Jump to content
Home
Forum
Join Us
Articles
About Us
Tapestry

Eyfs Updates


catma
 Share

Recommended Posts

extra clarification re EYFS will be available from 19th May, PNS don't think practitoners will need to get a NEW copy of the pack as the clarification sheet which should be available to download will be all you need, apparently. Assume its on the standards site if not on EYFS site. Can't recall as our newsletter is on my desk at work.

 

Cx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Assume its on the standards site if not on EYFS site.

 

Cx

Thanks, catma. Will rush home from my Gateway Review to look for it on the web! It will give me something to get my teeth into :o

 

Wonder what it will say?

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

would be great if someone could post a link here when its up to save us all hunting around the same site

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks Marion. Printed off the table, FAQ's etc. Do we think it would be a good idea to order new packs? I suppose there's no guarantee they'd send the updated ones is there? I can't log in to order on line anyway. Guess its very busy!!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest lucyevans

The change re. ratios will be of interest to childminders, as it seems to imply that 4 year olds in reception class will only count as over 5's during term time, and not in the holidays. The behaviour management amendment is interesting too!

 

Outings

Children must be kept safe whilst on outings.

For each type of outing, providers must carry out a full risk assessment,

which includes an assessment of required adult:child ratios. This assessment must take account

of the nature of the outing, and consider whether it is appropriate to exceed the normal ratio

requirements (as set out in this document), in accordance with providers' procedures for supervision

of children on outings. The assessment must be reviewed before embarking on each specific outing.

 

Medicines

Providers must implement an effective policy on administering medicines. The policy must include

effective management systems to support individual children with medical needs.

and..

Medicines should not usually be administered unless they have been prescribed for that child by a

doctor, dentist, nurse or pharmacist. Non-prescription medication e.g. pain and fever relief or teething

gel may be administered, but only with the prior written consent of the parent and only when there

is a health reason to do so. A child under 16 should never be given

medicines containing aspirin unless it has been prescribed for that child by a doctor. It is for the

provider to arrange who should administer medicines, either on a voluntary basis or as part of a contract

of employment

 

Behaviour management

Providers must not give corporal punishment to a child for whom they provide

early years provision and, so far as it is reasonably practicable, shall ensure that corporal

punishment is not given to any such child by:

a) any person who cares for, or who is in regular contact with, children;

:o any person living or working on the premises.

An early years provider who, without reasonable excuse, fails to comply with

this requirement, commits an offence.

 

Ratios

Each childminder may care for:

a maximum of six children under the age of eight; of these six children, a maximum of three may be young children, however

where four- and five-year-old children only attend the childminding setting before and/or after a normal school day,

they may be classed as children over the age of five for the purposes of the adult:child ratio;

Link to comment
Share on other sites

From what I can see the biggest 'change' or clarification is for maintained nursery to have a second teacher if they go over 26.. that's an awful lot of 39 place 1 teacher nursery classes that will be affected in my neck of the woods. I don't think that was explicit before was it?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I received my NCMA "Who Minds?" magazine today which has an article about school holiday numbers for childminders - I quote " Ofsted has confirmed that the ratios are based on the normal school term, and that during holidays, children who would otherwise be at school will continue to be classed as aged over 5"

Nona

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest lucyevans

What has happened is that the wording on Page 51 of the Statutory Framework for the EYFS we have NOW (not just the revisions, which is what I thought it was) state that "Each childminder may care for: a maximum of six children under the age of eight; of these six children, a maximum of three may be young children, however where four- and five-year-old children ONLY attend the childminding setting before and/or after a normal school day, they may be classed as children over the age of five for the purposes of the adult:child ratio;

 

The NCMA were expecting the revised EYFS (released last Monday) to have this wording changed to include holidays too... but it wasn't!! Also, at a NCMA Network Coordinators & Ofsted conference on Tuesday 13th May, Liz Olsen from Ofsted informed Network Coordinators that it was indeed the case that from Sept under 5's would only be classed as such during term time!

 

To date I have not received anything from Ofsted/DfES/NCMA to confirm that this is going to change, only that it is still 'under discussion'.

 

Bromley CMA are saying the same

http://www.bromleycma.org.uk/news/news

 

Regards,

Lucy

 

I received my NCMA "Who Minds?" magazine today which has an article about school holiday numbers for childminders - I quote " Ofsted has confirmed that the ratios are based on the normal school term, and that during holidays, children who would otherwise be at school will continue to be classed as aged over 5"

Nona

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 1 month later...

Hi I wonder if anyone can clarify one of the ammendments for me. On page 32 in the welfare requirements it discusses ratios. it states that exceptions to the ratios should only be made in limited circumstances such as when children are resting or sleeping. going on to say they neednt be uin same room as children but on premises. In the ammendments the 2nd ammendment to page 32 states that the first sentence has been ammended for clarification, 'The ratio requirements apply at all times-the required number of staff must be on the premises at all times. However, it may not always be necessary for all the staff to be working directly with the children. Now the owner takes this to mean that at lunch break, as long as the staff are on the premises we do not need to have the correct ratio in the room with the children, i.e. 1 member of staff and 6 under 2s for an hour, surely this can not be right, does anyone know, or actually do this at lunch times so staff can have their break. Thanks

Tracey

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi thanks for all info on updates. Have tried to download and print the "its's childs play supplement but having trouble at home and school. Can anyone help please?

Many thanks

xx

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The behaviour management amendment is interesting too!

I missed this when lucyevans first posted - but have finally got round to highlighting the legal responsibilities and statutory guidance in different colours so I can make sure I've got everything in order for September.

 

Under managing children's behaviour it states "so far as it is reasonably practicable, [providers] shall ensure that corporal punishment is not given to any such child by any person who cares for, or who is in regular contact with, children".

 

How do we interpret this and how far do our responsibilities stretch? How can we translate this into a procedure or policy? :o

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I missed this when lucyevans first posted - but have finally got round to highlighting the legal responsibilities and statutory guidance in different colours so I can make sure I've got everything in order for September.

 

Under managing children's behaviour it states "so far as it is reasonably practicable, [providers] shall ensure that corporal punishment is not given to any such child by any person who cares for, or who is in regular contact with, children".

 

How do we interpret this and how far do our responsibilities stretch? How can we translate this into a procedure or policy? :o

 

Maz

 

 

Good question Maz, What would you do (or expect your staff to do) if you (they) saw a parent smack their child? This should, I think be included in the policy.

 

Peggy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

 Share

×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue. (Privacy Policy)