Any Questions?

[AnonyMouse_8466]

So campbells and I joked about setting up a new political party - the "Pay Childcare Workers What They're Worth" party. Our rosettes would be made from crepe paper and assorted glitter, pom poms and bits of shiny cardboard cut out with patterned scissors, and fastened through button holes with pipe cleaners...

 

With all this talk of a destabilised Government and a possible early General Election I have been thinking about the implications of a change in Government for us in the work we do, but also in the wider agenda for children and families.

 

So, without this turning into a political rant against one party or another I was wondering if you all have any ideas about what questions we early years practitioners should be asking the party leaders, but also our local candidates when they come knocking on our doors asking if they can rely on our support.

 

If the response is good I may even gather them together and send them off to Messrs Cameron and co to see what they have to say for themselves.

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_1999]

I think I would suggest that the Government seem to have totally overlooked the issue of pay for early years practitioners. The Government have invested billions and implemented a range of initiatives for young children and to increase the quality of the workforce but nothing as far as I am aware mentions salaries.

 

Sorry Maz, not a great first reply to your message but I will have a think and see if I come up with something else/better!

[AnonyMouse_13453]

How about creating a STABLE early years sector - it's all very well building all-singing-all-dancing children's centres, but what about providing established, popular and successful provision operating out of church halls with the same facilities so that EVERY child is enabled and entitled to the same quality of provision in a 'bricks and mortar' sense.

 

I know that quality provision can be and already is provided by wonderful practitioners operating out of 'shoe boxes in the middle of the road' but why, in this day and age, should we have to!

 

There, rant over!

[AnonyMouse_3139]

I'd like to ask...

Why are training centres paid by the amount of passes it gives out?

I know some excellent staff but I also know some not so excellent and yet they passed because of the way the training centre was funded.

 

Agree with Geraldine about pay. Staff who are gaining higher and higher qualifications dont see any change in their pay especially if they are working for a non profit making charity. Doesnt seem fair that they are told what level they MUST have and then not have any recognition for it.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Rea

[AnonyMouse_8466]

What a good start: I think the whole issue of salaries is going to be key in the future sustainability of many groups. The Government has made much of its aim to improve the quality we offer children and families whilst not driving up fees - is that really possible?

 

Cait's point about packaway groups is well made. In our setting we spend nearly 16 hours in manpower terms setting up and packing away our group. Just think what we could achieve if we could devote the majority of that time to planning, reflecting, evaluating, researching, completing learning journies etc.

 

There has to be a better way doesn't there?

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_8466]

I'd like to ask...

Sorry Rea, you posted whilst I was calculating how much I spend on staff wages for setting up and packing away each day!

 

I had no idea that training centres were paid based on the number of candidates who pass. That is preposterous - imagine if a garage's income was based on the number of cars that passed an MOT?

 

If salary alone was the motivator for staff achieving higher qualifications then we'd all just do the minimum. It says a lot for our profession that we continue to want to learn and develop our skills both for the impact it has on quality and for our own personal improvement. However businesses like mine can't continue to rely on goodwill in order to run even if we only aim to break even. Something has to give!

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Why do they imagine having QTS or EYPS means you need fewer adults? or did I just forget to collect my extra pair of hands when I qualified?

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Why do they imagine having QTS or EYPS means you need fewer adults? or did I just forget to collect my extra pair of hands when I qualified?

The best explanation of this (in terms of EYPS) is that since EYPs have equality of status with qualified teachers, and they can operate in a maintained nursery with a 1:13 ratio, then so can we.

 

I wondered if it was because children who are cared for by practitioners with QTS or EYPS just stop needing help to blow their noses, change wet underwear or dry their tears and have a cuddle as soon as the status is conferred...

 

Maz

[AnonyMouse_4544]

I wish someone would convince my class ...

In the case of reception teachers it's 1-30 Maz!!

[AnonyMouse_1999]

In the case of reception teachers it's 1-30 Maz!!

 

Oh yes! I think the whole question of ratios is something that should be addressed! If the powers that be deem that a 4 yr old needs to have a ratio of 1:8 PLEASE can someone explain why this changes according to the setting the child attends?

 

1:8 PVI

1:13 in maintained nursery

1:30 in reception

 

In my preschool we have a maximum of 16 per session and if they are all over 3 that means we can operate with two members of staff - we never ever do, always 3 staff, sometimes more.

 

The whole QTS/EYP meaning an increase from 1:8 to 1:13 is just ridiculous and I would LOVE to know the rationale behind that decision!

[AnonyMouse_8466]

In the case of reception teachers it's 1-30 Maz!!

What has happened to the commitment to having smaller class sizes in key stage one then? Do you get support from a teaching assistant at all?

 

That's indefensible really, isn't it?

 

Maz

[Guest]

I would love a rant to the powers that be about all this!!! We provide an amazing service for our country! We are constantly proving ourselves, not just to our employers and cutsomers, but to the government. Our goal posts are moved far more than other areas of employment yet the rewards are few and far between.

