The DVD from the recent OpenEYE conference is now available and can be purchased for £19 inc. p&p. It contains three fascinating and inspirational talks from the following speakers:
Prof Kathy Hirsh-Pasek, Ph.D Dr Sebastian Suggate, Ph.D Prof Lilian G. Katz, Ph.D Please send cheques made out to 'OpenEYE' to:
OpenEYE DVD 16 High Bannerdown Batheaston, Bath BA1 7JZ |
The Unique Child Network
Are you interested in the broader issues that OpeEYE has raised? Would you like to keep in touch with cutting-edge thinking and research?
Join the Unique Child Network today!
|
What About the Children Conference
What Babies Need Parents to Know
What About the Children's National Conference is being held on the 8th March, 2011 at the Resource Centre in Islington, North London.
You can access the conference site here
|
IPA World Conference
How do we create a future where playing is valued and where every country and neighbourhood upholds every child's right to time, freedom and a safe enough environment for playing in their own way?
The 18th conference of the International Play Association offers four days to share evidence, experience and examples of good practice with colleagues from around the world.
Conference Website
|
'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
|
"What we emphasise in education
is generally what we get. When we emphasise achievement above
all else, then we are likely to produce achievement above all else. High achievement is desirable. But at what cost? When education
becomes focused on production -
namely, evidence of demonstrable
achievement - then we have
lost what it means to be educated. Teaching and learning are not just
about achievement or quality-assured products. They are
about care, compassion, love, hope. Joy, passion, grace,
relationship, and more ...
They are about people and how
we nurture and are nurtured
on our learning journeys"
Colin Gibb
|
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 |
DONATIONS
OpenEYE is entirely self-funded and we appreciate any contributions to help us protect the rights of young children. We are hoping to soon have a Paypal donate facility, but in the interim please send cheques (made out to OpenEYE) to
OpenEYE Campaign 25 Kew Gardens Road Surrey TW9 3HD
|
|
|
|
Please note that in yesterday's newsletter there was an error in the details for the 'What About the Children' Conference which has now been corrected
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.
|
JANUARY 2011
CAMPAIGN MATTERS
|
It was an interesting end to the early-childhood year and we have been thinking carefully about the way in which we now want to move OpenEYE forward. We were encouraged that there was going to be a review of the Early Years Foundation Stage and even discussed the possibility of disbanding OpenEYE if the new coalition government were to demonstrate a more open, comprehensive and future-oriented approach to the key issues that concern our campaign.
We have watched with concern, however, the constant use of the phrase that 'children should be ready to learn when they get to school' (something that implied that they were not doing so in any serious way beforehand!) together with the consistently unclarified use of the term school 'readiness'. We have also been confused about the number of mixed policy messages being given out by ministers, such as:
'Education Secretary Michael Gove has announced plans to "liberate" local authorities from the duty to set and monitor performance targets for schools and early years settings (Children and Young People Now - 4th November, 2010
Followed soon afterwards by: 'Early Years Foundation Stage Profile results are to be published by school for the first time, under proposals in the Department for Education's five-year business plan...Children will be assessed with new 'readiness for school' measures at the age of five, linked to the EYFS profile, and at age 11 they will be assessed to ensure they have basic command of the 'three Rs'.' Nursery World - 17th November, 2010
(and this despite the 2010 DFE Research Report on the EYFS that said:'The EYFS is a play-based and child-led framework: All practitioner groups welcome the play-based and child-led nature of the guidance and view it as a validation of early years principles, or as a return to early years approaches after a period in which pre-school was conceptualised as preparation for school: many participants are relieved that the period from birth to five is now recognised as an important phase of development per se)' Also: 'Ministers have given more details of plans to bring in reading tests for six-year-olds in England.Teachers will run the tests, which will be based on phonics, where pupils learn the sounds of letters and groups of letters before putting them together. Pupils in England will take the tests in Year 1 from 2012 and a pilot scheme will start next summer.' BBC News - 22nd November, 2010
Open EYE had a meeting with the new Minister Sarah Teather in November and shared some of our concerns with her. We are hopeful that this meeting will be the first of many others where our input could prove to be of value.
