Foundation Stage Teachers In Preschool Setting

[Guest]

Hi, I am keen to employ foundation stage teachers to teach my 3-5 years old groups. It would appear that there are very few nurseries that employ QT's and only public preparatory schools offer this and charge a premium for it. I'm not looking to charge a premium but I do want my 3-5's to be taught by QT's rather than nursery nurses who are given guidance by a QT on occasion throughout the year. Is there any reason QT's aren't used in nurseries - does it take me into another set of rules or something if I have QT's rather than nursery nurses?

Also, I understand the child:adult ratio when QT's are employe is 1:20 - I plan to have a QT and a classroom assistant per 20 children - is this correct or have I got my wires crossed.

 

I would appreciate any information or advice you can give me with regards to this as I seem to have conflicting information.

 

Thank you x

[Rea]

Hi muffin, from what I would guess, QT's arent employed by most nurseries because of money. You would have to pay a teacher more than most NN's have to suffer. In my opinion, good as a QT might be, if you're going to work to the ratio's of 1:20 (1:10 with TA) the children will lose out anyway. Why do you prefer a teacher rather than an NN's?

[Marion]

As a QT I would say an experienced NN would be better than an NQT (cheaper end of the pay scale) and as Rea says an experienced QT would be very expensive. Have you looked at QTs salaries?

 

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/9376/Cor...20to%202008.pdf

Edited July 27, 2006 by Marion

[hali]

I quite agree with the others Muffin, as a sessional pre school there is no way we could afford a QT and as for the ratios thats what worries me in the future of all this

[Guest]

Surely when you consider the payscale and the ratio's of adults to children with NN's - the age of the children would benefit better from the added adult support of NN's, as opposed to two staff? And the costs would be similar when you have paid extra staff as opposed to one QT??

Just a thought.

Edited July 27, 2006 by Guest

[Guest]

I think I have felt that offering QT's would make the nursery more unique and therefore more appealing to parents looking to place their children.

 

I have done some figures on a 1:8 ratio 2 adults per 15 children (groups of 15 from 3-5 is ok?) looking at employing QT + classroom assistant or two NN's it does work out better using the NN's even when I reduce the weekly fees. Can anyone give me a realistic annual full time salary for a good NN?

Thanks x

[Rea]

It might not necessarily make the setting more appealing. I was happy for my children leave any kind of formal teaching until they went to reception and even then I felt they should have been playing more and staring into space more. It was a long time ago before the FS but not all parents want that. I know many who purposley kept their children at playgroup to avoid any formal teaching until it had to happen. You might want to ask around first to see what people want.

[Marion]

QT pay scales

http://www.teachernet.gov.uk/_doc/9376/Cor...20to%202008.pdf

 

 

Nursery Nurse pay scales

 

http://www.aston.ac.uk/staff/hr/infoabout/.../nurssalary.jsp

 

 

If you do decide to go down the QT route be sure that they are qualified for this age group as some teacher training starts at 5years rather than 3.

Edited July 27, 2006 by Marion

[Guest]

Are you in a church hall or your own premises. I can't see a QT putting away furniture and packing up and moving tables, like my staff have to. and I'm registered for 52 children in 2 groups of 26. it would mean that my children get less adult time if their were leass adults around. also do QT's work for just above the minimum wage ? although if they don't put things away I would still have the same wage bill as I would have to employ some one to pack up

[Marion]

Yes teachers will move furniture and move tables etc its part of any early years workers daily job

[Guest]

Absolutely, Marion - but we would be more than happy to let someone else do it if they wanted to!!

[Marion]

Wouldnt everyone but its a matter of everyone mucking in to get things done I have spent past holidays painting my classroom walls to make it look more early years friendly (it was battleship grey when I got there) and regularly help the dinner ladies lift out dining tables and chairs. The last day of term was spent emptying the unit for workmen and the first day back will be spent putting things back. Thank goodness for the disabled lift for getting things up and down stairs.

[Guest]

As a parent of a child rapidly approaching 3 years, I don't think I would be too happy with the thought of a QT 'teaching' her at such a young age. It could be because of the career I chose and firmly believe that playing is the key rather than teaching, if you all know what I mean! I think teaching should be kept until children reach 'school age'. They spend so much of their lives at school that I wouldn't want to put her in a setting that would be like that. Sorry for any offence, but that is just my opinion!

 

I would be more than happy for a NN to care for my child, or any other caring and supportive adult employed within a setting.

