copy the linklink copied!Chapter 2. The context of early learning in England

This chapter provides contextual information that helps frame the interpretation of results from the International Early Learning and Child Well-being Study (IELS) in England.1 It provides demographic information about children and their families, describes the government’s strategic intent for early learning, overviews the types of early childhood education and care (ECEC) services available to parents and the levels of participation, and concludes with an overview of major issues and debates related to early learning in England.

copy the linklink copied!Profile of children under five and their families in England

A changing population

In 2018, there were about 8 million families – defined as a lone parent or a married, civil partnered or cohabiting couple – with dependent children in England (Carter, 2018_[1]). This included about 3.3 million families with a child aged four or under. Families without children were more common than those with children (Knipe, 2017_[2]). The proportion of children living in cohabiting couple families has continued to increase over the past decade, while the proportion living in married couple families has fallen. The proportion of children living in single-parent families has not changed significantly during this period.

Figure 2.1. Percentage of families with dependent children aged between 0 and 4 years, by family structure, United Kingdom

The total fertility rate2 (TFR) in England declined for six consecutive years between 2012 and 2018 (Littleboy, 2019_[3]). In 2018, the TFR for England was 1.70 children per woman, which was similar to the OECD average (OECD, 2020_[4]). The gradual decrease in TFR is consistent with trends across the OECD, as women continue to delay pregnancy and fertility rates among women aged over 40 continue to increase (OECD, 2018_[5]). The decrease in fertility rates in England was highest among women aged under 20, followed by women aged between 20 and 24. Women aged 30 to 34 currently have the highest fertility rates. This trend has raised the average age of first-time mothers in England to 30.5 years old.

Figure 2.2. Distribution of population by age and gender, England

Children under the age of five represent about 6 % of the total population in England (Park, 2019_[6]). During the 2011 census, over 75 % of these children were reported as White, 10 % as Asian and about 5 % each as Black or Mixed (Office for National Statistics, 2011_[7]). These proportions are consistent with the ethnic composition of children enrolled in state-funded ECEC. In 2018, children reported as White represented over 80 % of all children under the age of five in state-funded ECEC, children reported as Asian made up about 11 % and children reported as Black made up about 7 % (Department for Education, 2018_[8]). The vast majority of these children live in urban areas. In 2011, under 15 % of children between birth and the age of four lived in rural areas (Office for National Statistics, 2011_[7]).

Figure 2.3. Reported ethnicity of children enrolled in state-funded ECEC, England

Despite the decrease in the TFR, England’s population continues to grow, though at a slower rate than in the past decade (Blake, 2019_[9]). This is due to the combination of births and net migration. The population of England is around 56 million, with the total population in the United Kingdom around 66.4 million (Coates, Tanna and Scott-Allen, 2019_[10]). Of the total United Kingdom population in 2017, about 86 % were born in the United Kingdom and about 90 % were British nationals. A decrease in migration over the past few years has contributed to a slowing in population growth. Net migration to the United Kingdom – which accounts for just over half of the total annual population growth – was around 226 000 in 2019.

Figure 2.4. Non-British and non-UK-born populations, by region of birth and nationality, United Kingdom

Consistent with the demographic changes in the general population, about 30 % of children in England are exposed to a language other than English in their home by the time they enter primary school (Department for Education, 2019_[11]). The share of children exposed to a language other than English at home has steadily increased from about 12 % in 2006 (Department for Education, 2019_[11]). This is partly because of an increase in the birth rate of children born to non-UK-born mothers. The statutory framework for the early years encourages providers to help children use their home language in play and learning, while giving them opportunities to learn and reach a good standard in English (Department for Education, 2017_[12]).

Children living in poverty

Children are more likely than the overall population to be in a low-income household (Department for Work & Pensions, 2019_[13]). In 2018, 14 million people in the United Kingdom – about 22 % of the total population – were in relatively low-income households, after accounting for housing costs. This included about 4.1 million children – or about 30 % of all children. About 1.6 million children – or about 12 % of all children – lived in low-income households and material deprivation. Children with a single parent are nearly twice as likely to be in relative poverty when compared with children in two-parent families (Department for Work & Pensions, 2019_[13]).

Figure 2.5. Percentage of children aged four or under, by quintile of disposable household income, England

Income inequality in the United Kingdom remains relatively high (Webber and O’Neill, 2019_[14]). The average income of the richest quintile of households – before taxes and benefits – was GBP 88 800 per year in 2018. This was 11.2 times greater than the average income of the poorest quintile, which was GBP 7 900 per year. After accounting for both cash and in-kind benefits and taxes, the ratio between the average income of the top and bottom quintiles of households decreases to less than four to one, although the poorest quintile of households continue to pay the largest proportion of their income on indirect taxes. The United Kingdom’s Gini coefficient3 of 0.34 – compared to the 0.32 average across OECD countries – is below the high in 2009/10. The percentage of individuals in low relative income, however, has risen since 2013/14, when considering before and after housing cost. Incomes for individuals above the 90th percentile have been increasing, while those for individuals below the 23rd percentile have been decreasing (Department for Work & Pensions, 2019_[13]).

Parental educational attainment

The majority of adults in England have completed at least upper secondary school4 (OECD, 2020_[15]). Just under half of adults have completed up to upper secondary education, while about a quarter have completed at least a bachelor’s degree. Adults with children have a similar average level of educational attainment as the general population.

copy the linklink copied!

Table 2.1. Educational attainment of adults aged 16 to 65 by whether or not they have children, England
	All adults (%)		Adults with children (%)
Educational attainment	Male	Female	Male	Female
Below upper secondary	14	14	15	15
Upper secondary completed	47	46	48	47
Post-secondary, non-tertiary	11	13	11	14
Bachelor's degree and above	28	27	26	24
Source: Calculated using OECD (2016_[16]), Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) – Public data and analysis,www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/publicdataandanalysis/.
StatLink https://doi.org/10.1787/888934098364

The educational attainment of mothers is a particularly strong predictor of enrolment in ECEC (OECD, 2018_[17]). The children of parents in the United Kingdom who have not completed tertiary education5 are less likely to be enrolled in ECEC programmes (OECD, 2018_[17]). These children are also less likely to complete upper secondary school and advance to higher levels of education than those with at least one tertiary-educated parent.

Parental employment

Across OECD countries, having children decreases the probability that mothers will be employed on a full-time basis (OECD, 2016_[18]). While the overall employment rate of mothers and fathers has remained higher than that of men and women of similar age without dependent children, half of mothers in England work 30 or more hours in their regular working week compared to almost three-quarters of women without dependent children (Carter, 2018_[1]). This is despite mothers having experienced the largest increase in employment rates over the past two decades.

The current employment rate of 74.8 % for mothers in England – up from 61.9 % in 1996 – is lower than that of fathers, which is at 92.7 % (Vizard, 2019_[19]). Mothers with a child under five years old are also less likely than men and women with older children or those without children to be employed. The employment rate of mothers with children under five peaks at 69.4 % for mothers of children aged four, and increases from 74.7 % to 82.3 % as the child gets older. For fathers, the employment rate ranges from 90.3 % to 92.9 %, depending on the age of the child. The employment rate of mothers is partly driven by the costs of childcare negatively affecting maternal labour-market participation (Thévenon, 2013_[20]; Carter, 2018_[1]).

Figure 2.6. Employment rates for men and women with dependent children, by age of youngest dependent child, England

Statutory maternity leave in the United Kingdom is 52 weeks (Gov.uk, 2019_[21]), which is lower than the OECD average of 55.2 weeks (OECD, 2017_[22]). Maternity pay in the United Kingdom lasts 39 weeks and amounts to 90 % of the average weekly earnings for the first six weeks (Gov.uk, 2019_[21]). Mothers are then eligible for the lower amount of between GBP 148.68 and 90 % of their average weekly earnings for the next 33 weeks. Up to 50 weeks of leave and up to 37 weeks of pay can be shared between the mother and her partner (Gov.uk, 2019_[23]).

copy the linklink copied!Strategies to strengthen early learning in England

Statutory entitlements

While education is compulsory for all children between the ages of 5 and 18 in England, the early years have received increased attention over the past 15 years. The Education Act 2002 extended the national curriculum to cover children from the age of three until the end of reception year, when children are five years old. This legislation was later superseded by the Children’s Act.

