another news report showing us in a bad light

[sharonmanc]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-17496323

I dont know what is going on lately, I seem to be reading all these negative reports etc about childminders, often they are misleading. This one is in all the national papers and on the news this morning. Makes me think where do they get the samples they study. But it really ticks me off as the average joe will read this and poo poo what we do.

Also it makes me think this report is a pre cursor to changes. arghhhhh:angry:

[desiderata]

Yea I know where your coming from. This is another case of where we need a proffessional body to stand up for us !! Now where can we find one of those eh?:censored:

[BuggsieMoo]

Its okay - ive just let rip about it being a biased opinion that does not appear to be based on many facts, nor does it take into account the EYFS and what it is as well as the fact it does not mention once where a childminder has been consulted or Ofsted!
x

[sharonmanc]

I have not been childminding long, but it irks me how childminders get such a bad press.

Also I would like to know what standard of English and Maths they think is necessary. As I dont think GCSE maths is needed to teach the EYFS.

When i was teaching I had to have GCSE Maths regardless of my degree's, and I have never used it once as I dont teach maths, all I needed was to work out percentages, and ratios and be able to look at statistics, etc, but not ****** pythagoras's theory.

I knwo my degree's and teaching will be a selling point to some parents, but I have seen some very qualified people who do not know how to relate to children, where as I have seen some people without a qualification at all, who are amazing at what they do and are able to nurture the children in their care and bring them on leaps and bounds.

I have probably made spelling mistakes here, I have always had an issue with spelling, but when I am doing work for children, I check and double check everything. arghhhh. I am just so annoyed, and sick of the bad press lately, not to mention discussions in some groups about what we do.

[JulieA]

Ah but these same people are those who probably pay an au pair (probably with no qualifications, and unable to speak English (generalisation, I know!)) to look after their children.

[Penny1959]

I have responded to the news item (on link provided) and for my sins I have said they can contact me - lets see if they do

This is my personal response


I am a Registered Childminder, my current Ofsted grade is Outstanding (and under the pilot for the revised EYFS I also was judged to be Outstanding).

I have also worked for Worcestershire LA in the childminding Team (part time 2003 - 2007 and full time 2007 - 2010) and for the National Childminding Association (part time 2003 -2007). During 2002 - 2010, I was a tutor and assessor delivering childminder initial training, and NVQ's in Early Education and Care, and assessing NVQ and quality assurance schemes.

With this varied background - I feel I can comment from a personal and a professional point of view.

I would agree that initial training is often lacking in the area of child development - but it needs to be recognised that a lot of people becoming registered childminder have other prior experiences such as being a parent themselves - and so lack of a paper qualification does not mean that childminders do not have knowledge of child development.
I think Professor Nutbrowns comments actually support the need for childminders to remain regulated by Ofsted (rather than the current discussion to de regulate childminders) because in order to meet the requirements of the Early Years Foundation Stage, childminders need to demonstrate their knowledge of child development - and their own literacy and numeracy skills - and the Ofsted grading system does already highlight those childminders that need help in all these areas - because they will not receive the higher grades (not because care is poor but because they do not understand or full fill the record keeping aspects of EYFS - including tracking the children's progress) and ,maybe Ofsted 'actions' should be that those that are identified as needing further professional development in these areas are required to undertake further training.

Within nurseries that have staff teams Ofsted may not pick up on individual’s difficulties with complying with the EYFS as each individual will not have to deal with all aspects of delivering the EYFS - as is the case of Registered Childminders
If childminders were to be deregulated (away from Ofsted's remit) the outcomes for children in the care of childminders as well as safeguarding them would be unknown. Surely all children need to be in regulated provision and the concerns identified by Professor Nutbrown will be continued to be monitored and support given to those practitioners that need it.


Penny :)
I hope it does some good - because I a now in DH's 'Bad books' as he has gone shopping without me - due to fact that I got wrapped up in my response - and I am still in my PJ's!

[boxtree7]

I think my husband summed it up ........ its all a load of bullxxxx - (excuse his language) that was without my humble opinion. :censored:

[Mouse]

As I have commented on another thread about this, I agree with the Nutbrown lreport regarding nursery staff. I don't think it particularly applies to childminders, who don't generally go into the job straight from school.

But you cannot get away from the fact that many nurseries are staffed by young girls who are lower academic achievers. From when I was at school right up until now childcare courses are seen as being for low achievers who aren't capable of taking more traditionally academic subjects. That is what the Nutbrown report is highlighting. Bright students are not encouraged to go into childcare - the ones who aren't very bright are. It's not about them being able to teach young children, it's about them having good basic skills which they are going to pass on to young children.
As a parent I wouldn't be so concerned about whether or not my young child being looked after by a highly qualified person, but I would want to know that the person who has at least a basic grasp of English and wasnt merely going into childcare because they weren't bright enough to do anything else.

