ABSTRACT
Drawing on the theoretical work of the British sociologist Basil Bernstein, this paper documents how learning is structured and organised through play in three Early Years Education (EYE) settings catering for children aged three to five in England, UK. Its data address current issues raised within EYE research relating to ‘quality and high returns’ and ‘school readiness’ for compulsory education. The analyses reveal that multiple forms of play are evident in all three settings; however, they are afforded very different status and value in each, influenced by the assumptions practitioners [in this paper practitioner is used because this is what those working in the nursery settings viewed themselves as. Although we acknowledge that early childhood educator is perhaps a more common term in certain countries] make about children and their families’ knowledge and resources for learning. The effect of such processes is the reproduction of social class and cultural hierarchies inside EYE settings, reflecting those longstanding in wider UK society. Despite the best intentions of policy-makers and practitioners, EYE play as currently configured does not provide equal opportunities for all.
Disclosure statement
No potential conflict of interest was reported by the authors.
Notes
1. The Plowden report was commissioned by the Central Advisory Council for Education (England). Focusing on primary education, it acknowledged learning, a continuous, at the learners pace, suggesting that children learn through their own active efforts.
2. A learning journey is a celebration of a child's achievements and interests during the time they spend in a setting and shows the journey of a child's learning and development.
3. Academically, referring to practitioners’ responsibility to fulfil the literacy and mathematics requirements of the EYFS (Citation2014, 8).
4. The 2005 workforce strategy (DfE Citation2007) gave early years a high priority and set a target of one graduate in every setting by 2015 (two in disadvantaged areas). Within the three settings used for my research, practitioners were trained with either level 2 or level 3 qualification. A level 6 qualification is equivalent to graduate level.