Practitioners must speak out about the failings of proposed ELGs

The proposed educational programme for Communication and Language in the Government’s EYFS consultation is better than it was in the pilot version in that there is more emphasis on conversation and less on reading to children. However, as in the rest of the educational programmes, there is scant recognition that the EYFS is a birth to five key stage.

MAKING SENSE OF THE WORLD

Unlike older children who can relate to decontextualised language, such as they might hear from text read aloud, babies and younger children need to make immediate connections to their experiences and sensory input in order to make sense of the world and the words they hear.

They also need immediate feedback on their own efforts to communicate (not necessarily in spoken language) with contingent responses that acknowledge the whole of the child’s communication skills and can expand or remodel the child’s words.

They need to understand linguistics by hearing many examples of how grammar shifts with the perspective of the speaker in to-and-fro conversation.

MISLEADING SUGGESTION

The new version, which includes ‘By commenting on what children are interested in or doing, and echoing back what they say with new vocabulary added, practitioners will build children's language effectively’, goes some way towards understanding the way in which oral language develops.

However, the proposed educational programme still contains the following opening sentences. ‘The development of children’s spoken language underpins all seven areas of learning and development. Children’s back-and-forth interactions from an early age form the foundations for language and cognitive development.’

These statements do not recognise the interconnected nature of the three Prime Areas, and how all three are foundational for children’s learning. It misleadingly suggests a primacy about spoken language which is neither developmentally nor chronologically correct. This is not to downplay the importance of Communication and Language, but to ensure there is clarity about the importance and interconnectedness of all three Prime Areas.

THE PRIME AREAS

This brief summary of that interconnectedness draws on the rationale for the Prime areas included in the Tickell review.

Physical Development (PD) supports Communication and Language (CL) because a child who can effectively use gross motor skills, gestures and the fine movements involved in speech is able to convey messages to others. PD also supports Personal, Social and Emotional Development (PSED), as increasing physical control provides experiences of the self as an active agent in the environment, promoting growth in confidence and awareness of control.

At the same time, PSED supports CL within relationships which establish turn-taking, joint activity, a desire to communicate and understanding of shared meaning. PSED also supports PD as a child who feels secure and safe is confident to expand the boundaries of exploration and is motivated to reach, move and test physical capacities.

CL supports PSED because a child who can communicate feelings, needs and ideas develops a strong sense of self, and is increasingly able to relate to others in rewarding and satisfying ways. CL also supports PD through description of actions which increase conscious control and through talk about health and the factors which influence this.

SELF-REGULATION AND THE CoEL

Underlying these connections is a recognition that it is through learning in all the prime areas that children move from being other-regulated to self-regulated and are able to engage confidently in learning in all areas.

It is through playing and exploring, active learning and creating and thinking critically that children acquire the broad range of life-long learning emotional and cognitive self-regulation skills.

It is positive that DfE will include the Ofsted definition of teaching (which includes the Characteristics of Effective Learning) in the revised EYFS statutory framework. They have also ruled the CoEL ‘out of scope’ for this consultation which is meant I am sure to be reassuring to the sector and is also a sign that DfE recognises their importance. However, without including them, and the principles on which the EYFS is based we have a framework which has no foundations in sound research and pedagogy and which appears to be unprincipled. Which in turn leads to two big questions:

• Where is the acknowledgement of Getting it Right in the EYFS (the early years coalition literature review) and its sound research-based recommendations?
• Where is the recognition that a huge practitioner survey (not a pilot in 24 reception classes) overwhelmingly said there was no need for a complete re-write?

I would urge everyone interested in the future of the EYFS to read at least the summaries of the findings.

Here’s a quote that’s relevant here: The evidence suggests that there is no substantiated case for the EYFS Statutory Framework to be significantly changed. However, less advantaged children continue to underachieve and this perpetuates the gap as they progress into primary schooling. Given this context, a closer examination of the recent evidence reveals that with some modifications, particularly in relation to the guidance on Communication and Language Development, and giving greater prominence to the Characteristics of Effective Teaching and Learning, these children might be better served.

PROPOSED ELG – LISTENING, ATTENTION AND UNDERSTANDING

So, to return to CL and to the detail of the ELG for Listening, Attention and Understanding:

Children at the expected level of development will:

• Listen attentively and respond appropriately when being read to and during whole class discussions and small group interactions;
• Make comments about what they have heard and ask questions to clarify their understanding;
• Hold conversation when engaged in back-and-forth exchanges with their teacher and peers.

