Search

Quality early care and education (ECE) presents an unparalleled opportunity to avert disadvantage and promote children's development. Mealtimes are essential daily routines, yet are often overlooked in research on ECE quality. This paper crystallises a composite case study of ECE mealtimes in highly disadvantaged communities by combining Departing Radically in Academic Writing (DRAW) methodology with parent surveys, scorings of educator‐child interactions (inCLASS), and field notes. Poverty is perpetuated in these centres: children do not have enough food, and educator‐dictated feeding practices restrict children's opportunities to exercise their agency and learn. Systemic policy action is needed to address poverty in ECE. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Background: In developed economies, most children attend Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) services before school entry, many from early life and across long days. For this reason, ECEC services present significant potential to provide food environments that positively influence eating behaviours and food preferences with attendant effect on life course trajectories of health and wellbeing. Yet there is evidence that feeding practices that limit optimal ongoing nutrition, such as pressure and restriction, are amplified in ECEC services serving disadvantaged communities. We sought to identify underlying explanatory mechanisms through observation of children's feeding experiences and educator explanations comparing, family‐provided and service‐provided meals. Method: This study used qualitative analyses of educator interviews and observation records from 55 mealtimes in 10 ECEC services: 5 providing food and 5 requiring family food provision. Results: High levels of concern drove educator's controlling feeding practices at mealtimes but presented differently across meal provision modes. In centres that provided food, educators' concern focused on food variety, manifesting in pressure to 'try' foods. In centres requiring family‐provided food, concern focused on nutrition quantity and quality and manifested as control of order of food consumption and pacing of intake to ensure food lasted across the day. Interview data suggested that conflict aversion limited optimal nutrition. In centres providing food, this was seen in menus that prioritized child food preferences. In centres requiring family meal provision, conflict aversion was seen as reticence to discuss lunchbox contents with families. Conclusion: The findings direct attention to public health intervention. Currently, ECEC face significant barriers to realizing their potential to support child nutrition and establish positive life course trajectories of nutrition. To do so requires targeted supports that enable sufficient supply and quality of food in the context of poverty. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]