I'm posing this question to separate this issue from another thread where this has become the main point for debate. I would like to say here also, that I do not believe that abbreviations such as CLL, KUW etc etc, prevent us from being effective teachers. But then neither do I believe that they make us better at our job. They are merely a frame of reference. I acknowledge that they can be a pain toget your head round as a new EY practitioner, or indeed as someone trying to understand the EYFS from outside of Early Years. I do agree with posters on the aforementioned earlier thread who argue that all this kind of jargon is can be a "waste of time", but my point here is that we can be as effective teachers with them as we can without them.