Children in England are spending an increasing amount of their early lives in government-funded early years childcare. However, despite the strong consensus that high-quality childcare provision can generate significant and sustained improvements in child outcomes, there remains a lack of clarity as to what this high-quality provision looks like in practice.
By the time disadvantaged young people sit their GCSEs at age 16 they are, on average, 18.4 months behind their peers and around 40 per cent of the gap at age 16 has already emerged by age five.
Early years education can play an important role in tackling social disadvantage as well as boosting
children’s socio-emotional and cognitive development. Even after accounting for the home learning environment and other socio-economic factors such as family income and parent’s education level.
The goal of this review is to look at theories and practices related to structural elements of the early years provision to produce a clear and accessible summary of current research, and to identify areas where the evidence base is already strong and where significant gaps exist.
Key Findings:
- A formal degree with at least some specialised training in early childhood education or child development is useful in delivering the skills and knowledge that support optimal teacher behaviour. However, a clear strategy to deliver systematic, sustainable and transformative continuing professional development to staff working in different roles is also necessary for training to make a difference for quality and children’s outcomes
- The evidence on child to staff ratios is conclusive: having fewer children per staff leads to better children’s outcomes as it provides the opportunity for more individualised attention and leads to better teacher and child behaviour. There is not a golden rule to determine exact ratios for each age group, but research and practice agree on some general guidelines. While early years settings in England are required to adhere to ratios that are in line with these guidelines, ratios in Reception Year classes are generally much higher than what is usually recommended to maximise the impact on children’s outcomes
- International evidence strongly indicates that smaller class sizes for the entire school day are associated with improved children’s outcomes, greater educational effectiveness and other benefits at classroom level. Classroom size for children aged from birth to four is not regulated in England but practice seems to be in line with what the international evidence establishes as best practice. What stands in starker contrast is that for children in Reception Year, 30 pupils per class is the norm despite international evidence that clearly points to a maximum average size of 20 children per class for this age group
- The elements of the ‘iron triangle’ are tightly intertwined and the effects might get confounded. Each element may be a necessary, but often not sufficient, condition to improve the quality of provision. Relaxing regulations on any one of the three elements might lead to disappointing outcomes.
WEB LINK
Structural Elements Of Quality Early Years Provision: A Review Of The Evidence