Jump to content
Home
Forum
Join Us
Articles
About Us
Tapestry

Help Confused


beth1
 Share

Recommended Posts

Right I need some help, I am confused with all the new changes to the EYFS in terms of qualified staff.

 

As I think I understand it, that all staff have to or be working towards level 2 in early years.

 

This is an hypothetical situation to help me understand this:

 

So say a member of staff who had over 20 years experience but did not have a level 2 nor wanting to complete for personal reasons, but as kept up to date with short courses i.e EYFS, Safegarding Children etc.

 

What would you do? Does this member of staff have to complete the level 2 in order to stay in childcare?

 

 

Thanks in Advance.

 

 

Beth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

What would you do? Does this member of staff have to complete the level 2 in order to stay in childcare?

I'm going to quote this to get it right, Beth!

 

The EYFS statutory guidance says:-

 

"...all supervisors and managers must hold a full and relevant level 3 qualification.... and half of all other staff must hold a full and relevant level 2 qualification".

 

So long as you can show how you plan to achieve this, I see no reason why a person you describe shouldn't continue working in childcare.

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm going to quote this to get it right, Beth!

 

The EYFS statutory guidance says:-

 

"...all supervisors and managers must hold a full and relevant level 3 qualification.... and half of all other staff must hold a full and relevant level 2 qualification".

 

So long as you can show how you plan to achieve this, I see no reason why a person you describe shouldn't continue working in childcare.

 

Maz

 

So if the manger (me) has at least a level 3 and we had say for example 3 level 3 including a deputy and a couple of others training to level 2 or 3 we could still have an unqualified with lots of experience in the pre school?

 

I think I am getting there, like the one where you need a level 3 as a deputy and not working towards one. But then what happens if someone has a level 3 in say playwork or teaching assistants then what, yet more training for the person who may be good at deputy post but has a different level 3 in childcare.

 

 

Beth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So if the manger (me) has at least a level 3 and we had say for example 3 level 3 including a deputy and a couple of others training to level 2 or 3 we could still have an unqualified with lots of experience in the pre school?

So long as half of the rest of the staff have a level 2, you'll be fine.

 

I think I am getting there, like the one where you need a level 3 as a deputy and not working towards one.

I can't find anywhere it says that in the statutory guidance Beth: do you have a page number or is this something someone told you?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi Maz

 

2nd quote this is what I have been told by Mrs 'O' at my suitable persons interview, we asked if a the deputy could be working towards level 3 and the response was no a Level 3 has to be in place from September. Plus Hali as said something simlar in a previous topic.

 

 

Beth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2nd quote this is what I have been told by Mrs 'O' at my suitable persons interview, we asked if a the deputy could be working towards level 3 and the response was no a Level 3 has to be in place from September. Plus Hali as said something simlar in a previous topic.

I was talking to my LA adviser yesterday who quizzed me on the same assumption: she challenged me about where I had seen this and I had to admit it was just something I'd heard! Perhaps you should check with your early years adviser to see what they think? If the statutory guidance doesn't say it, how can they make us do it? :o

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it be because the statutory requirement says a supervisor must have level 3, and in the absence of the supervisor the deputy will in fact be the supervisor thus needs level 3 (and not working towards it). xD:o

 

Peggy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well it does make sense really if you think about it, if Miss 'O' walked in the door and the supervisior was away how would the trainee level 3 with maybe a little experience feel about what she needs to tell ofsted?

 

I will ponder that thought away.

 

 

Beth

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Could it be because the statutory requirement says a supervisor must have level 3, and in the absence of the supervisor the deputy will in fact be the supervisor thus needs level 3 (and not working towards it). xD:o

That was the basis I was making my assumption on Peggy: but my early years bod didn't seem to agree with me. I think I might email for clarification.... :(

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone

 

If you look in the statutory Framework for the EYFS pg 31 under specific legal requirements it will state what most have said Managers and supervisors must hold a level 3 and half of all other staff must hold a full and relevant level 2.

 

It also states in the must have regard part that we should be taking particular interest in those with no qualifications and trying to get them to train to level 2. However this is only to have regard for not a requirement.

 

Hope this helps

 

Lisa.x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

It also states in the must have regard part that we should be taking particular interest in those with no qualifications and trying to get them to train to level 2. However this is only to have regard for not a requirement.

