A teacher by any other name, or status, or pay

Abstract

AS I write we have still not heard the full response to the Childcare Commission, but bits of information keep appearing as to how the future might work. We are still no nearer hearing how the funding for More Great Childcare will work, though I suspect it will fall short of what is needed. What we have learned is that Childminder Agencies, the one’s that no-one seems to want other than Ofsted and the government, will not be centrally funded, which means they will need to charge childminders for their services, which means that costs will be passed on to parents. I would like to see the government come up with some gures to show how this will meet their expressed aims of increasing wages and reducing parental costs. Or indeed, how this will tempt new childminders into the sector? Meanwhile, the simpli cation of the early years continues apace. Where currently we have many di erent quali cations of varying standards, especially at Level 3, feeding up to degree level, and also to EYPS, we will soon have two types of practitioner – the educator and the ‘teacher’. Neither of which carries quali ed teacher status, although one will be called a teacher. Now we welcome Teach First into the mix, whose teachers will gain quali ed teacher status (QTS), after two years. Simple. Now, Teach First has, by all accounts, been a welcome and successful addition to the primary landscape, and I expect that given time, and with the appropriate support from the sector, the training programme will prove successful in the early years. But it must get that training right, and it must get the early years message across, it must be routed in child development and the holistic child. If it is to be a government-led tag-on to the primary scheme, with the aim of increasing the schooli cation of the early years, then it will be a disaster. But how lucky that the Teach First graduates will gain QTS. And how would that make anyone embarking on the Early Years Teacher training feel, who would be called a teacher, but wouldn’t be a teacher in the ‘accepted’ sense of the word. Or, is the point that the government would want everyone to train through Teach First? I suspect not because that is only open to graduates. So, does that mean if you are not a graduate, and you work in the early years, you will never have the same status, pay and conditions as your primary equivalents? Which, when you are trying to professionalise a workforce, seems to me a bit of a disincentive? I presume the Teach First early years teachers will be on the primary pay scale... One thing’s for sure, any change in ratios is not going to make up a wages shortfall, so we are left hoping that perhaps sense will prevail, and that all those potential Early Years Teachers, you know, the ones with years of experience, high levels of competence and empathy, a fantastic knowledge of child development, whole-child approaches and history of the early years, the ones who work day in and day out with children and their families, those devoted, enthusiastic and intelligent people, will nally be given the status, the kudos and the wages they deserve. You deserve it. Editor Neil Henty MSc eye@markallengroup.com