Creating a single coherent phase of development for all young children aged nought to five has been a long cherished aim of many in the early years sector. They have yearned for the integration of care and learning and an end to what one leading specialist terms 'the chopping up of childhood'.
Their hopes have been raised by the Childcare Bill in which the Government has outlined plans for an Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) incorporating Birth to Three Matters (BTTM), the Foundation Stage and elements of the national standards for under-eights daycare and childminding into a single framework.
The proposed EYFS has been outlined in a Direction of Travel (DoT) paper which emerged from the DfES in mid-December, but was largely overshadowed by the concern felt in the sector over the sudden departure of Lesley Staggs from her post of Foundation Stage director.
The EYFS, due to be launched in 2008, has been set in the context of the five outcomes of Every Child Matters, will be statutory for all settings required to register with Ofsted and, the DfES says, will 'form an important phase in its own right, of equal importance to the national curriculum'.
A DfES spokeswoman confirms that the Foundation Stage will be removed from the national curriculum to facilitate a coherent phase of learning and development from birth to five.
While few, if any, in the early years sector would object to the principle of an integrated phase, the devil is in the detail. And the more early years practitioners and academics have scrutinised the details of the DoT document, the more they are concerned that it embraces a 'top-down'
approach with its content shaped by the demands of the national curriculum rather than the needs of young children (see box).
Alarming expectations
Early years consultant Jennie Lindon acknowledges that the DoT document includes 'some extremely positive content'. She adds, 'It is very strong on the importance of meshing care and learning and it has a good focus on individual pace which is appropriate for children.'
But she insists that it must be viewed alongside other initiatives such as the literacy and numeracy reviews and, specifically, the Rose Review which has advocated the wider use of synthetic phonics to teach reading. Given the current rhetoric around the strategies, she fears that early learning goals, particularly the most contentious ones relating to reading and writing, will rest on even more 'developmentally inappropriate expectations'.
A key section of the document, which has provoked alarm, states: 'We will set out the content so that practitioners can clearly see children's general progression through the four "aspects" of children's development set out in Birth to Three Matters towards the early learning goals, and see how that relates to the five outcomes.'
It adds: 'We will also ensure we retain a clear focus on the early learning goals, which set out challenging expectations for children's achievement at the end of the Foundation Stage, particularly in the areas of communication, language and literacy, and problem-solving, reasoning and numeracy, where many of the existing goals are pitched at level 1 of the national curriculum.'
Julia Manning-Morton, senior lecturer in early childhood studies at London Metropolitan University, warns that the good work put into BTTM could be jeopardised by the introduction of areas of learning and goals that are inappropriate for the nought to threes.
She adds, 'I am concerned that practitioners with insufficient training and experience will end up gearing their practice to those goals rather than focusing on where the children are at.
'We have a culture in this country of wanting to move children as quickly as possible towards a formal education and not valuing children's needs and development. A firm foundation is about having children who are emotionally secure, socially able and literate. But literacy is about physical, emotional and social literacy, and if this is not nurtured and built on then the foundations for reading and writing are less secure.'
Selective evidence
Eva Lloyd, senior lecturer in early childhood studies at the University of Bristol, argues that 'the evidence base for the introduction of early literacy and numeracy strategies is very flimsy when placed in an international context'. And, she says, the evidence base of the DoT document itself is faulty, as its emphasis on the findings of the Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) ignores the fact that this study looked at children aged three years and over.
Jennie Lindon also detects a tendency in the document to be selective about the research it chooses to highlight, just as the Rose Review appears to be endorsing the wider use of synthetic phonics largely on the basis of one study in Clackmannanshire.
Comparing quality
Anne Nelson, director of Early Education, applauds the aim to create a single coherent phase, but believes the lessons from several European countries should have been harnessed to create a birth-to-seven stage.
She questions the assertion in the document that compelling providers to register with Ofsted will 'create a level playing field between maintained, voluntary and private sectors, ensuring a consistent, high quality for all children, regardless of which setting they attend'.
Ms Nelson asks, 'How can parents assess and compare quality across the sectors when there will continue to be separate inspection frameworks and with different teams of inspectors with different levels of qualification?'
She says that Ofsted has indicated to her that children's centres will continue to be inspected according to their origins, for instance from a nursery school or pre-school.
Potentially divisive
Professor emeritus and early years consultant Janet Moyles believes that the DoT document fails to come to grips with the scale of training that will be required to implement the EYFS. She also doubts whether, with the departure of Lesley Staggs, there is anyone 'who has the knowledge and strength of character to pull this off'.
Professor Moyles warns, 'The vast differentiation in training and background of early years practitioners means that something as potentially huge as the EYFS could prove challenging and potentially divisive if someone is in charge who does not understand the current staffing context.'
She is also concerned about who will provide the training. 'Universities have, on the whole, not necessarily been able to develop large numbers of early years qualified staff, and college staff are often very overstretched.'
Local education authorities and consultants currently run much of the training, but they too cannot keep up with demand, and Professor Moyles argues that there will be a need for many more trainers so the early years workforce is 'adequately prepared for the challenge of implementing the new EYFS'.
However, she welcomes the document's commitment to observation of children's play and the resolve not to have formal assessments of children aged five and under. She believes the set of principles to be included in the EYFS to underpin practice, which supersede those in BTTM, the Foundation Stage and the national standards, 'appear to be the beginnings of a useful set of guidance for the early years'.
Jennie Lindon sums up the view of many in the sector when she says, 'On the bright side, if everything good in the document comes off, we will have a coherent, child-friendly framework which and creates firm foundations. On the downside, we could have what I call pre-school panic, a top-down framework dominated by the demands of the school service, with even less realistic expectations for very young children and an atmosphere of educational bullying.'
Further information
* Early Years Foundation Stage - Direction of Travel can be downloaded at www.surestart.gov.uk
The Early Years Foundation Stage
* The EYFS will bring together the Birth to Three Framework, the Foundation Stage, and elements of the National Standards for Under-Eights Daycare and Childminding into a single framework.
* The areas of learning and development for the EYFS, specified in the Childcare Bill, are:
* Personal, social and emotional development
* Communication, language and literacy
* Problem solving, reasoning and numeracy
* Knowledge and understanding of the world
* Physical development
* Creative development
* The EYFS will also include education programmes suited to children's individual abilities and maturities and assessment, by observing children's play.
* Welfare requirements for children, currently set out in the national standards, will also be included within the EYFS.
* The EYFS document will include a set of principles to guide the work of practitioners and there will be an EYFS guidance document that will include examples of good practice from settings across the country.
* The timetable for implementation is: March 2006: first detailed draft of EYFS document completed Spring 2006: formal consultation on the content of the EYFS August to September 2006: EYFS guidance developed.
October 2007 to August 2008: EYFS training for providers.
September 2008: implementation.