openeyebanner2
Welcome to the OpenEYE Campaign Newsletter
OpenEYE consists of a unique and growing multi-disciplinary team of experts who have come together through a shared concern about Early Childhood in the UK. They have the support of an increasing number of childminders, parents, practitioners and teachers. Additional support comes from a prestigious group of international researchers, authors and early childhood experts. OpenEYE is an entirely voluntary group who give their time freely to the cause.

The monthly newsletter aims to share OpenEYE's core concerns and to highlight some of the relevant media and academic research items that have appeared during the past month.
 

 
In This Issue
Professor backs school at six
EYFS an Playwork
Tory Confusion?
Boys falling Behind
Summer-born help
U-Turn on childcare vouchers
Steiner and Montessori
From an alarmed parent
Rowan Williams
Letting the child come first
An important date for your diaries!

The OpenEYE Conference
Saturday 12th June

The Resource Centre
London


rowanwilliams

'The Child - The True Foundation'

In 2010 OpenEYE is bringing together a wonderful group of people who will share their expertise with us, along with their love and concern for early childhood

The full details will be available in our next newsletter.

We hope that you will be able to join us.

What about the Children?


National Conference

Tuesday 2nd March 2010
The Resource Centre
356 Holloway Road
London N7 6PA

Delegate Fee £70 (includes Tea, Coffee and Lunch)

'What is critical for a child's healthy emotional development'
whosechildhood

A new book by Richard Eke, Helen Butcher and Mandy Lee  explores the roles of children adults and policy-makers.

Childhood, Well-being and a Therapeutic Ethos
childhood

A new book edited by Dr Richard House and Professor Del Loewenthal, from Roehampton University's Research Centre for Therapeutic Education, calls for an approach to policy making that is informed by therapeutic values.

Addressing the current debate on the issue of "toxic childhood", it questions current policy and practice in the light if its impact on the welfare of young children.

More details
'If formal instruction is introduced too early, too intensely and too abstractly, the children may indeed learn the instructed knowledge and skills, but they may do so at the expense of the disposition to use them'

Professor Lilian Katz

OpenEYE Film

toomuchtoosoon

OpenEYE launched its Campaign film 'Too Much Too Soon' in July 2008.

It is now being used as course material on a number of early years trainings and courses.


You can see the film on Youtube
Send in your stories!
 
OpenEYE works because it is in touch not only with early years experts, but with people at the grass roots who really know what is going on. If you have stories that you think we should know about please email us
Join Our Mailing List

The OpenEYE newsletter is divided into two sections. The first section highlights issues that are directly related to OpenEYE's core concerns. The second is composed of interesting and/or inspirational items that have been sent to OpenEYE by our many supporters, and which may also touch on wider educational issues, perspectives and research.

CAMPAIGN MATTERS  

REVIEW OF NOVEMBER & DECEMBER 2009

The last two months of 2009 have clearly demonstrated the danger of policy-making happening too quickly and without adequate consultation. Following widespread criticism there have been three major U-turns on the vetting and barring scheme, childcare vouchers and the single funding formula. And now research is showing that boys are lagging even further behind following the implemention of the EYFS.
 
OpenEYE is constantly trying to introduce tempered realism to the various policy statements that are issued. Over the past two years, it has advocated extending a genuinely play-based EYFS into Year 1, when children become six, a change advocated by Professor Robin Alexander's Cambridge Review, Sheffield University Education Professor Greg Brooks, and the government's own Early Years Advisory Group

OpenEYE has also expressed concern that practitioners' commitment to the EYFS needs to be viewed within the wider context of the legal compulsion to 'deliver' outcomes, and that centralised control of education in the early years threatens innovation and represents undue interference in the pre-compulsory school domain.
 
Despite government protestations to the contrary, it is clear that many settings are reacting to to the new targets and outcomes by increasing the level of pressure on children (see, the example, letter from a parent below) - one 'outcome' that OpenEYE has predicted all along. There is a danger, too, that an inexperienced workforce will uncritically accept the inappropriate aspects of EYFS, and that they might already be becoming an accepted 'norm'
 
OpenEYE has no wish to see the EYFS dismantled in its entirety, especially the welfare requirements. It will, however, continue to call for the downgrading of the unjustifiable and unnecessary legal status of the EYFS learning and development requirements to guidelines only, and for a truly independent review at root-and-branch level.
 
It will also continue to challenge anything that it feels compromises the natural developmental capacities of children, especially where developmental appropriateness is sidelined in favour of adult-centric state imposed goals

The Early Years Foundation Stage and The OpenEYE Campaign - Two Years on
Professor backs starting school at six

Professor Greg Brooks, an emeritus professor of education at the University of Sheffield, has backed the recommendation of the Cambridge Review that children should start school at six.

