The Early Years Teacher Status Professional Development Network aims to:
- Work towards raising the quality of early years practice and provision
- Share and disseminate best practice
- Support one another professionally
- Formulate professional responses to local and national initiatives
- Contribute to the deliver of Early Years Initial Teacher Training at the University of Derby
If you are interested in being part of the network, please contact Sue Wilcockson at S.Wilcockson@derby.ac.uk
Early Years Teacher Professional Development Network meeting
4 April 2019 @ 2pm
Attendance:
UOD: Jo Byrd, Sue Wilcockson, Jenny Boldrin
Little Explorer’s Forest Nursery: Kate Cox, Melissa Bryon
Attending: Sue Opelt – Springfield Day Nursery; Laura Gapski, Frankie Wood – Bright Sparks; Holly Blews. Emily Booth – Cedar House & Smarties; Michelle Larman – Dragonflies DN
Introductions and welcome:
Jo Byrd welcomed everyone to Little Explorer’s Forest Nursery and thanked the operations manager Kate Cox and the nursery manager Melissa Bryon for hosting the event and showing the network members around their environment.
The visit to the Forest School had come from members wishing to see this in practice and gain a better understanding of Forest School activities.
The visit was highly successful, enabling members to observe and understand forest school environments suitable for babies to young children in the EYFS.
Key points raised: suitable clear boundaries ;
risk assessment – including children in this process so they gain an understanding of keeping themselves and their peers safe;
expected behaviours;
The curriculum: creativity, physical development,
PSE – appropriate clothing, food, toileting;
Safety; ensuring all staff aware of procedures to follow
Date of Next Meeting: 2 July 2019
Early Years Teacher Professional Development Network meeting
29 November 2018 @ 2pm
Attendance:
UOD: Jo Byrd, Sue Wilcockson, Su Wall
Jayne Watermann; Diana Lawton; Sara Bailey; Emma Duce; Hannah Stringer; Laura Boni; Rhiannon Kennion; Laura Upton; Sue Opelt; Christine Doubtfire; Joanne Chan
Apologies: Carol Fenton, Jo Glassbrook, Rachel Marley, Claire Saville, Sarah Moss, Laura Gapski, Ged Tinley, Sue Nesbitt
Introductions and welcome:
Why are you here and what would make these meetings more worthwhile?
• The group discussed the meeting focus and focus on the positives e.g. intergeneration play, all the good things we do in the sector. Be wary about the negatives. Keep the approach positive
• If we have the knowledge ahead of the meeting, we can research and come prepared.
• E.g. Forest School learning.
• New EYFS framework –
• Nice to be in a group that acknowledge barriers but can meet to discuss and find positives way forward.
• Knowledge that the local authority need to know about what is happening in the sector and other areas.
• Helps to keep up to date
Jo Byrd highlighted that the next meeting will look at outdoor learning and take place, in part, in the university Forest School environment.
Programme Update
Jo Byrd highlighted the current cohort figures. For the academic year 1819 we have 14 postgraduate trainees, 6 stage 3 Undergraduate EYTS trainees and 7 stage 2 Undergraduate EYTS trainees
Placement Permissions for trainees
A discussion took place around the permissions trainees have when on placement in settings and the issues we are seeing for our trainees from a university perspective. For example, some trainees are not being allowed to change nappies and have access to the rooms without staff accompanying them at all times. We are aware of concerns in the settings which include safeguarding concerns as well as issues with GDRP. Concerns seen around sharing data and observations around children. We acknowledge that nurseries have safeguarding in place as parents sign for permissions but still seeing an element of distrust as settings are frightened of being sued. Aware that nurseries are bogged down with jargon and legislation that they do not necessarily understand.
Jo Byrd explained that we need to get confidence out into the settings in regards to our trainees on placement. Full awareness of what is expected in the settings for the trainees.
• Clear code of conduct.
• Preparing them for the workforce.
• Expectation that trainees should experience all areas of the job, including personal care and should be seen as a full staff member.
Jo explained that she would like to write a policy for placements and asked the group to brainstorm what would they expect and allow for a trainee on placement. 5 minutes to brainstorm what is acceptable and what is non-acceptable.
Ensure all these are explained as to why this is beneficial and how the student is introduced.
We ask trainees to write a letter to introduce themselves, but should we provide a letter as well??
Need to have awareness of the skills trainees enter with. Do they need support from the setting? This could form part of the induction? There was a discussion around the need for children to form relationships with trainee before the trainee can undertake certain care needs.
Do we need to put into a place an induction tick list to ensure all trainees are having access to the care areas?
Does the nursery already have a policy in place to support students?
Develop the ideal EYT – review this considering expectations?
