Jump to content
About Us

Eyfs Web Page


Recommended Posts

Have been away for a while but now getting back into the swing of things, just been on the EYFS website and noticed a new icon! How long has this been there? It's information primarily for journalists or parents - so watch out don't go moaning about the paperwork involved with the EYFS, as this new icon is telling parents/journalists that it's a myth!?

Will try and attach a link...



hope it worked?


The icon is top right on page.

Is this old news? Sorry if it is. I was just looking for some format/info for my parents - it would be great if the govt. were going to print this off and mail to every parent - save me a huge job and would reduce my paperwork load!!?? (LOL)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi myhenroxanne, haven't seen you for a while, have you been really busy? (or maybe I'm just not looking in the forums you've been in :o )


Thanks for the link,had a quick scan read and overall I think the leaflets provide a very positive view of EYFS. xD I especially like the repetition about 'play' about not testing and the emphasis on the individual child and that there isn't an expectation for children to reach all the 69 goals.


I wasn't so keen on one sentence ( in the parent leaflet) which said "research shows that those who do well in reading and writing, and other areas, at age five go on to do well in their first year in primary school Key Stage 1." Why they had to emphasise reading and writing as seperate to 'other areas', is my main bug bare with 'education'.


I also feel they didn't fully answer this myth;


Myth: The EYFS removes parents’ right to choose

the sort of provision they want for their children

Under the EYFS parents are very involved with their

child’s progress and are encouraged to share ideas

about their progress with staff. We do recognise

however, that there may be circumstances in which

parents feel their beliefs are incompatible with the

EYFS, so they will have the option of applying for an

exemption for their child from parts of it. This policy

will remain under review. As the EYFS is not a rigid

curriculum and does not take a prescriptive

approach to day to day activities there is unlikely to

be a large demand for exemptions.


It does not explain how settings are financially and otherwise bound to have to follow the EYFS, ie: if not followed cannot be registered, if not followed Educational grant is not paid.

It says this policy will remain under review but if this is the only curriculum practiced what comparisons of 'alternative' curriculums can be made in the future? What if a parent wants a totally non-academic curriculum, solely based on PSE (for example) that choice will not be available, thus making the EYFS a compulsory curriculum for under 5's. There is reference to the consultation, how many parents and EYears professionals and other contributors to the consultation were clearly informed that the EYFS would be the ONLY choice available, for their under compulsory education aged children) when they participated in the consultation?


Even if this is the best curriculum since sliced bread, (and totally ebeficial to children) does a government still have the right to enforce through legislation a totally exclusive of anything other than what they have devised, early years experience for everyones child who is currently below the age of what has previously been understood as compulsory education?

(apologies for the long sentence :( )



Link to comment
Share on other sites

Peggy your post reminded me of where I saw this Booklet for parents in the news

"Two of the most contentious targets are that children should “write their own names . . . and begin to form simple sentences, sometimes using punctuation” and “use phonic knowledge to write simple regular words and make phonetically plausible attempts at more complex words”.


The booklet states: “It’s not about introducing a curriculum for young children. Or making them read or write before they’re ready. Quite the reverse.”

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Really interesting reading, especially the one for the Media to counteract all those stories that have been circulating and making inflammatory headlines. Interestingly I picked out the same statements as Peggy, and these are the ones that have caused most concern amongst professionals. This also seems to be a Government response to the Open-Eye Campaign.

This needs to be brought to the attention of some HT's, and I know that there is a paper mountain out there, whatever they might say. Certainly in some Primary Schools the lack of knowledge and understanding from SMT, or other teachers can lead to early years staff having to over-justify their way of working, or they have to follow the Primary model of planning and assessment. Value-added and concerns about OFSTED and SATS put pressure on everyone, and the 'the sooner they start the better they'll be' attitude can mean that the EY staff are not always supported in working as they should be, and this is to the detriment of the children.

Marion picked up on the seemingly two opposing statements and the document addresses these later when discussing the ELG's saying:


"Some of the goals relate to early literacy, and

there has been opposition from some quarters to

just two of these: use of phonic knowledge to write

simple regular words and make phonetically

plausible attempts at more complex words; and

writing their own names and other things and begin

to form simple sentences sometimes using


Ministers have asked Sir Jim Rose to look at these as

part of his review of the primary curriculum, to see if

they are appropriate and help kids make transition to

primary school."


I await the outcome of this with interest !

Link to comment
Share on other sites

yes thanks for that info

very useful

shame about the limit 10's not very helpful i can imagine all parents will want one


em x

Link to comment
Share on other sites

In a way I wish that the Open Eye group (or any other objectors) had put the 'curriculum content' to one side and just concentrated on the fact that 'education' for under fives is now statutory (if not in name but practice) the reason being is that a 'descriptive, government written curriculum' (irrelevant of actual content) is all that is on offer to parents because anything other than their particular curriculum being offered, the setting will not be registered by Ofsted. (and therefore won't excist (spl?)


If we take the messages given, literally,


'Learn through Play'


development -quote "These milestones are laid out to give those working with children some guidance and to help them to identify if a child may be having problems (there is no obligation that children have to reach any particular standard).


Quote "Parents should be kept up to date with what their children are doing" (not learning)


Then come Ofsted Inspection day, as long as children are seen 'playing', and 'parents know what their children have been doing,' and of course that all the children are safe, then we should all achieve an outstanding result. :o


If 'there is no obligation that children have to reach any particular standard' then why do providers have to 'evidence' the childrens progress against the goals? (something required from previous Inspections)


So here's the question now...What is the difference between development and the 69 standards? Does this mean we can record the childrens development using our own terminology, and not assess to the ELG's?



I am of course being very pedantic here, choosing quotes out of context which is exactly what the government have done with these 'media' documents, taken parts of the EYFS whole document and presented it in a way (and out of context to the whole) in which they want the EYFS to be perceived.


I also think that their attitude towards parents' is quite arrogant, one due to the fact they have produced two documents, why wouldn't one suffice? and two because of their comment.................."there is unlikely to be a large demand for exemptions"



To end on a positive note, off my soapbox, I really hope that the early years workforce continues to offer children what they, the real experts know, what is best for them, in a manner that they know is best for them.




Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, just joined as am having trouble getting my head around my profile books. Unsure to say Observation, Links to EFYS, Assesssment and then Next steps, can anyone help or have a simple format to share? Have I missed a heading! :o many thanks

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi, just joined as am having trouble getting my head around my profile books. Unsure to say Observation, Links to EFYS, Assesssment and then Next steps, can anyone help or have a simple format to share? Have I missed a heading! :o many thanks


Well this is what I plan on using



I have others but that is how we have always done it and I am not planning on changing too much for the EYFS!




Link to comment
Share on other sites

ive just ordered 10 copies :o

I got Siobhan to order another ten so why not get either your son/daughter (or both) to order another ten each. Then your chair, treasurer etc until you have enough? xD

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I've had a look at the two new docs todayat work and am rather dismayed that they don't seem to acknowledge the place of reception classes in the EYFS - it's all about nursery and other settings! I think there's one passing reference where Reception is mentioned. What I want is stuff I can stick under SMT noses. How irritating.


Link to comment
Share on other sites

Catma, that is a fair comment, it's heavily biased to settings based provision. I wonder if there's a way you can feed that info back? I just had a look at the leaflets our LEA have given us to distribute. They are LEA produced ones so I will be ordering from Teachernet too by the looks of things!

Link to comment
Share on other sites


  • 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)