'I think we induct children into formal school too young in this country. I think there is a case for having a much more play-based pre-school phase that would last from age three to age six, in which there would be very little or no formal teaching of literacy. That would start at age six.'

Professor Brooks is a phonics expert and has conducted specialist research into literacy interventions for children who have fallen behind. He told Nursery World:

 'A lot of children, especially a sub-group of boys, are not ready to begin formal learning of reading and writing at age five. Their reading could be impeded because they don't get it initially and then they develop a resistance to it.'

Read Laura Marcus's Nursery World article
 
Clarification on EYFS and Playwork

Over the last few months there have been continuing concerns in the play sector over the watchdog's interpretation of how playwork meets the requirements of the Early Years Foundation Stage.

In response to this Ofsted has now published guidance confirming that play providers can comply with the early years curriculum without compromising their professional principles. The inspectorate has published a factsheet for the play sector called Regulating Play-based Provision.

The document confirms that play workers should not have to change their existing good practice in order to meet the requirements of the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), which must be delivered by those working with under-fives.

"Play workers have been struggling with the idea of keeping detailed records on individual children, which is not good playwork practice," said Sue Saunders, workforce development manager for Bedfordshire Training and Assessment Centre.

The Department for Children, Schools and Families has confirmed that it will be issuing further guidance to help the play sector deliver the EYFS. The guidance is expected to be published before the end of the year.

Read Ross Watson's Children and Young People Now article
Contrasting Tory Voices on the EYFS

There is what looks like clear (pre-election) party-political positioning gong on in the Conservative party about their approach to the EYFS. In October all the key Ministers were highlighting the issue of bureaucracy with Nick Gibb talking about the EYFS as  'a bureaucratic nightmare' , shadow schools secretary, Michael Gove pledging to 'strip away bureaucracy in education', and shadow families minister Maria Miller talking about "bureaucratic burdens".

davidwillett

More recently, shadow universities secretary David Willetts, speaking at the Daycare Trust's annual conference in London, is reported as saying how the party is now committed to the EYFS and would look into how it could ease the process for providers. He acknowledged to Nursery World that there had been a 'softening' in Conservative comments on the framework.

It can only be hoped that if the Conservatives continue to follow press reports on all aspects of the early years of childhood, they will be unable to ignore the very real concerns vociferously expressed over the last two years , and currently, by practitioners, parents and experts, that making learning and development mandatory for the pre-compulsory early years' sector has no justification whatsoever. Hopefully, that will strengthen their resolve to take on board a genuine and urgent review of the changes which need to be made, rather than just tinkering with one or two goals as is constantly being advocated by the DCSF.

OpenEYE is deeply concerned about the crucial early years phase being the subject of pre-election political manoeverings. We urge politicians from all parties to need to consider our argument that there is a clear distinction to be drawn between supporting the four over-arching principles of the EYFS (which OpenEYE has always broadly supported), and its specific content and statutory nature (which OpenEYE contests). There also needs to be a great deal of attention paid to the use (and mis-use) of language, such as the difference between the terms 'Practice Guidance' and 'Statutory Framework', which imply totally different things.
 
We support policy makers in agreeing with the core principles of the EYFS, which does not imply that we by any means uphold the framework's disputed statutory intrusion into the early years' learning arena. This is a crucial distinction, that the OpenEYE campaign will continue to emphasise at every opportunity.

Read Katy Morton's Nursery World Article
Boys falling behind - are we surprised?

Official figures show that boys are significantly more likely to struggle in the basics of English, mathematics and science at the age of seven. According to Government data, the gap has widened in almost every area of early achievement over the last 12 months.
 
OpenEYE has consistently argued that there are significant gender differences in children's development and learning, with boys being bound to suffer more than girls in a developmentally inappropriate curricular framework where learning through movement and physical activity is afforded less importance than is appropriate.

This is supported by the evidence presented by the Cambridge Review which called for formal lessons to be delayed by a year to give children greater access to a play-based learning experience.

And, of course, there is the substantial body of evidence showing that children elsewhere in Europe (where they start school later) outperform the UK in these key areas later on.

And yet, we then read in a subsequent Daily Telegraph article, that there is now a new piece of government guidance which is to be sent to nurseries and childminders advising them to get boys as young as three to do more writing and drawing!

What more do we have to do to convince the Government that developmentally inappropriate practice inhibits the natural learning processes of young children? Surely it is obvious that it is our focus on targets and outcomes, rather than natural child development, that may be at the core of this increasing gender gap as well as our continued failure to improve the literacy and numeracy outcomes in line with our European cousins?

Read Graeme Paton's first piece in The Telegraph

and then his second
£80m to help summer-born children

Up to £80m will be available to fund full and part-time schooling and free full-time early years places for four-year-olds, in plans for parents of summer-born children to have greater flexibility over choosing when their child starts school.

