Nutbrown Review: Your Questions Answered

I qualified with a BTEC National Diploma in Childhood Studies in 1998, but due to having young children myself, was not able to get a job in childcare because most nurseries in my area only take on full time staff. When I later tried to get a job, I was told my qualification is no longer valid as the EYFS was introduced a few years after, and as I have no experience of this, I cannot get a job in childcare despite having taken a two-year full time course. The more the qualifications keep being changed, the more people like me will suffer, being unable to get worthwhile jobs in spite of taking qualifications, which become worthless after a few years.  

Childcarers tend to be very poorly paid and it is unfair to keep changing the goalposts every few years by changing the qualifications and making people have to retrain every few years for jobs which earn on average less than shop assistants per hour.

A.Hamdy

This reflects a message I have heard from a number of people – that changes in the early years sector have also seen confusion in the large number of qualifications that people have been able to take.  Employers often tell me that they don’t know which qualifications are valid and what potential employees are equipped to do.  I am taking a good look at how we can introduce a more rational approach to qualifications in the future, but don’t want to lose sight of the training that those working in the sector have already gained.

 

If a student has spent a year or more doing the new QCF Diploma for the Children and Young Peoples Workforce in an apprenticeship/college/private provider and you change it again, where does the student stand as we were told this was the new qualification to do? Surely this cannot go to waste?

We get told there is no child development in the qualification by others yet it is a huge unit running through the qualification. What is all the fuss?

Could you not develop a Level 4 work-based qualification as childminders cannot get to college two nights a week to do their Foundation Degree.

Sheila Turnbull, Tyneside Early Education

Of course I don’t want to see the skills and training that people have already completed go to waste.  I will consider how to recognise past training and experience as part of my review.  

I understand the point about child development, but I have heard two consistent messages on this point: that there is not enough focus on child development (particularly in comparison with previous qualifications); and that the focus is too broad (0-19), rather than looking specifically at the needs of babies and young children.  I am considering these points against the evidence.

 

I am an assistant programme manager for childcare in an FE college. My question/comment focuses on the new QCF qualifications and their suitability for full time school leavers.

Firstly I must point out that the QCF qualifications are excellent and the range of cover makes sense. I like the focus on workplace assessments and I feel these meet the needs of both employers and adult/apprentice learners. However, I feel there is a major flaw in these qualifications which I hope will be amended.

We are one of the very few FE centres who have chosen to move to the new QCF quals for our 16-19 full time learners. This has been a mistake! The emphasis on workplace assessment takes away from the academic ability many of these students need support in. The way the quals are set up make it a nightmare to run and we are having real issues in meeting the needs of these students.

Will the new QCF or future qualifications on offer take into account the requirements of full time learners and help the settings to focus on an academic approach to childcare (obviously with practical included)? I would propose a split qualification with one section tailored for work based learning and the other classroom based (with practical elements), i.e run the QCF and NQF together. UCAS must also be a consideration in order to encourage professional development.

Paul Starkey

At my consultation events I’ve heard strong and differing views about how qualifications should support new entrants to the profession, and what skills and experience they need to deliver. Some people have expressed concern that students are not receiving enough practical experience in a good enough range of settings, and others feel entry qualifications lack academic rigour and fundamental knowledge such as child development. I think both of these aspects of training are vital. I want to make sure in my review that the qualifications available deliver a good balance of theoretical learning and practical experience, but also contain the necessary flexibility to meet learners’ own individual needs.

 

When considering a return to the NNEB we need to consider what it is that was good about this qualification and do the current qualifications meet this and if not why not? I completed my NNEB in an era when all students had to undertake work experience in schools, daycare, hospitals, nursery class etc the assessment process was a combination of continual assessment, project based work and exam where students had to complete the required questions in essay format. (not multiple choice)

•    In my experience the NNEB had a level of reputation and status in the childcare field.

•    Employers could expect a level of expertise in the candidates coming to interview

•    The NNEB ensured that students received a wide range of work experience.

•    Students completed their training before entering the work place as an employee

•    The curriculum was set at a suitable level and contained a broad range of knowledge building and theory and practical.