County Updates:
Derbyshire County Council:
• Not meeting the gap for disadvantaged children.
• Communication and Language Every Child a Talker – now at maintenance programme. This has come as a result of using the Child Monitoring Tool to support children.
• Previously 0-4yrs and then School. Now 0-5 are tracked effectively throughout. What does tracking look like, how does it work in settings.
• DCC Involved in Vocab project.
• Also looking at work with PEN – Parental Engagement Network to consider transitions children go through, attachment.
• Strong focus on getting settings to good/outstanding but with a child focus at the heart.
Leicestershire County Council:
• focus of Ofsted.
• Focus on traveller groups.
Staffordshire County Council:
• Different providers working together. CM and PVI with schools – trying to bring them together to look at coming together more towards the end goal and to work effectively
• Setting up childcare hubs – looking at locality areas and how the settings work together to meet the needs of the families in the areas, as well as providing peer on peer support. Share good practice, training,
• Messages going out to parents on parent engagement is being developed. Little bite size information.
• Aware of children attending school nurseries at age 3 which impacts on number on roll. Induction at the start and started to include a further induction at 2 ½ Aware that some families are being targeted by schools to attend and put under pressure. Parents are concerned that their children won’t get a school place if they do not attend a school nursery, others it’s convenient, others think it is cheaper but the additional costs have made it more expensive. Aware that parents need the knowledge to make an informed provision. This also has a knock-on effect that schools need to understand the age they are taking in and how they younger EYFS children need specific support and whether schools have the knowledge to provide this.
• Aware that the reduction in Children Centre support has had a knock-on effect for 2-year olds gaining support. The Children Centre used to refer to nurseries. Home Start are providing links with Staffordshire to support 2 yr old children going into nurseries.
London Meeting:
Su Wall and Jo Byrd attended meeting at Westminster for a meeting with OFSTED and DfE.
DfE spoke and disappeared
Public consultation on the new EYFS will take place in 2019/2020 and be rolled out in 2020
The idea is to reduce workload and develop the framework. Reduce the statistics – currently 28% children nationally leave reception with poor Communication and Language skills
Self-regulation to be included. A split in physical development to fine and gross motor; remove space shape measure within Mathematical Development – It is not a curriculum – it is a basis to work from.
There is a Professional Development Fund of 20 million to focus on language development- developing Champions.
OFSTED – every child deserves the best possible start in life – research led changes
Inspection Framework – They will be looking at what’s right for these children. Still concern with poverty – huge gap not reducing.
Bold beginnings has found that staff are less confident with maths.
EY Profile should be on-going
Reading is key – discussion around reading for phonics and reading for pleasure
Key areas – impact, quality, key focus on early reading and maths in early years provision
Inspection should be around intent and impact and what would be the result of this and how can you prove this. Focus on individual children.
Speakers – concern about EYFS looking more like KS1, need emphasis on child development, should not be data driven
There had been a heated discussion at the London meeting around Early Years Teacher Status and – why they cannot be teachers but this had not been addressed.
CACHE attended – statistics from CACHE – crisis workforce. 48% older generation. Hugh gap envisaged.
Only 44% of settings with a graduate leader – 81% PVI with L3 leadership.
Discussions from the Group
DCC used to do work with EYPS/EYTS and aware that more needs to be done for this cohort. Looking at developing EYTS and EYPS to go out and support the sector and become Champions. Attend train the trainer training and be based in settings.
Nottinghamshire – training to be a support for settings. Rolled out across schools, nurseries and settings. Unsuccessful – nurseries couldn’t afford to pay the school rates.
Aware that EYTS/EYPS are willing to give up time but also aware that settings are short staffed and not being paid enough to deliver training in another setting when struggling to train our own staff.
Sue Wilcockson spoke about the Harmonisation Group meetings attended. This is a group of EYTS providers across the country that meet three times a year to share concerns and practice.
Interview dates: Jo Byrd issued the dates for interview and asked members of the PDN to let Sue Wilcockson know if they are available to support interviews as a workforce representative.
AOB
L6 Graduate Competencies: Early Childhood Studies Degree Network (ECSDN) launched in Sept 2018 – Derby University is one of 4 piloting
Early Childhood Degree is run alongside L6 Practitioner Status – placements to support, mixed settings, EYPP, SEND, EAL. Students are assessed by setting mentors and University Assessment Mentors.
There is to be a Conference in January as to where we are with this. Students need English and Maths GCSE on entry. 75% stage 1 taken up in this pilot year.
Date of Next Meeting: 14 March 2019 Place: Jonty Farmer car park at 1.45pm. Wear wellies!
