Part 2: More of Di’s thoughts and responses to the EYFS Consultation

Have just written 4750 words to the DfE in response to the EYFS Reforms!!!!!

They may help you to form your own responses - I hope so. We need all those involved in working with young children in the EYFS to have their say so please reply.

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.

Q 7. Please give us your views on whether the proposed ELGs are clear, specific and easy to understand. Please provide your views below, being specific about which ELGs they apply to where appropriate.

The whole sale change of the ELGs was not necessary as they are a good, well understood, carefully crafted measure of children’s progress at the end of the Reception Year with over 10 years of historic data. The EYFSP data has become accepted, year on year, to be a reasonable measure of progress bearing in mind that any measure will not be 100% accurate as there will be a 11+month variable between the children
The only ELGs which needed consideration as they were out of line with child development were the Literacy, writing and number ELGs, which in the feedback from Early Education (July 18) could have been revised as follows;

Reading: Children read and understand simple text using a range of strategies including context, visual memory and phonics. They use their phonic knowledge to decode regular words and read them aloud accurately. They also read some common irregular words. They demonstrate understanding when talking with others about what they have read.

Writing: children write to record their own ideas in a range of circumstances. They use their phonic knowledge to write words in ways which match their spoken sounds. They also write some irregular common words. Their writing can be read by themselves and sometimes by others. Some words are spelt correctly, and others are often phonetically plausible.

Numbers: Children use numbers in a range of circumstances. They can reliably count sets of objects to at least 10, and can say which set has more or less. They recognise and order numerals to at least 10 and can recognise small numbers of items without counting. They solve everyday problems in practical contexts using addition and subtraction by joining or separating sets.

These ELGs are realistic and achievable whilst being aspirational for others there will be more of an opportunity for children to reach the ELG. The current ELGs are developmentally skewed towards older children in Y1 and do not take into consideration children with SEND, EAL or summer born children.

The Governments over emphasis on the ELGs throughout the development of the reforms, the pilot and the consultation along with the lack of emphasis on the Areas of Learning and the Characteristics of Effective learning has significantly skewed the view of the early years curriculum. It is no wonder that teachers in Reception classes are continuing to view the ELGs as the curriculum (which was very evident in the EEF/NatCen Pilot Report p. 25,26) and only plan to teach with the ELGs in mind due to pressure and demands from the Govt and Ofsted
It is highly likely that children reaching the Good Level of Development will fall significantly and the gap will widen considerably with the current proposals. It is essential to involve specialists in child development who can review the ELGs in light of their knowledge, experience and research. The proposed ELGs are setting children up to fail with some only just being 5 yrs old and other 6yrs old. What about equal opportunities for all?
Using bullet pointed statements in the ELGs leaves the door open for tick lists – there are a potential 52 statements which imply, by the use of the term “Children at the expected level will….” that children have to ‘pass’ them. This does not support the strong view of the consultation of teachers being able to use their professionally informed judgements based on their observations and knowledge of the children. The way the ELGs were previously written, as a concise narrative from which to make an informed judgement gave a rounded more holistic view of the child’s progress
It then follows that practitioners/teachers will use their informed knowledge of the child from their observations and interactions, their embedded learning/understanding (responsible pedagogy) so that they can see the depth and breadth of development and learning in an appropriate context of child-initiated play and activities as stated in the EYFSP Handbook
The ELGs are a narrow measure of children’s development, learning and progress with the removal of Shapes, Space and Measures, Technology and reducing communication and language to two ELGs. The relentless focus on reading, vocabulary, phonics and number have severely limited each child’s potential for a holistic assessment at the end of the EYFS
The proposed changes to the ELGs have not been shared with parents/families – there needs to be an open and transparent opportunity for them to contribute to any decision which will see their children being assessed against goals which have not been verified by external child development experts
It is highly likely that these ELGs will lead to inappropriate teaching (classroom practice) methods for children in the EYFS. This was fed back by the schools involved in the pilot “ELGs resulted in an increase in the amount of structured delivery time required” (EEF/NatCen p.27) and “We had to incorporate additional teaching to ensure that children met the target of 10 digraphs and other elements of the descriptor” (EEF/NatCen p.26)
Feedback from teachers in the EEF/NatCen report also said there was a “shift from skills based to knowledge based descriptors” particularly in mathematics and knowledge and understanding of the world (p.27) and there were concerns that “Children were spending more time sat down for formal learning and therefore had fewer opportunities to develop their social skills and interact with peers through play” This is not the balanced pedagogy of the EYFS which ensures that children learn through sustained shared thinking (Ofsted July 2015, Ref 150085)
It is not surprising that Schools have used the ELGs as the ‘curriculum’ as they are full of directions for what should be taught. They read as a list of knowledge and criteria to be taught in order to reach the end goal. If the aim of the EYFS Reforms is to move away from the ELGs being used as a Curriculum, and reducing the amount of paper work and time spent on them, they need to be written in a more holistic way as a short paragraph which acts as an overall indicator of either Emerging, Expected or Exceeding – as in the current ELG format. Then teachers can make professionally informed, best fit judgements
Where point 11 has struggled in the past, is with teachers who are not fully experienced in young children’s development and learning, and as a result have misinterpreted or been unable to make professionally informed judgement. This is why those who work in the EYFS and especially Reception class teachers should be well trained early years professionals. This was outlined in the final report of the practitioner survey commissioned by the early years sector coalition to inform the review of the EYFS, which received over 3000 responses. The message from the survey is clear. In the words of one practitioner:

