Why has the recent proposal to extend the national curriculum to include the Foundation Stage got early years experts up in arms? Mary Evans asks them
The Government's consultation on extending England's national curriculum to include the Foundation Stage has prompted early years experts to launch a vigorous defence of the Foundation Stage and pre-empt any attempts to re-introduce formalised teaching into the early years.
The consultation is needed because, explains a Department for Skills and Education (DfES) spokesperson, 'the secretary of state is required to consult the profession upon her proposals for specification of the early learning goals which must be taught in the Foundation Stage.' The Foundation Stage became part of the National Curriculum on 1 October under the Education Act 2002.
The Act, like many other Acts, enables the secretary of state to specify the requirements by reference to a published document rather than setting out in detail all the early learning goals in the statutory regulations. It has been proposed, in the consultation, that this should be the existing Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage.
The consultation invites practitioners to respond to two proposals by the secretary of state.
Proposal 1 is that the early learning goals, as set out in the existing Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage, should be adopted as statutory learning goals for the Foundation Stage.
Proposal 2 is that the activities and play opportunities planned and provided by practitioners to develop children's emotional, physical and intellectual capabilities should have regard to Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage and should be consistent with children achieving the early learning goals.
The secretary of state may also specify educational programmes within the Foundation Stage but there are no plans at present to do this.
The QCA is responsible for carrying out the consultation, which runs to 1 November. A QCA spokesman says, 'The consultation provides an opportunity for the early years field to decide whether we have a curriculum that is right for this phase of education.'
Yet the thought of any changes to, or even minor tinkering with, the early learning goals has caused unease among many early years experts. The Foundation Stage is so fundamental to early years campaigners that they have grabbed the opportunity to caution the DfES against making any changes to it at present.
Tina Bruce, visiting professor at London Metropolitan University, says, 'The Foundation Stage has been hard won and must not be eroded now. If we change the early learning goals, we change the core reference document and the form of assessment through the Foundation Stage profile, and that would mean having to develop new documents. It would mean going through the same arguments again and it would set us back in embedding good practice in the early years. What we need to do now is embed the Foundation Stage. It's time to consolidate what we've achieved.'
And Sue Griffin, training manager of the National Childminding Association, adds, 'I think most people are very pleased with the way the Foundation Stage has been implemented but there are the pressures to formalise. There is a feeling that the Foundation Stage has been so hard won and therefore we have to guard it.'
The consultation document says that 'there are no proposals to specify educational programmes', but critics say this is already happening via the literacy and numeracy strategies.
One early years expert comments, 'The national Literacy and Numeracy Strategies are still being implemented in many reception classes (and in some nursery contexts) because of a feeling that "Well, the children have to do it sooner or later so it might as well be sooner".'
The QCA is consulting with 10 per cent of state, voluntary and private providers, all childminding networks, all LEAs, all EYDCPs and 500 'key stakeholders' (a catch-all term for childcare organisations ranging from CACHE to early years campaign groups). However, any practitioner can take part in the consultation process by visiting the QCA website (see box).
Professor Bruce urges practitioners to recommend that 'no change' be made to the core reference document when responding to both proposals. In the third box, asking for suggestions 'for action which would further support delivery of the Foundation Stage,' she recommends that practitioners outline 'the constraints in embedding the Foundation Stage', such as poor access to the outdoors, limited outdoor equipment or difficulty in finding trained staff.
The QCA spokesman insists, 'This is not some sort of exercise in trying to make some sort of material change in the ethos that underpins the early learning goals and guidance. It is more about how that ethos can be guaranteed through some sort of statutory underpinning. The proposal is for there to be the same sort of statutory underpinning for early years education as there is for the key stages.'
Early years experts generally agree that the emphasis should now be on consolidation rather than more change, on spreading much-needed good practice and on raising parents' awareness of the principles of early years education. Professor Janet Moyles, who chairs TACTYC (Training Advancement and Co-operation in Teaching Young Children), which is campaigning to end SATS for children aged seven, says, 'Many heads still do not understand that reception children are not Year 1 children.'
Gayle Newton, head teacher of Linthwaite Clough School in Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, set up an early years unit ahead of the launch of the Foundation Stage because of her passionate belief in early years education. But she says, 'The national curriculum, Key Stage 1 and Key Stage 2, was introduced with a lot of money and a lot of support and a lot of training, but the Foundation Stage has been introduced with almost nothing. There has been some training, if you could access it and the school could get the supply cover. For the introduction of the national curriculum, there was a lot of support for teachers - everybody had to go on a course and supply staff were provided. But if you do not have an early years philosophy, you would not necessarily have the commitment to see the Foundation Stage work.'
Pauline Cunningham, early years advisory teacher for Wirral LEA, says that head teachers often devolve responsibility for the Foundation Stage when they should be giving support, leadership and encouragement.
'We recently ran a head teachers' conference on the implementation and leadership in the Foundation Stage. From the feedback, it was very successful and heads said they wished they had had this sort of information two years ago.' She adds, 'Parents' expectations are really great in some of our schools. Parents feel that things should be done just as they were when they went to school and they are not aware of the principles underlying the practice.'
