Equal status and pay for Early Years Professionals

[Ratatat]

I have read Catherine Gaunt's pertinent article (NW, online: 29^th Jan 2013, ‘More Great Childcare’: Unions worry that EYPs will be sidelined) concerning the effects of changes to Early Years Teacher Training and agree whole-heartedly with the remarks made by Claire Dent.

 

I was relieved, this week, to have completed my final setting visit assessment. However, I am now devastated by the government’s plans to supersede Early Years Professionals (EYPs) with Early Years Teachers (EYTs).

 

I am certainly not alone in thinking that employers (particularly schools and foundation units) will prefer to employ EYTs above EYPs because the new training will incorporate appropriate use of relevant Teaching Standards. Indeed, I am employed at a LA Nursery School and have been advised that they are unlikely to ever employ an EYP even if they are awarded similar EYT status because of their distinct lack of access to ‘Teacher Training’. However, they will welcome the new cohort of Early Years Teachers because they will have undergone specific teacher training to meet Teaching Standards for the age group.

 

I think it is critical that the government quickly agrees that EYPs are provided with free, fast-track training to ensure that they too are qualified in the essential skills that ensure that we are truly given equal status in both respect and financial reward following intensive degree studies and the EYP assessment process.

 

Has it all been for nothing? Am I just over-reacting? I fear not!

 

I would be interested to hear other perspectives.

Unions worry that EYPs will be sidelined.docx

[eyfs1966]

I share your concern, I think we are likely to be overlooked in the longer run. In my opinion, the fair thing to do would be to automatically award us the new EYT, and put us all on a level footing, not deem us "equivalent".

[Guest]

Not really sure what it means for us existing EYP's. Does it mean even more training to convert to EYT's or starting all over again? Feeling really downhearted after all the effort I have put in over the years. I'm no spring chicken (!) and don't want to do endless courses and training whilst every government moves the goalpost.Surely they are not just going to say that my EYP is now an EYT?

[Ratatat]

I don't think that it is enough to automatically award existing EYPs the new status of EYT because any discerning employer would want job candidates to clarify exactly how they achieved the EYT status.

 

As soon as we declare that we studied to EYP and did not do any form of Teacher Training that assimilated the Teaching Standards we will shifted to the boottom of the job-applicant pile with no hope of short-listing.

 

I believe that existing EYPs must be fast-tracked onto free-of-charge, 'assessment only' training routes to achieve the equivalent Teaching Standards that will be provided to EYTs.

 

I too am no spring chicken (I'll be 50 this year) and I really don't relish the idea of more training but I can see no other way to avoid the past 4 1/2 years becoming a total waste of time and effort.

[Madmum]

The link on the forum topic posted this evening -http://eyfs.info/forums/topic/36053-info-for-candidates-have-you-read-this/unread/ would seem to say that existing EYPS and current candidates will automatically be equivalent to EYTs and no further training will be necessary/ offered.

 

I am wondering what that will happen in schools where QTS is currently required for nursery and reception.

[Ratatat]

The predicament is: How do we get Head Teachers to be prepared to employ EYTs whose training has not assimilated Teaching Standards. Put simply - They won't. They will continue to employ Primary QTSs until the new cohort of EYTs are qualified and then they will employ them.

 

The problems will arise at the point of interview when EYPs will have to declare how they achieved their EYT status and the Head Teacher will see that it is not the preferable route.

[Ratatat]

Anyone out there who knows how to organise a campaign to get these problems addressed?

[Madmum]

Anyone out there who knows how to organise a campaign to get these problems addressed?

No but if you work it out, I'm with you!

I think there has to be a way, without cost any many hours more of work and evidence , to make sure all existing EYPS can be 100% on a level with EYT IF they want to be. I also think there needs to be clarification of where EYPS/EYT will fit with maintained settings, if at all.

[Stargrower]

When EYPS was introduced, weren't the EYP standards taken from the Teaching Standards, then adapted for working with babies and young children? I thought that's how the 39 standards were created. We were told the status was at the same level as QTS, but not equivalent to it. I don't really understand why EYPS hasn't been promoted and celebrated as it should have been and why so many people, even in early years are not aware of it. If we are able to 'switch' to EYT status, maybe we will be taken a bit more seriously. I feel really depressed about it.

