Bolman and Deal (2013) state that myths often originate in the launching of an enterprise and can be understood as the stories behind the story; that is they explain, express and maintain cohesion and solidarity between stakeholders. However, the findings suggest that significant stakeholders, for e a ple the a age e t tea s i Ka e s a d De ie s setti gs, a d the pa e ts a d p a titio e s f o E a s setti g, e e ot u ited i suppo t of EYP“. Osgood a gues that the ECEC workforce was constructed in contradictory ways by the New Labour Government prior to the introduction of EYPS. This contradiction in the construction of the workforce, when viewed through the symbolic frame, means that there was a lack of a compelling and cohesive story to underpin the
139
launch of EYPS, which left some significant stakeholders unconvinced of the need to professionalise ECEC.
Although there is some debate as to whether the sector was in crisis before the launch of EYPS, as discussed in Chapter 3, in their stories Karen, Debbie and Lauren each expressed concern about the quality of qualifications and training in the sector for most practitioners and many managers. In order to meet the standards for EYPS, Lauren had to undertake a placement working with babies aged between 0- o ths hi h she did at Ka e s setti g, a d, hilst Ka e st uggled to get ti e in the baby room, Lauren did not. Lauren acknowledged that Karen had not had the same
opportunities and provided some of her thoughts on the management team at the setting.
So e people a e ot i the ight jo positio . The ha e the title a age e ause the ha e ee the e lo gest, ut the a e ot doi g hat s o the adge.
The pa ti ipa ts o e s eso ate ith a lo g u i g sto a out the variability and quality of qualifications in the ECEC sector, as highlighted by Nutbrown (2012) and Tickell (2011). In a
continuation of this story, it seems that the introduction of EYPS failed to dispel recurrent concerns about the quality and variability of qualifications in the sector, and, as a result, EYPS never achieved parity with QTS. Murray and McDowall Clark (2012) suggest that the introduction of EYTS has placed graduate leadership and specific professional roles once more in flux. Bolman and Deal (2013) suggest that myths offer a narrative which anchors the present in the past. EYPS has been
discursively constructed by the government as belonging in the PVI sector with its long association with childcare (Roberts-Holmes 2013), thus firmly maintaining cohesion between EYPS and the traditional and gendered concepts of the ECEC workforce. Furthermore, Murray and McDowall Clark (2012) point out that locating leadership in a politically designated role, EYPS and EYTS, risks
reinforcing the dependency culture created when leadership is seen as residing only in nominated individuals.
Perhaps, in an attempt to re-establish the myth of parity between professionals working in ECEC in the PVI sector and teachers working in schools, the Coalition Government replaced EYPS with EYTS (DfE2013). However, the participants were not convinced by this government constructed myth that EYPS or EYTS would have parity with QTS. Both Lauren and Debbie seemed resigned to the
anticipated disparity between EYPS and EYTS and had plans to apply for a QTS course. Perhaps, Lauren and Debbie had simply never believed that EYPS was going to be the same as QTS, in terms of status, pay and conditions of employment, and possibly, because they were in the early stages of their career, the prospect of undertaking further study was less daunting than for the others.
140
However, Emma had chosen to undertake EYPS rather than return to teacher training and she see ed to feel et a ed the go e e t s ha ge i poli . “he had es he ed the established status of being a qualified teacher for EYPS, believing that it would bring professional recognition for her and her work in ECEC, only to find that EYPS had been replaced by EYTS. Emma described her feelings about the introduction of EYTS
The ualifi atio EYPS does t eall a ou t to a thi g. I itiall , I did feel alidated ei g a Ea l Yea s P ofessio al, o I just see it as a thi g I ha e do e. I disappoi ted, g ossl disappoi ted the fa t that EYPS is t e ui ale t to an Early Years Teacher. Karen viewed the introduction of EYTS with concern for what it might mean for the children and suggested that the introduction of teachers into ECEC might interfere with children learning through play.
Bolman and Deal (2013) suggest myths undergird values and that values reflect a core ideology that shapes people. Siraj and Hallet (2014) suggest that there is a unique emotional drive in ECEC often des i ed as passio (p.53) for working with young children. This passion is a core ideology and a ke d i e i ECEC leade s p a ti e Hallet . I tu isio tu s a o e ideolog i to a i age of the future. All of the participants appeared to have a strong core ideology which meant they were committed to continuing their work with young children. The vision of Lauren and Debbie for the futu e i luded fu the stud to gai QT“; E a s disappoi t e t at the i t odu tio of EYT“ ea t that further study was out of the question; and Karen wanted a new job with better pay, and held to her belief that children should be allowed to learn through play.