: Learning how to share a vision]. In Ø. L. Marthinsen (Ed.), Perspektiver på ledelse [Perspectives on leadership] (pp. 109–123). Oslo: Gyldendal Akademisk. Ebbeck, M.,  & Waniganayake, M. (2003). Early childhood professionals: Leading today and tomorrow. Marrickville: Elsevier. Grisoni, L., & Beeby, M. (2007). Leadership, gender and sense-making. Gender, Work and Organisation, 14(3), 191–209. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2007.00339.x Hale-Jinks, C., Knopf, H.,  & Knopf, H. (2006). Tackling teacher turnover in childcare: Understanding causes and consequences, identifying solutions. Childhood Education, 82(4), 219–226. https://doi.org/10.1080/00094056.2006.10522826 Hard, L., & Jónsdóttir, A. H. (2013). Leadership is not a dirty word: Exploring and embracing leadership in ECEC. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(3), 311– 325. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2013.814355 Hard, L., & O’Gorman, L. (2007). “Push-me” or “Pull-you”? An opportunity for early childhood leadership in the implementation of Queensland’s early years curriculum. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 8(1), 50–60. https://doi.org/10.2304/ciec.2007.8.1.50 Ingersoll, R. (2001). Teacher turnover and teacher shortages: An organisational analysis. American Educational Research Journal, 38(3), 499–534. Lloyd, E.,  & Penn, H. (2014). Childcare markets in an age of austerity. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 22(3), 386–396. https://doi.org/10.1080/13502 93X.2014.912901 Long, C. S., & Thean, L. Y. (2011). Relationship between leadership style, job satisfaction and employees’ turnover intention: A literature review. Research Journal of Business Management, 5(3), 91–100. https://doi.org/10.3923/rjbm.2011.91.100 McDonald, P., Thorpe, K., & Irvine, S. (2018). Low pay but still we stay: Retention in early childhood education and care. Journal of Industrial Relations, 60(5), 647–668. https://doi. org/10.1177/0022185618800351 Moen, K. H.,  & Granrusten, P. T. (2013). Distribution of leadership functions in early childhood centers in Norway following organisational changes. In E. Hujala, M. Waniganayake, & J. Rodd (Eds.), Researching leadership in early childhood education (pp. 79–96). Tampere: Tampere University Press.

82  Birgitte Ljunggren et al.

Nakamura, J., & Csikszentmihalyi, M. (2002). The concept of flow. In C. R. Snyder & S. J. Lopez (Eds.), Handbook of positive psychology (pp. 89–105). New York: Oxford University Press. Nentwich, J. C., Poppen, W., Schalin, S., & Vogt, F. (2013). The same and the other: Male childcare workers managing identity dissonance. International Review of Sociology/Revue Internationale de Sociologie, 23(2), 326–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.804295 Peeters, J., Rohrmann, T., & Emilsen, K. (2015). Gender balance in ECEC: Why is there so little progress? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 302–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043805 Perrons, D. (2017). Gender and inequality: Austerity and alternatives. Intereconomics, 52(1), 28–33. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10272-017-0639-x Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Manni, L. (2006). Effective leadership in the early years sector (ELEYS) study. London: Institute of Education, University of London. Stempel, C. R., Rigotti, T., & Mohr, G. (2015). Think transformational leadership – think female? Leadership, 11(3), 259–280. https://doi.org/10.1177/1742715015590468 Sun, R.,  & Wang, W. (2017). Transformational leadership, employee turnover intention, and actual voluntary turnover in public organizations. Public Management Review, 19(8), 1124–1141. https://doi.org/10.1080/14719037.2016.1257063 Thomas, D. R. (2006). A  general inductive approach for analyzing qualitative evaluation data. American Journal of Evaluation, 27(2), 237–246. https://doi.org/10.1177/1098214 005283748 Torrance, D. (2013). Distributed leadership: Challenging five generally held assumptions. School Leadership & Management, 33(4), 354–372. https://doi.org/10.1080/13632434.2 013.813463 Torres, A. C. (2016). Is this work sustainable? Teacher turnover and perceptions of workload in charter management organizations. Urban Education, 51(8), 891–914. https://doi. org/10.1177/0042085914549367 Waniganayake, M. (2014). Being and becoming early childhood leaders: Reflections on leaderships studies in early childhood education and the future leadership research agenda. Journal of Early Childhood Education Research, 3(1), 65–81. Williams, C. L. (1992). The glass escalator effect: Hidden advantages for men in the “female” professions. Social Problems, 39(3), 253–267. https://doi.org/10.1525/sp.1992.39. 3.03x0034h Wolfram, H.,  & Mohr, G. (2010). Gender-typicality of economic sectors and gendercomposition of working groups as moderating variables in leadership research. Gender in Management, 25(4), 320–339. https://doi.org/10.1108/17542411011048182 Wright, D., & Brownhill, S. (2019). Men in early years settings: Building a mixed gender workforce. London: Jessica Kingsley Publishers. Yukl, G. (2010). Leadership in organisations (7th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson.

7 EXPERIENCES OF WORKPLACE RELATIONSHIPS AS FACTORS PRECIPITATING OR PREVENTING DROPOUT OF MALE EDUCATORS IN ECEC Victoria Sullivan, Ramazan Sak, and Karen Thorpe

Introduction Male teachers are likely to experience negative emotions in their work, and if there is no community to support them, this can lead to continuous accumulation of negative emotions. As a result, this increases the likelihood for male teachers to drop out of their career. (Jun, dropout, China)

Men comprise between 0.007% and 9% of educators across the 12 countries (see Table 4.1) engaging in this study (Chapter 3). As such a small minority, male educators stand out as different, and this experience has the potential to be isolating. Their inclusion in the social world and work of the ECEC workplace is dependent on their relationships with colleagues, both men and women (Bullough, 2015; Thorpe et al., 2018). In this chapter we examine the role of workplace relationships in decisions to persist with work in ECEC or to precipitate dropout. We commence by examining the literature on the experience of minorities in gendersegregated workplaces and how this relates to longevity of employment. We then focus on the specific context of the ECEC workplace and the evidence about the effects of collegial relationships in ECEC, followed by a presentation of analysis from the multi-country study.

Gender minorities and the workplace For the minority in gender-segregated occupations, whether men or women, the experience of difference, and quite often social exclusion, can impact on decisions of whether or not to persist with their career choice (Acker, 2012; Clow, Ricciardelli, & Bartfay, 2015; Sobiraj, Korek, Weseler, & Mohr, 2011). Collegial

84  Victoria Sullivan et al.

relationships are central to workplace well-being and decisions to stay or leave (Bullough, 2015; Gallant  & Riley, 2017). Respectful and inclusive relationships have been found to sustain ongoing persistence in workforce participation while tokenism and exclusion precipitate dropout. Kossek (2016), in reviewing the literature on women working in engineering, identified masculine culture and sense of ‘not fitting in’ as the reason for women exiting the workforce for alternative careers. Studies on men working in female-dominated occupations report similarly. For example, Sobiraj et al. (2011) in a study of German men working in feminised occupations found that attitudes of female colleagues and experiences of conflict with them impacted men’s job satisfaction, mental health, and experiences of stress. Clow et  al. (2015) report that male nurses are viewed as more deviant and less competent than their female counterparts. Such reactions are often framed within larger societal gender expectations (Shen-Miller & Smiler, 2015; Warin, 2017). Inclusion is essential to support productive and sustained workforce participation in gender-segregated workplaces and is predicated on leadership and positive peer practices (Vohra et al., 2015). Across a broad literature, three key processes are noted as central to inclusion of gender-minorities. First, positive expectations reflected in equitable division of labour is associated with individual well-being (Pirard, Schoenmaeckers, & Camus, 2015) and increased staff retention (Clayton & Schoonmaker, 2007). Second, actions that build positive inter-personal relationships support development of a sense of belonging and trust (Pruit, 2014). Finally, active supports, including those provided by minority-peers, serve to sustain ongoing productive workforce participation (Roberts-Holmes, 2009).

Collegial relationships in ECEC as factors precipitating or preventing dropout Collegial relationships are central to the inclusion of men in ECEC (Bullough, 2015; Cameron, Moss, & Owen, 1999; Thorpe et al., 2018). In contrast to work in the schooling sector where there is a single teacher, the work of an educator in ECEC occurs in teams, requiring collaboration and flexibility (Warin, 2017). The work is also highly relational and often intimate, and it requires children’s and parents’ trust (Heikkilä & Hellman, 2017; Sumsion, 2000). The work is demanding yet low status and, particularly for men, requires collegial support (Pruit, 2014). In examining relationships, we therefore focus on teamwork, trust, and peer supports (Figure 7.1).

Teamwork Division of labour has been identified as one key source of messaging gendered expectations in ECEC teaching teams and can serve to communicate either belonging or exclusion. Division of labour necessarily reflects the training, seniority, and role of each staff member but has also been found to reflect both gendered attitudes and trust in competence and motives (Thorpe et al., 2018). Accounts of division of

Workplace relationships as factors  85

Workplace Relationships

Teamwork FIGURE 7.1 

Trust

Support

Three dimensions of workplace relationships

labour, both from male and female educators, suggest that men more often engage in physical play and ‘fun’ activities (Aigner & Rohrmann, 2012; Cremers, Krabel, & Calmbach, 2012; Hedlin, Åberg, & Johansson, 2019) and may take less responsibility for record-keeping (Børve, 2017). Some reports from male educators also suggest they are more likely to be assigned ‘discipline’ or ‘heavy-lifting’ roles (Mallozzi  & Galman, 2014) and be excluded from tasks such as toileting (Sak, ­Rohrmann, Şahin Sak, & Schauer, 2019; Tufan, 2018). Relationships with a teaching team and the body of staff within a centre have been identified as important in sustaining male educators’ ongoing satisfaction and engagement in ECEC (Heikkilä & Hellman, 2017; Warin, 2017). Existing literature points to the value of professional relationships in which individual views are valued, decisions are shared, and staff focus on joint achievements in supporting children’s development (Bullough, 2015). Such approaches highlight shared work goals and individual contributions to achieve them, and are not gender-blind but rather acknowledge diversity (Warin, 2017). Failure to recognise gender or positioning men as exceptional can be perceived as excluding men from the day to day work in the ECEC setting. For example, in an Australian study of two centres, each with a single male educator, both men described feeling part of the teaching team and proud of their contributions; however, language used by female colleagues was at times emasculating or excluding. A participant in this study was described as ‘one of the girls’ while the other was tokenised as ‘our guy’ (Thorpe et al., 2018). Everyday language and relational practices are potentially salient signals of inclusion or exclusion.

Trust A general distrust of men working with children is a common theme in research on men in ECEC worldwide and has been well documented across two decades (e.g. Cameron et  al., 1999). ‘Social fear’ of male educators may exclude engagement in some fundamental aspects of the role of an ECEC educator that require close physical contact with children (Sak et al., 2019; Tufan, 2018). Such restrictions, when they occur, are commonly positioned as ‘protection’ of men from accusation of inappropriate behaviour and may be presented as response to parent requests

86  Victoria Sullivan et al.

(Kamberi, Karlsson, & Rennstam, 2016; Sullivan, Perales, & Thorpe, 2020). Nonetheless, restricting areas of practice conveys a limitation of trust in male educators and serves to exclude (Acker, 2012; Roberts-Holmes, 2009). Where management resists adjustments to work assignments on the basis of gender, male educators report feeling supported and trusted (Iannucci & MacPhail, 2019; Vohra et al., 2015); and when they do not, men report feeling mistrusted and unsupported (Gallant & Riley, 2017). Absence of trust and suspicion or accusation of inappropriate sexual motive, even if not founded in evidence, precipitate exit (Bhana & Moosa, 2016).

Peer support Peer support is crucial for professional development, and in this context, support by same-sex peers becomes relevant. The extremely low occurrence of men in ECEC means that a man in a centre is often alone and will have no or few male colleagues with whom to connect (Børve, 2017; Thorpe et al., 2018). Available research suggests that male educators value support of male colleagues and particularly mutual understanding of the issue of ‘risk’ (Warin, 2017). The need to understand how a male educator’s presence can attract others to the ECEC workplace and the ways in which they can support and sustain men’s ongoing positive participation is evident. The data emerging from this study across 12 countries provides a valuable contribution to understanding male collegial relationships and their role in supporting and sustaining male educators in ECEC.

Methodology Utilising the methodologies developed in this research (Chapter 4), we analysed data coded to theme Workplace Environment and subtheme Peer Relations to examine accounts of teamwork, trust, and peer support. We then undertook illustrative case analyses of a dropout and a persister to show how workplace relationships played a role in decisions to stay or to exit. Authors each analysed the full data set and then met to discuss any differences and similarities they found.

