13 replies to this topic

[Helen]

Hi,
I'm attending a couple of conferences this week about future plans for the early years workforce. I'd really like some of your views to take with me :) I think it's really important that we are able to put forward our ideas and opinions, and to explain what we would like to see happen in our careers.
So, any feedback regarding the following points would be very welcome, and I promise to represent you as best I can. :D

* What knowledge/skills do we need in the adults leading the provision of integrated care and education experiences for children?

* How can the government deliver a sufficient supply of early years professionals?

* How can we best support new recruits into the profession and allow them to develop the necessary skills?

* How do we improve the status (and pay!!) of early years practitioners?

* What do we want to be called? Pedagogues? Practitioners? Anything else?

* Anything else you want me to pass on!

Many thanks :)

[Rea]

Hi Helen, I've just got in from a child protection course where it was pointed out that the BTTM framework is making the people who work in the baby room, actually do something and where they are having to use their imagination. This in turn has led to some people realising they arent cut out for childcare, and that it's not the easy option they were led to believe, mainly by school careers advisers!
It was also pointed out that there is no progression in early years unless you choose to do teacher training, this leading to continually low pay and status, with childcare not being seen as a vocation but merely as somewhere to work because you like children, because childcarers are needed more and more as settings open, and because training is free.
Childcarers have low status and low pay because we are not recognised as proffessionals, even by other professionals especially in the teaching profession. Parents also still see playgroups and day nurseries in the voluntary and private sector as not providing the same as school nurseries. The discussion wcame about from us examining staffs regard to child protection with the context of neglect. Neglecting the children's needs as in providing for their developmental needs as well as their personal needs. IEP's not being written up and implemented, activities appropriate to the childrens abilities and routines which are age inappropriate. Not sure if this is the kind of thing you'll be discussing, but hope yopu can get something form it. :D

[Rea]

Can I add...
I dont really have a prefered title
I would like the powers that be to stop adding/changing things until we've had a chance to work on it as it is.
The NVQ's (from what I've seen) are not suitable for everyone, they rely too much on the candidate knowing their stuff when those new to childcare could do with courses that give them the knowledge they need to work with first.

[Weightman]

I agree with quite a lot of what Rea says, particularly in her second post. Can I add:
I don't think there's enough Management-type training
With our local training directory, you seem to get to a point, as an experienced practitioner, where it's actually hard to find any courses that appeal.
Maybe both of those points relate to the lack of career struture etc.

Having spent a study week in Denmark a few years ago, I quite liked the 'pedagogue' title. I'm not sure it's the right one for us, because few people would have a clue what it meant, but then maybe there's something in that because there's an opportunity to present us as a profession. They certainly seemed to enjoy greater respect than us and, even though there was clearly a bit of friction of some kind between theirs & the teaching profession, I think it was more to do with their closeness in terms of pay, conditions etc than the distance as it seems to be here.

How does it benefit a preschool's development etc if I [as an early years graduate] and those like me leave to do a PGCE in order to pursue my career?

I think, as well as looking at recruiting new workers, we should look at ways of retaining the experienced personnel who must be haemorrhaging out of early years settings. There's been quite a bit of evidence of this on the Forum, hasn't there?

Rant over!

[Lorna]

I would be interested to know as a teacher- what career progression there is for early years teachers without having to go for deputy or headship. I am currently an Early years manager in a two reception class infant school.

I would also like to see experience taken into account for classroom assistants- it seems silly with all their knowledge that if they want to train to teach that they have to start by getting a degree- and for some support staff that is not posible due to their own commitments.

I completely agree with lokking at and revising the pay of early years professionals and also trying to raise the profile- rather than has been said before it being an easy option.

L

[Inge]

too many experienced childcare professionals leave the sector due to the low pay. They could be encouraged to stay if treated as the professionals they are with a suitable pay which reflects the work and training undertaken. This is impossible with the amount of funding paid per child , we have reached our pay plateu in our setting, income and expenditure allow no increases even minimum wage is a headache, increase in wages but little increase in income per child. Our wages do actually rely on the grant given per child in a large number of the settings. If they do not pay a increase in grant we will never get the pay. Ours has only increased a minimal amount over the last few years since minimum wage has been introduced which has increased more, a welcome introduction to our pay but we should not have to be working at such a low wage.

