To think that early years should be inspected seperately to the rest of the primary school

[ReallyTired]

Ds primary school is offically inadequate after a dire inspection last term (athough reception was singled out as having good teaching). The new head has insisted on more formal structured work in reception and lovely reception teacher resigned over it. We now have an NQT who is like a rabbit caught in the traffic lights and my daughter's classroom has gone from being completely play orginated to being more like a year 1 classroom.

I feel that many head teachers and possibly OFSTED inspectors do not understand the EYFS philosopy or appreciate that small children learn best through play. I feel that teaching year 6 and reception require different expertise.

Different keystages in a school should have seperate inspectors who understand the demands of teaching a particular age group.

YANBU. Though just having inspectors who understood the demand of teaching full stop would do for now.

Good idea. Inspectors should know their field of expertise thoroughly, and have recent, practical experience of the area they inspect.

I would say similar with regard to childminders being inspected and expected to perform as mini nurseries instead of the home based environment that we are.

An inspector who understood the reality of Early Years would be great, that often it's just a dumping ground for uninterested parents of feral toddlers. Staff are then expected to cope with unrealistic ratios and do masses of paperwork in their own time.

"An inspector who understood the reality of Early Years would be great, that often it's just a dumping ground for uninterested parents of feral toddlers."

I think thats a little bit harsh to describe a typical British reception class.

I would like inspectors to have qualifications, practical experience and be an outstanding practioner in the are that they are inspecting. Prehaps a typical primary school (with children aged 3 to 11) could have three inspectors for each keystage. The inspection team could meet up, share observations and produce a report together.

I agree actually.

I recently looked at reception in sink primary the one no one wants to go to.

I was blown away how good it was.

They practically had their own wing just for reception.
2huge classroms biggest i seen in while
3rd huge room
own toiliets
loads outdoor space.
2teachers and 3 tas

they were underscribed and only has 16 in each class.

I cant see its ofsted unfortunatly it changed from lea academy last year so not been inspected yet frustrating.

we moving house looked at another school which liked look of.
read their ofsted there is a separate section for early years provision as you said and early years was not great and it was an infant school.

dd1s last school was downgraded by osfted and looking back reception wasent the best so they full desrved the grade they got prpblem is some inspected many years apart and the frameworks changed twice since dd1 been in school and shes only year 3.

Feel like visited more schools than osfted latly and amazig how different they all are.

in wales foundation stage lasts through year 1 too interesting see how compares to england.

it is isn't it?

We had a separate inspection anyway.

Our school has just been re inspected and there was only one inspector. The last major inspection where the school failed so dramatically had two inspectors.

The head is putting pressure on reception and nursery to bring up standards further up the school. This is so wrong/

I vote RT for Chief Inspector. Salary of around £200,000.

YABU in as much as the background you give and your title assertion are not linked.
OFSTED said the reception teaching was good.
The HT is the one changing things.

It does not therefore follow that OFSTED needs to change.

YANBU

I don't think dc should start school until 5 and go straight into KS1 and that EYFS belongs at pre school.
It would make things a lot less complicated, especially as EYFS is started during pre school.

Sounds to me more like you need a new HT rather than to change Ofsted (I would like to change Ofsted in many many ways though ) Not sure why they have changed the approach in EYFS when it was specifically praised in the report?

Anyway, the school won't get very far with that approach as Ofsted will just slam its early years provision for not being play based. (School local to me got absolutely slated for this.)

It's a nice idea but there is absolutely no way you are going to get 3 inspectors into anything but the biggest primary schools - there simply isn't enough money. My dcs' school got 2 days of 1 inspector (and bear in mind most of the second afternoon was spent giving feedback). Incidentally, as a governor, I have worked quite a bit with both our school improvement advisor (who is also an Ofsted inspector) and the HMI assigned to another school post-Ofsted and I would say both of them really know their stuff. The HMI on his first visit spent half an hour visiting each classroom and came back with some very pertinent observations. It was very impressive.

Did the Ofsted report say anything about standards/progress at the end of EYFS?

"Did the Ofsted report say anything about standards/progress at the end of EYFS?"

OFSTED were pleased with the progress of nursery and reception. I think the headteacher wants to hot house boost standards of reception so that they do better key stage 1.

The new head seems very focussed on SATs and phonics reading check. I don't think the EYFS is easily examinable in the same way.