Unbalanced and unbalancing acts in the Early Years Foundation Stage: a critical discourse analysis of policy-led evidence on teaching and play from the office for standards in education in England (Ofsted)

Abstract

ABSTRACTThis paper presents a critical analysis of a report by the Office for Standards in Education in England based on a survey of practitioners’ perspectives of play, focusing on children age 2–5 years in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS). The report, ‘Teaching and play in the early years – a balancing act? A good practice survey to explore perceptions of teaching and play in the early years’ www.gov.uk/government/organisations/Ofsted addressed the ‘recurring myth’ that teaching and play are disconnected endeavours. Critical discourse and critical policy analysis are used to interrogate this report alongside interrelated texts, the socio-political context of production, the methods used to define policy versions of ‘good practice’ in play, and the resulting power effects within early childhood education (ECE). It is argued that this report exemplifies how the remit of Ofsted has extended to provide policy-led evidence that is based on the construction of ‘problems’ of practice, and the proposed solutions. The Ofsted version of teaching and play relies on circular discourses that reinforce the government’s standards and accountability agendas. This analysis reveals the extension from Ofsted’s remit of inspection, to a mandate for defining ‘quality’ and ‘good’ practice. These actions, relationships and processes constitute the ‘meaning-laden architectures’ [Fairclough, N., P. Graham, J. Lemke, and R. Wodak. 2004. “Introduction.” Critical Discourse Studies 1: 1–7] that connect discourse and power. Using the metaphor of a kaleidoscope, it is proposed that ‘Teaching and Play’, and related reports, represent unbalanced and unbalancing acts in which policy-led evidence, based on flawed and biased ‘research’, exerts power effects for children, families and practitioners.