Results Teamwork In examining workplace culture, we focused on men’s accounts of decisions pertaining to division of labour that messaged inclusion or exclusion. Teamwork was important to a participant’s sense of inclusion. The men’s accounts spoke of the value of a supportive and communal culture as affecting their wellbeing and positive engagement in their practice. For example, Orhan (dropout, Turkey) talks of shared purpose and teamwork: After a hard and stressful teaching process, I was really happy in the encouraging and warm atmosphere of my new school. We were such a compatible

Workplace relationships as factors  87

team that we prepared many effective projects together. We tried to focus on problems in our school and in ECEC, made several projects about these problems, and presented our projects at academic conferences. Orhan’s statement clearly connects his feelings of wellbeing and inclusion to productivity and creativity in the workplace. Notably he identifies team support as central to addressing problems positively. Advocacy from the leadership group was identified as a central support. Enjoying the trust and support of management was particularly potent when questions of ‘appropriateness’ of having a male educator were raised. For example, Ross (dropout, Ireland) describes the value of such advocacy: They were very supportive. If there was ever an occasion where you know I was under pressure or you know there was . . . confusion maybe or query you know or curiosity towards my presence, they were always very supportive of me, saying: “Well Ross is a childcare worker here. . . . He’s here just as well as anyone else is. He’s Garda vetted [police checked] and qualified as we all are”. Here the team’s support focuses on Ross’s rights to be treated ‘as anyone else’. There is clear assertion by team members of the ‘appropriateness’ of his inclusion in the team. Further, he identifies division of labour as a key symbol of inclusion, once again citing his team: ‘If you think as a man that you’re not getting away with changing nappies you can forget about it’. The absence of gender-differentiation in work allocation, in a way that is gender-blind (Warin, 2017), is presented as a significant marker of full inclusion. Similarly, Matthias (persister, Germany) provides an account of inclusion as being a valued and contributing member of the team: The leadership offered me their trust and would count on me. They showed me that I am part of the team. I am accepted in this place, and I am appreciated, and I have a voice. I can contribute something. The choice of the word trust conveys a sense of belonging, the idea of shared responsibility and of making a valued contribution. It is notable that Matthias overtly links the theme of trust to having a voice as a team member. In contrast, gendered differentiation of tasks serves to exclude. Though not common in our data, there were some accounts of prejudice and exclusion. For example, Mehmet (persister, Turkey) describes how his pedagogical efforts as a school principal were belittled: Some principals did not appreciate or support my intense work schedule. Sometimes I was prevented from conducting certain activities or discouraged with comments that all the work I did was unnecessary. Some people said, “Don’t you have any other work? Stop these freaky activities and start to work as a principal in a school”.

88  Victoria Sullivan et al.

Mehmet’s account clearly identifies a view from management above that frontline work in the ECEC classroom is lower status and does not fit for a man. Care and education are ‘women’s work’, whereas management and leadership constitute a male domain. As Vohra et al. (2015) indicated, the attitudes of management can have profound effects in inclusion or exclusion of minorities in gender-segregated occupations through their influence on division of labour. The accounts presented earlier suggest that low status of work in ECEC is a factor underpinning the questioning or emasculation of men working with young children. Trust and valuing of colleagues, including those who have managerial roles, is critical in overcoming this barrier.

Trust Trusting relationships emerged as a significant theme from the men’s accounts of teamwork. Female colleagues’ actions and assertions of men’s competence signified inclusion. Concerns about the appropriateness of men caring for children, particularly in intimate tasks, has emerged in the literature (Chapters 8 and 11). The absence of such concerns among female colleagues of the men in this study was notable. Thorpe et al. (2018) noted that female educators who express concern are those who have not actually worked with a male educator. In the transcripts from this study, variations of trust in male educators’ competency emerged as a factor affecting workplace wellbeing. Nicolay (dropout, Norway) discusses how he allowed children to participate in risky behaviour while he was watching, assured in his ability to keep them safe. However, a female colleague felt the need to intervene: I was standing at the side and then some kids climbed up [the fence], and I stood by and made sure that it went well and all that, and then she came. I mean she was thinking, here I was, standing, a grown-up man, and I have . . . taken care of kids a lot before, and she came and was kind of saying: “Yes, it’s dangerous, can’t climb there”. But I was standing right here, you know. I’m in control. You don’t have to come here and tell me . . . Nicolay attributed his gender as the reason that made his colleague question his ability to protect children’s safety, and he presented this experience as alienating. On the other hand, valuing of respondent’s contributions by their teaching team was reported as a strong inclusion factor. Ross (dropout, Ireland) who had already identified strong trusting relationships with his ECEC team, explained how this extended into his teaching space: So I  felt  .  .  . part of a really, really strong team  .  .  . it was actually such a positive environment and  .  .  . you know when a team gets on well in a childcare room, you’re talking about them all wanting to be

Workplace relationships as factors  89

creative, . . . positive, . . . busy, . . . and you’re really kind of on the same page. So in my experience . . . it was excellent. Similarly, Alex, a persister from England, discusses how a mentoring relationship with a female colleague made all the difference to his work life: ‘She was brilliant. . . . She helped me through my first year immensely’. Discrimination and stigma were reported by some men. Yu (dropout, China) reported that the women in his teacher training classes teased the men and made jokes at their expense: [A particular male student] was very shy and was bullied by girls in his class. Sometimes, girls cracked a joke, but it was too much for him. He didn’t want to attend the class. Consistent with Acker’s (2012) accounts of women’s exclusion in male dominated work places, Thabo (dropout, South Africa) exemplifies how men are defined as being ‘out of place’ in ECEC: You know, they were saying: “No, this thing is for women. You’re going to teach little children; you’re going to have stress; this is not a male field; eh h you’re supposed to be teaching in high school not there”. . . . Like eh another aspect when we go to teaching practice, we would be faced by an enormous discrimination from teachers who are already in the field, first from the principals, the HODs [Head of Departments], and then the actual teachers. For him the women’s admonitions reinforced his own stereotypical beliefs and fear that ECEC is ‘women’s work’ and not the domain of men. The accounts in our data suggest that being included as part of a cohesive and supportive team allows male educators to feel secure and safe in their work. Inclusion was presented as positive relationships with female colleagues and participation in teamwork, including joint decision making and mentorship, acknowledgement of diversity, and trust.

Peer support The men’s accounts of their interactions with, and support from, male colleagues were examined. The mutual understanding of a male peer was something many men wished for, even if the participant had good relationships with female colleagues. Andrew (dropout, Australia) describes the importance of a male colleague: ‘But, again, I did have that male friend, who I’m really good friends with still, who was in childcare at my first job. So I had somebody to talk to’.

90  Victoria Sullivan et al.

Male peers can share mutual understanding and opportunities to debrief. Andrew indicates that although he shares trusting relationships with all his female co-workers, his male colleague filled a gap that they simply could not fill. Bernd (dropout, Germany) extends this idea: I had this friend I lived with, who was an educator as well. [When a peer made negative remarks about our vocational choice] we could both express . . . that it might be that we are not “normal” in his view, but for us it is totally OK to work with children as an adult. The comradery among male ECEC workers can differ greatly from the connection between a female and male colleague. Bernd speaks of the rapport that two men can have, based on mutual empathy regarding their situations. They utilise this tool even if they are not working in the same place. Jun (dropout, China) shares the example of a male colleague that had no male peer support network: ‘He was extremely depressed. I mean he had no one else to talk with. . . .’ Jun indicates his belief that there is a clear link between the absence of male peers and a male educator’s personal and professional well-being. He connects having ‘no one else to talk with’ to a lack of community and therefore feelings of exclusion, leading to exiting the ECEC workforce. Herbert (persister, Australia) clarifies that while female colleagues can be accepting and supporting, a male colleague makes a huge difference to his morale: I guess, for me, in a female dominated workforce, the connection that men have between each other is just important in life, really. But when you haven’t got that in a workforce, it’s actually kind of hard in many ways. So, to have a guy that I could be a guy with . . . [and] not be judged for the way we might do things differently. . . Herbert’s account highlights the importance of male colleagues in understanding the legitimacy of the way men are and the way they do things. A few participants shared experiences of negative comments from male peers who did not study or work in ECEC. Cem (dropout, Turkey) was teased by fellow male students at the Faculty of Education for his doing women’s work: We could get tea from [the teachers’ room] but when I went there, male colleagues from other majors ridiculed me. Therefore, in time, I started not to go to the teachers’ room in breaks. When the classes of other teachers started, I took my tea. ((pause)) It meant that I did not meet many teachers and usually felt alone in school. These male peers were usually teaching older age groups or were filling more “male acceptable” roles like physical education or management. The stigma and

Workplace relationships as factors  91

bullying caused Cem to isolate himself from them to avoid an unpleasant interaction. Senzo (dropout, South Africa), discusses this further: There’s that sentiment amongst us males that I can’t go there and be a post level one teacher, but I can go there as a manager because as much as I’m going to be teaching in the primary field, but I’m just going to be a manager, and I’m not going to teach in grade R,1,2,3,4. Senzo and the other male educators were made to experience teaching young children as socially unacceptable for men, even though they hold a degree in teaching. As a consequence, Senzo sought a managerial role, as acceptable male work.

Illustrative case analyses

Positive and negative feelings about those events

To further showcase these findings, we now focus on two storylines from the interview data, those of Herbert and Thabo. These cases show how peer relations affect male educators’ career trajectories in very different ways. Herbert comes from a Christian, middle-class family in Australia. His ECEC career decision was shaped by support of a friend and his family. After ‘floating around’ a range of different centres for a year (1), he obtained a full-time position at the centre where he is still working (2). Herbert emphasised that the presence of another male teacher in the preschool institution was an important support for him. A  man who had already been working there quickly befriended Herbert. Regarding division of labour, Herbert was expected to do

Teaching degree

Kindergarten Studied Film and TV -1

4 Kindergarten

Left university

1

3 2 Casual worker

Prekindergarten

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 7.2

Herbert, persister, Australia

5

Float

6

Current work ECEC 9 8 7

EECERA conference

92  Victoria Sullivan et al.

the care work such as nappies and toileting, and he was happy to do the same jobs as other workers. When occasionally asked to do heavy lifting, he was not bothered. Herbert stated that he made really good connections with staff, children, and families in his first year in pre-kindergarten class (2). He also emphasised the support of the director with whom he worked initially: ‘She . . . was amazing. She loved to have me there’. He mentioned another source of support, a woman who supervised him for his Diploma. Herbert summarises his career decision thus: Yeah, I love it. Obviously, it’s got its stressful moments. ((laughs)) But that’s awesome. Yeah, this is what I want to do, and this is what I enjoy, and I’m glad that I’m in this space.

Positive and negative feelings about those events

Herbert has been working in ECEC for seven years and is studying towards his BEd (early childhood and primary), working part-time during the semester and full-time between semesters (8). Thabo comes from a very disadvantaged family in South Africa. His ECEC career decision was shaped by his family’s poverty, which enabled his gaining financial support for a Foundation Phase (FP) degree. He was motivated to change the course of his family circumstances through obtaining an education. He wanted to study law but was not accepted to the program. He chose education because of the bursary provided for teaching children ages five to nine. For him, the need for

Varsity

2

Second job

3

8

Registered for honours in Family Relations, building house

FP studies 9

13

7 First job

1

6

No support from FP for 4 teaching 5 Funding

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 7.3

Thabo, dropout, South Africa

10

11

Foundation Phase (FP) teacher training

12

Removed from teaching in FP

Workplace relationships as factors  93

a steady payday pushed him through his studies. In addition, he didn’t understand that he had registered to teach in the FP (9): I thought teaching is just teaching, so I will just study and then everything will just fall into place. But when we were registering those guys who are called mentors, you’ll go to them and then you’ll ask for help, and they’ll check. “Eh h what it is that you need to register for”? Then I will tell them: “No, I need to register for foundation”, and they’ll say: “Why”? Thabo emphasised receiving support during the process from his mother and a few female colleagues in the same phase. However, the majority of students and staff were discriminatory. As other males joined his classes and stood up for themselves, he felt more secure, but still the stigma of training to do ‘women’s work’ affected him. Although Thabo prepared himself for FP, he preferred to teach a higher class and hoped that it would work out that way. When he went to his first job in ECEC after he graduated (11), his male principal confronted him and stated that foundation phase was no place for a man and moved him to a higher age group, even though he had been employed to teach the FP. Thabo was immensely pleased to be leaving ‘women’s work’ behind (12). Herbert and Thabo share some common points in their stories. Both emphasised that the presence of a male students and male educators was an important support for them during the progress of their career. Also, good relationships with children, families, and staff were important for them. However, the degree of choice they experienced in adopting an ECEC career was influenced by societal and familial values. Herbert made the conscious choice to become an early childhood educator, and had the strong support of family, friends, colleagues, and management. On the other hand, Thabo’s entry to ECEC resulted from necessity, and he suffered negative experiences from peers and more broadly from society.

