Opinion: Letters

We share a profound concern about the Early Years Foundation Stage legislation, which becomes law next autumn. We believe the EYFS to be fundamentally flawed in conception, with net harm likely to be done to young children due to the framework's contestable assumptions and unintended consequences.

Young children learn most naturally and effectively through a subtle balance of free play, movement, rhythm, repetition and imitation. An overly formal, academic and/or cognitively biased 'curriculum', however carefully camouflaged, distorts this learning experience; and an early 'head start' in literacy is now known to precipitate unforeseen difficulties later on - sometimes unpredictable emotional and behavioural problems.

Legally enshrining a model of child development disrespectfully allows no space for different but equally plausible developmental frameworks, which would, for example, fundamentally question the EYFS's programmatic blending of broad developmental milestones with 'early learning goals' (especially around literacy); the EYFS's emphasis on 'adult-directed' as opposed to free-flow play; and the appropriateness of ITC in early learning. The age bands and associated age-related goals in the EYFS are also quite arbitrary, with little if any coherent developmental rationale; and to impose a compulsory legal framework on what are pre-compulsory school-age children may well have profound civil rights implications.

Research suggests prescriptive intrusion by Government into education has not improved standards to any marked extent, and may be narrowing and 'over-mechanising' children's learning experiences, inducing needless anxiety and, at worst, a major diminution in children's enthusiasm for learning. Young children's needs are substantially compromised by an 'audit and accountability' ideology. Caring for babies and toddlers is profoundly personal, involving immeasurable qualities like attunement and responsiveness. A 'one-size-fits-all' framework, necessitating copious record-keeping, risks substituting bureaucracy for care.

We therefore call on the Government to commission an urgent independent review of the EYFS, allowing diverse conceptions of child development to flourish without undue compromise; and to reduce the status of the EYFS to 'professional guidelines', free of legal compulsion, so safeguarding the professionalism and freedom to practice of practitioners who have principled objections to the framework.

Many people feel unable to speak out against EYFS for fear of career reprisals, with others feeling helpless to influence Government thinking. We call upon practitioners, academics, administrators, teacher-trainers and parents to join us in our OPEN EYE Campaign for the very heart of childhood. Details can be obtained from r.house@roehampton.ac.uk.

Dr Richard House, Roehampton University ; Sue Palmer, educational consultant and author of Toxic Childhood; Margaret Edgington, early years consultant; Dr Penelope Leach, psychologist and author; Dr Dorothy Rowe, psychologist and writer; and 26 others

Letter of the week

Flexible to available

I was rather dismayed by Alan Bentley's column ('To the point', 15 November). While I understand the needs of children and nurseries, I can also see a 'chicken and egg' situation, as some nurseries miss out on experienced, qualified staff who would be available if nurseries could be more flexible and consider mutual agreements.

As a very experienced NNEB and level 4 qualified practitioner, I have been offered full-time positions. However, I need flexitime (part-time, job share or bank work) to be able to complete a childcare honours degree. I need a job to pay for my studies, and I am not alone.Then, even as a qualified and experienced practitioner, I can only expect pay not far above the national minimum wage.

There are qualified staff who, for various reasons, need flexible options. It could therefore be argued that the cost of inflexibility contributes to why, as Alan Bentley said, 'the availability of qualified staff is now at an all-time low'.

Louise Baker, by e-mail

Letter of the Week wins £40 worth of children's books

- Send your letters to ... The Editor, Nursery World, 174 Hammersmith Road, London W6 7JP letter.nw@haymarket.com 020 8267 8402.