It is still too early to comment with any degree of certainty on the new coalition government's early years policy direction, as it is ultimately what they actually do that will determine whether they prove to be more open than the previous government to the kinds of principled arguments we have consistently put forward since 2007. We still very much hope that some of our initial impressions and concerns (as illustrated, for example, in the report below on league tables) prove to be wrong.
|
Missing address
We received an OpenEYE Conference DVD cheque from a Mrs C M Hutchinson without an address to send it to. If this is you please could you contact ghooperhansen@onetel.com.
|
2011 Fundraising Drive
 OpenEYE has always been self-funding with all its key members giving their time for free. Although we keep running costs to the minimum there are some ongoing costs that we need to cover including maintaining this newsletter. During 2011 we would also like to redevelop and expand our website. We would be grateful, therefore, for any support that you can offer in helping us protect young children from developmentally inappropriate pressures. Please send your cheques, made out to 'OpenEYE', to OpenEYE Campaign 25 Kew Gardens Road Surrey Tw9 3HD
|
League tables for 5 year olds?
It is being proposed that school league tables of pupil performance at just five years of age are set to be published under government plans to give parents more information. At present, individual school results are only published for tests taken at the end of primary school and after GCSEs. A fierce campaign has already been waged to abolish key stage 2 SATS by the teaching unions amidst claims that the use of results in league tables encourages teaching to the test and a narrow curriculum. The proposal, contained in the Department for Education's business plan, proposes to use the results taken from the Early Years Foundation Stage profile, which is completed at the end of pupils' reception year. In the TES article NUT general secretary Christine Blower condemned the idea saying "Parents are much more interested in whether their child will be happy and well cared for at this age..This data will not only be unreliable but will also lead to the creation of league tables for nurseries and could turn a whole generation of children off learning before they even start formal schooling."Tina Bruce, early education expert and visiting professor at Roehampton University, described the proposals as "absolutely terrible... The worry about the profile was precisely that it would put young children under pressure; if you start publishing results you do inevitably put them under pressure."This development confirms one of OpenEYE's long-standing core concerns that the EYFS would eventually be used as a bureaucratic vehicle to then measure both pupil and school performance. Read Helen Ward's article in the TESThe following letters then appeared in response on the TES Letters page: 'Michael Gove's latest policy initiative ("League tables for five year olds", December 3) betrays a woeful ignorance of young children and what their parents want for them. It also indicates that he is likely to ignore Dame Clare Tickell's Coalition-sponsored review of the Early Years Foundation Stage, which is due to make recommendations on early-years assessment and the Profile. At the end of the reception year, some children are nearly a year younger than others (some being almost six and others, who were born in late July and August, still four) and many are just beginning to learn the English language.
To compare individual children at this point in their life is appalling enough. It is therefore hard to imagine what would lead someone to come up with the idea of comparing, school by school, the scores of such young, vulnerable children. Surely the teaching unions in England will stand together and support headteachers and teachers to mount a strong campaign against this highly damaging proposal.'
Margaret Edgington, Independent Early Years Consultant, Leicester 'League tables for five-year-olds implies intensification of Labour's disastrous audit culture. Mr Gove, the reason why most countries avoid cognitive work before the age of seven is because nature does not fully activate the left hemisphere until that age. Cell biologists tell us that the brainwave frequency is predominantly theta, far slower than alpha. This is why young children need fantasy, mobilisation of the sensory and motor systems and play, from inside, which brings forth that which is within. Disadvantaged children, overdosed on television, need it most. Japan learnt its lesson from hikikomori; must we suffer the same? '
Grethe Hooper Hansen, retired teacher, Bath. 'Not content with trying to scrap school sports partnerships, Michael Gove now decides that league tables at five are the new tablet from his educational "Sinai". Leave aside the fact that it was understood that the Foundation Stage Profile (FSP) - even given that its number of tick boxes, rivalling the last census - was not to be used for target setting or any other arcane data collection exercise, it beggars belief that no-one in the department has told The Gove anything about child development.