Herbert

Thabo

FIGURE 7.4 

Motivation at entry

Social response to work in ECEC

Vocational

Supported Positive

Financial necessity

Relationships with colleagues

Unsupported Negative

Diagram summary of illustrative case studies

Outcome

Trusted, Encouraged

Remain & thrive

Excluded Ridiculed Emasculated Stigmatised

Exit

94  Victoria Sullivan et al.

Herbert remains in ECEC while Thabo took the opportunity to leave as soon he had the chance.

Discussion and implications In any work environment, collegial relationships affect staff well-being and productivity. In work environments that are gender segregated these relationships become more salient (Acker, 2012; Clow et  al., 2015; Sobiraj et  al., 2011). Workers in the gender minority are not necessarily accepted and do not automatically fit or belong. In this chapter we focused on the question: How do the relationships in the workplace relate to feelings of belonging and attendant decisions to remain or stay in ECEC? The answer emerging from the data is that workplace relationships are critical. The accounts of the male educators across different cultures suggest that collegial relationships are crucial in men’s decision to persist in working in ECEC. These relationships serve to include or exclude and affect men’s day-today experiences, sense of belonging, and wellbeing. Men who exited experienced more negative relationships with colleagues, while those who stayed had, on balance, more supportive and inclusive relationships with fewer negative connections. These findings align with previous research on mixed gender ECEC teams (e.g. Bullough, 2015; Thorpe et al., 2018). Teamwork, trust, and support, three themes evident in the broader research examining retention of gender minorities in gender segregated occupations, were also clearly evident in our data. Teamwork is particularly salient in the ECEC workplace (Warin, 2017). The male educators’ accounts of inclusion referred to workplace cultures in which female colleagues and management did not make exceptions on the basis of gender but rather included men in all tasks associated with the work, including more intimate work tasks. Trust that the men were both competent and safe to work with children was a major theme in the overall cultural context of suspicion of their motives. When questions were raised by parents, female colleagues’ advocacy and affirmation of competence conveyed trust both to parents and other staff. Supports were a key feature of those with enduring careers in ECEC. The ability to share and off-load to other male ECEC colleagues was particularly identified. In contrast, accounts of exclusion focused on the male educator’s treatment as different or with indifference, rather than as a valuable and valued member of a diverse team. The accounts underscore Warin’s portrayal of ECEC as teamwork and the need to value men’s full participation alongside their unique contribution (Warin, 2017). While the commonality of the themes of teamwork, trust, and support stood out across the analyses of data from the 12 countries, the context of each mattered. Societal beliefs weighed in. We are wary of asserting that all is well in progressive countries (e.g.in Scandinavia) and not so in more traditional countries (e.g. Turkey and China) because men from all countries give accounts of overwhelming awareness of difference and risk. However, what is evident across context is different societal views of masculinity and the way these interplay with the choice to work

Workplace relationships as factors  95

in ECEC. These differences emerge in our analyses of male educators and colleague relationships in the context of initial training. In some contexts, working with young children is more overtly asserted as ‘women’s work’ and emasculating. Regardless of gender, work in ECEC has a lower status of compared with later stages of schooling (OECD, 2019). In societies where the expectation of men places greater emphasis on status and breadwinning, the choice to work in ECEC, and thereby selecting a lower status context as a teacher, raises question of motive (OECD, 2019). Our analysis has implications for creating inclusive pathways for men’s participation in ECEC. First, everyday experiences and relationships at work are critical to sustaining male educators in ECEC. Vohra et al. (2015) identify inclusion as essential to support productive and sustained workforce participation in gender-segregated workplaces and emphasise the role of leadership and positive peer relationships. The accounts provided by men here suggest the important role of leadership and advocacy of women in the ECEC team. Second, awareness training colleagues for leaders, as discussed in Chapter 6, would make salient the potency of everyday actions, words, and supports in the workplace. Finally, beyond the workplace, the role of specific supports for men working in ECEC and broader advocacy to change societal perspectives warrant further exploration.

References Acker, J. (2012). Gendered organizations and intersectionality: Problems and possibilities. Equality, Diversity and Inclusion, 31(3), 214–224. https://doi.org/10.1108/026101512112 09072 Aigner, J. C.,  & Rohrmann, T. (2012). Elementar: Männer in der pädagogischen Arbeit mit Kindern [Elementary: Men in educational work with children]. Opladen: Barbara Budrich. https://doi.org/10.3224/86649488 Bhana, D., & Moosa, S. (2016). Failing to attract males in foundation phase teaching: An issue of masculinities. Gender and Education, 28(1), 1–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0954 0253.2015.1105934 Børve, H. E. (2017). Men in kindergartens: Work culture and gender. Early Child Development and Care, 187(7), 1083–1094. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004430.2016.1154853 Bullough, R. V. (2015). Differences? Similarities? Male teacher, female teacher: An instrumental case study of teaching in a head start classroom. Teaching and Teacher Education, 47, 13–21. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tate.2014.12.001 Cameron, C., Moss, P., & Owen, C. (1999). Men in the nursery: Gender and caring work. London: Paul Chapman Publishing. Clayton, C. D. G., & Schoonmaker, F. (2007). What holds academically able teachers in the profession? A  study of three teachers. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 13(3), 247–267. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540600701299775 Clow, K. A., Ricciardelli, R., & Bartfay, W. J. (2015). Are you man enough to be a nurse? The impact of ambivalent sexism and role congruity on perceptions of men and women in nursing advertisements. Sex Roles, 72(7–8), 363–376. https://doi.org/10.1007/ s11199-014-0418-0

96  Victoria Sullivan et al.

Cremers, M., Krabel, J., & Calmbach, M. (2012). Male educators in kitas: A study on the situa­ tion of men in early childhood education. Berlin: Federal Ministry for Family Affairs, Senior Citizens, Women and Youth. Gallant, A.,  & Riley, P. (2017). Early career teacher attrition in Australia: Inconvenient truths about new public management. Teachers and Teaching: Theory and Practice, 23(8), 896–913. https://doi.org/10.1080/13540602.2017.1358707 Hedlin, M., Åberg, M.,  & Johansson, C. (2019). Fun guy and possible perpetrator: An interview study of how men are positioned within early childhood education and care. Education Inquiry, 10(2), 95–115. https://doi.org/10.1080/20004508.2018.1492844 Heikkilä, M., & Hellman, A. (2017). Male preschool teacher students negotiating masculinities: A qualitative study with men who are studying to become preschool teachers. Early Child Development and Care, 187(7), 1208–1220. https://doi.org/10.1080/030044 30.2016.1161614 Iannucci, C., & MacPhail, A. (2019). The effects of individual dispositions and workplace factors on the lives and careers of physical education teachers: Twelve years on from graduation. Sport, Education and Society, 24(1), 38–50. https://doi.org/10.1080/135733 22.2017.1307175 Kamberi, G., Karlsson, R., & Rennstam, J. (2016). Caught in the crossfire: A qualitative study of male preschool teaching (Unpublished Master’s Thesis), Lund University, Sweden (Managing People, Knowledge and Change). https://doi.org/10.1080/14755610600975910 Kossek, E. E., Su, R., & Wu, L. (2016). “Opting out” or “pushed out”? Integrating perspectives on women’s career equality for gender inclusion and interventions. Journal of Management, 43(1), 228–254. https://doi.org/10.1177/0149206316671582 Mallozzi, C. A.,  & Galman, S. C. (2014). Guys and “the rest of us”: Tales of gendered aptitude and experience in educational carework. Gender and Education, 26(3), 262–279. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2014.901724 OECD. (2019). Good practice for good jobs in early childhood education and care: Eight policy measures from OECD countries. Paris: OECD. https://doi.org/10.1787/64562be6-en Pirard, F., Schoenmaeckers, P., & Camus, P. (2015). Men in childcare services: From enrolment in training programs to job retention. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 362–369. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043810 Pruit, J. C. (2014). Preconstructing suspicion and recasting masculinity in preschool settings. Qualitative Research in Education, 3(3), 320–344. https://doi.org10.4471/qre.2014.50 Roberts-Holmes, G. P. (2009). “People are suspicious of us”: A  critical examination of father primary carers and English early childhood services. Early Years, 29(3), 281–291. https://doi.org/10.1080/09575140902989870 Sak, R., Rohrmann, T., Şahin Sak, İ. T.,  & Schauer, G. (2019). Parents’ views on male ECEC workers: A cross-country comparison. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 27(1), 68–80. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2018.1556535 Shen-Miller, D., & Smiler, A. P. (2015). Men in female-dominated vocations: A rationale for academic study and introduction to the special issue. Sex Roles, 72(7–8), 269–276. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-015-0471-3 Sobiraj, S., Korek, S., Weseler, D., & Mohr, G. (2011). When male norms don’t fit: Do Traditional attitudes of female colleagues challenge men in non-traditional occupations? Sex Roles, 65(11–12), 798–812. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-011-0057-7 Sullivan, V., Perales, F., & Thorpe, K. (2020). Beliefs and attribution: Insider accounts of men’s place in early childhood education and care. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 21(2), 126–137. https://doi.org/10.1177/1463949120929462 Sumsion, J. (2000). Negotiating otherness: A  male early childhood educator’s gender positioning. International Journal of Early Years Education, 8(2), 129–140. https://doi. org/10.1080/09669760050046174

Workplace relationships as factors  97

Thorpe, K., Sullivan, V., Jansen, E., McDonald, P., Sumsion, J., & Irvine, S. (2018). A man in the centre: Inclusion and contribution of male educators in early childhood education and care teaching teams. Early Child Development and Care, 190(6), 921–934. https://doi. org/10.1080/03004430.2018.1501564 Tufan, M. (2018). Public perceptions and the situation of males in early childhood settings. Educational Research and Reviews, 13(3), 111–119. https://doi.org/10.5897/ ERR2017.3458 Vohra, N., Chari, V., Mathur, P., Sudarshan, P., Verma, N., Mathur, N., Gupta, S., Dasmahapatra, V., Fonia, S., & Gandhi, H. K. (2015). Inclusive workplaces: Lessons from theory and practice. Vikalpa: Journal for Decision Makers, 40(3), 324–362. https://doi. org/10.1177/0256090915601515 Warin, J. (2017). Conceptualising the value of male practitioners in early childhood education and care: Gender balance or gender flexibility. Gender and Education, 31(3), 293– 308. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.2017.1380172

8 SOCIETAL FACTORS IMPACTING MALE TURNOVER IN ECEC Jean-Yves Plaisir, Thordis Thordardottir, and Yuwei Xu

Introduction ‘Men in women’s jobs are strange’. (Kevin, Iceland, dropout)

This claim by Kevin, an Icelandic early childhood education and care (ECEC) teacher who dropped out after three years of service in the field, illustrates the point that cultural stereotypes have constructed ECEC as an occupation for women (Haynes, 2008). As a result, men in ECEC not only seem ‘strange’, but they are oftentimes marginalised while also being pressured to challenge masculine cultures within a feminised profession (Sargent, 2005). Those who cannot withstand this pressure usually leave the field. Hence, a major challenge faced by ECEC systems worldwide is to ‘normalise’ men’s participation in the ECEC profession by shifting the conceptualization of ECEC as women’s work and by challenging gender stereotypes that define men’s and women’s roles differently. Even though certain countries have made noteworthy progress toward this goal (Peeters, Rohrmann, & Emilsen, 2015), there is much ground to cover. Part of the strategy for achieving this goal is to understand how societal factors impact the career trajectories of men who opt to work in the sector. In this chapter, we focus on men’s career decisions regarding leaving or staying in their work with young children aged 0 to 6 years old in 12 countries around the world. We depict how ‘feminization’ of the occupation (Laere, Vandenbroeck, Roets, & Peeters, 2014) and the status of ECEC professionals in various countries influenced some of the male educators to shun the field. Our data analysis also indicates that others left the profession due to the reactions of their family members and friends as well as ongoing experiences of marginalisation within the greater cultural contexts of their countries. Taken as a whole, this chapter aims to increase knowledge about the influence of societal factors on the dearth of men in ECEC globally.

