BERA-TACTYC Early Childhood Research Review 2003-2017

BERA/TACTYC Review of Early Childhood Education and Care in the UK, 2003-2017 has involved a wide range of early childhood specialists, both in the early consultation stages, and in writing the five main sections of the Review. Teams of authors and their reference groups came together from TACTYC – the Association for Professional Development in Early Years, and the BERA Early Childhood Education and Care SIG. Using specific questions to interrogate the literature, each team worked on one of five main themes: Professionalism; Parenting and Family; Play and Pedagogy; Learning, Development and Curriculum, and Assessment and School Readiness. These themes are contextualised within broad policy issues in the UK. The Introduction shows the working methods for the Review, and the Conclusion brings together key messages and suggestions for future research. We hope that the Review will prove useful to a range of early childhood specialists, including students, researchers, practitioners, policy makers and teachers in further and higher education. We intend to create a User Review that will be aimed at practitioners and to engage other stakeholders in current trends and debates. The Review is being launched at a time of change and uncertainty within early childhood education and care, and we hope that the Review will provide a focal point for discussions about future directions in the four UK policy frameworks, the importance of research, and how we use research evidence to inform provision and practice

Personal action potency: early years practitioners participating in interprofessional practice in early years settings

This paper reports on case study research in the UK analysing the participation of early years staff in interprofessional practice to provide effective care and education for children, primarily those with special educational needs. Even though case study staff in different ‘outstanding’ settings had equivalent qualifications and similar years of experience, the ease with which they were able to marshal and deliver effective provision for children requiring input from other services varied depending on a complex set of factors. Social Practice Theory (Holland and Lave 2009) and the concepts of personal action potency in trajectories of participation (Dreier 2002, 2008) shed light on how and why this was the case. The findings indicate that structural arrangements, interpersonal relationships, history and contentions influenced the practitioners' participation in interprofessional practice, but were not entirely deterministic. Contributing to theoretical development, the paper argues that the potential for interprofessional practice is a shared rather than individual capacity in settings. There is scope for enhancing this capacity through attention to the features identified in the analysis