Entering school at five, or earlier, many children have not reached the maturation point that allows for formal learning and its measurement. Add this fact to poor pre-school facilities, inadequate home background or their actual birthday, and such data is meaningless. Trying to jack up their FSP results will only appeal to the few schools who like being at the top of the league tables but to all the others it is another example of system triumphing over educational sense.
Presumably, despite his much-vaunted reading CV, Michael Gove thinks that Pestalozzi is a make of coffee machine, Froebel works for Audi and Montessori is a brand of handbag. God help our children.'
Tony Roberts, NAHT Lancashire branch secretary, Preston.
The letters featured last week under the heading "Five-years-old is no age for an audit" (December 10) represent the views of most of us who are involved in the early years sector. Pisa conveyed our falling worldwide performance ranking and confirmed Finland again as one of the top-performing countries. Children in Finland do not start formal education until they are seven, while our children are among the youngest in the world. In Finland, children are encouraged to co-operate and collaborate, not compete. Marie Charlton, Advisory consultant, Early Excellence Training and Resource Centre.
|
New Petition against league tables
Journalist and parent Frances Laing has set up the following petition against the proposed league tables that has already achieved over 200 signatories in just a few days. These include Sir Tim Brighouse - until 2007 Schools Commissioner for LondonDr Penelope Leach - Psychologist and authorSusie Orbach - Writer and social criticProfessor Michael A. Peters - Prof of Education, University of IllinoisOliver James -Psychologist and AuthorMargaret Morrissey - Founder of Parents OutloudDr David Whitebread - Developmental cognitive psychologist and early years specialist, Cambridge UniversitySally Goddard Blythe - Director of the Institute for Neuro-Physiological Psychology IPetition textThe UK government is proposing to begin publishing school league performance tables for England's five year olds on a school by school basis. We, the undersigned, believe that such an unprecedented development puts both young children and their teachers, parents and carers under unwarranted pressure that is distinctly unhelpful - especially for children at such a tender age. We believe such tables to be divisive and unnecessary, and that they generate all manner of unintended and unforeseeable consequences that do far more harm than good.Click here to sign the petition
|
The EYFS Review
We are all waiting to see the results of the EYFS Review, but OpenEYE remains concerned that some of the core issues that it has highlighted will not be addressed as there is so much now invested in the existing system. As OpenEYE newsletter editor Wendy Ellyatt said in her October Nursery World article:
'The Labour party's investment in the early years was truly admirable, with £25 billion allocated since 1997 (from the Labour Party website), but a whole industry has now sprung up around the EYFS and many people's jobs now rely on it. From programme and manual writers, websites and magazine creators, video editors, workshop facilitators, material manufacturers, consultants, researchers and advisors, not to mention those supporting the ever-expanding compulsory CPD requirements, the danger is that such a system has become self-perpetuating and this is not necessarily in the interest of either children's or teacher's wellbeing. And of course all of these people will themselves have filled in the online consultation forms.'
Peter Moss and Gunilla Dahlberg produced a very powerful report in 2008 exploring the issues around cultural repression and the dangers that it brings to any democratic society:
'Unfortunately, the acknowledgement of different perspectives is uncommon both among researchers and policy makers. Journal articles in the early childhood field frequently show no recognition of the authors' position with respect to paradigm and discourse, and its implications for defining questions in research and evaluation, the choice of methods and the interpretation of data.
Although today there is a sort of standard policy document, produced by governments and international organisations, which offers a predictable rationale and prescription for early childhood education and care and draws on the same much-quoted research, it does not provide so much as one critical question or recognition that there may be different perspectives and views.
