Nursery Education

www.eis.org.uk

Research Review

Report / 2010

1 

NURSERY EDUCATION

RESEARCH REVIEW REPORT

FOREWARD

This research review, which was prepared for the EIS Working Group on Nursery Education, is an important and timely document. For the first time the document sets out all the research relevant to Scotland on the impact of nursery education on young people before they enter the primary school.

Some of the research has been well publicised and some has to date received very little publicity. All available quality research points in one direction and that is of the immense value of high quality nursery education for very young children. The research review also rejects importing to Scotland other models of pre-5 provision which reflect the culture and educational background of other countries and which would not operate successfully in Scotland with its own traditions and educational history.

The report indicates that qualified nursery teachers are right at the heart of quality nursery education. This is particularly true at a time when pupils, aged 3-18, are adapting to the new Curriculum for Excellence. This is a message which is of paramount importance at a time when Government – Westminster, Holyrood and local authority – are planning massive cuts in education expenditure. The EIS believes that the route out of the current economic crisis lies in part in quality education provision for all our young people. This starts with our youngest children and their entitlement to access to quality nursery education provision.

The report was prepared by George MacBride an independent consultant, previously with a long term association with the EIS.

I commend the report to you and encourage you to share its contents as widely as possible.

Margaret Smith

Nursery Teacher, Deanburn Primary School, Bo’ness.

Convener of the EIS Working Group on Nursery Education

and Member of EIS Council and of the EIS Education Committee.

2 

3 

Report to EIS Working Group on Nursery Education

October 2010

1. Introduction

1.1. This paper has been produced for the EIS Working Group on Nursery Education. At a time when this sector of education is subject to considerable change, this paper uses a range of evidence to identify a number of issues related to pre-school education and to lead to conclusions for consideration by the EIS.

1.2. This paper was written over the summer of 2010. It draws on a range of reports and articles, especially published research and policy documentation. It is hoped that all of this is fully acknowledged and that findings and views are accurately reported in this paper. Responsibility for any inaccuracies, errors or misrepresentation lies with the author of this paper.

1.3. In accordance with common usage, ‘pre-school’ is applied to children under the age of compulsory education and to services provided for them; the inconsistency of this usage with the concept of nursery education, as usually understood, is acknowledged.

4 

5 

2. Executive summary

Note: the figures in parentheses refer to the relevant sections of the report.

2.1. The model underpinning pre-school provision in the UK, including Scotland, is one based on a historical dichotomy between education and care. (3, 4)

2.2. This pattern is now unusual in Europe where integrated services are common. (3)

2.3. Nursery education provided by a teacher has been highly valued in Scotland. (3)

2.4. Nursery education provided by a teacher has been threatened by policy developments in Scotland, including, cost-saving, neo-liberal dogma and the use of early years provision as a means of encouraging parents into employment. (3)

2.5. This model has been elaborated to include neo-liberal approaches to developing a market in early years provision which results in a dichotomy between public and private provision. (3)

2.6. This model was originally based on theories of early childhood development which did not recognise that young children’s learning depends on interaction with others. (4)

2.7. These theories have been replaced in by theories in which learning is a social activity. (4)

2.8. Concepts of the early childhood worker as a technician are inconsistent with our understanding of young children’s learning. (4)

2.9. The concept of the insufficient child puts at risk the concept of a universal service based on this model of effective learning. (4)

2.10. This understanding of the child as an active learner is reflected in curricula in many countries, including Curriculum for Excellence. (4, 8)

2.11. There are clearly established markers of good policy and practice in the provision of early years services. (4, 5, 9, 10, 11, 13, 32)

2.12. Workforce organisation in Scotland reflects out-dated historical views of early years provision. (5)

2.13. Funding of pre-school services in the UK, including Scotland, is lower than that in many other countries. (6)

2.14. Policy debate and formation has failed to consider alternative models and levels of funding. (6)

2.15. Much provision is dependent on payment by parents, supported to some extent by tax credits. (6)

2.16. The funding model is likely to drive down levels of funding available to pre-school services. (6)

2.17. It is important to avoid any risk that this funding model results in provision which is likely to reduce social cohesion. (6)

2.18. Policy debate and formation in Scotland has been marked by an uncritical acceptance of models of practice. (6)

6 

2.19. A number of education policies in Scotland recognise the common features of an inclusive high quality education from the early years through primary and into secondary education. (7)

2.20. Curriculum for Excellence is based on an understanding of children’s development and learning which is common to all learners from 3-18. (8)

2.21. Curriculum for Excellence is based on broad and inclusive definitions of the curriculum and of learning and achievement. (8).

2.22. Curriculum for Excellence makes clear the importance of coherence among curriculum, pedagogy and assessment. (8)

2.23. Curriculum for Excellence recognises the importance of teaching. (8)

2.24. There is extensive robust evidence of the importance and value of the teacher in pre-school education to ensuring successful learning and positive outcomes for children. (9, 10, 11, 12, 13, 16)

2.25. The positive impact of teachers in pre-school centres is both immediate and long term, lasting through the primary stages of education. (9, 10, 11, 12, 13)

2.26. The reasons for this positive impact are clearly identified in much research: it is behaviour which can be described as ‘teacherly’, challenging and supporting children to extend and reflect on their thinking. (9)

2.27. There is evidence that the employment of staff with higher level qualifications, other than teacher qualifications, leads to improved outcomes for young children. (9)

2.28. There is extensive and robust evidence that nursery schools and classes, staffed by qualified teachers, lead to better outcomes for young children than other forms of pre-school provision. (9, 10, 11, 12, 13)

2.29. There is evidence that the quality of public sector provision of services for children in general is better than private or partnership provision. (9, 10, 11, 14, 16, 17, 18)

2.30. There is very clear evidence that the number of teachers employed in the pre-school sector in Scotland is well below the number required to ensure the policy commitment that all 3 to 5 year olds have access to a teacher. (14, 15)

2.31. There is evidence that access to a teacher is interpreted in a range of ways. (14, 15, 18, 21, 23)

2.32. There is little evidence of Scottish Government or local authorities using evidence to inform policy development and implementation in the field of pre-school services. (19, 20, 21, 22)

2.33. There is evidence that the quality of placements in the pre-school sector provided to preservice primary teachers has been put at risk by pressures on university faculties and schools of education. (21)

2.34. The capacity of university faculties and schools of education to provide qualifications (teacher, pedagogue, child studies, CPD) is also likely to have been put at risk by cuts in their funding. (21)

2.35. There is clear evidence in Scotland that teachers are deployed (other than in nursery schools and classes) in ways that are likely to their having a limited impact on children’s learning. (23)

7 

2.36. While levels of teacher staffing and models of deployment are generally better in local authority provision than in partnership provision, there are local authorities with very poor levels of provision in their own establishments. (23)

2.37. There is evidence that levels of provision are the results of policy decisions taken, sometimes explicitly, within local authorities. (23)

2.38. The Scottish Government and local authorities have access to detailed evidence about local authority provision of pre-school services and the extent to which these reflect government policy commitments. (23)

2.39. It is readily possible to use this detailed information to identify those authorities supporting good practice and those failing to do so and to identify details the types of provision made by them. (23)

2.40. There is little evidence of the Scottish Government or local authorities using this information to monitor and improve provision of pre-school services. (22, 23)

2.41. There is evidence that the Scottish Government and local authorities have not carried out their stated intent to monitor and improve these services. (22, 23, 24)

2.42. It is important to avoid the risk that qualifications for the pre-service workforce at any level become based on competence models which prevent professional reflection. (25)

2.43. It is important to ensure that work place based learning ensures professional reflection. (25)

2.44. It is important to ensure that all recognition and accreditation of prior learning (including informal and non-formal learning) is rigorous. (25)

2.45. There is little evidence that the levels of qualification for those entering child care employment are better than in the past. (26)

2.46. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that Scottish Government targets to improve the qualifications of staff, other than teachers, in the pre-school sector are aspirational rather than realistic. (26)

2.47. Employers should ensure that they meet the requirement of SSSC to support learning on the part of their employees. (27)

2.48. Policy and practice are at risk of focusing less on the rights of the child than on economic policy. (4, 28)

2.49. It is important to avoid any risks that this funding model results in incoherence in provision. (28)

2.50. This funding model is associated with and dependent on the employment of low paid staff, especially but not only within the private or partnership sector. (28, 29)

2.51. The dependence on low paid staff leads to the employment of considerable numbers of less well qualified staff, especially but not only, in the private partnership sector.(28, 29)

2.52. The use of this funding model and consequent low pay is likely to be associated with continuing acceptance of roles for staff in the pre-school sector which can be described a substitute mother or technician. (4, 29)

8 

2.53. Local authorities can choose to ensure that all their employees are paid a living wage. (29)

2.54. Local authorities can seek to use their procurement policies to require those establishments which they commission to provide services to provide minimum conditions of service and pay for staff employed by them. (29)

2.55. The Scottish Government and local authorities have it in their power to negotiate and agree national conditions of service and levels of pay for staff employed in the pre-school sector. (29)

2.56. These bodies have it in their power to associate levels of qualifications with such conditions of service and thus to drive up standards. (29)

2.57. Most proposals for joint training of professions working with young children have been aspirational rather than practical. (25, 30, 31)

2.58. It is possible to consider appropriate means of supporting joint training among such professions provided due regard is made to practical and cost issues. (31)

2.59. Discussion on the role of the pedagogue has often been carried out in terms which ignore the realities of the roles played by teachers in Scotland and the realities of the curriculum, teaching and learning in Scotland’s schools. (32)

2.60. Discussion on the role of the pedagogue has often failed to recognise the extent of the split between well qualified and less well qualified staff. (32)

2.61. Discussion on the role of the pedagogue has often been conducted without consideration of the likely costs of providing qualifications. (32)

2.62. Little evidence has been brought forward to distinguish the role of the pedagogue from the role of the teacher as defined in the Standard for Full Registration. (32)

2.63. Discussion of the role of the pedagogue has tended to ignore the consequences for pay scales. (32)

2.64. A number of proposals for EIS action are made. (33)

9 

3. Background

3.1. Within the UK nursery education for 3 to 5 year old children has historically formed one distinct strand of public provision for children below the age of compulsory education. The other strand, though a range of titles has been used, can be referred to as early years care. These two types of provision differed greatly in terms of functions, administrative structures and staff qualifications. Nursery schools and classes, run by local authority education departments, offered almost exclusively part-time education to 3 and 4 year olds for the duration of the school year; they were staffed by qualified teachers and by nursery nurses with a lower level of qualification; their ‘client’ was primarily the child. Day care centres (with various titles), run by local authority social work departments, offered part time or full time care to children from 0 to 5, often for 50 weeks a year; they were staffed by nursery nurses and similarly qualified staff; their ‘client’ was primarily the parent or carer. There were, however, some similarities. Both types of establishment were provided, funded and managed by the local authority. Neither was a universal service; service levels were determined by each authority. This public provision was supplemented by very limited private sector provision of care services and by childminding, usually informally arranged. This fundamental split between nursery education and day care continues to the present and has, indeed, in some ways at least, become deeper and more entrenched as a result of government policies.

3.2. This type of pattern is now unusual within Europe. A recent Eurydice report (Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency 2009) makes clear that, while in many other European countries there is a split between pre-school education and care, this is typically related to age so that provision for 0-3 year olds is different in type and aims from provision for 3-6 year olds. It is unusual to have a dual system operating within an age group as is the case for 3-5 year olds in Scotland.

3.3. Within the dual system in Scotland there was clear recognition of the important role of the teacher in nursery education through the requirement of the Schools (Scotland) Code (1956) that in nursery schools and classes there had to be a ratio of one teacher to twenty children. The long history of nursery education in Scotland, the comparatively large number of places provided in some urban areas, the existence of specific additional teaching qualifications in nursery education and this statutory requirement for the employment of qualified teachers in nursery schools and classes were important factors in extending and maintaining provision of nursery education. Wilkinson et al (1993) in research carried out for Strathclyde Region, as it sought to reconfigure pre-school provision in the late 1980’s and early 1990s, reported support for local authority nursery education with teacher input. A 1995 survey of parents, conducted by the Scottish Parent Teacher Council (SPTC), found a ‘satisfaction’ rate of 71% for whole day local authority provision and 64% for local authority part-day provision; in contrast the corresponding figures for private provision were 33% and 27%

3.4. Nursery education, however, in Scotland did not enjoy the fundamental statutory status afforded to primary and secondary education; provision always remained discretionary and dependent on local authority policy. Local authorities are required only to secure a place for all 3 and 4 year old children whose parents may wish this; they are not required to provide

10 

themselves a place for all such children. This lack of status was exacerbated when the Scottish Executive in 2002 removed the statutory requirement to have teachers present in nursery education and thus ‘gave local authorities greater flexibility in deploying teachers in pre-school centres’ (HMIE 2007c cited in Adams 2008). A small number of local authorities quickly interpreted this, without challenge from the then administration, as permission to redeploy teachers out of direct work with children in nursery classes or schools into support roles within early years provision or indeed out of the sector and into teaching primary classes. Adams (2008) points out the consequences of this:

The resultant replacement of the teachers by nursery nurses … had some unwelcome side effects: Many establishments were left with no employees qualified to degree level; early years expertise was lost; and a number of nursery classes found themselves being nominally led by the primary head teacher, or depute, who knew little of nursery pedagogy. In these situations, the quality of nursery education became solely dependent on the practice of nursery nurses. (p198)

3.5. There is evidence that more education authorities are now proceeding down this road. In some cases they have used the fact that they have increased the number and/or qualifications of other staff as an excuse for reducing the number of teachers employed in pre-school provision.

3.6. Both Conservative and New Labour UK governments were committed to extending early years provision for several reasons: to provide child care which would allow parents (ie mothers) to participate in the labour market; to provide support for parents or families who were in some way vulnerable; to provide support for children who were vulnerable or whose life chances were threatened by disadvantage; to improve educational outcomes for all children. These aims are not necessarily mutually consistent. The weight accorded to any one rationale has varied from time to time and from context to context. However, there has often been an emphasis on getting parents into work on the grounds that this is the most effective route out of poverty. This has over the last two decades moved from facilitation to direction. It is significant that, in contrast to almost all other European countries where responsibility for pre-school provision is vested in one or both of ministries of education and of social welfare, in England the Department of Work and Pensions is formally involved in the planning of pre-school provision.

3.7. Given these diverse aims, it is perhaps not surprising that there has been considerable confusion in developing policy and practice. It is notable that this extension of provision has been built on the dual foundations of nursery education and day care and has, therefore, entrenched the chasm between these two sectors. On to this already existing dichotomy there has been added a new dichotomy between public provision and a greatly expanded private sector.

3.8. Recent extensions in pre-school provision have been marked by the following features:

a refusal to envisage the possibility of a universal public pre-school service

the consequent extensive use of the private sector as providers of pre-school services

11 

an uneasy balance between commissioning private sector provision and the use of the market to supply services

a general refusal to fund universal provision, free to parents, regardless of the provider

a partial exception to this in the commitment to provide limited nursery education to all 3 and 4 year olds (15+ hours per week), free to parents

payment for all provision of education and care beyond this through fees charged to parents

use of the tax system to provide some means tested financial support to working parents to contribute towards the payment of these fees

the dependence on quality assurance systems which make use of centrally determined standards and external evaluation

considerable dependence on low paid, low qualified staff, especially within the private, partnership sector

reductions in the numbers of teachers working with children

limited moves to enhance the qualifications of staff (other than teachers) in pre-school provision

limited and piecemeal attempts to bring the two sectors (nursery education and day care) together.

3.9. While the details of policy and practice in Scotland have changed over 20 years there has been no fundamental challenge to the model established by the Conservatives and developed by New Labour. Aspects of policy related to financial support for parents lie largely with the UK government and outwith the control of the Scottish government. Policy and practice in Scotland (as elsewhere in the UK) remain clearly different in aim as well as in structure from that elsewhere in Europe as summed up in the Eurydice report (Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency 2009):

ECEC [Early childhood Education and Care] programmes for 3-6 year-olds exist in all European countries and at this level (ISCED 0), the mission to educate is clear and overrides the child-minding function related to parental employment. … [S]taff working at this level of education have a pedagogy-related training which combines practical work experience with theoretical classes intended to produce qualified teachers or general educators. To sum up, the pre-primary level (ISCED 0) is characterised by a consistency in staffing – across most of Europe it involves teachers working in educationally-oriented teams and leading the majority of activities for children. (p13)

4. Learning from international comparisons

4.1. It is worth considering these developments in the context of studies of international provision and, in so doing, to return to the specific nature of policy and provision in Scotland.

