EYFS to be reviewed

[Simona]

Out today amongst Ofsted News
No surprises here as we were expecting changes both on EYFS and Development Matters....look at page 7

Ofsted | Subsidiary guidance supporting the inspection of maintained schools and academies (http://www.ofsted.gov.uk/resources/subsidiary-guidance-supporting-inspection-of-maintained-schools-and-academies)

[lisbet]

Thanks for taking the time to find that. Like you say, we thought it was coming, but :ohdear:

The good people who worked on DM must be gutted. And I dread to think what Truss/ Gove/ Wilshaw will come up with instead. :mad:

[merry]

I had no idea this was coming, no sooner do we get used to something than they go and change it again!

[EmmaReed84]

Haven't read it yet, but downloaded it for later... Or tomorrow when my brain can handle it... t'is the end of the week my head is mush!

So are they actually talking about changing things like they did last year? As in... everything we have worked our butts off for, is going to be all for nothing?

[bindy]

My inspector told me a few months ago there were going to big changers but would not say any more, I think she realized she had said too much!!

[lisbet]

Emma, it's only a couple of sentences on page 7; just saying that they are going to review the EYFS and DM.

Given the line the government has been taking so far, I fear they will change things to prescribe more formal teaching of toddlers. :(

I also wonder whether childminders will still have equal status with practitioners in nurseries and pre-schools; since the government seems to want 2yr olds in schools and childminders providing wrap-around/ unsocial hours care. :mad:

[sarah707]

They have to change some bits - safeguarding and first aid authorised by LAs for example...

What they are doing with the rest is anyone's guess :(

[Simona]

If we refer back to Truss' additional comments and N World interviews since MGC and MAC she may have given us a few clues as to what may be 'revised' in the EYFS: agencies, floor space, LJs and much more which would be great if 'clarified' and left no one in doubt as to what is required at inspections.

Whatever the outcome of this review...it is not a reform... it looks like it needs to be in place by Sept 2013...unless I read it wrong?
Not long before we get our answers

[hectors house]

If they change the Development Matters please, please, please Sarah can you do another condensed sheet version. :)

[bindy]

If we refer back to Truss' additional comments and N World interviews since MGC and MAC she may have given us a few clues as to what may be 'revised' in the EYFS: agencies, floor space, LJs and much more which would be great if 'clarified' and left no one in doubt as to what is required at inspections.

Whatever the outcome of this review...it is not a reform... it looks like it needs to be in place by Sept 2013...unless I read it wrong?
Not long before we get our answers

Simona I think you are right, like I said my inspector said there would be changes, she did mention September. She told me,( because we were disagreeing with my grade, good) that it did not matter any way because in September it looks like there will be changes.???

[rickysmiths]

I think EYFS may disappear altogether within 5 years.

As to changes I think we will see the same schools have had to cope with for the last 25 years. Constant changes that require a lot of work and no one knowing what they are supposed to be doing and the children suffering as a result. Its what happened in schools.

[Simona]

I was looking at the EYFS 2012 as I am updating all details for Sept 13...I would hazard a guess these will be changed according to recent announcements and some are already no longer valid

1.3 no need for Learning and Development in wraparound care
3.10 DBS now our remit not Ofsted
3.23 LA initial training and First Aid approved by them
3.56 floor space
3.63 Risk assessment
3.67 Information and records...may mention no need for LJs
3.75 certificate of registration (this will change for those in an agency later on)

There are a few more I spotted but lets wait for another framework
For DM there may be clarification on 'free flow' play which Truss said it is not required and maybe a mention 0f 50-50 structured activities and self chosen by the children and the EYFS Profile will probably get a mention...

[sweets]

I think EYFS may disappear altogether within 5 years.

As to changes I think we will see the same schools have had to cope with for the last 25 years. Constant changes that require a lot of work and no one knowing what they are supposed to be doing and the children suffering as a result. Its what happened in schools.

I agree and I will be glad when its gone! Ive said from day one that it wont last. I think a lot of the statements in development matters are in the completely wrong age bracket. It has underestimated the 'average' child

[sing-low]

I agree and I will be glad when its gone! Ive said from day one that it wont last. I think a lot of the statements in development matters are in the completely wrong age bracket. It has underestimated the 'average' child

That's interesting. Do others agree?

I've been attempting to do a 2 year check for my DD and was wondering if I was hopelessly biased about how advanced she was!

[rickysmiths]

I was looking at the EYFS 2012 as I am updating all details for Sept 13...I would hazard a guess these will be changed according to recent announcements and some are already no longer valid

1.3 no need for Learning and Development in wraparound care There is no need to do this now so nothing to change.
3.10 DBS now our remit not Ofsted
3.23 LA initial training and First Aid approved by them
3.56 floor space I can't see this changing
3.63 Risk assessment We no longer have to have written RAs for the EY register so not sure how this could change anymore
3.67 Information and records...may mention no need for LJs We don't have to do LJs now we just have to know where are children are in terms of development and be able to demonstrate it. A LJ is a good way but not compulsory.
3.75 certificate of registration (this will change for those in an agency later on)

There are a few more I spotted but lets wait for another framework
For DM there may be clarification on 'free flow' play which Truss said it is not required and maybe a mention 0f 50-50 structured activities and self chosen by the children and the EYFS Profile will probably get a mention...

