Rocky start for Ofsted’s Bold Beginnings Report
Ofsted’s Bold Beginnings report, published in November, upset many practitioners by calling the Reception Year a “false start” for many children. In recent weeks the debate has become heated, with critics and officials exchanging asides on social media.
The key points in the report for schools are:
- Refocusing the Reception Year on reading, including systematic synthetic phonics.
- Attaching greater importance to the use of numbers in building children’s fluency in counting, identifying small numbers of items, comparing numbers and solving problems.
- Ensure that when children are learning to write, resources are suitable for their stage of development and that they are taught correct pencil grip and how to sit correctly at a table.
- Devote sufficient time each day to the direct teaching of reading, writing and mathematics, including frequent opportunities for children to practise and consolidate their skills.
- Use the early-years foundation stage profile as a guide to end-of-reception expectations rather than to define what should be taught.
Commentary
The thrust of the opposition to Bold Beginnings is that it tries to make Reception teaching like Year 1, with less focus on play and more on maths and literacy. This is best illustrated by this week’s joint letter to the Guardian, signed by academics, MPs, senior trade unionists, and leaders of professional bodies and third sector organisations. The signatories charge that Ofsted visited only 0.25% of schools where they knew teaching would be compatible with the recommendations they wanted to make. An open letter, signed by more than 1,850 people, also calls for Ofsted to withdraw the report because of concerns that it undervalues play and play-based approaches to learning.
Sean Harford, National Director of Education at Ofsted has defended the report on Twitter, confirming that it will not be withdrawn and writing: “We can’t help it if some people don’t like it, but we’re not charged with being popular – we’re charged with assessing standards and reporting on where things are/are not working.”
Gill Jones, co-author of the report and Ofsted’s Early Education Deputy Director, said that the report did not pre-select schools but drew on those that taught reading, writing and maths exceptionally well. She said:
“The report drew on evidence from high-performing schools around the country which are delivering the best start for young children, particularly those from disadvantaged backgrounds. Our inspectors found that they offered a wide curriculum. What they had in common was that they taught reading, writing and maths exceptionally well.
“None of the schools were pre-selected on the basis of teaching methods. There is nothing in the report to suggest that Reception should be taught like Year 1. Rather, it makes clear that the schools achieving the best start for their pupils planned a good balance of class teaching, partner work and play.”