4.2. The Thomas Coram Research Institute of the Institute of Education of the University of London was commissioned by the Department for Education and Skills (DfES) to compare early years and childcare provision in 15 countries, including the UK (differences among countries within the UK are

12 

recognised). This became the Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project / October 2003. The outcomes of this have been published as a number of papers under that heading.

4.3. The project concludes that policy, practice and organisation of pre-school services in each country reflect deeply embedded economic, cultural, social and political factors. In addition to specific historical practices and structures, these include the social construction of childhood, the support that is afforded to working parents, and the extent to which services are seen as a universal entitlement or as support for specific groups.

4.4. Moss et al (2003a) identify three models of provision. Nordic welfare regimes emphasise entitlement in the context of welfare regimes oriented to universal services; liberal welfare regimes, typical of English speaking countries, emphasise targeted benefits, prioritise the market and limit government responsibility for general services; conservative welfare regimes (covering other European countries) generally provide good welfare protection to those with stable lifelong employment, though less for others.

4.5. The historical distinction between care and education which existed in many countries, at least until recently, was supported by an uncritical acceptance of theories of child development such as Piaget’s theory of developmental stages, which suggested that external influences, including teaching, had little impact on the processes of early development. Care was designed to serve the physical and emotional needs of very young children; education was designed to serve the intellectual needs of children as they grew somewhat older. However, the arguments of writers, such as Vygotsky, who recognise the role of others in supporting early learning, now supported by considerable research evidence on learning at the earliest stages, have resulted in the acknowledgement in many countries that education begins at birth and that separating education and care, in the ways that were previously accepted, is no longer defensible or sensible.

4.6. Although concerned directly with primary education, the Cambridge Primary Review argument that improved understandings of cognitive development should inform both policy and practice can be applied equally to pre-school provision. Key principles include the following:

learning is fundamentally a social activity that can be carefully and sensitively scaffolded and enhanced by adults from birth and throughout the primary years (Goswami, U & Bryant, P (2007), Howe, C & Mercer N (2007))

language development is fundamental to all learning so talk and collaborative activity and thinking about learning (metacognition) should be an intrinsic and integrated aspect of classroom life (Goswami, U & Bryant, P (2007), Howe, C & Mercer N (2007))

children are agents in making sense of their lives, taking action and shaping other people's understanding of their individuality and shared characteristics, so it is important to seek out children's views in terms of both in research and practice (Cambridge Primary Review (2007a))

4.7. The Review concluded that the practice in England of children leaving behind their active play based learning and embarking on a formal, subject-based curriculum at the age of four is not of value. Practice in the early

13 

years of primary school should reflect teaching in early years provision. Cambridge Primary Review (2009) summarises this:

We know, thanks to research, what children need to flourish in their early years. They need the opportunity to build their social skills, their language and their confidence. They do this best through structured play and talk, interacting with each other and with interested and stimulating adults. The evidence is overwhelming that all children, but particularly those from disadvantaged homes, benefit from high-quality pre-school experiences. (p16)

4.8. The report published as OECD Directorate for Education (2004) also argues that the education of young children (here referred to as early childhood education and care – ECEC) and the education of those in the statutory sectors are marked by the same principles including:

the same learning goals at all levels of education but at different levels of complexity

a continuity of perspectives through ECEC and the school

children’s learning must be focussed on creating meaning

ECEC curricula should deal with play and learning and the relationship between them

ECEC programmes must be open and make room for children’s initiatives and experiences.

4.9. Moss (2000) notes, in contrast, a discourse in some pre-school policy which reflects a limited view of education usually associated with those who seek to narrow education to achieving limited targets and to reduce teachers’ responsibilities to the carrying out of others’ instructions.

4.10. While it may be that this language has become increasingly dominant in some UK government policy statements, it has not become the dominant discourse in Scotland. Adopting such approaches would remove (or at least reduce greatly) the possibilities of pre-school education supporting children in developing in the ways envisaged for them in Curriculum for Excellence.

4.11. Such approaches reduce the opportunities for pre-school provision to provide children with the experience of being members of real community of dialogue and reflection in which they can become responsible citizens and effective contributors. An insight into the risks afforded by marketisation to broader definitions of education and to a universal service promoting social cohesion is afforded by the 2010 edition of Children in Europe published by Children in Scotland. This publication argues the importance of a sense of place for young children’s development. Articles provide examples of children in pre-school establishments which serve local communities in countries across Europe being afforded opportunities to develop a confident sense of place in developing their identity. However, no examples were provided from the pre-five sector in the UK; this lack was made up by exemplars drawn from the publicly funded school sector (Coleman 2010, explicitly, and Meade & Fairfax-Cholmeley 2010, implicitly).

4.12. Marketisation generally lends itself to limiting approaches as it purports to demonstrate through simplistic measurements ‘value for money’. More generally, a focus on using pre-school provision to provide measurable economic benefits excludes the perspective of the child (Penn et al 2006).

14 

4.13. Barron et al (2007) note that some discussions of pre-school provision depend on assumptions which are inconsistent with the recognition, based on the work of Vygotsky, that the learning of all children shares common features. One such is the view of the insufficient child or family as the legitimate or priority recipient of services; indeed these families are sometimes seen as a target for such provision – an interesting, indeed disturbing, quasi-military metaphor. Within this perspective, such children and families are defined as different from and deficient compared to some notional ‘normal’ child or family; neither are the status and value of these norms ever open to discussion or contested. Provision for them will (should) be different from the provision made for others; in fact, the evidence is quite clear that children benefit rather from universal provision based on common principles. It may reflect this historical view that, as Moss et al (2003b) note, in most countries responsibility for services has continued to be divided between education and welfare departments.

4.14. This view has, in the UK countries, been come to be associated with a discourse which stresses the need for improved parenting and the value of employment as the road out of poverty. These two discourses are not necessarily mutually consistent but together have tended to compromise the ideal of a universal service. All too often the individual parent or family is held responsible, indeed blamed, for the consequences and burdens of inequality which they bear, whether this is unemployment, poverty or ‘failure’ as parent.

4.15. Only Sweden, England and Scotland have placed administrative responsibility for all childcare, early years education and compulsory schooling within the single government department of education. However, making one department responsible for all services for young children does not necessarily lead to coherent policy formation. In Scotland within the Education and Lifelong Learning Directorate there remains a clear internal split between school services and services for children. Recent events in England have indicated the continuing tensions in childcare despite the enhanced responsibilities afforded to educational agencies for childcare. In contrast in Sweden the move to coherent administrative structures has been associated with a commitment to ensuring the quality and consistency of all early years provision through the staffing of all centres by qualified teachers.

4.16. Despite continuing divides in the administration of early years provision, countries are paying increasing attention to the continuity between early childhood services and school through developing curriculum frameworks which span pre-school and compulsory school provision. Even in those countries which maintain separate curricula for pre-school and school, common principles or concepts underpin these. This model of separate curricula based on common principles was that employed In Scotland, for a number of years. Curriculum for Excellence has now taken this forward through the development of one curriculum which covers the age range 3 to 18 years, within which the Early level covers both pre-school and early primary.

4.17. Mooney et al (2003) argue that definitions of quality depend on cultural values and understandings of childhood. They consider, however, that there is a general consensus among researchers that the following elements

15 

are associated with positive outcomes for children, both short and long-term:

adequate investment

co-ordinated policy and regulatory framework

efficient and co-ordinated management systems

adequate levels of staff training and working conditions

pedagogical frameworks and other guidelines

regular system of monitoring

equity and diversity expressed in eligibility and staffing policies.

4.18. The research identifies two main approaches to regulation: the first is built on the establishment of centrally determined standards and the use of external evaluation to determine conformity to these; the second is based on trust in local responsibility and the professional quality of staff to assure quality. The former is more likely to be of use in systems where the private market predominates.

5. Workforce organisation

5.1. Moss, P (2006) argues that there are three interrelated structural dimensions of any early years workforce: organisation, material conditions, and composition. These are related to the roles afforded the workforce; these structural dimensions contribute to the construction of these roles and are reproduced as the roles are played out in the workplace. In this view three different models have underpinned the roles of the worker in pre-school provision – substitute mother, technician and researcher. The first of these can be associated with concepts of provision in which care for young children is seen to be a ‘natural’ occupation for women, an occupation which requires no training or education; the impact of this continues to be reflected in the highly gendered nature of employment in the pre-school sector and was actively promoted by some Conservative thinkers in the UK in the 1980s as they sought to extend pre-school provision at minimum cost through the recruitment of a ‘mum’s army’. The second of these models suggests that working with young children requires no more than low level skills to carry out the instructions of others. It has long been a feature of provision in the UK and continues to be promoted by those who see the rationale for pre-school provision and education as primarily economic. It is reflected in the widespread employment of staff with low levels of qualifications at low rates of pay, especially but not only in the private partnership sector. The last is that associated with occupations such as the teacher or the pedagogue and is clearly associated with higher quality outcomes for children.

5.2. Kremer (2006) supports these arguments both about the longevity and resilience of the models which underpin early years provision, even when society has changed, noting that:

Most European welfare states today have said farewell to the male breadwinner–female caretaker model. Still, child care policy has a different pace and shape in each country. ... In Denmark, a universal

16 

child care provision was made possible because of the advocacy coalition of women with social pedagogues. They promoted the ideal of professional care. To combat the ideal of full-time motherhood, the Flemish Catholic women’s movement strived for subsidizing childminders -- the ideal of surrogate motherhood -- supported by the Christian Democratic Party. Both strategies led to comparatively high levels of child care provisions, but also to very different contents and shapes. (p261)

Kremer notes that the choice of roles and, consequently, the types of provision made available depend on political decisions.

5.3. Despite a rhetoric of integration and some moves towards more integrated administrative structures and responsibilities, policy makers have not necessarily taken effective action to move away from an organisation of the workforce which reflects these conceptual differences and the structural split between childcare and early education. The two issues are correlated. Workers in child care establishments are typically assimilated to the discourses of the substitute mother or the technician and are lower qualified and lower paid. Teachers are employed as professionals in pre-school education; however, many workers in this sector are not highly qualified or paid and can be perceived as technicians.

5.4. There has, however, in some countries been a tendency, sometimes a powerful tendency, to move towards the greater employment of professionally qualified staff. Developments in the UK have been much less clear in this direction and have tended to sustain traditional views and practices. Indeed there has been, as already noted, a drive to reduce the number of teachers employed in pre-school education. Some have argued that limited moves to enhance the status of early years practitioners in England have been marked by the use of narrow competence based models of qualification which result in technicians rather than reflective professional practitioners.

5.5. Oberhuemer (2005) considers that evidence indicates that split systems have lower standards of education and training in the private as opposed to the public sector and in the care as opposed to the education sector. The market model of childcare in particular generates highly differential systems of training, payment and employment conditions.

5.6. There have been a number of approaches to developing more integrated workforce structures. All Nordic states have an integrated workforce based on two groups of workers: one group qualified at higher education level, accounting for between 30 and 60 percent of all workers in early childhood services; and a second group of workers with a lower level of qualification. Both groups are employed in all centred-based services and with children under and over three. In Sweden and Norway the higher qualified worker is a teacher; in Denmark the higher qualified worker is a pedagogue.

5.7. Most of the other OECD countries that have sought to integrate early years services within one policy area have moved towards an occupation with a high level of qualification, working directly with children under and over three and in all centre-based settings. The introduction of such a framework in Ireland in 2002 provides an example of so doing in an environment which had afforded a wide range of disparate qualifications.

17 

5.8. Moss (2000) (p23) recapitulated some of targets are contained in the EC Childcare Network (1996) report. The following seem particularly relevant:

all qualified staff employed in services should be paid at not less than a nationally or locally agreed wage rate, which for staff who are fully trained should be comparable to that of teachers

a minimum of 60% of staff working directly with children in collective settings should have a grant eligible basic training of at least three years at post-18 level, which incorporates both the theory and practice of pedagogy and child development

all staff in services (both collective and family day care) who are not trained to this level should have right of access to such training included on an in-service basis

all staff in services working with children (in both collective and family day care) should have the right to continuous in-service training

all staff whether in the public or private sector should have the right to trade union affiliation.

5.9. It is clear that, despite some statements of policy intentions, the countries of the UK largely remain exceptions to the tendencies noted above and fall well short of the aspirations expressed by the EC Childcare Network.

5.10. Kuisma & Sandberg (2008) pose the fundamental issue of how we are to value qualitative differences among staff in pre-school provision and ensure that all employees are regarded as of equal value in the working team, although having qualitatively different educations.

5.11. One area of development in Scotland and England is the exploration of various models of enhancing the qualifications of workers other than teachers through workbased learning and the recognition of prior learning. Simpson’s (2010) account of the development of early years practitioner (EYP) status in England suggests, however, that simply adding to the qualifications of underpaid and undervalued workers does not necessarily resolve the tensions that are the result of the fundamental dichotomies between education and care and between technician and reflective professional.

The experiences of EYPs in the study demonstrate there may be some way to go before EYPS is regarded as having parity of esteem with qualified teacher status (QTS) across early years settings. This appears to be a negative by-product of setting up EYPS without addressing the issue of the continuing split early years workforce. (p12)

5.12. Alexander (2002) argues that it is important that professional education moves beyond competence-based training which relies on the exhibition and performance of tasks that are claimed to provide evidence of underpinning knowledge. This study argues that this assumption is not logical in that performance and knowledge are based on different models of learning that cannot be simply equated. His study of practice in England argues that it seems likely that the student childcare workers studied were not learning to be reflective practitioners:

18 

Instead of developing a coherent body of knowledge that enables them to work effectively with young children, they are developing a set of performance skills that enables them to merely imitate what they see in childcare settings. (p26)

5.13. Discussions with the Sector Skills Council responsible for Social Care, Children, Early Years and Young People's Workforces in the UK, as it developed the standards for support staff working with children in schools, made clear that it is possible to recognise in supportive ways the contributions that different groups of staff make to education while at the same time recognising the differences between these groups.

5.14. The Engineering Council UK is responsible for the UK Standard for Professional Engineering Competence (Engineering Council UK 2010). There are three standards presented in parallel:

Chartered Engineers who are characterised by their ability to develop appropriate solutions to engineering problems, using new or existing technologies, through innovation, creativity and change

Incorporated Engineers who are characterised by their ability to act as exponents of today’s technology through creativity and innovation

Engineering Technicians who are concerned with applying proven techniques and procedures to the solution of practical engineering problems.

Access to the standards for chartered and incorporated engineers is usually through appropriate degree level qualifications (SCQF level 10 or 11) or in the latter case by qualifications at SCQF levels 8 or 9; engineering technician can be accessed through SCQF level 6 qualifications. It may be worth considering whether this model of standards at different but parallel levels could be used to provide differentiation among professions in the pre-school sector.

6. Funding and philosophy

6.1. The philosophy of early years provision will be reflected in funding arrangements. Candappa et al (2003), surveying a range of countries, conclude that there are three main potential sources of funding for early years and childcare services: government at one level or another; parents; and employers. Nursery education is usually funded entirely by government, other early years services by two or more sources, but always including parents as contributors.

6.2. This study reports that comparative public expenditure on early childhood provision remains low in most English speaking countries including the UK. Public expenditure on early childhood services in Sweden and Denmark was in 2000 equivalent to about 2% of GDP, more than three times the level in the United Kingdom. This comparatively low investment in early years provision is consistent with each country’s tax and public service policies: in 2000, overall tax income in the three countries accounted for 54%, 49% and 37% of GDP respectively. More recent figures from Norway, published by Children in Scotland in 2007, paint a similar picture; these indicate that government expenditure on pre-school services in that country was 1.7% of GDP while the UK figure at that time was 0.47%. It is worth noting that at

19 

that same time 9% of children and young people (0-15) in Norway lived in poverty; 21% of this cohort in Scotland lived in poverty.

6.3. Public funding in most of the study countries is long-term and uses supply side mechanisms. English speaking countries tend to rely on demand side mechanisms like tax credits in which individual children are the funding unit. Partnership providers are always at risk of losing ‘custom’ and therefore income. The implications for stability and long term planning which arise from this difference are evident. The number of early years establishments closing each year both in England and in Scotland is considerable.

