Connect with like-minded education professionals and have your say on the issues that matter to you.
Don't forget to look at the how to guide.
Discussion in 'Early Years' started by adora, Jun 29, 2010.
Crossed wires, Debbie, - it was Nelly who made that point!
My biggest problem with EYFS, surprisingly isn't the paperwork; well it is but it goes deeper than that. Having SMT who know NOTHING about the EYFS - haven't taught for years, let alone been involved in all the changes that have happened since EYFS was introduced, means they still expect phonics assessments, reading assessments, numeracy assessments, APP children, etc, etc without acknowledging the huge amount of other paperwork we are doing which gives us all the information we need to support the children in their learning. I feel that I am writing the same thing a hundred different ways in order to justify what I am doing. And actually THAT is my main bugbear; constantly having to justify why I am doing something, what the children will be learning, how it moves them on, what I am going to ask them, etc.
Most of the time I love being a Nursery Teacher (and yes I am a teacher, not an EYPs - sorry I spent years at University qualifying and I expect some level of respect for that) but I would like not to be stalking the children with a clipboard and camera (although collecting evidence that is useful/usable/WOW moments is something I am happy to do) and be able to just get on with my job - whether that is direct teaching or playing alongside the children and thinking about what they need next.
And don't get me started on planning - that all started to go wrong when I was asked to plan for my child initiated learning time...
hat hits the nail on the head and puts into words what i feel but can't quite articulate and this is why we all end up feeling inadequate all the time.
They expect those from nursery children?
I don't understand.
They make EYFS compulsory for every setting in the land and threaten heaven knows what if you don't comply.
They allow LAs and SMTs to bully and browbeat people into producing paperwork that isn't required by the EYFS.
Am I stupid and missing something obvious?
yup inky I have to do phonics assessments every term; if we have readers (of which there are currently 4 in the morning session) we have to assess them on key words and we are expected to assess their numeracy (and science will be following soon I am sure) as the school uses APP...
I like your smiley too...feel it would be prudent for me to do that too now or else I may end up ranting!
Cripes. What type of school do you teach in?
I will not write in capital letters. No I won't. I wo
WHY ARE WE TREATED LIKE BOVINE 17-YR-OLDS ON WORK EXPERIENCE WHEN SMT ADVISORS AND SIPS ARE ALLOWED TO IGNORE THE MOST BASIC ELEMENTS OF THE EYFS?
If I had the answer to that one inky I wouldn't be considering leaving the profession. I'd just like to be able to my job and do it well
Thumbie wrote on Page 4
There is clearly a will for children to be able to play freely without their play being limited in order for strictly measurable
teaching and learning to happen, however there isn't enough commitment
and faith there for it to be accepted that this will lead to progress.
At heart, the powers that be just don't seem to believe and trust that
progress will happen. Hence the punishing regime of assessment,
recording and reporting. Because it is believed that children should
play but also that they should be proved to be progressing it is
demanded that they be assessed through and on a whole plethora of
standards (the profile).
I agree with the above that Thumbie wrote. The way it has gone with all the assessment and planning it seems that nursery children can never just play for playings sake and just have fun. You feel like there always has to be a learning intention/objective to everything they do even though they are only 3 and 4 years old.
Subject coordinators come and want to observe a science lesson so I am expected to 'teach' a science lesson to fit in with their non contact time to observe me in NURSERY.
My apologies to nellyFUF and inky - if I recollect, it's not the first time that I've confused you both.
You're both always making good comments and observations that it's not hard to confuse who said what if you don't mind me saying.
However, I must not be so slipshod - I must do better. LOL
The most sincere apologies to all the excellent work experience students I've had the privilege of working with, by the way. But we've all - very occasionally - met one who wasn't.
That little slip cost you your Outstanding, debbie. Now you're merely a Good.
I had to do the same recently - a music "lesson" and a science "lesson" (although the science co-ordinator was happy just to observe the children in child initiated play time and look at the continuous provision)
We only had one subject co ordinator insist they had to observe (Y6 teacher very very formal).
He asked where the maths lesson was and we pointed out 26 areas where maths was taking place ... he left
It did help that both FS teachers are members of the SMT but I suppose that reflects the importance the school/head views early years
Well, inky, in my book 'good' is good enough.
Those who want 'outstanding' always judge outstanding by their own criteria. Of course, I would dispute their criteria point by point!
This might be a good moment for everyone to look at the criteria for self-assessment provided by their local education advisors.
I was once sent a local authority SEF from someone for the early years which had the small total (ahem) of 76 areas to consider whether practice was unsatisfactory, satisfactory, good, outstanding. So multiply 76 by the four judgements and that is the small total of 304 statements to read to decide if the practice 'fitted' them.
Well, if any of you have the time to sit with your teaching assistant and nursery colleagues to look at your 76 areas for judgement and read the criteria to see where you need to improve, then I suggest you have too much time on your hands.
By the way, a quick look at the statements made me realise that I would probably be unsatisfactory in the majority of cases - or perhaps satisfactory.
Hmmm....I wonder what the children, the children's parents and my colleagues thought of my early years practice at the time.
Only joking, debbie
I'm still reeling at sadandconfused's post about what is required of her by her school.
It looks like people in education and political authority believe that the only route to increase professionalism, standards and accountability is through this complex guidance, formal observation of children in all their activities (based on the EYFS and DM guidance), and evidencing, assessment via 80% natural child-play occurrences, underpinned by onerous reporting, moderating and judgements systems - stipulated in law.
This reminds me of a story I have just heard whereby the Americans invented this whizzy and expensive pen which could be used in space, upside down and in any conditions.
The Russians, apparently, simply used something called a pencil.
Hear, hear Minizog94!
We recently had visiting teachers from Finland, who were flabbergasted at the documentary evidence we have to produce for EYFS, and asked why weren't teachers trusted in their judgements.
I think most EYFS teachers and teaching assistants must feel more like stalkers than anything else, these days - forever running after little children with cameras, observation sheets, microphones etc etc.
sorry, was echoing sadandconfused's comments on 'stalking' there.
I'll claim my credit here:
I mentioned the Finnish supply teacher