The early years : lost in translation?

This thesis asks two questions:
1. What is the connection between Early Years policy development
and the lived experience of those professionals implementing it?
2. To what extent do Early Years professionals consider that
government policy has contributed to a better understanding of
Early Years practice for those implementing it, and towards a
consistent national view?
Recent years have seen a growing national focus on the Early Years of
education, centring on government policy. With this focus has come a
wide range of opinion as to what constitutes effective Early Years practice
and how successful current policies are in achieving appropriate provision
for young children.
This thesis first introduces the central themes of policy and lived
experience and sets out the rationale for the study. This is followed by an
overview of the contribution of six key historical figures in early childhood
education. The thesis moves on to discuss policy developments in
England since the Plowden report in 1967.
The thesis outlines and justifies the life historical methods for the study
which involved interviews with eight professionals in order to understand
how policy had impacted on their lives and work. Analysis of the data
includes the stories of all eight participants and my own story as an Early
Years teacher. The experiences of the eight participants were analysed to
produce five themes: Personal qualities, Teaching- an art not a process?,
Respecfful or subversive teachers?, - Views of childhood; Resilience.
These are discussed in the light of the participants' experiences and the
literature on effective proactive practice and policy. This discussion illustrates professional and personal struggles to 'fit policy to children's
needs through appropriate practice.
The thesis concludes with an update on policy since the completion of
fieldwork and a conclusion, returning to the research questions, which
shows two things: first that - so far as the participants in this study are
concerned - there is a mismatch between policy development and lived
experience, and second, that some Early Years professionals develop
government guidance and policy to contribute to a better understanding of
Early Years practice.