The move follows a Government consultation with parents, teachers and local authorities over plans for all four-year-olds to start reception the September after their fourth birthday.

Under changes to the Schools Admissions Code, local authorities will have a legal duty to give parents flexibility and choice over school starting dates.Parents who do not want their four-year-old to start school will be entitled to free, full-time childcare. The revised admissions code will come into force in February 2010 and apply to admission arrangements from September 2011.

The changes follow the findings of the primary review by Sir Jim Rose, which confirmed research statistics that many children born in July or August are at a greater risk of poor outcomes.

Early years expert Wendy Scott said, 'The offer of real choice to parents as to when their children should start school is welcome. However, deferred admissions have potential cost implications well beyond the £80m on offer, not least to pay for the administrative burden of finding out what parents want. Few parents will feel that it is an open choice, as they will not want to risk losing a place at their preferred primary school, particularly if it is oversubscribed.

Practitioners are already well aware that over many years now, parents wishes have not been taken into account about their child's starting date because the maintained school of their choice simply refuses to hold the place in reserve. Unless the Local Authorities intervene and require schools to do so, then any new policy on flexible school starting age must also include the requirement for schools to hold such places in reserve. Not to do so would render this new proposed LA Schools' Admission Code little more than a 'damp squib'.

Read Melanie Defries full article in Nursery World
OTHER ARTICLES OF INTEREST 
U-Turn on childcare vouchers


In December the Government finally gave in to mounting pressure from former ministers and MPs in this issue. A parliamentary motion opposing the change was signed by 50 Labour MPs and 92,000 people signed a petition on the Downing Street website.

Tax relief on childcare vouchers will now not be scrapped. Instead basic rate taxpayers will continue to be exempt from all tax and National Insurance Contributions on the value of their vouchers, but in future, higher-rate tax payers who currently receive tax relief at 40 per cent will have the benefit halved.

Sarah Jackson, the chief executive of Working Families, said: "We are delighted that the Government has reconsidered the tax relief on childcare vouchers and has listened to the many concerns expressed by parents and employers.This is no time to be withdrawing any support for parents in work, and vouchers can make all the difference to parents struggling to make work pay."

Annette Brooke, MP for Mid Dorset and North Poole, had voiced her own concerns at the annual general meeting of the All-Party Parliamentary Group on Childcare, where she criticised the way the new formula is likely to be implemented in some local authorities:

'The implementation of the Single Funding Formula has been handled badly in part of my constituency and I fear some of the providers will be wiped out if the local authority doesn't see sense and respond to the representations being made.

I have met with a deputation of providers who are all deeply concerned, even if they are not losing money on the current proposals. The base rate proposed for a voluntary provider is just £2.74 per hour and one such provider estimates that they would lose £6,406 per year and the setting would no longer be sustainable. This is despite the setting being judged as outstanding.

I have been told a neighbouring authority is proposing £3.74 for private and voluntary settings.'

Ruth Thomson's November Nursery World article

Catherine Gaunt's Nursery World article

Jon Swaine's Telegraph article

Kirsty Walker's article in The Daily Mail

New hope for Steiner and Montessori Schools?

steiner1

Britain's first completely state-funded Steiner academy became a reality in Hereford last year. And a few weeks ago the Steiner movement held a special pre-election seminar 'Moving Forward' with Conservative special adviser Sam Freedman, who attended to explain how Steiner schools could benefit under a future Conservative government.

Tory education reforms would pave the way for more Government-funded Montessori, and Steiner, and other alternative schools. There are already five Montessori schools in the state sector and one Steiner school. In total there are 600 UK Montessori schools in the private sector and some 40 Steiner/Waldorf schools. Many of these schools achieve very impressive Ofsted reports and are strongly supported by parents despite their non-prescriptive approaches to education.

The Tories' new schools policy is intended to make it easier for independent schools using alternative pedagogical approaches to access state funding. To qualify schools would need to have a business plan, to be non-selective, to be inspected and, for reasons of accountability, reach a certain minimum benchmark in terms of exam passes. The schools would also need to demonstrate sufficient parental demand.

This follows the Conservative intention to develop a more open and diverse Swedish-style system.

Read Adharanand Finn's Guardian article
Letter from an alarmed parent

This is an excert from a letter sent to OpenEYE in December:

I have felt compelled to feed back on what I have heard in recent discussions with friends who have children of reception age - i.e. 4 years old and only just.
 
Two parents have reported that their children are spending a large amount of their school time on reading and writing. One, whose daughter is actually able to read, receives up to 90 minutes homework a day! Although pleased about her daughter's progress, she is very uneasy about the amount of extra work she has to do outside class, given that she was only four in March. Another parent has a boy who was four in July and has just learnt that her son is falling behind the other children (he is one of the youngest in the year - born in July) and she has been told he will therefore be targeted for extra help with his reading in a special class. It has alarmed the mother to learn that her child is considered a failure and the little boy in question will soon cotton on to the fact that he's already 'special needs.' On hearing this I was compelled to write to you.
 