Also, what happened to every day care setting needing an EYP by 2015? Has that gone now too?

[Ratatat]

I don't believe that Maintained Schools will take EYPs seriously even if we are enabled to switch to EYT status. How can they, when we (EYPs) have never been 'trained in the art of teaching key subjects'!

 

QTS students receive critical instruction in literacy, numeracy, science. These are key skills that maintained schools want for their Foundation Staff. EYPs don't get any of that. Following accreditation NQTs continue to access continuing skill development training. There is no such on-going training available to EYPs and it seems that we won't be afforded any kind of catch-up to achieve that.

 

How many EYPs are there currently and how many are currently engaged in EYP training? I would like to bet that there are a reasonable proportion who had hoped to access employment in the Maintained Sector as Early Years Teachers and hoped to receive equivalent pay! This cannot happen without radical change to the way our training is delivered.

 

I can also see how the way schools are funded encourages Head Teachers to employ QTS because they already have skills that enable them to be used more flexibly throughout the entire primary school population (5-11 years). Therefore, Early Years Teachers are of less use when budgets are tight.

[Ratatat]

I have discovered this remark from ASPECT, The EYP Union on Facebook:

 

 

 

 

 

Aspect EYPs I think part of the problem with today's proposals is that they side-step the issue of pay and conditions for EYPs, and for the new Early Years Teacher qualification. As neither have QTS, they are then not covered by the Teachers' Pay Scale.

 

Well I guess that tells us - There is still no intention to pay EYPs or ultimately EYTs a fair wage for the important job they do. - Exactly how little do they value us?

[Ratatat]

I have responded to the DfE's recent proposals online by completing a response document available at:

http://www.education.gov.uk/schools/careers/payandpensions/a00220966/early-educ-childcare-staff-deploy

 

I am afraid that I don't know how to organise a campaign to address the issues that concern me but I will keep on looking and I am interested if anyone knows what we should do.

[Ratatat]

I have just received a response to my email to the DfE regarding the 'More Great Childcare’ document.

 

It reads as follows:

 

Dear Mrs Dervey ,

Thank you for your email dated 04 February 2013 about Early Years Teachers.

The Government wants to move decisively away from the idea that teaching young children is somehow less important or inferior to teaching school age children. As part of this we will build on the achievements of the Early Years Professional Status (EYPS) programme by introducing Early Years Teachers to lead further improvements in quality. There are now over 11,000 Early Years Professionals across the country. Evidence from the Graduate Leader Fund final report in 2011 and the three-year Longitudinal Study of Early Years Professional Status (September 2012) shows that these graduate leaders are having a positive impact on the quality of early education and care for pre-school children.

Early Years Teachers will be specialists in early childhood development trained to work with babies and young children from birth to five. The training routes and the new Teachers’ Standards (Early Years) will build on the strengths of the EYPS programme. Those with EYPS are graduates already trained specifically to work with babies and children from birth to five years. Existing Early Years Professionals will in future be seen as the equivalent of Early Years Teachers. Early Years Teacher Status will be seen as the equivalent to Qualified Teacher Status (QTS). This change will give one title of ‘teacher’ across the early years and schools sectors which will increase status and public recognition.

The Government takes the view that the pay and conditions for staff working in early education and childcare settings are best determined at local level. However, the Government would expect employers to want to pay Early Years Teachers in accord with their status. Free Schools and Academies (including alternative provision Academies) can employ teaching staff without the requirement for them to have Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) and can set their own pay scales. In maintained schools, Qualified Teacher Status (QTS) is currently a requirement for teachers. However, head teachers in maintained schools have the discretion to employ people who don’t have QTS as instructors. From September 2013 head teachers will have even more flexibility and freedom on pay.

 

Your correspondence has been allocated reference number 2013/0008141. If you need to respond to us, please visit www.education.gov.uk/contactus, and quote your reference number.

Yours sincerely,

Early Years Team

Early Years and Educational Psychology Division

www.education.gov.uk

 

[Ratatat]

Following the Nursery World article dated 10th April 2013, entitled 'Teach First extended to the early years' (http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1177918/teach-first-extended-early-years), I excitedly accessed the Teach First website (http://graduates.teachfirst.org.uk/recruitment/requirements/teaching-subject-requirements.html) to make an application. Upon struggling to fin the required link, I emailed Teach First to get some help.

