The Early Years Professional: holding a mirror up to policy makers

The importance of the early years for later life outcomes is increasingly being recognised. The former Labour Government (1997-2010) in England introduced a raft of policies aimed at raising the quality of early years provision and outcomes for the youngest children. As part of the changes a new graduate professional role and status, the Early Years Professional, was introduced evidencing a new era of involvement by policy makers in the professions. Government involvement in imposing and shaping the development makes the Early Years Professional vulnerable to political change; it was developed by government and could be removed. Indeed, political change in 2010 brought considerable uncertainty about whether the Coalition Government would continue to support the development, though they have now provided funding until 2015. Alongside this uncertainty, commissioned research evidence is emerging of the positive impact of the policy agenda of the former government. A situation that has not been formally recognised, rather it appears to have gone unnoticed by policy makers. Indeed, the current government have taken a range of actions to dismantle changes previously made and there is an emerging discourse reframing the early years as a period that supports the youngest children being ‘prepared’ for education. This paper aims to address the challenges of this change of emphasis by drawing upon doctoral research critiquing the concept, implementation and impact of Early Years Professional Status as a new professional model. The research design was underpinned by Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory of Human Development and rather than being a linear development it has been impacted upon at every stage of development by instability in wider systems, therefore providing evidence that supports his under theorised ‘Chaotic System’ and that childhood is not only a development phase but one shaped by political ideolog

Universities with a commitment to social change can shape the Post-2015 agenda

The University of Northampton is the only university in the UK to achieve a 'Changemaker Campus' status from Ashoka U. As a 'Changemaker Campus', the University of Northampton is at the forefront of social innovation and entrepreneurship in the UK and Europe, and in an elite consortium of 24 universities and colleges from around the world, including institutions such as Brown University and Duke University. That means in reality that we, as staff, have taken on board the underlying philosophy of social enterprise and believe that both ourselves and our students have the ability, and indeed a responsibility, to promote change for social good. And where better to start than Early Years

You are safe but do you feel safe?

There is some excellent practice but we can/need to do better. How do we know a child feels ‘SAFE’? If we were getting it right why do we have more and more young children and young people with mental health issues What should we be doing individually and collectively? Where is our OUTRAGE

The Early Years Professional and the Early Years Teacher: complementary but essentially different: a mixed methods study

The Early Years Professional is now becoming established in the early years workforce. There is now emerging evidence that suggests that this new professional role and status, imposed by the former Labour Government in 2006, is impacting on the quality of early years provision and outcomes for children. The implementation of Early Years Professional Status was complicated by being presented as broadly equivalent to Qualified Teacher Status. This paper aims to provide insight into this relationship by specifically reporting on the findings about the similarities and differences between these two professionals that emerged from research exploring the concept of professional identity through a critique of the concept, implementation and impact of Early Years Professional Status as a new professional model. The work of Bronfenbrenner on ecological systems theory provides the underpinning theoretical framework. The research design drew on mixed methods with the mixed analysis combining the quantitative data gathered through questionnaires and qualitative data from interviews and focus groups with both Early Years Professionals and stakeholders. The main finding indicates that the Early Years Professional and the Early Years Teacher are complementary but essentially different. Furthermore those who have both Qualified Teacher Status and Early Years Professional Status viewed completing the new status as a training opportunity rather than developing a new professional identity. However evidence suggested that the training undertaken was positive and develop their practice. In settings where there was both a teacher and Early Years Professional findings indicated that they can be extremely powerful together and that the Coalition Government may have been a little premature in removing the requirement for both professionals in children’s centre

Early Years Professional status: a new professional or a missed opportunity

Prior to 1997, an integrated legislative and policy approach to meeting the educational and care needs of children and young people, in the English context, had been absent. Separatist rather than integrated models of service delivery prevailed. In the early years specifically, research findings have supported the growing recognition internationally about the importance of good quality Early Childhood Education and Care, both economically and for later life achievements. In England, the former Labour Government (1997-2010) began to address the issues through a raft of policy initiatives, including the Childcare Act 2006 which removed the distinction between education and care in the early years. This Act introduced the Early Years Foundation Stage and the Early Years Professional, a new inter-disciplinary professional status and role imposed at graduate level, rather than grown organically. This unprecedented step also took government involvement in the professions to a new dimension as it involved itself explicitly in orchestrating a new graduate level profession. The range of training routes to achieve Early Years Professional Status and the backgrounds of those being researched are complex and evolving. Therefore, the overarching aim of this research was to explore the development of professional identity through a critique of the concept, implementation and impact of Early Years Professional Status as a new professional role and status. Mixed methods were used to support a pragmatic, flexible approach to gathering the collective and individual perceptions of those who undertook the pilot in 2006 and those who commenced one of the four pathways to Early Years Professional Status in 2007. Questionnaires, interviews and a focus group were undertaken to gather insights at the start of the process, after the award of the status and a year later. The same methods were employed in two phases with stakeholders to add a further dimension to the research. The mixed methods research design was underpinned by Bronfenbrenner’s Bioecological Theory of Human Development, the model being envisaged with the Early Years Professional in the centre, rather than a child. This framework provided positive model for exploring a complex process. The development on Early Years Professional Status has not been linear and there have been several challenges. These include the starting point of a mixed economy of early years provision marked by variation in quality, poor qualification levels, low pay and low status, the initial confusing statement of broad based equivalency to teaching, political change and world recession. These last factors have supported greater understanding of the under theorised Chaotic System that Bronfenbrenner discussed in his final work. The research findings suggest that the development has been overwhelmingly welcomed, despite the lack of a clearly defined professional remit or being afforded the privileges ascribed to other professions. A new flexible professional space in the early years sector and children’s services is emerging at the intersection of health, social care and education. It is occupied by those who are developing a new holistic professional identity and others, who already had an established professional identity as a teacher, for whom completing Early Years Professional Status has been additional training, moving them towards being experts in their field. The training process and standards were affirmed and a community of practice is emerging, who would like to see a Continual Professional Development framework, a code of practice and an induction year for newly qualified Early Years Professionals. The roles of the Early Years Professional and the Early Years Teacher emerged as being complementary but essentially different. Evidenced also suggests that the Early Years Professional is a reflective professional, an advocate for all children and is leading and supporting quality outcomes. They are becoming a catalyst for change. However, the government has failed to recognise let alone celebrate the positive developments resulting from the workforce reform agenda and parents/carers and other professionals lack knowledge about the role, though those with Early Years Professional Status have not recognised their own role as wider change agents. The title Early Years Professional has not been widely welcomed, it is not being actively used and when it is, the acronym EYP prevails. Given this situation it could be opportune to rename the Early Years Professionals as Early Years Pedagogues, to reflect and celebrate a new flexible professional space at the intersection of health, education and social care that is occupied by an holistic leadership professional and an advocate for young children

Collaborative practice in enhancing the first year student experience in higher education

Transition into higher education presents challenges for students, whatever their age or previous educational history. An emerging issue on an undergraduate programme in England was how to support students who self reported educational histories of continual formative feedback, model answers, revision guides and limited use of the library. This article reports findings from an action research project which considered whether there was a mismatch between students’ previous educational histories and the academic expectations of the university. Findings indicated that academic expectations did not fully take account of previous student experiences. Student responses also indicated little previous guidance around effective internet searching and libraries were rarely used prior to starting university. Transitional scaffolding was positively evaluated, students reporting greater confidence levels in accessing appropriate resources, high levels of student completion, retention and satisfactio