6.4. Candappa et al (2003) report a key issue identified by Verry (2000):

We might also consider the issue of market imperfections and how this relates to ECEC financing within the market-forces model. Verry (2000) points out that parental investments in ECEC for their children are likely to be constrained by family incomes and savings, and the cost of resources invested in children therefore varies across families. He states: ‘this implies that even if parents took the full range of costs and benefits into account their investments would not, in aggregate, be efficient’ (p 115). On these grounds he argues the case for government intervention to secure more efficient levels and patterns of investment in children, through direct subsidies, tax credits and/or childcare vouchers. (p12-13)

6.5. Candappa et al (2003) develop this point:

Verry further argues that if early childhood education and care provides greater benefits to society as a whole than to the households demanding it, this would ‘provide a rationale for government intervention in order to equate social rather than private costs and benefits at the margin (p115)’. (p13)

6.6. The commitment to comparatively low levels of taxation noted above has continued. Recent UK New Labour governments made clear their distaste for enhanced levels of investment in public services if this required higher direct taxation or indeed imperilled their drive to lower direct taxes; this led to a range of means of making use of private finance to support investment in these services. The current Conservative - Liberal Democrat coalition is using the rationale of an economic and financial crisis to cut the public sector with what can only be described as gleeful enthusiasm. Equally importantly, New Labour demonstrated a lack of commitment to the idea of providing public services which would promote social justice for all as opposed to social mobility for the few. The current coalition government in Westminster is adopting policies which will undoubtedly promote inequality.

6.7. While governments in Scotland, Labour - Liberal Democrat coalition and SNP minority, have shown little enthusiasm to go further down the roads followed in London, they have shown little sign of wishing to adopt policies in this field which diverge greatly from the status quo inherited in 1999 at devolution. There is a risk that policy formation will be affected by drift from the larger jurisdiction. It is evident in any case that room for radical policy development will be severely constrained by the economic and public finance policies adopted by the UK government.

20 

7. Education for all 3-18

7.1. Within the current dichotomous model, the importance of recognising the continuity of education from age 3 onwards is formally recognised in Scottish education in a number of ways.

7.2. The Standard for Initial Teacher Education (required of teachers as they leave teacher education) (GTCS & QAA 2007) and the Standard for Full Registration (which must be achieved at the end of probation) (GTCS 2006) are as fully applicable to teachers in pre-five services as they are to primary and secondary teachers. All teachers must be registered with the General Teaching Council for Scotland as either secondary or primary teachers: all primary teachers are fully qualified to teach from age 3 to 11 across the nursery primary boundary.

7.3. As noted below, the Government is promoting a specialism in early years within teacher qualifications in the University of Stirling; the specialism covers the age range 3 to 8, again clearly across the nursery primary boundary. It is notable that additional teaching qualifications with a specific focus on the younger age range also cover learning and teaching in both pre five centres and the early years of primary education.

7.4. There is different quality assurance documentation for the pre-school sector – The Child at the Centre (HMIE 2007a) – and for the statutory provision of education – How Good is our School? (HMIE 2007b). This might be seen as suggesting that there is a clear distinction between the two sectors. However, the documents are based on common principles and presented in parallel formats. The existence of two sets of documentation is the consequence of the former being concerned with all forms of pre-school provision, not only schools, and having to address the needs of two different regulatory bodies in this sector.

7.5. Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education has common responsibilities in both the nursery sector and the statutory sectors of education. Their website and publications illustrate this and common themes consequent on these.

7.6. Through these structures the clear relationship between education at all stages and the role of the teacher in all sectors is clearly recognised and established. There is extensive evidence, considered below, from research within the UK which sustains the argument that teachers matter to the learning of young children.

8. Curriculum for Excellence

8.1. Curricular policy in Scotland clearly recognises the continuity of learning for all children and young people and recognises the crucial role that high quality teaching plays in ensuring achievement for all learners. Curriculum for Excellence is a curricular framework for all children and young people aged 3 to 18 which lies at the heart of education for all children and young people aged 3-18 in Scotland. This is true in terms of content, pedagogy, assessment and curriculum architecture. All political parties have affirmed their general support for this framework; none in the policy field appears to have suggested any return to models based on separate curricular specifications for different sectors.

21 

8.2. Curriculum for Excellence implies a shift from considering education not only in terms of content, ‘what we teach’, but also in terms of pedagogy, ‘how we learn’. It is built on a model of learning in which children and young people are active agents in being and becoming successful learners, confident individuals, responsible citizens and effective contributors to society.

8.3. Curriculum for Excellence extends the contexts and settings for learning beyond the school or college and extends the concept of achievement beyond the traditional limits of attainment. It recognises that children and young people learn in the classroom, through interdisciplinary working within school, through the life and ethos of the school and through opportunities for personal achievement. They learn also in a wide range of contexts outwith the school, including the contexts provided by their local community. Policy and practice, therefore, recognise that the definition of learning must be extended beyond attainment in the traditional sense to a much wider range of achievement. It is the role of the school to ensure that this learning is integrated. The evidence of the capabilities of teachers in early years provision in so doing is now well-established (see below).

8.4. The seven curricular principles which underpin Curriculum for Excellence are common to all stages of education from 3 to 18. The eight curricular areas which are fundamental to the organisation of learning are common to all stages of education from 3 to 18. The five levels through which learners progress until they enter the senior phase cannot be equated with the sectors of schooling. Indeed, the common nature of education for pre-five children and for primary aged children is clearly exemplified in the expectation that the Early Level will cover children aged 3 through to 6. The statements of experiences and outcomes for each curricular area at this level are, therefore, intended to cover pupil in both early years establishments and in primary 1.

8.5. Building the Curriculum 2: Active learning in the early years (Scottish Executive 2007) is designed to support teachers in nursery schools and the early primary years, stressing the importance of active learning for all young children and the continuity between nursery and primary education. The experiences and outcomes for each curricular area provide and foster opportunities for the sorts of pupil and teacher activities described as effective in the Effective Provision of Pre-School Education Project (see below).

8.6. While Curriculum for Excellence publications in the series Building the Curriculum are carefully addressed to all those who work with children and young people in educational settings, it is evident from these documents that the actions proposed for staff are those which have traditionally been associated with teachers and teaching. These actions are built on the foundations of current practice in schools, practice developed and sustained by teachers.

8.7. Curriculum for Excellence is not a free-standing development in Scottish education. The principles which underpin this development also underpin other policy developments in education. In particular, A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century (TP21) is founded on the recognition that the reprofessionalisation of teachers is central to the development of an education service which will meet the needs of all learners.

22 

9. The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education Project

9.1. The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project in England and Wales was commissioned by the then Department for Education and Schools in Westminster (DfES) and was carried out by a team of researchers led by senior staff from the Institute of Education of the University of London, Birkbeck College, the University of Oxford and the University of Nottingham. The project explored the impact of a number of factors, including early years provision, on children’s development in general and education in particular as children moved through their early years and into Key Stage 1. This research was later extended to follow up the consequences of these factors as the children moved through Key Stage 2 of primary schooling.

9.2. More than 2800 children in a range of local authorities across England were assessed at the start of pre-school (around the age of 3) and were then followed up when they entered school along with a further 300+ children with no pre-school experience. All children were then followed for a further six years until the end of Key Stage 2 (age 11 years). Children were recruited from the major types of early years settings existing in England at the start of the study (1997): integrated centres; public nursery schools, nursery classes, local authority day nurseries, private day nurseries and playgroups.

9.3. While this research was conducted in England, its findings can be extrapolated to Scotland with some confidence. Despite differences in details, policy on provision for young children was similar in both jurisdictions; a common history and similar funding structures resulted in types of provision which were generally similar; the differences among staff qualifications were similar in type in all jurisdictions within the UK.

9.4. The final report of the first phase of the project is published as Sylva et al (2004). The final report of the extension phase of the project is published as Sylva et al (2008). There are several supplementary reports from the same team, including Sammons et al (2008a) and (2008b).

9.5. The conclusions of these reports, with regard to outcomes for children as they were about to enter primary school, can be summarised as:

a. Pre-school experience, compared to none, enhances children’s development.

b. An earlier start to pre-school experience is related to better intellectual development and improved independence, concentration and sociability.

c. Full time attendance leads to no better gains for children than part-time provision.

d. Disadvantaged children in particular can benefit significantly from good quality pre-school experiences, especially if they attend centres that cater for a mixture of children from different social backgrounds.

e. ‘More’ and ‘less’ effective centres, in terms of the promotion of positive child outcomes, can be found in all types of provision; overall, however, children made better progress (cognitive and social/behavioural) in fully integrated centres and nursery schools.

f. The quality of pre-school centres is directly related to better intellectual/cognitive and social/behavioural development in children.

23 

g. Settings which have staff with higher qualifications, especially with a good proportion of trained teachers on the staff, show higher quality and their children make more progress.

h. Effective pedagogy includes interaction traditionally associated with the term ‘teaching’, the provision of instructive learning environments and ‘sustained shared thinking’ to extend children’s learning in which two or more individuals ‘work together’ in an intellectual way to solve a problem, clarify a concept, evaluate activities, extend a narrative etc.

i. Trained teachers were most effective in their interactions with children, using the most ‘sustained shared thinking’ interactions.

j. Staff qualified at degree level, almost all of whom were teachers, were more likely to encourage the development of language and mathematics and to encourage children to take part in activities which provided cognitive challenge.

k. Having qualified trained teachers working with children in pre-school settings (for a substantial proportion of time, and most importantly as the pedagogical leader) had the greatest impact on quality, and was linked specifically with better outcomes in pre-reading and social development.

l. Where there were trained teachers there was a stronger educational emphasis, with the teachers playing a lead role in curriculum planning and offering positive pedagogical role modelling to less well-qualified staff. Less qualified staff who worked alongside these highly qualified staff developed their skills in so doing compared with their colleagues who did not enjoy such opportunities.

m. However this collaboration required more than simply the addition of just one teacher or a peripatetic teacher to a more traditional local authority day care setting. Settings integrating care and education had high scores only when there was a good balance between ‘care’ and ‘education’ in terms of staff qualifications. The settings that viewed cognitive and social development as complementary seemed to achieve the best outcomes.

n. Different groups of children have different needs. Results imply that specialised support in pre-schools, especially for language and pre-reading skills, can benefit children from disadvantaged backgrounds and those for whom English was an additional language.

9.6. The researchers concluded that practitioners’ knowledge and understanding of the curriculum were vital. A good grasp of the appropriate ‘pedagogical content knowledge’ is just as important in the early years as at any stage of education. Moreover they found, crucially, that the most ‘effective’ educators also demonstrated knowledge of which content was most relevant to the needs of individual children. This required a deep understanding of child development.

10. Why nursery education and nursery teachers matter to older children: EPPE

10.1. The beneficial effects of pre-school remained evident throughout Key Stage 1 although the effects for some outcomes were not as strong as they had

24 

been at school entry, probably because of the increasingly powerful influence of the primary school on children’s development. Indeed, the benefits of pre-school education largely persisted through to the end of Key Stage 2 (ie the end of primary school). Attendance at pre-school remained beneficial for academic outcomes, social/behavioural outcomes and pupils’ self-perceptions. The benefits of pre-school were greater for boys, for pupils with special educational needs, and for pupils from disadvantaged backgrounds.

10.2. The quality of the pre-school predicted pupils’ developmental outcomes. Children who did not attend pre-school and those who attended low quality pre-school showed a range of poorer outcomes at age 11. Attainment in English and mathematics at the final stage of primary education was affected by whether the child had attended early years provision and the type of provision attended. Attendance at nursery school was associated with the highest positive effects.

10.3. The quality of the pre-school attended continued to have an impact on different aspects of social and behavioural development at the end of Year 6. Attending a high quality (even a medium quality) pre-school had a lasting effect in promoting or sustaining better outcomes. It appears that attending high quality pre-school provision also positively affected pupils’ attitudes throughout primary schooling in that perceptions of ‘enjoyment of school’ were higher for pupils who had attended such provision.

10.4. Disadvantaged children and boys in particular benefited significantly from good quality pre-school experiences. If disadvantaged children attended centres that included children from mixed social backgrounds they made more progress than if they attended centres serving predominantly disadvantaged children. Children identified as ‘at risk’ of learning or behavioural difficulties were helped by pre-school, with integrated settings and nursery schools being particularly beneficial in providing a better start to primary school.

10.5. The team is continuing this longitudinal study in secondary schooling but results of this have not yet been published.

11. The Millennium Cohort Study

11.1. Another major research exercise is reported by Mathers et al (2007). This followed the EPPE work and sought to investigate changes in early years provision in the intervening period.

11.2. The researchers found that there was still considerable variation in the quality of provision offered by the sample settings. The maintained settings provided the highest quality provision overall, particularly with regard to the ‘learning’ aspects of provision. Voluntary providers had, however, made significant improvements compared to the earlier sample. There was evidence to confirm the EPPE findings that while all early childhood settings are good at providing nurturing environments for children, some are less successful at offering provision which stimulates children’s cognitive development.

11.3. The most important influences on overall quality of provision for 3 and 4 year old children were (in rank order):

25 

• sector (maintained sector = higher quality);

• group size (larger groups = higher quality);

• staff qualifications (higher qualifications = higher quality);

• Children’s Centre status (Children’s Centres = higher quality);

• age range/s of children catered for (older children = higher quality);

• staff-child ratios (fewer children per adult = higher quality);

• links with Sure Start Local Programmes/ health services (SSLPs/health links = lower quality);

centre size (smaller centres = higher quality).

It should be noted for clarification that group size refers to the organisation of groups within the teaching room; it does not imply a poor adult-child ratio.

11.4. Not all of these are relevant to the Scottish context but those that are provide clear pointers to high quality provision, pointers consistent with the messages from international surveys.

12. EPPI Review

12.1. Penn et al (2004) report the findings of a review of research into the impact of integrated provision in the early years on children and on their parents.

12.2. All the studies reviewed broadly found that the impact of integrated care and education was beneficial for children and led to improved cognitive and socio-emotional outcomes. Children from multi-risk families showed significant gains. One well-designed study suggested that the impact of integrated care and education was amplified by home visiting family support, but conversely that home-visiting family support made no difference unless integrated care and education was also provided. The authors conclude that the relation between education and care merits further investigation – for example, pedagogical styles, training, curriculum.

12.3. Eurydice (Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency 2009) makes a similar if more general point in summing up a range of research:

The ‘winning formula’ consists in combining care and education of the young child in a formal setting with support for parents. Research still needs to identify the precise nature and characteristics of the parental support which should be provided in European countries. (p142)

12.4. Penn et al (2004) raise the more general issue of the relation between the current policy emphasis on mothers, especially single mothers, returning to the labour market and the type of provision made for young children.

13. Other research evidence

13.1. A summary provided in Sylva et al (2004) (p14) provides consistent evidence from a range of studies:

• Short-term, positive effects of pre-school education have been shown conclusively in the US, Sweden, Norway, Germany, Canada, Northern Ireland and New Zealand (See Melhuish, 2004a)

26 

• The effects of greater staff training and qualifications have been shown in the US (Peisner-Feinberg and Burchinal 1997) and in Northern Ireland (Melhuish et al 2000)

• The contribution of quality to children’s developmental progress has been shown in many studies, often using the ECERS observational scale, the scale used by EPPE (Melhuish 2004a and b)

13.2. The OECD Directorate for Education (2004) report argues that the quality of staff is the paramount factor to ensuring high quality provision in early years education and care and identifies the crucial importance of qualified teachers in contributing to this:

The quality of the programme and the competence of the staff are two closely linked dimensions. … in the curricula presented, they all have well educated staff, whether through recruitment level, initial training or extended in-service training. … Staff meeting children everyday must have high standards of training, since it is the daily interactions between the adult and the child that make the difference in children’s well-being and learning (Johansson, 2003). There should not be any difference in level of competence between teachers working in ECEC or compulsory school … the teachers leading, developing and assuring the quality of ECEC ought to have a university degree. (emphasis added) (p28)

13.3. Magnuson et al (2007) note a number of US studies which provide evidence of the long term value of enrolment in pre-school education programmes. While these findings seem particularly well evidenced and marked for disadvantaged children placed in high-profile, well-resourced programmes, they also seem to apply to all children in more typical provision. The authors then carried out a longitudinal study, the focus of which was to investigate the circumstances in which such advantage was sustained or not. The study provided further evidence that children who attended pre-school enter primary schools with higher levels of academic skills than their peers who experienced other types of child care. Children who had not attended pre-school could only catch up if they were placed in small primary classes and classes providing high levels of reading instruction. This provides further evidence of the close relationship between pre-school educational experiences and educational experience in the early years of primary school.

