Chapter 2 Review of the literature

Chapter 2

Review of the literature

2.0. Introduction

Over the past 20 years, the early years workforce in the UK has experienced some significant changes in type, organisation and, therefore, quality of the ECEC services, whilst under the leadership of various consecutive governments. Miller and Paige-Smith in 2004 suggested that “practitioners working in today’s early years settings are facing many new challenges” (p. 122). These new developments have thus continued. Penn (2011) also proposes that the ECEC workforce is largely responsive to the shifting global perspectives of children and childhood. As such, there has been a significant increase in the extension of the role of day nurseries and other provision for under-threes, with the transferral from babies being cared for within the family home to the combination of joint family and nursery (OECD, 2012) and the substantial competing changes in policy. Finnegan et al., (2016) suggest that “more and more young children are spending at least part of their day at nursery” (p. 10). Goouch and Powell (2013) propose that it is a significant fact that, in England, historically, almost half of babies up to the age of eighteen months old were cared for by adults other than parents and that many young children today are now cared for in nursery baby and toddler rooms. Elfer and Page (2015) maintain that this is, however, a “relatively new” [shift] “compared with the long history of nursery provision for three and four year olds” (p. 1763).

(DfE, 2014, p. 10)

Yet, there is no universal agreement or explicit definition within the EYFS (DfE, 2014) to indicate what it is that constitutes “a quality learning experience” (DfE, 2014, p.10).

Interestingly, the Save the Children Report ‘Lighting up young brains; how parents, carers and nurseries support children’s brain development in the first five years’ (Finnegan et al., 2016) also refers to high quality childcare on several occasions, with no definition of what this is, except to call for an “Early Years Teacher in every nursery in England by 2020” (p. 13). This certainly suggests that professional graduates are perceived as a key influence in raising quality, with some naivety about the complexity of ECEC and training, noted by Adamson and Brennan (2014) when working with inadequately subsidised private providers.

Considering that more under-threes are spending additional time in nursery settings, whether this is in the PVI or maintained sector (Gooch and Powell, 2013), it is becoming increasingly important to ensure that any improvements in the quality of ECEC provision, practice and staffing has further impact upon language and early reading development.
Lawton et al., (2016) suggest that there is “strong evidence that good quality early education has a positive impact on children’s early language skills and that this impact is stronger for children from low-income families” (p. 5). Flewitt (2013) advocates that “literacy lies at the heart of education” and is unarguably the “foundation for life-long learning” (p. 1). Given that Hedgecock and Ferris (2009) and Lindon (2013) claim that the development of literacy is aligned with the development of early reading skills, good quality early education is critical in supporting early reading development. Indeed, Hulme and Snowling (2013) propose that “learning to read is a key objective of early education” (p. 2). In addition, Finnegan et al., (2016) argue that in order “to become good readers, children first need to become confident communicators, with clear speech” (p. 3) alongside strong levels of understanding. It is widely acknowledged that this vital early reading development is most significant within the early years.
A substantial aspect of the professional role of the EYT involves creating and developing a communication and sensory environment, rich in literacy experiences for children from birth to five years, which is seemingly woven into the Teachers’ Standards (Early Years) (NCTL, 2013). Similarly, ‘The Framework for the National Curriculum’ (DfE, 2011a) and ‘The Early Years; Foundations for Life, Health and Learning Independent Review’ (DfE, 2011b) both suggest that an important feature of effective and high quality provision is providing very young children with a rich language and literacy environment and curriculum. It would seem that the dominant discourse of quality and literacy are often associated in the context of early years.
Head and Palaiologou (2016) assert that “the term literacy relates to reading and writing” and suggest the “simultaneous development and mutually reinforcing effects” (p. 292) of these two aspects of communication. Although Glenn et al., (2006) state that most children learn to read, usually in their own time and without too much difficulty, reading for some children can be the most perplexing experience (Reid Lyon, 2006). In particular, this may be the case for those young children who have not been exposed to early reading practices. Reid Lyon states:
Nearly four decades of scientific research on how children learn to read support an emphasis on phoneme awareness and phonics in a literature-rich environment. These findings challenge the belief that children learn to read naturally.

(Reid Lyon, 1998, p. 14)

Both Glenn et al., (2006) and Reid Lyon (1998) agree that it is the pre-school stage in early years (nursery) that nurtures early reading development for young children. Indeed, it is acknowledged that a strong knowledge and understanding of early reading development is significant in developing and encouraging children as readers for life. Equally, Merchant (2008) advocates that “understanding reading development is of central importance to early years practitioners” (p. 81).