Not only do these documents make dull and repetitive reading. They stifle democracy. Political and ethical choices are replaced by a search for technical specifications. The current expansion of early childhood education and care provides, potentially, many benefits and possibilities for children, parents and wider society. But as Foucault enjoins us to remember, 'everything is dangerous, but not always bad', and expansion brings with it major risks, not least of which is increasing regulation and normalisation, what Nikolas Rose (1999) terms 'governing the soul'.'
and in the introduction to her Exchange article, 'Knowledge, Understanding, and the Disposition to Seek Both,' Professor Lilian Katz makes these observations about the current rush to set standards: "During the last two decades federal and state educational agencies have put forward national and state standards for academic achievement for all of our children at all levels of education. Invariably, the main purposes of such standards are stated in terms of what all children "should know and be able to do." Thus far no reference to goals such as the dispositions to use the knowledge, and to be willing to do what they are expected to become able to do, have been seen. In other words, these national and state documents omit reference to the importance of young children "wanting to know" and becoming "eager to do; - or in any other sense, strengthening and supporting positive dispositions to go on learning and to use what is learned. Furthermore, performance standards that emphasize the acquisition of knowledge tend to omit reference to the importance of understanding the knowledge, or reference to the disposition to seek understanding. "For children growing up to become responsible participants in a democracy, the disposition to seek understanding of the complex issues and decisions for which we all share responsibility should be a major goal of education at every level. At the preschool level this goal means supporting young children's natural nosiness about things and events around them worth understanding. The disposition to seek understanding is one of several important inborn dispositions that early childhood educators should strive to support and strengthen, by providing a wide range of opportunities for young children to explore an d investigate important aspects of their environments and experiences." Will the review have the courage to move beyond the EYFS's current focus on written observations and culturally questionable measurable targets and outcomes to encompass all children's dispositions and capacities to want to know and be eager to do?
Will it also work to ensure that any framework is sufficiently broad that it does not compromise other philosophical, religious and cultural teaching approaches and encourages, rather than limits, new thinking and pedagogical innovation?
We wait and see.
Read Wendy's Nursery World article
Read Sarah Cassidy's article in The Independent
|
Early Years Programmes failing to improve literacy and numeracy
'Early years initiatives, such as Sure Start and the free entitlement for three-and four-year-olds, have not improved children's literacy and numeracy by the time they start school, according to new research. The study by the Centre for Evaluation and Monitoring (CEM) at Durham University surveyed the PIPS (Performance Indicators in Primary Schools) scores of 117,000 four and five-year-olds at 472 maintained primary schools throughout England. Basic levels of development in vocabulary, early reading and maths remained largely unchanged between 2001 and 2008.' Rather than being seen as evidence of failure, could this instead be taken as confirmation that we are focusing on the wrong definitions of success? And that we should, instead, be finding ways to measure creativity, meaning-making, engagement, self-expression, flow and the development of positive learning dispositions? Or even to raise questions about whether 'measuring outcomes' at all at this age is helpful or appropriate? Read the Nursery World report
|
Reading Tests
Under plans drawn up by the government, all children will soon be given a reading test after one year of formal schooling. The check, which will be administered by class teachers in year 1, is aimed to help confirm whether youngsters have grasped the literacy basics, and to identify those pupils who might need extra help.