............

[Simona]

Not until the EYFS is revised!

[sarah707]

You say those things are not required Ricky - and you are right in principle...

BUT in practice if cms don't have written RAs and a written file of children's progress they are getting very low and sometimes inadequate Ofsted grades.

A cm was graded inadequate for not having a RA for a baby who started crawling THAT morning

A cm was graded inadequate for sending her LJs home and not having them available for the inspector during her unannounced inspection.

Cms are still being asked by inspectors to show evidence of learning and development for children in wrap around care and getting lower grades if they are unable to do this.

I think what Simona is saying is that until these things are clearly stated for both cms AND Ofsted inspectors, confusion will still continue. This is why we are trying to engage Ofsted in useful conversation!

[hectors house]

I agree and I will be glad when its gone! Ive said from day one that it wont last. I think a lot of the statements in development matters are in the completely wrong age bracket. It has underestimated the 'average' child

I completely agree - I look after my 6 month old grandson just one day a week and although I don't charge anything for him, I am still doing a LJ for him the same as I do for other mindees - yesterday I went through my condensed version of Development Matters (that Sarah produced) and under Moving & Handling, Managing feelings and behaviour, Health & Care, listening & attention, - Birth to 11 months I can highlight every aspect already and have started to highlight some headings in 8-20 months. I know I am a very proud Nanna but I do try not to be biased.

[Simona]

I completely agree - I look after my 6 month old grandson just one day a week and although I don't charge anything for him, I am still doing a LJ for him the same as I do for other mindees - yesterday I went through my condensed version of Development Matters (that Sarah produced) and under Moving & Handling, Managing feelings and behaviour, Health & Care, listening & attention, - Birth to 11 months I can highlight every aspect already and have started to highlight some headings in 8-20 months. I know I am a very proud Nanna but I do try not to be biased.

I don't think it is a question of bias...your support, scaffolding, encouragement and planning is motivating him and stretching his learning beyond the 'expected' level...something Ofsted should note and grade appropriately!...but that's another argument altogether!!

[lisbet]

I agree that the DM age bands/ obs examples are pretty 'woolly' and I think that's what they put the reminder about children developing in their own ways and at their own rates across the bottom of each page. I've always thought of them as designed to give an alien some idea of what children might do. :laughing:

What I like about DM especially are the Positive Relationships and Enabling Environment columns, because I do think they could give someone new to working with children, like a student nursery practitioner, some useful pointers for how to support children's emotional and learning needs.

I like the Characteristics of Effective Learning too. (I think they used a lot of the good points of High/Scope when they developed DM!)

I just don't want them to change DM to suit Truss' vision of early childhood! :panic:

[Simona]

I agree that the DM age bands/ obs examples are pretty 'woolly' and I think that's what they put the reminder about children developing in their own ways and at their own rates across the bottom of each page. I've always thought of them as designed to give an alien some idea of what children might do. :laughing:

What I like about DM especially are the Positive Relationships and Enabling Environment columns, because I do think they could give someone new to working with children, like a student nursery practitioner, some useful pointers for how to support children's emotional and learning needs.

I like the Characteristics of Effective Learning too. (I think they used a lot of the good points of High/Scope when they developed DM!)

I just don't want them to change DM to suit Truss' vision of early childhood! :panic:

I agree with you that DM reflect High Scope
Very much so but they also reflect many other EY models: Reggio Emilia is there as is Montessori and Te Whariki without mentioning many theorists like Tina Bruce (12 features of play), Athey (schemas), Vygotsky (ZPD) Bruner (scaffolding), Bronfenbrenner (ecology theory) and Maslow (hierarchy of needs)...to name a few

DM was written by experts not the govt...but the govt is busy trying to move the goal posts in terms of child development to suit their ideology: get children ready for school and the sooner the better without considering that without achieving 'emotional intelligence' no child will ever be ready for school at 3...let alone 2!

In my view all children, unless they have additional needs that need to be addressed, progress at their own pace, however, the stimulation, opportunities and scaffolding of their learning we offer them allow them to move from the 'expected' to the 'exceeding' bracket

That is a fantastic reflection of good/o's providers whose practice is to have aspirations for children...very much Wilshaw's push for improvement so that only good is good enough!!
I do agree with him on that

Sadly our present inspection framework does not reflect enough the excellent progress children make but gets stuck in petty opinions about useless bits of paper and subjective judgements...none to the children's benefit

[loocyloo]

I agree with you that DM reflect High Scope


DM was written by experts not the govt...but the govt is busy trying to move the goal posts in terms of child development to suit their ideology: get children ready for school and the sooner the better without considering that without achieving 'emotional intelligence' no child will ever be ready for school at 3...let alone 2!






