This research aims to understand the perspectives of Chilean Early Childhood Education and Care (ECEC) leaders of ECEC centers and schools regarding the schoolification of this educational level. In particular, it aims to explore the definition, causes and proposalsmade by ECEC leaders for the ECEC schoolification.

ECEC schoolification has been defined as the trend in which children's learning is planned by following up primary education's guidelines: a large group of children organized according to their age, in which instruction is mainly carried out inside the classrooms; with a focus on literacy and mathematics pedagogical experiences, having less room for playful activities (OECD, 2006). Schoolification has also been described as the prevalence of formal teaching experiences -i.e., children sitting at tables, undertaking activities led by their ECEC teachers, or sitting on the rug listening to their teachers without interacting with their peers (Bradbury, 2019). Given the scope of this phenomenon, some authors have proposed that we are in an "epidemic" of schoolification (Bipath & Theron, 2020; Ring & O'Sullivan, 2018), which has been reinforced by the approach of preparing for school or school readiness (Bingham y Whitebread, 2011).

The schoolification of ECEC opposes social pedagogy, thereby limiting the benefits associated with ECEC. For example, by sending children “homework” in-text formats similar to those used in primary education (such as activity books), they are denied the time and opportunity to achieve family pedagogy, learn about life and the natural world as their families experience it (Garnier, 2011; Murray, 2015). Moreover, organizing ECEC following the guidelines of primary education means not recognizing the merits of this educational level (Brogaard Clausen, 2015) since free play and learning through play, pillars of ECEC, are not considered appropriate methodologies for the acquisition of knowledge (Gunnarsdottir, 2014).

Since ECEC schoolification is related to the pedagogical experiences carried out in nurseries and schools, ECEC leaders are a crucial element worth exploring because they guide the pedagogical decisions adopted in ECEC classrooms (Nupponen 2006; Siraj-Blatchford and Manni 2006; Siraj-Blatchford and Hallet 2014). Pedagogical work carried out by leaders and ECEC teachers are essential concerning education quality (Heikka & Hujala, 2013). ECEC teachers expected that principals assure curriculum implementation and support them with their expertise (Heikka, 2013). The most successful leaderships regarding educational outcomes possess a vision-oriented mostly to teaching and learning; there, principals focus on pedagogy and curriculum, valuing interactions between adult and child and supporting the staff to develop better ways to engage children (Siraj-Blatchford & Hallet, 2014).

In Chile, leaders of ECEC centers work in different institutionalities: in nurseries (with children of 0-3 years old) and schools (with children of 4-5 years old). Exploring this case contribute with a developing country perspective to international debates, as these have been mainly carried out in the European context, specifically in Nordic countries.

A qualitative tradition was used to get a deeper understanding of the Chilean ECEC leaders’ perspectives about the schoolification of ECEC, since this paradigm allows to explore of social phenomena through descriptions obtained by research work in the field or context (Robson, 2011). Data recollection were made through semi-structured interviews, based on guidelines constructed from an etic perspective (Given, 2008). These guidelines explored the definition, causes and proposals for the ECEC schoolification as aprioristic categories. The central topics addressed were the coverage of the different cores of the National Curriculum, the pedagogical methods used, the place of play in learning experiences, the type of discipline promoted and the preparation of children for school. Due to the context of the covid-19 pandemic in which this investigation phase took place, we conducted these interviews remotely (via Zoom or Google Meet). Participants were ECEC leaders from ten educational settings, five nurseries and five schools, all publicly funded and placed in the capital city of Santiago. ECEC leaders for nurseries (five) and schools’ principals (five) and ECEC coordinators (five), were interviewed, given a total of 15 participants. Content data analysis was conducted based on aprioristic and emergent categories (Schreier 2013). In addition, aprioristic categories emerged from the literature review about ECEC schoolification previously mentioned. Ethical considerations: the schools’ and nurseries’ leaders and coordinators were informed about the research. Consent forms were delivered, which explained the details of the study. Participants were also informed about their right to privacy, anonymity and protection to withdraw was assured at all times. Those consent forms were approved by the Ethics Research Committee from the Faculty of Philosophy and Humanities from the University of Chile. Regarding their right to privacy and anonymity, their real names were changed, and they used pseudonyms instead so nobody could identify them.