[mundia]

good settings with a QT do still do a lot of playing! And yes I have never nor will I ever ask any of my staff to do anything that I dont or wont do my self (she says as she has just put the 4th load of nursery washing in the machine....).

 

I think the biggest issue here is not about the quality of the provision and whether a QT is 'better' or not than a NN. (althouhg do check out the EPPE research on this). There are good and bad across all practitioners and I dont think its a good idea to over generalise, personally. I think the real issue is about the ratio, and whether or not you would prefer 1:8 or 1:10/13 (my LA is 13). The cost I would expect to be similar?

 

Also I am not sure if you would get a QT anyway, I would prefer to work for an LEA where I know I can contribute to the teacher's pension, something I probably wouldnt be able to in a preschool? It also has the potential from a teacher's point of view of wondering about career prospects, especially if you chose to employ a young relatively inexperienced teacher (hence cheaper), it may well be more difficult for them to move onwards and upwards if they want to.

 

I think you need to think carefull about the kind of provision you want to provide and then if you really feel that a QT is what you want, then test it out by advertising. I would aslo agree with Marion that you get someone defintaly trained in early years.

 

Let us know what you decide.

[Sue R]

Marion,

 

The NN payscales you quote are generous!! Ours get the minimum wage until they've built up experience or gained extra responsibilities. But then, we are Private Daycare, issues are different

 

Sue

[Guest]

Hi I have been reading all these replies with interest. I was just wondering if being a QT gives you an extra pair of arms. With 20 or even 26 children with 2 adults, it only needs one child to be upset and one to need help in the toilet (very common occurances) for many children to be left unsupported. I am slightly concerned at the suggestion that children can cope with less adult/child interaction if one of those adults has QT status. Am I missing something? (Also all early years staff now have to complete considerable training requirements)

[Marion]

This has always been an arguement in the difference adult child ratios between nursery and reception (lets face it a 4 year old leaving nursery has the same needs as a 4 year old 6 weeks later on entry to reception) A QT in a nursery class has a ratio of 1 adult to 13 a QT in a reception class has a ratio of 1 adult to 30 children. Wonder what miracle happens in that period!!!Something that hasnt been adressed by the new EYFS draft!!!!

[Guest]

Well at least we should stand firm about the ratios for three year olds. Once it is common practice for the ratio to be 1:13 it will be very hard to alter. The ofsted recommendation is 1:8 but I operate with a 1:6. Let's not undo all the fantastic work being done in early years by not valueing the needs of children and their right to freely access an adult when they need to.

[Marion]

Three year olds in a school nursery would be in a 1-13 ratio even without a QT

[Guest]

We operate a 1:4 ratio for the 3year olds and I have to say it is a selling point for the parents who choose our setting. I guess it comes down to what individual parents/carers want from the provision offered and how their child will benefit the most.

[hali]

we do the same shirel.

[Guest]

I have read with interest the discussion and am concerned with the new qualifications framework that is being introduced to develop the Early Years Professional qualification that eventually all nurseries will have to have the same ratio as maintained nurseries.

 

This would be awful - I work on a minimum 1:6 ratio in my 52 place nursery and all barr two of my staff are qualified to Level 3. Even with that ratio there are times when the staff are stretched such as when a child requires help in the toilet and another staff member is preparing snacktime - that then leaves 2 staff with 20 children and this happens on a regular basis not just occasional times.

 

The Mail on Saturday led their front page yesterday with a scathing report on nurseries and Health and Safety - I feel the Government should look to paying a better payscale for early years workers so that we can employ experienced staff and not youngsters who are prepared to work at just above the minimum wage. We also take a lot of students from local colleges on work placements and there are only a few that we have had over the years that have got what it takes and have not taken the course because they have been directed that way by ill advised careers advisors who think that early years care is an extension of babysitting!

 

We will never encourage more men and quality staff until the Government pay a 'living wage' to all early years workers.

 

I would be interested to hear how many settings think their staff will pursue the Early Years Professional qualification and if they don't think they will why they don't think they will?

 

[Marion]

The Mail on Saturday led their front page yesterday with a scathing report on nurseries and Health and Safety - I feel the Government should look to paying a better payscale for early years workers so that we can employ experienced staff and not youngsters who are prepared to work at just above the minimum wage. We also take a lot of students from local colleges on work placements and there are only a few that we have had over the years that have got what it takes and have not taken the course because they have been directed that way by ill advised careers advisors who think that early years care is an extension of babysitting!

