Helen

We started our anti-racism journey about 18 months/2 years ago- where we, as a group of colleagues, decided to read relevant materials, listen to podcasts, watch videos etc, that would provoke discussions between us, at our monthly online Diversity & Representation meetings. Identified in the early stages as a safe space, where we can each voice our opinions without fear of criticism, in order to learn from each other, and 'practice', if you like, using accepted terminology. To say we have each learned a great deal would be an understatement; and we all feel that this is a journey we'll be on for life. We have come to understand and appreciate the phrase: Not being racist is not enough. We have to be antiracist. https://www.penguin.co.uk/books/440300/how-to-be-an-antiracist-by-kendi-ibram-x/9781529111828

Flexibility is key, I think. being able to offer staff the hours that they need means they will be more likely to stay in the setting rather than moving elsewhere. Of course, this can be a logistical nightmare, but one participant in the breakout room I attended at the FSF conference said they were able to employ a much loved staff member just to cover lunchtimes, so staff could get their breaks. That suited both the setting's organisational needs and the staff member herself.

Interestingly, two or three participants of the breakout room I attended at the FSF conference were really delighted that they had had successful Ofsted inspections. Whilst this is obviously a great achievement and a huge relief, it was suggested that success isn't always reflected in an inspection outcome. Perhaps we're out of the habit of being able to reflect on our practice and provision and celebrate what we do well. We're part of a sector that historically hasn't felt comfortable 'blowing our own trumpets' but maybe we should do just that, and learn to identify and express what's working well for our children, families and staff.

Thanks for the link, Mundia. Just completed it. I had a problem with a couple of the questions: Do you agree with the proposal to reduce the requirement for ‘at least half of all other staff’ to be level 2 staff per ratios'? Dumbing down the sector helps nobody. At a time when we are encouraging respect for a sector that is crucial in helping children to learn and develop, we are simultaneously saying that the staff who do this, don't need to be highly qualified, nor well paid. We need to raise the status of working with our youngest children by demanding staff are well-qualified and well-paid as a result. The two must go together. I know there is a recruitment crisis but trying to solve it by reducing the requirements for certain qualifications isn't the answer. The other one was: The EYFS currently states that ‘When assessing whether an individual child is at the expected level of development, practitioners should draw on their knowledge of the child and their own expert professional judgement and should not be required to prove this through collection of physical evidence’ (2.2).DfE intends to change language from “should not be required to prove this through collection of physical evidence […]” "to are not required […]” in both versions of the framework.The aim of this change is to strengthen the Department’s position that we do not require the collection of physical evidence for assessment purposes or for partnership working with parents and carers, and to emphasise this time would be better spent focussing on quality interactions with children. Do you agree with the proposed language change around the collection of physical evidence? I really don't! Telling staff that they should not make any written records at all, nor share anything written with parents, is contradictory to the best early years practice in the world; that in New Zealand and in Italy's Reggio Emilia. No member of staff can keep everything in their heads about all their children. The best practitioners make a low number of observations, sometimes with photos or videos, to share with parents and colleagues- to discuss their progress and make plans to take their learning further. I see no reason to say explicitly that this isn't required. The worst settings will drop observations as a result of being told this, thereby leading to poorer practice and relationships with parents. Keeping records of children's learning should be a decision for each setting. I know things got really out of hand in previous years, with unmanageable demands for evidence-collecting, but the best settings didn't do this; they collected the appropriate amount of information they needed to plan for each child's learning and to share his/her development with parents and carers. Many strong early years leaders were able to see the benefits without taking staff away from interacting with the children. That is still the case, I believe. Children with SEND, or who are suspected of having SEND, need detailed records for LA purposes and to seek further help and support from multi-agency professionals. Video evidence is crucial to demonstrate the abilities and difficulties of a child with significant learning needs. Telling settings they are not required to do this, helps nobody. Finally, the best settings use observations of children in supporting staff with their professional development- to determine whether the child is developing well, or in need of challenge or support (as in Te Whaariki, Reggio, etc). Telling settings that they should not keep records anymore will make this task impossible. Given we are trying to upskill the workforce, standards will inevitable fall.

I can never keep poinsettias from Christmas to New Year- maybe I'm chucking them away too soon?!

Now I've gone from joyous to terrified. 😬

It has to be my bamboo growing! Last week, the new shoots were about 10 cms high and this week they are about 150! It's totally magic. 😃

Really agree with the emphasis changing from regulatory to advisory- rather like the LA advisory teams that used to exist but have now largely disappeared. One of the difficulties, in my view, is that an inspector can write about 30 pages of notes whilst they're carrying out the inspection but nobody (apart from Ofsted) ever get to see these. I talk from experience when I inspected during the Tribal contract years. In these notes, I'd include all the wonderful things I saw- what made that setting unique and how much learning the children were engaging with. I'd quote verbatim from staff and children and really paint as accurate a picture as I could, of my day in the setting. I'd also detail any problems and areas for improvement, as evidence for the final judgements, actions and recommendations, etc. The problem comes after this- the inspector then has to use those notes to create a very short, dry inspection report- one that could be about virtually any other setting. All the nuance has gone and the inspector can only select from a limited number of phrases- if you've read lots of reports, you'll know what I mean! If only those notes could be made into a lengthier, accurate picture of the setting, ending with a few actions/recommendations. No one-word judgements. Of course, there would still need to be an inadequate category for significant safeguarding concerns, where frequent subsequent inspections should be arranged until the setting reaches a safe standard.

