Qualifications For Delivering Eyfs

[Guest]

Anyone had a look at this on the CWDC website for next year?

It gives a list of qualifications and whether or not you can deliver it without furthar training.

I am sure someone will put a link to it. Please? I would if I knew how.

[hali]

here you go: https://secure.cwdcouncil.org.uk/eypqd/qualification-search

[HappyMaz]

I couldn't find the link you mentioned, sadiesmith (and I'm not sure whether hali's found the right one ), but I did find this when I was looking:-

 

Important Information About Level 6 Qualifications

 

Please note that all level 6 qualifications held on the Qualifications List for those delivering the Early Years Foundation Stage have been mapped to the criteria for a full and relevant level 3. The only recognition of practice at level 6 is QTS or EYPS. All references to ‘another suitable level 6 qualification (which is full and relevant, and defined by CWDC)’ in Appendix 2 of the EYFS Statutory Framework should be interpreted as being QTS or EYPS.

 

The 1:13 adult to child ratio may only be applied where there is a QTS or EYPS working directly with the children.

 

What do you think this means? That you can only be a Level 6 if you have QTS or EYPS, otherwise you're classed as a Level 3?

 

Do let me know if you work it all out,

Confused of Maidenhead

[Guest]

I would read it as if degree level could only count as level 3 unless QTS or EYFS!

[HappyMaz]

I would read it as if degree level could only count as level 3 unless QTS or EYFS!

The first thing that came into my mind was how many settings are operating a 1:13 ratio 'illegally' on the basis that their leader has a degree? At least now I know I'll have to wait until I achieve the status to double/halve my adult:child ratio! Which way round should it be: ratios always confuse me!

 

Maz

[Gezabel]

I read it as an Hons Degree is level 6 but any setting want to change their ratios to 1:13 can't do so with a member of staff who 'only' has a degree, it has to be someone with QTS or EYPS.

 

 

Sorry I really don't see how an hons degree can be viewed as the same as level 3

I checked the new site for my OU Foundation Degree and they have that as level 5.

 

 

I know the emphasis is on all settings providing full daycare to have an EYP by 2015 but I am sure there will be many settings who won't have - what I don't understand is that there seems to be little or know mention of levels 4 or 5. Still emphasis on level 3 and a push for EYP but nothing in between or have I lost the plot

[HappyMaz]

I know the emphasis is on all settings providing full daycare to have an EYP by 2015 but I am sure there will be many settings who won't have - what I don't understand is that there seems to be little or know mention of levels 4 or 5. Still emphasis on level 3 and a push for EYP but nothing in between or have I lost the plot

No, you haven't lost the plot, Geraldine: it does seem as if Levels 4 and 5 have been swept aside in the rush to get setting leaders to achieve EYPS. I wonder if the feeling is that undertaking a level 4 or 5 course is an unnecessary stepping stone, given the pilot for taking practitioners from Level 3 to EYPS. It will be interesting to see how things pan out, won't it?

 

Maz

[Gezabel]

So glad I haven't lost the plot I did wonder about levels 4 and 5 being seen as almost 'insignificant' and it's either level 3 or EYPS but I don't understand this thinking!

 

I am sure there are many settings run by people with level 3 and for a variety of reasons they may not want (or be able) to achieve EYPS but are yet willing to study to gain perhaps a level 4 or go on the Foundation Degree. I don't want to start a discussion about 'the best' qualification but surely a foundation degree is 'better' than level 3 and before someone shoots me down in flames I do fully accept that experience is very important

 

I was unaware of any pilot for level 3's to go straight to EYPS but knew it was something the CWDC intended to look at. Perhaps they should have thought of this in the first place, if level 3 with relevant experience can somehow get to EYPS by meeting the standards but not having to study for a degree where does that leave all those who have upped their qualifications en route to EYPS.

