Tag Archives: research

Men In Childcare Podcast

Men in Childcare: Interview with Andy Mitchell

AndyMitchellAndy Mitchell has had a very interesting, and almost certainly unique, route into the Early Years Sector. From being on the bone marrow donor register through the Anthony Nolan Trust, he is now a qualified Early Years Teacher.

Have a listen to find out how this happened – and how this career path has been via Norway (see photo)!

Useful references

Anthony Nolan Trust: http://www.anthonynolan.org/

Men in Childcare London: https://www.facebook.com/MeninchildcareLDN

Men in Childcare Ireland: https://twitter.com/menchildcareirl

This is my tenth Men in Childcare podcast. They have all been very different, incredibly interesting stories. One common thread is that all the interviewees are very positive about men coming into the Early Years Sector.

So, if you are a man, wondering if this is a career move for you, do have a listen to the podcasts to see if they can help to make up your mind.

subscribe-to-mic

If you enjoy the podcast, please leave a review on iTunes too – it helps to promote the podcast and get it to reach a wider audience.

 

Read More
Men In Childcare Podcast

Men in Childcare: Interview with Stuart Cloke

Stuart Cloke pictureStuart found he had a natural ability to work with children from a young age. He has worked his way up the career ladder, to be Deputy Manager at Rochford Day Nursery in Rochford, Essex.

His positive attitude and helpful solutions shine through in this interview, epitomised by his thoughts about young children needing to be ‘Happy, Healthy and Safe’.

Here he talks about his research into gender specific toys, being short listed for the Nursery World Practitioner of the Year and gives some good advice for all practitioners who may be considering a career in Early Years Childcare.

You can Follow Stuart on Twitter: @Starburst_stuie

and you can find his setting at http://www.therochforddaynursery.co.uk  

subscribe-to-mic

If you enjoy the podcast, please leave a review on iTunes too – it helps to promote the podcast and get it to reach a wider audience.

Read More
Articles

A Glimmer of Hope for EYPs

The EPPE report (Sylva et al. 2004) concluded that the best quality settings had a graduate led workforce.

The Graduate Leader Fund (or Transformation Fund) was set up in 2006 to support settings in achieving this aim. The idea was that settings could ‘home grow’ a graduate, by supporting their studies at University, whilst still working in the setting, or to assist a setting to recruit a graduate.

This would then enable graduates to go on achieve to the Early Years Professional Status (EYPS) – the gold standard.

But has spending all this money (£555 million) achieved anything in the last 5 years?

In July 2011, the Department for Education (DfE) released the Evaluation of the Graduate Leader Fund, researched by an eminent team and supported by the CWDC, Oxford University and the National Centre for Social Research.

Because the EYPS is still in its infancy (although there are now 7,500 EYPs), the research has used EYPs who have achieved the Status for 6 to 24 months. The two main questions to be investigated were:

  • Does having an Early Years Professional improve quality?
  • If so, which aspects of practice (and of quality) are most closely associated with EYP status?

(Evaluation of the Graduate Leader Fund p. 16)

I’ve done a couple of small scale research projects to explore the same questions and have found it incredibly difficult to unravel the Status from the person (see ‘Value your EYP’ on this website).

Similarly it is impossible to ignore the environment in which the EYPs work, physical and emotional. If there is already an ethos of implementing improvements, an openness to changes and a strong team, then the EYP stands a much better chance of making a positive contribution.

In the Evaluation of the Graduate Leader Fund, Mathers et al. have chosen to use the ITERS-R, ECERS-E and ECERS-R Environmental assessment tools (available from Amazon) which neatly side steps some of the issues.

These are a method of quantifying the quality of the setting and one that I always recommend to settings who know that there is something not ‘quite right’ but can’t put their finger on it. These audit tools enable practitioners to put a fine tooth comb through their practice and environment to identify which parts are functioning well and which need closer monitoring.

There are a myriad of findings and analysis from all the information gathered over the two year life of the project, which have been categorised into – The impact of gaining EYPS; Other predictors of quality; Improving practice in settings; Factors affecting improvements and Parents’ views of improvements, qualifications and their involvement in their child’s learning.

