Parliamentary petition to downgrade sixty-nine early years foundation stage learning and development targets

[mumoutandabout]

For those who have children new to early years education - the early years foundation stage sixty-nine compulsory targets have met with opposition from supporters of very varied educational philosophies.

As the mother of a four year old child, I am convinced these targets should be downgraded to recommendations only. I started a parliamentary petition which you may like to consider signing. Since this comes under the heading of campaigns, I'm assuming it is okay to post the link here.

Click here to go to the petition:

petitions.number10.gov.uk/parentsguideeyfs/

Thanks

mrz

Here is one of Open Eye's very detailed responses to the review that you mention.

openeyecampaign.wordpress.com/?s=rose+review

Can you explain why you don't like the EYFS targets (if I'm understanding you properly) but you're happy with the KS1 targets? Is it a developmental thing?

By mumoutandabout Fri 01-Jan-10 17:25:56
mrz

Here is one of Open Eye's very detailed responses to the review that you mention.

openeyecampaign.wordpress.com/?s=rose+review

The promised review hasn't actually taken place yet.

""Beverley Hughes also announced further details of the EYFS review, scheduled to begin in 2010.

The openeye response is to the primary review not the EYFS review.

mumoutandabout can you answer my question please posted at 14.34, thanks.

Yes, of course you're right. A bit foggy today I'm afraid I'm getting a head cold, I hope it's not flu. Good to know there will be more than one review. Did you read the Open Eye points in the link? What is your position on these?

Running out of time I'm afraid, relatives descending on us...

mumoutandabout I was one of the early signatories of the Open Eye petition a point which restlessnative seems to find suspicious.

oh that's interesting mrz. sorry to have so little time today, this multi tasking thing can be taken too far sometimes. Will just have to get back to this when I can.

holidaywonk, long missive answering with specifics the statutory goals that I object to for developmental reasons.

I believe there is enough of diversity of opinion amongst conventional education theorist to support questioning the direct teaching of literacy and abstract numeracy for this age group.

-Link sounds to letters, naming and sounding the letters of the alphabet.
-Read a range of familiar and common words and simple sentences independently.
-Know that print carries meaning and, in English, is read from left to right and top to bottom.
-How an understanding of the elements of stories, such as main character, sequence of events and openings, and how information can be found in non-fiction texts to answer questions about where, who, why and how.
-Attempt writing for different purposes, using features of different forms such as lists, stories and instructions.
-Write their own names and other things such as labels and captions, and begin to form simple sentences, sometimes using punctuation.
-Use a pencil and hold it effectively to form recognisable letters, most of which are correctly formed.
-Recognise numerals 1 to 9.
-Find one more or one less than a number from one to ten.
-Begin to relate addition to combining two groups of objects and subtraction to 'taking away'.
-Find out about and identify the uses of everyday technology and use information and communication technology and programmable toys to support their learning.

I was educated in America, and formal learning didn't start until what would be KS2 here, around age 6/7, so I feel similarly about the KS1 targets as I do about the EYFS targets.

Thanks. I do see that there are a lot of questionable assumptions in the decision to send children to school at rising 5 and zoning straight in on literacy and numeracy.

Just a quick one, and trying to pick up on a few points raised, in no particular order.

First up Holidaywonk's question:

Q. Can you explain why you don't like the EYFS targets (if I'm understanding you properly) but you're happy with the KS1 targets? Is it a developmental thing?

A. Actually hadn't thought very much yet about the KS1 targets yet (not 100 per cent sure I know what they are, do you have a link? And what age group are they? If they are what I think they are though, I wouldn't agree with the statement that I am 'happy with them'.

I'm a trained teacher in adult education, (although I only seldom work in training now) I'm not a professional early years practitioner in an early years setting and it is difficult to have an overview over everything - are these that the same as what people call the SATS? There's a lot to say about these too, isn't there?)

Had quite a lot on my plate understanding the early years system in the past few years...I'm sure most parents feel like this.

"don't like the EYFS targets" (your words). No, I would definitely not phrase my approach to the learning and development targets like this there's a lot more to say about it than that.

My understanding of this thread is that I'm not allowed to post a link which connects to my own work, but independently of this if you Google my name I'm sure you will be able to track down most things I've written on the subject of EYFS education and early years. Hope this helps. And here's the petition link again for info:

petitions.number10.gov.uk/parentsguideeyfs/

Probably very little time this weekend to come back to this now, so wish you luck with it and a chance to put your feet up perhaps...no doubt we'll talk on this again ssoon and I'll try to come forward to the remaining issues in some shape or form.

Head cold doesn't help, either...

mumoutandabout, you may not be able to link to your blog
but I can
here

Thank you purepurple, that's really useful.

Interesting

Some of the responses were quite rude, to be fair to moao - especially for someone who's not used to MN. But OTOH, moao, your refusal to see that the targets are not in any meaningful sense 'compulsory' for children hasn't helped matters!

Just putting this back on 'threads I'm on'....

Interesting blog.
I find the OP off putting in that you don't think the children should be working towards any of the targets. Not just a few you consider unreasonable - but the whole lot.
They mostly seem quite important skills to me, and something children should be having assistance with. I feel that not keeping an eye on how children are managing in some of these areas would be letting the children down.
And, again, that first paragraph is perfectly clear...
"By the end of the EYFS, some children will have exceeded the goals. Other children, depending on their individual needs, will be working towards some or all of the goals - particularly some younger children, some children with learning difficulties and disabilities and some learning English as an additional language".

mumaoutandabout said
"I'm a trained teacher in adult education, (although I only seldom work in training now) I'm not a professional early years practitioner in an early years setting"

In other words, she doesn't really know what she is talking about.

Are you saying that only trained professionals in EY education are qualified to have an opinion? Goodness, that's narrow-minded.

No, of course she can have an opinion. She shouldn't just expect everyone to agree with her though.

I am a teacher and have taught reception for many years and I think you will find many early years professionals are confused by EYFS and the profile requirements judging by the number who I get asking for help.

Purepurple, neither should someone with 'professional training' expect everyone to agree with them, so I fail to see the relevance of your comment that OP doesn't know what she's talking about. Is there some particular point she's making that you don't agree with, or are you feeling uncomfortable with her stance in general and therefore dismissing it all with her perceived lack of professional qualification?

I don't agree with everything the OP is saying, but I'm annoyed in general by posters who attempt to undermine credibility rather than take issue with actual statements or ideas.

I'm actually impressed by the continual non-answers to simple questions re the meaning of 'compulsory' in this context, it's hilarious reading!

FWIW I think the focus on EY teaching should be on encouraging children to speak and listen first. This in conjunction with any notable delays compared to peers.
Get them thinking and talking through interacting with them and talking to them instead of following them about obseving them in order to be able to tick boxes and collect evidence. Thought and speech must come first IMO (teacher).

I agree if children can't speak in sentences they won't be able to write in sentences either.

Looking at the EYFS targets: communication, interaction, speaking, listening, sounds, turn taking, is all quite high up on there.