Societal factors impacting male turnover  99

Perspective from previous research The history of ECEC is shaped and characterised by the widely accepted view that an effectual ECEC professional is endowed with the natural qualities of a good mother who does not need any formal training and qualifications to educate and care for young children (Burn & Pratt-Adams, 2015). This narrow understanding has contributed to devaluing the status of ECEC as a profession (Laere et  al., 2014), while also hindering men’s career trajectories in the sector. Messerschmidt and Messner (2018) examine how gender collectively constrains and enables social structures in the construction of masculinities. Similarly, Connell (2017, p. 189) describes a hegemonic type of masculinity when understood as a holistic concept of gender inequality in relation to various kinds of subordination and marginalisation of both men and women in local and global contexts of labour. Notably, men who perform ‘woman’s work’ are not exempt from subordination and scepticism about their masculinity based on perceived deviance from normative gender roles. Noteworthy, Sargent (2005) found that men in ECEC attempted ‘to live subordinate masculinities that could challenge traditional gender relations’ (p.  251) within ECEC settings. He demonstrated that ECEC constantly produces and reproduces gender differences and inequalities and that successful men in ECEC are coerced to play subordinated forms of masculinity to fit into ECEC institutional structures and cultural constructs. Additionally, male ECEC educators are often antagonised by suspicion of being gay or paedophiles within and beyond ECEC settings, and male caregivers are oftentimes ridiculed in both popular media and dominant discourse, which act as a social control mechanism to distance males from working with young children (Sargent, 2005). Moreover, the concept of ‘manhood acts’ (Skelton, 2009) was useful in guiding our understanding of why men leave the sector as they face gendered prejudices in ECEC environments while also experiencing social deprivation in the macro cultural context. Skelton utilises the notion of ‘manhood acts’ to show that men construct diverse understandings of what it means ‘to be a man’ through socialization and available role models from varied sources. Noteworthy, the literature on manhood acts stresses the intersectionality of racism, homophobia, and class structures (Haynes, 2008), which are often experienced by male workers in ECEC. Also, these acts tend to show masculine agency, which appears in both hilarious puns and resistant discourses when men attempt to perform tasks associated with female gender roles (Sargent, 2005; Nentwich, Poppen, Schalin, & Vogt, 2013), as depicted in a number of popular films, comedy, short talks on social media, and op-eds about men who work with young children (Cole, Plaisir, & ReichShapiro, 2020). Furthermore, manhood acts are constructed in relations to available resources, individual skill, local culture, and audience expectations (Schrock & Schwalbe, 2009). These constructs are deeply knitted into the reproduction of gender inequality both within and across various professions nationally and internationally.

100  Jean-Yves Plaisir et al.

It is important to bear in mind that normative masculinity discourages young men from doing so-called ‘female work’, and it therefore limits the recruitment and retention of male educators in ECEC. Some men in ECEC are likely to be marginalised based on their social class, race, sexual orientation or for simply pursuing careers in a feminised field. Men in these situations may feel pressured to redefine and defend their masculine selves. For instance, Tsfati and Ben-Ari (2019) found that caring gay fathers in Israel reconstructed the concept of manhood acts to the ‘manhood acts of caring’ to mesh masculinities and care together and justify the peculiar nature of men’s participation in a traditionally feminised role. Lastly, the separation of care as a motherly occupation and education as a professional activity provides much theoretical contestation for our study. This distinction is rooted in the Cartesian theory of body and mind duality (Laere & Vandenbroeck, 2018). In ECEC, this dualism appears when educating children is ascribed to the act of cultivating the mind while nurturing children is consigned to the act of attending to the body. Such a dichotomy (education versus care) fuels a philosophical debate in some circles as to whether ECEC can be delineated as either mind or body activities (Laere & Vandenbroeck, 2018). Thinking of women as caregivers and men as educators is a social construction, which hampers career trajectories for both females and males in ECEC. In this chapter, we utilise data collected from 12 countries through a collection of narratives, interviews, and storylines with 37 men who are racially, linguistically, and culturally diverse. We make use of code set D (Societal Factors) developed in our study to frame our analysis. Quotations from the data base were coded with this code set because they indicated circumstances related to decisions to enter, stay, or leave ECEC based on societal factors, culture, and societal norms. The subthemes in this code set can be found in Appendix B. Following the data analysis processes described in Chapter  4, we co-construct our interpretations of how societal factors are perceived by participants to have an impact on their career trajectories in ECEC. We try to maintain cultural sensitivity throughout the analysis and writing of this chapter. We organise our findings under three major themes: feminisation of ECEC, status of the ECEC profession and social expectations about men, and reactions of men’s parents/families and friends. Overall, we use perspectives gained from previous studies on the relation between gender inequality and labour as strong theoretical lenses for helping us to interpret portions of our data.

Findings Feminisation of ECEC In education systems around the world, male educators of various racial, linguistic, and cultural backgrounds face prejudices anchored in sexist ideologies

Societal factors impacting male turnover  101

that reinforce the ‘feminisation’ of ECEC. These biases were also found in our interview data. Following is an example from Senzo, a dropout from South Africa: They’ll use things that you’re doing  .  .  . things that should be done by women. You’re going to the creches, you’re going to find that maybe a child has peed on herself all of that stuff, you must be changing nappies. Senzo’s choice of career did not fit into the existing manhood ideals of the wider South African culture. Men who deviate from the cultural expectations of ‘manhood’ often experience antagonism and marginalisation by their peers and others (Sargent, 2005), who directly or indirectly pressure them to reverse their decisions. Likewise, some male educators develop an inferiority complex for being employed in a female-dominated profession. Sven, a dropout from Sweden, says, ‘I already felt a bit inferior by being in a women-driven field in which I know that some parents will be a little extra vigilant over me just because I am a man’. Interestingly, Sven’s feeling of inferiority is also accompanied by a fear that some of the children’s parents/guardians in his ECEC setting might perceive him as an imposter or a potential child molester, just because he is a man working in a feminised occupation. Yet working in ECEC can be rewarding for men whose hegemonic masculinity is welcomed and accepted in certain contexts. In China, men are welcomed to ECEC for gendered expectations such as supporting boys with their constructions of traditional masculine traits like being tough and sporty, which may otherwise not take place in a feminised environment (Xu, 2018). Rohrmann (2020) has observed that ‘tough men’ were portrayed in publicity gambits to attract men into ‘Kitas’ (early childhood frameworks, ages 0–6) in Germany. Kevin, a dropout from Iceland, concludes, ‘I think that part of my success as a preschool teacher has to do with the fact that I am a man’. Kevin paints a hegemonic masculinity portrait (Connell  & Messerschmidt, 2005) when he describes himself as a man who is ‘nearly two-meters tall, dressed in black wearing a leather jacket, with long hair and scary-looking’. Kevin’s appearance suggests a strong masculine presence (Connell  & Messerschmidt, 2005). It must be noted that men who display hegemonic masculine traits as ‘tough guys’ with Kevin’s looks are likely to be welcomed and positioned as disciplinarian and protective figures for children in ECEC settings, and they are also more likely to be accepted by parents for athletic activities with children than those who exhibit a non-hegemonic form of masculinity. Men of Kevin’s stature and phenotypic features are often deemed fit for fulfilling the perceived need of security for children and adults in ECEC settings. However, there is no guarantee that they will persist in ECEC.

102  Jean-Yves Plaisir et al.

Status of the ECEC profession and social expectations about men The participants’ experiences in tandem with numerous social expectations about men’s roles in society reflect Rohrmann’s (2020) findings of some factors that keep men out of the field. These include low salaries, unsatisfying work conditions, gendered suspicions, and ‘manhood acts’ ideal of breadwinners. Tom, a dropout from Sweden, describes how some of these factors impacted his decision to leave the field: As it is now, you can have an education and know everything about the profession. But if a parent suspects you of something, then it’s over. You get branded. . . . It is puzzling to me that (ECEC) is so low-paid and that it is not given higher status from the government. It’s a bad deal and there’s a lot of talk, but nothing ever happens. Tom’s account alludes to the threat of suspicion, low salary, and low professional status. It appears that low status and salary render it difficult for men to persist in ECEC. Cem, a Turkish dropout, echoes a similar viewpoint about gendered social expectations experienced by men in ECEC, stating: ‘It was thought as baby-sitting instead of a professional career’. This view of the profession is related to the idea that ECEC does not require any academic preparation or qualifications for women and men. Arguably, the perceived lack of professionalization or the de-professionalization of ECEC seems to turn many men (and women) away from the sector. Furthermore, many of the participants experience difficulty challenging hegemonic masculinity into new forms of masculinity (Connell & Messerschmidt, 2005) that value and welcome the nurturance and education of young children as a professional endeavour for both women and men. Senzo, a dropout from South Africa, states: I’m doing ECD [early childhood development]. They’ll not take you seriously, like why are you doing ECD? It’s for females but the pressure. . . . I don’t know how to put it, but it was not something that we spoke about with other [university] students. It was something that was interesting. I felt that I was doing it just because I was in a phase, you see. Senzo describes the societal pressure experienced by men who work with children in South Africa, including dealing with self-doubt as to whether they will achieve longevity in ECEC. Arguably, these men do not receive favourable acclamations based on public perceptions of ‘manhood acts’ (Schrock & Schwalbe, 2009). In our research, many participants speak about the importance of having more ECEC males as a strategy for countering negative public perceptions about men in the sector. Curiously, Nicolay, a dropout from Norway, asserts that the ‘manhood acts’ discourse sounds ‘very positive with men in ECEC’ because he thinks that such

Societal factors impacting male turnover  103

a narrative helps men to be ‘conscious of the gendered status of ECEC’. Hence, pre-service and in-service educators can benefit from understandings about gender issues in ECEC. For instance, Riaan, a persister from South Africa, states: When were brought up, like in the community, they tell you like what females must do and what males must do. . . . You know it didn’t even cross my mind, uhm, defining gender roles already threw me off, you know. In his narrative, Riaan recalls how his community communicates a set of expectations of women and men, and this implicit bias makes it difficult for South African men working in ECEC. A majority of the participants discuss how they need to challenge these ideas and redefine gender roles. Conversely, some participants try to hold on to their views of female workers as caregivers and themselves as teachers. Orhan, a dropout from Turkey, describes the low status of ECEC compared to other teaching tracks that are conceived as conventional male work. He says: Teaching young children is not thought [as] a valuable social status especially for men. In other words, people think that your job is not as important as the job of a history, math, or philosophy teacher working in a high school. Moreover, many of the participants express concerns about the impact of the wage gap on their decisions to leave the profession. For example, Yu, a dropout from China, says: The salary is not bad, but it is not good enough, which may influence my decision [to leave]. If my salary is not good, how am I supposed to afford myself or my own family in the future? Yu’s feelings about low wages mirror the concerns of other men who leave the field to join law enforcement agencies where they are offered more attractive salaries along with other social benefits and better working conditions. Albert, a persister from Iceland, makes a telling revelation on this issue: Of course, it is always necessary to raise the salary. Well, I’m not sure which is the main harm, the workload or the salary. It might be both, but maybe it will come clearer later on. I know what has kept me so long in the field. I  have [always] had opportunity to work some more than a fultime job and raise my income. Thus, you know, [income] has an effect on if you stay or leave ECE, and my overwork made the pay enough for my own breadwinning. Undoubtedly, working longer hours and receiving overtime pay matters for many persisters. It also enables these men to maintain their status as ‘breadwinners’ in

104  Jean-Yves Plaisir et al.

their families or to afford certain wants in life. Joel, who left the field for one of the largest law enforcement agencies in the US, puts it thus: The compensation, I don’t feel it was as good as it should have been, um but then you know with the profession, it’s not a profession that pays a lot to begin with, so you should sort of expect that to some extent. But as far as job satisfaction, it was good, but I just felt like it was my time to go. Joel also recalls that he had a good rapport with his teacher colleagues and that his supervisor offered him the option of choosing a different classroom or becoming the art teacher when he had shared his intention to leave ECEC. His example suggests that job satisfaction, for some men in the field, goes in tandem with professional status and equitable salary. On the other hand, the dearth of male educators working with young children seems the most important motivating factor for persisters. Marcos who is a veteran teacher and an instructional coach in the American context reflects on the reasons why he stays: I realized that just in general there’s not a lot of men examples. I kind of learned that early on that there’s not a lot of male teachers, because of the nature of teaching in itself, seemed to be a female dominated profession. I actually wrote my research proposal for grad[uate] school, [which] was on men in early childhood and children. It seems that Marcos was so fascinated by the lack of male educators in ECEC that he decided to research this phenomenon. Even though men like Marcos also worry about cultural stereotypes and suspicions related to physical contact with children, they have learned to deal with those issues over the years. For instance, Marcos says, ‘I learned how to hug and touch children [in a way] that doesn’t seem inappropriate, you know, but you still give the children what they need, which is physical contact’. Similarly, Cruickshank (2019) has analysed varying degrees of fear and uncertainty that male primary teachers experience in relation to physical contact with children. Regardless of the positive intentions that participants have in terms of their relationships with children, the marginal situation that men face in ECEC is nonetheless real and threatening. This marginalisation is related to worldwide gendered socialization. As appeared in the participants’ narratives, these social forces are quite strong, and they push men out of ECEC. Hence, the prospect of increasing male participation to enrich experiences for children and achieve gender equality and diversity in ECEC remains a distant dream.