I was particularly drawn to the impact of gaining the EYP Status, the key findings of which were that:

  • Gains were seen in overall quality
  • EYPS provided ‘added value’ over and above gaining a graduate in terms of overall quality
  • Improvements related most strongly to direct work with children, such as support for learning, communication and individual needs
  • EYPs were more influential on the quality of practice in their own rooms than on quality across the whole setting.
  • There was little evidence that EYPs improved the quality of provision for younger children (birth to 30 months)

(pages 6 and 7 – Executive Summary)

In addition, it was found that few EYPs were working in baby rooms, which mirrors my own experiences with EYPs. It seems to be felt that EYPs are best used in pre-school. Maybe because they will be expected to talk to teachers, write leaving reports or liaise with multi-professional teams?

I would suggest this is an area ripe for research and discussion with settings. If this can be analysed successfully then EYPs may be used more effectively and efficiently in settings.

EYP networks have plenty of support in the Report: “EYPs valued having access to continuing professional development opportunities through EYP networks established within LAs. These networks provided the opportunity … to share best practice. Networks also provided additional training, for example on specific elements of provision.” (page 99) and “Local networks were seen as a valuable resource for training and for keeping up to date with new developments” (page 100) and “EYPs identified both CPD and the role of EYP networks as key facilitators for ongoing development.” (page 106).

This is very encouraging. Currently networks are struggling for funding and EYPs are having to justify their time away from the settings. This research clearly shows how valuable the benefits are.

In conclusion, I would strongly recommend anyone in childcare to access the report on the DfE website because I have only picked out a very few of the findings and their possible implications here. The report is thorough, interesting and very relevant – just as you would expect from these authors.

Now let’s hope the Coalition Government take the time to read and understand it.

References

Sylva, K. Melhuish, E. Sammons, P. Siraj-Blatchford, I. and Taggard, B. (2004) The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: Final Report A Longitudinal Study Funded by the DfES 1997-2004

Mathers, S. Ranns, H, Karemaker, A. Moody, A, Sylva, K, Graham, J, and Siraj-Blatchford I. (2011) Evaluation of the Graduate Leader Fund Final report. Research Report DFE-RR144

Note

Since then, there have been a number of updates to the Standards, requirements and Government policy.  The Early Years Professional Status has been replaced with a new Status – Early Years Teacher Status – which still has 8 Standards, but you now have to hold GCSE maths, English and science to do the course.

In addition, you have to pass the professional skills tests. You can find out more information from the Government website here

Image by Jenny

Read More
Recommended Resources

How Children Learn. Book 2 by Linda Pound


As the title suggests this is the follow on book from How Children Learn by Linda Pound and is laid out in the same style, with key dates in the side margins and good, clear headings. The references are many and varied, and, more importantly, easy to find!

The major difference with this book is the depth of the content. As well as an overview Linda goes into more detail about the development of each theory, how they build on each other and they differ. I found the way that phonics, in various forms, has been in and out of fashion since the middle of the nineteeth century fascinating – there is a particularly good table which compares analytic phonics with synthetic phonics in the chapter about how children learn to read and write.

In the chapter about intelligence there are some mind blowing facts:

  • The first series of tests for children, to see if they would benefit with mainstream schooling, were devised in 1905 (Simon-Binet tests). And I thought SATS were a modern demon!
  • In 1967 Joy Paul Guilford suggested there are 120 elements which make up human intelligence.
  • Scores in intelligence tests have been rising ever since they started (the Flynn Effect) – no-one is totally sure why.

Creativity is explored in the long view, from Freud to Pinker to Csikszentmihalyi, and then applied to the educational approaches. I found that this really made me think about what creativity is and why it is so important – and also why we don’t foster it more in our practitioners.

Conversely when Linda discusses progressive twentieth century theorists I felt that I had seen it somewhere before “individuality, freedom and growth”,”learning rather than teaching” and “a child’s life under his own direction is conducted all in play, whatever else we want to interst him in should be carried on in that medium”. The EYFS, maybe? No, progressive thinkers before the second world war.

The book ends on an overview of how children learn to talk including a very useful section on early years research.

Overall I would thoroughly recommend this book, especially if you have a particular interest in literacy, linguistics and intelligence or even if you have ever just thought ‘why do we do it like this?’.

Unlike book one, which I enjoyed as an interesting and informative read, I found this one really had me thinking and questioning my assumptions on phonics, creativity and intelligence. Linda deals with complex subjects and interwoven threads of theories comprehensively but clearly. It has inspired me to revisit theorists with a new outlook, particularly Gardner and Csikszentmihalyi, and has made me realise there is very little which is brand new in education!

Read More