The United Kingdom government’s Department for Education (DfE) has overall responsibility for the education system in England. The DfE aims to provide high-quality ECEC services that meet the needs of both parents and children. This involves preparing children for the transition to year one of primary school by prioritising skills that predict success, helping families with the cost and hours of eligible ECEC provision, and developing the ECEC workforce to increase the quality of ECEC provided (Department for Education, 2016_[24]). Policy actions also emphasise the quality of and access to ECEC services by disadvantaged children to improve their life chances and social mobility (Department for Education, 2017_[25]).

The Childcare Act 2006 (Childcare Act 2006_[26]) requires local authorities (LAs) to provide ECEC services free of charge. The aim of the act is to support LAs in improving the well-being of young children in their area and reducing inequalities. LAs are required to inform parents of the provision of childcare in their area, including funded early years places and how to find them. The Childcare Act also requires LAs to provide sufficient ECEC places so that parents may either work or participate in education or training opportunities that allow them to obtain work. Parents whose income is below a certain level are eligible for extra support to help pay for childcare costs through Working Tax Credit and Universal Credit.

The entitlement to ECEC currently covers two-, three- and four-year-olds at the pre-primary level (ISCED 06). Part-time provision of ECEC is free of charge for disadvantaged children from the age of two, and for all children from the age of three. Children are entitled to attend a primary school reception class full-time from the academic year after their fourth birthday.

The provision of free ECEC is justified by evidence from a number of influential English studies – including the Effective Provision of Preschool Education (EPPE) project (Sylva et al., 2010_[27]). These show that the benefits of high-quality early education start as early as two years old (Sylva et al., 2003_[28]; Smith et al., 2009_[29]). The EPPE project has provided some of the most comprehensive research on the determinants of early learning outcomes.

copy the linklink copied!

Table 2.2. Entitlements to free ECEC in England
Age	ECEC entitlement	Eligibility
2-year-olds	15 hours free (since September 2013; further extended in 2014)	Low-income families where parents earn GBP 15 400 or less (Universal Credit) or GBP 16 190 or less (Working Tax Credit) Children looked after by the LA Children from families in receipt of specified benefits
3- and 4- year-olds	Universal 15 hours free (since September 2010 – up from 12.5 hours)	All three and four year-old children
3- and 4- year-olds	Extended 30 hours free (since September 2017)	Children of parents/sole parent earning the equivalent of 16 hours a week at (or above) the national minimum or living wage, and each earning less than GBP 100 000 per year

Since 2010, all three- and four-year-old children have been entitled to 570 hours of ECEC per year (the equivalent of 15 hours of free education for 38 weeks a year). This is referred to as the universal funded early education entitlement. All four-year-olds have been entitled to funded early education since 1998. Entitlement for all three-year-olds started in 2004 – initially at 12.5 hours per week for 38 weeks of the year.

Take-up of the programme has been high, with about 95 % of three- and four-year-olds attending some form of funded early education in private, voluntary or independent providers or maintained (state-funded) nursery, primary, secondary and special schools. In 2018, there were about 80 000 providers offering 2.8 million registered childcare places between group-based providers, school-based providers and childminders (Department for Education, 2018_[30]).

For families where each parent or the sole parent earns the equivalent of the National Minimum Wage or Living Wage (or above) for at least 16 hours a week, the entitlement to ECEC doubled to 1 140 hours per year in 2017 (the equivalent of 30 hours of free education for 38 weeks a year) (Childcare Act 2016_[31]). This is referred to as the extended funded early education entitlement.

In addition to the universal entitlement for three- and four-year-olds, two-year-olds living in disadvantaged households – including those looked after by LAs and those from families in receipt of specified benefits – have been entitled to 15 hours of education for 38 weeks a year since 2013 (Secretary of State for Education, 2014_[32]). Two-year-olds from low-income families, those with special needs and those who have left LA care have also been eligible for funded ECEC since 2014 (Secretary of State for Education, 2018_[33]).

Framework for learning and development

The Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS) framework – put into law by regulations made under the Childcare Act 2006 and first implemented in 2008 – supports the quality of ECEC delivered in all registered settings. The EYFS sets out the values and goals of the ECEC system and the overall standards that providers must meet for children’s learning and development between birth and the compulsory schooling age of five. It also describes the assessment requirements that regulate what practitioners assess and how child progress is discussed with parents (Department for Education, 2017_[12]).

The framework sets out the requirements for ECEC in terms of learning and development areas, early learning goals and assessment arrangements. It also sets out the statutory safeguarding and welfare requirements. It applies to all maintained schools, non-maintained schools, independent schools, providers on the Early Years Register and providers registered with an early years childminder agency (Department for Education, 2017_[12]).

The EYFS does not impose a particular pedagogical approach. Instead, it describes best practices in ECEC, including guidance for staff on pedagogy. The EYFS recognises the importance of play-based activities and a balance of adult-led and child-initiated activities (Siraj-Blatchford and Manni, 2008_[34]; Siraj-Blatchford and Nah, 2014_[35]). It requires that learning take place through play-based activities that are a mix of both adult-led and child-initiated activities. Practitioners are also required to consider the individual interests and development of children when planning learning activities.

Practitioners are encouraged to adapt the curriculum to the needs of different children. A non-statutory guidance booklet provides examples of best practice for practitioners and inspectors (Early Education, 2012_[36]). The booklet helps professionals implement the EYFS statutory guidelines and informs them on child development and developmental outcomes through the early years.

The EYFS prioritises seven areas of learning that describe the expected level of development for children by the end of reception year (Department for Education, 2017_[12]). These are further divided into 17 Early Learning Goals. The EYFS promotes balance between the development of academic and literacy skills, social-emotional development and creative and physical development. The areas of learning consist of three prime areas: 1) communication and language; 2) physical development; and 3) personal, social and emotional development. There are also four specific areas: 1) literacy; 2) mathematics; 3) understanding the world; and 4) expressive arts and design. Providers are required to support children in these areas through activities and experiences.

copy the linklink copied!

Table 2.3. Early Years Foundation Stage framework
Area of learning and development		Early learning goal
Prime areas of learning	Communication and language	1. Listening and attention 2. Understanding 3. Speaking
	Physical development	4. Moving and handling 5. Health and self-care
	Personal, social and emotional development	6. Self-confidence and self-awareness 7. Managing feelings and behaviour 8. Making relationships
Specific areas of learning	Literacy	9. Reading 10. Writing
	Mathematics	11. Numbers 12. Shapes, spaces and measures
	Understanding the world	13. People and communities 14. The world 15. Technology
	Expressive arts and design	16. Exploring and using media and materials 17. Being imaginative

The EYFS promotes teaching and learning for children’s school readiness and progress through school and life. The three prime areas of learning encompass the key skills children need to develop and learn. They are also the basis for successful learning in the other four specific areas of learning.

The DfE has recently consulted on changing the learning and development requirements in the EYFS. The changes aim to strengthen language development in the early years. The revisions also aim to help reduce the emergent gaps in language and literacy skills between socio-economic groups.

Assessments of child progress

The DfE requires national assessments in the early years to help parents and practitioners better understand a child’s progress and future needs. This is supplemented by ongoing formative assessments that involve practitioners observing children to understand their current level of learning. Practitioners can then use this information to customise the child’s learning experiences moving forward.

Child assessments on the goals of the EYFS take place at two critical junctures: at two years old and before the child makes the transition to year one of primary school. The second assessment creates an individual EYFS Profile (EYFSP) for every child, which parents and primary school teachers may use to facilitate the transition between reception and year one.

Between the ages of two and three, practitioners review the child’s progress and provide parents with a written summary of their child’s development in the prime areas of learning. This progress check allows practitioners to understand the learning needs of each of the children in their care. The assessment also allows practitioners to identify children with special educational needs (SEN) so that they may receive appropriate support, after consulting with parents. This allows practitioners to work with parents to access services from other agencies as needed.

The EYFSP is an assessment of children’s early learning at the end of reception year. Reception teachers assess whether the child is meeting, exceeding or emerging towards the expected levels of development. They describe the child’s abilities in relation to three “characteristics of effective learning”: playing and exploring, active learning, and creating and thinking critically. The assessment consists of staff observations, interactions with children and discussions with parents. It provides an overview of a child’s ability and their progress against the early learning goals in the EYFS framework. Year one teachers and parents receive the results to support the child’s transition to the next phase of their education. The information is also used to create the national EYFSP data set.

Monitoring the quality of provision

England imposes a legal requirement – outlined in the EYFS framework – to monitor the quality of ECEC settings. The Office for Standards in Education, Children’s Services and Skills (Ofsted) and inspectorates of independent schools carry out inspections and report on the quality of provision based on the principles and requirements of the EYFS. Quality measures include the EYFSP outcomes and the results of Ofsted inspections.

