We're currently taking applications for a nursery teacher, as well as maternity cover for myself and while our current head has always been keen to employ specialists. Our new head who is starting in October has asked us to consider applications from candidates with a range of training. I'm glad about this, as we have sometimes had non-EY supply teachers who I have felt 'are just right' for Early Years. For me, I've always felt that my Early Childhood Studies degree has been invaluable - not necessarily made me a better teacher, but it was an excellent start to me understanding child development and a huge range of different types of Early Years practice. Then again, others may feel that they develop this understanding purely while working with young children. When I'm observing candidates and interviewing, first and foremost I'm looking at interaction with the children - responding to what the children say or do, modelling new language and giving them opportunities to use it, using language that is pitched appropriately, how you use your voice to draw the children in etc. I think a lot of this is something that people either have or they don't (sure this isn't exclusive to EYFS). I've seen candidates who are terrified and freeze when the children don't stick to the learning objectives, candidates standing up to 'play' with children who are on the floor, candidates who don't respond to children's comments at all during direct teaching and during play..not good. I'm not too worried if candidates have got experience using the FS profile, although some schools will be looking for this. Sorry, this reply is a bit waffly. If you think you have the qualities of a good EY teacher, then go for it, trained or not. If you're not sure what these qualities would be then spend more time in nursery and reception classes that you know to be good. Good luck!