 

ppp

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Reception isn't KS1 it is EYFS I'm afraid and the legal EYFS ratio is 1-30 which some teachers are working to. I'm lucky have a TA because we work as a FSU so we have 56 children and 4 adults.

[AnonyMouse_11485]

Absolutely - smaller class sizes in reception (and key stage one) but especially reception as free flow, child-initiated, child-led planning and provision is... tricky ...with fewer adults. The whole keyworker concept doesn't get a look in.

Also, sorting out the ELGs to be more appropriate.

AND extending EYFS to the end of KS1. All those recommendations that have been ignored.

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Reception isn't KS1 it is EYFS

Of course it is! I was having a senior moment there! So how do ratios work in mixed Reception/Year 1 classes then?

 

And of course your post only adds confusion to Geraldine's point about the different ratios for the same age children depending on which kind of setting they attend. 56 children and 4 adults means a ratio of 14:1 - what's the legal ratio for an FSU?

 

Ratios seems to be one of those issues that becomes less clear the more light you shed on it...

 

Maz

[Guest]

The infant class size limit is 30 so that's upto year 2. I taught in a mixed reception/year 1 class with just 5 hours TA support a year!

[AnonyMouse_15046]

5 hours a year?

[AnonyMouse_1999]

I would love a rant to the powers that be about all this!!! We provide an amazing service for our country! We are constantly proving ourselves, not just to our employers and cutsomers, but to the government. Our goal posts are moved far more than other areas of employment yet the rewards are few and far between.

 

ppp

 

Good point!

As far as I am aware we are the only profession that has to constantly prove ourselves and adapt to ever changing goalposts.

I worked in the sector way back before desirable learning outcomes and just 'updated and moved on' as changes came into force but there was no requirement to actually update formal qualifications. Other professions such as doctors just keep abreast of changes and I am not aware of say GP's who have been practicing for years who have to take any 'new' medical exams,

 

The whole CWDC list of qualifications that are 'deemed relevant and suitable' makes confusing reading!

How come my ancient NNEB awarded by the National Nursery Examination Board in 1974 is on the list as a relevant level 3 but yet some BA(Hons) as recent as 2004- 2006 are not acceptable and recipients of such awards have to undergo further training. It just doesn't add up in my book!

 

I think this is an EXCELLENT thread but just wondering whether we could have 'headings' somehow as already 'big issues' are being raised: salaries, qualifications, ratios. Sorry just rambling now!

[AnonyMouse_4544]

So how do ratios work in mixed Reception/Year 1 classes then?

 

 

 

Maz

 

The same ratios apply in reception Y1 and Y2 even though reception is a different Key Stage and we have a curriculum which by it's nature and age of the child needs more adults. In a mixed R/Y1 class you would require 1 teacher.

[AnonyMouse_15046]

May not be the best place to make this comment but I would like to hear about why there is so little financial supprt for mothers who stay at home and look after their babies. However high quality the childcare we deliver is I still think that when they are tiny most babies are better off with their mums.

 

Ok, I've said it. Now I'm going to duck....

[AnonyMouse_4544]

Absolutely - smaller class sizes in reception (and key stage one) but especially reception as free flow, child-initiated, child-led planning and provision is... tricky ...with fewer adults. The whole keyworker concept doesn't get a look in.

Also, sorting out the ELGs to be more appropriate.

AND extending EYFS to the end of KS1. All those recommendations that have been ignored.

 

In short can they please look at the Welsh Foundation Phase?

[AnonyMouse_8466]

Ok, I've said it. Now I'm going to duck....

Well you're entitled to your opinion, and to express it so there's no need to duck, Alison!

 

Is there any research into the factors that affect the decision to either stay at home when a baby is very young, or to go back to work. I know that anecdotal evidence says that many mothers need to go back to work to pay the mortgage, and that does beg the question of how much we would need to pay new mums to stay at home for it to be financially worthwhile?

 

I think the answer to your question probably lies in the fact that the Government is trying to persuade women back into the workforce and so it doesn't have a vested interest in a large part of the workforce staying at home to raise their babies. Or does that make me a little cynical?

 

Maz

[Guest]

How about the question of how Ofsted inspections are carried out -

 

I mean some clarifiction as to the difference in one setting and another and what one inspector deems ok and another disagrees.

 

I know that each setting should be judged individually (and I suppose I can accept that all inspectors are human - but given experience of several inspections I home in on what they want as opposed to what I feel is more important) A setting should be merited on its personal good points but so many circumstances and scare-mongering occur in a small rural area such as where I live that stresses and unneccesarily makes practitioners question their provision or constantly question the problematic issue of planning and record keeping that they are changing and doubting what they do because their is no uniformity, no set standard it is all so variable, yes planning is personal but it doesn't need to be such an issue and I think it is because of the pending inspection that practitioners find it difficult to believe in what they do.....

 

'so and so nursery down the road got satisfactory because they use wet wipes' - 'well we got outstanding and we use wet wipes!'

I realise that other factors will of been considered in judgements but there is little continuity in how inspections are carried out.

