While many welcome a review, there is a groundswell of support for the framework throughout the sector now that the EYFS has been in practice for nearly two years.
Some people feel that red tape should be reduced, but others say that the paperwork is not really an issue.
Others have voiced views that the Code of Practice for the free entitlement, due to be implemented in September, and ongoing issues with the Early Years Single Funding Formula are more pressing concerns for a Government review.
Below is a selection of the comments that Nursery World has received so far.
‘We understand the need for a review of the EYFS. We are part of a very over-regulated sector, but from our perspective, a review of the Early Years Single Funding Formula is more critical. The private sector as a whole is struggling with the formula. We would say that the content of the curriculum is fine and is a Montessori model. We want as many people to access Montessori as possible, but the funding issues are crippling Montessori. Reducing bureaucracy is helpful, but it’s not helpful if there are no Montessori schools left.’
Philip Bujak, chief executive of Montessori Schools Association
'Evidence from Ofsted inspections in the last year shows more registered childminders than ever are achieving good or outstanding grades under EYFS. Many registered childminders have been able to make minimal adjustments to the great work they were already doing to meet these requirements. Ofsted’s self-evaluation process is helping them demonstrate at inspection how they are delivering EYFS without the need for significant additional paperwork. We have worked hard over the last 18 months to ensure registered childminders deliver the EYFS without feeling they need to produce large amounts of paperwork to monitor a child’s development. There is, of course, always room for improvement, and we look forward to discussing this with the Department for Education. This dialogue will be based on the fact that NCMA members have told us they believe the EYFS should be kept a statutory requirement. This is because they are successfully delivering it within their settings – and because it gives them the ability to demonstrate to parents their professionalism and that they are providing the same high-quality care and learning as other registered providers.'
Liz Bayram, joint chief executive, National Childminding Association
‘The EYFS is popular with the early years sector and was initially developed by specialists with a sector-wide consultation. As a result, it is built on the soundest principles of young children’s development and learning. It has undoubtedly been responsible for much of the improvement that has taken place in early years services over the past few years – improvements which are particularly beneficial for the most disadvantaged children. However, everything has room for improvement. We hope this review is a chance to dispel some underlying myths surrounding the EYFS. For example, many have said it is overly bureaucratic, and it will be helpful to have some hard evidence on this rather than relying on anecdotes. We urge the Government to send out a strong message that the current framework remains in place until the review is completed, so that a period of uncertainty for children and their families is avoided. We would be very concerned that early years professionals aren’t left in limbo, not knowing which direction they should be taking.’
Sue Owen, director of well-being at NCB
‘Progress made in the early years is crucial in helping children to achieve their full potential. Initial fears that the introduction of EYFS would cause chaos have not been realised. In fact, it has been welcomed by professionals and parents who recognise that it has improved the quality of early years education and benefit from important information about how children are developing. The personalised approach to care and learning that the EYFS provides is particularly important for disadvantaged children who can too easily fall behind. We welcome the review of the EYFS, as it will reveal many of these strengths. However, it is right we continue to look for ways to build on the progress that has been made since its launch. It is important that bureaucracy is kept to a minimum and that the EYFS is workable in all childcare settings. What will be important now will be building the capacity of the workforce to deliver it.’
Anne Longfield, chief executive of 4Children
'While NDNA believes reviewing the effectiveness of the EYFS is important, it is vital that the views of childcare providers 
and parents are listened to in full. A huge investment has been made in the EYFS and in supporting nurseries to implement it effectively. Many of our members report the framework has helped them to encourage children to develop at a pace that suits them, although some do share that they would welcome ways to reduce red tape and administration from using the EYFS to track children’s progress. NDNA hopes the review will in particular look at how any bureaucracy can be reduced, to ensure childcare professionals can focus fully on the children in their care. It is also to crucial to look at how the most disadvantaged children can continue to be supported. There has been much change for the sector, and it is important that Government carefully considers the implications of any recommendations made by the review. Children must be protected by any welfare standards, and these must give parents confidence regarding the level of quality at their chosen childcare provider. It is vital that Government looks at how to continue to enhance quality through areas such as staff development, and consider how the cost of this can be supported. We believe there must be a national system for all types of providers, especially for those receiving public money for delivering the free entitlement to ensure all children are receiving the same good quality service.'
Purnima Tanuku, chief executive of the National Day Nurseries Association
'It’s very welcome that the EYFS’s alleged rigidity and over-bureaucratic nature are going to be addressed by the Government. Some of the areas being focused on in the review are certainly admirable, and are consistent with issues that campaigning groups like Open EYE have been highlighting – for example, whether there should be a one-size-fits-all framework for all providers, and whether young children’s development should be formally assessed at a certain age, and if so, what this should cover. However, there are some very notable and disappointing absences from the list. In terms of Learning and Development, there are significant concerns about what the phrase "what is needed to give [children] the best start at school" actually means. If this means an explicit focus in nurseries on getting children ready for quasi-formal learning at four, this would be catastrophic for children’s development and well-being. It’s notable that play isn’t mentioned anywhere. Is this because it has become so taken for granted that play needs to be central in early years ? Or is there something more concerning afoot about the new Government’s view on the importance of play?'
Early Years Foundation Stage, Dr Richard House, Research Centre for Therapeutic Education, Roehampton University
- What do you think about the EYFS review? Discuss online in our form at EYFS review
