Memorandum submitted by the Early Childhood
Forum[34]
The Early Childhood Forum is a voluntary organisation
hosted by the National Children's Bureau (NCB). It is a coalition
of 55 professional associations, voluntary organisations and interest
groups united in their concern about the care and education of
young children from birth to eight. The Forum's geographical remit
is England, although it is recognised that member organisations
may have a wider sphere of work.
ECF has five central areas of work which form
the basis of its policy agenda:
— Championing children's rights and
entitlements.
— Supporting training, development
and education of early childhood practitioners and all who work
with children and their families.
— Working in partnership.
— Addressing inequalities and valuing
diversity.
— Evaluating practice and ensuring
quality.
A group of members of the Early Childhood Forum
have been meeting since the Early Years Foundation Stage was announced.
This group responded to the consultations, met with colleagues
at the DCSF and reviewed the materials after they were published.
We welcome the recognition in the EYFS of the importance of this
crucial stage of a child's life. It is significant that for the
first time that we have a curriculum which builds up from birth
rather than being handed down from the stage above. We hope that
the DCSF will continue to use every opportunity to stress that
EYFS is based on play and to separate the document from other
non-statutory initiatives such as synthetic phonics, which is
leading to negative publicity for EYFS. Moreover, we support the
broader delivery aspect of the EYFS in helping to widen opportunities
and narrow the gap in achievement. In addition:
— ECF feels that there should be a
review of the Early Years Foundation Stage at the earliest opportunity.
We are aware that there will be a review in 2010. We would like
to know the brief of the review, who will be carrying it out and
what the scope of the consultation will be. We would also like
to be informed on how the impact of the EYFS will be managed and
how changes will be implemented.
— We believe that every child has a
right to natural light and quality experiences outside on a daily
basis. "Playing outdoors, exploring their community and natural
environment is essential to children's health."[35]
At the Oxford University EYFS conference in November 2007, Beverley
Hughes MP replied in her answer to a question that the reason
there is no requirement to have an outdoor area adjacent to the
indoor area is because this would be unfair to childminders. We
would like to ensure that plans are made to exempt childminders
and for the requirement to be stronger for non-home based group
settings, so that children can have a quality experience outdoors
as well as indoors without leaving the nursery premises.
— ECF is disappointed that the regulations
around ratios in reception classes have not been addressed. We
see no reason for there to be a different ratio to that applied
to nursery classes and we consider the basic requirement of one
teacher to 30 children to be unsafe under EYFS. We understand
that this would need to be addressed in a different act to the
Childcare Act. We would like to see plans for this to be changed
and guidance to recommend that there should be an extra person
working alongside a teacher at all times. We would recommend that
this person should be qualified at NVQ level 3 as in nursery classes.
— In the EYFS there is a lack of clarity
around the maximum size of groups. Currently in the private and
voluntary sectors the group size is 26. We have been unable to
find any reference to this and have asked for clarification. In
nursery classes in maintained schools there is a requirement for
a teacher and an NVQ level 3 for 26 children. Some local authorities
run nursery classes with 39 children staffed by a teacher and
two nursery nurses. We believe that all early years settings should
be staffed on the same basis to ensure similar ratios.
— Regarding the qualifications of staff
which we consider to be very important, we would like to see a
QTS initial training course for birth to 7, as currently some
practitioners working with young children, particularly those
aged birth to 3, have not had appropriate training or the level
of experience required to undertake this role. Suggested training
should include child development, the importance of play and working
with parents. There needs to be monitoring of supply of teachers
with an early years specialism currently being trained to work
with the 3-7 age range. We consider this an important issue as
some nursery classes are currently being staffed by two nursery
nurses.
— There is a great deal of confusion
between the roles of teachers and the Early Years Professionals.
This needs clarification as they are often treated as being equivalent.
However, one is a qualification and the other a status.
— The requirement for teachers in nursery
classes is welcomed. However, there is concern that the requirement
for teachers in children's centres will be dropped and they will
be replaced by EYPs. We would like to know what statistics are
available to show the percentage of children's centres that have
fulfilled the guidance of a 0.5 teacher upon designation and a
full time teacher 18 months after designation. We are also interested
in any evidence about how these teachers are carrying out their
roles.
— We would like to see the EYFS continue
into Key Stage 1. The EYFS offers a single framework underpinned
by clear principles, with scope for flexibility and interpretation.
It provides a strong framework which can be used to meet the needs
of all children, in particular younger children moving into key
stage 1. Practitioners need to be empowered to make principled
professional judgements as to when individual children are ready
to start more formalised learning (eg systematic phonics work).