The way it's reported might not be very good, but the Nutbrown report is spot on. For too long the notion has been of childcare being the only option for low achievers. This has lead to the low opinion many people have of childcare workers in general, including childminders. If childcare courses had their profile raised and were attractive to higher achievers, it would help improve the image people have of us.

[carol cameron]

Well said Mouse. Totally agree with everything you said :clapping:

[Bitsy Beans]

Is it really fair to say low achieving GCSE's means you're not very bright? What about those people who aren't naturally academic and struggle with the style of secondary education. This job isn't just about academic achievement but kinesthetic teachers and my gut feeling is some traditional "low achievers" would fall into the latter.
As the "academic" one in my family and having gone through school and 6th form I have never understood the suggestion that academic is always better. The EYFS pushes the idea that children learn in different ways and yet the further up the school system the less this idea is embraced. I just feel those that are more suited to vocation should be held in as much regard as those with a load of GCSE's.

Hope that makes sense :o

[MaryMary]

As I have commented on another thread about this, I agree with the Nutbrown lreport regarding nursery staff. I don't think it particularly applies to childminders, who don't generally go into the job straight from school.

But you cannot get away from the fact that many nurseries are staffed by young girls who are lower academic achievers. From when I was at school right up until now childcare courses are seen as being for low achievers who aren't capable of taking more traditionally academic subjects. That is what the Nutbrown report is highlighting. Bright students are not encouraged to go into childcare - the ones who aren't very bright are. It's not about them being able to teach young children, it's about them having good basic skills which they are going to pass on to young children.
As a parent I wouldn't be so concerned about whether or not my young child being looked after by a highly qualified person, but I would want to know that the person who has at least a basic grasp of English and wasnt merely going into childcare because they weren't bright enough to do anything else.

The way it's reported might not be very good, but the Nutbrown report is spot on. For too long the notion has been of childcare being the only option for low achievers. This has lead to the low opinion many people have of childcare workers in general, including childminders. If childcare courses had their profile raised and were attractive to higher achievers, it would help improve the image people have of us.

Mouse, you are spot on re the perception of childcare courses, and childcare in general.
I worked in banking for 20 years (another group who get a regular bashing who don't deserve it (except for the top minority, of course)), and when I say that I am now a childminder, people look at me as if to say 'that's a bit of a comedown!' :angry: Infact, I find this job much more challenging (not just from some of the children's/parent's behaviour! :rolleyes:), but academically. I think I am a serial learner, and don't seem to be able to let go of studying whatever job I do!

I recently asked another CM if she had seen any LJ's from the playgroup we pick up from. She said yes she had, and she was appalled by the content/spelling/grammar! :panic: That is down to the individuals that are assigned as key workers, as the one I saw was fine. But it highlights that it is hit and miss wherever you send your children. When the nursery staff (or even, dare I say, some CM's) can't string a sentence together, what hope do the children have :(

[sharonmanc]

The Nutbrown report in itself i snot what I am annoyed about. It is the dumbing down of the report in the press to sensationalise and generalise, the average person who reads the newspapers etc, will not go onot to find out what is written in the report, and think this is the case for every childminder.

I have taught health and social care and child development to 15 and 16 year olds, and there is the perception in schools that those less able should be doing this subject, infact they get dropped into a lesson they dont like, but there are those who are not as academic who love the subject, and do very well. On the other hand, those academically bright are steered away, and parents have to fight for the child to do the subjects.

I too find that the perception of childminders is not good, when i tell people that I am a childminder, they almost sound like they feel sorry for me, i just think it comes down to people not understanding what is involved in the job, I am sure some people think that I sit children in front of the TV all day

[Pipsqueak]

ooooh FEEEEELLLLL that squeeeeeeeeeeeeeeeze

[Spangles]

I really felt for you all today when I heard the news reports about this.

It makes me so mad.

Now I am training as a breastfeeding counsellor I get really angry about all the negative breastfeeding media stories too and how everything is twisted to sensationalise the story and put people off.

As someone who's been a childminder I get sick of people trying to put childminders down and create a negative picture of them.

[Jiorjiina]

Er, isn't that more of an indictment of the how poor the British education system is, though?

What do you all think it will take to create some positive reports about childminding, which also let the general public know what it really involves?

(Since the chief inspector of Ofsted doesn't even seem to understand, I think this is a more than uphill struggle!)