Hi Lisa

 

I think most of us would encourage our staff to undertake at least a level 2 qualification, but there's a world of difference in insisting they do so in order to keep their job! Luckily I'm fortunate enough to have a young team and I have put the willingness to commit to undertaking training in my person specification for all vacancies. I know there is a recent report by a think tank suggesting that all practitioners are qualified at level 3, and I wonder whether this is the ultimate goal (or indeed how the Government will fund it)...

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happymaz, I like your idea to include 'willingness to train' in the person spec, and to follow that I presume it is also in the contract of employment?

Does your training policy include a long term strategy on how to support current employees to increase qualifications ( a word more specific than 'training'), should the government not intervene with dosh?

A good time maybe for people to review (and adapt if necessary) their peson specs, contracts and Training policies. (but maybe not until next week as sunshine forecast for all this week :o )

 

 

Peggy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peggy - my generic term 'training' translates into a statement like "commitment to commence training to gain a level 2 qualification within x months of employment" or something like that! I'm having to do a whole new action plan to show how I can meet the statutory requirements because from September I have staffing difficulties (only myself and my deputy will be level 3 qualified) although two others will be working towards their level 3. So short of working every single day which neither of us really wants to do, I can't have a named deputy who will be level 3 qualified.

 

Incidentally I emailed my development officer to ask for clarification two level 3 qualified practitioners at each session: I am still nervous about what she told me and I'd like it in writing so I can print it off for my Operational Plan to show Mrs O should be come a-calling!

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Incidentally I emailed my development officer to ask for clarification two level 3 qualified practitioners at each session: I am still nervous about what she told me and I'd like it in writing so I can print it off for my Operational Plan to show Mrs O should be come a-calling!

I've had my reply, and basically what I've been told is that there is no requirement for the named deputy to have a level 3, although if this person was regularly taking charge of the session then obviously they would need to be qualified.

 

Since I only have two level 3 qualified staff (and we do not work every day), I would need to show who would take charge in any emergency situation. My decision about who would take over in such an emergency would need to take account of the qualifications/experience of the remaining members of staff at each session.

 

She re-iterated what we have already discussed here: that the manager/supervisor needs a level 3, and half of the remaining staff must have at least a level 2, and said that Mrs O would expect to see this at a 'normal' session (ie where no emergency has occurred!).

 

I obviously need to have clear procedures in place for what might happen in this mythical emergency, and ensure that everyone understands their roles and responsibilities in such situations. However unless this actually happens when Mrs Ofsted is in the building it is impossible to know how they would react.

 

Needless to say I will print out her email and file it in my operational plan... but my search for good, level 3 qualified practitioners goes on apace... :o

 

If anyone else is in a similar situation to me, I would suggest getting advice (in writing) about how your local authority views such situations, just for your own peace of mind.

 

Maz

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happymaz, does Ofsted 'take account' of advice given by LEA, even if it is in writing?

 

Sounds like another 'risk assessment' will cover this one.

 

I had a discussion with CWDC and ACAS about changing contract requirements for current staff to get training to enable qualification requirements from government ie: Degree. I also discussed the fact that I employed someone with a disability who couldn't qualify at level 2 but was a good EY assistant and that to sack her because she couldn't achieve level 2 could be seen as discrimination.

ACAS adviced how to change contracts and CWDC were so vague in their response I can't remember what they said, but I do recall that they appeared to 'have not thought these issues through properly before setting these requirements', they just kept quoting to me "Highly qualified staff result in higher quality practice". Well this doesn't help all those people with disabilities who work very well within preschool teams. Who also provide a positive role model of 'inclusion' to the children.

 

 

Peggy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Happymaz, does Ofsted 'take account' of advice given by LEA, even if it is in writing?

That's the sixty four thousand dollar question, Peggy! I hope I never find out... :o

 

ACAS adviced how to change contracts and CWDC were so vague in their response I can't remember what they said, but I do recall that they appeared to 'have not thought these issues through properly before setting these requirements', they just kept quoting to me "Highly qualified staff result in higher quality practice". Well this doesn't help all those people with disabilities who work very well within preschool teams. Who also provide a positive role model of 'inclusion' to the children.

Presumably this is why there is only the requirement to have half of all other (non supervisory) staff qualified at level 2 Peggy: we're back at the same old argument aren't we? We probably all know people who have level 3 qualifications who cannot work effectively with children, and people with no qualifications who have a natural talent for supporting children's learning and development.

 

We need to be careful not to throw the baby out with the bathwater - it is in no-one's interest to 'retire' good practitioners because they can't or won't get a qualification...

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)