"EYFS doesn't need to be changed. What must be enhanced are practitioner skills, training and funding available to settings to increase salaries and attract higher calibre teachers."

See Mapping the landscape: practitioners views on the Early Years Foundation Stage

Q8. Please give us your views on whether the proposed ELGs contribute to a well-rounded assessment of a child’s development at the end of reception year. Please provide your views below, being specific about which ELGs they apply to where appropriate.

The ELGs do not contribute to a well-rounded assessment of a child’s development for the following reasons;

See notes re the ELGS in Q. 7 and also in Q.6 relating to the areas of learning
They are developmentally in appropriate and have not been verified by experts in child development
Many of the ELGs are beyond the developmental reach of some children e.g. summer born children, children with SEND and those learning English as an additional language
They are a narrow representation of children’s development and learning, with on over focus on literacy and maths
They do not see children’s development and learning holistically

Communication and language ELGs;

Listening attention and understanding

If the aim of the EYFS Review is to primarily improve key outcomes at age 5 by focusing on strengthening language and vocabulary development then the previous ELG for Understanding needs to be reinstated as this is central to how children develop their conversations, knowing and choosing the right words to explain what they mean and making sense of what people say – it is fundamental
Both here and in the introduction to Literacy, it needs to be made clearer that CL (especially oral language) is the root of literacy – reading grows out of talk (See Talk for Reading Initiative)

Speaking

New vocabulary is not best introduced through reading as suggested here, with first-hand activities serving only as follow-up practice. This misunderstanding reflects the lack of awareness of Understanding as preceding using vocabulary. Children best understand words when they experience them in first-hand contexts, not in the more abstract situations of being read to
Speaking (Language development) is directly connected to thinking (cognitive development) - the ELG should reference the way children use language for thinking in narratives and connecting ideas and experiences
Using full sentences is an arbitrary measure – how many adults always speak in full sentences all the time? The important language of serve and return conversations are often in unfinished sentences and changes – this is what happens when children and adults use language for thinking
The goal discriminates against children whose first language is not English and may not have fully learned grammatical speech but have made incredible progress and are bilingual
The same applies to children who have SEND

Personal, Social and Emotional Development ELGs;

Self-Regulation

Emotional Self-regulation as a disposition is better viewed and understood through the Characteristics of Effective Learning and not as a goal to be reached – it would be better for children’s progress to be viewed through the C of EL and not by simple statements to be ticked off. It is far more complex than this
Linking self-regulation to ‘good’ behaviour and compliance is setting up children to fail especially those who are the youngest in the year and those with SEND
The original ELG is much more helpful than the proposed replacement in relation to self-confidence and self-awareness as it is about what children do and how they do it. The replacement is far too abstract. Part of resilience is being able to ask for help when needed. Perseverance is part of the Characteristics of Effective Learning, as is play

Managing self

The original ELG is much better that the proposed reforms and should be retained. It expresses how children take responsibility for themselves in a personal way – managing their bodies and learning how to look after them for their own well-being
Keeping, healthy, safe and eating well is a critical part of growing up and becoming emotionally well rounded, self-aware and confident. All extremely important in todays culture and part of the Heads Together Charities 5 Big Questions conversation on early childhood

Building relationships

The original ELG is much better that the proposed reforms and should be retained
“Work” is not a word which would often be used to describe activity in the EYFS. If a broader word than “play” is wanted, perhaps “play and learn”?
The second bullet is too vague: children from birth onwards form positive attachments, and friendships from at least age 2.
There is no clear rationale for a name change from “Making relationships” to “Building relationships”.

