eyfs1966 Posted October 7, 2009 Posted October 7, 2009 I think between this and the single funding formula Peggy's question will not be applicable for me because I will have sailed off into the sunset by then. Maz Maz...is that as opposed to the rest of us who will be left paddling up a well known creek without a paddle? If so, I think i might choose the sailing option!
Upsy Daisy Posted October 7, 2009 Posted October 7, 2009 Let's hire an ocean liner and all sail off together. Then where would they be? (They'd probably send the children to join us!)
sunnyday Posted October 7, 2009 Posted October 7, 2009 I think between this and the single funding formula Peggy's question will not be applicable for me because I will have sailed off into the sunset by then. Maz Wait for meeeee!
SueJ Posted October 7, 2009 Posted October 7, 2009 Children & Young People NowConservative conference: Tories would get rid of early years curriculum By Lauren Higgs Children & Young People Now 5 October 2009 The shadow schools minister has slammed the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), describing it as a "bureaucratic nightmare". Speaking at a fringe event at the Conservative party conference, Nick Gibb branded the EYFS "typical of the bureaucratic approach to education that we oppose". "We've got to get rid of that kind of approach to education," he said. He claimed the system was based on a "ludicrous" tick-box mentality, and on the assumption that "before EYFS, nursery school teachers or reception school teachers didn't know about the development of every child in the class". He warned: "We've got to trust professionals to do the jobs that they do well, not have all these forms." Lest we forget 1988 The national curriculum - government = blue 1996 The Desirable learning outcomes - government = blue 1999 The Early Learning Goals - government = red 2000 The Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage - government = red continuing on with B23 and EYFS etc. Whatever the colour they all know best and I for one can't wait for the day that a politician will trust a professional to get on with the job Now about that cruise!!!!!!!
Guest Posted October 7, 2009 Posted October 7, 2009 Really interesting stuff but hey it has been here a long time and the folders aren't falling apart yet so I guess it is about time for change............................. only joking - but I am not surprised - people need to think they can do it better. Interesting point about Ofsted - has anyone heard that Ofsted are thinking of farming out their early years inspections to about 5 suppliers - was this one missed by you lot?? We may be going back again to an old system of inspection by external providers again. If you look at one of the other articles from Children and YOung People Now they talk about how to save £50 billion - cut child benefit, children staying on in full time education till they were 18, abandon Contact Point, stop all CC monies and divert into Health etc etc - all sorts of stuff being branded about now that there is soon to be an eleciton. - everyone getting in on the act as to how they can do things better. Anyway so who's best Ofsted or the luck of the drawer - or maybe it's the same!!! Nikki
sunnyday Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 Interesting point about Ofsted - has anyone heard that Ofsted are thinking of farming out their early years inspections to about 5 suppliers - was this one missed by you lot?? We may be going back again to an old system of inspection by external providers again. Nikki Yes absolutely - I have read about that too.......
catma Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 But it is after all some fringe event with some tory boy trying to make his tuppence h'appeny's worth heard!! Just roll with it folks - there's nothing you can do except accept the way it is and after 25 years of curriculum reforms I'm fairly immune. Ever read my signature??????
Marion Posted October 8, 2009 Posted October 8, 2009 From what I've been told David Cameron has been holding audience with lots of chalkface practitioners and asking their opinions and the results are the "sound bites" at the conference.
lynned55 Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 and when has any of them ever taken any notice of our opinions?? Like others I too can remember when we had vouchers (or parents did) and then we changed Goverments and one of the first things our new ones did was to abolish neg funding and vouchers (so they said) and replace it with NEF & funding paid direct to the provider, still trying to work out what the difference was/is. So I am sure they will abolish EYFS if only because they will want to try and show they can 'invent' something better. Shame as it's the one change that I've quite liked and haven't had to make that many changes to accomadate. I think the only people that will benefit from changes will be the peple that publish all the paperwork that goes with all the changes, because it certainly wont be the children.