Findings Regarding ECEC schoolification definitions, all ECEC nurseries leaders, school leaders and ECEC coordinators indicated that the schoolification of this educational level is highly harmful to children and the entire educational community. They stressed that the focus on literacy and mathematics, children’s discipline understood as good behaviour, and the pressure of national standardized tests has caused a deterioration of children’s well-being and learning opportunities. About the causes of ECEC schoolification, participants expressed their concern identifying the sources of this trend, such as family pressure for primary education’s learning goals. In addition, ECEC nurseries leaders indicated a misunderstanding of ECEC specificity in schools. In contrast, school leaders and ECEC coordinators said that the most crucial cause is the National Test carried out in schools every year. Also, participants raised some proposals to approach ECEC schoolification: the Ministry of Education should lead a national campaign that promotes ECEC pedagogies, learning outcomes and the relevance of playful methodologies across society. Finally, some differences were observed with regard to ECEC leaders’ pedagogical leadership. In the cases of nurseries, a common vision-oriented was developed regarding pedagogy, which was not always the case for the school’s context. Conclusions Findings show different leadership styles to deal with ECEC schoolification. They also give an account of the broad misunderstanding of the pedagogical specificity of early childhood education, even at the directive level and at the families and State level. Given the scarce research on this topic, future research should be developed into how leaders face schoolification, and how their leadership style varies. This will contribute to a better understanding of how leaders cope with this trend, informing policies to overcome this problem.

Bingham, S., & Whitebread, D. (2011). School Readiness: A critical review of perspectives and evidence (pp. 1–194). pp. 1–194. TACTYC Research Publication. Bipath, K., & Theron, H. (2020). Contesting schoolification through snapshots of pedagogy-in-participation in early childhood development centres in South Africa. Perspectives in Education, 28(2), 227–240. Bradbury, A. (2019). Datafied at four: the role of data in the ‘schoolification’ of early childhood education in England. Learning, Media and Technology, 44(1), 7–21. https://doi.org/10.1080/17439884.2018.1511577 Brogaard Clausen, S. (2015). Schoolification or early years democracy? A cross-curricular perspective from Denmark and England. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 16(4), 355–373. Garnier, P. (2011). The scholarisation of the French école maternelle: Institutional transformations since the 1970s. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 19(4), 553–563. Given, L. M. (2008). The Sage encyclopedia of qualitative research methods (pp. 1–1014). pp. 1–1014. Thousand Oaks, Calif.: Sage Publications. Gunnarsdottir, B. (2014). From play to school: are core values of ECEC in Iceland being undermined by ‘schoolification’? International Journal of Early Years Education, 22(3), 242–250. Heikka, J. (2013). Enacting Distributed Pedagogical Leadership in Finland: Perceptions of Early Childhood Education Stakeholders. In E. Hujala, M. Waniganayake, & J. Rodd (Eds.), Researching Leadership in Early Childhood Education (pp. 255–273). Tampere: Tampere University Press. Heikka, J. (2014). Distributed pedagogical leadership in early childhood education (Doctoral dissertation). Acta Electronica Universitatis Tamperensis 1392. Tampere: Tampere University Press. Heikka, J., & Hujala, E. (2013). Early childhood leadership through the lens of distributed leadership. European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 21(4), 568–580. Heikka, J., Pitkäniemi, H., Kettukangas, T., & Hyttinen, T. (2021). Distributed pedagogical leadership and teacher leadership in early childhood education contexts. International Journal of Leadership in Education, 24(3), 333–348. https://doi.org/10.1080/13603124.2019.1623923 Nupponen, H. (2006). Framework for Developing Leadership Skills in Child Care Centres in Queensland, Australia. Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood, 7(2), 146–161. OECD. (2006). Starting Strong II: early childhood education and care. Paris: OECD Publishing. Ring, E., & O’Sullivan, L. (2018). Dewey: a panacea for the ‘schoolification’ epidemic. Education 3-13, 46(4), 402–410. https://doi.org/10.1080/03004279.2018.1445474 Robson, C. (2011). Real world research (3rd ed.). West Sussex: Wiley. Schreier, M. (2013). Qualitative Content Analysis. In U. Flick (Ed.), The SAGE Handbook of Qualitative Data (pp. 70–183). London: SAGE Publications. Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Hallet, E. (2014). Effective and Caring Leadership in the Early Years. London: SAGE Publications. Siraj-Blatchford, I., & Manni, L. (2006). Effective Leadership in the Early Years Sector (ELEYS) Study. London: University of London.