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.

Well the response to the consultation on the reforms to the EYFS has been out a couple of weeks now, along with the revised framework and profile handbook for early adopters. (2020) Here if you haven't seen it yet. I have so many thoughts, sadly most are not especially complementary, but it would be good to hear a range of views here. I like the addition of OFSTED definition of teaching. I still have concerns that shape space and measure will no longer be an ELG, despite it being 'beefed up' a bit in the educational programme. We know from old that frequently, what isn't assessed, isn't taught, or is marginalised as a 'nice extra'. I am especially concerned about the making into a 'may', the reporting of the characteristics of effective learning, both to parents and to year one teachers. They barely get a mention in the new EYFSP handbook. I don't recall this being asked about in the consultation. I wonder if there are early adopters out there, amongst the membership here. How are you feeling about this, at a time when we don't really know what September will look like yet. What about early adopters with a nursery class? As those schools will have to adopt the new EYFS in the nursery too. Perhaps it's a sign of the current climate that I'm feeling a bit 'ugh' about the new framework, and in fact, maybe I'm missing lots of positives. Perhaps you can enlighten me, so that I can embrace the new framework with gusto. What are others thinking, if indeed this has even crept into your thinking at the moment, because, understandably, there are probably a zillion and one other things on your mind just now.