Ofsted is a non-ministerial government department that inspects registered early years providers and schools – including public providers, independent for-profit and non-profit providers and home-based childcare. Ofsted is independent of the DfE and operates “without fear or favour” (Ofsted, 2017_[37]). It reports directly to a parliamentary select committee made up of members of parliament from different political parties.

Settings that wish to provide childcare – including childminder agencies – must register with Ofsted under sections 49 and 50 of the Childcare Act 2006. Once a provider is registered on the Early Years Register, Ofsted carries out regular inspections to evaluate the overall quality and standards of the early years provision – in line with the principles and requirements of the statutory framework for the EYFS. Inspections occur at least once in every inspection cycle.

Newly registered providers on the Early Years Register are usually inspected within 30 months of their registration date. Ofsted considers any information about early years providers that indicates they may be breaching the requirements of the EYFS and takes enforcement action where necessary. Ofsted publishes its inspection reports on the quality and standards of provision at www.gov.uk/ofsted.

Inspections evaluate the overall quality and standards of the early years provision, including the requirements on safeguarding and welfare as well as those on learning and development set out in the EYFS (Ofsted, 2015_[38]). Providers are judged on a four-point scale. They are rated as either “outstanding”, “good”, “requires improvement” or “inadequate”. Re-inspections occur within 12 months for providers judged as requiring improvement. For providers judged as inadequate, re-inspections occur within six months. Local Authorities (LAs) also support the improvement of settings through a variety of training schemes.

Inspectors make graded judgements on the following areas using the four-point scale (Ofsted, 2019_[39]):

quality of education
behaviour and attitudes
personal development
leadership and management

As part of the inspection, inspectors use their professional judgement to interpret and apply the criteria set out in part two of the inspection handbook. Inspectors consider some factors that may be particular to the setting they are inspecting. This includes whether they are inspecting a childminder with a small number of children or settings that care only for very young children. In all cases they consider the different ages and stage of development of the children attending.

Ofsted also assesses the quality of pedagogical practices. While Ofsted does not have a preferred teaching method, it has a definition of teaching, which is included in the early years inspection handbook (Ofsted, 2019_[39]). Inspectors evaluate the quality of teaching, learning and assessment, as well as their impact on children’s learning, development and well-being.

Parenting programmes

The approach that parents adopt to parenting – including the quality of the home learning environment – is a significant predictor of children’s life outcomes (Taggart et al., 2015_[40]). The quality of parenting affects children’s long-term physical, emotional, social and educational outcomes. An authoritative and cultivating parenting style – where parents are responsive to their children’s needs, bond with their children early using positive interactions and conversation and set high standards for behaviour and academic aspirations – can contribute to positive outcomes (Doepke and Zilibotti, 2019_[41]; Siraj-Blatchford et al., 2011_[42]).

Successful parenting programmes tend to focus on parental understanding of child development, raising the confidence of parents in their role, helping both parents become actively involved in their child’s development and upbringing, and reducing stress and tension within the family. Parental circumstances, however, can affect the approach taken. Lack of income, stress and mental health issues, among others, can make it more difficult for parents to bond with their children and use positive parenting practices. Targeted parenting programmes – including good home-to-school transition programmes – can help contribute to better outcomes, particularly for children at risk, those with special needs or those for whom English is not a first language (Clarke and Younas, 2017_[43]).

The government provides information resources on parenting and the early years. Parents-to-be and new parents have access to digital services through emails, videos and texts that offer advice based on the age of the child (Clarke and Younas, 2017_[43]). The DfE also publishes a number of resources – including the “What to Expect, When?” handbook – that focus on the first five years of child development for parents.

LAs – charged with the health and education of children from birth to five – have been able to increase their outreach by coupling dissemination services. Sure Start – a programme targeted at parents and children under the age of five – for example, requires each children’s centre to have access to at least one named health visitor. Some LAs also deliver parenting programmes through their children’s centres, depending on the local assessment of need and commissioning of services.

copy the linklink copied!Early childhood education and care provision in England

Settings that offer ECEC

The childcare market in England is a mixed economy. While the private, voluntary and independent (PVI) sector provides most government- and parent-funded formal ECEC, state-funded nurseries and early years provision within state-funded schools also provide places for children (Patel, 2019_[44]).

Early years provision in England takes place in a wide variety of settings. PVI settings and childminders can offer both government-funded provision and parent-paid provision (Department for Education (DfE), 2017_[45]). PVI settings include day nurseries, independent nursery schools and nursery classes in independent schools, as well as childminders, playgroups, and children’s or family centres. These settings are eligible to provide government-funded ECEC if they are registered on the Early Years Register. Maintained nursery schools and nursery classes in maintained primary schools and academies provide government-funded ECEC for two-, three- and four-year-olds. Children are also entitled to start full-time reception class in a maintained primary school from the academic year after their fourth birthday. No entitlement to free provision exists for children below the age of two, although parents may choose to use Tax-Free Childcare or the childcare element of Universal Credit to support the costs of ECEC provision.

By the end of 2018, about 77 000 ECEC providers were registered in England with Ofsted (Patel, 2019_[44]). These constituted group-based providers who operate in non-domestic premises, childminders (who usually operate in domestic settings) and school-based providers. School-based providers included about 7 300 schools with reception but no nursery provision, 9 200 providers with reception and nursery provision, and 400 maintained nursery schools.

ECEC providers offer an estimated 2.8 million registered childcare places (Department for Education, 2018_[46]). This number has decreased over the years as the number of children in the relevant age range in the overall population has also decreased. Group-based providers currently offer the largest average number of places at 45. School-based nurseries offer about 39 places on average, with reception classes offering 42 places on average. Childminders offer on average 6 places due to the maximum statutory requirements, which explains why childminders constitute the largest share of providers but a relatively lower share of places.

About 430 500 early years staff were employed across group-based or school-based settings and childminders or childminding assistants to provide ECEC services in 2018 (Department for Education, 2018_[46]). Group-based providers employ more than half of the early years workforce. Some 30 % work in reception and nursery settings and 11 % work as childminders or assistants. Some 12 % of childminders employ at least one assistant.

Figure 2.7. Proportion and number of childcare providers that receive government funds, by type of setting, England

ECEC providers can be grouped into three settings: 1) formal in PVI settings; 2) formal in maintained settings; and 3) formal in domestic settings.

Formal PVI settings include those outside the state sector, such as voluntary sector preschools and privately run nurseries. While all formal settings are eligible for government funding, private nurseries are for-profit settings that typically offer the free entitlements. Voluntary sector providers include not-for-profits and social enterprises. They tend to operate out of community or school sites rather than premises they own.

Maintained settings include state nursery and reception classes within state primary schools, and maintained nursery schools. The latter typically operate in areas of greater disadvantage to support ECEC in these areas (Paull and Popov, 2019_[47]).

Formal domestic settings include childminders. These make up the largest share of the market in terms of absolute number of providers. A childminder typically works in their own home looking after children for a fee. With the restriction of 3: 1 child-to-staff ratio requirements for children under five, however, the share of places with childminders is limited.

Informal domestic settings include relatives, friends or nannies. These are not eligible for government funding (Naumann et al., 2013_[48]). Children are also under informal care if looked after by grandparents, neighbours or other home carers. Grandparents remain the largest informal provider of ECEC in England (Department for Education, 2019_[49]).

A qualified workforce

Practitioners need a number of professional competences and skills to offer high-quality learning opportunities to young children (Stuhlman and Pianta, 2009_[50]). The statutory EYFS framework sets out the requirements for staff-to-child ratios in early years settings and the qualifications practitioners must hold (Department for Education, 2017_[12]). This approach recognises that high-quality pedagogy is linked to both curricula and staff qualifications.

England has continued to raise its staff qualification standards. England requires that ECEC providers meet statutory qualification requirements. In group settings, managers must hold at least a full and relevant level 3 qualification. Half of all other staff must hold at least a full and relevant level 2 qualification. The manager must also have at least two years of experience working in an early years setting or have at least two years of other suitable experience. While there is no requirement for graduates in PVI settings, staff who lead classes in maintained settings are required to have qualified teacher status (QTS) (Department for Education, 2017_[12]), which may be either level 6 or 7.

Childminders must also complete training to understand and implement the EYFS before they can register with Ofsted or a childminder agency. Childminders are accountable for the quality of the work of any assistants and must be satisfied that assistants are competent in the areas of work they undertake.

