EYFS Reforms Di's Response to Question 6 : The Areas of Learning

Early Years Foundation Stage Reforms – Government Consultation – 31^st January 2020

It’s time to get your voices heard by responding to the Governments proposed reform to the Early Years Foundation Stage which closes at mid-day on Friday 31^st January 2020.  PLEASE RESPOND – we need as many replies as possible to prevent the biggest change to the EYFS since it’s inception.

How can you respond?

• You can access the Consultation here  https://consult.education.gov.uk/early-years-quality-outcomes/early-years-foundation-stage-reforms/which closes on Friday 31^st January at mid-day
• The DfE especially want to hear from practitioners and settings working directly with young children and families so your voice is crucial – the number of submissions from you will be counted
• If you are the parents of a young child your voice will also be crucial – the Government have not consulted with parents at all

Why you should respond?

The proposed EYFS Reforms will impact across the Early Years Foundation stage from birth to 5+. The Government’s relentless focus on Reception classes in schools, and the massive changes to the Early Learning Goals (ELGs) and the Foundation Stage Profile (EYFSP) have left most of the private and voluntary sector in the dark. The so called ‘expert groups’ who have been consulted by the Department of Education, to inform the changes, have focused on schools.

There has been no engagement by the Government with the PVI sector, no pilots and no real understanding that the EYFS is made up of many skilled providers, all working under the same Statutory Framework across the age range 0-5+.  This has left the PVI sector in the dark and possibly feeling as though the reforms will have no impact on the valuable work you do with young children; when in effect it will significantly change your work mainly through Areas of Learning and how these are woven together to inform the curriculum for young children.

What are the implications for  children in the EYFS?

-          Considerable changes to the 7 Areas of Learning - see the points below

-          Removing Shape, Space and Measures, Technology and narrowing Communication and Language

-          Whilst the Characteristics of effective Learning remain a statutory duty (1.9) they are hardly mentioned

-          No real understanding of HOW children learn between the ages of birth to 3+

-          A relentless focus on Literacy, Mathematics and School Readiness

-          A new version of Development Matters and a separate document for the Reception Year

In the consultation Question 6 focuses on the 7 Areas of Learning:
Q6. Please give us your views on whether the activities described in each of the proposed educational programme summaries support children’s learning and development throughout the EYFS.  Please provide your view below, being specific about which educational programme this applies to where appropriate.

The following are my thoughts about this question which gives you detailed, informed feedback which you can use to help write your own responses;

The educational programmes:

• The title ‘Educational programmes’ needs to better reflect its overall purpose and how they form the foundations of the EYFS Curriculum. The original title ‘Areas of Learning’ in use across the sector is clearer, reflects the fact that there are several aspects which make the whole curriculum and does not sound like a school programme to be delivered in a specific, didactic way
• Have not met the aim of giving greater clarity and specificity to support daily practice in the EYFS. In many cases the original Areas of Learning are much stronger having been co-constructed as part of the Tickell Review (2011) by a strong team of experienced and knowledgeable professionals/experts through a consultation process which was open, transparent, collaborative and co-constructed. Children’s development and learning has not changed since then – child development remains consistent
• There needs to be a better connection between the ‘Educational Programmes’ and the Themes and Principles of the EYFS so that practitioners/teachers are very clear about everything that is included in the framework and avoid splitting it up into separate pieces e.g. Themes and principles; Educational programmes; ELG’s ; Characteristics of Effective learning etc are all part of the EYFS which form the whole.. Separating them out in this way, has and will continue misunderstanding in interpreting the curriculum
• The proposed changes to the areas of learning are in many cases misinformed and not aligned with current child development research and theories. See ‘Getting it right in the Early Years Foundation Stage: a review of the evidence’ for the full and recent research evidence to support this point
• Changing all 7 areas of learning will have a significant impact across the non-maintained sector, who have not been included in the review of the EYFS and have not had representation in the ‘expert’ groups. This will require cpd/training for the workforce that is already underfunded. How will the DfE ensure that there is enough funding for high quality training for all practitioners in the non-maintained sector?
• The terminology here and throughout the areas of learning is ‘school- ified’, uninspiring and not appropriate for a curriculum framework from birth to 5+. A more inspiring, appropriate term could be ‘Aspects for learning’; ‘Educational experiences’; ‘Educational Strands’ – which arise out of the Themes and Principles of the EYFS
• The Areas of Learning (Educational programmes) need to be in a separate section from the ELG’s as they are in the current statutory framework (The areas of learning and development 1.3 – 1.12 p. 7-10). This is the part of the EYFS Framework which should form the basis for the curriculum, which is then interpreted alongside practitioners/teachers understanding of child development, so that appropriate experiences are provided to support babies, toddlers and older children as they progress towards the ELGs at the end of the Reception Year
• In conclusion more work/discussion needs to be undertaken with the sector, along with fully informed professionals and experts in the field of the EYFS (birth to 5+) to ensure that we have the basis on which to build a strong, aspirational and creative curriculum as we see in other countries e.g. Scotland, Wales, New Zealand, Sweden