These are only anecdotal snippets but I only know 2 parents of 4-year-old children, so that makes 100% of those I know being driven towards early literacy. As a parent of a 3-year-old girl who is being forced to send their daughter to school when she is 4 years 3 months (summer born), I don't know about my rights to refuse this early intervention if the same thing happens. Consider the fact that I learnt to read at nearly 7! I would have been labelled a failure at school and may never have gone on to academically succeed as I have done - I am now a physics teacher.
 
I strongly suspect the practitioners in question are orientating activities with a view to the children attaining the EYFS goals, which contradicts what the government insisted would actually happen, i.e. that practitioners would do their normal thing and see the goals as only desirable. This is hardly surprising as government-published target-rich material like the EYFS usually ends up being the assessment criteria for Ofsted inspections, and therefore the yardstick by which one is judged.

This is just one example, from the feedback that we regularly receive, that strongly reinforces our concern that the statutory and outcome-based nature of the EYFS is resulting in the inappropriate and potentially damaging 'schoolification' of pre-school settings.

The loss of twelve childminders a day


'Twelve childminders a day in England have quit the profession since the Government introduced its new curriculum for toddlers, analysis by the Conservatives has revealed. At least 4,277 childminders abandoned the job during the first year of the Early Years Foundation Stage.

Official figures show that there were 59,323 registered childminders in England this autumn compared to 63,600 the previous year.'

OpenEYE has consistently predicted that the imposition of the EYFS statutory learning and bureaucratic requirements on to childminders would have this effect.


See Sarah Cassidy's piece in The Independent

 

Rowan Williams' Christmas Message

rowanwilliams

The Archbishop of Canterbury, Dr Rowan Williams, expressed his concerns about childhood in his Christmas message that you can hear here

This is an exerpt from Dr Williams foreword for OpenEYE co-founder Dr Richard House's new book (see left-hand column)

'No-one can now ignore the fact that a serious debate about the welfare of children has at last begun in our society. And, appropriately, it has started to open up a wider debate about the nature of learning and even the nature of human maturity. The essays in this collection are significant not only for what they say about childhood but for what they invite us to think about human growth and well-being in general. '
2010 - Letting the child come first

As we enter 2010 we think it a good point to acknowledge that early childhood sets the stage for all that is to come and that we should not let our youngest and most vulnerable citizens be at the mercy of any political agenda. We all want to nurture happy, healthy, confident learners who feel good about themselves and the world in which they live. And we should all have the courage to question any system that compromises such joyful natural development.

Although it is admirable that very considerable amounts of investment have gone into the early-years field under the present government, it seems that it may have come at a substantial and unexpected cost. Early education is now subject to a vastly complex monitoring system that has been designed, in part, to justify such large expenditure. There are targets and outcomes for everyone and everything so that boxes can be ticked and evaluation forms filled in. We currently have the most bureaucratic early years system in Europe that has been nicknamed 'schoolification' by some of our continental counterparts. Is this really what was intended? Or is there a danger that the system itself might become a kind of self-perpetuating monster that has lost sight of the small child quietly playing at its centre?

Ministers (themselves not experts in their fields) are in the unenviable position of having to constantly rely upon external advice and research evidence for their decision-making. We know that research is highly vulnerable to researcher bias and 'allegiance effects' which makes it all the more vital that it is appropriately and independently reviewed. And honest and authentic debate is an essential part of the process. It is a very dangerous situation in any field when experts and researchers are so compromised by their place or status within the system that they feel unable to share their true views. And when people on the ground find themselves ticking pre-defined boxes rather than being encouraged to accurately share their own thoughts and experiences. Professional authenticity is the tragic casualty of such a situation, which we see as a direct consequence of the chronic over-politicisation of the education system, in which there has been, over many years, a major but publicly unacknowledged shift in the balance of power from professionals to politicians.

Whoever becomes the next government in the UK we hope that they will have the courage to re-evaluate everything that has happened so far. Have we really improved the everyday experience and confidence of our young children? Or is there a danger that we have introduced systems that let them know at an ever earlier age that what really matters is how they measure up to adult-led agendas. Are we nurturing passionate, empathic early-years teachers who truly engage with the children in their care? Or are we instead creating a professional workforce that increasingly relies upon externally produced guidelines and frameworks in their interactions with children.

This is an issue that is just too important for us to get wrong.

OpenEYE Team
JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST!
We really care about childhood and Early Years Education and value your support. Please join our email list and let us know about your own practice and concerns.
By clicking on the bottom side-link you can also easily forward this email to others.
With warm wishes from
 
The OpenEYE Team

We hope that we have fairly and accurately reported the items in this newsletter. Please contact us if you notice any errors.