« Previous | Contents | Next »
Listen
CHAPTER 10: EARLY YEARS AND CHILDCARE - A DEVELOPING PROFESSION
10.1 The main consultation stated:
The term "profession" is generally applied to a group of workers possessing a unique set of skills, knowledge and values. By definition, therefore, there is an element of exclusivity inherent in a profession - engagement in a task, or activities which require this specialised combination of attributes. The early years and childcare workforce encompasses a range of specialisms embedded in a unique core of knowledge, skills, values and commitments that focuses on children and young people's care, learning and development in the social contexts of their childhoods. Together with the qualification and regulation drivers mentioned above, these characteristics suggest that we are moving towards identification of a new profession, bringing together all those who work in early years and childcare. In addition, the workforce demonstrates key skills and abilities which are shared by other professions, such as communication and teamworking, evidence-based reflective practice, and working co-operatively with agencies, families and communities.
The main consultation asked:
Q19: THE REVIEW SETS OUT PROPOSALS INTENDED TO CREATE A SINGLE, COHERENT PROFESSION FOR ALL THOSE WORKING IN EARLY YEARS AND CHILDCARE. ARE THERE OTHER ACTIONS WHICH WOULD SUPPORT THE DEVELOPMENT OF A SINGLE PROFESSION?
Overall 79% of respondents to the main consultation addressed this question. Although some consultees re-iterated their support for actions already addressed in detail in the consultation document (e.g. qualification structure, better marketing, changing public perceptions and so on), others raised new ideas or provided more emphasis to topics which they felt had attracted too little attention in the document.
The action recommended most often in responses was to review pay and conditions across the sector. One consultee commented, " it is disappointing that the review's remit did not extend to this" ( LA). Many respondents from different categories called for sufficient funding to underpin the sector on a sustained basis, perhaps using ring-fenced monies. There was much support, again from across different respondent sectors, for the idea of a national pay structure for the sector, with salaries on par with those of workers in related professions. Many consultees stressed that the current disparity in pay and conditions between the independent sector and the public sector needed to be addressed. One respondent stated:
" Unless there is some alignment of this (pay) between the public, private and voluntary sectors things will not change very much" ( CP)
Another common theme was that there needed to be more effort within the sector to join up and work together. One respondent argued that a profession that views itself as disjointed will come across to others as fragmented (Rep). To counter this, consultees recommendations included more networking opportunities across the sector ( LA, CProv); sharing of good practice ( CProv); clarity of common goals ( LA); the development of partnership working (Rep, CProv); the introduction of job swapping opportunities and more emphasis on team working ( CP, CProv); more joint training across the profession (Rep, CP); and ensuring that each worker is clear on the part they play in the overall vision (Rep, Rep).
A few consultees were concerned that the proposals for a phased approach, particularly to registration requirements, might serve to divide the sector rather than pull it together (Rep, Rep, LA).
Many respondents, from different categories, stressed that in their view it is essential to include teachers and childminders within the proposals for a single coherent profession. Typical comments were:
" We believe it has been a serious omission to exclude other profession groups working in early years and childcare from this review" ( LA)
" This section of the consultation is woolly in is thinking mainly because of the specific exclusion of teachers from the remit" (Rep)
Another recurring recommendation was for continuing consultation with early years and childcare staff on issues affecting them in order to promote more ownership of the profession.
Other suggestions for actions were made by fewer consultees:
- Work on attitude change within the profession. Get umbrella and support organisations on board ( CP); encourage mutual respect (Rep, Rep); and value and recognise all parts of the profession (Indiv)
- Ensure that the profession has a clear vision and purpose ( LA, LA, LA, LA, Rep)
- Emphasise the professional status of the sector ( TP, LA, LA, Rep, CProv)
- Address the current diverse range of job titles within the profession ( LA, CProv, Indiv, Indiv)
- Establish new bodies/structures which relate to the sector as a whole: a professional institute, charter and an accreditation authority ( LA); a joint set of ethics, values and beliefs, a self-governing organisation with a figurehead (Rep); an advisory committee made of representatives from across the profession to feed into the SSSC regulatory process ( CP); and a single sector skills council for working with children and young people ( CP)
Finally, a few respondents sounded a note of caution regarding the creation of a single coherent profession. One view was that although this was a goal worth achieving, it should still take account of the diverse needs and aims and objectives of different parts of sector ( CProv). Others considered that aiming to include an age range of nought to sixteen years might be too broad for a single profession (Rep). Another argued that perhaps there was too broad a range of skills involved to harness within one profession ( LA). One consultee considered that a new profession was not required, but rather the development of a craft that operates in a professional manner without this happening in too rigid a manner ( CP).
