mundia

List maker too. Like crossing things off but for everything crossed off, something gets added. Mr mundia looks at me bewildered, he's never been a list maker.

I'm saddened to read this, I too have such fond memories of Pander's warmth, humour and all round being a good egg. I hope her family may get to read these posts, and know what an importnat role she palyed in this community. A lovely idea to donate to a favourite charity if anyone knows if she had one. In lieu of not knowing, she was always a great supporter of our Children in Need fund raising fun evenings of the early days, so that might be quite fitting perhaps?

I did O'levels and the year I did them I was eating Terrys Chocolate lemons! Yes, lemons. I remember the corona man as well. Also taking a bowl out to the ice cream man to fill up at Sunday tea time. I do remember 'old money' but only just. We used to play cards by candlelight during evening power cuts. Cream cakes were Saturday treats. I was still at primary school when ads like " nuts whole hazelnuts, Cadbury make them etc " and we used to sing those ads at playtime. We only had a black and white telly, which was rented and only had 2 channels.

I agree with everything you've said, Helen and its starting to feel like a further step towards a more unregulated sector, bit by bit. Regarding documentation, its already become much more difficult when settings apply for funding for children with SEND, and they submit applications with no supporting documents. This is sadly, already happening. My concern as well is the including of apprentices etc being included in ratio at the level immediately below. Yes it adds the condition if the provider considers them capable. But it theoretically means that a setting could have only the manager qualified and the 30/40 % of the rest are apprentices who can be counted at level 2. This actually means they are unqualified. I can't see this easing the recruitment crisis, or improving overall quality. ( all assuming I've read this correctly!). What are others thinking? Please do respond to the consultation, whatever you think.

The consultation on proposed changes to the statutory framework is now open until July 26th. There's a really handy summary on the consultation page. Many refer to changes for childminders version of the EYFS but some affect group settings as well such as reducing the 50% requirement for staff to be level 2 qualified, and experience routes to be included in ratios. I always say if you have a view, have a voice. What are thoughts once you've had a look? EYFS consultation (Please delete if the topic has already been started)

I'll add on. We used to have a code word in case of difficulty. Either by call or text depending, thankfully I never needed it. Find out about dogs/ pets. I'm allergic to dogs and cats so I didn't visit homes with those pets. Also with so many deaths from dog attacks, its important to know. Consider if its customery to be offered food and drink and therefore consider food allergies. Asking if anyone has Covid or is ill. Any mobility difficulties? Eg is the home upstairs. Personal alarm Find out who is likely to be at home when you visit. Hope that helps.

Reckon I'd be an 'ancient' tree, but Ill graciously accept mature!

Has anyone read yet if the increase in 2 year old hours will take away from the current hours for more disadvantaged children? I've only seen mention of working parents. I read the increase in funding for 2 year olds but not a lot for 3-4 year olds. I do wonder where all these thousands of new practitioners will come from not to mention the premises that will be needed. Hmm as others have said, devil in the detail.

Wow is it really 20 years? I remember well joining this forum quite early on when the corridors were fairly empty and a few people(you know who you are!) were talking to themselves. It grew quite quickly into the vibrant place it became. Remember our Children in need activities? A quiz or a story, or cramming as many as possible in the chat room? We even took part in a Guiness world record attempt. We shared our highs and lows, the good days and the bad, I remember so many people generously giving their time and energy to support each other. I remember the reminders to all to " check your bits n bobs" for anything unusual, plus gardening and other tips n tricks. So to re introduce myself. I'm Mundia, I've been here for, well, ages. I've been in early years for, errr. about 35 years save for a few I worked overseas. Nursery teacher, reception teacher, children centre teacher. Fs lead, then advisory teacher, I'm still working and involved in the Covid recovery programme and NPQLEY, so never a dull moment. I do miss working with children though, so occasionally need a fix! Big happy birthday to the FSF, many times my lifeline over the years. I don't do Facebook, twitter. Etc so I'd love to see the forum grow again. I'm ready and willing, even if a bit decrepit, slow and ever so slightly barking.

As Finleysmaid said, a risk assessment should be in place considering the outdoor space, where it is, what's in it, and how it can be seen.eg if there is a large window or door. Plus how easy it is to summon help. The statutory framework just says setting must ensure safety of all children and that they must be adequately supervised, and be within sight or hearing. Its then up to providers to decide what that looks like. If the teacher is concerned that they are not doing this, they should raise it with their head. Its not uncommon in small school especially to have a teacher on their own with a small reception class.

I'm pleased this takes a centre stage. Lot to digest isn't there? Think I'll have more to say when I've had chance to really get into it.

I like the addition on self regulation and executive function.

I'm also quite pleased there is more shape, space and measure (SSM) in there, this was something really bothering me! Will investigate further in due course.

I've been really enjoying having a teeny bit more time to read articles, so thanks to the FSF team for having some great ones to dip into. Some of this article really resonated with me too. Like you, Helen, it's refreshing for it to not just be 'Ok' but to actively celebrate the not knowing, and I really enjoyed reading this. Years ago when I did my masters we kept a journal style for part of it. It terrified be that it would be the assessment for that part if the course. (No essay!). At the time, it was completely new to me (20+years ago), and I looked at my empty book for quite a long time, not knowing what I 'should' write. I'm a mathematician, I'm used to things being done in a particular way. I still have my journal and from time to time read it back to see where I've come from in that time, and also the things that I was grappling with then and still am! I like Kathy's response that she wanted her book to be 'pretty'. Isn't that what many of us wanted our children's learning diaries to be like, neat ordered and pretty, whereas when you leave them to children to design, they are, as Kathy also points out, an extension of themselves. How many of us have removed children's ownership of their journals by wanting them to be right? Anyway I digress. Years after my first, often troubled trip into a scrapbook approach, it's now a permanent fixture. I always have a book with me, it's full of all sorts of stuff, questions, readings, observations, musings. When I reflect back, I'm glad I had those anxious and highly uncomfortable moments, that I was able to say hmm I don't know about this or why that is, I can't answer that, etc etc, I definitely think it was worth it. Thankyou Kathy and Rebecca, for sharing.

I'm not sure of the benefit of 7 days given that the virus can take up to two weeks to appear, hence usual isolating being 14 days. I'm also not sure if you should be deciding which places people have travelled to are safe or not safe, as you do not know what families have been doing, nor what the rate is in the exact place they have been. So if they went somewhere where there were lots of people in close proximity but a generally lower rate, would they be less at risk than someone who had been strictly distancing , not mixing with many people but in a place where the rate is higher? It would be impossible to say which is more or less at risk. Also, numbers are often reported for whole countries rather than districts so it's difficult to tell if they have been to somewhere less safe than another place. This has been the case with the current situation with Spain because many people have been staying on the islands where numbers are much lower. I would be concerned if you set what appears to be arbitrary decisions (ie not down to any govt restrictions like with Spain) about who can attend after a holiday might result in some parents feeling they are being treated unfairly especially if they are returning to work, and feel they have been very strict about what they did whilst away. It may also result in them deciding not to tell you where they are going. If you do decide to go ahead with this, you would really need to ensure parents understand this well before they go, so that they can make arrangements.