Tony Dowling produced this very apt metaphor in his Nursery World Opinion letter of the 8th December
LETTER OF THE WEEK - THE EYFS LEAGUE'Use increasing control over an object, such as a ball, by touching, pushing, patting, throwing, catching or kicking it.' Over the last few months we've been developing an EYFS database to track the progress of our children towards the Early Learning Goals. So far the results are promising, with greater visibility of each child's progress and a more consistent approach to their Learning Journals. But when I hear of the DfE's plans for an EYFS League Table, a little alarm bell starts ringing. The similarities with football stats are quite striking. Every week, videos of Premier League football matches are analysed by a team of experts to show each player's contribution to the game. In total there are a couple of dozen actions to record, including passes, interceptions, corners, shots on goal, goals scored/saved etc. At the end of the season, every player in the League ends up with a profile of their overall performance. Sound familiar? Child development is obviously a much more complex 'game' than football and the actions are less easily defined. But defined they are - by the DfE - in several hundred so-called Development Matters. Determining which to select for a particular observation is quite difficult and several are needed to 'score' an Early Learning Goal. So we pass the ball to the children, they run around a lot and between them they score one or two goals a week. We spend a considerable amount of time taking pictures of the 'match' and recording the goals scored and the nearmisses. At the end of the week we print a 'match report' with photos of the ball crossing the line - even though this line is fuzzy and the goalposts keep moving. Parents love the photos and like to hear that their child is well on the way to playing for England. But no England manager would use football statistics to select his team. Or declare that England should have won the World Cup when they were so convincingly thrashed 4-1 by Germany. Yet this is precisely what the DfE is attempting with EYFS League Tables. Schools will jostle for a place in the Premier League by claiming goals that were clearly offside. Referees will be called in to decide who's diving in the penalty box. And the whole exercise will be a multi-million-pound fiasco. If this absurd nonsense goes ahead, England can say goodbye to the 'Jules Rimet Trophy for Early Education'. Our exhausted players will be so bogged down in paperwork, they'll be lucky to keep the scoreline in single figures! Tony Dowling, Parkway Pre-School, Welwyn Garden City And the TES ran an article called 'Is the zort-and-koob reading test for six-year-olds simply too monstrous?' Read Dr Lilian Katz's views on early reading
|
Do we really understand play?
Following on from our September item 'Playtime Becoming a Lost Art?' the global innovation firm Frog Design is now asking 'Are our children getting the play they need to thrive in the 21st century?" and reports from sources such as Harvard University, Time magazine, Newsweek, and The Futurist, with the answer being being a clear no. In 2007, Howard Chudacoff, a professor of History at Brown University, wrote a book called Children at Play: An American History, in which he identified a disturbing trend suggesting that play is changing dramatically from a world invented by children to a world prescribed by parents and other adults. He discovered that "the resourcefulness of children's culture has eroded, as children have become less skilled at transforming everyday objects into playthings."Frog Design says, ' When 85 percent of today's companies searching for creative talent can't find it, will more focus on standardized curriculum, testing, and memorization provide the skills an emergent workforce needs? Not likely. Play is our greatest natural resource. In the end, it comes down to playing with our capacity for human potential. Why would we ever want to limit it? In the future, economies won't just be driven by financial capital, but by play capital as well. And the greatest game to be played, won't be played at all-we'll be too busy designing the next one.' According to the EYFS, Play and the concept of the unique child constitute an integral part of the learning and development process. What we are currently seeing, however, is clear confusion about the true nature of play and increasing moves towards the setting and measurement of norms of performance. Read Frog Design's 'Shaping the Future of Play'Read Alex Spiegels' NPR article 'Old Fashioned Play Builds Serious Skills'and the blog 'Creative Play Makes for Kids in Control'
|
The Need to Protect Creativity
The new 'Born Creative' report by Demos has highlighted that creativity in the Early Years is vital for the country's future economic growth. With contributions from, amongst others, OpenEYE newsletter editor Wendy Ellyatt, children's ministers Sarah Teather and Tim Loughton, Bernadette Duffy, head of Thomas Coram Children's Centre, childhood expert Tim Gill, and Anna Craft, professor of education at the University of Exeter and Open University, it calls for a greater emphasis on creativity in the EYFS and says that the Tickell review is an ideal opportunity to unleash children's potential from birth.
