Jump to content
Home
Forum
Join Us
Articles
About Us
Tapestry

Eyfs 2012 Training


 Share

Recommended Posts

I've had 2 hour training. The general consensus is that it's not too different, once we get to grips with the 7 areas and 'prime' factor. A lot of it is simply what we already do as 'good practice' and the 24-36m check is not a lot more than we do as standard. Health Visitors are being trained too, to catch up on the children who don't attend settings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Had a full day just after Easter with Gail Du Bock (?) Stayed behind to discuss what we already do in terms of assessment/paperwork and am blooming looking forward to September now!!!! :D

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well our LA has required us to cross reference each observation and 'highlight' each dec matters statement with 3. Pieces of evidence since 2008 and we do termly'reports' whicj are the same as the progress check to tie in with key meetings. It works and is very sound but by the time you've got 10 key children is also very time consuming! After showing her what we do now and what we've been working on she was gob smacked by the ammount of paperwork and strongly recomended a reduction to the newer format, as she was National Strategies lead for the South I think this will be taken on board , I can't wait!ve my role as key person but I always have the most because I don't get paid and the way we work really eats intomy 'free time'!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Well our LA has required us to cross reference each observation and 'highlight' each dec matters statement with 3. Pieces of evidence since 2008

 

So even if you just knew something from continuous observation, like child separates from their carer everyday, do you still have to write it down 3 times? i ask because I'm interested in how the myth of 3 pieces of evidence gained such a stronghold on our practice. I'm really trying to emphasise with our practitioners that evidence is what you've heard and what you've seen, and does not lose validity if it's unwritten.

cx

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

 

 

So even if you just knew something from continuous observation, like child separates from their carer everyday, do you still have to write it down 3 times? i ask because I'm interested in how the myth of 3 pieces of evidence gained such a stronghold on our practice. I'm really trying to emphasise with our practitioners that evidence is what you've heard and what you've seen, and does not lose validity if it's unwritten.

cx

Hurrah! Thought I was the only one thinking this way! Cannot begin to think Moo20 how you have time to even turn around with all that lot to do!!! How is it these LA directives are accepted by practitioners....it almost undermines any training and qualifications we have. Can we not be trusted to make a judgement!! We've not been dragged of the street to 'babysit' !! I see our job as ensuring we build a firm foundation not a case for the prosecution...ha ha! And while Im on me soapbox....how come your not paid Moo for doing What you do? ??

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hurrah! Thought I was the only one thinking this way!

 

It's also the case that these kinds of systems are put in by settings despite the LAs guidance, or national guidance for that matter! It's very well defined in all the EYFSP documentation! But for some reason there is an urge to "systematise" assessment and forget that evidence is everything recorded and unrecorded.

 

Cx

Edited by catma
Link to comment
Share on other sites

And in a school that would be 117 x 3 x 30 = 10,530 pieces of written evidence!!!

 

I did that calculation once and decided there and then that there was no way I'd be collecting it no matter what anyone said! Not that anyone in my LA has ever told me to collect any specified amount of evidence other than doing three focused observations per child throughout the year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

So even if you just knew something from continuous observation, like child separates from their carer everyday, do you still have to write it down 3 times? i ask because I'm interested in how the myth of 3 pieces of evidence gained such a stronghold on our practice. I'm really trying to emphasise with our practitioners that evidence is what you've heard and what you've seen, and does not lose validity if it's unwritten.

cx

 

I have argued this point time and again, for the last two years we've only been 'aloud' to pas 'professional judgement' at the point of transition! There are quite alot of statements that simply can't be evidenced! When I said this the other day it was completely denied by the LA, but I've since spoken to my lot and those from other settings and we ALL remember this being said in training over the last few years.......repeatedly! Our funding is dependant on using LA systems so there's been little we can do. Hence my delight at the training :P is pretty much what I wanted to do.

 

And as for time................it's a constant struggle as it is and although I love doing my key files, if I'm managing to keep on top of them everything else goes pear shaped, and if I'm not then it's a nightmare every hopliday!

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I feel heartened! We don't cross reference any of our evidence in our learning journeys. When we input our summative assessments on to Target Tracker we use a mixture of learning journeys, observations and mostly teacher knowledge to underpin our judgement. I have resisted cross referencing for 2 reasons...one because it encourages us to look at the children in a bitty way rather than holistily and two....it takes so much time for no real gain. i thought I was the only one that didn't!!! and so have always felt a bit vulnerable to criticsm. Now am feeling a bit bolder!