Reactions of men’s parents/families and friends The earlier section on feminisation and low status of ECEC addresses broader societal influences, while this section focuses on the immediate contexts of family and

Societal factors impacting male turnover  105

friends. On the one hand, many parents’ and friends’ reactions as reported by the participants mirror and police gendered norms and expectations in their particular society, pressing the participants to leave ECEC. On the other hand, the emotional, financial, and other support from significant others have proved to be important factors for some men to persist in ECEC. Indeed, many participants reported that their family’s encouragements were important drivers for them to enter ECEC, as also noted in other studies (Xu, 2018). These family connections include mothers, sisters, or other relatives who are themselves ECEC educators, and also include positive experiences looking at their own relatives’ children. Senzo, dropout in the South African context, expresses his frustration about his friends and family members who constantly reminded him that he was doing a woman’s job. Similarly, Kevin, a dropout from Iceland, describes his negative experiences with close friends and parents when he decided to work in a preschool. His story is also reflected by other participants in the study. Kevin recalls: When she [a girlfriend] learned that I was working at a preschool she looked me in the eye and just asked me straight out, “Are you gay”? There is nothing wrong with being gay in general. But the comment was different . . . you know, “what’s wrong with you”? Kevin also remembers that his parents, especially his father, thought it was ‘weird’ for him to become an ECEC educator. Senzo, a dropout from South Africa, recollects the negative responses he received from his friends: The females were shocked, but they didn’t pay it any attention. But it was more the males, my friends, they even laughed, even today when we speak about [university] they still laugh. They’d be like you’re coming from ECD [Early Childhood Development], and I said I left ECD. . . . It was mostly the males, and you felt that no, I’m being excluded even when we’re doing assignments. We were doing education studies, all of us we were doing them – could be FET [Further Education and Training], ECD. But because you’re in ECD you’re taken as though you think slower than other people. Senzo’s account shows that negative perceptions about men in ECEC and exclusionary practices by other men function to police gender norms and socialise individual men in obedience to gendered expectations (see also Chapter 7). Paradoxically, some parents encourage their adult male children who work in ECEC, because there is pride and employment stability in the sector. As Yu, a dropout from China, explains: It is good for my family, because this job is stable. They feel proud of telling others [that] their son is a kindergarten teacher. Personally, I wouldn’t tell others so proudly, because I think it is just like that. I am not that proud as my parents. They appreciate the sense of stability. (Yu, China, dropout)

106  Jean-Yves Plaisir et al.

In Chinese culture, the manhood acts ideal is usually connected to financial stability, so that men can be primary breadwinners. Like Yu, all three Chinese male teachers in this study alluded to parental expectations as part of their motivations to work in ECEC. This conformance to parental expectations reflects patriarchy in Chinese society. Interestingly, Liang (China) persisted as a kindergarten teacher for over 10 years, because his parents provided him with financial support: To be honest, we don’t earn much as a kindergarten teacher, and we do need financial support from our parents. . . . For example, my parents paid the initial deposits for my flat and my wife and I pay off the mortgage with our housing fund. This is so crucial. Although one left and one remained in ECEC, both Yu’s and Liang’s stories represent how parental and governmental supports can shape ECEC male career in Chinese society. Due to the increasingly competitive job market, having a tenured job in a public kindergarten therefore has become popular in Chinese society, leading to increased participation of men in ECEC in recent years (Xu & Waniganayake, 2018). Noteworthy, culture plays a determining role as to whether family influence will be positive or negative with respect to men’s involvement in the sector. In Chinese society, to date, both government policies and family influences seem favourable to men’s participation in ECEC.

Summary of key findings Our findings confirm insights from previous studies signalling that negative societal perceptions discourage men from working with children (Ashiedu & Scott-Ladd, 2012), and the risks associated with men doing ‘female work’ also contribute to male teacher turnover in the field. Feminine traditions in ECEC, gendered expectations, and heteronormative construction of society work against men in ECEC (Messerschmidt & Messner, 2018; Peeters et al., 2015; Haynes, 2008). According to one of our participants, ‘men are in much more danger of experiencing negative feedback’ in ECEC. Ali, a dropout from Turkey, remarks that ‘society should be informed about the importance of men in this area because bias and perception of people in society discourage men’ from making long-term commitment in ECEC. Ali’s view is reinforced by Kevin’s statement, ‘This prejudice is so ingrained into society somehow, not just in Iceland’. Both men recall the gender-based reservations and the cultural traditions that hampered their interactions with children’s mothers in their respective contexts. Societal barriers are difficult to dismantle in traditionally female occupations. The reverse is also true for women in maledominated professions (Skelton, 2009). Additionally, our data show that social deprivation and peer pressure outside of work push men out of ECEC. Senzo (dropout, South Africa) observes: ‘They don’t take you serious and they don’t give you that, so it was another thing that I’d say peer pressure’. Moreover, the low representation of males and the fear of being

Societal factors impacting male turnover  107

accused of child molestation deter men from staying in the sector. Sven, a Norwegian who dropped out during training, reflects on this issue: We were very few men, and I began to wonder why that is so. I got a little worried because I  heard from several people that men have been accused in recent years and that it is almost always men who are charged with child sexual abuse or violence. Lastly, our analysis reveals that the lack of reciprocal appreciation and job dissatisfaction drive men out of ECEC. Kevin puts it thus: I’m the kind of person that gives a lot, and I did [so] in this job, and that also plays into the reason why I experienced the burnout. I probably gave too much without receiving the same in return.

Positive and negative feelings about those events

Figure 8.1 provides some insights into why Kevin entered and left the sector. Kevin, a restive heavy metal musician, was struggling financially when he entered ECEC (1) in spite of negative reactions form his girlfriend and parents. He liked his work with children from the start, pursued and obtained a bachelor’s degree in ECEC but started to feel ‘redundant’ (2). Kevin began to climb the career ladder in a multi-cultural school (3), where his teaching approach was appreciated (4). He soon changed jobs (5), and his career took a different turn when his wife fell sick. Kevin went on sick leave (6). Lastly, when Kevin resumed work, he was diagnosed with teacher burnout, which seemed to be related to feeling marginalised. He left preschool teaching (7) to take a job as a forklift truck operator.

6 4

3 5

1

2

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 8.1

Kevin’s storyline (dropout from work, Iceland)

7 Burnout, leaves preschool teaching

108  Jean-Yves Plaisir et al.

Interestingly, Kevin’s storyline reflects the manhood acts of care observed amongst Israeli gay fathers (Tsfati & Ben-Ari, 2019). More importantly, it illustrates how societal factors influenced his career trajectory. A push factor for him when entering the profession was negative reactions of close friends and parents, and an additional push factor was his wife’s illness, when he went on sick leave. A pull factor was the positive support he received from centre management along the way. After many years in the field he began to feel marginalised, which led to his burnout and eventual exit, again another push factor.

Implications The pervasive lack of men’s participation in ECEC is cause for concerns both nationally and internationally. Despite the global appeal for more men in ECEC (Rohrmann, 2020), recruiting and retaining male educators in the sector has met with little success. Though female domination is not the root cause, essentialist assumptions about the care and education of children impact men’s career decisions in ECEC. To attract men to the sector, Wohlgemuth (2015) emphasises the importance of acknowledging males’ educational motivations and understanding the multi-farious professional challenges in the field. While some studies report high job satisfaction among men and women in ECEC (Rohrmann, 2020), the workforce is nonetheless shaped and characterised by highly gendered views of the profession. Though dominant discourses about the innate capabilities of men and women are toning down (Thordardottir & Lárusdóttir, 2016), it is not clear that implicit biases about men in ECEC are changing anytime soon. Moreover, ECEC suffers a status deficit, whereby male educators are praised for their engagement with young children, but they are concomitantly ridiculed for doing ‘woman’s work’. Furthermore, ECEC professionals generally receive inadequate compensation for their work (Ashiedu & Scott-Ladd, 2012), and this factor deters some men from entering the field. Lastly, even though there is a globally felt demand for more men in ECEC, the workforce is likely to remain numerically gender imbalanced unless action plans are developed around understandings about why more men are needed in the sector. In the US, for instance, the shortage of male early educators is linked to negative learning outcomes for African American and Latinx boys who need culturally congruent male educators in their lives (Milner, 2016). Regardless of their sexes and ethnicity, American children in low-income and single-mother households are significantly impacted by the absence of male figures in their lives. Local educational agencies in New York City and other major metropolitan areas of the US are taking steps toward recruiting male educators to help address part of the problem. In some contexts, like the US, increasing fathers’ participation in childrearing can be a novel approach toward recruiting and retaining more men in ECEC (Plaisir, Cole, & Reich-Shapiro, 2019) as part of a much broader strategy to address the global shortage of men in the sector. Perhaps, fewer men would leave if gender biases and stereotypes were challenged in the wider society. It is equally important to keep

Societal factors impacting male turnover  109

in mind that recruiting, developing, and retaining men of diverse backgrounds can help support the cognitive, social, emotional, and physical needs of young children in ECEC settings. In sum, service providers and policymakers worldwide can develop innovative teacher recruitment and retention approaches that take into account the societal factors discussed in this chapter.

References Ashiedu, J. A., & Scott-Ladd, B. D. (2012). Understanding teacher attraction and retention drivers: Addressing teacher shortages. Australian Journal of Teacher Education, 37(11), article 2. Retrieved from http://ro.ecu.edu.au/ajte/vol37/iss11/e Burn, E., & Pratt-Adams, S. (2015). Men teaching children 3–11. Dismantling gender barriers. London: Bloomsbury. Cole, K., Plaisir, J. Y., & Reich-Shapiro, M. (2020). How can we get more men in early childhood education? Retrieved from www.nydailynews.com/opinion/ny-oped-men-earlychildhood-education-20200130-rhva6yna5fh3ncj6gwy7lx4szu-story.html Connell, R. W. (2017). Masculinities (2nd ed.). Cambridge: Polity Press. Connell, R. W., & Messerschmidt, J. W. (2005). Hegemonic masculinity: Rethinking the concept. Gender & Society, 19(6), 829–859. https://doi.org/10.1177/08912432305276639 Cruickshank, V. (2019). Male primary teachers’ fear and uncertainty surrounding physical contact. Education 3–13, 47(2), 247–257. https://doi.org/10.1090/03004279.2018.143 4221 Haynes, K. (2008). Transforming identities: Accounting professionals and the transition to motherhood. Critical Perspectives on Accounting, 19(5), 620–642. https://doi. org/10.1016/j.cpa.2006.10.003 Laere, K. V., & Vandenbroeck, M. (2018). The (in)convenience of care in preschool education: Examining staff views of “educare”. Early Years, 38(1), 4–18. https://doi.org/10.1 080/09575146.2016.1252727 Laere, K. V., Vandenbroeck, M., Roets, G., & Peeters, J. (2014). Challenging the feminisation of the workforce: Rethinking the mind-body dualism in early childhood education and care. Gender and Education, 26(3), 232–245. https://doi.org/10.1080/09540253.20 14.901721 Messerschmidt, J. W.,  & Messner, M. A. (2018). Hegemonic, non-hegemonic and new masculinities. In J. W. Messerschmidt, P. Y. Martin, & M. A. Messner (Eds.), Gender reckonings: New social theory and research (pp. 35–56). New York: New York University Press. Milner, R. H. (2016). A  Black male teacher’s culturally responsive practices. The Journal of Negro Education, 85(4), 417–432. https://doi.org/10.7709/jnegroducation.85.4.0417 Nentwich, J. C., Poppen, W., Schalin, S., & Vogt, F. (2013). The same and the other: Male childcare workers managing identity dissonance. International Review of Sociology, 23(2), 326–345. https://doi.org/10.1080/03906701.2013.804295 Peeters, I., Rohrmann, T., & Emilsen, K. (2015). Gender balance in ECEC: Why is there so little progress? European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 302–314. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043805 Plaisir, J. Y., Cole, K.,  & Reich-Shapiro, M. (2019). Intrinsic and extrinsic factors impacting male educators in ECE settings: A research report. Borough of Manhattan Community College, City University of New York. Retrieved from www.bmcc.cuny.edu/wpcontent/ uploads/2019/BMCCTechnicalReportkt-revised.pdf Rohrmann, T. (2020). Men as promoters of change in ECEC? An international overview. Early Years, 40(1), 10–19. https://doi.org/10.1080/0957146.2019.1626807