The Professional Development Network Early Years Teacher
Department for Education
Areas of research interest May 2018 – a response
by the Professional Development Network to aspects of this document.
Discussed at a meeting held on Tuesday 10 July 2018
Background
In May 2018 the DfE published its document highlighting the area where the DfE is interested in more research and new evidence. Within the list is the areas which are key departmental priorities and where they feel the research community is currently well placed to add to the primary research.
The full publication can be accessed at: https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/706991/DfE_Areas_of_research_interest.pdf
The Early Years
- What is the prevalence of different pedagogical approaches in different early years settings, including maintained nurseries and nursery provision in primary schools? How does this vary across the workforce? Which of these approaches have the greatest impact on development?
- How can schools best manage the transition from early years to school and minimise any negative effects on children, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds?
Findings
The members of the Early Years Teacher Professional Development Network considered the following areas of interest.
Q: What is the prevalence of different pedagogical approaches in different early years settings, including maintained nurseries and nursery provision in primary schools? How does this vary across the sector?
Members considered specific pedagogical approaches and examples of these included: Steiner, Montessori, High Scope, Reggio Emilia and Forest School. Discussion arose around the opportunities for children and the members acknowledged that these are different for individual children. These vary widely depending on the location and what is provided within that area, as well as parents’ wishes for their child’s early years experiences.
Members considered the approaches of an independent school/maintained sector. Members highlighted that these sectors are largely led by persons holding QTS and are accountable for demonstrating the outcomes and progress of children within the Early Years Foundation Stage. The experiences for children are principally curriculum based and provide opportunities for specialist teaching.
In contrast, members agreed that early years provision in the private, voluntary and independent sector (PVI) is varied. The members discussed the very formal approaches seen in some PVI settings compared to some very informal approaches to the Early Years Foundation Stage. The requirement for leading in the PVI sector is a minimum Level 3 qualification.
Planning for children was also considered and the members agreed that this is completed differently in settings. In maintained provision and independent schools, this can be led by the teacher/ teaching assistant whereas the nursery lead may oversee this in the PVI sector. There has been a recent interest in the ‘in the moment planning’ approach.
Further information on this approach can be found at: https://eyfsmatters.wordpress.com/2015/04/16/anna-ephgrave-guest-blog-in-the-moment
A further recently new initiative being identified in nurseries is ‘The Curiosity Approach’ with further information found at https://www.thecuriosityapproach.com/
Members discussed the need for research to underpin the practices developed within early years settings.
Q: Considering different pedagogical approaches – which of these approaches has the greatest impact on development?
Members considered how to meet children’s individual needs. Which is the most appropriate approach to follow? One specific approach is not always the best for that child. An example was given of the different phonics programs available to the sector. One method of approaching the teaching of phonics may not suit a child’s learning style, however another method may be better suited.
Members felt that a researched informed approach encourages a critical workforce. For example, members discussed an approach seen within the network area ‘Early Talk Boost’. This is a research backed approach and improvements have been seen within 9 weeks of the program commencing. https://icancharity.org.uk/early-talk-boost-homepage.
Teaching approaches that involve a two-way approach with parents were highlighted as having the greatest impact on a child’s development, along with having a well-trained graduate workforce with a passionate team supporting children.
There were discussions around the table about specific approaches such as Steiner and Montessori. Is the impact on a child’s development seen because this philosophy about child development is believed by the parents?
Members discussed the impact of providing children with experiences, both indoors and outdoors. The benefits of outdoor play in supporting children’s development and their confidence, language and resilience was seen positively by the members. Again, this approach is widely researched.
Q: How can schools best manage the transition from early years to school and minimise the negative effects on children, especially those from disadvantaged backgrounds?
Members acknowledged the broadness of the topic around transition. The statement – a school should be ready for the child and not the child ready for the school was felt appropriate to support positive transitions. All stakeholders involved should recognise and acknowledge the vulnerability of children within transitions. Members discussed the competitiveness seen among some schools and pressure this sometime puts onto parents
Members also considered the support for children in their individual transitions. It is widely seen as an aspect of the child’s life that takes place the half term before they start at the school, predominantly in the summer term. Members agreed that transition should start in the September the year before the child is due to start school. This good practice would develop confident, independent, resilient, risk taking children who are well prepared for this next stage in their life. Openness to the school and allowing children to experience all different aspects, not just the classroom but lunchtimes, play times and assemblies was identified as important.
Relationships feature strongly in supporting a positive transition. Consideration should be given to strengthen relationships, and the continuity of these, between the child, parents, school and early years setting. This could include further activities and events for children and their families. Members discussed how schools should be more proactive with parents and consider how they can remove barriers, be more communicative, non-judgmental and provide a welcoming environment. Members highlighted some positive approaches to transition seen, such as when teachers visit the nurseries and parents to share information about the child that will support that child’s individual transition.