They want professional high quality care at a minimal cost. to make an even playing field over the country as a whole would help. as shown from this site every area is different , some can charge if a parent misses headcount, others not at all etc etc.

things change before they have time to be integrated and established... eg I have had four/five ofsted inspections over the last few years and every one follows a new format no two have been the same and we have yet another one introduced. just as we feel we are understanding what is expected of us it changes.

training needs to include more courses that give them the knowledge they need to work with first as its no good trying to do an NVQ if you do not have the foundation knowledge to begin with. Many are doing this as it is given as the only part time option in some areas (or as in our case pushed by the college when I told the staff to do a DPP and not NVQ. Luckily they both insisted that they had to do DPP and both have said it was a better option for them.)


A name, I wonder if it will make much difference, practioners always reminds me of a doctor or nurse - pedagogue cannt even spell it never mind expect parents to have any idea what it means. If we are given a suitable name it needs to be one that does not need explaining all the time.

sorry but for many of us it all comes back to pay. I have lost many experienced good workers who cannot survive on the wages and if we can earn more at the local supermarket with no reponsibility, set hours, no work at home, no paperwork, no ofsted, why not.

may not be what you want but it always helps to say it!!


Inge

[Sharon]

There needs to be some structure and unity within training levels, for example an NVQ, a BTEC, DPP and the varying CACHE awards all being equivlelent at level 3? This is confusing to those within the childcare sector let alone those outside it.

Also What is a Nursery Nurse is this someone with a NNEB or BTEC qualification if so what do NVQ level 3's call themselves?

I think we need a name that is relevent to the job we do, (although I'm not sure what?) a pay structure that recognises the varying levels of responsibility we have and career progression for those that want it.
I feel quite strongly that whilst experience and having 'a way with children' is important but so is an academic background.

In a school a newly qualified teacher is given support in the form of a mentor, ongoing training and non contact time this should be offered to newly qualified child care workers too.

Having reread this I hope it makes sense to you? ! Sorry it's abit rambling but I am in the middle of revising for a GCSE maths exam, I've nearly got the degree but me becoming a teacher all hinges on pythagoras and mathematical formulae all of which will be a great help with those early learning goals!

P.S any of you with children doing GCSE's now tell them it's alot easier doing it now than in 16 years time!

[Peggy]

Knowledge & skills.

I do not believe a "degree" equates to having the required knowledge and skills. Having employed someone with an early years degree who didn't know how to do observations!
I agree with others comments re NVQ, this was originally designed for "vocational" workers to have a system which could measure their current knowledge and skills. It was never meant to be a "training course" however it has been offered by Higher education colleges, adult education centres etc as a training course to get "bums on seats" and financial gain for the institutions. It also became a political means to reduce the "Unemployment figures". There are now not enough Assessors and in my experience ( may not be others) assessors are paid on results, therefore reducing the validity of the whole qualification. It is openly known as "Not Very Qualified (NVQ)".
The most successful employees I have had are people who have initiative, common sense, a disposition to be around children, a responsibility for their own learning. I use the expression "You've either got it or you haven't" in other words it's not just about academic ability, its more importantly about attitude, a caring, nurturing nature. Our societys whole emphasis on "Academic" ability is why young children are now having to perform to tests and standards instead of gaining a lifelong zest for learning. I could go on!
Experience counts for a lot and shouldn't be undermined by the lack of "paper qualifications". The importance is an ability to research, to reflect on our practice and then tailor our professional development training to our developing needs.

How can Government deliver a sufficient supply of early years professionals?

As others have said, retain the ones we have.
Have childcare and development as a core subject in secondary schools for boys as well as girls, with an aim to teach the important responsibilities that all citizens have for all our children.
Provide opportunities to gain qualified teacher status through work placements in pre-schools / Nurserys voluntary/private sector offering the Foundation Stage curriculum as well as primary schools.
Stop changing the goal posts when people qualify - just provide updating workshops.

Best support for new recruits

Offer incentives for employers to provide apprenticeships in early years settings.
Require a responsibility to the employers to maintain a personal development plan for each individual employee.
Research which training has previously been successful in students development and their positive attitude toward the profession ie: NVQ, college full time, DPP, other training. KEEP WHAT WORKS.
Then offer updating workshops.
Stop alienating people from less academic backgrounds/ability, reduce all the jargon used in the education system. Reduce the requirement for so much paperwork and more time to "engage" with the children. I could go on.

How do we improve the status?

