Dear Ofsted......I DON'T WANT......

[caz3007]

We bought new boxes last weekend, plastic I will add (don't shoot me) as the fabric ones didn't last very long and for various reasons money is a bit tight. My ds spent time sorting them and chose to print labels as he had seen some on ******. Wonder how long before we give up on them though

[VeggieSausage]

All that inspectors...or the EYFS require is a for a 'print rich' environment...
if you don't want labels on your boxes then there are other resources you can display to make it so: children's names, alphabet and number friezes, books and much more

I won't be doing alphabet and number friezes either......books, yes I will have those

[VeggieSausage]

Oh come on, there's a sensible answer to this. Buy enough windmills and stick them in your lawn in a pattern so as to spell out (in your bestest writing) the words "S0D OFF OFSTED".

This satisfies the twin 'requirements' for windmills and for a 'language-rich' lawn. (And they can go on your expenses.)


Note: to be fair on inspectors, they are in a no-win situation. When they tell CMs vague things like "need a rich/stimulating environment" we complain they've not been specific. When they give examples such as the jolly old windmills thing, we accuse Mrs* O of being over-proscriptive.


* or Mr/Ms/Miss - other gender choices are available, let's all keep this nice and diverse.

hahaaa

[bunyip]

Tbf, I did qualify my comment about Ofsted and the Great Windmill Debate.

Simoana is right in that most/all CMs introduce the children to a 'print-rich environment', just so long as inspectors are prepared to accept the holistic view that we take them out and about, etc. Sadly, some inspectors seem to think we should be practically shoving the printed word in their face every moment of every day.

I think this: "got rid of those who could not be bothered to take up the EYFS challenge for a start!" is more than a little harsh. There were (are) a lot of perfectly good CMs offering principally care to families who needed it, appreciated it, and who didn't necessarily want or need the State's "educational" agenda forced upon them and their children. Incredible as it may seem, there are those of us who not only survived childhood but thrived and went on to enter adult life and society before EFYS was ever a tw1nkle* in some so-called "expert's" contracted bonus payment.

Sure, some parents want the L&D programme as part of their lo's daycare. Fine, I have no problem with them exercising that choice. Unfortunately is isn't a choice - cos (as Mrs Milk Snatcher used to love telling us in her beer-kellar-style crazed rantings) there is no alternative. Most CMs will know plenty of other perfectly good parents whose eyes glaze over at the merest mention of L&D, DM, EYFS and all the other trendy abbreviations that may or may not have any relevance to the dear wee thing mewling and puking in the nurse's arms. Many if not most want to know their child is safe and happy and free to experience what little childhood they are still allowed these days. They learn and develop perfectly well.

For all its weasel words, the regime's stated aim is to climb the international league tables of educational standards to compete with the likes of Korea. It sounds all very good and worthy, and who could possibly argue against raising the educational bar but, as ever, the Devil resides well within the detail. This does nothing for the well-being of children, pushed toward the Korean trend of 16 hours' study a day and a colossal youth suicide rate to match. Nor will it create a single job for any of them to go to after school, merely a more competitive job market in which more will fail or burn out at an ever-quicker rate.

The state-sponsored cull of bl00dy good CMs that came with compulsory EYFS had 2 main effects. One was to remove parental choice, whilst making the regime's agenda for children into the only show in town. The other was to provide a massive boost for the burgeoning illegal childcare market, as parents who didn't want EYFS were forced into the arms of unregistered childcarers.

*The proper spelling being a strange and unexpected auto-edit in my initial draft.

[Simona]

Tbf, I did qualify my comment about Ofsted and the Great Windmill Debate.

Simoana is right in that most/all CMs introduce the children to a 'print-rich environment', just so long as inspectors are prepared to accept the holistic view that we take them out and about, etc. Sadly, some inspectors seem to think we should be practically shoving the printed word in their face every moment of every day.

I think this: "got rid of those who could not be bothered to take up the EYFS challenge for a start!" is more than a little harsh. There were (are) a lot of perfectly good CMs offering principally care to families who needed it, appreciated it, and who didn't necessarily want or need the State's "educational" agenda forced upon them and their children. Incredible as it may seem, there are those of us who not only survived childhood but thrived and went on to enter adult life and society before EFYS was ever a tw1nkle* in some so-called "expert's" contracted bonus payment.

Sure, some parents want the L&D programme as part of their lo's daycare. Fine, I have no problem with them exercising that choice. Unfortunately is isn't a choice - cos (as Mrs Milk Snatcher used to love telling us in her beer-kellar-style crazed rantings) there is no alternative. Most CMs will know plenty of other perfectly good parents whose eyes glaze over at the merest mention of L&D, DM, EYFS and all the other trendy abbreviations that may or may not have any relevance to the dear wee thing mewling and puking in the nurse's arms. Many if not most want to know their child is safe and happy and free to experience what little childhood they are still allowed these days. They learn and develop perfectly well.