Sue Wilcockson
Partnership Coordinator
Early Years Initial Teacher Training
University of Derby
July 18
Closing Gaps Early – a response
by the Professional Development Network to aspects of this report.
Discussed at a meeting held on Thursday 30th November 2017
Following the core meeting, network members discussed aspects of the recently published report, Closing Gaps Early. The report, published by The Sutton Trust in September 2017 by Kitty Stewart and Jane Waldfogel, examines the current state of early years policy. The publication looks at the strengths and limitations of today’s early years’ service, and identifies key next steps for policy attention.
Background
The Sutton Trust report acknowledges ‘that early years are fundamental in preparing children for success in school, and in later life’ (Closing Gaps Early 2017). It also recognises how later learning is underpinned by the skills and abilities developed in the early years, but also highlight how early deficits have lasting consequences for later inequality and social mobility.
This article substantiates new evidence previously documented by The Sutton Trust, Waldfogel and Washbrook (2010) which considered gaps in school achievement. Inequalities that are present at age five ‘underscore the crucial importance of the early years in generating lifelong intergenerational inequalities and the critical needs for effective early years policy to address them. (Closing Gaps Early 2017)
The release explains the progress made in the UK in recent decades highlighting the focus in England with the development of Sure Start Children’s Centres; two, three and four, year old funding; the introduction of the Early Years Foundation Stage curriculum as well as investment in upskilling the early years workforce. (Closing Gaps Early 2017)
However, challenges remain. The Sutton Trust go on to consider three significant areas of early years policy. These are
- Parental leave and parenting policies
- Early education and childcare, incorporating The quality of early education
and
- Financial support
The full report, which can be accessed at https://www.suttontrust.com/research-paper/closing-gaps-early/ goes into detail in these three areas.
Key findings are highlighted by Womens Grid (http://www.womensgrid.org.uk/?p=4119) who provide a review of the report.
These are identified as follows:
- The UK has made a great deal of progress over the past 20 years, doubling the period of paid maternity leave and introducing new rights to paid paternity leave and parental leave.
- Progress in parenting policy has been more uneven. While parenting is a major factor contributing to gaps in early child development, research has also highlighted the difficulties of designing and implementing policies to improve parenting or close gaps in parenting and the home environment between low- and high-socio-economic status families. Carefully designed programmes, drawing on the growing evidence base, can play a role in reducing disparities in early childhood, although delivering them effectively at scale remains challenging.
- Early education and childcare has been a major focus of policy in this area. Of concern is that recent developments indicate a shift in funding and policy focus away from quality early education for child development towards childcare affordability for working families. Investments in affordability are welcome, but neither the tax-free childcare scheme nor the 30 hour entitlement for working families are well-designed to promote social mobility, meaning longer hours in state-funded early education for children who are already relatively advantaged, which may be expected to widen gaps in child development at school starting age. Particularly worrying, these investments are coming at the expense of the quality of provision.
- One third of staff working in group-based care still lack either English or Maths GCSE or both. A current proposal to remove the requirement for maintained nursery and reception classes to have a qualified teacher is particularly worrying and could affect children in disadvantaged areas most of all.
- Targeted places for disadvantaged two-year-olds continue, but nearly one-third of eligible two-year-olds still do not take up their place, while many of the available places for two-year-olds are not in the highest quality settings.
- Cash transfers can have a significant impact on household financial resources and therefore on children’s outcomes. From 1997 to 2010 cash transfers for children became much more generous, with children under five the greatest beneficiaries. Since 2010 aspects of this support have been unravelled: notably, additional benefits for babies have been scrapped; the tax credit system has been more narrowly targeted; and a freeze on working-age benefits means a steady erosion in the real value of support.
- Changes to benefits and tax credits are projected to lead to sharp increases in child poverty in the next five years, undoing much of the progress of the early 2000s. It is difficult to see how even well-designed policies to support parenting and ensure access to high quality early education can have their optimal impact against such a backdrop.
Summarising the report, Closing Gaps Early, seven key recommendations were highlighted by Womens Grid as well.
Recommendations
1: The shift in focus of childcare policy away from quality towards quantity, with less focus on educational development, is ill-advised and should be reversed. Specifically, funding should be secured to ensure that qualified teachers remain in place in school nursery and reception classes, and that local authorities can continue to provide support for continuing professional development. The earlier commitment to having qualified practitioners in every early years setting should be revived as their presence is crucial for the development of disadvantaged toddlers.
