We ARE human services

In Early Childhood Education and School-Age Care, we’ve long understood our roles as educators, carers, and leaders. But what if we widened the frame? What if we stopped seeing our work as “just teaching” or “just care” and started naming it for what it is - human services.  

We are part of a powerful, interdependent network of people who support the wellbeing, rights, and potential of individuals and communities. And the work we do with children, young people and families every day is central to that mission (Crinall & Berends, 2017; ACECQA, 2023). 

My postgrad study in human services didn’t give me a new belief. It gave language, structure, and evidence to a belief I’ve held for a long time: that education and care sits right at the heart of human services. It also sharpened my drive to keep naming what our work contributes - because the impact is bigger than many of us have been encouraged to notice. 

From sector thinking to systems thinking 

The human services field exists to meet both individual needs and systemic responsibilities (Crinall & Berends, 2017). It includes health, housing, youth work, family support - and yes, education and care.  

When we hold our work in that context, the everyday parts of our role look different. Educators are: 

• Advocates for children’s rights 
• Contributors to lifelong wellbeing 
• Builders of safe, culturally responsive environments 
• Steady adults when families are stretched thin 
• Facilitators of identity, belonging, and resilience 

We do not sit outside the human services system. We are the human services system - for some children, young people and families, we are their most trusted support (Barblett et al., 2022). For many children and families, we are the system they can access without forms, referrals, or long waiting lists. 

Professional identity - beyond compliance 

The National Quality Framework (NQF) makes it clear that the rights and best interests of the child and young person are paramount (ACECQA, 2025). But if we’re honest, the “why” of our work stretches beyond meeting standards.   

A human services lens helps us remember: 

• program design is social infrastructure 
• pedagogy can operate like preventative health 
• relationships are powerful protective factors 
• respectful practice upholds human dignity 

It’s not just for children and young people. When we protect and promote the wellbeing of families, educators, and communities, we act on behalf of human dignity - a core principle in both the NQF and the (United Nations, 1948), as well as the Convention on the Rights of the Child (United Nations, 1989).  

This isn’t about compliance. It’s about contribution. 

Instead of, “How do I meet the standard?” we start asking, “What kind of society am I helping to build through the way I show up with children and families?” 

Human services principles, already alive in our practice 

Human services professionals work through a set of guiding principles. If you read these and think, “We already do that”, you’re right. Many of which align directly with the EYLF V2.0 and MTOP V2.0: 

Dignity and respect: We build relationships grounded in warmth, attunement, and trust. 

Social justice and equity: We design for inclusion, agency, and cultural safety. 

Integrity and accountability: We lean into reflective practice, ethical leadership, and professional inquiry. 

Self-determination: We centre child voice, partner with families, and protect autonomy in learning. 

Systems thinking: We navigate housing, health, funding, and policy pressures that land in our work. 

Every time you design and build an inclusive environment, respond to distress with empathy and steadiness, or adjust practice to uphold culture and identity, you are doing human services work. 

Educators as change agents 

In my work as a mentor and coach, I see how often educators underestimate the significance of what they do. 

When we map everyday practice onto well-established theory - ecological systems (Bronfenbrenner, 1977), self-determination (Ryan & Deci, 2017), choice theory (Glasser, 1998), and relational frameworks like the Phoenix Cups - we can see the social, emotional, and civic impact inside ordinary moments. 

You are often: 

• Supporting children and young people to meet essential needs through safer, healthier pathways 
• Creating conditions for healing, learning, and growth 
• Partnering with families who are navigating complex systems 
• building relational foundations that influence school success, mental health, and community cohesion 
• Reimagining care as justice (Cartmel et al., 2023) 

You’re not ‘just an educator’.  

You are a change agent inside a human services system. 

This work is collective 

Let’s be clear: the education and care sector does not sit quietly in the background. It underpins everything else. Safe housing, mental health, school success, family cohesion - these all rely, in part, on the relational foundations we co-create in our services. 