10.2 The main consultation stated:
We believe that a key task is to develop a new language to capture the challenge and complexity of work within early years and childcare services. This needs to reflect a growing professional status across the workforce and to reveal the dynamic, two-way process with children and young people as they engage in and develop throughout their childhoods. It also needs to represent the whole sector and to articulate the common elements of the emerging profession.
In some countries where pedagogues have been around for a long time (like Sweden), they are now beginning to take even further steps to "integrate" the pedagogue with other professional groups and drop the name pedagogue altogether. The developing role of the pedagogue seems to reflect well the widening range of roles and responsibilities and the growing interconnectedness of Scotland's early years and childcare workforce with others in improving outcomes for children and their families. Whilst the concept of pedagogues is a useful example, it is an unfamiliar term. We need to find a language that works for Scotland.
The main consultation asked:
Q20: WHAT ARE YOUR VIEWS ON THE TITLE "PEDAGOGUE" WITHIN A SCOTTISH CONTEXT?
Overall, 86% of respondents to the main consultation addressed this question. One-quarter of these (from a range of respondent categories) indicated clearly that they supported the use of the title "pedagogue" within a Scottish context, albeit that it might take time for the term to be fully accepted. Of the others, three stated that they supported the concept but found the title difficult ( TP, LA, Rep). The remaining respondents did not support the use of the title or provided more general commentary.
10.2.1 Arguments in Favour of the Title "Pedagogue" within a Scottish Context
Several consultees reported that the term was already being used within their establishment. Recurring views were that the title reflected a child-centred educationalist paradigm, which reflected the value and status of those working with young children. It was welcomed as helping to signal the end of existing practice and a move to approaches more akin to those operating in European and Scandinavian countries ( CP, LA, Rep, TP).
The concept of the "pedagogue" was seen as progressive ( CP), reflective (Rep) and one which could break down professional barriers ( LA) by reflecting cross-sector roles and responsibilities ( LA). Others commented that it was important for Scotland to consider using a term which European colleagues had been using ( TP). A further view was that using this term could help with developing career pathways across countries ( TP).
General comments included:
" We welcome the word in its true literal sense as we use it ourselves in our existing practice!" (Rep)
" A comprehensive term which encompasses all we would wish for the future of Scotland's children and young people" (Indiv)
One consultee pointed out that other more familiar terms such as "curriculum" were not widely understood when they were first introduced ( LA).
10.2.2 Arguments Against use of the Title "Pedagogue" within a Scottish Context
Around one-third of all those who responded to this question (35%) argued clearly that the term was unfamiliar in Scotland and/or was not suitable within a Scottish context. Four respondents (Rep, Rep, LA, CP) requested that more debate take place around using the term.
Many different rationales were contained in responses against using the title "pedagogue" within a Scottish context. These are summarised below:
- Could alienate service users such as parents (Rep, Rep, CP)
- Some countries are already moving away from using the term (Rep, TP)
- Associated with the Greek word "pedantic" ( TP, CProv, Rep)
- Could become confused with the word paedophile ( CP, CProv)
" If people can confuse paediatrician and paedophile, the jump to pedagogue is a small one" ( CProv)
- Cumbersome/clumsy ( LA, CProv, CP)
- Imported from another country and context - more suitable elsewhere ( TP, TP, Rep, LA)
- Much contested term/ open to interpretation ( TP, TP, TP, Rep)
- Too formal ( CP)
- Would not attract men to the profession ( LA)
- Not down to earth/plain English/Academic jargon ( CP, LA, LA)
- Could restrict rather than assist an understanding of the profession ( TP, Rep)
- Could be cost implications of restructuring the profession around this (Rep)
- Old fashioned term and not relevant to Scotland ( CP, TP)
- Not sure what value it would bring (Rep)
- Support staff answering our phones would not like to use this term ( TP)
- Has no tradition of use in Scotland (Rep)
- Difficult for workers to identify with ( LA)
In addition, two consultees argued:
"…would require a fundamental shift socially and politically in the way we consider children's characteristics, needs, development, care and education" (Rep, Rep).