- Parental leave policies should be extended to provide enhanced entitlements for fathers and to ensure that low-income and non-standard workers can take full advantage of them. Steps to increase leave-taking by men through measures such as providing some ‘use it or lose it’ leave and providing some leave time at a higher rate of pay – to increase father involvement and promote greater gender equity – should be a priority.
- Parenting policies should build on the research evidence to help parents provide the best possible early start for their children. The government should continue to trial and evaluate promising programmes while also working towards taking the most promising ones to scale.
- Income support for families with children, particularly those with young children, must be provided at an adequate level – so that parents can make necessary investments in their children and so that financial insecurity does not undermine the impact of other investments like parental leave, parenting policies and high-quality childcare.
- The government should move towards giving early years teachers Qualified Teacher Status, with the increase in pay, conditions and status this would entail, and should invest in improving qualifications for all practitioners in the sector. A dedicated funding pot, similar to the old Graduate Leader Fund, is important to achieving this.
- Government should consider the potential adverse impact on equality of offering 30 free hours to children in working families, and explore how to avoid the policy inadvertently increasing gaps in development at school starting age.
- Early years policy should be informed by the best available evidence from sources such as the Education Endowment Foundation. The EEF’s Early Years Toolkit can form a valuable source of information on the most effective and cost-efficient use of the early years pupil premium.
Sector Responses
Sector responses to this report are in favour of the findings.
Nursery World refer to ’30 hours risks widening the gap with ‘quality over quality’.
accessed at : https://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/nursery-world/news/1162374/30-hours-risks-widening-the-gap-with-quantity-over-quality
In agreement are the Pre-School Learning Alliance but they also stress that higher level qualifications do not always reflect high quality early years practitioners.
https://www.pre-school.org.uk/alliance-responds-sutton-trusts-closing-gaps-early-report
The Guardian reports on the findings and considers how the free childcare expansion could widen the gap between the rich and the poor.
The Early Years Teacher Professional Development Network, University of Derby – a response
The members of the EYT Professional Development Network considered three of the recommendations made by the report – Closing Gaps Early.
Statement: The shift in focus of childcare policy from quality to quality, with less focus on educational development, is ill advised and should be reversed.
Question: Do the members agree that quality is at risk following the 30-hour entitlement?
Members agreed unanimously with this question. Members highlighted the concerns relating to a reduction in the providers income which in turn impacts on the capacity to provide high quality early years care and education. Discussed also was the potential to employ less qualified/experienced practitioners, again a result of funding and covering the costs of delivering quality education. Concerns were also raised when children attend number of different providers to take up their funded hours with quality being lost through ineffective communication between the partnerships. There is a definite push on tracking data for the 30 hours.
The discussions also raised, however, a few questions relating to this statement.
- How could quality be improved with the policy shift to quantity?
- Who is responsible for quality?
Statement: The government should move towards giving Early Years Teacher Qualified Teacher Status.
Question: How would giving Early Years Teachers QTS impact on the sector?
Whilst members are in favour of Early Years Teachers being awarded QTS there are concerns about how this would impact on the PVI sector. This award would help to retain Early Years Teachers in the sector but who is going to pay the salary? A discussion followed regarding the previous Graduate Leader Incentive previously provided to the PVI sector to employ and retain a graduate, Early Years Professional or Early Years Teacher to lead practice across the Early Years Foundation Stage. The Graduate Leader fund was seen as a positive across the PVI sector. Further information on how this worked can be accessed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/197418/DFE-RB144.pdf
There is concern among the members if or when Early Years Teachers are permitted to lead Foundation Stage classes within maintained primary schools. Members questions on how this will impact on the PVI sector and the ability to recruit and retain Early Years Teachers.
Statement: The government should consider the potential adverse impact on equality of offering 30 free hours to children in working families, and explore how to avoid the policy inadvertently increasing gaps in development at school starting age.
Question: Does the sector agree that implementing 30 free hours will advertently increase gaps in development at school starting age?
Members raised the concerns over the governments use of the work ‘free’. This would be better replaced with the term ‘subsidised’.
Discussion took place about how the members are implementing the 30 hours. It was strongly felt that qualified early years practitioners, with a sound understanding of the Early Years Foundation Stage and early years development are crucial to ensuring that gaps do not widen.
However, if families below the threshold are not accessing the 30 hours, this will continue to provide disparity between children’s development, and potentially gaps could increase when the child is at school starting age. This links to statement 1 where data tracking was identified.
Sue Wilcockson
Partnership Coordinator
Early Years Teacher Professional Development Network
January 2018
The Early Years Funding and the 30-hour offer – a response
Discussed at a meeting held on Tuesday 11th July 2017
Following the core meeting, network members discussed the impact of the 30 hours offer which is being introduced to early years’ settings in September 2017. Concerns have been raised by members of the Professional Development Network EYT at each meeting this academic year.