Physical Development ELGs;

Gross Motor Skills

No reference to important aspects of physical development such as the development of proprioception and the vestibular system. Yet the ability to move with co-ordination and balance is as much about these aspects of development as it is about gross motor skills. For this reason, the previous heading of “moving and handling” is perhaps preferable, as “moving” can incorporate some of these wider aspects.
Second bullet point is too vague, as demonstrated in the pilot: What does the expected level of strength, balance and co-ordination for a 5-year-old, compared to a 3-year-old or a 15-year-old? This needs more on balance, coordination and control.
The EYFS should promote children having more physical activity in line with the Chief Medical Officers’ guidelines (which should be clearly referenced within the Statutory Framework).
What level of skill or co-ordination in jumping, hopping, skipping etc should be expected for a child at the end of Reception?
Can the ELG be appropriately worded so as not to unnecessarily exclude its achievement by children with SEND?

Fine Motor Skills

Using tripod grip is too prescriptive and not important enough to be an ELG -- the effect is more important than the detail of grip, and a range of grips are appropriate and effective. It is also not inclusive of some children with a disability.
It is not clear whether “in almost all cases” is intended to mean “almost all children” or children “in almost all situations”. Given the variation in application of “best fit” to this in the pilot, it is clear that this needs further reformulation.
The reference to drawing could more appropriately be replaced with “when mark-making or using small equipment”.
These two ELGs (Gross and Fine Motor Skills) could be combined to make it possible to keep Health and Self-Care as an ELG under PD which ensures the relationship between these areas of PD are clear to practitioners.

Literacy ELGs;

Comprehension

This ELG is the same as Understanding and should be in Communication and Language as this is the foundation of comprehension and makes the connection between talking and reading
This means that the Understanding ELG can be left as it is.
It is not helpful to split reading up into these two aspects – reading has many aspects which when woven together, in a natural way, help children to understand everything in the context of enjoying a book, avoiding confusion and misunderstandings e.g. Phonics as a separate aspect of reading is often confusing as children try to apply them back into the context of reading and writing

Word Reading

Bullet 1 of Word Reading is inappropriate: This is too challenging for many children. How does this fit in with the current expectations in Phonics teaching? For children with EAL, SEND and summer born children this could be a significant challenge.
This will all be used as a tick list – adding to workload as well as defining children’s progress in a negative way. This is one of the areas which could lead to a significant drop in outcomes at the end of the Foundation Stage as children would have to have achieved these before being given the Goal. There is no wiggle room here. In order to show progression in language comprehension, this needs to include children understanding 'how' and 'why'.
It is not weakness in teaching that leads to many children not achieving the current Literacy ELGs. It is developmentally inappropriate for many children. EYFS should focus on emergent reading.
The sole reliance on phonetic decoding before engaging with meaning of words and texts, though supported by the current government, is a highly contested area. This does not reflect much current expert understanding of the development of reading.
The approach is inappropriately restrictive and attempts to dictate pedagogy instead of leaving this to teachers’ professional judgement. There is nothing here about using pictures to support the understanding of words and comprehension.
What about children’s enjoyment of reading?

The ELG should read as follows;

Reading: Children read and understand simple text using a range of strategies including context, visual memory and phonics. They use their phonic knowledge to decode regular words and read them aloud accurately. They also read some common irregular words. They demonstrate understanding when talking with others about what they have read.
This is a more appropriate and developmentally aligned ELG

Writing

The ELG should read as follows;

Writing: children write to record their own ideas in a range of circumstances. They use their phonic knowledge to write words in ways which match their spoken sounds. They also write some irregular common words. Their writing can be read by themselves and sometimes by others. Some words are spelt correctly, and others are often phonetically plausible.