110  Jean-Yves Plaisir et al.

Sargent, P. (2005). The gendering of men in early childhood education. Sex Roles, 52(3–4), 251–259. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11199-005-1300-x Schrock, D., & Schwalbe, M. (2009). Men, masculinity, and manhood acts. Annual Review of Sociology, 35, 277–295. https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev-soc-070308-115933 Skelton, C. (2009). Failing to get men into primary teaching: A feminist critique. Journal of Education Policy, 24(1), 39–54. https://doi.org/10.1080/02680930802412677 Thordardottir, T., & Lárusdóttir, S. H. (2016). The day the gender system collapses will be a good day: Students’ memories of being girls or boys. Timarit um uppeldi ogmenntun/ Icelanding Journal of Education, 25(1), 129–147. Retrieved from https://ojs.hi.is/tuuom/ article/view/2188 Tsfati, I., & Ben-Ari, A. (2019). Between the social and the personal: Israeli male gay parents, surrogacy and socio- political concepts of parenthood and gender. Journal of GLBT Family Studies, 15(1), 42–57. https://doi.org/10.1080/1550428X2019.1413475 Wohlgemuth, U. G. (2015). Why do men choose to become social educators? A profession continuously in pursuit of male colleagues. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 23(3), 392–404. https://doi.org/10.1080/1350293X.2015.1043813 Xu, Y. (2018). A cross-cultural analysis of gender and practitioner-child interactions in early childhood education and care (ECEC) settings in Scotland, Hong Kong, and Mainland China. PhD thesis. University of Glasgow. Xu, Y., & Waniganayake, M. (2018). An exploratory study of gender and male teachers in early childhood education and care centers in China. Compare: A Journal of Comparative and International Education,  48(4), 518–534. https://doi.org/10.1080/03057925.2017.1 318355

9 INTRINSIC MOTIVATIONS AS A FACTOR IN MEN’S CAREER DECISIONS IN ECEC Yarden Kedar, Markus Andrä, and Victoria Sullivan

When kids are around me it’s where I belong. It’s my place to relax . . . I don’t feel [as if] I’m working for one second . . . I have a position from eight to one, but many times I  come in the afternoon and it’s like “What are you doing here?!”. Like today, my day off . . . I could have sat down [in the city], drank a cup of coffee and relaxed, but no, I went . . . that’s my fun, I went to the kindergarten for an hour, got my fix, man what fun. (Amos, persister, Israel)

Overview Intrinsic motivations (IMs) correlate to actions and thoughts that are not dependent on external rewards, but rather reflect a person’s internal desire or interest to learn something new, or to use or share some knowledge they have gained in practice (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Men who study and work in ECEC settings often struggle with an array of challenges on various societal levels, for which a strong sense of self-determination seems to be required (Brody & Gor Ziv, 2020). This chapter discusses the role of IMs in men’s career trajectories in ECEC based on a multi-faceted examination of self-reports by male persisters and dropouts. Our quantitative and qualitative analyses illustrate that IMs play a complex and crucial role in men’s experiences and career decisions in ECEC.

Introduction Motivation relates to an array of physiological drives, behaviours, desires, and cognitive inclinations that are driven both consciously and unconsciously by one’s needs. Due to the complexity of this concept, it is not surprising that attempts to define and explain its core properties have long initiated heated debates in philosophical,

112  Yarden Kedar et al.

educational, and psychological thought (Bandura, 1997; Gollwitzer & Oettingen, 2015; Ryan & Deci, 2000; Simpson & Balsam, 2015). Although significant progress has been made in the study of motives, we still lack a comprehensive model for predicting – across the variety of personal, professional, and cultural settings in which human beings act – an individual’s decision to engage in a particular activity at a given point in time, the amount of time they will maintain their interest, and the amount of effort they will invest in an active pursuit of a goal. One fundamental attempt to explain motivation, which relies on internal processes, has been Ryan and Deci’s self-determination theory (2000), a theoretical framework which posits intentionality as the defining, core aspect of motivated actions and is thus strongly related to our main topic of investigation (IMs). In particular, self-determination theory defines three psychological needs as the basis for one’s motivation to pursue a goal in a given domain of achievement: competence, autonomy, and social relatedness (Ryan & Deci, 2000). Competence relates to one’s confidence regarding their ability to accomplish a goal in a given domain of achievement. Competence also relies on a sense of autonomy and responsibility for one’s actions. Lastly, the psychological need of social relatedness derives from attachment theory (Bowlby, 1979). Infants with a secure attachment pattern produce more intrinsically motivated exploratory behaviour (Ainsworth, 1979). In addition, motivation is often tied to and dependent on a social environment that offers relatedness. Thus, the dialectic character of self-determination theory suggests that individuals develop motivations due to environmental conditions that promote satisfaction of these three basic needs.

Intrinsic motivations Intrinsic motivations are considered a basic form of motivation because they are based on an individual’s desire to do something for its own sake, as in children’s play (Lepper & Greene, 1975; Piaget, 1945/1962), rather than attempting to achieve a goal because it is regarded positively by the community. Intrinsic motivations have been shown to exist in higher mammals who sometimes engage in activities driven by interest in novel stimuli rather than linked to instinctual drives (Baldassarre et al., 2014). Reiss (2004) classifies IMs into 16 basic drives that result from evolutionary processes (e.g. power  influence; social contact  play). This evolutionary view suggests that ‘human relationships, careers, family life, and spirituality are organised to satiate the 16 basic desires’ (p. 188). Studies in occupational psychology often focus on the intrinsic value of a given profession for employees, and their motivation to enter this profession and to develop a long-term, satisfying career (Grant, 2008; Kuvaas  & Dysvik, 2009; Zhang  & Bartol, 2010). In the field of education, positive effects of IMs have been found, such as children’s positive emotions in school, non-directed text learning, and reading (Patrick, Hisley, & Kempler, 2000). Another related phenomenon is integrated regulation, indicated by shifting extrinsic motivations which gradually become internalised and integrated into one’s own perception and behaviour, until they are experienced as autonomous (Ryan & Deci, 2000).

Intrinsic motivations in men’s decisions  113

In this chapter, we explore the role of IMs in men’s decisions to enter, stay, or leave the field of ECEC in academic and professional settings. Men who work in occupations that are regarded in their culture as ‘feminine’ must continuously struggle with their societal status, often experiencing confrontations and pressures even from their close environments (Simpson, 2005; Sobiraj, Rigotti, Weseler, & Mohr, 2015). In order to overcome the significant pressures with which men who work in ECEC settings cope (see Chapters  1 and 2), one must possess a robust ability to resist the common gender order regarding ECEC and its dichotomous gender paradigm in terms of job placement.

Study rationale and design Hypotheses Our main hypothesis is that men who study, train, and work in ECEC must possess a solid set of IMs to work with young children. Hence, we predicted that the two groups of participants in this study (persisters/dropouts) would exhibit different patterns and levels of IMs. Moreover, in accordance with the self-determination theory principle of a dialectic connection between motivation and a social environment, which provides people with opportunities to satisfy their basic psychological needs, we predicted that our informants would refer to competence, autonomy, and social relatedness when describing their career trajectories in ECEC (Ryan & Deci, 2000), with dropouts exhibiting negative views of self-confidence while persisters exhibit more positive views.

Design Based on the general methodological approach and participant population of the research project (see Chapter 4), a combination of quantitative and qualitative strategies was applied for the analyses in this chapter. Table 9.1 depicts four motivational subthemes that reflect men’s motivations to enter, remain in, or exit ECEC studies and professions. These subthemes were not based on a-priori categories but rather derived directly from the interview transcripts. Based on this design, two specific research questions arise: 1

To what extent do IMs influence critical moments and choices in men’s career trajectories in ECEC? 2 Are particular subthemes associated with men’s decisions to enter, stay in, or leave ECEC more than others? First, we ran a quantitative analysis to test the relations between group and subtheme statistically, comparing the proportional distribution of the four subthemes in each group (dropout versus persister). Because each participant produced a different number of quotations relating to the subthemes, the data were standardised.

114  Yarden Kedar et al. TABLE 9.1 Definitions of IM and its Subthemes

Sub-themes of IMs*

Definition: Personal factors related to entering, staying or leaving the field of ECEC

IM1: Expressing feelings about working with young children IM2: Self-confidence about ECEC work IM3: Personal and professional values

Love, enjoyment, prior experience with children; negative feelings about work with children Feeling capable/incapable of working with young children Perception of job responsibilities; professional pride; idealism; working with preferred pedagogy; approaches to qualification; views self as man of practice rather than theory Job satisfaction; self-contentment; self-fulfilment; passion; rewarding aspects of the job; feelings about tasks in ECEC work

IM4: Emotions about ECEC professions

* Each subtheme covers both positive and negative valences

Furthermore, because the two groups are unbalanced in number with more dropouts than persisters, we based the comparison on proportions rather than definite values. This was achieved by dividing each group’s total number of quotations for each subtheme by their total number of quotations in all four subthemes together. For example, in the dropouts’ data there were 112 quotations that were coded as ‘IM1’, which add up to 34% of all quotations (N=330) coded as IMs in the dropout group (see Table 9.2). The qualitative analysis of the interviews served two goals. The first was to examine links between leading theoretical models of IMs and our coded data. The second goal was to clarify the extent to which IMs are indeed a critical factor in men’s experiences and career decisions in ECEC and to assess the depth of the informants’ remarks on their IMs with respect to each man’s professional status (persister/dropout) and his specific personal, academic and professional journey.

Results Quantitative analysis The statistical comparison of the four IM subthemes yielded a significant result, χ2 (3) = 8.06, p = .04. As demonstrated in Table 9.2, the dropouts had a higher proportion of statements that expressed feelings about working with young children (IM1), whereas the persisters addressed their personal and professional values (IM3) more than the dropouts did. In addition, the ranking of the four subthemes by proportion was different in each group (except for IM2, which was the lowest in both groups): Persisters:   Most common   IM3 > IM1 > IM4 > IM2   Least common Dropouts:   Most common   IM1 > IM4 > IM3 > IM2   Least common

Intrinsic motivations in men’s decisions  115 TABLE 9.2 Proportional distribution of quotations which address IMs by subtheme

Dropouts

IM1

IM2

IM3

IM4

34%

20%

22%

24%

Total 100% (330 quotations overall)

Persisters

26%

18%

31%

25%

100% (243 quotations overall)

Qualitative analyses The qualitative analyses complement the statistical analysis by an in-depth inspection of the use of specific expressions that relate to IMs. For example, while a person may refer more often to their feelings about working in ECEC settings, a comprehensive understanding of the exact nature, meaning, and valence of such remarks can only be achieved by closely examining the transcribed interviews. Furthermore, to assess the relevance of our data for self-determination theory (Ryan & Deci, 2000), we examined the influence of competence, autonomy, and social relatedness on the men’s IMs. In the following paragraphs we exemplify some of the many traces of these psychological needs that were found in our data. We begin with a recurring combination in the data of perceived self-competence and a sense of autonomy and their impact on one’s motivation to work in ECEC: So that was great because it felt like I was able to move things in a direction I was interested in. (Alex, persister, England) You want things to happen and the work does not stand still . . . there is a kind of meaningfulness in the work. (Anders, persister, Sweden) In contrast, Tzvika (dropout, Israel) experienced an opposite scenario, in which his autonomy as an early childhood educator was disrupted by demands from his principal, which were wrong in his view: And I’m a really strongly principled person. And I said, they’re going to have workbooks from first grade on, you are not putting a workbook [in my kindergarten] . . . next they are going to take my blocks! Similarly, Liang (persister, China) expresses his frustration when his sense of autonomy and self-competence was weakened by employers, consequently decreasing his motivation: I was transferred among different campuses and I  had no idea which one I would stay. In each campus, I worked temporarily. When the principal told me about the transfer, I had no words to describe my feelings.

