Section Seven: Case Studies of Practice
Analyses of the quantitative data collected on every child in the study revealed that in some pre-
school centres children made progress as expected or better progress than expected given their
individual and home characteristics. In order to choose settings for the case study research we
compiled a profile of each setting based on their child outcome data. We were therefore able to
see the variation of child outcomes between centres and the range of outcomes within centres on
the cognitive and social development outcomes.
All of the settings selected for case study demonstrate a range of practices, all of them
demonstrate some above average outcome/s. Put another way, settings were chosen from a
range identified as good (even if their children only made slightly more developmental progress
than expected given a plotted trajectory based on their individual child and home characteristics)
to excellent (where children made significant developmental progress above their projected
developmental progress). We therefore consistently refer to settings throughout the section as
good (slightly above average) or excellent (well above average) based on their child outcome
data. Good and excellent are sometimes used in relation to whole centres or when we are
reporting on differences between particular outcomes e.g. the 3 settings which had significantly
added to their children’s development in number concepts are contrasted with those where
children are making progress as expected.
Data from 12 effective pre-school centres, reflecting good child outcomes, (cognitive and/or
social/behavioural from our quantitative analysis) has been analysed to reveal a unique ‘story’ for
each centre. The associated, DfES funded Researching Effective Pedagogy in the Early Years
(REPEY) study (Siraj-Blatchford et al, 2002) allowed us to add two reception classes to our 12
EPPE cases, and we draw on these data in this section too (14 cases in total). The aim of the
intensive case study analyses has been to attempt to tease out the specific pedagogical and
other practices that are associated with achieving ‘excellent’ outcomes compared to those
centres with ‘good’ or more ‘average’ outcomes.
For further, full details on the methodology and findings please refer to EPPE Technical Paper 10
(Siraj-Blatchford et al, 2003). This report provides comprehensive descriptions of one of each
type of early years group setting representing the Foundation Stage (local authority day
nurseries, private day nurseries, playgroups, nursery classes, nursery schools, integrated
provision11 (Early Excellence Centre) and reception classes). None of the cases reported fully is
meant to be typical or representative of its type of provision.
The EPPE definition of ‘effectiveness’ is based on child outcomes, which was understood as a
necessary but insufficient component of quality on its own. High quality provision is determined
by the quality of child care and pedagogical practices that is offered as well. It was possible that
care and pedagogy might be compromised at times to achieve effectiveness and we therefore
had to look very closely at all of the practices that were a normal part of centre routine. Our
report illustrates how the actual practices in the settings vary significantly.
In conducting the case studies, trained researchers, who were already familiar with the centres,
spent two whole weeks in each centre collecting qualitative data. Case study data came from
multiple sources to allow for assessment by source and the method of data collection.
Information from policy documents was triangulated with manager and parent interviews, and,
extensive naturalistic observations of staff (over 400 hours). In addition systematic focal child
observations of children (254 target child observations) engaged in various curricular activities
were conducted.
11 The integrated setting was also an Early Excellence Centre; this type of centre is part of the
Government’s initiative to provide every region with a one-stop-shop childcare and education
service that is responsive to the needs of children, families and local early years staff.
34