In response to criticism from the sector that the vital strands of ‘Attention’ and ‘Understanding’ had been omitted from Communication and Language, the DfE has changed the ELG from ‘Listening’ to ‘Listening, Attention and Understanding’. However, only one word of an already unsatisfactory ELG has been changed ‘whole class and small group discussions’ has become ‘whole class discussions and small group interactions’.

Listening and attention

As regards listening and attention, this ELG shows no awareness of CL development and clearly no input from speech and language Therapists. This is especially surprising bearing in mind the recent specific recommendations for DfE contained within the recent Bercow Ten Years On report.

It is critical that Attention be properly included as part of this ELG. It is a necessary prerequisite of effective listening, and for children with communication and language delay it is the first aspect that must receive focus in supporting progress. Development Matters sets out very clearly how it develops from fleeting to integrated attention and the ways it can be enhanced by adults supporting children to focus their attention.

A criticism of the first version of this ELG was that ‘Make comments about what they have heard and ask questions to clarify their understanding’ belonged in Understanding. However, it is not appropriate to shoehorn Understanding in with Listening and Attention. It needs a separate ELG to reflect professional understanding of language development. Understanding (receptive language) comes before speaking (expressive language), and must receive specific attention.

The current ELG on Understanding is ‘Children follow instructions involving several ideas or actions. They answer ‘how’ and ‘why’ questions about their experiences and in response to stories or events’ Making comments about what you have heard does not necessarily indicate understanding whereas answering questions about ‘how’ and ‘why’ is an appropriate marker for the stage, and ties in with the Development Matters guidance; understanding this sort of question is not typical for younger children

The third bullet point of this ELG Hold conversation when engaged in back-and-forth exchanges with their teacher and peers is a tautology and does not make clear how the ability to converse relates to either listening, attention or understanding

PROPOSED ELG – SPEAKING

Children at the expected level of development will:

• Participate in small group, class and one-to-one discussions, offering their own ideas, using recently introduced vocabulary;
• Offer explanations for why things might happen, making use of recently introduced vocabulary from stories, non-fiction, rhymes and poems when appropriate;
• Express their ideas and feelings about their experiences using full sentences, including accurate use of past, present and future tenses and making use of conjunctions, with modelling and support from their teacher.

Vocabulary

A very welcome restoration to this ELG from the current ELG is using past, present and future tenses. In this iteration, the ‘new vocabulary’ of the piloted version has been changed to ‘recently introduced’ vocabulary. This seems merely cosmetic as nothing else around it has changed. There is no explanation of what is meant by ‘recently introduced vocabulary’ – recently introduced to whom? Is it still new or recently introduced when we use it in different contexts and for different purposes? How much of it is nouns, adverbs, adjectives, verbs, adverbial phrases? What about EAL? Or using foreign language phrases? Or body language etc? Knowing vocabulary is a proxy indicator, and not one we should expect practitioners to measure as part of the ELGs. It can lead to a ‘tick list’ approach and teaching sets of words.

The current ELG contains the fundamentally important aspects of ‘children express themselves effectively, showing awareness of listeners’ need’ and ‘They develop their own narratives and explanations by connecting ideas or events.’ There is nothing here about expressing themselves effectively and actively communicating with others taking listeners' needs into account; nor clarity around the importance of using language for thinking in narratives and connecting ideas. These are the ways language supports learning across all areas, not just repeating vocabulary whether it is characterised as ‘new’ or ‘recently introduced’! Full sentences is not an important element, and can be artificial in conversation. Connecting ideas and events indicates more complex sentence/grammatical structures.

IN CONCLUSION: RESPOND

In conclusion I would urge all readers to respond to this consultation. If you are a busy practitioner, you may well not have time to read all the various documents in detail, but your membership organisations are doing just that now and engaging in debate with others across the sector about how best to respond. They will make considered and detailed responses which will be available on their websites.

Read them, use the bits you agree with and reflect on how the proposals may affect you and the children and families with whom you work and add in your own views and send them to DfE.

The more responses there are from practitioners the better. The DfE did not consult the birth to five sector before re-writing not only the ELGs but the whole EYFS, do not consent by silence to letting them ignore current research and practitioner expertise