Jump to content
Home
Forum
Join Us
Articles
About Us
Tapestry

Planning (again) For Eyfs


Guest
 Share

Recommended Posts

I have looked on the forum but I can't find an answer exactly to this, so I hope you can help.

 

For our adult led activities we use a planning format similar to one on the EYFS CD, and state which Early Learning Goals we are evaluating against in that activity. The children who attend are aged from 2 years to 4 years 11 months, and plans are different for the 2 and 3 year olds, than for the 3 and 4 year olds. We use a coding system which shows if the child achieved the ELG independently, with adult assistance or not at all/did not want to join in. However when we use certain ELGs especially, we do not anticipate that the child will achieve in the same way as a 4 or 5 year old might. We usually use the phrase 'we make them age and stage appropriate".

 

I personally believe that by using the ELGs as end "targets" (for want of a better word!) we can encourage the children to aim higher. I do not disregard the Development Matters section of the EYFS but use this to exemplify how a child might be achieving the ELG at their stage of development.

 

So my question is: does this seem alright to you all? The question has been raised by a member of staff who has previously worked heavily with Stepping Stones and is worried that our planning does not evidence our understanding of the EYFS and show we take into account the differing abilities and levels of development of the various ages of the children. I appreciate her worrying about it and discussing it with me, but I am now doubting myself and also wondering how to help her feel more secure with this method of planning. Prior to Birth to Three Matters, the setting used Desirable Learning Outcomes and Early Learning Goals for all the children and did differentiate them for age and stage. Ofsted never had a problem with this but was that because they weren't looking to pick up on this then?

 

Oh obviously we plan to the children's interests as well!

 

Thanks and sorry for the long post!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

quote"We use a coding system which shows if the child achieved the ELG independently, with adult assistance or not at all/did not want to join in"

 

I'm not familiar with the EYFS CD (not working with it) but wondered if you could add the statement, "is working towards......"to the above code, with a space to comment at what development level, otherwise it may appear that a child has achieved the ELG.?

 

Maybe as this is a new 'curriculum' the recording could be more specific, just untill everyone is more familiar with it, then go back to your more general coding system as above, once all the staff feel more secure with the content / approach / levels of the EYFS?

 

 

Peggy

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Thanks for the input - I think that might help this staff member in particular. It is very difficult when I understand why and how we do something and then am thrown a curve ball like this. I do understand she means well by her questions but sometimes I can't move on from where I am to address them fully. It is very helpful to bounce the question off someone else. Thank you,

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I personally feel uncomfortable planning for ELGs with this age of child: although experienced members of staff would be able to differentiate and consider the development matters statements as the pathway to the ELGs, I worry that less experienced staff will aim straight for the ELGs and ignore all the material before.

 

An alternative might be to have headings taken from the aspects ( eg "Language for Communication", "Language for Thinking" etc) and make observations againsts the levels within these?

 

I don't want to upset the applecart, though! If you believe your system works for your setting, then stick with it. :o

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)