AnonyMouse_3139 Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 That looks useful and far less rambling than my efforts. Welcome to the forum too, I can see its your first post
Guest tinkerbell Posted September 16, 2011 Posted September 16, 2011 thanks Helen more bedtime reading
Guest Posted September 21, 2011 Posted September 21, 2011 Hi everyone, Am posting a response which a team of Early Years Consultants has collated. This may be a useful starter for people responding to the consultation. Confess I haven't read all the comments in this discussion, and it's certainly not perfect, but hopefully some key points are included. Good luck with your responses. Helen This looks like a very useful post - our local group of early years practitioners met tonight, and I am trying to galvanise them into action! I have just sent them the link and am sure it will help them focus on the important points in this very lengthy document - nothing like leaving it till the last minute!
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted September 22, 2011 Posted September 22, 2011 Interestingly, pretty much the same points we all made as a team of consultants too. Cx
AnonyMouse_30147 Posted September 25, 2011 Author Posted September 25, 2011 Hi folk, just wanted to say the deadline of 30th September is looming so anyone not entered their form but wants to - please do - don't miss out! Being the precise (sad) person I am I spent the weekend comparing the current EYFS statutory guide with the revised edition and was actually surprised by how similar the two still are. What actually seems to have happened is they've altered the order of the paragraphs to change the emphasis and taken away the words enjoyment, progress, challenge, observation, outdoor play and individual needs. But apparently the principles are the same!! Again, the questions are such to guide your answers, so my advice to any other last minuter is don't be afraid to use the comments box. Suebear x
AnonyMouse_3307 Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 enjoyment, progress, challenge, observation, outdoor play and individual needs What a tragedy that these are the things that have been removed. Bring on the tables and worksheets. Cx
Guest Posted September 26, 2011 Posted September 26, 2011 And in a response to a story on the "erosion of childhood" Sarah Teather has cited the revisions as a positive step to stop this erosion. Apparently getting children "school ready" at an earlier age is the answer! She also speaks about a reduction in the number of EYFS targets as if there wasn't an ongoing consultation about the revisions. http://www.education.gov.uk/inthenews/inth...on-of-childhood
AnonyMouse_37030 Posted September 30, 2011 Posted September 30, 2011 (edited) As I said on the other thread, went to a 4children seminar (amazing how this organisation has managed to hoover up so much govenment money) and the dfe rep there was very clear. Nothing is set in stone. They really do want to knwo what the profession thinks. If you want to retain development matters or at least to 0 -22 months then say so quite clearly. If you think the profile proposals are actually an increase in workload and more complicated that what we already have then say so. If enough of us say the same things they will actually listen. If you think the two year old assessment cannot take place unless the child is already in a setting then strongly point this out because i really don't think they realised what they were proposing - they say the point of this consultation is to point all these errors out. Be clear what is in that document is the proposed new framework. A completely truncated development matters and 150 assessment points for the profile. No real reduction in paperwork and no real simplification. All that has happened is that 69 early learning goals have been bundled together into the 17 headings but there are still around 50 things to assess. Tell them clearly what your objections are, make constructive suggestions as to what you do actually want to see and it might actually happen. remember the government originally wanted to scrap the whole curriculum and had to back down in the light of our collective responses -one of the best ever responses to consultations. The number of our repsonses carries huge weight with a government which doesn't clearly know what it wants in detail. They do want to destroy local authorities but they are not set on anything in particular in this document as long as they can trumpet that it has the support of parents and practitioners and promotes 'Early Intervention'. So clearly make the case for what you want and some of it at least might just happen. Alas I am a cynic here as I remember the last consultation when we were all asked about EYFS.....(before it started) and there was one question that we all screamed "NO!!!!!!" at......what was ye olde Governments ministers response.....to tell us that none of us had correctly understood the question so they were going to go ahead with it anyway! Ha.......no my dearies what we have here is an example of tokenism......(where would it fit on Harts Ladder of Particiaption one wonders?). The reason I say this is because many of the people heavily involved in the drafting of these proposals are the major chains involved in delivering child care...and dare I say that for many of these profit will always be the bottom line (hence why many of the run on minimum ratios as standard). No we will be asked but if we respond in a way that doesnt fit with the hidden agenda....then we shall be ignored have no doubt! Edited September 30, 2011 by enuffsenuf
Guest Posted September 30, 2011 Posted September 30, 2011 Alas I am a cynic here as I remember the last consultation when we were all asked about EYFS.....(before it started) and there was one question that we all screamed "NO!!!!!!" at......what was ye olde Governments ministers response.....to tell us that none of us had correctly understood the question so they were going to go ahead with it anyway! Ha.......no my dearies what we have here is an example of tokenism......(where would it fit on Harts Ladder of Particiaption one wonders?). The reason I say this is because many of the people heavily involved in the drafting of these proposals are the major chains involved in delivering child care...and dare I say that for many of these profit will always be the bottom line (hence why many of the run on minimum ratios as standard). No we will be asked but if we respond in a way that doesnt fit with the hidden agenda....then we shall be ignored have no doubt! I, too, am very cynical about the 'consultation' process, but if you look at Dame Claire Tickell's original consultation, and her 'call for evidence' document, you can see that it was a very fair representation of what most of us fed back. However, this Review is not in line with her findings in some areas - it's what the government's spin on it is. So, everyone please do send your replies by the end of today, - if we say nothing, then it will be assumed we are in agreement with it! It's not something to do lightly (it took me a whole day and evening to read, digest everything, discuss it with colleagues and then send in my formal response - if we don't agree then we must say - if we do nothing then we can't grumble in the future!
Recommended Posts