Geethika Jayatilaka, director of communications at CCE, writes, 'The Tickell Review of the Early Years Foundation Stage is a real opportunity for unleashing the potential of children from birth onwards. If the Government is serious about providing the economy with a skilled workforce fit for economic growth, then it must take this opportunity to support innovation and imagination right from the start of a child's education. Bernadette Duffy argues that a focus on creativity in the early years must continue. 'We must not be tempted to narrow the curriculum and return to the outdated belief that concentrating only on literacy, numeracy and behaviour will strengthen early years practice.'
and Wendy Ellyatt calls for a new 'Science of Learning' that focuses on the importance of personal 'meaning-making' rather than the simple transmission, accumulation and reproduction of information: - We need the courage to look again at what it is we are trying to achieve and to identify and question anything the compromises natural developmental processes, especially in the foundational early years.
- We need to understand more about brain development, what nurtures human creativity and well-being (rather than achievement), what helps and hinders its progress, and how to accommodate different styles of learning and development
- We need to see children within the context and demands of the unique systems within which they live and to better understand their need for relationship, personal meaning and contribution
- We need to conduct rigorous and open-minded global research into the efficacy of alternative/cutting edge/emergent approaches and to encourage and nurture innovation (rather than hinder it)
- We need to develop new criteria for success based upon personal fulfillment, flow, well-being and contribution
- We need to establish new and innovative forms of global collaboration that bring together scientists working in the field with leading thinkers, practitioners and policy-makers.
- We need to develop a new, empirical 'Science of Learning' based upon an understanding of optimising natural systems and development.
Download the report
Read the news item on Creativity, Culture and Education |
|
It's not just Britain that is putting pre-schoolers under pressure
We were sent this Examiner article by Carol Josel from a supporter in the United States:
The kindergarten controversy is not about to abate any time soon, as, more and more, school districts here in Montgomery County and across the country turn the "children's garden" into a full-day affair, complete with reading, writing, arithmetic, and testing, too. In other words, the new first grade.
Used to be, our youngest students engaged in all manner of play, everything from playing dress-up and building wooden block castles to carving out sand tunnels and singing along as their teacher accompanied them on the piano. And always for just a few hours every day.
That was then. Now, though, thanks in part to former President Bush's No Child Left Behind Act of 2002, play and socialization have taken a back seat to curricular and testing demands. And fitting it all in has resulted in full-day kindergarten classrooms...
Says psychiatrist, author, Tufts University professor, and early childhood expert David Elkind, "When children are required to do academics too early, they get the message that they are failures. We are sending too many children to school to learn that that they are dumb. They are not dumb. They are just not there developmentally."
|
Boys - failing, or just being boys?
The BBC reported that more than half of five-year-old boys are struggling in the basics after a year at primary school. Some 53.1% of boys of this age are struggling with skills such as reading and writing, and emotional and social development. In comparison, 34.9% of girls are failing to reach this target - a gender gap of 18.2 percentage points.
'The figures reveal that one in six (15.1%) boys could not write their own name by the age of five, compared to just 6.9% of girls. Some 9.6% of boys could not say the letters of the alphabet, compared with 5.5% of girls, the data shows. And 9% of boys could not do simple adding up by the age of five, while for girls that figure was 6.1%.
The data also reveals that poorer pupils, particularly poor boys, are falling behind their richer classmates. A quarter (24.9%) of poor boys could not write their own name, compared to 12.9% of poor girls, while 16.2% of poor boys could not say the letters of the alphabet. For poor girls, this figure was 9.7%.'
The government said it was concerned boys were lagging behind girls and will no doubt react by putting more pressure on nurseries to improve literacy and numeracy. And yet this is the exact opposite of what is needed which is clearly demonstrated by the increasing body of international research. Boys develop in different developmental ways, and according to different developmental timescales, to girls and it is highly misleading (and potentially highly damaging) to produce such comparative results for such young children as it is likely to lead to the introduction of developmentally inappropriate pressures.
Read the BBC item
|
The Dangers of ICT
Dr Richard House provided a strongly argued Nursery World article in response to John Siraj-Blatchford's support of ICT in the early years. 'We misguidedly treat children like 'mini-adults', fed by all kinds of commercial vested interests that have a material stake in children growing up into savvy little 'technophiles'. We urgently need more information on what is actually happening to children physiologically and psychologically through early exposure to ICT, for in imposing ICT on young children, we are playing grossly irresponsible Russian Roulette with their long-term well-being.
