코로나19 대응 영유아 교육·보육 정책 국제비교

Abstract

This study's purpose was threefold: (1) To examine, from a cross-cultural perspective, the impact of the global COVID-19 pandemic on the lives of young children. (2) To compare the ECEC policies of the United States, Germany, and South Korea in response to COVID-19 for exploring similarities and differences. (3) Based on these findings, to discuss future ECEC policies in preparation for possible prolongation of the COVID-19 pandemic and the post-COVID-19 era. First, data collection was conducted by drawing primarily on the electronic databases and websites of a set of internationally recognizable public policy organizations (e.g., OCED, UN, UNICEF, UNESCO). Second, for each of the United States, Germany, and South Korea, we performed a manual search for all possibly relevant government articles, reports, documents, and data from early 2020 to 2021 that pertain to any of four particular aspects of that country's ECEC policies. The four aspects were: (1) Operation of ECEC institutions, (2) Training support for teachers, (3) Learning support for children, (4) Financial support for ECEC institutions. Third, we conducted an online survey of 40 experts (USA=13, Germany=7, Korea=20) in the three target countries. We asked experts' opinions on (1) the effectiveness of local government policies, (2) the difficulties/challenges in implementing local government policies, and (3) the areas in which local government policies can be further improved. Fourth, we held an online international symposium in order to share findings of this study and discuss future directions for ECEC. We found that all three countries provided emergency child care even when institutions were closed. Generally, in the US and Germany, the children of essential workers were eligible for emergency child care, whereas South Korea allowed all households to access the service as needed. The three countries included ECEC teachers and staff among the first eligible for vaccination. South Korea enforced the strictest rules, mandating the wearing of masks for ECEC teachers and care providers. In Germany, the government required ECEC teachers and staff to test for COVID-19 twice a week and "lollipop" test was introduced to make COVID-19 testing easier for young children. USA were generally active in funding institutions in response to the closure of ECEC institutions. Based on the study results, we suggest a two-pronged approach—"prevention" and "education/care"—for a gradual return to normal in ECEC. For prevention, it is necessary to review and improve countermeasures in the event of confirmed cases within the ECEC institution, regularly test for teachers, parents, and children, and strictly follow the quarantine guidelines within the institution. In terms of education/care, we should encourage outdoor activities for in-person education, and effective use of interactive commutation media for distance learning.