When we acknowledge our place in the wider human services landscape, we: 

• Speak with more confidence 
• Collaborate more effectively with allied sectors 
• Strengthen our advocacy for funding, access, and equity 
• Reclaim our professionalism 

And perhaps most importantly, we reclaim our purpose. 

And once we start naming our purpose clearly, the next step is reflection - not as an extra task, but as a way of staying aligned with what matters most. 

A call to reflect: what shifts when we see ourselves differently? 

You don’t need a new title to see your work differently. You need a new frame.  

And when we change the frame, we change what we’re willing to name, protect, and advocate for - in our programs, in our teams, and in the systems around us. 

Try journaling or discussing with your team: 

• Where do I see human services values in my daily work? 
• How does my pedagogy contribute to community wellbeing? 
• What systems do I navigate on behalf of children, young people and families? 
• How do I hold space for others while honouring myself? 

We are human services 

This isn’t a soft sector. It’s a strong one. 

This isn’t babysitting. It’s steady, skilled work that holds families and communities together. 

This isn’t just play. It’s belonging, wellbeing, equity, and intergenerational change in action.  

And because human services is grounded in dignity, rights, and self-determination, it’s worth adding another layer of reflection: how we invite children and young people’s voice into the work. The NQF emphasises agency and meaningful opportunities for children and young people to influence their day, including collaborating with educators in program design and evaluation (ACECQA, 2025). 

This matters deeply in school aged care. OSHC is one of the few places children and young people can practise independence, identity, and belonging in real time - with supportive adults nearby (ACECQA, 2025). 

Try adding these prompts: 

• How are we actively seeking children and young people’s views throughout the day - not only during planned group moments (ACECQA, 2025)? 
• Where do children and young people genuinely influence program decisions (what we offer, how we offer it, how spaces are used) (ACECQA, 2025)? 
• Which children or young people are most heard here - and who might be getting missed, silenced, or overlooked (ACECQA, 2025)? 
• Do our routines and environments make choice easy, or do they quietly funnel everyone into the same options (ACECQA, 2025)? 
• How do we respond to children’s ideas in ways that show their opinions matter and can shape what happens next (ACECQA, 2025)? 
• How are we documenting children and young people’s contributions and using them to inform reflection and program improvement (ACECQA, 2025)? 
• What is one small change we could trial this month to increase shared decision-making in OSHC - and how will we check in with children and young people about whether it worked (ACECQA, 2025)? 

So, to every educator, leader, teacher and professionals across our sector, in all the contexts reading this: 

You are human services  

Own it. Honour it. And let’s advocate like it. 

References: 

ACECQA. (2025). Guide to the National Quality Framework. Australian Children’s  Education and Care Quality Authority. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/nqf/about 

Australian Government Department of Education. (2022a). Belonging, Being & Becoming:  The Early Years Learning Framework for Australia V2.0. ACECQA.  https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/EYLF-V2.0.pdf 

Australian Government Department of Education. (2022b). My Time, Our Place: Framework  for School Age Care in Australia V2.0. ACECQA. https://www.acecqa.gov.au/sites/default/files/2023-01/MyTimeOurPlaceV2.0.pdf 

Bronfenbrenner, U. (1977). Toward an experimental ecology of human development. American Psychologist, 32(7), 513-531. https://doi.org/10.1037/0003-066X.32.7.513  

Crinall, K., & Berends, L. (Eds.). (2017). Community and Human Services: Concepts for Practice. Oxford University Press. 

Glasser, W. (1999). Choice theory: A new psychology of personal freedom. HarperPerennial. 

Phoenix, S. & Phoenix, C. (2020). The Phoenix Cups: A cup-filling story. Phoenix Support Publishing. 

Ryan, R. M., & Deci, E. L. (2017). Self-determination theory: basic psychological needs in motivation, development, and wellness. In: Guilford Press. 

United Nations. (1948). Universal Declaration of Human Rights. https://www.un.org/en/about-us/universal-declaration-of-human-rights 

United Nations. (1989). Convention on the Rights of the Child. https://www.ohchr.org/en/instruments-mechanisms/instruments/convention-rights-child