Stop undermining people who have already given years of experience to this profession. ( Too many advisors, experts coming into settings overseeing and advising - I have at least 4 external advisors per month visiting!)
Fully financially support Quality Assurance schemes ( including man hours, administration costs) The best way to regulate is to start with regulating ourselves- true professionals always expect the best and more from themselves.
As previously said; Stick with new ideas until they are embedded. I like the look of the new Ofsted inspection ( although not experienced one yet)
Equal playing field in all aspects, respect of each others qualities and roles across the professions involved in early years.
Financial equality across the sectors.
Value the people who do not want to be supervisors, owners, teachers.
Value the people who want to remain "practitioners" without leadership responsibility by paying a professional salary through, for example, spending less money on administration of the Educational grant.
Give each setting a set amount of funding for the number of children they are registered for.

What shall we be called?

I like the term "Teacher" if this was used in settings other than schools we may gain the same status they have with parents etc. It is well known by everyone. If our name changes then teachers should take on the new name. We "teach" the same curriculum so why can't we be called the same.

Anything else?

All MP's to work in a day nursery for one day ( :D only joking)
True partnership between voluntary /private sector and LEA's. Put children before money, don't open new settings if it closes others.
Have an annual national FATHERS IN SCHOOL day to encourage men into the early years.

Like Weightman, I spent time in Sweden and read Tricia David's European perspectives on Childcare & Education. We have a lot we could learn from them. Compulsory schooling aged 6yrs and still a playbased "Pedagogue".
A much wider "social" focus to the training encompassing all care sectors. Equal status for all early years workers.

Helen, I hope you enjoy the conferences and are able to say your piece.

Peggy

[akire]

Isnt it nice when you get a chance to talk about the real issues in childcare!

I really think that society and goverment are finally begining to realise the importance of early years workers, but we are still along way off being reconized for the hard work that we do, and the pay we take home.

Have you heard the adverts on the radio lately about "have a career in childcare" Its rewarding yes, you need qualification yes, but what about the fact that after training for 2 years you will be lucky to get alot more that mininum wage.

Somewhere along the lines goverment is going to have to come up with funding so parents are not the only ones paying fees.

I think we need to educate the public in how diverse the early years sector is, and how important it is, young people thinking about working with children are now more and more likely to go in to teacher training and not neccesary "just" be a nursery nurse etc.

We are unlikely to be able to gain and retain a workforce in the future when it is more and more in demand. Many of my friends in their late 20's and 30's dont see a big future in childcare, they feel after working 10-15y in the proffession that their skills are valued and their pay does not reflect the vast changes in work loads and responsbility.

For the future we need money and goverment support, are they waiting until they have no staff to fill their new childrens centres before they think about us?

[diane]

Akire,

I can only reiterate everything that has already been said.

But here you get a subordinate practitioners viewpoint (I'm a pre-school assistant):

I am level 4 qualified and I am very professional. Early Years is my second career. I'm now 50, and I moved into EY seven years ago, and I became single-minded about EY about four years ago!

I intend to work in EY for the rest of my professional life.

However, I do not intend to work as a subordinate to unqualified persons ad infinitum. I can't do this for ever!

Pay isn't my priority! Recognition counts for more!

Where I work, the two "leaders" (both level 3), only impart information on a "need to know" basis. Hence, I work in the dark - I don't need to know anything (and, gosh, they are scared of people with qualifications). And they use my skills to the full!! As if. Ha ha!!

Because I feel that "whole group" activities (i.e. 26 children aged 24 months to rising 5) are not my forte, my place is "toilets" and "shifting stuff". All the staff working towards level 2 tell me what to do. e.g. "xchild needs the toilet", "stuff needs to go back in the cupboard".

What I do, and what I do well, is work with children, individually and in small groups. And I do this really well. But it's not wanted here.

I have excellent planning skills. I do MD well. I do CLL well. I do KU well. I think I'm also good at PSED. Everything impinges on PD. And I'm absolutely wizard at ICT with the children (computer/pixie/smart board/camera/CD player, etc)! And I have management training/experience from my past life. What more can I offer?

My skills and qualifications are wasted where I work. But I'm a "pair of hands" paid at government minimum wage. And I feel "abused", because I know I'm capable of more than I'm allowed to do,

Following from what I've said, my addition to the discussion is that before we start educating the public, we need to educate "childcare providers". They cannot go on forever being scared of qualified people. If my setting had not refused me funding for a level 2 EY qualification when I asked for it, I would not have had to go down the level 4 route!

Anyway, I'm committed to Early Years. And happy to be so! Despite what I have said above!

Diane.

[Nicola Gray]

Dear Helen,
Bet you wish you hadn't asked this now - I too am feeling a little demotivated but in answer to some of your questions.

