BBC News Today

[Shoshe]

here

Looking after 3 under 3's including my son has put the pressure on me to think about doing the EYFS with my own son! I'm putting all this effort in to planning and resources for children I'm paid to care for. I feel robbed of being a normal mother that does normal mummy things - without having to plan each activity and linking them to learning! Does this make sense?!

Maybe OFSTED should regulate parents too. If your 3 year old can't write his name and tell you the names of the letters in three languages, then shurely you aren't fit to be a parent.

(kidding of course)

I actually like Ofsted and the licensing for childminders and nurseries. But, it has gone too far.

I work on my own and have the 3 under 3's 2 days per week. I do spontanious play on these days as there is only one of me - and the ages of my minded children and son are all very different. We tend to go to groups and park so its easier to please all children. Like many cms i'm really starting to feel the burden of the EYFS. I'm happy to sit and do an observation on a child once a month but the planning is really a difficult one for me. There is no getting away from it - just a case of getting on with it and trying ones best!

I'm wondering how all this reconciles with parents being allowed to home school their children. Because it seems bizarre to be heavily bureaucraticing (word?) childcare for under fives, making it difficult if not impossible to opt out of schemes where ther carer has to spend significant time on activities demanded by government regulators(if you can't afford a nanny AND they don't require them to register). But then from age 5 parents are allowed to school their children at home, giving them significant (if not total) control over their childrens' education up to the age of 17. But then maybe the state does come down hard on parents who don't follow the curriculum. It would be interesting to hear from parents who home school, what their interaction with the people who come to observe them is like, and what the consequences are if they don't take their advice.

Home-educators don't have to follow the curriculum. Local authorities only have a duty to intervene if it appears to them that a suitable education is not taking place. In practice this usually means that they would normally make enquiries annually as to the education being provided for the child. If they are not satisfied there is a procedure which could result in a school attendance order being issued.

Home educators don't receive any funding and so don't have to fulfil targets etc to justify the funding and so have a free hand in the education they provide. Schools and cm are covered by govt initiatives and various funding so presumably that's why the govt. gets to call the tune.

That's interesting about home schooling, it's an area I hadn't compared before.

I will be cracking on with the EYFS, Just not for long!!

For planning I have taken that as planning for each child based on their interests and level of development, rather than 'on Tuesday 21st at 11 a.m. we will be manipulating clay'. I have a one year old obsessed with cars so we are counting cars, looking at their colours, reading car books etc.

I don't think it is comparable, is it?

Does the EYFS curriculum really include 'pre-school children writing their own name' (from the Daily Telegraph) and if so why???

Yes jimjam it does. Why I do not know.

Here is an extract from our development table in the EYFS pack:
30-50 months Communication, language and literacy
Writing - recognising and writing their own names

I know some children can do this at 50 months - but for the rest of them that are average devlopmental wise.

Dear god.

DS2 is about to go into year 2. He's doing very well at school - is above whatever level he's 'meant' to be on. (I confess to have zero understanding of levels and even less interest).

However, he's left handed. At 4 there is no way he could have written his name. When he started school he was scribbling for drawing. Over the last 2 years his writing and drawing has come on well, and at his own pace. He can now use scissors without crying as well! What on earth would have been the point of having him write his name at 50 months? Being unable to write his name at just-turned-4 has not held up his academic development at all!

(And what on earth is the point of writing a name anyway- unless the child is particularly interested).DS3 (3) likes picking out his name or asking where his name is written and being shown it. I'm not going to start flashcarding it or asking him to write it. I like to see his pictures!

Barking barking barking.

I don't see the writing their names bit as a problem at all.

It is not a statutory requirement that all children MUST be able to write their own names by the age of five. Nor is it expected that childminders/nurseries drill children to write their names through flashcards or systematic coaching.

I see so much hysteria from a lot of people who seem almost paralysed with panic and dread over the EYFS.

It is scaremongering to make parents believe that name writing is a big focus. Parents are being led to believe that their little children will be sitting ridgidly at tables with their carers guiding their hands to form letters, and that the government will see their children as failures if they don't achieve this goal.

Poppycock.

All children are interested in their own names and like JJ says they love to recognise their own names and to take pride in seeing their names written down.

If they have name cards on their coat pegs or their own homemade laminated drawings as place mats to which you add their names, if you keep writing and painting materials easily accessible so that they can make their own marks and initiate for themselves through play the symbolism of their marks meaning their names, then yes, SOME children (probably the ones with fewest letters in their names ) will quickly and easily start to copy the letter forms.

For me it's no big deal whether they do or they don't. It's not a test. But I can't deny a child's pure pleasure at being able to make a symbolic approximation of their own name, even if to start with their marks look nothing like letters.

