quality profiles of centres (see Section 5). Centres where managers reported they had Level 5
qualifications (trained teachers) exhibited higher quality. Findings from the associated
Researching Effective Pedagogy in the Early Years study (see Siraj-Blatchford et al, 2002) also
indicate that the observed behaviour of other staff is positively influenced by the presence of a
member of staff with Level 5 qualifications.
The value added multilevel analyses found a significant positive relationship between the
percentage of Level 5 staff hours and young children’s social/behavioural developmental gains in
‘Co-operation & Conformity’. In addition, children who attended centres where proportionately
more staff time were at Level 5 showed reductions in ‘Anti-social / Worried’ behaviour. Given the
complex inter-relationships between ratios, staff qualifications, quality and type of provision, plus
the extent of variation between individual centres of the same type, these influences on children’s
social/behavioural outcomes may be confounded. It may be more relevant to consider the
impacts of packages of provision, rather than to try to separate the impact of particular features
in isolation.
Children who do not experience pre-school
Comparison of the ‘home’ sample with the main EPPE sample of children who experienced pre-
school showed that both the characteristics and the social/behavioural development of ‘home’
children vary significantly. It is not possible to conclude with certainty that differences in social
behaviour found for the ‘home’ group are directly a consequence of their lack of pre-school
experience, due to the ‘home’ children’s very different social backgrounds. Analyses of
social/behavioural assessments exploring the impact of child, parent and home environment
factors illustrate that, even when these important influences are controlled, ‘home’ children’s
social behaviour is rated as significantly poorer in terms of three areas of development -
‘Independence & Concentration’, ‘Co-operation & Conformity’ and ‘Peer Sociability’ - than those
of children who attended any of the six types of pre-school provision studied. This suggests that
pre-schooling has a positive impact on these aspects of social/behavioural development, in
particular ‘Peer Sociability’. Hence, children without pre-school centre experience may be at a
disadvantage in terms of ‘Peer Sociability’, ‘Independence & Concentration’ and ‘Co-operation &
Conformity’ when they start primary school, as these behaviours are likely to be important for
successful adjustment to primary school. In addition, ‘Independence & Concentration’ is
modestly associated with cognitive attainment at entry to school and hence would be expected to
promote classroom learning. Home children do not show any significant differences in terms of
‘Anti-social / Worried’ behaviour in comparison to the pre-school sample.
In combination with the findings for cognitive progress reported earlier, the results summarised
here indicate that pre-school centre experience can help to combat social exclusion and promote
inclusion by offering disadvantaged young children, in particular, a better start at school, through
promoting positive social/behavioural as well as cognitive development. Section 9 reports on
progress to the end of Key Stage 1. This helps to establish the positive impact of pre-school on
young children’s cognitive (which remains significant to the end of Key Stage 1) and
social/behavioural development (which remains significant to the end of Year 1) as children
progress through their first years at primary school. At the end of Year 2, the impact of pre-
school experience on social development had decreased. This decrease for duration and quality
on social/behavioural development became non-significant at the end of Year 2. However, when
we look at the impact of the pre-schools level of effectiveness (children showing more/less
progress than expected given their initial profile and background characteristics) then there are
still significant effects on children’s social/behavioural development at the end of Year 2.
The EPPE team was asked by Her Majesty’s Treasury (HMT) to explore the effects of pre-school
provision and family income (as measured by salary or lack of it). These analyses are reported
in Appendix B.
33