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

When I worked in a setting where 3 pieces of evidence were needed, we were able to just write down 'professional judgement' and date it for things like 'separates from carer'.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

When we've had any students they have always thought that they needed 3 pieces of evidence to be able to say a child 'can do it' and I've always had to stress that it's their NVQ evidence that needs 3 levels of evidence, nothing to do with EYFS and development matters statements.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do your LA'a check all your LJ's then to check you are cross ref & that you have 3 pieces of evidence.

I have to admit to occasionally wishing ours would give us a little more guidance on things such as these, however

whenever I read of something like this I breathe a huge sigh of relief that they dont!!

I know they provide the funding (well they act as the middle man I suppose between us and Central Government)

but surely unless they are paying your wages that doesn't give them the right to dictate what your

staff do? Goodness what a lot of time must be wasted cross referencing and chasing up 3 bits of evidence,

I think I would be inclined to ask my LA who was going to pay us for doing all this work

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

For a long time on Kent courses I have understood it to be 3 pieces of observational evidence which would enable you to say that a child can in all probability do something, afterall, they may be able to do something one day and not the next! It needs to be observed over time. Some things are pretty obvious that they can do, others not so. I allow my staff a few PK's (practitioner's knowledge), but whilst I don't monitor it down to the last counted observation I do expect them to be looking for 3.

 

My SIP who came in only last Thursday was saying the same thing.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Do your LA'a check all your LJ's then to check you are cross ref & that you have 3 pieces of evidence.

I have to admit to occasionally wishing ours would give us a little more guidance on things such as these, however

whenever I read of something like this I breathe a huge sigh of relief that they dont!!

I know they provide the funding (well they act as the middle man I suppose between us and Central Government)

but surely unless they are paying your wages that doesn't give them the right to dictate what your

staff do? Goodness what a lot of time must be wasted cross referencing and chasing up 3 bits of evidence,

I think I would be inclined to ask my LA who was going to pay us for doing all this work

 

yes,they do come in and moderate! I do think it's a protective way of working and I would feel more confident in new practitioners working this way :ph34r: for some !!! But as experienced professionals we should be able to pass proffesional judgements throughout the year!

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

:o After reading what you've all been saying, I am quite loking forward to the changes, and expecting to be able to plan some extra activities for myself with the free time i will be having!

 

What a wonderful world of surprises we live in!!?! :P

Edited by angela41
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi everyone.

I've had quiet a bit of training on the revised document (I say revised because it is really the same thing just a few changes as the current government would not even dream of maintaining something that labour introduced)! :huh: However our training so far has been mostly informal i.e our local EYFS advisor coming into school and discussing it and i think that's the way it will stay as our LEA have informed us there is very little training at all.

 

From what I understand so far the rather big change is there not being a profile document, like we currently have. The guidance now ensures both Nursery and Reception are working towards early learning goals and at the end of Reception children are assessed as emerging, expected and exceeding. The early learning goals are SO much more broader (basically 9 points in one goal) and children need to achieve everything in that paragraph to be able to be 'expected.'

The only u-turn I feel is that the goals have a lot more 'year one' sort of things, i.e learning about money and time and the guidance suggests that the last term should be spent getting children ready for year one, I'm sure in 2008 we were told year one needed to get ready for receiving reception :mellow:

 

O and there will be no paper copy of the guidance so its either print it your self or use it on line - annoying.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hi thumper rabbit....the 2hours was basically spent just going through the new framework doc and pointing out main changes, as already said the 2 year check is basically what we send out at the end of first term now, with the intention being that the health visitors have a copy eventually for red books, a lot of emphasises was put on the ,learning styles of children (effective learning) and including them on planning (just one more thing to cram on my A4sheet - gonna have to provide magnifying glasses for staff I think :/ ) more staff supervision/ monitoring looks to be big with ofsted, the 17 ElG's are a bit of a con, just crammed 3/4 statements into 1 sentence so it only looks like 1per area or classed the statement as 40-60 rather than an elg as previous. Was hoping to see what they,d come up with for assessing but have parts1&2 to go on now, I quite like how the new DM is laid out, you can see it at www.foundationyears.org.uk (pla seems best place to order - framework, DM & 2year check guidance in one book)

We did briefly get shown sheets for each stage/area for using to assess but all looks to be on A3sheets , and a lot of them !

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)