Introduction Ofsted published their first report on the early years sector in April 2014. This year’s report, published in July 2015 includes some very interesting statistics and discusses issues highly relevant to all providers. If you don’t have time to read the document in full, here are the highlights. The sector is about to receive a large amount of funding and recent debate has remained on the cost of childcare. However, in Ofsted’s 2014 review, it was made very clear that early years is not predominantly about childcare over the importance of education. (Ofsted Early Years Annual Report, 2014). Standards are rising 85% of early years registered providers are now good or outstanding- an increase of 18% in 5 years. The quality of early education in schools is also rising- of 2,438 inspected between September 2014 and April 2015, 86% were judged good or outstanding. Numbers of settings and children There are nearly 50,000 childminders- more than any other type of provider, offering 260,000 places. School reception classes offer 307,000 places. Nurseries and pre-schools offer over a million places, mainly in the PVI sector, but also in the public sector as some are run by LAs. September 2014 saw the introduction if childminder agencies. Ofsted has registered five, but as of June 2015, not one childminder had registered. Childminders who are newly registering are performing better overall. ‘A stronger registration process means that childminders start out with a better understanding of what it takes to deliver good quality learning and care. The process will deter those with unrealistic views of the demands of childminding, at the same time as providing clear guidance for those who want to get it right from the start’ (p31). Teaching ‘Teaching’ in the early years has often been misunderstood as ‘formal teaching’ and critics have complained that there is no room for these methods with babies and young children. This year, Ofsted have worked with the sector to encourage early years practitioners to view themselves as teachers. Indeed teaching and learning will form a significant part of inspections under the new Common Inspection Framework- more than ever before. Ofsted does not have a preferred style or approach to teaching and inspectors cannot favour one style over another. However, Ofsted does define the elements: Communicating and modelling language Showing, explaining, demonstrating Exploring ideas, encouraging, questioning, recalling Providing a narrative for what they are doing Facilitating and setting challenges The report states, ‘The practitioners we observed did not subscribe to a rigid distinction between teaching and play. They demonstrated how the adult’s role, and how much they interact with children, could shift during the course of an activity.’ (p.10) This has obvious implications for staff supervisions and training, and of course, the joint observation during an inspection. How do you monitor your staff interactions with the children? How do you feed back to staff and offer support to further develop these crucial skills? The quality of leadership and management is so important here- as the report continues, ‘A strong and visionary leader sees the potential in practitioners as well as in children. In our last report, we emphasised the importance of good qualifications for early years practitioners, but qualifications are only an indicator of ability. Where practitioners are successful teachers, it is because they have not just the understanding of how children learn, but also a commitment to seeing children develop well. A good leader knows this and fosters it.’ (p 11) The Ofsted publication ’Teaching and play in the early years- a balancing act’ identified that quality teaching was paramount in supporting disadvantaged children to progress well. The 2015 report states, ‘Where providers were successful, they worked closely with parents to assess a child’s development compared with what was typical, and continually revised this assessment. They used this information to focus on areas that needed greater support, which was often speech, language and communication, while balancing the need to continue to develop the full range of other areas’. (p.20) Whilst carrying out inspections with a focus on teaching and play, Ofsted identified other elements that made a difference to the progress made by disadvantaged children: Collaboration between providers to share expertise, eg entering into a professional network Learning alongside older children- disadvantaged two-year-olds make the greatest progress when they are able to learn and play alongside their older early years peers. Sharing info, especially at the transition points. Constant transfer of information between parents and staff is hugely important, not just on entry to the setting. The evidence from these thematic inspections also showed that, for the most disadvantaged children, ‘the balance between adult-led and child-led activity could shift, so much so that some children needed constant adult involvement so that they could benefit from the full range of opportunities to play on offer’. Lots of our members can recognise the increased demands of accepting two year olds! Staff modelling self-regulatory behaviours associated with play is cited as a crucial role here. The Gap Remains Outcomes for children from disadvantaged backgrounds are rising, but there is no sign of the gap narrowing between their achievements, and those for children without disadvantage. Around 113,000 two year olds, who were eligible for a free nursery place for 15 hours, did not take up their entitlement. This makes up 42% of all eligible children. Lots of children who could be helped to catch up with their peers but are not accessing any nursery education. The rising health visitor numbers are likely to help with this- they will be proactive in promoting the two-year-old offer. There is likely to be better coverage to aim for a universal one-year-old check. Inspections give consideration to how well the provision meets the needs of all children; particularly those most disadvantaged. EYFSP data over the last 8 years has shown a general increase in the percentage of children achieving a good level of development. This is true for both children eligible for free school meals (FSM) and those or are not. However, the gap between the two groups remains at around 19%. Working with schools An interesting point from the report- ‘One of the reasons some children start school at a disadvantage is because the school does not have a good enough relationship with its feeder nurseries, pre-schools or childminders to make sure each child has a smooth transition into school. Schools must do more to support transition.’ (p.6) I’m sure a number of our FSF members here are going to be pleased to hear that, although of course many of our members clearly have extremely good working relationships with their feeder schools. It was outlined in the Tickell review that transition from nursery/preschool to school was an area where vulnerable children can encounter difficulties. It is clearly essential that schools and preschool settings work collaboratively to ensure that this transition is as smooth as possible for all children. The report states, ‘We therefore note with concern that some nurseries and preschools are reporting a negative response from schools when they have made an approach to develop a partnership with the school’. The current system of school accountability does not incentivise schools to work collaboratively with nurseries, preschools or childminders...There is a perverse incentive for schools to only begin to intervene once children have joined the school’ (p 26) Reports that some children are being assessed on-entry to be far lower than their real abilities demonstrate is a concern too. Of course, children’s confidence and therefore ability to demonstrate their skills and knowledge, can lower over the summer period prior to starting school, but should the difference be so marked as to significantly alter their assessment data? It is in the school’s best interest to assess new children as low as possible, thus being able to show a greater value-added score. This is going to be the case with the new baselines too. To read the full report, click here.
Recommended Comments
There are no comments to display.