The mixed findings come from the longitudinal Study of Early Education and Development (SEED), which is following 6,000 children from the age of two into school.
Children’s home learning environment and their relationship with their parents was also found to have ‘considerable influence’ on children’s cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes measured during Reception and Year 1.
The same Government-funded research, published by the Department for Education, has also found a link between children that spend a large amount of time in informal childcare with friends and relatives and better speaking skills when they start school.
However, for the 40 per cent most disadvantaged children, spending time in formal early education and childcare meant they were more likely to do well in the Early Years Foundation Stage Profile results at the end of Reception and have better verbal skills.
The latest report looks at the impact of early childhood education and childcare (ECEC), the home environment and parenting on cognitive and socio-emotional development on around 6,000 children in England from the age of two to the end of key stage 1, at the age of seven.
The report’s authors are Professor Edward Melhuish, from the University of Oxford, and Nord University, Norway, and Julian Gardiner of the University of Oxford.
The authors point out that their findings are at odds with EPPSE, the last comparable longitudinal study, which ran from 1997 to 2000.
They cite various explanations for the difference in findings, including that given the increase in take-up of ECEC since that time, it is no longer possible to compare children with no experience of it with children who are in ECEC settings (see below).
Key findings
1. A larger amount of informal individual ECEC (with friends and relatives) used between age two and the start of school was associated with higher child verbal ability measured during Year 1.
2. A larger amount of formal group ECEC (in pre-school, nursery etc.) was associated with poorer outcomes on a number of child socio-emotional scales measured during Year 1.
3.There is evidence that the use of some individual ECEC (childminders, friends, relatives) mitigates the negative socio-emotional effects of high formal group ECEC use.
4.For the 40 per cent most disadvantaged children, starting to use a minimum of ten hours per week formal ECEC no later than age two, combined with an average use of over 20 hours per week of formal ECEC between age two and the start of school, increases the chances of achieving expected EYFSP levels in Reception and improves children’s verbal ability in Year 1.
5.The characteristics of the home environment, including the home learning environment and the parent / child relationship, have considerable influence on children’s cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes measured during Reception / Year 1.
6.There was no clear evidence of associations between the quality of ECEC which children had attended between ages two and four and their developmental outcomes during Reception/ Year 1. However, these findings may relate to the relatively small sample of settings for the SEED quality study and the similarities in ECEC quality across the sample.
Why the difference between EPPSE and SEED?
The effects of ECEC associated with children’s cognitive outcomes at the start of school were more limited than those found in the EPPSE study, the last comparable study in England.
The authors of the report conclude, ‘The differences between EPPSE and SEED results may partly reflect the increase in ECEC use since the EPPSE study (1997-2000), as it is no longer possible to use a no ECEC group in comparisons; this study utilises a low ECEC use comparison group instead.’
They also attribute the difference to the fact that ‘the percentage of children experiencing low quality ECEC has substantially reduced’, and that the EPPSE measures were taken when children had finished pre-school but before Reception.
In contrast, the SEED start of school measures were assessed at the end of Reception and during Year 1.
‘This may have allowed children with less pre-school ECEC use to catch up with those who used more pre-school ECEC, resulting in less impact of ECEC use in SEED as compared to the EPPSE study.’
Comments
Max Stanford, head of early childhood education, at the Early Intervention Foundation, said, ‘Given early education and childcare is one of the biggest government investments in early intervention, it is critical that we know the impact this is having on improving child development and reducing the disadvantage gap. We would certainly support the continuation of the study to assess impacts into adulthood.
‘While the report presents a very mixed set of findings, it is important to see them in the context of a changing early years education landscape. Given that almost all children now receive some form of early education and care, as opposed to none at all, we need to switch our focus to understanding and improving the quality of that provision.
'At the same time, given the benefits of a rich parent-child relationship and home learning environment, as shown in this report, we should concentrate on ensuring children have as high-quality a learning environment at home as they do in other early education and care settings.’
A Department for Education spokesperson said, ‘A child’s early education is crucial to their future success and our research shows that young children, especially the most disadvantaged two-year-olds, benefit from an early start to learning.
‘We are also supporting parents to kickstart their children’s learning at home through our Hungry Little Minds campaign and today announced six new independently approved apps to boost early literacy, language and communication skills.’
- The report, Impact study on early education use and child outcomes up to age 5 years, is available here