Since its inception, the place of the literacy hour in early years education has been open to question. How could a literacy strategy based on formal, whole-class teaching methods co-exist with a Foundation Stage based on child-centred, play-based principles? The simple answer is, it can't, say early years specialists, who are now campaigning for its removal from reception class teaching.
Leading the campaign is early years consultant Margaret Edgington, who is gearing up to gain more support now that the new school year is under way. 'I currently have 500 signatures and the number is rising daily,' she says.
She argues that the literacy hour is 'too passive, too adult-dominated and too structured' and so 'flies in the face of everything we know about how young children learn most effectively'.
Early years and literacy specialist Marian Whitehead, who has signed the petition, agrees. She says, 'We have struggled to put in place a Foundation Stage which reflects an appropriate curriculum for three-to five-year-olds, with its emphasis on such things as play and informal teaching methods and its awareness that children learn in an experiential way. Then the literacy hour comes from a different philosophy and view of language and makes a nonsense of it.'
The DfES rejects any incompatibility between the two. 'Covering the elements of the literacy hour is fully consistent with the early learning goals,' says a spokesperson, adding that guidance for both is 'clear and consistent'.
Yet a closer look at Developing Early Writing, a recent National Literacy Strategy (NLS) document for reception and Key Stage 1 practitioners, suggests tensions remain. While early years specialists may agree with the recommended devices for introducing early literacy - rhymes, cooking, shopping, role play and so on - the adult-dominated approach remains far removed from the Foundation Stage principles of good practice.
Tricia David, emeritus professor of Christchurch University College, says of the guidance, 'For early years practice to be appropriate, teachers need to be "formal in their heads but not in practice".' That is, she explains, they need to set up contexts for learning and respond to the meaningful literacy learning embedded in children's self-directed play, not teach in a whole-class, top-down way.
First things first
So, which approach is winning out in the classroom? Though not compulsory, most schools are doing the literacy hour, and two trends emerge. Teachers with early years training or good support are tending to use the Foundation Stage guidance as their key planning document and are implementing the elements of the literacy hour that they feel are appropriate.
Among them is Joyce Wardle, head teacher of Coles Hill Primary School, North Warwickshire. 'We're doing the components of the literacy hour that the teachers feel the children are ready for and along the lines of the Foundation Stage guidance,' she says.
A reception class teacher in Tower Hamlets explains that her school, too, relies on the Foundation Stage guidance. The school relates elements of the literacy hour to the whole curriculum 'to make it more meaningful' and ensures the focus remains on 'what is important', principally socialisation and confidence building. A shortened version of the literacy hour is then introduced in the final term. 'The summer term is a bit harder but it's preferable to doing it all year,' she says.
Some local authorities are also stepping up their efforts to make the two strategies work, among them Southwark. English adviser Virginia Bridge of WS Atkins Southwark (the privatised LEA) says, 'Most LEAs are aware of the tensions that exist and the perceived tensions that don't exist and are working hard to iron them out. The literacy team and early years team at Southwark work closely together in preparing training and advice for schools to avoid teachers receiving mixed messages from the LEA.' However, teachers with little or no early years training and poor support appear to be sticking with the formal methods that they know.
Pamela Hope, an early years specialist, former Ofsted inspector and supply teacher, says, 'In my experience, across a number of primary schools in inner and outer London boroughs over the past year the literacy hour is approached in a formal, sedentary way. There is a tightly planned routine which involves whole-class teaching, in which the children sit silently, ready to respond to questions, alphabet flash cards and a familiar story in big-book format. The emphasis is on performance and coming up with the "right answer", rather than exploring meaning in a way which relates to the child's experiences.
'The right approach is where each child is treated as an individual and their learning style, pace and ideas are respected, but unfortunately, this caring, developmental approach is not much in evidence in many schools.' Virginia Bridge agrees there is a problem. 'At the moment we have a lot of teachers in reception classes who are not early years trained and who may have limited experience of the NLS and the Foundation Stage, and are having to make sense of them both,' she says.
Teacher shortages have added to the problem, believes Pamela Hope. 'It is not unusual for a teacher who has always worked with, say, eight-or nine-year-olds to be drafted in by the head teacher to teach four-and five-year-olds. An untrained, unqualified classroom assistant, working alongside a teacher who is inexperienced in working with young children, can also pick up what can only be regarded as impatient, inappropriate and often bullying teaching methods,' she says.
A related problem is the speed with which the literacy hour is introduced. While the Government expects teachers to have established the literacy hour 'by the end of the reception year', in Margaret Edgington's experience, some schools are introducing the whole literacy hour in the autumn term, while others have it in place by the beginning of the summer term.
'The reality is that the DfES is not getting the message across that the literacy hour can be introduced very slowly and in small parts,' she says.
Under pressure
Reception class teachers also face further pressures and mixed messages. Margaret Edgington lists NLS regional directors, local literacy consultants, head teachers, school literacy co-ordinators and even Key Stage 1 teachers among those who often have a primary background and are putting pressure on reception class teachers to implement the literacy hour early and according to formal methods.
She says, 'Even the strongest teachers are caving in to pressure. There is considerable unhappiness among teachers being pressured into working in ways they consider to be inappropriate.'
Other early years consultants agree that the pressure can be 'unrelenting', while one head teacher confides that it is at the NLS conferences where she feels under most pressure to implement the literacy hour in full.
Parental pressure also makes some heads reluctant to modify their formal approach. Joyce Wardle, who regrets such methods, says, 'The difficulty is convincing parents that things will come right in the end and their child will make better progress in the long term.'
Early years specialists believe children are suffering as a result of these formal teaching methods. Early years consultant Marjorie Ouvry tells of children complaining to her that the literacy hour is 'tiring' and 'hurts' (because of the amount of writing expected of them at an early age), while Margaret Edgington fears, 'The literacy hour has left many children, particularly boys, turned off from books and writing and resulted in many young children being seen as failing or having special needs.'
Joyce Wardle fears the effect of the emphasis on literacy and numeracy on other curriculum areas. Pamela Hope argues that bullying teaching methods 'can have a devastating effect on children's self-esteem and motivation'.
The Government is committed to providing more training to help resolve the problems. It will commit at least 24m to fund Foundation Stage training in each of the next two years, in addition to the 13.5m Standards Fund for Early Years, to provide at least four days' training a year for all early years practitioners.
But while some local authority advisers feel the two strategies will be able to co-exist, Margaret Edgington is not convinced. 'Teachers cannot make the literacy hour OK for children because it is a totally inappropriate way of educating young children and is a totally inappropriate structure,' she says.
Marian Whitehead adds that 'the literacy hour is too remote, abstract and removed from real language. Language can only be acquired through use, and approaching it analytically (as in the literacy hour) can only be done when children are much older'.
Most importantly, signatories to the petition believe the literacy hour is jeopardising the Foundation Stage and only by removing it, will schools finally be able to implement the stage as it was intended. 'I don't think heads and teachers have taken on board that they're part of a Foundation Stage,' says Marian Whitehead. 'But we're saying, "You've got to come on board the Foundation Stage and be like early years teachers and have early years classes."
To sign up to the petition, contact Margaret Edgington at edgington@madasafish.com