Link 30 hours to workforce development: PACEY
Monday, January 11, 2016
Ministers should consider restricting the 30-hour offer to those settings that are graded Good or Outstanding, a leading early years organisation argues.
Ahead of the Government’s workforce strategy expected later this year, PACEY is calling for it to seize the momentum generated by the doubling of the free entitlement to 30 hours for three- and four-year-olds and focus on creating a coherent workforce development strategy.
PACEY says that while the number of early years workers holding Level 3 qualifications or higher has risen in recent years, practitioners are increasingly under strain.
The early years workforce faces a tipping point, with a significant drop in the number of childminders and a high staff turnover rate in nurseries.
Meanwhile, a number of studies have now shown that better-qualified practitioners deliver higher-quality care.
PACEY chief executive Liz Bayram told Nursery World, ‘We’ve been highlighting the importance of workforce quality for many years and now want to align workforce development with the free entitlement.’
She added that despite the pressure of cuts in funding, the sector has achieved much and that there are things that could be done to incentivise practitioners that do not require extra funding.
She also said that the Government should consider limiting the 30 hours to only Good or Outstanding nurseries, in line with the original intention for two-year-old funding, and that
this would act as an incentive for providers to offer the new entitlement.
‘Absolutely it’s a funding issue. But local authorities should only give the 30-hour funding to Good and Outstanding nurseries. I know there is concern about capacity, but if the system recognised Good and Outstanding settings it would help to alleviate the lack of places.
‘We wouldn’t want austerity and a lack of money to be an excuse. If the focus is on delivering quality experiences for children, let’s just try and make the most of these Good and Outstanding settings.’
The issue of Early Years Teacher Status and Qualified Teacher Status must also be settled, Ms Bayram said.
She also said there was a need for a graduate leader fund to be brought back in.
‘How do we get to the point where EYTS and Qualified Teacher Status are linked? If there’s a pathway that says that you can achieve Qualified Teacher Status, the incentive is professional and financial for you. The funding system should reward people. Local authorities should recognise it,’ she said.
Ms Bayram added there was evidence from colleges that some students are using Early Years Educator to go on to teach rather than join the early years because the QTS issue is unresolved.
Action should be taken to make it easier for practitioners to see how their careers can progress; for example, an online one-stop-shop careers service so that people with different qualification levels and training can see where to go next, she said.
‘For social workers and teachers, there are really clear pathways, but not so much for early years. There should be clear pathways to progress, so an apprentice can see the best way to become a manager, or what to do if they want to specialise,’ she said.
There should also be greater recognition of the value of CPD, Ms Bayram added.
‘For example, if nurseries and childminders invest more in their staff training and development, we would argue that you should get a higher level of funding from the local authority. There should be more acknowledgement of that from Ofsted. For example, under leadership and management you could get more “points” for investing in staff CPD.’