13.4. The Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project adds to the body of research identifying qualifications and training as a key indicator of quality. The findings reported in Cameron et al (2003) are consistent with those arising from the EPPE fieldwork. Staff qualifications and training, staff to child ratios and group size are key quality variables because they are associated with positive, sensitive interactions between staff and child, which in turn are associated with positive child outcomes. These three key variables are described as the ‘iron triangle’.

13.5. Results from some research carried out into the effects of the employment of lower qualified classroom assistants in primary and secondary schools are consistent with these findings concerning the pre-school sector. The Tennessee STAR research on the impact of class sizes on attainment included ‘regular’ classes (ie classes with larger number of pupils) as one of the groups against which smaller classes were compared; the research

27 

model also included regular classes with a classroom auxiliary present. Interestingly, it was only class size which made a difference to pupils’ attainment; there was little impact through the deployment of classroom auxiliary staff. It may be argued that the relevance of these findings to Scotland today is limited as this research was carried out some time ago in another education system.

13.6. However the recent Deployment and Impact of Support Staff (DISS) project in England, as reported by Webster 2010, concluded that

pupils who received the most support from teaching assistants (TAs) made less progress in English, mathematics and science than similar pupils who received less support from TAs (even when controlling for the factors which that can affect progress and the allocation of TA support, such as prior attainment and special educational needs).

The authors of the reported research are clear that the TAs were not at fault but rather that systemic structural factors were central to these findings. TAs were employed in such a way as to separate pupils from the curriculum and teachers; they were encouraged to concentrate on getting pupils to finish tasks rather than on ensuring learning had taken place; there were limited opportunities for teachers and TAs to communicate about their work. Evidence considered later would suggest that some at least of these factors may sometimes apply in pre-school services in Scotland.

14. HMIE: The Key Role of Staff in Providing Quality Pre-School Education

14.1. Findings from HMIE in Scotland are consonant with these findings from academic research. The report The Key Role of Staff in Providing Quality Pre-School Education (HMIE 2007c) is based on inspection evidence gathered in 2003-2006.

14.2. The context was the removal of the requirements of the Schools (Scotland) Code for the provision of teachers in nursery education; the purpose is set by the statement (p2):

The new guidance [on the roles of teachers in pre-school education] aimed to:

identify and affirm the value of the contribution trained teachers made to the quality of experiences for children in pre-school education;

set the involvement of teachers alongside the contributions of other staff and underline the importance of team working;

identify ways in which teachers added value to the early education experience, both within and outwith the pre-school settings;

identify key factors which made for successful integration of teachers within staff teams; and

encourage authorities to consider carefully future staffing arrangements which reflected the interrelationships between care and education, and the need to provide flexible opportunities for the use of staff skills.

28 

14.3. The Foreword to this document (p1) confirms research findings noted above:

Where the quality is high, … children have increased chances of success in their primary education and reduced chances of problems with attainment, relationships and behaviour. Moreover, the benefits are experienced across the range of social advantage and disadvantage and persist even in the face of weaknesses in the quality of their experience in primary school.

14.4. Evidence is presented by type of centre. Unfortunately, education authority nursery schools and family centres are clustered into one group which may make for some difficulties in discussing the distinctive contribution of nursery schools; however the fact that there were at this time proportionately many more nursery schools than family centres does allow for some confidence in making statements about nursery school provision. Education authority nursery classes do not form a discrete category but are grouped with nursery classes in independent schools, all of which seem likely to have a qualified teacher.

14.5. A number of statistical conclusions are evident, all of which appear to be consistent with the EPPE findings. Staff child interaction, meeting children’s needs, support for children with additional support needs and leadership are all assessed as better in centres with a teacher than in those without a teacher. Further, staff child interaction, meeting children’s needs, support for children with additional support needs and leadership are also all assessed as better in public than in private or voluntary centres.

14.6. The Report goes on to recognise the roles played by teachers; again the findings are consonant with those reported by EPPE:

Teachers played an important part in equipping their colleagues who were not teachers with the right knowledge, skills and training to meet the changing and increasing demands required of a high-quality, pre-school education. Teachers demonstrated very effective skills in coordinating partnership working. (p16)

14.7. The Report recognises that support from teachers has a significant role to play in professional development for staff who are not teachers:

Staff in these centres [where no teacher was employed] had often undertaken higher level qualifications and appropriate early years training. … Staff often worked closely with visiting teachers, sharing knowledge and experience. (p16)

Within local authority and independent school nursery classes, qualified teachers operated often as the day-to-day managers with responsibility for the nursery. In these circumstances, teachers as team leaders regarded nursery nurses as valued colleagues and they worked well together. (p16)

14.8. The Report recognises that there are changing patterns of deployment of teachers in this sector. HMIE continue to recognise from the evidence of their inspections the important role of teachers and urge local authorities:

to ensure that, when they review the role and remit of teachers in early education, they make appropriate and effective use of the particular skills and expertise of teachers to ensure that they maintain the consistently

29 

high standard of provision and support for pre-school children’s development and progress. (p19)

15. The role of the peripatetic teacher

15.1. The EPPE study identifies the important role of the teacher and the difficulties in exercising this role when it is seen as an ‘add-on’ to provision which is staffed by colleagues who are not teachers.

15.2. Garrick and Morgan (2009) identify some of the limitations of the role of the peripatetic teacher. In contrast to a ministerial statement noted below, this study noted the consequences of the situation when the expertise of teachers was spread thinly. Each teacher studied worked in at least eight partnership centres but their expertise was spread even more thinly than this figure would suggest because some centres had three or more staff teams working with different age groups. Although this was a small study, the evidence was clear that teachers deployed in this way found difficulties in sustaining the professional development of their colleagues in these centres.

15.3. It was notable that teachers were better able to assess the quality of provision in the centres in which they worked on a peripatetic basis than the (non-teacher) managers of these centres who tended to overestimate the quality of provision: the teachers’ ratings of key aspects of practice were more closely matched to the scores derived from the use of standardised instruments than those of managers.

15.4. These difficulties in promoting professional development were exacerbated in one case by an unwillingness on the part of the owner to permit staff to attend courses, identified as important by the teacher, other than in their own time. This is clearly a result of the introduction of a quasi-market driven by profit in the provision of services for children.

16. Public and private provision

16.1. The National Statistics Publication for Scotland Pre-School and Childcare Statistics 2009 (Scottish Government 2009a) provides a very detailed picture of all childcare provision across Scotland in January 2009.

16.2. The figures demonstrate the reliance on private provision. In terms of the total provision of childcare (for all ages, not only pre-school) across Scotland:

44.2% of centres were managed by the public sector, 25.4 % by the private sector and 30.4% by voluntary organisations.

These national averages conceal very great local variations by local authority:

public provision ranges from 24.2% to 87.5%; private provision from 4.2% to 45.2%; and voluntary provision from 8.3% to 69.7%.

There is no apparent pattern in terms of geography, demography or history: for example the two extreme examples in levels of public provision are both islands authorities.

16.3. Across Scotland, there are signs that public provision offers better quality provision than the private or voluntary sectors. Thus, public provision offers a higher proportion of provision which has access to an outdoor play area

30 

(90.2% as opposed to 76.5% in the private sector and 70.6% in the voluntary sector).

16.4. This imbalance in the quality of provision is clearly visible in the statistics relating to the access of nursery age children to a teacher. These are examined later.

17. Care Commission data

17.1. While the Care Commission is not concerned with the educational quality of the provision it inspects, evidence from its statistical returns appear to be consistent with these findings on the value of public sector provision (Care Commission 2008). Local authority provision achieved a much greater number of higher grades (5/6) in their inspections and a much smaller number of lower grades (1/2) than other providers:

Percentage of graded inspections with all grades 1/2 grades or all grades 5/6

Daycare of children 1/2 5/6

Health board 0.0% 0.0%

Local authority 0.7% 32.4%

Private 5.5% 10.0%

Voluntary or not for profit

3.9% 12.1%

Daycare of children total

3.9% 15.3%

17.2. In a report on active play (Care Commission 2009) the Care Commission noted that in the inspection year April 2007 - March 2008, there were 4287 services for early years children registered with the Commission (note that each establishment counts as an individual service); these were made up of:

• 1852 local authorities services

• 1076 private sector services

• 1359 voluntary sector services.

Their findings showed that most of the 2088 services inspected provided good opportunities for active play in the inspection year 2007-08: only 328 received recommendations for improving active play provision and practice (ie were a source of some concern):.

50 reports for local authority provision

• 151 reports for private sector provision

• 127 reports for voluntary sector provision.

Although local authority services make up some 43% of the total number of services, they account for only 15% of the recommendations for improvement. It is evident that local authority provision is again typically of higher quality in requiring disproportionately considerably fewer

31 

recommendations for improvement than voluntary or private sector provision.

17.3. As Children in Scotland point out in a media release of 24/08/10, research published in Children in Europe magazine demonstrated that private sector provision does not require to meet the outdoor space standards required of public provision:

outdoor space standards in services for young children vary widely across Europe, with some countries, including the Republic of Ireland, France and Germany, having no national requirements specified. Although Scotland does have a requirement for local authority nursery schools and classes for 3-4-year-olds to provide an area of 9.3m2 per child – less than the size of the average bedroom – other services need only provide ‘adequate and appropriate space’ for the activities being undertaken.

18. HMIE: Improving Scottish Education

18.1. Reports by HMIE provide further evidence of the value of public early years provision. Improving Scottish Education 2002 -2005 (HMIE 2006) in its section on the pre-school sector provides little analysis in terms of the types of provision. However, it does indicate, again consonant with other evidence, that public provision is of higher quality than independent, private or voluntary provision.

The quality of leadership needs to be improved, particularly in a substantial proportion of centres in the private and voluntary sectors. (p10)

18.2. The subsequent publication, Improving Scottish Education 200 -2008 (HMIE 2009), in its section on the pre-school sector provides no analysis in terms of the types of provision but does again identify weaknesses in the private and voluntary sector in its first Aspect for improvement:

The variable quality of provision across sectors with the partnership private and voluntary centres, in general, less effective than the local authority sector. (p28)

18.3. Despite improvements since the first edition of Improving Scottish Education and the growing recognition that leadership for learning is everyone’s job, HMIE considered that:

more remains to be done to ensure all children attend centres where leaders are well qualified and provide high quality guidance to staff and children. Leadership in the private and voluntary sectors still lags behind that of education authority provision. In almost all of the centres where leadership was highlighted as a weakness, there were also weaknesses in children’s learning experiences. (p33)

18.4. HMIE considered that many pre-school staff still needed to access further training and qualifications to develop their understanding of children’s learning. The continuing gap in the level of qualifications of staff needed to be reduced to implement Curriculum for Excellence and to ensure the success of the Early Years Framework.

32 

19. Nursery education in Scotland: party policies

19.1. The development of private partnership provision and the removal of the requirement to have teachers working in pre-school education provide the context in which political parties developed their 2007 Parliamentary election manifesto statements on early years provision. There appears, at the level of rhetoric, to be a general political consensus nationally in Scotland that high quality early years provision and, specifically, nursery education, is of benefit to children, families and society in general. Commitments to extend and improve provision vary considerably in terms of explicitness. Despite aspirational statements concerning the value of early years education and child care, none of the party manifestos addresses the central dichotomy that underpins provision and none fundamentally challenges the funding principles currently operating.

19.2. The SNP (Scottish National Party 2007) stated that an SNP government would

seek to extend access to high quality, affordable and flexible childcare services which match children’s needs and parents’ working patterns. We will increase the provision of free nursery education for 3 and 4 year olds by 50 per cent, with families benefiting from longer hours of free provision ... That means increasing the entitlement from 400 hours a year to 600 hours a year.

19.3. More specifically the SNP were ‘concerned at the removal of nursery teachers from nurseries in some council areas’ and made the express commitment to ‘deliver access to a fully qualified nursery teacher for every nursery age child, starting with children in deprived communities.’ They express admiration for ‘the Scandinavian model, giving every family access to affordable, high quality childcare and support from the end of maternity leave’. To support the development of early years education an SNP government would ‘begin to develop a flexible, dedicated ‘Early years development’ teaching degree’.

19.4. The Scottish Labour Party manifesto made a non-specific commitment to ‘invest[ing] in the early years, improving health care and family support for our under 2s, expanding free early years education for our 3-5 year olds’. (Scottish Labour Party 2007)

19.5. The Scottish Conservative manifesto focused more on extending parental choice:

Parents should be entitled to greater flexibility in the provision of nursery education and childcare requirements. At present, their choices are often curtailed by local and national government stipulating an unreasonably narrow list of accepted providers, which prevents many parents from accessing the combination of support which best meets their requirements. It should be left to parents, not councils, to decide with which nursery they should use their 12½ hour free weekly entitlement. (Scottish Conservative Party 2007)

The Conservatives would ‘encourage all employers to make salary-sacrifice childcare vouchers available to their employees’.

19.6. The Liberal Democrat manifesto included a more extended statement which explicitly recognised the value of nursery education:

33 

It [is] the right thing to do to give our children the best possible start in life. Today, we have even more evidence that pre-school education makes a real difference to the outcomes of our children’s lives. Research shows that society sees a return of around £7 for every £1 invested in early years education through improved learning.... (Scottish Liberal Democrats 2007)

Despite expressed admiration for provision in other countries, there seemed to be no specific plans for extending nursery education in Scotland. The Liberal Democrats would improve transition to primary school through children ‘start[ing] their formal schooling a little later’.

20. Implementing manifesto commitments and the Concordat

20.1. Following the 2007 election and the establishment of the minority SNP government, one of its first major policy acts was the conclusion of a Concordat with COSLA acting on behalf of all 32 local authorities (Scottish Government & COSLA 2007). In return for local authorities agreeing to give up temporarily the power to increase income by raising council tax, the Government enhanced the ability of local authorities to take decisions on provision and staffing in all services through ending almost all ring-fencing of central funds provided to local authorities and through greatly reducing the number of government targets to be met.

20.2. Two commitments related to nursery provision were included in this Concordat.

Improving the learning experience for children and young people by improving the fabric of schools and nurseries; developing and delivering A Curriculum for Excellence; and, as quickly as is possible, reducing class sizes in P1 to P3 to a maximum of 18 and improving early years provision with access to a teacher for every pre-school child. (p4)

Expanding pre-school provision and making substantial progress towards a 50% increase in pre-school entitlement for 3 and 4 year olds. The entitlement to pre-school provision will be maintained at the new level of 475 hours per annum (equivalent to 38 weeks at 12½ hours) in 2008-09 and 2009-10. This will increase to 570 hours per annum (equivalent to 38 weeks at 15 hours) in August 2010. (p5)

While this last is a slight moving away from the SNP manifesto commitments, the intention to provide access to a teacher for every (presumably 3 and 4 year old) child remains clear.

21. Nursery education: policies into practice

21.1. Within months of the SNP forming the government, Adam Ingram MSP, as Minister for Children and Early Years, announced in response to a question (05/12/08):

significant progress in the last 18 months in terms of improving the position of pre-school children in Scotland, in line with our manifesto commitments. We have made the most significant enhancement to pre-school education since 2002, increasing the entitlement to 475 hours from the start of the last academic year with a further increase to 570 hours from August 2010.

34 

21.2. However, the reality of this intention, itself a slight deterioration from the increase to 600 hours contained in the manifesto, is now in considerable doubt. As reported in the Herald of 22/12/09, the Minister appears to be offering local authorities flexibility. In the words of a letter from the Minister:

Our thinking on further expansion of pre-school education has become entwined in wider discussions with Cosla … on commitments included in the concordat, particularly around class sizes in P1-P3. … While we would still encourage local authorities to work towards expansion of 570 hours per annum, we will allow more flexibility and will not legislate to impose new duties on councils to deliver further expansion.

21.3. The commitment to develop an early years teaching specialist qualification has been carried out through funding the University of Stirling to provide such an option within its existing concurrent primary initial teacher education (ITE) degree. The programme combines extended study of Professional Education with interprofessional working within the Early Years Framework (Psychology, Social Work & Family Health). In addition to the modules in psychology, social work and family health relating to this specialism, students study modules in education including modules in primary literacy, primary numeracy and a module that focuses on how to make most effective use of their specialism in the primary school.

21.4. Universities have also developed additional qualifications for teachers in employment who are working with early years children (usually up to the age of 8). These are usually offered at SCQF level 11 leading to certificates and diplomas with the possibility of progression to a master’s degree. It is notable that as in the Stirling concurrent degree these post-graduate qualifications recognise the common nature of teaching in the pre-five sector and the early years of primary school.