 

that sort of differing standards in all aspects of provision drives me crazy and I see so many stressed and anxious pracitioners who do so much work to provide the best they can for early years education....they have little recognition but plenty of stress pending inspection!

 

Don't get me wrong I believe in being inspected....Ofsted should pat us on the back for what we do well and advise us on how to improve what we don't do well....not terrify pracitioners and drive good leaders away.

Edited June 13, 2009 by Guest

[AnonyMouse_15046]

I think the answer to your question probably lies in the fact that the Government is trying to persuade women back into the workforce and so it doesn't have a vested interest in a large part of the workforce staying at home to raise their babies. Or does that make me a little cynical?

 

If you're cynical then so am I. I'm sure it's more to do with increasing the workforce than what's best for the children . I've heard about lots of research into whether being cared for at home is better and I'm fairly sure most of it finds that it is. I think I have just found my research project for my foundation degree second year. How well do you think it would go down if I concluded myself out of a job?

 

Shirel I would love to see more (or do I mean some?)consistency between ofsted inspections and also an Oftsed helpline which was able to answer the question I asked them rather than the one they have beentrained to answer.

 

In fact I think we should go the whole hog and demand an early years practitioner as Prime Minister. We would be able to deal with all the squabbling and tale telling within seconds.

[AnonyMouse_15046]

Gloop in the cabinet office!

 

And a make do and mend mentality llike we have to have would sort out all the expenses issues.

[AnonyMouse_1999]

I am not sure how it could be implemented but I agree that some sort of consistency across/within OFSTED inspectors is a very valid point.

 

I was at a consultation meeting this week about how the single formula for government funding for free EY provision should be calculated.

 

One of the 'areas' under consideration for being a supplement to the hourly rate was 'quality' - how this could/should be measured was the subject of debate. Should it be that those settings with QTS/EYP should get more than those settings where the highest qualified member of staff is level 3? Should this supplement be linked to inspection outcomes? should some form of specific quality assurance be introduced?

 

Overwhelmingly it was felt that OFSTED inspection outcomes should NOT be used to calculate the supplement and the reason was the huge variation between inspectors - what one deems outstanding/good/satisfactory does not necessarily concur with what others think.

 

I too believe in OFSTED inspections but my experience has shown that each inspector has had their own 'pet issue' and if that happens to be a particularly strong point of the setting then it's a great outcome but if a particular strength lies elsewhere then maybe this isn't the case. I also strongly believe that PVI settings (in line with other provision) should have notice of inspection - but before I get shot down in flames I am talking of 24 notice as a matter of courtesy. We don't have staff on the premises every day who are 'non contact' time and if OFSTED arrive on one of those days they will be told I am 'in ratio' and they will have to wait until extra staff are called in so I can be 'free' for Mrs OFSTED.

[Guest]

And a make do and mend mentality llike we have to have would sort out all the expenses issues.

 

That would be brilliant! We could probably make a dent in the national debt that way.

 

Yes consistency in Ofsted would also be welcome. As would a pay scale for us all.

 

I think where I am a lot of mums return to work because they feel lost out of the office/workplace. I went to visit a phase one CC last week and the drop in children's room which doubles as a creche is exactly what we need in my area. It would provide a neutral place for new parents to meet others while with their child and is open all the time pretty much. Unfortunately as a phase three area we aren't getting that

[Guest]

Well you're entitled to your opinion, and to express it so there's no need to duck, Alison!

 

Is there any research into the factors that affect the decision to either stay at home when a baby is very young, or to go back to work. I know that anecdotal evidence says that many mothers need to go back to work to pay the mortgage, and that does beg the question of how much we would need to pay new mums to stay at home for it to be financially worthwhile?

 

I think the answer to your question probably lies in the fact that the Government is trying to persuade women back into the workforce and so it doesn't have a vested interest in a large part of the workforce staying at home to raise their babies. Or does that make me a little cynical?

 

Maz

 

My friend has to go back to work next week despite her baby only being 8 weeks old as of this Wednesday coming. She is the major wage earner, in fact come the end of the month the only wage earner as her partner is being made redundant and he hasn't been able to find anything else yet. She works for a small independent firm so there's no great maternity pay system. They couldn't manage on the SMP and the small extra amount from her work so is going back to work to pay for the mortage. I think that's really sad and despite how good any childminder or nursery could be, I think that's a real shame that at 8 weeks old she has to let someone else look after her baby, no matter how good they are, I think that's far too young.

[Guest]

Nichola, I couldn't agree more.

 

I care for a little boy who was one day less than 4 weeks when I first met him! He started part time at 12 weeks (5 hours per day) and was full time by 20 weeks. His Mum is the major wage earner and his Dad was made redundant the month before their son was born. Dad cared for the baby when he wasn't with me, until he found new employment.

 

Although the little boy is lovely and we have a strong bond, my relationship with his Mum is tense as she feels so "replaced" She refers to me as "his second Mum" and sometimes makes passing comments about how he prefers to be with me or Dad and she's third in his list of favourite people - as a Mum myself this tugs at my heartstrings every time!

 

Nona