The government’s plan to nearly double the number of free nursery hours by 2020 is “massive”, says Maureen McKenna, Glasgow’s director of education and the president of education directors’ body ADES.
By 2020, the intention is that children aged 3 and 4 should spend as much time in nursery as their older peers spend in school. TESS understands that one education director doubts whether there are the builders to deliver all the new centres that will be required. It has been estimated that over 1,000 new nurseries will be needed; the SNP acknowledges the change is “this government’s most transformative infrastructure project”.
Another education director told TESS he saw the move as a lowering of the school starting age, which would have huge implications for the early primary curriculum.
But is the increase in the number of hours about childcare or education? The government argues that it’s both. They make the case for the move in talking about the economic benefits of getting more parents back to work, while also saying it will help to close the attainment gap.
Benefit vs cost
Primary headteachers believe the educational benefit cannot justify the cost, arguing that the move is expensive and the research shows that a part-time place at nursery has as much impact as a full-time place.
They also accuse the government of planning the expansion of free nursery “on the backs of a low-paid predominantly female workforce”.
Early years expert Iram Siraj reviewed the early learning and childcare workforce in Scotland in 2015 and estimated it would take around 15 years to achieve a good mix of graduate and other professionals “who are truly capable of improving children’s learning”.
She highlighted the current problem that girls unlikely to make the academic grades for other professions are steered towards hairdressing or childcare, describing it as “hair or care syndrome”.
The EIS teaching union, meanwhile, has long argued against the ever-diminishing number of teachers working in the early years.
Something needs to be done to make early years education fit for the 21st century
Something needs to be done to make early years education fit for the 21st century; in 2015, only 15 per cent of local authorities reported they had enough childcare for parents who work full-time.
In the town where I live, the local paper recently reported the closure of a private nursery - one of just two offering full days serving a town of 15,000. The rate paid by the council for three- and four year olds was not sufficient to cover the costs, the owner said.
It is generally accepted that council nurseries provide a higher standard of quality than private settings. But councils spend an average of £5.45 to provide nursery education - procuring it from a partner provider only costs around £4.58 per hour. Wages account for most of this difference and, well, you get what you pay for.
And the study Growing up in Scotland showed that the education of the people caring for children matters. At age 5, children with degree-educated parents were around 18 months ahead on vocabulary and around 13 months ahead on problem solving, compared with those children whose parents had no qualifications.
So if the government want to begin to close this gap, it will have to put its money where its mouth is and invest heavily in the early years.
Because while its plans are welcome, we all know it will not be the advantaged children who end up in sub-standard nurseries with poorly paid, underqualified staff who have no idea of just how important their job is.
@Emma_Seith