21.5. While these innovative courses have been initiated and funded by the government, there is considerable anecdotal evidence that at the same time there has been a reduction in the emphasis on early years education in existing pre-service PGDE and BEd courses. All such courses include a placement in an early years establishment. However, it appears that not all such placements are in nursery schools or classes where there is a qualified teacher present. More generally, staffing pressures in universities have led in some cases to there being no tutorial visit to student teachers during their nursery placement. This contrasts with practice in other placements. There are likely to be several outcomes to these developments. Firstly a clear message is given to the students that in some sense nursery education is less important than statutory primary education; secondly, the quality of the experience is not subject to the same controls as in any other placement; and thirdly there is less encouragement and support afforded to the student to reflect on and develop their learning from the placement.

21.6. Over the summer of 2010 faculties and schools of education across Scotland have had to reduce their staffing considerably as a result of reductions in government funding. Given the depth of these cuts, it is difficult to see how these will not impact on the pre-service courses and the continuing professional development which they have provided.

35 

21.7. The commitment to ‘deliver access to a fully qualified nursery teacher for every nursery age child, starting with children in deprived communities’ has been the subject of parliamentary questions on a number of occasions. Answers provided in December 2007 and April 2008 by the Minister for Children and Young People are typical of those provided on a number of other occasions:

The level of teacher involvement required in pre-school education will depend on the characteristics of each individual centre. Different models of teacher involvement, including peripatetic teachers, may be appropriate depending on the type of centre and the way it operates. We will be developing guidance in partnership with local government on the deployment of teachers in pre-school education. (10/12/07)

The concordat with COSLA includes an agreement to give every pre-school child access to a teacher as soon as possible. …. We expect to have 20,000 teachers in training between 2007-11 as support to workforce requirements, class size reductions and teachers for nursery age children. (10/12/07)

The amount of teacher involvement in pre-school education will be monitored through the annual pre-school and childcare statistics. (10/12/07)

The Scottish Government expects that local authorities will deliver on the commitment to deliver access to a teacher for all pre-school children, on the basis of local needs and priorities. (16/04/08)

There is evidence to show that the quality of provision is higher in centres where a teacher is involved in pre-school education and, where the quality is high, there is evidence that children have increased chances of success in their primary education and reduced chances of problems with attainment, relationships and behaviour. ... there is no evidence to support the setting of a specific minimum level of access needed to achieve that quality of provision. (16/04/08)

21.8. While these answers do make some explicit reference to the commitment that all pre-school children will have access to a teacher and to monitoring the implementation of this commitment, these statements can be considered as aspirational with their repeated expressions of confidence in the ability and willingness of local authorities to carry out this commitment. These local authorities have been afforded considerable flexibility through the Concordat, are subject to considerable financial pressures, and are often politically opposed to the government. Contrary to the last statement quoted, there is considerable evidence about the minimum level of access to a teacher required to achieve quality of educational provision.

21.9. It should be noted that access (as indeed noted in Pre-School and Childcare Statistics 2009 considered below) has been interpreted variously. While it is clear that access must include opportunities for professional dialogue between the teacher and less well qualified staff, it appears that in some cases the teacher works with the children while the other staff carry out administrative tasks.

21.10. The admiration for ‘the Scandinavian model’, an admiration shared by some others in Scottish policy discourse, has led to little action, perhaps because it came to be realised that it is a misconception that there is a

36 

single Scandinavian model. In both Sweden and Norway early years provision is led by qualified teachers, in Denmark by pedagogues; in Sweden, at least until recent policy changes, provision was made by the state, as remains the case in Denmark; in Norway there is a mix of public and private provision. What does appear common to all three states is firstly a clear policy focus on children and their learning as opposed to the mixed messages in the UK about the function of early years provision. Secondly, these three systems recognise that high quality provision requires that there is a significant proportion of highly qualified staff working with young children. Finally levels of expenditure on early childhood services are considerably higher than in the UK countries. It must also be borne in mind that it is never readily possible to transfer a model from one system of education to another without consideration of existing culture and practice and of related policies,

22. Monitoring policy implementation

22.1. The difficulties faced by a minority government in ensuring implementation of its pre-school policies are reflected in the dispute between the previous Cabinet Secretary and COSLA over primary class size reduction; progress in implementing this commitment has been as slow and limited and marked by local authority resistance as that in implementing the commitment to ensuring access to a teacher for all pre-school children. Indeed, the present Cabinet Secretary has all but recognised the impossibility of ensuring that this commitment is made real.

22.2. The abandonment of the requirement for local authorities to deliver the commitment to increased hours of nursery education has already been noted. Monitoring of the implementation of the outcome guaranteeing access to a teacher for every child has been weak. While the statistics about teacher deployment in the pre-school sector are assiduously collected and are readily available, there is no evidence of the government using this information and seeking to ensure that local authorities move to meeting the commitment of ensuring access for all 3 and 4 year olds to a teacher.

22.3. The Minister for Children and Young People has referred frequently to local authority commitments within the Concordat to ensure access of all 3 and 4 year olds to a nursery teacher. Within the Concordat with COSLA, ensuring policy implementation by local authorities is primarily through the means of Single Outcome Agreements. There is no reference in any of a sample of recent local authority reports on their implementation of Single Outcome Agreements to ensuring access for 3 and 4 year olds to a qualified nursery teacher. It was impossible to find on the COSLA website any reference to the guidance which was to have been drawn up between government and COSLA on the deployment of nursery teachers.

22.4. There is anecdotal evidence that even within an authority there may be differences in the implementation of policy: differences which are not the result of professional decision making but rather of lack of leadership and support from the authority.

37 

23. Teachers in pre-school education

23.1. Pre-School and Childcare Statistics 2009 (Scottish Government 2009a) provides a wealth of information about pre-school provision across Scotland in January 2009. Because the published figures are rounded, there is some slight approximation in this analysis. While it should be borne in mind that children can be enrolled in provision which is not located in the local authority in which they reside, it seems unlikely that this would make a significant difference to any of the statements which follow.

23.2. There were 2780 providers of pre-school education of which 1558 were local authority managed centres, 1087 were partnership providers offering places funded by the local authority and 135 were neither. The proportion of pre-school education centres within a local authority managed by that local authority ranged from 36 per cent in Eilean Siar to 90 per cent in the Orkney Islands. As with childcare generally, there is no apparent pattern in the variations across Scotland in the proportions of pre-school education provision provided by the public sector directly or by partnership providers on their behalf.

23.3. There is equally great variation among local authorities in the proportions of children enrolled in pre-school education provision, whether provided by the public sector or through partnership provision:

the proportion of under 3’s so enrolled varies from 0.1% (West Lothian) to 17.6% (Stirling)

the proportion of the ante-pre-school cohort enrolled ranges from 81.9% (West Lothian) to 108.4% (Argyll & Bute)

the proportion of the pre-school cohort ranges similarly from 81.4% (Inverclyde) to 105.9% (Highland).

Again there seems little pattern to this variation:

some authorities (eg Stirling) have comparatively high rates of enrolment in all three age cohorts

others (eg Inverclyde) comparatively low rates of enrolment in all three age cohorts

others (eg Glasgow) have a high rate of enrolment of under 3 year olds and comparatively low rates of enrolment of ante-pre-school children.

23.4. There appeared to be 2880 posts (full or part time) for qualified teachers registered with the General Teaching Council Scotland (GTCS) who were providing pre-school education under a regular arrangement in January 2009, however, there may be some multiple counting if a teacher worked in more than one centre. It seems that there were an estimated 2590 GTCS registered teachers filling these 2880 posts. Thus, some teachers must have been employed in more than one part-time post. The Whole Time Equivalent (WTE) of all GTCS registered teachers providing pre-school education under a regular arrangement in January 2009 was much smaller than 2590; it was in fact 1638 WTE. It is evident that many of these teachers must be employed on a part-time basis; this is further examined below. In fact , the WTE was 34 fewer than in 2008. The number of WTE teachers has declined by another 25 in the current year.

38 

23.5. In the guidance notes to the publication, access to a teacher is defined as the teacher being present in a pre-school education setting when the child is in attendance; the notes acknowledge that systems for providing access to teachers vary. This range of possible interpretations should be borne in mind.

23.6. 68% of pre-school centres reported that they had access to GTCS registered teachers who provided pre-school education under a regular arrangement, whether employed solely within the centre or shared with other centres; this represented a small increase of two percentage points from 2008. Analysis by type of provider shows a considerable difference between local authority and partnership provision:

almost three times as many (93%) local authority centres compared with partnership centres (32%) had access to GTCS registered teachers who provided pre-school education under a regular arrangement.

23.7. It is evident that in some areas there are very few peripatetic teachers supporting partnership provision. In 13 education authorities the WTE figure of peripatetic or shared staff working in partnership centres is recorded as 0 (in fact the rounding used could mean that provision could be as much as 0.5 WTE teacher in an authority). This very low (indeed probably non-existent) level of provision of peripatetic or shared teaching staff could of course imply that within these authorities there are high levels of employment of teachers within individual centres. However, this appears not to be the reality. Analysis of the figures (allowing for rounding) suggests that:

there are over 40 partnership education centres in each of Aberdeen City, Dumfries and Galloway and North Lanarkshire in which children had no regular access to a GTCS registered teacher

there may have been over 30 such centres in each of Angus, Scottish Borders and South Ayrshire, around 20 in Moray, 15 in Dundee and 15 in Eilean Siar.

23.8. In authorities in which a figure greater than 0 is recorded for WTE provision of GTCS registered teachers providing support to children in partnership establishments without their own teaching staff there were:

5 WTE in Edinburgh spread across approximately 70 such centres

13 WTE in Glasgow across approximately 70 centres

2 WTE in Highland across approximately 70 centres

2 WTE in Aberdeenshire across close to 100 centres.

23.9. As already noted, provision in publicly managed centres is higher than in partnership ones. However, there are examples of education authorities with low levels of WTE provision of GTCS registered teachers providing peripatetic support to public establishments without their own teacher:

in Argyll and Bute there appears to be 1 WTE provision to support some 25 education authority establishments

in Eilean Siar there is 1 WTE provided to support some 10 education authority establishments.

39 

23.10. It is worth noting that this fragmented provision is made even more fragmented by the use of several teachers to make up one WTE. An extreme example is provided by Argyll and Bute where, within local authority provision, 20 teachers (in reality before rounding, 15 to 24 teachers ) provided 1 WTE (in fact between 0.5 to 1.5 WTE) of peripatetic provision; while 50 teachers (again before rounding 45 to 54 staff) provided 7 (6.5 to 7.5) WTE in individual establishments. Each of these teachers can therefore have been employed for only a few hours per week. Across Scotland the typical peripatetic teacher worked just over the equivalent of 1 day per week in education authority and/or partnership provision.

23.11. Across Scotland, 5.1% of public provision had no access to a GTCS registered teacher at all. As in other statistics there was considerable variation between authorities:

in 13 education authorities every education authority establishment had some access to a teacher, though sometimes limited or ad hoc

50% of education authority establishments in Eilean Siar had no such access

in another 6 authorities more than 10% of education authority provision is recorded as providing no access to a teacher (Angus, Clackmannanshire, Glasgow, Moray, North Lanarkshire and Orkney).

These education authorities do not seem to demonstrate any common political, demographic or geographic factors.

23.12. While the figures for public provision in some areas are poor, those for partnership establishments are considerably worse. Across Scotland, 49.5% of partner establishments had no access to a teacher at all. The proportions vary greatly from authority to authority:

in Orkney every such establishment is recorded as offering some access, however limited, to a teacher

in East Dunbartonshire, East Renfrewshire, Falkirk, Midlothian, South Ayrshire and West Lothian, over 90% of such establishments provided some such provision

in contrast, fewer than 20% of partnership establishments in Aberdeen City, Fife and North Lanarkshire offered any access to a teacher

no such establishment in Inverclyde made any such provision.

23.13. As a result, only some 70% cent of pre-school children wherever they were enrolled, had access to a GTCS registered teacher during census week. However, this includes a number of children whose access was to a teacher providing only ad hoc or occasional support to the centre during the census week in January. While this figure has risen to 74% in 2010, the reduction in the WTE figures, noted above, may suggest further fragmentation of provision. As might be expected from the variations in provision to establishments, the proportions of children having access to a teacher varied greatly across education authorities:

only 13.3% of children in Eilean Siar had access to a teacher under a regular arrangement while 98.1% in West Lothian had such access

40 

only 17.4% of children in total in Eilean Siar had access to a registered teacher during that week when those centres which had only ad hoc support from external teachers are included

fewer than 50% of children in Moray, North Lanarkshire and Stirling had access to a teacher that week

in a number of large authorities only some 2/3 of children had access to a teacher during the census week: these include Aberdeen City, Dumfries and Galloway, Glasgow and Highland.

23.14. Again, there seems little political, geographic or demographic pattern to this variation. History also seems to play little part: eg Stirling makes notably less provision than Clackmannanshire or Falkirk and there are considerable variations among the three Ayrshire authorities.

23.15. As can be deduced from these statistics, even where children had access to a teacher this could be very limited. It would appear that in centres which had access on a regular basis to a peripatetic teacher this may well have been for a small proportion of the week; even in those which had a teacher employed to work solely in that establishment, this may well not have been on a full time basis. Indeed 1/5 of establishments supported on an ad hoc basis received this support for less than 5 days a year and another 1/5 for between 5 and 9 days.

24. Rhetoric and reality

24.1. Perhaps not surprisingly, the SNP website (www.snp.org/government) in recording 56 manifesto commitments which had been delivered at least to some extent by the SNP government, notes the delivery of a 50% increase in the provision of free nursery education to 3 and 4 year olds but does not refer to achievement of access to a GTCS registered teacher in early years establishments.

24.2. It is also evident from the above figures that the gap between public and private provision remains considerable, even if this is to some extent confounded by the very different levels of provision in different authorities.

24.3. It is difficult to avoid the conclusion that differential staffing among authorities is the result of conscious political decisions since there do not appear to be common geographical or demographic patterns; the variations among authorities which until 15 years ago were included within the same regional authority, suggests that some councils have in the comparatively recent past taken decisions to reduce the quality of provision for nursery age children.

25. Scottish Subject Benchmark Statement: The Standard for Childhood Practice

25.1. This document (Scottish Government, SSSC & QAA 2007) is the outcome of the development of government thinking and a consultation exercise on the qualifications appropriate for staff in early years establishments other than teachers. Teachers were explicitly excluded on the grounds that A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century had provided a firm basis for defining the necessary qualifications and professionalism of teachers. The last coalition government decided to take forward as a matter of some urgency one of

41 

the recommendations of this exercise: the requirement that managers of early years establishments other than those who were teachers should be qualified at SCQF level 9. To ensure that all staff in such posts or aspiring to hold such posts had the opportunity for such a qualification the administration decided that a work-based route to such a qualification should be established. The government justified this decision on the grounds of the fact, well-founded in research, that children progress better in establishments led by highly qualified staff; it ignored the equally well-founded conclusion that children progress better when teachers are responsible for their learning.

25.2. The document is published by the Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education; the Preface makes clear that responsibility for the final award of a qualification lies with a higher education establishment. This addresses any concern that some work based learning may not support the sorts of reflection which is central to the development of professions like teaching.

25.3. The structure of the Standard is based on candidates developing professional values and personal commitment, professional knowledge and understanding, and professional skills and abilities, all of which are interlinked and result in professional action. The format of the Standard for Childhood Practice, thus, parallels that used for QAA standards in social work education and in initial teacher education, as well as the comparable documents for nursing, midwifery and health-visiting. It is parallel also to the structure of the standards for Chartered Teacher and for Headship.

25.4. Within this structure, the content is defined in ways that ensure candidates will have had opportunities for critical reflection on their own and others’ practice and on policy. It is intended that initially there will be development of two types of award at SCQF level 9: a bachelor’s degree and a post-graduate diploma. These awards are located firmly within the QAA Framework for Qualifications for Higher Education Institutions in Scotland. The parallel to the dual routes to teacher qualification is evident.

25.5. Ministers must approve any programme for these qualifications and will only do so if they are subject to normal institutional validation and review processes and if they are acceptable to the Scottish Social Services Council (SSSC) as leading to registration as a manager/lead practitioner in early years and childcare service. The parallels to approval of teacher preservice programmes and the role of the GTCS are again evident.