 

 

 

The report in the Mail yesterday bore very little if any resemblance to the actual OFSTED report which said 97% of nurseries and pre schools were doing a good job you can find the discusion here

http://www.foundation-stage.info/forums/in...ic=6520&hl=

 

I also think there are a lot of good caring people out there doing the job for very little pay because they are committed to their chosen careers.

From a personal point of view I believe lots of young people are 'pushed' onto child courses when they have no interest in working with children. My own daughter gets weekly phone calls from CONNEXTIONS asking if she wants to do a child care course when she has made it quite clear that this not what she wants, lots of the students we get say 'I really want to do ****** but couldnt get on the course so they suggested I do this instead!!!'

[hali]

i agree marion , almost all our work experience students we have in the setting do not want to work in childcare but are put with us anyway!!!!

[Guest]

We are the same just had two students who both said they didn't really want to work with children but were persuaded to try it - neither of them intend to pursue the career as they didn't realise it was such hard work!! (they're words not mine)

[Rea]

I kind of got the impression when I visited the childcare class at my childrens school, that the class was for the less academically able students, rather than for those who wanted to pursue childcare as a career.

[Guest]

Maybe it's about time that school careers advisors are informed that to have a career in childcare students will require a degree, and refer them to the CWDC website.

 

Peggy

[mundia]

Marion I was interested in your comment that 3 yeras in maintained settings would still have a 13:1 ratio even without a QT. Im just wodnering if I got the wrong end of the stick as I thought that in the absence of a QT, the 8:1 ratio would apply and I thought this was good because at the moment I am never covered for PPA or illness and its so unfair on my wonderfull colleagues.

 

I was hoping that the new curriculum would address the ratio issue.

Oh silly me!

[Guest]

You could be right Rea, not wanting to appear mean in anyway but the two students I mentioned were lesser able than you would expect - I realise you have to take into account the circumstances they are in but it was quite noticeable that both of them had learning difficulties,(not necessarily special needs just not always able to comprehend the written work that they had been given and asking us for help, which of course we gave willingly, yet it seemed there was no passion, no real commitment which we all know you need, maybe they're just young ??- )

 

it does make you wonder that someone somewhere is suggesting this is the easy route

[Marion]

Marion I was interested in your comment that 3 yeras in maintained settings would still have a 13:1 ratio even without a QT. Im just wodnering if I got the wrong end of the stick as I thought that in the absence of a QT, the 8:1 ratio would apply and I thought this was good because at the moment I am never covered for PPA or illness and its so unfair on my wonderfull colleagues.

 

I was hoping that the new curriculum would address the ratio issue.

Oh silly me!

 

 

I am lucky that in my FSU our head has opted for 2 QTs and 2NNEBs(1with HLTA status the other with FD) mainting the ratio of 1-13 (but there are times when there is no QT present )but I do know other schools where there is no QT with the younger children and a ratio of 1-13. Also lots of heads seem to see FSUs as a way to cut costs with 1QT and the rest of the staff NNEBs while maintaining the 1-13 ratio

 

The government guidance states

 

Q14: What is the ratio of staff to children in a Foundation Stage Unit, and do I have to have qualified teachers?

A14: There is little statutory guidance provided for children in the Foundation Stage, but there are recommendations. Decisions about ratios in maintained provision rests with the Governors of schools, with reference to their respective local education authorities. A higher adult:child ratio is needed for young children than for those of statutory school age. Favourable staffing ratios help children to make the most effective use of resources, they allow children to work in smaller groups or individually with the support and encouragement they need; and they help foster the necessary sense of security in children whose experience of groups larger than their family may well be minimal. Easy access to an interested and responsive adult is an essential means of reinforcing the learning process in young children.

 

 

Maintained nursery school

Children Act guidance, volume 2

2:20 (qualified teacher status + NNEB)

2:26 (where the headteacher does not teach)

 

Nursery class in maintained school

Education Act (1988) regulation 4 states 'for the governing body to determine'.

Children Act guidance, volume 2 states, 2:26 is 'suitable and sufficient in numbers' 2:26 (qualified teacher status + NNEB)

 

Reception classes

Infant class size legislation applies, where the majority of children will reach aged 5 within the school year

1:30 (qualified teacher status)

 

 

 

Where different ratios/recommendations apply to the range of ages within the Foundation Stage Unit, the lower ratio/recommendation should be the guiding measure (i.e. 2:26 rather than 1:30), but the final decisions that Governors make should ensure that the children's individual learning needs are met.

 

 

 

Like you I was hoping that ratios would be addressed how naive!

Edited August 21, 2006 by Marion