Joint vision

Early years professionals involved in the creation of children's centres have told the Government what they want. Here Sue Owen summarises their views

e need a skilled and more stable workforce, in sufficient numbers, led and deployed effectively around the needs of children and young people.' This is the vision set out in the Government's consultation document for the Children's Workforce Strategy. It marks an important step towards a new culture of joined-up working, along with an attempt to grapple with many of the key issues within the sector, such as the balance between graduates and non-graduates in the workforce and the need for a qualifications framework.

These are some of the questions raised in a report earlier this summer by the National Children's Bureau's Early Childhood Unit. Defining and developing an integrated workforce in children's centres draws on a 12-month project that began in April 2004 to support the work of the Sure Start Unit. It compiles the views of 300 people involved in the development of children's centres, gathered from consultation events held in the nine Government office regions, and reveals important concerns and recommendations from early years workers.

Integrated package

To encourage participants in the events to focus their attention on the difference that children's centres could make, they were first asked to consider whether children in existing centres experience integrated care and education throughout the day.

Feedback showed a much greater concentration on processes the 'how' of developing a service, rather than the 'why' and 'what' of a vision. There seemed to be a consensus, however, that children should not have their care and education experience split in any way. As one participant commented, 'The children shouldn't notice any difference: same people, same practice, wherever they are and whatever time of day or year.'

Despite agreement in principle, it was clear that integration did not always happen. Many centres were splitting nursery education from daycare, some still offering them in different locations. The centres that had achieved integrated care were those that had gone back to the drawing board to develop new staffing structures, as well as a joint vision to which all staff were committed.

Pay and conditions

For staff, pay and conditions were seen as crucially important, with many participants calling for national guidance and basic job and person specifications.

There was agreement that these issues must be tackled at an early stage, reinforcing the importance of developing a vision and then creating processes, structures and workforce patterns to make it a reality.

Skills and knowledge

When asked to list the most important areas of expertise for practitioners, consultation participants were unanimous that knowledge of child development from birth was central, as was understanding how children learn. Participants stressed that these are not the same, and that both are required if children's needs are to be met in an integrated fashion.

Other attributes included partnership working with parents, and the ability to listen and reflect. It was generally agreed that specialisms were still important and that particular skills should not be watered down just to create a 'generic' practitioner.

It was felt that centre leaders should be able to audit the skills and qualifications of their staff and thus create effective team working. There was also agreement that training should include mandatory common elements, such as inclusion, equality and disability issues, while allowing specialisms to be added.

Concerns were expressed about the variable quality of training. Participants felt that the need for competent, reflective staff was not being met by the current system of college-based courses and Learning and Skills Council funding, which typically concentrate on young workers at NVQ level 2. Instead, centres should be able to 'grow' their own trainees and to use their preferred training providers.

Qualifications

When participants were asked whether existing qualifications were suitable for delivering integrated care and education, many quoted examples of colleagues who had found it difficult to move out of traditional roles. While this affected all professions, the view was that teachers had a particular problem because they had experienced higher professional status, backed up by better pay and conditions, for so long.

There was overwhelming agreement that centres should not be staffed or led solely by teachers, and there was approval for a 'pedagogue' model able to support integrated services and to work with all children holistically. This model should be tailor-made for children's centres in England today, rather than being imported from another country.

The groups reported mixed views on the importance of a graduate level workforce. Some felt there was an inexorable move towards graduate status, particularly in leadership roles, but that the term often acted as a proxy for a particular level of general education and competence which some people had already achieved through work experience and personal development. The overall view was that actual requirements in terms of competency and knowledge need to be identified so that routes to so-called 'graduate status' are clearer.

Many participants argued for the creation of a new, dedicated early years professional, drawing on the pedagogue model. Although it was recognised that an integrated centre would need more highly qualified specialists such as centre leaders, health professionals and social workers, a core qualification should make it possible for staff to progress into these different specialisms if they wished.

It was generally agreed that the age of 16 was too young to enter the profession and it could contribute to the low status of work with children. To counteract this, the creation of a robust apprenticeship role with clear skills and knowledge outcomes was proposed, going beyond the current Modern Apprenticeship system.

Management

When participants were asked about the management structures in emerging centres, issues of differing pay, conditions and status arose again. Any requirement that a centre manager should be a teacher was seen by many as inappropriate and a problem for the initiative's development.

Participants said they had experienced difficulties where teachers were managed by people with a care background, or by someone earning less than they did, while there were examples of teams feeling undermined because a teacher was brought in, especially as staff did not feel in a position to train for this role themselves. There were, however, examples of centres where a fusion of backgrounds had worked well because the issues had been aired fully in advance.

The way forward

A clear theme emerging from each area of discussion was the need for a joint vision. If centres are to be successful they must begin by considering what their community wants and then develop a shared philosophy and plan to meet their needs.

But it is not only a question of vision: robust funding is needed to support the training necessary to transform the early years workforce, and to shape the culture of learning and quality assurance.