Guest Posted October 11, 2009 Posted October 11, 2009 Catma your signature makes me smile every time I read it. I suppose we could always set up our own political party, what would OUR manifesto look like and how would we finance it. My promises would be; 1/ Increased pay for ALL EY practitioners - funded by the scrapping of any MP expenses hand outs. 2/ All settings running from shared accomodation funded for own buildings designed by the workforce. 50 % of cost paid by the government, 50% non interest loan to the owner. In committee run settings ownership to be offered to the highest qualified and/or experienced member of staff who applies for it. Committee's abolished (no offence intended) - funded by a compulsory opt out tax for high earning tax exiles ie: a one off payment to government from all people wanting to become tax exiles. 3/ Freedom of choice of curriculum, with an emphasis on fun and wellbeing, the 'curriculum' will be a combination of all pedagogy, which each setting can choose from relevant to their current intakes developmental needs. Inspection of quality will be carried out by parents. staff and other local settings staff. ie: settings local to each other will inspect each other, knowing that the setting they inspect will be inspecting them to ensure 'fair play'. Any critisisms to be reported constructively, a minimum of 10 positive attributes must be given to each setting within the report. Funding will be based on parent satisfaction rather than academic/curriculum targets. Funding of fees will be for as many hours as a parent wants for the child, but 50% paid by government and 50% paid by parent. Government responsible for parents debts to any setting. 4/ School to start at 6 yrs old, intake same as preschools, at any time of the year as the child reaches their 6th birthday. Schools to have a 1-10 ratio and no more than 25 children per class. - funded by not having to pay for under 6 yr olds in schools. 5/ Children with special needs, parents choose whether to send to maintained or special school without the need for a statement. Children with SEN get double funding whatever setting they attend. The settings will improve services to these children to gain the funding. Healthy competition based on parents choice. Assessment will be based on a two term longitudinal child study, assessment of individuals developmental progress in all aspects, making comparisons with children attending the same setting at the same time. - funded by abolishing MP's second homes. MP's to be housed in 'community' housing in the capital if needed. Funding of places will be based on break even calculations per individual setting. What would be on your manifesto? Peggy
sunnyday Posted October 12, 2009 Posted October 12, 2009 I too would like to sign up for 'Peggy's Political Party'! Go Peggy! Peggy for PM!!!! Sunnyday
Guest Posted October 14, 2009 Posted October 14, 2009 Peggy, that's just brilliant! Did you just write it off the top of your head?! I am impressed whatever - isn't it a shame we have to vote in constituancies? If we could vote on issues I think you'd be in there me dear! Go Peggy!
Guest Posted October 14, 2009 Posted October 14, 2009 Thanks everyone for your votes of confidence, and yes, all off the top of my head but more importantly thoughts inspired by all the posts from all you dedicated hard working professional members of this forum over the last few years. Unfortunatley I am not politically astute enough to know whether my manifesto could actually be achieved in reality, ( especially the financial side of it all). What I do think though is that even if we are 'not in power' we should strive to be pro-active, to challenge and to most importantly offer an alternative practical and financial (if possible) solution if asked to do, behave or think in a way that goes against our own professional judgement of what is right for us as workers and most importantly our children. This we can all do on a day to day basis. from little changes oak trees grow Peggy
Guest Posted October 14, 2009 Posted October 14, 2009 Hiya, really interesting that Peggy especially about the 50/50 funding and the savings made for children to start at 6 - as you say difficult to work out just how much it would all cost/save but might be interesting concept in that maybe parents would get on board with the fact that it really is not so important that children are pushed into school and tested at 4! It does give out a certain message to parents although I would say that on a 50/50 fee split that the most vulnerable families may miss out - so couldn't agree with that one - sorry - but then we are back to means testing and I am not sure that I like that either. But for the most part I like it - go Peggy go Nikki
Guest Posted October 15, 2009 Posted October 15, 2009 Thanks Nikki, The reason I think parents to pay 50/50 fees is because I noticed way back when vouchers were introduced that parents attitudes seemed to change, when places became free they seemed to actually expect more. Without wanting to tar all with the same brush, 'they' tended to expect us to chop and change sessions more than before free places, 'they' became less 'responsible' for behaviour management of their child, etc. It seemed that once we were in effect 'employed by the government' (well paid for our services by the government) the parent partnership working seemed more difficult. Sorry this sounds a bit wooly (and stereotyping) but it's difficult to put my finger on it exactly what changed, but it just felt different. It seemed like some parents were less respectful, and more demanding of what they saw as their given right. Maybe this is something that schools have experienced, but maybe it is not linked to free places but just they way society is changing, I'm not sure, it could have been a co-incidence that I felt attitudes changed at the same time as funding came in. I personally think though that if you have chosen something and paid for it yourself, you are more likely to value it more than if it was given easily to you. That's why I think parents should pay something towards the fees. Actually another example of this is if a practitioner pays for his/her training they will most probably put more effort in and stick to it compared to some students who leave courses if paid for by someone else. I too did think about affordability but actually if government paid 50% of all sessions attended but there was not a minimum or maximum number of sessions dictated as allowed, the parents could still choose whatever was affordable, match funding in a sense. Don't we all try that bit harder to raise revenue if we know it will be doubled by match funding? Peggy
emmajess Posted October 15, 2009 Posted October 15, 2009 it's kind of 'political re-decorating' isn't it? Only they get to do the fun bits like choose the paint and the fancy wallpaper - we get to spend months scraping off the woodchip and painting over our favourite shade of duck egg blue , or whatever it might be with something we don't know we want to live with........... What a fantastic metaphor! Really accurate and really made me laugh!
Recommended Posts