10.3 The main consultation asked:
Q21: HOW WOULD YOU LIKE TO SEE THE EARLY YEARS AND CHILDCARE WORKFORCE NAMED?
Around three-quarters (77%) of respondents to the main consultation addressed this question.
Some consultees argued in broad terms about what any name should capture and reflect. One suggested that as a starting point, questions should be asked such as, " What is the purpose of the workers in the sector and what are they trying to achieve?" (Rep). Others considered that the workforce should be consulted on a new name and perhaps allowed to vote on this ( CP, LA, Rep, Rep, CProv).
It was proposed that the name should reflect the roles of workers in the sector, their value and professionalism ( LA, LA, LA, CProv, Rep). Two respondents urged that the name be " warm" as well as " professional" ( CP, Rep).
According to some, the status of the workforce should be captured by their title ( LA, LA, CP), which should be easily recognisable ( LA) and acceptable to service users and to service providers (Rep). It should reflect the diversity of the work provided (from 0 - 16 years) ( CP), and, according to one consultee, preferably be a single word title ( TP).
One respondent called for a name which emphasised the dual role of educating and caring ( LA). Another considered that is should reflect the interconnectedness between families and staff (Rep). Some pointed out that the definitions already in use by the SSSC could provide the base for any new names (Rep, CP, CProv). One consultee suggested that the word " professional" be included in the title ( TP). Another urged that the word " teacher" should not be dismissed without some thought (Rep).
Whilst one consultee (Rep) stressed that the word " education" should be included in the title, and another requested the inclusion of " educator" ( LA), a contrasting view was that such terms were not appropriate as they did not reflect the image of a holistic approach ( LA). Others considered that the word " childhood" could usefully be incorporated into the workforce title (Rep, Rep, TP, TP, CP), or " children's learning and development" ( TP, Rep), or " nursery" ( LA). However, another respondent thought that the title " nursery nurse" was outdated ( TP), with another consultee arguing that it failed to reflect the full range of roles and responsibilities carried out ( TP).
Other words which various respondents disliked were " worker" ( LA, LA) and " care" ( TP). According to these consultees, the former word did not portray a highly professional and skilled workforce, and the latter was not helpful in raising the status of the profession. Likewise, according to two respondents, the word " childcare" suggests the impression of babysitting ( CP, LA). One consultee argued against the use of the word " practitioner" as being too vague ( LA).
Finally, one view was that care should be taken not to try to find too generic a term as this might dilute the diversity of roles and responsibilities across the workforce (Rep).
Most consultees who provided a view suggested specific terminology to adopt. Their numerous ideas are presented in Annex 4, with the top six most popular job titles below:
- Early Years and Childcare Professionals
- Early Years Workforce
- Early Years Professionals
- Early Years Educators
- Early Years Managers
- Early Years Practitioners
10.4 SUMMARY OF KEY POINTS
- Action (other than that proposed in the Review) recommended most often by respondents as supporting the development of a single coherent profession was a review of pay and conditions across the sector.
- Another common theme was that there needs to be more effort within the sector to join up and work together.
- Many respondents stressed their view that it is essential to include teachers and childminders within the proposals for a single coherent profession.
- A recurring recommendation was for continuing consultation with early years and childcare staff on issues affecting them.
- One-quarter of respondents who provided a view clearly supported the use of the title "pedagogue" within a Scottish context. Around one-third of respondents argued that the term was unfamiliar in Scotland and/or was not suitable within a Scottish context.
- A vast range of ideas for an appropriate name for the early years and childcare workforce was suggested, with several consultees stressing that any name should reflect the roles of the workers in the sector and their status. The most common six recommendations were: Early Years and Childcare Professionals, Early Years Workforce, Early Years Professionals, Early Years Educators, Early Years Managers and Early Years Practitioners.
- Many of the proposals for names included the term "early years" and/or the word "childhood".
« Previous | Contents | Next »