•    The NNEB was either a pass/fail with opportunities to re-sit if required

Do the current qualifications do this?

•    There are such a range of different qualifications on the market now that not any individual one has a level of reputation and status that is equivalent to the NNEB and in fact most employers I have had contact with regarded the NVQ as fairly poor in preparing students for working with children

•    The standard of students qualifying in childcare is very variable and employers can not expect a consistent level

•    Students studying the NVQ whilst in employment do not experience the wide range of work opportunities that are available in childcare

•    Studying whilst already working in childcare does not ensure a sufficiently high standard of care on a day to day basis – additional CPD and further qualifications should be available and easy to complete whilst working but a basic level of competence must be established before starting work

•    The content of the current qualifications is more variable with a wide range of difference between those who want to "get by" with the minimum effort and those who put in a lot more work

•    NVQ candidates experience the pass/refer system which gives the impression that anyone and everyone can pass they just have to keep plodding on.

I hope that my view of my experience of the childcare field is useful

Barbara Morton

Thanks for these comparisons between the NNEB Nursery Nurse Diploma and current qualifications – they reflect messages that have been made to me at almost all of the events and meetings I have held.  As part of my review, I am looking carefully at the content and delivery of both the NNEB qualifications and current qualifications, to get a clear understanding of the relative strengths and weaknesses.

 

As an owner/operator of a single site daycare nursery in York registered for 48 children.  I believe that my nursery represents the vast majority of daycare settings in size and operation i.e. owned and operated as a self employed business, employing approx. 20 staff, a mixture of full and part-time.

I have attended one of the consultations in Leeds recently only to find yet again very few owners and managers of settings, with the vast majority of delegates being from local authorities, colleges and training organisations.  This I believe can result in impractical outcomes for those that actually work with children directly.  For example, I was hearing delegates suggesting that nurseries should have a Early Years Professional (EYP) leading practice in each area of a nursery as well as a manager, yes in an ideal world this would be wonderful but unfortunately we who work in nurseries have to live in the real world where either the government or our parents have to pay our salaries and with salaries representing 70% plus of the cost of a nursery setting I can't see where this extra money is coming from.

My second concern is the government's constant moving of the goal posts. I talk about the CWDC announcement that a level 3 qualification would be needed to be a 'licence to practice' then we see this dropped.  We are set targets to have a EPY in place before 2015 then we see the target disappear.  A few years ago we got told that all daycare setting would need to have a quality assurance award, only to see that disappear.   I have always tried to maintain a high quality setting, working very hard to meet the requirements being set by governments, so we gained our accredited Quality Assurance Award, my nursery manager gain a 1st Class Honours Degree in Early Years Leadership & Management and shortly afterwards was validated as an Early Years Professional, and finally we help our staff with only a level 2 to gain a level 3 and we now have a policy that we only employ staff with a level 3 or working towards a level 3.  We have done all this and still find that the EYFS qualification requirement for a setting manager is only a level 3, the staff qualification only a level 2, no EYP requirement and no QA requirement. So what do we do the next time the Department for Education comes out with another target, do we ignore it knowing that the track record will have it disappear in a year or twos time or do we do what we have in the past, spent our very precious financial resources on complying and upgrading our setting?

I know I have talked little about the actual types of qualifications and the relevance of course content but I feel that your review of qualifications needs to draw attention to the mixed messages government is giving to those that work in this industry because unless we in the industry see a consistency of approach you may find there is little engagement for the workers.

Ken McArthur, Polly Anna's Nursery

I can assure you Ken, that I am hearing the views of all groups right across the early years sector.  During the course of this review I have heard some interesting and thought provoking discussion on improving quality of provision, the role of EYPs and graduates within this and the strength of feeling about having well educated educators.  Turning to your second point, this reflects the increasing number of comments I have heard on the lack of clarity around perceived targets. Undoubtedly confusion does exist. I am looking into this and considering these against the evidence.      