25.6. Programmes offering the new qualifications were available on a part-time basis from September 2008. It seems to have been intended that all relevant staff should have obtained this qualification by 2011 if they did not already have an equivalent. The Ministerial Foreword refers to the roles of both colleges and universities in bringing this to reality in ways that meet the diversity of staff across the country.

25.7. It is argued that the parallel structures of this qualification and of the qualifications of other professions working with young children allow for the identification of common elements in the training of these different professions and for the possibility of future integrated training initiatives. This aspiration ignores three factors. Firstly this qualification is set at SCQF level 9 while courses of initial teacher education are set at SCQF level 10 with a strong drive to include elements at level 11 which will facilitate transition to Master’s levels programmes. Secondly this qualification is

42 

intended for managers: equating it with an initial teacher standard which is not designed to develop mangers is difficult to understand. Thirdly, teachers will have progressed beyond this initial standard to the Standard for Full Registration by the end of their probationary year while there seems no similar arrangement within this new Standard.

26. Developing practice

26.1. A number of courses have been successfully created to meet this Standard; between them they provide a range of access routes which address the diversity of the potential client group; they also offer within their structures a number of routes to qualifications below SCQF level 9:

• University of Aberdeen BA Childhood Studies (BACS): this is designed to meet the continuing professional development (CPD) needs of adults working with children from 0-16 within all sectors of provision. The BACS is structured into four levels, each level being equivalent to one year of a full-time undergraduate degree. Each level (SCQF levels 7-10) normally takes two years to complete. There is a range of options for entering and exiting the programme. Distance learning is the main mode of delivery.

• University of Dundee BA Professional Development in Childhood Practice: this is part time and delivered flexibly using a blended learning approach including interactive online distance learning. There are optional workshops and support from a Personal Tutor and Workplace Mentor or peer. The programme has flexible entry and exit points. Candidates can exit with a Certificate or Diploma. Candidates are encouraged to seek credit for prior formal learning and for experience. Completion of the BA can take from 2 to 6 years.

• University of Glasgow BA (Childhood Practice): candidates review their experience and use this review as the basis for planning and setting targets for professional development within the programme. Details of courses to be studied are dependent on previous qualifications (HNCs, PDAs and SVQs). In addition to formal learning, candidates will draw from their own practice in the field of childhood practice. All students are required to have a degree (or equivalent) in any academic discipline. Students should also have completed or be prepared to undertake an HNC, PDA, SVQ3, SVQ4 or equivalent professional qualifications in Children’s Care, Learning and Development or Playwork.

• University of Glasgow PGDip (Childhood Practice): this 24 month part-time qualification requires applicants to have a degree (or equivalent) in any academic discipline. They should also have completed or be prepared to undertake an HNC, PDA, SVQ3, SVQ4 or equivalent professional qualifications in Children’s Care, Learning and Development or Playwork.

• University of Strathclyde in association with UHI Millennium Institute BA in Childhood Practice: this is designed to develop degree level professionals and future leaders in the sector. The course takes a holistic view of children's development, learning and well-being and covers areas identified in the benchmark statement. Work-based learning is a central feature of this part time course. The basic entry qualification is HNC or

43 

SNEB with a Learning Statement. Prior learning can be recognised and accredited. Entry is possible to year 1 with 120 Scotcat points and year 3 with 240 Scotcat points.

• University of the West of Scotland BA Childhood Studies: this is offered on a full-time basis. The structure has been designed to allow students entering at Year 2 to build on their previous qualifications, upgrading to degree level through two years of university-level study. Entry requirements to Year 2 are HNC Early Education and Care or HNC Childcare and Education or similar (including accreditation of prior learning).

• University of the West of Scotland BA Childhood Practice: this will be offered on a full-time and part-time basis with entry at Year 3 (SCQF Level 9).

26.2. It should be noted that there is a considerable number of managers who will require to have their qualifications enhanced to degree level if government intentions are to be effected: according to the Pre-school and Childcare Workforce Statistics 2009 (Scottish Government 2009b), 25% of staff in the public sector have a degree level qualification but only 4% in the private sector. It is likely that many, though not all, of those with degree level qualifications will be employed in management posts. These statistics do not allow one to establish directly the proportions of managers in each sector with a degree level qualification (the immediate government priority). However, an estimate can be made. Only 31% of those managing a Care Commission registered service have a degree level qualification. All managers of nursery schools and classes must have a teaching qualification. This must imply that considerably fewer than 31% of managers, though more than 4%, of private and public services which are not nursery schools or classes can have a degree level qualification. Given the large number of establishments, this implies that the number of managers who require to enhance their qualification must be of the order of one thousand.

26.3. Those holding a degree are predominantly aged over 46 while younger staff have a disproportionately small number of degree holders and a disproportionately high proportion of the lowest levels of qualification (SVQ 1 and SVQ2). This does not suggest that new employees are better qualified than those recruited in the past, a situation which would have made it less challenging for the government to meet its targets. The numbers working towards higher level qualifications were low: only 3% of staff were working towards a degree and 4% towards an SVQ4 qualification. It would seem unlikely that the original aim that all managers will be qualified at degree level by 2011 can be attained.

27. SSSC Code of Practice

27.1. There is a major contrast between the Standard for Childhood Practice (Scottish Government, SSSC & QAA 2007) and the SSSC Codes of Practice (Scottish Social Services Council 2009) which are applicable to all those who are registered with it. These are much more general statements.

27.2. In contrast to some professional codes of practice this document places obligations on employers as well as on staff. These obligations on employers include the following relevant to quality of provision:

44 

• Having systems in place to enable social service workers to report inadequate resources or operational difficulties which might impede the delivery of safe care and working with them and relevant authorities to address those issues.

• As a social service employer, you must provide training and development opportunities to enable social service workers to strengthen and develop their skills and knowledge.

27.3. How such commitments are monitored is unclear. The extent to which employers in the private sector are carrying out these obligations is, therefore, unknown.

27.4. Current qualifications for registration with SCCC as a practitioner appear to include a considerable number which have no educational component, so far as can be judged from their titles. Others lie clearly in the social work and community development fields (Scottish Social Services Council (nd). Many clearly focus on child development but few relate this to learning in the ways that the research outlined above identifies as crucial to high quality outcomes for young children.

28. UK funding

28.1. The UK government has sought to develop the purchasing power of parents through the introduction of a childcare element to the Working Tax Credit. Receipt of this payment is dependent on the parent(s) being in employment and is limited to a maximum of 80% of the costs of childcare (a maximum payment of £140 per week for one child, £240 per week for two or more children). This system is intended both to encourage parents to shop around for the best deal and to link this childcare subsidy to the wider government strategy of making work pay. The pressures to interpret ‘best’ in this context as ‘cheapest’ rather than ‘highest quality’ are evident.

28.2. The close relationship between early years strategy and encouraging parents into paid employment is underpinned by the introduction in England, in April 2003, of Childcare Partnership Managers (CPMs) in Jobcentre Plus. CPMs were introduced to help parents who are seeking work to overcome any childcare problems they might face.

28.3. Penn et al (2006), however, report a randomised controlled trial of day nursery provision in the UK which found no significant differences in employment rates of mothers (Toroyan et al 2003). The authors of this study argue that, in the UK, even if fulltime care were provided, low-skilled mothers would not necessarily seek employment since low paid work would not compensate for loss of other benefits (e.g. housing benefit). A mother might still be marginally better off not working, even where childcare was provided. It should be borne in mind that the assumption that paid employment guarantees that children will no longer live in the poverty associated with life on benefits has proved in many cases to be false.

28.4. This funding model assumes that childcare is provided to meet the needs of parents rather than of children. This approach has little in common with approaches to early years provision which have the child at the centre as does educational policy in Scotland. Penn et al (2006) report that PricewaterhouseCoopers (2004) have argued for the need to undertake more research on calculating the costs and benefits of universalised services

45 

in the UK. Consideration of the rights and status of young children, in terms of the UN Convention of the Rights of the Child, implies that the scope of cost-benefit studies in early childhood should be substantially rethought.

28.5. Dickins et al (2005) provide a critical account of the funding model used within the England. Given the common tax system, the research is of likely significance for Scotland. This research confirms that this model promotes inequity in provision. There is a continuum in the demand for childcare from parents as ‘beneficiaries’ of childcare to parents as ‘customers’. Broadly, beneficiaries were parents whose limited purchasing power led them to rely on heavily subsidised care and free early years education. Customers had greater purchasing power and used this to buy formal childcare on a regular basis; they were much more likely than beneficiaries to select provision to suit their needs. Given the value noted in research for young children at risk of attending centres which have enrolled children from a range of backgrounds, the risks of encouraging segregation for future educational success and social justice are evident.

28.6. Adams (2008) points out that the increased funding given to parents for places has in fact had a negative effect in that it has led entrepreneurs to open establishments to meet the needs for full-time and extended day places. Many of these establishments keep costs manageable by training their staff on the job which has resulted in increasing numbers of unqualified employees.

28.7. The Cambridge Primary Review confirms the widely held view that marketisation and inter-school competition, often disguised in the language of individual choice, appear to exacerbate educational inequality:

Marketisation, ‘choice’ and inter-school competition appear to be among the policies which exacerbate educational inequality because not all parents are equal in their capacity to access and interpret the information on which choice is based or to act on that information (1/3 and earlier reports, notably 7/1) ... There are strong reasons to question the efficacy and fairness of ‘choice and competition’ as a school improvement strategy (1/3). (Cambridge Primary Review (2007b) p3)

29. Equitable pay

29.1. While both the previous and current Scottish governments have sought to raise the qualifications of pre-school staff, they have been consistently unwilling to take any action which would result in enhanced pay and status for these staff. Adams (2008) considers that a key factor in the refusal to provide for a national collective agreement on pay and conditions was concern about the potential costs of early childcare and education for rural and small local authorities. This has resulted in separate negotiations by each local authority. Rather than encouraging flexible services which meet differing needs (one of New Labour arguments for ‘flexible’ employment in general), this has resulted in a variety of pay and conditions of service across the different education authorities and a wide array of job titles.

29.2. Adams further argues that for those in post the changes associated with this break up of national into local negotiations led to workers developing new self-perceptions that competed with pre-existing self-perceptions and discourses of professionalism. This may well result in early years workers,

46 

especially as they were just beginning to establish a professional identity, perceiving their job differently from those who manage the system in which they work.

29.3. The partnership model adopted by the Scottish Government, while it seeks to ensure quality of provision for the child through setting and monitoring standards, does not allow those commissioning services to impose conditions relating to the employment contracts of staff in partnership establishments, provided legal minima are met. Indeed the whole funding model is all too likely to drive down pay and worsen conditions.

29.4. The Pre-school and Childcare Workforce Statistics 2005 (Scottish Executive 2006) reveal the very low levels of pay earned in the early years sector. The median hourly pay of all staff was £6. This compares to £8 per hour for all female employees in Scotland and £9 per hour for all employees in Scotland. There was also a strong relationship between childcare qualifications and hourly pay: staff qualified at SVQ level 1 or 2 earned on average £6 per hour, compared to £13 for those with a relevant degree. It is evident that many staff can only have been paid at the minimum wage. These low levels of pay may be associated with the fact that approximately 42 per cent of vacancies in privately managed centres were long-term compared to 21 per cent in both local authority centres.

29.5. The BBC on 30 May 2007 reported the findings of an Equal Opportunities Commission enquiry in the following terms which illustrate the extent of the use of low paid assistants within the education sector:

Scotland's classroom assistants receive ‘scandalously low wages’ and are undervalued, according to an Equal Opportunities Commission (EOC) report. The survey found classroom assistants are among the lowest paid local government workers, receiving between £7,000 and £10,000 a year. (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/scotland/6702875.stm )

29.6. This investigation was carried out in terms of the Sex Discrimination Act 1975 which gave the Commission the power to undertake investigations into deep-seated issues of gender equality or discrimination. While it was concerned with classroom assistants within primary and secondary schools, it is clear that the gendered nature of that workforce is similar to that of the early years workforce; it is also clear that for many the role of the classroom assistant had traditionally been conceived in terms similar to that of the substitute mother model of the early years worker. The report (Equal Opportunities Commission 2007) makes it evident that public sector employers were very willing to employ these workers at low levels of pay:

Typically classroom assistants are paid between £5.68 and £7.58 per hour, although pay rates differ within each local authority.

Through minimalist interpretations of their contractual obligations local authorities were able to ensure that:

Therefore, the annual salary of classroom assistants ranges from around £6,810 - £10,089 and between £567 - £841 per month.

Many staff worked unpaid overtime. It was also reported that many employees were further exploited by being required to carry out activities which lay beyond their contractual obligations.

47 

29.7. If such is the condition of local authority employees who, like their colleagues in local authority pre-school establishments, are not protected by national negotiations, then it is reasonable to assume that conditions in the private sector will be no better, and indeed, quite possibly, worse. The Pre-school and Childcare Workforce Statistics 2005 do nothing to cast doubt on this likelihood.

29.8. The Minimum Income Standard Project funded by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation calculates that both partners in a couple would require to be paid around £7.14 per hour to provide a family with two young children with a minimum acceptable living standard (http://www.minimumincomestandard.org/livingwage.htm ).

29.9. It is notable that both the former Labour Mayor of London and his Conservative successor, supported by the London Assembly, have ensured that the employees of all public services for which they are directly responsible are paid a London Living Wage (currently £7.85 per hour) which is higher than the legally required minimum wage. They have sought to ensure that employers in London, including suppliers of services to the Greater London Authority, commit themselves to this action and that, as far as possible, procurement procedures encourage this.

29.10. Given the contribution made by early years provision to the economy, estimated by the New Economics Foundation at £7 for each £1 of wages (NEF 2009), these levels of low pay cannot be justified. UK policies of ensuring that lone mothers work fail by comparison with countries which have more generous funding and more equitable levels of qualification and pay: the UK has 56% of lone mothers in employment, Sweden 80%. The Daycare Trust, in arguing that more highly qualified better paid staff are needed to improve the quality of early education in England, estimates that if half of staff were qualified at degree level then this might well increase the costs of daycare by 200%. This would result in

the amount spent by parents in England (after any entitlement to the childcare element of WTC is taken into account) would increase from £2.6 billion per year to £4.9 billion, while Government expenditure would increase from £1.5 billion per year to £2.1 billion. (Daycare Trust 2009 p3)

29.11. The Daycare Trust recognises that many would find this to be untenable and proposes an alternative model of funding such costs. This includes extending the number of free hours of nursery education to which children are entitled, paying an increased hourly support to partner centres, and improving the child care element of WTC.

30. Workforce Task Group

30.1. The final report of the Workforce Task Group – Early Years / Early Intervention Framework: Workforce Task Group - Final Draft - 25 June (Scottish Government 2008) – considers that the development of the Standard in Childhood Practice will strengthen leadership in the sector and improve career opportunities and pathways for early years and childcare professionals. More generally, it takes forward the development of

48 

integrated qualifications for the early years and childcare sector. The Group argued that the Standard be used flexibly.

30.2. The Group identified a range of recent and ongoing developments affecting roles across the workforce and designed to assist the workforce to respond to the needs of children and families more effectively. It noted the existence of common themes around the roles and skills required (eg carrying out case work or initial assessments, being a key contact for children or parents and specialist professionals), the similar conceptualisation of qualification levels and of values, and the frequency of cross-sectoral working associated with the jobs.

30.3. The Group did not suggest a single regulatory regime for all early years staff because it was important to maintain existing holistic systems regarding the regulation of such professions as social workers, medical practitioners and teachers. The Group did identify the possibility of streamlining the regulatory systems to meet future workforce developments.

30.4. As a first step, in order to emphasise the distinctiveness and priority of the agenda in the Framework and its Scottish context and to help to break down cultural and language barriers they suggested the development of a Scottish Values Statement for those working with children and families.

31. Joint professional training

31.1. It has been argued, among others by the contributors to Children in Scotland (2008), that one effective solution to the variety of roles in pre-school provision is the use of common or joint professional preservice education. While few would argue against the value of joint professional education, this strategy cannot be developed as a ready panacea.

31.2. Firstly and most fundamentally, the promotion of this as the main or even sole response to this issue ignores the ways in which this diversity is rooted in differing philosophies and models of provision. This approach does not address the different levels of qualification within the young children’s workforce and seems, at least implicitly, to assume that all staff are qualified at (or at least close to) degree level.

31.3. As pointed out by the Workforce Task Group, much professional education for those working in children’s services relates to their work with others than children and young people (eg the professional education of nurses, doctors, social workers or psychologists). Typical of the pattern in many professions, initial qualification in medicine will be followed by specialism in paediatric medicine. Indeed the education of pedagogues in Denmark prepares them to work not only with children, but also with young people and with adults, such as those in residential accommodation; students then opt for specialisation in one of these fields.

