Guest lucyevans Posted September 13, 2013 Posted September 13, 2013 https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-outcomes http://www.nurseryworld.co.uk/article/1211343/new-eyfs-guide-support-childrens-development?DCMP=EMC-CONNurseryWorldUpdate&bulletin=nursery-world-update-bulletin
Helen Posted September 13, 2013 Posted September 13, 2013 It does seem strange, doesn't it? With a few order changes, and a couple of statements with some of the words taken out, there seems little point in this! :huh: I feel the layout is dreadful- really hard to find the sections you want, and really quite dangerous in that it does look like the ticklist we are always trying to avoid. Very sad that the characteristics of effective learning are not mentioned at all- but do remember this is still in the statutory framework, thank goodness. The changes are: 1) Different order of prime areas, to : C&L, PD, then PSED 2) PSED aspects have changed order to: Self-confidence and self awareness, Managing feelings and behaviour, Making relationships. 3) Two statements in technology have changed slightly (dev matters in brackets): 30-50 months-shows an interest in technological toys with knobs or pulleys, or real objects (shows an interest in technological toys with knobs or pulleys, or real objects such as cameras or mobile phones) 40-60 months- interacts with age-appropriate computer software (uses ICT hardware to interact with age-appropriate computer software) I've read it all through and can't find any other differences- has anyone else spotted anything? What do you think about the new document?
AnonyMouse_19782 Posted September 13, 2013 Posted September 13, 2013 Thank you Helen Iwill trust your judgement and put it to the bottom of the to do pile! Frankly I think it's been a waste of time ,money and effort to produce this little nugget! 3
AnonyMouse_19762 Posted September 13, 2013 Posted September 13, 2013 What do you think about the new document? I think...... A complete waste of time - theirs and ours! It is not at all helpful to less experienced/new practitioners it will/may cause confusion - practitioners may jump to the (wrong) conclusion that CoEL are no longer required I suspect (but then I do love a conspiracy theory) that this part of a bigger 'plot' I apologise for my very negative post - not my style - but really I despair - pointless exercise in my humble 2
AnonyMouse_19762 Posted September 13, 2013 Posted September 13, 2013 Thank you Helen Iwill trust your judgement and put it to the bottom of the to do pile! Frankly I think it's been a waste of time ,money and effort to produce this little nugget! Crossed posts there Panders - glad to see that we are 'singing from the same sheet' :1b 1
Recommended Posts