If Dr Aric Sigman is right about early ICT, the implications for our children's development could well be catastrophic, especially when a statutory early years framework enforces these technologies. But if Professor Siraj-Blatchford is right, then perhaps the worst harm that can be done is that children will delay slightly the age at which they become ICT-competent.
The balance of risk, therefore, comes out decisively in favour of a strict precautionary principle, for the scale of harm done by imposing developmentally inappropriate ICT on young children by far outweighs any harm that might be done by not introducing it when children are developmentally ready for it...
Early childhood is a crucial developmental time when children need to learn about being fully human, unintruded-upon by the inhuman 'virtual realities' and addictive instantaneity of computer and information technologies. They benefit far more from empowering experiences of the world that are real and relationally human than from those that are machine-derived and ultimately barren.' Byte Back - Nursery World 16th Dec
|
OTHER ARTICLES OF INTEREST |
Early Years in Denmark
One of our supporters sent us an interesting piece about Early Years Education in Denmark which has developed particularly strong family centred policies. The Ministry of Social Affairs is responsible for the Social Services Act and consequently has main responsibility for ECEC facilities, while the Ministry of Education is responsible for the act on primary and lower secondary education and for the training and education of child and youth educators (pædagoger) and school teachers.
'In Denmark, services for children aged 0-6 years have traditionally been considered as an integral part of the social welfare system. A major aim is to support, in collaboration with parents, the development of young children and provide caring and learning environments for them while their parents are at work. The Ministry of Social Affairs has the primary responsibility for national early childhood policy, but many policy and operational matters have for long been decentralised to local authorities. The Ministry of Education has policy responsibility for pre-school classes (5/6-7 years) and SFOs (school-based, leisure-time) facilities. Within the overall aims of the Act on Social Ser- vice and the Act on the Folkeskole(covering primary and lower secondary education), local authorities determine the objectives and the framework for work carried out in day-care facilities and schools, and are responsible for funding and supervision. Frequently, they establish unified departments, bringing together care and education.' Starting Strong Report, OECD
With the increasing 'schoolification' of the Early Years that has resulted from the DfES taking over responsibility for the education of the under-5s, maybe this is a model that we should be seriously considering?
|
Nurseries threaten to pull out of scheme
A nursery chain offering more than 650 childcare places is considering pulling its nine nurseries out of the free entitlement scheme if underfunding continues. The campaign by Early Years Childcare, which has nine settings in Sussex, Hampshire and south-east London, says that underfunding the free entitlement means that providers could be forced to make cutbacks that will impact on the quality of their provision. The nursery chain has set up a campaign website and petition at www.freechildcare.org.uk.Read the Dec 8th Nursery World articleand the follow-up article on the 15th Dec
|
The Call for Children's Radio
Educators want a children's radio service to replace the BBC Asian Network that is listed for closure next year. Following MP Frank Field's call fora more positive approach to learning at home in the Foundation Years, The Sound Start Group says radio is an accessible and cost-efficient way to provide daily support for families with young children and to help tackle the worrying increase in language delay identified in reviews by John Bercow MP and Sir Jim Rose. Chaired by the Baroness Warnock, Sound Start supporters claim that children are marginalised in PSB radio as the BBC reduces audio for four to six year olds and moves it on line, with increasing reliance on screen and keyboard access that is often blamed for deteriorating communication skills, increased attention disorders and early childhood obesity. "Many children are joining nursery without the most basic of skills for life", says Lady Warnock. "They haven't learned to listen, talk and express themselves or to understand simple instructions. This seriously undermines their social inclusion and future education opportunities". Read more about Sound Start
|
|
|
JOIN OUR EMAIL LIST! We really care about childhood and Early Years Education and we 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.
|
|
|