31.4. Thirdly, these proposals ignore the practical difficulties of matching professional education courses which are based on very different conceptual and organisational structures. In particular, they often imply without detailed examination the use of modular structures as a solution to such issues. It is likely that such proposals would lead to a reduction in flexibility of access. Bloomer (2008) does recognise that the development of a new post or qualification must be placed in the context of existing structures;

49 

this is not to accept these uncritically but to recognise that development is not simple. In the words of Kyriacou et al (2009):

Changes to the organisation of education and care professionals and their constituent roles will clearly involve both conceptual and logistical challenges. (p85)

31.5. Bloomer goes on to argue that it may be more valuable (or at least more realistic) to think of the school as both a provider and a broker which would ensure access to a range of learning activities and learning opportunities provided by others. The model of learning to which this relates is enshrined within Curriculum for Excellence.

31.6. Within this collection, it is notable that it is those with experience of teacher education who propose practical means of developing common elements of pre-service education for different professions working with children. Munn et al (2008) propose a staged approach in which trainees would firstly have opportunities to meet and work together (eg in workshop activities). This could be developed into student placements working with other professionals for one week, developing their understanding of the community and the contribution of different agencies. In the long term:

[the] aim would be to create a common module enabling all students from across the early years, education, health and social work, to study together. Units of work undertaken jointly would need to emphasise the complementary roles and skills of each profession in relation to children as well as promote opportunities for students to reflect on and debate the changing nature of childhood in our society. (p27)

31.7. Donaldson (2008) considers the implications of Curriculum for Excellence for all staff working with children, especially those in the early years sector. He recognises that while common knowledge and skills will become ever more important, the importance of teaching skills remains crucial.

Everyone will need a general understanding of child development. Those working in education will need to understand pedagogy, use assessment top support and report learning and have a repertoire of learning and teaching approaches to promote effective learning. ... This will require a greater emphasis … on strong interpersonal skills, on collaborative working and on taking professional responsibility and showing leadership at every level. But the ‘traditional’ skills of knowing the learner well and knowing what they have already learned, of being knowledgeable about what is to be learned, of identifying and addressing barriers to learning, of explaining things clearly, of asking good questions, of proving good feedback and being well organised will remain as vital as ever. (p30)

The similarity of this conclusion to the findings on the benefits of the role of the teacher as outlined in the EPPE documents is notable.

32. The pedagogue

32.1. There has recently been considerable interest in the concept of the pedagogue and in introducing this post into early years provision in Scotland. These discussions have more explicitly recognised this question of the very different levels of qualification within the existing children’s

50 

workforce than some of the proposals for joint working; the extent to which they have addressed it, other than rhetorically, is open to question.

32.2. The Workforce Task Group suggested that substantive building blocks exist in the form of the Standard for Childhood Practice and existing developmental work and thinking around Getting it Right for Every Child (GIRFEC). They also suggested that the underpinning principles of the concept of a Scottish pedagogue (a holistic, child centred approach where children can contribute to their own learning and development and a workforce that sees families, carers and communities as partners) could also form a starting point for the work.

Our starting point in considering the role of a Scottish Pedagogue is not to assume a fundamental gap in our workforce that cannot be filled by existing or developing roles. Rather, it is to suggest that a thorough exploration is made of the apparent differences in workforce structure elsewhere in Europe and the distinctive qualities around the role of the Pedagogue that seem to be particularly well suited to the breadth of skills and role required as a consequence of the Framework. As well as potentially identifying any structural gaps in workforce provision such investigation will inevitably provide benchmarks for workforce development within current structures. (paragraph 47)

32.3. It is always useful to explore other educational structures with the aim of improving provision but it is notable that Task Group’s starting point is a refusal to assume that there is a fundamental gap in the workforce which could not be filled by existing or developing roles. This would suggest that the Task Group was less committed to the introduction of a new post of a pedagogue than exploring means of developing the attributes associated with such a post and exploring the extent to which these are present (actually or potentially) within the current workforce.

32.4. While arguing the value of exploring the apparent differences in workforce structure elsewhere in Europe and the distinctive qualities around the role of the pedagogue, the Task Group does not address the more fundamental issues which have led to the current workforce structure. It cannot be assumed as the next quotation appears to do, that, contrary to all experience, a model can simply be exported from one country, history, society and culture into another.

Although the Scottish pedagogue model will undoubtedly raise questions, it would enable Scotland to make use of a model which is demonstrably effective in many other European countries (and is currently being investigated in England). (paragraph 49)

32.5. The Group wanted to develop a post of pedagogue which would be child centred, treat children as active participants in services, recognise parents, carers and community as partners, and be appropriately skilled and valued. The new type of worker would operate at graduate level and be supported by assistants at SCQF level 7. The Group itself argued that these principles were not new (paragraph 51):

The Group felt it was important to stress that the concept of a Scottish Pedagogue should not be seen as an "all or nothing" option. The principles of pedagogy are already embraced within the Standard in Childhood Practice and could be made more explicit and built upon for future developments.

51 

32.6. It is difficult to identify much that is significantly different here from what one would expect of teachers in nursery schools who are supported by appropriately qualified assistants. Of course, teachers and assistants in local authority establishments are paid more than their colleagues in partnership establishments. Adopting the same principles in both sectors implies that levels of pay and conditions of service in the partnership and private sector would be raised to those in the public sector. As already, noted there has been no political willingness to do so.

32.7. Kyriacou et al (2009) provide a relatively detailed account of the development of the concept of the pedagogue:

The official origin of social pedagogy as a university (and essentially theoretical) discipline in Norway can be traced to a dispute involving researchers at the University of Oslo in the mid-1970s. Inspired by the new sociology of education, a group of radical academics in the Department for Educational Research set up a course in social pedagogy as an alternative to the existing (mainly cognitive-based) programme in educational studies. For the next two decades, students of education at the University of Oslo could choose between two courses: educational studies (the established programme) or social pedagogy (the new alternative programme). ... The Oslo radicals also argued for a broader understanding of pedagogy as a subject that had as much to do with socialisation and upbringing as it had with cognitive learning. (p82)

32.8. It is interesting to note that the origins of the pedagogue lie in university education departments; it is also interesting to note the extent to which teacher education, certainly in Scotland, has adopted the educational principles which 30 years ago were associated with the pedagogue. This paper goes on to recognise that the social pedagogical components of schooling now associated with the pedagogue can be readily undertaken by others, including teachers, although the authors recognise that this will be easier for some teachers than for others. Indeed, as already noted, in Norway and Sweden it is teachers who are responsible for all early years education.

32.9. It is fair to note that some of those who see the benefits of the pedagogue model contrast this with a caricature of the teacher, which, if ever true anywhere outside fiction, is most certainly not true in Scotland today. Moss (2006), using earlier work, contrasts the role of the pedagogue with a limited view of the teacher,:

The pedagogue sets out ‘to address the whole child, the child with body, mind, emotions, creativity, history and social identity. This is not the child only of emotions, the psycho-therapeutical approach, nor only of the body, the medical approach, nor only of the mind, the traditional teaching approach’ (Moss & Petrie, 2002, p. 143). (p32)

It is important to bear in mind that while this may just possibly be true of a ‘traditional teaching approach’ it is most certainly not typical of teaching in schools in any sector in Scotland.

32.10. Oberhuemer (2005) states even more bluntly:

the term teacher as a fairly homogenous concept associated with a transmission role, presents a number of problems ... rather than adopting a widely assigned and school related concept and using it as a

52 

generic term for the early childhood field, I refer to early childhood pedagogues, workers, practitioners, or professionals. ... my personal preference is the term early childhood pedagogue. According to Alexander (2000, p.40), while teaching is an act, pedagogy is both act and discourse. He describes pedagogy as encompassing ‘the performance of teaching together with the theories, beliefs, policies and controversies that inform and shape it’. (p7)

32.11. Oberhuemer proceeds to define what is significant in the role of the pedagogue:

Early childhood pedagogues need to be able to reflect openly on their personal and professional beliefs, relating these to the expectations arising from the documented principles. They need to be encouraged to see themselves as interpreters and not as mere implementers of curricular frameworks. (p12)

32.12. While this provides a welcome antidote to the all too common view in the UK of early childhood workers as substitute mothers or technicians, it ignores that this description is close to the role of the teacher in many countries, most certainly including Scotland. Indeed, the Standard for Full Registration, Curriculum for Excellence and A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century all share a view of the teacher as not merely interpreting the curriculum but as contributing to its creation and development. This requires teachers to have the qualities which this author describes as the specific attributes of the pedagogue:

At the level of interacting with children, democratic professionalism presupposes a professional attitude, disposition or habitus (Rabe-Kleberg, 2003) which acknowledges that children are social agents, participating in constructing and influencing their own lives. (p13)

This understanding of children and of their learning lies at the heart of Curriculum for Excellence and is articulated both in policy and in exemplars of practice.

32.13. Petrie et al (2009), reporting on research carried out by the Thomas Coram Research Unit, identified the following key principles of pedagogic practice (p4):

• A focus on the child as a whole person, and support for the child’s overall development.

• The practitioner seeing herself/himself as a person, in relationship with the child or young person.

• While they are together, children and staff are seen as inhabiting the same life space, not as existing in separate, hierarchical domains.

• As professionals, pedagogues are encouraged to constantly reflect on their practice and to apply both theoretical understandings and self-knowledge to their work and to the sometimes challenging demands with which they are confronted.

• Pedagogues should be both practical and creative; their training prepares them to share in many aspects of children’s daily lives, such as preparing meals and snacks, or making music and building kites.

• In group settings, children’s associative life is seen as an important resource: workers should foster and make use of the group.

53 

• Pedagogy builds on an understanding of children’s rights that is not limited to procedural matters or legislative requirements.

• There is an emphasis on team work and valuing the contributions of others — family members, other professionals and members of the local community — in the task of ‘bringing up’ children.

32.14. Again the similarities between the role of the pedagogue as described here and the role of the teacher as developed in Scotland are strong. The model of learning is that which is outlined in Curriculum for Excellence documentation, perhaps in particular Building the Curriculum 2 and the Health and Wellbeing Principles and Practices paper.

32.15. Kyriacou et al (2009) recognise the concern with social cohesion and the argument that ‘social pedagogy’s mission in society is social integration’. It is again worth noting that A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century (Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers 2001) explicitly states regarding the work of the teacher:

this important work is, critically, carried out within the framework of social inclusion which seeks to engage every child in learning and personal development to secure achievement and the promotion of confidence and ambition in all our young people

32.16. Children in Scotland (2008) takes forward discussion about the possibility of developing in Scotland the role of the pedagogue. Cohen (2008) referring to Petrie (2001) states:

In most other European countries however, the term [pedagogue] has a much broader meaning encompassing not only children’s educational needs but their social and emotional development. This has been described as relating to the whole person – their ‘body, mind, feelings, spirit, creativity and the relationship of the individual to others – their connectedness’ (Petrie 2001). (p19)

This may be usefully compared with Clause 1 of the Standards in Scotland’s Schools Act 2000, which, reflecting Article 29 of the UN Convention on the Rights of the Child, provides a broad definition of education to be provided to all children and young people in Scotland which includes ‘the development of the personality, talents and mental and physical abilities of the child or young person to their fullest potential’. It may also be usefully compared with the aims of Curriculum for Excellence which seeks for all children and young people from the age of 3 onwards that they become not only successful learners, but also confident individual, responsible citizens and effective contributors to the society and communities in which they live.

32.17. In support of the case Cohen cites the 1964 report of the Kilbrandon Commission which argued:

It may well be that in the past the emphasis within the Scottish educational curriculum, with its fairly strong academic bias, lent encouragement to the view that education could be treated as a formal process of learning, in that sense divorced from the wider aim of training and social living. In so far as such attitudes exist, they are, we consider, rapidly disappearing. (emphasis added) (Kilbrandon Report c XII para 245)

This is a somewhat more accurate description of the education system than that implied by the more recent accounts of Oberhuemer (2005) and Moss

54 

(2006). If the approach criticised by Lord Kilbrandon was already a thing of the past 45 years ago, it is very unlikely to be a feature of Scottish education today.

32.18. The reference by Cohen to Lord Kilbrandon is related to the argument of many of the contributors to this publication that there is a need for a single coherent children’s service. This makes a number of assumptions of which the most fundamental is that children and their needs can be isolated from the rest of society. It is not difficult to think of counter examples: poverty and poor housing have appalling effects on many children but poverty and poor housing affect people of all ages, including adults who live in households without children. Similarly, many children are affected by the ill-health of the adults in their families and communities: simply addressing the immediate needs of the child may not provide a longer term solution. For some commentators (not those who contributed to this collection), this approach to children’s services can slide into a consumerist approach or into models based on the idea of the ‘deficient child’, which run counter to the philosophy expressed by Petrie (2001) and the Standards in Scotland’s Schools Act.

32.19. Cohen exemplifies the sorts of education and training which would produce pedagogues by outlining practice in Denmark and Sweden. This again makes for some difficulty in discriminating between the role of the pedagogue and that of the teacher since pre-school staff with degree level qualification in Sweden are in fact teachers. Citing articles by Johansson and Taguchi from Children in Scotland magazine, the illustration ends with an explicit recognition that the post described in the heading as ‘pedagogues in Sweden’ is indeed that of the qualified teacher:

The qualification was intended to enable teachers to work in a new way, combining the ‘work of the hand’ with the ‘work of the mind’, stimulating learning outside as well as inside traditional school settings and involving parents and making use of other resources in the local community ( Johansson 2003, Taguchi 2005) (p20)

55 

33. Conclusions

33.1. In the light of the evidence considered above, the EIS as an organisation committed to the promotion of sound learning may wish to consider the following aims and actions. Some of these will be of a long term nature; others may be achievable in the short to medium term.

33.2. The EIS should promote debate on early years provision which has at its heart the rights of the child, in particular to education.

33.3. This debate will recognise the long term benefits to children and society of high quality universal pre-five education.

33.4. The EIS should draw in its campaigning on clearly established markers of good policy and practice in the provision of early years services from a range of countries and organisations.

33.5. This debate will recognise that this approach is consonant with developments in Scottish education, particularly our growing understanding of how children learn and Curriculum for Excellence.

33.6. This debate will further recognise the economic benefits of high quality early years provision, while not adopting these as the primary rationale for such provision.

33.7. The EIS should continue to highlight the higher quality of public provision compared to that of private provision.

33.8. The EIS should continue to highlight the low levels of investment in pre-five services in Scotland (and more generally within the UK).

33.9. The EIS should continue to publicise the risks to social cohesion of the current quasi-market model of provision of early years services.

33.10. The EIS should build on the basis of educational policies (such as Curriculum for Excellence, the Standard for Full Registration) the case for a universal education with common high standards for all from 3 to 18.

33.11. Within this, the EIS should continue to publicise the role of the teacher in ensuring high quality outcomes for young children and for the long term nature of these positive outcomes.

33.12. As an ultimate, if long term, goal, all education for all children and young people aged 3 to 16 should be placed on the same statutory footing and local authorities required to make the same provision for nursery education as for primary and secondary education.

33.13. The government should take action to ensure that its policies leading to improvements in pre-school education are carried out by all local authorities.

33.14. The government’s manifesto commitment to extending the hours of free nursery education for all 3 and 4 year olds should be carried out.

33.15. All local authorities should be encouraged and finally required to staff their nursery schools and classes with both teachers and other (less qualified) staff.

33.16. The ratio between these categories of staff should be of the order of 1:1.

56 

33.17. The government and all local authorities should ensure that all children aged 3-5 should have access to a teacher for a minimum number of hours per week.

33.18. The government should ensure that ‘access’ is defined in such a way as to include both working cooperatively with other employees in the classroom and other learning areas with children and the provision of time for both groups of staff to plan and reflect on their experiences.

33.19. Provision should be set at a level which ensures that each child has access to the teacher for at least 5 hours per week in the classroom and other learning areas.

33.20. Local authorities should ensure that teaching staff in all establishments, public and private, are deployed in ways that ensure consistent provision which is not fragmentary.

33.21. The worst performing authorities in terms of providing children with access to a qualified teacher should be ‘named and shamed’.

33.22. The EIS should in its campaigning point out the dependence on low paid employment in the early years sector and the impact this is likely to have on the quality of experience.

