Implementing the quality framework for leisure-time centres

Perspectives of leaders and staff

Abstract

This study explores developing and implementing a quality framework for schoolaged education or leisure-time centres for six-to-nine-year-old children in Iceland. Evaluating the quality of educational programs is complex, as various cultural, social and professional values influence quality evaluation. When discussing quality in educational activities, a distinction is often made between structural quality and process quality, where structural quality refers to the external standards of the work that policymakers and administrators are responsible for, such as the number of children, safety factors, training and staff education, and the premises and infrastructure of the programs. On the other hand, process quality refers to daily organisation, professional practices and the quality of communications between staff and children (Cassidy et al., 2005). The Icelandic educational government introduced a policy framework in 2018 that defined the quality of leisure-time centres. The quality framework defines four main criteria: a) child-centred practices and children’s rights, b) daily organisation and practices, c) human resources and professionalism, and d) management and organisation. Four main goals were defined under each theme that further described the desired conditions to develop a quality practice within the leisure-time centres. Following the establishment of these quality standards, the Ministry of Education and Culture published a selfassessment tool for leisure-time centres in 2021 (Mennta- og menningarmálaráðuneyti, 2021b). Furthermore, a theme issue for leisure-time centres was published the same year, summarising their ideological basis (Oddný Sturludóttir, 2021). The main research questions were: 1) What is the role of leisure-time centres according to the quality framework; and 2) How do leaders and staff assess the state of implementation, and what opportunities and challenges do they identify?

The research used a mixed methodology, quantitative and qualitative, to gather multifaceted data on the state of implementation of the quality criteria in leisure-time centres. Such a methodology can be well suited to seek further explanations and get a fuller picture of the subject of research (Anna Ólafsdóttir & Sigfríður Inga Karlsdóttir, 2021). The study was conducted in three steps. The first step of the research was to analyse the focus and themes in the relevant policy documents on the quality of leisuretime centres. The second step was to explore the perspectives of leaders and staff of leisure-time centres through an online questionnaire, and the third step was to conduct a focus group with leaders in leisure-time centres.

Results show that the main challenges in the implementation of quality standards relate to structural quality, such as housing and outdoor areas. About a third of the respondents believed that it was going poorly or very poorly to ensure these basic pillars in the work of leisure-time centres. About a quarter believed that it was difficult to ensure that materials and equipment that appeal to children’s interests are available, or they do not think they can assess that aspect. 31 % thought that it was going badly or very badly to ensure that a municipality had formulated a policy, and 15 % of the respondents did not know if there was a policy in the relevant municipality. About 20 % of the respondents answered that it was going poorly/very poorly to ensure the competence of the staff and that staff showed initiative.

On a more positive note, most respondents believed that implementing the professional goals related to the children’s well-being, interests, and social skills was going well or very well. About 11 % believed that it was not working as it should be to ensure children’s active participation. In general, the participants believed that democratic practices characterised the work, but 11 % of the participants assessed that it was going poorly or very poorly to ensure that the work environment was inclusive and that there was active cooperation with schools and other sports and youth activities in the local environment.

A large majority believed that the leisure-time centre offered a variety of activities, but about 8 % believed that was not the case, and 5 % did not trust themselves to assess it. In Iceland, as in many European countries, there is no specific data on children’s enrollment in leisure-time centres or their operations (Plantenga & Remery, 2017). The findings of this study call for a targeted response on the part of the government, local authorities and the leadership of educators and leaders responsible for the professional development of leisure-time centres. Education and professional support for the staff of after-hours centres need to be greatly strengthened. Further study is needed to explore the relationship between structural and process quality in the educational activities of leisure-time centres.