England’s average child-to-staff ratio for preschool-aged children is lower than the OECD average, which ranges from 12: 1 for pre-primary education and 8: 1 for early childhood education (OECD, 2015_[51]; OECD, 2017_[52]). While there are statutory staffing requirements in England, providers tend to operate with fewer children per staff member than is required. The average child-to-staff ratio for three- and four-year-olds at private and voluntary providers is 6: 1, compared to a statutory minimum of 8: 1. For three- and four-year-olds at school nurseries, the average is closer to 10: 1, while the statutory minimum is 13: 1. For two-year-olds, the average child-to-staff ratio is 3: 1, and the statutory minimum is 4: 1 at private and voluntary providers.

Figure 2.8. Proportion of staff qualified to different levels, by type of setting, England

Staff-child ratios affect teaching quality and child development (Love et al., 2003_[53]). Higher staff-child ratios are especially beneficial for younger children (Sylva et al., 2010_[27]). A lower number of children per practitioner makes it possible for staff to pay more individualised attention to each child and allows for more interaction. In England, however, higher staff ratios in settings also serve to partly offset the pay and pension contributions that would be required for staff with higher levels of qualifications.

Training an ECEC workforce

Qualified teacher status (QTS) is required to lead classes in primary school from nursery to year six. Practitioners in England must meet the teachers’ standards set out by the DfE in order to be accredited with QTS. The teachers’ standards define the minimum level of practice expected of any qualified teacher. While QTS is mandatory for appointment in a maintained school, the majority of teachers in academies also have this qualification.

The DfE defines the minimum requirements for an early years educator qualification. These qualifications set out the minimum knowledge, understanding and skills that an early years practitioner needs to support young children from birth to the age of five. Practitioners need to meet the level 2 and 3 qualifications to be included in the required staffing ratios specified in the EYFS framework.

At level 2, practitioners need to demonstrate proficiency in: 1) knowledge of child development; 2) safeguarding; 3) health and safety; 4) well-being; 5) communication; 6) support in the planning and delivery of activities, purposeful play opportunities and educational programmes; 7) support of children with special educational needs and disabilities; 8) own role and development; and 9) working with others – parents, colleagues and other professionals (Department for Education, 2018_[54]). Required competencies at level 3 include: 1) support and promote children’s early education and development; 2) plan and provide effective care, teaching and learning that enables children to progress and prepares them for school; 3) make accurate and productive use of assessment; 4) develop effective and informed practice; 5) safeguard and promote the health, safety and welfare of children; and 6) work in partnership with the key person, colleagues, parents and carers or other professionals (Department for Education, 2019_[55]).

Most programmes that accredit QTS involve both academic qualification in education and professional accreditation. Completing primary initial teacher training – either via a bachelor of education undergraduate degree (level 6) or a post-graduate certificate of education (level 7) – is the most common graduate route into early years teaching in England.

In addition to the QTS route, professionals working in ECEC in England can qualify with early years teacher status (EYTS). There are three options available to complete early years teacher training that lead to EYTS on successful completion. These include undergraduate entry, graduate entry and graduate employment-based entry. Graduates with prior experience working with children under the age of five are also able to take an assessment to demonstrate that they meet the teachers’ standards (early years) without the need to undergo training.

The ECEC workforce in England continues to be predominantly female (98 %) (OECD, 2017_[56]). While the ratio of female teachers across other OECD countries varies between a limited window of 87 % and 99 %, the participation of male teachers in ECEC in England is lower than the OECD average. This may be due to the status of the profession, the perceived social roles of men and women, and the hesitance of certain parents to enrol their children in classes led by men (Warin, 2018_[57]). Teacher salaries in England are similar across pre-primary, primary and secondary levels (OECD, 2019_[58]). Salary is therefore unlikely to explain differences in the ECEC workforce gender gap.

Financing ECEC provision

The state, private individuals and organisations finance ECEC services in England. Funding of entitlements is a key lever through which the government incentivises provision. Public spending on ECEC is around 0.7 % of gross domestic product (GDP), which equates to about GBP 15 billion. Actual spending per enrolled child aged between three and five is about USD 7 500 (in USD PPP),7 which is close to the OECD average of about USD 8 000 (OECD, 2019_[58]).

Entitlements have boosted the demand for places by parents. Two-thirds of parents cite childcare as a critical factor in enabling them to participate in either work or academic study (Department for Education, 2018_[30]). Parents tend to keep their children at the same setting based on convenience and the child’s familiarity with surroundings and staff (Department for Education, 2015_[59]). Entitlements also provide a sustainable source of income for ECEC providers. Providers tend to operate with a mix of age groups – partly for the funding from caring for these different groups (Blainey and Paull, 2017_[60]) – preferring children to remain at their setting until they are eligible for a place in a school reception class.

The DfE allocates entitlement funding to LAs so that every three- and four-year-old – as well as eligible two-year-olds – is entitled to a part-time place (the equivalent of 15 hours a week for 38 weeks a year) in an ECEC setting (Agency, 2018_[61]). Three- and four-year-olds of working parents are entitled to the equivalent of an additional 15 hours per week (for 38 weeks per year). LAs then allocate funding – in compliance with regulations set by the DfE – to an estimated 70 000 providers who offer the free universal and extended entitlements.

In 2017, the DfE introduced a new LA funding formula for ECEC to improve the distribution of funding. The early years national funding formula (EYNFF) funds three- and four-year-olds, while the two-year-old formula funds ECEC for two-year-olds. In 2019-20, the government aims to allocate around GBP 3.5 billion to these early education entitlements.

The EYNFF for three- and four-year-olds consists of a universal base rate plus factors for additional needs that include measures for deprivation, disability and English as an additional language. The EYNFF also includes an area cost adjustment multiplier to reflect variations in local costs for staff and premises. The funding allocation to an LA is based on the LA’s hourly funding rate and the number of entitlement hours taken up by three- and four-year-olds in the LA.

Figure 2.9. Early years national funding formula for three- and four-year-olds

LAs are required to pass at least 95 % of the EYNFF budget they receive to ECEC providers. LAs are responsible for setting the funding for individual ECEC providers using a local funding formula. To create a more level playing field, LAs are required to provide a universal base rate to all providers in their local formula. On top of the base rate, additional funding can be paid to providers to reflect local needs through the use of a mandatory supplement for deprivation, and other discretionary supplements for quality, flexibility of provider opening hours, rurality or a sparsity of providers, and providing for English as an additional language. LAs are required to establish a SEN inclusion fund to support early years providers in meeting the needs of individual children with SEN.

The government provides two financing mechanisms in addition to the universal and extended ECEC entitlements: Tax-Free Childcare and the childcare elements of Universal Credit. Tax-Free Childcare is available for 0-12 year-olds. It provides a GBP 2 supplement from the government for every GBP 8 parents pay into an online account – up to a maximum contribution of GBP 2 000 per child per year. The childcare element of Universal Credit reimburses up to 85 % of childcare costs based on parental earning from paid work, monthly childcare costs and the number of children in the family.

Settings receive the majority of their income from a mix of parent-paid fees and the free entitlement funding (Paull and Xu, 2019_[62]). More than half of the income of all school-based providers comes from the free entitlement, although the exact proportion tends to vary by the type of setting. Private providers tend to receive more than others from parent fees, and maintained settings receive more from other contributions. Childminders receive over three-quarters of their income from parent fees and less than a quarter from free entitlement funding.

Figure 2.10. Income sources of ECEC settings, by type of setting, England

The mix of funding sources for settings also depends on the age of the child and the number of hours they are enrolled in ECEC (Paull and Xu, 2019_[62]). The free entitlement to 15 hours a week for eligible two-year-olds accounts for about one-third of income for centres that cater for that age group. The universal entitlement to 15 hours of childcare for all three- and four-year-olds – and the extended entitlement to 30 hours for eligible children – accounts for more than three-quarters of income for centres that cater for those age groups. Over half of settings also have additional charges for items such as meals, trips and extra activities. These charges average between GBP 0.08 and GBP 0.14 per childcare hour (Paull and Xu, 2019_[62]).

