“I’d like to make a toast; here’s to the new revised EYFS – may it be interpreted with wisdom and applied with dedication, love and playfulness – bottoms up! Cheers!” (Martine Horvath, June 2012) If you have ever read ‘A Tale of Two Cities’ by Charles Dickens you may resonate with this famous quote as you read through the revised EYFS. “It was the best of times, it was the worst of times, it was the age of wisdom, it was the age of foolishness,…” These famous lines, which open A Tale of Two Cities, hint at the novel’s central tension between love and family, on the one hand, and oppression and hatred, on the other. Likewise I am torn between loving and celebrating certain parts now embedded within the revised EYFS whilst not quite hating, but getting rather frustrated by the condradiction in terms or ambiguities in others. As I thumbed through there were ‘Allelluia!’ moments followed by ‘Oh no!’ moments. In this article I will share with you as honestly as I can my reactions and those of others, explore the similarities and the main differences between what was and is until September 2012 and what will be from thereafter. I do however feel that it’s important to stress right from the very beginning that all our energies should be channelled into celebrating the positives, continuing to be the confident and positive practitioners that we are, interpreting this revised framework in the spirit that it was intended and acknowledging our own responsibility to use our professional autonomy to keep the children and key principles at the very heart of what we are about, in everything we do, reflect on and work towards so that we do not unintentionally suffocate best practice with negativity. It is good to think critically and reflect constructively but blind negaitivity for the sake of it can be incredibly destructive and this most certainly is not what we are about. On that note, let me dispell a myth. When talking about the revised EYFS soon to be published a practitioner recently said to me “I don’t care what’s in it, it’s all a load of prescribed rubbish just like the last document and just when you get used to doing it that way, they go and change it and make you do everything all over again anyway, what’s the point?”. It is not new. It has evolved. The EYFS was always going to be reviewed and revised. Just as we reflect on our practice and make changes for the better, it was always part of the plan to reflect on the EYFS and make necessary revisions and changes. Remember the debate surrounding the ‘new nappy curriculum’ as some called it? On the one hand there was outrage at the new EYFS whilst on the other there were those that felt it put early years on the map and raised the status of the profession. Whatever your personal feelings and response to the EYFS, the fact is we now have a framework within which to work. What we must remember though, is that whatever legislative framework we have to work within, we know the truth of it; that the nature of children’s learning does not change. This brings me to my first ‘Alleluia’ moment of the revised framework. The EYFS themes and principles remain unchanged, not only this they are enhanced by the recognition of the three ‘Prime Areas’ of learning and development which recognise the centrality of personal, social, emotional, physical and language development. The revised, simpler framework for the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) was published on 27 March 2012, for implementation from September 2012. The Statutory Framework was originally 54 pages and is now only 30 but still has in excess of 200 ‘musts’ referring to the mandatory requirements that all early years providers must work within. The new framework does not contain any statutory rules about the presence of ICT in early years settings and this is a major shift that some will welcome and others, not. This is the main document used by Ofsted for regulating provision and making judgements. There are also two supporting documents, ‘Development Matters’ compiled by Early Education. This looks very similar to the existing ‘Practice Guidance for the Early Years Foundation Stage’ but is set out in the seven new areas of learning and development; • Communication and language development involves giving children opportunities to experience a rich language environment; to develop their confidence and skills in expressing themselves; and to speak and listen in a range of situations. • Physical development involves providing opportunities for young children to be active and interactive; and to develop their co-ordination, control, and movement. Children must also be helped to understand the importance of physical activity, and to make healthy choices in relation to food. • Personal, social and emotional development involves helping children to develop a positive sense of themselves, and others; to form positive relationships and develop respect for others; to develop social skills and learn how to manage their feelings; to understand appropriate behaviour in groups; and to have confidence in their own abilities. • Literacy development involves encouraging children to link sounds and letters and to begin to read and write. Children must be given access to a wide range of reading materials (books, poems, and other written materials) to ignite their interest. • Mathematics involves providing children with opportunities to develop and improve their skills in counting, understanding and using numbers, calculating simple addition and subtraction problems; and to describe shapes, spaces, and measures. • Understanding