Background
The issue of raising the funding from 15 hours to 30 hours was highlighted through the Childcare Bill Policy Statement in 2015. https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/482517/Childcare_Bill_Policy_Statement_12.03.2015.pdf
Consultation took place and pilot schemes were rolled out. Many issues have been raised by providers and this led to two reports being published in April 2017. One report by the Preschool Learning Alliance entitled Sector Views on Early Years Funding and the 3o-hour offer, (accessed at: https://www.pre-school.org.uk/sites/default/files/30-hour_and_funding_survey_-_pre-school_learning_alliance.pdf) the other NDNA Annual Nursery Survey 2017 (accessed at: http://www.ndna.org.uk/annualsurvey2017)
The Preschool Learning Alliance report explains the introduction of the new Early Years National Funding Formula in England. Under this formula, the level of funding each local authority receives from central government will be based on local staff and premises costs, also taking into account the proportion of children in the area from disadvantaged backgrounds, with special educational needs and/or disabilities (SEND) and speaking English as an additional language (EAL)
Both reports raise the concerns about the adequacy of the funding and the impact this has on the sustainability of businesses. Many providers were looking at charging for previously free good and services and the reports highlighted concerns about reduced staff to child ratios whilst keeping within legal limits.
To consider the issues further, the Professional Development Network EYT was asked to complete a SWOT analysis around the 30 hour funding offer.
What are the STRENGTHS of the 30 hour offer?
Members discussed the strengths of the 30 hour offer.
Benefits to parents: The strengths included a reduction in costs that working parents face and flexibility in childcare subject to the settings approach.
Benefits to children: The members felt there were benefits to children through the 30 hour offer. These included the opportunity for providers to establish good routines for the children with increased consistency of care. There were more social opportunities for children and the opportunity to identify children that would benefit from spending more time in a quality provision. It was also felt that there was further opportunity for staff to identify and address safeguarding concerns with children spending more time in their care.
What are the WEAKNESSES of the 30 hour offer?
Members discussed the weaknesses of the 30 hour offer.
Government funding was highlighted as a concern. This area included capital funding, underfunding and squeezing of the local authority who had no additional money available to support the funding offer.
Staffing. Concerns were raised with retaining staff. There is little or no money to increase salaries. In addition the staff could be overstretched, particularly where a person holding EYPS, EYTS or QTS was in the setting. This could see an increased ratio of 1:13 in the pre-school environment. The 30 hour funding could impact on staffing and, as a result, not having enough staff available to ensure sufficiency.
Training. Members expressed concern about the impact on training opportunities within settings. There is currently little money available to meet training needs and local authority training now has a charge attached to it. More providers are only accessing the required core training for their staff.
‘Corporate Parenting’. The question ‘who is the parent’ was raised. Increased hours children attend in early years settings raises the expectations of the setting in supporting education and health.
Children. Does the 30 hour offer support the ‘right’ children?
What are the OPPORTUNITIES of the 30 hour offer?
Members discussed the opportunities presented through the 30 hour offer.
Providers. Members felt that opportunities from the 30 hour funding could support providers in sustainability, providing they were able to charge for services additional and got this right from the start. Offering the 30 hours could provide a marketing opportunity. Providers might get more children attending the nursery dependent on the competition in their immediate area and what other providers were offering.
Children. Members felt that increased hours provided the opportunity to support children more consistently, particularly children with Special Educational Needs and/or disabilities. Safeguarding was seen positively as providers would spend more time with children. The opportunity to build more positive relationships with other settings children attend was also seen as an opportunity.
What are the THREATS of the 30 hour offer?
Members discussed the threats to the 30 hour offer. Without a doubt, sustainability to the PVI sector was seen as the biggest threat, and with this, pressure of staffing and resources. Whilst shared care and building relationships with other providers was identified as an opportunity, it was also seen as a threat with quality issues highlighted. A further threat identified as schools taking in 2 year olds and the threat this poses to quality teaching. Members also considered how the funding exacerbates the divide between the wealthiest and the poorest.
Further information
Since the Professional Development Network EYT meeting further guidance has been published around the 30 hour offer. The government have published a provider guide which can be accessed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/30-hours-free-childcare-la-and-early-years-provider-guide however nurseries are closing due to the funding concerns as this report from an Essex nursery on the BBC confirms http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/education-40660648
Nursery World issued a report in their magazine dated 24 July -6 August entitled 30 hours pilot study predicts success but flags up risks. In this report they consider the findings of the 30 hour pilot evaluation – Evaluation of Early Implementation of 30 Hours Free Childcare (accessed at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/30-hours-free-childcare-early-implementation-evaluation) The reports looks at 5 areas which includes delivery risks, delivery of places, SEND, technical aspects and parents. Again, this report echoes the findings of the Professional Development Network highlighting concerns with insufficient funding, staffing resources and additional costs to parents for additional services. Similarly the benefits to parents were identified.