ECF believes that the flexibility offered within the strongly
principled learning framework of the EYFS needs to underpin Key
Stage 1. Continuing the principles of EYFS, and the six areas
of learning, will provide a good framework for children up to
the end of KS1 and provide integrated, broad and balanced learning
experiences rather than dividing learning into "subject areas"
at age 5 or 6. This approach will help widen the curriculum for
play based learning opportunities.
— The Early Childhood Forum believes
that it is essential that early years provision continues up to
the age of seven and that a play based curriculum forms the basis
of learning and teaching across this age range. International
studies have identified that children who start school at age
six (as in Scandinavian countries) often perform better in examinations.
— The Early Childhood Forum believes
that the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile should be used as
a continuous assessment process across the whole of the Foundation
Stage and Key Stage 1. It should not be used as a summative assessment
at the end of reception by which to make judgements on local authorities
and their leadership of early education. The profile is intended
to bring together a holistic picture of a child's interests, preferred
ways of learning and needs as well as development. We are very
concerned that the Early Years Outcome Duty (National Indicators
72 & 92) will become the driver of early years provision in
England.
— Within the EYFS there is a need to
reduce the detail and specificity of phonics in Communication,
Language and Literacy and increase the emphasis in this part of
the curriculum on oral language, eg vocabulary, play, narrative.
Knowledge and skill in these areas can be enhanced through conversations,
drama, poetry, and language games. ECF considers that the DCSF
should make it clear to all concerned that the phonics guidance
is non-statutory.
— The EYFS profile needs significant
adaptation and ECF believes that it is not appropriate to provide
clear summative profiles at the end of reception and that assessment
approaches need to stretch up through KS1 and to inform the next
stage of learning. Current Foundation Stage profile data indicates
that in many authorities more children are struggling to reach
national expectations in communication, language and literacy
than in personal, social emotional development. This leads ECF
to question the level set in the literacy learning goals for EYFS.
We feel that they set too high and they should be moved into Key
Stage 1.
— Finally, we feel that there needs
to be much more clarity around the key person requirement in the
EYFS. Some of the papers in the documentation draw on the work
of Goldschmied and Jackson while in other papers there is a different
and much looser interpretation of the role. We would expect the
key person approach to enable the continuity of relationship to
be established. If we are to implement this requirement for the
benefit of our children there needs to be a clear definition so
that the support offered is of the highest quality.
EARLY CHILDHOOD
FORUM MEMBERS
4Children
Association of Educational Psychologists (AEP)
Association of Teachers and Lecturers (ATL)
British Association of Community Child Health
(BACCH)
Campaign for Advancement of State Education
(CASE)
Children in Scotland (CiS)
Children's Society
Children in Wales (CiW)
Children's Links
Council for Awards in Children's Care and Education
(CACHE)
Council for Disabled Children (CDC)
Community Practitioners and Health Visitors
Association (CPHVA)
Daycare Trust (DCT)
Early Childhood Studies Degrees Network
Early Education
Early Years (formally NIPPA)
Early Years Equality (EYE)
Fatherhood Institute (formally Fathers Direct)
(co-opted member)
Forum for Maintained Nursery Schools
High/Scope UK
ICAN
Learning Through Landscapes (LTL)
Local Authority Early Years Network (LAEYN)
Mencap
Montessori Education UK
National Association of Education Inspectors,
Advisors & Consultants (ASPECT)
National Association of Head Teachers (NAHT)
National Association for Primary Education (NAPE)
National Association of Nurseries in Colleges
& Universities (NANCU)
National Autistic Society (NAS)
National Children's Bureau (NCB)
National Campaign for Nursery Education (NCNE)
National Childminding Association (NCMA)
National Council for Parent Teacher Associations
(NCPTA)
National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA)
National Deaf Children's Society (NDCS)
National Network Of Children's Information Services
(NACIS)
National Portage Association (NPA)
National Union of Teachers (NUT)
NCH (now called Action for Children)
Parenting UK
Parents for Inclusion
Play England (formally Children's Play Council)
Preschool Learning Alliance (PLA)
REU (formerly Race Equality Unit)
Refugee Council
Royal National Institute for Blind People (RNIB)
Save the Children (SCF)
Scope
Steiner Waldorf Schools Fellowship (SWSF)
Training, Advancement & Co-operation in
Teaching Young Children (TACTYC)
UNISON
Voice—Union for Education Professionals
(formally PAT / PANN)
What About the Children (WATCh)
World Organisation for Early Childhood Education
(OMEP)
Young Minds
May 2008
34 This was originally submitted to the Committee's
inquiry into the Early Years Foundation Stage. Back
35
Early Childhood Forum/Play England (2008) It's All About Play.
London: NCB Back
| 