 

Imagine my shock at being advised that my qualifications are not sufficient to be considered to train to achieve QTS in Early Years. - I have GCE O levels in English, Maths, Science and a variety of other subjects, thirteen years experience in the Early Years sector, a Foundation Degree in Early Childhood Policy & Practice (July 2011), a First Class Honours Degree in Early Childhood Education & Care (July 2012) and have achieved Early Years Professional Status (March 2013).

 

Teach First advised that I should hold a 2:1 degree in one of the following core subjects:

• Art & Design
• Design & Technology
• English
• Geography
• History
• Computer Science & ICT
• Maths
• MFL (French or Spanish)
• Music
• Physical Education
• Religious Education
• Science (Biology, Chemistry, Physics
• Psychology

or possibly two A levels at grade B or above in those subjects.

 

I am thoroughly speechless that my specific and protracted studies relating specifically to Early Childhood Education & Care have such minimal relevance to accessing Teacher Training with QTS for the Early Years!

 

I am also stunned that the accepted degrees have so little relation to the EY sector!

 

What does everyone think!

 

 

[Scarlettangel]

That's terrible!!!!

 

Too speechless right now to formulate a suitable answer

[Ratatat]

Do you think they realise that the EYFS is the National Curriculum for children up to 5 years old and it is much more important to have teaching and caring skills relating to the specific needs of the age group than a degree in Music (no offense meant to anyone who does have such a worthwhile degree - it is just of less importance than other skills in this age group!)

<_<

[Ratatat]

I have emailed loads of preschool magazines etc.

EYE magazine want to quote me in an article! I told them to go ahead.

[flowlow]

That is awful and very wrong!!!!! I can honestly say I have no idea what else to say at this point, I am not sure that silence doesn't say it all!!!

[Ratatat]

I am going to try to set up a petition to address this matter. I know that it can be done through http://www.change.org/en-GB but I want to be clear how to address the issues first.

 

Any ideas/help/support are welcome :1b

[Guest lillybeth]

Why don't you apply through school direct, I think this replaced the graduate teacher training I'm not sure if they do early years. My daughter starts her teaching course in September through school direct, she is based in a school for a year and is being paid. It is quite a daunting application process, she has a lot of experience working with children and for the last year has been working as a TA in a special school, her original degree was in dance, but she has no formal childcare qualification. It is worth a try.

[catma]

I understand Teach first is a very specific route for accessing teacher training and the degree list would reflect the school curriculum across EYFS and primary. In some respects whilst you may specialise in early years, in essence you train as a primary teacher so this might be why?

Edited June 21, 2013 by catma

[Ratatat]

@ lilybeth

Yes, I have recently applied and been interviewed to access a salaried School Direct Position. Unfortunately, the interviewees were advised (at interview) that the local schools do not presently do salaried teacher training for the Early Years because they do not have the training in place at the local University.

 

Although, I felt my interview went very well, I was advised that I was not offered a place because I do not have sufficient Primary School experience to be offered training in KS1 or KS2! - I understand that as the only secure wage earner in my home, I will need to leave my job in a local authority Nursery School to get a lower paid position in a primary school (probably a temporary contract) on the off-chance that this may enable me to be successful when I apply next year.

@catma

I had been hopeful that following the Nursery World article relating to Teach First's trial run of training for Early Years Teachers with QTS that this new training would address some of the issues relating to irrelevance in the sector!

 

John Colenutt, acting chief executive officer of Teach First, said, ‘This is an exciting development for Teach First and will allow us to respond to the needs of our partner schools which are keen for us to provide graduates to teach their younger pupils.

‘We are tailoring the training for those who will be working with three- to-seven-year-olds to ensure that they are fully equipped to manage the very different demands of children in the early years and support them.’ (Nursery World, 10/04/13, http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1177918/teach-first-extended-early-years )

[Ratatat]

I had been hopeful that following the Nursery World article relating to Teach First's trial run of training for Early Years Teachers with QTS that this new training would address some of the issues relating to irrelevance in the sector!