 

Sorry if I sound grumpy! just feeling disillusioned tonight and wondering why I have spent over £3000 of my own money on achieving a degree and actually wondering whether to bother with the final course to turn it into honours

[Guest]

So glad I haven't lost the plot I did wonder about levels 4 and 5 being seen as almost 'insignificant' and it's either level 3 or EYPS but I don't understand this thinking!

 

I am sure there are many settings run by people with level 3 and for a variety of reasons they may not want (or be able) to achieve EYPS but are yet willing to study to gain perhaps a level 4 or go on the Foundation Degree. I don't want to start a discussion about 'the best' qualification but surely a foundation degree is 'better' than level 3 and before someone shoots me down in flames I do fully accept that experience is very important

 

I was unaware of any pilot for level 3's to go straight to EYPS but knew it was something the CWDC intended to look at. Perhaps they should have thought of this in the first place, if level 3 with relevant experience can somehow get to EYPS by meeting the standards but not having to study for a degree where does that leave all those who have upped their qualifications en route to EYPS.

 

Sorry if I sound grumpy! just feeling disillusioned tonight and wondering why I have spent over £3000 of my own money on achieving a degree and actually wondering whether to bother with the final course to turn it into honours

 

Here! Here! Geraldine thats exactly how i was feeling after reading this thread.... I'm on year 2 and was thinking about BA etc, and i have paid £3696 pounds....

[Cait]

I took 'being mapped to level 3' to mean that grid thing which begins and level 3 and 'maps' the different levels upwards from there. At least I hope it does or i'm royally p****d off!

[Gezabel]

I think it might be a case that whether we have level 4 5 or 6 it is considered to be a 'full and relevant level 3' though they do acknowledge these levels on their list. They only seem to be concerned that staff must have the 'full and relevant level 3' to run a setting and as long as the answer is 'yes' it really doesn't seem to matter if you actually have a 4, 5 or 6

 

I could be completely misunderstanding it but I do believe there has been some sort of change by the CWDC. I never had any intention of changing the ratio to 1:13 as no qualification or status comes with extra eyes/hands!! but I did think that a BA (Hons) in Early Years would be ' a full and relevant level 6' but now they have moved the goalposts (again!!)

The bit that upsets me is 'the only recognition of practice at level 6' is QTS or EYPS so are they saying all our hard work and all those assignments is worth nothing unless we do EYPS????

 

Please don't think I am knocking EYPS because I am not but I really don't understand how when someone new to early years can achieve it in a year it can be deemed soooo fantastic by the CWDC??

 

I am going to phone the CWDC on Wednesday and will see what they say!! I just have a feeling of deja vue when we had our discussions about the 'old nnneb' some years back.

Edited November 10, 2008 by Geraldine

[Cait]

You and me both, Geraldine! I await your reply with bated breath!

[Guest]

I am a qualified teacher and have owned and managed a small day nursery for over 15 years.As my B.Ed. and University aren't on the CWDC list I am now advised that I need to complete a 'full and relevant' 0 - 5 course that is on the list by Sept 2112.

Further,my deputy completed her NNEB pre-1992 so the same applies to her.

We are also A1 Assessors.

We are not considered qualified nor are we to be included in the ratio of qualified staff until we complete further training.

Yet our 2 junior staff (both completed their NVQ 3 last year) are deemed suitable to be counted in the ratio of qualified staff.

There must be hundreds of settings affected by this and whilst no one can object to updating skills and attending appropriate training it is rather insulting to an experienced graduate to be told to do 'any of the playwork or NVQ qualifications on the list'(from an adviser at CWDC this morning) where I will sit alongside the very students I have been trained to teach and assess!

[Gezabel]

Further,my deputy completed her NNEB pre-1992 so the same applies to her.

 

Hi

Don't know if it helps but your deputy should be fine with her NNEB. I gained my NNEB in 1973 and it is listed as full and valid!

 

To be 'valid' a qualification has to meet certain criteria, some of these are optional but providing the qualification meets the mandatory criteria it's OK!

Here is what the site says about a Pre 1992 NNEB

 

This qualification meets all the mandatory criteria.