The EYFS can be interpreted to allow for all ranges of development, and I wouldn't have any problem at all in explaining my reasoning to an inspector.

My DD was introduced to writing at her preschool at just over 36 months. We suspect like JimJam's DC she is also left handed and nine months later she has still not finalised her choice so to speak. She has no problem recognising or spelling her name and can do all the usual things, like say what letter words start with. But she has found the writing process very stressful - partially it has to do I believe with the way they've gone about it. I knew they had started the writing when we were reading a book and the character was doing his homework, with loads of crumpled up papers on the floor. "That's me, I makin' mistakes" and mentioned the letters. I then sat with her to write her name, just to see what happened. After each letter she chastised herself for getting it wrong. I am not kidding. And then a worksheet came home with all 26 letters on it - they were to copy the letters below in a box which was about one inch by one inch. DD did not do well. I finally called the school and their explanation was that DD's was 'a perfectionist' and that she just needs to build her confidence up. Also said she AVOIDS the table where writing and art is going on (whereas at home, she scribbles and sticks for hours, it's the main thing we do.) I told them to leave it. I don't think they did quite. DD still does't like it althoguh she can make some letters now, I've noticed as sometimes she will show me. But it also sets her off - she had a huge tantrum on holiday last week when we were doing something with it and got frustrated. She is not yet four.

I know some kids CAN write their name at 36 months, indeed they did in her class. And tehre are some exeptionally creative teachers who could have made it much more fun. But parents are right to have legitimate concerns that an early learning process gone wrong can colour a child's view of herself. I think these children were being coached because on a siilar numbers sheet DD could suddenly write the number 13; it was clear someone else was doing it.

This is a school which got OFSTED outstanding.

Oh but ollyop it's not really the name writing is it? It's the idea that every step/action has to be observed, recorded, planned, linked to a developmental stage, had a next step worked out for and written down.
Poor nurseries/childminders are chronically understimulating the children/dragging them around the shops/on school runs the whole time and making them write about about it isn't really going to change that. Lots of parents want their children played with and cuddled when they fall over, want fresh food cooked, want interaction with their carers etc etc. I was saddened to see the people at nursery spending all their time writing down what the children are doing (and in several cases sticking a camera in their face to photo it the whole time), I really think it impacted on the care my dcs were receiving, I can't see it really impacting on any/many of the current 'issues' in childrearing and think it just reflects this govs obsession with targets!!

Harriet that is so sad for your dd, and for all the other children who are subject to the same pressure.
Worksheets fgs.
I totally agree that an early learning process gone wrong can have a huge effect on a child's self esteem.
It's up to chidcarers to be confident in using their knowledge of the children they care for to protect them from such nonsense. I actaully think it's vital that all carers/teachers be encouraged to be questioning and creative and that they shouldn't be in the job if they are not.
I am far too idealistic though.

1dilemma - It appears to me that this "idea that every step/action has to be observed, recorded, planned, linked to a developmental stage, had a next step worked out for and written down" is a self-imposed one.

We are NOT expected to do that for EVERY step and action. The provision of love, cuddles, chat, etc and the attention to detail necessary to get to know a child are not mutually exclusive

In the same way as attentive parents would notice things about their children's development and provide resources and experiences for them, so are we rightly expected to.

If you have a close relationship with the children in your care then it's easy to spot their increasing skills and knowledge and to provide opportunties for them to develop their own play.

Noticing children's interests and their new skills learnt from their parents is only possible if you allow time to listen and observe.

One sentence once a week would be enough to illustrate that. The target of prooving good quality care is for the carer not for the child.

Maybe it would be more difficult for carers in a nursery with more children, but for childminders it shouldn't be exaggerated into a chore. It really is something that competent minders are doing already. And if the poor ones you mention are leaving then what's so bad for the children about that?

As the husband of the CM who was featured in the BBC news story that started this thread, I have been following these comments with some interest.

ollyop is right when she says you are not expected to write everything down. In fact, we have letters from Beverley Hughes, Ed Balls and the DCSF saying just that. The only thing required by law is the early years profile, which will probably be done by their reception teacher once they start school. However, that is not the message that Ofsted and the NCMA (who did the EYFS course that my wife attended) are giving out and it is Ofsted who do the inspection and Ofsted who grade you according to how they feel that day and what side of the bed they got out of.

My wife received her letter from Ofsted yesterday about her registration under the Childcare Act together with the 5 page requirements document. In this document she is told she must have written policies, but paragraph 3.9 of the statutory framework for the EYFS says that CMs need to have policies, but don't have to have them in writing. So which is correct? And if you take a chance and don't have the policies in writing, will you then get downgraded?