It really helped me to reflect on the considerable opportunities we have to influence young and growing minds and that our learning in these areas never stops. A great chapter.

What a wonderful resource this is! I've just watched a couple of the videos in the 'Interactive Reading' section. I particularly like the way in which both educators introduce new vocabulary within the discussions of the story, eg 'unique', 'gills', 'hollow' etc. Such a difficult skill to learn when you're new to early years practice but what a joy to watch when it's done well. 😃.

The article states it'll be from September. I'm sure everyone will be watching closely 😬

Reading the article in April's Nursery World from Claire Coutinho MP, she states that from this September, the average hourly rate for 2 year olds will rise to £8. and to £5.50 for 3 and 4 year olds. How will this affect you? Will it be sufficient to keep vulnerable settings open and even, perhaps to raise the hourly rate for your staff?

Welcome to the FSF, Plin 😀. It's lovely to have you here!

Having spoken to Early Years Equality co-founder Claire Kenyon for our recent podcast, I wanted to let everyone here know, if you don't know already, about a demonstration march they are organising. I'll certainly be going to help raise awareness of the exceptional practice and provision that goes largely unrecognised, in thousands of early years settings. My hope is that we can stop using the word 'childcare' to diminish this important work in supporting young children's learning and development. Are you coming to the demo? 😃 Information about Early Years Equality demonstration can be found here.

That's a disaster, sunnyday! We have more, I think. PM me your address and we'll put it in the post 😃 Cait- that's a good point about the birthday announcement threads. We should reinstate those as our numbers grow again.

Just wanted to let people know about this excellent publication (Edited by Julian Grenier and Caroline Vollans) and how much we, the FSF/Tapestry education team, are enjoying it. We meet every week to discuss all things early years and primary and at every other meeting we choose a chapter to read and discuss. It's been such a great experience- keeping us all up to date with the latest thinking and helping us to express our own views to each other. If I were still running a setting, I'd be using this in staff meetings. Thoroughly recommend it. I think some of my colleagues are going to come in and say something about the chapters they chose, but the one I was particularly interested in was Jan Dubiel's 'Understanding Assessment and Curriculum'. I like the way the author outlined how in the past, practitioners have often been told to gather and record evidence for the purpose of justification, and it 'became an unwelcome and time-consuming additional dimension to the educator's role'. I'm sure we'd all agree with that! But Jan describes how important the appropriate documenting of children's can be and refers to Reggio Emilia and Margaret Carr's Learning Stories. How wonderful it would be if we consistently moved closer to those ways of recording and, more importantly, understanding, each child's unique journey. As he says, 'To celebrate and understand the nature and trajectory of a child's progress.' As an added bonus, these methods also help to develop the professional skills of educators, as they share and discuss children's learning with their colleagues and the children's families.

Yup- Neil explains it all so simply. Well, clearly not simply enough for some politicians. I don't know where he gets his energy from- he's been saying this for decades.

This is a good summary from Frontier Economics Hugely telling that elsewhere, the government are congratulating everyone on the proposed increase in capacity for childcare, but absolutely no mention, as far as I can see, about early education.

Main headline: The new rules mean from April 2024, parents of two year olds will get 15 hours free care. From September 2024 children from nine months will get 15 hours free childcare and from September 2025 all under 5s will get 30 hours free childcare. Of course, until we see the figures for the increased hourly rate of funding, it's impossible to see if this will help with salaries and sustainability. I'm uncomfortable with the increased ratio for 2 years olds- that's not going to make staff want to stay in the job.

Well, I'm sure I'm not the only one waiting to hear the details. Relieved that the government realises the sector crisis, but concerned that their proposal won't help with staff recruitment and retention, or raise the status of working in the early years. Fingers crossed.

Such a difficult situation- after all the good things that were put in place- graduate fund, EYPS, Foundation Degrees, all excellent at attracting and keeping high quality staff. But the stress of the work and generally poor pay has ultimately led to us losing many, many wonderful early years teachers and practitioners.

I'm hearing from parents that Ofsted inspectors ask them how the settings inform them about their child's learning and development and whether they believe they receive sufficient information to continue their learning at home. They also often ask if parents are able to share information about their child's home activities, with nursery staff and what the setting does with that information.

It is obviously good that the government is identifying high quality early years provision is essential to support children with SEND, but it needs sensible funding. Until that happens, children, families and early years staff all struggle to access and provide what we all know children need. Increasing nursery funding by a few pennies here and there just isn't going to cut it.

Hi lovely to see you here, Mundia and Sunnyday! Very happy times in the early days of the forum- and I can now admit, after 20 years, that it was indeed me who had 5 different names and was talking to myself for the best part of a month! 😂 I think Mundia might have already known that.... I love your expression Sunnyday, 'You can take the girl out of early years...' I totally agree. Can't imagine not being interested in what's going on and how we educate and care for our youngest children. There's always something to learn and get excited about.

You're welcome! Are you, like many others, finding it hard to recruit qualified practitioners?