Qualification Details

Qualification name Certificate in Nursery Nursing

Awarding body National Nursery Examination Board (NNEB)

Level Level 3 Qualification type Early Years

Validation period 1970 - 1988

Qualification purpose Full

[Gezabel]

Ooops! sorry Michkat just noticed that was your first post, so welcome to the forum

[HappyMaz]

Welcome to the Forum mitchkat

 

What an interesting (!) post - I'm off to dig out the booklets that came from the CWDC yesterday to go and have a look...

 

Maz

[Cait]

I didn't get one for the manager, although they said there was one in the envelope - just three of the practitioner ones.

[Guest]

Thank you Geraldine!

Teresa (Deputy) qualified in 1990 and Ofsted and CWDC both confirmed that neither of us is now classed as qualified but our junior staff are.Further,despite it saying that we were to have additional 'full and relevant'qualifications in place by Sept 2012 Ofsted say that it should have been in place 01/09/2008.

I do not understand how qualifications can be effectively written off overnight,as it were.

Also,if ALL people caring for children MUST deliver EYFS how can all these thousands of settings have the correct ratio of 'full and relevant' qualifications?

Where does this leave childminders?They do a short course but they do not necessarily hold any of the qualifications on 'the list'.

Why is my QTS no longer acceptable to do the job I have been doing for so long?

 

We are both now faced with completing qualifications as quickly as we can and in my case at a lower level than my degree.

It is demoralising,time wasting and leaves us in a grey area legally.

The 2 most highly valued and experienced members of the team are,officially,unqualified while our newly qualified 18 yearold NVQs feature as the qualified staff.

If I didn't work for myself I'd be made redundant.Great.

[Cait]

I'm absolutely spitting! I completed an Advanced Diploma in Childcare and education 10 years ago and have just completed 6 years with the Open Uni doing my foundation degree which now seems a total waste of time and money.

 

What other profession would put up with this!!!!!

[HappyMaz]

I didn't get one for the manager, although they said there was one in the envelope - just three of the practitioner ones.

That's helpful Cait!

 

Can't find my degree in the qualifications list. Mind you my university wasn't listed either!

[HappyMaz]

What other profession would put up with this!!!!!

I just did a search on your ADCCE Cait and was interested in the "Next Steps: Training and Development Pathways" - the options for someone with this Level 4 qualification is to do a full level 3 or EYPS.

 

This would suggest that the Foundation Degree (or come to that the full degree) is not recognised as being higher than a level 3 (which is what I was asking in a previous post). It seems nothing between Level 3 and EYPS is recognised as a qualification - so until I achieve EYPS I'm classed as a level 3 practitioner. If these assumptions are true it does rather make you wonder whether it is worth undertaking further training at all (although obviously I am committed to CPD and recognise the benefits to my practice of wider reading and learning).

 

I might just send a little email to our training development officer...

 

Maz

[Cait]

so are CWDC going to give me my money back! and the 6 years i wasted!

[HappyMaz]

so are CWDC going to give me my money back! and the 6 years i wasted!

Sorry to repeat myself from earlier, but here's the quote from the website:-

 

Please note that all level 6 qualifications held on the Qualifications List for those delivering the Early Years Foundation Stage have been mapped to the criteria for a full and relevant level 3. The only recognition of practice at level 6 is QTS or EYPS. All references to ‘another suitable level 6 qualification (which is full and relevant, and defined by CWDC)’ in Appendix 2 of the EYFS Statutory Framework should be interpreted as being QTS or EYPS.

 

This, together with the two training development options for your level 4 qualification Cait, leads me to believe that the Foundation degree/full degree is not recognised by the CWDC as being higher than a level 3. I've emailed the Borough to find out if I'm missing something obvious - but that's how it looks to me.

 

Unless of course someone here can spot the fault in my logic and show me the error of my ways!