And that is and has been the major stumbling block the whole time, the govt are NOT experts in children and will not listen to those who are. :(

[rickysmiths]

You say those things are not required Ricky - and you are right in principle...

BUT in practice if cms don't have written RAs and a written file of children's progress they are getting very low and sometimes inadequate Ofsted grades.

A cm was graded inadequate for not having a RA for a baby who started crawling THAT morning

A cm was graded inadequate for sending her LJs home and not having them available for the inspector during her unannounced inspection.

Cms are still being asked by inspectors to show evidence of learning and development for children in wrap around care and getting lower grades if they are unable to do this.

I think what Simona is saying is that until these things are clearly stated for both cms AND Ofsted inspectors, confusion will still continue. This is why we are trying to engage Ofsted in useful conversation!


Sarah I have always been Graded Good and the last twice Good with outstandings. My last two inspectors have been horrible and I had the body of my last report changed.

I have never done RAs for individual children.

I read about the one who had sent home the LJ and I would have challenged that to the hilt however why did she have an un announced inspection in the first place? That is not done without reason it.. If the inspector was wrong she should have had the book thrown at her for that it was a completely unacceptable outcome. On my last inspection I had one LJ and the other was at home with a parent who despite being asked numerous times had not brought it back. I still got Good with outstandings.

Cms may be asked for evidence of L and D for wrap around care but they can not be down graded for it if they don't as it is not required.

I think many of these examples may not be the only reason a cm may have been down graded. If it is the only reason then cms must be prepared and question the inspector at the time and complain immediately if something is put in the report. I had nearly a stand up argument with my last inspector because she had a bee in her bonnet about Daily Diaries, something I was not doing with the parents in my care at the time because they had said they didn't want them and they are not a requirement. She had a good go at me but I made it clear that I knew that she could not comment in my report because DD are not a must.

Yea I agree that Ofsted need to be more consistent but I think cms have got to get tough and stand up for themselves instead of crumbling at the sight of Ofsted at the end of the day they are not God they are an ordinary person doing a job like we are. Instead of standing in aw and being scared if we encouraged all childminders to treat inspections as a normal part of their business, to keep as up to date as they can and not to panic them by telling them they need to do tons of paper work that they do not need.

Earlier this year I helped a cm prepare for her first grade inspection. She called me for help and when I went to see her I honestly thought she would only get an inadequate, she had let her First Aid lapse for a start, not her fault she had booked on a course in plenty of time and then it was cancelled and another one booked for her but after her Cert had run out. Any how she did do a lot of work over the weekend but not over the top and she called Ofsted about her First Aid. She had scant written RA, scant planning and LJ for the child in her care. She was graded Good by a locally known inspector who is very very tough.

[lisbet]

I agree with you that DM reflect High Scope
Very much so but they also reflect many other EY models: Reggio Emilia is there as is Montessori and Te Whariki without mentioning many theorists like Tina Bruce (12 features of play), Athey (schemas), Vygotsky (ZPD) Bruner (scaffolding), Bronfenbrenner (ecology theory) and Maslow (hierarchy of needs)...to name a few

DM was written by experts not the govt...but the govt is busy trying to move the goal posts in terms of child development to suit their ideology: get children ready for school and the sooner the better without considering that without achieving 'emotional intelligence' no child will ever be ready for school at 3...let alone 2!

In my view all children, unless they have additional needs that need to be addressed, progress at their own pace, however, the stimulation, opportunities and scaffolding of their learning we offer them allow them to move from the 'expected' to the 'exceeding' bracket

That is a fantastic reflection of good/o's providers whose practice is to have aspirations for children...very much Wilshaw's push for improvement so that only good is good enough!!
I do agree with him on that

Sadly our present inspection framework does not reflect enough the excellent progress children make but gets stuck in petty opinions about useless bits of paper and subjective judgements...none to the children's benefit

Completely agree with you Simona :thumbsup: DM 'cherry picks' in the good sense of the word, lol! And all the elements it draws on are the result of people researching and working to understand how to support children to flourish:- All at risk from a childcare 'minister' who just wants to make a name for herself and get promoted. :mad::ohdear: *climbs off soapbox again...*:blush:

[sing-low]

Can someone explain what is meant by 'high scope'? Not a term I've come across before.

[Simona]

Can someone explain what is meant by 'high scope'? Not a term I've come across before.


It is an EY method of teaching...see if this is of interest to you
What Is High/Scope? (http://perpetualpreschool.com/highscope/highscope_info.htm)

[sing-low]

Thanks, Simona! As they say 'you learn something new every day' ;-)