Foundation Years Benchmarking Data

1
The Childrens Partnership Strategic
Partnership for Early Years and Childcare Sue
Robb Head of Early Years, 4Children
2
The Childrens Partnership DfEs strategic
partner

• Adoption and Children in Care NCB and Barnardos
• Early Years and Childcare - 4 Children
• Families Families and Childcare Trust
• Safeguarding - NSPCC

3
More Affordable Childcare

• Building on from More Great Childcare
• Triangulation of

QUALITY
AFFORDABILITY
FLEXIBILTY
4
What does quality, flexibility, affordability
mean to you
5
Statutory Assessments

• The EYFS requires early years practitioners to
  review
• childrens progress and share a summary with
  parents
• at two points
• In the prime areas between the ages of 24 and 36
  months (the Progress Check at Age 2)
• Integrated review - 2015
• At the end of the EYFS (the EYFS Profile).
• Consultation on Primary Assessment and
  Accountability

6
The Integrated ReviewUpdate on progress
7
Recap on the Integrated Review

• July 2011 - DfE and DH jointly published
  Supporting Families in the Foundation Years
• It includes the commitment for DH/DfE to explore
  integrating health and education reviews for
  children aged 2 to 2 ½ by 2015

8
Background Why an integrated review?

• Early intervention is a key focus for the
  Government
• Age 2 2 ½ is a crucial stage problems with
  speech, behaviour etc. become visible, yet there
  is time to make a real difference
• Currently the two reviews can be very different
  but parents need a whole picture of the child
• There can be confusion and duplication between
  the health and education systems for 2 year olds

9
The Context

• DfE policies mean there will be more 2 year olds
  in early education (free places for most
  disadvantaged 40) and they could take advantage
  of an integrated review
• Increase in Health Visitors will mean integrated
  review can be provided universally
• Commitment to a public health outcome measure at
  2 2 ½ - which will be measured during/as part
  of the integrated review
• Report of Information Sharing Task and Finish
  Group due shortly

10
The Integrated Review Development Group

• The Integrated Review Development Group (IRDG)
  includes
• health and education experts
• five Development Sites (a subset of the Health
  Visitor EIS sites)
• The IRDG has been in place since autumn 2011 and
  has been considering the complex issues around
  integration
• Working groups reported in July 2012, and a draft
  resource pack has been developed.

11
Timetable
JUL-DEC 2012 JAN-JUN 2013 JUL-DEC 2013 JAN-JUN 2014 JUL-DEC 2014 JAN-SEPT 2015 SEPT 2015
Develop content, Testing prep
Testing
Consultation
Develop e-learning modules, Comms, Training
Implementation
12
Content Development

• The Child - looking at
• speech, language and communication
• personal social and emotional development
• physical development
• learning/cognitive development, and
• physical health
• The Child in Context - taking account of
  parenting, home learning environment, family
  circumstances, social/community circumstances,
  etc.

13
(No Transcript)
14
The Community
The Child
The Child in the Family
The Child In Context
The Family
15
Testing models for the Integrated Review

• From January, our five pilot sites will start
  testing models of the Integrated Review across
  their area for 12 months.
• Islington
• Leeds
• Medway
• Norfolk
• Northamptonshire

16
Testing models for the Integrated Review

• Alongside the pilot sites, we have five Pilot
  Partners whose role is to
• Stay close to the testing process
• Share good practice
• Act as a sounding board
• There will be regular meetings for pilots and
  pilot partners to share progress
• Bristol, Hackney, Manchester, Rotherham,
  Warwickshire

17
Designing a local model

• Sites need to consider
• WHO will undertake the reviews? (health visitors,
  early years practitioners, a combination)
• WHERE the reviews will take place? (SSCCs, the
  childs home, early years settings, health
  clinics, etc)
• HOW to arrange the integrated reviews
  (coordination by SSCCs, HV teams, etc) getting
  this right can be key to moving towards greater
  integration.
• How to communicate and train staff to undertake
  the testing
• How Information Sharing will work

18
What will the output of pilot testing be?

• The evaluation will be carried out by an
  independent third party.
• The approach is expected to be
• Collecting the number of integrated reviews
  completed (as a proportion of the total number of
  2 year olds)
• In depth interviews with 5 health and 5 early
  years practitioners
• Focus groups with parents, and with health and
  education staff
• An understanding of the costs and benefits
• Ultimately provision of a case study for the
  area, offering a narrative on how the model is
  performing.

19
Consultation Primary assessment and
accountability under the new national curriculum

• Launched 17 July
• Respond by 11 October
• https//www.gov.uk/government/consultations/new-na
  tional-curriculum-primary-assessment-and-accountab
  ility

20
Question 6

• Should we introduce a baseline check at the start
  of Reception?

21

• Key stage 1 tests, at the end of year 2, are not
  a genuine baseline for primary schooling.
  Measuring a baseline from the end of key stage 1
  gives schools no credit for the crucial work they
  do in reception, year 1 and year 2. There is
  also a perverse incentive for schools not to
  focus resources on early interventions, in order
  to maximise their progress measures. We could
  instead take a baseline shortly after pupils
  entered reception. Progress measures would
  therefore reflect the whole time that a pupil
  spent in a school, and would reward schools which
  taught well from the very start. It could also
  provide valuable national information on the
  effectiveness of different types of early years
  provision.
• We could introduce a simple check at the start of
  reception, to be used as a baseline to measure
  progress and to inform schools about each pupils
  strengths and weaknesses on entry. Schools often
  assess what pupils can and cannot do when they
  begin school. The baseline check could be
  administered by a teacher within two to six weeks
  of each pupil entering reception and would be
  subject to external monitoring similar to that
  used at key stage 1. The results of the check
  would be collected to provide the baseline for
  progress measures. We would develop or procure a
  statutory baseline check.

22
Question 7 Should we allow schools to choose
from a range of commercially-available
assessments? Question 8 Should we make the
baseline check optional?

• .

23

• Another approach we could consider is to allow
  schools to choose and administer a baseline check
  from a range of providers, and report the results
  to be used as a baseline. Research studies would
  be required to ensure that the available baseline
  checks were comparable and consistent. We could
  also consider whether the reception baseline
  check could be optional for schools. Schools
  that were particularly concerned about the
  assessment burden at the start of primary could
  choose not to administer the check to reduce the
  amount of testing. These schools would be judged
  by attainment alone in performance tables and
  floor standards. They would still track pupils
  progress internally and make this data available
  to Ofsted

24
Question 9 If we take a baseline from the start
of reception, should end of key stage 1 national
curriculum tests become non-statutory for
all-through primary schools?

• .

25

• If we measured progress from the start of
  reception, the need for key stage 1 assessments
  to provide school accountability measures would
  reduce. End of key stage 1 tests would continue
  to provide an important accountability measure
  for infant schools and should remain statutory
  for them. Infant schools key stage 1 test
  results would provide the baseline to measure
  progress in junior schools. However, we could
  consider making end of key stage 1 national
  curriculum tests non-statutory for all-through
  primary schools. Since key stage 1 tests provide
  an important way for schools to benchmark
  themselves nationally and identify pupils at risk
  of under-performance, the Standards and Testing
  Agency would continue to make them available for
  use on an optional basis

26
www.foundationyears.org.uk
27
Contact

• Email us foundations_at_4children.org.uk
• Visit our website www.foundationyears.org.uk

Do not throw the baby out with the bath water!!