I recently used a Google news alert to stream the latest reports on the Tickell review of the EYFS to my blog, with illuminating results.
The first problem that faced the media was how to make sense of the numbers. To be fair, this was hardly surprising. Dame Clare herself, usually admirably direct and clear, came up with the baffling claim that 'there is clear and unambiguous evidence that outcomes for young children are improving. Notwithstanding this, less than half of children (44 per cent) are still not considered to have reached a good level of development by the end of the year in which they turn five.' I had to read that a fair number of times to untangle all those nots.
This led the Daily Telegraph to state '44 per cent of pupils in England currently start compulsory education without the basic social, communication and language skills needed to make a success of school'. That makes it sound as if nearly half of all children are seriously unprepared for the move into Key Stage One. But in fact, the 44 per cent figure refers to the proportion of children who have not achieved 78 points in the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile and at least six points in all the scales associated with the Personal, Social and Emotional and Communication, Language and Literacy areas of learning. A large number of those children are developing and learning perfectly well.
Meanwhile, the respected weekly magazine the Economist told its readers that the EYFS sets out '69 skills that nursery staff and childminders must impart to their charges before they toddle off to school'. I wonder what these skills are, and at what age these youngsters are imagined to be toddling to school?
A quick search online will uncover many more misunderstandings and falsehoods about the so-called 'nappy curriculum'. How can the general public make a sensible judgment about the quality of early years education and care, which is funded by significant amounts of their money, when there is so much misinformation about?