A Freedom of Information (FOI) request sent to the Children's Workforce Development Council and seen by Nursery World shows that there was little wider consultation beyond the expert group that developed the diploma, which only included two early years and childcare employers - the Pre-School Learning Alliance and Busy Bees.
Concern about the extent to which the early years and childcare sector was consulted during the development of the diploma was raised at the National Day Nurseries Association conference last year.
Children's minister Sarah Teather was presented with a briefing paper signed by a number of nursery groups which together employ 16,000 nursery staff. This said that the diploma was 'inadequate for many reasons' and called for a specialist early years qualification to be developed and given official status and funding.
Nursery chains and organisations supporting the paper included Busy Bees and the National Childminding Association (both in the CWDC expert group), Bright Horizons, Asquith Nurseries, kidsunlimited, the Childcare Corporation, Early Years Childcare and TACTYC.
Objections included the fact that learners could achieve the qualification in just six months with minimal literacy levels, that there were no units on play, that it did not prepare practitioners for work with two-year-olds and that there was little specific content relevant to child development.
As Nursery World reported, CWDC chief executive Jane Haywood, tackled on why nurseries were not consulted during the development of the CYPW qualification, said, 'The Diploma and Certificate were developed with employers and providers. We did not invent this in a room on our own.'
However, some early years experts now say that the FOI response reinforces their assertion that the sector was not properly consulted and that there was insufficient input from early years sector employers, practitioners and colleges.
CWDC acknowledges in its FOI response that 'there was not a formal consultation process prior to the development of the Level 3 Diploma for the CYPW'.
It adds, 'However, the work on the SSA (Sector Skills Agreement), together with the Statutory Framework and the 2020 Workforce Strategy, provided Government and workforce support for the initiative.'
According to the CWDC response, the expert group 'represented employers and training providers across children's social care and learning support, as well as early learning and childcare. Key infrastructure organisations and employer/workforce representative bodies were also represented.'
The expert group included the National Day Nurseries Association and the NCMA, as well as universities, training providers, children's organisations and local authorities. (For the full list see our online story.)
Early years experts say that the make-up of the group shows that the early years workforce was not properly consulted.
Chris Lawrence, principal of Chiltern College, which employs 100 staff at the college's nursery, said, 'The majority of the employers I come into contact with have expressed concerns about the suitability of this qualification since it was first introduced.
'It is a great shame that the confusion that employers experience regarding appropriate qualifications has been added to, and that a large group of people have worked to gain this qualification that has such a question mark hanging over it.
'All of this could have been avoided by a proper and thorough consultation process. Employers are very aware of the knowledge and skills that their staff need and it seems ridiculous that so few were consulted on this really important matter.'
Ms Lawrence added that she hoped that the Nutbrown review would lead to an 'understandable, respected set of qualifications that equip the early years workforce to meet the demands of the role and most importantly, the needs of the children.'
One expert, who did not wish to be named, told Nursery World, 'The CYPW was developed by the CWDC to replace all other early years qualifications and to set the standard for "full and relevant". The CWDC would not consider the development of any other qualifications as being full and relevant for early years. How did they decide what was to be 'full and relevant' when there is no evidence that the sector was properly consulted?
'Did the CWDC really get to grips with what the grassroots, and colleges and employers wanted?'
The interim report of the Nutbrown review, published this week, includes feedback showing the strength of feeling from the workforce about dissatisfaction with the CYPW (see box).
Jane Haywood, Chief Executive at the Children's Workforce Development Council (CWDC), said, "The expert group helped us to develop a qualification which met the wide-ranging requirements of the sector and we are confident that key workforce representatives for the early years were more than able to speak for the sector.
'The group included the National Day Nurseries Association (NDNA), the leading national charity representing children’s day nurseries across the UK, the Pre-school Learning Alliance (PLA), which is a leading early years membership organisation and one of the largest providers of quality childcare in England and offers support to over 14,000 settings and over 800,000 young children and their families every year, the National Childminding Association (NCMA), plus two of the country's largest nursery chains, as well as universities, training providers, children's organisations and local authorities.
'Clearly, the Nutbrown Review gives an opportunity to further strengthen qualifications in the early year’s sector. CWDC has worked closely to support Professor Nutbrown and the Department for Education in this process and we are confident that the final conclusion of the Nutbrown Review will be able to build on and develop the very effective work of this expert group.
'Throughout its operation CWDC has always sought to work with the sector and on behalf of the sector and we hope that future working arrangements will be able to maintain this approach.'
WHAT THE NUTBROWN REPORT SAYS ABOUT THE CYPW
'Some significant concerns about the Certificate and Diploma have been raised in my consultation workshops, especially the intention to make them the only "full and relevant" qualifications available for a future workforce.
'Some concerns have been expressed about the age-range focus of current qualifications being too broad, and questions about the level of understanding of SEND and inclusivity issues.
'Taken together, these endorse the message I have heard: the content of qualifications should focus on babies and young children, providing those working in the early years with the skills and knowledge to observe, understand, and respond sensitively to individual needs.
'More commonly throughout my consultation events, concerns have been expressed about those qualifications currently available, including the CWDC Certificate and the Diploma. This includes a key concern over the amount of time devoted to child development, especially for babies and young children, given that the Certificate and Diploma cover the 0-19 age range... Whilst it is important to understand the wider childhood years, this should not, I suggest, be at the expense of focus on early years content. For context CWDC has provided information that suggests that around two-thirds of the children's workforce within their remit work in the early years.'
