Early Years Leaders Course

[Gezabel]

I have just had an email from the CWDC about a new course 'early years leaders'. I read all the blurb about the two year course for graduates which results in EYP status and an MA in Early years. Then I saw a link to a 6 minute video which I watched. It all looked good and included a little bit from Sarah Teather saying how good this course was, how it's just what the GOvernment needs etc etc

 

so far so good until I clicked on the 'apply' button for further information. Bearing in mind they are looking for quality applicants I wondered if my 2.1 degree in Early Years would be enough.

 

SIlly silly silly me!!!! Yes they want graduates with a first class or 2.1 degree but guess what it actually specifies that the degree should be:

 

in a subject predominantly unrelated to early childhood studies

 

All the people in the video seemed lovely but why are so many of us working our way up the ladder though experience and qualification after qualification to get to 'the top' and then people with 'any old degree' are actually being blatantly preferred for an 'Early Years Leaders' prgramme.

 

Sorry for whinge but it makes me sad and cross

[Cait]

Yep, I just did exactly the same - it actually says how lovely the applicants are, all from different backgrounds etc etc. Have deleted the email with such gusto that Zebedee looked up to ask what on earth was going on!!

[Deb]

Unbelievable!

[sunnyday]

in a subject predominantly unrelated to early childhood studies

NO

[Gezabel]

NO :wacko:

 

Sadly and unbelievably yes :rolleyes: :unsure:

 

Seemingly they want to have high quality early years leaders who after completing this course will be advisors, consultants, policy writers to name but a few. To ensure the quality of these leaders the course is only open to graduates and only those with a first class or 2.1 degree. That in itself, in my opinion rules out many wonderful, suitable, qualified and experienced early years workers which is terribly sad to say the least. To then add in a specific entry requirement that you must have a degree that is not related to Early Years is something i find downright insulting and I would love to know which bright spark thought this one up

[suebear]

Now I'm fascinated by this one!!!! Where is their thinking at??? Anyone you can e-mail to query it? Also dare I wonder on the cost of it?

[Guest]

I too had a look, I've looked before, but sadly only have a 2:2 in an unrelated subject, have gained EYPS already so don't qualify, but would have liked the Masters bit. I do have 16 years experience in childcare so I hope this makes up for lack of childcare degree. I am interested to see how they can experience all aspects of being a childminder (I work with childminders and have been one) when to really understand they would need to be registered themselves!

[HappyMaz]

This qualification is specifically designed for candidates with a high quality degree gained in a field outside of childcare. As far as I know there is nothing similar for those of us with degrees in a related field. I cannot express how miffed I am at that.

[Cait]

Is there any other profession where it could happen?!

[hali]

Blimey that is unbelievable

[Guest]

In a way it is a bit like the Teach First programme for teachers, but there you can argue that different degrees are relevant to teaching, whereas surely a child development degree is most relevant to working with the very youngest children. I am most upset about the fact that they haven't thought to include EY graduates or run the same thing for those graduates too. I guess their argument would be that they do - EYPS but it isn't quite the same programme and they do seem to be selling this new programme as being superior in some way.

[finleysmaid]

where do these people think they are going to get a job? 'Luke's' story suggest he will be an asset to any early years setting but it just shows that they have no idea...how are we to afford these graduates??? if they have trained for a degree and then for this early leaders course how much do they want £30/40k !!! all i can think is that the governemnt will want to club us all together in some sort of amalgamation and put one of these very inexperienced people in charge....humm i am all for raising the standards in early years (and our status) but lets concentrate on those of us whose vocation is to work with young children before we bring in those who are in it for the money!! unfortunately i feel that education in 'states schools' is going this way too with more teachers coming in to the proffession because they cant get a job in their chosen field not because they want to work with the children and families.

[catma]

Write to your MPs.

Request they pass on your query to the secretary of state.

Await replies.

Cx

[Rea]

Sarah Teather seem's to be hell bent on upsetting people already working in early years. It might not have been her comment but as she says this is a good course, it just endorses the bit that follows.

 

Still no reply from her through my MP regarding her comment on men in EY raising the status.

[catma]

It can take a while - hang on in there!

[Gezabel]

It's on my to do list!

I worte to my MP when there was uproar about the old NNEB not deemed a level 3 qualification

My MP was brilliant and forwarded my letter to the then secretary of state for education. I got positive replies from both of them so it can do some good

[HappyMaz]

Is there any other profession where it could happen?!