This is a more appropriate and developmentally aligned ELG

Mathematics ELG’s;

Shape Space and Measures

Removing Shape, Space and Measures as an early learning goal is a huge mistake. This is an aspect of learning that underpins children’s all-round mathematical development. For example, most children in the EYFS are imaginative builders and constructers deeply engaged in block play in many forms on a small scale indoors and a large scale outdoors, with innovative and inspirational ideas about design, testing out balance and form, how blocks fit together (tessellation), cause and effect and collaborative co-construction with others.
It is vital that the maths ELGs are not just focused on numbers mathematical learning is much more than that, including key aspects of the CoE particularly creating and thinking critically.
Research (look particularly at the Coalition EYFS Review of the Evidence, 2019, pages 35-36) shows that children’s development of spatial awareness contributes significantly to mathematical development and learning:
‘Much research shows that spatial skills predict not only general mathematics attainment but innovation in creativity and STEM fields.’ Spatial awareness and reasoning helps children to see how shapes may fit together (for example, using jigsaws), what happens when you combine shapes; internal visualisation of number lines and using these abstractly in the brain; being able to work out abstract number problems internally and understand concepts of number so that they can solve problems in abstract ways.
Mathematics involves more than just number skills; a strong foundation in practical maths problem-solving and pattern recognition is essential to success in maths, and there is a need for an ELG in this area. In my work across the country with schools I have met many mathematics co-ordinators who, when they have heard about the removal of Shape, Space and Measures as an area of learning and an ELG have voiced strong concern as to the effect this will have when children enter KS1 and KS2 without the underpinning knowledge, experience and skills of these concepts. It is highly likely that in five years’ time, we will see the outcome of removing this aspect of learning and the impact it has had on narrowing children’s mathematical development and opportunities.
Also see my points under the mathematics area of learning in Question 6
Shape, space and measure must be included in the ELG to avoid a narrowing of the maths EYFS curriculum
The current ELG on Shape, space and measures should remain as it gives children a wider experience of mathematics which they are actually tuned in to develop. Many schematic patterns of thinking are the basis for these aspects of learning so crucial to keep them (see Areas of Learning in Q.6).

Numerical patterns

This ELG is not necessary as in the main these bullets are part of Numbers. They will just become another way or being able to ‘test’ children – easily measurable and show a superficial rather than deeper understanding of mathematical patterns.
The ELG should not be about “recall” or rote learning. “Patterns of numbers” not clear – this needs to be more explicit. Inclusion of evens and odds is not appropriate for all children at this stage.

Number

Focusing on a deep understanding of the numbers to 10 is an improvement on the previous focus on counting to 20, although it might be helpful to add “at least to 10”.
Research on subitising generally says it is not really possible beyond 4; some adults can do 5, but generally we have to mentally add 2 +3, because we can actually perceive only up to 4.

The ELG for Number patterns and Number should be merged together as;

Numbers: Children use numbers in a range of circumstances. They can reliably count sets of objects to at least 10 and can say which set has more or less. They recognise and order numerals to at least 10 and can recognise small numbers of items without counting. They solve everyday problems in practical contexts using addition and subtraction by joining or separating sets.

Understanding the World ELGs;

The original ELGs are better as they are not muddled and have an informed approach to supporting the development of British Values and social mobility

Past and Present and People Culture and Communities

These ELGs are muddled and confusing with many overlapping themes – they could be brought into one ELG and Technology brought back
Is clearly linked to the study of history in some mistaken and worrying alignment with subjects in KS2
It should not be about “books read in class” (repeated here twice), it is about experience and conversation
It needs to start with the familiar, and children's daily lives and the lives, similarities and differences of people around them, and meaningful personal histories.
Recall of historical facts is inappropriately bringing in aspects of the Y1 curriculum. For young children history starts with their family and Grandparents not characters from history like Florence Nightingale!
Evangelou et al (2009) used a version of Bronfenbrenner’s ecological model of child development to structure the research report which informed the review of the EYFS. The child reaches out to, and is influenced by, first their family, and then settings and community. The setting or school sits within the family and community spheres of influence and should not be seen as separate from them.
Learning and development takes place within this broad and flexible context and both what children learn (the areas of learning) and how they do it (the CoEL) are part of it
It is about real, in the moment, concrete experiences connected to children’s lives

Technology

Fast-changing nature of technology means this cannot be too specific, but it is also an area of the EYFS which helps children and families as learners and communicators and which is looking to the future.
It is appropriate for children to learn about all sorts of technology – not just computers. There is already concern that we are losing the type of thinking, dispositions and skills that are needed for the future in terms of developing technologies, and it would therefore seem a backward step to abandon this ELG, and even more so to remove references to technology from the educational programme
See references to Technology in Q.6
With the increase in STEM and STEAM activities it is common sense to use this as the basis for Technology. Research by Sheffield University into STEM and STEAM has led to a fuller understanding of Technology in the 21^st Century (See Jackie Marsh – Sheffield University)

Expressive Arts and Design ELGs;

Creating with Materials

A better, more informed understanding of creativity and being creative is required for both the ELG and the Area of Learning
Creativity is not the sole preserve of the arts – in the EYFS it is in the CoEL and runs through all areas of the curriculum (eg maths, language, making relationships with others)
“Draw and paint” is a very restrictive definition – what about clay, woodwork, collage, etc? A broader word is needed. The process is more important than the product, so the emphasis should be on the experimenting, not the drawing and painting
How does this ELG give status to Expressive Arts and Design within the curriculum? It is more like an afterthought!