the world involves guiding children to make sense of their physical world and their community through opportunities to explore, observe and find out about people, places, technology and the environment. • Expressive arts and design involves enabling children to explore and play with a wide range of media and materials, as well as providing opportunities and encouragement for sharing their thoughts, ideas and feelings through a variety of activities in art, music, movement, dance, role-play, and design and technology. The second supporting document has been published by NCB: ‘A know how guide’ providing practitioners with guidance on making the proposed two-year old developmental check. Be careful not to view this change as an additional extra. I think it is more helpful to view the two-year check as part of the existing summative assessment that you can carry out with parents which some practitioners may already be using. In a full day care setting this could be the information that is passed on into the next room when a child is ready to make that transition. Alternatively, if a 2 year old child is starting sessional pre-school, the check could be done in positive partnership with parents just in the same way that you would share similar information at registration. This is some of what the revised EYFS says about the progress check at age two 2.3 When a child is aged between two and three, practitioners must review their progress, and provide parents and/or carers with a short written summary of their child’s development in the prime areas. This progress check must identify the child’s strengths, and any areas where the child’s progress is less than expected. If there are significant emerging concerns, or an identified special educational need or disability, practitioners should develop a targeted plan to support the child’s future learning and development involving other professionals (for example, the provider’s Special Educational Needs Co-ordinator) as appropriate. Another change is the rather inflammatory phrase ‘school readiness’ which does concern me. The last thing we want is a ‘schoolification’ of the early years as Early Childhood Action put it. Why is there still a focus on school readiness when actually the reverse should be the case? Our schools should be getting ready for our lovely children! I would prefer to coin a new phrase, ‘Are schools ready for each strong unique and precious child?’ Let Ofsted assess, ‘What is their level of child readiness and how do they demonstrate this effectively?’ ‘School readiness’ is a dangerous term open to the wrong kind of interpretation as illustrated by a rather arrogant Head Teacher recently who thought that he knew best because his school was recently graded outstanding by Ofsted; thus he was quite proud of the fact that formal structured teacher-led sessions occurred on a daily basis in his nursery and reception classes. So be careful when interpreting this phrase because like much rhetoric in policy documents, it’s all down to the interpretation and application, which is your responsibility in being strong, positive and confident practitioners who do what they know is best and right for each individual child. The phrase ‘school readiness’ and the following repeated statement seem to me to be a contradiction:: Children develop at their own rates; the development statements and their order should not be taken as necessary steps for individual children. They should not be used as checklists. The age/stage bands overlap because these are not fixed age boundaries but suggest a typical range of development. [Development Matters p. 6-46 on every page at the bottom] The EYFS is for children from birth to the end of the academic year in which a child has their fifth birthday, when they start school, but how can all children be ready to start school at the same time if they develop at their own rates, in their own ways etc.? We need to work towards a seamless transition from EYFS into Key Stage 1 with EYFS informing best practice in Key Stage 1 so that it’s not a shock to children or a completely different ball game for them moving from one class or phase of education into another. I think most settings have now embedded good transition policies and practices since the introduction of the EYFS. The revised EYFS goes a step further in stating that transition from Reception into Year 1 must also be in place: Teachers must be given a copy of the Profile report together with a short commentary on each child’s skills and abilities in relation to the three key characteristics of effective learning (see paragraph 1.10). These should inform a dialogue between Reception and Year 1 teachers about each child’s stage of development and learning needs and assist with the planning of activities in Year 1. There is a duty placed on schools regarding information sharing in the statutory guidance ‘If a child moves to a new school during the academic year, the original school must send their assessment of the child’s level of development against the early learning goals to the relevant school within 15 days of receiving a request.’ This kind of continuity and progression is encouraging. Moving onto my most major ‘Alleluia’ moments! I could feel some heavy burdens being lifted as I read comments through the revised EYFS document along the lines of ‘…commitment to freeing professionals from bureaucracy to focus on supporting children…,’; ‘…a lighter touch regulatory regime..’ and ‘The Government will continue to seek to reduce burdens and remove unnecessary regulation and paperwork, which undermine professionals’ ability to protect children and promote their development.” Followed by, The new EYFS framework makes a number of improvements: Reducing bureaucracy for professionals, simplifying the statutory assessment of children’s development at age five. [Hooray!] Simplifying the learning and development requirements by reducing the number of early learning goals from 69 to 17. [That’s more like it!] Stronger emphasis on the three prime areas which are most essential for children’s healthy development. These three areas are: communication and language; physical; and personal, social and emotional development. [Er…obvious why wasn’t this thought of before!?] For parents, a new progress check at age two on their child’s development. This links with the Healthy Child review carried out by health visitors, so that children get any additional support they need before they start school. [i’m all for early intervention and support but this one comes with a major health warning – as explained earlier.] Strengthening partnerships between professionals and parents, ensuring that the new framework uses clear language. [so sensible.] If we can spend more time with the children, more time being creative helping to enrich their learning environment by planning and resourcing irresistable experiences and less time pen pushing, that has to be a great thing! I have never been a great believer of paperwork for the sake of it and constantly ask and challenge settings with ‘Why are you filling this piece of paper in? What does it tell you about the child? How will the information recorded inform future planning?’ Some paperwork is necessary, essential in fact such as IEPs. Individual Education Plans should be ‘tatty’ and well used, working documents that are referred to every day so that all practitioners supporting a child with SEN knows what resources and language to use, which positive behaviour management strategies work best, etc. but some paperwork is completely unnecessary and can be shredded into oblivion right now. For instance, when supporting a chain nursery setting once, head office insisted certain paperwork was filled in but the same information was on several sheets so by collating this information into a slightly different grid we managed to get 5 pieces of paper reduced to one – practitioners were delighted because they had more time with the children and didn’t feel so resentful of the paperwork as they had taken ownership, considered what was essential and necessary and what was not. Head office had what they needed and I was delighted because they went onto to get a ‘good’ in their Ofsted inspection. So remember, as EYFS so eloquently says: 2.2 Assessment should not entail prolonged breaks from interaction with children, nor require excessive paperwork. Paperwork should be limited to that which is absolutely necessary to promote children’s successful learning and development. I have always delighted in the term ‘Key Person’ and my heart has sank somewhat on setting visits where displays still refer to ‘Key Worker’; it’s a subtle yet significant difference, clearly explained in the revised EYFS. No one, in my opinion explains the difference more eloquently than Veronica Read on page 64 in her wonderful book ‘Developing Attachment in Early Years Settings’. To paraphrase her words in a nutshell, ‘worker’ refers more coldly and dispassionately to a job title, associated with perfunctionary administrative tasks whereas ‘person’ assumes more about the personal relationship between the child and key person bringing the warmth and love of a vocation and relationship, rather than the role, to the foreground. Most of us have, or would like to have, a special relationship with some person on whom we can rely, a relationship which is significant to us. If we are parted from that person we have ways of preserving continuity even through long separations. We use telephones, letters, photographs, recollections, dreams and fantasies to keep alive the comfort that we derive from such human relationships. We lose them, we experience sadness and often deep feelings of despair. [Goldschmied and Jackson 1994:42]. So it’s not a case of ‘out with the old and in with the new’ at all. Most of us are already well versed in implementing the existing EYFS framework with energy, creativity, commitment, drive and enthusiasm. We don’t [or shouldn’t] waste time and energy focusing on the perceived downsides because whatever framework we work within, let’s face it, there’ll always be some. Surely it’s far better to channel our energies into focussing, monitoring and evaluating the unique needs of each individual child in our care, building positive relationships, improving high quality continuous provision and building up a genuinely happy setting where everyone loves to be and feels safe to be, achieving above and beyond their potential because it’s a secure place where everyone can take risks, set themselves challenges and thrive. In conclusion then, let’s agree to hang onto the key principles; don’t dilute these in translation or application in the slightest, because these are what good early years practice is based on and should be about. If you were doing this well before, hang onto and continue reflecting on your practice, never getting complacent but always driving towards improvement continuing to keep the children you support at the heart of everything you do. Bibliography Read, Veronica (2009) Developing Attachment in Early Years Settings (Routledge)
Recommended Comments
There are no comments to display.