The cost of provision is mostly driven by the staffing choices that providers make, and how quickly that can change based on fluctuating demand. Staff costs make up about 80 % of overall costs for group-based and school-based providers, although this is lower for childminders and informal settings (Department for Education, 2018_[30]). Settings with higher average staff qualifications, lower child-to-staff ratios and smaller group sizes have higher costs. Costs also vary based on occupancy. Hourly costs for ECEC have risen at a faster rate than can be explained by inflation and minimum wage and pension contribution policy changes over the past few years (Paull and Xu, 2019_[62]).

copy the linklink copied!Participation rates in ECEC

Expanding participation for all children in ECEC

Although participation in ECEC services is voluntary, most children attend some form of full- or part-time setting. Very few children remain at home until the start of compulsory primary education. The age of compulsory primary education begins the term after the child’s fifth birthday, but all children are entitled to a place in primary reception class from the term after their fourth birthday. In 2018, 95 % of all four-year-olds, 92 % of all three-year-olds and 72 % of all eligible two-year-olds participated in some form of funded ECEC (Department for Education, 2018_[8]). About 76 % of eligible children benefitted from the extended 30 hours of ECEC provision.

Most two- and three-year-olds who take up state-funded ECEC provision attend a setting run by private and voluntary providers (Department for Education, 2018_[8]). About 82 % of two-year-olds with a funded ECEC place attend group-based private and voluntary providers, and an additional 4 % are under the care of childminders. About 61 % of three-year-olds with a funded ECEC place attend private and voluntary providers, and an additional 4 % are under the care of childminders. The share of children attending a maintained nursery or nursery classes in primary schools has decreased slightly over the last few years.

Most three- and four-year-olds who benefit from funded ECEC places attend group-based provision in a nursery class, day nursery or playgroup. Because most children make the transition from ECEC to school reception class at the beginning of the school year in which they turn five, a lower proportion of four-year-olds attend private and voluntary providers. Some 63 % of four-year-olds attend reception classes in primary schools, and an additional 13 % of four-year-olds attend nursery classes in primary schools.

Figure 2.11. Take-up of state-funded universal early education among 3- and 4-year-olds, and take-up of state-funded early education among eligible 2-year-olds, 2011 to 2018, England

Figure 2.12. Funded ECEC places, by type of setting and age of child, England

The quality of funded early education settings – as reported by Ofsted – is high (Department for Education, 2018_[8]). Only 1 % of children benefitting from funded ECEC places attend a setting rated as inadequate. The majority of children attend settings rated as good, and about a quarter attend a setting rated as outstanding.

Children in England receive their entitlement to government-funded ECEC an average of about four days per week, with variation based on age (Department for Education, 2019_[49]). This ranges from an average of three days for eligible two-year-olds to four days for three- and four-year-olds who benefit from the universal and extended entitlements. Parents may opt to enrol their children in more than one ECEC setting to cover the days and times for which they needed childcare. About 6 % of children attend two or more providers during the week.

The composition of providers in the market and the hours taken up by parents differ between regions and local areas. Even within postcode areas, large differences can exist between the costs of childcare, partly due to the supply mix. Preschool-aged children are also more likely to require full-day care, for which private providers are the most common and usually the most expensive option.

The most common reported parental constraint on using childcare is affordability (Department for Education, 2018_[30]). Provider supply, trust or quality appear to be less of an issue. This has implications for access by income level. Some 62 % of children aged 0 to 14 living in the least deprived areas receive formal childcare, compared to 44 % of children living in the most deprived areas. Most parents who do not use childcare choose to look after their children themselves.

Figure 2.13. Ofsted ratings of settings that provide funded ECEC places, by age of child

Figure 2.14. Average number of hours per week children under 5 spent in an ECEC setting, by type of provision, England

Figure 2.15. Proportion of funded places, by type of setting and region, England

copy the linklink copied!The quality of early childhood education and care services and their impact on learning outcomes

Outcomes across the system

England’s national assessments – as well as its participation in international assessments – provide an informative snapshot of learning outcomes at different critical stages. The assessments emphasise England’s commitment to measuring pupil progress throughout the education system. In addition to learning outcomes, the assessments gather contextual information about students, teachers, schools and systems that lead to adaptations in teaching methods to improve learning and inform evidence-based policy. Assessments of learning in key subjects – such as language, mathematics or science – are a good proxy for the performance of the education system as a whole. Focusing on the quality of education through measures of learning is also likely to encourage other desirable outcomes.

The share of children with at least the expected level of development in the EYFSP early learning goals has been increasing since 2013 (Department for Education, 2018_[63]). At the age of five, about 70 % of children in England had achieved at least the expected level of development in 2018 based on practitioner observations. This had increased from about 49 % in 2013 and 69 % in 2017. While girls continue to score higher than boys, the gender gap in the expected level of development measure has been gradually decreasing each year, with boys improving faster than girls in all key measures.

Figure 2.16. Percentage of children achieving at least the expected level in the EYFSP, by gender, 2013 to 2018, England

In 2018, 82 % of pupils in England passed a national phonics screening check at the end of year one – at about the age of six (Department for Education, 2017_[64]). The check consists of students reading aloud 20 words and 20 pseudo-words to their teacher. In 2012, only 58 % of children in year one had passed the check. This translates to 163 000 more six-year-olds on track to become fluent readers in 2018 than in 2012. By the end of year two, 92 % of children had met the expected standard in 2018 – a 10 percentage point increase between year one and year two.

Year five children – between the ages of nine and ten – in England score significantly higher than the international median on the Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS) (McGrane et al., 2017_[65]). They also place among the highest performers in Europe. PIRLS provides internationally comparable data on student reading performance after approximately four years of formal primary schooling. As in other participating countries, the performance of students in England varies by the student’s home learning environment – measured through factors that include the number of books the student has in their home – as well as their socio-economic status – measured by free-school-meal eligibility. A significant gender gap exists in England, with girls outperforming boys, although the size of the gap is consistent with the international median.

Students in years five and nine in England also scored significantly higher than the international mean in mathematics and science in the 2015 Trends in International Mathematics and Science Study (TIMSS) (Greany et al., 2016_[66]). TIMSS provides internationally comparable data on the performance in mathematics and sciences and attitudes of students in year five (between the ages of 9 and 10 years old) and in year nine (between the ages of 13 and 14). England’s performance over the last 20 years has gradually improved in both subjects and across age groups, placing it in the second highest-performing group of countries. However, there continue to be differences in performance by socio-economic status. England has a relatively large performance gap between the average achievement of disadvantaged and advantaged students when compared to similar countries.

At the age of 15, students in England scored above the OECD average in science, reading and mathematics (OECD, 2019_[67]). Average scores have changed little since 2006, although mathematics scores did rise between 2015 and 2018. Students in England who attended ECEC for two years or more scored higher on the 2018 PISA tests than their peers, even after accounting for socio-economic background.

There is a large performance gap between the top and bottom 10 % of students based on their 2018 PISA outcomes in England (Sizmur et al., 2019_[68]). This gap amounts to over eight years of schooling in reading, mathematics and science. This gap is larger than the OECD average in science and similar to the OECD average in reading and mathematics. Large differences in performance also exist across other characteristics, including socio-economic status, ethnicity and migrant background. There is a difference of almost three years of schooling between students in the most and least advantaged socio-economic quartiles. White students are more likely to score higher than their Black or Asian peers. Students from immigrant backgrounds are more likely to score lower than their peers who were born or raised in the United Kingdom. Similarly, there is about a two-year gap across subjects between students in schools rated as outstanding by Ofsted and those rated as inadequate/requiring improvement (Jerrim and Shure, 2016_[69]).

Figure 2.17. Performance of students on international assessments of science, reading and mathematics, 1995 to 2019, England

Home environment and student well-being

The Effective Pre-school, Primary and Secondary Education Project (EPPSE) longitudinal study emphasises the influence that the home environment has on outcomes up to age 16 (Taggart et al., 2015_[40]). Parent educational attainment is the strongest predictor of performance in GCSEs, while socio-economic status predicts self-regulation and prosocial behaviour. Disadvantaged families had lower full GCSE grades in English and mathematics, and neighbourhood disadvantage predicted lower GCSE scores and poorer development in self-regulation and prosocial behaviour.

Attending preschool predicts both educational attainment at age 16 and future lifetime gross earnings (Taggart et al., 2015_[40]). Attending preschool predicts a higher likelihood of an academic pathway (4+ A/AS levels) and a lower likelihood of opting for a less academic route. Using GCSE scores to predict future lifetime earnings, attending preschool also has an expected return of GBP 26 788 for an individual and GBP 35 993 for an average household (Cattan, Crawford and Dearden, 2014_[70]). Children who attend a higher quality preschool setting are expected to earn GBP 12 335 more over their lifetime.

