The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) framework is now in all our schools and settings. There is much to welcome in the new framework, especially the principles and commitments at its heart, emphasising that the curriculum is much more than six areas of learning. Many of us hoped the new framework would contribute to resolving the workforce issues that have been apparent in the early years sector for years. However, there remains much to be done in this area.
Ratio confusion
The EYFS welfare requirements specify the ratios for schools and settings. There have been changes, for example, allowing settings that employ a Level 6 practitioner to have 13 children per practitioner, but there are still different requirements for different types of settings and other issues, which leads to confusion. For example:
- Which qualifications confer Level 6 status?
- Are schools and settings clear that the 1:13 ratio only applies when the Level 6 practitioner is actually with the children?
- How much time should the Level 6 practitioners be spending with the children?
- Are schools clear that nursery classes/schools must have a Level 6 practitioner who is a QTS?
- How many children per qualified teacher is appropriate?
There is a need for strong guidance alongside the welfare requirements clarifying areas of confusion, emphasising best practice and using case studies as illustrations.
The welfare requirements on ratios also leave the majority of four-year-old children at a disadvantage, since most are in reception classes. The decision not to specify ratios in reception arose because there is separate legislation relating to reception class size, which specifies no more than 30 children per class.
But many children are entering reception classes at the beginning of the year in which they become five, which means that some are only just four years old when they start school. In any other setting these children would be supported by a ratio of at least 1:13 and often lower.
In reception classes they have no such protection. While appreciating that, in some schools, additional staff are allocated to reception classes to improve ratios, we do not think that relying on heads and governors understanding the importance of good adult:child ratios is enough.
Good schools will already have made themselves aware of best practice and will strive to implement it, while other schools, some under pressure (especially financial pressure) will stick to the minimum requirements. The key-person system, which is, quite rightly, a welfare requirement, will be impossible to implement in reception classes if the issue of ratios is not addressed.
We urge the DCSF to review the legislation that puts reception classes outside the EYFS ratios.
EYP or teacher?
We all know gifted individuals who, with little or no training, have an empathy with young children and are able to bring out the best in them. But even the most brilliant intuitive practitioners benefit from training which helps them to be aware of what they know and do. Anyone working with other people's children needs maturity, training and qualifications.
The welfare requirements specify the qualifications needed in different settings and, as with ratios, there continue to be differences between types of setting.
The plans to increase the number of graduates in the early years workforce are welcome. There is strong evidence that having early years graduates working directly with young children leads to improved outcomes. The introduction of Early Years Professional Status (EYPS) is well intentioned and we hope it leads to the improvements in practice envisaged by its creators. But currently there is too much confusion surrounding it.
Our understanding is that the aim is to move towards a graduate leading each group setting, that graduate being someone with EYPS (except those large integrated settings who will need someone with a national college qualification). If that is the case, they will not be with the children all the time, but caught up with administration/personnel/parents/SENCO responsibilities as well - all important and essential tasks, but ones that take them away from directly working with children.
There is a lack of clarity about the terms and conditions that those with EYPS can expect. Early years practitioners are committed and eager to deepen their understanding of how best to support children's learning and development, often in their own time and expense. In return for such commitment they are entitled to appropriate reward. The work of those with EYPS needs to be valued and their contribution reflected in their pay and conditions.
Confusion remains about the relationship between EYPS and Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). Recent documents have stated that each children's centre will have someone with EYP status, but it is not clear whether this is as well as, or instead of, the QTS (children's centres with school status would still have to have a QTS).
While having early years graduates leads to improved outcomes for young children, having graduates with QTS leads to even better outcomes. So, it is essential that graduates with QTS are retained as part of the early years workforce.
The combination of a degree, a clear focus on learning and teaching during initial training, the use of placements to ensure that practitioners are able to put theory into practice, and a structured year-long probationary period leads to practitioners who interact with children in the ways identified in the EPPE research (Effective Provision of Pre-school Education). This does not mean that QTS could not be improved upon! We want to see a greater emphasis on child development, learning from birth, partnership with parents and multiagency working in initial and continuing teacher training.
Qualified teachers also help to link the EYFS with the rest of the education system. Teachers can move between early years settings and schools, increasing awareness of each age phase and leading to greater continuity for children. We recognise that there are funding issues; employing a teacher is more expensive than employing an early years practitioner, even one with graduate status.
We would like to see a clearer definition of the role of the EYP and its relationship to QTS. The settings and schools where EYFS is being implemented are increasingly complex, and practitioners there undertake a wide range of tasks, including work with parents as well as children, targeted work with the most vulnerable families, work with multi-agency colleagues and training and employment agencies.
Our view is that we should be developing complementary roles for those with EYP and QTS and making it more straightforward for practitioners to move from one status to the other.
Pay and training
There are still wide variations in the terms and conditions of early years workers. Some are on the minimum wage, despite the responsibility they take for children's futures. At all levels of the workforce there are disparities - in local authorities those in the early years services are often paid less than those in the school sector, and national level posts continue to reflect this gap.
The effective implementation of the EYFS is dependent on the training practitioners receive. We hope that the lessons from the roll-out of training for the Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage and Birth to Three Matters have influenced that of EYFS training.
Each local authority will deliver training and at the moment it is not clear how its quality will be assured. The training offered needs to be able to respond to the needs of different practitioners - some with a great deal of experience of the current documents, others with little idea of what they contain. Training needs to be organised not as an introduction but as an ongoing process, with opportunities for practitioners to find out about the requirements, audit their own practice, draw up plans for areas of development, and then come back and share their knowledge and identify next steps. Training needs to be delivered by those with experience and training themselves in working with young children and families.
CONCLUSION
Any guidance is only as good as the people using it. By investing in enhancing the knowledge and skills of the people who work with young children, we stand the best chance of making the EYFS principles a reality - and that is something we all want.
- Bernadette Duffy is head of the Thomas Coram children's centre, Sue Griffin is an early years consultant and Lesley Staggs, former director of the Foundation Stage, is an early years consultant.
