Men in child care and early years education

I fear that the recent publicity drive from the CWDC has done little to argue the case for bringing in more men to work with young children. I agree with the aim of having a more balanced workforce, but the discussion makes me uncomfortable.

The first and most obvious argument is that children in nurseries need male role models, but only 2% of the workforce is male. Personally, I have never much liked this “role model” argument. It implies that a man working in a nursery is not simply there as a member of staff: he must represent men and masculinity in general. Yet many men who work with young children would feel uncomfortable about this. Some may wish to be there to play football, make things out of wood and have fun playing superheroes; some may not. Equally, there are many terrific female nursery staff who do all these things with children, and more.

A second proposition runs like this: we want men in childcare, so we must raise wages and improve conditions. But we should want these changes for a more straightforward reason: because the work is important and requires a high level of expertise. I can think of few graver insults to the 98% of staff working with young children who are women, than to say that pay should rise to bring in more men.

It is easy to be critical, and I agree with the CWDC’s aim of achieving a more balanced workforce. So I have two positive suggestions to make. Firstly, could we please stop talking about “childcare”? Childcare is just part of the job: the word erases the other parts, like early education, for example, and gives no hint of the complexity of the role. Childcare sounds like something that would come naturally to a woman, and would be a bit weird for a man to do. Different organisations have come up with alternatives: early education worker, family worker or pedagogue, for example. I am not sure that any of these is quite right, but I think they are all, without exception, a better alternative to a job called childcare. Secondly, we should value work with young children for its own sake, because it matters, and because it requires a high level of skill, commitment and expertise. If that encourages more men into the profession, so much the better.

Will making all children start Reception in September work?

In the interim report from the Independent Review of the Primary Curriculum, Sir Jim Rose is proposing that all children should start Reception in September. If implemented, this policy could have a significant impact in areas where younger children stay in nursery until the January or April before their fifth birthday.

It could have a really bad effect on children whose development makes them unsuited to the more formal world of learning that still characterises many Reception classes. It is important that we fully understand and act on the fact that the development of children in the EYFS will vary hugely from child to child. The maturity of summer-born children, and some others born earlier in the year as well, will mean that any assessment of their learning will show them to be significantly behind some of their peers. This is not a sign of poor teaching: it simply results from the variability of development and biological growth.

For some children, the main developments they will make in nursery and reception are to settle in, to get used to socialising with their peers and to become more confident communicators. These are perfectly adequate aims for early education, and we shouldn’t be shy of saying so. Educationally, there is no point in making the youngest and least mature children sit through formal whole-class lessons and fill in worksheets when they can hardly hold a pencil.

This doesn't mean that we should wait endlessly for children to be "ready" for certain aspects of learning. This happened to many children in the past, especially those from working class and ethnic minority families. They could spend years languishing in school without adequate teaching because they were judged to fall short of the required "readiness". Children will only be curious, excited learners if there are many stimulating experiences to be had, many opportunities to solve problems, enjoy stories, poems and songs, to move and dance, to draw write and paint, and to benefit from the skilled support and teaching of well-qualified staff.

The planned single point of entry to Reception classes will only be in children’s interests if we stop expecting all children to achieve arbitrary learning goals like writing a full sentence by the end of the summer term. We need to focus instead on the bigger principles and commitments in the EYFS and offer Reception children a carefully organised play-based, stimulating early education with sensitive care co-ordinated by a key person.