These factors all contribute to the perceived well-being of students as they progress through their education. 15-year-olds in England were less likely to report that they were satisfied with their lives than 15-year-olds across the United Kingdom or across the OECD countries (OECD, 2019_[71]). Boys and students from advantaged families were more likely to report being very satisfied with life. Similarly, while the majority of 15-year-olds in England report feeling that they belong in their school, that share is lower than the OECD average. Children from disadvantaged families are more likely to report feeling that they do not belong than their peers from more advantaged families. Fifteen-year-olds in England are also more likely to report being exposed to bullying than the OECD average, with over a quarter reporting that they have been bullied at least a few times a month. Schools that reported a low incidence of bullying scored 38 points higher in PISA 2015 than schools reporting high levels of bullying (OECD, 2017_[72]).

copy the linklink copied!Policy issues and debates around early learning

Perpetuating socio-economic disadvantage

The community in which children grow up continues to influence the quality of schools they attend and, ultimately, their life outcomes (Department for Education, 2017_[25]). Children from disadvantaged families often enter primary school with large gaps in their cognitive and social-emotional development when compared with their more advantaged peers. For example, 45 % of children eligible for free school meals do not have the knowledge, skills and understanding expected for their age by the time they finish reception year (Department for Education, 2018_[63]). Among disadvantaged students, 72 % meet the expected phonics standard at the end of year one, compared to 85 % of all other pupils.

The gap in performance persists – and grows – during the later school years (Melhuish, Gardiner and Morris, 2017_[73]). Only about half of all children who had not reached the expected level at the age of 5 went on to achieve the national benchmark in reading, writing and mathematics at the age of 11 (Taggart et al., 2015_[40]). Children with poor vocabulary at the age of 5 are also more than twice as likely to be unemployed at the age of 34 (Law et al., 2009_[74]).

The gap in performance becomes increasingly hard – and expensive – to close as the child grows older (Cunha et al., 2006_[75]; Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University, 2016_[76]). On average, disadvantaged children lag the equivalent of 4.3 months of learning behind their more advantaged peers by the end of reception year (at around the age of 5). This gap more than doubles to 9.4 months by the age of 11 and grows to 18.4 months by the age of 16 (Crenna-Jennings, 2018_[77]).

Children from disadvantaged families or those with an immigrant background benefit the most from attending quality ECEC (OECD, 2019_[17]; Cattan, Crawford and Dearden, 2014_[70]). This is especially true for those who lag behind their peers from an early age (Speight et al., 2015_[78]). While the benefits of attending ECEC apply to all children, those from disadvantaged families have a lower starting base, are less likely to attend childcare settings and, therefore, have more to gain from ECEC (Melhuish, Gardiner and Morris, 2017_[73]). Children also benefit most from classrooms that are a mix of different socio-economic groups, rather than homogenously disadvantaged groups (Melhuish et al., 2008_[79]).

Due to the compounding effect of disadvantage, children from disadvantaged families do not receive the same quality of home learning environment as their more advantaged peers (HM Government and National Literacy Trust, 2018_[80]). Three-year-old children from disadvantaged families, for example, are 37 percentage points less likely to be read to every day than their most advantaged peers (Department for Education, 2017_[25]). The home learning environment is predictive of a child’s verbal ability from as early as two or three years old (Melhuish, 2010_[81]). Overall, children from the most deprived families are 20 percentage points less likely to meet at least the expected standard in all early learning goals on the EYFSP (Department for Education, 2018_[63]). The quality of a child’s home learning environment is as important a predictor of early learning outcomes as parental factors such as occupation and education (Sylva et al., 2003_[28]).

Children from disadvantaged families perform more poorly than their more advantaged peers from as young as the age of two (Feinstein, 2003_[82]), therefore starting ECEC at this age is especially beneficial to their life chances (Melhuish and Gardiner, 2018_[83]). Attendance at two years old also allows parents greater flexibility in taking up paid employment.

England has committed additional resources to address some of the disparity in the funding of ECEC (Department for Education, 2017_[25]). In addition to increasing access through the universal and extended entitlements for three- and four-year-olds, policies include the early years national funding formula, which prioritises increased funding to the areas most in need, and the early years pupil premium, which supports disadvantaged three- and four-year-olds. Disadvantaged two-year-olds are also eligible for 15 hours of free childcare a week. England has also made significant progress in bridging the gap between the quality ratings of ECEC providers in the most and least deprived areas (Ofsted, 2020_[84]).

However, children from disadvantaged families are less likely to attend ECEC settings, even when the government funds provision (Speight et al., 2015_[78]). Participation at the age of three is almost universal in part-time ECEC, but younger children are more likely to participate if they come from more advantaged families or if their mother completed tertiary education. Similarly, children are more likely to enrol beyond the universal entitlement if they are from families in the wealthier income brackets. This trend is consistent across the OECD (OECD, 2019_[17]). This relative under-enrolment of children from disadvantaged families in ECEC services led to about GBP 200 million of allocated funding for two-year-olds going unspent in 2015 (Ofsted, 2016_[85]).

Special educational needs

More than 1.27 million school students – about 15 % of all those in England – have some form of SEN (Department for Education, 2018_[86]). Of those, approximately 253 000 – under 3 % – have SEN statements or education, health and care (EHC) plans. The SEN statements and EHC plans are critical and legally binding documents. They detail the type of support the child needs, the outcomes the child will work towards and the setting the child should attend. For students who do receive SEN support, moderate and specific learning difficulties account for about 40 % of primary needs, while autistic spectrum disorder accounts for about 28 % of primary needs of students with a statement or EHC plan.

In 2016, a new inspection framework was introduced to assess the effectiveness of local areas in undertaking their SEN duties and improving outcomes for children with SEN. Of 68 local areas inspected between 2016 and 2018, 30 areas were required to provide a written statement of action in response to serious concerns (Ofsted, 2018_[30]).

The funding mechanism for SEN was changed in 2013. Prior to this reform, SEN funding was allocated as part of the school budget to the LA, which, in consultation with school forums, would then determine individual allocation to schools. As part of the revised formula for funding schools, LAs now have access to funding through a national formula, which accounts for funding for students in specialist SEN provision, historic spending and proxy measures such as population, school attainment and the number of children in bad health. Every LA must now have a SEN inclusion fund to support early years providers in meeting the needs of individual children with SEN (Department for Education, 2018_[87]).

References

[61] Agency, E. (2018), Schools revenue funding 2019 to 2020 Operational guide, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/ system/uploads/attachment_data/file/767607/Operational_guide_2019_to_2020.pdf (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[60] Blainey, S. and G. Paull (2017), Study of Early Education and Development (SEED): The cost and funding of early education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/586235/SEED_-_The_cost_and_funding_of_early_education_-_RR552.pdf (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[9] Blake, A. (2019), Migration Statistics Quarterly Report: February 2019, Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/internationalmigration/bulletins/migrationstatisticsquarterlyreport/february2019 (accessed on 8 April 2019).

[1] Carter, T. (2018), Families and the labour market, England: 2018, Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/familiesandthelabourmarketengland/2018 (accessed on 9 April 2019).

[70] Cattan, S., C. Crawford and L. Dearden (2014), The economic effects of pre-school education and quality, The Institute for Fiscal Studies, London, http://www.ifs.org.uk (accessed on 27 March 2019).

[76] Center on the Developing Child at Harvard University (2016), From Best Practices to Breakthrough Impacts, http://www.developingchild.harvard.edu (accessed on 28 March 2019).

[26] Childcare Act 2006, C. (2006), Childcare Act 2006, National Archives, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/21/contents (accessed on 3 April 2019).

[31] Childcare Act 2016, C. (n.d.), “Childcare Act 2016”, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2016/5/enacted (accessed on 3 April 2019).

[43] Clarke, B. and F. Younas (2017), Helping Parents to Parent About the Commission, Social Mobility Commission, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/592452/Helping_Parents_to_Parent_report.pdf (accessed on 11 April 2019).

[10] Coates, S., P. Tanna and E. Scott-Allen (2019), Overview of the UK population: August 2019, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/articles/overviewoftheukpopulation/august2019 (accessed on 30 January 2020).

[77] Crenna-Jennings, W. (2018), Key drivers of the disadvantage gap, Education Policy Institute, https://epi.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/EPI-Annual-Report-2018-Lit-review.pdf (accessed on 28 March 2019).

[75] Cunha, F. et al. (2006), “Chapter 12 Interpreting the Evidence on Life Cycle Skill Formation”, Handbook of the Economics of Education, Vol. 1, pp. 697-812, https://doi.org/10.1016/S1574-0692(06)01012-9.