 

Recognising the need to improve the quality of the childcare workforce and in order to ensure children receive the best care and education in the early years, will you be requiring Childminders to undertake a level 3 qualification within one year of working as a childcare professional, as they do in other countries such as Australia?

Elke Bailey

Interesting view Elke. There has been lots of interesting discussion coming out of the consultation events on the subject of childminders, particularly in view of Level 3 qualifications.  At this point in my review I am now considering these and other areas that have been put to me alongside the content of the call for evidence and will reflect on what I have heard.    

I am a 39-year-old early years teacher. I did not go into teaching immediately after university but later in life. I studied with London Montessori and have now been teaching for 13 years. I love my job and am passionate about helping every individual student strive to develop a love of learning and to reach their potential. Recently I have studied a foundation degree in early years education at Kingston university in order to gain qualifications. However, to gain full qualified teacher status I have to leave my job for one year and complete a PGCE. This seems a little ridiculous and I was wondering if there can be any inclusion for experience?

Nicola Morris

Unfortunate situation Nicola – I can see where you’re coming from.   Career pathways and progression are one of the key areas I am looking at as part of my review.  I will consider this more fully taking account of how to recognise past training and experience.

I'm a male NNEB qualified Nursery Nurse who's been in childcare for 20 years now.

I suppose the usual route for young people who want to get into the childcare profession is to do some kind of child development course at school, then get a qualification at a college or a vocational qualification as a trainee at a nursery. Are there any statistics on men going that route? 14-18 years old is possibly the peak of peer pressure for a young lad. Is anything being done to encourage more boys into training for childcare work? Do men tend to wait until later on in life before getting into childcare?

I believe that the NNEB course that I and many others did is superior to NVQs. During interviews I have been told by employers that my qualification set me apart from the other applicants as it was a sign of quality. There are many good NVQ level 3s about, but there are also many bad ones. The NVQ seems to guarantee its students will pass, although some will take longer and need much more help than others, whereas the NNEB was a much more sink or swim affair: You passed each module or you failed and didn't get your qualification. Also, if an employer has a trainee that they want to get a qualification for staffing reasons, it's in there interest to sign off things saying they are competent in areas in which they are not.

NVQ students are able to get their qualifications at one nursery. For my NNEB I had to get experience at 2 nurseries, a nursery school, a year one class in a school and a home placement. None of those places had a vested interest in me passing or failing. I also got taught basic car maintenance, cookery and sewing. NNEB produces much more well rounded and confident students. I've been unemployed for a while now but do lots of supply work in different nurseries, some of which are best described as shit. The bad ones treat the children and staff badly (but legally) but are good enough to stay open and make money. I use to think "Why do the staff work there? Do they not know what good nurseries are?" And then I realised that they don't know what good nurseries are. They get employed at 16 and trained up by the nursery so they've never seen what a good nursery is. I've worked in bad nurseries that make sure staff don't visit other nurseries for training and other purposes to keep their own staff from even looking at somewhere decent. NVQs often know what to do and how to act, but often don't understand why. NNEBs were taught to analyse their actions and to think in much more depth.

Low pay. Obvious but needs saying. 2 years at college, huge pressure, huge responsibility, masses of paperwork, long hours, and you get paid £3 an hour - less than a cleaner.

Comments on career progression and motivation? I want to be able to do my job as well as I can, be valued for it, get treated well, and get enough money to live somewhere on my own.. Reality means: very few nurseries about where you could reach your full potential because of badly designed or badly managed nurseries trying to achieve as much profit as possible by spending as little as possible. Low pay. No sick leave. Long hours. Unrealistic expectations from management. I've more or less given up on having a childcare career. It's a second job in a household. A hobby job. It's not a real profession. Unless you're deputy or above you will not get enough money to live independently where I am in the south.

