(p. 62), which is certainly the case relating to Ofsted and the buzzword” mismatch of quality indicators between the and ‘Ofsted Inspection Framework’ other quality indicators; (ECERS, ‘Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale’ Harms et al., 2011), the (ITERS, ‘Infant-Toddler Environment Rating Scale’ Harms et al., 2006) and Local Authority schemes, such as into ‘Step Quality’ (Lancashire County Council, 2015). In addition, Cottle (2011) argues, most early years practitioners identify that having a mutual understanding of the vision, aims and ethos of the setting and how best to support children as integral to quality. Ball (1994) quality early education as provision that leads to defines “high lasting cognitive and social benefits in (p. 18). To a certain extent the children” influential EPPE Project (Sylva et al., 2004) identified alignment between quality provision and improved outcomes for children. Additionally, the ‘Early Education Pilot for Two-Year-Old Children’ et al., 2009) highlighted that, (Smith when children attend the higher quality settings, there was a direct impact upon their outcomes, which implied that the quality of the setting is the significant factor. The (DfES, 2006) portrayed a direct ‘Children’s Workforce Strategy’ relationship between quality provision and well-qualified practitioners, which Murray (2013) suggested placed development of the workforce as central “the to raising quality in (p. 528). The prerequisite for children’s services” knowledgeable practitioners to ensure quality practice and provision is a recurring consistent theme throughout key documentation, research and reports (HMSO, 1990; Ball, 1994; Sylva et al., 2004; Smith et al., 2009; Mathers et al., 2012 and Nutbrown, 2012). Additionally, Nupponen (2006) considers that effective leadership is also a vital aspect of the quality discourse. Leadership in early years settings, however, is somewhat ambiguous and viewed as complex in and of itself by practitioners and researchers (Dunlop, 2008; Osgood, 2004). Muijs et al., (2004) also report that effective leadership influences outcomes for young children and families, yet proposed that research on the effects of quality leadership is somewhat limited in early years. Consequently, the (2012) ‘Nutbrown Review’
buzzword” (p. 62), which is certainly the case relating to Ofsted and the mismatch of quality indicators between the ‘Ofsted Inspection Framework’ and other quality indicators; ‘Early Childhood Environment Rating Scale’ (ECERS, Harms et al., 2011), the ‘Infant-Toddler Environment Rating Scale’ (ITERS, Harms et al., 2006) and Local Authority schemes, such as ‘Step into Quality’ (Lancashire County Council, 2015). In addition, Cottle (2011) argues, most early years practitioners identify that having a mutual understanding of the vision, aims and ethos of the setting and how best to support children as integral to quality. Ball (1994) defines “high quality early education as provision that leads to lasting cognitive and social benefits in children” (p. 18). To a certain extent the influential EPPE Project (Sylva et al., 2004) identified alignment between quality provision and improved outcomes for children. Additionally, the ‘Early Education Pilot for Two-Year-Old Children’ (Smith et al., 2009) highlighted that, when children attend the higher quality settings, there was a direct impact upon their outcomes, which implied that the quality of the setting is the significant factor. The ‘Children’s Workforce Strategy’ (DfES, 2006) portrayed a direct relationship between quality provision and well-qualified practitioners, which Murray (2013) suggested placed “the development of the workforce as central to raising quality in children’s services” (p. 528). The prerequisite for knowledgeable practitioners to ensure quality practice and provision is a recurring consistent theme throughout key documentation, research and reports (HMSO, 1990; Ball, 1994; Sylva et al., 2004; Smith et al., 2009; Mathers et al., 2012 and Nutbrown, 2012). Additionally, Nupponen (2006) considers that effective leadership is also a vital aspect of the quality discourse. Leadership in early years settings, however, is somewhat ambiguous and viewed as complex in and of itself by practitioners and researchers (Dunlop, 2008; Osgood, 2004). Muijs et al., (2004) also report that effective leadership influences outcomes for young children and families, yet proposed that research on the effects of quality leadership is somewhat limited in early years. Consequently, the ‘Nutbrown Review’ (2012)
120200555%20Thesis%20Final%20Karen%20Boardman%20April%202017.docx