[49] Department for Education (2019), Childcare and Early Years Survey of Parents in England, 2019, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/853358/CEYSP_2019_Report.pdf (accessed on 31 January 2020).

[55] Department for Education (2019), Early years educator level 3: qualifications criteria - GOV. UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-educator-level-3-qualifications-criteria/early-years-educator-level-3-qualifications-criteria (accessed on 9 October 2019).

[11] Department for Education (2019), Schools, pupils and their characteristics: January 2019.

[30] Department for Education (2018), Childcare and Early Years Survey of Parents in England, 2018, Department for Education, https://www.gov.uk/government/consultations/surveys-on-childcare-and-early-years-in-england (accessed on 28 February 2019).

[63] Department for Education (2018), Early years foundation stage profile results in England, 2018, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/748814/EYFSP_2018_Main_Text.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2019).

[54] Department for Education (2018), Early years practitioner (level 2) qualifications criteria, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/728906/Early_Years_Practitioner_Level_2_Qualifications_Criteria.pdf (accessed on 9 October 2019).

[8] Department for Education (2018), Provision for children under 5 years of age in England, January 2018, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/719273/Provision_for_children_under_5_2018_-_text.pdf (accessed on 4 April 2019).

[87] Department for Education (2018), Sources of income for early years providers - GOV. UK, https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/early-years-business-sustainability-guides-for-providers/extra-sources-of-income-for-early-years-providers#special-educational-needssen-inclusion-fund (accessed on 3 February 2020).

[86] Department for Education (2018), Special educational needs in England: January 2018, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/729208/SEN_2018_Text.pdf (accessed on 8 April 2019).

[46] Department for Education (2018), Survey of Childcare and Early Years Providers: Main Summary, England, 2018, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/752919/Survey_of_Childcare_and_Early_Years_Providers_2018_Main_Summary3.pdf (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[64] Department for Education (2017), Phonics screening check and key stage 1 assessments in England, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/654859/Phonics_KS1_SFR_Text_2017_.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2019).

[12] Department for Education (2017), Statutory framework for the early years foundation stage, http://www.gov.uk/ofsted (accessed on 18 March 2019).

[25] Department for Education (2017), Unlocking Talent, Fulfilling Potential, Controller of Her Majesty’s Stationery Office, UK, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/667690/Social_Mobility_Action_Plan_-_for_printing.pdf (accessed on 26 March 2019).

[24] Department for Education (2016), DfE strategy 2015-2020, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/508421/DfE-strategy-narrative.pdf (accessed on 3 April 2019).

[59] Department for Education (2015), Review of childcare costs: the analytical report, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/479659/151124_Analytical_review_FINAL_VERSION.pdf (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[45] Department for Education (DfE) (2017), Early Years Workforce Strategy, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/596884/Workforce_strategy_02-03-2017.pdf (accessed on 15 March 2019).

[13] Department for Work & Pensions (2019), Households below average income: an analysis of the income distribution 1994/95 to 2017/18, Department for Work & Pensions, https://www.gov.uk/government/statistics/households-below-average-income-199495-to-201718. (accessed on 6 June 2019).

[41] Doepke, M. and F. Zilibotti (2019), Love, money and; parenting: How economics explains the way we raise our kids, Princeton University Press, https://press.princeton.edu/titles/13326.html (accessed on 11 April 2019).

[36] Early Education (2012), Development Matters in the Early Years Foundation Stage (EYFS), http://www.foundationyears.org.uk (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[82] Feinstein, L. (2003), “Inequality in the Early Cognitive Development of British Children in the 1970 Cohort”, Economica, Vol. 70/277, pp. 73-97, https://doi.org/10.1111/1468-0335.t01-1-00272.

[89] Goldstein, H. et al. (2018), A baseline without basis, British Educational Research Association, https://www.bera.ac.uk/wp-content/uploads/2018/07/A-baseline-without-basis_BERA-report_July2018.pdf?noredirect=1 (accessed on 12 April 2019).

[21] Gov.uk (2019), Maternity pay and leave, https://www.gov.uk/maternity-pay-leave/leave (accessed on 9 April 2019).

[23] Gov.uk (2019), Shared Parental Leave and Pay, https://www.gov.uk/shared-parental-leave-and-pay (accessed on 6 June 2019).

[66] Greany, T. et al. (2016), Trends in Maths and Science Study (TIMSS): National Report for England, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/572850/TIMSS_2015_England_Report_FINAL_for_govuk_-_reformatted.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2019).

[80] HM Government and National Literacy Trust (2018), Improving the home learning environment: A behaviour change approach, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/756020/Improving_the_home_learning_environment.pdf (accessed on 13 June 2019).

[69] Jerrim, J. and N. Shure (2016), Achievement of 15-Year-Olds in England: PISA 2015 National Report, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/574925/PISA-2015_England_Report.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2019).

[2] Knipe, E. (2017), Families and Households: 2017, Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/families/bulletins/familiesandhouseholds/2017 (accessed on 8 April 2019).

[74] Law, J. et al. (2009), “Modeling Developmental Language Difficulties From School Entry Into Adulthood: Literacy, Mental Health, and Employment Outcomes”, Journal of Speech, Language, and Hearing Research, Vol. 52, pp. 1401-1416.

[3] Littleboy, K. (2019), Births in England and Wales - Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/birthsdeathsandmarriages/livebirths/bulletins/birthsummarytablesenglandandwales/2018 (accessed on 30 January 2020).

[53] Love, J. et al. (2003), “Child Care Quality Matters: How Conclusions May Vary With Context”, Child Development, Vol. 74/4, pp. 1021-1033.

[65] McGrane, J. et al. (2017), Progress in International Reading Literacy Study (PIRLS): National Report for England, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/664562/PIRLS_2016_National_Report_for_England-_BRANDED.pdf (accessed on 29 March 2019).

[81] Melhuish, E. (2010), Impact of the Home Learning Environment on Child Cognitive Development: Secondary Analysis of Data from “Growing Up in Scotland”, Scottish Government Social Research, https://www.nls.uk/scotgov/2010/impactofthehomelearningenvironment.pdf (accessed on 13 June 2019).

[83] Melhuish, E. and J. Gardiner (2018), Study of Early Education and Development (SEED): Impact Study on Early Education Use and Child Outcomes up to age four years Research Report, NatCen Social Research, University of Oxford, and Action for Children 2018, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/738725/SEED_Impact_Age_4_Report_September_2018.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2019).

[73] Melhuish, E., J. Gardiner and S. Morris (2017), Study of Early Education and Development (SEED): Impact Study on Early Education Use and Child Outcomes up to Age Three, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/627098/SEED_ECEC_impact_at_age_3.pdf (accessed on 27 March 2019).

[79] Melhuish, E. et al. (2008), Effects of the Home Learning Environment and Preschool Center Experience upon Literacy and Numeracy Development in Early Primary School, https://pdfs.semanticscholar.org/9c4e/643a74b6fb295fc8a5d1092b4dae396a0b1d.pdf (accessed on 28 March 2019).

[48] Naumann, I. et al. (2013), Early Childhood Education and Care Provision: International Review of Policy, Delivery and Funding, Center for Research on Families and Relationships, University of Edinburgh, Scotland, http://www.scotland.gov.uk/socialresearch (accessed on 15 March 2019).

[15] OECD (2020), Educational attainment and labour-force status, https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=EAG_NEAC (accessed on 30 January 2020).

[4] OECD (2020), Fertility rates (indicator), https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/8272fb01-en (accessed on 30 January 2020).

[58] OECD (2019), Education at a Glance 2019: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/f8d7880d-en.

[67] OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume I): What Students Know and Can Do, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5f07c754-en.

[71] OECD (2019), PISA 2018 Results (Volume III): What School Life Means for Students’ Lives, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/acd78851-en.

[17] OECD (2018), Education at a Glance 2018: OECD Indicators, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/eag-2018-en.

[5] OECD (2018), SF2.3: Age of mothers at childbirth and age-specific fertility, OECD, http://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm (accessed on 9 April 2019).

[56] OECD (2017), Distribution of teachers by age and gender, https://stats.oecd.org/Index.aspx?datasetcode=EAG_PERS_SHARE_AGE (accessed on 31 January 2020).

[22] OECD (2017), PF2.1: Key characteristics of parental leave systems, OECD, http://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm (accessed on 9 April 2019).

[72] OECD (2017), PISA 2015 Results (Volume III): Students’ Well-Being, PISA, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://doi.org/10.1787/9789264273856-en.