BUT, ollyop, I take extreme offense at your suggestion that it is the poor CMs who are leaving. We know of many extremely good CMs who have given up simply because they are fed up of being made to jump over higher and higher fences by Ofsted inspectors who seem to be making it up as they go along. Take a look at the comments added to this news item and then judge whether it is only the bad CMs that are leaving. It is so much harder to stand up and say NO than it is to meekly roll over and aquiesce.

Also, you are not taking into account the level at which the most advanced goals of the learning and development part of the EYFS are pitched. A number of early years academics are asking for the EYFS to be
increased by a year to 6 instead of 5. The DCSF also commissioned a report which, unfortunately for the DCSF, came to a similar conclusion and which was probably why they decided to shelve it. You can read more in this article from The Times.

Finally, what about the parents? It is they who should be deciding where and what type of early years education their children get. The government, using the blunt tool of the EYFS, attempts to homogenise early years education across the board making it increasingly difficult for parents to choose something different. The EYFS was originally devised because the government realised that a poor start in life usually leads to a poor outcome in later life (something that most people already knew), But, instead of targetting the deprived areas, they chose to target everybody. How much is the EYFS roll out really costing? How much better would it be if that money had been concentrated on the deprived areas. Who knows, we may have already been seeing some positive results.

Arfa
Bravo. Great post.

I too take offence that only poor childminders are leaving due to the EYFS. I love my job, I write detailed daily diaries for my under fives as well as giving them a caring environment.

I have been graded good by Ofsted and have lovely glowing references from parents and children I have child minded for.

I know lots of lovely, natural child carers (not just minders), who feel too regulated and restricted by ever increasing red tape.

Arfa - deprivation isn't always neatly contained in areas, and not all children from families who live in so called deprived areas are deprived.

As far as my business goes it is most emphatically I who decide what type of early years education the children in my care receive. If parents want me they choose me, and if they don't they can provide it themselves or go elsewhere.

There is plenty of scope within the EYFS for me to implement my own individual ideas and systems, and it's sad to see so much bleating hysteria on the open eye comments board.

I belong to several other childminding forums where both new and longstanding childminders have a much more cheerful and positive view of the EYFS. Nothing to do with rolling over and aquiescing to homogenisation, rather a sign of their confidence in what they are doing, their resourcefulness and their openmindedness.

Also, I wasn't suggesting that the only childminders leaving are poor ones. I was responding to a specific point about poor carers in a previous post.

For a fairer and more balanced article the BBC story really ought to have also included the words of a pro EYFS childminder.

I have also recently received the letter from Ofsted you mention, and didn't find it ambiguous at all.

My wife works in partnership with her mindees parents.

"As far as my business goes it is most emphatically I who decide what type of early years education the children in my care receive. If parents want me they choose me, and if they don't they can provide it themselves or go elsewhere."

Of course, that's your choice. Unfortunately, from what I've been reading, it would appear the choice of 'elsewhere' for parents is becoming not an option.

I much prefer arfur's stance that parent's should choose the type of education for their children and would hope that more cm would work in partnership with parents than not.

Speaking as a parent, not a cm. Although I do know some very good cm who are ill at ease with the way things are going.

Arfa - Clearly and confidently stating your childcare ethos, and type of early education that you offer (e.g. Steiner, Montessori, Forest or any other approach) does not equal not working in partnership with current parents.

Can I just point out ollyop I don't think you quite got my point (a difficulty with the internet I suspect rather than a face to face conversation)
I made no connection between 'poor childminders' leaving and EFYS. That was yours.

My point was that I'm not convinced that the way I see most interpretations of EYFS (here, nurseries, press etc I have little experience of childmnders) is not necessarily going to make a poor childminder good, as always I'm sure there are many reasons why some childminders are not so good most wont necessarily be fixed by writing some stuff down.

(I also wasn't seriously suggesting that every step was observed recorded etc etc.

I think the word that is needed is choice.

Parents should be able to choose the type of childcare they want - and none of mine are enthralled by the EYFS. They love my (fun) written diaries and monthly newsletters/photos. They do not need or want to know how any of it links to any educational curriculum. That's not why they chose a childminder.

Childminders should also have a choice as to how they want to work. If they want to offer meticulous planning and lots of written observations, then fine. If not, then that should be fine. Parents can then choose what they would prefer.

I have 7 under 5s each week - paperwork already takes up a lot of my time. I really don't want to do written observations as well, even if it's one a week per child.

I also take offence at suggestions that it is only "poor" childminders who are leaving the profession.

This article in The Times is quite interesting. I would expect to see a lot more like it for the next few weeks.