How did you personally become involved in the council?
As an early years teacher and school leader with more than 28 years’ experience, I am only too aware of how, for too long, it has felt as though our sector has been marginalised and overlooked, especially by government and policy-makers. This is why the opportunity to chair a new Early Years Sector Council within the National Association of Head Teachers was one that I jumped at.
How will the council represent all sectors within early years?
The council has been established to represent the views of NAHT members who lead in early years settings. It will help to shape and influence the broader NAHT policy through our National Executive Committee [which it is responsible to]. Three of the 14 members of the council are themselves members of the National Executive Committee. We also have five co-optees who are also NAHT members from early years providers.
We have worked hard to ensure that these professionals are drawn from as wide a range of different settings as possible. Four additional advisors to the group are currently being sought and this is another way we will seek to gather views from across our very diverse sector. These will be people with specific expertise on whom the group can draw to help inform our thinking and decision-making. We will also be inviting guest speakers to join the group for some of our meetings so that we can draw upon as wide a range of knowledge as possible.
Because we were so overwhelmed by the call for members, we are setting up an online forum for those who wish to stay up to date with developments from the council and so that we can seek a wider range of opinions. Those early years leaders who are not yet senior leaders or head teachers will also have a strong voice on the council, as the director of our middle leaders’ section, NAHT Edge, will also be a part of the group.
What is your response to the consultation on early years funding?
The long-awaited DfE consultation on early years funding will be central to our early work, and our response to it will draw on the immense amount of expertise from NAHT members across the country.
An initial reading suggests that we should cautiously welcome the proposals and that they are largely sensible. The concept of a national funding formula makes sense. We would welcome an end to the significant funding differences we see currently between different local authorities, and a greater proportion of funding going directly to providers themselves.
However, we are concerned that the Government has not committed to protecting nursery school budgets beyond two years. Nursery schools face significantly higher costs and provide an excellent standard of education, especially for children from disadvantaged backgrounds. Any fair funding formula should reflect this. Having representatives from a range of different providers on the council will give us a shared understanding of funding challenges across the sector and the unique challenges we all face. This puts us in a strong position to make this point forcefully when talking with ministers.
What will you do to ensure the 30-hour free offer benefits all children?
While we broadly support the increase, the details of implementation will be critical in determining the success of this ambitious policy. At our initial meeting, members of the group were keen to discuss concerns that had been raised by providers. There is understandably a very real concern about there being capacity in the system to provide enough places. The group were also clearly concerned about the potential negative effect the policy could have on some of the most disadvantaged children whose parents are not in work. We need to monitor the implementation of this policy and the full range of providers must work together to ensure that no children are unintentionally let down.
What specifically will you be lobbying for, in the light of your strong focus on disadvantage?
We are very concerned about how early years providers often struggle to access the resources they need to support vulnerable children. This is why the proposals for a Disability Access Fund and local inclusion funds for children with special educational needs sound positive. Getting provision right for these children can make such a difference but we need the resources to do this. Funds are only one part of the picture (albeit a very important part) and it will be crucial that there are enough specialists to call on when they are needed. Children are increasingly joining our early years settings presenting a wide range of complex challenges, just as support from specialists is more difficult to find. Services are stretched and early years staff are often the first to identify significant developmental, physical or psychological challenges, and increasingly they have very little support from other agencies to address these.
The Government needs to seriously consider increasing the Early Years Pupil Premium so that it matches the amount received in the primary years. Investing in pre-school provision is likely to be an effective means of breaking the cycle of disadvantage.
What are your priorities on strengthening the workforce?
We are awaiting the promised workforce review with interest. Our members have consistently reported difficulties in recruiting high-quality members of staff.
We would like to see clear pathways to professional qualifications and opportunities for high-quality continuous professional development; it is not just about new recruits to the sector, but upskilling those already working in early years. The early years stage is crucial in the development of a child, and the Government must recognise this in relation to the skills of the workforce. We are very keen to engage with both the profession and the Government to help determine how best this can be achieved.
How would the council like to see assessment resolved? NAHT welcomed the principle of a Reception baseline, which the majority of the early years secor is against, but said the Government’s assessment plans were chaotic…
It is clear that the Government made significant and avoidable mistakes with the Reception baseline, and the recent announcement that the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile will remain mandatory for next year suggests that we are no closer to a long-term solution in this area. As a group, we will be following developments very closely and drawing on a wide range of early years experts to help shape our thinking on the issue. As a starting principle, we need to be clear that any assessment should be focused on supporting practitioners in meeting the needs of children, not as a tool for government league tables. We must also ensure that assessments do not distort the curriculum and detract from the rich physical, exploratory, playful, creative and intellectual experiences children need in the early years. We should question if they will be harmful to partnerships and relationships with pre-school settings, as they point towards narrow measures of learning and progress and undervalue the careful records that nurseries and pre-school settings already send on to schools.
To register interest for the forum, email: policy@naht.org.uk
ASSESSMENT UPDATE
The Government’s decision to keep the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile statutory for 2016-2017, and retain funding for the baseline assessment, is being viewed as a positive sign by the sector, suggesting that the Department for Education (DfE) recognises the importance and validity of observation and assessment. While there is a current lack of clarity around assessment, this does not necessarily imply that big changes to the EYFS are in the pipeline.
Around 2,500 schools in England are continuing to use the EExBA baseline assessment model developed by Early Excellence. Its national director Jan Dubiel reports that Early Excellence ‘is in the process of a long conversation with the DfE and trying to get a sense of how it is taking things forward. It is considering a number of ways to approach assessment but is not prepared to give us anything concrete.’
He adds, ‘We do not yet know how new ministers will be shaping policy, but as the parliamentary term progresses, we should get a clearer idea.’