[52] OECD (2017), Starting Strong 2017: Key OECD Indicators on Early Childhood Education and Care, Starting Strong, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/9789264276116-en.

[18] OECD (2016), Maternal employment rates, OECD, http://www.oecd.org/els/family/database.htm (accessed on 9 April 2019).

[16] OECD (2016), Survey of Adult Skills (PIAAC) - Public data and analysis, http://www.oecd.org/skills/piaac/publicdataandanalysis/ (accessed on 6 June 2019).

[51] OECD (2015), Early childhood education and care pedagogy review – England, https://www.oecd.org/unitedkingdom/early-childhood-education-and-care-pedagogy-review-england.pdf (accessed on 18 March 2019).

[7] Office for National Statistics (2011), 2011 Census data, Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/census/2011census/2011censusdata (accessed on 8 April 2019).

[84] Ofsted (2020), The Annual Report of Her Majesty’s Chief Inspector of Education, Children’s Services and Skills 2018/19, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/859422/Annual_Report_of_Her_Majesty_s_Chief_Inspector_of_Education__Children_s_Services_and_Skills_201819.pdf (accessed on 3 February 2020).

[39] Ofsted (2019), Early years inspection handbook, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/801429/Education_inspection_framework.pdf (accessed on 4 March 2020).

[37] Ofsted (2017), Ofsted strategy 2017–22, Ofsted, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/648212/Ofsted_strategy_2017-22.pdf (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[85] Ofsted (2016), Unknown children-destined for disadvantage?, Ofsted, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/541394/Unknown_children_destined_for_disadvantage.pdf (accessed on 28 March 2019).

[38] Ofsted (2015), The common inspection framework: education, skills and early years, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2006/40/contents (accessed on 19 March 2019).

[6] Park, N. (2019), Population estimates for the UK, England and Wales, Scotland and Northern Ireland - Office for National Statistics, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/populationandmigration/populationestimates/bulletins/annualmidyearpopulationestimates/latest (accessed on 30 January 2020).

[44] Patel, A. (2019), Childcare providers and inspections, Ofsted, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/788928/Childcare_providers_and_inspections_main_findings_as_at_31_December_2018.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2019).

[47] Paull, G. and D. Popov (2019), The role and contribution of maintained nursery schools in the early years sector in England Gillian Paull and Danail Popov-Frontier Economics 2 Acknowledgements, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/782568/RPT_Frontier_Economics_MNS_Report.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2019).

[62] Paull, G. and X. Xu (2019), Early years providers cost study 2018, Department for Education, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/782471/Frontier_-_Childcare_Cost_Study.pdf (accessed on 24 April 2019).

[33] Secretary of State for Education (2018), The Local Authority (Duty to Secure Early Years Provision Free of Charge) (Amendment) Regulations 2018, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2018/146/contents/made (accessed on 28 February 2019).

[32] Secretary of State for Education (2014), The Local Authority (Duty to Secure Early Years Provision Free of Charge) Regulations 2014, http://www.legislation.gov.uk/uksi/2014/2147/contents/made (accessed on 28 February 2019).

[34] Siraj-Blatchford, I. and L. Manni (2008), “‘Would you like to tidy up now?’ An analysis of adult questioning in the English Foundation Stage”, Early Years, Vol. 28/1, pp. 5-22, https://doi.org/10.1080/09575140701842213.

[42] Siraj-Blatchford, I. et al. (2011), Performing against the odds: developmental trajectories of children in the EPPSE 3-16 study, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/183318/DFE-RR128.pdf (accessed on 7 June 2019).

[35] Siraj-Blatchford, I. and K. Nah (2014), “A comparison of the pedagogical practices of mathematics education for young children in England and South Korea”, International Journal of Science and Mathematics Education, Vol. 12/1, pp. 145-165.

[68] Sizmur, J. et al. (2019), Achievement of 15-year-olds in England: PISA 2018 results.

[29] Smith, R. et al. (2009), Early education pilot for two year old children: evaluation, Department for children, schools and families, https://dera.ioe.ac.uk/10651/1/DCSF-RR134.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2019).

[78] Speight, S. et al. (2015), Study of Early Education and Development Baseline survey of families Research Report, http://www.seed.natcen.ac.uk/media/5645/Study_of_early_education_and_development_survey_of_families.pdf (accessed on 27 March 2019).

[88] Standards and Testing Agency (2019), Assessment framework: Reception Baseline Assessment, Standards and Testing Agency, https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/781766/Reception_baseline_assessment_framework.pdf (accessed on 12 April 2019).

[50] Stuhlman, M. and R. Pianta (2009), “Profiles of Educational Quality in First Grade”, The Elementary School Journal, Vol. 109/4, http://www.journals.uchicago.edu/t-and-c (accessed on 18 March 2019).

[27] Sylva, K. et al. (2010), Early childhood matters: evidence from the effective pre-school and primary education project, Routledge, London, https://doi.org/10.4324/9780203862063.

[28] Sylva, K. et al. (2003), The effective provision of pre-school education (EPPE) project: Findings from the pre-school period, Institute of Education, University of London, http://generic.surestart.org/pdfdir/news6.pdf (accessed on 28 February 2019).

[40] Taggart, B. et al. (2015), Effective pre-school, primary and secondary education project (EPPSE 3-16+), https://assets.publishing.service.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/455670/RB455_Effective_pre-school_primary_and_secondary_education_project.pdf.pdf (accessed on 26 March 2019).

[20] Thévenon, O. (2013), “Drivers of Female Labour Force Participation in the OECD”, OECD Social, Employment and Migration Working Papers, No. 145, OECD Publishing, Paris, https://dx.doi.org/10.1787/5k46cvrgnms6-en.

[19] Vizard, T. (2019), Families and the labour market, UK: 2019, https://www.ons.gov.uk/employmentandlabourmarket/peopleinwork/employmentandemployeetypes/articles/familiesandthelabourmarketengland/2019 (accessed on 31 January 2020).

[57] Warin, J. (2018), Men in Early Childhood Education and Care: Gender Balance and Flexibility, Palgrave Studies in Gender and Education, Palgrave, Macmillan, https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-89539-0.

[14] Webber, D. and J. O’Neill (2019), Effects of taxes and benefits on UK household income: financial year ending 2018, https://www.ons.gov.uk/peoplepopulationandcommunity/personalandhouseholdfinances/incomeandwealth/bulletins/theeffectsoftaxesandbenefitsonhouseholdincome/financialyearending2018 (accessed on 30 January 2020).

Notes

← 1. Where data for England are available, these are cited. Data for the United Kingdom are only used in instances where data for England are not available.

← 2. The total fertility rate in a specific year is defined as the total number of children that would be born to each woman if she were to live to the end of her child-bearing years and give birth to children in alignment with the prevailing age-specific fertility rates.

← 3. The Gini coefficient is a measure of income or wealth distribution, where 1 corresponds to maximal inequality and 0 represents perfect equality.

← 4. To compare the skills of adults who have similar qualifications in England with other participating countries, all qualifications are coded to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED). Qualifications are then split into three broad categories: ‘below upper secondary’, ‘upper secondary’ and ‘tertiary’.

← 5. Population with tertiary education is defined as those having completed the highest level of education, by age group. This includes both theoretical programmes leading to advanced research or high skill professions such as medicine and more vocational programmes leading to the labour market.

← 6. According to the International Standard Classification of Education (ISCED), ISCED 0 programmes are pre-primary programmes situated in institutional settings that contain an intentional education component, among other criteria. ISCED 01 captures participation by very young children (aged two and under), and ISCED 02 captures participation by slightly older children (aged three to five).

← 7. Purchasing power parities (PPPs) are the rates of currency conversion that try to equalise the purchasing power of different currencies, by eliminating the differences in price levels between countries. This indicator is measured in terms of national currency per US dollar.

Metadata, Legal and Rights

This document, as well as any data and map included herein, are without prejudice to the status of or sovereignty over any territory, to the delimitation of international frontiers and boundaries and to the name of any territory, city or area. Extracts from publications may be subject to additional disclaimers, which are set out in the complete version of the publication, available at the link provided.

https://doi.org/10.1787/c235abf9-en

The use of this work, whether digital or print, is governed by the Terms and Conditions to be found at http://www.oecd.org/termsandconditions.

╳

: Early Learning and Child Well-being in England:

Continue to open the publication page on OECD iLibrary to find:

All available formats

Buy option for print or PDF copies

All publication details?

Cancel