Ofsted inspections. An outstanding report tells you that a nursery can be great. "Can" be, not is. A nursery like the one I worked in with it's own training unit, that is understaffed all year but on inspection day can cancel all training and fill the place with staff.  A nursery like the one I trained in once that ignored it's menu and gave it's children value ham slices with beans and chips can actually stick to the menu. A nursery like the one I did supply in with the staff ignoring the children and chatting all day can actually do their jobs. An outstanding nursery has to be good on one day out of every four years. Depending on the opinion of the inspector and whatever mood they're in on that single day every four years. I've worked in some dreadful nurseries that were ranked outstanding. All good childcare professionals would like at least yearly unannounced inspections. I miss our local daycare advisers who were always popping in for a chat and a cup of tea and a nose about. The approach seemed to be to help and advise rather than to give grades.

It would be interesting if staff nationwide were asked "would you send your child to your nursery?"

The future?

• Better pay.

• Investigate men coming into childcare, find out why not many do, and change things until they do.

• Better inspections so bad nurseries can't get good grades. (3 or 4 inspectors spending a week at a nursery unannounced? Marked as a percentage?)

• NNEB brought back.

• Only level 3 qualified staff allowed to call themselves qualified Nursery Nurses/Early years whatevers. NVQ 2s shouldn't count.

• Every nursery unit should be run by level 3 or above.

Somebody give me a job.

David

David! I’m particularly interested in your views about men in childcare, you being a male nursery nurse yourself. Through my consultation events and visits I’ve been pleased to meet so many men in childcare and early education who are incredibly dedicated to and passionate about their work. 98% of our workforce are women, and I have been considering through my review why that is and if there are things we can do to achieve a better balance.

I wanted to voice my concerns.  I'm a manager of a setting which has just been rated outstanding.  I moved from a school setting a number of years ago to my current role as manager. The training I received at school has been very valuable to my current role and covered a lot more than current training for staff under level 2 and level 3. I was employed as a higher level teaching assistant.

My concerns are not the level of training a person with the right level 3/4 is able to manage a very successful setting. It's the content of the courses being offered as there are huge gaps in things which are everyday practice for all staff. (Planning, observations and additional needs) I think this was one of the reasons the training I received as a TA has been of so much value to me in my current role.

I am concerned that qualifications gained in schools are not being counted more fully within the sector when they are so valuable. (I have retrained to level 4 to be full and relevant) Although I undertook the course it has not affected my development as I had hoped.

I am concerned as a manager that I cannot trust the new L2 Certificate CYPW or the L3 Diploma for any future employees.  A lot of the course work is based on written work not practical skills. I feel the role needs to be based on a very good base knowledge which can be supported by practical skills. These practical skills need to be observed as part of the course to ensure we have the right skills for supporting the hands on skills needed to undertake roles within the sector. For example writing about observing a child is very different to showing you can observe development and then plan for it.

Dawn Spall

Thanks Dawn.  All these points are indeed crucial. The importance we need to give to the quality of the course content, tutor and what is taught within the qualification is a message I am hearing from the sector over and over.  I am clear that this needs to be addressed, which is why I have made this a key element as part of my review.  

Having started the new Children and Young Peoples Workforce Diploma at a college (which was very good) I couldn’t believe that there wasn’t a unit or a least a small section on Play! How can you begin to teach young children in their early years without Play? I feel that this is a big mistake for the new qualification which NEEDS to be changed! Having looked after children from three months up to 11 years. I feel that they learn their best through play.

I have only got Level 2 in Childcare which I qualified for in 2009!! I have only just been able to get a job finally in a Nursery after hard work and determination to be able to get to this point! I started at a college an hour from where I live, to be able to do Level 3 but couldn’t stay on as I didn’t have a Job at the time and there is NO funding for the over 19s at college and I am now nearly 21! I was very sad to leave, but maybe able to do it on the job or go back part time.  

I hope that these points have been noted and feel that the Early Years is becoming increasingly harder to get into. I don’t know whether is a good thing or not!?! I hope it’s a good thing! (I haven’t been put off thankfully!)

Frederica Rich

Good point on play, Frederica.  I agree that understanding play is a key part of working in the early years.  It seems that you are committed to improving your skills – like so many of those working in the early years – and I absolutely want to make sure that this enthusiasm is supported via the qualifications system.