2. The Areas of Learning

Prime Areas of Learning - Comments

Personal, Social and Emotional Development (PSED):

• Should be at the at the beginning as this is fundamental to all aspects of learning and development (See PSED in Getting it right in the EYFS: A review of the evidence p.19 – 20)
• This is not developmentally informed across the spectrum of babies, toddlers and older children e.g. ‘set themselves simple goals’ is not appropriate for babies or toddlers who need to focus on feeling safe and secure and understanding their emotions before they can control them
• Helpful to acknowledge the it is crucial and also fundamental to cognitive development but there is confusion between emotional self-regulation and cognitive self-regulation which needs to be ironed out to avoid misinterpretation and confusing the workforce (there is a great deal of valuable research available here which would inform this aspect and which is already being used across the sectors)
• PSED does provide a secure, foundation but this is relevant to the child’s present and not about preparation for school. There is a danger that with this view that ‘school readiness’ becomes the goal and lead to ‘quick fixes’ or moving children on before they are ready – setting up further issues later in their lives.
• Older children may be able to manage good friendships, co-operate and resolve conflict peaceably but these are difficult and complex concepts for babies and younger children to understand
• There is nothing here about attachment and the importance of how early relationships impact on brain development. Or the development of dispositions of confidence, resilience, well-being etc all crucial for children’s early development and learning

Communication and Language (CL)

• The inclusion of serve and return conversations (which is the most often used term and links to the research) is very welcome. Also reference to the ‘quality’ of the conversations and the language rich environment. However, including the word ‘number’ will lead to a superficial view and most likely reduce the assessment of children’s progress in this area to quantitative tick list. It is not the number of conversations or words but the quality of the serve and return conversation
• Overuse of the term vocabulary is not helpful. Yes, children need to hear lots of talk and new vocabulary embedded within their conversations, in meaningful contexts, as this is how they will really learn new words. Communication and Language is one of the key aims of the reforms. However, the constant references to vocabulary will lead to an inappropriate ‘teaching’, possible use of flash cards/pictures etc and lists of words to cover. Many settings and LAs are already using materials like ELKLAN, Every Child a Talker (ECAT), the Communication Trust etc and have training programmes in place (e.g. Trafford’s Giving Voice Accreditation scheme) which are informed and developmentally appropriate
• There is no reference to early communication particularly the critical skills of attention, listening and understanding which underpin the development of language from birth.
• Or the centrality of oral language, talk as the foundation to early reading remembering that,

‘Children’s talk enables them to understand linguistic patterns, phonological sensitivity, drawing, writing and reading in the whole context of children being involved in talk, conversation, chatting, singing, play, rhyming, dancing and ritual’ (Whitehead)

• Use of the word ‘teacher’ does not reflect the workforce and reinforces the school-ified nature of the reforms. This needs to be consistent and relevant across the areas of learning and the reforms

 Physical Development (PD)

• This is a wholly inadequate description of the importance of children’s physical development. There is no mention of the connection between physical activity, brain development, vestibular and proprioceptive development (see the research evidence for this in the EYFS Review of the evidence p.21 and 22) which not only relates to physical co-ordination but also cognitive development and embodied learning where children are physically active in their play and learning e.g. what it feels like to go fast or slow, understanding the concept of special awareness etc, counting steps or jumps so they have an internal physical map of number (see also Mathematics). This relates to Thom’s (2017) research see ‘All about embodied learning’, Nursery World, 27^th November-10^th December 2017 for more information
• Spatial Reasoning is also a critical part of children’s physical development particularly related to mathematical development and learning as explained by Thom (2017),

As a starting point, we can describe spatial reasoning as how in the minds eye, we see the world around us, and how we can picture, understand and manipulate the locations and relative positions of shapes, objects or processes (p.21)