 

Maz

 

PS Cait: you haven't wasted your time and money. Your studies will have profoundly impacted upon your practice and therefore the services you offer the children and families you work with. There is no doubt that highly qualified practitioners promote better outcomes for children. However I can well understand your frustration - time to start asking some questions I think. Wonder where the next CWDC roadshow is going to be held?

[louby loo]

My Fd wasn't recognised - unless I had at relevant level to back it up ----------- hello!!!!! needed a level 3 before we could even start the FD!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

My BA uni is not on list - but guess what? I don't think I really care anymore - I chose to do the BAhons (for myself more than anything) My county refused to pay anything towards it - because in their words "well you're not going to stay in childcare with a full degree when you can get more money elsewhere" in short they were prepared to offer me a 'status' but not a quailfication.

 

 

I now sit in a class with some excellent peers that have worked their way up - and also with post graduates that haven't a clue... one even walked into class the other week and very excited she had something she'd found and wanted to share with us~ she then asked if any of had heard of this wonderful website - we might find it really usefull............ the ECM website. These PGs will gain their EYPs before any of the 'working their way up' people, which I find totally ludacrass [s?]

 

This evening my husband has begged me to give up my job- he hates the amount of unpaid effort I put into it - I've had a really stressfull day and am seriously considering it.

 

xxxx

[hali]

oh bless Louby Lou - im sorry i dont know where i am tonight had a stressful day witn EYP assessor - just walked through the door and had a collegue on the phone about this new qualification list and we were not on it! - i know what your hubby is saying - mine is saying the same!!!! - its all a bit unbelievable isnt it!! - think at the mo we just have to say whatever we have done we have done it for our development!

 

have a good evening

[Guest]

My degree wasn't listed, either. I contacted CWDC saying I was concerned it wasn't there. They forwarded a request to my uni to complete a form, so I will have to wait and see. [it doesn't help me with the QTS/EYP business but it might help some of my ex-fellow students. ] It might be an option for some of you, too.

[Guest]

If it helps at all and gives you any peace of mind - my uni has been moaning about this for ages. Apparently to get on the list they have had to submit masses of evidence and even then it is no guarantee it will be looked at. they have also been to lots of meetings as the paper work is putting them all off.

 

For example my foundation degree is on the list, but recommend we need more child protection. My uni is not happy as we have child protection modules and are not sure why more work is needed. They are currently resubmitting all the course info to get it re adjusted. But apparently is a nightmare.

 

I know its a huge worry on a Friday night that our work may be pointless, but I would suggest the list has been published before they have finished referencing the courses accuratley.

 

Good luck and maybe have a chat with your college to see what they are doing about getting on the list.

[Guest]

Can I just reiterate previous posts. I looked up today my NNEB from 1981 and on the website it is stated as valid. I phoned up to verify this and was told it is valid.

You DO NOT need another qualification.

[KIKPOP99]

Hi

 

I have just taken on a staff member with a QTS qualification. I don't mind whether she is classed as level 3 or 6, as long as I can include her as a 'qualified' staff member in the ratios! My only concern is that the cert does not mention any connection to Early Years Studies of any sort. Does anybody believe this matters or is relevant?

 

Also, does anybody believe I can definitely include her as a 'qualified staff' ratio?

 

Thanks

sat

[HappyMaz]

My only concern is that the cert does not mention any connection to Early Years Studies of any sort. Does anybody believe this matters or is relevant?

Hi sat - welcome to the Forum and congratulations on your first post!

 

As far as I can see the EYFS documentation doesn't specify what type of QTS, but only mentions QTS/EYPS. But to be sure I'd give Ofsted or your local early years support team for advice.

 

Incidentally whilst searching the Statutory Framework for this information, I came across this sentence (on page 31):-

 

"Providers should support their staff in improving their qualification levels. In particular, those staff with no qualifications should be supported in obtaining a relevant qualification at a minimum of a full and relevant level 2 qualification (as defined by CWDC)."

 

I hadn't seen this before. Should I take this as confirmation that there is no space in the team for an unqualified member of staff?

 

Maz