116  Yarden Kedar et al.

Riaan, a South African persister, expresses the importance of feeling competent and effective: I find it very gratifying to mould a child, for people to discover . . . a child comes through with very little prior knowledge, for you to impart them in that you know, that you are shaping them towards their future – it’s gratifying. It’s satisfying in the fact, you know when you get a blank . . . canvas, and you let your mind run wild, and you come up with a Mona Lisa. The issue of feeling effective was also stressed by other persisters, like Herbert (Australia). When asked what he likes about working with kids, he answered: I just like to see them develop. I guess I’m a creative kind of person, so when I  see that they’re investigating something I  like to think about, ‘How can I make this interesting, and how can they get the most out of that?’ I mean, it’s just fun. Marcos, a persister from the US, points directly at competence and the encouragement and motivation it gives to him: I got the encouragement from knowing that I was one of the few in the field and that led me to this! To where I was able to transition within the NYC Department of Education into instructional coordinator. Where I  could influence, yeah so. Norbert (persister, Norway) seeks and enjoys challenges, an inherent predisposition and a major characteristic of IMs according to Ryan and Deci (2000). Here, this predisposition interacts with Norbert’s self-evaluation as a competent person: I think the children are quite significant as to whether I choose to stay on in the profession. I like to be challenged, so I think it’s fine to struggle a little bit with a few of the children. If the whole group had been demanding it wouldn’t be any fun, but if just some of the children are difficult, I find that it challenges me, and it makes me more and more interested and think that this is something that I will be able to deal with. This quote also features traces of social relatedness, where competence to deal with challenges is intertwined with relatedness to the children. Mehmet, a Turkish persister, emphasises the relation to the children he works with as a basis of his IMs: The first time I  entered an ECE institution, I  didn’t have negative feelings. I  sat among the toys and felt comfortable in the classroom environment. I could communicate with the children. They were hugging me and

Intrinsic motivations in men’s decisions  117

showing me love. They were not uncomfortable because I was a man or had a large body. This was very meaningful for me. Mehmet even rejected an attractive job offer in favour of having direct contact with his students: When I evaluated this suggestion professionally, I decided that my school and my students needed me as a teacher more than as a principal. I was happy with my students and did not want to spend my time on administrative work. I preferred to save my energy for the children. Ted (persister, US), shows a similar approach to Mehmet regarding social relatedness: Relationships with children, it’s great. You see a child kind of have a breakthrough. Like in development or something, so that’s really great. Makes you feel good. The importance of seeking contact with children emerges in Sven’s (dropout, Sweden) self-description as well: I have always wanted to work with people and have also been involved in working with children. I think it’s easier to relate to children. Adults tend to make things complicated, and I feel that I need to take a stand on many issues. With children one can be more relaxed. The following statement, however, illustrated the effect of lacking a will to work with children (as well as parents and directors) on Joel (dropout, US): You have to deal with directors, parents, deal with children, and I feel like I wasn’t able to give the children, you know, all of me, and I don’t think it was fair to them to continue going that path if I wasn’t able to give them all the focus that they needed. We also detected links between social relatedness and autonomy. Here, Norbert (persister, Norway) describes how being given responsibility over the children and the staff in his workplace had strengthened his sense of autonomy and therefore his motivation and love for the profession: It’s good to have a large responsibility, I think. It’s good work with people, I like to be responsible for people, and I like to be a good role model for them. . . . [T]o be a leader for three, four others – gives me a lot. I get a lot back, and at the same time I get to give from myself. And at the same time, I get to be with small children who love me for the person I am, and that’s fantastic. To be met every day with cuddles, that’s fantastic for sure.

118  Yarden Kedar et al.

Anders (persister, Sweden) also points out the critical role of feeling related to each of the key groups in the profession: colleagues, parents, and the children. It is a team that is accepting of different people. We are different but have fun together. We have the same views on the basics and children. You want to see the best in both children and parents, and it feels very nice to work in such a team. Then, the ambition level is high. This emphasis on social relatedness as a source of IM is found among several other participants. However, it is hard to assess whether one’s motivations in these cases are intrinsic or a product of an increasing identification with an extrinsic factor. Ryan and Deci’s (2000) Cognitive Evaluation Theory presents a cyclical scenario in which rewards or positive feedbacks can gradually become an intrinsic part of the self because they bring about a sense of competence, which in turn increases one’s IMs. In our data we found such instances mostly among persisters: It started with my sister having twins, and she thought I was good at taking care of children. I was 13 years old and had not decided what I wanted to be when I grow up but thought that I might want to work with children. (Anders, persister, Sweden) Anders maintained his motivations throughout his career. Keeping the motivation ‘alive’ requires a process of self-evaluation, which may reflect an ongoing internalisation of external influences. This process is illustrated with Mehmet (persister, Turkey): Many of my male colleagues couldn’t believe it, and thought I’d failed to recognise my big chance. But I’ve never regretted my decision in the years that followed. Of course, I sometimes ask myself: “I love my profession and children, but how long can I do it”? And each time, I decide to continue as a teacher. In other cases, however, an opposite scenario arises in which one’s IMs and commitment to ECEC work are crushed by extrinsic factors: When you love the job you’re with, then you’re just going to keep coming to work, doing the best you can, and that’s just the simple fact of it. I’m probably at the stage now where I don’t and I’m a little bit, I wouldn’t say I’m bitter and angry, I’m over that now, but I’m pretty much at the stage where the inspiration and the motivation is not there purely just because of certain management decisions. (Anakin, dropout, Australia). We conclude this section with a focus on Amos, an Israeli persister whose selfdescription of his career trajectory in ECEC illustrates the crucial role of IMs for

Intrinsic motivations in men’s decisions  119

men in this field (see Figure 9.1). Amos was 47 years old at the time of the interview, married with three children, and had been working in several ECEC settings for 12 years. Before his ECEC career, Amos worked as a chef. When his second child was born, he quit his job to take care of the infant, as his wife is the primary income provider in the family. As shown in the graphic storyline in Figure 9.1, soon after Amos started taking care of his son, he was approached by parents in the neighbourhood, asking him to care for their children as well. Amos ended up taking care of five children for two years (point 1 in Figure 9). He returned to work as a chef when his son entered kindergarten, but soon realised that his heart was truly in his work with children: I went back to the kitchen, and then the bug turned up, right there, in the kitchen. I said: “. . . I’ll work in kindergartens, I’ll see if it’s good for me and if I see that it is, I will do it properly, [with a] BA in education”. I love the kitchen, [but] I felt that I love the kids much more. . . . When you say that you don’t feel like you’re working, that’s how I felt . . . [for] two years. I don’t understand what I got [paid for]. It’s 2700 [Israeli shekels] for each kid. I said: “For what? What’s wrong with you”?!

Positive and negative feelings about those events

After quitting his job as a chef, Amos earned a BA in Education (2) and worked for several years in both private and public settings as a subsidiary team member (3), with most of these transitions being initiated by him rather than his employers. Although he was frustrated at certain stages (4), he was nevertheless totally devoted to the children and to his decision to stay in ECEC. The following examples

5 ECEC work as assistant

BEd studies education

Family daycare

2

Changes jobs in ECEC

1

Critical events in my professional life

FIGURE 9.1

Storyline of Amos (persister, Israel)

Manager in kindergarten, earns teaching certificate

3

4

120  Yarden Kedar et al.

illustrate Amos’ character, principles, and state of mind which fostered his continuous search for a suitable ECEC job: It was important for me to work at kindergartens that I . . . I was looking for a kindergarten where I’d be happy. The atmosphere wasn’t good anymore, and I felt like I couldn’t change it, I felt that really, me and [another employee], we both left together. Because we felt like we were coming in with a smile and everyone, even the staff, the older staff [being negative]. So you can’t change. When I start in a new kindergarten, I never talk about money, never. I say minimum [wage] that’s what I take. I will work here, see if you approve, if I like it, I can take minimum for a month, and then if you’re happy we will talk about the salary. [The manager] told me: “You should know that all the moms said – what’s this? A man at the kindergarten”?! Now me, the whole year, not that I’m so obtuse and didn’t feel it . . . but I always told myself: “You [parents] think whatever you want to think, it’s your right, I have no control, even if I don’t want you to, and I will do my thing”. Amos eventually found a private day care centre that he loves, working as a principal caregiver and a manager of other caregivers (5). At the same time, he decided to earn a teaching certificate in ECEC, which allows him to work in supervised day care centres under the authority of the Ministry of Education, despite the fact that he is happy with his position in the private setting: S [Amos’ employer] told me: “You don’t need to bring a teaching certificate . . . you will get everything here, the paycheck, the benefits, everything you want”. She was afraid of losing me. But at this point, it’s my path. Amos concludes: There weren’t any bad times at work. . . . When there are difficulties and crises with kids, parents, whatever, then it just gives more energy. It’s only more proof that you’re in the right place . . . if there weren’t any problems, then the job would be without content. I keep hearing it from parents: “I struggle with what you’re saying but I trust you”. I hear that a lot. Amos’ quotations exemplify the tight interplay between his IMs for ECEC work and the themes of competence, autonomy, and social relatedness. He had felt highly competent regarding his work with young children already during his very first steps in this field. He has also led an autonomous, principled route as to when, where, and how he will train and work in the field. And lastly, his statements clearly illustrate the great importance he sees in his relationships with colleagues, employees, parents, and above all, the children.

Intrinsic motivations in men’s decisions  121

Conclusion Self-determination theory suggests that IMs thrive in contexts that promote competence, autonomy, and social relatedness. Research with students and teachers has shown that IMs tend to be more robust and to yield more positive outcomes when people have a true interest in their professional activities, experience a sense of control and autonomy over their academic achievements, feel that they possess the skills that are required for effectively obtaining their goals, and seek interpersonal attachments and connections with their environment (Deci, Vallerand, Pelletier, & Ryan, 1991). Our data converge with these assumptions and empirical findings to a large extent, as evidenced in both the quantitative and qualitative differences that we found between men who managed to stay in the field of ECEC versus those who left it. Most notably, the persisters in this study had a greater sense of competence, autonomy, and social relatedness in regard to their work in ECEC than the dropouts. They show confidence, as autonomous agents, in their ability to work with children and transform their lives. They are satisfied with their daily performance as well as in retrospect, looking back at their careers. Above all, it seems that these men truly love their job and, in some cases, would turn down offers for advancing to another position or profession. At the same time however, our findings also demonstrate some novel, complex aspects of the relations between men’s IMs and their career trajectories in ECEC. In particular, in terms of social relatedness, which is considered theoretically as one of the main influences on IMs. It was expected that our persisting informants would raise this issue frequently. Thus, it is contradictory from our perspective that they did not address this as much as the dropouts did (statistically, in terms of expressing feelings about working with young children; see Table 9.2). One possible explanation for this finding is that for the dropouts, discussing their feelings about working with children is a result of a significant emotional load that they experienced based on their perceived failure to stay in ECEC. In addition, two of our four data driven categories of IMs – personal and professional values, emotions about ECEC professions – do not seem to be strongly linked to either one of the three self-determination theory tenets mentioned earlier. However, these two categories provide us with additional information regarding IMs in the specific context that we investigated. For example, statements concerning personal and professional values regarding ECEC were significantly more common in the persisters’ data. This finding suggests that possessing a strong collection of such values is of importance in men’s struggle to stay and advance in ECEC. Lastly, the statistical analysis demonstrated that, in fact, ‘self-confidence’ was the least frequent subtheme in both groups. This finding suggests that even if persisters show a more solid sense of competence in comparison to dropouts, they are still struggling with numerous challenges that are associated with this field for men, and consequently, may experience some lack of confidence which is at least partially based on their gender.

122  Yarden Kedar et al.

Implications Based on our findings, we suggest some directions for further exploring the IMs of men in ECEC environments. First, in order to pinpoint the specific, gender related challenges for men who study and work in ECEC settings and to understand how these challenges are mediated by one’s IMs for working in this field, we must compare between men and women in ECEC settings and explore whether each gender holds a different arrangement of IMs in regards to working with young children to begin with; or whether such differences only appear during the course of their career in ECEC. If the latter option is supported, it will demonstrate the effect of the socio-emotional load which men are continuously facing on their views and functioning in ECEC settings. Another interesting option is that in fact no IM related differences would be found between men and women. In that case, the source of the difference between ECEC persisters versus dropouts will turn to the general difficulties that characterise ECEC, academically, and professionally, rather than a clear gender-related cause. Second, future studies should investigate whether certain subthemes of IMs are characteristic of different stages in men’s careers in ECEC. For example, do men who train to become ECEC practitioners possess a different array of IMs in comparison to those who are already working in the field? Third, as the idea of IM seems to focus on the individual rather than on the societal context, the aspect of social relatedness could be broadened in future research by considering group and team dynamics (see Chapters 2, 6, and 7). Lastly, this study features men from a variety of countries, religions, and cultures, in which issues and norms that are related to masculinity in general, and to men working in ECEC environments in particular, vary greatly. A closer look at the effect of culture on IMs is needed. As discussed earlier, people often go through a process of integrated regulation in which external reinforcements are internalised in the self. For example, the degree of college teachers’ enthusiasm regarding their profession gradually raises their students’ IMs to succeed in their studies, along with higher levels of vitality that these students experience (Patrick et al., 2000). It would be interesting to see how cultures that are regarded as stricter – or more tolerant – in regard to masculinity and non-traditional occupations affect men’s development and maintenance of IMs to work with young children. In addition, our data suggest some practical pathways for men in ECEC to express their IMs to work with young children, even in societal contexts in which such motivations (of men) are not treated favourably. Considering our statistical findings and the significance of the basic psychological needs from the perspective of the self-determination theory that were replicated in our data, we find it crucial for novel policies in ECEC to promote a work environment that reinforces competence, autonomy and social relatedness among the male workforce, along with an emphasis on men’s development of professional values, which seems to be crucial for their inclination to stay in the field. Such measures would facilitate the transformation of the ECEC workforce towards a more balanced situation in which both men and women work together for the benefit of the children.