• Spatial reasoning is a skill which develops from birth starting with sensory experiences such as using the mouth, lips, tongue, eyes and smell to explore objects and moving onto embodying, owning and coordinating body parts, hands, fingers (proprioception). It then becomes more internalised and conceptual (Chilvers. D. 2020 forthcoming publication on Talk for Maths Mastery)
• It is no coincidence that young children are inherently active and that playing and exploring is a prerequisite of development. But for many children in school today, learning is most often associated with sitting down at a table with paper and pencil, completely detached from the physical movement of the body, with teachers who have little awareness of how this internal embodiment underpins cognitive understanding, particularly mathematics
• Outdoor play needs to be included as a right for young children to regular access to the outdoors, not least because some children (especially boys) learn more readily when they have the freedom of space to work on a large scale and in a natural way, without being confined to a table
• Health and self-care should be part of physical development as it has more relevance to children’s physicality including toilet training (developing appropriate muscle control), getting dressed (fine and gross motor skills) and proprioception as well as healthy eating and exercise

3. The Specific Areas of Learning:

 Literacy (L)

• The only relevant part of this proposed area of learning is the last line regarding developing a life-long love of reading. This should be the opening line and not the last
• This is a case of leaving the current wording of the area of learning as it is far more appropriate across the EYFS birth to 5+
• This is completely school focused with the emphasis on formal aspects of reading. It forgets (or ignores) that the purpose of these statements is to give a general overview of how children develop literacy from birth to 5+.  This actually describes the teaching of reading and phonics of which Ofsted have been very clear does not begin in a formal way until the Reception year. As such it runs the risk of starting formal reading too early, by-passing the essential experiences and skills that children need before launching into word reading and comprehension
• There is no connection here about how Communication and language is still part of reading which is particularly relevant for younger children, children with SEND and those learning English as a second language. Reading grows out of talk
• It needs to include how children understand, imagine and create stories in their play and use them as a starting point for early reading
• It also needs to reference how literacy connects to children’s lives, home learning and reading at home e.g. The REAL project led by the NCB has a great deal of evidence-based research on the success of early reading in partnership with parents
• There is nothing to inspire a creative and innovate approach here with professionals having the opportunity to link reading, storytelling, story scribing to children’s interests and their play – playful teaching etc.
• The description of writing is wholly inappropriate as an overall statement, it completely dismisses children’s natural mark making and writing from an early age and the links to children’s fine motor/physical development and hand/eye coordination. Handwriting as a term and skill is not appropriate for children under 5
• Handwriting, transcription, spelling and composition should be at the end of the Foundation stage with the proviso that some children will not reach this at all for various reasons e.g. summer born children particularly boys and children with SEND. This is developmentally unachievable for most children and will set children up to fail and develop a negative attitude towards wanting to write
• This all leaves the door wide open for inappropriate practices such as using phonics schemes aimed at KS1 and 2 e.g. Read, Write Inc

 Mathematics (M)

Shape Space and Measures SHOULD NOT be taken out of the Areas of Learning for the following reasons;

1. Thom’s (2017 – see above) research makes the connection to the development of children’s spatial awareness and spatial reasoning and how this underpins science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) with the additional perspective of the arts (STEAM). For young children, becoming mathematical encompasses all these aspects, but only if the adults around them are aware of the connections, for example, between shape, space and measures, number, technology, expressive arts and design and physical development (EYFS, 2017).
2. Thom’s (2017) work also points out that “children’s spatial skills prove to be a better gauge for their later mathematics performance than vocabulary and even mathematics tasks” after research “found the spatial thinking of the three-year-olds accurately predicted how well they performed in mathematics two years later at school” (p.21).
3. The profound and implicit message is that if they are not an ELG, they are not important
4. The EEF/NatCen Pilot Report (p.17 and 44) has shown that teachers/practitioners will not teach SSM if it is not an area of learning or an ELG and this has been shown to be the same for those working in the non-maintained sector as well
5. Removing SSM narrows the curriculum which contradicts Ofsted’s EIF which is looking for a broader curriculum
6. Simply mentioning SSM in the narrative is not strong enough – this has been proved in the EEF/NatCen feedback (see p.17 and p.44)

