EYFS stages of development- help please!

[orangebowl]

Hi,
I'm hoping that someone can help me understand my sons report that has just been sent onto his new school nursery that he is starting in September. He is 3 yrs 5 months and the report gave him stages of development as follows:

• Personal, Social and emotional development 30-50 months
  
• Communication, language and literacy 22-36 months
  
• problem solving, reasoning and numeracy 22-36 months
  
• knowledge and understanding of the world 30- 50 months
  
• physical development 30-50 months
  
• creative development 22-36 months
  

does that mean that he behind in the 22-36 month sections because he is 41 months?

some things i have read say they should be entering reception at 30-50 months stage which suggests he is about average/ a bit ahead but not sure?

Thanks for anyone who can help me get to the bottom of it- everything online i am finding a bit confusing as lots refers to the 9 points system (which i have figured out is only really used from reception age),

thanks

[IOutrunBoltInMySpareTime]

With the tracking we do at my say nursery, we only put that a child is in an age band if they have been observed doing all the things in the previous band. Sometimes a DC does not want to, or hasn't been observed doing one or more of the criteria for an area. We then put them down as still in the lower age band, even though for some aspects they are working in the higher band. For example:
Bob loves looking at books, acts out scenes from favourite stories, has good fine motor skills, but does not want to write letters. He would stay in 22-36 month band until he is observed "attempting to form letters".
It's just a guide for the teachers, and it's better that they know where to support your DCs learning, than fail to focus on key skills they assume he already has.

[orangebowl]

ok that explains it a bit more then thanks. :) i might have a look at all the different points they are supposed to be able to do then
thank you

[teacherlikesapples]

Does your child have English as a second language? Have they given you any other feedback about his language use at nursery? I would consider 22-36 to be "below expectations" especially if the child is 41 months. As the previous poster alluded to, the band is selected when the child has been observed "mostly" achieving in that area. For this age most of CLL is Communication and language, literacy is only a very small part at this age such as giving meaning to marks and having favourite books, recognising familiar letters.

Ask for more feedback from his previous school- Do they have concerns or were they not able to collect enough evidence (bit concerning if he was there full time for more than a term) As for the 30-50, that is exactly where you would expect him to be for that age.

[orangebowl]

Thanks teacher no English is his first language. Tbh I dont really agree with their assessment which is why I was querying it. They have previously told me he is "clever" and ahead of his peers and I have noticed similar when we are with friends who have same age children ( promise that I am not. Wong biased!) so when I dropped him off this morning I asked if I should be concerned and she said "no not at all he is fine, it's just if there is one point then I can't move him on". Then she asked if it was numeracy I was concerned about as "that's a national thing and the whole class are behind on that". I asked about the creative one to which she said it was because he doesn't really like messy play. And with the literacy one, even though he can recognise most letters and write his name (looks a but funny but he can!) it was because he doesn't really like painting/ drawing. Does all that seem odd to you? He can count to 12 but not just recite it, he can easily "count out" objects/ items to 12. Points out letters as we walk around eg "look a "s", my name begins with a "s". His language is brilliant ( used "unfortunately" in the right way yesterday! ).

Anyway I asked his nursery teacher to let me know which points in each of the sections she had put him in 22 - 36 she didn't think he had covered and she said she would ( though looked a bit uncomfortable, some of the thugs she said suggested the assessment had been made a while ago).

I will report back! Thanks lots

[BeatriceBean]

I really wouldn't worry. The new nursery will make their own observations. So much at that age is based on letting them play. I doubt it will matter as all!

[teacherlikesapples]

TBH from that feedback it sounds like they are doing it wrong. The developmental matters are not intended to be used as a complete checklist.

So from what you are saying-

• Your son generally speaks in complete sentences (more than 3-5 words) Using more complex words and sentences.
  
• Recognises his name & forms some recognisable letters
  
• I am assuming he enjoys books (and can possible hold a discussion about what happens & maybe even has favourite books)
  
  This does not sounds like a child that should be 'graded' as 22-36 for CLL. The system is extremely flawed (and I am not a big fan of it), but it is supposed to give a guide, as to where children should be and help us identify those who need extra input.
  
  We have been told that any child we have 'assessed' as being behind expectation should have a clear support plan in place, to establish what the issues are and what our plan is to support them. So if we were sending a 41month old child to a new nursery with any 22-36 grading, they would have had referrals & an IEP in place.
  
  It is perfectly common for a 3 year old boy to not show any real interest in painting and drawing. However that is an issue for the teacher- not your son! If he is still developing the skills as you say- he should not be graded down because they haven't been able to captivate his interest properly yet.
  
  Her comment about numeracy is also ridiculous! Is this person actually a qualified early years teacher? It sounds as though they don't really have a good understanding of the EYFS or how this assessment is supposed to be used.
  
  So in summary- it's great that your child is going to a new nursery- I wouldn't really worry about the "assessments" done at the previous one. Take them with a grain of salt and keep doing what you are doing :)

[orangebowl]

sorry for the delay in coming back here today- work got a bit manic. So it seems that the mystery is over... got to Nursery to pick DS up and his key worker (with very serious face) basically told me she had screwed up. In their computer system, if there is say one point they havent achieved on a lower level- they keep them on that to make sure they remember to cover each one off, however he is most definitely at 30-50 for all 6 areas and she said he is actually acheiving some points in the 40- 60+ range. theyve given me an accompanying apology letter too. they are resending the report with a letter to his new school/nursery.

I have to say i wasnt kicking up a fuss, was just a bit confused as to how he could be behind!!

so thanks everyone- especially teacher for giving me the reassurance that I wasnt being ridiculous!

x

[JellyLellyBean]

You're definitely not being ridiculous. I know that because of inspections and expectations for paperwork in reception, teachers are often more aware of children's abilities than documentation represents. If ofsted were to come in and look at children's 'levels of development' they would expect to see evidence. Something such as on 31st of October Billy recognised all of the numbers to 20. Lots of schools require specific examples often with accompanying photos so that Ofsted doesn't penalise them for their record keeping. A teacher may know a child is capable of something but won't officially recognise that until they can document the evidence. I hope that's helpful.

[fraktion]

Glad it's been resolved. When I read the first post I bet myself it was a computer record keeping related issue.

I looked at various computer systems at the childcare expo and while they have their applications they are quite rigid. It wasn't the key worker's 'fault', although his report should have been rechecked if it was as far out as you say, it's a recognisable flaw in the system.

I would gently point out that they need to double heck and not rely on 'computer says so'.

[fraktion]

Sorry, unwittingly contributing to the resurrection of the dead