This document summarizes the key developments in early childhood education policy and practice in Italy from the 1960s to present. It discusses the origins of early childhood institutions in Italy, driven initially by Catholic and later municipal influences emphasizing democratic and civic values. It outlines the phases of policymaking from the 1970s to 2000s, including a move towards integrated public and private systems. Recent trends show an increasingly instrumental approach and emphasis on standardized outcomes over educational values. The conclusion warns that current reforms risk weakening democratic values and inclusion in favor of economic priorities, with implications for the future of both education and society.

1. Investing in early childhood education for
sustaining democracy
Past, present and future critical issues within the
Italian context
Geneva, 15 September 2011

2. Aim and scope of the study:
- Past developments, current trends and future directions in
ECEC policy-making (3 to 6 services)
- Policy-making conceptualised as a multilevel process:
complex interaction between national, regional, local
dynamics
- Socio-cultural perspective: how historical, social and cultural
influences shape ECEC policy-making over time
- Phenomenological analysis (highlighting themes,
contradictions and tensions)
- Sources: policy documents, laws, curricular guidelines and
documentary sources

3. Context: origin of ECEC institutions
Before 1960 most pre-schools (Asili) were run by
Catholic affiliated bodies:
Charity purposes
custody of
disadvantaged
children
Pedagogy inspired by family like model (Agazzi, 1948)

4. Context: origin of ECEC institutions (cont.)
Radical roots of municipal pre-
schools
Democracy
Civic
traditions
(Putnam, 1992)
Participation
Solidarity (Malaguzzi, 1972)
Social Justice
Children’s right to education (Ciari, 1969)

5. Context: origin of ECEC institutions (cont.)
1968: the State takes over responsibility in the pre-school
sector ‘attendance not mandatory & free of charge’
Scuola Materna
for education
of young children and
assistance to working families
National guidelines (Orientamenti, 1969)
Tripartite system: Municipal, State, Catholic pre-schools

6. Policy-making in ECEC: first phase (1970s)
Democratisation of school institutions under the
influence of municipal experiences:
- parents’ participation to decision-making
committees (schools as democratic
communities interacting with wider social and
civic community)
- inclusion of special needs children in integrated
settings (universal right to education)
- educational responsibility shared by all team
members (joint work and collegiality)

7. Policy-making in ECEC: second phase (1980-
beginning 1990s)
Consolidation of the pedagogical identity of Scuola
dell’Infanzia:
- local experimentalism contributes to further qualify
municipal services under local and regional
administrations (pedagogical coordination,
documentation and research centres, experimental
services: eg. tempo per le famiglie - MI, area bambini -PI)
- the ‘culture of childhood’ (Mantovani, 1987) developed
within municipal services inspires the new pedagogical
guidelines of state scuola dell’infanzia (holistic approach,
children’s active participation to social and cultural life of
their communities, project work) > Orientamenti, 1991

8. Policy-making in ECEC: third phase (late 1990 –
beginning 2000)
Trends of devolution in a time of financial constraints:
- progressive devolution of central authority to
regional and local administrative bodies
- autonomous management of school institutions
(istituti comprensivi) > contradictory effects due to
limited funding
- equal status of non-state institutions implying public
funding
 toward an integrated system of ECEC services
(increased collaboration between public & private
sector)

9. Recent trends: curriculum reforms (2000s)
• Indicazioni, 2004:
- prescriptive guidelines
- emphasis on personalised education vs social and cultural participation of children
- lack of consultation with stakeholders
• Indicazioni, 2007:
- strong cultural and pedagogical framework
- weaknesses: methodological tools
- no time for experimentation
• Atto di indirizzo, 2009 (D.P.R. 89/2009):
- personalised vision of education > emphasis on the private rather than the public
dimension on ECE
- perspective of school readiness > acquisition of knowledge and behaviours for
schooling (achievement of predetermined outcomes and objective evaluation)
- compensatory interventions vs inclusion
- efficient management of financial resources (less time for joint work)
 Increasingly instrumental approach to early childhood education in
the context of neo-liberal influences

10. Future scenarios…
• Increased governmental control (values determined
from above) and less space for public consultation
(values as result of negotiation processes)
• Schoolification of early childhood education (SFP)
• Weakening of collegiality (less time for joint work)
• Achievement of predetermined outcomes become
predominant on shared educational values
FROM EDUCATIONAL VALUES TO
ECONOMIC NECESSITIES 
DEMOCRATIC deficit

11. “At the present time, more than any other time before, the possibilities of what
the future of early childhood education could be are played out. We can choose
whether to accept the authoritarian turn undertaken by the current trends of
educational reforms or to deny it, in name of the democratic values that gave
origin to our pedagogical tradition. From this choice it will depend not only the
future of early childhood education but also the future of our society. We can
decide whether to accept a less democratic and equal society in name of
economic necessities or rather we can decide that only by sustaining a more
democratic and inclusive society the conditions for the flourishing of sustainable
growth can be created. In this particularly critical time our role as teachers,
educators, researchers and policy-makers impose us to make a choice. In making
this choice we need to reflect on the image of the child we bear in mind when we
talk about early childhood education. Is he/she a capable human being, who is
able to give meaning and shape reality? Is he/she a citizen who is entitled to give
a significant contribution to the future of our society? Or is he/she an incomplete
human being who needs to be educated in order to function well in an already
given and increasingly competitive society?”

12. Arianna Lazzari
Dipartimento di Scienze dell’Educazione
arianna.lazzari2@unibo.it
www.unibo.it