The Professional Development Network Early Years Teacher – meeting 30th March 2017
The Early Years Workforce Strategy – a response
Discussed at a meeting held on Thursday 30 March 2017
Following the core meeting, network members discussed the recently published Early Years Workforce Strategy which can be found at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-workforce-strategy
The network was asked to reflect on two areas within the Early Years Workforce Strategy and their findings of these areas are detailed below.
Attracting staff to join the sector 1.2: Specialist Graduates
Statement: We know that graduates with specialist early years training make a positive impact on the quality of settings and ultimately improve children’s outcomes. We want to support the sector to grow the graduate early years workforce.
Barrier: recruiting and retaining graduate staff is difficult
The government are proposing to amend the regulations to allow those with EYTS and EYPS to lead nursery and reception classes in maintained schools. What impact do you think this will have on a) maintained sector, b) PVI sector?
In response, the network members felt strongly that children in the early years would benefit hugely from having an Early Years Teacher / Early Years Professional leading practice in their settings/school reception classes. In addition they felt that the impact of an Early Years Specialist in a school environment would have a positive effect for that school.
The network felt that pay and conditions were the main influencing factor and that this could have a negative impact on the PVI sector who may not be able to afford to pay Early Years Teachers at the same rate as the maintained sector. There were concerns about higher qualified staff leaving the PVI sector to move into the maintained sector
The network could see the benefits to Early Years Teachers working in a maintained school. These included the status of working in a school, school holiday periods and the financial attractions to working in a school.
The network discussed the EYTS qualification. There were concerns about this currently not being valued within the maintained sector and that this could lead to a two-tier system, with EYTS being seen as the weaker to QTS.
Attracting staff to join the workforce: 1.5 Gender diversity of the workforce
Statement: we want children in early year’s provision to have both male and female role models to guide them in their early years, and we want more men to choose work in the early years sector.
Barrier: recruitment of men is difficult and childcare is seen as a female occupation.
What factors influence the number of men entering a career in childcare? How can we strengthen this?
In response, the network felt that the Early Years sector is traditionally a female dominated sector and this may prevent men from entering the profession. Historically, this raises an issue with society as childcare was seen as women’s work. Today, the network felt that the reaction of parents can influence a man’s decisions to work in early years – both positively but also negatively.
There was discussions about the role of an Early Years Teacher and the understanding of that role from a male perspective. The network felt that men tended to look at job prospects differently to women, considering their prospects from the job, the life it will provide for them and the economic outcomes. Currently the career progression is not clear.
When considering how men may be attracted to a career in the Early Years sector, the network felt that After School and Holiday clubs tended to recruit men due to the nature of the work in this field. It may be here that men could be encouraged to undertake an Early Year qualification.
Sue Wilcockson May 2017
Early Years Workforce Strategy, available at:
https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-workforce-strategy
Professional Development Network Meeting – 6th December 2016
Untapped Potential – Save the Children
How England’s nursery lottery is failing too many children
The Professional Development Network Early Years Teacher considered aspects of the report issued by Save the Children in 2016 at their meeting held on 6th December 2016.
The report Untapped Potential states:
‘If a child is already behind in their development when they start primary school they are more likely to be behind not just throughout school, but for the rest of their lives.
Untapped potential presents new evidence that attending a childcare setting with highly qualified staff has a substantial and positive impact on a child’s early development’
The report focuses on the importance of the childcare workforce and considers challenges and key issues. It is divided into four key areas:
- High-quality childcare: key to giving every child the best start in life.
- Too many children miss out on high-quality childcare.
- How the rate of improvement in childcare quality is stalling.
- Investing in the childcare workforce – to give every child the best start.
The Professional Development Network reflected on an aspect identified within each of the areas. Their findings are detailed below.
1: High-quality childcare: key to giving every child the best start in life.
The network were asked to consider the question: ‘Are well qualified staff the key to securing high-quality childcare in England? The report finds that ‘high-quality childcare is clearly beneficial for children’ but questions how quality is defined and what contributes to this.
In response, the network felt that some of the best practitioners are not the highest qualified but agreed that a minimum level of education is required to enable quality observations, assessments and planning for children’s individual development and learning. The network felt that high level qualifications for leaders and managers can equip them to better support their teams. They also agreed that continued professional development is essential in raising the quality of childcare and education.
