EYFS, dubbed the "nappy curriculum", is the first legislation to give the State a say in the raising of children under five.

[mrz]

EYFS, which comes into force in September next year, has already been harshly criticised by teachers, parents and politicians.

At the time of its launch Margaret Morrissey, from the National Confederation of Parent Teacher Associations, said: "I think it's really sad that we have reached the point now where instead of reducing children's stress we have increased it.

"Will nurseries be worrying more about children reaching these targets than caring for our children?"

EYFS applies to around 25,000 nurseries across both private and state sectors, plus all childminders.
openeyecampaign.wordpress.com/about/

Having read nosnikrap's last post again I am afraid I have to disagree that there has to be uniformity in young children's care. Surely this is the whole issue. The right of parents to choose the type of experiences their child has in the very early years of life. To remove parents choice is wrong. Are we to insist that all children attend Early Years settings so we can ensure uniformity?

The EYFS is merely the collaboration of the Birth to Three Matters Framework, and Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage, both of which have been in place for some time.

Ofsted have been conducting inspections with both of the above in mind for a few years now, so what is all the fuss?

The fuss ChristmasShinySnowflakes is that previously settings could choose not to follow Birth to Three and the Curriculum Guidance for the Foundation Stage this won't be possible with EYFS.

Surely parents can still have the right to choose their children's experiences? Not every school, pre-school, nursery will need to approach the EYFS in the same way. Schools don't need to change their values and beliefs in order to implement the EYFS.

When I refer to uniformity I mean that settings and schools should have a minimum care level that they need to adhere to. There are too many sub-standard and poorly run nurseries and that matter had to be addressed.

I would like to repeat that I am not kissing the arse of the Government, the EYFS is far from perfect, but IMO it is a step in the right direction to ensuring that all children have the same opportunities from as early as possible.

Neither schooling nor education is compulsory under 5 years old. Over 5 years old, only education is compulsory, not schooling.

Do as I do. Dig your heels in and tell them all where to go. They'll leave you alone after a couple of years. In this way you can choose what you want your child to learn.

I have all sympathy to playgroups and childminders. I'm on the committee of a playgroup, and all these changes, if uncontested will close the playgroup, if the playgroup doesn't close before hand for other reasons, which are too long to write here.

My children, apart from the couple of hours of playschool a week, went to a childminder (2 days a week) rather than a nursery precisely because I wanted them to be in a home environment. When the previous lot of regulations were brought in, I felt something of this experience was being eroded; our childminder got very taken up with the need to tick boxes and monitor their progress and provide meaningful activities all the time, in a way that I would have not have thought appropriate at home. Let's face it, how many SAHMs sit filling in sheets about their children's development every day? Or think that every waking minute should be filled with activities specifically calculated for the child's progress? ('Giggling and making silly faces at each other' does not look good in the Offsted report- but it's a valuable learning experience.)
Obviously, nurseries and schools need to be monitored slightly differently- but I would still like childminders to have more freedom, so that there is one alternative left for working mums to negotiate for themselves.

"From the original ?Desirable Outcomes? and Foundation Stage to the new EYFS, the demands have become increasingly prescriptive and more demanding for both practitioners and children; and from September 2008, the Statutory Guidance states that all providers, ?regardless of type, size or funding?, ?must by law deliver? the learning and development requirements . This quite unprecedented compulsion is particularly distressing for settings such as the Steiner Kindergartens, which have developed a highly effective ?holistic? early-learning approach over many decades right across the globe.
There are also wider concerns. The compulsion enshrined in the legislation at what is a pre-compulsory schooling age not only contradicts principles of educational diversity, but raises profound issues of civil liberties and the parental right to choose the kind of early-learning experience parents wish for their children. There are also grave concerns about a flawed consultation process, and the cascading of the ?audit culture? right into the earliest of years, where its values, practices and accompanying mentality are singularly inappropriate.
A very important public/private-sphere boundary may have been crossed in this legislation, and we intend to bring these grave issues to the attention of Parliament, in the hope that a much-needed re-assessment of the legislation will, with MPs? support, be granted by the government. For the state to define what is ?normal? child development, and then to enshrine this in law, is a dangerous and quite unprecedented development in modern political life."

This extract is from an article which first appeared in The House Magazine: The Parliamentary Weekly, No. 1244, Vol. 33, 14 January 2008, page 27.

hi, im a student researching the current problems facing reception techers and assitants in relation to learning assessment and the new EYFS curriculum. any ideas about this would be fab thanx x

EYFS becomes law in England today

Hi mrz, I've recently joined mumsnet, too late to be involved in this converstion. This is shocking. The objectors in this converstion fail to see your point.
When will this country realise that we need to do less not more with our children to allow them to reach their full potential, both educationally and in terms of their own happiness?
I'm sure that many experienced practioners will be able to juggle this whilst continuing to provide excellent childcare. But others wont. For others they will have to go completely against their own values.
The best point made, IMHO, was by the childminder poster who said they could no longer just sit and make funny faces at the babies.
I paint and bake and play music and write and read and role play with my son, but the best times we have are when we just roll around being silly.

I may be a little late to comment as this is now in force but when I attended a toddler group that is using the EYFS recently I was very much surprised when told what rules were in place at toddler groups now. my older children now 12 and 17 went to a great toddler group where mums shared ideas and chatted to support each other and now letting children play independantly is not how they want things done, children must be with their parents at all times, discussions between parents should be done at snack time whilst the children and parents are around the table (personally I would rather concentrate on what my child is doing at the table and making sure he doesn't choke). whatever happened to toddler groups and preschools being fun places for children to start learning social skills. By all means have crafts and activities at the groups but allow parents to support each other in person as well as here.

Toddlers dont need a certificate for successful completion of toddler group. leave enforced education to playgroup and nursery and start at a minimum of age 3.

PMSL when I saw that 3 - 4 yo kids should have 'respect for other people's beliefs' FFS, I don't have respect for other people's beliefs and I am ancient!

I do of course have respect for other people and their right to hold their beliefs, but that is a different thing!