The implications of the Nutbrown review for EYPS were recently branded by one academic as 'one of the most damaging, demoralising and detrimental acts of vandalism towards the early years sector in recent years'.
The blow to morale stems from Cathy Nutbrown's determination to address the thorny issue of EYPS versus Qualified Teacher Status. While this focus is welcome, the suggestion that EYPs should fast-track to a new early years QTS, specialising in the years from birth to seven, is seen by many as a detrimental step, undermining what has so far been achieved.
In Professor Nutbrown's proposed structure for job roles and titles, EYP sits below early years teacher, and it is the latter which provides 'overall pedagogical leadership for a setting'. However, many feel that it is the EYP who has the unique pedagogical credentials to fulfil this role, and that a future direction for the workforce should not require EYPs to jump through more hoops.
'LEADERSHIP ON THE CHEAP'
In her review, Professor Nutbrown emphasised that EYPs should not be forced into seeking QTS, but testified to the fact that many EYPs express a desire to achieve parity with the teaching profession. In her response to questions posed by Nursery World readers she said, 'EYPs have extensive skills, knowledge and early years expertise, and therefore it would be a waste of everybody's time and resources to make them start at the beginning and retrain. That is why I suggested there should be a quick and straightforward route for EYPs to gain QTS'.
Certainly this view has its supporters. Sharon Hogan, head of centre at Midland Road Nursery School and Children's Centre in Bradford, believes EYPS desperately needs to achieve wider recognition.
She says, 'The biggest concern I had about EYP status from day one is that it would be leadership and management in the early years sector on the cheap - and so this came to pass. It has never had the parity of pay with teachers that it should have done. Teachers' terms and conditions reflect the value a society attaches to all those who work daily with children.'
She adds, 'Of course the training needs to be different from the secondary specialist, but we will be eroding all that Margaret McMillan fought for if we do not insist that we need teachers in the early years sector.'
According to Eunice Lumsden, EYP and early years teacher, the sector should interpret the Nutbrown proposals as an opportunity to take the status to the next level.
'If the detail is read, it is about evolution,' she says. 'This could be a real opportunity for the sector to come together with Government and positively build on the huge developments that have happened since 2006 when EYPS was first introduced.'
At TACTYC, Professor Jane Payler testifies to the impact that graduate practitioners are having on practice and agrees that the recommendations strengthen the position for the early years as a graduate-led sector.
'Well trained graduate leaders in every setting are vital to securing high-quality early years provision for children,' she says.
'The presence of early years teachers and, more recently, early years professionals have been associated in research findings with higher levels of the "process" features of quality. Progress was already under way towards the previous government's target of graduate leadership in every PVI full day care and education setting and every children's centre, and the recommendations in the Nutbrown report could serve to redouble those efforts.'
However, she underlines the practical considerations attached to creating a new early years QTS. 'If this is introduced, those who currently hold QTS and wish to work in the early years sector should be required to undergo further training and assessment to achieve it,' she says. 'Primary QTS (or secondary QTS, for that matter) does not qualify a teacher to work effectively with children across the age range birth to seven years.
'The implications of terms and conditions of service for those with QTS will also need to be considered carefully with regard to rates of pay and holiday entitlements and the impact of these in early years provision carefully assessed. For example, day nurseries are open throughout the year, not only for school terms, and increased rates of pay will need to be funded. This should not be at the expense of introducing higher child-to-adult ratios, which are associated in research with lower quality.'
SQUARING THE CIRCLE
While most people will agree there are a great many positives to come out of the Nutbrown review, the proposals around QTS are inevitably dogged by these kinds of unresolved practical considerations. Kathy Brodie, EYP and training consultant, says, 'It is an area that the review had to tackle and EYPs' views have clearly been listened to very carefully,' she says. 'The recommendations are based on two factors - namely, EYPs' dissatisfaction with not being equivalent to teachers and the findings of the EPPE research. However, creating a new QTS will not give parity. There is not the money in the PVI sector to give the pay and conditions afforded to state sector teachers, so instead of EYPs being dissatisfied it will be the QTS (early years) being dissatisfied. How likely are qualified teachers to choose to work in nurseries for on average a third of the pay of those working in schools?
'I agree that parents do recognise the job title "teacher", but this is in association with a school. Has it been shown that parents want their baby in the care of a teacher or would they prefer a "key person"?'
Ms Brodie also believes that a preference for a teacher role could be pre-empting the evidence. 'At the time of the EPPE research there were no EYPs and graduate-led equated to "teacher",' she says. 'Until further research is completed there cannot be a true picture of the difference that EYPs are making. It may have been preferable to wait and consider the research evidence before ditching EYPS in favour of QTS.'
She also questions whether there is the money or educational capacity to create QTS courses. 'There is likely to be a much larger taught element, especially if it does include five- to seven-year-olds. If it is to be equivalent to QTS, then the cost is likely to be similar. Will this be paid by the candidate or will it be fully funded? Where will the candidates get their five- to seven-year-old practical experience? At the moment there are just too many unanswered questions.'
JUST REWARDS
Many in the sector have expressed the view that the difference between the role of the EYP and QTS is not really clear, highlighting that many settings and childminders will have this as one role. As Ms Brodie says, 'The proposals do not really address the complexities of most settings. For example, where does the SENCO fit in, the owner/manager or the safety officer? I can see the logic of having a clear job title (in school it is understood where the head teacher comes in relation to the deputy head, curriculum lead and secretary) but settings tend to be, and indeed should be, team orientated so a "clear'" structure may be less desirable.
'Similarly, having a clearly defined career ladder may be necessary in many professions, but I would prefer to see a passionate, knowledgeable Level 4 leading practice on SEN rather than a QTS, who may have limited knowledge.'
This view chimes with that of Jane Harrison, director of Red Hen Day Nursery, in Louth, who believes there should be a strong emphasis on the value of pedagogy and the early years as a specialism in its own right.
'The early years are so important and we really need to make sure we get it right for every child by ensuring the adults with whom they spend their time are knowledgeable,' she says. 'There is a huge emphasis on qualifications and I appreciate that this is a necessary benchmark - especially for those in leadership roles but also for those at Level 3 who are with the children all the time. But qualifications do not guarantee the emotional literacy and the diversity of both innate and learned qualities we require for those working with the youngest ages.'
Mrs Harrison believes that the proposals around QTS will not resolve the wider issues which hamper the sector's recognition and professionalism.
'The dichotomy of pay and conditions in the PVI, state sector, schools and early years settings remains a contentious issue and until there is financial support first to attract a capable workforce, and then to retain those that have the essential qualities for early years staff, we will not be able to elevate the early years as a truly respected profession,' she says.
'I feel that there is a difference between a teacher and an early years practitioner and I am disappointed that Cathy Nutbrown's report suggests that EYPS is not good enough and that QTS, albeit with an early years specialism, is the only respected way forward.'
At Essex County Council, workforce development consultant Linda Keats testifies to the enormous amount that has so far been achieved by EYPs in her area. 'I currently work with an amazing EYP network in Essex and have seen some amazing, inspiring practice and mentoring since the status first came about. This is a specific age range that needs expertise and focused knowledge, not a teaching status to make it acceptable. EYPs have that knowledge and expertise and should be rewarded.'
So, while the sector awaits the Government's response to the report in the autumn, EYPs just have to get on with the job in hand. Whichever way the Government swings, it is hoped that opportunities for all those who have worked so hard to gain the status will continue to grow.
MORE INFORMATION
Foundations for Quality - the independent review of early education and childcare qualifications, Final Report is at www.education.gov.uk/nutbrownreview.
