Target setting has often appeared to be a favoured practice of the current Government, but it is breaking new ground by proposing to negotiate with local authorities to set objectives for the Foundation Stage. Allied to this will be the collection of individual child-level data on children receiving the free entitlement to nursery education in the private, voluntary and independent (PVI) sector.
Both proposals have been put out for consultation in recent weeks and both arise out of sections 99 and 100 of the Childcare Act 2006. At present:
* The DfES collects child-level data on three- and four-year-olds taking up the free entitlement in the maintained sector through the Pupil Level Annual Schools Census (PLASC)
* Information on children in the PVI sector is aggregated setting-level data collected through the Early Years Census
* Local authorities collect the Foundation Stage Profile (FSP) scores for each child in the July following the child's fifth birthday
* The DfES receives aggregated local authority-level data together with a 10 per cent randomised sample of full results.
Now the Government wants local councils to submit FSP scores for all children. On the surface, this demand for individual child-level data on all those in free nursery education seems to be for economic reasons.
The DfES says it is to ensure that funding is allocated fairly and to end instances of 'double-counting', where children are registered with more than one provider and end up being funded twice.
Nick Cracknell, data collection and quality assurance manager at Kent County Council, welcomes the move to prevent 'double-counting', but warns that PVI providers could face logistical difficulties in supplying the required child-level information.
He explains, 'Basically, the Government wants to get data that it already gets from schools, from nurseries who don't have the same infrastructure.
Most nurseries are not on electronic systems and so it will be another administrative burden for them.
'We will assist them, because we believe that local authorities should all be singing from the same hymn sheet. We already do an inordinate amount of work to ensure the DfES has the right information.'
Individual child-level information will include the name and address of the child, their unique pupil number, ethnicity, gender, SEN status, the number of funded hours, category of provision attended, unique reference numbers for the DfES and Ofsted and details of their provider.
John Thorn, head of early years and childcare in Nottinghamshire, says that his council already communicates with neighbouring authorities about the funding of a child's nursery education entitlement to prevent 'double-counting'.
Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of the National Day Nurseries Association, says, 'Some children may attend both a school and a nursery, and a number of nurseries have reported that the school receives a higher proportion of the funding. We hope that the new system for data collection will help stop this.'
According to the DfES, 'better data on children's outcomes would allow improved monitoring of the effectiveness of delivery at national and local level, feeding through into future policy development and targeting of resources'. In a briefing on its proposals, the DfES says that the two FSP targets - one aimed at improvement and the other at greater equality - will be negotiated with local authorities each year and 'will not measure the progress of individual children, but compare one cohort with the next'.
Closing the gap
The improvement target, to be negotiated with the help of the 12 regional Foundation Stage advisers, will indicate the rise in percentage terms of children expected to achieve 78 points across the 13 scales of the FSP, with at least six points scored in each of the personal, social and emotional development (PSED) and communication, language and literacy (CLL) scales.
Under the equalities target, the DfES suggests that the average of the lowest achieving 20 per cent needs to improve three times as fast as the rest if there is to be 'a significant closing of the gap'.
The DfES says that a number of local authorities have been consulted on the proposals four times in the past 15 months and that they have indicated that the current collection of aggregate information is 'too complex, time-consuming and burdensome'. They also told the DfES that they already have databases that hold most of the same information.
But one early years specialist questions the validity and reliability of the numerical data for the FSP and says that Government reliance on it means it has 'an extremely high chance of undermining good Foundation Stage practice and proper transition into school'. Rather than rely on 'a bunch of numbers', it would have been better to use a descriptive method for assessing children's development, ensuring continued close working with parents.
Areas of learning
Naomi Compton, head of service for early years and childcare at Derbyshire County Council, says the authority's attention to outcomes in 'super output areas' (the 30 per cent most disadvantaged) has been 'extremely useful in targeting provision where there needs to be additional support, training and continuous professional development'.
Lesley Staggs, former director of the Foundation Stage, says that while the proposals may prompt 'understandable anxiety' in some quarters, they could be useful in identifying where there are problems, not with the child, but with the teaching on offer. Rejecting suggestions that the DfES plans could lead to league tables for the Foundation Stage, she says, 'I really do welcome local authority targets, because it will make them take very seriously the information coming out of the Foundation Stage.'
She welcomes the fact that the targets will not just relate to PSED and CLL scales but to all six areas of learning. 'This is important, because it's about the breadth and balance of the curriculum and the interrelation between physical and creative development.' . But she argues that for the targeting to be effective, appropriate systems of training, moderation and assessment need to be in place and the data has to be interpreted 'sensibly'.
Ms Staggs also believes that if target-setting in this way is to be effective, the Government needs to 'look again' at some of the early learning goals in reading and particularly writing, because they are 'just pitched unrealistically high'.
She adds, 'I don't think they are achievable for many children at the moment. That's not just a question of better teaching, it's about looking again at those goals compared with the others and those at the end of Key Stage 1. Otherwise, it could result in inappropriate pressure, typically on four-year-old boys.'
Pressure without power
It is a concern shared by Linda Devey, adviser on early years education and childcare in Shropshire, who says, 'Some aspects of CLL are very challenging for very young children. Summer-born children, who may not have any experience of nursery, may be affected by this.'
But she welcomes the Government's plan to extend scrutiny of FSP outcomes outside the 'super output areas' because it means that pockets of deprivation in a predominantly rural county like Shropshire can be tackled more effectively.
John Thorn emphasises that the DfES data collection proposals do not represent 'a big step change that we are suddenly going to have to shift hell and high water to do'. He says, 'It's more about using the information we already have in a more consistent way. Original Sure Start targets were based on outcomes at the end of Key Stage 1, which is obviously far too late. It is sensible to bring them forward to the Foundation Stage.'
Unlike targets for Key Stage 1 and beyond, the Government insists there are no statutory powers to require schools or other settings to generate targets at their level.
The DfES says, 'Local authorities will have to consider the contribution they expect individual schools and settings to make to improve FSP results and will need to involve them in planning how to do this. It is not appropriate to set child-level targets at such a young age. Instead we recommend that authorities help settings to develop a good learning environment.'
But will pressure on local authorities to meet statutory targets result in the 'berating and bullying of schools' which one leading practitioner fears? Despite the DfES's denial, will this approach result in local authorities imposing their own FSP 'targets' on schools, in order to meet targets to improve outcomes and reduce inequalities which they have negotiated with the Government? NW
More information
Consultation on draft regulations for setting statutory Foundation Stage targets under the Childcare Act 2006 will continue until 31 January 2007.
Consultation on draft regulations on the collection of individual child-level information from early years providers funded to deliver the free entitlement for three- and four-year-olds will end on 14 December.
The consultations are at www.dfes. gov.uk/consultations.