 I am currently working towards a foundation degree in Early Years with the Open University.  I have had to pay all the fees incurred myself, as my authority doesn’t include the Open University as a training provider that they will fund.  Is this correct?  I prefer distance learning as it fits in with my work commitments and lifestyle and feel that I am being penalised. 

Jane Langton

I’m sorry to hear about your difficulties, Jane. The funding of qualifications is certainly a tricky issue in the current economic circumstances. However, decisions about what funding will be offered for what qualifications and courses must be made locally – either by the setting management or by the local authority – in order to meet local needs.

I have both an NNEB Nursery Nurse diploma and a BA Honours Degree in Early Childhood Studies (1st class) yet still find my skills/qualifications to be both undervalued and underpaid in the workforce.

I am currently working as a Nursery Room Leader which I could have done with just my NNEB qulification (I returned to education as a mature student to study for my degree).

There does not seem to be a valued place (both in terms of status and salary) in the childcare industry for those with degree level qualification. Any advice?

Caroline Burns

This is a common concern I’ve heard through my review, Caroline. Progression is one of the key areas I am looking at as part of my review, and I will be looking into how qualifications can support progression.

A career progression framework which endorses Montessori qualifications will support the Families in the Foundation Years ambition of  'a diverse and vibrant early education sector'.

Will the review take into account the unique nature of a Montessori Teaching Diploma (currently Level 4 on the framework) and protect its status rather than the qualification becoming necessarily 'post qualifying' after a Level 3 Diploma ?

Nathan Archer, Development Manager, Lincolnshire Montessori

Hi Nathan, I too am passionate about a diverse and vibrant early years sector.  As part of my review I have engaged with many representative groups and organisations including Montessori.  I have listened to the different approaches that have enhanced people’s skills and experiences within the profession.  My review will carefully consider the content and delivery of all qualifications in terms of their contribution to improving quality of teaching.

        

I am a teaching assistant (NVQ 3) working in a maintained nursery setting alongside a teacher and a teaching assistant.  

In order to further my practice I am weeks away from completing a Foundation Degree in Early Years Practice which, on a low TA wage, I have had to fund myself (over £3,000).  

I will receive no recompense for my newly acquired level 5 grade nor can I further my career (no scope for HLTA) unless I want to go into teaching, which at 47 I do not.  

I will remain employed as a level 3 TA on exactly the same pay as the other TA who has no formal qualification whatsoever.  

Although I am more than happy for the children I work with to gain the benefit from my studies, from an employee point of view it does not seem fair.

During my review so far many have expressed their concerns about how qualifications are recognised in settings. You are right in that the children you work with will be benefiting from your work towards your Foundation Degree. The ways in which qualifications can support progression, and how we can recognise this, are key considerations of my review.

Could the government not ring fence the Early Intervention Grant? We operate 2 nurseries in Tyne and Wear and since the EIG has come in we have lost £35,000.00 in funding a year from the two sites. Most of this was spent on training and allowing our EYPS to work with staff/attend meetings etc.

One local authority is charging us for even mandatory training ie First Aid at £80.00 person and Food Hygiene at £45.00 person. We understand the need for cutbacks in the public sector but it is the private nurseries that are suffering. Even our local childminders are being charged although not quite as much as nursery staff.  How can we develop staff when we have these cuts yet are still expected by these authorities to act as Lead Professional on cases and attend meetings etc?

Sheila Turnbull, Tyneside Early Education Ltd

Although local authority funding policy is not within my remit, I have heard a number of messages about the impact of funding changes on local authority training programmes.  I want to make sure that any recommendations I make are both ambitious – responding to the highest aspirations of the sector – but some will cost more than others.  So, as I continue my review, I will keep speaking with local authorities and central Government to understand the key barriers and impacts of any funding changes.

 

Why is there no funding for learners over 19 for the traditional qualifications such as the BTEC and the CACHE diploma? This is not fair as it forces people to do the CYPW or the Extended Diploma in CYPW.