 

John Colenutt, acting chief executive officer of Teach First, said, ‘This is an exciting development for Teach First and will allow us to respond to the needs of our partner schools which are keen for us to provide graduates to teach their younger pupils.

‘We are tailoring the training for those who will be working with three- to-seven-year-olds to ensure that they are fully equipped to manage the very different demands of children in the early years and support them.’ (Nursery World, 10/04/13, http://www.nurserywo...ded-early-years )

[Guest lillybeth]

How frustrating my daughter had just come back from Australia and got accepted for a TA job in a special school, but you are so right the salary is very low and such a gamble in case you did not get to do the training. I do hope you are able to access training in the future x

[catma]

The key point is teaching 3 to 7 surely? This means key stage 1 as well.

 

Could you apply for a pgce?

Edited June 21, 2013 by catma

[Ratatat]

Unfortunately, I am the sole earner in my family. I am unable to afford further training fees or to reduce my hours in my setting (and therefore lose pay) so that I might go on work placements.

 

Another issue is that I am now 50 years old and risking employers thinking I am too old to be an NQT!

 

I do not have a problem with working or training in KS1 by doing a PGCE or any other training that will enable me to get QTS, there is just the financial implication that I am unable to manage.

 

And it would have been nice to think that my studies to date are worth something in the grand scheme of things!

Edited June 21, 2013 by Ratatat

[Ratatat]

Thank you for your support and I hope so too!

 

How frustrating my daughter had just come back from Australia and got accepted for a TA job in a special school, but you are so right the salary is very low and such a gamble in case you did not get to do the training. I do hope you are able to access training in the future x

[Ratatat]

I may be irrational at present but can anyone explain to me why or how being able to speak and write fluent German or to discuss the causes of the French Revolution can be so much more important and relevant than having practical experience and five years of study involving the intricacies of the developing child and their unique educational and emotional needs to a potential applicant wishing to access Teacher Training for children aged 3 to 7 years?

 

I remain flabbergasted and fail to understand how such an outrageous state of affairs can be permitted to continue simply because those in power have no idea how young children think and learn.

 

Has the past five years of study really been nothing more than an expensive waste of time, effort and study fees? Have my new levels of skill been of so little benefit to the children I have worked with? Am I really worth no more than £12600pa?

Edited June 21, 2013 by Ratatat

[Ratatat]

I have set up a petition to address this issue.

Please sign if you are interested and feel free to share the link with any body you wish!

 

At present, some training for ‘Early Years Teachers with QTS’ (e.g. Teach First) do not regard Early Childhood based degrees or Early Years Professional Status as relevant or equivalent core studies to apply for this training. These providers prefer applicants to have academic core study degrees such as Maths, French or History over specific studies relating to Child Development, etc. - and will not consider applications from Early Years Professionals or candidates with Early Years degrees.
EYPs were promised that their ‘status’ would be equal though different to that of QTS. The DIFFERENCE is clearly that they will continue not to be valued as equal in financial terms.
If qualified EYPs are not to be paid an equivalent rate to those with QTS then those that wish should be enabled to be fast-tracked to access free additional training to achieve QTS.
It is unacceptable and damaging to the Early Years landscape that Early Childhood Specialists are discriminated in this way and the situation should be resolved with immediate effect.

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/department-for-education-stop-disc...

[Ratatat]

I have set up a petition to address this issue.

Please sign if you are interested and feel free to share the link with any body you wish!

 

At present, some training for ‘Early Years Teachers with QTS’ (e.g. Teach First) do not regard Early Childhood based degrees or Early Years Professional Status as relevant or equivalent core studies to apply for this training. These providers prefer applicants to have academic core study degrees such as Maths, French or History over specific studies relating to Child Development, etc. - and will not consider applications from Early Years Professionals or candidates with Early Years degrees.
EYPs were promised that their ‘status’ would be equal though different to that of QTS. The DIFFERENCE is clearly that they will continue not to be valued as equal in financial terms.
If qualified EYPs are not to be paid an equivalent rate to those with QTS then those that wish should be enabled to be fast-tracked to access free additional training to achieve QTS.
It is unacceptable and damaging to the Early Years landscape that Early Childhood Specialists are discriminated in this way and the situation should be resolved with immediate effect.

 

http://www.change.org/en-GB/petitions/department-for-education-stop-disc...