The network discussed the impact of coaching and mentoring on staff, seeing the value in this but finding time for enabling staff and mentors to meet difficult to maintain. They recognised challenges with minimum ratios in staffing and restraints on funding for additional staff to enable more professional development time in the settings.
The network agreed that to raise the quality of childcare, then the sector needs to financially invest in early years. They felt that a closer link between the sectors and higher educational institutions could help with this.
2: Too many children miss out on high-quality childcare.
The network was asked to consider the question: ‘Most settings do not have an Early Years Teacher. How can we raise the profile of the Early Years Teacher? The report states that their ambition is ‘for every child to have access to an EYT in every nursery in England’. However their evidence shows that this has a long way to go before being achieved with government statistic showing just two in five PVI settings having an Early Years Teacher or equivalent.
In response, the network felt that there was a strong need to promote early years as a viable and respectable career choice for young people. They felt that more information needed to be available. This to include a strengthening of the position of the Early Years Teacher, particular in schools against a person with QTS. There needed to be a stronger focus of the Early Years Teacher being a specialist in their area.
The network consider what impact of having an Early Years Teacher has in relation to the setting, children, wider early year’s community and parents? Again, this was felt an area that more information needs to be available to raise the profile of the Early Years Teacher.
The report focusses on having and early Years Teacher however the network critically commented that quality and qualifications are not always the same thing.
3: How the rate of improvement in childcare quality is stalling.
The network was asked reflect on three key challenges facing the childcare workforce:
- How do we improve the entrance routes into the workforce;
- How do we provide better support or continuing professional development; and
- How do we develop clearer progression routes for the workforce?
The report found that there has been ‘a lack of focus on supporting the workforce to deliver high-quality childcare. The report goes on to highlight the challenges facing the sector with the introduction of additional hours of free childcare and increasing costs for providers resulting from the National Living Wage and pension auto-enrolments.
The network considered these challenges. They strongly agreed with the report findings that, although the EYT qualification was introduced as the equivalent to QTS, it is still not matched and not always recognised within a mainstream primary school environment. The impact of paying the minimum wage to early years’ practitioners was identified as a factor. Members of the network had experienced staff opting to work in the retail sector due to better pay structures. The network felt that a lack of a pay structure hindered progression. Again, as in discussion 1, a need for financial investment is required to raise qualifications and quality.
The network considered the continual professional development of staff and recognised links to both Q1 and Q4. Budget restrictions, due to funding cuts with training, and also a decline in local authority support, impacted heavily on the support for CPD. Again, staffing restraints were considered and the time available for mentors to work with staff on development.
In regards to progression routes for the workforce, the network agreed with the report findings. The report states: ‘There is a lack of clear progression routes in the sector, and a lack of clear links between training, qualifications, and better pay and opportunities’. They also agreed with the reports finding that there is no clear pathway from Level 3 qualification to EYTS. They felt there are many different routes to achieving a Level 3 and that the entry qualifications with GCSE’s need to be more rigorous. The network identified the need for a clear progression ladder that differentiates between the roles in the setting defining a clear career pathway.
4: Investing in the childcare workforce – to give every child the best start.
The network was asked to consider the question: ‘Can we introduce a ‘workforce quality supplement’ into the Early Years Funding System?’ The report explains how Save the Children called on the government to create a ‘workforce quality supplement’ in the funding system. They believe that this would support the growth in settings having an early years’ teacher.
The network recognised similarities on this to the previously provided ‘graduate leader fund’. Questions were raised by the network in regards to the implementation of a ‘workforce quality supplement’. They considered the questions ‘what quality looks like?’ in respect of the term ‘workforce quality supplement’. The network linked to the Common Inspection Framework and how this calls for leaders to: improve staff practice and teaching, learning and assessment through rigorous performance management and appropriate professional development
The network asked how quality can be measured and would this be against a set of quality tools, for example, ECERS and QISP audits. Critically, the network felt that the goalposts for these were constantly changing.
The network felt, through experience, that there are small pockets of funding available to the early years’ sector. However these are not coordinated to ensure they have a long term impact on high-quality provision. They agreed that there was a need for additional funding to provide ease and flexibility in the early years sector. They felt a need to redefine the role of the Early Years Teacher in light of additional funding through a ‘workforce quality supplement’ being made available.
Sue Wilcockson January 2017
Save the Children, 2016. Untapped Potential available at http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/resources/online-library/untapped-potential Jan 2017
Gov.uk, 2015, Common Inspection Framework education, skills and early years from September 2015 available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/common-inspection-framework-education-skills-and-early-years-from-september-2015