Claire Deadman

I understand your concern, Claire. The funding of qualifications is certainly a tricky issue in the current economic circumstances, but I would hope everybody should be able to develop their practice and learn new skills, regardless of their age. Decisions about what funding will be offered for what qualifications and courses are made locally in order to meet local needs though I recognise this raises a national issue around equity.

 

At present only QCF qualifications are funded, which means that learners are forced to do the Diploma in CYPW and cannot do the Diploma in Childcare and Education, Diploma in Home-based care or the BTEC National. This lack of choice is causing problems for learners who wish to have a more specialist early years qualification.

Funding for those over 19 to do training is a common concern raised through my review. Decisions about what funding will be offered for what qualifications and courses are made locally in order to meet local needs. It’s up to employers and local authorities to decide which qualifications they are willing to fund.

 

 

As a nursery owner and trainer of 20 years, my concern is that we are up certifying and down qualifying people.

By this I mean that we are insisting on people being qualified to a level 3; however, we have dulled down these qualifications.  

In the past I have been involved in delivering Cache Diploma in Pre-school Practice through to Foundation Degree. In all areas I feel that older qualifications resulted in staff with better underpinning knowledge and a true understanding of the needs of children

Carroll English, Foundation Learning Co-ordinator

Thanks Carroll.  Your concern is one that I have heard at a number of events – that the content and training programmes for previous qualifications – especially those delivering by the NNEB – were more rigorous and substantial.  I am in the process of comparing existing and legacy qualifications to get a better sense of the issues here.

As an NNEB I do not feel it can be beaten as an initial qualification to work in the Early Years sector, obviously with some updating. My training prepared me to take on a very responsible role, I am not sure ALL of those with an NVQ would be in the same position. Having just completed a BA in Early Years Education and Childcare, I do not feel my qualification is well recognised in any area, and I am struggling to determine where I will find employment that will take into account the knowledge I now have. Even if I pass my EYP assessment, I am neither a teacher or a social worker, roles that are readily recognised. I feel that I need to start at the bottom and work my way up, even though the reason for completing the degree, was that I could take on the more responsible job without spending years proving myself as an lowly paid worker with more knowledge and experience than many in the sector. Young children deserve the best start in life, but there does not appear to be sufficient investment in this area.

Barbara

I am particularly interested in your views on the EYP programme, as this is a message that I have been hearing a lot.  People seem to value the training they receive as an EYP, but are less certain about what it means for their career and whether those new skills are fully utilised.  I am looking at this issue quite closely, to understand what I can recommend to improve the perception of EYPs, and to ensure that those training to the highest levels are able to use those skills and be rewarded.

I have just attended a training session about the new BTEC L3 CPLD in Newbury and am really hoping that it achieves UCAS accreditation and also full and robust competency.

We have been delivering the L2 & L3 CYPWF  to 16-19yr olds with much despondency  and worry because we were under the impression that it was going to replace all others so my question is:

If it does stay, how can it be revised to make it more appropriate for delivery to 16-19 yr old learners?

I do so wish I had looked at the Nutbrown Review more closely – it’s a shame it can’t be extended to allow for more comments!!

Liz Webb, Totton College

Thanks for these comments Liz.  I am looking closely at the current and planned batch of early childhood qualifications, especially at Levels 2 and 3.

I manage a Sure Start children's centre day nursery.

I am currently studying for my BA and EYPS and we have a graduate who has EYPS on our team and six level 3 practitioners. We have to be sustainable and can only do this if we pay all but three of our level 3 practitioners level 2 wages. Job profiles have been rewritten to reflect a difference in each level.

Sure Start was set up to serve the community. We have to offer continuous professional development. We can no longer afford to be as flexible as we would like, we cannot pay staff for qualifications they gain and fees and terms and conditions are changing to reflect the present financial climate.

I appreciate the need for the high standards and quality to meet the needs of children, families, workers and employers in the early years sector but how can this be achieved financially?

Patricia Keysell

Although funding for early years is not within my remit, I cannot talk about improving the qualifications of the early years sector without considering the cost implications.  I recognise the serious financial pressures that all types of settings are facing, and when I make my recommendations I will be mindful of the fact that some will cost more than others.