• It is not the case that children need only focus on number as evidenced in the above points – this is setting children up to have missing experiences and learning which are required in KS1 and 2. Maths coordinators have been shocked when they heard that SSM was being removed and expressed their concern regarding later teaching and learning
• There is no recognition or acknowledgement of children being mathematical from birth particularly through their schematic lines of thinking exhibited in their play. This undervalues younger children’s mathematical potential and leads to a poorer understanding of how children develop and learn mathematically through their play
• There is no mention of how the Characteristics of Effective Learning, especially creating and thinking critically underpin mathematical development in the EYFS. This includes critical dispositions for maths such as problem setting and solving, testing out hypotheses/ideas, making predictions and noticing patterns, groups, sequences, cause and effect
• There is an over direction of how to teach e.g. using manipulatives which are not appropriate for younger children and can narrow the opportunities for children to use other more familiar, natural materials in their play. Also see pages 22/23 of the EYFS Review of the Evidence ‘Getting it right in the Early Years Foundation Stage’
• The narrative, as in other educational programmes, reflects a school/teaching approach when many children will be in nurseries, pre-schools and childminders
• Using the phrase ‘mathematical mastery’ is concerning as this leaves the way open for publishing companies to produce inappropriate one-dimensional materials to be used as a systematic programme of teaching as is common in KS1 and 2. We have already seen KS1 Maths Mastery programmes being used  in Reception classes based on the notion that it can be made simpler or watered down. This is not appropriate as children’s development and learning (in all areas not just maths) starts from birth and only gathers momentum (from the ground upwards)  when supported by experienced adults who have extended their learning through playful, real life experiences and not through work books/sheets
• Mathematical Mastery in the EYFS is grounded in mastery orientation (Dweck 2000, Sylva 2004, Dowling 2013, Robson 2006, Parker Rees 1997, Gifford 2010 and Katz) which is very different to the mastery used in the Maths Programmes. Mastery orientation includes sustained shared thinking, the characteristics of effective learning, cognitive self-regulation, meta -cognition and a range of other dispositions and skills (Chilvers. D 2020 forthcoming book on Talk for Maths Mastery)
• It may be better to remove the term mathematical mastery unless there is a clearer definition of what this means in the EYFS

 Understanding the World (UW)

• This is completely knowledge based rather than children actively exploring their immediate world of home, nursery and local community.  The important people to babies, toddlers and older children are their parents, grandparents, brothers and sisters and their key person and other adults at nursery. This is their world
• There is no recognition of the things that children bring such as their own ‘funds of knowledge’ through their interests, culture, language and important home experiences – this is the starting point for understanding their worlds
• For babies this is through their sensory world of playing and exploring gradually widening their understanding through real life experiences as they grow and develop. Books are just one way of doing this, important but not limited to this. The emphasis on Literacy detracts from the many valuable experiences that children need for their holistic development and progress
• There is a danger that Understanding the world will be divided into history, geography and science for older children – this is already happening in some schools
• The removal of Technology is a significant concern in the 21^st Century and the emphasis on STEM (Science, Technology, Engineering and Mathematics) experiences and learning.  Children’s construction play, box modelling, woodwork, loose part play, experiences of materials and tools all contribute to technology. There is a huge potential for learning in terms of fundamental skills, language, imagination, creativity and much more
• Children are becoming digital ‘experts’ from an early age; with concerns about the way in which they experience technology at home e.g. over use of mobile phones it becomes even more imperative that the positive use of these technologies is modelled with children and parents in ways that support learning and development

Expressive Arts and Design (EAD)

•  There is a shift of focus from the current area of learning which sees the child as creative, exploring and finding out about media and materials through play. Following their ideas and interpreting their thinking through painting, drawing, modelling, building, movement, music and many other forms – it supports children’s expression through their 100 Languages (Malaguzzi)
• The revised area of learning focuses on other people’s creativity rather than their own
• There is no recognition of development of the way in which babies, toddlers and older children experience expressive arts and design using their imagination through playful experiences
• There is no evidence to suggest that the current area of learning EAD should be changed (See Getting it right in the Early Years Foundation Stage: a review of the evidence p.54)

A final thought…. 

Pausing to listen to an airplane in the sky, stooping to watch a ladybug on a plant, sitting on a rock to watch the waves crash over the quayside—children have their own agendas and timescales. As they find out more about their world and their place in it; they work hard not to let adults hurry them.

We need to hear their voices.

Cathy Nutbrown Contemporary British educational theorist

More to follow after I have answered  the other questions - please feel free to cut and paste 

Please contact Di at:

Email: di.chilvers@watchmegrow.uk

Website: www.watchmegrow.uk