For all its weasel words, the regime's stated aim is to climb the international league tables of educational standards to compete with the likes of Korea. It sounds all very good and worthy, and who could possibly argue against raising the educational bar but, as ever, the Devil resides well within the detail. This does nothing for the well-being of children, pushed toward the Korean trend of 16 hours' study a day and a colossal youth suicide rate to match. Nor will it create a single job for any of them to go to after school, merely a more competitive job market in which more will fail or burn out at an ever-quicker rate.

The state-sponsored cull of bl00dy good CMs that came with compulsory EYFS had 2 main effects. One was to remove parental choice, whilst making the regime's agenda for children into the only show in town. The other was to provide a massive boost for the burgeoning illegal childcare market, as parents who didn't want EYFS were forced into the arms of unregistered childcarers.

*The proper spelling being a strange and unexpected auto-edit in my initial draft.

Good points Bunyip
My understanding is that EYFS 2008 aimed to keep 'care and education' together not separated...one is linked to the other...yes?
Many cms did good care but got frightened of the dreaded 'paperwork' inflicted on them
It also brought CMs in the sector...or so we thought...and we got a level playing field in recognition...or so we thought

The same will happen with agencies when some cms will join thinking no more inspections and no paperwork...wrong I feel
Agencies will require cms to evidence the education for their Ofsted targets and cms will be randomly inspected...so no escape there.

Those who understand the EYFS will find it easy to discuss with an inspector what they are doing...some inspectors are knowledgeable while others have quickly been trained for the job and make mistakes...lets call them mistakes...even Ofsted have agreed that inconsistencies are due to poor training...see London OBC and the recall of in-house inspections for schools and FE...but not EY...sore point that !

The problem is that children go to school earlier and earlier ...if not 'educated' we get the blame of not preparing them for school or potty training them early enough
Parents may not like the 'education' side of EYFS but they still put their children in school at 3 and now 2...that is certainly one way to get More Affordable Childcare in my view.

It is definitely a no win situation

As for print rich environment...no need to put anything on our walls if each day we present print to children in whatever shape or form?
Friezes do not have to be on a wall...the floor will do
Try to hide car number plates to the children on the way to school or the park...impossible... but it is how we use that opportunity that is important...totally my view.

[bulldog]

I dont have labels, nor do I have posters up on my walls or displays etc.

This is my HOME not a nursery, Parents chose to send their children because they want a home environment!

I do however have lots of books to chose from, and if we are playing with farm/animals I will "display" farm books, tractor books etc etc.
We read together and use pens/paper/aquadraw for mark making.

I use i huge magnetic board with picture magnetics as well as letters which the children generally just cover the whole board with

I did work in a school nursery that labelled EVERYTHING and shadowed toy spaces on shelves. It proved a nightmare!! Labels get messy after a short time, get lost, mixed up etc etc.

Sometimes I do wonder who we are doing all these things for??

[lilac_dragon]

We don't have windmills - but we do have 4 flipping ginormous wind turbines at the bottom of the garden!!

[LauraS]

Dear ofsted, I don't want..

You to keep telling childminders that they are not yet outstanding because of x, or y.

This creates a horrible, rumour driven, tattle tale atmosphere of panic and indignation where childminders 'know' someone who is definitely otherwise outstanding but did not get the grade because of the lack of windmills, or because their mindee didn't cut their own apple on the day, or because they do not display labels on their boxes or posters on their walls, or because or because.

Those little snippets in the reports aren't helpful,quite the opposite. The sensible and more confident amongst us will see those judgements and know that despite our lack of windmills, our gardens are interesting and educational in their own right because we are already doing x and y and z instead. The less confident, the new childminders and the list tickers might well panic. The lazy will buy a few windmills, shove em in the earth and think job done. You really need to consider how better to inspire us to improve.

That is all xx

[LauraS]

We don't have windmills - but we do have 4 flipping ginormous wind turbines at the bottom of the garden!!

Well that's just showing off. Perhaps you could have them painted in bright primary colours too?

[MAWI]

Oh I am so glad someone is on my wave length. I used to have a dedicated playroom at my previous house and had all the posters, labels etc... That goes with the territory.
This time around, I have a new house andI want my home to be my home. I have no labels on boxes( although I may do some just for tidying purposes). I have a notice board in my hallway that I take down all CM relate stuff when not working. No posters in my bathroom.
I do have a garden room and that has posters on the walls and boxes of toys with labels. I refuse to put laminated posters on my fences. I have made a few outdoor chalkboards and will use stones, natural stuff to promote literacy and Maths outdoors.
I promote literacy through other means and my environment is still rich in literacy and Maths for th children. It's just done in a different way. I have told all new parents not to expect my house to look like a nursery and At first I thought this would put some parents off but actually I have realised that it is the person and how you deal with the children they look for, and your experience and qualifiications( in my recent experience). Parents choose me because I offer home from home. I will be telling Ofsted the same too.