Intrinsic motivations in men’s decisions  123

References Ainsworth, M. S. (1979). Infant – mother attachment. American Psychologist, 34(10), 932– 937. https://doi.org/10.1037//0003-066X.34.10.932 Baldassarre, G., Stafford, T., Mirolli, M., Redgrave, P., Ryan, R. M., & Barto, A. (2014). Intrinsic motivations and open-ended development in animals, humans, and robots: An overview. Frontiers in Psychology, 1–5, 985. https://doi.org/10.3389/fpsyg.2014.00985 Bandura, A. (1997). Self-efficacy: The exercise of control. New York: W. H. Freeman. Bowlby, J. (1979). The making and breaking of affectional bonds. London: Tavistock Publications. Brody, D. L., & Gor Ziv, H. (2020). Hybridized agency among male early childhood workers as a factor in their career decisions. Early Years, 40(1), 20–36. https://doi.org/10.10 80/09575146.2019.1605335 Deci, E. L., Vallerand, R. J., Pelletier, L. G., & Ryan, R. M. (1991). Motivation and education: The self-determination perspective. Educational Psychologist, 26(3–4), 325–346. https://doi.org/10.1207/s15326985ep2603&4_6 Gollwitzer, P. M.,  & Oettingen, G. (2015). Motivation: History of the concept. In J. D. Wright (Ed.), International encyclopedia of the social & behavioral sciences (2nd ed., vol. 15, pp. 936–939). Oxford: Elsevier. Grant, A. M. (2008). Does intrinsic motivation fuel the prosocial fire? Motivational synergy in predicting persistence, performance, and productivity. Journal of Applied Psychology, 93(1), 48–58. https://doi.org/10.1037/0021-9010.93.1.48 Kuvaas, B., & Dysvik, A. (2009). Perceived investment in employee development, intrinsic motivation and work performance. Human Resource Management Journal, 19(3), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1748-8583.2009.00103.x Lepper, M. R., & Greene, D. (1975). Turning play into work: Effects of adult surveillance and extrinsic rewards on children’s intrinsic motivation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 31(3), 479–486. https://doi.org/10.1037/h0076484 Patrick, B. C., Hisley, J., & Kempler, T. (2000). “What’s everybody so excited about?”: The effects of teacher enthusiasm on student intrinsic motivation and vitality. The Journal of Experimental Education, 68(3), 217–236. https://doi.org/10.1080/00220970009600093 Piaget, J. (1945/1962). Play, dreams and imitation in childhood. New York: Norton. Reiss, S. (2004). Multifaceted nature of intrinsic motivation: The theory of 16 basic desires. Review of General Psychology, 8(3), 179–193. https://doi.org/10.1037/1089-2680.8.3.179 Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2000). Self-determination theory and the facilitation of intrinsic motivation, social development, and well-being. American Psychologist, 55(1), 68–78. https://doi.org/10.1037110003-066X.55.1.68 Simpson, E. H., & Balsam, P. D. (2015). The behavioral neuroscience of motivation: An overview of concepts, measures, and translational applications. In Behavioral neuroscience of motivation (pp. 1–12). Cham: Springer. Simpson, R. (2005). Men in nontraditional occupations: Career entry, career orientation and experience of role strain. Gender, Work & Organization, 12(4), 363–380. https://doi. org/10.1111/j.1468-0432.2005.00278.x Sobiraj, S., Rigotti, T., Weseler, D.,  & Mohr, G. (2015). Masculinity ideology and psychological strain: Considering men’s social stressors in female-dominated occupations. Psychology of Men & Masculinity, 16(1), 54–66. https://doi.org/10.1037/a0035706 Zhang, X., & Bartol, K. M. (2010). Linking empowering leadership and employee creativity: The influence of psychological empowerment, intrinsic motivation, and creative process engagement. Academy of Management Journal, 53(1), 107–128. https://doi. org/10.5465/AMJ.2010.48037118

10 AGENCY AS A DETERMINANT OF MEN’S DECISIONS TO LEAVE OR STAY David L. Brody, Markus Andrä, and Yarden Kedar

I was one of the most defiant sons of bitches around. They brought in workbooks, and I said “You are not putting a workbook in my kindergarten”. And then they kind of said, “It’s not really your kindergarten”. And I said, “You’re not putting a workbook in my kindergarten ((laughs)). I won’t allow it”. So they said “We have these aims”. So I said, “You give me the book and give me your list of aims, and I will put together a program, and I will create students that meet all of your objectives without using this disgusting book”. (Tzvika, dropout, American-Israeli)

Agency is a construct that explains how individuals operate on and negotiate their reality in order to thrive. Teacher agency specifically refers to dispositions that enable teachers to achieve their career and educational aims within the socio-cultural context of the workplace (Smith, 2011). In this quotation, Tzvika was faced with a supervisor’s demand that he should engage in a practice that he deemed inappropriate for young children. His decision to confront the supervisor and stand up for his pedagogic principles reveals three agentic characteristics: initiative, self-reflection, and self-assurance. In this chapter we explore these and other traits, showing the complexities of agency as a critical factor in men’s career decisions in ECEC.

Introduction Albert Bandura (2006) proposed the construct of agency as an essential perspective on development, adaptation, and change. He argued that individuals significantly influence their own functioning through four core properties: intentionality, forethought, self-reactiveness, and self-reflectiveness. Intentionality refers to action plans and strategies for realising them. Forethought involves visualised futures as current guides and motivators. Self-reactiveness links thought to action by constructing

Agency as a determinant of decisions  125

courses of action and then regulating their execution. Self-reflectiveness relates to reflection focused on personal efficacy, soundness of thoughts, and actions, meaning of pursuits, and making corrective adjustments. Furthermore, Bandura suggested that agency is socially mediated. Agency theory has been used to explain teachers’ career decisions. Pressure from high stakes testing and marginalisation from decision making have been shown to undermine professional agency and contribute to Australian early career English teachers dropping out (Manuel & Carter, 2016). Likewise, a Finnish study of early career teachers found a negative relation between turnover intentions and sense of professional agency (Heikonen, Pietarinen, Pyhältö, Toom, & Soini, 2017). These studies emphasise how professional agency influences future career decisions. Research on veteran teachers focuses on internal agentic tendencies. Smith (2011) found that UK female teachers’ awareness and exertion of their agency potential is key to understanding their career paths. Likewise, Sumsion (2004) found that Australian ECEC teachers’ construction of resilience enabled them to thrive professionally, positioning ECEC as a worthy profession. These studies were based on female participants. No parallel research has been found on males. This chapter is the first to focus on agency of men within ECEC. Agency theory adds another dimension to the conceptualisation of personal and professional identity. A continuing identity is widely considered to be a social phenomenon. Agentic self-management is a further resource for the continuity of selfhood: ‘Through their goals, aspirations, social commitments, and action plans, people project themselves into the future and shape the courses their lives take’ (Bandura, 2006, p. 165). Of particular relevance to our study of men in ECEC is the seminal work of Anzaldúa (2013), a feminist post structural theorist. She coined the term the new mestiza referring to hybridised agency as a blend of diverse identities. She explored how individuals negotiate contradictory and marginalised identities in a positive manner, creating ‘borderline spaces’ for themselves. Men who choose to work in ECEC can be characterised by the new mestiza in that they often find themselves out of place on many societal levels (Brody & Gor Ziv, 2019). Their chosen occupation unavoidably resists the gender order because they opt out of the male hegemonic occupational framework as described by Connell and Messerschmidt (2005). They work in a feminine field thereby questioning the binary gender paradigm of job placement. Their pedagogic interactions involve caring, which is the ‘wrong’ behaviour template for men. Society projects insecure identities that intersect with each other. Hence, persisters often exhibit the agency of the new mestiza to create a borderline space for themselves (Brody & Gor Ziv, 2019). In this chapter, we will propose a model of persister agency which harnesses this concept.

Methodology Both qualitative and quantitative methods were employed to examine the effect of agency on men’s career trajectories. Following the qualitative paradigm, the

126  David L. Brody et al.

data base of 37 interviews revealed four agentic subthemes. Our grounded theory approach (see Chapter 4) drew these themes from the transcripts rather than relying on a-priori categories, such as Bandura’s four agentic traits. Nonetheless, some overlap was found between these themes and those of Bandura. These grounded subthemes include: initiative/assertiveness, self-assurance regarding competence, resistance, and self-reflection/evaluation. Table 10.1 provides an overview of the definitions of agency as a major theme and the four subthemes. Furthermore, the table indicates the relationship between these grounded subthemes and Bandura’s core properties of agency. With these subthemes as our guide, our group of three researchers embarked on a four-stage analytic process. First, using a quantitative perspective, we tested the relation between dropout and persister groups using the four subthemes, by comparing the proportional distribution of the agentic subthemes between the dropouts and persisters. Second, we shifted to qualitative analysis by comparing the coded quotations of the two groups. The third stage consisted of taking a closer look at each of the subthemes by analysing the quotations in each subtheme to generate secondary themes for each, thus enabling a more fine-grained comparison between the dropouts and persisters. These secondary themes are found in Table 10.2. The fourth stage involved a hermeneutical dialogue between the three researchers based on insights gained from the first three analytical stages, enabling us to construct a dynamic model demonstrating the interplay between the men’s agentic factors and their career decisions. TABLE 10.1 Definitions of agency and its subthemes

Theme/ Subtheme Subtheme 1: Selfreflection and self-evaluation Subtheme 2: Initiative and assertiveness

Definition

Awareness of critical moments and transition points; emotional appraisal of career decisions Taking action, managing fortuity, dealing with obstacles, strategic planning, engaging in caring behaviours despite scrutiny, job placement flexibility, openness to uncertainties, resisting steadfastness in employment Subtheme 3: SelfPositive feelings about self-related to assurance regarding identity as ECEC professional, remarks competence on one’s own contribution to ECEC, professional pride that leads to action Subtheme 4: Rebellion, nonconformity, bending Resistance societal norms, pushing back, resisting authority. Resistance can be a general attitude or a response within the context of the workplace culture

Comparison to Bandura’s core properties of agency Self-reflectiveness

Intentionality Forethought Self-reactiveness

Self-reflectiveness

Self-reactiveness Self-reflectiveness

Agency as a determinant of decisions

127

TABLE 10.2 Subthemes for each of the original four agentic themes

Theme

Subtheme

Subtheme 1: Selfreflection and selfevaluation about. . .

Self as student Encountering bias Classroom practice Relationships with parents Relationships with children Leadership style Salary Own emotional state Influence of fatherhood on career Assertiveness Intentionality Initiative to advance professionally Future orientation Taking advantage of fortuity General self-confidence Professional self-confidence Professional pride Contribution to children’s development Contribution to ECEC Sense of mission Resistance to entering ECEC Resistance to managerial expectations Objection to female work norms in ECEC Objection to curriculum practice

Subtheme 2: Initiative and assertiveness

Subtheme 3: Selfassurance regarding competence

Subtheme 4: Resistance

This four-stage analysis follows Freire’s (1970/2018) hermeneutic principles which can be described as a ‘dialogic inquiry’. At each stage, we engaged in dialogue to deepen our mutual understanding of the men’s career trajectories. This inquiry resulted in measures to further understand the four initial subthemes of agentic traits among the dropouts and persisters, resulting in the secondary analysis described earlier. As our dialogue progressed, we used agency as a lens to consider the dynamics of the men’s careers, thereby constructing the dynamic model to be presented towards the chapter’s end.

Quantitative findings The statistical comparison of the distribution of coded quotations between dropouts and persisters showed a significant difference between these two groups in their choice of subthemes during the interviews, χ2 (3) = 15.48, p = .001 (see Table 10.3). The distribution of the subthemes differed significantly between the two groups. The proportion of quotations indicating self-reflection and resistance was higher for the dropouts, whereas for initiative and self-assurance a reverse order was found.

128  David L. Brody et al. TABLE 10.3 Proportional distribution of quotations which relate to agency by subtheme

and group Theme Self-reflection Initiative and and self-evaluation assertiveness

Self-assurance

Resistance

Total

Group

Dropouts 54% (n = 134) Persisters 49% (n = 75)

17% (n = 42) 11% (n = 26) 18% (n = 45) 100% (N = 247) 7% (n = 10) 18% (n = 28) 26% (n = 40) 100% (N = 153)

p