Well, yes. I just found something similar on the CWDC here website aimed at enabling career changers to become a Social Worker.

[Cait]

sigh

[Gezabel]

Well 5 months on since I started this post I have had a two page letter from Sara Teather today

I wrote to my MP in July and had almost an immediate reply saying he was forwarding my letter to Sarah Teather. I raised a few issues and this is the reply I received. Sorry it's a bit long!

 

"Thank you for your letter enclosing correspondence from your constituent Gezabel regarding the standard and quality of the Early Years Workforce.

 

In her letter Gezabel states that the Government aims to have a member of staff with Early Years PRofessinal Status in all full day-care setting by 2015. We have voiced our commitment to raising standards and share with the sector an ambition to see highly skilled, graduate led, workforce that can give children the best possible start in life. In doig so, however, we do not want to over-burden or over regulate the sector. We are continuing to invest in both the EYPS and the New Leaders in Early YEars programmes, though we are not requiring a member of staff in each full daycare setting to have obtained EYPS.

 

Turning to Gezabel's comments about EYPS, the role of the EYP was originally introduced in order to raise the quality of provision in the private, voluntary and independent sector. It was also intended to raise the number of graduate EYPs in full day care settings in the PVI sector. SInce EYPS came into existence in 2007, over 8,300 candidates have been trained and awarded EYPS and a further 1,800 candidates are currently undertaking training.

 

Of the 8,300 graudates who have EYPS 86% have come via a practitioner pathway. THe Full or Graduate entry pathway has always been a much smaller, but important, element of EYPS. It provides a route in for entrants who may also be career changers. All EYPs on every pathway have to go through the same assessment process to achieve EYPS. We know from evidence and experience that EYPs do make a positive impact and enhance the experience for children and families.

 

There are many examples of succesful and well regarded new entrant practitioners. In particular, they are valued for some of the insight and different perspectives they bring as well as having a good grounding in practice and leadership. They, like all practitioners, will continue to develop and learn throughout their careers. We are working to ensure that the new EYPS programme, launching with a first intake of candidates in January 2012, ensures that the same rigorous standards are applied and maintained.

 

Gezabek also expresses concerns about the New Leaders programme particularly the entry criteria which means she is unable to apply to join the programme as she already works in the sector. Let me be clear that New Leaders is not unique in this approach. INdeed Teacher First, which New Leaders is based upon, also recruits new candidates from outside of schools. The primary aim of New Leaders is to attract high level graduates into the early years environment from different backgrounds, bringing a variety of skills, expertise and experience as well as an alternative point of view. We make no excuses for this. Candidates undertake an extensive programme of placements and employment over two years and study for a Masters in Early Childhood. New Leaders is, however, a pilot programme of two cohorts across three years. We will of course evaluate the programme before making decisions about any future roll-out and the potential shape of the programme.

Finally, Gezabel mentions the introduction of changes to the EYFS in September 2012. Let me explain that, following a review by Dame Clare Tickell, we consutlted widely between July and eptember this year on a revised EYFS framework. We will shortly be launching a further one month consultation on the learning and development elements of the EYFS, along with a Government response to the consultation. We expect to publish a final EYFS document in Spring, so that the new EYFS can be implemented from September 2012.

 

As Gezabel implies, the timeline is tight, but we will continue to ensure that we share information with the sector. Support and/or training in the period leading up to implementation of the EYFS will be widely disseminated to the sector in good time.

 

Please pass on my thanks to Gezabel for taking th time to write about these issues and I hope she finds this reply helpful."

 

 

I don't know that it actually answers anything but hey ho what did I really expect!

Edited December 21, 2011 by Gezabel

[Pimms o'clock?]

Just to add to the insult of the New Leaders MA, did you know that they get PAID a bursary of about £14,000 per year for the first two years I believe and are only expected to find paid employment during the third. Having met some of them who tell me that they "will never have to cahnge a child's nappy" or seem likely to return to their home country once they have gained the free qualification this makes me spit blood.

 

I have run-ins with the programme director for New Leaders at Canterbury Christ Church University nearly everytime we are in the same room about this as it doesn't sit well with me as my MA has to be paid for.

[catma]

Teather's response is really the same govt waffle and flim flam. IF the PV sector can afford to employ all these graduate leaders it would be happening already for graduates.

Cx