33.23. Government and local authorities should agree with the appropriate trade unions national conditions of service for all staff in the public pre-five sector.

33.24. This would help to ensure that appropriate standards of qualification for entry to this sector of employment were recognised and required.

33.25. The government, GTCS and universities should take action to ensure that pre-service teacher students enjoy the same quality of pre-five placements and the same opportunities to learn from these placements as in primary school placements.

33.26. The government and local authorities should take action to ensure that all private sector employers carry out their obligation to ensure that all employees are afforded staff development opportunities.

33.27. The government and QAA should monitor provision of recently introduced courses for pre-school staff to ensure that all course members are supported to become reflective practitioners.

33.28. The EIS should ensure that discussion of joint professional education is based on real needs rather than tidy models.

33.29. The EIS should ensure that any discussion of the ‘pedagogue’ is not based on ill-informed generalisations and stereotypes.

33.30. The EIS should highlight the extent to which teacher education in Scotland is informed by the principles which appear to underpin the concept of the pedagogue and result in teaching and learning which is close to that attributed to the pedagogue.

33.31. The EIS should highlight the similarity between the concepts of achievement, teaching and learning which underpin Curriculum for Excellence and those apparently associated with the pedagogue.

57 

Abbreviations and Acronyms

APL accreditation of prior learning

COSLA Convention of Scottish Local Authorities

DfES Department for Education and Skills

EC European Commission / Community

ECEC Early childhood education and care

EPPE Effective Provision of Pre-School Education

EPPI Evidence for Policy and Practice Information and Co-ordinating Centre

GIRFEC Getting it right for every child

GTCS General Teaching Council for Scotland

HMIE Her Majesty’s Inspectorate of Education

HNC Higher National Certificate

HND Higher National Diploma

ISCED International Standard Classification of Education

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PDA Professional Development Award

QAA Quality Assurance Agency for Higher Education

SSSC Scottish Social Services Council

SVQ Scottish Vocational Qualification

UHI University of the Highlands and Islands

WTE whole time equivalent

58 

Bibliography

Notes

1. This bibliography includes the references quoted within the paper but derived from citations by others.

2. On-line resources were last accessed during June 2010.

Adams, K (2008) 'What's in a name? Seeking professional status through degree studies within the Scottish early years context' European Early Childhood Education Research Journal 16: 2, 196 - 209

Alexander, E (2002) ‘Childcare Students: learning or imitating?’, Forum, 44:1, 24 - 26

Alexander, R (2000) Culture and Pedagogy. International Comparisons in Primary Education Oxford: Blackwell Publishers

Barron, I, Holmes, R, MacLure, M & Runswick-Cole, K (2007) Primary Review Research Briefing 8/2 Primary Schools and Other Agencies Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Cambridge Primary Review (2007a) Primary Review Research Briefings Overview 2/1a, 2/1b, 5/1 and 5/2 Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Cambridge Primary Review (2007b) Primary Review Research Briefings Overview 1/1, 1/2, 1/3, 1/4 Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Cambridge Primary Review (2009) Introducing the Cambridge Primary Review Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Cameron, C, Candappa, M, McQuail, S, Mooney, A, Moss, P & Petrie, P (2003) Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project / October 2003: The Workforce London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

Candappa, M, Moss, P, Cameron, C, McQuail, S, Mooney, A & Petrie, P (2003) Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project / October 2003: Funding & Sustainability London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

Care Commission (2008) Gradings so far: A summary of the first grading results for care services in Scotland 1 April 2008 - 5 November 2008 Dundee: Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care http://www.carecommission.com/images/stories/documents/publications/reviewsofqualitycare/gradings_so_far_-_27.01.09.pdf

Care Commission (2009) Active play in children’s day care services. Are services meeting the standards? Dundee: Scottish Commission for the Regulation of Care http://www.carecommission.com/images/stories/documents/publications/reviewsofqualitycare/active_play_-_nov_09.pdf

Children in Scotland (2008) Working it out: developing the children’s sector workforce Edinburgh: Children in Scotland

59 

Cohen, B (2008) ‘Introducing ‘The Scottish Pedagogue’’ (pp 19 - 23) in Children in Scotland (2008) Working it out: developing the children’s sector workforce Edinburgh: Children in Scotland

Coleman, W (2010) “What is school for?” Children in Europe 18, 17 - 18

Daycare Trust (2009) Quality costs: paying for Early Childhood Education and Care London: Daycare Trust

Dickins, S, Taylor, J & La Valle, I (2005) Local Childcare Markets – A Longitudinal Study London: DfES

Donaldson, G (2008) ‘Towards greater professionalism’ (pp 29 - 31) in Children in Scotland (2008) Working it out: developing the children’s sector workforce Edinburgh: Children in Scotland

EC Childcare Network (1996) Quality Targets in Services for Young Children Brussels: European Commission Equal Opportunities Unit

Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency (2009) Early Childhood Education and Care in Europe: Tackling Social and Cultural Inequalities Brussels: Education, Audiovisual and Culture Executive Agency

Engineering Council UK (2010) UK Standard for Professional Engineering Competence http://www.engc.org.uk/ecukdocuments/internet/document%20library/UK-SPEC.pdf

Equal Opportunities Commission (2007) Valuable Assets: a general formal investigation into the role and status of classroom assistants in Scottish schools: Summary Report Glasgow: Equal Opportunities Commission

Garrick, R & Morgan, A (2009) 'The children's centre teacher role: developing practice in the private, voluntary and independent sector' Early Years 29:1, 69 - 81

Goswami, U & Bryant, P (2007) Primary Review Research Briefing 2/1a Children’s Cognitive Development and Learning Cambridge: University of Cambridge

GTCS (2006) The Standard for Full Registration Edinburgh: GTCS http://www.gtcs.org.uk/Publications/StandardsandRegulations/The_Standard_for_Full_Registration.aspx

GTCS & QAA (2007) Scottish subject benchmark statement: The Standard for Initial Teacher Education Glasgow: QAA Scotland http://www.gtcs.org.uk/Publications/StandardsandRegulations/The_Standard_for_Initial_Teacher_Education_(ITE).aspx

HMIE (2006) Improving Scottish Education 2002 – 2005 Livingston: HMIE http://www.hmie.gov.uk/documents/publication/hmieise.pdf

HMIE (2007a) The Child at the Centre Livingston: HMIE http://www.hmie.gov.uk/documents/publication/catcseey.pdf

HMIE (2007b) How Good is our School? Livingston: HMIE http://www.hmie.gov.uk/documents/publication/hgiosjte3.pdf

60 

HMIE (2007c) The Key Role of Staff in Providing Quality Pre-School Education Livingston: HMIE

HMIE (2009) Improving Scottish Education 2005 – 2008 Livingston: HMIE http://www.hmie.gov.uk/documents/publication/ise09.pdf

Howe, C & Mercer N (2007) Primary Review Research Briefing 2/1b Children’s Social Development, Peer Interaction and Classroom Learning Cambridge: University of Cambridge

Johansson, I (2003) Children in Scotland magazine 5

Kremer, M (2006) ‘The Politics of Ideals of Care: Danish and Flemish Child Care Policy Compared’ Social Politics 13:2 261 - 285

Kuisma, M & Sandberg, A (2008) 'Preschool teachers' and student preschool teachers' thoughts about professionalism in Sweden' European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 16:2, 186 - 195

Kyriacou, C, Ellingsen, I T, Stephens, P & Sundaram, V (2009) 'Social pedagogy and the teacher: England and Norway compared' Pedagogy, Culture & Society 17:1, 75 - 87

Magnuson, K, Ruhm, C, & Waldfogel, J (2007) ‘The persistence of preschool effects: Do subsequent classroom experiences matter?’ Early Childhood Research Quarterly 22, 18 - 38

Mathers, S, Sylva, K & Joshi, H (2007) Quality of Childcare Settings in the Millennium Cohort Study London: DfES

Meade, C & Fairfax-Cholmeley, K (2010) ‘Family learning: supporting the family as a catalyst for change’ Children in Europe 18, 23 - 24

Melhuish, E C (2004a) A literature review of the impact of early years provision upon young children, with emphasis given to children from disadvantaged backgrounds London: National Audit Office

Melhuish, E C (2004b) Child Benefits: The importance of investing in quality childcare London: Daycare Trust

Melhuish, E C, Quinn, L, McSherry, K, Sylva, K, Sammons, P, Siraj-Blatchford, I, Taggart, B & Guimares, S (2000a) The Effective Pre-School Provision Northern Ireland (EPPNI) Project: Technical Paper 1 – Characteristics of Pre-School Environments in Northern Ireland: An analyses of observational data Belfast: Stranmillis University College.

Melhuish, E C, Quinn, L, Sylva, K, Sammons, P, Siraj-Blatchford, I, Taggart, B & Shields, C (2000b) The Effective Pre-School Provision Northern Ireland (EPPNI) Project: Technical Paper 5 - Progress of Cognitive Development at the Start of P1 Belfast: Stranmillis University College

Mooney, A, Cameron, C, Candappa, M, McQuail, S, Moss, P & Petrie P, (2003) Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project / October 2003: Quality London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

61 

Moss, P (2000) ‘Workforce Issues in Early Childhood Education and Care’ Paper prepared for consultative meeting on International Developments in Early Childhood Education and Care, Columbia University, New York May 11-12, 2000 http://www.childpolicyintl.org/publications/Workforce%20Issues%20in%20Early%20Childhood%20Education%20and%20Care_Peter%20Moss.pdf

Moss, P (2006) ‘Structures, Understandings and Discourses: possibilities for re-envisioning the early childhood worker’ Contemporary Issues in Early Childhood 7:1 30-41

Moss, P & Petrie, P (2002) From Children’s Services to Children’s Spaces: public policy, children and childhood London: RoutledgeFalmer

Moss, P, Petrie P, Cameron, C, Candappa, M, McQuail, S & Mooney, A (2003a) Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project / October 2003: Introduction London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

Moss, P, Petrie P, Cameron, C, Candappa, M, McQuail, S & Mooney, A (2003b) Early Years and Childcare International Evidence Project / October 2003: Provision of Services London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

Munn, P, Frame, B, Reid, L & Lynch, M (2008) ‘Reforming the initial education of teachers and others working in schools’ (pp24 - 28) in Children in Scotland (2008) Working it out: developing the children’s sector workforce Edinburgh: Children in Scotland

NEF (2009) A Bit Rich: Calculating the real value to society of different professions London: New Economics Foundation

Oberhuemer, P (2005) 'Conceptualising the early childhood pedagogue: Policy approaches and issues of professionalism' European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 13:1, 5 - 16

OECD Directorate for Education (2004) Starting Strong: Curricula and Pedagogies in Early Childhood Education and Care Paris: OECD

Peisner-Feinberg, E S, & Burchinal, M R (1997) ‘Relations Between Preschool Children’s Child Care Experiences and Concurrent Development: The Cost, Quality, and Outcomes Study’ Merill-Palmer Quarterly 43:3, 451 – 477

Penn, P, Barreau, S, Butterworth, L, Lloyd, E, Moyles, J, Potter, S, & Sayeed R (2004) What is the impact of out-of-home integrated care and education settings on children aged 0-6 and their parents? London: Institute of Education

Penn, H, Burton, V, Lloyd, E, Mugford, M, Potter S & Sayeed, Z (2006) Early Years: What is known about the long-term economic impact of centre-based early childhood interventions? London: University of London EPPI Centre

Petrie, P (2001) Children in Scotland magazine 5

Petrie, P, Boddy, J, Cameron, C, Heptinstall, E, McQuail, S, Simon, A & Wigfall, (2009) Pedagogy – a holistic, personal approach to work with children and young people, across services: European models for practice, training, education and

62 

qualification London: Thomas Coram Research Unit, Institute of Education, University of London

PricewaterhouseCoopers (2004) Universal Early Education and Care in 2020: Costs, Benefits and Funding Options Daycare Trust/Social Market Foundation

Rabe-Kleberg, U (2004) 'Experte' und 'Professional' - zwei soziale Praxen des Umgangs mit Ungewissheit. Aufgezeigt am Beispiel der gesellschaftlichen Kleinkindererziehung im gesellschaftlichen Umbruch’, in: U. Rabe-Kleberg (Ed) Der Gesellschaftliche Umgang mit der Ungewissheit - Berufe und Professionen als Beispiel. Sonderforschungsbereich ‘Gesellschaftliche Entwicklungen nach dem Systemumbruch. Diskontinuität, Tradition und Strukturbildung' Heft 13, März 2004

Scottish Conservative Party (2007) Scottish Conservative Manifesto: Scottish Parliament Election 2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/bsp/hi/pdfs/02_04_07_manifesto.pdf

Scottish Executive (2006) Pre-school and Childcare Workforce Statistics 2009 Edinburgh: Scottish Executive http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/93905/0022592.pdf

Scottish Executive (2007) Building the Curriculum 2: Active learning in the early years Edinburgh: Scottish Executive

Scottish Government (2008) Early Years / Early Intervention Framework: Workforce Task Group - Final Draft - 25 June http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Publications/2008/07/workforce-report

Scottish Government (2009a) Pre-school and Childcare Statistics 2009 Edinburgh: Scottish Government http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/285219/0086645.pdf

Scottish Government (2009b) Pre-school and Childcare Workforce Statistics 2009 http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/289501/0088565.pdf

Scottish Government & COSLA (2007) Concordat http://www.scotland.gov.uk/Resource/Doc/923/0054147.pdf

Scottish Government, SSSC & QAA (2007) Scottish subject benchmark statement: The Standard for Childhood Practice Glasgow: QAA

Scottish Labour Party (2007) Building Scotland http://www.politicsresources.net/area/uk/ass07/man/scot/Labour_Manifesto_Final.pdf

Scottish Liberal Democrats (2007) We think Scotland has a bright future http://www.scotlibdems.org.uk/files/Full%20Manifesto.pdf

Scottish National Party (2007) Holyrood Manifesto 2007 http://www.snp.org/node/13534

Scottish Negotiating Committee for Teachers (2001) A Teaching Profession for the 21st Century http://www.snct.org.uk/library/278/2001%20Teachers%20Agreement.pdf

63 

Scottish Social Services Council (nd) Qualifications criteria for phase two registrants – day care of children service workers Dundee: Scottish Social Services Council http://www.sssc.uk.com/sssc/all-about-registration/what-qualifications-do-i-need-to-register-with-the-sssc.html

Scottish Social Services Council (2009) Codes of Practice for Social Service Workers and Employers Dundee: Scottish Social Services Council

Simpson, D (2010) 'Being professional? Conceptualising early years professionalism in England' European Early Childhood Education Research Journal, 18:1, 5 - 14

Sammons, P, Sylva, K, Melhuish, E C, Siraj-Blatchford, I, Taggart, B & Hunt, S (2008a) Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11): Influences on Children’s Attainment and Progress in Key Stage 2:Cognitive Outcomes in Year 6 London: DCSF

Sammons, P, Sylva, K, Melhuish, E C, Siraj-Blatchford, I, Taggart, B & Jelicic, H (2008b) Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11): Influences on Children’s Development and Progress in Key Stage 2: Social / behavioural Outcomes in Year 6 London: DCSF

Sylva, K, Melhuish, E C, Sammons, P, Siraj-Blatchford, I & Taggart, B (2004) The Effective Provision of Pre-School Education (EPPE) Project: The Final Report: Effective Pre-School Education London: DfES

Sylva, K, Melhuish, E C, Sammons, P, Siraj-Blatchford, I & Taggart, B (2008) Effective Pre-school and Primary Education 3-11 Project (EPPE 3-11): Final Report from the Primary Phase: Pre-school, School and Family Influences on Children’s Development during Key Stage 2 (Age 7-11) London: DCSF

Taguchi, H L (2005) Children in Scotland magazine 49

Toroyan T, Roberts I, Oakley A, Laing G, Mugford M & Frost C (2003) ‘Effectiveness of out-of-home day care for disadvantaged families: randomized controlled trial’ British Medical Journal 327, 906 – 909

Verry, D (2000) ‘Some economic aspects of early childhood education and care’ International Journal of Educational Research 33:1, 95 - 122

Webster, R ‘Should teaching assistants have a pedagogical role?’ BERA Research Intelligence 112, p28

Wilkinson, J E, Kelly, B & Stephen, C (1993) Flagships — an evaluation/research study of Community nurseries in Strathclyde Region 1989-1993 Glasgow: University of Glasgow

Printed and published by The Educational Institute of Scotland, 46 Moray Place, Edinburgh EH3 6BH,

www.eis.org.ukISBN: 978-0-905477-18-3