I don't really have any strong feelings on what we are called - practitioners are fine - besides I couldn't bear the waste of money that would be spent on revising all the QCA Guidance and other publications and would rather that money be spent directly into the settings

I also believe that there are far too many types of qualifications - I think they should look at just how many there are and refine them - seems to be far too much time wasted in evaluating what their worth is - perhaps their ought to be one set of guidelines - of course, we shold still have Montessori, Steiner etc but make it simple. Wenow have to follow the QCA guidance why do we then have 25000 types of qualifications. Maybe split it down to u'3's and over 3's and 5 to 8's

I also agree that payments should be made to groups based on their numbers - e.g. my group is registered for 30, we should then be paid a fixed amount for the whole year based on full capacity - with the proviso that the Manager, the Deputy should be paid not less than, qualifieds not less than, assistants not less than and there should be set scales/increments based on qualifications, training and years of service and perhaps there should even be an overlappng of grades in some areas. As has been suggested here some staff are excellent workers, have a wealth of experience but may not necessarily havce a piece of paper to support them, neither do they want to get one, yet they should not be penalised

Make it easier to gain qualifications - provide far more e-learning for all those people like me who find it difficult to get out but would be happy to do more with on-line help and perhaps monthly training to fit my needs.

I can dream can't I

Nikki

[Helen]

Thank you so much for all this :D
I've been to one conference today (a local one) and off to London tomorrow. I've printed all this topic out and will be delighted to wave it at anyone who will permit me! :D
I'll tell you the main points of discussion in a couple of days. :)

[Helen]

Hi, I'm back !
The conferences I attended on the Children’s Workforce Strategy were extremely thought-provoking. The following is a very brief summary of some of the points that were discussed, thrashed about, and generally dissected! This is such a time of change for the Children’s Workforce, and you have the ability to make your ideas heard.

The consultation ends on July 22nd, 2005. You can complete the form on paper or online :
here


Here is a summary of what I think the main points of last week were for me. I must stress that some people agreed with these ideas, others didn’t. This Forum is for you to take on the discussion!

* The Children’s Workforce Development Council (CWDC) will be a leading team in these reforms. The Children’s Workforce Strategy has defined the four following major challenges:
o Recruit more high quality staff
o Develop career progression (ie developing and retaining the workforce)
o Strengthen inter-agency and multi-disciplinary work
o Develop strong leadership and management to create new models of practice and deliver and sustain these changes


*Working in childcare has traditionally been of low status. How can we address this?
o By recruiting and demanding higher qualifications, maturity and experience from our staff, and by matching this to appropriate pay. (Using the Transformation Fund of £125 million)
o If a young person wants to become a nurse, we don’t allow them to turn up on Monday morning and work with patients! They have to undergo training first, and then gain experience “on the job”. This should be the case for the children’s workforce too.
o So no more 16 and 17 year olds who can’t really decide between hairdressing and childcare or “working with animals”. Everyone has a tale to tell about people employed in the sector who really don’t seem to have any interest in what they are doing.

* Our ultimate aim should be to have a graduate workforce to work with children. This can be achieved via:
o Current students entering as graduates in 2, 3, 4, years’ time
o Current workforce to have their qualifications, skills, and experience assessed, points awarded for courses or work-based areas of responsibility. Gaps identified, courses offered, and eventually (it may take a very long time, but that’s OK) everyone who works with children in an early years setting will be a graduate.

* The profession will then be as respected as the teaching profession, and we will expect to be paid the same wage.

* A career structure will need to be designed to make the sector attractive for quality people to want to join it.

* Helping early years teams to become self-evaluation practitioners, and able to identify items for their development plans. Not only do individuals have to take part in continuous professional development, so does the team as a whole. What is the role of QA in all this? How can we push this issue forward in a way that is affordable, and indeed essential, for all settings to continuously reflect and improve upon their provision. Or should we offer an alternative to QA schemes? Maybe use the Transformation Fund for this? QA schemes should not be sold along the lines of “You have to do this, because Ofsted is just a base line!” Ofsted should up the stakes, demand the same kinds of things as a QA scheme.


* Current teachers who wish to work in early years should have access to courses on 0-3 years, and child development from 0- 6 and beyond, (there is currently not much of a teacher training course devoted to child development), In this way, teachers are given the skills and knowledge that a practitioner with an NNEB (or equivalent) would have.


* High standards for the workforce should NOT be a barrier to entering the profession; it should be an incentive for talented individuals to move into work with young children.

[hali]

wow..sounds great Helen....... will post my thoughts... :D