Being Imaginative and Expressive

Performance should not be an ELG. Children should be engaging in singing and dancing, but this puts too much focus on an “end-product”, i.e. “performing”. The aim may have been to acknowledge “performance arts”, i.e. singing or storytelling, but this could be misinterpreted leading to inappropriate expectations that children should perform
Reference to make music and dancing have been lost other than an overly specific reference to well-known nursery rhymes and songs. The vital creative aspect of children experimenting with and changing music and movement have been taken out
Children can construct narratives alone, as well as with peers and teachers.
The two existing ELGs are far better than these. They highlight becoming familiar with media and materials, and then using them to express their own ideas.
Being imaginative is not fully explored or expressed. Children expressing their own ideas and using their imaginations is central to learning not just in this ELG. It is poorly understood and marginalised becoming a superficial outcome rather than a disposition which will be fundamental for the future

Q9. What are your views on removing the LA statutory element of EYFSP moderation? Please provide your views below.

Having an external moderator is important in ensuring that professionally informed judgements are consistent across schools. Where moderators are highly experienced, knowledgeable and informed and they can take an objective view this is helpful
Removing the external role would lead to schools, especially those in Academies and MAT’s moderating their own outcomes which would skew the validity of the EYFSP and the robustness of any outcomes. This was a concern of the teachers in the EEF/NatCen Pilot Report (p.42) to ensure that there is a ‘balanced picture’
LA moderation also supports EYFS Foundation Stage Leaders in keeping the focus on good practice and not being influenced by top down pressure, or indeed pressure for good Ofsted grades from Head Teachers, Senior Leads etc

Q10. What are your views on whether removing the LA statutory element of the EYFSP moderation will help to reduce teacher workload? Please provide your views below.

Sensible moderation processes do not require excessive paperwork or workloads. This has happened as a result of overzealous moderation and misinterpretation of the EYFSP, responsible pedagogy and guidance. Having undertaken a full evaluation for one LA with regards to moderation and the impact on outcomes, the findings showed that overzealous moderation, LA devised procedures and paperwork and inexperienced moderators led schools to feel as though they were being forensically examined
However, where schools did not have knowledgeable, experienced well trained EYFS leaders and staff they often relied on having excessive paperwork rather than being able to talk about children’s development and progress in an informed way
Workload was also increased significantly by Head Teachers who did not understand the EYFS or the EYFSP and observation informed assessment, insisting on the Foundation Stage using the assessment tools in KS1 and 2 as well. They were then doing twice as much paperwork and unnecessary duplication
Worries about Ofsted also significantly contributed to the workload and paperwork

Q11. What alternatives to LA statutory moderation do you think could help to ensure consistency of EYFSP judgements across the ELGs? Please provide your views below.

LA moderation or external moderation does ensure that the EYFSP outcomes are triangulated and robust, but they need to be undertaken by well experienced people who fully understand child development, HOW children learn and progress.
Moderating once a year in such a formal way needs to be fully explored as a process – there are better ways of doing this so that everyone learns from the experience and it is collaborative and helpful
Moderation processes should also be an integrated part of observation and assessment throughout the Foundation Stage
Triangulation is the key factor here in making decisions as objective as possible and professionally informed by considering multiple perspectives. By bringing in other perspectives such as the Leuven Scales of well-being and Involvement or a good knowledge and understanding of language development judgements stronger and more professionally informed. Moderation becomes an integrated part of the process and not an ‘add on when there is time’!
Moderation is an essential part of good practice as it strengthens professional knowledge and understanding of children’s development and learning; supports the quality of learning and teaching; and ensures that children are supported and engaged in appropriate and inspiring experiences based on their specific needs and interests.
See https://watchmegrow.uk/2017/11/moderation-some-thoughts/

If you got to the end - well done have a treat..mine would be a G & T!!!

Please contact Di at:

Email: di.chilvers@watchmegrow.uk

Website: www.watchmegrow.uk